May 26, 2008 | Read Time: 1 minute
Hildy Gottlieb, a nonprofit consultant, is angry.
“Nothing gets my teeth gnashing like the discussion of donor rights and
donor accountability,” she writes on her blog, Creating the Future.
While the nonprofit world appears to be embracing the notion of donors as investors who charities ultimately answer to, Ms. Gottlieb, a lifelong community activist, says the concept “sounds good at face value, but it is a logic that goes beyond being just seriously flawed (which it is). It is a concept that is hazardous to the ability of community organizations to create visionary improvement to the quality of life in our communities.”
“The questions ‘To whom are we accountable? And for what?’ are about more than just dollars and donors. These questions are at the heart of everything community organizations are able to accomplish. And the reason for that is simple: We accomplish what we hold ourselves accountable for,” she writes.
Prompted by a discussion on the Tactical Philanthropy blog about whether donors should be given the right to vote for the board members, Ms. Gottlieb poke holes in the donor-as-king view in a six-part series on her blog.
For example, in what she calls her “Bill Gates vs. my grandmother” argument, she asks does donor accountability mean “the organization is more accountable to the person who writes a $1-million check than to the person who gives $10? Are we then really talking about a sliding scale of accountability, where the organization is accountable to each and every donor, in direct proportion to the level of his/her gift?”
What do you think of Ms. Gottlieb’s concerns? What do you think of allowing donors to vote for board members? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.
