August 6, 2009 | Read Time: 1 minute
Are foundations more beholden to their trustees than the charities they support?
David Geilhufe, who manages philanthropy programs for NetSuite, a software company in San Mateo, Calif., argues this point on his Social Source blog.
“In the egregious cases,” he writes, “the value of a grantee to a trustee derives from their ability to support the trustee’s ego. Does the grantee make me feel good? Does the grantee support my religious construct of ‘giving back.’ Does the grantee connect me with other powerful people? Can I chat about what the grantee does on my private plane with my social and business associates?”
He wonders how this mentality will affect the Obama administration’s Social Innovation Fund, which will support grant makers to seek out effective and innovative charitable efforts.
“Are we OK with people who are often unaware of what it actually costs a nonprofit to deliver services making the decisions about what the most innovative, scalable, and effective programs are?” he asks.
What do you think? Are foundations in some cases more interested in pleasing their boards than helping nonprofit groups solve social problems?
