April 13, 2009 | Read Time: 1 minute
On the Tactical Philanthropy blog, several nonprofit experts are discussing the work of the Center for Effective Philanthropy and how to define good grant making.
Sean Stannard-Stockton, author of the Tactical Philanthropy blog and a columnist for The Chronicle, writes that the center, which is a nonprofit research group that studies foundation efforts, has set out three primary rules for quality philanthropy: “clear goals; coherent, well-implemented strategies; and relevant performance indicators.”
In response, several people said that the rules are good, if obvious, but aren’t sufficient to lead to effective philanthropy alone.
On his Uncivil Society blog, Jeff Trexler, a professor of social entrepreneurship at Pace University, writes that the rules “fall short of addressing the relation between part and whole. On one level, they tend to frame a social issue in such a way as to isolate it from its broader social context. In so doing they create micro-solutions that can actually exacerbate macro-problems, if not fail to reach the target goal itself.”
In comments on Tactical Philanthropy, the center’s executive director, Phil Buchanan, responds, saying that the organization is not arguing that there is a formula for effectiveness.
“We are not advocating for a set of ‘transactional rules,’” he writes. “Nor are we advocating for small, incremental approaches that are isolated from a larger context.”
What do you think of the center’s efforts?
