Nonprofit Groups Seek to Put a Face on the Toll of Possible Spending Cuts

As Congress and President Obama debate how to avoid the automatic spending cuts and tax increases often called the fiscal cliff, many nonprofit leaders worry that politicians aren’t grasping the human toll of deep reductions to social programs.

While the Washington-insider banter centers on obtuse concepts such as sequestration, nondefense discretionary programs, and floors and ceilings for tax deductions, the thrust of the debate is far simpler for Kristen Phillips, development manager at Fayette Senior Services in Georgia.

“If federal funding goes down,” says Ms. Phillips, “people are going to go hungry.”

Her organization serves 40,000 meals to 250 homebound older people and provides them with rides to doctors’ offices and pharmacies. Slightly more than half of the group’s $1.3-million in revenue comes from federal and state government.

“For every dollar lost, it’s more people going hungry,” Ms. Phillips says. “We’re all starting to think about where we are going to make up the difference.”

Tallying Costs

Some nonprofits are trying to show lawmakers and others just who would be harmed by the $55-billion in automatic cuts scheduled to hit domestic programs starting in January.

“Our emphasis has been that low-income and vulnerable people have to be protected in this process,” says Deborah Weinstein, executive director of the Coalition on Human Needs.

Ms. Weinstein’s group and two others to start the Half in Ten project, a campaign aiming to cut poverty in half in 10 years. The project has a Web site that displays videos of people sharing how nonprofit services have helped them.

“Behind every piece of data there is a person and a family and a worker, and those voices are too often not at the table,” says Melissa Boteach, director of Half in Ten.

Yasmina Vinci, executive director of the National Head Start Association, says that the $622-million loss in federal aid that Head Start would face if Congress takes no action and automatic cuts occur would eliminate services to 96,000 children and result in 22,000 layoffs. “What we’re doing right now is to put a human face on this,” Ms. Vinci says.

Her group is encouraging its network to display success stories on a Web site called 27 Million Windows, which refers to the number of students who latched onto Head Start’s window of opportunity.

The Meals on Wheels Association of America anticipates a similar situation for its members, which stand to lose $66-million in federal funds for their nutrition programs if the automatic cuts are imposed. That would translate into 31 million fewer meals served across the nation to people who are too sick or otherwise unable to leave their homes.

“Our constituency is the hidden hungry,” says Larry Tomayko, the association’s interim chief executive. “They have no way to lobby Congress. You can’t see them or hear from them.”

The group’s national Web site features “Stories From the Heart” from older Americans, but none of them are tied to the debate about spending cuts.

“We generally try to stay away from politics,” the association’s spokeswoman, Mary McNamara, said in an e-mail.

Too Small to Fail

That is part of the problem with the approach many nonprofits are taking, says Gary Bass, president of the Bauman Foundation, in Washington.

“Advocacy is dismissed or shunned as inappropriate,” Mr. Bass says, “but it’s essential.”

A new campaign called Too Small to Fail, led by the Center for the Next Generation, in San Francisco, is starting one of the most highly produced video efforts demonstrating the impact on children.

“We wanted to raise awareness on what’s going on with kids in America today,” said Ann O’Leary, director of the center’s children and families program. “We have the highest number of children living in poverty since 1962.”

One of the most common arguments for groups to make is that their services save taxpayers money.

Dorothy Stillman, founder and chief executive of YouthBuild USA, said that every low-income youth who completes her group’s job-skills and GED-diploma program saves governments $236,000 annually because participants avoid actions that increase social costs, such as dropping out of high school, using drugs, or getting arrested.

In the past two years, Congress has cut YouthBuild funds by 37 percent, causing 40 programs to close.

“It’s so short-sighted economically, aside from it being a moral disaster,” Ms. Stillman says.

But such savings are difficult to sell to lawmakers.

Jerry Davis, vice president for public policy at Boys Town, a $1.2-billion organization that has contracts with 11 state agencies, says reductions to the federal Social Services Block Grants would cut $136-million that helps state programs serve vulnerable populations.

But in an era of deficit cutting, he worries that Washington may not be swayed by the argument that charities save government money. “That’s hard for the political community to look at it that way,” he says. “But if you cut the wrong program, you’re going to increase costs elsewhere.”