Promote Charties’ Organizational Efforts

To the Editor:

Shame on The Chronicle of Philanthropy for so prominently placing Bernard Marcus’s quote saying how “badly organized” most charities are (“Rolling Up His Sleeves: Hardware Magnate Takes a Do-It-Yourself Approach to Giving,” August 22). Perpetuating this image of charities does the sector a tremendous disservice and flies in the face of the everyday realities of audits from government-funding agencies, questionnaires from the Better Business Bureau and other watchdog groups, voluntary accreditations, accounting regulations, internal auditors, etc.

While I don’t disagree that improvements can be made, it is time that we promote what charities are doing to be more businesslike and that businessmen-turned-philanthropists like Bernard Marcus focus more of their giving on programs to help charities adopt business models.

We also should promote more unrestricted giving so charities can hire senior managers who can implement “businesslike” planning and budgeting procedures. Why is it that charities are the only companies in the world where staff are expected to work for nothing, with few resources, yet still produce strategic plans, policies and procedures, and business plans like the Fortune 500?

Charities are squeezed on all sides, from government funders that pay 5 percent administrative overhead to donors that want none of their money paying for items they deem to be non-program-related. Budgets are tight, we operate with leftovers; donors demand accountability and professionalism, but who is going to pay the auditors?

If the industry and donors want charities to be more businesslike, it is time that we stop patting “do-gooders but paid-nothings” on the head for “really trying,” and reward businesslike charities with unrestricted dollars and ask charities that are run well to share their expertise with others.

Linda McNeil Tantawi
Director of Development and Communications
Volunteers of America-Greater New York
New York

To the Editor:

Two years ago the world, including nonprofit leaders, were falling all over themselves to extol the business virtues of Enron, WorldCom, Arthur Andersen, and countless others masquerading as responsible corporate citizens. Now the rampant corruption is exposed, but we are still blindly repeating the old saw that nonprofits should be more like business.

This wrong-headed saying was quoted in your article on Home Depot co-founder Bernard Marcus.

The point of business is to enrich the people at the top — others may or may not benefit from the success of that business, but that is not the fundamental point. The point of a nonprofit is to make the world a better place — the leaders of the nonprofit may or may not benefit from the success of the nonprofit, but that is not the fundamental point.

Yes, nonprofits should be as efficient, responsible, and accountable as possible. They should be creative in taking advantage of intellectual and material resources to accomplish their missions. And they should be called to task whenever they betray the public trust. They should not be run like business.

Certainly there are companies that are ethical and well run. And there are many good people with big hearts in the business world. They may know how to run a business, but they do not know how to run a nonprofit unless they also have the humility and intelligence to start at the bottom and learn. That lesson is this: The difference between nonprofits and business is fundamental and essential. We in the nonprofit world would do well to praise that difference, not pander to CEO egos by denying it.

Lane Brooks
Director of Development and Marketing
Public Citizen
Washington