especially if their efforts are thwarted when the larger organization ends up winning anyway.
This raises another point about crowd-sourcing philanthropy: there’s a reason that corporations (and foundations) have a grants process in the first place. A more formal grants process rewards a strong mission and effective management, not vote count. The idea of democratizing this process sounds nice, but will the money really be used effectively? Program officers at corporate foundations extensively vet potential organizations to fund based on the financial feasibility of their projects and as other factors that contribute to a project’s success, rather than persuasiveness or brand power. Voters’ motivation for supporting one nonprofit over another may be pure, but others might vote based on their affinity for an organization’s logo or celebrity spokesperson.
How do arts organizations fit into the picture? Both the Members’ Project and Pepsi Refresh fund organizations in several fields, including arts and culture. But in competitions where there is no mission-based separation, such as Chase Community Giving and USA Today’s Twitter campaign, can arts organizations compete with nonprofits with a social mission?
Whatever the pros and cons, it seems the trend is certainly gaining traction. We’d love to hear what you think of this trend. Have you voted in any of these contests, or has your organization participated? Do you think they are an effective way for businesses to help the arts and other nonprofits?
Popularity: 12% Tagged with: Fundraising
0 comments
Post a Comment