City-Based Charities Wising Up to Rural Causes
08/07/2007
1 comment![]() ![]()
U.S. foundations overwhelmingly favor urban and metropolitan charities with their grants. No one disputes that. The question is why. A new study by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research attempts to answer that question by talking to staff at U.S. foundations. The report, commissioned by the Center for Rural Strategies, which publishes the Daily Yonder, and Stand Up for Rural America, is an update of Greenberg’s 2004 study on rural philanthropy. (Editor's Note: Latest news from meeting on rural philanthropy in Montana can be found here.) Report co-author Anna Greenberg found a number of impediments to increased funding for rural nonprofits: The new report did find that foundation staff are generally more attuned to rural issues than they were three years ago, when Greenburg also studied attitudes toward rural philanthropy. “Overall awareness of rural issues has increased … and many are more optimistic about increased rural giving in the future," writes Anna Greenberg. And optimism may be channeled into action this week. More than 100 foundation leaders from around the country are gathering in Missoula, Montana, to look at the problems and possibilities of rural philanthropy. The event is sponsored by the Council on Foundations, at the behest of U.S Sen. Max Baucus of Montana. Last year, Baucus challenged U.S. foundations to devote more of their grants to rural projects. While 20% of Americans live in rural communities, only about 1% of the $30 billion U.S. foundations granted in 2001-02 went to projects identified as rural, according to Rick Cohen, author of a 2004 report by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy that tracked rural grantmaking. Most of the nation’s foundation assets are located on the coasts – the top three states in foundation assets are New York, California, and Washington. In the new study of philanthropy, foundation staff said that geographic distance makes it harder to fund rural programs. “It’s kind of out of sight, out of mind," said one staff member. Participants said there is also a cultural divide between foundations and rural communities. “I think for the most part people who work in foundations have urban orientations, and those academic backgrounds that they come out of stress urban analysis," said another foundation staff member. “There is a bias that you get more bang for your buck and the problems are worse in urban areas."
Foundations also had a harder time identifying effective organizations to give grants to in rural areas. “My impression is that just the range of nonprofit organizations to work with is more dispersed," said a staff member. “It’s thinner." The study recommended that those interested in increasing foundation grants for rural charities focus on the following: The new report was based on interviews with ten members of foundation staff, most of whom were involved in rural grant making. The study tracked changes in attitudes based on Greenburg’s 2004 survey of fifty foundation staff members.
|
Comments
Ha! More Nonsense
Continual baloney and propaganda from the "Center for Rural Strategies to Despoil the Countryside." What b_s! How about taking your big-city liberal philanthropy money and using it to solve city problems? Sounds good to me! And take your school consolidation ideas with you and ruin more of your urban school systems (see related story on this site).
And any jokers who would hire Anna Greenberg, an inside-the-beltway liberal Democrat who doesn't know a cow's udder from a combine, to study rural areas and issues, is completely wasting their money.
Why not try to find someone who does survey research and actually lives in a rural area, or at least knows something about rural Americans? Or is that too tough because all of these pollsters are REPUBLICANS!!? Yeah, that's it! Greenberg, Quinlan, Rosner...ha! Have any of the charlatan social scientist clowns who head this firm ever visted rural America? Do they KNOW any rural Americans?
If you want to know what these folks are up to, they're trying to dupe rural and small town voters into thinking that the scumbag Democratic candidates are a reasonable alternative. They are doing this by ignoring the left-wing liberal urban issues that the Democrats stand for, and shift the ground all toward economic issues, where supposedly rural America will like Democratic platforms and positions.
Well, I've got news for you. Most rural voters know full well where the Democrats stand on gays, gun control, abortion-on-demand, school prayer, easy-divorce, and the other issues that make us despise the Democratic Party as the longstanding force for evil that it has been since the late-1960s.