News & Features
Fleishman urges new era of accountability in philanthropy
Now 72, he has written his first book — an effort, he says, to air his “lifelong lover’s quarrel” with foundations.
“People
criticize them for having lots of money and not spending it very well or
spending it on excessive salaries or perks,” he said. “Sure,
there are examples of that, but what’s really important is what the
foundations have done. The value they’ve conferred on society over
the course of the past 125 years is just amazing, and nobody knows about
it.”
However, facing minimal government regulation or public oversight, he writes in his book, foundations “operate within an insulated culture that tolerates an inappropriate level of secrecy and even arrogance in their treatment of grant seekers, grant receivers, the wider civic sector, and the public officials charged with oversight. This needs to change.”
Foundations, Fleishman warns, are treading on dangerous ground by keeping information from potential supporters. Furthermore, by refusing to discuss their mistakes openly, grant makers keep vital information from their nonprofit colleagues about what works and what doesn’t.
Right and Wrong
In preparing his book, Fleishman interviewed more than 100 foundation executives
and program officers, academic leaders and nonprofit heads. He and some Duke
colleagues used that information to draw up 100 case studies, some of which
are included in the book. He writes that the most successful foundations focus
on a limited number of issues, thoroughly analyze whether it is practical to
tackle a given problem and carefully select the organizations that will receive
their grants.
next page >>>
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
