1 / 12

Member Survey Results

Discover key findings from member surveys (2012-2015) and strategic planning implications for promoting diversity, public policy engagement, and field leadership in philanthropy. Explore evolving member priorities and strategic directions.

ashort
Download Presentation

Member Survey Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Member Survey Results 2012—2015 Strategic Planning Prepared for:

  2. The Full Spectrum

  3. Top 5 Member Priorities • Noteworthy: When asked to select no more than 5most-valuedroles, 1 additional role made its way into the top 5: “Convening members with nonprofits, government and other public and private sector representatives to discuss community issues” displaced “Maintaining principles and practices that build public trust and accountability,” which ranked number 5 when measured by proportion of “very important” ratings.

  4. The Service—Leadership Continuum: Where Members Fall

  5. How We Asked the Question Respondents were told that during strategic planning, MCF’s Board of Directors will explore several strategic priorities, including: • deeper engagement in state and federal public policy. • promotion of increased diversity/inclusion in philanthropy. We then asked for respondents’ opinion about how MCF can most effectively serve individual member interests and/or provide field leadership within each of these strategic priorities. Respondents were asked to review and check all the activities within the defined service—leadership continuum in which they believed MCF should be involved. They were also asked to suggest other ideas, if any.

  6. The Service—Leadership Continuum Although respondents were able to select any activities along the service—leadership continuum, their selections favored service over leadership within each of the two strategic priorities. Service Leadership

  7. Public Policy

  8. Public Policy – By Organization Type Serve as a convener and facilitator Educate and encourage public policy engagement Continue to defend the field Initiate state legislation to incent philanthropy Strengthen relationships with government officials Identify and select one or more important broad societal issues and lead initiatives to advance these issues

  9. Public Policy – By Respondent Role Serve as a convener and facilitator Educate and encourage public policy engagement Continue to defend the field Initiate state legislation to incent philanthropy Strengthen relationships with government officials Identify and select one or more important broad societal issues and lead initiatives to advance these issues

  10. Additional Strategic Priorities “Convening and imagining around how philanthropy can play an effective role in resolving the challenging social issues we are facing, especially as government funds become less available for services citizens need and expect. In big or small ways, can we be part of redesign of nonprofit service delivery, government service delivery, etc.” “The current strategic priorities are ambitious and will keep MCF fully engaged.” “I think any work that helps grantmakers understand the value of systems, policy, and environmental change (versus programmatic efforts) will help us achieve greater sustainability of efforts. I also feel that many foundations fear "policy," not realizing that there are many ways to advocate without jeopardizing their status as a foundation. Some education and comfort building is needed here.” “Your plate is full! Good job.” “What has been outlined in the survey will fill the plate. It is better to take the chosen foci and develop a plan of action that can be measured as it is implemented than to do a smattering of activities around various issues.” “Expand program access to include individual philanthropists and donor advisors.” “How does MCF activate its member base to promote democratic philanthropy or democratizing the field of philanthropy? How does MCF promote community giving beyond philanthropic institutions i.e. giving circles that present models of philanthropy that are democratic, inclusive, and transforming of power and privilege related to wealth. MCF needs to push philanthropy beyond its own conservatism within the field.” “Become more accessible and relevant to younger sector of the population.”

  11. Implications for Strategic Planning

  12. Implications for Strategic Planning • Although public policy involvement and promotion of diversity and inclusivity are areas of great interest to the board, both are near the bottom of the list in terms of what MCF roles members value most.  In light of this, the strategic planning committee may want to consider the following:    • Integrate diversity and inclusion into all of MCF's practices instead of making it a "special strategic initiative."  MCF has been a leader in this area for years and is also currently involved in D5, a field-wide initiative related to this.  • If MCF decides to champion a particular issue related to public policy, it may want to sequence its activities in a way that "brings the field along," i.e. starting with educating, convening, and networking, roles of MCF favored by members, and then moving into more proactive lobbying and/or introduction of legislation, which are less supported and likely less understood by MCF members.

More Related