310 likes | 425 Views
Trends Reflected in 20 Years of American Charities Receiving the Most Donations. Bill Cleveland October 29, 2013 WIMPS Seminar. Today’s Presentation. Interestin g findings as starting point Define fundamental terms and issues Explore 3 questions Is this a phenomenon of concern?.
E N D
Trends Reflected in 20 Years of American Charities Receiving the Most Donations Bill Cleveland October 29, 2013 WIMPS Seminar
Today’s Presentation • Interesting findings as starting point • Define fundamental terms and issues • Explore 3 questions • Is this a phenomenon of concern?
What is the Philanthropy 400? • Chronicle of Philanthropy ranks annually since 1991 • Ranks public charities with most private support • Individuals: Gifts and bequests • Corporate gifts: Cash and in-kind • Foundation Grants • NOT fees for service or government funds • Stable method: most recent fiscal year data available • Does not exclude any category of organization • Includes consolidated financial information • 900 entities ranked, upwards of 50,000 locations • Completely unstudied: “Unexploited data set”
Why Private Support? • Fundraising distinctive to the nonprofit sector • 87% of public charities receive donations • Solicitations educate public about organizations • Branding important to attract donors • Significant source of income for some organizations • >50% of revenue for 20% of organizations • >75% of revenue for 12% of organizations All figures from Horne, C. S. (2005). Toward an understanding of the revenue of nonprofit organizations. Georgia Institute of Technology.
Is Private Support a Good Measure? • Distinctive of public charities • Indication of an organization’s ability to convince people to make donations • Minority of cumulative income for public charities • Intermediate outcome • Does not evaluate effectiveness of service delivery • Allows comparable measure of many types of organizations
Compile Rankings to One Data Set • Distill 8,800 entries into single list of names • Name variations, changes, and mergers • Include all variables year-by-year • Income, expense, and fiscal year accounting data • EIN, Category, and headquarters location • Notations: affiliates, in-kind giving, capital campaign • Ranking number and age • Some published data outdated • Carried over from year to year or outdated by a year • Cumulative impact of updates <1%
Is Philanthropy 400 Data any Good? • Data voluntarily submitted by organizations • Most organizations use Form 990 data • Most studied 990 data flaws for expense allocation • Less incentive to lie about revenue • Council for Aid to Education for public universities • Allows fairly direct comparison • Difference in accounting rule application • Include some, but not all religious organizations • Published with factual and typographical errors
Other Data Issues • Attempts to include entirety of affiliated organizations • United Way included as entire organization in 2005 • Jewish Federations report individually • For commercial firms, Wal-Mart reports consolidated for entire corporation and McDonald’s excludes independently-owned franchises • Including all franchise revenue would ~double McDonald’s total revenue
Question 1: What ages of organizations drove the concentration of private support for ranked organizations? • Hypothesis: New Entrants will surpass incumbents in overall private support because they are better suited to the current environment than persisting organizations. • Theoretical Backing: • Organizational Inertia • Organizational Legitimacy • Organizational Ecology: Senescence
Question 2: Do ranked organizations change dependence on private support? • Hypothesis: Organizations are more likely to diversify income streams as they get more mature, relying less on private support • Theoretical Backing: • Resource dependence • Organizational Isomorphism • Risk and rewards of revenue source diversification
Encountering Data Problems • Around 70 organizations with no total income reported each ranking • Majority are colleges and universities • May be able to replace with 990 data • Many Universities report total income for fundraising entity and not entire organization • Several organizations each year with private support exceeding total income
Question 3: Do certain categories drive increased private support, or does growth mirror all categories? • Hypothesis: Ranked organizations will collectively track changes seen with public charities overall in number of organizations and private support received. • Theoretical Backing: • Organizational Ecology: resource partitioning and density dependence • Organizational Legitimacy
Categories Declining • Not strong growth categories • Expect a declining percentage of organizations • Not closely tied with giving • Declining popularity of federated giving • Giving decreases tied to aging organizations • Youth as an exception
Categories Increasing • International growing in number & private support • Accounting Issues • At least 3 organizations with restated financials • Commercial Funds with a strong impact • Number of hospitals outpacing increase in their private support • Private support to Human Services group more volatile than number of organizations ranked
Should Concentration be a Concern? YES!!! NO!!! Economies of scale allow effective groups to scale up Specialization improves efficiency Resources shared between orgs Donations: Federateds, In-Kind Contracts: Komen to Planned Parent. Professionalization & bureaucratic inertia for consistency Weeds out marginally effective New organizations have grown Groups representing minority interests have flourished • Creates barrier to entry & growth • Inhibits innovation • Stasis in sector more likely • Corporatization of sector • Donors increasingly set agenda • More power to the influential • Marginal voices at greater disadvantage • Big bet philanthropy can fail
Recurrence of Concentration? • United Way steadily dropped in percentage of receipt of overall private support • 5% in 1950s • 1% today • Other organizations with huge market shares • Red Cross >1% in 1950s • March of Dimes ~1% in 1950s • Reliable statistics likely unavailable prior to 1990