Acumen Fund Fellows Program: Deadline 5 Nov 2009!

I got this in my email box today. Please direct all questions to Blair Miller (below):

__________________________

APPLY FOR THE ACUMEN FUND FELLOWS PROGRAM: 2010-2011

We are excited to announce that the application process for the 2010-2011 Class of Acumen Fund Fellows is now open!

Applications will be accepted online until 11:59pm on Thursday, November 5, 2009. Detailed information about the program and application the process, as well as the bios of current and past fellows, can be found on our website. To apply, or to send more information to others you know who might be interested, please go to www.http://www.acumenfund.org/get-involved/fellows-program.html

We are looking for dedicated individuals with the practical skills, the creativity, the empathy and the leadership potential to affect change by leveraging market-based solutions to create social impact. Acumen Fund Fellows are drawn from a pool of talented, passionate people from all geographies, sectors, backgrounds and religions.

Since graduating its first class of Fellows in 2007, the Fellows Program has continued to grow and expand, using the experiences of each class to continue building a unique training curriculum specifically focused on leadership and social enterprise.

Fellows Alumni have called the program a life-changing experience, and one that allowed them to build critical business skills and a better understanding of the challenges involved in serving low-income consumers around the world.

If you know exceptional individuals who should be part of our 2010-2011 class, we hope you will encourage them to apply.

We are also excited to welcome our new Class of 2009-2010 Fellows to New York. Over the coming weeks the 2010 Fellows will be training and actively preparing to support Acumen Fund investments. The Fellows have committed to sharing their experiences both from New York and on the ground, so expect to see frequent posts from them on the Acumen Fund blog.

Best regards,

Blair Miller

Fellows Program Manager

LGT Fellows Program: Deadline is 26 OCT 09!!

Got the following in my email and it looks like a GREAT opportunity!

_______________________________________

Building on the success of last years LGT Venture Philanthropy fellowship program we are proud to announce the launch of the iCats Program! The iCats Program is an answer to the need for professional know-how and resources in many social enterprises. We created a web-based platform to match experienced professionals with specific positions in selected philanthropic organizations.

The fellow positions for 2010 are now online on www.icatsprogram.com ! Application deadline is 26^th October 2009.
A fellow works 11 months on-site with a portfolio organization from February to December 2010 and receives regular mentoring from the LGT Venture Philanthropy team. In addition, a 4-day induction workshop brings all fellows together in the Swiss mountains. Go to www.icatsprogram.com to find out more and to apply.

We appreciate if you could circulate this call for applications to potentially interested people. If you have the opportunity to post an article on your website or in your newsletter, please use the text below or from the attached article. Please let us know when and where you posted it.

Thank you for helping us to spread the word!

Wolfgang Hafenmayer
Oliver Karius
LGT Venture Philanthropy

www.icatsprogram.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update on LGT Venture Philanthropy

The LGT Venture Philanthropy Foundation was founded in 2007 by initiative and funds of the Princely Family of Liechtenstein. Its mission is to raise the sustainable quality of life for the less advantaged people especially in the developing world. Applying a venture philanthropy approach, LGT Venture Philanthropy supports both organizations with financial, social and intellectual capital. LGT Venture Philanthropy makes use of grants, loans and equity investments. Any generated profit is channeled back into the fund and will be used for additional investments.

LGT Venture Philanthropy is pleased to share some results of its philanthropic activities with you: The portfolio has grown to seven organizations with USD 3 Mio invested, the global team now counts 12 people in seven countries, negotiations with several clients interested in LGT Venture Philanthropy's due diligence and investment services are ongoing, and last but not least, the feedback about the 1^st generation of fellows in LGT Venture Philanthropy's fellowship program has been overwhelmingly positive!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary iCats Program

LGT Venture Philanthropy is proud to announce the launch of the iCats Program: The iCats Program is an answer to the need for professional know-how and resources in many philanthropic organizations and social enterprises. LGT Venture Philanthropy created a web-based platform to match experienced professionals with specific positions in selected philanthropic organizations.

The fellow positions for 2010 are now online on www.icatsprogram.com ! Application deadline is 26^th October 2009.
A fellow works 11 months on-site with a portfolio organization from February to December 2010 and receives regular mentoring from the LGT Venture Philanthropy team. In addition, a 4-day induction workshop brings all fellows together in the Swiss mountains. Go to www.icatsprogram.com to find out more and to apply.

Beyond Good Intentions

A lot of people say that it is intention that counts. I'm hard on people...I expect more. Its simply NOT enough to just have good intentions. You need to think ten times beyond just your intention into the impact it has on the people around you.

Not convinced?? Let's take the example of suicide. Quite often, it is done with "good intentions." I used to work with suicidal teenagers...so trust me on this! Most people contemplating suicide believe that they are doing the world and their families a HUGE favor by killing off a terrible, horrible person (that's how they perceive themselves!). But the truth is that their suicide hurts the people they are most trying to help. Friends and family spend years trying to come to terms with that decision. Trust me on this too. The pain left behind is unbearable. In fact, when the kids I worked with realized how much pain they were actually causing by leaving, they often abandoned their attempts altogether.

This is an extreme example of the point I am trying to make...good intentions are simply NOT enough. The same is true of the aid world. People need to think ten times about the impact of their intention before putting it into practice. The reason aid is SO ineffective is exactly because no seems to think past the intentions.


(photo credit: http://www.beyondgoodintentions.org/Mozambique_30.jpg)

Tori Hogan (above, in Mozambique) went through a similar questioning period. Was it enough to just have good intentions?? Tori worked as an aid worker for a few years, got incredibly frustrated with the inefficiencies and left. She saved all her money from various jobs, bought a camera and went around the world asking people working in the aid world, "What makes aid effective??"

She's in the process of putting together a documentary titled Beyond Good Intentions. Tori has an interesting blog here; and a teaser video here.

Links I liked

Here are my favorite links from the week:

1. They are digitizing the soils across Africa which I thought was absolutely fascinating, and a project with tremendous potential for agro-development. Truly gargantuan, but important!

2. The Places We Live is a really well-done site (accompanies the book) about slum life around the world. Read/view and be moved!

3. Ranking Rich Countries in the World and their giving. This was pre-Obama, remember!

4. The Destiny of Girls, an article in the Washington Post about the inequality of women in India.

5. Solvatten has been making waves in the blogosphere. What do you think??

Spotlight: The Secret Millionaire

Photo credit: Strevo

I never thought about this, but giving away money is just as hard as applying for it. The Freakonomics blog was the first to bring this to my attention, when sociologist Sudhir Venkatesh asked readers What would you do with $70 Million?? I don't think I'd ever considered that it was hard to give away money. Excess funds have never been an issue for me, rather its been the latter.

On a recent flight through the UK, I stumbled upon a program called The Secret Millionaire. The show follows undercover millionaires as they search for worthy people and programs to distribute their money amongst (rumor has it that an American version will soon debut in these parts). I'd honestly never seen philanthropy from their point-of-view---the difficulties of figuring out who to trust, who would most benefit, and how to take a social investment furthest. At the end of each episode (I saw two), the millionaire finds several worthy causes and is humbled by the act of giving, and the recipients are most grateful and humbled by the act of receiving. Both describe it as life-changing. I wish most philanthropy was this personalized, and this gratifying.

There are many lessons to learn from this program. The viewer gets to see several points-of-view including that of the donor and that of ordinary people who are potential recipients. You also get exposed to the complexity of charitable giving or receiving. Even midway through my first episode, I found myself deep in thought. If you get a chance, I would urge you to check the show out (you can see episodes online, though I haven't figured out how!)

Here's a sample:

Writeup on Terry George

Teaser:


And an interview with Terry after:

What would you do if you had $70 Million??

(photo source: Tracey Olson)

So here's a premise that made me realize that giving away money is about as hard as getting it. You can weigh in on this debate yourself here. Still, here's a gist:

What would you do if you had $70 million??

This is the dilemma faced by Michael, a 31-year-old who will soon inherit a large sum of money.

For reasons that the truly wealthy will immediately understand, Michael has been advised to set up a foundation. “I have to donate about $70 million over the next decade,” he laughs. “Or maybe it’s $50 million. I can never remember.” [...]

So here's what happened:

[...] If he followed the traditional path, Michael would set up a charity, and then donate about 3 to 10 percent of his endowment each year. But, he says he wants to exercise his charity in a slightly different way:

1) I want to give it all away in ten years.
2) I want to give it away only in the U.S. — I can’t stand these people who give money overseas when we need it at home.
3) I won’t give a penny to schools. I think its unconscionable that Gates is paying for schools; that’s the government’s job.
4) I don’t want to give anything less than $1 million at a time. Meaning, no small grants.

So what says you?? Give your input here.

An opinion: Oprah's Big Give

the cast of Oprah's Big Give. (photo credit: www.oprah.com)

Oprah's Big Give was something I was excited truly excited about. First off, I love her talk show, and I truly respect and admire what she has made for herself. She's funny and fabulous. She walks her talk. Essentially, she's great. But her Big Give show sucks!

Why does the Big Give suck? Its ridiculously unrealistic and it teaches people/reinforces bad philanthropy habits! I guess the point of the show is to get us to realize that we, i.e. anyone, can do something. We should all care and help. And we can!! But the way of doing it is just bad. Done right, this could be powerful...but it isn't and its annoying. So here are my big issues with it:

1. It teaches people to throw money (sometimes in the form of stuff) at a problem: Philanthropy is NOT about money ONLY. Philanthropy is about caring, and caring for a while. I think the show is set around people caring for a short period of time and rallying around a cause (maybe because the camera is there). What happens after they leave?? I don't know about this case, but I do know about several other cases where the short-term momentum has killed a good project or killed someone's coping abilities. For example, the problems were often long-term, but they focused on short-term solutions...which is what money is. How about coping and money management?? What about their lack of skills??? And that takes me to my next point.

2. It doesn't force people to think long-term: This was obvious from the very beginning. Let's take the guys who "won" the first episode. Two guys went and helped a family who had just lost their father in a tragic shooting incident. The mother was worried about her mortgage. So the guys called around and got a bunch of money. They then took the kids on a Target shopping spree. They emerged with carts of stuff, most of which I wondered if they really needed and about how long it would serve their needs. And more than anything else, I wondered if they had lost their house, where the heck were they going to put all that stuff?? This is a continuous problem in the show (and with most donors). You can't just throw money or stuff at a problem. You can only solve it with a little more well-rounded thinking and more holistic solutions.

3. I don't get their definition of "person in need": Ummm...i'm sorry, but some of the people on the show who have been defined as "victims in need" are better off than myself and many of the people I know or have known in my life. For example, the "plastic surgeon from South Central LA" who needed people to help pay off his medical school loans. I know many professionals (doctors, lawyers, engineers) who have come from adverse circumstances, paid off their loans, and done a lot of community service...a couple of them called me up and scoffed. A plastic surgeon?? come on!! If he cares so much, he'd work for two years, pay off his loans and then spend the rest of his life doing service. Or in the second episode where a restaurant owner who had three cars gets another free one just for hosting a fundraiser at his place. (we won't go into the gas consumption of those vehicles either that they gave away...how is that helping a poor person get on their feet!!). I have more, but we'll leave that...and its been only two episodes!

Part of the problem is the judging itself as they set the tone. While the host and judges are nice people, I wonder how much they really understand the idea of need, philanthropy (granted they are involved in philanthropic efforts, but being involved can be at different levels!), or the particularly crucial need for sustainability in philanthropy.

My biggest pet peeve is the lack of long-term thinking in the philanthropic industry (and among donors). This is for various reasons which I will discuss later...particularly that they lack the understanding or economic incentive to do so. This NEEDS to change, and Oprah's Big Give is perpetuating a bad situation. Come on Oprah...your show needs a makeover!! (you can hire me and i'll help fix it).

Its sad that a show with so much potential is just not thinking big itself...

Media's love affair with philanthropy

Its true, media loves philanthropy, and its beginning to be vice versa, which is really good. We now have a win-win situation.

Here's an article written by Rich Polt, a commentator on the field, asking "When Will the Media Bubble Burst??" And he answers saying that it won't. Here's why...

Good news, folks! Philanthropy will remain a permanent fixture of the media universe. Here are three important reasons why (each a topic worthy of further discussion):

1. Sex sells, and apparently so does philanthropy. Yes, it's true. The images we see and the stories we read are a direct reflection of what society demands. And in this day and age, people are all about giving. Whether driven by global disasters, technology's ability to make giving a one-to-one experience, or the financial windfalls of the '90s, everyone is interested in how they can do their part to give back. It's funny, but I never hear anyone talking about "charity" anymore. Even a gift of $25 dollars to support a friend doing a walk for cancer is now thought of as personal philanthropy. There has been a major culture shift and the media is simultaneously covering it and selling advertising against that demand. Check out Sean Stannard-Stockton's recent column in the Financial Times about "social capital markets" in the year 2033. It provides another interesting viewpoint on how philanthropy is becoming more entrenched in the fabric of our society.
2. Philanthropists are rock stars...and rock stars are philanthropists. This cover image from Time magazine says it all. As philanthropy increasingly becomes a pastime and passion for athletes, politicians, and celebrities, the paparazzi and "personality media" will continue to infuse their reporting with coverage and images of how their subjects are giving back. Conversely, since business success coupled with giving back have become such great fodder for media coverage, we will only see more in-depth interviews and personality pieces on those who are passionate about philanthropy.
3. Foundations are open to being open. Over the last few decades, donors and foundations have become increasingly comfortable using external communications to complement and even strengthen their giving activities. Much has been written about this already (read Joel Fleishman's recent book, The Foundation, check out this article by Bruce Trachtenberg and Grant Oliphant, or this piece that I wrote). In the old days, a newspaper would assign a private foundation story to its investigative reporter -- a reflection of how easy it was to obtain information. Today, those same stories are handled by business reporters, financial reporters, lifestyle reporters, and even (you guessed it) philanthropy reporters.

Its SO on. Cameras, keep rolling!