NRFC Mid-Term Learning Event
January 20-22, 2003
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Introduction
On January 20-22, NRFC Learning Network participants, foundation, and USDA representatives gathered in Santa Fe, New Mexico for a provocative two-day session devoted to an introductory exploration of public policy advocacy, entrepreneurship, and social change evaluation methodology. Guest presenters included Dr. Cornelia Flora, Distinguished Professor at Iowa State University and the Director of the North Central Regional Center for Rural Development (Outcomes and Measures); Don Macke, Co-Director for the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship (Entrepreneurship); and Dr. Kate Clancy, Director of the Wallace Center for Agricultural and Environmental Policy at Winrock International (Policy).
While each of NRFC's twenty learning network partners represent a distinctive strategic approach to community-based transformation of rural areas facing persistent poverty, they all sense the need to better link their efforts to state and national policy initiatives, to directly or indirectly exploit opportunities that expand entrepreneurial enterprises in their regions, and adopt methods to better measure the effectiveness of their work and document their stories. The learning retreat also provided a chance for Network partners to identify key policy issues for collective dialogue and advocacy as well as begin conversations on the formation of a national rural policy agenda.
Outcomes in Real Time
What's The Plan? Where Am I Going And How Do I Know When I Get There?
Cornelia Butler Flora, North Central Regional Center for Rural Development, Presenter
Measuring the progress of social change is difficult and complex. While there is general agreement that evaluation is an essential tool for understanding how change happens, learning what can be done better and building a system of accountability that meets the needs of multiple partners and constituents is challenging. As funders and constituents alike look for greater clarity and delineation of the results of investments in social projects, social change organizations are tested. What should be measured and why? How do we determine short-term indicators of success? How do we develop an evaluation plan that is multi-level and multi-dimensional - one that meets the internal needs of individual organizations while still being useful to the collaborative, grantor agencies, and constituents?
Designing an effective evaluation model begins with knowing where you're trying to go and what you're trying to change, Dr. Neal Flora tells the Learning Network partners. Formulating an evaluation paradigm is a deductive inquiry:
- Where do we want to go?
- What will it look like when we get there?
- Where do we start?
But while the inquiry process is straightforward, the construction of the actual design is not.
Why is it hard to evaluate community change initiatives? Community transformation is by definition complex. It involves lots of moving parts and represents a commitment to change at many levels - individuals, family, institutional, and community wide-processes that require collaboration and coordination both within the community and between the community and the broader society. Further transformation work,
Places priority on a resident-driven approaches that values local knowledge and participation in at all stages of the endeavor - from initial conceptualization and priority setting through evaluation and policy change.
Aims to build capacity at the neighborhood level for a continuous process of local improvement.
Is focused on building or rebuilding "social capital"-that is, the social fabric among residents in the community.
Operates according to values of racial equity, social and economic justice, and respect for community assets, including local culture, environment, and history.
In a phrase, community change is BIG. Trying to track the progress of constituent engagement, community revitalization, quality of life improvements, asset development, the growth of social and political capital, and racial and economic justice advancement is exhausting and futile. Creating an appropriate evaluation model for change efforts reflective of their multi-dimensional nature often overwhelms collaborative practitioners - making it hard to reach agreement on what should be measured. Moreover, faced with the sheer size of these projects, groups tend to want to measure too many things - obscuring critical processes and indicators and making it virtually impossible to pay attention to the interconnectedness of issues or valuable lessons that may be occurring.
Given the challenges associated with evaluating social change, how can the various dimensions of the work be documented in a simplistic, but holistic manner?
Dr. Flora introduced one approach, the "capitals" model. Defining capital as "resources used to create other resources over a long time horizon," Professor Flora presented an asset based evaluation approach gleaned from conversations with Learning Network partners. The model is constructed around six critical community assets or capitals:
- Human Capital
- Social Capital
- Environmental Capital
- Financial Capital
- Political Capital
- Cultural Capital
Pluralistic, this design assumes vertical and horizontal participatory constituent and stakeholder engagement and is useful in helping collaboratives identify and reach agreement on key process and outcomes measures. By allowing practitioners to observe the process of community change through the lens of six major outcomes categories or capitals, collaboratives are able to both identify and measure the multiple desired future conditions (outcomes) that their work anticipates and understand the interrelationship of these outcomes.
For example,
Human Capital relates to the characteristics and potentials of individuals - their education, skills, health, values, and leadership. Successful human capital outcomes might include demonstration of increased use of the knowledge, skills, and abilities of local people
Social Capital represents interaction, trust, shared vision among groups. Successful social capital outcomes could include the demonstration of both strengthened relationships and communications with internal and external stakeholders as well as improved community initiative, responsibility and adaptability to changing circumstances.
Environmental Capital speaks the quality of air, water of land. Successful environmental outcomes might include demonstration of sustainable, health ecosystems with multiple community benefits.
Financial Capital generally correlates to equity and ownership. Successful financial outcomes could include demonstration of diverse and healthy economies; reduced poverty; increased business efficiency; increased business diversity; or increased resident assets.
Political Capital describes the ability to get thing done in the political arena. Demonstration of successful political outcomes might include increased voice and influence; understanding how the system works;
Cultural Capital characterizes how people know the world. Examples of successful cultural outcomes might include degree to which different heritages are maintained and valued; ancestral language and customs are in place and upheld; or willingness of collaboratives to take time to understand and build upon different ways of knowing and doing.
This approach assumes a dynamic, non-linear, improvisational, and natural interplay between each of the capital elements and can (and should) be customized to fit the requirements of the particular initiative.
Why is measurement so important?
Community transformation processes are public efforts and therefore benefit from the support of a wide range of constituents, all of whom need to be kept informed of progress and outcomes. Measurement allows collaborations to generate useful feedback to guide implementation - to inform planning, management and administration, and mid-course correction. This is particularly important when dealing with neighborhood and regional level change. There are no blueprints. Structures and activities must be tailored to localized circumstances, which places emphases on learning from each unique, progressive experimentation. Moreover best lessons and practices from rural revitalization projects should be documented in order to inform and shape policy and research agendas.
But measurement is only important if it relevant and useful to the people involved and reflects excellence. It is essential that the measurement framework created be answerable - accountable - at multiple levels - the individual organization, local constituent, network, and public and private funder levels.
To be maximally useful, measurement should become an intrinsic and continual process upon which organizational direction and decision are based:
Reflection → Measurement → Reflection → Action → Measurement → Reflection.
Understanding how change happens is as important as knowing what change occurred.
As important as outcome measures are, measuring the effectiveness of collaborative processes - how members work together - how decisions are made - how conflicts are resolved - is equally important. Collaboratives must be mindful of both their internal "cultures" and the current external cultural context as different cultural norms, differing capacities and inequalities among partnership members can impede work and create conflict.
Creating processes from the outset that address
these issues and
Foster collaborative learning
↓
Build common ground and
↓
Help partners reach agreement on approaches and improvements
Is fundamental to the ultimate success of the collaborative engagement and worth the investment of time.
Advice to remember:
Avoid surveys as a measurement tool. Surveys are expensive and are only valuable if repeated.
Because partnerships often include members with unequal capacity, it is important to address capacity gaps and power imbalances early on in order to forestall conflict and divisiveness.
Pay attention to the multiple dimensions of change.
Equitable change only comes about with diversity and inclusivity.
Questions for reflection:
What do we need to do to bring about change?
How does strategic readiness relate to opportunities? How is it measured? What are the short-term and long-term opportunities for which we are preparing? What is our ability to respond to unanticipated opportunities?
There are patterns of successful business. Are there standards/patterns of successful transformational initiatives? Is there need for a more explicitly developed entrepreneurial model to move the change agenda forward?
Our whole culture focuses on heroes, and not on collective action. How do you capture/measure the role that an extraordinary, charismatic individual plays? How do you determine the degree to which organizations, rather than charismatic individuals, are responsible for change?
How does a collaborative maximize its capitals? Is there an opportunity to enrich capitals through connections with higher education?
More Than A Business
Entrepreneurship: Transforming Rural Communities
Don Macke, The Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, Presenter
Much of America's rural landscape is threatened. Out migration, disinvestment and a stifling, one-size-fits-all economic climate are fueling the decline. While the poverty level for the country as a whole grew only slightly, the percentage of people in rural areas living below the poverty level is nearly 30 percent higher than it is in cities. Among the poor, poverty rates are highest for rural minorities - nearly three times those of whites and substantially higher than those of urban minorities.. While the nation as a whole grew by 13 percent in the 2000 census, rural counties in five northeastern and three Southern states lost more than 9 percent of their population. Equally telling is a growing wage gap that finds people who work in rural areas making just 70 percent of the average salaries of workers in urban areas. Even factoring the lower cost of living outside cities, workers in rural areas are 60 percent more likely to earn minimum wage than their urban counterparts.
As NRFC-sponsored multi-issue collaboratives pursue agendas to transform the quality of life in rural communities, what is their role in helping to boost economies and raise the level of wealth and economic vibrancy?
For Don Macke of the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, the answer to these questions lies in increasing the entrepreneurial activity in rural communities and fostering a climate of entrepreneurship and civic engagement. Though rural areas exhibit a high potential for entrepreneurship, rural communities consistently lag behind urban areas in entrepreneurial presence for a number of reasons:
Many of the best and brightest talents are exported to area where there is greater opportunity;
There are fewer markets and a lack of a critical mass of entrepreneurial energy;
Rural residents have limited access to resources to implement ideas;
There is a lack of entrepreneurial peers to support and learn from; and,
While there is a lot of subsistence level entrepreneurial activity that supplement incomes and help folks make a living, there are few available resources to expand this "underground economy" to the next level - to the mainstream.
Given these circumstances and obstacles, how do rural communities begin to build a climate of entrepreneurship?
By fostering an entrepreneurial mindset
Creating an entrepreneurial climate is an intentional, developmental process. It begins by knowing what entrepreneurship is, and understanding that in its broadest context, it is more than business. Quoting from Jeff Timmons, "Entrepreneurship is the transformation of an idea into an opportunity." In short, entrepreneurship is an approach - a style of leadership. "The entrepreneur always searches for change responds to it, and exploits it as an opportunity."(1) Entrepreneurs are change agents - acting as a catalysts and drivers of economic progress. As an approach and set of behaviors, the principles and practice of entrepreneurship can be easily applied to other sectors.
By exploiting the principles of entrepreneurship in the civic and social arenas
The notion of civic /social entrepreneurship marries business principles with social purpose. Viewing the work of social justice and community development professionals through the portal of entrepreneurial principles and values (e.g. innovation, progress, resourcefulness, pursuit of opportunity, and accountability), points up glaring similarities in the approach and standards of community change agents and their business counterparts. Blurring sector lines gives collaboratives the chance to conceive their work within the context of its current and potential value to the economic and civic landscape of rural communities and regions.
By "practicing" entrepreneurship and focusing on economic growth
While all growth is not good growth, "practicing" entrepreneurship -
Having a deliberate entrepreneurial focus;
Concentrating on people, the right geography and scale;
Being creative;
Developing strategic partnership; and
Promoting a systems approach,
Provides the potential for multiple growth models.
By creating an infrastructure of supports and training that expands the pool of entrepreneurs
Transforming and reinvigorating rural communities and their economies will require a concentration of entrepreneurial talent, peer support networks, and cohesive infrastructure development. Entrepreneurial Support Organizations (ESOs) clearly represent a partial response to the need. Focusing on under-represented as small business owners - people of color, women, people with disabilities, and dislocated workers, ESOs provide small business training, one-on-one business counseling, technical support services to those people who are interested in starting new businesses or expanding existing enterprises. These centers represent a valuable part of the infrastructure and technical assistance needed to support entrepreneurial talent and move the rural "underground economy" to the next level of efficiency and wealth through a continuum of skill development that shepherds enterprising individuals with
Limited potential → to entrepreneurial potential → to business management skills → to entrepreneurial acuity
By being intentional about entrepreneurship
To have real impact, the entrepreneurial pursuit must be deliberate and decisive. The current entrepreneurial support system in rural areas is fragmented, limited in its scope of services, and generally inaccessible to Blacks and other minorities. Communities will need to invest in an integrated system of supports and networks that go "beyond business planning" and that are open and accessible to minorities and women.
Group Discussions and Presentations
Despite the fact that many of the collaboratives may not see their work directly related to entrepreneurship, "a lot of you are struggling with a lot of the same issues," Macke told participants. "At the end of the day what we are all trying to do is raise income levels, create greater economic opportunities that retain and attract young people - we are all trying to reduce poverty," Handing out an article on Outcome Measurement developed by the Center for Rural Entrepreneurship, Macke introduced the monograph as a tool based on outcomes achieved by successful entrepreneurial ventures around the country. Designed to help groups see some of the more obvious connections across their work and across issues, Macke suggested that the Outcome matrix might be a useful reference in the small group discussions.
Recognizing that positive economic growth and change is a long-term process, the matrix is structured to show economic progress over time and is divided into short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes. In the short-term (six-twelve months) the level and quality of enterprise activity and capacity building are the two initial indicators of successful economic development and change. During the mid-term phase, one to three years, indicators of change are demonstrated by enterprise, community, and organizational improvements. Long-term, three years or more, wealth/asset development, sustainability, smart growth, and constituency engagement are the major indicators of successful economic development investments.
Following the introduction to the outcome measurement matrix, participants broke into site-based groups to discuss ways to measure entrepreneurial activity occurring in their initiatives. The chart that follows summarizes the presentations from the small group discussions.
ENTREPRENEURIAL OBJECTIVES BY COLLABORATIVE SITES
|
Collaborative |
Goals/Objectives/Strategies |
Indicators |
| South Carolina |
CDC Association/ CBO's have:
1. Increased voice, value within state
2. Increased private/public partnerships
3. Increased # of funders to support entrepreneurial activity |
Undetermined |
| Ohio |
1. Sustainable resource management
2. Entrepreneurial civic capacity building
3. Investment policies |
1. Robust entrepreneurial networks
2. Principles of sustainable development imbedded within infrastructure |
| New Mexico |
1. Expand political capital
2. Establish state IDA program
3. Increase investment in alternative lenders
4. Decrease predatory lending |
Undetermined |
| Nebraska |
1. Mitigate out migration by building community endowments
2. Capture wealth transfer: $129 million |
1. Percentage of wealth captured (target 5% or 6.4 million) |
| Colorado |
1. Create seal or brand for agri-business
2. Develop wholistic marketing system |
1. Increase resources within next year
2. Initiate one farmer pilot project
3. In 1-6 years three orgs sign-on
4. Products produced |
| Maine |
Rethinking governance structure and priorities |
Undetermined |
| CVP |
Having trouble putting in entrepreneurial framework |
Undetermined |
| Arkansas |
Want to have conversation about how to win |
Undetermined |
| Alaska |
Tribal Health Consortium
1. Create 100 jobs
2. Raise health status
3. More Informed customer-community |
Short-term
1. Tribal buy-in and people responding to RFPs
2. Program Implementation e.g. # of people sent out |
Toward an Effective Rural Policy
Entering the Policy Debate - Local, State, And National Levels
Kate Clancy, Henry A. Wallace Center for Agricultural & Environmental Policy, Presenter
For years, rural policy has been synonymous with farm policy. Fragmented, unfocused, and emerging without informed public debate, rural policy has failed to live up to its promises. Despite billions of public dollars for rural areas targeted at the agriculture and manufacturing sector, the economic viability of rural communities remains largely unimproved. It is increasingly clear that the current policy approach has failed. Rural areas continue to trail urban areas, even after huge government transfers. Poverty rates are higher in rural communities. Rural employment growth is slower than in metropolitan areas. Personal and business service provision is more difficult. Rural youth continue to migrate from rural areas, taking with them possibilities for future growth. The obvious failure of rural policy is causing decision makers, rural analysts, academics, and rural citizens to reconceptualize rural policy frameworks to reverse the slide and re-energize the flagging economies of rural regions.
Though many community-based efforts don't make public policy a focal point of their missions and daily activity, Kate Clancy of the Henry A. Wallace Center for Agricultural & Environmental Policy began by repeating an old African adage:
"You may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you."
The importance of public policy to the work of CBOs should not be overlooked. Consciously or unconsciously, every time organizations attempt to secure funding or sustain it, try to institutionalize "best practices," bring public attention to unaddressed problems, or build issue focused coalitions to advance an advocacy agenda, they have entered the policy arena at some level. Unfortunately, many groups concentrate on the local agenda to the exclusion of national policy, which has the dual consequence of isolating them from the opportunity to link with strengths of collaborative partners interested in the same issues or from connecting local best practice to national policy initiatives.
For those involved in rural work, however, the current period is particularly pivotal. Not only are there pending cuts from war and Homeland Security related activity, recent farm bill gains are now being undermined and reinterpreted by the Office of Management and Budget - for example pitting advocates of WIC and agricultural conservation programs against each other. As the slow decline of the rural sector continues and begs for a cogent rural approach and a breakaway from the "farm policy equals rural policy" paradigm, Congress has been reluctant to take-up a comprehensive national rural policy. With few organized nonfarm interests available to articulate nonfarm rural policy, academics and analyst have debated whether rural advocates should continue to seek a comprehensive policy or seek a more modest localized and selective strategy. The strategy debate not withstanding, there is some agreement among rural analysts that the outcome of any new rural policy must be to:
Reduce concentrated poverty
Retain the rural middle class
Sustain and improve the quality of the natural environment (Stauber,2001).
Given the current policy context in Washington, rural advocates will have to be particularly vigilant to avoid further losses in support.
Public Policy 101
As NRFC sponsored collaborative prepare to enter the policy arena, it is important to have a fundamental understanding of the policy process. The steps include:
- Defining the problem
- Getting on the policy agenda (usually requires an advocate)
- Formulating proposals
- Majority building (and beyond)
- Budgeting for programs
- Implementing (program writing; writing regulations;; and monitoring/watchdog)
- Evaluation
- Solution or change
Cautions: Understanding Lobbying
There are generally no legal limits on the amount of time and money charities and other nonprofits may spend on policy related activities including community organizing, holding rallies, advocating on administrative rules and regulations, conducting public education campaigns, producing and disseminating research or engaging in judicial advocacy. However there are legal limitations placed on nonprofit organizations involved in lobbying or voter education activities. For a more complete discussion of lobbying and its implications for 501 (c) (3) organizations, please see the Addendum.
POLICY INTERESTS AND ACTIVITY
Group Presentations and Discussions
After the initial policy introductions Network Partners had the opportunity to share their current policy concerns and activities. While the level of involvement varied, all groups clearly had issues that affected their work. The chart on the following pages summarizes the small group presentations.
|
Collaborative |
Policy Process |
Policy Issues/Strategy |
Policy Agenda |
| South Carolina |
CDC Association:
1. Develops position paper on key issue and distributes to the state legislature
2. Prepares articles /information for the Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank |
Policy issues vary per year as determined by constituent process |
To be determined |
| Ohio |
Not in place |
1. Forest Management
2. Land use planning (fragmentation)
3. Enterprise: Get local counties to support entrepreneurial infrastructure
4. Create venture fund (Angel Network) could turn into legislative mandate |
Work in progress |
| New Mexico |
Undetermined |
1. Free-up practitioners to become more involved in policy dialogues |
1. Micro-enterprise
2. Professionalization of childcare
3. Children's Cabinet -interagency coordination of children's agenda
4. Rural transportation Nebraska Have coalition in place |
| Nebraska |
Have coalition in place |
1. Enact similar legislation to Montana and Michigan re: tax credits for endowment contributions
2. Engage local groups and public agencies in endowment building
3. Build wealth transfer strategy into "aging in place" facilities (pilot) |
Charitable income tax credits for philanthropic contributions to endowments - Legislation Drafted (Will defer until climate better) |
| Colorado |
Family Farm Brands |
1. Fighting to maintain conservation funding in post farm bill
2. Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture -Support for disaster relief |
Undetermined |
| Maine |
Created 25 member sustainable development network (16 years) |
1. Cultural heritage lens (new strategy)
2. Conference/congress on rural poverty |
1. Sustainable development
2. Rural policy
3. Regionalism and consolidation |
| CVP |
Constituency threatened by Amnesty legislation opposing guest worker legislation |
1. Over arching issues impacting undocumented workers
2. Prior involvement in Propositions 187, 227 |
AB560
Dream Act: Legislation that will give undocumented children legal status and opportunity to attend college |
| Arkansas |
Coalition formed |
Tax Reform and Education |
|
| Alaska |
Tribal Consortium |
Tribal access to health care |
Reauthorization of Indian Health Care Act has language re: Health Aid Program s - allows behavioral/mental and dental healthcare as part of primary healthcare package. Being tested in Alaska, may be applicable to other states |
Afternoon Session: Choosing A Policy Agenda
During the afternoon session, Network partners held a brainstorming session to identify state and national policy issues that NRFC might take-up. Four options received final consideration:
1. Implement Farm Bill interagency collaboration for greater alignment of efforts/programs (on the ground)
2. Modify IDA
a. Expand IDA eligibility
b. Change match criteria
c. Loss of eligibility for other programs
d. Increase administrative allowance
3. Encourage Federal incentives to support rural entrepreneurship
4. Improve access to health and human services to rural areas
Two issues were selected for further strategy formulation: Health and human services and entrepreneurship. Strategies developed will:
Improve access to health and human services in rural areas
Encourage Federal incentives to support rural entrepreneurship
From Here
Next Steps: Strategies and Tasks
The NRFC Learning Community developed a preliminary course of action to address the priority issues - entrepreneurship and human services - that the group had identified. A third issue, Individual Development Accounts (IDA's), may be taken up if resources permit. Legislative teams will assume overall responsibility for this policy work working in concert with the Wallace Center.
Plan for Entrepreneurship
| Problem: |
Categorical programs do not specifically include entrepreneurial strategies. A change in regulation(s) is needed to allow programs to address networking, infrastructure, etc. |
| |
|
| Strategy: |
The strategy for addressing this issue has six components and begins with the identification of a few specific regulations that the group hopes to change. This is followed by the identification of successful programs and innovative applications of categorical funds to serve as models and precedents. The rest of the proposed approach to the issue consists of activities that map the "lay of the land" regarding congressional champions, committees, key agencies, programs and trends, and other organizations and collaborations focused on entrepreneurship which might support the effort to change the regulations.
TASKS:
1. ID specific regulation(s) - NCOE, Macke, USDA
2. Document Successful programs, precedents - Macke, other grantees, USDA
3. Compile programs - WC
4. Map people, organizations, programs - WC organize process and compile
5. Re-engage rural caucus - TBD
6. Fine tune plan as steps 1-5 are completed. |
| |
|
| Plan for Rural Transportation Issue |
| |
|
| Problem: |
TEA-21 is being re-authorized and the group would like to lend a voice to the work of other organizations. |
| |
|
| Strategy: |
Develop a set of principles as to what would be good transportation policy for rural areas.
TASKS:
1. Discuss whether/ how the principles would be effective - how this would be measured.
2. Identify a set of organizations working on rural transport (STPP, CTAA, others) - groups, Dianne McS, WC
3. Look at the positions organizations are taking on the issue - same
4. Compile these and, with TBD process, determine which are compatible with NRFC goals - NRFC, WC
5. Prepare principles document and get agreement of NRFC network - WC, Dianne
6. Determine vehicles(s) by which principles are disseminated - groups
7. Undertake dissemination of document - NRFC |
| |
|
| Plan for Health Delivery Issue |
| |
|
| Problem: |
Access and support for health care for tribal people and others living on tribal lands |
| |
|
| Strategy: |
Alaska model: The group felt that the Alaska project provided a model that should/could be replicated with other tribes and people living on tribal lands. Their strategy was the same as above: to develop a set of principles regarding health delivery, which would bring the NRFC voice to the discussion of the Indian Health Act. The steps are similar to those above - but NRFC must first decide if the issue, as defined at present, meets the key criteria and has identified leadership and advocates.(2) |
Between the Lines
Lessons and Take-Aways
Observations:
Process:
Cultural heritage important: Partners indicated that it is important to build time for cultural exchange and learning into all NRFC events as a means of building stronger bond and understanding among groups. NFRC is challenged to use cultural styles and motifs (e.g. story telling, art, etc.) in future learning frameworks.
More time for reflection: Participants expressed the desire for more scheduled reflection and peer-to-peer sharing time.
Learning from Peers: Many of the Network partners have extensive experience in areas that are of interest to the work of collaboratives. Opportunities need to be made for these practitioners to share their knowledge with interested groups and individuals, problem solve, and have conversations "about how to win."
Funder involvement in learning: Few funders were present for this event. How will the lessons from this event be shared? What can be done to increase funder participation in the future?
Translating terms, jargon: In introducing new methodologies and approaches, NRFC must be mindful of the need to ensure that new terms and jargon can be easily translatable into the everyday vernacular of community development and social justice practitioners. For example, the terms civic engagement and civic participation are common used in the community development field. Would the understanding (and utility) of the concept of civic/social entrepreneurship been enhanced by discussing the relationship of civic engagement and civic participation to civic entrepreneurship in the presentation?
Measuring and Documentation: For Learning grantees, the evaluation/measurement process is particularly onerous in part because of the minimal level of NRFC 's investment in these projects. For these and other grantees, much of the initial change that occurs from their work, particularly in the area of human and cultural capital, is best captured in stories and anecdotes. How can this non-traditional method of capturing change be factored into NRFC's overall evaluation process?
Lessons:
Viewing community change through the "capital" lens: The capital lens evaluation model offered a common framework through which groups with disparate strategic approaches could view, measure, discuss, and understand progress of their individual work specifically and the community change process more generally.
Civic /social entrepreneurship: The concept of civic/social entrepreneurship is an example of the blurring of sectoral lines between business and social purpose ventures. Funder's emphasis on accountability and measurement, theory of change, business plans, etc. is another. While applicable and useful, the concept may raise values questions for some social justice professionals who are resistant to ascribing business principles to their work.
Public Policy arena: The daylong public policy discussions surveyed numerous areas of common interest and affinity. While only two policy issues can go forth collectively, NRFC may want to explore whether there's interest in maintaining small affinity groups around identified thematic policy interests. In particular., the issue of IDA's seemed to be of interest to a large number of participants.
Resources
More on Lobbying:
ADDENDUM
Lobbying
1. Is legal for nonprofits to engage in lobbying?
Yes, it is legal for nonprofit organizations to lobby, but there are restrictions.
2. What are the restrictions that limit nonprofit participation in political activities?
Nonprofits are under certain restrictions by the IRS regarding their ability to conduct lobbying or political activities. Some agencies resolve this conflict by organizing at least part of their activities under 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations, or 501(c)(6) trade associations for which different rules apply. But for organizations that choose to maintain their 501(c)(3) status, it is important to make a 501(h) election (see p. 17) and understand what is permissible.
3. What is lobbying?
Lobbying is one important form of advocacy and public policy participation that involves attempts to influence specific legislation. Lobbying by public charities, a 501(c) (3) organization is protected by the constitution. The Internal Revenue Code regulates charities', foundations' and other nonprofits' lobbying activities and expenditures.
4. Why should nonprofits participate in lobbying?
It is important for all nonprofits to understand the legal opportunities for them to lobby and influence legislation that affects their mission. Why? Because lobbying can bring about policy changes that improve peoples' lives.
5. Why are lobbying limitations places on tax-exempt organizations?
Because taxable (for-profit) entities are not allowed tax deductions for lobbying or political activity expenditures, the IRS wants to make sure that tax-paying entities do not side step this rule by taking deductions for contributions made to nonprofits, which then use the contributions for expenditures that the tax-paying entity is not allowed to make.
6. What are the various forms of lobbying?
Direct Lobbying: In general, your organization is engaging in direct lobbying when you state your position on specific legislation to legislators or other government employees who participate in the formulation of legislation, or urge your members to do so.
Grassroots Lobbying: You are participating in grassroots lobbying when you state your position to the general public and ask the general public to contact legislators or other government employees who participate in the formulation of legislation. How lobbying is defined, in both cases, is quite liberal.
Political Campaigning is defined as any expenditure intended to influence the selection, nomination, election or appointment of any person to a federal, state or local public office, or to any office in a political organization, or the election of the presidential or vice presidential electors. A 501(c)(3) organization must pay an excise tax on any political expenditures, as well as risk losing its tax-exempt status by being considered an action organization.
7. How are lobbying activities of nonprofits monitored?
The IRS requires certain exempt organizations to disclose information about lobbying expenditures on their annual Form 990 and to inform members of the nondeductible portion of membership dues spent on such activities. In order to remain a 501(c)(3) exempt organization lobbying cannot represent a substantial portion of an organization's activities. An organization, which is found to have engaged in excessive lobbying, may lose its 501(c)(3) status.
8. What is considered excessive lobbying
Exactly what the IRS considers to be excessive lobbying is open to interpretation. Courts have rejected tests based solely on a percentage of the organization's budget stating that using percentages (such as 5%) is only one measure to be considered.
9. What is section 501 (h)
In order to avoid this uncertainty, The Tax Reform Act of 1976 allows a nonprofit to register with the IRS under Section 501(h), called the "Expenditure Test." This establishes a sliding scale of allowable lobbying expenses based on a percentage of the Nonprofit's budget. An organization making the 501-(h) election is permitted total annual direct lobbying expenditures as follows:
- 20% of the first $500,000 of the agency's budget, plus;
- 15% of the second $500,000 plus; 10% of the third $500,000 plus;
- 5% of any balance.
10. Should You Make the 501(h) Election?
If you make any expenditures of the type defined as lobbying or political, then the 501(h) election is to your advantage. You should be aware, however, that there is some additional accounting and reporting involved. Part VI-A of Form 990 needs to be completed, and your accounting system must be able to track the types of expenditures listed on this portion of Form 990. At any rate, you should review parts VI-A and VI-B of Form 990 and modify your chart of accounts as necessary in order to track these expenditures. Regardless of whether you make the 501(h) election, you will need to accurately account for lobbying and political expenditures. If organizations don't make any lobbying or political expenditures, you should remain aware of the ability to make the 501(h) election and consider making this election prior to incurring any of these expenditures. The election is revocable, so a group can always change its mind at a later date.
11. Are there exceptions to what is considered lobbying?
Yes, there are exceptions.
| Request for technical advice and assistance: |
Presenting testimony or technical assistance before legislative committees in response to official written requests for such testimony. |
| |
|
| Membership Communications |
Membership communications on specific legislation are not lobbying expenses if directed only to members of the organization. The legislation it refers to must be of direct interest to the organization and its members, and the communication does not directly encourage members to engage in direct, grassroots or lobbying activities. |
| |
|
| Self-defense communications |
Self-defense communications are allowed. These are considered to be communications with respect to possible action by the legislative body, which might affect the organization's existence, its powers or duties, its tax-exempt status or the deductibility of contributions to the organization. |
| |
|
| Discussions of broad social, economic, and similar problems |
Addressing broad social economic issues is not considered lobbying communication if the discussions do not address the merits of specific legislation or directly encourage a member to take action on a proposal or legislation |
| |
|
| Nonpartisan analysis, study, or research: |
Nonpartisan studies, analysis or research are not considered lobbying. |
(1) Peter Drucker
(2) We say this because of the Medicaid component that may be DOA with states.
|