Ignoring the Asian Vote

| Posted: April 24th, 2012

The Latino vote gets a great deal of attention during presidential campaigns—and understandably so. Latino voters in key states such as Colorado, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico may well decide whether President Obama gets to stay through 2016 or Governor Romney takes over come January 2013.

But analysts, experts, strategists, and other talking heads are largely ignoring the Asian vote. Again, understandably so. Asian American Pacific Islanders (AAPI) make up only 4.8 percent of the U.S. population, a mere pittance of 14.7 million people compared with the 50.5 million Latinos. Moreover, AAPIs are not exactly known for their attendance come election time. Their share of the electorate hovers around the 2 percent mark.

In an extremely tight election however, every vote does count and the invisible Asian voter can make as much of a difference as her Latino neighbor. In highly contested Nevada and Virginia, AAPIs make up 7.8 percent and 5.6 percent of the population respectively.

Asian Americans are poised to be a force to be reckoned with in the near future. AAPIs are the fastest growing racial group, multiplying by 45.6 percent in the past decade, far outpacing the total U.S. population, which only grew by 9.7 percent. Their numbers have risen by at least 30 percent in all states, except in Hawaii where they are already the undisputed majority. Politicians should take note that the AAPI population grew by 116 percent in Nevada and by well over 80 percent in Arizona and North Carolina. Projections show that by mid-century, over 9 percent of the population will be of Asian Pacific Island descent.

As Don T. Nakashini, director emeritus of UCLA’s Asian American Studies Center, writes in the 2011-12 National Asian Pacific American Political Almanac: As voters, donors, public policy advocates, and elected officials, “Asian Pacific Americans seek to no longer remain as spectators to the parade of politics, or as vulnerable victims of partisan power struggles. Instead they are striving to become more organized, more visible, and more effective as participants and leaders in order to advance—as well as protect—their individual and group interests, and to contribute to our nation’s democratic processes and institutions.”

It just might be worth both parties’ time to pay Asian voters some heed.

Share this:

Filipino-American Political Invisibility and Community Organizations

| Posted: March 23rd, 2012

Filipinos were living in Louisiana as early as the 1750s and have been integral members of American society ever since. They have labored in Hawaii’s sugar cane plantations, picked vegetables in California, tended Washington’s strawberry fields, and worked in Alaska’s fish canneries. They now take care of the sick and elderly, educate America’s children, serve in the U.S. military, and help power commerce and industry. Filipinos are also the second-largest Asian group in the United States, below Chinese.

Despite this long history in the United States and their considerable number, Filipinos remain politically invisible, particularly at the federal level. Only two members of Congress are of Filipino descent: Rep. Steve Austria of Ohio and Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia. President Obama’s Asian American presidential appointees are predominantly of East and South Asian descent. This lack of representation at the highest levels hinders issues relevant to the Filipino-American community from surfacing and getting addressed.

Ethnic community nonprofits can facilitate integration into the mainstream. Some strive to give their constituents political voice and power. A glance at Filipino-American organizations can help explain the group’s political invisibility.

The National Center for Charitable Statistics identifies over 700 Filipino-American nonprofits, not counting regional associations and congregations that are not readily identifiable as Filipino. Four in ten are classified as arts and culture nonprofits and two in ten are faith-based. This comes as no surprise because many ethnic organizations foster awareness and maintenance of native culture. Filipino-Americans also tend to be religious and predominantly Roman Catholic.

It is striking, however, that less than a percent of Filipino-American nonprofits are advocacy groups. These are the nonprofits that are vital to political participation and representation. This dearth, no doubt, contributes to the Filipino-American community’s lack of political presence and clout.

While other factors can help explain Filipino-American political invisibility, it is worth the community’s time to take stock of their organizations and consider what more they can do to get their voices heard.

Filipino-American Community Organizations by NTEE Classification

Source:  National Center for Charitable Statistics (IRS Business Master File)

Share this:

Need Nonprofits Fret About the President’s Budget?

| Posted: February 22nd, 2012

The federal budget President Obama sent to Congress last week has some in the nonprofit sector worried, but are they fretting about the right stuff?

The president’s $3.8 trillion proposal for fiscal year 2013 includes increased revenues and spending cuts. Revenues in the order of $1.5 trillion will be raised over a decade by allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire for high-income taxpayers and putting a cap on their itemized deductions; by raising taxes on the top 1 percent (the “Buffet Rule”); and by reinstating the estate tax at higher levels. Savings include non-health mandatory spending and entitlement cuts and the elimination of hundreds of programs.

Nonprofit leaders and advocates have expressed concern over the suggested limitations on charitable deductions, tax increases for millionaires, and higher estate taxes.

Sue Santa, senior vice president of the Philanthropy Roundtable, told the NonProfit Times, “The president is sending mixed messages to the charitable community. On one hand, he wants to limit the charitable deduction. On the other, he wants millionaires to continue to give to charity while also paying higher taxes.”

“We thought we had turned the corner of the issue, that we had made progress with the administration, only to learn that we are back to square one,” Diana Aviv, chief executive of Independent Sector, told the Chronicle of Philanthropy. Her coalition of nonprofits and foundations opposes policies that discourage private giving and has advocated for preserving the status quo.

The fear is that higher taxes on the wealthy would result in less giving.

The president’s budget is a request that will not be enacted in its entirety. Congress will have its own ideas about what to keep and what to toss out. It is highly unlikely under a Republican-controlled House that the wealthy will suffer higher taxes anytime soon. It is almost guaranteed however, in today’s economic and political climate, that funding of programs will suffer.

And this is where nonprofits should be concerned.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy points out that “the $3.8-trillion blueprint proposes no drastic cuts to social programs. But it proposes few big increases either, despite what nonprofit leaders say is a growing need for services to help people recover from the economic downturn.”

The demand for human services remains strong while funding, from government and private sources, has not kept up with the cost of providing these services. Entitlement and programmatic cuts will further strain human service nonprofits that can barely keep up with the needs of their clients.

Nonprofits should fret, not much about the remote possibility of lost largesse, but about the real threat faced by programs that prop up those at the bottom, the most vulnerable among us.

Share this:

Virtual Community, Real Outcomes

| Posted: January 23rd, 2012

Sandi Scannelli had big plans for the Community Foundation of Brevard when she took over its helm in 2010. First and foremost, she wanted to bring together the nonprofit community in the Florida county.

“There are so many public charities in the county,” Scannelli told the Brevard Business News, but there was “no clearinghouse that brings all the information together.”

That is, until she met Tom Pollak, a senior researcher at Urban Institute’s Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy.

Pollak, program director for the National Center for Charitable Statistics, met Scannelli at a conference and told the nonprofit executive about the NCCS Community Platform—a web tool that combines public data on nonprofits and open technology to help communities and nonprofit organizations work together more effectively.

The Community Foundation collaborated with Urban Institute to develop ConnectBrevard.org, which according to Scannelli is “designed for people who want to volunteer, individuals who want to contribute resources, including people and dollars, into a cause or organization that is aligned with their community priorities.”

As communities, nonprofits, and governments learn to deal with the new reality of limited budgets, increased demands for programs and services, and heightened expectations for effective outcomes, aids such as the NCCS Community Platform come in handy.

“This could really help organizations around the country better align their programs, better coordinate their services, and better present the nonprofit sector as a whole in relationship to community needs,” Pollak said.

The web tool is now being developed in 10 states and counties across the United States. The Connecticut Data Collaborative, for instance, is described on its website as a “central portal where all Connecticut organizations and residents can access a wide range of data from federal, state, local, and private sources relating to the health, well-being, and economy of the residents of the state of Connecticut.”

University of Connecticut’s David Garvey, who directs the site’s development, told the Hartford Business Journal that the website will be able to match specific community needs to nonprofits, assess the financial health of nonprofits for interested stakeholders and funders, and connect nonprofits with one another.

The NCCS Community Platform holds great promise for communities, governments, and nonprofits that find themselves bound together in a shared well-being and future. The question is, will more municipalities adopt it anytime soon? Better yet, are public and private funders willing to invest in such a helpful tool?

Share this:

The Nonprofit Sector In 2011 And Beyond

| Posted: December 29th, 2011

Now is when some us look back at the year that’s about to end and make predictions about the coming one. Recent reports and events from the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy (CNP) give us a snapshot of the nonprofit sector in 2011 and a peek at what nonprofits face in 2012 and beyond.

The Nonprofit Sector in Brief: Public Charities, Giving, and Volunteering, 2011 reports that the sector is burgeoning.

More than 1.4 million nonprofits are registered with the Internal Revenue Service, a 19-percent increase over the first decade of this century. And this number excludes organizations that aren’t required to register with the IRS—namely, nonprofits with less than $5,000 annual revenue or religious congregations that opt not to register.

Private giving is on the uptick, reaching $291 billion in 2010, after a decline during the Great Recession. Forty-four percent of nonprofits saw contributions rise during the first half of 2011, and 25 percent said contributions held steady. In 30 percent of charities, funding fell.

Patrick Rooney, executive director of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, points out that at the current rate of increase, funding wouldn’t return to prerecession levels for six years.

CNP discussions with nonprofit leaders and experts also confirmed that challenges will dog the sector well into the future. Less government funding. Growing demand for programs and services. Heightened funder scrutiny and demand for accountability. Challenges to the nonprofit tax-exempt status. Combined, these forces could put many charities at risk.

Some experts on performance management and mission effectiveness do see these challenging times as a possible “inflection moment.” Twenty leaders from government, nonprofits, philanthropy, and business agreed at a recent convening that nonprofits have every reason right now “to step out of their comfort zones, take a hard look at what they’re doing well and what needs work, and look for new means of assessing and improving their performance as they adapt to the ‘new normal’ and learn to do more with less.”

In an earlier blog I also listed possible workarounds and solutions for nonprofits. Be strategic about limited resources. Collaborate and partner. Identify and reward best and promising practices. Innovate. Advocate for the sector, especially at the state and local levels. Educate the public. Harness technology and the internet.

It will be rough sailing ahead for nonprofits, but those that can ride the wave will land in solid ground, better and stronger.

Share this:

Nonprofits and Asian Immigrant Integration

| Posted: November 22nd, 2011

Asians are America’s fastest growing minority group, increasing in number by 43 percent during the last decade. Close to 15 million people -- 5 percent of the total population -- identify as Asian. Another 2.6 million  say they are part Asian.

Immigration accounts for most of this growth. Asians are the second largest immigrant group behind Latinos, with most coming from the Philippines, India, and China.

In the D.C. Metro Area, 9.2 percent of residents are Asian, most of them foreign born.

D.C. Metro Area Population Breakdown

Uprooting oneself from home and country to start anew thousands of miles away is stressful and challenging. Immigrants encounter strange faces, a new language, and mores that may go against deeply held values and beliefs. All this while finding their way through a labyrinthine immigration system.

Some newcomers have friends and family members to lean on while they adjust. Others seek out compatriots through immigrant congregations and other organizations.  These community-based immigrant-serving nonprofits can be community centers and advocates. They also serve as intermediaries between immigrant communities, government and other stakeholders. They provide social services and help immigrants find work and advance.

The D.C. Metro Area has more than 500 nonprofits that help region’s immigrant populations get their bearings. Half of these organizations target Asian immigrants while one in ten caters to all immigrant groups. Most Asian-serving nonprofits are congregations.

Nonprofits serving immigrants are clustered around Washington, D.C. while Asians have been moving into outlying suburbs and counties for jobs and homes. This spatial mismatch however should resolve itself in time as Asian and other immigrants integrate and start new associations, much as those before them did -- thanks to nonprofits that helped pave the way.

Foreign-Born Asian Populations

Share this:

The Outlook (And Some Solutions) For Nonprofits

| Posted: October 21st, 2011

“Where’s the light at the end of the tunnel?” This was the key question for panelists at a recent Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy (CNP) event held to explore what’s ahead for this sector.  Marking its 15^th anniversary, CNP asked nonprofit leaders and thinkers to give their take on the “new normal” – limited funding, increased demand, and intensified scrutiny.

The outlook for nonprofits is daunting, according to Stephen Bennett, president and CEO of United Cerebral Palsy:

I’m not sure there’s an end to the tunnel. I think things are totally different, and I’m not sure I’m looking for light at the end of the tunnel anymore. It’s kind of a wasted exercise for me. We have to do things very differently, I think, in going forward.

Bennett’s view is understandable. The Great Recession and lingering economic torpor strain nonprofits while government funding is down and private giving remains static. Nonprofits make do with less while demand from Americans with nowhere else to turn grows. Talk in Washington about reforming the tax code and charitable deductions and revisiting nonprofit tax-exempt status heightens nonprofits’ anxiety.

Yet, nonprofit experts and leaders convened by CNP at this and other anniversary events offered some solutions for getting through today’s dark tunnel.

Be strategic about limited resources.  Obvious? Maybe, but nonprofit executives and boards need to weigh both the short term and long term costs of cuts. Letting go of staff or drawing down reserves might bridge current gaps, for instance, but can also undermine capacity and viability.

Collaborate and partner. Nonprofits have long worked together to help the individuals and families they serve. Besides sharing resources and expertise with each other, nonprofits can partner with the wider community to address systemic issues. Nonprofit housing assistance agencies in the Washington, D.C. metro area, for instance, can collaborate with school districts to minimize the impact of the foreclosure crisis on children moving homes and switching schools.

Identify and reward best and promising practices.  Private and public funding has to be maximized and channeled to programs proven to get results. Mario Morino, co-founder and chairman of Venture Philanthropy Partners, urges nonprofits to “manage to outcomes.” That means using information to guide decisions and operations, which leads to measurable and meaningful impacts.  That said, nonprofits need financial support to gather information and measure outcomes.

Innovate. Marta Urquilla, senior policy adviser at the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation, says that “when we talk about innovation in this context, we’re not talking about novelty. We’re talking about the innovation that comes from the relentless pursuit of results.” Funders must resist funding “the latest thing” for two to three years and then chasing the next big idea. They should see a new initiative through since false starts and glitches can bedevil even very viable programs.

Advocate, especially at the state and local level. The political climate in Washington means that there’s little or no pay off in trying to get Congress and the administration to act on behalf of nonprofits. Julie Rogers, president and CEO of the Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation, cites the Think Twice Before You Slice Campaign in the Washington, D.C. metro area as an example of an initiative that has convinced local and state governments to preserve funding for nonprofits (in this case, more than $45 million) by showing the contributions nonprofit make in their communities.

Educate the public. Bennett believes that the general public isn’t aware of the extent of nonprofits’ contributions and challenges because nonprofits are resilient and usually don’t turn anyone needy away. Educating people, many of whom benefit from nonprofits, can get them to support nonprofits more.

Harness technology and the internet. Joining the digital revolution can be a low- cost and effective way to reach out to the public, raise funds, and train practitioners.

Nonprofits may be stuck in the tunnel for now, but there are ways out of the dark.

Share this:

Are DC’s Metro Area Nonprofits a Match for Hard Times and Unrealistic Expectations?

| Posted: September 23rd, 2011

The Census Bureau’s latest poverty numbers paint a dismal portrait of the lives of millions of Americans. Over 47 million of us are poor. That includes families of four subsisting on $22,314 a year and individuals struggling to survive on $30 a day on average for food, shelter, transportation, and other basics.

In Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, the average poverty rate from 2009-2010 is 13.3 percent, slightly below the national rate partly because average poverty rates in Maryland (10.2) and Virginia (10.7) are lower. The District of Columbia’s average poverty rate is far higher -- 18.9 percent.

Will hard times for poor Americans change anytime soon? Probably not with the unemployment rate hovering at 9.1 percent and projected to remain well above 8 percent in the next couple of years.

The safety net most of us count on also continues to unravel. Federal, state, and local budgets are still shrinking, which leads to more service cuts that disproportionately impact the most vulnerable, including the estimated 1.5 million poor people residing in DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

The District of Columbia has been able to address a projected shortfall in FY2012 with spending reductions, revenue increases, and government staff reductions but it now has less funding for most of its services. Maryland foresees a $1.4 billion deficit in FY2012 while Virginia anticipates a $2 billion gap in FY2012.

Needy families and individuals are turning to nonprofits more than ever, and some believe that this is how it should be. The onus of helping struggling citizens ought, they say, to be on charities and not governments.

But do nonprofits have the wherewithal to save the day? Some 1,358 registered nonprofits in DC, Maryland, and Virginia provide basic services to those living in poverty. Among them are organizations that provide multiple services and agencies that meet more particular needs through, say, food banks and pantries, employment counselors, and community health clinics.

Seventy-seven percent of these nonprofits are general human service providers whose combined revenue totals about $1 billion. Ten percent run employment programs with 24 percent of the total revenue and nine percent offer health services with 20 percent of total revenue. Only 48 of registered nonprofits (or 4 percent of the total) provide food.

Support Nonprofits in D.C, Maryland and Virginia

One in four nonprofits are located in the District, home to only 7 percent of the metro area’s poor. Maryland, which has 38 percent of the area’s poor, houses 35 percent of support nonprofits but has only 24 percent of the total revenue. Virginia, which has 55 percent of the region’s poor, claims 40 percent of the charities but 51 percent of total revenue.

Distribution of Nonprofits in D.C., Maryland and Virginia

The metro area’s nonprofits will be saddled with increased demand from poor families and individuals along with many others in temporary straits and not counted among those living in poverty.  Meanwhile, they can expect tighter budgets as revenue from government contracts and grants shrink. Clearly, major fundraising challenges lie ahead.

The 2010 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey reports that only about four in ten charities (43 percent) said philanthropic contributions in 2010 topped their 2009 level. Almost a quarter (24 percent) saw them plateau while a third (33 percent) experienced declines.

The survey packed other sobering news on the basic services front. Human service nonprofits registered had the fewest gains in 2010, with just 38 percent enjoying any funding increases. Nearly as many (36 percent) reported drops, and the rest (26 percent) a flat line.  And small nonprofits lost more ground than larger groups.

As millions of Americans struggle amid sustained unemployment and other economic woes, nonprofits that are increasingly under financial pressure themselves are expected to keep the safety net together. Governments need to step up -- if not through more funding, through policies that make it easier for charities  to provide for citizens in need. Large foundations and the ultra- wealthy can also afford to be a bit more generous considering what’s at stake.

Share this:

Maryland’s DREAM Act Deferred

| Posted: August 22nd, 2011

Washington’s inability to reform the country’s immigration system has left state lawmakers little choice but to address constituents’ immigration concerns themselves. The National Council of State Legislatures reports that during the first half of this year, 1,592 immigration-related bills and resolutions were introduced in the 50 states and Puerto Rico. That’s 16 percent more than in the same period last year. Most of these initiatives dealt with law enforcement, identification/driver’s licenses and employment.

Nine states went farther, though, passing education laws, mainly related to in-state tuition eligibility and financial assistance for immigrant populations. In May, Maryland’s General Assembly approved its version of the DREAM Act, which Gov. Martin O’Malley promptly signed.

The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act was first introduced a decade ago by U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Richard Durbin (D-IL) and has since been introduced regularly but has yet to pass Congress. The statute would allow undocumented immigrants under 35 who came to the US before age 16 and earned a high school degree or its equivalent to apply for legal permanent resident status after living here for at least five years. Then, if they complete at least two years of college or military service and abide by the laws, they can apply for permanent legal status after a six-year wait.

Maryland’s DREAM Act is narrower and offers no path to citizenship. It merely establishes in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented youth who went to a state high school for at least three years and can prove that their parents pay taxes. After a couple of years in community college, these young immigrants can transfer to a public university.

Maryland’s DREAM Act was to have become law on July 1. But opponents managed to gather over 100,000 signatures for a petition, almost double the number needed to halt its implementation. The law will now be put up to a vote in a referendum in November 2012.

Those who signed the petition contend that Maryland shouldn’t and can’t afford to subsidize the education of undocumented youth. The Act’s supporters accuse the petition’s authors of using misleading information to get people to sign up and argue that the state’s DREAM Act grants undocumented students only some of the rights enjoyed by other high school graduates.

An estimated 65,000 undocumented youth graduate from American high schools each year, a fraction from Maryland schools.

Maryland’s Department of Legislative Services, the research arm of the General Assembly, calculates the state’s DREAM Act will cost $778,000 in fiscal year 2014 and rise to $3.5 million in fiscal year 2016. This is relatively miniscule compared to the state’s total higher ed expenditures, around $5 billion annually from fiscal years 2009 through 2011.

During economic hard times like ours, it’s understandable why some are fighting any budgetary outlay for Maryland’s DREAM Act.  But, over time, investing in educating Maryland’s undocumented youth could pay off.

The state has already seen these kids through years of schooling, and affordable college helps ensure a productive and educated workforce for Maryland and the rest of the US. College-educated immigrants would get better paying jobs and pay more in state and local taxes, and their lifetime contributions would more than cover the cost of Maryland’s subsidies.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, workers with college degrees in 2009 had median weekly earnings of $1,137, almost twice the average of what those with only a high school diploma earned. The unemployment rate for college-educated workers was 4.6 percent, 10 points lower than the rate for less educated workers.

Denying these young people the opportunity for a bright future could disenfranchise and marginalize them. And since they came here as children, didn’t choose to be undocumented, and consider themselves Americans, they are highly unlikely to leave willingly, especially in light of the Obama administration’s new policy which suspends deportation of undocumented immigrants who pose no threat to national security or public safety.

With tuition subsidy costs relatively low, and the life-long stakes high for the immigrants and the rest of society high, investing in immigrant youth through higher education can only be to everyone’s benefit.

Share this:

Compensating Gay Public Servants Equally - Good Business Practice?

| Posted: July 15th, 2011

This month, Cambridge, Massachusetts becomes the first US city to give married gay employees a stipend to help defray federal tax on health insurance.  The quarterly rebate to nearly two dozen workers covers taxes paid by these public servants on the value of health benefits their spouses receive from the municipality.

Cambridge city councilors made this move with equality in mind. Lesbian and gay employees get the same health insurance as their straight colleagues but have to live with a federal tax penalty for gay unions (which have been legal in Massachusetts since 2004). On average, gay employees with domestic partners or spouses pay $1,070 per year more in taxes on health insurance benefits than married straight workers with the same coverage.

Some private companies have been offering partner benefits, including health insurance to employees in gay domestic partnerships or unions.  At least a third of employers in all and half of employers with 5,000 or more workers extend benefits to employees’ gay partners. That includes such Fortune 500 giants as Bank of America, Coca-Cola, Dow Chemical, General Electric, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, UPS, Walt Disney Co. and 276 others.

Some corporations also now compensate gay employees for federal tax on health coverage. Cisco Systems and Google and 19 other firms have sought ways to address the tax burden on lesbian and gay workers. Their main goals are strictly practical--worker recruitment and retention.

The UCLA-based Williams Institute estimates that at least 50,000 lesbian and gay couples have legally wed in California, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and the District of Columbia. Another 85,000 lesbian and gay couples have entered civil unions or domestic partnerships in California, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont, New Hampshire, Washington, and Nevada. These numbers will rise as more enter civil unions in Rhode Island and marriages in New York beginning this month.

As more states legalize gay unions, both public and private employers will have to find ways in this “altered” environment to attract, keep, and compensate lesbian and gay workers. The federal tax penalty for gay couples is steep enough to drive some potential new hires or trusted old hands to look for work elsewhere.

Share this: