Effective Philanthropy Requires Advocacy

By Charles R. Halpern
President, Nathan Cummings Foundation

---

Foundations are inevitably involved in advocacy. The areas they support, the values they espouse, and the grantees they choose all reflect their vision of the good society and of worthwhile charitable activity. When foundations choose to make grants to symphony orchestras, they are, by implication, asserting the importance of classical music and inviting others to share that perception and support such music. They are putting into practice their belief that the arts are essential to the well-being of the community, a proposition that many people are contesting today. When foundations give their money to the local hospital they are asserting the importance of making sophisticated health care readily available to all members of the community. They are inviting others to join them in this charitable pursuit.

The question is whether foundations should be more explicit about their advocacy--by supporting advocacy organizations, by encouraging citizens to organize to assert their views, and by explicitly taking positions themselves.

We believe that this is a time in the nation's history when such advocacy is more important than ever. Foundations should lead the way in urging that advocacy is a vital activity for the nonprofit sector--giving voice to those who are silenced by a lack of resources and lack of access, and assuring that all points of view are adequately heard on critical questions. Advocacy touches on the very essence of the democratic process.

The American Cancer Society, for example, can hardly do its job if it does not take an advocacy stance with regard to cigarette smoking. The powerful and effective advocacy of the cigarette companies needs to be counterbalanced by opposing views. Since the ties between smoking and cancer are now well-documented, the Cancer Society would be shirking its responsibilities if it did not try to see this scientific understanding reflected in public policy.

Some of the most important social and political achievements over the last 50 years were helped by plain, clear advocacy efforts. Foundations that recognized the importance of the civil rights movement funded the tax-exempt advocacy of the NAACP, the Legal Defense Fund, and the Urban League. Similarly, the environmental movement, supported by foundations, helped to establish the network of protective measures that have done much to reduce environmental damage and are now under attack.

Conservative foundations, in recent years, have had no problem supporting their ideological vision. Their aggressive advocacy is part of the reason so many of the democratic values we have taken for granted are being challenged today. Over the past two decades, foundations opposed to government and committed to unregulated corporate activity stepped up their support for like-minded think tanks and intellectuals who are now shaping national policy debates on issues such as poverty, the environment, and the arts. The influence of these foundations is pervasive because they have skillfully developed grant policies that reflect their ideological zeal.

This does not mean that advocacy must be divisive and polarizing. Some of the most effective advocacy has the objective of establishing common ground among diverse groups and trying to assure that common values are asserted and articulated.

Advocacy should not be seen as a separate area of a foundation's funding interest. Rather, every program area of the foundation should be scanned for advocacy opportunities. Effective philanthropy demands that such systematic attention be given to the matter. At an earlier time, a foundation could support its local art museum and not feel that it had to become involved in debates about the importance of the arts in society. Today, however, when the legitimacy of the arts is under attack, the foundation, in order to have an effective arts program, has to be prepared to deal with the larger policy questions.

Evolution of Advocacy at Cummings

Advocacy was not an explicit part of the strategy of the Nathan Cummings Foundation when we began to shape our grants program seven years ago. But as we developed our grantmaking programs in the arts, health, environment, and Jewish life, we came to realize that advocacy was a necessity if we wanted our grants to be effective. To support a vibrant arts community, we had to support groups fighting censorship and defending public funding for the arts. To reduce the environmental damage done by automobiles, we had to build a presence in Washington and the states where transportation policies were made. To revitalize Jewish life, we had to reinvigorate the Jewish tradition of social justice, including support for advocacy efforts on behalf of Israeli Arabs.

Our work in the area of health can serve as a more detailed example. Recognizing the connection between mind and body in health, the Foundation first supported the practitioners and pioneers doing the research and providing services. Next, we helped finance the Bill Moyers series "Healing and the Mind" on PBS, making innovative and effective mind/body approaches to medicine visible to a large and receptive audience. To capitalize on public interest, we joined forces with the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation to establish the Center for the Advancement of Health in Washington, DC, which works to assure that policy makers and providers include mind/body approaches in all levels of the health care system.

At the same time, the Foundation realized that, for the poor, health depended on proper nutrition, prevention, and access to care. From the beginning, we have given support to advocacy organizations such as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Food Research and Action Center to increase the number of eligible women and children participating in federal food assistance programs.

Such advocacy is of vital importance today, because we are living in a time of rapid change and limited resources. Responsibility for the poor and the helpless is shifting from the federal government to the states. State and local government bureaucracies are not equipped to handle these new responsibilities, nor will they have sufficient money to serve everyone. The result will be a reordering of priorities and considerable hardship. In that reordering, the poor, the homeless, the mentally ill, the aged, and children in need of special health and education services will be left out unless they obtain effective advocates to advance their interests. Unfortunately, this is also a time when the federally funded legal services program, which has provided effective advocacy for the poor, is being decimated.

Foundations cannot provide replacement dollars for services that are cut, but we can make sure that the democratic process taking place in our state capitals and city halls is well-informed and reflects the positions and the views of our grantees, not just the opinions of those who can hire lobbyists at market rates. We can also stand up, use our considerable clout, and make ourselves heard. Different Ways Foundations Can Support Advocacy

A foundation's advocacy work can take at least three forms. First, it can support efforts to organize individuals and educate them for effective advocacy roles. For example, our support for student environmental organizations falls in this category. We try to support college students in organizing themselves to understand environmental problems and promote effective solutions. This activity might take the form of encouraging energy efficiency on campus, or it might include urging state environmental agencies to rigorously enforce environmental protective legislation.

Second, the foundation can make grants to organizations that are in the advocacy business. In our transportation program, for example, we support a number of organizations that advocate on behalf of public transportation, since public transportation, cheap and available, is an essential component to any solution to the nation's transportation problems. Advocacy can take place at the state, national, and local level, and must include a component of public education.

Third, the foundation can engage in advocacy activities itself. It can join affinity groups around its program interests, and urge its points of view on fellow grantors and solicit their support as partners in joint funding efforts. The foundation can maintain regular contacts with elected representatives and encourage them to support positions that promote and facilitate a vital and expanding philanthropic community.

Of course, there are limitations on foundation advocacy. Foundations cannot support individual candidates. They cannot lobby for specific legislation unless the interests of foundations themselves are directly affected. However, that leaves open a very wide range of advocacy activities. Foundations can make their grantmaking effective by assuring that those opportunities are identified and developed.

Most effective advocacy proceeds from a real understanding of the positions of all parties and a respect for the interests of diverse people. Each foundation has its own distinctive culture and its advocacy efforts will be its own, reflecting that culture. We have found that advocacy grants and activities compel us to think more clearly about the reasons for our selection of grantees and to evaluate more precisely our successes. In short, we have found advocacy to be a critical stepping stone to effective philanthropy. The Philanthropists

There was once a family who lived in a small village by the side of a large river. They had more than they needed and wanted to help relieve the suffering of their less fortunate neighbors. For many years it was their practice to give a large fish to each of the poor families in their village on every major holiday and on the birth of each of their children.

One day, a wise woman suggested to the family that their charity could be directed in a more meaningful way: why not set up a school to teach fishing skills to the poor people in the village so that they could catch their own fish. The family could pay for the instruction and give each poor family a small boat.

This seemed like good advice, and they reshaped their giving to match it. The prosperity of the village increased visibly, and the health and happiness of the poor families grew greatly over a period of many years.

However, the period of prosperity came to an end. Sickness fell on the village and the villagers' daily catch dropped dramatically.

The wise woman spoke to the family again. She said that teaching people to fish no longer made sense. The river had become polluted and the fish contaminated by poisonous chemicals. The number of fish had also declined because the villagers had been catching too many of them. A different kind of giving was needed, she said.

"You must help the villagers organize to clean up the river. They need to improve their sanitation, and fight the large factory which dumps poisonous chemicals into the river upstream. Help them petition the distant government to establish laws that will safeguard the purity of the river, restore the fisheries, and bring prosperity back to the land."

The family thought about this for a long time. They had so thoroughly learned the lesson that philanthropy means "teaching people to fish" that it was hard for them to understand that effective giving could not stop there. It must embrace and teach a larger vision of the natural order and the human place in it; it must empower people to support policies that will protect the environment and enhance their well-being.

In time, they followed the wise woman's advice, and they were rewarded to see the fruits of their generosity in the villagers' contented air of strength and self-sufficiency and the teeming schools of fish that swam upstream every year to spawn. grantees and to evaluate more precisely our successes. In short, we have found advocacy to be a critical stepping stone to effective philanthropy.