Tag Archives: Social Investment

New FIA principles and standards of fundraising practice

Recently the Fundraising Institute of Australia (FIA) launched an important new Code of Practice, Principles and Standards of Fundraising Practice, which allows Third Sector organisations to check how they should be operating and allows donors to recognise complying organisations.   Ethical fundraising is crucial to public trust in Third Sector organisations.  The Code plays an important part in setting the framework for appropriate transparency, accountability and ethical practice.  The principles are critical to how the fundraising profession … Continue reading

Posted in Ethics, Issue 8: Summer 2010-2011, Social Investment, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Place in Society

The Economist Print Edition; 25 September 2009. When the GFC hit, financial innovation fell out of favour. Yet The Economist reports that the Third Sector is embracing it with abandon. The movement is premised on the belief that financial innovations can solve our most entrenched social problems. Recent events point to its growth in two distinct cultural contexts: San Francisco/ Silicon Valley and New York/ Wall Street. San Francisco hosted SoCap09, a conference infused with … Continue reading

Posted in Demonstrating Social Impact, Issue 5: Summer 2010 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

The End of Charity: How to Fix the Nonprofit Sector Through Effective Social Investing

by David E. K. Hunter, Philadelphia Social Innovations Journal; October 2009. This author lights a fire under funders to promote social impact measurement through social investing. His claim is clear: “Social investing, if widely adopted, will help channel funding streams that are directed by measurable performance rather than feel-good stories, habits of giving and rank sentimentality. And social investing has the potential (yet to be realised) to advance a selection process that either forces poor … Continue reading

Posted in Demonstrating Social Impact, Issue 5: Summer 2010 | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Measure? Nonprofits use metrics to show that they are efficient. But what if donors don’t care?

by Katie Cunningham and Marc Ricks, Stanford Social Innovation Review; Summer 2004. Do donors really care about performance measurement? According to this Stanford Social Innovation Review piece: not really. Through interviews with individual donors, the authors reveal that the real motivations behind giving are a personal connection to the cause, leadership, or trustees. There is also a widespread belief in the donor community that there’s not much difference between organisations engaged in similar work. Individual … Continue reading

Posted in Demonstrating Social Impact, Issue 5: Summer 2010 | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Wrong Risks

by Sheela Patel, The Stanford Social Innovation Review; Winter 2010. Railing against the culture of measurement, Sheela Patel takes professional philanthropists to task for the “log-frame virus” which she describes as “an infection that drives funders to insist upon seeing the logical framework or business plan of an intervention, from inputs, to outputs, to outcomes.” Patel has worked for grassroots organisations in India for over three decades and is the founding director of the Society … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 6: Autumn 2010 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off

What Women Think

by Paula Curtis, Fundraising and Philanthropy; December 2009 / January 2010. Paula Curtis’s contribution to Fundraising and Philanthropy points out that women are increasingly important donors to the social impact sector. Curtis, who is President and CEO of Opportunity International of Canada, notes a number of important lessons from research on women and giving: 1. Women control household decisions pertaining to charitable giving and make 80% of the overall spending decisions 2. Single women are … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 6: Autumn 2010 | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off

Sustainability key to economic survival

by Sarah Rich, The Australian, 22 April 2009. (Reported by Xander Wheen) The value of sustainable business practices has been thrown into question on the back of the Global Financial Crisis. Some believe that a down market begets a singular focus on profit maximisation. This article from The Australian traces a series of high profile individuals who tend to disagree. Sustainability in business remains key to Tyndall’s Roger Collison, Insurance Australia Group’s Mike Wilkins, and … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 4: Spring 2009 | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off

A Partial Marvel: Microcredit may not work wonders but it does help the entrepreneurial poor

The Economist; 18 July 2009. Has microcredit delivered on its promise to lift borrowers out of poverty? Academics have had a hard time finding evidence to answer this question. Part of the challenge of studying the impact of microcredit is selection bias. A scientific survey requires that you compare those who get a microcredit loan with a control group of similar people facing the exact same economic hardships and external market constraints. Microcredit loans may … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 4: Spring 2009 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Does Microlending Really Help the Poor?

The BBC World Service; radio broadcast; 29 July 2009. To listen to the voices of borrowers, lenders, and regulators engaged in microcredit BBC radio reporter Jo Fidgen goes to the streets in Zambia. She uncovers the “debt trap” into which some Zambian borrowers have fallen. According to one microcredit borrower who runs a sewing shop: “After I pay off the interest on my loan every month, there is no money left to invest in my … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 4: Spring 2009 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Emerging Markets, Emerging Models: Market-Based Solutions to the Challenges of Global Poverty

The Monitor Group; March 2009. Although microfinance may be the best known example of serving low-income groups through a market solution, many other models are now emerging to serve a large and growing population of poor people. Half the world’s population lives on less than $2 per day: that is 2.6 billion people. During the last few decades of increasing aid the livelihood for those at the “bottom of the pyramid” has not gotten better. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue 4: Spring 2009 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off