philanthropyOz Blog

Guest Post: Seven habits of highly-effective natural disaster recovery granting

This post written by Alex Gartmann, Foundation For Rural and Regional Renewal (FRRR). See Part One here.

Previously, I wrote about the overarching issues that need to be considered in responding to the natural disasters which have continued to unfold around us. In this post, I want to share some practical lessons and principles that we have used to guide our activities in the natural disaster recovery space.

1. The first principle is that it’s critical to recognise that recovery is a marathon rather than a sprint. The emergency response and first recovery phase can take up to 12 months; full recovery can take up to 10 years. Accordingly, we advocate thinking about philanthropic spend over the long term. Short term relief is absolutely critical, but there are often many other government agencies involved in the first 12 months. Yet they move on to other issues, or disasters, after about 12 months. Our tip therefore is to commit 40% of your allocation to emergency assistance and response (the first year), and 60% for medium to long term recovery (providing support long after the media and high intensity support has disappeared).
2. A second principle we learnt following the 2009 Victorian bushfires was the importance of philanthropic, government and private sector collaboration for recovery. There is a need to support and collaborate at the time of a disaster, and for the duration of the disaster recovery. Collaboration means we can better manage duplication; we use each other’s strengths and skills more effectively. It also means stressed communities have an easier time navigating their way towards philanthropic support.
3. Be comfortable in early allocation or dispersal of your recovery funds but a delay in a report on the ‘impact’ of your funds, particularly if those funds were to be used for medium to long term recovery phases.
4. Put an emphasis on listening to the locals. This way you can learn what will work at the local level, what is needed and what could help in the future. It is tempting to invest in infrastructure – it’s visible and often ‘easy’. However, our experience shows that it is the community services, or soft fit out, that are often in most demand. Philanthropy is well placed to facilitate lateral thinking such as the appropriateness of ‘like for like’ restoration. Turning the disaster into an opportunity to review community needs and create something that will sustain and support community in the future – when they are ready to consider the disaster in that manner.
5. Because recovery from a disaster is a sustained effort over a long period of time, it is important to be mindful of volunteer fatigue issues that will emerge later in the journey. The money for recovery is vital, however so is the volunteering and semi-skilled labour. Given the economic impact many businesses and communities will face, mentoring during recovery will be essential – a key role for corporate foundations with access to business skills.
6. Critical to any communities’ recovery is an element of economic development and adjustment. Communities cannot survive on air and water alone and reinvigorating that economic fabric is crucial to a town’s survival. Recent research by the Regional Australia Institute has highlighted that economic recovery, particularly in smaller regional locations, is often not supported or assisted - a gap philanthropy could address.
7. Consider the systems and processes that will be needed in a disaster recovery environment. How fast can you operate; what risks can you take to grant to organisations you have no established relationship with; what system do you have to handle applications and acquittals; do you have the personnel that can interact with stressed community members?

At FRRR, we don’t profess to have all the answers, by any means. However the lessons above have emerged from active involvement in the area of natural disaster recovery over the last seven years. If you would like to explore any of these issues in any more detail, or if you would like to contribute to the program we are currently implementing to support the fire and flood recovery efforts in relation to the current and recent disasters, please contact us on 03-54302399 or email a.gartmann@frrr.org.au.

References

Bushfire recovery interview (retrieved 29/1/2013). http://www.abc.net.au/rural/telegraph/content/2013/s3677927.htm
Morris, H. (2012). Lessons in Disaster Recovery: Learnings from FRRR’s Response to the 2009 Victorian Bushfires. www.frrr.org.au

Guest Post: Natural Disaster Recovery: the role of the philanthropic sector

This post written by Alex Gartmann, Foundation For Rural and Regional Renewal (FRRR). Stay tuned for the second part of this post later this week, where Alex shares some practical lessons and principles for the natural disaster recovery space!

Australia is certainly a land of drought and flooding rains and the summer of 2012/13 is presenting a series of challenges for numerous communities across the country.

Bushfires have devastated communities, and the local economies, across Victoria, New South Wales, Tasmania, the Queensland Gulf and central Australia. Cyclones have thrashed communities in the Kimberley and northern Queensland, while ex-tropical cyclone rains have resulted in widespread flooding in Queensland and New South Wales. And summer is only half way through.

FRRR’s involvement in this area began in 2006, following Cyclone Larry in Queensland. Since then, we have provided support for disaster-affected communities all over Australia, including the 2009 Victorian Bushfires (Morris 2012) and communities devastated by floods and storms over the summer of 2010/11. From these experiences, we know that support needs to be provided a long time after the immediate effects of the disaster have been felt. It takes many years for smaller regional communities, for the trauma to be replaced with hope, and for economic stability to return.

But what exactly is ‘recovery’? It means different things to different people, but by going back to the roots of the words, we can discern that recovery is ‘to re-immerse in the medium of life’.

At an individual and community level, highly respected Australian disaster recovery psychologist Gordon (2011) proposes a recovery model that encompasses the four stages.

• Stage 1: Survival (1-6 months)
• Stage 2: Endurance (6 months – 2nd year)
• Stage 3: Identity crisis (2nd – 4th year)
• Stage 4: Recovering from the recovery (4th year +)

The Third Stage of recovery is an important period as far as philanthropy is concerned. It is during this medium term period that the event may have moved out of the media spotlight with attentions shifting onto the next issue or community need. There will be significant rebuilding activity; drawing heavily on the resources of community members and requiring sophisticated capacities to manage the recovery effort. Individual and community identities can begin to fragment and any security or solace found in the ‘disaster identity’ can be lost or diminished the closer communities get to completion of rebuilding; repeating the sense of uncertainty and disorientation experienced immediately after the disaster. It is common after the third year for core government relief and assistance to be scaled back and recovery activities to be absorbed back into mainstream services.

A Fourth Stage is concerned with ‘recovering from the recovery’. This Stage recognises the immense toll that recovery takes on individuals and communities and provides the next step after the recovery work itself is complete; finding a new normal and living life in relation to an altered future state. The Fourth Stage acknowledges the need for renewed energy, a focus on stepping away from recovery toward an identity expanded beyond the disaster.

So where does philanthropy fit in?

With models of climate change predicting more frequent and severe natural disasters, how do we better prepare our grant making to support community preparedness and resilience? There is the emergence of a paradigm shift in the ways in which communities are supported to prepare for and recover from natural disasters. The National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (COAG, 2011) suggests moving from an ‘emergency management’ emphasis on roles, responsibility and procedures to greater consideration and planning for prevention, mitigation, preparedness, and recovery, as well as response. The strategy documents the need to focus more on action-based resilience planning, strengthening local capacity and capability, with a greater emphasis on community engagement and understanding the diversity, needs, strengths and vulnerabilities within communities.

This new perspective contains elements that are closely aligned with FRRR’s mission, and those of many other Trusts and Foundations, and our approaches to supporting communities within grant programs.

Preparedness and recovery should work in parallel; rather than in isolation. Graham (2012) says this bottom-up participative approach is relatively new to the emergency management sector; however it has been the basis of community development practices and principles for many decades. Our challenge in philanthropy is to move with the paradigm shift and better support the development of resilience in community.

While many organisations are making generous donation to the immediate relief effort, at FRRR we are turning our focuses to the medium to long-term recovery of the communities, implementing a response within the Natural Disaster Recovery Framework. The four key approaches are:

• Grants and funding support
• Community support and advocacy
• Project management of donation accounts
• Strategic recovery projects and strategic partnerships

Partners and contributions are being sought – to the recovery programs and to the thinking about resilience. This collaborative and proven approach will help to sustain momentum in community led recovery efforts when volunteer fatigue sets in, providing ongoing support long after most of us will return to ‘business as usual’.

To be involved in these efforts or perhaps have a grant program FRRR can consider in a ‘clearing house’ role, please contact us on 03-54302399 or email a.gartmann@frrr.org.au. Donations for medium to long term recovery programs can be made online (http://www.frrr.org.au/cb_pages/donate.php) or contact us at FRRR and we can assist to direct your donation to particular communities.

References

COAG, National Emergency Management Committee (2011). National Strategy for Disaster Resilience: Building our nation’s resilience to disaster.
Gordon, R. (2011). Crisis Intervention and Management Australasia Conference, Melbourne, November 2011
Graham, W. (2012). 2011 Winston Churchill Fellowship for disaster assistance program and community resilience. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 27, (4), pg 5.
Morris, H. (2012). Lessons in Disaster Recovery: Learnings from FRRR’s Response to the 2009 Victorian Bushfires. www.frrr.org.au

Guest Post: Kids In Philanthropy launching in Melbourne

This post written by Amanda Miller, Kids in Philanthropy.

“No more pollution, peace in the world, no more homeless people, and of course, lots of lollies…” Those are some of the answers given by young children to describe the kind of world they would like to live in at the recent Kids in Philanthropy Melbourne family afternoon. Whilst lollies featured high on the priorities list, so did orphanages, indigenous children, the environment (’no more factories’) and children who do not have enough food to eat.

Photo: Kids in Philanthropy Melbourne family afternoon, November 2012

Kids in Philanthropy is a not-for-profit sub-fund of the Sydney Community Foundation. It focuses on building social awareness, social conscience and a practice of giving, in kids for kids. KIP aims to engage children between the ages of 5 and 18 years, and their families, in an annual program of active philanthropy where activity is focused on raising awareness of local areas of need, and providing opportunities for these young people to take a leadership role in addressing these areas of need.

With KIP Sydney having been successfully established earlier this year, and planning well underway for the first program it is funding, the natural next step was to set up KIP Melbourne. KIP Melbourne will have up to ten Advisory Board members (there are already six), who will each contribute seed funding to be invested in projects / programs involving disadvantaged youth in Melbourne. The children of the KIP families will also engage in fundraising activities, will learn about giving and the disadvantage that exists in our local communities, and will interact with children in those communities. KIP workshops will also be run for families with the aim of engaging kids in the benefits of giving.

Photo: Kids in Philanthropy Melbourne family afternoon, November 2012

KIP parents are motivated by a desire to pass onto their young children an awareness that whilst they lead a privileged life, not all other children are as fortunate as they are. KIP teaches children that just as sport and learning are part of their lives, so too is giving. The belief is that if we embed a culture of giving from a young age, children will grow up naturally taking on the responsibility of helping those in need. KIP kids will learn that there are children just like them, who live only half an hour away, but don’t have books to read, enough food to eat or a warm bed at night. They will interact with these children and contribute to raising funds to help them.

Last Sunday, KIP Melbourne held its first information session for those interested in being involved. 30 adults and more than 30 children, aged 2 - 11, enjoyed a wonderful discussion about what philanthropy means, through the eyes of children. Whilst some of the children were not sure what ‘that big word’ meant, many understood that it had something to do with ‘helping other people’ and ‘raising money and giving it to people who need help’.

Photo: Kids in Philanthropy Melbourne family afternoon, November 2012

It was fascinating to hear of some of the ideas the children had for helping other kids, such as inviting a homeless child to live in their house. Many of the children had already given away their birthday presents to other causes, such as the RSPCA and Victorian communities affected by the bushfires, but there were lots of other ideas for fundraising, including bake sales, lemonade stands, making things and selling them and sports days.

The enthusiasm and excitement generated by the day has led to a group of the KIP Melbourne kids planning a cake bake / lemonade stand / toy sale to take place in Malvern in early December. The KIP Melbourne parents are also going full steam ahead and have already started considering projects for their first allocation of funding.

For more information or if you are interested in being involved, please visit www.kip.org.au or contact KIP Advisory Board member Amanda Miller: amanda.miller@me.com.

Guest Blog: Gandel Philanthropy’s review of strategy, philosophy and the need for small grants

This post written by Vedran Drakulic, Chief Executive Officer, Gandel Philanthropy.

Over the recent months Gandel Philanthropy has undertaken a process of reviewing its strategic direction, its granting philosophy and the nature of its grant-making. The reasons for this include Gandel Philanthropy’s wish to expand its community involvement and influence, create stronger links and develop its relationships, as well as the fact that the Board aims to increase grant distributions in the coming years.

The new strategy addresses matters such as the areas of interest that we wish to support; outlines the three levels of grants in terms of their financial size; the distinction between grants that are open for application and those that are by invitation; and it outlines the time-frames for grants in relation to the application periods and the frequency of granting.

In terms of the actual structure of giving, Gandel Philanthropy developed three levels - categories of grants that are aimed at providing support for both Jewish and Australian causes and organisations:

1. communityassist grants

These grants are allocated up to a maximum amount of $40,000. They are generally envisaged as one-off grants aimed at providing support for a defined program or part of a program. They are geared towards smaller community organisations, however any eligible organisation can apply. These grants are open for application to anyone that is eligible, and that delivers programs or services within one of the specified areas of interest (see below). This is a rolling program of applications throughout the year and there are no closing dates for these grants. Decisions will be made around four times a year.

Reasoning:

Gandel Philanthropy believes that all types of grants are needed to enable us to provide support for the benefit of those in need in the community, and to achieve our vision of “creating a positive and lasting difference in people’s lives.” We believe that, strategically, we can support both the ongoing, immediate, as well as emerging needs in the society through allocations from our communityassist grants. As Chet Tchozewski, of Global Greengrants Fund, pointed out in Alliance magazine, “too often foundation leaders incorrectly assume that small grants are not strategic”. We believe they are and can be, and our strategy reflects that belief.

In addition, we will provide grants in both the traditional, as well as some new, areas of interest, reflecting our wish to explore and learn about the needs in a range of sectors in the community. These areas of interest may continue to evolve as part of our learning.

Currently Gandel Philanthropy communityassist grants are allocated towards eight specific Areas of Interest:

• Arts & Culture;
• Education;
• Health & Medical Research;
• Community Development;
• Social Cohesion & Inclusion;
• Poverty & Disadvantage;
• Environment; and
• Emergency Response & Recovery.

Additional details related to eligibility, Areas of Interest, the application process, exclusions and other relevant information are contained in the communityassist Grant Guidelines document. Potential applicants need to contact Gandel Philanthropy on info@gandelphilanthropy.org.au, or by calling (03) 8564 1288, to obtain the communityassist Grant Guidelines and the communityassist Application Form. Applicants are encouraged to discuss their project proposal with us before submitting an application.

2. communitybuild grants

The communitybuild category of grants reflects Gandel Philanthropy’s wish to provide significant support to community organisations to achieve stronger and longer-term positive social impact within the specified areas of interest. These grants can be allocated as single, one-off contribution or multi-year support, depending on the nature of the need and the proposal. As a rule, the aim is to support programs that are evidence-based, that deliver defined positive outcomes in the community, that may provide long-term benefit to the target audience, that have the potential to be ‘transferrable’ and broadly implemented.

Continue reading Guest Blog: Gandel Philanthropy’s review of strategy, philosophy and the need for small grants…

Guest Blog: The transformation of energy sources & philanthropy’s long-term focus

This post written by Amanda Martin, Executive Officer, Australian Environmental Grantmakers Network (AEGN)

Did you know that we are in the middle of a quiet revolution? It’s one that has to happen and is transforming our energy systems before our ideas. For example:

• Germany has a target of reaching producing 20% of its energy from your renewable energy sources by 2020. And guess what? It’s already there!
• The cost of photovoltaic solar panels has decreased by 75% in 4 years.
• On a windy day, South Australia gets at least 50% of its energy from wind.
• The rate of roof top solar installation in private homes has increased by 5,500% in the last 4 years and 20% of Australian households now have PV solar panels or solar hot water systems.

Despite all this, Arctic sea ice has shrunk to record lows this northern summer, the US is enduring one of the worst droughts on record, and in Australia we are seeing climate abatement efforts being challenged nearly every day.

Whether you are a teacher, an investor, a property owner, a hiker, a tourist, a mother or a child, climate change impacts on all aspects of life – including you. Many of us are convinced that human induced climate change is happening and 99% of climate scientists agree with us. We know the implications – rising sea levels, more catastrophic storms and fires, drought, increased stress on our already stressed plants and animals and our national icons like the Great Barrier Reef and more problems for many of our developing nation neighbours. Just to name a few issues.

But what can we do? What can you do as an individual and what can we do as a funding community? Philanthropy can play a transformational role. Design to Win: Philanthropy’s Role in the Fight Against Global Warming, funded by several major US foundations, describes philanthropy’s role in climate change:

“Politicians are fixated on the next election; CEOs are focused on next quarter’s numbers. Philanthropists, by contrast, have longer time horizons and can tolerate more risk. Besides being more patient investors, philanthropists have a strong tradition of filling in gaps, spurring step-changes in technology and pursuing programming that transcends both national boundaries and economic sectors. Such capacities are exactly what are needed to tackle global warming.”

Environment doesn’t need to be your sole focus to fund in climate change. You can combine your interests in other areas like health, welfare, rural and regional Australia, youth or Indigenous people with climate change funding.

The Australian Environmental Grantmakers Network conference in Melbourne on October 24 is called Funding the Change: Catalysing Transition to a Safe Climate. It will explore the themes of climate and energy, and will focus on how philanthropy can play a key role in catalysing the transformation to a clean energy economy.

The conference will look at various themes including:

• What technology and policy is here now to help us on the journey to a zero carbon economy and what is already happening in Australia and around the world?
• How can we build widespread, enduring support for a clean energy future and what is philanthropy’s role in achieving this?
• What else is happening around the world including in the US and what philanthropic funding and projects are leading the way?
• A portfolio approach of different actions and strategies is needed to address climate change. What are these approaches and how can we fund them to speed the transition we require?

Speakers will include Heidi Binko from The Rockefeller Family Fund, Professor Mike Sandiford from Melbourne University’s Melbourne Energy Institute and Paul Gilding – author of ‘The Great Disruption’ and advisor to the business community.

The conference will be preceded by a field trip to the Hepburn Wind Farm and the Lakehouse restaurant in Daylesford and followed by a walk around Melbourne’s CBD to look at how the Melboure City Council is working toward a low carbon city.

All funders are welcome. For further details, go to AEGN’s website – www.aegn.org.au.

Grantmaker Spotlight: Kids in Philanthropy

This post written by Amanda Miller, Kids in Philanthropy.

Photo: Kids in Philanthropy launch, 27 May 2012

Kids in Philanthropy (KIP) is a sub-fund of the Sydney Community Foundation. It is an innovative new philanthropic fund created to teach children the art and skill of giving. KIP, which was launched on Sunday 27 May 2012, will focus on building social awareness, a social conscience and a practice of giving in kids for kids. The ultimate aim of KIP is to build social awareness among kids and by doing so create opportunities for knowledge sharing, friendship, encouraging a spirit of sharing and cultural exchange.

KIP will involve children in workshops to teach them about all aspects of philanthropy guiding them through fundraising and the development of programs to help make a genuine difference to the lives of their peers living in Sydney and Melbourne’s disadvantaged suburbs. There will also be events enabling the kids from KIP and the programs they fund to work together and celebrate their achievements.

KIP, which was the idea of Dr Catriona Wallace and two of her five children, is supported by an Advisory Board, who provided the seed funding, and includes experts in community-based philanthropy such as the Sydney Community Foundation’s Kristi Mansfield, psychologist Dr Tracey Pillinger and child philanthropy consultant Melanie Greblo.

Photo: Kids in Philanthropy launch, 27 May 2012

Children aged from five to 18 will be able to participate in KIP along with their families, forging stronger connections between parents and children around their values and giving. While the initial program is set in Sydney, KIP will become a national initiative.

The first project to be funded by KIP is a Technology and Learning Program designed specifically for children in the middle years aged eight to 12 years olds, who attend various schools in Fairfield, in Sydney’s south west - one of Sydney’s most disadvantaged local government areas. Developed as a result of extensive community consultation working with Fairfield City Council and schools, the Technology and Learning program will be piloted by KIP and will provide the most disadvantaged children with the opportunity to participate in technology, music, art and sporting programs - activities and care they might otherwise miss out on.

At KIP’s launch on Sunday, attended by over 200 people, some of the children involved with KIP spoke about what philanthropy means to them and why they are excited to be involved with KIP.  Dr Catriona Wallace spoke about her personal story and why she founded KIP, and Amanda Bray of Fairfield City Council, together with Fairfield Youth Advisory Council speakers, spoke about the needs of the Fairfield community and the impact the program will have.

To get involved with KIP visit www.kip.org.au or call the Sydney Community Foundation on (02) 9251 1228.

The Foundation Project - a new initiative for common reporting & acquittal forms

This post written by David Hardie, Project Manager of the Foundation Project from November 2011 to April 2012.

An issue attracting increasing attention amongst grantmakers is how their application and reporting processes impact on grantseekers. In recent years, high profile initiatives such as the US Project Streamline have highlighted how grantmakers can develop more efficient processes. Now a group of Australian Trusts and Foundations have come together to see what they can do to reduce the administrative burden on grantseekers.

The Foundation Project is an initiative sponsored by the Vincent Fairfax Family Foundation on behalf of the following organisations:
• Helen Macpherson Smith Trust
• The Myer Foundation and Sidney Myer Fund
• Perpetual
• The Ian Potter Foundation
• The RE Ross Trust
• Philanthropy Australia
• Queensland University of Technology – Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies.

The purpose of the project is to support the work of the Australian not for profit sector by examining opportunities for coordinating the application and reporting processes for small grants (<$25,000) of philanthropic organisations.

The key outputs from The Foundation Project are a set of core principles for grant application and reporting information and a common application form and acquittal report for small grants.

I led the project from November 2011 to April 2012 and really enjoyed being part of a real life example of collaboration in philanthropy. One of my favourite aspects of the project was how a number of our leading Trusts and Foundations came together to take a look at their own processes and use their extensive collective knowledge to develop some new grantmaking tools.

The initial focus of the project was to see what could be learnt from related initiatives such as Project Streamline. The current grant application and reporting processes of the participating Trusts and Foundations were also analysed and this identified many common attributes in current small grants application and reporting processes. It also highlighted the opportunity that exists to develop common forms for small grants, as well as the barriers to their widespread adoption. Also identified was the need to establish a set of core principles to guide ongoing decisions on the information required for grants application and reporting. We felt that it was important that a set of principles was developed to provide ongoing guidance for grantmakers on how, why and what information should be requested from grantseekers.

The participating Trusts and Foundations endorsed the following core principles for grant application and reporting information:

Philanthropy acknowledges that its contribution to the community is primarily through the work of the not for profit sector and we will strive to minimise the administrative burden of grantmaking on not for profit and related organisations. Accordingly:
• Information will be requested only if it will be used
• The effort expended in application and reporting processes will be proportional to the size and risk of the grant
• Duplicate information requests will be minimised
• Terminology will be defined and standardised in order to limit the variability in information requested
• Joint reporting will be established for projects that are collaboratively co-funded.

These principles then informed the subsequent development of the common small grants application form and common small grants acquittal report. The forms were reviewed by community sector organisations, fundraising consultancies and other philanthropic organisations prior to their endorsement by the project team.

The common forms can be found here: http://www.philanthropy.org.au/tools/

It’s important to remember that the development of the forms is a step in an ongoing process. There will never be a perfect form and we’re very keen for grantmakers to pilot the common forms and provide feedback on how they are being used by grantseekers and grantmaking staff. We also hope that new players in philanthropy will benefit from this work. We think that what we’ve developed will be of real value to a variety of grantmakers, especially those new grantmakers who are yet to establish their own grantmaking systems.

The project team intends to periodically review the impact of the principles and the common forms. Further enhancements to the common forms should be anticipated as they are piloted from April to September 2012 and as their ongoing impact is assessed.

Grantmakers are encouraged to trial the common forms and to provide feedback on them to Philanthropy Australia. Master copies of the forms will continue to be available on the Philanthropy Australia website.

The Summary Report for the Foundation Project can be found here (PDF format). A more detailed project research paper has also been prepared as a Queensland University of Technology – Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies Working Paper and will shortly be available on the QUT ACPNS website.

—
David Hardie is a 2010 graduate of the QUT Graduate Certificate in Business (Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies). He was the recipient of the 2010 Myer Foundation Internship and was the Project Manager of the Foundation Project from November 2011 to April 2012.

Guest Blog: Include a charity – a welcome initiative

This post written by Christopher Baker, Asia-Pacific Centre for Social Investment and Philanthropy

Just on 12 months ago, a campaign was launched under the banner of Include a Charity. This marked a significant development in the history of co-operation amongst charitable organisations in this country. The campaign now involves some 140 of Australia’s leading charities, urging Australians to leave a charitable bequest in their wills. While Australians take a pride in the way in which we contribute to charity collections and respond to natural disasters, very few of us have any understanding about how many of us leave a bequest in our wills. I suggest that many Australians would be surprised at just how few us do set aside anything from our estates for the charities we have often supported through out our lives.

To understand bequest giving it makes sense to look at general charitable giving during our lifetimes. The measurement of charitable giving in Australia however is not strong. The most comprehensive effort to gather quantitative information on giving in Australia was undertaken at the instigation of the Federal Government in 2004/2005. The resultant ‘Giving Australia’ Report (2005), estimated that in the twelve months to the end of January 2005, nearly 9 in 10 adult Australians (87%) had given money to at least one nonprofit organisation. It is this level of participation in charitable giving that resulted last year in the World Giving Index rating Australia amongst the most ‘giving’ countries in the world.

The World Giving Index does not look at bequests, so for the best available information on that we need to return to the ‘Giving Australia‘ Report whose own survey estimates that 58% of adults in this country have a will and that 7.5% of those have included a bequest in that will. This means less than 4.5% of adult Australians reported including a gift to charity on their death.

A similar pattern emerged from a study I undertook at Swinburne University of Technology which looked at some 1,800 Victorian probate files processed in 2006. (Probate is the legal process required for transfer of intestate and willed estate assets from the deceased to the beneficiaries, where required. About half of all estates require probate.) This study found that approximately 5% of the estates examined included a charitable bequest*.

While it is both fair and reasonable that individuals should look after the needs of their family first, there is a very big gap between 87% of us giving something to charity each year, and the 5% who then leave something to charity in our will. Most leave everything to family, and more specifically to the children. This seems to occur irrespective of need. One example illustrates this point very well. A Melbourne widow aged 91 left her rather large estate of $10m to her three children, aged 71, 69 and 65. The executor of the will was the son, a retired barrister from a very wealthy suburb. The circumstances of the two daughters were not addressed in the probate file. The estate was split evenly between the three children.

How an individual distributes their estate is of course a matter of personal choice. Nevertheless, in this example had the woman left 1% of her estate as a charitable bequest, the resultant one hundred thousand dollars could have been of considerable benefit for the charity or charities concerned and the impact on the children’s share would have been negligible. Had she left 10% of the estate as a charitable bequest, the benefit to the included charities would have been tenfold; and the share left to each of the children would have been reduced from approximately $3.3m each to $3.0m.

The Swinburne study and the example above indicate that most of us settle quite simply for the default option: leave everything to the kids. Of course people provide for their children, as they should. For many, there is also a capacity to allocate a small share of their estate to a charity or charities that they value and may have supported throughout their lives. Not everyone has the capacity to leave a bequest, but many do.

What a welcome initiative it has been to see so many Australian charities coming together on the ‘Include a Charity’ initiative. The focus of the campaign is inclusive; it is encouraging Australians not to give to charity at the expense of family, but simply to include something for charity where that is a feasible and reasonable option. Many charities depend heavily on gifted funds, both regular gifts and bequests. In practice charities are in competition with one another for our charitable dollars. It is therefore quite significant that more than one hundred charities have joined forces to encourage Australians first and foremost to at least consider including a charity in their will. The initiative is not about which charity to choose, but about taking the generosity we show during our lifetimes towards charities and to extending that generosity to including a charity in our wills. Attitudinal and associated behavioural change is neither quick nor easy to achieve. The ‘Include a Charity’ is a constructive and collaborative initiative and one to be lauded.

—-

Dr Christopher Baker is a Research Fellow at the Asia-Pacific Centre for Social Investment and Philanthropy, in the Faculty of Business and Enterprise at Swinburne University of Technology. His current research interests include charitable giving from personal estates, diaspora giving patterns, and high net worth philanthropy. E: chbaker@swin.edu.au

—-

* Baker, C & Gilding, M (2012), ‘Inheritance in Australia: Family and charitable distributions from personal estates’, Australian Journal of Social Issues, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 273-289.

Grantmaker Spotlight: Trust for Nature – applying an Indigenous lens to conservation

This post written by Justin Glass, Development Manager, Trust for Nature

Trust for Nature is an independent, not-for-profit organisation established to protect native habitat on private land. Established under the Victorian Conservation Trust Act (1972), Trust for Nature is the only Victorian organisation to protect bushland with conservation covenants that last in perpetuity.

Trust for Nature has conservation covenants on about 1100 Victorian properties covering 46,000 hectares; owns a further 47 properties covering about 35,000 hectares and has transferred a further 67 properties to the State.

Image: Map of Victorian covenants and location of Neds Corner. Download as PDF.

Trust for Nature’s Strategic Plan stresses the importance of stakeholder engagement in private land conservation particularly with local Indigenous and Traditional Owner groups. At the Trust’s largest property, the 30,000 hectare former grazing property, ‘Neds Corner Station’, located 70 km west of Mildura, Trust for Nature has done a lot of work with Indigenous people to concurrently protect cultural assets and native species. It was purchased in 2002 for large scale conservation research and practice with assistance from the Commonwealth Government, the RE Ross Trust, the Cybec Foundation, The Meles Fund, The Limb Foundation and many other generous individuals.

The Indigenous history of Neds Corner Station is as rich as its natural heritage.  It is thought that the patterns of native plants and wildlife found by the first Europeans were shaped by Indigenous use of the region dating from about 13,000 years ago.  The Murray River provided food for large communities of Indigenous people and areas like Neds Corner Station became important sites for trade and cultural ceremonies.  Archaeological discoveries in the area continue to provide us with valuable insights into how the land was managed and the cultural significance it holds for Indigenous people.

Photo: Indigenous crew erecting fences around sensitive sites

At Neds Corner Station many projects have been undertaken to protect Indigenous cultural heritage by Trust for Nature and local Indigenous people including:

• Completing over 50 kilometres of fencing to protect important Indigenous cultural sites have been built by Indigenous and non-Indigenous fencers in partnership with Mallee Catchment Management Authority Indigenous Advisory Officers;
• Securing Commonwealth funding to establish a large-scale fence, that builds on earlier work to improve cultural heritage protection and research environmental restoration and cultural heritage protection working in together. Trust for Nature is thankful for further investments by philanthropists that build on this Commonwealth grant and enable additional works to be planned.
• Trust for Nature has established a partnership with La Trobe University that provides training in the recognition and management of cultural sites to Indigenous and non-Indigenous people;
• Commenced development of a cultural heritage management plan for Neds Corner;
• Created a “Keeping Place” for Indigenous cultural items requiring removal as part of the Commonwealth Government’s Living Murray works;
• Develop a project plan to obtain funding for Indigenous officers in ecology and land management.

Photo: Blue and MEEP participant erecting rabbit-proof fence

With the recent floods and good seasons the River is again awash with fish, turtles, crustaceans including water mussels. Kangaroos, emus, tree goannas, shingleback lizards and move over earth that is filled with yams, soft root tubers, other edible roots and herbaceous perennials. This currently abundant supply of food, reminds us of how the Neds Corner Station area has provided Indigenous people with food and supplies for millennia. Neds Corner Station and its surrounding areas are believed to contain one of the highest densities of Indigenous cultural objects and burial sites in Victoria.

Trust for Nature recognises the significance of these sites and works closely with the Indigenous people of the Murray region to protect them from potential exposure caused by erosion, rabbit burrowing and other animal or human disturbance. Protection of cultural heritage is often best achieved through the promotion of native plants and the Trust, in partnership with many others has undertaken work to regenerate native vegetation and protection of Indigenous sites synergistically.

The goal of Trust for Nature at Neds Corner is to promote the bond between people and the landscape, a bond demonstrated by Indigenous use of the land for millennia. Achieving closer ties with the Indigenous community will be an important part of our journey.

—-

For further information on Trust for Nature or Neds Corner Station please contact Justin Glass, Development Manager, Trust for Nature  - (03) 8631 5888,  www.trustfornature.org.au

Guest Post: Communicating ideas and innovation through social media

The following guest post is by Stacey Thomas, Myer Family Company.

One of the strengths of the philanthropic sector is its ability to be flexible and respond quickly to needs and trends within the community. However when it comes to communication, the methods employed by the philanthropic sector have been, until quite recently, limited and unchanging.

The sector relies on not-for-profit organisations and yet has historically offered a very one-sided and austere method of communication. For those foundations who have engaged in public communication it has tended to be through a formal publication such as an annual report, and in recent times through a more casual newsletter. And then of course there are many more foundations who have not engaged in any kind of communication.

The last couple of years have seen a slow change in the way the philanthropic sector engages with those organisations they seek to support. With the explosion of the social media revolution there are now a growing number of foundations using this as an opportunity to link with others who have an interest in philanthropy. Whether it is The Ian Potter Foundation’s Facebook page, or The Myer Foundation’s twitter account we are seeing some of Australia’s biggest philanthropic institutions opening themselves up to a more two-sided dialogue with those that they fund.

There is also a growing number of ‘philanthrocrats’, or the staff of foundations, deliberately trying to engage with the not-for-profit sector around topics from basic information sharing to seeking opinions on operational aspects. In a recent Three Eggs blog (an Australian philanthropy blog http://3eggphilanthropy.com) 26 Australian philanthropy tweeters were identified.

Continue reading Guest Post: Communicating ideas and innovation through social media…