3: STRATEGIC RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE ORGANIZATIONS

STRATEGIC RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE ORGANIZATIONS

Other Information:

In our own work and in discussion with other support groups, we will carefully consider which activities are best performed by the Council. In some instances, the most prudent course of action for the field will be to defer to other organizations to carry out certain activities and develop referral or co-sponsorship relationships as needed on behalf of Council members. The Council will: - Form new working relationships with other philanthropic support organizations, where each contributes its core strengths in complementary ways. - Test ways to better facilitate regional and local service delivery, networking and identification of emerging trends or issues. - Adjust existing working relationships to ensure that organized philanthropy receives services effectively and economically. The Council will cooperate with and be a “good citizen” in the overall third sector infrastructure and will encourage its members to form effective relationships with nonprofit service providers related to their work. The Council’s primary connection with the third sector will be with other infrastructure organizations, as the Council must focus its energies on organized philanthropy. As the Council on Foundations looks to sharpen its focus and concentrate on areas where it can add the most value to its customers and have significant influence on its audiences, it is logical to look externally to other organizations within the philanthropic infrastructure network to help ensure access to the services required for the Council and its members to achieve excellence. In addition, those organizations are a source for other philanthropic services and resources that the Council does not, and perhaps should not, offer. The Council will seek partners to jointly test some mutually beneficial initiatives that will provide members with advantages beyond what either organization could offer on its own. The Regional Associations of Grantmakers, the Council’s Affinity Group Network and established philanthropic support organizations external to the Council are logical potential allies. Other colleague organizations may be identified during the life of this framework. Regional Associations of Grantmakers. The regional associations of grantmakers are logical allies because of their complementary activities and scope of customers. In reality, many organizations are members of both the Council and of one or more regional associations. Potentially changing the nature of the Council’s relationship with regional associations represents an opportunity for the future to both streamline and expand services to members, nationally and locally. Absent some rationalization of the “system” of services to member foundations, there will continue to be confusion and some consternation about duplication of efforts. A logical starting point is entering into discussions with regional associations to examine the possibilities for a substantial overhaul of this key relationship. Areas for potential exploration include forming joint membership structures, combining membership structures, helping to create regional associations where none currently exist, helping to build the capacity of existing regional associations where such help is needed, partnering or contracting with regional associations to deliver programs and services, sharing legislative agendas and responsibilities, and consolidating administrative functions. We recognize that each regional association has different strengths, capabilities and levels of interest in working with the Council, and we will target pilot efforts to strong and motivated associations that are willing to experiment with us. Affinity groups. The Council values affinity groups, at present a varied collection of selforganized networks composed primarily of grantmaking staff, whose work represents substantive (programmatic) content. Some affinity groups are formed around the identity of the population they serve (e.g., ethnic groups) or the identity of the grantmaking staff (e.g., grant managers). In many respects, these groups work on issues that the Council would need to take on if affinity groups did not exist. Importantly, the affinity groups attract members that the Council (and even regional associations) does not. Their collective membership represents a broader “voice.” Explicit strengthening of the relationship between the Council and affinity groups is a way to include diverse voices with greater depth and regularity. The Council’s longtime commitment to diversity in the field has been one of the most difficult issues with which we have grappled. The identity-based affinity groups of the Council are uniquely positioned to join us as partners in achieving our internal diversity goals and fulfilling our overall commitment to diversity in the field. The Council, in partnership with affinity groups, will explore developing long-term diversity strategies that will solidify the Council’s position as a leader in philanthropy on diversity issues. In some cases, the Council may want to partner with one or more affinity groups in order to pursue the agenda set forth in the strategic framework. In other cases, the Council may maintain its current relationship, characterized as neutral on the question of creation and growth yet helpful in providing resources and support. However, the Council may want to consider more explicitly working with and through affinity groups to plan and deliver the programmatic content of conferences. In still other cases, the Council may want to scale back its support and relationship, particularly if the group’s work falls outside the Council’s role, agenda and priorities. Other colleague organizations. The Council on Foundations will look for additional opportunities to work with colleagues in areas such as setting a research agenda, conducting research and development, and delivery of curricula.

Objective(s):

3.1: New Working Relationships

3.2: Regional and Local Service Delivery

3.3: Economy and Effectiveness

Content