Rockefeller Foundation and NY Times Win “Just Awards”
Rockefeller Foundation and NY Times announced as the “winners” of the first-year Just Awards for dubious contributions to nonprofit sector.
Winners named for their dubious contributions to the nonprofit sector.
Other industries have their “Worst Dressed” awards, the “Golden Fleece” awards for public waste, and the Ig Nobel Prizes for dubious science-related achievements that “first make people laugh, then make them think.” Until now, the nonprofit sector has lacked its own such award program. The new Just Awards have announced the “winners” for the first year’s awards: one for Abominable Press Coverage of the Nonprofit Sector, and the other for Narcissism in Philanthropy.
Award for Abominable Press Coverage
For Abominable Press Coverage of the Nonprofit Sector the Just Awards panel of judges chose Stephanie Strom’s November, 2009 article in the New York Times: “Charities Rise, Costing U.S. Billions in Tax Breaks.”
The article reported that the I.R.S. approved 99% of applications for charity status last year, and picked some easy targets to suggest that there are too many nonprofits, and that many or most of them are frivolous. The article asserts that the U.S. government lost $50 billion in taxes due to donations given to nonprofits… making the false assumptions that a) contributions to the nonprofit sector would remain the same without the tax exemption, and b) government could ignore the enormous financial impact of demand for services (such as emergency room visits) that would inevitably follow from fewer nonprofit programs. A better headline: “Charities Rise, Saving U.S. Billions.” Furthermore, the article neglected to provide, as a basis for comparison, information on the many billions more in tax breaks provided to the commercial business sector. The article can be found here.
In making the Award, the judges did praise the New York Times for covering the nonprofit sector, and Stephanie Strom as “generally a very good reporter.” But judges felt this story was the “worst story of the year” and that its lack of research led to “bad journalism.” A better headline, said one of the judges, would have been, “Charities Rise, Saving U.S. Government Billions.”
Award for Narcissism in Philanthropy
For the much-anticipated Narcissism in Philanthropy Award, the Just Awards panel of judges chose the Rockefeller Foundation, citing the “overwhelming and relentless promotion” of its president, Judith Rodin.
Additional research confirmed this consensus among the expert judges based on their experiences and observations. A comparison was made of online mentions of three top foundations and their presidents: the Ford Foundation and Luis Ubiñas, the Kellogg Foundation and Sterling Speirn, and of course, the Rockefeller Foundation and Judith Rodin. Looking only at mentions since 2008 (when Ubiñas, the newest of the three, started his tenure at Ford) we find that, in proportion to their online mentions in general, Rockefeller promotes its president more than 12 times as often as Ford and more than 176 times as often as Kellogg.
Runners-up
As a runner-up to the Abominable Coverage of the Nonprofit Sector Award, the panel chose to cite “all of journalism” for the coverage of ACORN over the past several months. “It was a giant frame piece,” commented one of the judges.
And the judges chose two funders as runners-up for the Narcissism in Philanthropy Award. One is a California community foundation that gives out approximately $4 million in grants each year, and is building an “$8 million plus headquarters.” The nominating statement commented, “They are openly touting the building and have architects’ plans displayed in their offices for nonprofit grantees to see as they grovel for grants of $5,000 and $10,000.”
The other runner-up is a large bank that gives out funding based on American Idol-like popularity contests where nonprofits must urge their supporters to vote for them on the bank’s website. Judges noted wryly that this type of giving is a demonstration of “successful corporate philanthropy,” which inherently involves large doses of self-promotion.
The Just Awards are sponsored by Blue Avocado and Nonprofit Online News. Nominations were received from the public; a nominator was required to submit his or her name to the sponsors, but could request anonymity in public. Winners were notified of their upcoming selection but did not respond by press time.
You made it to the end! Please share this article!
Let’s help other nonprofit leaders succeed! Consider sharing this article with your friends and colleagues via email or social media.
About the Author
Blue Avocado is an online magazine fueled by a monthly newsletter designed to provide practical, tactical tips and tools to nonprofit leaders. A small but mighty team of committed social sector leaders produces the publication, enlisting content from a wide range of practitioners, funders, and experts.
Articles on Blue Avocado do not provide legal representation or legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for advice or legal counsel. Blue Avocado provides space for the nonprofit sector to express new ideas. The opinions and views expressed in this article are solely those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect or imply the opinions or views of Blue Avocado, its publisher, or affiliated organizations. Blue Avocado, its publisher, and affiliated organizations are not liable for website visitors’ use of the content on Blue Avocado nor for visitors’ decisions about using the Blue Avocado website.
51 thoughts on “Rockefeller Foundation and NY Times Win “Just Awards””
Leave a Reply
Related Posts
I had a good laugh reading the Just Awards this morning. I often feel that myself and other fundraisers are in a tough spot when it comes to complaining about the behavior of some funding entities in anything but whispers amongst ourselves. I, for one, was very amused to see a few of them rightly called to the curb. Might I suggest you send them a trophy for their efforts? Perhaps a bronzed copy of the tree that had to be hacked down and converted to 3 copies of a 50 page proposal (replete with holes in specific spots, random margin settings and tabbed with dividers) just to make a $1,000 ask to some of these foundations?
Did I miss something or did you deliberately not name the runners-up?
What a great idea! No foundation and its president could be more deserving!
Silly. And why the obsession with foundations who constitute a grand total of thirteen percent of total giving? Maybe if those of us who raised funds spent as much time worrying about the other eighty seven percent, our organizations would be in better shape.
I love this!
I’d like to add that I enjoyed the idea that one could submit a Just Awards nominee without having to fit our words in a box the size of a postage stamp that ends up being attached to fifty forms requiring fifteen reams of recycled paper (gotta think about the environment) because they need seven copies for the trustees!
On the flip side, it is unfortunate that many of us know of a few folks who are begging for dimes for their not for profit cause while driving around in an expensive company car…too sad.
Well, we decided not to name the runners-up by name in order to keep the focus on the main winner. We felt it would dilute the impact to have several foundation names available. Our original idea was only to name one winner, so deciding to mention the runners-up but not name them was an effort to draw some lessons without diluting the power of "winning."
This is also the first year we’ve done them . . . so we’re still experimenting and learning, too!
You are now my new favorite Web site. Thank you! One question, why not name the “large bank” or the “California community foundation?” Or, perhaps more fun, have a contest where readers guess! My guess is that the large bank is Chase, but the California community foundation is stumping me.
I think the large bank is American Express
Can you tell me who the two runners up were?
please name the runner up! what’s the point of keeping their names in the dark?
is it possible the two awards are linked?: that the NY Times article by Strom on Rodin was never published because they have even more in common?
KUDOS ON THE just AWARDS. Will there be any national publicity on this? I strongly believe that ALL OF JOURNALISM for their shoddy treat of ACORN should have been at least a tie for second. Unfortunately, except for a few news blurbs, little has been done to show how staged the ACORN "news" items were staged and misrepresented. An organization of its size will always have a few problems but they are being shut down due to the machinations and lies of outside sources.
KUDOS ON THE just AWARDS. Will there be any national publicity on this? I strongly believe that ALL OF JOURNALISM for their shoddy treat of ACORN should have been at least a tie for second. Unfortunately, except for a few news blurbs, little has been done to show how staged the ACORN "news" items were staged and misrepresented. An organization of its size will always have a few problems but they are being shut down due to the machinations and lies of outside sources.
I enjoyed your awards article…however, if you are going to all the
trouble of naming names, then why leave out the runner ups?? seems a
little like junior high gossip to me. Who is the nonprofit who is
building an 8 million dollar facility? If knowledge is power, then
empower us so we can advocate for and against those who need some help!
I enjoyed your awards article…however, if you are going to all the
trouble of naming names, then why leave out the runner ups?? seems a
little like junior high gossip to me. Who is the nonprofit who is
building an 8 million dollar facility? If knowledge is power, then
empower us so we can advocate for and against those who need some help!
All I can say is that you certainly got the choice of most narcissistic foundation president correct. Hands-down, Rockefeller/Rodin – sorry, I mean Rodin/Rockefeller – have to take that category.
What lies beneath the smirking humor in this selection, however, is the tragic demise of one of America’s great humanitarian institutions, sacrificed slowly over these past seven years or so on the alter of celebrity and selfishness.
Maybe this form of "recognition" will go at least part of the way toward bringing back the old Rockefeller Foundation, which, through its relentless commitment to "the betterment of humankind" did change the world in many positive ways over the course of the 20th century.
Just Awards is a great idea, one that reveals the chasm between what we despair of in foundation culture and what we dare utter about it.
The (also great) warm up piece from a few weeks ago (Jan’s sampling of bad foundation behavior) tied in to the Just Awards at the end. So a lot of us were thinking, wow, finally one of these guys is going to be outed.
But the award went to a foundation for one aspect of their practice that is based on publicly available information. And the runner up was not named, even though its own narcissistic plans apparently are on display.
The irresistible opportunity and the gnarly dilemma of the Just Awards are one and the same: what most needs it change about the foundation sector are things that we cannot state for the record because of our sector’s "green code" of silence.
Just Awards is a great idea, one that reveals the chasm between what we despair of in foundation culture and what we dare utter about it.
The (also great) warm up piece from a few weeks ago (Jan’s sampling of bad foundation behavior) tied in to the Just Awards at the end. So a lot of us were thinking, wow, finally one of these guys is going to be outed.
But the award went to a foundation for one aspect of their practice that is based on publicly available information. And the runner up was not named, even though its own narcissistic plans apparently are on display.
The irresistible opportunity and the gnarly dilemma of the Just Awards are one and the same: what most needs it change about the foundation sector are things that we cannot state for the record because of our sector’s "green code" of silence.
Now…….. when will the members of the Board of Trustees at the Rockefeller Foundation come to their senses and understand the damage Judith Rodin has done to this noble old foundation?
Is someone suggesting that the ACORN staff featured on some grainy video last year were posed? As much as we might want to blame last year’s scenario completely on staging and framing, the ACORN organization has to answer for having its associates so freely dismissing child prostitution, defrauding a government assistance program, and aiding and abetting the trafficking of illegal immigrants for monetary gain. If an organization has grown too large to keep each representative focused on the mission, then it has a model that doesn’t work. There are numerous articles from the Board Cafe archives that ACORN could benefit from.
For some reason I’m on a list of people that Rockefeller’s publicity people send press releases t0. They’re all about "Under the leadership of Judith Rodin . . . " and "Judith and her team . . . " and "Judith is eager to …" It’s shocking and I’m glad someone’s talking about it in the open.
Judith thanks you for your concern……..
Love the Just Awards! … More of that, please!!
If you ever plan to expand the categories, may I suggest:
Anyway, thanks for the good laugh. Keep ‘em coming.
Great ideas. How about Worst Logic Model?
Bravo for honoring Stephanie Strom with the award for abominable press coverage. Here’s how Tides responded:
http://tinyurl.com/38uqbuk
http://tinyurl.com/39pwdnn
Congrats on a successful launching of the “Just Awards”. I just read through the responses and clearly you’ve tapped something huge here. Really very cool. And what a great way to build awareness.
Man I wish I knew who that community foundation was – I really think it might be our local regional foundation…it would sure help us shake some funds loose if you release the name!!!
There can’t possibly be TWO California community foundations with $4 million in annual giving building new $8 million-plus headquarters, so I think it must be our county’s:
http://www.localgiving7807.org/
The link will take you to the Web cam showing progress on the new building, and from there you can also check out their annual report, entitled (I’m not kidding) "Building the Future Together."
There can’t possibly be TWO California community foundations with $4 million in annual giving building new $8 million-plus headquarters, so I think it must be our county’s:
http://www.localgiving7807.org/
The link will take you to the Web cam showing progress on the new building, and from there you can also check out their annual report, entitled (I’m not kidding) "Building the Future Together."
Bravo! It’s about time someone poked fun at some of these overly self-important individuals and institutions. Here’s to increased accountability and (thank god!) sense of humor, courtesy of the Internets!
Too sweet
Too sweet
Delighted by your new awards and impressed by the panel of judges you assembled.
Congrats on the awards (great idea), but also congrats to Mr. Linares and his thoughtful response to his organization’s runner up status. If nothing else is gained, hopefully he and his board are more aware of the need to educate their grant recipients (and most likely the public) about their new facility.
I think Chase Giving comes off much worse, too. Am I the only one who thinks perhaps someone asked how Chase could get some GOOD attention rather than more attention regarding how Chase used their bailout money?
I think this is awesome! Nonprofits need recognition and lets face it, everyone else has awards. Foundations are not as widely known as one would think. For example, I recently had someone recommend that we apply to the Carnegie Foundation because they support libraries. Not so clear cut, they do support libraries outside of the US, but for our needs, it didn’t apply. Awards of this kind that generate an interest in nonprofits and philanthropy raise awareness and helps the general population learn more about a topic that they do not necessarily understand.
I don’t know if this particular bank is the runner up – but I do know that ‘Bangor Savings Bank’ in Maine is guilty of hosting an American Idol-like contest. Pepsi is of course doing something very similar – at least they have a really catchy song.
Nice try, but you miss the point of the award. Building a new building with half the space for non-profits sounds nice but it’s really just a way to position the case. I’d love to know if any of the non-profits in Santa Cruz County were surveyed to determine how this met their needs. I can’t imagine that any of them would put a new center for philanthropy at the top of their needs list. Not when they’re working SO HARD JUST TO SURVIVE.
Imagine if the foundation engaged those same founders in a campaign to raise $8,000,000 for direct support to our non-profits, say to be used for projects to train non-profit leaders to enhance their board and fund-raising capacity. While understandably it would not be easy to raise those funds (but neither was the case for a new building an "easy sell"), the $8,000,000 would provide 400 grants @ $20,000/grant. By distributing them to 80 non-profits a year for the next 5 years you could assist nearly half the non-profits in the County. Or the $8,000,000 could be placed in an endowment whose earnings could generate $400,000/year and when distributed @ $20,000/grant would directly benefit 20 non-profits a year IN PERPETUITY.
This, in addition to the all the other grant making being done by the foundation, would TRULY create the core of a “Center for Philanthropy”. It would provide resources to our philanthropic community that could have long-lasting effect on the people of our county that would be much, much more important than any physical structure.
Anonymous
The SC Community Foundation capital project was originally promoted as being funded by philanthropists who have since defaulted on several regional for profit projects without being publicly faulted. Regardless of how much the donors actually ended up contributing (or not), the building is far from a trophy! It is one of the ugliest buildings imaginable in a hole of a site; it resembles a bunker more than anything. Perhaps some non-grantee can post a photo?
Just stumbled on the Just Awards, which are Justly named and Just perfect. Naming and shaming the Rockefeller and its demise as a respected institution under Judith Rodin is itself a public service worthy of an award. In the few years of her tenure, she has managed to see off (fire or drive off) a very large proportion of the staff, demoralized and disempowered those who endured the regime change and destroy a brand that was a century building. I’m truly disappointed however that in the all-too-easily captured world of philanthropy, the whistle wasn’t blown earlier (or more soundly) about Rodin. Having heard her preen in many international fora where the previous RF presidents had been thoughtful, engaging and scholarly, I weep for the lost opportunities. How they could have terminated their brilliant agriculture program, with its decades of experience in nurturing fine partnerships, and passed the baton to a completely inexperienced and vastly less nuanced Gates Foundation beggars belief. RF had a great brand. Rodin trashed it. Ah well….