Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The Canadian Experience. Susan Phillips

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

The Canadian Experience. Susan Phillips

  1. 1. Local empowerment through philanthropy: Isthe community foundation the right model?The Canadian ExperienceSusan PhillipsPresentation to the CGAP ConferenceMay 2013
  2. 2. The Right model?Compared to what?For what purpose?
  3. 3. The Study• With Tobias Jung and Jenny Harrow• Comparative study of community foundations inthe UK and Canada• Supported by CGAP and Canadian grantingcouncil (SSHRC)• Data on 13 Canadian CFs• More extensive interviews over the summer• 360 degree assessment
  4. 4. CommunityFactorsOrganizationalFactorsRelationalFactorsCommunityLeadershipPhillips, Harrow & Jung, drawing on Graddy & Morgan, 2006; Daly, 2008A Conceptual Model: ExplainingLeadership
  5. 5. Canadian Context• Very generous tax incentives• Giving is flat, except for high income donors• Canada was early adopter of communityfoundation model, 1921• Important role of CFs in donor advised funds• Governor General: Smart, Caring Communities
  6. 6. 748.4(477.2)507.5(323.6)408.8(260.7)266.5(169.9) 194.6(124.1)93.1(59.4)0100200300400500600700800Vancouver Winnipeg Calgary Edmonton Toronto OttawaMillionsofCanadianDollars(MillionsofU.K.PoundStirling)Canadas Largest Community Foundations:Total Assets0.7 m 1.1 m 1.0 m 5.2 m 0.96 mPopulation 2.1 m
  7. 7. Size Comparisons with US$0$500,000,000$1,000,000,000$1,500,000,000$2,000,000,000$2,500,000,000$3,000,000,000$3,500,000,000$4,000,000,000TulsaMountainViewNew YorkClevelandChicagoVancouverCFsCFs
  8. 8. Comparisons with the UKCanada UKTotal Assets £ 1.9 billion £ 309 millionTotal Grants(2011-12)£ 98.7 million £ 52.1 millionNo. of CFs 183 54Canadian CFs: no government funding, none for the national association
  9. 9. The Financials0102030405060708090Vancouver Winnipeg Calgary Edmonton Toronto% Donor Advised% Donor AdvisedMean = 44 %
  10. 10. Recovery after the Crisis01000002000003000004000005000006000007000008000009000002007 2008 2009 2010 2011VancouverWinnipegCalgaryEdmontonToronto
  11. 11. Change in Assets & Grants01000002000003000004000005000006000007000008000009000002007 2008 2009 2010 2011AssetsGrantsVancouver
  12. 12. 01000002000003000004000005000006000002007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012AssetsGrantsWinnipeg
  13. 13. 0500001000001500002000002500003000003500004000004500002007 2008 2009 2010 2011AssetsGrantsCalgary
  14. 14. 0500001000001500002000002500002007 2008 2009 2010 2011AssetsGrantsToronto
  15. 15. Growth in assets is not directly reflected ingrowth in grants
  16. 16. Pick us over aCommercial DAF orPrivate FoundationAdvice toProfessional Advisors
  17. 17. Toronto: The Knowledge CentreVital Leverage Started Vital Signs in 2001 Process not data Leveraged to:• Vital Ideas (capacity building)• Vital People (prof development)• Vital Youth (recreation) Community Knowledge Centre• Connects issues with solutions &organizations
  18. 18. Vancouver: Focus & Impact# 1 - Youth homelessnesscreated separate organization,streetohome ( investment of £320,000 to £ 17 m)#2 – Connections and Engagement
  19. 19. • Fit initiatives to the community– Giving/matchmaking; social enterprise; ‘forever funds’• Policy transfer: Knowledge centre• Impact initiativeLargest gift ever to aCanadian communityfoundation
  20. 20. Niche-Picking relative to other CFsWhat is ‘our’ space?• Social enterprise• Responsible and impact investing• Youth and family philanthropy
  21. 21. Are Canadian CFs agents of change?• Mixed, but most of the larger ones are seekingto be agents of change
  22. 22. Explanations – what it is NOT:• NOT a direct result of:– Asset size (over a threshold)– Community size– Age of the foundation– Increase in grantmaking– Size of grants
  23. 23. What it might be:• Leadership and strategy• Focus – drive change, pick a few priorities• Fit with the community• Knowledge and connection• Collaboration, relational networks• Leadership of the national association
  24. 24. Organisational Leadership• Women in leadership?– of the 13 CFs in the major cities, 8 have womenCEO/Presidents• Boards are ‘corporate,’ but the more innovativetend to be more diverse and connected– Toronto: Council of 100– Vancouver: ethnoculturally diverse board– YACs – Youth Advisory Committees
  25. 25. ConclusionPlace-based philanthropy is gaining prominence,and community foundations are likely to be themajor players, IF they are strategic and make useof their relational capital.They need to look beyond their grantmaking tobecome leaders of change and communityempowerment.
  26. 26. Susan.phillips@carleton.caThank you