The pandemic revealed much about the philanthropic sector, namely its ability to quickly adapt to the immediate needs of the communities they serve while also questioning certain operative practices that until now have been considered norms. Jim Rendon reflects on how the shift towards providing direct cash assistance, a relatively uncommon practice prior to the COVID-19 crisis, has revealed how nonprofits can serve as better advocates for individual autonomy and agency. To read the article, click here.
The Foundation’s Executive Director, Pooja O’Hanlon, wrote a thoughtful response which is embedded below.
Why Philanthropy Must Explore the Case for (Un)Conditional Cash Support
To the Editor:
I appreciated your article titled “Giving Cash Instead of Services, Arts Groups Taking on Civics and Racial Healing and More Ways Nonprofits are Rethinking Their Work in the Wake of 2020’s Crises,” from October 2020. With nonprofit organizations at the front and center of navigating short and long term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on their constituents AND also confronting the survival of the organizations and sector in itself, philanthropy must take note. At its core meaning, philanthropy is well intentioned, but as enablers of the nonprofit industrial complex this bears some continued responsibility on our parts.
I was excited that your article discusses bi-partisan support for cash transfer programs, I am eager to see how the foundation world follows suit. Philanthropy and institutional philanthropy in particular relies heavily on outcomes to follow through with the ideas of accountability and stewardship of resources. The idea of cash transfer programs, especially those that are unconditional, expects institutions to be in a liminal space as we explore how to address the most basic need for many struggling families, i.e. money.
Over a decade plus ago and new to the world of institutional philanthropy, I was working on a project in the Midwest to help a local foundation highlight a fundraising and friendraising strategy in order to leverage its own investment in select zip codes in its geographic focus area. While i was working on a team to strategize ways to publicize this strategy, I realized that the population in these zip codes was of a certain size where if the foundation wanted, it could easily divvy up its investment across families and provide them with a certain amount of cash to help residents navigate basic necessities in their lives and contribute to a greater sense of meaning and worthiness, to complement the programs that existed. While this made sense to me, I felt that my thinking was a bit “out of the box” at that time, no one was discussing this and so I didn’t bring it up as a suggestion to my colleagues.
Therefore, it is great to see that the idea of universal and guaranteed basic income, or at the very least conditional cash transfers is picking up traction in the political sphere and as organizations working at the frontlines of addressing basic societal issues recognize the need for such measures in addressing the root causes.
I lead a mid-sized place-based foundation in NYC. After years of funding and partnering closely with our grantees, I have a greater understanding of the needs of our partners; from a place of humility my organization is trying to do our best in our position of power and privilege. When we look at programs to fund, we are exploring how to help change trajectories for those in generational poverty or at risk of sinking deeper but the themes of human agency and building self-sufficiency are becoming increasingly important. I am learning from the work of organizations that have taken on a cash transfer element (conditional or otherwise) that there is growing evidence that shows money can go a long way in helping people along rather than simply providing a program. I am not advocating for one over the other but as examples in your article show, when done in combination, a program structure that empowers people and creates a sense of belonging, community and worthiness and also one that recognizes the challenges of living a life with limited financial resources and other insecurities can make an important contribution to changing the economic trajectory for many in a deeply impactful way. I and we have a lot to learn, but I am optimistic.