Beyond networks?

The value of networks was a recurring theme at the fifth networking meeting of the Community Philanthropy Initiative (CPI), which brought together 91 participants from 23 different countries – the highest attendance ever. How do networks reach out beyond their own members? Can we actively work together? These questions arise for almost any network one can think of.

Networking and dialogue shouldn’t be the end, said Bernardino Casadei. As chair of the extraordinary session on ‘Promoters of Community Philanthropy’ that followed, his agenda was clearly to find something else to be the end. ‘Can we work together?’ he asked. ‘Are there key audiences with whom we all have to work and can we develop common strategies?’ Community foundations (CFs) need to be promoted at local, national and international level. Individual CFs do this at the local level, national networks work at the national level, and WINGS-CF performs the role at global level. Is there a role for CPI in approaching European-level associations? One speaker pointed out that this is already part of CPI’s mission.

Olga Alexeeva (CAF Russia) was not so sure: community philanthropy is very different in different countries. ‘What are we selling?’ In her view, even if we don’t collaborate actively, brainstorming and comparing ideas is of value in itself. Overcoming language barriers is one problem in achieving wider dissemination. Another speaker suggested that feeding information and ideas from meetings like the CPI network down to local organizations in different countries is very valuable, while feeding up to Europe-level approaches is altogether more dubious.

What is the added value of a networking meeting like this was a question also addressed at the second meeting of the Sub-Saharan Africa Interest Group. Can the exchange of information alone justify people coming together? Knowing who’s doing what and who to talk to; trying to see where the pieces are missing so you can fill the gaps; strategic collaboration – all these were put forward as possible gains. A mapping exercise to look at what EFC members and others in the field are doing was recommended. The need for information from existing African networks to feed into this was also stressed.

The endowment question

As in any meeting about CFs, the question of endowment arose. Is having an endowment still a defining characteristic? 109 out of 144 non-US CFs surveyed by CPI had some sort of endowment. However, the difference between Europe and the rest of the world is clearly narrowing. One speaker made the point that even in the US the proportion of funds coming from endowments is declining. Barry Gaberman (Ford Foundation) was more unbending on this point. ‘If community foundations don’t have assets,’ he asked, ‘will they be able to play a significant role in their societies?’ With or without substantial endowments, in post-Communist countries, it seems, CFs are beginning to build local resource bases – sustainable because they are local. This discussion will undoubtedly run and run.

For more information about CPI, contact the coordinator at cpi@efc.be