MORE STUFF

Some idle thoughts:

~ An addition to "what I'm reading now:" Please consider adding Tablet Magazine to your reading list and, in particular, the exciting work of correspondent Alison Hoffman.

~ For more flabbergasting reading try the 2008 JFNA Form 990 now appearing on the almost impenetrable JFNA website. I think you will find the reported compensation of the immediate past CEO to be as incomprehensible as I did. Learn more about how your Dues have been spent.

Want more? See how the buy-out of JFNA's space at 111 was applied in full to build-out the space at 25 Broadway (and appears to have fallen $1.7 million short) over and above the landlord's contribution; how JFNA's meeting consultants were paid $604 thousand; see how much Dues your federation paid in relationship to others...read it and weep.

~ At its Governance meetings last week, JDC leaders were urged to double their personal commitments to the Joint -- commitments that already total $4,000,000 annually. Didn't sound like there was much in the way of first encouraging the Board members to maintain their federation Annual Campaign commitments -- in fact, there were none. Didn't sound to me as if any one present from JFNA urged that these leaders first commit their contributions to their Federations and then to the JDC. In other words, the beat goes on.

~ After its woeful (non-existent?) Cash collections effort at 2009 year-end, JFNA reported to a closed circle of its leadership that cash to the Joint was down $5.4 million or 9%; cash to JAFI down $18.3 million or 12% (without mentioning that those cuts were from historic lows in 2008 collections). These results were even more dismal as they included designated project funding by the federations. So, what has JFNA done since announcing these dismal results which were compounded by JFNA's own timidity and failed promises of a vigorous 2009 collection effort? Nothing. Wouldn't you think that, much like the best federations, JFNA might have organized a year around lay-driven cash effort so that at year-end 2010 the results might be better? You might think so...but you would be wrong. Too much on their plate (#ish, I-Philanthropy), apparently.


Rwexler