You know the drill; you've heard those exact words or something similar. You've learned that when you hear them it's either going to cost money ("Complete the Journey," "Support the IAN," "We need your Dues now," etc., etc.) What follows is a cautionary tale of just what JFNA means by "help."
When the beloved Marty Stein, z'l, and then UJA senior professional Russell Robinson first developed the concept of the Network and then implemented it, the United Jewish Appeal created not only a fund raising opportunity for 1000s of leaders in 400 non-federated communities across the country but also a strong voice in the governance of UJA. These were handed to JFNA with the expectation that Network FRD would increase and that the Network's "voice" would resonate even stronger than before. But this was JFNA after all.
Things started well. The Network leadership felt empowered and were supportive of their professional leader, Rhea Attias. Then, about five years ago, the Network first learned how much of its annual fund raising was being used to support JFNA's budget -- a much higher percentage than the JFNA dues of any federation. The Network leaders expressed their shock and outrage but were placated by promises that "things will change." They didn't. The Network Executive Committee had long engaged in creating a set of Procedures pursuant to which the Network would operate going forward. It was also a declaration of independence -- an Independence within and under the JFNA brand and umbrella. Manning was made aware of the Network process.
And, then, JFNA suddenly terminated the Network's long-time professional director without notice to or prior discussion with the Network lay leadership -- suddenly her position was "no longer needed" (the reasons for the termination are now being contested in litigation previously discussed). JFNA filled the Network professional leadership position with Jim Lodge, a long-time JFNA Senior professional with no prior involvement with the Network whatsoever...none. Jim, whose JFNA involvement was in the ONAD, Israel and Overseas area, performed as one might have expected, it was not long thereafter that Lodge himself was gone.
A new Network organizational proposal emerged for discussion in Winter 2011 -- a discussion from which Lodge was excluded. Now the JFNA Board Chair stepped in. No more assurance of greater Network leadership involvement in JFNA; no, without discussion, Manning issued her order: she created a "Committee" to study the relationship between the Network and JFNA. She appointed Lew Margolis as Chair. Margolis, no doubt a great guy, a Professor at the Gilling School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. (Ya' think Manning knew him? Nah.) Lew had had no involvement in the Network but he clearly was someone on whom Manning could rely. And the Network's steps toward independence within the JFNA came to a dead stop.
And the outcome of the Lew Margolis Committee's work? The Network Executive Committee was disbanded; in its place an "Advisory Committee" appointed by...Manning. The new Network Chair, a reliable lay leader from Miami...who had no prior experience with the Network. And no more troublemakers.
And what does the future hold? Bet on this: the Network's funds raised, heretofore supportive of projects of the Joint and JAFI will be deployed to fund the Global Planning Table, pure and simple. Manning will reward her latest acolytes with a meaningless seat or two at the "Table" and there you have it. The Network essentially out of the business it was in and into the sorry business that is JFNA.
But, that doesn't have to be the end. The Network can easily spin off into independence using its own resources to hire a strong CEO, one who sees the potential that Marty and Russ and UJA and the former (and many of the present) leaders saw and see. Then hire a small but strong staff. No need to support the bloat with no return that is the result of sending Network funds to JFNA now and in the future. The Network would elect its own Chair and its own Board without the intervention of Board Chair or Advisory Committee and it would identify the Israel and overseas projects of the Joint and JAFI that would inspire the Network's donors. Annually, leadership could convene a Network Assembly that would probably inspire attendance greater than the 800+ full pay Registrants that JFNA now attracts to the GA. All of this could be done with lower overhead and greater return than today. It would just take time and inspiration. All it would take would be for the Network's real leaders to take a look around and ask "what are we getting, really, from JFNA?"
Yes, this is a cautionary tale; but also exemplary. The Network had and has the capacity to raise $14 to $15 million -- all for needs of JDC and JAFI in Israel and overseas. But, never mind. To JFNA the Network's fund raising was far less important, even meaningless, to a leadership focused solely on absolute loyalty to it, total control and nothing more. Well, they got it; more great lay persons just thrown away because they wouldn't step forward in total fealty. And they...and all of us...lose.
Rwexler
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
If this is your Fort Sumpter moment you should perhaps sound less like a carpetbagger. Tie an independent Network to JAFI and JDC but build in a community building approach to revitalize the proud historic shtetls of America. A Network Limmud? Synagogue consultations? Assistance to long distance caregivers? Interfaith couples outreach? Pick one or two. Show that we care for them as Jews and families and not just bank accounts.
Your facts are outstanding. Yes the Network wanted its independence in light of the budget and other issues with poor leadership. Yes it is also true that Kathy Manning did what she does best, "destroy" and eliminate anything that gets in way. Her example will reverberate negativity for years and insure that any Network leadership, excuse me, advisors, never put a toe out of a line or do anything meaningful at all (why they were chosen in the first place). The Network should have declared its independence and become a real player. And yes, community building and strengthening should have been part of the equation. Yes, what might have been an outstanding organization that really made a difference world wide and at home will never be. Not with Kathy Manning and her lapdogs in place. Pity. Sorry have to post anonymous don't want to get bit by the dogs.
Your facts are outstanding. Yes the Network wanted its independence in light of the budget and other issues with poor leadership. Yes it is also true that Kathy Manning did what she does best, "destroy" and eliminate anything that gets in way. Her example will reverberate negativity for years and insure that any Network leadership, excuse me, advisors, never put a toe out of a line or do anything meaningful at all (why they were chosen in the first place). The Network should have declared its independence and become a real player. And yes, community building and strengthening should have been part of the equation. Yes, what might have been an outstanding organization that really made a difference world wide and at home will never be. Not with Kathy Manning and her lapdogs in place. Pity. Sorry have to post anonymous don't want to get bit by the dogs.
http://sclow.freeblogit.com/2012/02/19/martin-greenberg-jfna-vampire/
Here is a review for the new Network Exec. Why was Rhea Attias let go? Who let the dogs out?
..
On Civility, Corporate Vampires and Community Conservation
Yesterday our receptionist buzzed me and informed me that there was someone from JFNA who wished to speak with me. The call was transferred and with it I met, for the first time, the Executive Director of the JFNA Networked Communities. Over the next 15–20 minutes I was subjected to a bizarre beration. It was an unprofessional, vicious, tirade during which I was repeatedly threatened. The director was angry because I had responded to an invitation from the lay leadership of Lansing Michigan, a JFNA network community, to address them concerning ways in which we might collaborate to share resources and reduce costs to the benefit of all concerned. The savings would permit both communities to reinvigorate their campaigns, raise more funds for local and overseas needs. Additionally, a foundation had made funding available to small Michigan Jewish communities that was conditioned upon the creation of programs by those small communities in collaboration with one another. In the course of his tirade the exec made it clear that his priority was the statistical indicia of his professional performance rather than a genuine concern for Jewish life in our small Michigan Jewish communities and the welfare of our beneficiaries overseas. Rather than view small communities as a resource to be cultivated and conserved into the future he has decided on the vampire’s approach” to suck them dry and let em die.”I have been in Jewish communal work for over 20 years. I have seen UJA and UIA and UJC come and go. (click on link to read more).
Post a Comment