"A lot of time has been spent discussing the drop in core allocations to JAFI, JDC, and World ORT.In fact, JFNA has a lot of data which it parses out only to those it deems "worthy." The Global Planning Table has seen the same data as I -- allocations to core and total Supplemental (designated) giving. There is no breakdown as to where those dollars were allocated to in supplemental/designated fashion, but "Total Supplemental Giving 2013-2014" was $40.3 million (+/-) -- again, there has been no breakdown of the recipients. This total is not insignificant, but it nowhere approaches "more total dollars from the federation system than at any time in history" for JDC/JAFI/ORT. Far from it when one merely considers that the drop in core to JAFI since the merger now is approaching $100,000,000 annually.
For all we know, JAFI, JDC, and World ORT may, in fact, be receiving more total dollars annually from the federation system than at any time in history....or maybe not.
Doesn't JFNA have the data on not only how much each federation sends JFNA for allocations to the core, but also in addition to the core allocation, how much each federation allocates directly to JAFI, JDC, and World ORT?
That, it would seem to me, would lay all the cards on the table for a transparent analysis of the situation.
And it would seem that this information should, in fact, be public information for the members of the JFNA System."
I agree wholeheartedly with one recent correspondent who wrote:
"The conversation on advocacy needs to shift and focus on three basic truths:If JFNA could lead us here, what a change in systemic attitude might occur. But the leaders of JFNA seem to be so involved in brand and self-promotion, they appear to have no time or interest in promoting the critical work of those with which we have charged with our responsibilities.
1. The indivisible nature of local and overseas needs- hence a single Jewish agenda built around peoplehood and community
2. The unique set of deliverables provided by global partners (what we once described as "the franchise")
3. The acknowledgment that for 3/4 of our Federations or more local needs alone cannot maintain the loyalty of their biggest donors"
But, far too often, there are federation professional leaders who, when challenged about the deconstruction of the overseas allocation engage in pathetic sophistry. Here's how it works -- a donor sees the JFNA data. It shows your federation with an overseas allocation of 12.3% including Supplemental Giving. He asks the CEO how can that be? The CEO responds: "Well, JFNA's number is just wrong. You have to deduct our cost of raising the money, our overhead, from our campaign numbers first. Then you compute our percentage -- it's really...40%." Thus, you have a community whose overhead is 50% -- and there are those that even exceed that percentage -- which allocate almost nothing but under this perverse logic that community's CEO could argue that its allocates 50, 60, 70% to overseas. Sophistry, pure and simple.
JFNA's numbers, which are the same as those used by UJA before it, compare true federation-to-federation figures -- annual campaign and allocation -- applicable across the board. The results may not look good -- in fact, they look horrible -- but this data enable a fair evaluation of each federation's allocation in the absolute and relative one to every other.
You will recall that JFNA abdicated its advocacy and allocations responsibilities to the ineptitude of the Global Planning Table; and what did that leadership do? Nothing. It collected data that disclosed that over ten federations are allocating directly to overseas beneficiaries; it "eliminated" the "split" by converting it to cash; they acquiesced to the "repayment" this year of not only allocations "advances" by a few federations but of an allocations loan by JFNA. In other words, in the shadows in which JFNA and the GPT work best, these two Potemkin Villages just did what they do best...nothing. And, in doing nothing, damaged the credibility of our system even more than they did before. And, just who have been the continuity in this deconstruction over the past five years? Kathy Manning and Jerry Silverman.
Let's have transparency and let's have some honesty -- two excellent places to start.