The Rotem Conversion Law now having had its First Reading in the Knesset is bad -- bad for Israel, bad for Diaspora Jewry. This legislation has provoked JFNA to correspond with the Prime Minister on at least 4 occasions and to meet productively with President Shimon Peres. As I read the correspondence (including the JFNA "Coordinating Council's" letter of July 13) , the JFNA Leadership Briefing on the subject yesterday and Silverman's daily "Updates" to G-d knows who (but not to JFNA Board members), I begin to fear that JFNA may not even understand the Bill's impact.
Sure, Jerry Silverman cites the Bill's ceding to "...the Orthodox-run Chief Rabbinate full control over conversions in Israel and urging that any convert 'accepts the yoke of mitzvot according to halacha." But this legislation is then ignored by JFNA which then focuses on the meetings it has held, the frustration that the Prime Minister hasn't replied to its urgings, etc., etc. READ THE LEGISLATION, JFNA LEADERS, IT IS FAR WORSE THAN THE WHAT YOU HAVE CITED. You've met with Rabbi Uri Regev, CEO of HIDDUSH -- for Freedom of Religion and Equality. Why not reprint Regev's analysis if you can't provide your own?
I have grown impatient with JFNA's failure to focus on the core ills of the legislation while they seem to seek some undefined "dialogue." "Dialogue" about what exactly? This isn't about JFNA after all, as important as JFNA is (or could be). This is about something far more important -- the portent of the impact of the legislation in its present form upon Diaspora Jewry and the previously converted, immigrants and on our families and the families of our fellow Jews. Articulate why, if you are able.
Focus anyone?
Rwexler
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
DISSIPATED CLOUT
As one of my friends reminded me a few weeks ago -- before the recent outbreak of the conversion bill in Israel -- we used to tell our donors that our Government and Israel measured our commitment as American Jews to Israel in part based upon the achievement of our annual fund raising and our communal allocations to the Jewish State. If that is still the case, just think of how we are thought of in those precincts today.
In Fantasyland, our leaders send urgent letters to the Prime Minister but the reality of our impact is quite different -- in the reality of today, were it not for the relationship between the PM and JAFI's Chair of the Executive, Natan Sharansky, JFNA would have no impact at all. (I would add that there is one professional at JFNA with access to the Prime Minister, Yitzchak Shavit, the Executive Vice Chair of UIA and when Itzik retires, there will be none.) And JFNA should continue to piggyback on JAFI in this "process." (There are, of course, Federation CEOs with real access -- you probably know who they are -- from federations which demonstrate their continuing commitment to Israel through their Israel and Overseas allocations.
As one terrific North American leader asserted to me earlier today, if we as the Jews of North America had any real influence in Israel today, we wouldn't be pleading for "dialogue" on the conversion issue, we would be asserting in no uncertain terms (without apologizing for our "strong language" as JFNA has) that the pending Conversion Bill must be withdrawn from Knesset consideration before any dialogue can begin. But we don't have that clout -- we have allowed it to dissipate away by our national organization's ineptitude.
One doesn't begin "negotiations" with pleas for inclusion...inclusion must be presumed. But that presumption must be based on reality. To speak for the 6,000,000 Jews of the United States and Canada, you must stand for sacred and historic values and principles. And here we are today -- with a JFNA whose leaders neither know nor comprehend them.
Strong letter to follow, of course.
Rwexler
In Fantasyland, our leaders send urgent letters to the Prime Minister but the reality of our impact is quite different -- in the reality of today, were it not for the relationship between the PM and JAFI's Chair of the Executive, Natan Sharansky, JFNA would have no impact at all. (I would add that there is one professional at JFNA with access to the Prime Minister, Yitzchak Shavit, the Executive Vice Chair of UIA and when Itzik retires, there will be none.) And JFNA should continue to piggyback on JAFI in this "process." (There are, of course, Federation CEOs with real access -- you probably know who they are -- from federations which demonstrate their continuing commitment to Israel through their Israel and Overseas allocations.
As one terrific North American leader asserted to me earlier today, if we as the Jews of North America had any real influence in Israel today, we wouldn't be pleading for "dialogue" on the conversion issue, we would be asserting in no uncertain terms (without apologizing for our "strong language" as JFNA has) that the pending Conversion Bill must be withdrawn from Knesset consideration before any dialogue can begin. But we don't have that clout -- we have allowed it to dissipate away by our national organization's ineptitude.
One doesn't begin "negotiations" with pleas for inclusion...inclusion must be presumed. But that presumption must be based on reality. To speak for the 6,000,000 Jews of the United States and Canada, you must stand for sacred and historic values and principles. And here we are today -- with a JFNA whose leaders neither know nor comprehend them.
Strong letter to follow, of course.
Rwexler
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
ONLY FOOLING THEMSELVES
This is all pretty sad.
Albert Ratner, one of our system's great leaders, one of the few mega-donors once willing to offer his wisdom and commitment to JFNA, led the federations to conclude that the payment of Fair Share Dues would be the sole criterion for JFNA membership. Dues would be determined by a given Federation's Annual Campaign relationship to the aggregate of all Annual Campaigns. A failure to pay Dues, absent real "hardship" as determined by JFNA's Financial Relations Committee, would mean an automatic -- no further governance action required -- termination of membership. The Financial Relations Committee would weigh a given federation's "hardship." The Board approved it all.
How simple.
Working with a great staff, I and other members on the Financial Relations Committee -- among them Joel Alperson, Jay Sarver, Jerry Yanowitz, Herb Gimelstob and others -- with a great professional staff, would consult, sometimes negotiate, with federations approaching Dues default and, almost always, achieve Dues compliance or work out an agreement to assure compliance over a period of years in a spirit of good will and good faith. If UJA or UJC determined a write off of amounts due would be appropriate, such an action was normally accomplioshed only if the community agreed to an equitable overseas allocation going forward. Dues compliance meant something...then.
How simple.
That was then and this is now. The instruments are still in place: a terrific professional supporting the Financial Relations Committee; a Committee with a well-meaning Chair and members anxious to work with the federations. But JFNA's leaders have assured that membership no longer has meaning; that Dues compliance is meaningless; that "hardship" is no longer necessary. Pay what you can, for some it's pay what you want. JFNA will issue an invoice for full Dues -- your percentage responsibility for the JFNA Budget. The message -- pay the Dues if you want or if you can. If not, we'll issue you a debit statement for the difference between the Dues you paid and the amount you didn't with, maybe, a payment plan (that you may adhere to or not) -- you will owe JFNA the difference. JFNA will just go borrow the aggregate unpaid Dues and JFNA's balance sheet will show an ever-growing receivable balance with no reserve for unpaid Dues. They have their blinders on.
How simple.
No federations have hardships any more. Uh uh. No federations are out of compliance the way JFNA now figures it. Membership, in fact no longer carries with it any obligations or responsibilities...and few if any benefits. The reality: membership no longer has any meaning whatsoever. Federations which pay their Dues have no greater rights as federation Members within JFNA as those which do not pay their Dues for whatever the reason. Haven't paid your Dues? It's OK; your lay leaders can become Chairs of our constituencies, get Mission subsidies, serve on our Work Groups and Boards. We don't care. Haven't paid your Dues? It's OK; your professionals can serve on JFNA Panels, attend CPE sessions. After all, we've sent you a bill for the balance due.
Oh, and of course, because what they have done is indefensible, they don't/won't discuss it. Where is Albert when we so desperately need him? (Oh, wait a minute, this leadership doesn't need Albert or anyone else, do they?)
Bye now.
Rwexler
Albert Ratner, one of our system's great leaders, one of the few mega-donors once willing to offer his wisdom and commitment to JFNA, led the federations to conclude that the payment of Fair Share Dues would be the sole criterion for JFNA membership. Dues would be determined by a given Federation's Annual Campaign relationship to the aggregate of all Annual Campaigns. A failure to pay Dues, absent real "hardship" as determined by JFNA's Financial Relations Committee, would mean an automatic -- no further governance action required -- termination of membership. The Financial Relations Committee would weigh a given federation's "hardship." The Board approved it all.
How simple.
Working with a great staff, I and other members on the Financial Relations Committee -- among them Joel Alperson, Jay Sarver, Jerry Yanowitz, Herb Gimelstob and others -- with a great professional staff, would consult, sometimes negotiate, with federations approaching Dues default and, almost always, achieve Dues compliance or work out an agreement to assure compliance over a period of years in a spirit of good will and good faith. If UJA or UJC determined a write off of amounts due would be appropriate, such an action was normally accomplioshed only if the community agreed to an equitable overseas allocation going forward. Dues compliance meant something...then.
How simple.
That was then and this is now. The instruments are still in place: a terrific professional supporting the Financial Relations Committee; a Committee with a well-meaning Chair and members anxious to work with the federations. But JFNA's leaders have assured that membership no longer has meaning; that Dues compliance is meaningless; that "hardship" is no longer necessary. Pay what you can, for some it's pay what you want. JFNA will issue an invoice for full Dues -- your percentage responsibility for the JFNA Budget. The message -- pay the Dues if you want or if you can. If not, we'll issue you a debit statement for the difference between the Dues you paid and the amount you didn't with, maybe, a payment plan (that you may adhere to or not) -- you will owe JFNA the difference. JFNA will just go borrow the aggregate unpaid Dues and JFNA's balance sheet will show an ever-growing receivable balance with no reserve for unpaid Dues. They have their blinders on.
How simple.
No federations have hardships any more. Uh uh. No federations are out of compliance the way JFNA now figures it. Membership, in fact no longer carries with it any obligations or responsibilities...and few if any benefits. The reality: membership no longer has any meaning whatsoever. Federations which pay their Dues have no greater rights as federation Members within JFNA as those which do not pay their Dues for whatever the reason. Haven't paid your Dues? It's OK; your lay leaders can become Chairs of our constituencies, get Mission subsidies, serve on our Work Groups and Boards. We don't care. Haven't paid your Dues? It's OK; your professionals can serve on JFNA Panels, attend CPE sessions. After all, we've sent you a bill for the balance due.
Oh, and of course, because what they have done is indefensible, they don't/won't discuss it. Where is Albert when we so desperately need him? (Oh, wait a minute, this leadership doesn't need Albert or anyone else, do they?)
Bye now.
Rwexler
Monday, July 12, 2010
THE FEDERATIONS ARE DEAD...THE JESER APPROACH
THE JEWISH FEDERATION SYSTEM IS DEAD;
LONG LIVE THE JEWISH FEDERATION
Paul Jeser – fayepaul67@aol.com
Many lay leaders and professionals who are or were part of the Federation world are looking at what is happening today with very great sadness.
In the ‘good ole days’ (were they really that good?) the Federation was the key player in all, if not most, communities. In the ‘good ole days’ the Federations attracted the top leaders, the most significant donors, and the most creative and visionary professionals. In the ‘good ole days’ the Federations were looked to for guidance and support by the entire Jewish Community.
From what I read, see and hear, with very few exceptions, this is certainly not the case today.
Most major leaders and donors have decided that institutional life is not for them. They have set up their own Foundations, decided upon their own priorities, formed their own umbrella support system and have hired top staff.
So – as many of my friends have said: ‘Yes, we all know the problem – so what is the answer?”
I may not have THE answer, but I do have a vision.
But first, as the song says, let’s start at the very beginning.
I may be wrong, but I think that the most significant event that began the slide down the slippery slope was…. Project Renewal!
Yup – that great and most effective program began the downfall of the Federation world.
In the 50's, 60's and 70's, the major communal organizations were the Federations and their support organizations, the UJA and CJF. They attracted the major donors, leaders and professionals. That world was where all the action happened. It was the place to be.
Outside of the Synagogue world, and as a somewhat educated guess, probably 80%++ of all Jewish giving came through the Federation world. The Israel Education Fund was a quiet way that major gifts could be given through the Federation, not be allocated through the general campaign process, and be designated for special projects in Israel. With that exception most all other charitable giving and allocation was controlled by the Federation.
In the late 1970’s Project Renewal was proposed by the Jewish Agency and accepted by the Federation world. Many voiced reservations; not because the goal was not a wonderful one, but because they felt that once donors had the ability to so specifically designate their gifts (even with the parameters being agreed upon) doors would be opened that could never be closed.
There is a story about an incident that took place in the mid-70's during the discussion most Federations had about supporting Soviet Jewish Refuseniks who came to America (versus only funding those who went to Israel). A major Federation donor and board member, who felt strongly that all Soviet Jews should go to Israel and if they came to America should not be supported, seeing that he was in the very small minority, made the following statement: “I know that in a traditional democracy my position will be defeated, but let me redefine democracy for you: traditional democracy believes that one person has one vote; in my democracy, one dollar equals one vote.” Since his gift was more than all the rest of the Board members collectively, he felt that his position should prevail. Of course it didn't as it should not have. But the lesson was there – he did not want others to decide how to allocate his contribution!
Whether right or wrong, whether good for the community or bad, the fact is that most people, and certainly most – if not all - major donors do not want others to allocate their contributions and certainly do not want to spend time in organizational life.
We are now thirty years later. The desire and ability to have more control over ones own gift and what Project Renewal began has resulted in the unbelievable growth and strength of dozens (if not hundreds) of niche organizations, hundreds (!) of significant family foundations and the significant weakening of the Federation world.
So – since we all know the problem, what is the solution?
My vision – or at least the beginning of a concept: We need a totally new communal structure.
• The Federation should no longer raise funds to directly allocate to other institutions, agencies or programs.
Thus it will not be seen as a competitor.
This is the key.
Once the Federation is no longer an advocate for any specific organization, agency or program, it can become the ‘honest-broker’ for the donors and agencies and the effective organization the community needs.
• The Federation should be the communal organization whose responsibility it is to:
o Serve as a resource for all organizations in the areas of fundraising, leadership, staff development and management.
o Serve as a resource for all donors and provide ‘fair and balanced’ (sorry FNC) information about all programs and projects needing funding.
o Serve as the place where all organizational leaders meet to discuss the issues – not necessarily to force a consensus but to allow for open discussion in a neutral environment.
o Serve as a true ‘community relations committee/council’ in developing relationships between the Jewish and non-Jewish community and even within the Jewish community.
o Serve as the community-wide outreach organization to motivate those not involved to become involved and assist them in developing their own paths.
o Convene the community in times of crises or special need. Play the major role in the development and coordination of community action, programs, and responses.
• Federation leadership should include the top local leadership (lay and pro) of all communal organizations and, as importantly, the top donors (who may be much more willing to serve in this new institution than in what we now currently have).
• Funding for this ‘new’ Federation will have to come from the cadre of communal donors who, if they buy in to the new concept, will see this new structure as a benefit to all, not as a waste of time and money.
• This vision does not see the need for the UJC since the JAFI and the JDC will, as all other organizations, raise funds directly in the community. This vision does see the necessity for an organization much the same as the CJF was – a national umbrella resource for all communities.
This is drastic surgery for the community. However, without it, or something close to it, we will continue to see the diminution of the one community organization/structure that is so needed.
LONG LIVE THE JEWISH FEDERATION
Paul Jeser – fayepaul67@aol.com
Many lay leaders and professionals who are or were part of the Federation world are looking at what is happening today with very great sadness.
In the ‘good ole days’ (were they really that good?) the Federation was the key player in all, if not most, communities. In the ‘good ole days’ the Federations attracted the top leaders, the most significant donors, and the most creative and visionary professionals. In the ‘good ole days’ the Federations were looked to for guidance and support by the entire Jewish Community.
From what I read, see and hear, with very few exceptions, this is certainly not the case today.
Most major leaders and donors have decided that institutional life is not for them. They have set up their own Foundations, decided upon their own priorities, formed their own umbrella support system and have hired top staff.
So – as many of my friends have said: ‘Yes, we all know the problem – so what is the answer?”
I may not have THE answer, but I do have a vision.
But first, as the song says, let’s start at the very beginning.
I may be wrong, but I think that the most significant event that began the slide down the slippery slope was…. Project Renewal!
Yup – that great and most effective program began the downfall of the Federation world.
In the 50's, 60's and 70's, the major communal organizations were the Federations and their support organizations, the UJA and CJF. They attracted the major donors, leaders and professionals. That world was where all the action happened. It was the place to be.
Outside of the Synagogue world, and as a somewhat educated guess, probably 80%++ of all Jewish giving came through the Federation world. The Israel Education Fund was a quiet way that major gifts could be given through the Federation, not be allocated through the general campaign process, and be designated for special projects in Israel. With that exception most all other charitable giving and allocation was controlled by the Federation.
In the late 1970’s Project Renewal was proposed by the Jewish Agency and accepted by the Federation world. Many voiced reservations; not because the goal was not a wonderful one, but because they felt that once donors had the ability to so specifically designate their gifts (even with the parameters being agreed upon) doors would be opened that could never be closed.
There is a story about an incident that took place in the mid-70's during the discussion most Federations had about supporting Soviet Jewish Refuseniks who came to America (versus only funding those who went to Israel). A major Federation donor and board member, who felt strongly that all Soviet Jews should go to Israel and if they came to America should not be supported, seeing that he was in the very small minority, made the following statement: “I know that in a traditional democracy my position will be defeated, but let me redefine democracy for you: traditional democracy believes that one person has one vote; in my democracy, one dollar equals one vote.” Since his gift was more than all the rest of the Board members collectively, he felt that his position should prevail. Of course it didn't as it should not have. But the lesson was there – he did not want others to decide how to allocate his contribution!
Whether right or wrong, whether good for the community or bad, the fact is that most people, and certainly most – if not all - major donors do not want others to allocate their contributions and certainly do not want to spend time in organizational life.
We are now thirty years later. The desire and ability to have more control over ones own gift and what Project Renewal began has resulted in the unbelievable growth and strength of dozens (if not hundreds) of niche organizations, hundreds (!) of significant family foundations and the significant weakening of the Federation world.
So – since we all know the problem, what is the solution?
My vision – or at least the beginning of a concept: We need a totally new communal structure.
• The Federation should no longer raise funds to directly allocate to other institutions, agencies or programs.
Thus it will not be seen as a competitor.
This is the key.
Once the Federation is no longer an advocate for any specific organization, agency or program, it can become the ‘honest-broker’ for the donors and agencies and the effective organization the community needs.
• The Federation should be the communal organization whose responsibility it is to:
o Serve as a resource for all organizations in the areas of fundraising, leadership, staff development and management.
o Serve as a resource for all donors and provide ‘fair and balanced’ (sorry FNC) information about all programs and projects needing funding.
o Serve as the place where all organizational leaders meet to discuss the issues – not necessarily to force a consensus but to allow for open discussion in a neutral environment.
o Serve as a true ‘community relations committee/council’ in developing relationships between the Jewish and non-Jewish community and even within the Jewish community.
o Serve as the community-wide outreach organization to motivate those not involved to become involved and assist them in developing their own paths.
o Convene the community in times of crises or special need. Play the major role in the development and coordination of community action, programs, and responses.
• Federation leadership should include the top local leadership (lay and pro) of all communal organizations and, as importantly, the top donors (who may be much more willing to serve in this new institution than in what we now currently have).
• Funding for this ‘new’ Federation will have to come from the cadre of communal donors who, if they buy in to the new concept, will see this new structure as a benefit to all, not as a waste of time and money.
• This vision does not see the need for the UJC since the JAFI and the JDC will, as all other organizations, raise funds directly in the community. This vision does see the necessity for an organization much the same as the CJF was – a national umbrella resource for all communities.
This is drastic surgery for the community. However, without it, or something close to it, we will continue to see the diminution of the one community organization/structure that is so needed.
'WHO IS A JEW"
Last March, when JFNA first dipped its toe into the critical issue of potential changes to Israel's Law of Return, it aggressively attacked proposed changes being led by ultra-Orthodox elements in Israel by sending a "strong letter" to the Prime Minister demanding continuing consultation on the subject. At the time I suggested, based on past experience, that good sense called out to JFNA to immediately organize federation lay and professional leadership for direct talks in Israel organized with the Jewish Agency to focus Knesset members on the global controversy they would create by weakening the bond between Israel and Diaspora Jewry. Nothing happened.
The legislation's sponsor, MK David Rotem, visited with JFNA in the States and, quite clearly, was never listening to what our leaders had to say. Yesterday, in a message to his staff and Federation CEOs but not to you, Jerry Silverman expressed his shock and dismay that no further discussions took place and that Rotem would be introducing his Bill today with proposed devastating changes to the Israeli laws pertaining to conversions that would vest all determinations of conversions' validity in the Chief Rabbinate who would be allowed to define, in his discretion, a qualifying conversion. JFNA sent another "strong letter." (And, it was a good letter, indeed.) On Sunday, the matter was already discussed in the Israeli media. Sharansky publicly deried the Bill as "...stupidity." JFNA sent its "strong letter." Today, JAFI issued a strong public statement; JFNA still has not gone beyond its Memo to Federation Executives...it hasn't even alerted its own Board members...but Silverman did express "deep shock and disappointment" that the Bill would be introduced "without input" in Haaretz. Consider this Post the "trickle down."
To his credit, Jerry was working with Becky Caspi, his Israel and Overseas chief pro, and Natan Sharansky to influence Rotem not to introduce this bill. That didn't work. The Bill was introduced and had its first reading and, as reported this morning in The Jerusalem Post, the Prime Minister has assured that the Bill "won't pass." Rotem has promised undefined "changes" at second or third reading on the legislation but he is clearly in the pocket of the Chief Rabbinate. Jerry promised that he, Becky and Natan would attend the Knesset Law Committee meeting today. They did. Not comforting.
A question: Is it wrong to ask that for the multi-million dollar annual "investment" we make through JFNA's Israel & Overseas activities ($4.5 million) that there be advance intelligence on an issue as critical to our Streams and to us than one day in advance? A suggestion: It is JFNA Washington that has demonstrated its ability to mobilize our federations on domestic legislative issues. Let's use that ability to now mobilize our federations to create a continuing presence in Jerusalem in the halls of the Knesset and in the Prime Minister's Office to make it clear that the conversion issue is an Israeli-Diaspora issue of overriding importance. And JAFI must mobilize the Streams.
Or, we can just send another "strong letter" and wring our hands.
Rwexler
The legislation's sponsor, MK David Rotem, visited with JFNA in the States and, quite clearly, was never listening to what our leaders had to say. Yesterday, in a message to his staff and Federation CEOs but not to you, Jerry Silverman expressed his shock and dismay that no further discussions took place and that Rotem would be introducing his Bill today with proposed devastating changes to the Israeli laws pertaining to conversions that would vest all determinations of conversions' validity in the Chief Rabbinate who would be allowed to define, in his discretion, a qualifying conversion. JFNA sent another "strong letter." (And, it was a good letter, indeed.) On Sunday, the matter was already discussed in the Israeli media. Sharansky publicly deried the Bill as "...stupidity." JFNA sent its "strong letter." Today, JAFI issued a strong public statement; JFNA still has not gone beyond its Memo to Federation Executives...it hasn't even alerted its own Board members...but Silverman did express "deep shock and disappointment" that the Bill would be introduced "without input" in Haaretz. Consider this Post the "trickle down."
To his credit, Jerry was working with Becky Caspi, his Israel and Overseas chief pro, and Natan Sharansky to influence Rotem not to introduce this bill. That didn't work. The Bill was introduced and had its first reading and, as reported this morning in The Jerusalem Post, the Prime Minister has assured that the Bill "won't pass." Rotem has promised undefined "changes" at second or third reading on the legislation but he is clearly in the pocket of the Chief Rabbinate. Jerry promised that he, Becky and Natan would attend the Knesset Law Committee meeting today. They did. Not comforting.
A question: Is it wrong to ask that for the multi-million dollar annual "investment" we make through JFNA's Israel & Overseas activities ($4.5 million) that there be advance intelligence on an issue as critical to our Streams and to us than one day in advance? A suggestion: It is JFNA Washington that has demonstrated its ability to mobilize our federations on domestic legislative issues. Let's use that ability to now mobilize our federations to create a continuing presence in Jerusalem in the halls of the Knesset and in the Prime Minister's Office to make it clear that the conversion issue is an Israeli-Diaspora issue of overriding importance. And JAFI must mobilize the Streams.
Or, we can just send another "strong letter" and wring our hands.
Rwexler
Sunday, July 11, 2010
"THE FEDERATION SYSTEM IS DEAD"
There are those who have determined that, as they state with absolute certainty, that the "federation moment" has come and gone -- as one put it recently "the old model doesn't work anymore." Then there is the Los Angeles Federation's new CEO who has concluded, after six months on the job, that "the model of the Federation as an umbrella is gone." This followed the crisis that the Jewish Federation of Greater San Francisco faced in laying off 33 employees last week. Each of these independent actions will be cited by some as "further evidence" supporting their pre-formed conclusions.
Those doomsayers ignore the fact that 159 Jewish federations (and I assume the Network of non-federated communities) which, in the aggregate, in a terrible economy, last year raised in excess of $800,000,000 from 350,000 donors allocated to helping local agencies, to its partners in Israel and overseas -- to assisting Jews in need wherever they may live. (And, certainly, federations must do better in campaign and donor development if they are to thrive.) To agencies, hospitals and universities competing for Jewish philanthropic dollars and donors, the federations system, even in times of declining dollars and donors, is a source of envy...and, often, deprecation. Even in these challenging times, federation is the one organization about which I think everyone would truly say: "if it didn't exist, we would have to create (or recreate) it" -- because the alternative is communal chaos. Those who assert the "end of days" offer no alternative ("Federation as hub" not umbrella?)-- one must assume that some sense that a "federation free" world of multiple appeals to Jewish donors in every community would be nirvana; they would take us back to an age when it was every organization for itself.
In many of the cited communities Federation has engaged new lay leaders or a CEO new to federation work, places where the federation model has tried to find its place in a highly competitive, undisciplined Jewish philanthropic environment. If one reads the words of LA's new CEO carefully, his and his Chair's redesign is is intended to change that Federation's approach to gain greater traction in a community where it has had so little, not to bury the Federation model but to change it. I am in Chicago, where the success and place of the federation is, perhaps, unparalleled; where our federation is the central address of the Jewish community. friends may draw their conclusions from their environments while I draw mine not only from my Chicago experience but from my visits with federations around the country as well. It is true that there are many Jewish communities which are facing many challenges today...but I sense among their leaders, lay and professional alike, a commitment to building and rebuilding and, where necessary, to new experiments in recreating federation.
The impetus for new models of communal organization has several sources: the impacts of the economic collapse, the rise (with the encouragement of federations themselves) even the dominance of designated giving, our increasing mobility and the demise of our rootedness in any given community, the diminishing reach of federations to current generations of donors let alone the next, and other factors. Where experiments in change have been suggested -- e.g., a paper now several years old drafted for discussion at what I recall was a JFNA/UJC event by the Jacksonville and San Antonio federation CEOs, or the ideas flowing from Houston's introspection leading that community forward and shared with JFNA -- JFNA's leaders, lacking any real understanding of the federation movement, just ignored them. And, therein lies the rub.
The rub, the tragedy I perceive is that the federations today lack a national organization that is capable of leading and partnering with local federations as was intended when UJC (now JFNA) was first created by merger. An organization that fails to comprehend its own purposes, let alone the values and principles of the federation movement, can't lead the federations through change. That is the tragic and seminal failure of the federations themselves. For $30.3 million dollars this year and last (and close to $400 million since JFNA was created by merger), our investment, we have demanded literally nothing from the national entity we created and fund and we have received almost nothing in return. Worse, I know of a number of federation leaders, mainly professional but lay as well, who have sought JFNA's assistance (or at least a response), and have been ignored if not shunned.
It did not have to be this way; it doesn't have to be this way. Emerging communities evidencing both high growth and high potential needing both organizational and campaign assistance were to be part of a JFNA Emerging Communities effort -- a JFNA/Federation partnership authorized by the JFNA Board's vote in support of the FRD Study which proposed it. Started with two federations and moving forward, JFNA's leaders literally and precipitously "pulled the plug" on the embryonic effort without any governance authority to do so after two years. Were the program to be revived (which would require some funding [easily diverted from any number of JFNA programs that have no value to the federations] and a deployment of staff members with federation experience), it would send a message to the federations of a new sense of partnership.
It was only three years ago when then UJC professionals turned their collective backs (with no lay involvement) on a mega-donor's offer to fully fund a national e-philanthropy effort. The lay leader, both a Next Gen model of federation involvement and philanthropy, was embarrassed with a "don't call us, we'll call you" attitude at JFNA HQ. Could that leader's interest in serving our system be revived? Not if all JFNA is about is marketing, Washington and waiting for the next disaster to show its "worth."
So, what is needed? First and foremost those federations which provide the bulk of JFNA Dues need to meet to assure that the current self-perpetuating lay leadership oligarchy ends now. Those federation leaders must assure that the next Board Chair (and if the office is to continue [which it shouldn't] Chair of the Executive) be truly representative of those who pay the Dues and that the next group of officers will be immediately recognized as thought leaders and campaign leaders both deserving of respect and respectful of the lay-professional partnership.
Second, a "coalition of willing federations" must join together with the JFNA CEO and President (and if the CEO and President is unwilling to go forward without him) to do for JFNA what it is no longer is capable of doing for itself -- setting priorities for the organization that are in synch with the priorities of the federations themselves...and then (a) commit to funding those priorities and (b) soliciting other federations to join them in a renewed national effort.
No, the federation construct is not "dead" no matter how often some repeat the unsupported conclusion that they are; but our national organization is comatose or tone deaf or both. The federations are hurting badly and require new experiments in governance and financial resource development, in donor acquisition and retention (and I am not suggesting #ish or Heroes or any other toilet training, run it up the flagpole silliness or the extravagance of a wasted "investment" in Sheatufim of close to $1 million of your money with no outcomes, no purpose), in attracting the next generations to lay leadership and in retaining, training and attracting professionals into the federations' work, and in creating a living bridge between North American Jews and the federation system and Israel while continuing to care for those of our People most in need.
It's time for a change -- actually, many changes. And, no one is home.
Rwexler
Those doomsayers ignore the fact that 159 Jewish federations (and I assume the Network of non-federated communities) which, in the aggregate, in a terrible economy, last year raised in excess of $800,000,000 from 350,000 donors allocated to helping local agencies, to its partners in Israel and overseas -- to assisting Jews in need wherever they may live. (And, certainly, federations must do better in campaign and donor development if they are to thrive.) To agencies, hospitals and universities competing for Jewish philanthropic dollars and donors, the federations system, even in times of declining dollars and donors, is a source of envy...and, often, deprecation. Even in these challenging times, federation is the one organization about which I think everyone would truly say: "if it didn't exist, we would have to create (or recreate) it" -- because the alternative is communal chaos. Those who assert the "end of days" offer no alternative ("Federation as hub" not umbrella?)-- one must assume that some sense that a "federation free" world of multiple appeals to Jewish donors in every community would be nirvana; they would take us back to an age when it was every organization for itself.
In many of the cited communities Federation has engaged new lay leaders or a CEO new to federation work, places where the federation model has tried to find its place in a highly competitive, undisciplined Jewish philanthropic environment. If one reads the words of LA's new CEO carefully, his and his Chair's redesign is is intended to change that Federation's approach to gain greater traction in a community where it has had so little, not to bury the Federation model but to change it. I am in Chicago, where the success and place of the federation is, perhaps, unparalleled; where our federation is the central address of the Jewish community. friends may draw their conclusions from their environments while I draw mine not only from my Chicago experience but from my visits with federations around the country as well. It is true that there are many Jewish communities which are facing many challenges today...but I sense among their leaders, lay and professional alike, a commitment to building and rebuilding and, where necessary, to new experiments in recreating federation.
The impetus for new models of communal organization has several sources: the impacts of the economic collapse, the rise (with the encouragement of federations themselves) even the dominance of designated giving, our increasing mobility and the demise of our rootedness in any given community, the diminishing reach of federations to current generations of donors let alone the next, and other factors. Where experiments in change have been suggested -- e.g., a paper now several years old drafted for discussion at what I recall was a JFNA/UJC event by the Jacksonville and San Antonio federation CEOs, or the ideas flowing from Houston's introspection leading that community forward and shared with JFNA -- JFNA's leaders, lacking any real understanding of the federation movement, just ignored them. And, therein lies the rub.
The rub, the tragedy I perceive is that the federations today lack a national organization that is capable of leading and partnering with local federations as was intended when UJC (now JFNA) was first created by merger. An organization that fails to comprehend its own purposes, let alone the values and principles of the federation movement, can't lead the federations through change. That is the tragic and seminal failure of the federations themselves. For $30.3 million dollars this year and last (and close to $400 million since JFNA was created by merger), our investment, we have demanded literally nothing from the national entity we created and fund and we have received almost nothing in return. Worse, I know of a number of federation leaders, mainly professional but lay as well, who have sought JFNA's assistance (or at least a response), and have been ignored if not shunned.
It did not have to be this way; it doesn't have to be this way. Emerging communities evidencing both high growth and high potential needing both organizational and campaign assistance were to be part of a JFNA Emerging Communities effort -- a JFNA/Federation partnership authorized by the JFNA Board's vote in support of the FRD Study which proposed it. Started with two federations and moving forward, JFNA's leaders literally and precipitously "pulled the plug" on the embryonic effort without any governance authority to do so after two years. Were the program to be revived (which would require some funding [easily diverted from any number of JFNA programs that have no value to the federations] and a deployment of staff members with federation experience), it would send a message to the federations of a new sense of partnership.
It was only three years ago when then UJC professionals turned their collective backs (with no lay involvement) on a mega-donor's offer to fully fund a national e-philanthropy effort. The lay leader, both a Next Gen model of federation involvement and philanthropy, was embarrassed with a "don't call us, we'll call you" attitude at JFNA HQ. Could that leader's interest in serving our system be revived? Not if all JFNA is about is marketing, Washington and waiting for the next disaster to show its "worth."
So, what is needed? First and foremost those federations which provide the bulk of JFNA Dues need to meet to assure that the current self-perpetuating lay leadership oligarchy ends now. Those federation leaders must assure that the next Board Chair (and if the office is to continue [which it shouldn't] Chair of the Executive) be truly representative of those who pay the Dues and that the next group of officers will be immediately recognized as thought leaders and campaign leaders both deserving of respect and respectful of the lay-professional partnership.
Second, a "coalition of willing federations" must join together with the JFNA CEO and President (and if the CEO and President is unwilling to go forward without him) to do for JFNA what it is no longer is capable of doing for itself -- setting priorities for the organization that are in synch with the priorities of the federations themselves...and then (a) commit to funding those priorities and (b) soliciting other federations to join them in a renewed national effort.
No, the federation construct is not "dead" no matter how often some repeat the unsupported conclusion that they are; but our national organization is comatose or tone deaf or both. The federations are hurting badly and require new experiments in governance and financial resource development, in donor acquisition and retention (and I am not suggesting #ish or Heroes or any other toilet training, run it up the flagpole silliness or the extravagance of a wasted "investment" in Sheatufim of close to $1 million of your money with no outcomes, no purpose), in attracting the next generations to lay leadership and in retaining, training and attracting professionals into the federations' work, and in creating a living bridge between North American Jews and the federation system and Israel while continuing to care for those of our People most in need.
It's time for a change -- actually, many changes. And, no one is home.
Rwexler
Friday, July 9, 2010
A SUMMIT...OF SORTS
How many times on these pages have we suggested to JFNA Board Chair Kathy Manning and CEO Jerry Silverman that JFNA recreate the federations' Oak Brook, Illinois "Retreat" convening federation leaders, academics, the Streams and thought leaders from outside the system? I count five times. And how many times have we been ignored...I would guess...five times. A leading thought leader, Steve Windmueller had an even more detailed construct for JFNA -- he was ignored as well.
So who/what is holding a Future of Jewish Nonprofit Summit? Well, it ain't JFNA. With confirmed speakers ranging from "Eliyahu HaGiloni, Prophet, ProphetWanderer," to Kosha Dillz, Rapper, Shamspeed Records. (I am not making this up), to Steve Clark, SVP, British Airways (?), Rabbi Motti Seligman, Media Relations, Chabad, to Wiliam Daroff (you know him -- apparently invited as the major Tweeter in the Jewish nfp world), it should be interesting and very "cutting edge."
I know -- many of you still think that I am making this up -- oh you skeptics -- go to http://www.fojnp.com/ and read the speakers list, the Schedule and register -- then attend and hear Daroff serve on a Panel on "Social Media Successes;" and see the Topics Currently Planned including "Government Data Opening While Jewish Data Is Closing" (huh?), "How to Hire, Fire & Motivate. Plus the Gen Y Phenomenon" (this is a must just to observe how these topics are tied together); and other even more relevant Topics. If you don't wish to go to the website, just tweet William Daroff.
I know -- I am a dinosaur but, Jeez, Kosher Dillz, Rapper, and William Daroff?? Forget I ever suggested a leadership conclave -- this is the real GA.
Rwexler
So who/what is holding a Future of Jewish Nonprofit Summit? Well, it ain't JFNA. With confirmed speakers ranging from "Eliyahu HaGiloni, Prophet, ProphetWanderer," to Kosha Dillz, Rapper, Shamspeed Records. (I am not making this up), to Steve Clark, SVP, British Airways (?), Rabbi Motti Seligman, Media Relations, Chabad, to Wiliam Daroff (you know him -- apparently invited as the major Tweeter in the Jewish nfp world), it should be interesting and very "cutting edge."
I know -- many of you still think that I am making this up -- oh you skeptics -- go to http://www.fojnp.com/ and read the speakers list, the Schedule and register -- then attend and hear Daroff serve on a Panel on "Social Media Successes;" and see the Topics Currently Planned including "Government Data Opening While Jewish Data Is Closing" (huh?), "How to Hire, Fire & Motivate. Plus the Gen Y Phenomenon" (this is a must just to observe how these topics are tied together); and other even more relevant Topics. If you don't wish to go to the website, just tweet William Daroff.
I know -- I am a dinosaur but, Jeez, Kosher Dillz, Rapper, and William Daroff?? Forget I ever suggested a leadership conclave -- this is the real GA.
Rwexler
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
"LET'S FINISH THE MERGER"
There is a movement afoot, led by some federation CEOs who should know better and JFNA leaders to, as they now call it, "finish the merger" of 11 years ago. I would join this movement and carry its flag were it dedicated to increasing federation resources, increasing the share of those resources with our partners in Israel and overseas, engage in vigorous advocacy for meaningful collective responsibility, focus JFNA on increasing dollars and donors, reaching the new generations of leaders and donors, cementing the bridge between Israel and North America and strengthening federations and federation leadership, among other important, even critical, matters. But none of these...none of these...are the focus of this "movement." Of course not; as you will read below, this is just another JFNA sideshow.
As a curious by-product of the JAFI BOG meetings last month, where a number of federation CEOs were in attendance, this distraction, led by one of them in concert with JFNA leaders (hiding in the shadows as always), has begun to "complete the merger" by "doing away with the United Israel Appeal." Let's be clear at the outset that that aspect of the merger was completed 11 years ago when the UIA Board, reluctantly and with great prescience about the potential outcome of the merger, gave up its independence and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of what is now JFNA. That part of the merger was done, so why the sudden clamor for "completing the already complete?" Let me explain from the perspective of one who led the negotiations with UIA's leaders into the merger and later chaired UIA (all of which has been explained to JFNA leaders over the past decade more than once, more that 10 times)...
At the time of the merger the UIA Board was a hodgepodge of fine men and women dedicated to Israel and the success of the Jewish Agency but who were not all representative necessarily of their federations; it independently nominated American members to the Board and Executive of JAFI; it was responsible for the US Refugee Resettlement Grant (which has meant over $1 billion to the Agency for its purposes); it vetted and directed our American communities' allocations to JAFI and authorized them; it owned significant properties in Israel including Amigour housing for the elderly which became the security for loans to JAFI arising out of underfunding by our system of the Exodus; and it was an advocate for the Agency's work.
That was then; now, 11 years post-merger, UIA is performing the same functions (sans advocacy) with two critical exceptions: (1) its Board is comprised today of current Federation leaders who are committed to Israel. to JAFI and to the goals of JFNA; and (2) its nominees to the JAFI Board and Executive are determined by Committees on which JFNA plays a critical role. And, therein lies the rub. JFNA leaders -- those who utter "they're not JFNA" as often as they do the acronym JFNA -- though these JFNA "leaders" serve and have served on the UIA Board and JAFI Nominating Committees and, to my knowledge have offered one...that's one...nominee for the JAFI Board over a decade other than those recommended by the federations themselves -- these are the "leaders" who want absolute control of that process and (I am speculating here) they also want absolute control of the properties owned by UIA in Israel.
Let's get this absolutely straight -- UIA isn't "broken" in any sense, so JFNA's leaders who have "broken" everything they have touched over the past decade (other than the Washington Office and in the area of disaster relief) want to "control" UIA completely -- apparently so that they can "break" it as well. UIA performs its work pursuant to the express terms and conditions of critical IRS Revenue Rulings -- that federation CEO and JFNA's leaders who would "sponsor" what they mischaracterize as "finishing the merger" would be willing to put the deductibility of our contributions, the vetting of which by UIA is done pursuant to IRS Revenue Rulings specific to the United Israel Appeal, at risk solely in the interests of their selfish and unreasoned demands to control everything.
Please remember that these very leaders have evidenced the reverse Midas touch -- everything (ok, almost everything) they have touched turns to dross. But, they are an irresistible force -- when they "want" something, reason does not get in the way. JDC and JAFI have leveraged with Israeli philanthropists, JFNA "wants in," wreaking havoc as they do so; Chicago decides to commemorate the 20th Anniversary of Operation Exodus, JFNA "wants in" through a few missions and a lot of rhetoric; the Agency and Joint perform their respective vital roles in Yemen, JFNA "wants in" in the worst way and raises funds independent of any process to bring Yemeni Jews to Monsey, New York; JFNA "partners" in the Israel Advocacy Initiative but fails in its one responsibility -- to act as the funding partner; and on and on.
I have a suggestion for this federation CEO and JFNA's "leaders" who are embarked on a "cause" without purpose or thought, paraphrasing an AmericaN politician of equal competence: "come on, don't you have anything better to do than this?" Then again, perhaps not. More to follow...
Rwexler
As a curious by-product of the JAFI BOG meetings last month, where a number of federation CEOs were in attendance, this distraction, led by one of them in concert with JFNA leaders (hiding in the shadows as always), has begun to "complete the merger" by "doing away with the United Israel Appeal." Let's be clear at the outset that that aspect of the merger was completed 11 years ago when the UIA Board, reluctantly and with great prescience about the potential outcome of the merger, gave up its independence and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of what is now JFNA. That part of the merger was done, so why the sudden clamor for "completing the already complete?" Let me explain from the perspective of one who led the negotiations with UIA's leaders into the merger and later chaired UIA (all of which has been explained to JFNA leaders over the past decade more than once, more that 10 times)...
At the time of the merger the UIA Board was a hodgepodge of fine men and women dedicated to Israel and the success of the Jewish Agency but who were not all representative necessarily of their federations; it independently nominated American members to the Board and Executive of JAFI; it was responsible for the US Refugee Resettlement Grant (which has meant over $1 billion to the Agency for its purposes); it vetted and directed our American communities' allocations to JAFI and authorized them; it owned significant properties in Israel including Amigour housing for the elderly which became the security for loans to JAFI arising out of underfunding by our system of the Exodus; and it was an advocate for the Agency's work.
That was then; now, 11 years post-merger, UIA is performing the same functions (sans advocacy) with two critical exceptions: (1) its Board is comprised today of current Federation leaders who are committed to Israel. to JAFI and to the goals of JFNA; and (2) its nominees to the JAFI Board and Executive are determined by Committees on which JFNA plays a critical role. And, therein lies the rub. JFNA leaders -- those who utter "they're not JFNA" as often as they do the acronym JFNA -- though these JFNA "leaders" serve and have served on the UIA Board and JAFI Nominating Committees and, to my knowledge have offered one...that's one...nominee for the JAFI Board over a decade other than those recommended by the federations themselves -- these are the "leaders" who want absolute control of that process and (I am speculating here) they also want absolute control of the properties owned by UIA in Israel.
Let's get this absolutely straight -- UIA isn't "broken" in any sense, so JFNA's leaders who have "broken" everything they have touched over the past decade (other than the Washington Office and in the area of disaster relief) want to "control" UIA completely -- apparently so that they can "break" it as well. UIA performs its work pursuant to the express terms and conditions of critical IRS Revenue Rulings -- that federation CEO and JFNA's leaders who would "sponsor" what they mischaracterize as "finishing the merger" would be willing to put the deductibility of our contributions, the vetting of which by UIA is done pursuant to IRS Revenue Rulings specific to the United Israel Appeal, at risk solely in the interests of their selfish and unreasoned demands to control everything.
Please remember that these very leaders have evidenced the reverse Midas touch -- everything (ok, almost everything) they have touched turns to dross. But, they are an irresistible force -- when they "want" something, reason does not get in the way. JDC and JAFI have leveraged with Israeli philanthropists, JFNA "wants in," wreaking havoc as they do so; Chicago decides to commemorate the 20th Anniversary of Operation Exodus, JFNA "wants in" through a few missions and a lot of rhetoric; the Agency and Joint perform their respective vital roles in Yemen, JFNA "wants in" in the worst way and raises funds independent of any process to bring Yemeni Jews to Monsey, New York; JFNA "partners" in the Israel Advocacy Initiative but fails in its one responsibility -- to act as the funding partner; and on and on.
I have a suggestion for this federation CEO and JFNA's "leaders" who are embarked on a "cause" without purpose or thought, paraphrasing an AmericaN politician of equal competence: "come on, don't you have anything better to do than this?" Then again, perhaps not. More to follow...
Rwexler
Sunday, July 4, 2010
BUDGETS -- A COMPARISON
After a Jewish Federation Overall Planning and Allocations (Budget) Committee meeting last month, I took the Federation Budget materials back to my office to compare the budget data we in Chicago examine with JFNA's Budget. I have long failed to comprehend why the JFNA Budget process has deteriorated into nothing more than a rubber stamp from the days of vigorous debate and full lay participation -- even as sycophantic JFNA lay leaders blindly praise the national "process" -- essentially a four hour meeting taken up almost entirely by professionals' presentations and a vote. In fact, the JFNA Budget, to my sorrow, reads, as A.O. Scott described a recent film in The New York Times, as if: "...slapped together with the meticulous care of a high school yearbook staff...on deadline."
I started with an examination of what was: at the United Jewish Appeal, the Budget process began with professionals operating within lay-driven guidelines (as does JFNA's) then proceeded through review by the lay constituencies and Committees (as JFNA's does not), culminating in a two day meeting where the administrative and program budgets were presented by the lay Committee and constituency Chairs and lead professionals vigorously debated by a federation populated Lay Committee. And when I write "debated" I mean real uninhibited discussion, tough choices and priority-setting -- final results were never dictated by the professionals. We left those meetings exhausted but satisfied that our final product was one we could present and defend to the UJA Board and to our owners.
In Chicago and probably at your federation, there is a rigorous budget process. Here in my Federation, the programmatic and office Budgets in every area arise out of a Commission process -- one where lay leaders meet with beneficiaries and prioritize programs based upon needs and income projections. The Commissions are populated with federation and community leaders staffed with the best and brightest professionals. Our Budget Committee has the opportunity (which JFNA denies) to review allocations on a program-by-program and line-by-line basis. We examine Federation's estimated income from all sources. We make our recommendations to the Federation Board fully informed.
Yet, at JFNA Budget, Executive and Board, members are willing to ignore proper process and authorize the expenditure of $30.3 million of our money without demanding any...any...revenue analysis and without much in the way of attribution of dollars to programs. Amazingly, the JFNA 2011 Budget Book contains 57 pages...that's 57 pages, my friends...of Program narrative without an assignment of dollar one to any of them. And, at the Budget meeting...nary a question?!? Forget what we do in Chicago, or how you budget in your community, this is nothing more than ignorance of fiduciary duty.
The fact that JFNA plans to operate 57...that's 57...pages of Program is astounding enough -- and speaks more vividly to a horrible lack of focus than anything else -- but couple that with a lack of questions at the Budget and Finance Committee, a lack of questions at the JFNA Executive Committee or Board, suggests that no one cares how our money is spent. And, the lack of any...any...attributable Program costs in the Budget except in a very narrow set of circumstances suggests to this writer that JFNA's leaders treat your, our, Dues as fungible and treat you as imbeciles.
I have no doubt that ultimately it will be irresponsible budgeting (it didn't start at JFNA this year), a lack of focus and a lack of caring will ultimately be the nails in JFNA's coffin. And who will get blamed? You, me?
Rwexler
I started with an examination of what was: at the United Jewish Appeal, the Budget process began with professionals operating within lay-driven guidelines (as does JFNA's) then proceeded through review by the lay constituencies and Committees (as JFNA's does not), culminating in a two day meeting where the administrative and program budgets were presented by the lay Committee and constituency Chairs and lead professionals vigorously debated by a federation populated Lay Committee. And when I write "debated" I mean real uninhibited discussion, tough choices and priority-setting -- final results were never dictated by the professionals. We left those meetings exhausted but satisfied that our final product was one we could present and defend to the UJA Board and to our owners.
In Chicago and probably at your federation, there is a rigorous budget process. Here in my Federation, the programmatic and office Budgets in every area arise out of a Commission process -- one where lay leaders meet with beneficiaries and prioritize programs based upon needs and income projections. The Commissions are populated with federation and community leaders staffed with the best and brightest professionals. Our Budget Committee has the opportunity (which JFNA denies) to review allocations on a program-by-program and line-by-line basis. We examine Federation's estimated income from all sources. We make our recommendations to the Federation Board fully informed.
Yet, at JFNA Budget, Executive and Board, members are willing to ignore proper process and authorize the expenditure of $30.3 million of our money without demanding any...any...revenue analysis and without much in the way of attribution of dollars to programs. Amazingly, the JFNA 2011 Budget Book contains 57 pages...that's 57 pages, my friends...of Program narrative without an assignment of dollar one to any of them. And, at the Budget meeting...nary a question?!? Forget what we do in Chicago, or how you budget in your community, this is nothing more than ignorance of fiduciary duty.
The fact that JFNA plans to operate 57...that's 57...pages of Program is astounding enough -- and speaks more vividly to a horrible lack of focus than anything else -- but couple that with a lack of questions at the Budget and Finance Committee, a lack of questions at the JFNA Executive Committee or Board, suggests that no one cares how our money is spent. And, the lack of any...any...attributable Program costs in the Budget except in a very narrow set of circumstances suggests to this writer that JFNA's leaders treat your, our, Dues as fungible and treat you as imbeciles.
I have no doubt that ultimately it will be irresponsible budgeting (it didn't start at JFNA this year), a lack of focus and a lack of caring will ultimately be the nails in JFNA's coffin. And who will get blamed? You, me?
Rwexler
Thursday, July 1, 2010
IGNITIONS, GA REGISTRATION...AND MORE
~ JFNA has been promoting the revival of Regional Campaign "Ignition" meetings to be held across the country this Summer. These "2011 Annual Campaign Kick-Offs" as they are termed are, if I get it, a means of reintroducing the national organization into the Annual Campaign "game" after a long absence. The question is...just how?
Is it going to be the newly-arrived Paul Kane articulating the "Case for Giving" as they did in New York City or will these meetings proceed with an intro from National Campaign Chair, Michael Lebovitz of Chattanooga, then a bunch of consultants? Where and who are the lay leaders for these "events?" Are they too being recruited now?
~ Like you, I received the JFNA announcement of the opening of Registration for the November New Orleans GA in a Leadership Briefing. It is not until one gets into the body of the Registration link that you will find the price -- $625.00!!!! and that's for early registration!!!! (In case you've forgotten as I did, last year's "early" registration was $575.) If you register by August 6, you get this "discounted" fee -- register after August 6? $695. So, don't wait.
I remember at JFNA'a onset the internal agony over a $495 Registration. Now, no agony over $700 -- pardon me -- $695 -- and that's $5.00 less than on-site Registration for the 2009 DC GA. So, this is a real bargain. There is much one could write -- but OMG will do. Apparently it is "never mind" when it comes to the cost of Jewish organizational participation for you and me. And, in the Budget, JFNA deleted a $500,000 GA subsidy and its leaders "expect" 4,000 to 5,000 registrants for New Orleans -- they must have very wealthy friends...a lot of them. (When I had the temerity to question the Registration Fee, with great sarcasm a JFNA leader asked if I needed a loan.)
It happens that at the same time as the JFNA notice that registration is now open, I received the announcement of this year's ABA Convention -- registration $470.00 (with a scaled down cost for those who don't wish to participate in the entire Convention). Then there is JNF -- inviting registration to their National Conference -- early Registration? $395 per person, $700 per couple!! (Regular Registration after the early-bird, $425 per person.)
Do the JFNA party planners actually talk with participants before pricing? The cost of the GA has gotten completely out of hand...like so much else. Let them eat cake, I guess. The GA Registration website asks for "Feedback" -- here's mine: "Are you crazy?"
~ With some kudos to JFNA, a recent Leadership Briefing discussed Federation Partners Care for Kyrgyzstan Crisis Deepens. The prior professional leadership couldn't bring itself to give credit to JDC and JAFI for their incredible work on the ground; this leadership does. Kal ha'kavod.
~ After Chicago's top lay and professional leaders visited Haiti on our federation's behalf, JFNA included their brilliant report in a Connection Briefing, and we suggested that this kind of visit is exactly what our national organization should be doing. That took place two months ago. Just received an invite along with you to participate in a national Mission to Haiti -- three little Missions in fact (and one of them was already sold out). Better late than never. We call this "progress."
Rwexler
Is it going to be the newly-arrived Paul Kane articulating the "Case for Giving" as they did in New York City or will these meetings proceed with an intro from National Campaign Chair, Michael Lebovitz of Chattanooga, then a bunch of consultants? Where and who are the lay leaders for these "events?" Are they too being recruited now?
~ Like you, I received the JFNA announcement of the opening of Registration for the November New Orleans GA in a Leadership Briefing. It is not until one gets into the body of the Registration link that you will find the price -- $625.00!!!! and that's for early registration!!!! (In case you've forgotten as I did, last year's "early" registration was $575.) If you register by August 6, you get this "discounted" fee -- register after August 6? $695. So, don't wait.
I remember at JFNA'a onset the internal agony over a $495 Registration. Now, no agony over $700 -- pardon me -- $695 -- and that's $5.00 less than on-site Registration for the 2009 DC GA. So, this is a real bargain. There is much one could write -- but OMG will do. Apparently it is "never mind" when it comes to the cost of Jewish organizational participation for you and me. And, in the Budget, JFNA deleted a $500,000 GA subsidy and its leaders "expect" 4,000 to 5,000 registrants for New Orleans -- they must have very wealthy friends...a lot of them. (When I had the temerity to question the Registration Fee, with great sarcasm a JFNA leader asked if I needed a loan.)
It happens that at the same time as the JFNA notice that registration is now open, I received the announcement of this year's ABA Convention -- registration $470.00 (with a scaled down cost for those who don't wish to participate in the entire Convention). Then there is JNF -- inviting registration to their National Conference -- early Registration? $395 per person, $700 per couple!! (Regular Registration after the early-bird, $425 per person.)
Do the JFNA party planners actually talk with participants before pricing? The cost of the GA has gotten completely out of hand...like so much else. Let them eat cake, I guess. The GA Registration website asks for "Feedback" -- here's mine: "Are you crazy?"
~ With some kudos to JFNA, a recent Leadership Briefing discussed Federation Partners Care for Kyrgyzstan Crisis Deepens. The prior professional leadership couldn't bring itself to give credit to JDC and JAFI for their incredible work on the ground; this leadership does. Kal ha'kavod.
~ After Chicago's top lay and professional leaders visited Haiti on our federation's behalf, JFNA included their brilliant report in a Connection Briefing, and we suggested that this kind of visit is exactly what our national organization should be doing. That took place two months ago. Just received an invite along with you to participate in a national Mission to Haiti -- three little Missions in fact (and one of them was already sold out). Better late than never. We call this "progress."
Rwexler
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
