For the past 15 years, since the United Jewish Appeal initiated the program through this month, high potential donors with little or no knowledge of the federation system have gathered, generally in Aspen, to frolic, party and listen to presentations on philanthropy that have little or nothing to do with the federation system. Since I was there at UJA at Breishit of the Jewish Leadership Forum, I have been urging the JLF leadership (which somehow is allowed to consider itself outside of the JFNA even if the annual party/event is "sponsored by" JFNA) to sit down and ask themselves what outcomes they believe would be appropriate -- their responses have been ignorance (of what I'm even suggesting) or anger or both. So why stop now?
This year's party will be held August 1-3 at The Stein Erickson Lodge, Park City -- away from Aspen. JFNA identifies the attendees as "emerging Jewish leaders." I have learned that "emerging" has been defined as "arising from obscurity" -- thus, JFNA's announcement seems perfectly patronizing or, maybe, perfectly pandering. A JLF Co-Chair is quoted as saying that "JLF brings like-minded Jewish philanthropists together;" another case of hyperbole gone wild. Maybe...maybe...had the quote been "like-minded future philanthropists," it would resonate in some reality. Then, again, maybe the quoted Co-Chair had yet to be apprised of the intended JLF audience when words were put in his mouth.
Jerry will speak, of course, but not about our system -- he will address "partnering with your philanthropy" (which should, actually, now that I think about the theme be about our system except he is being joined by two prominent San Francisco-based philanthropists, the Leytes.) Otherwise, the program features Jeffrey Solomon just about everywhere. Jeffrey is terrific, brilliant, funny, cynical, insightful -- but I believe that Jeffrey understands that he is often the bete noir of the federations. He will be speaking on "strategic philanthropy," moderating a Panel asking "well known philanthropists" "what is your Philanthropic inspiration?" (at least it's not "what's your #ish"), and publicly discuss with Chicago's terrific Senior V-P, Jay Tcath, "Collective Giving in an Age of Individual Philanthropists" (I won't even get into a debate on these pages of the presumptions underlying the topic title.)
There will be Israeli philanthropists present and JAFI's past SVP Development, now with World ORT, who attended all (or most) of the prior annual events in silence will this time speak as well. From the pages of Jerry's Contacts, you will hear from the "incredible innovators, Elisa Bildner (psst,whose philanthropy focuses on Jewish camping) and Nancy Lublin, founder of Dress for Success who will share with us their motivations for their work." Note that while World ORT's new FRD lead professional will speak, my recollection is that in his at least a decade of attendance at the JLF while leading JAFI's Development effort, he was never given the opportunity to present. And so it continues -- neither JAFI nor JDC has any presence on the JLF Agenda. So does JFNA deal with its "partners," let alone its owners.
Oh, there will also be opportunities to "[W]atch or participate in Olympic-style events at Olympic Park, horseback ride, mountain bike, river raft, hike and, of course, eat. Yes, great fun will be had by all...but this is an event BY INVITATION ONLY.
There have been successes arising from the 15 years of JLF -- some federations have formed groups of high potential young men and women; some major communal projects have been funded by participants; a few of the participants have become federation volunteers and achieved senior positions. But neither UJA nor JFNA has chosen to monitor the participants ("too intrusive") or to suggest outcomes ("too institutional") so the JLF mainly goes from year-to-year as an annual event without a plan or follow-up other than to schedule and plan the next year's event -- and graduate the participants to "emerging leader" status. After all, it's always a nice few days in the mountains in Summer.
So, how about this? Reconvene the JLF Founders with this year's Co-Chairs and JFNA Staff and develop an actual written plan for the JLF going forward with suggested outcomes. Is that too much to ask? Merely calling the registrants "up and coming figures in the Jewish philanthropic world" hardly makes it so.
Rwexler
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
CHAOS-ISTAN
In the hallways and meeting rooms at the Inbal Hotel in Jerusalem one month ago, during the Jewish Agency Assembly and Board of Governors meetings, a small number of federation CEOs and the JFNA President were on the warpath. They were inflamed by the temerity, the chutzpah of JAFI embarking on a Global FRD path -- forced to do so, as is the Joint, as is World ORT, by the failure of the federation system and JFNA to meet their moral and merger obligations to advocate for and impact upon an increase in the financial resources of the Partners. Their flailing anger in Jerusalem was directed as well toward their now former colleague, Misha Galperin, for agreeing (with their express support by the way) to lead the JAFI Global FRD effort with a budget adequate to support the effort.
Let's look at the facts. While I won't judge the support of these CEOs for JAFI, they have expressed it by their constant presence at Agency meetings, one of them led his community to cut their JAFI/JDC allocation in the late 90's by $3,000,000. His public and private reason (he told me at the time that he had led this effort himself) -- the UJA/CJF merger was "moving too slowly." Back then I asked what would happen when the merger took place and I he stated, "I'll restore the dollars." He, his community, didn't (and his community was followed shortly by another, professionally led by a future UJC CEO which cut its core allocation by $1.2 million one year later. That federation was also represented at the BOG meetings). Another of these concerned CEOs who expressed chagrin at the JAFI meetings leads a federation whose core allocation to JAFI/JDC is near the bottom rung of communities of similar city-size. It was this group of professionals for whom I otherwise have the greatest admiration who led the response to the devastating cuts to Joint and Agency core by arguing that the partners failed to include the $100's of millions raised and transmitted through the Israel Emergency Campaign in stating federation annual allocations. They did so knowing full well that those incredible amounts were completely passed through by JAFI/JDC and others -- that enormous outpouring of donor generosity did not fund the JAFI or JDC Budgets at all. And, finally and inevitably, there is, as there always is, JFNA...
Let's examine the reality that none of these federations and certainly not JFNA have offered JAFI or JDC or ORT any alternative. Oh, there has been rhetoric for sure -- any number of ONAD (!!) Resolutions contained (at my Federation's request) hortatory language, non-binding of course, "urging" the Federations to maintain/increase allocations to core. Neither the federation members of ONAD nor the lay or professional leaders of JFNA in its earlier iteration did anything further...beyond "urging" there was nothing. When the opportunity to find additional dollars for core -- for example, when federation Dues obligations were reduced by $10 million dollars -- not any action from JFNA beyond a one-time "urging" of federations to transfer those dollar savings so as to increase core allocations. And, in fact, in the aggregate the federations cut those allocations and most have since cut and cut and cut some more.
So here you have the irony of JFNA demanding...that's right, demanding...institutional discipline from the Jewish Agency and the Joint while demanding nothing of its own members...or itself. (Who can forget the serial unauthorized "asks" of federations to fund "pet projects" in competition with the partners themselves just one year ago?) Complaining about a lack of JFNA representation on the JAFI FRD Task Force, JFNA's CEO sat at a meeting in Jerusalem rejecting the past Chair of a Large City Federation on the JAFI FRD Task Force as "not JFNA;" and the current Chair of another Large City sitting on the JFNA Task Force rejected as "not JFNA." There has been the conceit expressed by JFNA lay leaders that the allocations -- sent through UIA by the federations..."are our money." Yet, when the first federation -- Boston, as I recall -- sent its allocation checks directly to JDC, the system stood silent. (I should note that at the time I plead with the Joint on behalf of UJA not to accept the CJP's check [JAFI at the time refused it] arguing that in cashing that allocations check, the Joint would be starting our system down a path from which it would never return.)
Today, JFNA, holding no sway over the Federations which own it, can only attempt to intimidate our partners after a decade of neglect. Now there was to be a JFNA-convened meeting, after months of silence and neglect, with JAFI/JDC leaders scheduled for late August -- a meeting that now appears to be off the calendar. While this may have been intended as the "follow-up" to the last meeting, so long ago, it's been forgotten just as JFNA'S Chair and CEO have seemingly forgotten that they were to build consensus over the ensuing months for an aggressive advocacy plan. The CEO distracted by the conversion crisis, the JFNA Board and Executive Chairs distracted by...summer?
I know that these CEOs, including Jerry Silverman, represent among the best and brightest professionals we have. It is a real shame that they have nothing more to offer the Agency or Joint than criticism for doing that which they, our partners, have been forced to do. And I am heartbroken that we have reached this nadir for our federation system is now at risk as never before -- where, in short order, JDC, JAFI and ORT will be independently and directly raising dollars as never before.
This reality should come as no surprise to anyone at The Jewish Federations of North America even as they may disingenuously claim that they were "shocked" by the JAFI Global FRD Plan. These were no surprises -- they were foretold by JFNA's own distancing from its partners, by its lack of advocacy for collective responsibility, by its "service" to the federations as the national apologist for federations' withdrawal from the collective enterprise, and by its silence (except for an occasional "tsk, tsk") while core allocations dropped by over $100 million, and on and on.
JFNA: it is responsible for nothing; it stands for nothing. It has proved itself to be feckless.
Rwexler
Let's look at the facts. While I won't judge the support of these CEOs for JAFI, they have expressed it by their constant presence at Agency meetings, one of them led his community to cut their JAFI/JDC allocation in the late 90's by $3,000,000. His public and private reason (he told me at the time that he had led this effort himself) -- the UJA/CJF merger was "moving too slowly." Back then I asked what would happen when the merger took place and I he stated, "I'll restore the dollars." He, his community, didn't (and his community was followed shortly by another, professionally led by a future UJC CEO which cut its core allocation by $1.2 million one year later. That federation was also represented at the BOG meetings). Another of these concerned CEOs who expressed chagrin at the JAFI meetings leads a federation whose core allocation to JAFI/JDC is near the bottom rung of communities of similar city-size. It was this group of professionals for whom I otherwise have the greatest admiration who led the response to the devastating cuts to Joint and Agency core by arguing that the partners failed to include the $100's of millions raised and transmitted through the Israel Emergency Campaign in stating federation annual allocations. They did so knowing full well that those incredible amounts were completely passed through by JAFI/JDC and others -- that enormous outpouring of donor generosity did not fund the JAFI or JDC Budgets at all. And, finally and inevitably, there is, as there always is, JFNA...
Let's examine the reality that none of these federations and certainly not JFNA have offered JAFI or JDC or ORT any alternative. Oh, there has been rhetoric for sure -- any number of ONAD (!!) Resolutions contained (at my Federation's request) hortatory language, non-binding of course, "urging" the Federations to maintain/increase allocations to core. Neither the federation members of ONAD nor the lay or professional leaders of JFNA in its earlier iteration did anything further...beyond "urging" there was nothing. When the opportunity to find additional dollars for core -- for example, when federation Dues obligations were reduced by $10 million dollars -- not any action from JFNA beyond a one-time "urging" of federations to transfer those dollar savings so as to increase core allocations. And, in fact, in the aggregate the federations cut those allocations and most have since cut and cut and cut some more.
So here you have the irony of JFNA demanding...that's right, demanding...institutional discipline from the Jewish Agency and the Joint while demanding nothing of its own members...or itself. (Who can forget the serial unauthorized "asks" of federations to fund "pet projects" in competition with the partners themselves just one year ago?) Complaining about a lack of JFNA representation on the JAFI FRD Task Force, JFNA's CEO sat at a meeting in Jerusalem rejecting the past Chair of a Large City Federation on the JAFI FRD Task Force as "not JFNA;" and the current Chair of another Large City sitting on the JFNA Task Force rejected as "not JFNA." There has been the conceit expressed by JFNA lay leaders that the allocations -- sent through UIA by the federations..."are our money." Yet, when the first federation -- Boston, as I recall -- sent its allocation checks directly to JDC, the system stood silent. (I should note that at the time I plead with the Joint on behalf of UJA not to accept the CJP's check [JAFI at the time refused it] arguing that in cashing that allocations check, the Joint would be starting our system down a path from which it would never return.)
Today, JFNA, holding no sway over the Federations which own it, can only attempt to intimidate our partners after a decade of neglect. Now there was to be a JFNA-convened meeting, after months of silence and neglect, with JAFI/JDC leaders scheduled for late August -- a meeting that now appears to be off the calendar. While this may have been intended as the "follow-up" to the last meeting, so long ago, it's been forgotten just as JFNA'S Chair and CEO have seemingly forgotten that they were to build consensus over the ensuing months for an aggressive advocacy plan. The CEO distracted by the conversion crisis, the JFNA Board and Executive Chairs distracted by...summer?
I know that these CEOs, including Jerry Silverman, represent among the best and brightest professionals we have. It is a real shame that they have nothing more to offer the Agency or Joint than criticism for doing that which they, our partners, have been forced to do. And I am heartbroken that we have reached this nadir for our federation system is now at risk as never before -- where, in short order, JDC, JAFI and ORT will be independently and directly raising dollars as never before.
This reality should come as no surprise to anyone at The Jewish Federations of North America even as they may disingenuously claim that they were "shocked" by the JAFI Global FRD Plan. These were no surprises -- they were foretold by JFNA's own distancing from its partners, by its lack of advocacy for collective responsibility, by its "service" to the federations as the national apologist for federations' withdrawal from the collective enterprise, and by its silence (except for an occasional "tsk, tsk") while core allocations dropped by over $100 million, and on and on.
JFNA: it is responsible for nothing; it stands for nothing. It has proved itself to be feckless.
Rwexler
Sunday, July 25, 2010
HOT AIR REDUX
I was taken with The Fundermentalist's lengthy interview with the old/new Chair of JCPA about, among many matters, the JFNA "commitment of millions of dollars" to a JCPA advocacy program promoting Israel. Huh?? Is this some secret allocation out of JFNA's $30.3 million budget? Or is it all in this new/old Chair's head -- a dream of involvement and self-promotion? Or, is it real -- real involvement and self-promotion?
Perhaps, those in JCPA leadership who thought JFNA was their "partner" in the Israel Advocacy Initiative in the prior administration only to see the current CEO's predecessor first reach out to federations for a special (and unauthorized) multi-million dollar grant for the IAI and, having wholly failed, told JCPA to go out and fund raise in the federations directly -- another flop. Perhaps those at JFNA -- who have no history (as the new/old Chair has) and no sense of history never learned the difference between the federations' responsibilities and those of its agencies -- certainly, my friend, The Fundermentalist doesn't know.
But, one of my friends knows. Reading this inanity, he wrote: "I remember not so many years ago that one of the strongest advocacy arguments federations could make was that together we received 800,000 plus donations (voters) and provided hundreds of millions of dollars 'for Israel' (1 billion in the early 90's including the loan guarantees for aliya from the FSU). We used this argument in our Washington visits, with donors, and elsewhere. Now they (JFNA) seem to be relying on JCPA and local CRCs to be the source of advocacy when JFNA should be the one speaking for the thousands of donors in local communities. Am I missing something? While advocacy is very important, how does advocacy by JCPA or a JCRC translate back to the prospective donors in federations to raise more funds? This is especially a relevant question when we look at the statement below (that appeared in The Fundermentalist): 'We spend so much time here talking about the federation's overseas partners, sometimes we forget that it also has significant domestic partners, too, including the JCRCs and the JCPA.'"
(That last quote appears to be attributed to Berkman, the Fundermentalist himself.)
But, the most preposterous of the preposterous is the following: "During my talk with (this new/old Chair)...he mentioned that the Jewish Federations of North America could be committing several million dollars over the next few years to working with the JCPA on an intense Israel advocacy program and to fight the growing international movement to deligitimize Israel." (emphasis added) Folks, that's SEVERAL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!!
As ridiculous as it sounds, let's assume that this new/old Chair was at some secret meeting with JFNA, learned the secret handshake and the password and heard the words "millions for JCPA and the CRCs" from someone other than himself. But, probably not. By now, perhaps, someone from JFNA (or JCPA) has whispered to this new/old Chair that he really needs to shut up about this if he wants it to happen inasmuch as everything and almost every one at JFNA is being cut. Yeah, sure.
OK, now the cat is surely out of the bag. I would strongly recommend that JCPA not go out borrowing against the "commitment" this new/old Chair thought he heard. The only thing for which our system can be grateful is that Hannah Rosenthal is no longer JCPA CEO.
Rwexler
Perhaps, those in JCPA leadership who thought JFNA was their "partner" in the Israel Advocacy Initiative in the prior administration only to see the current CEO's predecessor first reach out to federations for a special (and unauthorized) multi-million dollar grant for the IAI and, having wholly failed, told JCPA to go out and fund raise in the federations directly -- another flop. Perhaps those at JFNA -- who have no history (as the new/old Chair has) and no sense of history never learned the difference between the federations' responsibilities and those of its agencies -- certainly, my friend, The Fundermentalist doesn't know.
But, one of my friends knows. Reading this inanity, he wrote: "I remember not so many years ago that one of the strongest advocacy arguments federations could make was that together we received 800,000 plus donations (voters) and provided hundreds of millions of dollars 'for Israel' (1 billion in the early 90's including the loan guarantees for aliya from the FSU). We used this argument in our Washington visits, with donors, and elsewhere. Now they (JFNA) seem to be relying on JCPA and local CRCs to be the source of advocacy when JFNA should be the one speaking for the thousands of donors in local communities. Am I missing something? While advocacy is very important, how does advocacy by JCPA or a JCRC translate back to the prospective donors in federations to raise more funds? This is especially a relevant question when we look at the statement below (that appeared in The Fundermentalist): 'We spend so much time here talking about the federation's overseas partners, sometimes we forget that it also has significant domestic partners, too, including the JCRCs and the JCPA.'"
(That last quote appears to be attributed to Berkman, the Fundermentalist himself.)
But, the most preposterous of the preposterous is the following: "During my talk with (this new/old Chair)...he mentioned that the Jewish Federations of North America could be committing several million dollars over the next few years to working with the JCPA on an intense Israel advocacy program and to fight the growing international movement to deligitimize Israel." (emphasis added) Folks, that's SEVERAL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!!
As ridiculous as it sounds, let's assume that this new/old Chair was at some secret meeting with JFNA, learned the secret handshake and the password and heard the words "millions for JCPA and the CRCs" from someone other than himself. But, probably not. By now, perhaps, someone from JFNA (or JCPA) has whispered to this new/old Chair that he really needs to shut up about this if he wants it to happen inasmuch as everything and almost every one at JFNA is being cut. Yeah, sure.
OK, now the cat is surely out of the bag. I would strongly recommend that JCPA not go out borrowing against the "commitment" this new/old Chair thought he heard. The only thing for which our system can be grateful is that Hannah Rosenthal is no longer JCPA CEO.
(Just as an aside, this same new/old JCPA Chair, moderating a recent conference call featuring the Kadima Party's leader, Tzipi Livni, kept calling her "Snippy." [I guess that was better than "Tipsy."])
At least one thing is perfectly clear -- we have a system out of all control.Rwexler
Saturday, July 24, 2010
"MR. SILVERMAN, YOUR TABLE IS READY"
At the Jewish Federations of North America there is an obsession with "tables."
You may recall that at the "Federation Leadership Institute" in Winter 2009, attended by those representing a little more than 1/3 of the federations, the then Chair of the Executive, now the Board Chair, attempted to find a consensus on allocations to JAFI and the Joint where there was none. The "consensus" she conjured was in support of something called "planning tables" to assess needs. Nobody knew what these "planning tables" would be, who would be sitting around them -- in fact they were undefined. In the JFNA 2011 Budget, this conjured consensus morphed into facts on the ground when $250,000 was budgeted for them. This is what passes for "decision making" at JFNA.
We move on. In its announcement of the great news that the Conversion Bill has been put "on hold" for 6 months thanks to the efforts of the Prime Minister within the governmental coalition, the efforts of Natan Sharansky and JAFI and the agreement of the Reform and Conservative Movements not to pursue issues before the Israeli courts for a like period, the JFNA CEO and President also announced his hope that there would now be a "dialogue table" at which the federations would be represented to...to...represent you or me? And represented by just who exactly?
So, we have a "planning table," hope for a "dialogue table" and, in the meantime, how about a kitchen table, yada, yada, yada. One thing for certain...these guys love tables.
Rwexler
You may recall that at the "Federation Leadership Institute" in Winter 2009, attended by those representing a little more than 1/3 of the federations, the then Chair of the Executive, now the Board Chair, attempted to find a consensus on allocations to JAFI and the Joint where there was none. The "consensus" she conjured was in support of something called "planning tables" to assess needs. Nobody knew what these "planning tables" would be, who would be sitting around them -- in fact they were undefined. In the JFNA 2011 Budget, this conjured consensus morphed into facts on the ground when $250,000 was budgeted for them. This is what passes for "decision making" at JFNA.
We move on. In its announcement of the great news that the Conversion Bill has been put "on hold" for 6 months thanks to the efforts of the Prime Minister within the governmental coalition, the efforts of Natan Sharansky and JAFI and the agreement of the Reform and Conservative Movements not to pursue issues before the Israeli courts for a like period, the JFNA CEO and President also announced his hope that there would now be a "dialogue table" at which the federations would be represented to...to...represent you or me? And represented by just who exactly?
So, we have a "planning table," hope for a "dialogue table" and, in the meantime, how about a kitchen table, yada, yada, yada. One thing for certain...these guys love tables.
Rwexler
Thursday, July 22, 2010
SO WHAT IS THIS FIGHT REALLY ALL ABOUT?
The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee leadership started a fight with the federation system and the Jewish Federations of North America last month. As a "cease fire" now appears to hold (and JFNA and some Large City Federation CEOs deserve credit for imposing it), both the Joint and JAFI have "staffed up" their FRD efforts and JDC, while having "agreed" to take its two most threatening demands of the federations off the table, implementation of their Development effort is on-going. But, when one looks at the most recently available data on income derived by both "partners" (from their 2009 IRS Form 990) for 2008, the question arises -- why has the Joint chosen this fight at this time?
Here are the U.S. Income results for 2008: JAFI -- $238.5 million; JDC -- $244 million. (All funds accounted for as reported.) The Joint down <$10 million> from 2006; JAFI is a negative <$150 million>. Shouldn't the question, therefore, be about federation allocated cash not about a fictitious "split?" For the Joint to raise the 75/25 "split" is but a red herring, a MacGuffin, a fiction, designed to distract the federations and JFNA from the real issue: because of drastically diminished campaigns, the economic collapse, the partners' messages not being heard and a failure by JFNA to advocate for federation collective responsibility, the actual cash allocated by the federation for both partners' core budgets and for project giving have reduced, in the Joint's case, by a relatively small but important amount; in JAFI's case by a staggering sum.
So, why the JDC's "preemptive" threats at this time and place? One can only speculate: the demands of some of its more extreme lay leaders who deprecate the federation system to which they owe so much; the looming threat of a revitalized JAFI under Natan Sharansky's creative leadership; an invigorated JAFI global Development effort being constructed by Misha Galperin reflecting the evolving Agency emphasis on Jewish identity as well as JAFI's more compelling core functions, etc. I am not even certain that JDC's top leaders fully comprehend (a) why they have attacked the federation system when that system, as the data evidence, has responded to them and remains devastated in many places by failed campaigns and the economy or (b) what the consequences of their attacks could be to the Joint itself? (Reading the Report of the Joint Committee whose Recommendations threaten the federations one could ask and answer: "Why are we doing this? Because we can.")
It's time for an accounting by the JDC. It's past time for JAFI to challenge those within the federation family, to do what is right. And for JFNA, it's time for a reckoning.
Rwexler
Here are the U.S. Income results for 2008: JAFI -- $238.5 million; JDC -- $244 million. (All funds accounted for as reported.) The Joint down <$10 million> from 2006; JAFI is a negative <$150 million>. Shouldn't the question, therefore, be about federation allocated cash not about a fictitious "split?" For the Joint to raise the 75/25 "split" is but a red herring, a MacGuffin, a fiction, designed to distract the federations and JFNA from the real issue: because of drastically diminished campaigns, the economic collapse, the partners' messages not being heard and a failure by JFNA to advocate for federation collective responsibility, the actual cash allocated by the federation for both partners' core budgets and for project giving have reduced, in the Joint's case, by a relatively small but important amount; in JAFI's case by a staggering sum.
So, why the JDC's "preemptive" threats at this time and place? One can only speculate: the demands of some of its more extreme lay leaders who deprecate the federation system to which they owe so much; the looming threat of a revitalized JAFI under Natan Sharansky's creative leadership; an invigorated JAFI global Development effort being constructed by Misha Galperin reflecting the evolving Agency emphasis on Jewish identity as well as JAFI's more compelling core functions, etc. I am not even certain that JDC's top leaders fully comprehend (a) why they have attacked the federation system when that system, as the data evidence, has responded to them and remains devastated in many places by failed campaigns and the economy or (b) what the consequences of their attacks could be to the Joint itself? (Reading the Report of the Joint Committee whose Recommendations threaten the federations one could ask and answer: "Why are we doing this? Because we can.")
It's time for an accounting by the JDC. It's past time for JAFI to challenge those within the federation family, to do what is right. And for JFNA, it's time for a reckoning.
Rwexler
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
THE "COORDINATING COUNCIL" OF JFNA
So, the cat's out of the bag, the secret is out, JFNA is being run on the lay side by a 15 person "Coordinating Council." Membership is not controlled by JFNA Governance but, apparently, by whim -- the Officers, the Chairs of various things (all appointed by the Board Chair) including a curious "Israel and Overseas Coordinating Council." This will come as no surprise to federation leaders in the West, but there are no members from west of St. Louis other than Alice Viroslav the YLC Co-Chair from San Antonio. Such is the geographic distribution of today's leadership that Los Angeles, Kansas City, Dallas, Houston, San Francisco, San Diego, Las Vegas, Portland, East Bay, Seattle and more are excluded, so either eat your hearts out or count your blessings.
What does this extremely effective group do? Well, apparently, agree with whatever Kathy and Jerry wish them to. How do we know what they do? We don't, we won't. I wasn't supposed to even know about this letter to the Prime Minister, and neither were you -- it was in an attachment Jerry sent to "Dear Colleagues" (either his senior staff or Federation CEOs, although in the latter group are many who don't yet consider Jerry a colleague). The JFNA Executive Committee, the structure of which was the result of significant negotiation to assure participation by gender and geography and City-size -- apparently you are just a body designed by the current and immediate past leaders to ratify, to nod yes in choreography of which the Joffrey would be proud. Your role, if any, usurped while the Chair of the Executive appears to have "gone rogue."
Now, they've gone and done it. They surfaced. They joined in a letter to the Prime Minister. With all due respect to the co-signers, it's not like it came from leaders no longer leading -- not from Max Fisher, z'l, Alex Grass, z'l, Corky Goodman, Shoshana Cardin, Lester Pollack, Morris Offit, Jim Tisch, Sissy Swig, Marvin Lender, the Bronfmans, the Ratners, Bill Berman and others who might actually cause the Prime Minister and his Ministers and Knesset members step back for a moment and think. Someone once wrote that we "..get the leaders we deserve" -- I would vote for us getting the leaders we need. Lay leadership at JFNA today is so disconnected from those North American Jews with clout in Israel that on a JFNA Conference Call on the Unity of the Jewish People last Friday morning, our "leaders" had to plead to those on the call: "If any of you know any mega-donors, could you get them to call or write the Prime Minister?!"
The last time this crisis arose, at a time that the CJF and UJA were operating with strength and respect, the Jewish leadership of North America mobilized and, coordinated by CJF, assured that the halls of the Knesset were filled with lay leaders whose names and importance were recognized in Israel and here in North America. Visits were timed so that our lay presence was a constant over the weeks before it was assured that the Law of Return would be respected. The tool kit for how to respond to this crisis is right there. But this cast of characters has gone the letter-writing route. Just a few years ago we sent lay and professional leaders into the breach in a planful, direct way; now, we send letters hoping that the logo, the brand, is recognized.
Rwexler
What does this extremely effective group do? Well, apparently, agree with whatever Kathy and Jerry wish them to. How do we know what they do? We don't, we won't. I wasn't supposed to even know about this letter to the Prime Minister, and neither were you -- it was in an attachment Jerry sent to "Dear Colleagues" (either his senior staff or Federation CEOs, although in the latter group are many who don't yet consider Jerry a colleague). The JFNA Executive Committee, the structure of which was the result of significant negotiation to assure participation by gender and geography and City-size -- apparently you are just a body designed by the current and immediate past leaders to ratify, to nod yes in choreography of which the Joffrey would be proud. Your role, if any, usurped while the Chair of the Executive appears to have "gone rogue."
Now, they've gone and done it. They surfaced. They joined in a letter to the Prime Minister. With all due respect to the co-signers, it's not like it came from leaders no longer leading -- not from Max Fisher, z'l, Alex Grass, z'l, Corky Goodman, Shoshana Cardin, Lester Pollack, Morris Offit, Jim Tisch, Sissy Swig, Marvin Lender, the Bronfmans, the Ratners, Bill Berman and others who might actually cause the Prime Minister and his Ministers and Knesset members step back for a moment and think. Someone once wrote that we "..get the leaders we deserve" -- I would vote for us getting the leaders we need. Lay leadership at JFNA today is so disconnected from those North American Jews with clout in Israel that on a JFNA Conference Call on the Unity of the Jewish People last Friday morning, our "leaders" had to plead to those on the call: "If any of you know any mega-donors, could you get them to call or write the Prime Minister?!"
The last time this crisis arose, at a time that the CJF and UJA were operating with strength and respect, the Jewish leadership of North America mobilized and, coordinated by CJF, assured that the halls of the Knesset were filled with lay leaders whose names and importance were recognized in Israel and here in North America. Visits were timed so that our lay presence was a constant over the weeks before it was assured that the Law of Return would be respected. The tool kit for how to respond to this crisis is right there. But this cast of characters has gone the letter-writing route. Just a few years ago we sent lay and professional leaders into the breach in a planful, direct way; now, we send letters hoping that the logo, the brand, is recognized.
So, last Friday, the JFNA Board Chair communicated with the JFNA Board and shared Jerry's incredible efforts in Jerusalem. Instead of announcing that she and Gelman and the JFNA Coordinating Council will be leaving for Jerusalem on Sunday past, she asked us to write letters and get others to do so. Were it not for the totally fortuitous coincidence that the Campaign Chairs and Directors Mission was in Israel for part of this critical time, not a single federation lay leader would have confronted this issue with the Knesset face-to-face.
But, perhaps the "Coordinating Council's" absence from the arena is ok. Had they gone to Israel en masse, maybe the Prime Minister would have observed how many of them represent federations which demonstrate an embarrassing minimum of supporting allocations to JAFI and JDC. Instead the PM can marvel once again at our institutional ability to write letters. For letters are cheap.
While I give Jerry Silverman an A+ for his efforts, clearly we have lost our way.Rwexler
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
THE CONVERSION BILL...CONTINUED
My wife is fantastic. Dedicated to Chicago Federation discipline, she rarely reads this Blog. She is an avid reader of more reliable sources like the JTA, Jerusalem Post, Jewish Week and Forward, among others. While we were driving today, she asked: "What is going on with the Conversion Bill." I explained that tomorrow is a day of reckoning -- if the Bill is not voted on, there will be a two-month period in which Diaspora Jewry can organize itself and mount an international campaign with JAFI and our religious streams to offset the destructive efforts of Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas to pass this odious legislation and. perhaps, bring down the Netanyahu Government.
I added, "this will give Jerry Silverman the chance to continue to run around the halls of the Knesset for the next two months." My wife then asked: "Is Jerry a terrible at delegating?" To which I replied -- "Sorry you don't read my Blog, for then you would know that Jerry has no one at JFNA to delegate to. No one."
Meanwhile, Silverman continues to seek meetings with the nefarious MK David Rotem, the Bill's Knesset sponsor as if he can change Rotem's mind. In today's JTA, Rotem is quoted: The Bill "...has nothing to do with the Jews in the Diaspora. It is only an Israeli matter." One might ask, "then why did you travel to the United States to "listen" to North American Jewry's 'concerns' six weeks ago?" A rhetorical question -- Rotem didn't come to "listen," he came to "sell." He just doesn't care a whit about the unity of the Jewish People.
My wife told me she would start reading the Blog.
Rwexler
I added, "this will give Jerry Silverman the chance to continue to run around the halls of the Knesset for the next two months." My wife then asked: "Is Jerry a terrible at delegating?" To which I replied -- "Sorry you don't read my Blog, for then you would know that Jerry has no one at JFNA to delegate to. No one."
Meanwhile, Silverman continues to seek meetings with the nefarious MK David Rotem, the Bill's Knesset sponsor as if he can change Rotem's mind. In today's JTA, Rotem is quoted: The Bill "...has nothing to do with the Jews in the Diaspora. It is only an Israeli matter." One might ask, "then why did you travel to the United States to "listen" to North American Jewry's 'concerns' six weeks ago?" A rhetorical question -- Rotem didn't come to "listen," he came to "sell." He just doesn't care a whit about the unity of the Jewish People.
My wife told me she would start reading the Blog.
Rwexler
Monday, July 19, 2010
"AN AQUARIUM OF DEAD FISH"
As I listen at JFNA Board Meetings, as I have written often, we watch a group of federation leaders behave like marionettes, nodding up and down, with debate controlled by either what passes for leadership or a small group of federation CEOs. I have spoken to federation boards about fiduciary responsibilities -- it strikes me that no one seems to have spoken to JFNA Board members about theirs. Once again eJewish Philanthropy has provided valuable insights in its reprint (July 1, 2010) of David Simms Harvard Business Review article -- A Nonprofit Board or a Group of Dead Fish?
A couple of Simms insights should suffice:
"During a conference I attended last month...one of the CEO participants described (his) non-profit board...as 'an aquarium of dead fish'"
"What some board members tell me, when pushed, is that they tolerate things on a nonprofit board that they wouldn't stand for in their day jobs. The boards don't ensure that the organization has a sound strategy, they tolerate mediocrity in management, they don't hold the organization accountable for results, and they don't ensure that resources are adequate to accomplish goals..."
Then, Simms prescribes some cures -- "leadership...a great diversity of experiences...board members do their homework before the board meetings" -- none of which are found at JFNA.
One far more perceptive than I recently observed that "democracy demands wisdom." Finding that the JFNA Board is made up of very wise people in the main, I would amend the dictum -- democracy demands wisdom and the willingness to use it.
When I hear "leaders" who have failed to question a single entry on a vague $30.3 million budget but do commend the "process" as "the best I have ever experienced," I know a dead fish when I see or hear or smell one. When I see those who do question excluded from leadership roles or when one person writes me confidentially to tell me that she "fears" speaking out because she "will be excluded from leadership," I understand that this leadership likes/loves more than anything but self-promotion the aquarium of dead fish that, if they didn't create it, they have perpetuated it.
Rwexler
More on the "curse of the sycophants" in future Posts
A couple of Simms insights should suffice:
"During a conference I attended last month...one of the CEO participants described (his) non-profit board...as 'an aquarium of dead fish'"
"What some board members tell me, when pushed, is that they tolerate things on a nonprofit board that they wouldn't stand for in their day jobs. The boards don't ensure that the organization has a sound strategy, they tolerate mediocrity in management, they don't hold the organization accountable for results, and they don't ensure that resources are adequate to accomplish goals..."
Then, Simms prescribes some cures -- "leadership...a great diversity of experiences...board members do their homework before the board meetings" -- none of which are found at JFNA.
One far more perceptive than I recently observed that "democracy demands wisdom." Finding that the JFNA Board is made up of very wise people in the main, I would amend the dictum -- democracy demands wisdom and the willingness to use it.
When I hear "leaders" who have failed to question a single entry on a vague $30.3 million budget but do commend the "process" as "the best I have ever experienced," I know a dead fish when I see or hear or smell one. When I see those who do question excluded from leadership roles or when one person writes me confidentially to tell me that she "fears" speaking out because she "will be excluded from leadership," I understand that this leadership likes/loves more than anything but self-promotion the aquarium of dead fish that, if they didn't create it, they have perpetuated it.
Rwexler
More on the "curse of the sycophants" in future Posts
Sunday, July 18, 2010
THE CONVERSION ISSUE -- STRATEGIES AND TACTICS
The Conversion Bill crisis -- I think it is safe to use that term -- has proved a number of realities:
1. All politics is local. When Diaspora Jewry finds itself with a negligible impact in Israel for reasons that are abundantly clear (and have been reported on these pages too often), with a North American leadership so diminished they have had to rely on those not at the top of the JFNA lay or professional leadership and on the Jewish Agency just to gain appointments with Knesset members and to reach out to the Prime Minister, we find ourselves in deep, deep trouble. For Israeli Knesset members, their interest, much like a Chicago alderman's, is in pandering to their "constituencies" and their patrons. Some have suggested that what we are seeing politically is pure "coalition politics," with Yisrael Beiteinu, the party of the Foreign Minister, using its leverage to embarrass the Prime Minister (or threaten him) and Shas now joining the fray. Whatever, placing the power to deligitimize conversions or dictate the criteria for them, threatens the bond between Diaspora Jewry and Israel as could little else.
2. In the hands of the too few. As it has appeared for too long, at JFNA "power," such as it is, is vested in the hands of the CEO/President and Board Chair, and no one else. I fear that federation CEOs have had little to say on the conversion subject while they look for "cover" behind JFNA and JAFI. Jerry Silverman, no matter the outcome, has distinguished himself in the trenches doing "battle" for us almost single-handedly. Too little too late. The JFNA-encouraged letter writing campaign has had exactly the impact one would expect even though some of the letters (and, in particular, one written in Ivrit by UIA Board Chair Bruce Arbit addressed to each Knesset member) have been well done. The lack of JFNA-driven access to the Prime Minister, to the Knesset, to mega-donors in North America is a tragic example of chickens coming home to roost.
3. Aftermath. With its self-created disability or just lack of influence and a Prime Minister reliant on a disabling coalition, Diaspora Jewry faces a perfect storm. A strategy that should have dictated demanding that this legislation be withdrawn now apparently has focused on getting passage postponed until after the Knesset Summer recess (and pathetic "constructive discussions" with a sponsor apparently so beholding to his ultra-Orthodox patrons as to be no friend, if he ever was). Can we really rely on Parkinson's "delay is the deadliet form of denial?"
While it now appears that there will be no further votes taken on this legislation until the Summer recess ends, our federations must confront the reality that in allowing JFNA to self-destruct through a series of failed lay leaders over the past six years that it is at home, in our communities, where we will reap the whirlwind if this legislation passes in its current form as donors, already facing a damaged economy, act out in repulsion at the Israel Government's actions -- no matter the "innocence" of the federations, this is how our communities "work." If campaigns reduce, JAFI, notwithstanding its commitment to the Reform and Conservative Movements on the conversion issue, and JDC (whose absence from thus issue has been conspicuous) will be the victims -- after all, if during times of rising campaigns our "system's" partners have seen their federation allocations reduce year after year, the spiraling down trend line of recent years will accelerate.
4. Time for Major Changes. We have reached the nadir. The end of the line. Eleven years after its creation, the limited abilities of JFNA to respond to a real Israel-Diaspora crisis -- and, worst of all, to be unprepared for it -- demands, at long last, a thorough federation-driven reconstruction of its national organization. Period. End of story,
Rwexler
1. All politics is local. When Diaspora Jewry finds itself with a negligible impact in Israel for reasons that are abundantly clear (and have been reported on these pages too often), with a North American leadership so diminished they have had to rely on those not at the top of the JFNA lay or professional leadership and on the Jewish Agency just to gain appointments with Knesset members and to reach out to the Prime Minister, we find ourselves in deep, deep trouble. For Israeli Knesset members, their interest, much like a Chicago alderman's, is in pandering to their "constituencies" and their patrons. Some have suggested that what we are seeing politically is pure "coalition politics," with Yisrael Beiteinu, the party of the Foreign Minister, using its leverage to embarrass the Prime Minister (or threaten him) and Shas now joining the fray. Whatever, placing the power to deligitimize conversions or dictate the criteria for them, threatens the bond between Diaspora Jewry and Israel as could little else.
2. In the hands of the too few. As it has appeared for too long, at JFNA "power," such as it is, is vested in the hands of the CEO/President and Board Chair, and no one else. I fear that federation CEOs have had little to say on the conversion subject while they look for "cover" behind JFNA and JAFI. Jerry Silverman, no matter the outcome, has distinguished himself in the trenches doing "battle" for us almost single-handedly. Too little too late. The JFNA-encouraged letter writing campaign has had exactly the impact one would expect even though some of the letters (and, in particular, one written in Ivrit by UIA Board Chair Bruce Arbit addressed to each Knesset member) have been well done. The lack of JFNA-driven access to the Prime Minister, to the Knesset, to mega-donors in North America is a tragic example of chickens coming home to roost.
3. Aftermath. With its self-created disability or just lack of influence and a Prime Minister reliant on a disabling coalition, Diaspora Jewry faces a perfect storm. A strategy that should have dictated demanding that this legislation be withdrawn now apparently has focused on getting passage postponed until after the Knesset Summer recess (and pathetic "constructive discussions" with a sponsor apparently so beholding to his ultra-Orthodox patrons as to be no friend, if he ever was). Can we really rely on Parkinson's "delay is the deadliet form of denial?"
While it now appears that there will be no further votes taken on this legislation until the Summer recess ends, our federations must confront the reality that in allowing JFNA to self-destruct through a series of failed lay leaders over the past six years that it is at home, in our communities, where we will reap the whirlwind if this legislation passes in its current form as donors, already facing a damaged economy, act out in repulsion at the Israel Government's actions -- no matter the "innocence" of the federations, this is how our communities "work." If campaigns reduce, JAFI, notwithstanding its commitment to the Reform and Conservative Movements on the conversion issue, and JDC (whose absence from thus issue has been conspicuous) will be the victims -- after all, if during times of rising campaigns our "system's" partners have seen their federation allocations reduce year after year, the spiraling down trend line of recent years will accelerate.
4. Time for Major Changes. We have reached the nadir. The end of the line. Eleven years after its creation, the limited abilities of JFNA to respond to a real Israel-Diaspora crisis -- and, worst of all, to be unprepared for it -- demands, at long last, a thorough federation-driven reconstruction of its national organization. Period. End of story,
Rwexler
Friday, July 16, 2010
PROGRESS COURTESY OF JFNA
In his daily report of anti-Rotem conversion legislation on July 14, Jerry Silverman reported on a burst of important actions to his "Colleagues." It was an important day -- one during which Jerry reported on meetings with 20 Knesset members and leaders of the Reform and Conservative Movements. These were face-to-face meetings and, while many were "preaching to the choir" meetings, they reflected what appeared to me to be a change in strategy from the "correspondence model" to the "direct face-to-face" model. And, while Jerry also reported on a "constructive meeting" with MK Rotem, these were but baby steps albeit critical ones for which Silverman and JFNA staff in Israel deserve a kal ha'kavod.
JFNA I assume understands that there is across the board Diaspora opposition to this Bill. A paid professional mouthpiece no matter how articulate cannot have the impact that a large group (or small but constant groupings) of lay leaders (you remember them, volunteers?) visiting the members of the Knesset would have. Where is that mobilization?
Yesterday, in his daily secret report to his "colleagues" on the Conversion Bill, Jerry evidenced signs pointing to the need for him to return home and plan Missions so that lay leaders can begin to confront the Knesset and Israeli administration on this matter. In that July 15 "Important Follow-up on Conversion Issue," all that the JFNA CEO had to offer was a Statement by a "prominent Orthodox figure," a long time JAFI Board member going "on record opposig the...legislation." This was framed as "breaking news that impacts this important debate." Well, not so much, unfortunately.
The statement itself supports "...promoting the genuine effort to bring immigrants desirous of conversion into the ranks of halacha recognized Judaism." (Emphasis added) I will leave it to my friends in the Conservative and Reform Rabbinate to explain just what that italicized phrase means even as the writer looks "to replace the proposed legislation (with) language which will unify rather than divide our World Jewish community." This correspondent reflected on the position that he and "...other Orthodox members of the (JAFI) Unity of the Jewish People Committee" support the work of the Conversion Institute of Rabbi Ish Shalom and the Beth Din of Rabbi Druckman..."
I have known the author well since he and I traveled to a Canadian federation on behalf of CJF to analyze issues that community was facing and offer remedies from our respective experiences. He is a person of great integrity; a man of dignity and very articulate.Just when I had hoped that JFNA had turned from letters to face to face, I guess for JFNA success is still to be judged by the number and quality of letters.
Rwexler
JFNA I assume understands that there is across the board Diaspora opposition to this Bill. A paid professional mouthpiece no matter how articulate cannot have the impact that a large group (or small but constant groupings) of lay leaders (you remember them, volunteers?) visiting the members of the Knesset would have. Where is that mobilization?
Yesterday, in his daily secret report to his "colleagues" on the Conversion Bill, Jerry evidenced signs pointing to the need for him to return home and plan Missions so that lay leaders can begin to confront the Knesset and Israeli administration on this matter. In that July 15 "Important Follow-up on Conversion Issue," all that the JFNA CEO had to offer was a Statement by a "prominent Orthodox figure," a long time JAFI Board member going "on record opposig the...legislation." This was framed as "breaking news that impacts this important debate." Well, not so much, unfortunately.
The statement itself supports "...promoting the genuine effort to bring immigrants desirous of conversion into the ranks of halacha recognized Judaism." (Emphasis added) I will leave it to my friends in the Conservative and Reform Rabbinate to explain just what that italicized phrase means even as the writer looks "to replace the proposed legislation (with) language which will unify rather than divide our World Jewish community." This correspondent reflected on the position that he and "...other Orthodox members of the (JAFI) Unity of the Jewish People Committee" support the work of the Conversion Institute of Rabbi Ish Shalom and the Beth Din of Rabbi Druckman..."
I have known the author well since he and I traveled to a Canadian federation on behalf of CJF to analyze issues that community was facing and offer remedies from our respective experiences. He is a person of great integrity; a man of dignity and very articulate.Just when I had hoped that JFNA had turned from letters to face to face, I guess for JFNA success is still to be judged by the number and quality of letters.
Rwexler
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
