Grantmaking in a Disorderly World: The Limits of Rationalism

Leat, Diana; Williamson, Alexandra; Scaife, Wendy

doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12249

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Policy networks, focussed on fulfilling the need for public decision-making; • Collaborative networks, sometimes called implementation networks, focussed on connecting organisations (public, not-for-profit and for-profit) which deliver services in communities, particularly to meet needs in areas of social sectors where problems are "invisible, messy or unpopular" (Leat, Williamson, & Scaife, 2017); • Governance networks, which "fuse collaborative public goods and service provision with collective policymaking" (Isett et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Networks in Chronic Disease Prevention: What Factors Inhibit Partnering for Funding?

Hopkins

Chamberlain

Held

et al. 2019

International Journal of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inter-organisational partnering is seen as an effective mechanism for improving the delivery of chronic disease interventions in communities. Yet even in communities where organisations across multiple sectors are well connected and collaborative in other ways, when it comes to partnering for joint-funding, multiple barriers inhibit the establishment of formal partnerships. To understand why this is so, we examined quantitative and qualitative data from organisations in an Australian community and compared the findings with a review of the published literature in this area. We found that even organisations which are well connected through informal network arrangements face pressure from funding bodies to form more formalised inter-organisational partnerships. Community based organisations also recognise that partnerships are desirable mechanisms for service improvement; however, barriers to joint-funding partnerships exist which include restrictions imposed by funding bodies on the way grants are designed, implemented, and administered. Additional barriers at the community level include organisational capacity for partnership work, intra-organisational restrictions and timing issues. Policy makers must recognise and address the barriers to partnerships which exist within funding structures and at the community level in order to increase partnering opportunities to improve service delivery.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Networks in Chronic Disease Prevention: What Factors Inhibit Partnering for Funding?

Hopkins

Chamberlain

Held

et al. 2019

International Journal of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparison as an element of philanthropic evaluation is little discussed in the literature, but relates to the counterfactual or the opportunity cost of one decision as compared with multiple possible others (Leat et al, 2018). The utility of evaluation data by foundations is also contested, with multiple studies finding that foundations undertake and commission evaluations in response to normative or peer-pressures, but then fail to use the outcomes in future decision making (Anheier & Leat, 2018; Greenwald, 2013; Williamson et al, 2017).…”

Section: Literature and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Key papers on evaluation in and by philanthropic foundations are often based on empirical data or observation from the United States (Dean-Coffey, 2018), and to a lesser extent, from Europe (Anheier & Leat, 2018). Comparatively little is known in the context of Australia, New Zealand or South East Asian countries, with some notable exceptions (Blewden, 2010; Leat et al, 2018; Williamson et al, 2017).…”

Section: Literature and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance measurement, evaluation and accountability in public philanthropic foundations

Williamson

Kingston

2021

Evaluation Journal of Australasia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Philanthropic foundations routinely evaluate and measure the performance of nonprofit organisations to which they distribute funds, as well as the programmes that are funded. Another aspect of philanthropic foundations’ evaluation processes, which receives comparatively little attention within academic or practitioner literature, concerns evaluations of grant applications. While the focus of philanthropic evaluation literature is mainly on ‘how evaluation is done’, the focus of this article is on ‘how evaluation is understood’. This article details perspectives from interviews with 28 managers and trustees of Public Ancillary Funds as part of a wider study on the accountability of foundations. These public foundations must fundraise from the public, and donations to them are deductible against the taxable income of the donor, resulting in a significant element of accountability to the public for their effectiveness and evaluation of the distribution of their funds. Four main themes emerged through the exploration of how evaluation is understood from the perspective of these senior foundation leaders: motivations, values, criteria and processes of evaluation.

show abstract

“…In just two of the leading international journals, Public Administration Review and Public Management Review , 28 articles related to philanthropy have appeared since 2000. Although research on the US has an overwhelming influence on the field, accounting for at least half the output, work on foundations in Europe, Australia and China is expanding rapidly (see Heydemann and Toepler ; Boesso et al ; Guo and Lai ; Leat, Williamson, and Scaife ).…”

Section: The State Of Research: Philanthropy and Public Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dancing with giraffes: Why philanthropy matters for public management

Phillips¹

2018

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of institutionalized philanthropy is a blind spot in Canadian scholarship on public management. This article identifies five ways in which private "family" foundations add value to public management: through their roles in grantmaking; advancing social innovation; field building; shaping ideas; and advocating for policy and social change. An assessment of how well Canada's largest family foundations-those holding more than $100 million in assetsperform on each of these indicates they are not realizing their potential and need to be more attentive to their claim to public legitimacy. Equally, governments need to be more creative in how they work with the philanthropic sector.Sommaire : Le rôle de la philanthropie institutionnalis ee est un angle mort dans le travail des erudits canadiens portant sur la gestion publique. Cet article r epertorie cinq manières par lesquelles des fondations familiales priv ees sont une valeur ajout ee a la gestion publique : a travers leurs rôles dans l'accord de subventions; en faisant progresser l'innovation sociale; en promouvant la conception de domaines; en elaborant des id ees; et en pr econisant des changements politiques et sociaux. Après avoir evalu e la performance, dans chacun de ces rôles, des plus importantes fondations familiales du Canada -c'est-a-dire celles qui d etiennent plus de 100 millions $ en actifs -cela nous laisse a penser qu'elles ne donnent pas leur juste mesure et doivent porter plus d'attention a leur revendication de l egitimit e publique.Egalement, les gouvernements doivent faire preuve de plus de cr eativit e dans leur manière de collaborer avec le secteur philanthropique.

show abstract

Grantmaking in a Disorderly World: The Limits of Rationalism

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

Collaborative Networks in Chronic Disease Prevention: What Factors Inhibit Partnering for Funding?

Collaborative Networks in Chronic Disease Prevention: What Factors Inhibit Partnering for Funding?

Performance measurement, evaluation and accountability in public philanthropic foundations

Dancing with giraffes: Why philanthropy matters for public management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About