All worthy work, it would seem. So, for that matter, is the work done by Himes, who is also an SVP member but reserves the bulk of his hands-on activities for his nonprofit Project Alchemy. Tim Harris of Real Change says that before Himes came along, the homeless advocacy organization didnt have networked computers or even networked phones; e-mails came into one account and then had to be forwarded to staffers individual accounts. Himes changed all that, and he also introduced Real Change to a Web-based service geared toward social activism, called ActionStudio, that facilitates e-mail alerts and allows the initiating organization to track responses. The first time Real Change used it, to ask people to e-mail City Council members about cuts in human services funding, it was able to tell that 40 people responded. Before we had no way of knowing, Harris says.
Thinking about the details of what these philanthropists do, though, you might question whether it is as revolutionary as they sometimes make it out to be. Writing in Philanthropy magazine, author Martin Morse Wooster calls the roster of schools, tutoring programs, and early education organizations supported by Social Venture Partners strikingly conventional causes. The Seattle Displacement Coalitions John Fox adds that he wishes that groups like SVP nurtured more radical organizations like his, ones that in his words are fighting for structural change.
Robin Laananen
Bill Gates Sr.
Related Content
More About
That, of course, is precisely the goal of Himes and his Project Alchemy, which does fund edgier groups. But does his work for Real Change, for example, truly qualify as transformative? Or has SVPs effort at Powerful Schools produced dramatic new directions or results? One would have to say no, not yet. SVPs Shoemaker concedes as much about his organization generally when he says that its work to date has largely been good, not great, which is the conclusion of a just-completed internal assessment. Shoemaker is now hoping to take the organization to the next level, in part by looking harder at what its beneficiaries truly need.
The benefactors, though, seem satisfied with what theyre getting from it. The payoffs for this generation of philanthropists are different. Uninterested in advertising their wealth, the new philanthropists are less interested in getting their names on buildings than in a kind of self-fulfillment they didnt get by making money.
What I think is that this is a huge opportunity, says Himes, explaining why his philanthropy is motivated by excitement rather than guilt. If you give out of a sense of guilt and obligation, then youre relieved when its over, he says. Now that he thinks of himself as a philanthropist, he doesnt want his giving to come to an end, even if he currently has to give away smaller amounts because of the stock market plunge. If you think about my ability to contributethats what makes me fully human.
Political do-gooders have a similar perspective. I realized this had given me an opportunity, echoes Responsible Wealth organizer Lois Canright, talking about the sudden wealth that came to her when she inherited her familys valuable real estate. I could pay myself to do this important economic justice work and not have to worry about whether people could pay me or not.
As with so much else in life, then, its actually easier to be good when youre rich. If only every millionaire saw it that way.
nshapiro@seattleweekly.com
