Comments for Separate Ways at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 27 out of 20 comments http://www.theind.com Fri, 24 May 2013 14:12:19 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-776 Just saw Mr. Pierce's article on our little debate. No my puppy was never run over by a United Way motorcycle. It was grassroot's motorcycle. I told you that guy was trouble. And I just have one correction. I do not think the UWA is run by leftists. The word I used was "lefty" and I think I said I suspected a shift to the left. But I never said leftist. In my book leftist equals communist or anti-capitalistic. I have many good friends and relatives who are lefty. And Lord knows as conservative as Acadiana is if someone around here shifts to the left they can still be right of center. So, you can be lefty and still a long way from being leftist and that is the intent I had in using those words. The United Way's stock in trade is trust. This is because they ask people to give and THEN the United Way announces who gets the donations (unless you have earmarked your donation). You have to trust the United Way is not going to use your donation in a way you would not want. You have to trust their judgment -- or at least trust the judgment of their Community Visions Impact Council Selection Cabinet computer that grassroots loaned them. Their judgment: Scouting does not meet their goal of "Education, Earnings and Essentials." Fine. I have no problem with them choosing some new programs to support. It's UWA money once you give it. But it leads to an honest question: Is judgment that leads to that conclusion the kind of judgment you want deciding who gets your blind donations? Have a great weekend folks. With all the rain it's a good time to clean out some closets and find some donations to Goodwill. All the best, Soop - Soop Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:13:59 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-773 Response to Soop: Thanks for your comments. Our intent has been to be as helpful as possible and relay information in an understandable and accurate fashion. I admit...the blog format is interesting! I have enjoyed participating and appreciate the interest in United Way of Acadiana's pursuit of lasting measurable change to benefit our communities in support of Education, Earnings and Essentials. Nevertheless, the blog format does limit our ability to completely understand each other. I welcome blogging to discuss United Way, however speaking in person increases both of our chances of being completely understood. I will continue to check this blog so I can comment in a timely manner. Should you want to discuss in person, my direct line is 706-1221. Thanks, Sarah - Sarah Berthelot Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:01:08 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-736 Thank you Ms. Berthelot for the response. 1. I guess "grassroots" and "shared decision making" is as close as we are going to get as to hearing who initially came up with the new funding model. Funny that no one wants to own up to it. 2. So staff members do serve on Vision Councils they are just not voting members. Thank you. 3. 15.72% is correct for overhead or operating cost and not really 3.3%. Thank you. And I understand how you come up with 3.3% -- it gets masked because some donors apparently designate their donations for overhead. Using that theory, if Corporate Cornerstone Designations and multiple funding streams were in excess of "overall operating costs" then you could actually say you have a negative "overhead." And presuming that overage went to donations, could you not claim UWA gives out more than 100% of donations? That would be cool. All the best, Soop - Soop Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:05:15 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-712 Response to Soop: Margaret Trahan is traveling today. If you don't mind, I will address your questions to your comments submitted on April 13. 1. One of the strengths of the non-profit business model is that decision making is a shared process. Shared decision making led to the strategic change to address root cause issues within Education, Earnings and Essentials. 2. Staff members do not serve as voting members of Vision Councils. 4. We hope you have enjoyed visiting our new website. If there are any problems with viewing the board list with the link provided, please alert us. 5. Your original question was "How are funds generated from the Annual Campaign used? 2008 Annual Campaign Total was $3,423,516." Margaret�s response provided a listing on how these funds were used, including $112,983 for overhead. This number is correct. Thanks to the support of Corporate Cornerstone designations and multiple funding streams (including grants), the cost of overhead to our individual donors participating in the Annual Campaign is reduced to only 3.3%. United Way of Acadiana's overall operating cost for all aspects of the organization is 15.72%. This includes facilities, fundraising and operations. Thank you again for your interest. I can be reached at 706-1221 should you want to talk further. - Sarah Berthelot Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:43:09 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-696 Soop, there is in fact a list of Board members on the site. Here is the link directly to the page: http://www.unitedwayofacadiana.org/PageDisplay.asp?p1=5552 - Stephanie Mire Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:42:19 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-694 Back again. Hope everyone had a great Easter. For Ms. Trahan, 1. I can appreciate that "grassroots" decided there needed to be a change but that does not really tell us much. Who got the ball rolling at the UWA? Someone had to bring it up. Even if it was as simple as someone saying "Hey grassroots was telling me the other day that we need to completely change the way we decide who we should fund ..." Was it the Board or Executive Director? 2. So, the process is Vision Council picks the finalists, reviews by a Cabinet, the Board and a Sink (hah, just kidding about the Sink). Does any UWA staff sit as a member of the Vision Council? 3. No changes by the Board. 4. Website went live. Great. No board member listing, though. Or how about the Vision Council? Can the members of these bodies be listed on the site or at least divulged? 5. Overhead is 3.3%? Is that correct? 96.7% of donations to United Way of Acadiana goes right back to local charities? Or is there a distinction between Operations and Overhead? Three staffers have posted, there was a reference to another: that is at least four staffers. The big building on Pinhook, plus utilities to run it. Putting on programs. All that gets done for $112K? MY SUSPICION: the actual number is not 3.3% but other overhead is tucked into one or more of the other categories so that at a quick glance someone like Jason above only sees 3.3%. But again, perhaps I am wrong. Maybe we will see. ONE MORE QUESTION: I was told the UWA even holds back portions of the "donor directed" collections. For instance, if I donated $5000 to Food Net through the UWA, FoodNet wouldn't get that $5000 because UWA holds some back. Is that true and if so how much is held back? All the best, Soop - Soop Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:48:58 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-658 Oops. I failed to include our web site address, eacbsa.org. Gary - Gary McGoffin Thu, 09 Apr 2009 11:20:13 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-656 On behalf of the Evangeline Area Council Boy Scouts of America, I want to thank Walter Pierce for taking the time to understand and explain the evolution in the relationships between the United Way of Acadiana and many of its historical partner agencies. For nearly 100 years, the Scouting movement has addressed the United Way's three pillars: education, earnings and essentials. That is validated every day by the many community leaders, employers, parents and volunteers whose values were shaped by their own Scouting experience. Next year's Centennial celebration will reaffirm our commitment to those same values for the next 100 years. The bottom line is that everyone understand the impact of this change. For those who want to direct their support to the Boy Scouts, please do so directly through our web site or by calling the Council office at 235-8551. Strong Values, Strong Leaders. Character Counts. Gary McGoffin Council President-Elect - Gary McGoffin Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:30:03 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-655 Our new site went live yesterday! Check out www.unitedwayofacadiana.org for more information and all details on the PACT United. - Stephanie Mire Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:14:38 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-653 Calgon, take me away! - Walter Pierce, Managing Editor Thu, 09 Apr 2009 09:20:22 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-652 I would be glad to respond to Jason. The only problem is that his argument runs afoul of my criticism. As I said repeatedly, I have no criticism of Meals on Wheels or any program that helps feed the less fortunate. I've donated to Food Net. I've collected and delivered to Food Net. I've volunteered at St. Joseph's Diner. I understand that need. MY ORIGINAL POINT: My criticism of the United Way is in the decisions that were made and whether this whole "new" system was just an attempt to insulate themselves from backing away from non-profits that they had supported for years. Simply saying "well they didn't meet this test" looks to me like an attempt to convince others that what is clearly a subjective selection process was instead something objective. Because if it was objective, then there should be no criticism, right? "We just plugged the numbers into our Community Visions Impact Council Selection Cabinet computer and 1600 hours later it spit out the names of some people we should give money too. We were just as surprised as anyone to see that certain organizations were left off." I don't buy it. It appears UWA decided it did not want to continue to fund certain groups before the process even started -- and they must have made this decision otherwise why change the process? UWA was just happy as a clam with their previous process until "grassroots" made them change it? Silly me thought it was either the executive director or the board that wanted the change. But according to Ms. Trahan, it was neither. It was "grassroots." My mom always warned me about hanging out with "grassroots." He always got me in trouble. To Jason's specific points. To his first, if feeding people is the penultimate concern, then why fund any other programs and is UWA now just a food bank? To his second, well ... admittedly this is the line of thinking that partly led me to presume the changes were lefty inspired in the first place. Two points on his second issue to address: means testing and "to facilitate public-private partnerships." Means Testing: Jason likes means testing (objective) except in the instances where the public good is served but means testing wouldn't favor funding (subjective). In those instances, you should fund regardless of the means testing analysis. Got that? So you use means testing on the programs you don't want -- sorry you just didn't make the cut. And you don't use it on the programs you like -- hey you make the cut even though the morons around here don't really see the need. You think you've created an objective process but if you get to pick and chose who gets thrown in and who doesn't, then it is still subjective. Facilitating Public-Private Partnerships: I hate to say I told you I saw this coming. "The United Way is able to receive corporate donations, that governments cannot receive directly, in order to facilitate public-private partnerships." Thank you Jason. I DON'T WANT THE UNITED WAY TO BE AN EXTENSION OF THE GOVERNMENT! UUUUUUUUUGH! I don't think it needs any more explaining. The quote either makes you nauseous or makes you say "YES WE CAN!!" And a bonus point about it being cheaper for non-profits to collect through the UWA rather than do it themselves: First, most still have their own fundraising arm since they don't get 100% of their funds from UWA. And even if they did rely on UWA for all funds, they would still have to hire someone to (A) put the proposal together, (B) expend other precious time implementing the alleged safeguards and (C) still being subject to the UWA, sorry, I mean the grassroots up and changing the playing field. I will respond to Ms. Trahan when I can but for now I have to run. I would like to thank her for responding. All the best, Soop - Soop Thu, 09 Apr 2009 09:12:31 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-650 Thank you Jason for your feedback. I will pass your comment regarding "food security" to our staff member working directly with Essentials. - Sarah Berthelot Thu, 09 Apr 2009 07:25:04 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-647 Thank you, Jason. Soop, would you care to respond? - Walter Pierce, Managing Editor Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:48:34 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-646 Secondly, I would like to suggest a reader consider, that what the UWA is attempting to do in this current era, is prudently use resources by having measurable data that supports the use of their funds. This is your basic "means" testing. If the end results don't support the influx of money expended, then a program has to either adapt it's efforts or wither. That this is true of community non-profits as well as granting institutions privately held as well as agencies of the state, is for us all a good thing. These practices are what prevent "Bridges to Nowhere" from being built. However, in certain occassions, a vehicle, program or object that does not serve a vested economic interest only, but that serves a public good, that can be measured should come up for review, there are always certain activities which we do as a community serve to support, because not every thing funded in a democratic republic is necessarily going to be profit-making, in order to vest community spirt and co-operation as well as civic literacy and wherewithal to maintain a functioning free-society, which believes in a rule of law, a fairness principle, that is in favor of free and competitive and co-operative markets, but not those which are corporately rigged and manipulated as oligarchies do. My apologies for this ramble. What I would truly like to express in this second point I am attempting to make is that, I believe based on my current impressions, is that the UWA is an organization that can also serve as a specialist. As a clearinghouse for fundraising and support of partner agencies and non-profits, the United Way is able to receive corporate donations, that governments cannot receive directly, in order to facilitate public-private partnerships and social work and improvement. It can also specialize to do the fundraising that other organizations who partner with it, are less able to do on their own, or to alleviate the difficulties of maintaining separate staff to do the same work, pulling funds out of the same donor pools locally, statewide, and nationally. As a specialist, my belief is that the UWA or others similar are able to target their efforts, such as the another national non-profit organziation proposed to do for Lafayette, in order to assist local efforts to secure private lands for public parks. Their expertise made the success of the effort more likely as it is their bread and butter. Sure one can donate directly to an organization, and that is fine, but often there are "win-wins" by partnering up. Sure we could save a farm here and there and do it ourself, and not pay the "administrative fee" to do so. Well I'm sorry to tell Soop, but even the directly benefiting agency would have an administrative fee if it expended additional salary hours recruiting the donations in the first place. Let's use this one example before I conclude....often retailers are given data, by credit card vendors...that convinces them to take the card machines, one, because customers expect the convenience, but also because data will show that their sales tend to increase beyond the level of cost associated with the transaction fees they are assessed. (While there is a side argument to be made for needelessly enriching corruptable banking institutions which exercise undue influence upon our government, and increasing the level of consumption of natural resources by us Americans) it is undeniable what the data will show, which is net benefit to the retailer. A survey of charitynavigator.com will find that most of the large, well respected national nonprofits have administrative and advertising(member recruitment) expenses of budgeted expenses running from 8-15% per year. If those expenses are covered under "Operations" at 3.3% then I am supremely impressed. I mean, $112K, isn't that maybe 3 full time salaried employees? or less? Aren't school teachers paid that much now? In summation, I would also like to say, that I have no involvement with United Way other than the 2 or 3 times I made donations in $10.00 increments to the Second Harvest Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana, who appear to be a partner of theirs. I have volunteered with EarthShare Gardens, CSA (no relationship to Earthshare, the national non-profit) and have volunteered to help Save the UL Horse Farm. - Jason D. Faulk Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:38:11 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-645 I have two thoughts to contribute here. Firstly, I appreciate the United Way of Acadiana's interest in preserving and providing for a citizen's security to be fed day in day out when they should fall on hard times, between the cracks in between when government assistance in the forms it is available, is not otherwise available to a working person. Thankfully in Lafayette, times are less dire for now than they are and have been in other areas more stricken. Overall the food security question is one of provisioning the economically vulnerable not only with sustenance, but also nourishing foods. As nourishing foods are generally more perishable (fresh fruits and vegetables,) this has remained a challenge throughout the USA, and is a consequence of federal fiscal policy as it concerns the farming communities of this country. I would like to suggest though, that the term "Food Security" is in danger of being reappropriated due to pending federal legislation that our members of Congress will be considering upon their return from Spring Recess on April 20th. Pending bills will seek to relegislate "Food Security" by affecting farmers, transporters, warehousers, retailers, and possibly, the home resident themselves, the end "consumer." This term "Food Security" is going to take on new meaning beyond the scope of our accepted connotation. This legislation may lead to a burden of regulation and a weakening of organics standards nationwide, along with a concentration of power to farm, and a restriction of seed-keeping rights for farmers. - Jason D. Faulk Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:37:03 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-644 Looks like the numbers to question 5 above did not post correctly as the percentages ran into the actual dollar figures. Hopefully the list below will be more readable! Operations $112,983 (3.3%) PACT AWARD Funding/ Other External Programs $1,890,906 (55.2%) Direct Community Impact from UWA* $350,978 (10.2%) Designations (Restricted by Donor)$674,226 (19.6%) Anticipated Uncollectibles $280,454 (8.5%) 2008 CFC Pledge Designations (Restricted)$113,929 (3.2%) *Direct Community Impact from UWA supports 10 internal initiatives and 9 coalitions - Margaret H. Trahan Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:01:17 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-641 Answers to Soop's questions: 1) No changes were mandated by our national organization. Community United Ways are locally governed, set their own policies, raise and disburse their own funds. The new funding model actually came from our grassroots here in Acadiana based upon our experiences after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita when UWA funded and collaborated with 60 organizations outside of its traditional partners. Approval went through three Vision Councils, a Community Impact Cabinet and the Board of Directors. All of these groups consisted of volunteers. 2. Approval process for actual grants awarded is the same as item 1 above. Staff did not vote or express opinions on the merits of any proposal during the review process. 3. The board did not make any changes to the recommendations presented by the Vision Council volunteers. After 600 hours of time invested in the review, the board had a high level of confidence in the recommendations. 4. Our website should go live today! 5. How are funds generated from the Annual Campaign used? 2008 Annual Campaign Total was $3,423,516 Operations $112,983 3.3% PACT AWARD Funding/ Other External Programs$1,890,90655.2% Direct Community Impact from UWA* 350,97810.2% Designations (Restricted by Donor)$674,22619.6% Anticipated Uncollectibles $280,4548.5% 2008 CFC Pledge Designations (Restricted)$113,9293.2% *Direct Community Impact from UWA supports 10 internal initiatives and 9 coalitions I can tell that you have a great deal of interest in United Way of Acadiana. We are happy to answer any questions that may come from the public or our partners. Should you want to talk in person, we welcome your phone call to our office. - Margaret H. Trahan Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:04:54 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-636 I'm glad to see the website will soon be back up and running for the United Way. Hopefully that will scratch No. 4 off my question list. Will we be blessed with answers to the other questions? Or does United Way refuse to be held to answer to even basic questions about it's new system? And thanks to the Independent for hosting this little back and forth. All the best, Soop - Soop Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:52:05 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-635 A nice press release but it still doesn't answer the questions!! - Soop Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:18:31 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/9-indnews/4179#comment-634 My name is Stephanie Mire and I am Marketing and Communications Director for United Way of Acadiana. Thank you for your patience regarding our website. During the fall hurricanes, our site was hit by a virus. Look for our new site to go live later today. www.unitedwayofacadiana.org - Stephanie Mire Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:11:29 +0100