In February 2018 the Beveridge Family Foundation, Inc. (“the Foundation”) conducted a survey of prior grant applicants. The topic of the survey was alternative funding streams. Out of roughly 400 valid email addresses, 190 responses were received. A brief review of the results follows.
58% of respondents indicated that they currently receive some form of government funding. If the N/A responses are excluded, the rate is 73%. This was higher than expected and added urgency to our efforts as the Foundation anticipates the likelihood of cuts in government spending in the areas of focus for nonprofits. Still, there are good opportunities for the 10% considering, the 5% planning, and the 6% implementing government funding sources. In conversations, the Foundation heard many stories of organizations that had become dependent upon government funding who then suffered due to cuts, delays, or process issues. Clearly it is an area with large potential, but also many pitfalls.…
Funding Series Cohorts THE WHY
The Beveridge Family Foundation seeks to expand its impact through philanthropic giving, impact investing, and initiating improvements in the community. We see continued threats to funding of the nonprofits who most perform the work we consider vital to our society and environment. In 2018 we launched an alternative funding strategy to assist nonprofits in learning about, planning, and implementing additional funding streams beyond traditional development. We have partnered with the Human Service Forum on a series of workshops led by nationally-recognized consulting leaders in one of seven alternative funding strategies.
2018 Beveridge Family Foundation “Alternative Funding Survey” Results In February 2018 the Beveridge Family Foundation, Inc. (“the Foundation”) conducted a survey of prior grant applicants. The topic of the survey was alternative funding streams. Out of roughly 400 valid email addresses, 190 responses were received.
with Chuck Gordon
The Beverdige Family Foundation survey goes on to say “Only 21% of respondents indicated they have endowed projects in place.…
I applaud Massachusetts State Senator Eric Lesser on his efforts to promote high speed east-west to connect Boston and Springfield.
See MassLive article: http://s.masslive.com/yxeRcZV
The legislature has repeatedly approved funding for a study and it is consistently vetoed in order to protect lucrative bus routes. I feel strongly that it is short sighted to reject the high speed rail project. The need to connect Springfield and Boston is compelling, not just for Springfield, but for Boston, and the long term viability of the entire state as an economic engine.
There are some important caveats however to the viability of east-west rail. First of all, it must be truly high speed. A route that takes more than ninety minutes is indeed a needless competition to existing bus routes. Ninety minutes is too long a travel time to compile Boston workers to live in Western Mass rather than the closer in communities. Ideally, we would see sixty minute or less times from the new Springfield station to South Station in Boston.…
These are dark days for many non-profits with the threats and realities of extensive cuts in government funding. As a foundation, we are prohibited from influencing elections or lobbying. Our board has a diverse range of political views. We all agree there is a need for continued support for non-profits working in areas such as environmental stewardship, mental health treatment, aid for the disabled, the arts, and more. We provide funding in these areas, and more, focused on Hampden and Hampshire counties in Western Massachusetts. We are limited in how much funding we can provide and can’t come close to matching the scale of the cuts being proposed and implemented at the federal level. We’ve seen this before. The political pendulum swings back and forth. The impact on the organizations we support is unfortunate. Given the uncertainty of their funding and their limited ability to influence it, they have difficulty budgeting and planning.…
Welcome to the second edition of the President’s Report. It’s been a busy six months since the last report of the Beveridge Family Foundation. In the following pages, I hope to share our progress.
Descendants of Frank Stanley Beveridge should be sure to read the “Bev Bucks” section near the end.
As of April 30, 2017, the investment value of the Foundation was $55,710,723, up 3.6% since the previous report at the end of August 2016. The assets remain prudently invested among common sectors under the guidance of UBS.
The Beveridge Family Foundation seeks to expand the role of impact investing to help fulfill its mission. Different forms of investment solve some problems, but the need for scale, and operational funding point towards Social Impact Bonds (SIB). We hope to remove the barriers to expanding SIB’s. To find out how we’d like to achieve this, please visit the post on Impact Investing.…
Welcome to the first President’s Report of the Beveridge Family Foundation. This report is designed to inform friends of the Foundation of highlights from the past six months.
As of August 31, 2016, the investment value of the Foundation was $53,778,327, up 1.8% for the year. The assets remain prudently invested among common sectors under the guidance of UBS. As a Foundation, we contribute 5% of our assets each year to approved charities.
Governance is overseen by a board of thirteen directors, consisting of ten family and three non-family members. Day-to-day operations are managed by the President, with assistance from GMA (bookkeeping), Edelstein, (auditors), Kenneth Wenzel (retained counsel), and Tim Turner (web programmer).
To date in 2016, we have awarded 60 discretionary grants totaling $267,000, 29 general grants worth $502,000, and provided monthly support amounting to $530,000 to The Stanley Park of Westfield, Inc.
In addition to our usual grant-making activities, a major focus the last six months has been to review and update our long-term goals and succession plans.…