The Institute for One World Health, the world’s first nonprofit pharmaceutical has announced a new breakthrough in the fight against cholera and diarrheal disease which combine to kill 1.5 million children a year. The drug they are developing could be the first synthetic drug to reduce fluid loss and work in combination with oral rehydration therapy. The ABC News coverage of the story can be found at http://saveone.net/filter/Cholera#1202193/Curing-the-disease-of-poverty-Non-profit-drug-development-org
Death from cholera is preventable but as the iOWH's Elena Pantjushenko points out, “neglected diseases are perpetuated by poverty. Those most affected are the poorest populations often living in remote, rural areas, urban slums or in conflict zones. With little political voice, neglected tropical diseases have a low profile and status in public health priorities. “
As a result there are no economic incentives and therefore no markets for solving such problems. Which is why a nonprofit pharmaceutical, that can serve as a proxy for market forces, is such a critical innovation. It took the classic “unreasonable” person to come up such an idea, which is one reason that founder Victoria Hale figures prominently in my new book, THE IMAGINATIONS OF UNREASONABLE MEN, @ http://www.amazon.com/Imaginations-Unreasonable-Men-Inspiration-Purpose/dp/1586487647/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1292267953&sr=8-1
Monday, March 28, 2011
A government already shut down for too many
No matter how many times Congressional budget stalemates lead to the threat of a government shutdown, it is always front page news. It was again on this past weekend. A New York Times page 1 story warned that “with time running short … Congressional leaders are increasingly pessimistic about reaching a bipartisan budget deal that would avert a government shutdown in early April.” The Washington Post chronicled the impact of budget indecision on Navy shipbuilding and the space program.
The drama of such stand-offs, and the dire consequences that follow, are the bread and butter of journalism. But for millions of Americans – the most vulnerable and voiceless among us - the government has been effectively shut down for so long it is not even news.
Consider that of the 47 million Americans who live below the poverty line, 19 million (up from 12.5 million in 2000) live in extreme poverty – below half of the poverty line: $7500 a year for a family of three or $11,500 a year for a family of four. It is hard to imagine a more dire set of circumstances, and a more compelling reason for bold government action.
But for these fellow citizens the government has already been shut down to their needs. There has been no serious effort to create jobs for them. There is no national commitment to allocating the resources that would ensure a quality education for their kids. The national conversation is focused relentlessly elsewhere. Unlike wealthy Americans or corporate lobbyists, the poorest Americans have virtually no opportunity to speak with their Senators or members of Congress about their plight. They don’t belong to influential national organizations with offices on K Street. And unlike those from industries such as energy, banking, insurance, housing, etc. they have no national champion who can be counted on to be their voice.
Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University who was the top legislative assistant to Bobby Kennedy remembers when Kennedy played that role, visiting Appalachia and the Mississippi Delta and insisting that poverty be at the top of the national agenda. Interviewed in the March 22 issue of The Nation he asks: “I really do wonder why we don’t have people who hold elected office who speak more clearly? Where is the Robert Kennedy of this generation?”
“Something has to happen to get people off their tail”, Edelman continues “to get people back to the level of commitment and enthusiasm that they had—it turns out ever so briefly when they elected Obama to be president. And to get out into the streets—both literally and metaphorically. We had Madison, which we might say was our Cairo. And we need people all over the country to stand up in the same way and say, “I’m opposed to the direction that these things are going.” There has to be some sense of outrage about that and the only way that’s going to be is if people will stand up and speak up for themselves. Any sort of sustained change from the progressive side has got to come from the grassroots. We’re the side that depends on people power.” (The entire interview with Edelman can be found at http://www.thenation.com/article/159381/us-poverty-past-present-and-future)
Even the prospect of a government shutdown represents a profound failure of our political markets. It comes on top of the failure of economic markets to produce jobs to replace those that once existed in manufacturing. This is why the efforts of Share Our Strength and CWV to respond to such market failures, to at bridge the gap with innovative and entrepreneurial solutions, are so critical.
Even when the government is officially shut down there are always a few “essential personnel” required to show up at work to help avoid the most catastrophic consequences. For those for whom the government already seems to be shutdown to their needs – those who are hungry, homeless, unemployed - we are and have always been the essential personnel. One of our greatest responsibilities is to remember that even when, especially when, the news forgets.
The drama of such stand-offs, and the dire consequences that follow, are the bread and butter of journalism. But for millions of Americans – the most vulnerable and voiceless among us - the government has been effectively shut down for so long it is not even news.
Consider that of the 47 million Americans who live below the poverty line, 19 million (up from 12.5 million in 2000) live in extreme poverty – below half of the poverty line: $7500 a year for a family of three or $11,500 a year for a family of four. It is hard to imagine a more dire set of circumstances, and a more compelling reason for bold government action.
But for these fellow citizens the government has already been shut down to their needs. There has been no serious effort to create jobs for them. There is no national commitment to allocating the resources that would ensure a quality education for their kids. The national conversation is focused relentlessly elsewhere. Unlike wealthy Americans or corporate lobbyists, the poorest Americans have virtually no opportunity to speak with their Senators or members of Congress about their plight. They don’t belong to influential national organizations with offices on K Street. And unlike those from industries such as energy, banking, insurance, housing, etc. they have no national champion who can be counted on to be their voice.
Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University who was the top legislative assistant to Bobby Kennedy remembers when Kennedy played that role, visiting Appalachia and the Mississippi Delta and insisting that poverty be at the top of the national agenda. Interviewed in the March 22 issue of The Nation he asks: “I really do wonder why we don’t have people who hold elected office who speak more clearly? Where is the Robert Kennedy of this generation?”
“Something has to happen to get people off their tail”, Edelman continues “to get people back to the level of commitment and enthusiasm that they had—it turns out ever so briefly when they elected Obama to be president. And to get out into the streets—both literally and metaphorically. We had Madison, which we might say was our Cairo. And we need people all over the country to stand up in the same way and say, “I’m opposed to the direction that these things are going.” There has to be some sense of outrage about that and the only way that’s going to be is if people will stand up and speak up for themselves. Any sort of sustained change from the progressive side has got to come from the grassroots. We’re the side that depends on people power.” (The entire interview with Edelman can be found at http://www.thenation.com/article/159381/us-poverty-past-present-and-future)
Even the prospect of a government shutdown represents a profound failure of our political markets. It comes on top of the failure of economic markets to produce jobs to replace those that once existed in manufacturing. This is why the efforts of Share Our Strength and CWV to respond to such market failures, to at bridge the gap with innovative and entrepreneurial solutions, are so critical.
Even when the government is officially shut down there are always a few “essential personnel” required to show up at work to help avoid the most catastrophic consequences. For those for whom the government already seems to be shutdown to their needs – those who are hungry, homeless, unemployed - we are and have always been the essential personnel. One of our greatest responsibilities is to remember that even when, especially when, the news forgets.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
"Cost to Society Incalculable" says Hartford Courant op-ed endorsement of No Kid Hungry
While I was on vacation last week during my son’s spring break (so I take no credit for what follows) our team did an excellent job of launching No Kid Hungry in yet another state; this time Connecticut with newly elected Governor Dan Malloy. The Hartford Courant ran an important editorial focusing on an angle that rarely gets the attention it deserves, which is the long-term economic consequences and costs to society of letting children go hungry. I thought you’d find it of interest and include the link below.
The editorial concludes: “The cost of having children go hungry — or feeding them overly processed, filling-but-not-healthy meals — is nearly incalculable. How do you measure a generation's lifelong loss of income due to a lack of mental development brought on by a lack of good food? How do you measure what that lost generation could have contributed to the greater society? Either way, there's always a bill coming due. We can pay now, or we can pay much, much more later.”
We are pleased with the success so far in bringing childhood hunger into the national conversation, and in redefining why it is in the interest of policymakers and average citizens (and taxpayers) alike to get behind our No Kid Hungry strategy.
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-campbell-hungry-kid-0327-20110327,0,4544896.column
The editorial concludes: “The cost of having children go hungry — or feeding them overly processed, filling-but-not-healthy meals — is nearly incalculable. How do you measure a generation's lifelong loss of income due to a lack of mental development brought on by a lack of good food? How do you measure what that lost generation could have contributed to the greater society? Either way, there's always a bill coming due. We can pay now, or we can pay much, much more later.”
We are pleased with the success so far in bringing childhood hunger into the national conversation, and in redefining why it is in the interest of policymakers and average citizens (and taxpayers) alike to get behind our No Kid Hungry strategy.
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-campbell-hungry-kid-0327-20110327,0,4544896.column
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Share Our Strength's unprecedented growth: secrets of success, lesson #9
I recently used a Community Wealth Ventures convening of leading nonprofits in Cincinnati, and then a lecture at the Kennedy School in Boston, as an opportunity to discuss Share Our Strength’s unprecedented growth over the past two years. Specifically I sought to tease out and understand the key ingredients of that growth, almost as if presenting a case study. This is a unique moment in our 25 year history. And our recent experience is all but unique across the broader nonprofit sector. That makes it a valuable learning opportunity that could help others, whether within or outside the hunger field.
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson # 9 Margaret Mead Was Wrong.
Randomly visit the headquarters of any ten nonprofits and you’ll find that at least nine have a poster somewhere on their wall with the iconic and reassuring words of Margaret Mead to “never doubt that a small group of people can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” The words are reassuring and inspiring but would be more accurate if amended to read “can begin to change the world.” Actually changing the world takes a lot more than a small group. In fact it takes more people than you can know, speak with, meet with, and a commitment to reaching out to circle after circle of potential allies in ways that are accessible to them and empowering them.
Whenever we stopped to think about what it would really take to leverage (as opposed to raise) the billions of dollars necessary to change the lives of millions kids across thousands of miles and numerous cultures, it became obvious that no matter how committed our staff of 50 or 100 or 150 might be, that was just a fraction of the people that would be necessary.
One of the critical operating principles of an organization should be to relentlessly increase the number of shareholders that has genuine ownership for creating change. This not only means collaborating, partnering, forging coalitions, etc., but also giving real ownership to others so that they are working with you or even independently of you, toward a shared objective. Whenever you think your ambitious mission is the sole province of your own small dedicated team, you are thinking too small and destined to fall short.
Tomorrow: Lesson #10 Pay Attention to What Matter Most, Not to What Others Think Matters Most
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson # 9 Margaret Mead Was Wrong.
Randomly visit the headquarters of any ten nonprofits and you’ll find that at least nine have a poster somewhere on their wall with the iconic and reassuring words of Margaret Mead to “never doubt that a small group of people can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” The words are reassuring and inspiring but would be more accurate if amended to read “can begin to change the world.” Actually changing the world takes a lot more than a small group. In fact it takes more people than you can know, speak with, meet with, and a commitment to reaching out to circle after circle of potential allies in ways that are accessible to them and empowering them.
Whenever we stopped to think about what it would really take to leverage (as opposed to raise) the billions of dollars necessary to change the lives of millions kids across thousands of miles and numerous cultures, it became obvious that no matter how committed our staff of 50 or 100 or 150 might be, that was just a fraction of the people that would be necessary.
One of the critical operating principles of an organization should be to relentlessly increase the number of shareholders that has genuine ownership for creating change. This not only means collaborating, partnering, forging coalitions, etc., but also giving real ownership to others so that they are working with you or even independently of you, toward a shared objective. Whenever you think your ambitious mission is the sole province of your own small dedicated team, you are thinking too small and destined to fall short.
Tomorrow: Lesson #10 Pay Attention to What Matter Most, Not to What Others Think Matters Most
MArian Wright Edelman bearing witness to child poverty
There is probably no one who has thought longer and more passionately about children in poverty than Marian Wright Edelman, the legendary founder of the Children’s Defense Fund. This week she had an article in the Huffington Post describing their recent report “Held Captive: Child Poverty in America” whose title comes from looking at the issue through the eyes of a 13 year old girl in rural Mississippi. I found Marian’s effort to “capture a particular truth about poor children’s lives” to be provocative reading and thought you might too. Her article can be found at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marian-wright-edelman/poor-children-stranded-at_b_837792.html
Billy
Billy
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Share Our Strength's unprecedented growth: secrets of success, lesson #8
I recently used a Community Wealth Ventures convening of leading nonprofits in Cincinnati, and then a lecture at the Kennedy School in Boston, as an opportunity to discuss Share Our Strength’s unprecedented growth over the past two years. Specifically I sought to tease out and understand the key ingredients of that growth, almost as if presenting a case study. This is a unique moment in our 25 year history. And our recent experience is all but unique across the broader nonprofit sector. That makes it a valuable learning opportunity that could help others, whether within or outside the hunger field.
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson #8
Most failures are failure of imagination. As far back as the 1500’s Michel De Montaigne “Fortis imagination generat casum”: a powerful imagination generates the event. Imagination makes it possible to envision and create a world which does not yet exist but is within our grasp. No one thought it realistic that college graduates without teaching degrees could succeed in underserved schools until Wendy Kopp and Teach For America imagined it. No one assumed that a pharmaceutical devoted to developing medicines for neglected diseases like malaria could operate as a nonprofit until Victoria Hale imagined it and created the Institute for One World health. At Share Our Strength our initial failure of imagination was to focus on feeding people not ending hunger. Once we made that leap everything changed, as described in greater detail, and with plenty of other examples, in my new book, The Imaginations of Unreasonable Men.
Tomorrow: lesson #9: Margaret Mead was wrong. It takes more than a small group!
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson #8
Most failures are failure of imagination. As far back as the 1500’s Michel De Montaigne “Fortis imagination generat casum”: a powerful imagination generates the event. Imagination makes it possible to envision and create a world which does not yet exist but is within our grasp. No one thought it realistic that college graduates without teaching degrees could succeed in underserved schools until Wendy Kopp and Teach For America imagined it. No one assumed that a pharmaceutical devoted to developing medicines for neglected diseases like malaria could operate as a nonprofit until Victoria Hale imagined it and created the Institute for One World health. At Share Our Strength our initial failure of imagination was to focus on feeding people not ending hunger. Once we made that leap everything changed, as described in greater detail, and with plenty of other examples, in my new book, The Imaginations of Unreasonable Men.
Tomorrow: lesson #9: Margaret Mead was wrong. It takes more than a small group!
Monday, March 21, 2011
Share Our Strength's unprecedented growth: secrets of success, lesson #7
I recently used a Community Wealth Ventures convening of leading nonprofits in Cincinnati, and then a lecture at the Kennedy School in Boston, as an opportunity to discuss Share Our Strength’s unprecedented growth over the past two years. Specifically I sought to tease out and understand the key ingredients of that growth, almost as if presenting a case study. This is a unique moment in our 25 year history. And our recent experience is all but unique across the broader nonprofit sector. That makes it a valuable learning opportunity that could help others, whether within or outside the hunger field.
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson #7
Social entrepreneurship without public policy is like a garage band without amps. It may be fun, cool, and trendy, but it won’t reach very far. If your mission is ambitious and impactful the odds are it cannot be achieved without a public policy component. At its most basic building political will simply means that you’ve succeeded in getting a broader base of people to care about your mission than just those immediately affected by it.
There are many things nonprofits can do that government cannot. They can innovate and take risks and be closer to the people they serve. But once they’ve built a better mousetrap, it requires public support to get it to scale. Otherwise you are pushing a boulder up a hill and it will slide down again.
This need not necessarily mean lobbying. But it does mean building some capacity to engage in policy development at both the federal and local level, share and advance ideas with policy makers and ultimately bring some political pressure to bear on behalf of your ideas. Political will is the fuel that brings effective ideas to scale through the enactment and execution of policy.
Tonmorrow: Lesson #8. Most failures are failures of imagination
At Share Our Strength our revenues hovered around $13 million annually in the years between 2004-2008. We were a classic case of the nonprofit whose growth had reached a plateau. We were stuck. Then we sharpened our strategy and made investments in capacity – including a few we could not afford. Our revenues grew to about $19 million in 2009, $26 million in 2010 and they will be $34 million this year. We added 30 staff to a base of 65 in 2010 and we are hiring for 20 more now. Though improbable it was not accidental or coincidental. The specific reasons follow below.
Lesson #7
Social entrepreneurship without public policy is like a garage band without amps. It may be fun, cool, and trendy, but it won’t reach very far. If your mission is ambitious and impactful the odds are it cannot be achieved without a public policy component. At its most basic building political will simply means that you’ve succeeded in getting a broader base of people to care about your mission than just those immediately affected by it.
There are many things nonprofits can do that government cannot. They can innovate and take risks and be closer to the people they serve. But once they’ve built a better mousetrap, it requires public support to get it to scale. Otherwise you are pushing a boulder up a hill and it will slide down again.
This need not necessarily mean lobbying. But it does mean building some capacity to engage in policy development at both the federal and local level, share and advance ideas with policy makers and ultimately bring some political pressure to bear on behalf of your ideas. Political will is the fuel that brings effective ideas to scale through the enactment and execution of policy.
Tonmorrow: Lesson #8. Most failures are failures of imagination
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)