State University – Higher School of EconomicsCentre for Studies of Civil Society and Nonprofit Sector

The potential of the corporate philanthropy in the local community development and

limitations of the third sector organizations involving

Irina Solodova

The Monitoring of the Russian Civil Society

2

The empirical data originates from the monitoring of Russian civil society:

• the monitoring was launched in 2006

• sociological methods are used to collect the data

• the monitoring covers the population, NGOs, local self governance bodies etc.

• research objectives are multiple

The presentation is based on empirical data from a country-wide representative

population surveys and surveys of NGO’s Сhief Executives (CEOs).

Data collection method – personal interviews

The size of the samples - 3,000 persons (2007) and 1,600 persons (2008)

The NGOs survey covered 1000 NGO’s CEOs, selected by a special sample.

3

Social Conditions for Engagement in Civil Society activity

2007 2008 2009

18 18 18

15 15 16

5752

51

59 5558

Most people can be trustedThere is more agreement, cohesionin our country in generalThere is more agreement, cohesionin our country among people around meReady to unit with other people

“Who should be engaged in philanthropy, and who is most engaged in philanthropy?” (% of respondents to a multiple choice question that allowed for

no more than three response options)

4

”Who most of all should help people who are considered “socially vulnerable” (the elderly, people living alone, disabled, single mothers, orphans, and families with many children)? In reality, who most often

helps them?” (% of respondents to a multiple choice question that allowed for no more than five response options)

5

Corporate philanthropy perspectives: Russian context

Business type Characteristics

Small and medium businesses

• Irregular help, address current help:• Poor development of predicting and preventing programs, of

principles of early prophylaxis ;• Mainly financial help, narrowed use of voluntary forms of help:• Low development of inter-sectoral partnership, low role of NGOs

as an institutional contractors:• Insufficient development of financial and financial competence.

Large corporations • Consistency with strategic aims of a company;• Structuring corporative philanthropy by program or project

principle, direction towards social infrastructure and preventing of social problems development;

• Long-term programs;• Choice of adequate mechanisms of programs realization, including

corporate philanthropy funds, spreading of program-structural approach;

• Practice of in and inter-sectoral partnership;• Evaluation of results of philanthropy programs; • Using various forms of philanthropy, including corporate

volunteers.

7

Donors community: characteristics

• Understanding of philanthropy - non-public and even private character, personal altruistic action (more for small and middle businesses);

• Mutual knowledge – rather low. Do not discuss philanthropic practices a lot:

• Horizontal communications as donors – rather weak.

• Coordinating centre – no regular centre. Role of nonprofit organizations is not significant;

– In considerable degree communications are mediated by public authorities as a coordinating centre (including directives or recommendations in choice of recipient, volume, form, organizational procedure and controlling organization of corporate philanthropy);

• Conjoined philanthropic programs – very few. Corporate philanthropy is mostly made by donors by themselves.

• Regional corporate donors are not engaged in subject interactions for forming their own identity as a philanthropist and reproduction of this status among others.

• Quoting classical sociological theories of gaining identity through action we are to conclude that social self-identification of corporate philanthropist on a local level is poorly developed.

8

Donors community: Cognitive maps of donors communications

9

Based on research results by Centre for Studies of Civil Society and Non-for-profit Sector at the State University - Higher School of Economics , 2009.

NGO contractors

• NGOs have potential to be involved as mediators and contractors in a corporate philanthropy for community development through following models:

– voluntary actions, – grant competitions,– shared costs,– purchasing NGOs’ production and services, – financial aid, in-kind aid, – mechanisms of social partnership–competition, socio-technical and organizational-

structural ones (Iakimets, 2001).

• In practice NGOs (mainly excluding community foundations) are involved in rather limited number of communications (only 10% on NGOs are communicating with business in forms of contracting).

10

Macro level – institutional problems

• Amount of NGOs: 2/3 of registered NGOs do not function. Only 38% of total amount of NGOs really work - 136 302 organizations (2009);

• Weakness of NGOs material resources: lack of material resources is the most actual problem for 60% of NGOs;

• NGO role as a philanthropy contractor: on average only 10% of citizens make charitable

donations with the help of NGOs. Potential of growth - 13%.

12

How many full-time employees work in your organization in present?

From 1 up to 544%

From 6 up to 1022%

From 11 up to 30 22%

31 and more6%

Don`t know5%

13

How many volunteers monthly participate in work of your organization?

14

Do not have volonteers

24%

1-9 persons27%10-19 persons

19%

20-49 persons14%

Over 50 persons13%

Don't know3%

Meso level – problems on a level of individual subjects;

• Poorness of NGOs informational field:– Undervaluation of a role of communications with community for increasing an

awareness about aims, directions and results of NGOs activity:– Insufficient informatively of NGOs materials and web-sites. This are restrictions for

current and potential donors and volunteers;

• Lack of specialists of certain qualification:– Luck of qualified profile specialists with e.g. medical, pedagogic, legal education;– Luck of qualified specialists to work in organization (managers, PR and fundraising

managers).

• Insufficient level of financial and management competence:– Poor knowledge and default of competitive selection rules;– Low variety of proposed projects for competitions;– Low development of audit and evaluation procedures for nonprofit organizations and

projects.

15

Main directions of NGOs activities (international classification, %)

16

Others

Religion

International activities

Public health

Environment

Education and research

Philanthropy

Development and housing

Professional associations. Unions

Civil rights advocacy and other public activity

Culture and recreation

Social services

0 5 10 15 20 25

311

22

45

1114

1717

22

Micro level – problems on a level of separate individuals

• Lack of trust: – 53% of citizens – most of NGOs might be trusted. 24% - most NGOs can not be trusted. – Most of citizens make charitable donations by themselves, individually – 46%.– 22% of citizens are ready to donate more in they would be sure the money would by used in purpose.

• Lack of personal experience in participation in NGOs activities: – Help to NGOs – goods and money – 3% of citizens;– Personal voluntary participation in philanthropy organizations - 1% of citizens;– Potential of personal voluntary participation in NGO – 3%.

17

2007

2008

2009

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

74%

81%

83%

26%

19%

17%

Yes No

Know / heard about some types of NGOs and civil initiatives

”How often have you made a charitable cash donation to help a needy stranger

including beggars?”

” If you have made a charitable financial contribution to help a stranger during the

last year, estimate the total amount of your donations?”

(Per cent of the respondents who stated the amount of their donations)

(Per cent of respondents)

Level of Russian’s involvement in making donations

18

Conclusion - 1

19

A typical Russian:

• considers private philanthropy as an imperfect substitute for state activity,

• distrusts institutionalized philanthropy but approves its support,

• actually is involved in philanthropic activity in its primitive ineffective forms

A typical nonprofit organizations:• either a personal instrument of a single businessman or extremely anxious of

fundraising,

• leaded by one person (board of trusties doesn’t exist or plaid a decorative

role),

• not very transparent

Conclusion – 2

Optimal model of communicating with corporate donors

• Conjoined projects with business, using co-financing;

• Administrating of corporate philanthropy programs of a contract base;

• Interactions with business for attracting resources of public philanthropy and charity;

• Participating in competitions of business:

• Establishing of cooperation with developing and growing companies.

20

Conclusion - 3

21

Authorities:

• gradually recognize importance of philanthropic activity,

• are suspicious to potential political role of charitable organizations,

• are going to support, but sluggish and not well informed about prior needs

What are the prior needs:• to create independent infrastructure for information dissemination and exchange,

• to support institutionalization of middle-size giving,

• to encourage voluntary acceptance of higher standards of transparency and

corporate governance

Centre for Studies of Civil Society and Non-for-profit Sector

National Research University – Higher School of Economics

http://grans.hse.ru

isolodova@gmail.com

22