February 6, 2024

National foundations and local, county, and state governments are increasingly urging community foundations to step into their natural policy leadership role, to help advance policies and funding that can strengthen our communities. 

Helping secure some of the billions of federal dollars intended for local projects is a concrete opportunity that’s presently – and perhaps fleetingly - available to community foundations. Seizing this opportunity can serve a region extremely well, strengthen a community foundation’s reputation, and improve the daily lives of the people who live there.

A growing number of community foundations are pursuing such efforts. They’re doing so on their own, together through the Community Foundation Climate Collaborative, and/or with support from organizations such as What Works+.  

Yet while many of the nation’s 800 community foundations realize they can take advantage of these opportunities, the vast majority have chosen not to.  The obstacles to their engagement seem rooted not in a lack of desire, nor an unwillingness to do the work involved. Based on my years of work on community foundation policy leadership, the primary obstacles seem to be their boards’ reflexive resistance to anything that might be deemed “political”; unfamiliarity with how to effectively engage on policy-related efforts; and the need for practical and reliable support to enable their confident understanding and navigation of those challenges (which are in fact eminently manageable).

I’d been exploring these issues with a variety of organizations when I saw last week’s Washington Post op-ed by Mitch Daniels, former Governor of Indiana and Senior Advisor to the conservative Liberty Fund. 

His piece sings the praises of community foundations, as cherished “vehicles of consensus and cohesion” who can “arguably deliver more tangible, meaningful results than their vastly larger counterparts. And they do so in a participatory, ear-to-the-ground fashion that can preserve, or build, the social capital and sense of common purpose that is in distressingly short supply in today’s ‘bowling alone America.’” 

He encourages community foundations to lead their neighbors toward shared solutions to “the nitty-gritty problems that afflict their localities.”   This is important, he said, because “(i)n this era of social atomization, many once-vibrant towns have seen the departure of major employers, along with the consolidation of their schools, banks, and hospitals. These erosions, however rational their intent, damaged the civic engagement and sense of empowerment on which self-governance depends.” A solution, he says, is to “seek out and draw together as many of their neighbors as they can enlist in conceiving and deciding on their investments.”

After delving into the evolution and purpose of community foundations, this libertarian leader closes with a big tent view of community foundations’ local policy leadership potential.  Citing Alexis de Tocqueville, he then quotes the leading center-left thinker David Brooks, whom he notes, "was thinking about public sector action" in saying "that the way back to a society more confident in its institutions is to encourage and strengthen localized activism.  ‘Federal power is impersonal, uniform, abstract and rule-oriented. Local power is personalistic, relational, affectionate, irregular and based on a shared history of reciprocity and trust.’

Community foundations are inherently local, typically respected, and invariably committed to developing community strength – which available federal dollars can enable. As Mr. Daniels notes, the very qualities that define community foundation leadership also extend to the policy realm.  So in his eyes, our field’s unfamiliarity with our policy leadership potential is misplaced – arguably even a dereliction of duty.  Governor Daniels asserts that community foundations (and therefore their boards, staff, and donors) deserve praise, not attack, for filling the local civic leadership role that America needs, because it is no longer reliably provided by other institutions.

America is at an undeniable crossroads – as is every community within. I share Mitch Daniels’s thoughts to help buoy the many of you interested in leading for policy-related solutions, yet concerned about the obstacles you might face when doing so. 

Community foundations are far more capable of fostering systemic improvements than we realize – or are willing to pursue. Yet when most of you look at your community foundations’ messaging and past efforts, you’ll see that you’ve got a history of engaging on policy issues - however lightly or indirectly - which made sense to your board, staff, and mission.  

If you're concerned about the fate of your region, and especially those facing systemic challenges, you might find it helpful to consider your past experiences on policy issues and how you could smartly build upon them. National, state, and local leaders are urging us to do so, in order to help them enable our communities' - and the nation's - future strength. And they're increasingly indicating that by doing so, we’ll be noticed, appreciated, and seen as impactful.

-------------------

If you’re interested in learning more about how to engage on these federal funding opportunities, or how to successfully engage your community foundation’s policy leadership potential overall, I'd be glad to connect at your convenience.  

PS. Congratulations to CFLeads and Meghan Cummings, their new Senior Vice President of Strategy, Impact, and Operations!