No wonder Americans regularly express far more trust in state and local governments than in the federal Leviathan.
Our nonprofit sector is remarkable. Too often, the big foundations that make headlines waste their fortunes on programs that don’t produce measurable improvements, “grand challenges” that remain just as grand even after the money is spent.
Meanwhile, a completely different category of philanthropy is steadily and quietly demonstrating the American “spirit of association” that Alexis de Tocqueville marveled at. The nation’s 900 or so “community foundations” are perhaps producing more concrete and meaningful results than their much larger peers. And by doing so in a participatory and listening manner, they maintain or build the social capital and sense of common purpose that is woefully lacking in today’s “bowling alone” America. This is possible.
Community foundations were invented in the Midwest and are still concentrated in central areas. It is generally believed that the Cleveland Foundation, founded in 1914, was the first foundation of its kind, but comparable institutions in neighboring states soon followed. Every state now has at least one, but more than a third are in the Midwest, with more than 200 in Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana alone.
These organizations aim to leave concerns about ocean boiling to the Fords and Gateses and instead address the core issues plaguing their regions. A call to the foundation office in my home state of Indiana produced many examples.
At the Community Foundation for Owen County (population 21,482), Kara described the successful construction of a bike and hiking trail from the county seat of Spencer to the nearest state park. But with equal pride, she recalled the time she bailed out Lions Club members when their fish fryer broke down the night before the county fair.
Lisa, whose Steuben County is home to 101 lakes (about 1 for every 340 people), said the foundation’s funding for regular water quality testing has led to increased public confidence and tourism in recent years. In Montgomery County, a recent grant helped him renovate two public parks and create much-needed child care capacity.
But the good that these brave little organizations do may be secondary to the way they do it. In this era of increasing social fragmentation, many once-vibrant towns are seeing the departure of large employers, along with consolidation of schools, banks, and hospitals. This erosion, no matter how rational its intentions, undermines the sense of citizen participation and empowerment that is the foundation of self-government.
Bucking this trend, community foundations serve as vehicles for consensus and solidarity, seeking out and bringing together as many neighbors as possible to help envision and decide on investments.
Kara explains how a group of eight volunteers actively travels the county three times a year looking for requests and ideas. In Montgomery County, Kelly works with the 13-member board to hold regular “listening sessions” and considers her office the “eyes and ears” of the county. It is clear that two of the three counties cited here are home to private universities, but both are subject to intra-town conflicts, which are common in areas where two different cultures coexist in close proximity. There are no reports.
The abundance of these foundations in some places is the result of enlightened philanthropy by larger groups that galvanized movements in states such as Iowa, Kansas, and Indiana. True to that part of its founder’s mission to foster community development in its home state, the Lilly Foundation has undertaken a large-scale effort to midwife new foundations in even the smallest of Indiana’s 92 counties. He started in 1990.
N. Clay Robbins, the foundation’s outside attorney at the time and now its president and CEO, derided the plan, predicted it would lead to duplication of administrative costs, and recommended a statewide organization. He recalled the backlash from philanthropy experts. Some suspect that this criticism included suspicions that the local rubles tasked with managing the funds were unable to make wise decisions.
The time-honored principle of subsidiarity states that decisions should be made as locally as possible. Social progress and social harmony could be enhanced by applying this principle more broadly. Managers of both public and nonprofit funds should take note.
Author David Brooks has argued that the way to return to a society with more confidence in its institutions is to encourage and strengthen local action. In 2018 he wrote:“Federal power is impersonal, monolithic, abstract, and rule-oriented; local power is personal, relational, affectionate, irregular, and based on reciprocity and shared trust.” It is based on the history of
Although Brooks was thinking about public sector work, his insights and community foundation work apply equally to the unique and proud private realm of American philanthropy.