Sunday, October 15, 2006

Global Giving Fund - example of Porjects in China

Foster families for 50 disabled orphans in China
Establish 10 permanent families for children not eligible for adoption within or from China. The families have access to government services and HTS educational programs Learn more


Location: China | Theme: Education | Need: $147,800


Protection and Promotion of Legal Rights in China
view progress reports
Support governmental efforts in Asia to protect citizen rights and implement existing criminal laws by providing training, legal and administrative structural support, and material assistance. Learn more


Location: China | Theme: Democracy and Governance | Need: $35,000


Free Cleft Surgery for 600 Poor Chinese Children
view progress reports
The Smile Train is dedicated to helping the 1.2 million children in China who suffer from unrepaired cleft lips & palates by providing free surgery. They will get a new smile and a new beginning. Learn more


Location: China | Theme: Health | Need: $150,000


China Radio Information Project for the Blind
view progress reports
A self-powered radio project makes information and education accessible to visually impaired people in China. Isolated listeners can receive advice, and connect with each other and their communities. Learn more


Location: China | Theme: Human Rights | Need: $357,500


Tibetan Mother-and-Child Birth and Health Center
Save lives by providing safe, affordable, linguistically and culturally appropriate health services and health education for rural Tibetan women and children. Learn more


Location: China | Theme: Health | Need: $70,000


Source: http://www.globalgiving.com/

Hybrid For-Profit / Non-Profit Social Enterprise Structure

Creating a Hybrid For-Profit / Non-Profit Social Enterprise Structure
Vaserius - 11:10am May 31, 2005 PST

Hosted by Jeff Hamaoui

Binary Decision: For-profit or Non-profit?

As social entrepreneurs view the landscape of potential funding available to them they inevitably begin to assess their options and opportunities for both non-profit and for profit investment. Both models have advantages and disadvantages and both can have a critical impact on how an enterprise is viewed in the marketplace.

The final decision for many social entrepreneurs is complicated by the fact that there is no clear answer; on the one hand a part of their activities often sit squarely in the public domain, while on the other, their commercial activities (by definition) would best be served by a more commercial format.

This is tricky territory for many social entrepreneurs and one we have faced both with clients in our consulting practice at Origo but one we also face ourselves in our work as a think tank that engages in research and development of social enterprise best practices.

Why Not Both?

One answer that we, and many of the people that we worked with, have arrived at is to structure as a hybrid social enterprise so that you can be both.

A number of social entrepreneurs have successfully built ‘hybrid’ organizational structures using a number of innovative approaches to tap into the strengths of both; non profits with wholly owned business subsidiaries, donated equity models and emerging for benefit business structures are all good examples of this type of thinking. Others have developed hybridized investment structures that achieve similar goals from the investor side like Calvert Foundation’s GiftShare program. In addition, there has also been research done by groups like the Aspen Institute into the frameworks that surround these structures and how to begin moving public policy to embrace the for benefit business structure initially pioneered in the UK.

Discussion

Despite these examples, the decision to go ‘hybrid’ is still largely undocumented and feels difficult. We have invited some thought leaders in the area to comment on the subject and in addition we’d like to open out the discussion to others who have tried, failed or succeeded in building hybrid social enterprises. Particularly, we would be interested to hear people’s thoughts and experiences on:
The advantages of a hybrid structure; what kind of opportunities were opened to your organization by going down this route?
The risks; it seems like many people are put off hybrid structures by legal fears and complexities around governance, IP and conflicts of interest between one entity and the other. How have these risks been navigated and in your experience how real are they?
The costs; how easy was it to set up the hybrid structure? What kind of ongoing management (bureaucracy) and accounting costs are associated with it?
Any unexpected consequences or opportunities?


Source: http://www.socialedge.org/?128@1.f1WeauDOVIh.0@.3c432e32

How to change the world? - The book

Across the world, social entrepreneurs are demonstrating new approaches to many social ills and new models to create wealth, promote social well-being, and restore the environment.

- David Bornstein
The book: How to Change the World:
Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas

Social Entrepreneurs attributes

Social entrepreneurs are:
Ambitious: Social entrepreneurs tackle major social issues, from increasing the college enrollment rate of low-income students to fighting poverty in developing countries. These entrepreneurial leaders operate in all kinds of organizations: innovative non-profits, social purpose ventures such as for-profit community development banks, and hybrid organizations that mix elements of non-profit and for-profit organizations.

Mission driven: Generating social value - not wealth - is the central criterion of a successful social entrepreneur. While wealth creation may be part of the process, it is not an end in itself. Promoting systemic social change is the real objective.

Strategic: Like business entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs see and act upon what others miss: opportunities a to improve systems, create solutions nd invent new approaches that create social value. And like the best business entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs are intensely focused and hard-driving - even relentless - in their pursuit of a social vision.

Resourceful: Because social entrepreneurs operate within a social context rather than the business world, they have limited access to capital and traditional market support systems. As a result, social entrepreneurs must be exceptionally skilled at mustering and mobilizing human, financial and political resources.

Results oriented: Ultimately, social entrepreneurs are driven to produce measurable returns. These results transform existing realities, open up new pathways for the marginalised and disadvantaged, and unlock society's potential to effect social change.


Source: http://elevatevents.com/ser-exploers.html

Also, have a look at www.elevatevents.com, consulting venture dedicated to venture philanthropy

Social Entrepreneurs portal: www.socialedge.org

Background

Social Edge is a program of the Skoll Foundation that was inspired by Jeff Skoll's commitment to connecting people with shared passions. The site launched in June 2003 with the mission to:

Connect social entrepreneurs, their partners and allies to discuss cutting-edge issues shaping the field
Foster frank dialogue, mutual respect and a sense of community among all in the sector
Promote learning from the best, promising and disastrous practices
Evolution

Social Edge has become a site where social entrepreneurs, nonprofit professionals, philanthropists and other practitioners of the social sector connect to network, learn, inspire and share resources. The site strikes a balance between the visionary and the practical, with its spirited discussions and online workshops and features. Social Edge remains committed to fostering frank dialogue, building mutual respect and creating a sense of community among those in the social sector.

Vision

The vision of Social Edge is to become a spiritual home for social entrepreneurs, supporting the growth of social entrepreneurship as a field.

Mission

The mission of Social Edge to inform social entrepreneurs about news and opportunities, educate them with a set of information resources in the field and connect them to each other and the broader community with tools and services that support their work.

Audience

Social Edge has an audience of tens of thousands of current and aspiring social entrepreneurs around the world; it is particularly targeted at social entrepreneurs with limited access to other local resources and practitioners due to the nature of their work (e.g., international development) or their location (e.g., developing countries or in rural areas.)

Goals and Objectives

Create understanding of social entrepreneurship by inspiring those new to the field to get involved and providing them with connections and entry paths into social entrepreneurship

Increase networking and collaboration by connecting social entrepreneurs to each other to foster learning and sharing of best practices

Strengthen knowledge and tools by disseminating leading ideas and thinking in the field to those without access to intelligence and information resources on social enterprise

Attract new resources for social entrepreneurs by providing an open platform where potential contributors can participate, interact and partner with social entrepreneurs

Strategy

Social Edge’s strategy is to work together with range of marketing and content partners - and with social entrepreneurs themselves - to reach aspiring social entrepreneurs, provide them with a coherent set of information resources, tools and services, and empower them to share their knowledge, skills and friendship on the site.

How for profit sites could help social entrepreneurs actions

Web Video for the Social Benefit Sector
For-profit sites like YouTube.com, googlevideo.com, current.tv and Jumpcut.com are collecting thousands of videos every day and making news. Join Patrick O'Heffernan in learning how your social benefit organization can benefit from that trend.

About six months ago, I launched a non-profit website that enables visitors to upload videos, comment on and rate them, and engage in online forums about the American elections. The site, ThePeopleChoose, is linked to the non-profit television channel, Link TV, which will broadcast the best videos that have been uploaded. My experience tells me that there is opportunity here for NPOs.

• I learned that there is an appeal for some foundations to experiment with this new form of creative relationship building and communication.

• I learned that private companies in this field are new enough that they welcome non-profit partners because they see they traffic enhancement and branding potential.

• I learned that online promotion is necessary to build traffic and that blogs are likely the best way to do it.

• I learned that it can excite an NPO's staff and board and raise morale to see their work in video, especially video that others have gone to the trouble to shoot and post.

Why do it?
1. Video can deliver unique impact and reality about your work. By asking people to upload video, you avoid production costs and achieve a powerful authenticity. Your appeal to donors and funders will go up as they see and get engaged in your work and even upload videos of their own. You will build relationships with film schools, local high school and college classes where the faculty are assigning video projects, and with new foundations that found you through video.

2. Video websites appeal to young people – a source of new members and volunteers. They also showcase new talent, like the students and volunteers who upload videos and text to ThePeopleChoose.

4. The technology is widespread and the cost is low if you partner with a private sector video site – a good way to build a corporate relationship that can grows into other things.

3. Video sites can build relationships with users and commenters.

How do you do it?

1. Unless your organization has large amount of server space and bandwidth, form a partnership with a video upload company. This is a win-win for them because your members and promotion will bring more traffic to their site, increasing ad revenues, and they provide the space, upload applications and bandwidth to you at no cost.

2. Have your IT person or a contract programmer add a "new clips" section to your site's back end. This is a site which allows your staff to grab videos uploaded to your partner's site and post on you own so they open theirs, preferably in Flash.

3. Put a button or a box on your home page that asks people to upload their video and takes them to a page where they agree to your terms of service, and then sends them to a page on your partner's site that has your logo on it where they actually upload the video. Your staff then reviews it to make sure it meets your terms of service (TOS) and rules, like no profanity or copyrighted material. (In your TOS, let them keep the copyright to their videos, which they license to you at no charge – take a look at the TOS's on some of the upload sites and then have your lawyer or a volunteer attorney draft yours.)


Source: http://www.socialedge.org/Events/Workshops/83

ALso, have a look at: www.participate.net

Jeff Skoll & Film making: Participant Productions

What do you do for an encore when you’re worth a billion dollars before turning 40? Canadian-born Jeff Skoll, the first president of eBay and the developer of the Internet giant’s hugely successful business plan, set out to realize his boyhood dreams of being a writer and changing the world.

In 1999, he created the Skoll Foundation, a philanthropic organization that tries to shift the imbalance between the “haves” and “have-nots” of the world and to encourage social entrepreneurs worldwide. BusinessWeek recognized Skoll as one of today’s most innovative philanthropists.

Always fascinated with the power of a story to effect change, Skoll set up Participant Productions in January 2004 as an independent production company whose goal is to deliver compelling entertainment that inspires people to get involved in social issues. Three of Participant’s projects—Syriana, North Country, and Good Night, and Good Luck.—won multiple Oscar and Golden Globe nominations this year; Syriana earned an Oscar for George Clooney as best supporting actor.


The studio’s most recent project was An Inconvenient Truth, a documentary released in May about global warming that features former Vice President Al Gore, a longtime advocate of environmental issues.

Hemispheres recently sat down with Skoll to talk about Participant Productions and the social-action initiatives integral to each of his movies.

Q: How did you get started in this business?

A: Being involved with the eBay Foundation, I began to meet people from different charitable foundations. I was so intrigued that I started the Skoll Foundation to back social entrepreneurs. They’re a lot like business entrepreneurs—they are strategic, passionate, creative, hardworking, and they see an opportunity to make change that can be valuable. A social entrepreneur sees a problem in society—AIDS orphans who have nowhere to go or refugees who are stranded—and has a better way to deal with these issues.

Q: What’s the foundation’s goal?

A: To find the social entrepreneurs who’ve done something which demonstrates that a new model can be effective. Then, we help them scale it and build it in much bigger ways so it can affect the whole system. We bring money, strategic help, connections. We created a Web site [socialedge.org] that is now the prime destination site for social entrepreneurs.

Q: What made you form Participant Productions?

A: My vision was to create a company that could make a difference in major world issues by using compelling entertainment as the means.

Q: Why do you think issue movies are being so well-received?

A: After September 11, there was a demand for material that was entertaining, could make sense of the world, and could provide some inspiration about what to do.

Q: Were you a fan of the political movies of the ’70s and ’80s?

A: I was influenced by All the President’s Men, The China Syndrome, Gandhi, and films like that. There’s enough of a history in Hollywood of doing movies that have a message—Erin Brockovich, Schindler’s List, Hotel Rwanda, movies like that. But I was shocked that nobody had created a company that was specifically focused on entertainment that could make a difference in the world, done in a systemic way.

Q: What’s been the social impact of your movies?

A: With each film, we create a social-action campaign where we partner with social-sector organizations. In Syriana, the issue is oil dependence and the dangers that implies, so we partnered with the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council. Even President Bush in his State of the Union address spoke about America’s addiction to oil, and it’s a line that’s repeated throughout the film.

Q: And North Country’s issue was violence against women? What did you do for that film?

A: We timed its release to October 2005, when the Violence Against Women Act was up for renewal in the House, and partnered with NOW and other groups to mobilize people to contact their representatives and remind them that the legislation was important. We also had a screening of North Country on Capitol Hill. Fortunately, the House passed the renewal of the act.

Q: And for An Inconvenient Truth?

A: Part of the campaign for the film was to work with Conservation International, the Sierra Club, the National Audubon Society, and the World Wildlife Fund and with groups like the United Auto Workers. And once people have seen the film, there’s a site, climatecrisis.net, where this tremendous coalition has come together to help people get involved. We think it’s going to blow people away just how urgent the issue is.

Q: What are your criteria for getting involved in a film project?

A: First, is the issue relevant to a large segment of society and is it actionable? Second, is it a good story, well told with the right people involved? Third, is it financially sustainable; will it make money? It’s a complicated equation because we’re willing to take risks on material that may be financially dicey, so long as the social good that comes from it is worth the effort. In the case of North Country, where we felt the film contributed to getting the Violence Against Women Act renewed, the social good that came from doing that film was well worth the effort.

Q: How can you gauge a film’s social success?

A: Measuring social return on investment is difficult. We measure what we can. For example, we track how many people have downloaded tips to encourage “oil change,” a campaign associated with Syriana’s release that’s intended to influence oil policy, and how many car owners have bought a TerraPass, which lets drivers offset the effect of their auto emissions by helping pay for clean-energy projects. The good news is that tens of thousands of people have downloaded these tips and bought these TerraPasses. But the bigger question—Has this project made a difference in the way people see oil policy?—that’s a little harder to measure.

Q: How tough is it to make these movies that aspire to effect change?

A: What occurred to me when I was going around town, trying to assess whether this idea for Participant Productions would fly, was why there weren’t more movies of this kind. It really came down to economics. The studio executives are kind of risk-averse, because if they make a superhero movie or an action film or a romantic comedy with big stars and it doesn’t do well, nobody’s going to take their job away. That’s what studios do. But if they make a movie about social action, like the Angelina Jolie film Beyond Borders [2003] and it doesn’t do well, then they could lose their jobs.

It struck me that everybody I talked to—writers, agents, lawyers, directors— wanted to make films that they could feel more proud of, but the system just wasn’t set up that way. The one major thing I could do was to bring financial resources to these risky projects so that it took away the financial risk from the studios.

Q: Where did you get your sense of giving back to the community?

A: As a kid, I read a lot of books like The Fountainhead, Brave New World, 1984—books that painted different pictures of what the world could be like if folks didn’t pay attention. When I was 14, my dad, who’d been a hard-working guy, announced that he had cancer. He survived it, but I remember him saying he didn’t feel so bad that he might die but that he hadn’t done the things he’d wanted to do. That inspired me to ask, “How can I make a difference in the world?”

Q: What projects are you particularly proud of?

A: There was a TV series we did last year called The New Heroes, which was hosted by Robert Redford and ran on PBS. It focused on social entrepreneurs, and it educated viewers about the fact that there were people doing great works, that there was hope, and also that there’s a noble calling in doing this kind of work yourself. And the series raised quite a few dollars for organizations.

Q: Where would you like your efforts to have impact?

A: First is the environment, then health, human rights, institutional responsibility, peace and tolerance, and social and economic equity. Under each of those, there are subheadings. For example, with the environment, there’s global warming, diversity of species, oceans, pollutants, and toxins. There are multiple other issues. Through the foundation, we’re working with social entrepreneurs or through the films we do, hoping to make a difference. To make sure that the world of the future is brighter than the world of today. And that’s a big challenge.

Source: http://www.hemispheresmagazine.com/july06/innerviews.html