tcc group
Winter 2006
strategies to achieve social impact
perspectives a newsletter for the clients and friends of TCC Group
Richard Mittenthal Becomes New CEO of TCC Group
On January 1, 2006, Richard Mittenthal became chief
executive officer of TCC Group, after John Riggan
stepped down from that role at the end of 2005.
Mittenthal joined TCC Group (then The Conservation
Company) in 1989 when the firm decided to open a
New York office. Before joining the firm, he had spent
12 years at The New York Community Trust: six as a
program officer and six as vice president for
Programs. TCC Group was not his first foray into
consulting, however; prior to his tenure at the Trust,
Mittenthal was associate director of a small, not-forprofit consulting organization that worked under contract for foundations and the United Way to improve
the functioning of their grantees.
The following are excerpts from an interview with
Mittenthal, where he shared some of his thoughts
about the firm and the larger context in which it
operates.
What’s Inside?
How has the field of consulting evolved since you've
been at the firm?
Back in 1977, when I left consulting to join the New
York Community Trust, there was little interest in
the subject of how nonprofits actually performed.
Foundations were interested in program, not management, and it was a struggle to raise funds to
support the work we were doing.
Today, of course, much has changed. SarbanesOxley and press coverage of some abuses in the
sector get the credit for the recent surge in interest
in accountability. However, there has been growing
scrutiny for many years, particularly on the part of
nonprofit boards, which are meeting more frequently and asking more questions. Strategic planning
and board training are now regular occurrences in
many organizations. There's been an explosion in
professional training and degree programs in nonprofit management, and more and more people with
continued on page 4 »
The “Lifecycle” and Organizational Capacity Models:
Richard Mittenthal
Becomes New CEO
page 1
The “Lifecyle” and
Organizational
Capacity Models
page 1
Workshop Datebook
page 4
Current and Recent
Work
page 5
Staff Updates
page 6
A Powerful Combination for Building a High-Impact Organization
here are times when a picture is far more
valuable than a thousand words. Often,
explaining or simplifying a
complex concept with the right
image or metaphor helps us
understand and apply that concept in our own work or life. One
such metaphor that TCC Group
has found particularly useful in
its organizational assessment
and planning work has been the
“organizational lifecycle.” The
lifecycle model assumes certain
parallels between human and
organizational development and
identifies an evolutionary process
that, very generally, describes the
trajectory of most nonprofit organizations. While the lifecycle model is a very helpful one on its own, it can be limited in its ability to
actually help a nonprofit understand how it can
get from one phase of development to the next and
strengthen its performance. Enter the organiza-
T
tional capacity model, which offers one way for
nonprofits to approach the concept of organizational effectiveness—both what it
is and how to attain it.
Understanding these two models
and how they can be combined to
build nonprofit capacity are at the
center of a new book by Paul
Connolly, seniorvVice president at
TCC Group, called Navigating the
Organizational Lifecycle: A
Capacity-Building Guide for
Nonprofit Leaders, recently published by BoardSource. The book
covers the following topics:
• the nonprofit organizational
lifecycle model and why it matters;
• the core components of organizational
capacity and how they change during
each evolutionary stage;
continued on page 2 »
We Get Around
page 6
Defining Your Role in
Disaster Relief
page 7
2
Lifecycle (continued from page 1) »
• how boards’ responsibilities and composition change at
each stage of the lifecycle;
• how to assess a nonprofit organization’s stage of
development;
• how to anticipate future challenges, align
capacities and lifecycle stages, manage organizational
transitions, and strengthen capacities; and
• strategies for obtaining funder support for nonprofit
organizational development.
The book also includes a number of resources to help the reader
apply its central concepts, including indicators for high-performing nonprofit organizations; the nonprofit organizational lifecycle
assessment tool that TCC Group has developed; and types of
capacity-building assistance that grantmakers can provide to
nonprofits at each stage of their lifecycle. This book also profiles
several nonprofit groups that illustrate different developmental
stages, including Leeway, The Maryland Food Bank, The
Foundation Center, The New York-Historical Society, Dance
Theater of Harlem, and the YWCA of Waukesha County.
The Lifecycle Model: An Overview
Originally introduced in the mid-1990s by Sue Stevens in her essay
“Growing Up Nonprofit,” the lifecycle model assumes that nonprofit organizations follow a developmental path in many ways
similar to that of human beings. There are readily identifiable
stages, as shown in Figure 1 below. (Aspects of this model are
adapted from the models described in Susan Kenny Stevens’
essay, “Growing Up Nonprofit,” and Nonprofit Lifecycles: StageBased Wisdom for Nonprofit Capacity (2001), as well as Karl
Mathiasen and the Management Assistance Group’s writings on
this topic.)
and defunct—is characterized by a set of distinct traits. For example, the start-up might have a very hands-on board, whereas the
mature organization might have more of a policy-making board,
having delegated the day-to-day work to the executive director
and staff. Usually nonprofits begin as start-ups and then progress
into adolescence and maturity. When a nonprofit organization
stagnates, it typically either renews itself or moves into obsolescence and ultimately becomes defunct and dissolves.
Progression through these stages is an organic, nonlinear flow.
Not every organization passes through every phase. Furthermore,
it is rare for a nonprofit to simultaneously exhibit all characteristics of a particular stage. Programs might be mature, but management structures might be adolescent. Like life for humans, life for
nonprofits is often messy and unpredictable, and like people, each
organization follows its own path, depending on its particular
internal resources and relevant external factors. While there is no
one path to maturity that is right for all organizations, TCC Group
has found one thing to be true: Any group that aims to deliver successfully on its mission must strive to attain the mature stage
and sustain itself there. This principle applies to any nonprofit,
regardless of size. Maturity is not necessarily correlated with
growth; it is about achieving mission through the delivery of effective services. This is a goal that even the smallest nonprofit can
and should seek to attain.
Organizational Capacity Model
The lifecycle model is very useful for helping an organization identify where it is strong, and where it needs to further develop.
However, the model can be limited in its ability to help nonprofits
figure out how to move from one phase to another. What facilitates successful transition between each of the stages toward
maturity, helps a mature nonprofit sustain itself over time, or
ensures a successful turnaround for a stagnant group?
Each of these phases—start-up, adolescent, mature, stagnant,
Figure 1: The Nonprofit Organizational Lifecycle Model
Sustain
G
e
clin
De
Mature
w
ro
Stagnant
Start-Up
ve
sol
n
gi
Be
Dis
Renew
Adolescent
Defunct
The organizational capacity model offers a way for nonprofit organizations to address these issues. The model evolved from TCC
Group’s work evaluating funders’ capacity-building initiatives,
based on what evaluation data indicated were the critical components of an effective organization: an organization that, over time,
has the capacity it needs to be able to fulfill its mission. These
core capacities include:
• Adaptive capacity, an organization’s ability to learn and
incorporate new information into its programs and
operations, toward continual improvement and effectiveness;
• Leadership capacity, the ability of staff and volunteer
leadership to establish a vision, communicate it effectively, and procure the resources (human and financial)
needed to achieve it;
• Management capacity, the ability of an organization to
allocate resources efficiently and effectively; and
continued on page 3 »
3
Lifecycle (continued from page 2) »
• Technical capacity, the ability to
get the work done.
At its most basic, organizational capacity
is defined as the wide range of capabilities,
knowledge, and resources that nonprofits
need in order to be vital and
effective in achieving their
mission. The model is presented in Figure 2 below.
Toward a More Effective
Organization
Where do the lifecycle model
and the organizational capacity model intersect?According
to Connolly, it is the organization's ability to learn, to be
reflective and flexible, and to
adapt that determine whether
current challenges can be
overcome. The lifecycle model
and the organizational capacity model both recognize the
key role of transitions. A nonprofit becomes stronger as
the organization advances
and increases its ability to
manage transitions at critical
turning points. An entire system of interrelated parts—
including programs, governance, financial management,
fund development, and human
resources—must work
together for an organization
to move through its lifecycle
and to achieve its mission. This type of
transition requires transformational
change.
What Can Grantmakers Do to Support Their
Grantees at Different Points of the Lifecycle?
Capacity-building efforts, no matter how
large or small, require time, commitment,
and financial resources. Nonprofits often
will not have allocated funds for capacitybuilding activities in their budgets and may
require outside assistance. There are many
ways funders can support their grantee’s
capacity-building efforts, regardless of
their lifecycle stage. It’s always good to
start with an organizational assessment
taken by a number of senior staff and
board members. That way, the composite
assessment will reflect diverse perspectives and will be more likely to accurately
reflect the organization's particular capacity building needs. Once the assessment
has been completed and needs have priori-
the costs of an executive search and providing opportunities for peer mentoring
from other nonprofits that have successfully turned themselves around.
At the end of the day, an organization’s
ability to master challenges relies largely on
Figure 2: The Organizational Capacity Model
its leaders' willingness
to candidly assess its
weaknesses and commit
to addressing them in
constructive ways. It is
for this reason that
adaptive capacity is critical, because good decisions depend heavily on
the quality of information at hand. Without
good data, even the
most resource-rich organization won’t succeed
at a small transition or a
major transformation. It
is more critical than
ever that nonprofit leaders articulate a strong
vision for their organization and then use the
information and other
resources at their disposal to improve performance. The vision will
likely change over time,
just as it does for individuals. There will be
progress, and there will
tized, there are several types of direct
be setbacks. But we are all well served by
assistance funders can provide: managetaking the time to reflect on where we've
ment assistance (perhaps in the form of
been, assess where we are now, and make
paid consulting services, coaching, or a
informed decisions about where we want to
peer mentoring program), grants that supgo next.
port specific capacity-building efforts, and
capital financing (such as a loan that will
provide unrestricted working capital).
Funders can tailor their support according
to the lifecycles stage of their grantees. For
example, a funder can support a start-up by
providing training on how to establish a
board and awarding a small grant to rent
space and set up an accounting system.
On the other hand, a grantmaker can help a
stagnant nonprofit revive itself by covering
To order a copy of Navigating the Nonprofit
Organizational Lifecycle, contact
BoardSource at 202-452-6262 or 1-87789BOARD, or visit
www.boardsource.org/Bookstore.asp.
Friends of TCC get a 10% discount using
code SP10 .
4
Workshop Datebook
Richard Mittenthal becomes New CEO (continued from page ) »
business experience are finding their way into
leadership positions with nonprofit organizations
and foundations.
How have the firm's services evolved? What distinguishes TCC Group from others doing similar
work?
When I joined the firm, the bulk of our work was
in planning for all three of our client groups: private foundations, corporate citizenship programs,
and nonprofit organizations. While planning still
represents a significant service area, other services have grown more rapidly.
These include evaluation, grantmaking outsourcing, and organizational capacity building. Our
growth, particularly in these areas,
relates to issues of accountability
and an increasing interest in organizational efficiency and effectiveness.
We are one of a very small number
of national firms that works with
all three of our client groups and
are distinguished by the diversity
of our core services. The synergies created by our
client and service mix are considerable. Our work
with funders is informed by our specific knowledge of the workings of nonprofit organizations.
Conversely, what we've learned about the policies
and priorities of corporate and private funders is
extremely useful to our nonprofit clients.
What are major trends affecting the work of the
nonprofit and philanthropic sectors, now or in the
foreseeable future? How will they affect the field of
consulting to nonprofits and foundations?
Three come to mind. First, I believe that the
trends toward globalization, interdependence
among countries, and the growing interest in
international issues among U.S. citizens will continue. Second, some time soon, maybe even this
coming year, we will begin to see the effects of
fighting a war and cutting taxes at the same time.
These effects will disrupt the lives of people at
the bottom of the economic scale and, of course,
people who find they do not have the resources to
live the kind of retirements they planned. Third,
interest in accountability will continue to grow,
and boards and staff of foundations and nonprofit
organizations will be asking even more questions
about results and impact.
All of these trends will intensify the pressure on
private philanthropy and the nonprofit sector.
Foundations will be thinking about global health,
job creation, and the responsibility of the private
sector to provide social and health services. Even
with existing foundations growing and new ones
being established, it is likely that needs will outpace resources. And, whatever issues philanthropy takes on, people will be asking about
impact and results. We expect a continued
growth in all of our practice and
service areas but particularly in
planning and evaluation. We are
hopeful that the firm's tools and
processes can help foundations
and nonprofits assess whether they
are, in fact, achieving the desired
impact.
What do you enjoy most about this
work? What is next for the firm?
The most rewarding thing for me is
knowing that the firm has delivered
a high-quality service to an organization that
wants and needs it, and that our work helps the
client to better serve its constituency. While our
work directly affects an organization's management, board, or overall operations, I think that
everyone in the firm believes that we also serve
whomever our clients seek to assist, be they victims of abuse, the elderly, people with disabilities,
hungry people in Africa, or children learning
about the arts.
Looking ahead, I see a great deal of potential for
the firm not only to help clients address the
issues of accountability and effectiveness I've
mentioned but also to have a role in how they get
defined. What do we mean when we use these
words? What is fair and reasonable to expect?
Finally, I'm confident that the firm will continue to
make a valuable contribution to our clients and to
the broader field because of John Riggan's leadership. He leaves behind a diverse and talented
staff and a very strong organization, well positioned for the future.
At the Grantmakers in Health
conference on February 22-23
in Phoenix, AZ, Paul Connolly
will present on funding to
support organizational lifecycle stage of grantees with
Susan Sherman of the
Independence Community
Foundation and Erica
Weinberg of Pfizer, Inc. For
more information on the
event, please visit
www.gih.org.
On March 8 at the
Grantmakers for Effective
Organizations conference,
Paul Connolly will serve as
facilitator at an orientation
pre-session on philanthropic
effectivness. Paul
Shoemaker of Social Ventures
Partners and Janine Lee of
The Arthur Blank Foundation
will be panelists for this session. To learn more go to
www.geofunders.org.
On May 8 at the Council on
Foundation’s annual conference in Pittsburgh, TCC’s
Peter York will co-present a
session with Dee Merrill of
the Wachovia Foundation,
Caroline Roan of the Pfizer
Foundation and Rene Deida
of the Prudential Foundation.
The session is entitled
“Creating Win-Win
Evaluations by Engaging
Internal Resources and
Sharing Insights.“ To register
for the conference visit
www.cof.org.
At a pre-Conference Institute
on May 16 at the Axelson
Center for Nonprofit
Management's Annual
Symposium, Paul Connolly
and Steve Bumbaugh will
present a day-long session
on “Change Making 101: How
to Build and Sustain Your
Nonprofit's Adaptive and
Leadership Capacities.“
Also at the Axelson
Conference on May 17,
Chantell Johnson, Jen Avers
and Peter York will lead a
session entitled “Using
Evaluation to Support
Innovation.“ To learn more
about the conference, visit
www.northpark.edu/axelson/2006.cfm.
perspectives Winter 2006
5
Current and Recent Work
TCC Group is conducting an evaluation
for the Deaconess Foundation of the
Deaconess Impact Partnership,, a
capacity-building initiative for organizations serving low-income children in
St. Louis, MO, and two surrounding
counties.
TCC has been retained to evaluate The
Aspen Institute’s Business and Society
Program., which is dedicated to developing leaders for a sustainable global
society. Through dialogues and pathbreaking research, the program creates
opportunities for executives and educators to explore new pathways to sustainability and values-based leadership.
The firm provided general advice and
counsel to Pfizer, Inc. regarding implementation of a 2005 - 2007 Strategic
Business Plan for the Partnership for
Clear Health Communication Initiative.
TCC is currently facilitating
a comprehensive strategic
planning process for the
Delaware Valley
Grantmakers (DVG), a
regional association of
grantmakers in the
Delaware valley region. The
process included surveys on
current and future needs of DVG’s
member base.
Computer Associates, one of the
world's largest IT management software providers, has hired TCC to assist
with the development of a training
manual for its community relations professionals, and to provide additional
advice on the implementation of its
new community relations program.
TCC’s Chicago staff worked with The
Shedd Aquarium, one of the oldest
public aquariums in the world, on the
development of an evaluation planning
system and data collection methodologies as part of a larger evaluation project the Aquarium undertook. TCC created a comprehensive logic model and
evaluation plan for its Right Bite
Sustainable Seafood Program. The
plan was large-scale and comprehensive and included priorities by ease of
implementation, time frame for implementation, and cost-effectiveness.
Goldman Sachs has
retained TCC Group to
assist the Charitable
Services Group with the
strategic development of a
new focused giving program.
TCC has begun providing
capacity-building services
(such as organizational assessments,
convenings, peer exchanges, and individual coaching) and management
assistance to The James Irvine
Foundation for Investing in Arts
Leadership, a multi-year grantmaking
program for arts and culture organizations throughout California.
The United States
Organization, (USO), which
operates in more than 122
centers around the world,
hired TCC to assist in a
needs assessment and gap
analysis of needed programs and its comparative
niche going forward. The organization
seeks to provide morale, welfare, and
recreation-type services to American
men and women in uniform.
A team of TCC consultants is engaged
in a feasibility assessment,
facilitated consensusbuilding and business plan
development process for a
National Jewish Retreat
Center of the Jewish Life
Network.
TCC Group completed
three successful projects
for The Community Service Society of
NY: an organization-wide strategic
plan for CSS; a business plan for its
Public Benefits Resource Center
(PBRC); and a strategic plan for its
Community Health Access Program,
which focused on helping to plan and
manage its rapid growth.
TCC Group was engaged to develop an
evaluation system for the
Philadelphia Zoo. Our firm
designed a system that
measures changes in conservation behavior and
leadership for all groups of
customers; developed
measures to monitor the
quality of programs and
services; improved strategic decision-making about
the zoo's programs in order to better
achieve its mission; and provided "best
practice" and "outcome" data that
contribute to the body of research and
improving programs throughout the
country. The evaluation was recently
featured in the American Zoological
Society's member publication.
TCC Group recently completed the
development of a comprehensive
strategic plan for Henry Street
Settlement. Henry Street is one of the
nation’s most highly regarded social
services agencies, offering a wide variety of arts, health, youth development,
workforce development, and shelter
programs on New York City’s Lower
East Side. TCC Group staff facilitated
an inclusive process that brought staff
members, board members and other
volunteers, service consumers, funders, and partners together to develop
a vision and approach to
the agency's work.
perspectives Winter 2006
6
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Richard Mittenthal
President and CEO
Staff Updates
Richard Mittenthal became Chief Executive
Officer on January 1, 2006. Mittenthal took over
when John Riggan stepped down as CEO. (See
article on page 1.)
The firm recently hired
Stephen Bumbaugh. Stephen
comes to TCC from the
California Endowment,
where he served as program officer. He will be a
Senior Consultant in TCC’s
Chicago office. Steve specializes in planning for funders and nonprofits.
He has degrees from Yale College and Stanford
Business School.
The firm welcomes a new
research associate, Artis
Bergman. Bergman is a
recent graduate of Vassar
College and has held internships at the Office of the
Public Advocate in New
York and Psychologists for
Social Responsibility in D.C.
The firm also welcomes Amesha Hidalgo who
has jointed as administrative assistant in our
New York office. Amesha comes to us from
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center,
where she was a research study assistant.
Anne Sherman has been promoted to senior consultant.
Additionally, Sherman was
recently invited to join the
Advisory Board of the
Family Life in Sunset Park,
an organization in Brooklyn,
NY, that is highly regarded
for its work in a range of family-centered services.
TCC says farewell to Marcus Littles, who
recently left the firm to work with the Ford
Foundation to help plan and manage its
response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We
wish Marcus, who is a native of Mississippi, the
best as he pursues this important new work.
We also bid adieu to Laura Colin Klein, who has
worked at the firm for more than ten years.
Laura has taken a new position as Director of
the Rhinelander Center, which provides children's services and is a division of the
Children's Aid Society.
We Get Around
On September 19 and 20,
Paul Connolly and Peter
York conducted a series of
workshops in New York City
for the Association of Small
Foundations' Advanced
Grantmaking Program.
Chantell Johnson and Paul Connolly presented
on “Evaluating Capacity-Building Efforts” at
Chicago's regional conference of the
Grantmaker's for Effective Organizations on
September 28.
At the Stonewall Community
Foundation's 2005 Board
Leadership Development
and Skills-Building Day on
October 22, Susan Misra
presented on organizational
lifecycles model and growth.
On November 18, Tom
Knowlton and Janice
Brown presented a session
entitled “Assessing
Nonprofits: How Corporate
Funders Can Find and
Support Nonprofits That
‘Fit’” at The Contributions
Advisory Group (CAG) in New York City
Between November 30 and December 1, Julie
Malloy, Jen Avers, and Richard Mittenthal participated in an Asian Studies Conference hosted by the Freeman Foundation in Honolulu, HI.
On February 1, Grantmakers
for Effective Organizations
and The Open Society
Institute hosted a book
party for Peter York, to celebrate the publication of A
Funder’s Guide to
Evaluation.
Paul Connolly
Senior Vice President
Shelly Kessler
Vice President and CFO
Thomas W. Knowlton
Vice President
Peter York
Vice President
PROFESSIONAL STAFF
Carol O’Connor Gallo
Director of Administration
Lois Chierico
Director of Finance
Stephen Bumbaugh
Senior Consultant
Chantell Johnson
Senior Consultant
Sally Munemitsu
Senior Consultant
Anne Sherman
Senior Consultant
Jennifer Avers
Judy Barci
Artis Bergman
Irene Bostick
Janice Brown
Cara Cipollone
Ashley DelBianco
DeShele Dorsey
Denise Finley
Amesha Hidalgo
Kelly Lee
Janice Mendieta
Susan Misra
Ana Ramos-Hernandez
Jared Raynor
Sheila Scott
Ashley Snowdon
AFFILIATES
Thomas H. Fox
M. Patricia Hoven
Shelby Miller
Julie Maye Malloy
John Riggan
Jennifer Li Shen
Tom Stephens
7
Defining Your Role As a Funder in Disaster Relief:
Preliminary Questions for Planning an Organizational Response
Numerous disasters over the last year, including Hurricane Katrina,
have once again revealed the need for funders to have clear principles and criteria that can guide them in determining whether, and
at what level, to respond to a natural disaster. Because of the need
to make decisions quickly, planning and preparation is critical
before a disaster hits. While disaster planning can be daunting,
considering three key questions related to disaster response is an
effective way to begin planning for foundations and businesses.
1. Why should my organization respond to a disaster? There are many
reasons why organizations of all types respond to disasters. TCC
Group believes a few of the most important issues to be considered
are the following:
Mission/Business focus: Many funders can justify responding to a
disaster at some level, but the key to determining level of involvement should be driven in part by the alignment with the mission or
the business.
Impact: Will funding and participation from your organization have
a significant positive impact? More important, will this divert funding away from areas that will result in a significant negative
impact?
Stakeholders: Do your stakeholders (employees, trustees, grantees,
customers) expect you to respond? Are you currently working with
grantees in the region? Do you have a strong business presence in
the region? Will your stakeholders understand if attention is diverted away from their region or interest?
These are beginning criteria that need to be customized and developed more fully by the leaders of the funding organization, so that a
decision on whether to provide relief, and at what level, can be
made quickly and with the full support of the organization.
2. What scope of response is appropriate for my organization?
The process of determining whether to respond will also begin to
provide clarity on the level and scope of the response for your organization. Helicopter rescues and distributing water and blankets are
the likely images conjured when asked about disaster response. In
reality, disaster relief can continue for many months and years after
the initial event. Funders should begin to define and frame their
level of involvement using some of the following factors:
Timeframe: immediate relief or long-term recovery?
Socio-geographic sphere: at the epicenter of the disaster or at the
periphery dealing with the residual effects? Relief of human physical suffering (food, shelter, physical/mental health services, etc.) or
focus on resource needs (environmental recovery, economic development, etc.)?
Resource contribution: cash, volunteers, and physical supplies (temporary housing, vehicles, water, etc.) or less conventional resources
like political capital and web-based communication.
There is a need to intervene at many different points of disaster
response, and strategic mixes of timeframe, socio-geographic
sphere, and resource contribution are necessary for the overall
response.
3. How does my organization effectively fit our scope into the broader
disaster response?
by Jared Raynor
A foundation or business that desires to have a meaningful
response to a disaster must gain a clear understanding of the
broader framework of the response, assess its internal competencies, gauge its institutional will and commitment, and set tangible
goals for its response. The following questions and case examples
provide a useful framework and guide for funders:
What are your core competencies that might be valuable in a disaster
response?
Kraft Foods immediately provided $1 million in food and cash
grants to assist with the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. This
included $700,000 in food donations; the balance of $300,000 came
in the form of grants for food and shelter relief efforts. In addition
to the $1 million commitment, Kraft provided several ways for
employees to get involved, including a matching gifts program, food
and clothing drives, and other volunteer efforts.
What role is your organization willing to play and what resources are
you willing to commit? Time? Funds? Products? Services? Advocacy?
Northwest Airlines determined that each month it could offer a different relief organization 1 million frequent flier miles and special
fares for relief workers. Further, NWA was interested in providing
opportunities for its patrons to support the response and consequently allows patrons to donate their frequent flier miles to the
response effort.
What are your goals for your response? After assessing institutional
competencies and gauging strategic interests and/or roles, an organization should set clear goals about desired impact.
The Ms. Foundation for Women repositioned its historic focus on
women of color and low-income women around a plan for Katrina
response that included focusing on women's voices in reconstruction policy and addressing the specific needs of female-headed
households. The foundation's goals for Katrina don't deviate from
its historic mission, but elaborate specific goals for the disaster
response within that mission.
How does your response fit within a broader response framework? As
part of devising a meaningful response, organizations should consider the broader issues and frameworks of the overall disaster
response.
Disasters of all types around the world disrupt, damage, and often
destroy communities, homes, and businesses. Funders have a critical role to play in every aspect of disaster response. However,
effective response efforts and the ultimate successful recovery of
affected areas depend on a strategic organizational response that
best utilizes core competencies, has clear and defined roles, is
goal-driven, and fits into a broader response framework. Clearly,
the three questions presented above are mutually reinforcing and
not likely to be answered in isolation. However, answering these
three questions is the basic starting point for building a disaster
response plan for your organization.
www.tccgrp.com
nonprofit organizations
management consulting
philanthropies
corporate citizenship programs
organizational and program planning
evaluation
50 East 42nd Street
19th Floor
New York, NY 10017
strategies to achieve social impact
Philadelphia
New York
Chicago
tcc group
perspectives a newsletter for the clients and friends of TCC Group
Winter 2006
WHO WE ARE:
WHO WE SERVE:
WHAT WE DO:
CONTACT US:
TCC Group is a
consulting firm that
develops strategies and
programs that enhance
the efficiency and
effectiveness of
nonprofit organizations,
philanthropies, and
corporate citizenship
programs to achieve
social impact.
• Philanthropic
organizations
• Planning
Chicago
875 North Michigan Ave.
31st Floor
Chicago, IL 60611
phone: 312.794.7780
fax: 312.794.7781
• Evaluation
• Nonprofits
• Corporate citizenship
programs
• Government
• Grantmaking
assistance
• Program and strategy
development
• Needs assessment and
competitive analysis
• Organizational
development
www.tccgrp.com
New York
50 East 42nd Street
19th Floor
New York, NY 10017
phone: 212.949.0990
fax: 212.949.1672
Philadelphia
One Penn Center
Suite 1550
Philadelphia, PA 19103
phone: 215.568.0399
fax: 215.568.2619