No result found
Environmental and Energy Study Institute;
A revolving loan fund (RLF) is a self-replenishing financing mechanism that can be used to fund a variety of programs, ranging from small business development to clean water infrastructure. For example, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revolving loans have for years helped states fund clean-water and drinking-water infrastructure projects. Though RLFs can vary greatly depending on their mission and scope, they all share the same basic structure. RLFs start with a base level of capital, often consisting of private investment or grants from the federal government or state. This capital is then loaned out to several borrowers. Over time, as these borrowers make repayments and pay interest on their loans, the capital is replenished. When enough repayments are made, the fund uses its reaccumulated capital to issue new loans.RLFs are often employed by states, municipalities, and nonprofits as a means for property owners to overcome financial barriers to undertaking environmental improvements. The self-sustaining nature of RLFs allows them to operate for decades with little to no additional investment if designed correctly. By providing low-interest loans with long repayment periods, RLFs can help those who may not have funds available to pay for improvements up front. In this way, RLFs can be used as a tool for building community resilience to environmental hazards.
Violence Policy Center;
This study examines the problem of black homicide victimization at the state level by analyzing unpublished Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data for black homicide victimization submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The information used for this report is for the year 2017. This is the first analysis of the 2017 data on black homicide victims to offer breakdowns of cases in the 10 states with the highest black homicide victimization rates and the first to rank the states by the rate of black homicide victims.It is important to note that the SHR data used in this report comes from law enforcement reporting at the local level. While there are coding guidelines followed by the law enforcement agencies, the amount of information submitted to the SHR system, and the interpretation that results in the information submitted (for example, gang involvement) will vary from agency to agency. This study is limited by the quantity and degree of detail in the information submitted.
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) have been an important part of the United States for over 170 years, and are the fastest-growing racial groups in the country today. AAPIs have made significant gains in political representation, from the halls of Congress to state and local offices. We have also seen important gains in understanding the demographic makeup and public opinion of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.Yet, when it comes to philanthropy, AAPIs continue to be rendered invisible and marginal. This report—based on a summary of prior findings and insights from several data collections, including prior population surveys, content analysis of philanthropy news coverage, and surveys and interviews of leaders and staff in philanthropy—indicates that grantmaking to AAPIs remains a relatively low priority, and that AAPIs continue to face barriers when it comes to serving in leadership roles.
Asian American/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy (AAPIP);
This report, Seeking to Soar: Foundation Funding for Asian American & Pacific Islander Communities, probes the question of foundation investments in AAPI communities. In these pages, AAPIP provides a brief overview of philanthropic support for AAPI communities over the past 35 years, 10 years, and an even closer look at the last five years of currently available data. The major findings are a shocking disappointment — the percentage of foundation dollars designated for AAPI communities has not moved over the past three decades.This report is being released amidst an ongoing pandemic that unleashed anti-Asian hate and violence readily simmering just below the surface; a long overdue reckoning with systemic racism; a global economic crisis; and a tumultuous period of partisanship that is testing the strength of this country's multiracial democracy.
Initiative for Energy Justice;
This report reviews existing literature and compiles equity metrics for the implementation of 100% renewable energy policy. Initiative for Energy Justice created this literature review for energy regulators and communities engaged in energy rulemaking proceedings in particular. The content may also be adapted to address equity initiatives within utilities, and used by advocates in independent efforts to hold utilities accountable to equity standards. The resources provided are meant to provide a flexible basis from which to expand systems of accountability regarding equity goals in the implementation of 100% renewable energy (or 100% clean energy) policy.
How is the philanthropic sector responding to the interconnected inequities laid bare by the COVID-19 pandemic and the national movement against policy brutality and racism? Is this time of acute social upheaval leading funders to reevaluate their generally siloed approaches and consider what it will take to address today's challenges in transformational ways? Approaching the Intersection: Will a Global Pandemic and National Movement for Racial Justice Take Philanthropy Beyond Its Silos? explores these questions through conversations with place-based funders and national philanthropy-serving organization (PSO) leaders. It presents a snapshot of a sector that appears receptive to new ways of working, has access to approaches that suggest promise for making transformational change, but is moving cautiously and at times hesitantly toward undertaking the types of fundamental institutional realignment that will enable approaches with the greatest promise for delivering systemic equity and justice.
Alliance for Safety and Justice (ASJ);
This report, based on a survey commissioned by the Alliance for Safety and Justice and released by the National Coalition for Shared Safety (NCSS), offers a sobering assessment of the U.S. government's failure to help address the major issues that fuel cycles of crime and the lack of safety for people across the country. The report raises serious concerns about current public safety spending that has been dominated by $300 billion spent annually on the criminal justice system. The study also demonstrates wide agreement amongst voters across the political spectrum, and in cities, suburbs and rural areas, on where the nation's public safety budget and policy focus should be shifted.
This guide captures the wisdom of philanthropic leaders who have participated in multi-party advocacy collaboratives. It synthesizes information to dig deeper and understand the pain points and levers of success tied to funding advocacy and donor collaboratives. Examples have been anonymized to ensure candor and clarity, as well as to broaden the appeal and applicability of wisdom derived from a specific collaborative example. Each bite-sized chapter is intended to make this work easy to reference and share, and to read as a full body of work or in pieces as is helpful and relevant to your work.
National Conference of State Legislatures;
A Whole Family Approach to Jobs: Helping Parents Work and Children Thrive started as a partnership between NCSL and ACF. Primary funding came from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, while regional and community foundations bolstered the effort (see back cover). Launched in September 2017, the six New England states agreed to create a learning community across interest areas, programs, agencies, geography and political landscapes.
Employers of frontline talent face an unprecedented opportunity to advance racial equity as a source of competitive advantage. The United States is experiencing dramatic demographic shifts, its workforce is becoming increasingly racially diverse, and the nature of work is fundamentally changing due to automation. Approximately nine million of the country's 24 million frontline employees—entry-level employees who engage closely with customers—are people of color who represent a reservoir of talent, innovative ideas, and multicultural competency that are increasingly sources of competitive advantage.At a time when there are rising societal expectations for companies to embrace a more active role in society and lead with an ambitious corporate purpose, employers face an unprecedented opportunity to advance racial equity as a source of competitive advantage by intentionally finding ways to advance the careers and enhance the experience of employees of color.Advancing Frontline Employees of Color, written in partnership with PolicyLink, identifies 23 evidence-based practices for advancing racial equity and fostering working environments where all people feel valued and can thrive.
Sillerman Center for the Advancement of Philanthropy;
This brief responds to new funder interest in rural communities and educational opportunity. The brief describes the rural education landscape, highlights longstanding challenges and describes the central role of schools in rural community life. We offer several recommendations for grantmakers.
Bendixen & Amandi International;
In 2016, nearly 100 million eligible Americans did not cast a vote for president, representing 43% of the eligible voting-age population. They represent a sizeable minority whose voice is not heard in our representative democracy. Most of our attention, in politics and in research, tends to fall almost exclusively on "likely" voters perceived to make the most difference in the outcome. As a result, relatively little is known about those with a history of non-voting. Yet their non-participation is a key feature of our democracy, and raises important questions about the basic health of a participatory society.To help understand this large segment of the population, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation commissioned Bendixen & Amandi International to develop a comprehensive study of those who do not vote. This study surveyed 12,000 chronic non-voters nationally and in 10 swing states, soliciting their views, attitudes and behaviors on a wide range of topics. For comparison purposes, a group of 1,000 active voters who consistently participate in national elections and a group of 1,000 young eligible voters (18-24 years old) were also surveyed. Findings were further explored through in-depth conversations with non-voters in focus groups held around the country.