ElitheChef...and Other Dichotomies

When I grow up...

2008-03-13T12:53:00.000-04:00

I want to be Tina Fey.

Missing the Point on Rhetoric

2008-02-27T06:59:00.003-05:00

Another conversation with my friend DC challenging me to think more critically about my issues with Obama. At the end of the conversation, I'm even more befuddled, what is my problem with this campaign?

Then I read this editorial in the Financial Times and I thought -- maybe my frustration isn't so much with Obama as it is with the Americans who buy into empty messages. If the last election taught us anything, its that we need to put a critical eye on our candidates and not get caught in their hype.

The rebuttal in the paper this morning was smart and pointed -- making me feel, well, stupid. "Rachman misses the point," writes the contributor.

"Obama is appealing to voters who wish: first, to return to the traditional American land of hope from the present environment of fear; second to see a change from the traditional style of Washington-dominated politics; and third, to hold their heads up high as Americans when they travel abroad."

Huh. OK. I get that. So its not so much about actual tactical change at a policy level. Its about change within ourselves. Being hopeful. Not being afraid. If thats the case, my own hope would be that, if Obama is elected as the next President, that in this new paradigm of hope and change-- that the American people continue to be hopeful, set high standards, and hold their President accountable to these standards. Because even if we buy into a message of hope rather than fear, we still need see changes at the policy level to make that hope stick, to enable us to be proud to be Americans.

But OK... I get the message now.

And the Deal is...

2008-02-21T08:22:00.002-05:00

A friend and colleague was at the house yesterday. Together , we're working on the roll out of the Maine Women's Fund new economic security initiative together and while I'm on maternity leave we meet in the front room of my house, drink tea, and think great thoughts.

She was doting her new copy of "Pink" -- a magazine for professional women; she was so excited about the magazine, she was practically fawning over each page. I knew from the get go that I wasn't going to get a lender, so after she left, I checked it out on line.

As is my fancy I went straight to the blogs, where I read this from editor Cynthia Good:

It's easy to get bogged down by things like negotiating contracts, dealing with high-demand clients, answering two ringing telephones at once, replying to 320 e-mails a day and so on. Your employees' livelihoods (as well as your own house) are on the line. And the deal is – despite all the pressure, you aren't allowed to be a stressed-out b---h!

Wow. I know that feeling. Its not easy when the buck stops with you, and as much as I know I'm up to the challenge, that doesn't make it any easier on those lonely days when you know not to show fear, tension, stress, and anxiety. I suddenly felt overwelmng appreciation for the great leaders I've provoked, yelled at, and criticized all in the name high expectations. And I felt even more appreciation for those friends who have emerged as mentors and coaches. And finally, I was immensely grateful to work with colleagues with high EI and know when to ask: who can I best support you? Sigh... YOu guys rock!

OK. I'm done with my love fest.

Yellow lines and dead armadillos

2008-02-09T05:42:00.000-05:00

Let me just say this -- I want change in the White House, and I'll be even more happy to herald change if it comes with the first female or the first African-American president. And I'd be more than ecstatic to welcome them both at the same time.

With that said... let me be Eli for second -- irrational, stubborn, and prone to gross generalizations.

I'm realizing lately that I have a VERY high disdain for unrealized leadership potential. Don't have it in you? That's fine. But if you have it in you and don't live up to it, that's bad. Very very bad. Second to this, I have a very low tolerance for inauthenticity.

Ask me my thoughts on Obama, and what you get is actual anger. Not fair really, since I don't know the guy and his stance on the issues is really no different than any other democratic candidate. At the root of my irritation is gay marriage. Like the other Dems, Obama is in the 'separate but equal camp' of supporting civil unions, but as a black man, I expect more from him. What's the point of diversity in the White House, if the diversity of experience doesn't yield a different platform? More to the point, I am not a justice chic and don't champion diversity because a marginalized group deserves it. I champion diversity because the myriad of experiences therein brings a myriad of new perspectives, which has inherent value for reflecting the many different perspectives in our country.

My friend DC tells me that Obama doesn't think the country is ready for a conversation about gay marriage. I thought about this for a while, and my response is: Well tough. The country really wasn't ready for a conversation about civil rights either -- it was tearing itself apart, burning cities, and destroying neighborhoods. But we had it anyway, and we are richer for it. But that's the thing about real change. Its hard and a lot of people will dislike you before you are done. Nobody, NOBODY, takes to real change without a fight.

One of my favorite mantras of all time comes from James Carville, speaking at my alma mater, responding to a question about why Bill Clinton couldn't be more middle of the road about some issue. Carville responded in his best southern drawl, "Son, there ain't nothing in the middle of the road but yellow lines and dead armadillos."

Obama is running on a platform of change. Leaders championing change need to be brave, they need to be bold, and they need to be OK with not being liked. Which is why I question whether any authentic leader championing change can run for a political office. In today's world, a political candidate needs to be liked by the masses and that means plenty of yellow lines and dead armadillos. It rarely means actual change.

Have Baby, Will Read

2008-01-09T07:15:00.000-05:00

I am surprised at the amount of reading that is occurring in the Stefanski household. Between bedtime rituals, play time and nap time, there are number of opportunities to introduce the written word to Miss Willa. It is said that verbal communication (especially reading) will increase IQ as well as advance a child's reading skills and because neither Scott or I are inclined to simply narrate our day, we take as much of an opportunity to read out loud as we can. This month, Willa has read everything from the morning paper to Innovation Nation. Here's a quick run down of my favorites:

First Book of Sushi, a hand me down from one of my board members, and my favorite cardboard book to date. Who would not love:

I"ll take yellowtail hamachi and a red maguro slice.
Big, BIG Futomaki has so many grains of rice.

or...

Ikura, squishy salmon roe like dabby dots of jelly.,
salty on my lips and yummy in my belly!

At bedtime (or what Mom and Dad would hope would be bedtime... without much luck), Scott is continuing the epic adventure of the Mysterious Island. This is a family and Maine tradition. We both were read these Wyath illustrated story books -- inspiring perhaps both a love of reading and a love of Wyath (a family of artists and Maine native). Scott began reading the Mysterious Island while Willa was in utero, leading to the instant recognition of his voice and a very nice calming effect.

Thirteen Moons, by Jonathan Frazier, is his first book since Cold Mountain. Its a great story, but nothing as powerful as Cold Mountain. I think what does set the book apart however is Frazier's love of place -- the Southern Appalachians -- and his ability to narrate its beauty. It actually had me missing the South and longing to pack Willa up for some winter camping. The zero and below temperatures, however, dissuaded me quickly.

The Meaning of Night was a Christmas present from Scott and also a great read. Per the editor's note, it is neither fiction nor non-fiction -- or at least, it can't be proven to be either. It is a confession by way of a manuscript found at Cambridge University, part of a collection bequeathed by a noble family of England in the 19th century. The book starts and ends with murders, and in between details the events leading up to both and explores the incidence of fate and coincidence in our crazy world.

Next on the reading list: Global Books a la Dana, the Paper Bag Princess, more of Mysterious Island, and some Amy Tan.

Any Given Sunday...

2007-12-16T09:59:00.001-05:00

Tellingly, it was with those words that Scott and I wrapped up our evening last Saturday. He was, of course, referring to the improbable possibility that the Steelers would beat our undefeated Patriots in Sunday's game, and not to the possibility of an early arrival of our baby girl. But there you have it, our first lesson learned in parenting --any given Sunday life comes at you fast. In our case, it was Sunday December 9th when Ms. Willa Maclaren (Willa Mac) made her way into the world.

The second lesson we learned during childbirth itself, and this is both relevant to a previous post about our hippie dippie childbirthing preparations, and folks' inquiries about the efficacy of hypnobirthing. The lesson is that you do the best with the tools you have, and no one tool set is going to be a magic bullet for anyone. Or maybe other folks' have that experience. Something tells me no.

Despite our rigorous preparations, Scott and I were open to what would be. We wanted to give natural childbirthing a go -- primiarly so that we had a baby born into the world without drugs in her system, but also because working with your body, eliminating fear and tension, and incorporating deep breathing and relaxation, all seemed like sensible strategies. But if I ended up with an epidural or c-section, that was the way of the world.

In the end, we did have our natural childbirth -- and the hypnobirthing helped. Here's how. Contractions started at 3:45 am, and by 7 am, they were 5 minutes apart. I started listening to birthing day affirmations, eliminating any last fears I had. When I spoke to the doctor at 8, she told me I was the only patient she'd talk to who was giggling during contractions. When we got to the hospital, we were already halfway there in terms of dialation and I was feeling pretty good. The photo should speak for itself.

Ashley, the nurse who worked with us through the delivery, was a hypno Mom herself, and worked with Scott to incorporate her actions (i.e. moving me into new positions) into the hypnosis. The hypnosis kept me calm through the transition into full labor, and the next five hours of pushing. At the very end, when the doctor was telling me I should really consider an epidural or csection soon because I was exhausted, but when I wanted to keep going, the hypnosis and deep breathing allowed me to fall asleep between fairly rapid sets of contractions, giving me the strength I needed to push through the final stages.

There were two challenges -- unrelated to hypnobirthing. Willa was, as they say, "sunny-side up." The back of her head (the hard part) was positioned against my back bone. Normally, the soft (malleable) part of a baby's head is positioned against the back bone which allows them to squeeze on by. Its a different level of effort and discomfort to push the back of a head past the backbone. The second challenge is that my contractions stalled and I could push all I wanted, but without my body pushing as well, she really wouldn't go any where fast and she certainly wouldn't move past a back bone. The one disservice of our classes is that there is some fear of God when it comes to Pitocin -- a drug that will increase your contractions, but is also associated with harder, more painful contractions. I said no to Pitocin upon first offer, but when we really needed help, we said OK. Because of the IV, Ashley was able to begin me on low-level Pitocin and increase it as needed. I felt no ill-effects from the Pitocin at all, in fact, I felt nothing other than an increase in the contractions tht enabled me to push through till the end.

My point here is only that the Pitocin helped ME, didn't hinder me, which might not be true for EVERYONE.

We do the best with the tools we have, but no one tool set will serve everyone the same way and I think that any childbirth or childrearing "method" should start considering itself a guiding framework, rather than a method, to keep participants open to what may be.

That said, I think that we are both committed to using hypnobirtihng in any other Stefanski births.

Triple Crown Winners

2007-10-20T10:54:00.000-04:00

I'm going to riff off one of Dana's recent posts about Triple Crown Winners, especially in light of my recent participation at Pop!Tech and the announcement that Pop!Tech is launching its own Social Innovation Fellows program.

The social enterprise trend is still a pretty nascent phenomena, and at its ethos is the concept of solving root problems with scaleable or sustainable solutions. Ashoka really began this trend by identifying and investing in social entrepreneurs -- individuals with the vision and skills to implement pattern-changing solutions to sticky problems. Originally, Ashoka invested in these early stage social entrepreneurs while they were in the start-up phase of implementation, a little financial and technical assistance could go a long way. Ashoka's theory of change banked on the impact that modelling and celebrating this amazing work could ripple into the community and enable anyone to see themselves as agents of change.

As the social enterpreneur trend began to take off, other organizations began to emerge to fill out gaps in the lifecycle ecoystem. The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship and the Skoll Foundation began investing in social entrepreneurs in the scaling phase, Acumen Fund began investing in social entrepreneurs who used market-based approaches to scale their social change solutions. I know from my work at Ashoka that all three saw their work as complementary. To some extent, Ashoka became a pipeline for other programs which is why, as Dana points out, we began to see many social entrepreneurs wearing different hats of recognition (and this is a good thing).

As these solutions gained in popularity, however, it is my opinion that social innovation award/fellow programs began to emerge as fundraising strategies rather than integral contributions to the ecosystem, and as part of that trend, organizations began to compete for recognition/branding of the individuals they worked with as "their" Fellows -- it became an "either/or" recognition rather than an "and."

Utlimately, I think this is damaging to the ecosystem exhibited in the early days by Ashoka, Acumen, and Skoll -- if we're not careful, I think it can also be an inefficient use of resources. Simultaneously, I believe that more recognition programs are important because they bring with them resources -- and therein is the ultimate need: we need more social entreprenerus with access to more resources. (Interestingly enough, in the private sector the emergence of "more" would be a good thing because it would inspire more innovation and more co-opetition. In the nonprofit sector, donors see more as a bad thing -- too many organizations basically doing the same thing competing for resources... As if Ashoka alone could/should invest in all the emerging social entrepreneurs around the world).

A key component of the ecoysystem, however, is the efficient flow of information. The Tech Museum needs to be able to access and assess the visible social entrepreneurs out there who are using technology to benefit humanity. Pop!Tech and its Project Masilukele needs to know about and be able to access other social entrepreneurs working in Kwa Zulu Natal who can complement their work by bringing enterprise based health distribution mechanisms, e.g. Riders for Health.

GlobalGiving is the perfect platform for this type of information flow (and it would be even better with a reputation system that aggregates and displays how this organization is growing within the greater ecosystem).

Given the ecosystem that is already in place, organizations like Ashoka or Pop!Tech should never feel its their role to own the market on identifying social innovation. They have their own role to play in advancing it.

2007-10-16T16:48:00.000-04:00

Kobashi Maru

Do I out myself as complete geek by referencing the Kobashi Maru in a blog post? Its been coming to mind quite a bit lately -- the way song lyrics stuck in your head are often a reflection of a current thought or struggle.

Motherhood currently exists in my mind as the great unknown. I'm told its life altering, and as such, its impossible to imagine how I will want to live, how I will prioritize choices, and how my perception and my current daily operations will change. And because its impossible to imagine, I'm forced to envision the modern construct of motherhood -- time strapped, re-balanced priorities, professional retardation, missed opportunities. Its not an attractive vision to me.

I was pondering this the other day while reading an article by Elizabeth Debold, when Kobashi Maru popped into my head. I went onto other things but the reference wouldn't go away. It came back to me many times that day, forcing me to finally reflect on its relevance.

Kobashi Maru is a reference to an old Star Trek episode. As a young cadet, Kirk doesn't like the prospect of losing what is predestined to be an unwinnable war game. So he reprograms the computer such that he can win. He changes the framework. He changes the rules.

Why must I consider motherhood as a series of trade offs? Why is it always about reapportioning the pieces of the pie? Why can't it be about expanding the pie? "Because the pie is time," a colleague told me. "You can't create more time."

I'd like to argue that she's wrong. The pie is not time. The pie is energy and identity, which do grow. Should grow. Can create more space for new additions, passions, and joys.

And then, in the abundance of the universe, I happened to come across this meme. "If our interconnected universe is continually expanding," its creator asks, "shouldn't our identity do the same?" It is a silly and short video, looking at the dynamics that "promote and inhibit our expanding sense of self."

It made me think that maybe I'm not such a crack pot ... Or at least there are other crackpots out there who see the potential synergy between motherhood and the Kobashi Maru.

2007-10-01T07:13:00.000-04:00

Despite two of our busier work weeks, Scott and I have managed to enjoy some quality down time with friends from DC and Maine (via DC). It's all part of that master plan to recruit the best of the best to our beautiful state. Plan could backfire as we become the vacation destination for friends and family alike -- but I won't complain. A few highlights include:

Molly, Joe, and their 5 month old son visited last weekend. As is always the case with Molly and Joe, we spent our time cooking and eating. However, we did make the rounds to the Common Ground Fair -- a true celebration of our organic hippie dippie state -- highlighted by my first taste of (organic) apple fritters and the dog trials (we're signing George up next year... how hard could it be?)

Donna arrived on Thursday, spending the day in Augusta with the MWF board, sharing insights on board development, economic security, and women's funds more generally. We spent Friday tooling around Portland -- visiting a few of my favorite destinations (Front Room, the Eastern Prom, Soak, and Walters). We spent the afternoon driving around the country side, trespassing on private private property and agog at the 31 varieties of pumpkins and 21 varieties of gourds that can be found in New Gloucester. We closed the night out at Bar Lola's -- my favorite dinner location where three can over eat local, yummy, seasonal foods for barely a buck (beverages included).

On Sunday, we met up with Megan and Mike and spent the morning apple picking at Ricker Hill Farm in Turner. The orchard is situated on top of a hill overlooking fields of apples, and with a great vantage point to the Western Mountains and the bright foliage that is appearing across the state. The apples were good too -- and have already appeared on the table in the form of homemade apple sauce and apple crisp.

2007-09-21T09:34:00.000-04:00

Hippie Dippie Birthing in Portland

The conversation that started off our foreay into hippie dippie birthing didn't start well. I was just barely a month pregnant and Scott and I were hiking with George. Scott suggested that women in non-western countries give birth all the time and it seems so easy, whereas images of western births are filled with a lot of huffing and puffing, swearing at husbands, purple faces, and screaming -- in short, they are filled with images of pain. I shut the conversation down, suggesting that when he could squeeze a watermelon out of a pea, we would revisit the conversation (not perhaps one of my most giving moments).

But it made me think. I had been practicing some killer yoga and through it I was finding that I could control muscles in my body I thought otherwise uncontrollable -- i.e. making that krinkle between my eyebrows go away. I also knew the power of positions like pigeon and frog to help you breathe through pain. What if one could use relaxation, breathing, and knowledge to work with your body during childbirth rather than allowing fear and tension create pain?

So we reopened the conversation, and found a solution in Hypnobabies -- also called our "hippie dippie" birthing class by our friends Joe & Molly. Hypnobabies relies on a combination of deep relaxation, hypnosis, and re-programming to enable women to work with their bodies during child birth. The antithesis is letting fear and tension work against your natural process, creating pain. Breath and deep breathing is an important element in hynobirthing, and is contrasted against the hyper-ventilating breathing techniques seen in movies. Who could sustain hours of hard exercise while hyperventilating?

Utlimately our goal is an easy childbirth -- but embedded in the hynobabies technique is a natural childbirth -- i.e. no drugs. I'd prefer not to be numb during the process -- I also can't imagne how this could help all that work -- and I also like the benefits of having a child born without drugs (apparently they sleep better and tend to be more 'chill' while awake).

We see a lot of video and footage of hypno-enabled births and its pretty convincing. Women laughing through child birth; women getting up and walking around after having given birth. Women not showing any signs of pain. I have to say, I'd like to be on those women.

We're in our 4th week of classes -- which require three hours of class work over six weeks and daily practice. The practice is having profound side effects which make me happy and make me chuckle. Side effect #1 is a very relaxed Eli. I will go into self-induced hypnosis for at least 30 minutes a day. According to some, this is the equivalent of a three hour nap. The result is that I have a ton of energy, and while I'm into my third trimester (when baby is suppose to be zappy my energy), I'm not sure I've ever felt better in my life. I am walking to work, attending regular pilates, and still putting in long hours at the Fund. I am also sleeping marvelously -- which is unusual. Side effect #2 is a very optimistic Eli. This is a result of the reprogramming -- daily affirmations that I listen to while working to work, cooking dinner, etc. The affirmations reinforce positive thinking -- i.e. I'm healthy, the baby is healthy, and we're going to have a healthy, natural, and easy child birth process. Within a few days of listening to these affirmations, I realized that any anxiety I had had about my pregnancy had disappeared. I also realized that across the board, I was looking at the world in a more positive way.

They say 'where the mind goes, the body will follow.' I'm one to believe that these days, as the proof is in the pudding. Who knows how it will all unfold, but right now, I'm OKAY with having joined the hippie dippie contigency in Portland. My parents will be so proud :)

2007-08-21T07:22:00.000-04:00

I use to have this regular 'stress' dream -- I show up on my wedding day with no dress, no lovely coiffure, and my generally ragged nails. Its not an atypical image for me (especially now as I sport my island girl attitude, with hair that could care less if sees a hair brush any time soon). But early last week that usual dream transferred to one about Baby Stefanski. It's Thanksgiving, and baby is about to arrive. I haven't gone to birthing classes and decide I should just wing it. When baby does pop out, I don't have a car seat, diapers, or clothes. And I haven't put the turkey in and those cherries in the freezers aren't going to make it into my much talked about cherry pie.

So I decide to get on the ball -- signing up for classes, putting together the shopping list, etc. etc, when my much beloved colleague says to me -- you should sign up for infant care. Seems a bit early, but when my doctor asks me later that afternoon if I've chosen a hospital I tell her its on my to-do list along with birthing classes and infant care. Her response: Prioritize infant care above the other two. So yesterday I went about putting my infant-to-be-named-later on infant care waiting lists -- inserting "Projected" before the DOB line item, "TBD" in the child's name category, and "T minus 3 months" in the age bracket. I'm hoping that a sense of humor gets me somewhere (I wasn't able to drop that I'm the ED of the Maine Women's Fund which has thus far managed to get me into closed classes and an awesome apartment without background checks :)

At one highly recommended center, I was told it was unlikely that my infant would ever make it into the infant care but that at least she was on the list for toddler care. In the same breath, she suggested I call St. Elizabeth's and I said great -- do they do infant care? No, said the voice on the other end of the phone, but their toddler program is the best in Portland and if you get on the list now, you should be assured a spot.

I guess I expect this kind of madness out of competitive urban centers, and less from my "laid-back-toss-your-child-into-a-wheel-barrow" Maine. On that front, there was a very funny article in this month's Down East -- City Mom, Country Mom -- written my a Maine transplant to NYC who is raising her kids with this dual identity. She writes:

"Viewed from New York, the land of padded playgrounds and antibacterial gel, Maine can seem like the land of the parentally supervised toddler death wish." Her examples include the laxed response of parents when their toddler is mule kicked by a llama at a forth of July party. "But," she continues "it would be too neatly oppositional to imply that all Maine parents are paragons of laissez-faire childness. My Maine mother's group introduced me to a whole slew of worries I wasn't aware I should be entertaining... None of them vaccinate their kids -- ever [and] autism isn't the root concern. More objectionable is that the government forces everyone to vaccinate their kids."

"In Maine," she concludes, "the seemingly lack of kidnappers and mad cabbies lets parents free their head space to worry about kids' civil liberties..."

I think I'm going to like parenting in Maine.

2007-07-31T07:45:00.000-04:00

The Zeitgeist of the Universe (and the SROI application)

I'll admit -- I was taken with the blog post title "I will blow your mind in 17 minutes." Its hard to ignore, especially when it comes from my collection of major dorky but all favorite social innovation blogs. Beyond wowing my technology mind, and more importantly tingling that hard to touch sense that lies between the cerebral and the spiritual, I found myself obsessing about the technology that surfaces, as I see it, the "zeitgeist of the universe."

For those without the 17 minutes to spare, I'll give you the quick and dirty such that I can connect it to my thoughts on SROI. Humans around the planet are using social media and social networking tools (flickr, youtube, blogs) as a form of self-expression and individual story telling. Jonathan Harris (and I'm assuming some other cool folks) are building software that collects thoughts and images and aggregates them for a variety of purposes).

"We Feel Fine," for example, is a program that searches text in the digital expression universe for the phrase "I feel..." The software collects that full sentence, determines what it can from the demographic of the user (male/female/age...), pinpoints the location of the user (geographic), the time of the post, the WEATHER at the time of the post... etc. You can see the aggregation of this data in a number of different forms -- a "cloud" of feelings rushing through the universe... feelings depicted in weather icons (sun, rain, snow, clouds)... feelings by geographic location. You're able to see what feelings are in abnormally high proportion, e.g. at a given snap shot people were feeling "used" 3.3 times more than any other feeling.

In short, users can tap into the soul and well being of planet earth.

What are the applications of this technology? Well, like the creator, we could transmit it, via binary code and super duper spotlights into the universe. Slightly less spiritually (though Contact is one of my all time favorite books/movies), I think there is somehow a potential application for measuring social return on investment (SROI).

SROI is all too regularly snubbed pie-in-the-sky measurement in my world (i.e. the nonprofit world). There is often the gross generalization made that social investments are not efficient simply because they can't be measured (if a tree falls...) The comparison is obviously the efficiency gained by a bottom line measure in the private sector. Its not that we can't measure outputs and outcomes of nonprofit work; its that (1) most outputs and outcomes vary by sector and program, and (2) outputs and outcomes rarely get at the uber question -- has the life for the beneficiary improved? And the problem in getting at that question is this: there is a power dynamic between funder, grantee, and beneficiary that predisposes us to distrusting any collection mechanism that would collect and aggregate that data.

Now... imagine if quality of life for a group of people could be measured by aggregating individual self expression inputted via social media tools? There are, any number of "practical" reasons this wouldn't work, e.g the targeted beneficiaries are often the most poor without access to digital media tools. However, wouldn't it be fun to ask, a la my favorite strategist, how this could work, rather than state why it won't?

2007-07-25T07:41:00.000-04:00

I'm a rather lame blogger -- as this post is about the YouTube/ CNN debates that took place TWO whole days ago. Things are humming at the Maine Women's Fund and it took me two nights to watch the recorded program (love my dvr....) However, I liked it, so I thought I would share my thoughts.

1. I felt involved. I felt like there had been a paricipatory process in which citizen voices were heard. It made me feel good about the democratic process and it made ME want to participate. This is a slightly huge landslide, as while I consider myself a civic activist, I carry out my activism more often in venues other than the political one, e.g. through my consumerism, blogging, and professional life. So while I didn't post a question, (and in all honestly didn't even know about it until I read the newspaper Monday morning), I felt like I could have been involved.

2. To some extent, it demonstrated that Americans can be something other than a herd of sheep (Scott often says I'm too harsh... whatever could he mean). Rather than taking lip service from the candidates and than being moved out to vote, Americans actually put forth the questions and shaped the conversation (albeit with some intrusion from the CNN production team.) They had to be active, responsible, and take some initiative. Now, I really like that.

3. Though... only 3000 submissions were recorded, which seems like a relative few. Definitely few compared to the YouTube community. Perhaps if I hung out on You Tube a bit more, I might have actually known about it -- but I didn't. Poor marketing? Or intentional (sorting down from 3000 to 39 must have been a tough job...)?

4. Not shocking -- I don't like candidates who skirt around a question, rephrase a question, or ignore it completely. I liked the accountability of specific vloggers in the community who Anderson would occassionally call on with a "did the candidate answer the question?" I like that.

5. I think all the candidates suck when it comes to the gay marriage question. "Senator Obama, not too long ago, interracial marriages were illegal, would you not support gay marriage based on similar discrimination?" (goooooo Anderson!!!!!) "I believe that civil unions provide all of the same benefits as marriage, but we should keep marriage a separate institution between a man and a woman." Is a black candidate SERIOUSLY argueing for separate but equal in a political campaign?

Those are all my rants not specific to individual candidates. Would love to hear others perspectives on the debates.

2007-07-20T08:50:00.000-04:00

A article in the Portland Press Herald caught my attention a few weeks back:

Youth Alternatives and Ingraham, two social services here in Maine, have agreed to merge.

As a nonprofit-innovation-phile, I'm generally interested in nonprofit mergers, since a the sector is growing rapidly and has failed to fully recognize the value of an ecosystem (i.e. most nonprofits will expand their missions to cover new program areas rather than adequately partner with others already providing those same programs). I'm interested because despite the above failure of the nonprofit sector, I'm not convinced mergers are the answers. Here's why.

Firstly, I have yet see true value generated -- either value for the beneficiaries or real value for organizations. Blame it on the Portland Press Herald, but I don't see the increased value in the merger. The two organizations merged under the auspices of reducing operating costs and expanding services. However, both organizations are maintaining their base of operations, combining staff, and maintaining the current scope of programs and services. They will be laying off 4-5 people, but maintaining their combined budget of roughly $4 million. Any money saved by combining operations will be directed into program costs, but with the facts I have -- even if calculating potential unreported redundant costs in administrative and financing -- the "money saved" on an annual basis will most likely be less than 3% of total costs, and certainly less than the legal fees associated with the merger itself.

This could simply be the limited information presented in the press release -- but I recently picked up the Summer edition of the Stanford Social Innovation Review which reviews "the merger proposal," cases for and against nonprofit mergers. I was struck that of the example given to support nonprofit mergers, the primary return on the merger was a 20% increase in assets the first year, which has not grown since. That is, the two organizations increased their combined annual fundraising budget from $2.4 to $2.9 where it has remained the last few years.

Furthermore, I'm intrigued that I've yet to see a case demonstrating how nonprofit mergers improve and expand services for beneficiaries. Perhaps the one value of small nonprofits is the power to touch individual lives. I'm not saying larger organizations can't do this -- but (1) no evidence has ever been made to indicate that they can and can do it better -- which ultimately should be the value proposition of the merger, and (2) our experience with other behemoths is that they can't -- the value of a clinic over a hospital, the intimacy of your personal physician compared to an HMO.

And finally... I doubt mergers solve for what's really gnawing in people's craw. I know in Maine, the philanthropic sector is calling for mergers because the sector is growing faster than many other sectors. It employs 12% of the population and contributes $43,000,000 million to the economy. The government is simultaneously shrinking its support of many direct service organizations and the philanthropies are suddenly being asked to fund (and perhaps being criticized for not funding) direct service and municipal projects (which is apparently beneath their strategic focus).

Across the world, the sector is growing rapidly, and the services (particularly the financial services) supporting the sector isn't growing or innovating. This isn't a new topic at all -- many have been talking and writing about it for almost a decade now. And there are the few innovative folks who are actually doing something about.

But its far too early to either shut down or consolidate this growth. I found it slightly ironic that those arguing for mergers do so under the auspices of increased application of business principles to the nonprofit sector. And those same people are the very people who should understand that the growth brings innovation and that innovation is good. Our problem is not the need to consolidate. Our problem is information and resource flows and the failure of nonprofits to "destruct" in the process of "creative destructive." In the private sector, capital will not flow to the services/products left behind by innovation. People will not buy them and investment firms will not invest in them.

Information and resources do not flow the same way in the nonprofit sector, and this is the problem that needs addressing.

2007-07-19T12:21:00.000-04:00

WYSIWYG Love Fest...

Yeah -- so this isn't really a commentary on WYSIWYG. I was just trying not to use "autheniticity" for the 1 millionth time on this blog. A few interesting posts relevant to authenticity and nonprofits in the blogosphere today.

Katya's blog gives a brief (and slightly unhelpful) introduction to authenticity in nonprofit marketing. On the uptake, it does direct us to Mark posting a Authenticity Carnival on Sea Change Strategies. The carnival actually provides some great example of how to be truly authentic and some good links to other blogs. And Mark also directs us to the May cover story from Fast Company on the challenges and benefits an authentic. All in all good reading for your lunch time festivities.

2007-07-17T13:33:00.000-04:00

Texting 4673. Calling for hope. Calling for Gore.

Dana alerts me that an interview in Fast Company indicates that Al Gore is pretty convinced that he's not even thinking of running for President. I haven't seen the article and immediately txt Scott to see whether or not we've recieved this particular edition. In doing so, I realize that the number for texting Gore -- 4673 -- are the same numbers for texting hope. Sigh. It's a sign, obviously.

"We Need Al Gore."

Great post by James Boyce in the Huffington Post which sums up why I am in the Gore camp and would not only donate and vote, I'd also campaign (which is saying a lot for this non-political-activist.) I've pulled out a few of my favorite points.

"Hell, how about a campaign that isn't run by, for and about Washington and instead have one that is by, for and about the people? Paging Al Gore."

"We also need a Democratic candidate who publicly and loudly called the Iraq War a mistake right from the beginning. We need a candidate who didn't vote without reading the intelligence and is now trying to correct a mistake."

"We need a Democratic candidate who understands how the issue of climate change is impacting our world from a security standpoint, from a poverty and education point, we need someone who can use signing statements for someone other than torture. Al Gore springs to mind."

2007-07-05T10:12:00.000-04:00

A Thousand Splendid Suns

I recently moved to "the Hill" -- the eastern side of the Portland peninsula which provides amazing access to Casco Bay (George has been swimming ever night, and has since learned to swim as well as to fetch and retrieve). Even on its hottest days, which really only max out at 80, there are strong cold sea breezes that waft through my apartment with the overly addictive smell of sea air. It's lovely.

And in this environment, I have finally found my will to read for pleasure again -- starting off with a Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini. This is Hosseini's second book following the much celebrated Kite Runner. A few things struck me which I thought I would share.

His happy endings. I'm not really giving anything away here. Both books really dive into the depths of human suffering -- describing circumstances that kicks the reader in the stomach, and leave you grasping for air. Most of us know only too well that the circumstances aren't fantastical, but a stark reality for so many. But I'm struck that both books don't leave you in a pit of despair -- they bring you back to the surface for air and hope.

Interconnectedness (my favorite theme). Related to his happy endings, its clear to say that its not a happy ending for everyone. Only a chosen few, who's happy conclusion comes at the expense of so many others. Hosseini is subtle about the chosen few's gratefulness and recognition of this, which for me is a celebration of the interconnectedness of people and communities. I loved that.

A women's perspective. Anyone out there read She's Come Undone, by Wally Lamb? I remember myself, and the cadre of regulars at Emerson Book being so surprised that a man could so well know what it is like to be a 13 year old girl. I think I was 13 at the time, which made his cognition seem so miraculous. But others too were struck by it. Hosseini tells his story through two women, and while I don't know if the experience of being an Afghani woman is accurate, he captured dynamics between mothers and daughters, mothers and fathers, friends and wives that are all too familiar for me. I was as impressed by his omniscience as I was by Wally Lamb.

June, 2001. At some point in the book you realize that its June 2001. That September 2001 and the US's invasion of Afghanistan are not far away, and the subtle reference made me want to cry with relief. Shocking -- as I have never considered myself a supporter of the current US foreign policy and its war on terror. But the switch was made in my mind that the US probably did more good than harm in Afghanistan that year. I still, however, don't think the same is true for Iraq.

2007-06-21T09:35:00.000-04:00

Language, Law, and the End of the World as We Know It

My friends and family know that I do take pride in being a collegiate cross-ex debater. Mostly, I take pride in being good at it, though I had begun to detest the state of cross-ex debate by the time I left it. It thrived on spewing, the act of speaking your case or your rebuttal so quickly that it would be difficult for your opponents to pick up on each point -- and if they drop a point, you win. It also thrived of language -- using very strict definitions to prove that a case/rebuttal was relevant (or topical) based on the words used. Finally, it thrived on nuclear war. The goal of any team would be to prove to the judge that it would be the end of the world as we know it if the judge accepts your opponents case. Nuclear war is the easiest way to end the world, so any debater can link nuclear war from pudding pops (my favorite case) to pesticides. Towards the end, my partner and I ended up running a winning critique against our opponents that basically said that promoting the use of nuclear war as the fall out option would itself result in nuclear war.

We built most of course case off prejudicial cases (primarily sexual harassment) that demonstrated how use of words like "babe," "chick," "honey" in professional settings lent itself to women being taken less seriously as professionals. Eliminating the words, and defining them as harassment, elevated the standing of women. Similarly, we argued, eliminating people's propensity to use nuclear war as the go-to option elevated its legitimacy as a solution and anyone or any case that did so was itself propagating nuclear war.

A Nebraska judge recently used similar logic to ban "rape," "sexual assault," "sexual assault kit," "assailant," and "victim" during a rape case. According to Judget Cheavront, those words are prejudicial and emotional -- they assume guilt and set the jury up to assume guilt as well. He mandated that the act in question be referred to as "sex." This too is problematic, and perhaps as prejudicial, because most people define and understand sex as CONSENSUAL between two people.

Is the judge creating a level playing field? Or is he casting aspersions and preventing a case to be made? (One other tid bit is that the jury members, use to hearing the banned words, were not told that the words were indeed banned). Is the judge charged with ensuring that the rules of debate are adhered to in a court of law or is it his charge ensure that a debate is as 'fact' driven as possible?

2007-05-24T09:38:00.000-04:00

A little more Gore Hugging...

Maybe its because I'm seeing the world through a authenticity lens -- but I'm loving the blogosphere's reaction to Gore's new book, The Assault on Reason. An inspiring perspective from someone who saw him read last night.

2007-05-23T08:14:00.000-04:00

Fierce Conversations and Authenticity

Recently, I had a love at first sight experience -- Arianna Huffington. I was listening to her keynote the Women's Funding Network closing luncheon.

(A bit of a declaimer is that while I have been a Washingonian for the past several years, I have stayed out of the political news. It didn't seems worth paying attention to. As a result, I probably would have told you that Huffington was still a Republican, and I could never have told you about the Huffington Post -- of which I'm now a daily reader.)

Huffington was a very good speaker -- but what made me fall in love was her emphasis on authenticity. Asked, in an all women, pro-women forum, what she thought of Hillary Clinton - she replied, not much. "She lack's authenticity. She's unwilling to take responsibility for the decisions she's made and the votes she's taken." While most politicians lack authenticity (as an aside, I do find that Gore to be authentic and I am bummed that he's not running again soley based on that) -- trying to be all things to all people, they aren't true to themselves -- I appreciated Huffington's authenticity. In no way did she try to placate the audience.

Most people who know me know that I love the blogosphere because it feels like an authenticate place to me. A place where marketing and sound bytes don't belong -- though shameless self-promotion is allowed. A place for fierce conversations.

A fierce conversation is one in which we come out from behind ourselves into the conversation and make it real. Fierce means identifying those conversations out there with your name on them and resolving to have them with all the courage, grace, and vulnerability they require. In fierce conversations, there is neither a struggle for approval nor an attempt to persuade. There is, instead, an interchange of ideas and sentiments, during which you pay attention to and disclose your inner thoughts while actively inviting others to do the same. During fierce conversations, people don't cling to their positions as the undeniable truth. Instead, they consider their views as hypothesis to be explored and tested against others. -- Susan Scott, Fierce Conversations.

I think life requires fierce conversations -- and the concept is so important to me now as my life continues to be in a constant state of churn, transition, change, and wonder. Leadership requires fierce conversations -- knowing you don't always know the answer, being flexible in your perspectives and passions, but most importantly, stepping up to be present in the conversation.

2007-05-19T17:33:00.000-04:00

Stewardship vs. Civic Leadership

Serving as an Executive Director is a huge learning opportunity for me -- daily my assuptions, perceptions, and positions are challenged. For example...

Many nonprofits are public entities -- mine is at least. We are public foundation that receives the majority of its resources from individuals. I view the organization and its board of directors to be the stewards of the organization and the public's resources. I think it goes without saying that the board would probably also agree with me.

Board members are lured onto the board through a sense of civic responsibility and leadership. They have personal callings, world views, which they must realize and they join boards as an outlet. Or at least, when an individual feels passionately about an issue, joining a board of an organization with shared values and passions is one way make dreams into a reality.

So when it comes to making important decision for the board, how far can an individual's personal passions affect their decision making? What's the point of joining a board if you can't realize your personal passions? And rarely does an organization recruit a board member who's values aren't aligned with the organization, so should not the organization trust that the board member, making decisions based on their own values, will also make decisions that are in the best interest of the organization?

2007-05-17T13:24:00.000-04:00

Funny, and of course, pointed commentary by Tony Newman in the Huffington Post -- equating random drug testing in schools with random virginity testing. It falls into the category of "common sense" can go a long long way.

It also gives me the occassion for a little prideful MWF promotion. We (the Maine Women's Fund) recently funded Real Life, Real Talk -- an national initiative of planned parenthood promoting hard but good conversations about sex. Shockingly its an initiative that even pro-abstinence camps are getting behind. The Real Life Real Talk commercial are airing in national prime time media and if you haven't seen one, here's a click from You Tube.

We funded a project specifically designed to use community based theatre to get families talking about sex. Our team, along with a team of volunteers, captured the collaboration through a cool video. Check it out!

2007-04-11T16:34:00.000-04:00

I love stories about the interconnectedness of our world. This one, from my favorite farm writer Jon Katz, is about the interconnected of people, donkeys, and dogs. It a good for an afternoon laugh.

2007-02-27T07:45:00.000-05:00

Mari forwarded this Slate article by Jonathon Katz because, like most of you, she knows I have an affinity for raising chickens. I liked this line:

" Some things simply can't be accounted for by human perception. Often, the best part of living on a farm is the mystery."

It's akin to local story. Jenny the Donkey. Jenny was chasing off vermin on a farm when she escaped and has been at large for, oh, about 6 weeks now. Jenny's orneriness has been contributed to, well, being a donkey. When the local rags picked up the story it appears the mystery is beyond human perception. Jenny seems to be searching for her mate -- Isabella who is living in New Hampshire.

A lover's reunion is scheduled for the near future.

2007-02-23T06:26:00.000-05:00

More on Choice and Nature vs. Nurture

The issue of men at MWF is a hot button. Invite men to the board? Invest in men and boys through grantmaking?

I know it is a hot button because most people I meet make sure I know their opinions, which inevitably fall into one of four camps.

1. Give women and girls the opportunity to define their fund "first" before we invite men to contribute. In a combined situation, women will defer to men, losing the empowerment that the institution stands for.

- or -

We need a level playing field first, so invest in women and girls primarily.

2. Live the equality and diverity value that we preach.

- or -

Let us not create a false environment where women and girls succeed on thier own; then expect them to succeed in a environment that they have no experience negotiating.

My personal opinion (and though being the ED, my personal opinion does not necessarily represent the opinion of the organization) is the latter. If we believe in feminism, we must believe that women have the natural ability to compete in an environment with men and that we must give them the ability to choose whether or not to do that. We can not make that decision for them.

That is not to say that we're not battling societal norms and cultural baggage along the way and that some nurturing is required.

2007-02-16T07:37:00.000-05:00

Interesting piece by Slate about transparency in the philanthropic world.

Transparency and accountability are a big deal in the philanthropic/nonprofit world of late. Which drives me nuts because its just another buzz word for folks initiated by Sarbanes/Oxley. I love it when foundations and nonprofits figure out what it is they want to hold themselves accountable for and deliver on that promise... rather than talking about 'accountability' and 'transparency' in a vaccuum. So articles like these make me happy.

2007-02-13T06:59:00.000-05:00

Choice

This is a bit embarassing to admit for the Executive Director of a women's fund -- but lately, I've been having some revelations about what it means to be 'pro-choice' and realize that my definition has always been severely limited. I assumed that the term referred only to reproductive health -- and to that end, I always felt that the pro-choicers got the short end of the stick when it came to categorization. Pro-choicers are obviously in favor of life and believe that the ability to choose is part of a self-determined life. And I do believe that name positioning is important -- there is a huge difference between 'global warming' and 'climate change' -- the latter not paralyzing people in fear...

But choice goes far beyond reproductive health. Choice is about not making a women's decision for her and proactively giving her the opportunity to be self-determined, believing that when a woman makes decisions in her own self-interest, her community and family will be better off. And there are many applications of this. Most recently this came to light in the fundraising world -- when a board member and I were trying to decide how much to ask (financially) of a potential donor. She was more inclined to ask for a lower amount given that the donor gives so much to the movement in addition to financial dollars. I was more inclined to ask for more becauseI I believe that the if she can't give at that level, she'll tell me so and give me what she can. The concepts of choice offered a third rationale -- its not our job to predefine a giving bracket for her -- in doing so, we never give her the choice to be a major donor. We are telling her its 'out of grasp.'

The same could be applied to many areas -- the level of transparency we use with employees when talking about staff development, providing clear and understandable health information to let parents choose whether or not vaccine are right for their children, etc. etc.

2007-02-09T18:49:00.000-05:00

Superman was Superman first. He had to be Clark Kent to pay the bills. Not vice versa.

Why then do we think of our secret identities as our alter egos rather than owning our secret identities as our core identity?

Having an alter ego is about owning a secret passion -- a passion so deep that we long for its actualization in our daily lives. My alter ego is Eli The Chef. In a more perfect world, I would have invested my creativity in a culinary institute. But we don't live in a more perfect world and so I came online as EliTheChef about the same time Mari and I started having deep debates about identity and I started struggling for a sense of place.
Seven months later, I no longer feel that EliTheChef is an alter ego. I'm living the dichotomy in my virtual world. Mari's right. In a virtual world, I can be Elithechef, Eli the Global Foodie, and Eli the Executive Director of the Maine Women's Fund. Not one is more core than the other.

Any one else going the route of virtual schitzophrenia?

2007-02-07T08:08:00.000-05:00

I'm officially a tri-blogger. It's funny how quickly it happened. I had agreed with Mari that managing multiple blogs was a scary/time consuming prospect and hadn't intended to be working on 3 blogs at once (as well as religiously following a host of others). But today the Maine Women's Fund launched E-quality Matters to bring our offline conversations about the future of the fund online. I've said it before and I will say it again. Maine is a big state. My hope is that a blog can help bring ideas, challenges, persepctives, and beliefs together in one place. This would be a huge coup for Fund that is hoping to become a 'statewide' fund.

2007-01-25T22:46:00.000-05:00

A little video montage (and great music!) from the Maine Women's Fund. I work with such creative folks. Enjoy!

Make video montages at onetruemedia.com

2007-01-24T06:36:00.000-05:00

Whose job is it anyway?

I've been participating in a conversation at SSIR that begs the question -- who's responsibility is it to pay for social services? I've been dancing around this question for the last few years from my professional life to online conversations.

Last week I met with a leader in the homeless community -- who is dealing with the issue of homeless in Maine through the housing first model. This model was introduced to pop culture by Malcolm Gladwell, in his New Yorker article Million Dollar Murray. Interestingly enough the vast majority of people at a homeless shelter on a given night will only spend that one night at a shelter -- despite the fact that there are so many of them, they are not a costly group to serve. The major costs of homelessness are borne by 10% of the homeless population that are 'chronically homeless' -- they suffer from mental diseases, substance abuse, and a host of other health issues. They are expensive to treat because once a month they will end up in emergency care for hypothermia, cirrhosis, broken bones, etc. Emergency care is a very expensive way to care for these folks. Malcolm's Million Dollar Murray is one man who cost the city of Las Vegas over $1 million because of this care.

The Homeless first model prescribes dealing with these people on the front end to reduce the high end cost of dealing with them on the back end. A model has been established in Portland and seems to be working fairly well (an economic analysis is underway to determine if any efficiencies were really gained). A new model home is being developed to support the chronically female homeless who in addition to all the other problems are more vulnerable to violence and sexual assault.

Once this home is set up, it will take a $1 million/year to service the home. This is an economic burden for a nonprofit. Should the government pay the cost because the government would have paid the more expensive costs on the back end?

2007-01-22T15:41:00.000-05:00

Today launches birthday week for ElitheChef. My funny fabulous friends here at the Maine Women's Fund were quick to catch on (to my not so subtle hints that I love to celebrate January 28th), and put together my birthday montage. Check it out, they have a sense of humor and know how to use it.

Happy Birthday Eli

PS -- The weather forecast called for sunshine today and, go figure, its been snowing since noon!

2007-01-18T17:01:00.000-05:00

Only in Maine... I feel bad for the guy -- but the headline sparked a case of the giggles anyway. One other landmark transition event -- the temperature this morning was a high of 7 degrees, and with complete disregard for my DC clothes attitude of dress to impress, I layered on the long underwear beneath cold weather gear :)

Worm digger rescued after foot freezes in muck

3:41 PMWESTPORT ISLAND - Rescue crews had to battle the cold on Wednesday to save a man along the banks of Westport Island.

They said the man, a worm digger, became stuck when his boot filled with water then froze.

The man's co-workers called for help, and Westport volunteer firefighters responded. They said that when they arrived, the unidentified man was showing signs of hypothermia.

Volunteer firefighter Rusty Robertson said, "He was shivering uncontrollably, but he was answering questions appropriately. So he had his faculties, but he was definitely showing signs of being out in the weather."

The man was taken to Maine Medical Center in Portland. There is no word on his condition, but firefighters said they didn't believe he will lose his foot.

Reader comments

Josh of Carrabassett Valley, ME
Jan 18, 2007 3:14 PM
Nice Headline...

2007-01-09T19:10:00.000-05:00

Today, I attended a panel discussion, at which the five largest foundations in Maine discussed growing philanthropic trends. I expected the conversation to focus on new philanthropic tools and mechanisms, growth rates, geographic representation, etc. Instead, the conversation was targeted at the recipients of philanthropic funds and ultimately their disfunction:

- There are too many nonprofits.
- They do not collaborate enough.
- They reinvent the wheel.
- The need to improve accountabiity and transparency.
- They need to stop head counting and start measuring actual change.

These are not unfamiliar points. I recognize them, and I even own having contributed to this conversation at some point in my life. But as I listened to the conversation, I felt uncomfortable with the tone -- nonprofits are the source of the innovation that we invest in. It is their passion and drive that constantly mend the tears of our social fabric. Yes, their proposals are the stuff of our files and email jams, but they are not the source of our problems.

As to there being too many of them. It does make life complicated for the consumer, i.e. the donor who sorts through message after message to find the one or two worthy of a donation. But in the end, isn't this quantity good for innovation, competition, volunteerism, and all the other stuff that social capital is made of?

2007-01-07T14:56:00.000-05:00

Super Dog, alias George, is settling in just fine to her new digs. Perhaps in part to beginning to dress like a Mainer. George's new attire includes:

Wonder Boots. Obviously a wardrobe essential for any web footed female. The ice and snow builds up quickly, making my partner a snoe shoeing obstacle as she stops mid-trail to knaw out the painful crustations.

Blaze Orange Reflective Super Cape. Capable of warding off hunters and speeding cars alike.

Side kick. Bullwinkle the Moose, courtesty of DCisME, stands watch as Super Dog naps. and naps. and naps some more.

John Updike wrote that "people who live in Maine need things like Pasta Makers." The quote went through my mind when I bought the wonder boots and the cape. Perhaps he was making light of the banality of yuppie life (which most Mainer's don't live). I don't think people in Maine desire or need things like pasta makers the way they desire or need things like long underwear. A good hat. Gortex boots. And the same goes for my dog.

2007-01-07T14:48:00.000-05:00

a foodie's hell

I did indeed return to Natasha's for lunch the following day. Had a great half sandwich/soup bowl. Returned home and finished up some deli salads and the Caribbean soup.

Then died.

6 hours in food poisening hell. And too all those who know me, I will admit that perhaps my immune system is a bit weakened by the ladened stress lately. However, it was food poisening indeed.

4 days later and I can sip gingerale and nibble on crackers.

A foodie's hell is not bad restaurants, it is having no interest in food at all.

a foodie's paradise

2007-01-03T10:18:00.001-05:00

A moment now, to put all this world changing stuff aside, and focus on another true delight of Maine: The Food.

This morning I finished off the blueberry buckwheat pancakes that Scott and I had gorged on all weekend. At the health food store (no, not Whole Food, my friends, this former addict hasn’t stepped foot in a Whole Foods since leaving the District… the run of the mill Hannafords and Royal River Health Food is serving me just fine), I was amazed to find straight from the patch frozen blueberries that, despite any formal packaging, I bought and tested anyway. Um umm good. I still can’t believe that I had never really liked blueberries until I tasted Megan’s Mom’s Maine blueberry pie… blueberries don’t get better than those from Maine as I’m beginning to realize that the ½ inch diameter blueberries from Whole Foods are nuclear-waste scary, not intriguing.

This afternoon I lunched at Natasha’s – Portland owned and operated by none other than… Natasha! Natasha herself was running around the comfy farm/chic restaurant in a black Asian tunic which she made herself ‘for comfort.’ Natasha also owns Mim’s – a little bistro in old Port which makes a fabulous Haddock Chowder (I’ve begun to realize that chowders (chowda-z) are everywhere and I need not order it every time I see it on the menu.) My favorite thing about both menus is this. There are 3-4 soups on the lunch menu – each creative and yummy. Roasted tomato with feta crème fraiche and chives. Clam chowder with fennel, bacon, and potatoes. Butternut squash with apple chunks. And.. there are 3-4 salad selections. Roasted pumpkin with duck prociutto on a bed of greens. Pot sticker salad with sesame, oranges, and greens. For $9, you can get a bowl of any of the soups and half of any of the salads. That’s the best part. Today, however, because I’ve got another lunch meeting at Natasha’s tomorrow, I went with the fish tacos. Another thing I love about Maine. I LOVE FISH TACOS. They are all over the west coast and I’ve had them even in the eBay cafeteria. They are equally represented in Portland and I’ve had them more times since moving here than all my West coast trips. Today’s selection were wrapped in thin crispy flat bread, with apple slaw, wasabi cream, and roasted habanera salsa. Oh dear heaven… so good!

And last but not least my random fine this evening. Days start early in Maine (to the extent that I’ve had a lunch meeting start as early as 11:45… back in the District, Dana would still be on her second breakfast at that time). Usually they end earlier too and I head home to Super Dog. Only this evening, a meeting ran late and I was hustling to get out of the office at 6:30 to make it home. With no food in the house, I swung by a take out place on my way home and found the crème de la crème of soups. Caribbean chicken and sweet potato. The broth was somehow addictive in its spicyness. The chicken was tender and soft. The tomatoes were chunky. I think it is the best soup I have ever had (a hard second to that French Onion soup I had at TGIF– unknowingly sick with Pneumonia and having spent the day outside to watch Clinton’s bitter cold inauguration – that soup tasted damn good.)

Finding something this good random locations is what defines a foodie’s paradise.

2006-12-22T15:01:00.000-05:00

Oh Dear God, sometimes Blogger is the most irritating tool!

But enough about blogger... onto KMart's pro-violence against women t-shirts.

A few good places to read about it...

K Stands for Kreepy at Walley Whateley's blog...

Femineste

The Kennebunc Journal

And a best yet --

Hardy Girls Healthy Women

Hardy Girls, who has joined forced with Boys to Men, is asking KMart to take responsibility and pull the t-shirts from the shelves. Visit their web site and learn how you can help.

A few folks out there think that the brood of women who are pissed about the shirts should get a sense of humor. And then there are those of who have to deal with 50% of homocide cases being victims of domestic violence and don't think we need to chuckle.

Get involved at Hardy Girls. This isn't just a Maine issue.

2006-12-15T16:20:00.000-05:00

Okay, okay, I wax my eyebrows...

Because otherwise, they would take over my face -- and I'll be honest with you, when they are neat and trimmed I do feel more confident. I have to get them waxed every 3-4 weeks, and I pluck incessantly in between to keep that look.

Why do I think you care?

Because I think its part of the conversation about what it means to be a feminist.

I've long thought that it was my father who was the ultimate feminist in the family. This might be shocking, given it was my mother who took me to my first pro-choice rally when I was 9 (and to her credit, she did a brilliant job explaining the posters depicting clothing hangers).

But in addition to being a feminist, my father is also a naturalist -- the thicker the leg hair the better -- and I think I've long thought the two concepts synonymous.

I also believe that I'm not alone in that thinking. A feminist would be comfortable in her own skin. A feminist would never pluck. A feminist would never shave. A feminist would be comfortable with her grays. I never really thought there was more to the definition, and it never occurred to me to even attempt to tease more out of the conversation.

But that is exactly where I find myself today. Last week, I moved to Maine to join the Maine Women's Fund as its new Executive Director. I've long admired and funded the broader women's' funding movement -- as it fits with my own theory of change -- that individuals need to take responsibility for themselves and their communities thoughtfully and strategically. Women bring their own unique perspective, decision making process, and priorities to social change; and they are known for investing in themselves, their families, their communities, and their businesses when given the resources to do so. Supporters of the women's funding movement believe that investing in women's fund provide the widest possible leverage, or ripple effect, per dollar.

To provide strategic thinking, perspective, and leadership to this movement, and to do so in Maine, proved to be an unparalleled opportunity. I've also joined the Fund at an opportune time. We've got a sound track record behind us -- $1.4 million invested in over 250 grassroots organizations across Maine. We've got a broad base of citizen, corporate, and partner support helping us change the behaviors and policies that affect women and girls. Most excitingly, the projects we've supported have been designed by the women and girls themselves.

That is not say that we still don't have major challenges ahead of us:

Women in Maine are far from financially secure. The work place is increasingly unable to cover a share of the increasing costs of health care, leaving women increasingly vulnerable. Women still earn $.73 for each dollar earned by men. Over 70% of families living below the poverty line in Maine are headed by women. 50% of homicides in Maine are cases of domestic violence. Girls are trapped realizing the limitations of poverty rather than empowered to envision the impossible -- college, professional training, and beyond.

With these barriers surrounding the women and girls of Maine, they can not be active participants in the development of their communities, and that ripple effect of social change is never even activated.

So here I am -- excited and ready to start that activation. And I think that happens by realizing the feminist within to broaden the base of support required to change behaviors, and transmit the change we want to see and the nurture. But we can't do that if most people feel excluded by 'feminism' (which btw, i've often heard referred to as the 'f-word.')

So my dear community, help me in this process. Tell me what feminism means to you and whether or not you feel part of this tribe.

2006-12-06T12:38:00.000-05:00

Help! I'm Locked out of Lux 1500!

For control-focused individuals (freaks is such a nasty word) change can indeed be traumatic. Especially a change as drastic as a new home, new job, and new state in 3 days. There are new patterns to set; new routines to formulate. When it is all new, everything takes more time. And when it doesn’t come easily… well, one can feel like a bit of a dolt.

Take for instance my lighting problem. Scott, George, and I managed to find and rent a house on Saturday -- a cozy little place in Yarmouth with a working fireplace and enough space to handle our many boxes of books. We moved in Sunday afternoon and managed to get to the grocery store before it got dark (which happens early up north). About that time, we realized (a) there is no overhead lightening in the house, and (b) we didn’t pack any lamps. We lighted up the fireplace and lit the many candles and settled in for a romantic evening. It wasn’t so romantic, come Monday, with just George and I. Yet, with new responsibilities and a new town, I’ve yet to find time to go buy lamps (or a shower curtain for that matter). However, I did manage to find some AA batteries and pull my headlamp out of my camping gear – enough light to suit me just fine until the weekend.

My story about the Lux 1500 started out about the same way. The Lux 1500 is one of these fancy dancy thermostat regulators that will automatically turn the heat up at 6 am when you’re waking up, turn it down around 8 am when you leave the house, turn it back up around 7 pm when you get back, so on and so forth. Very eco-friendly. Love it.

Only, on Monday night I managed to “lock” the Lux 1500; the result was that I was unable to increase/decrease the temperature in the house. Lucky for me, it was stuck at 50 degrees, rather than 30 or a 100. However, when it’s down in the single digits here in Maine, 50 degrees still stinks. I spent much of Tuesday emailing back and forth with my landlord – trying to determine what I had done, whether or not it was actually broken, and how to fix it. By that evening, I didn’t have a solution. George was bit pissy as time went by and the house didn’t heat up, nipping at me as if to say: “I bet there is heat in DC” and “what have you done to us!” Megan brought dinner over the house and we realized things were getting bad when we could see our breath as we huddled over our pasta.

When Scott called later that night, he had the good sense to know that if he told me stand in front of the thermostat and do what I had already done, I might scream. However, he did offer to google the thermostat name and brand – which is how we discovered that enough people had locked themselves out of their Lux 1500 that “Help! I'm locked out of Lux 1500!” actually registers as the 2nd most relevant topic under the brand.

God bless Google.

So, while I’m making my way in this strange land, it is nice to know that my ineptitude isn’t always ineptitude. Sometimes only google can save you.

2006-11-30T11:24:00.000-05:00

The Things I Carry

A neighboring highschool had this tradition -- departing seniors wrote essays, describing the things they carry with them as they leave school; the things gleaned from that phase in their lives that shape them as human beings. Its an allusion to the great book/essay from Tim O'Brien. I was thinking about that today. I have less than a few hours left in my official capacity at GlobalGiving. What do I carry?

Love and admiration for the most amazing brilliant crazy stimulating fun people anyone can be blessed to call friends and colleagues.

Confidence in world-changing product that I and those amazing colleauges of mine have been building. There is still much to do, but we should take stock of what has already been done and the social change we have enabled.

A taste of what it means to unleash people's potential to maximize innovation and deliver results.

It sounds so mundane, but GlobalGiving and its people are very very special.

My wish to all of you is that you continue to be so.

I look forward to my new role in the GlobalGiving Community, that of a project leader.

So no goodbye quite yet. Just a ciao, for now.

Ears of empathy?

2006-11-19T09:57:00.000-05:00

A few weeks back, I went on a serious rant about abusing public resources in the name of learning. The sting still burns, and I've been trying to put my finger on why. A few things are coming together together:

Social change is truly inefficient if each participant in the process must "live" the experience before they "get it." That is to say, we are lost if we can not be empathetic enough to participate in the change process until we've experienced the worst of the human condition individually. It is hard for me to believe that in today's global society, burgeoning with digital media tools, that a direct experience is the only way to establish empathy. I realize that the following are not mainstream -- but, if we're truly listening -- shouldn't they do the trick?

Global Voices -- bringing voices the south into mainstream journalism

KarmaTube -- Inspiring the world one video at a time (in beta)

Rhythmic Uprising -- using podcasts to report on social change in Brazil

These are just a few that move me.

I guess these only work if we are listening, so I question if we are. I have often been at mutli-cultural events, where the diversity of the room is heralded, but the dialogue remains polite and restrained. I wonder if the diversity sentiment itself lacks integrity, e.g. we get excited about diversity, but never really open ourselves up to listen to the diverse perspectives that would lend itself to empathy. Helen LaKelley Hunt writes:

"What is it like to be a welfare mom? A lesbian wanting to raise a child? An incarcerated mother? A woman of wealth struggling with guilt? A man doing the best he can to keep his family together, who is accused of being domineering? In our efforts to prescribe solutions for world problems, do we take the time to ask questions like these and then to quietly listen to the answers?"

Yasmina questioned whether I would be equally mifffed if Keely had been an investigative journalist. Had she been EXPOSING a problem, I would certainly be in a different position. However, the problems with the welfare system have been exposed -- google "problems with welfare" and you'll get the immensity of this exposure. Keely had the opportunity to discuss life with a few welfare recipients. Did she not believe their stories? Or was she not listening?

2006-11-16T09:52:00.000-05:00

Yasmina Zaidman in the NY Times

Good article in the Times about Acumen Fund and its approach to social change through investments.

My good friend adds some depth to the article as well:

"But often local entrepreneurs do feel tension between business and philanthropy, said Yasmina Zaidman, who manages water projects for Acumen. They are caught because nonprofits tell them to “stop making money off the poor” while business executives say, “If you want to make money, get serious, stop messing around in the rural areas,” Ms. Zaidman added. “They haven’t been supported or acknowledged.”

This is a critical issue in our social entreprise community (and I think the spokesperson is pretty brilliant too).

2006-11-12T12:55:00.000-05:00

Elect the "Un-Woman"

Today in the Washington Post, Benjamin Wallace-Wells asks: Is America to racist for Barack? Too Sexist for Hillary? He lays out a series of provacative questions:

Is one characteristic -- race or gender -- more socially crippling than the other?

Is electing its first female president not pioneering enough for America? Worldwide, there have already been 35 female world leaders... (if only there was a formatting technqiue to underscore sarcasm...)

Because Barak is post-racial, does he have the advantage?

huh?

Here, he argues that Barak's "exotic background" makes him a "new kind of human," one that does not carry the political baggage, moral authority, and experience of that defining era in US history known has the civil rights movement. And that this might make Americans more comfortable with a black candidate.

There is also 'post-gender' candidates, but Hillary doesn't fit the bill. Being a woman is indeed part of her identity as a politician -- a decision she has consciously made. Additionally, the public's eye is clouded with images of Hillary the Wounded Wife, Hillary the First Lady, Hillary the Lesbian, Hillary the Bra-Burning Feminist. Oh, and Hillary the Senator who has saved her state's bases, reclaimed jobs, and got immediate compensation for the famililies of 9/11 victims.

If being a post-gender candidate is the way to take the White House, and Hillary is too much woman for us, thats OK (again, where is my sarcasm formatting tool???), because:

"Fredrick Harris, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, sees a post-gender future out there, and its name is Condoleeza Rice. The secretary of state he notes, 'is unmarried, has no children, is completely dedicated to her job, for pleasure she plays the piano and works and that is about it'."

Condoleeza has definitely not made being a woman part of her political identity. She is Bush's right hand man and stands for nothing other than his agenda.

For those of us advocating for a women in the White House, do we care (politics aside) if its the "female president," or the "post-gender" president good enough?

If the latter is good enough, perhaps we're just advocating for the sake of precident. That is, we need a female president in order to get America past that proof of concept phase, i.e. the national realization that a female president won't blow up the country with a bad case of PMS.

The other side of the argument is that a woman in power will inherently bring different good outcomes. Female leadership is critical because it brings with it a female framework to problem solving and resolving differences, human and economic development, and national protection.

Case in point: When Muhammed Yunus created the Grameen Bank making small loans to woman, his goal was not to create more women owned businesses for the sake of equality. He gave the loans to women because revenue generating women are likely to (1) use profits to shelter, feed, and educate their children (ending cycles of poverty), and (2) reinvest in the business. Men would be more likely to (1) default on their loans, and (2) spend profits on hooch. The decision was a strategic one for leveraging the most social benefits from the investments. Thats not to say that microloans aren't available to men, they are indeed. However, the vast majority are still aimed at engaging women.

The women's funding movement shares a similar philosophy -- that providing resources and opportunity to women is a strategic approach for realizing the best outcomes for communities and individual families.

The logic then is that giving a woman the power and voice of the presidency should be also be a strategic approach. My problem then is with the focus on the "post-gender" candidate -- that candidate who, like the "post-racial" candidate holds none of the perspective and sensitivity that might contribute to great leadership.

Thoughts?

2006-11-09T11:23:00.000-05:00

My Interconnected World

My world view is one based on the interconnectedness of people and issues. The interconnectedness of issues was understood at a young age when my parents brought Jacob, a young African man from apartheid South Africa to live with us. I knew nothing of apartheid at that time, but I knew I loved Jacob -- he was a talented dancer who would spend the evenings after dinner teaching my sister and I the art of Soweto dance. One night, there was news coverage of an anti-apartheid riot in Soweto and I saw coffins the size of children. I understood immediately that Jacob would return to Soweto and that his fate could be like that of those dead children. My world immediately got smaller and I understood that the personal is political.

The interconnectedness of people I only absorbed later, and surprisingly it came from activism in my church. Surprising now only because Scott and I are not active in any church. We've intended to be once we settled down in a community; years have passed and we haven't felt settled, so we remain outside of the religious communities. But in high school, I served on the Board of Christian Education, I taught Sunday School, I was a member of the Youth Council for the state of Connecticut, and I was an active member of the youth group that pioneered service trips to such 'remote' locations as West Virginia and Kentucky.

It was through my work on the Youth Council that I also grabbed the opportunity to work in an orphanage in Puerto Rico when I was 16. During one Sunday service, about a month before I left for Puerto Rico, our Minister called me to the pulpit and announced to the congregation what I was doing. It was embarrassing, of course, though not because I was 16 and in front of the congregation; it was embarrassing because I didn't want the service work to be 'called out' as anything special. But the congregation was impressed and showed its support through an outpouring of checks to offset the travel costs, travel wisdom for a girl who had not been out of the continental US, and their overall love and support.

I'm not sure I can adequately express how I processed that love and support, other than to say that suddenly faith and religion felt very tangible to me. I could feel the spirit of the congregation around me, supporting me, and I believed in it as something that gave strength and faith. I understood the interconnectedness of people as profound.

I've continued to realize that interconnectedness in my professional life which gives new meaning and rewards everyday. I haven't dwelled on its religious context until recently. I am reading Helen LaKelly Hunt's Faith and Feminism: A Holy Alliance. Helen is trying to mend the rift between secular and non-secular feminism. The book illustrates how feminists throughout history have used their faith to realize their feminist agenda, rather than feeling ostracized from it. (It is a good read for those interested).

In the Letter to the Reader, Helen lays out her core message:

"We are meant to live in unity. We are meant to be interdependent. We are meant to be responsible for each other."

I think reading those words took my breath away. Helen had so acutely captured my own belief system. A little known fact is that I have toyed this year with pursuing an advanced degree in theology. It felt intuitively right, but as a nonchurch goer, it felt hard to justify or explain. What was I searching for in theology? What did I feel I could offer in public service? With no answers, my interest wained on the back burner. Reading Helen's words, I was thrilled and my interest in faith and spiritualism was rekindled.

At a far deeper personal level, those words took on new meaning this week. Scott and I have been nurturing another little secret. While embracing the excitement of new jobs and a move back to New England, we also discovered we were going to have a baby. It was overwhelming at first, but with a little time, we fully embraced the expansion of the Stefanski clan. At two months and with a little trepidation, we began telling family members and close friends.

But as quickly has it had happened, it was over. I had a miscarriage this week. Apparently, one in three pregnancies results in a miscarriage, and logically, we can understand that this is nature's way of saying it wasn't meant to be. We get that, but it didn't make it any less painful for us.

With the diagnosis, we've begun the process of telling our families and friends -- those who we had told we were pregnant and those we hadn't. Many of the women in my life have also experienced a miscarriage and are sharing their experiences. At a time, when I am unsure how it happens, feeling guilty that it was something I did, their stories solace me; others are just regaling us with love; and others are simply making me laugh (a good feeling when your days are filled with spontaneous crying). While their outpouring of support did not make the sadness go away, it is helping us process it.

I feel our interconnectedness and it gives me strength.

I share this because modern wisdom inhibits women from sharing news of their pregnancies until they are safely passed the first trimester. Keeping the workplace issues aside, I do know just how hard it is to make those 'follow-up' calls when things go wrong. It does, however, give people the the information they need to rally around you, to care for you, and to love you when, at least for a while, everything else seems a little bleak.

2006-11-06T17:36:00.000-05:00

CNN headline leads: Probe urged after Bill O'Reilly gets abortion records

Bill O'Reilly (Fox media mogul and anti-choice -- I'm not linking to him out of complete disdain) referenced on national television that he has seen and reviewed patient records from 2 clinics (clinics that among other services provide abortions) in Kansas. The clinics claim that the records were recently released to Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline. The clinics are charging Kline with sharing these records with O'Reilly.

One of the clinics in question has already been a victim of violence -- the clinic was bombed in 1985 and the primary doctor was shot in 1992.

The leak of this information makes the patients and doctors vulernable to harm and violates privacy. I will not get into the irony of the (religious) right's platform -- it is full of inconsistencies. I will leave it at this -- it is disgusting and dangerous and I hope American's use their vote tomorrow to do something about it.

2006-11-04T07:43:00.000-05:00

Northern Bound

Hats off to Dana, for suspecting a mystery. One month without blog updates, sporadically out of the office, and being uncharacteristically silent about the whole thing. (Hats off to Dana for also probably being the only one in the universe who frequents this blog!)

So the truth is now out:

Scott and I (and of course George) are moving to Maine!

I am joining the Maine Women's Fund as their new Executive Director. I will talk more about the fund later, as well as my thoughts on leaving GlobalGiving.

I'm going to focus here on the move to Maine. It has been said, and those who have said it will remain anonymous, that my interest in moving to Maine is huge shock. Hmmm.... then I guess I must share a few little known facts:

- Moving to Maine was subject of Scott's and my first date
- I knew I had hooked Scott when he told me he had started pricing kayaks
- "Blogs I am reading" section contains two links: BlogHer and From Away
- I have vacationed on Chebeague Island (yes, in Maine) forever
- Scott and I got engaged on Chebeague Island (going back to that first date conversation)
- My best friend Megan lives in Monmouth Maine
- My testimonies about struggling with a sense of place and disdain for Washington life were captured here and here
- I want to live in a place where I can raise chickens and George wants to live in a place where she can herd sheep
- I intend for my next race to be a kayak regalla
- My profile states that one of these days Scott and I intend to live a Dog's life style. OK. not a direct Maine reference, this is a quote from Pam Houston (Cowboys are my weaknesses) who says about owning a dog -- they force you to live the kind of live you actually will enjoy living. for us, that Dog's life style is in Maine.

For anyone else for whom this is a shock, I hope that this will provide a little context.

2006-11-03T10:35:00.000-05:00

Olympians raise $120,000. Whew hoo!

Proof in the pudding about making an ask. The GlobalGiving Olympics put out the challenge to all project leaders -- ask your network to participate. Those who get the most participation (measured in absolute dollars donated) will win a prize.

Roughly 15 organizations participated -- raising $120,000 in 3 weeks. Two organizations accounted for over $90,000. This is an impressive nonprofit campaign. We saw very creative mobilization techniques:

Ray Umashankar and the ASSET India team were true Olympians during the competition, employing a variety of fundraising strategies that helped them earn first place. From emailing all ASSET supporters to contacting corporations and major donors and even driving around Tucson to pick up checks personally, Ray promoted his project and the Olympics opportunity nonstop. ASSET India was featured in a variety of newspapers and publications targeting the Indian diaspora community, such as this article on Yahoo India. When asked to share a tip for successful fundraising, Ray emphasized persistence and said, "The real reason for success is in the follow up, not in the e-mail message."

Inderjit Khurana, her son Anoop, and her organization Ruchika have been members of the GlobalGiving community for four years, and they put these years of experience into practice to earn second place in the Olympics. Ruchika had an anonymous donor offer to match all contributions to the Helpline project, and they sent an email to all Ruchika supporters encouraging them to take advantage of the matching opportunity and help Ruchika's project win the Olympics. Inderjit and Anoop also posted progress reports on the Helpline project and their previous project, "Train Platform Schools for Children in India," offering an update on Ruchika and encouraging donors to give again for the Olympics program. You can see their progress report here.

Competitions at GlobalGiving, like the Olympics, are run with more than volume mobilization in mind. We are ultimately testing the potential of social networks. The Olympics and the GlobalGiving Open test the scope and reach of the project leader's networks. The goal is to inform how these networks can be used to (1) identify good organizations for the community; (2) assess the reputation of hundreds of organizations around the world quickly and efficiently; (3) mobilize supply side economics.

What are we learning?

1. There is a power law in participation and mobilization. Two organizations were accountable for 2/3 the volume.
2. There is an optimal use of incentives. The potential of earning $75,000 mobilized $120,000 and got 15 organizations engaged. At the GPF (also an experiment) the potential of 15 organizations splitting $100,000 mobilized 200 organizations. Matching funds for one organization or campaign results in little mobilization on behalf of the organizations, but is a large incentive for donors.
3. The network is not just something to be activated; successful mobilization depends on the network being aware of the opportunity and mobilizing the organization to do something.

How will we intend to utilize this? Not sure yet. But we'll keep you posted.

2006-10-06T11:11:00.000-04:00

Don't Forget to Ask

The last decade has seen the rise of new financing tools for social entrepreneurs, and related, new ways for donors to give. Paul Newman's Supermarket Fundraising. Acumen's Investment Portfolio Model. Ashoka's stipend for up start Fellows. The GlobaFund for... women, children, human rights, environment -- the mutual funds of philanthropy. And of course, my personal favorite, the Global markets.

The markets aside, because they fundamentally allow personal choice, most of these models are attractive because they focus on the leveraged impact of each philanthropic dollar. Invest in health by investing in innovation. Invest dollars into financially sustainable models because your dollar with go farther. And, if you believe that each of these will contribute to the growth of a new financial service sector for nonprofits, as a donor you can buy into the value of building this infrastructure, along with making a social investment. The cost for the donor, of course, is personal choice and a personal connection.

The social sector, or the potential beneficiaries of this infrastructure, are embracing it. Many believe that the infrastrcuture itself is a cure-all to our resource needs. And to be sure, the infrastructure does address many of the ineffciencies -- capital going to the best sources and information flows that enable dynamic feedback loops (you know, the stuff of good markets).

However, for the time being, over 80% of the sector's resources are still going to come from individuals -- or put another way, individuals are still going to give directly to organizations, accounting for 80% the country's philanthropy. And to capture these resources, even with our fancy new infrastructure, we're still going to need to ask. This is the part of fundraising that makes nonprofits hate fundraising.

Asking people to part with their dollars. Most people find it embarassing. Others are afraid of the rejection.

Someone told me long ago that people want to give and if you ask, you're doing them a favor, you're making it easy for them to give. Having had to do a lot of fundraising in my short career, I've embraced that principle and, while it hasn't made me fearless, I've not not enjoyed the ask.

So this brings me to the GlobalGiving Olympics. A new competition we're running at GlobalGiving. Often, project leaders post projects; then, sit back and wait for their $1million check. GlobalGiving is building a market by finding ways to attract and retain a qualified donor base. But that is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the potential of the tool.

- a project specific unit ensures donors where their funds are going
- project leaders are holding themselves accountable for specific activities and outputs
- any one donation is aggregated with others to increase the likelihood of project success
- costs of due diligence spread across multiple donations, utilized beyond just one transaction

The GlobalGiving project should be a tool as much for the project leader to use in 'making the ask' as it is for potential donors to make a contribution.

The GlobalGiving Olympics is designed to give 'asking' a competitive -- competitive like road races, competitive like Iron Chef. Competitive fun.

My hope is that the fun-factor could fun-damentally change the project leaders behaviors, get them seeing their own success.

My goal would be that they raise at least $75K amongst themselves.

We'll see how it goes.

2006-10-03T18:06:00.000-04:00

From Tribeca to Tanzania

Wow. I'm actually a little shell-shocked having read this post, being a huge fan of both Keely's work, the Acumen Fund, and SocialEdge.

In short, on assignment for the Acumen Fund, Keely assumed the fake identity of a poor, pregnant, abused, single-mom; she went to New York Human Resource Administration in an attempt to procure social services (and was unsuccessful because she could not produce her fake social security card because she had left it behind as she 'escaped' her fake abusive boyfriend's house). After wasting an administrator's time to actually get this prognosis, she then went to a medical clinic to apply for a fake abortion. Unable to assist her, the medical clinic directed her to Planned Parenthood Federation who could not help her either. Not because her pregnancy was FAKE, but because she needed $500 of real dollars, which her fake identity did not possess.

Oh my.

Acumen's goal was to help Keely understand her clients -- the Poor.

Being in a position to understand your clients' perspective is not only noble, its critical for designing appropriate/relevant products and services. People learn to understand in many different ways and often experiential is the most effective.

There are, however, so many non-disruptive, ethical methods for gaining this experience. There are good immersion programs out there:

- Living with your constituency
- Managing for a day with the purchasing power of your constituency
- traveling without resources

Experiences like these help you learn desperation and helplessness. However, we must gain this perspective without abusing public resources, under false pretenses.

While Acumen's approach was creative for sure, it lacked the ethical fiber that I expect in any organization that understands the power of the social entrepreneur in social change. Social entrepreneurs are able to develop a broad base of support that is ultimately critical for changing behaviors at the individual level. To do this, they must be truly worthy of our trust; they must have the public's confidence.

Escapades such as Keely's is not worthy of our confidence or support.

It is disheartening and discouraging.

2006-09-28T10:14:00.000-04:00

Feminism and Communism -- collaborative filtering gone wrong!

For no other reason that it hadn't really occurred to me, I had never read anything by Virginia Woolf until last month when I picked up a copy of a Room of One's Own. Ordered directly from Amazon, with copies of Three Guineas and Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More.

A Room of One's Own is an essay written from a series of lectures that Virginia Woolf gave, discussing the future of women in fiction.

Her directive is straight forward, and very much common sense (or so I thought):

Individual wealth and assets are critical for anyone individual to establish a public voice. Poor people don't regularly write books. Women, now and then, are/were less likely to have this kind of financial security. And if we want the hear women's voices, get them to the table creating and documenting their belief and histories, then the focus needs to be on wealth creation. Specifically, Woolf says a woman needs "A Room of her Own" -- not a room given to her from her neighbor, her government, or any other source. She needs to own it. It needs to be hers. This is tied into the premise of the book.

I think this is a pretty straight forward market-oriented philosophy. So you can imagine my surprise when I logged into Amazon to see my new recommendations, and based off my purchase of A Room of One's Own, Amazon is recommending:

My first thought is that Amazon is supporting one of the oldest stereotypes of all time. But of course, Amazon's recommendations are based off of collaborative filtering -- which means that of the 200+ people who bought the Communist Manifesto, also bought A Room of One's Own (or vice-versa). So based off this phenomena, Amazon thought their recommendation made sense.

Crazy stuff, huh?

Anyone think I missed Ms. Woolf's point? Is there a hidden agenda that my world view isn't open to receiving?

Or is this a case in which the wisdom of crowds doesn't actually produce the 'right' results?

2006-09-23T07:18:00.000-04:00

One of my favorite conversations asks whether individuals acting alone, in their own interests, will create a stronger social fabric than individuals, or governments, acting out of welfare or charity.

Sort of a Wisdom of the Crowds/Libertarian Mashup.

Hungary has a tax law called the "1% law" (written by a fantastic woman I met during the expansion of CBI in CEE). This law allows ordinary citizens to direct 1% of their income any place they like -- health care, social security, nonprofits. While the US tax system does allow individuals to direct a portion of their income to charity, and incentivizes us doing so by decreasing our taxable income based on donations, it never the less limits the end destination to those organizations classified as nonprofit organizations -- 501(c) 3 classified by the US government.

The Omidyar Network and Google are suggesting that this severely curtails people's opportunities to do good. Isn't ebay contributing to our social fabric by building trust and unleasing people's potential? Aren't green energies just as good for the economy and production as they are for the environment? Increasingly, for profits are showing the power to create tremendous good and, if ordinary citizens, wanted to support those efforts the way we support nonprofits, with the incentives to boot, shouldn't we be able?

So what about a system that enables us to direct a portion of our income where ever we, as individuals, see fit? Lets imagine we don't have a welfare state and it was with this system that we needed to fund the social systems we deemed relevant. The assumption is that we would each operate in our own self interest. I, for example would investing in health care, my own retirement, and education. I'm sure a number of other people of my income and age bracket would do the same. Others would invest in programs to accommodate child care and nutrition programs.

Would the spread of these interests result in each initiative getting the support it needs? By sheer buying power, my friends point out, the top of the pyramid would have more to invest than the bottom. So a system where all votes were equal vs. straight taxable income allocation might in fact enable people to cover their own needs.

If you could see where others were investing would this create more efficient allocation of each dollar? Would it decrease or increase the free rider problem? This type of market would inevitably be more efficient, and probably enable the cream of service providers to rise. Largely better than the government's existing system for determining which intiatives get the pork.

Would there still be some need for government protection? How about in defense -- an area that would most likely languish far from the top of immediate direct and personal needs? Would individuals americans be comfortable with a military power not unlike the Polish in WWII?

Its food for thought.

2006-09-22T11:18:00.000-04:00

Adding Richard Branson to my heroes list

An Inconvenient Truth made me cry and left me overwelmed with the magnitude of the problem. Richard Branson's commitment of $3b to fight climate change -- profits from his Virgin Brand -- gives me confidence. Hopefully his commitment won't be left alone in the universe like Ted Turner's failed attempt to dramatically increase funding for the United Nations.

While I recognized that a massive behavioral change is necessary to truly mitigate climate change, cheaper and more accessible technologies will make those behavior changes easy.

A Big Whew HOO.

Also on my list of constructive climate warriors...

PlanetReBoot has organized a scavenger hunt that will take participants around Seattle on foot, bicycle, and maybe kayak (love that!!!) The scavenger hunt will raise funds for carbon offsets.

2006-09-16T07:21:00.000-04:00

On Ramp (on speed)

At GlobalGiving, we're committed to helping social entrepreneurs become the best 'sellers' (selling their projects to donors who are buyers) that they can be. We assess donors needs, translating them into strategies, tools, and other resorces for social entrepreneurs. Riffing off eBay, we call this "On Ramp" services.

Yesterday, working on a concept like digital post cards (which I think has awesome story telling capabilities), I came across the mobile365 (didn't exactly come across it -- my mobile guru husband directly pointed me that as a helpful technology for the project).

The cool factor was this. Mobile365 (and probably there are other like technologies/services) could give our team the capability to distribute information, images and resources out to the field via mobile phone. Mobile 365 offers templates into which data and resources can be appropriately formatted for mobile and funds and enables the mass distribution. Collecting feedback/images from the field via mobile phones is viewed as relatively radical -- but also appropriate given the broad and wide reach of cell phones in developing countries, limited bandwidth, etc.

But using the same technology to push out our on ramp services and reach our clients? LOVE THAT... it is, in effect, on ramp on SPEED.

2006-09-14T08:10:00.000-04:00

Will finding my place make me a better runner?

I've never been a very good runner, but I've been a dedicated one. I've never really improved my time (despite hill work), I've never focused on my diet, and I've never thought much about lactic acid. I try to run 5-6 days a week, and each year I train for and run several races -- which will always include a few 10Ks, a half marathon, and a 10-miler (my favorite distance). In 2004, I even ran the Marine Corps Marathon (despite getting a stilletto heal through a tendon in my foot only months before -- I love mentioning that one :)

George is my best coach -- alerting me every morning when its time to go out. Dogs are precious that way. And I look forward to getting out each morning as much for her as for me.

Lately however, running is not fun. In fact, its outright stressful. It started with a manic boxer who lunged at us (from within a gate), leaving us both rattled. Next came a dog who, having squeezed himself under a fence and into the cemetary, darted so quickly towards us and into George's face that I barely had to time to assess what type of risk he was. The other day, random passerby's (actual humans) yelled at us to get off the "f*&king" path. And finally the straw, coming across a stray rottweiler who was on George in a matter of seconds.

The humans aside, because lately I can just find no excuse for them, the dogs were probably all harmless (if they hadn't been I doubt George would still be in one piece). But with each experience, I curb by path, my initiative, and my enthusiasm for what would otherwise be a very focused relaxing part of my day. I still run, but now it needs to be planned -- taking time out to head down to the mall and do a 6 mile loop there. Getting up super early to hit the Rock Creek Park trails. Finding places that are 'safer' (mentally) than my own neighborhood, places where I'm more anonymous than others. There are random dogs in these spaces too; and, well, more bodies have been found in these places than in my neighborhood.

What is this about? I believe its rooted in needing a 'sense of place.' I've always struggled with that, and increasingly for the last 5 years. Feeling like a fish out water in all but my professional career. Knowing that DC does not make my heart sing. And what if it did? What do I expect when I find my place? Calm. An urgency to embrace each morning. Clarity. Less distraction.

Ultimately, I antiicpate being better at each thing I do -- including running.

2006-09-12T06:55:00.000-04:00

Ethical fiber is a trait of leading social enntrepreneurs that perhaps I value more than others. Why? Because our world is full of false leaders who fill us with distrust, who don't inspire hope, who beat down the possibilities of positive change. As warm and fuzzy as this is, we're lost without it. And believe it or not, it wasn't Bush invoking the memory of 9/11 to mobilize suport for the war in Iraq that makes me blog about this (though... I'm not sure if my point could be any more clear.)

My thinking was actually inspired by a recent call from Gretchen Steidle Wallace, a former colleague and founder of Global Grassroots, reminding me of the truly incredible people out there. Gretchen and I got to know each other while at Ashoka; she was helping Bill develop his new baby, Social Enrepreneur Associates, and I was running CBI. There was a nice synergy between the two programs leading us to occassionaly talk collaboration, but more importantly, Gretchen immediately proved to be accessible, warm and very smart. Very attractive traits in a human being.

We both left Ashoka at the same time -- me to GlobalGiving; Gretchen to her own entrepreneurial self. She moved to New Hampshire, where her and her husband, a boat builder, could imagine building a life. I don't know if Gretchen was deterred from starting her own intiative or being isolated -- the prospect certainly scares me -- at the very least her outward persona seemed to embrace it. Gretchen's focus then was take her experience in social investing and apply it to the most marginalized communities.

When I next heard from Gretchen, it was in the context of her brother, Brian. Brian had recently returned from Darfur, Sudan, where he had served as a peace keeper for the African Union. Brian had become a one man witness to the human tragedy facing the Darfur people and was bringing his photos and his stories home with him to help us remember that after the Rwandan genocide -- we had sworn "never again." (apparently we forgot) Gretchen had joined forces with him -- getting media attention and mobilizing support necessary to make a movmenet.

Gretchen returned to Africa with Brian a few months later. It being too unsafe to return to Sudan, the two went to Chad, visiting the camps where hundreds of thousands of displaced people had settled in as home.

Its both simple and difficult to imagine Gretchen in a IDP camp. She has an impenetrable elegance to her that belongs in pearls and pumps. She also has a warmth and empathy rooted so deeply that I can only imagine it leads her into, and makes her at home in, the dark heart of human suffering.

I spoke to Gretchen last Friday morning. I envisioned her enjoying a cup of coffee while breathing in a view of the White Mountains (not sure if she actually has a view or if its just my imagination). She had just finished a manuscript of her brother's memoir's that she had co-authored. She's also finished an application for a movie deal. In a few weeks, she leaves for Rwanda -- where she is implementing a series of trainings focused on bringing social investing tool to the most marginalized -- women who were victims of the genocide, now living with HIV/AIDS, struggling to care for themselves and their children. Gretchen is experimenting with a series of -- training, investments, loans -- to help these women escape a circle of poverty.

I'm half tempted to go with her. If only to be a witness to her determination.

2006-09-08T18:58:00.000-04:00

I feel the beginning of fall reading come over me. This summer was more productive then I imagined it would be -- if only because while I do love reading there are days when all my mind can muster is people magazine. This summer however I read some fantastic books:

- History of Love.... a beautiful beautiful story
- The Last Days of Dogtown .... Anita Diamont is a faboulous story teller
- Joy Comes in the Morning ... Great plot, if the only the author had not tried to be melodramatic and foreboding in the last chatpter
- A Room of One's Own ... finally got around to it .. i'll write more about that later...

This reading has ultimately rekindled my romance with good books. And since I look forward to fall reading (historically, other great "fall read books" include: Soldier of the Great War, Anna Karina, Jude the Obscure...), I've set out a course for the next 12 weeks.

1. Return of the Native -- I love Thomas Harding and I can't get around that. He constantly 'outwits' his readers, which is a talent I respect and long for in an author. This is also my contribution to the 'ghoulish' reading campaign. Return of the Native is also one of Scott's favorite books and his recs have yet to fail me.

2. Three Guinees -- Continuing with getting to to know Virginia Woolf

3. Long Tail -- Three times a charm on long tail theories. It was a topic discussion at the Markets meeing. Mari blogged about it recently. And the other night at dinner, one of our best friends recommended this book. So, I will listen to the universe.

I'd like to add three more books to list -- but I need to find some information first. Any thoughts?

2006-09-03T21:32:00.000-04:00

(Stay with me here for a quick story about George. .. It has a point)

While sunning herself on the porch last week, my dog, george barked at passing stranger and his unleashed pitbull. His response left me a bit rattled: "Shut-up , or I'll kick you in the f*&king face."

OK. So my exuberantly friendly 35 lb dog barked at you. Is that call for threatening to kick her face in?

My neighborhood isn't exactly Pleaseantville, but its a pretty sound middleclass neighborhood -- so for the most part, one should expect random acts of kindness rather than malicious-dog threatening. My point however is not about my neighborhood, as I see and hear this open hostility increasingly more every day.

Esther Dyson blogged the other day about the impact of transparency (through the digital world) on individual ethics. She mused that the rawness we enjoy on the Web has permeated our offline lives -- the result being we all feel much more comfortable being honest and confrontational with one another.

I'm not sure if I agree with the cause and effect, but I do feel our world is increasingly emboldended to leave behind "frank," and become generally comfortable with hostile.

Not only do I feel that this can't lead to anything good, I'm confident it moves society away from the Ghandian principles of respect that are critical to a society that manages the play of power peacefully. And what then?

So I'm left pondering whether the new found freedoms we herald in our digital world -- greater transparency, better information, and democratic access, can actually erode the very conditions that allow society to manage transparency, information, and democracy....