NACC News: May 2017
NACC News publishes information about the Nonprofit Academic Centers Council
and its members. We invite you to contribute your news and encourage you to
share this newsletter with colleagues, the nonprofit community, and all others you
think might find it of interest.
NACC 2017 Biennial Conference
Please join us on July 31 through August
2, 2017 at our biennial conference
hosted by Indiana University Lilly
Family School of Philanthropy.
To become a sponsor and to register
please go to http://www.nonprofit-academic-centers-council.org/events/.
We thank the following organizations and invite you to consider becoming a NACC sponsor.
Host Sponsor & Tuesday Evening Reception Sponsor –
Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy
Sponsor Cost: $5,000
Monday Evening Reception Sponsor –
University of Notre Dame, Mendoza College of Business
Sponsor Cost: $5,000
NACC Member Meeting Sponsor --
Cleveland State University, Levin College of Urban Affairs
Sponsor Cost: $2,500
Technology Sponsor –
University of San Francisco, School of Management
Sponsor Cost: $2,500
General Support –
Auburn University, Department of Political Science
Sponsor Cost: $2,500
General Support --
Texas A&M University, Bush School of Government & Public Service
Sponsor Cost: $2,500
General Support –
Helen Bader Institute for Nonprofit Management, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Sponsor Cost: $750
General Support –
Seton Hall University, Center for Public Service
Sponsor Cost: $750
General Support –
University of Oregon, Department of Planning, Public Policy, & Management
Sponsor Cost: $500
General Support –
Arizona State University, Lodestar Center for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Innovation
Sponsor Cost: $500
General Support –
North Park University, Axelson Center for Nonprofit Management
Sponsor Cost: $500
NACC would also like to recognize our Sustaining Members:
Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy
University of Oregon
Message from the President
Associate Professor and MPA
Department of Political Science
and Public Affairs
Seton Hall University
One of the things that I always enjoy about the research process is that moment or series of moments when you first start running the data and get the first set of results. Sometimes looking at those initial results is maddening. Wait, why isn’t this working the exact way I thought it would? Other times the results are surprising. Ok, that is interesting I didn’t see that coming. That moment can also be comforting. This is going to be a good paper.
But no matter whether that moment is maddening, surprising, or comforting there is always a sense that maybe there is no one else in the world who knows what you know at that moment. You and your co-authors have some nugget of knowledge that is just yours and you can’t wait to share it. Hey, look at what we found!
After a long and intense process, NACC is kind of at that moment. We have over the course of the last 2 years developed an accreditation plan for nonprofit and philanthropy programs. The work is the product of many, many people. Specifically, however, it is the work of the NACC members on the various subcommittees of our accreditation task force. These people are listed below and I personally want to thank each one of them for their time, expertise and effort.
The Accreditation Process Committee
Matt Hale, Seton Hall University Stuart Mendel, Cleveland State University
Peter Weber, Murray State University Heather Carpenter, Notre Dame Maryland University
David Garvey, University of Connecticut Alicia Schatteman, Northern Illinois University
Sylvia de Hass Phillips, Bay Path University Julie Turner, Lindenwood University
Robert Ashcraft, Arizona State University
The Business Plan Committee
Renee Irvin, University of Oregon Wesley Lindahl, North Park University
M.D. Kinoti, Regis University Craig Furneaux, Queensland University of Technology
Patrick Rooney, Indiana University Matt Hale, Seton Hall University
The Membership/Accreditation Committee
Maureen Emerson Feit, Seattle University Stuart Mendel, Cleveland State University
Angela Logan, University of Notre Dame Renee Irvin, University of Oregon
Rob Fischer, Case Western Reserve University Linda Serra, Cleveland State University
Erin Vokes, Cleveland State University Matt Hale, Seton Hall University
I believe that the draft accreditation, business, and membership plans that you can see on the NACC website (http://www.nonprofit-academic-centers-council.org/accreditation/) provide a curriculum centered, non-invasive yet rigorous way to help develop the nonprofit/philanthropy field. I believe that plan is “doable” for NACC as an organization. I believe that many programs will find this process to be a valuable one, both in terms of improving their programs and in terms of using the process to advocate for additional resources.
As it is with the research process, the fact that “I believe” all of those things, doesn’t really matter much. That is because, like any paper, this one has to go out for peer review. NACC has always tried to be as inclusive in bringing in differing opinions to this process. If you want evidence of that, I encourage you to keep reading this edition of NACC news for some thoughtful, heartfelt and appreciated comments by Bob Donmoyer.
The draft documents for accreditation are again available on our website at http://www.nonprofitacademic-
centers-council.org/accreditation/. They need your comments, feedback, and criticism and hopefully (maybe?) some praise. Please send them all to NACC’s executive director at firstname.lastname@example.org. The task force will be collating these and integrating them into a final document, which we will again circulate to NACC members prior to our summer conference in Indianapolis. We are hoping to have comments back by June 20, 2017.
Thanks and see you in Indianapolis.
The primary mission of NACC News is to bring our members together in an exchange of ideas and convictions about the sector. Please let us hear from you. We hope to facilitate many ongoing discussions and encourage a diverse array of thoughtfully articulated perspectives.
To Accredit or Not to Accredit?
That is the Question…
That Generates More Questions
Professor, Department of Leadership Studies
The University of San Diego
For a number of years, now, the Nonprofit Academic Centers Council (NACC) has flirted with the idea of
supporting the accreditation of nonprofit academic programs. By sponsoring a so-called accreditation summit at Texas A&M University in the summer of 2016, that flirtation was transformed into something analogous to an active courtship of the accreditation idea.
I was a member of the NACC board for most of the years that the accreditation idea was being considered. A number of years ago, for example, I attended a NACC meeting where someone from the organization that accredits accrediting organizations spoke and indicated, among other things, that NACC could not actually engage in accreditation directly; rather, it would have to set up a separate organization to do accrediting work.
After that meeting, the accreditation issue appeared intermittently on agendas for other board and institutional-representative meetings. The discussions of these agenda items left me, at least, with more questions than answers about whether NACC should get into the accreditation business.
My unanswered questions were major reasons I opted last summer not to run for re-election to a board that seemed increasingly committed to implementing an accreditation initiative, and, because I had decided to leave the board, I did not attend last summer’s accreditation summit. Now I have been asked to write a NACC News commentary about accreditation. I will focus much of this commentary on the questions about NACC embracing an accreditation effort that I still have not been able to answer to my satisfaction. First, however, I must state that I certainly could make the case for NACC getting into the accreditation business.
The Case for Accreditation
That case would be grounded, in part, in the fact that the accreditation of programs is a standard operating procedure in academia. Although most nonprofit/philanthropy programs are embedded within public administration, business administration or social work programs that already have organizations to accredit their various components (including components focused on nonprofit management), some nonprofit and/or philanthropy programs have no such affiliation. At my university, for example, the M.A. and PhD. programs in nonprofit and philanthropic leadership and management are operated out of a Department of Leadership Studies, and Leadership Studies is a field in which accreditation currently does not occur. Consequently, when prospective students ask whether our programs are accredited, we have to answer, “No, they are not. No agency exists to accredit our programs.”
Our program is not completely unique in this respect. The well-regarded nonprofit programs at Arizona State University, for example, also have no access to accreditation through a so-called parent discipline or field of study, and even Indiana University’s prestigious Lilly School of Philanthropy is not positioned to play the accreditation game. Furthermore, the Nonprofit and Philanthropy-First Movement championed by previous NACC president Stuart Mendel would appear to challenge the assumption that another discipline or field of study should determine and enforce standards for academic programs focused on nonprofit organizations and philanthropy.
I also have witnessed the benefits that accrue to my colleagues in other departments in my school that are able to go through the accreditation process. Because of accreditation standards, they often have lighter teaching loads, smaller classes, and an easier time making the case for new faculty positions. To be sure, there are costs associated with netting these benefits, especially the time-costs associated with preparing the voluminous paperwork accrediting agencies normally require. However, on a good day, at least, most of my colleagues in accredited programs claim the benefits of working in an accredited program outweigh the costs.
There also are likely benefits that would accrue to NACC should NACC set up an affiliated organization to
accredit nonprofit and philanthropy programs. NACC always has had to operate in the shadows of the much larger Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA). At times, individuals from NACC-affiliated universities who also were leaders within ARNOVA even suggested that, because of an apparent duplication of effort, NACC should fold its tent or, at the very least, operate under the ARNOVA organizational umbrella.
When such arguments were raised, I saw some of my colleagues on the NACC board strive valiantly to differentiate NACC from ARNOVA. Some, for example, pointed to NACC’s widely used curriculum standards and argued that NACC is focused on teaching while ARNOVA is interested in research. This argument, however, can be undermined by the common sensical claim that academics interested in teaching presumably should engage in research about teaching and by the fact that ARNOVA’s teaching section is one of that organization’s largest and most active sections.
There are, of course, differences between NACC and ARNOVA that cannot be disputed. The most obvious of these differences: ARNOVA is an organization composed of individual members; NACC’s members are institutions. To many faculty and staff in NACC-affiliated institutions, however, this is a distinction without a day-to-day difference. In fact, the only meaningful difference institutional membership makes for many faculty and staff is limiting their involvement in NACC unless they are their institution’s one designated representative to NACC and, consequently, the one faculty or staff member who can attended twice-yearly NACC meetings.
During my time on the board, in fact, NACC board and staff members struggled to find ways to engage
nonprofit and philanthropy faculty and staff in member institutions who were not their institutions’ NACC representatives. These efforts included hosting a NACC conference every other year, affiliating with the Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, creating an honorary society for high-achieving nonprofit students, and publishing this newsletter. Clearly, getting into the accreditation game would be an even higher-profile way to engage all nonprofit/philanthropy-oriented faculty and staff at member institutions in NACC-related activity. It also would be a way to clearly demarcate NACC’s contributions from the contributions ARNOVA makes to the nonprofit/philanthropy field.
As I noted at the outset of this commentary, however, I have lingering questions about the feasibility and desirability of NACC attempting to play the accreditation game. It is to these questions I now turn.
Questions about Feasibility
One set of questions relates to feasibility. It is not clear to me, at least, that a separate organization set up by NACC to do accreditation business will do enough business to sustain itself. After all, although I work in programs that currently have no way to get accredited and there are a handful of other nonprofit/ philanthropy programs in similar situations, most nonprofit/philanthropy programs already are accredited by the accrediting organizations that serve the fields of public administration, business administration, or social work. Will the bulk of these nonprofit programs be willing to undergo the added expense—both in terms of dollars and in terms of the time required to amass accreditation paperwork—that an additional accreditation effort almost certainly would require? And, if the bulk of nonprofit programs are reluctant to engage in dual accreditation processes, would getting accreditation from a NACC-sanctioned organization be worth the effort even for the small number of programs that are not affiliated with social work or public/business administration?
During my time on the NACC board, I heard some board members argue that the above questions can be answered affirmatively if the NACC-supported accreditation effort is focused narrowly on the NACC curriculum standards. If this were done, the work required to go through a NACC-sanctioned accreditation effort presumably would be much less than what is required to participate in a typical process of accreditation.
Such a limited accreditation effort, however, also is unlikely to net the sorts of teaching load, class size, and faculty expansion benefits of accreditation alluded to above. In the absence of such benefits, will programs conclude that having an accrediting agency certify that their curricula conform to NACC standards be a sufficient reason to undergo the accreditation process, especially if they have already participated in a much more encompassing accreditation process through a parent discipline or field of study? Furthermore, would getting an accrediting organization’s seal of approval for their curriculum be sufficient motivation to incur the costs of an accreditation effort even for programs that are not covered by the accreditation processes for public administration, business administration, or social work?
A Desirability Question
The questions I have raised thus far all, in one way or another, asked about feasibility. Before concluding, let me raise one additional question focused on the desirability of bringing accreditation even more front and center in the nonprofit/philanthropy field than it currently is by virtue of being a small component of accreditation processes employed in public administration, business administration, or social work, the fields in which most nonprofit and philanthropy academic programs are situated. Ultimately, accreditation promotes standardization. It insures that programs conform to some sort of a priori image of what a quality program looks like and, especially in recent years when accountability has increasingly become a central concern, that it produces pre-defined outputs and outcomes. One could ask, however: Is standardization desirable in a field as diverse as Nonprofit and Philanthropy Studies? After all, this is a field that prepares professionals to work in elite arts organizations such as operas and symphonies, but also prepares people to work in organizations that support the most impoverished individuals in our society. Even the fact that the field encompasses both charities and foundations that help fund charities is symptomatic of the field’s incredible scope.
It is one thing to embrace the sort of general curriculum standards that NACC has adopted. They help focus attention and structure discussion about what should be happening in nonprofit and philanthropy programs. It is something else to employ such standards in a high-stakes accreditation process. To do the latter, standards like NACC’s curriculum standards ideally should be made much more operational, which might be difficult, if not impossible, given the diversity that exists in the nonprofit/philanthropy world. If the standards remain vague, those conducting an accreditation review will have to fill in the blanks and use their own interpretations of vaguely defined standards to decide whether a program undergoing accreditation meets standards.
The trick, in short, is to write accreditation standards that are (a) broad enough to encompass the diverse range of nonprofit and philanthropy programs that educate nonprofit and philanthropy professionals who work in a diverse array nonprofit and philanthropic organizations but (b) not so broad that assessors are left to their own devices to determine what the standards mean in operational terms and whether the program they are accrediting measures up to the standards on which an accreditation decision is supposedly based. Can this balancing act be accomplished? I must admit, I have my doubts.
I was taught a long time ago that posing questions represents a weak form of argumentation. Posing questions, of course, is precisely what I have done in this commentary. I apologize. The questions I have posed here are not merely rhetorical. They reflect my honest-to-goodness ambivalence and confusion about whether NACC should move ahead with its apparent intention to establish an organization to accredit nonprofit and philanthropy-oriented academic programs.
As a former treasurer of NACC who was required always to focus on the organization’s fiscal bottom line, my recommendation is that NACC proceed cautiously until there is clear evidence that the answers to the feasibility questions I have raised here are positive. And, as someone who has always been wary of the assessment tail wagging the curriculum dog, I urge current NACC board members to seriously consider the potential pitfalls as well as the obvious institutional benefits of promoting standardization in a field that is anything but standardized.
On My Mind
Representatives of NACC Member Institutions Speak
NACC News offers brief articles contributed by representatives of member institutions. This column offers an opportunity to the faculty of member institutions to present their thinking and begin an exchange of ideas about issues that affect the nonprofit sector.
Community Indicators, Collective Impact, and Strategic Philanthropy
Patrick Bixler, Research Fellow and David Springer, Director and University
Distinguished Teaching Professor. RGK Center for Philanthropy and Community
Service, LBJ School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin
The RGK Center for Philanthropy and Community Service (LBJ School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas) has recently embarked on an initiative that has us asking new and exciting questions: How can data help guide nonprofit action? How does research inform strategic philanthropic decision-making? What is the role of a research-education institution in a community-collective impact initiative? How do all of these pieces fit together in the system we seek to better understand and change?
Developing a strategy capable of large-scale impact (i.e., really moving the needle) is a daunting challenge, particularly when focusing on local or regional issues frequently driven by social, economic, or environmental trends at a larger scale. Most problems today are dynamic, nonlinear, and arise as the result of an interplay between multiple independent factors that influence each other – they are complex (rather than complicated) problems. Beginning to solve these problems requires nonprofits, foundations, public officials, and, we assert, universities to work together.
In 2015, the RGK Center began managing the Austin Area Sustainability Indicators (A2SI). Initiated in 1999 under a different name, the project has a relatively long institutional history and has developed some key constituencies through the periodic publication of the “Data Report”, a compilation of secondary data metrics and results from a community survey of primary data collection. Community indicators – a system of measures designed, developed, and analyzed to provide community-level information for capacity building and decision making – provide the shared data collection and measurement needed for collective impact. However, the simple generation and compilation of massive amounts of data doesn’t ensure incorporation into decisionmaking. Since the project has been managed at the RGK Center, our journey has been the ongoing transformation from a periodic “data report” into an actionable science collective impact initiative.
Over the past year, we have identified three key areas that can help us move from data collection to community impact. First, an understanding that different audiences present different categories of potential change agents and the need to develop an appropriate outreach communication strategies for each; second, developing an Austin Area Sustainability Index that reduces the 128 metrics through a statistically robust method to tell a simpler story; and finally, developing explicit strategies for impact by using the indicators to weave together local nonprofits, philanthropy, city and county officials towards focus on specific issues. By connecting the “data” to “impact”, we harness the indicators to identify and communicate issues facing our region and then apply a systems approach to catalyze collective action.
In moving from data to impact and being an active participant in a community change initiative, we are engaging in participant action research through community-university partnerships where research supports community problem solving. And while these partnerships have a long history with varying levels of impact, a focus on the role for universities in the “systems change” process is a relatively new one. Ultimately, A2SI can be a platform to advance the RGK Center’s mission of preparing the next generation of nonprofit and philanthropic leaders through graduate education and research by guiding students to think about the ecosystems they seek to leverage.
We’d love to hear about similar efforts focused on community-university partnerships to advance sustainable communities from our NACC colleagues when we convene in Indianapolis in early August. In the meantime, please visit our websites to learn more about A2SI (www.austinindicators.org) or the RGK Center (www.rgkcenter.org).
The Board’s Perspective
NACC Board Members Share their Thoughts
This feature of NACC News is intended to present the reasons members of the Board choose to serve NACC. They are asked to think about how they perceive their contributions to the organization and to
describe their views of NACC as it is now and where it’s going in the future.
Assistant Dean for Administration
Director, Center for Nonprofit Policy & Practice
Director, The Urban Center
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs
Cleveland State University
In the thinking out loud department...Recently, I have had cause to reflect on the work I've been doing for pretty close to 25 years at two institutions. I can stake a fair claim for any number of accomplishments as a manager of people, programs, and processes. But what would that number be?
Conservatively, I estimate resolving in some fashion two management dilemmas a day, five days a week, 50 weeks (assuming two vacation weeks off) per year, for 25 years. Something on the order of 12,500 management problems. (It's likely closer to 20,000 but why quibble?). Since I've been employed without interruption over those 25 years while working for 9 or 10 deans and others, few would argue that solving 12,500 management dilemmas and problems while keeping my job trends toward the positive.
On a typical day, I might illustrate some of the dilemmas as follows:
To my way of thinking, solving management dilemmas requires inductive and reflective learning. In fact, I think learning-by-doing is at the center of nonprofit management, nonprofit leadership, nonprofit governance.
As an historian, I consider context to be essential the most important component of problem solving and resolving management dilemmas. Nonprofit executives tell us that their most valuable learning occurs in the work place, with and from their peers. In my research on nonprofit first partnership endeavors (those from the perspective of the nonprofit actor), executives explain that formal education and academic degree programs do little to help them hire the right people; fire the right people; manage their budgets; align their programs correctly; select the right program mix for the best financial health of their organization; manage the politics of board governance, and on and on. Few if any cite the theory of the field that we in the University swear by.
So I guess my musing comes down to this: Since learning from our own experiences and those of peers is characteristic of nonprofit management, why do our research journals seem to doggedly follow the trail of public management, business, and social science research where counting things and measuring them is more prized above doing them?
I know the answer has to do with risk averse scholarship, career tracks for faculty, and the conventions of our industry; but I also think that there would no nonprofit studies if somebody, somewhere had not taken the first steps to recognizing the field as its own corpus of knowledge. I hope to have this discussion this summer at the up-coming NACC conference in Indianapolis. Looking forward to learning from colleagues on their experiences resolving management dilemmas.
Nu Lambda Mu Graduates Celebrate
NACC is proud to congratulate our 130 Nu Lambda Mu inductees for the Spring 2017 semester. The names of all graduates receiving the Nu Lambda Mu honor are listed at the end of this newsletter.
On May 3rd, 2017 the Nu Lambda Mu Nonprofit Honor Society – Arizona State University Chapter was
honored to induct seven new members into the Spring 2017 class in a ceremony held in Phoenix.
Pictured from left to right are: Richard Knopf, Ph.D., professor, ASU School of Community Resources & Development; Lili Wang, Ph.D., associate professor, ASU School of Community Resources & Development; Behrang Foroughi, Ph.D., assistant professor, ASU School of Community Resources & Development; Tyler Adams, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Leadership and Management Spring 2017 graduate; Thomas Avery, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Studies Spring 2010 graduate; Mark A. Hager, Ph.D., associate professor, ASU School of Community Resources & Development; Brenna Paes, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Leadership and Management Spring 2017 graduate; Robert F. Ashcraft, Ph.D., executive director, ASU Lodestar Center for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Innovation and associate professor, ASU School of Community Resources & Development; StanfordPrescott, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Leadership and Management Spring 2017 graduate; Brian Spicker, Senior Vice President of Community Impact, Valley of the Sun United Way and Carletha Sterling, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Leadership and Management candidate. (Not pictured in the Spring 2017 class of Nu Lambda Mu inductees: Michelle Bulriss, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Leadership and Management candidate; Dorilene Davies-Venn, Nu Lambda Mu inductee and Master of Nonprofit Studies Fall 2010 graduate).
NACC is proud to feature two of our NLM recipients.
Miriam Mendoza Moody is the Executive Assistant to the Director and Board Liaison at the Exploratorium in San Francisco. She coordinates high level meetings and has an overarching view of the organizations fiscal, fundraising and board governance stratagems.
Miriam received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Broadcast Communications Arts from San Francisco State
University and her Masters in Nonprofit Administration from the University of San Francisco.
Miriam joined the Exploratorium in May 2011 and helped move the museum from the Palace to the Piers in 2013. She continues to use her excellent communication skills to promote the mission of the institution and is an ambassador and advocate in bringing power for good to nonprofits during
Miriam is a native San Franciscan. She is fluent in Spanish, has raised 3 children, and enjoys riding her scooter around town.
Michelle J. Collier
A Californian at heart, Michelle Collier grew up on the East Coast, and came out west right after high school to attend UC Santa Cruz. She majored in Feminist Studies and graduated with honors in 2004. She spent the next several yearsvolunteering and working abroad in Australia, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. Michelle say, “I did everything from building cabanas in the rainforest of Costa Rica, to painting a community mural on a village school in Ecuador, to working at an elephant sanctuary in Thailand.” After her travels, she made her home in San Francisco.
Michelle began her nonprofit career in 2008 at a small environmental nonprofit focused on permaculture design. Since 2012, she has worked at Playworks, a national nonprofit that uses play to promote social-emotional learning for elementary school kids. She currently serves as the Development Director for three Northern California Playworks offices, now leading a team of seven in achieving a $2 million fundraising goal to support Playworks in more than 200 schools in the Bay Area. “I’m inspired by our mission at Playworks because playing on the playground, in a respectful and inclusive way opens so many doors for our students. We’ve seen some huge changes in our partner schools thanks to our programs - less bullying, more physical activity, and increased learning minutes.”
In fall of 2015, she presented at Salesforce’s Dreamforce conference on corporate volunteerism and engagement. Her current portfolio includes corporate and institutional partnerships, major gifts, event
planning, grant writing, and development planning and oversight.
Michelle completed her Master of Nonprofit Administration degree from University of San Francisco in May 2017, and joined Nu Lamda Mu in her last semester. “I plan to be an Executive Director of a nonprofit someday soon. Outside of work and school, I love being active outdoors and making and seeing art,” says Michelle.
To find out more about Playworks, please visit http://www.playworks.org/.
Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership
We’re excited to share the special issue of JNE&L featuring papers from the 2016 NACC Accreditation Summit (Texas A&M University, July 2016) in is now available. As a special courtesy, NACC has purchased one complimentary print copy of the special issue for each of our 51 NACC Members. NACC Member Representatives should be receiving this complimentary issue within a few weeks if you haven’t already. JNE&L has also extended the discounted price of $40 to all NACC members for an individual subscription purchase which will include both special issues to come out this year—that will be 6 issues for $40. Or, members can purchase extra copies of the special issue on its own without a subscription for a one-time price. Below is the information to view the issue now online, or to order additional copies or subscriptions.
Print only: http://www.sagamorepub.com/products/jnel-special-issue-one-2017-print
Online only: http://www.sagamorepub.com/products/jnel-special-issue-one-2017-online
Print and Online: http://www.sagamorepub.com/products/jnel-special-issue-one-2017-print-and-online
Free article "Accreditation: Seven Perspectives From Outside Academia" by JNEL Editor Norman A.
Code for members to receive 50% off individual subscription price:
Go here: http://www.sagamorejournals.com/jnel-association-offer
And enter code: NACCJNEL50
The Master of Nonprofit Administration MNA
program at University of San Francisco, in its redesigned curricula, has integrated the NACC guidelines with innovative competencies like social impact analysis, global ethics, and sustainability mindset. It has also re-centered its teaching and learning along experiential learning with consulting practices for nonprofits (practicum course) and career related social sector data analysis research (capstone projects). The program, under the leadership of Dr. Marco Tavanti, has also initiated professional certificate programs in specialized nonprofit areas forsocial entrepreneurship, sustainable development reporting, humanitarian emergency, and refugee service management.
This 36 credit program is offered as a full-time 12 month program or a part-time 21 month program for those immersed in full-time jobs. Many MNA alumni are nonprofit leaders with executive positions at nonprofit corporations and other social economy organizations, including foundations, social enterprises, voluntary associations, faith-based organizations, communitybased organizations, and international nongovernmental organizations. In addition to studying in San Francisco’s dynamic nonprofit environment, graduate students benefit from the program’s project based learning, experienced faculty, global immersions and richly diverse cohorts. In line with the University’s motto change the world from here the MNA program promotescompetent nonprofit leaders and effective managers for innovative, strategic and systemic solutions to make
the world a better place.
2017 Academic Global
Immersion Program on Refugee
Service, Forced Migration &
Human Trafficking in Rome, Italy.
Pastors receive financial management and leadership training through School of Business and Nonprofit Management, Axelson Center for Nonprofit Management, and the Seminary.
Professor and Dean
School of Business and Nonprofit Management
North Park University
Lilly Endowment’s National Initiative to Address Economic Challenges Facing Pastoral Leaders awarded North Park University with a $750,000 grant to provide specialized curriculum and programming geared for pastors and church leaders. To lead financially strong congregations, pastoral leaders need to be well versed in accounting, finance, human resources, and operations. As such, the seasoned educators from
North Park University’s School of Business and Nonprofit Management (SBNM) and the Axelson Center for Nonprofit Management (Axelson Center) will work with North Park Theological Seminary (NPTS) to readily offer pastors financial management and leadership training.
North Park joins other higher education grant recipients Northwestern, Villanova, and Seton Hall universities, as well as magazine and online publication Christianity Today. Rev. Dr. David
Kersten, dean of North Park Theological Seminary and vice president of church relations remarks, “I hope this national effort will form a closer relationship between business schools and seminaries.”
With North Park’s existing dual master degree program in seminary and business, the University is well-positioned to provide immediate instruction to pastoral leaders. In courses from both the business and nonprofit management school and seminary, students acquire the business skills they need to run financially strong congregations, in conjunction with their calling to serve the church.
Faculty and staff of the NACC Affiliated, Lodestar Center for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Innovation, Arizona State University (Phoenix) hosted a delegation from the Center for Civil Society and Nonprofit Management (CSNM) at Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen Thailand. The purpose of the visit was to explore collaborative research and education opportunities between respective centers and universities.
During the two-day visit, the visitors were introduced to NACC and its curricular guidelines along with various models of collaboration already in place between ASU and global partners involving joint degree programs and the delivery of the ASU Lodestar Center’s Nonprofit Management Institute professional development and executive education portfolio through online means to stakeholders of the Khon Kaen region.
Pictured (left to right) are: Mr. Rattaphon Pitakthepsombat (USAID Civil Society Partnerships Project), Dr. Robert Ashcraft (ASU Lodestar Center), Dr. Kathy Andereck, (ASU School of Community Resources and Development), Dr. Sataporn Roengtam (CSNM), Dr. Buapun Promphakping (CSNM), and Dr. Jonathan Koppell (ASU College of Public Service and Community Solutions).
Auburn University MPA Program: More Than Auburn Footgolf Event
Soccer balls, laughter, a golf course, more than twenty participants and one worthy cause were the glue
that held together the spring event for the Auburn University MPA program’s student-led service
organization, More Than Auburn. On April 1st of this year, More Than Auburn hosted the 1st Annual Footgolf tournament to benefit Hope Alliance, a nonprofit organization based in Liberia, West Africa, which works to combat corruption and promote transparency and community development. The Auburn University MPA Program’s More than Auburn group raised $1,700 to support the work of Hope Alliance.
To ensure this event was successful, More Than Auburn students applied knowledge and skills gained during their nonprofit program coursework. They worked together on event planning, coordinating coffee and pastries for breakfast, one round of footgolf for each team, and a full lunch. They also executed a silent auction, which contained over ten items up for bid. This required that they solicit donations, package them for bidding, and create bid sheets. They engaged donors and volunteers for the event, and put their marketing and communication skills to work to recruit participants. They also honed their advocacy skills with a presentation on behalf of the MPA program, as well as the beneficiary organization.
The success of the More Than Auburn team exemplifies the commitment of the Auburn University MPA program to instilling a sense of civic agency in our students. Civic agency imparts in students the ability to work collaboratively, in order to strengthen communities and solve public problems. The Auburn MPA program promotes civic agency in our students not only by providing them with the knowledge, skills, and abilities they need to create change, but also by instilling students with the motivation and values to make a difference in their communities, and in the world. We build our students’ sense of civic agency beginning with our curriculum, but also by purposefully moving beyond the classroom to engage them in participatory, collaborative, and process-oriented activities through mechanisms such as More Than Auburn. This allows them to develop and build their own sense of civic agency, and gives them the opportunity to apply it in a community setting.
Each semester, More Than Auburn students are presented with a global partner facing a pressing need. They are tasked with addressing this need using skills gained in the classroom, and also through group dialogue and deliberation that leads to the design and implementation of programs and activities that successfully meet partner needs. These students devote their time and resources to engage in activities that are unlike their traditional classroom experience. That can be uncomfortable as they wrestle with uncertainty. While this means that sometimes failure can occur, it also means that students become more capable of embracing the ambiguity that is part of our increasing complex environment. Over the past three years, our students have planned and executed local community fundraisers, completed a resource development plan for a small nonprofit looking to engage innovative fundraising tools to drive strategic growth, and conducted a needs assessment and subsequently developed a “voluntourism” pilot program for a global INGO.
More Than Auburn is also a demonstration of civic agency in and of itself. The student group was formed by students, who engaged in learning how to charter a student organization. They worked together, with faculty guidance, to develop the organizational materials and obtain University sanction for operating as an official student group. In the process, they learned and demonstrated skills that will translate in to their careers in public service, whether as staff, board members, or community volunteers.
The More Than Auburn student group includes students from China, India, Nigeria, and the United States. The diversity within the team and the capability of the team members to work closely with one another to create and deliver a successful fundraiser for a nonprofit located on a different continent, emphasize their growing ability to act as civic agents not just in their own local community, but across the globe.
Dennis R. Young, Executive in Residence, Cleveland State University and Professor Emeritus, Georgia State University
This book applies benefits theory to the financing of nonprofit and other social purpose organizations. Individual chapters are devoted to organizations primarily reliant on earned income, gifts, government support and investment income, respectively, as well as organizations that are highly diversified in their sources of operating support. The book is intended to guide managers andleaders towards finding the best mix of income sources for their organizations, to help educate future managers about resource development and to stimulate additional research on the financing
of nonprofits and other forms of social enterprise.
A 35% discount is available using the code VIP35. The 1st chapter is available without charge.
Looking for a job in a nonprofit academic institution? Go to the Job Opportunities tab on the NACC website for the latest job postings from NACC institutional members.
Please, members, take note: job postings can be added to NACC News and posted on the NACC website.
This is a free service and exclusive to members. Email a link to the job posting along with a brief description of the position description of the position to Linda Serra.
Do you have news or event notices to share? Please send to Linda Serra.
If you no longer wish to receive NACC News, please send an email to Linda Serra with your email address
and the words “unsubscribe NACC News” in the subject line.
Linda Serra, Editor, email@example.com. Nonprofit Academic Centers Council, 2121 Euclid Avenue, UR120, Cleveland, OH 44155