ICTworks by Inveneo

This is an interesting study about the impact that technology has had on the philanthropy landscape (enterprises and funders) and its role in changing the way things are done within these institutions. The writers also glance at how technology will continue to impact how things are done in the sector. It would be interesting to juxtapose this study with the impact introduction of technology has on supply chains, connectivity and economic returns through on the ground results from the work of the enterprises and funders in question.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary
This monograph explores the immediate and longer-term implications of networked digital technologies for philanthropy. Our claim is that information networks are transforming philanthropy. Enormous databases and powerful new visualization tools can be accessed instantly by anyone, at any time.
We provide a brief overview of the philanthropic landscape, followed by an explanation of the “long tail” of giving and receiving.

Case studies of FasterCures and the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation show how information networks have transformed the grantmaking strategies of some institutional funders. Next, we examine how networked technologies are affecting five philanthropic practices:

• Setting goals and formulating strategy: how funders and enterprises make decisions about what to do, where, and how.
• Building social capital: how funders and enterprises support one another, cooperate, and collaborate.
• Measuring progress: how funders and enterprises set benchmarks, measure outputs, and make course corrections along the way.
• Measuring outcomes and impact: how funders and enterprises know whether what they’ve done has made a difference.
• Accounting for the work: how funders and enterprises account for what they do, to the public at large and to regulators.

We then offer a glimpse of what is to come. While the future is unknowable to a large degree, we feel confident in predicting we’ll see an increase in the following three phenomena:
• New blendings of market-based and nonmarket solutions.
• Networked, boundaryless, and often temporary alliances that call for the creation of new ways of activating, coordinating, and governing cooperative efforts.
• More and better data, more readily available and at lower cost.

We conclude by pointing out that inequities of access and capacity prevent many individuals and institutions from benefitting from information networks. We believe the next decade will see
explosive growth in networking for good, creating opportunities for creative solutions to large social problems.

The New York Times has put out its annual section on Giving, which focuses on charities, mostly in the US, and on the entire philanthropy sector. This generally includes international aid and other government efforts, but in a worldwide economic downturn, this year's focus is mainly on opportunities and responsibilities within the US. (For example, one article discusses the efforts within the new Office of Social Innovation at the White House, which deals mainly with domestic nonprofit work and volunteerism. No mention of USAID's new administrator or really any of the philanthropic efforts in Africa or the Global South.)

It's not the most exciting rundown I've seen. In fact, it got a pretty harsh critique from a media blogger, who agreed that it's pretty ho-hum.

This is was a great opportunity to share insights into the American donation industry to the rest of the world... and the NYT missed out.

What do you think? See also the Wall Street Journal's Philanthropy Section, which leads with the provocative title "What's Wrong With Charitable Giving - and How to Fix It." Why did the WSJ do a better job? Charities and grants and foundations are about more than just money... so why did a money-focused newspaper do such a better job?