-
Notes
- Brookings Institution Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Chapter One 1. Claire Gaudiani, “Sustaining America’s Tradition of Generosity,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, October 2, 2003; Jeffrey Berry, “Nonprofit Groups Shouldn’t Be Afraid to Lobby,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, November 27, 2003; Lester Salamon, “Nonprofit World Faces Many Dangers ,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, January 8, 2004; William Schambra, “The New Politics of Philanthropy,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, November 13, 2003; Pablo Eisenberg, “What Congress Can Do to Fight Charity and Foundation Abuses,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, March 18, 2004. 2. For an insightful discussion of the impact of state budgets on nonprofits and the impact of economic recession on the nonprofit sector, see Wood Bowman, “Fiscal Crisis in the States: Its Impact on Nonprofit Organizations and the People They Serve” (Washington: Aspen Institute, Nonprofit Sector Research Fund, November 18, 2003). 3. The survey of 770 randomly selected Americans was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates on behalf of the Center for Public Service on October 2–12, 2003. 4. Bill Bradley, Paul Jansen, and Les Silverman, “The Nonprofit Sector’s $100 Billion Opportunity,” Harvard Business Review (May 2003), reprint R0305G, p. 1. 5. Lester Salamon, “Charities Shouldn’t Be Urged to Act Like Enron,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, May 29, 2003. 6. Alison Fine, “Letter to the Editor,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, August 7, 2003 (www.philanthropy.com [accessed on March 3, 2004]). 7. Robert Egger with Howard Yoon, Begging for Change: The Dollars and Sense of Making Nonprofits Responsive, Efficient, and Rewarding for All (HarperBusiness, 2004). 8. Paul C. Light, Making Nonprofits Work (Brookings, 2000); Paul C. Light, Pathways to Nonprofit Excellence (Brookings, 2002). Notes 197 9. Paul C. Light, Monitoring Government: Federal Inspectors General and the Search for Accountability (Brookings, 1993). Chapter Two 1. The list can be found in Paul C. Light, Government’s Greatest Achievements: From Civil Rights to Homeland Security (Brookings, 2002). 2. See Paul C. Light, “Nonprofit-Like: Tongue-Twister or Aspiration,” Nonprofit Quarterly , vol. 8, no. 2 (Summer 2001), available at www.tsne.org/print/87.html [May 7, 2004]. 3. The survey of the nonprofit work force was conducted from October 29, 2001, to January 2, 2002, and involved a random sample of 1,140 employees; the survey of federal employees was conducted from February 7 to June 1, 2001, and involved 1,051 employees ; and the survey of private sector employees was conducted from May 11, 2001, to January 22, 2002, and involved 1,005 employees. The 1,140 nonprofit employees were reached through random-digit telephone dialing, conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates. The interviews averaged twenty-seven minutes in length, and interviewers made up to twenty calls to each sampled respondent in an attempt to complete the interview. The sample was randomly drawn to ensure representation of all nonprofit employees. Although it is not an exact census, it does reveal the general demographic shape of the sector. Demographic patterns might vary substantially across subsectors such as community-based organizations, child care agencies, think tanks, hospitals, and so forth. The response rate for the overall survey was 71 percent. For results based on the total sample , one can say with 95 percent confidence that the error attributable to sampling and other random effects was within approximately plus or minus 3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, wording of the question and practical difficulties in conducting telephone surveys could introduce error or bias into the findings of this survey. By sex, 32 percent of the sample was male, 68 percent female. By age, 11 percent of the sample was eighteen to twenty-nine years of age, 13 percent was thirty to thirty-nine years of age, 33 percent was forty to forty-nine years of age, and 32 percent was fifty years of age or older. By race-ethnicity, 84 percent of the sample was white, 7 percent African American, 4 percent Latino or Hispanic, 3 percent other, and 1 percent Asian or Pacific Islander. By organizational mission, 33 percent of the sample worked in health, 39 percent in education, 25 percent in social services, 7 percent in economic or community development, 2 percent in arts, 2 percent in science, and 1 percent in environmental organizations. By age, 4 percent of the sample worked in organizations that were less than seven years old, 8 percent worked in organizations seven to fifteen years old, 18 percent worked in organizations fifteen to thirty years old, and 70 percent worked in organizations more than thirty years old. By scope, 79 percent of the sample...