developing a community foundation affiliate A Case study | April 2006 comparing efforts in three regions of sonoma county: healdsburg • west county • petaluma richard burg simple idea supported by: table of contents Executive Summary | 3 Introduction | 5 Context | 7 Healdsburg Area Affiliate | 11 West County Exploration | 21 Petaluma Proposals | 28 Analysis | 36 Conclusions | 42 Questions For Reflection | 48 Appendices | 50 Author’s Note | 56 Acknowledgements | 57 click to jump to chapter developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  executive summary in 2002, Community Foundation Sonoma County began an outreach effort in four distinct areas of the county, with the goal of establishing one or more affiliate funds. Inspired and shaped by a monograph published by The James Irvine Foundation in 2001, the Community Foundation efforts were initially focused on Healdsburg, Petaluma, West County and Sonoma Valley. The idealized goal was to launch an affiliate fund in each geographic area. While that did not occur, significant benefit has been realized. This report, supported by The James Irvine Foundation, documents these efforts in the hope that other community foundations interested in starting affiliate funds might benefit from the strategies and processes applied here. Of the four areas, Healdsburg is the only one to have created an affiliate, with an endowment that is now approaching $1 million. Sonoma Valley was not investigated for this report, due to a lack of activity in the time period studied. In West County and Petaluma, significant efforts were made to find a path to the formation of affiliates, but for varying reasons, none led to the desired outcomes. Healdsburg’s success could, in part, be attributed to the determination of the initiators and the good fortune of having a benefactor who put up a significant matching grant. However, as this document indicates, Healdsburg’s success was also built upon an unusual combination of individual commitment, group cohesion, and a clearly defined goal. These elements were lacking in West County and Petaluma. This report looks closely at what occurred in each community, comparing and contrasting each community’s philanthropic endeavors and idiosyncrasies. It examines and discusses the strategies used in each, and offers an analysis of what worked and what didn’t. The report is aimed at both community foundation professionals and community members who are interested in the processes, successes, constraints, and results of affiliate outreach efforts in three very different communities. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  executive summary continued The report outlines the activities that led to the birth of a successful affiliate in Healdsburg: a core of volunteers began as a loose group, over time becoming a committed team and eventually forming an affiliate advisory board. Healdsburg’s story suggests that this process cannot be driven solely by individuals or an organization, but needs citizen participants working for the whole. In Petaluma and West County there was no champion driving the formation of an endowment, although each in its own way was rich in philanthropic institutions and impulses. Without an idea born from within, neither ever witnessed the emergence of a group that imag- ined and nurtured a new institution. The report is supplemented by numerous appendices. There are timelines for Healdsburg, and links to source materials used in each area. In Healdsburg’s case, there are formation documents, collateral materials, newspaper stories, and current web-based documentation. There are also web links to resources at The James Irvine Foundation which provided some of the impetus and ideas for affiliates. This document is on the web site of Community Foundation Sonoma County: http://www.sonomacf.org/Affiliate_Case_Study/REPORT.pdf developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  introduction C ommunity is one of the strongest expressions of the social impulse of humanity. We use this word when we want to reference a qualitatively different experience of a group. It permits us to transcend political boundaries, religious affiliations, fraternal collectives, and other social structures with strong membership criteria. Community embraces the edges of our collective experience, both implying and confirming our interdependence. It is a big and generous word, which often inspires generous acts. If we look at it as a phenomenon which describes boundaries, we’ll see that it is more permeable than patriotism, tribalism, nationalism, and other identifying characteristics of human collectives. We get pleasure from participating in and find safety recognizing the community we live in. Recognizing our community allows us to support it, give to it, and share with it, in ways that pull us out of our daily routine and self absorption. We can respond to the needs of our community without demanding to know the names of beneficiaries. Serving the needs of the community is knowledge enough. one hundred & fifty years ago, in a small agricultural town in Northern California, Harmon Heald opened a general store, laid out a street grid and sold lots — but he also deeded plots of land to local religious denominations for the building of houses of worship. Significantly, he designed his town around an open public space, which — depending on the viewer’s background — evokes a village green, a town commons, or a Spanish-style plaza. Heald’s Plaza is still in downtown Healdsburg and continues to be a center of civic life and a source of pride. The spirit of generosity in Heald’s gift continues six generations later. Today, both new and established Healdsburg families recognize the need to reach outside their circles of comfort, by supporting and leading community institutions. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  introduction continued This is the story and analysis of the launch of the Healdsburg Area Affiliate, Community Foundation Sonoma County. This report identifies Critical Success Factors that enabled the rapid and robust establishment of a new philanthropic institution that created a new community endowment. The report also compares two parallel efforts elsewhere in Sonoma County that did not result in the forma- tion of affiliates. They are all part of the region Community Founda- tion Sonoma County serves, and were included in an outreach effort begun in 2001 and sustained in part by funds from The James Irvine Foundation. Beginning in July 2002, conversations between a few individuals led to the formation of an Organizing Committee in Healdsburg. By the end of 2004, a formal Advisory Board had been created, the first competetive grant cycle had taken place, and the Affiliate had more than $1.9 million in all funds, including the endowment, the Healdsburg Area Fund, with nearly $600,000. Healdsburg’s experience might be encouraging and potentially useful to other Community Foundations in other regions interested in launching affiliates. This report considers the individuals involved and their social networks, the structure of the original working group, the impact of demographics, the support and guidance offered by Community Foundation staff, and the sequence of steps taken. “The key to an affiliate’s In Petaluma and West Sonoma County, efforts were also made success is having to explore the formation of affiliates, but no leadership emerged to relationships with people.” sustain the development. What was different in Petaluma and the West County? The Community Foundation staff had made contact CH and believed there were viable nodes of interest. These proved to be CFSC consultant unproductive after informational meetings were held to explain the affiliate concept and seek interest and potential support. To set the stage for the analysis, contextual information is presented about each community. This report is based upon more than thirty interviews with community members, staff from nonprofits, Community Foundation staff, board members and donors. They generously shared their experiences, notes, and recollections. This anecdotal data is used to explore what contributed to the rapid establishment and sustained growth of the Healdsburg Area Affiliate. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  context I n 2002, Sonoma County was in the throes of an economic downturn, as was the rest of the country. The recession had begun prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but worsened after. The downturn hit hard in “Telecom Valley” in the south of the county, where a cluster of high-tech firms had emerged as innovators in internet technology and become a significant economic engine. Economic growth slowed throughout the county — the consolidation of companies continues today. The residential building boom of the 1990’s slowed, as did the resources and interest in charitable giving. As a balancing factor, Sonoma County had been “discovered” by well-off, mobile retirees who sometimes come from places where a culture of philanthropy is better established. Sonoma County an hour north of the San Francisco Bay Area, Sonoma County is a large and geographically diverse region of slightly more than 1 million acres, 50 miles long and 30 miles wide. It stretches from the Pacific Ocean to the Mayacamas Mountain range, includes several very productive valleys, known for their wine grapes, and to the southeast, reaches the northernmost tip of San Pablo Bay, which connects to San Francisco Bay. At the time of the 2000 census, the population of 458,000 was distributed widely, with 65% living in nine cities, 10% in unincorporated communities, and 25% in rural areas. Between 1990 and 2000, the population grew 18%. The county has more than 1,500 nonprofit organizations. The cities of the county range in size and character from sleepy and funky Cotati (population 6,431) to the bustling and fast-growing county seat, Santa Rosa (population 147,595). The three cities discussed in this report represent 16% of the population of the county. Each community has a “sphere of influence,” which includes rural areas that interact with the larger towns for shopping, education, culture, and social life. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  context continued Community Foundation Sonoma County community concerns about adequate funding for human services led to the founding of Community Foundation Sonoma County in 1983 with an initial gift of $9,000. In 1984 it merged with the Santa Rosa Foundation. By 1988 it had $1 million in assets. Until 1996 the Community Foundation had a relatively low profile, which changed when it received a $16 million bequest from the Charles DeMeo Trust, designated for support of a teen center and for homeless families. The DeMeo bequest attracted larger donations and allowed the Community Foundation to increase its distributions and visibility. Today the Community Foundation’s assets total $115 million and a cumulative total of $57 million has been distributed in grants. In February of 2002, the Sonoma County Community Foundation was renamed, Community Foundation Sonoma County. The name change was intended to make it clear that the organization was not part of county government. Still, several interviewees in Petaluma referred to it as “that Santa Rosa foundation.” There is a long standing competition between these two communities, dating back to the Civil War. Santa Rosa was for the Confederacy. Petaluma was not only a Yankee city, but also believed it should have been the county seat. It is not surprising that a Santa Rosa-based organization would be referred to as ‘other,’ even imprecisely. Community Foundation Sonoma County participated in the Community Foundations Initiative, a program of The James Irvine Foundation. Begun in 1995, it was a seven-year, $11 million effort to “assist seven small/mid-sized community foundations to increase their philanthropic capacity, leadership roles and ability to serve as a catalyst for positive change in their communities.” The plan was to accelerate growth, build capabilities, and generally become more effective philanthropic catalysts. But in 2001, the Community Foundation began to experience significant fiscal constraints, due to regional and global economic trends, reflected in stock market performance. Income from fees on fund balances was well below the levels of previous years, and it was necessary to reduce overhead. At the beginning of 2002 the equivalent of three full time staff were lost through reduced hours and layoffs. The staff reduction included the loss of the Vice President, Develop- ment and the arrival of her part time replacement. It would be an developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  context continued understatement to describe the situation as a blow to organizational capacity. It was particularly unfortunate that this contraction occurred simultaneously with the end of funding from the Community Foundations Initiative. In 2002 the League of California Community Foundations created the Visibility Campaign to disseminate information and increase the visibility of 29 community foundations in California. This included a web site and the sharing of materials among members; it also provided Community Foundation Sonoma County added incen- tive to initiate an outreach effort. Irvine Outreach Grant in october 2002 , The James Irvine Foundation provided a six-month, $35,000 grant to Community Foundation Sonoma County to support the creation of affiliate funds in Petaluma, Sebastopol, Sonoma Valley, and Healdsburg, using the model described in the publication Affiliate Funds: A Rising Practice in Community Philanthropy. The Irvine Foundation’s long-standing interest in the field of community foundations joined with initial efforts launched by the Community Foundation. The scheduled departure of the Vice President, Development of the Community Foundation and the increased pace of activity in several Sonoma County communities led to the request for this support. Both institutions recognized the importance of building local philanthropic and leadership capacity and this specific opportunity allowed Irvine to support the Community Foundation. The hope was that this support might create a framework for other community foundations as they sought to develop the fund- raising and grant-making capacities of affiliates. The Whole Wide World while this report primarily examines the success of Healdsburg and offers interpretations of different outcomes in Petaluma and West County, there were global trends worth noting, because they were in the news and on the minds of everyone involved in these efforts. We start our examination in the beginning of 2002, four months after the terrorist attacks on the East Coast. Even in California, the world had not quite righted itself. Tourism, the lifeblood of so many California communities, was severely impacted by 9/11. As life continued, the unbelievable magnitude of the attack’s impact began to diminish, but the national mood clearly dampened collective enthusiasm for the future. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study |  context continued The economy, the underlying engine for personal philanthropy, was in a downward slide. The local manifestation of the technology boom, Petaluma’s “Telecom Valley,” began to struggle and shed jobs, and capital became scarce, gifts smaller, returns on assets lower. Families tightened their belts and nonprofits felt a dramatic change. The state economy experienced the largest deficit in decades, with the double impacts of energy deregulation and heavy losses in personal wealth (and subsequent lower tax collections). It was against this uncertain backdrop of world and regional upheaval that Healdsburg succeeded in launching an affiliate, yet nothing came to fruition in two other communities. There was no clear-cut beginning to this idea in these two communities; there had been earlier conversations in each. For some, the Community Foundation was already a known quantity, as a vehicle for donation, a grant maker, or a sponsor of a charitable enterprise noted by the media. But The James Irvine Foundation had published its monograph on affiliates in November of 2001 — the idea was in the air, and was a focus of conversation at the Community Foundation’s Board Retreat in late 2002. It is not surprising that in one community, one person’s idea of a local foundation led to a relationship with Community Foundation Sonoma County. developing a community foundation affiliate | A Case Study | 10