28 Comments - Gruntled University Employee - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:48 am: Hang in there little Buckeroo. Fake Bruce Rauner - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:51 am: (Snark) Diana Rauner wants everyone to remember Bruce has no social agenda, and Diana thinks very highly about JB and the Pritzkers who bailed out The Ounce when they needed that $5 million. So, there’s that… (End Snark) - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:57 am: Just a friendly reminder as Diana and Bruce Rauner donate millions to Raunerites willing to destroy social services… http://prn.to/2nq8L7m ===”More than three decades of experience have led us to identify some big bets that have the potential to transform early learning. We are so grateful to the J.B. and M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation for sharing our belief in these innovations,” said Diana Rauner, president of the Ounce of Prevention Fund. “By developing strong leaders and programs, empowering parents and strengthening early learning systems, together we can change lives for children and families.”=== Sounds like JB Pritzker cares about people abs children. Diana Rauner tells me so. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:58 am: ===“I’m a nervous wreck,” said owner Cassie Waterman. “I don’t know how next month I’m going to continue to run my facility.”=== Bruce Rauner says he’s never been happier. Says he loves his job. Also, he says your pain and suffering will be rewarded once we freeze property taxes for a few years to starve our schools a little more. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:11 pm: For those who believe that willfully not paying your bills is a legitimate political tactic to achieve an obtuse partisan agenda, any predictable, misanthropic outcome can be rationalized. Embrace your complicity, see you in church. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:11 pm: analysis of services directly provided by governments always leads me to question whether services are in the right location or if more, or less, are needed in places. I wonder the same thing about not for profits. there was an article recently (Crain’s?) that discusses whether a not for profit should exist as there are often many for the same issue. the example that showed how many literacy organizations that exist was pretty compelling as there were lots and lots of groups. I often wish that there were a comprehensive map of groups by area of service so that one could actually picture where the services are. It’s sad when a group serves and cannot get the money from the state. Need should be more apparent. I wonder if anyone is actually assessing how services are delivered, where there are holes in need of particular Not for profit needs, and where there are groups overlapping. also wonder with NFPs about tax loss where NFP provides breaks not afforded to for profit/ individual. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:14 pm: - Amalia - So you are an advocate of squeezing the beast? Don’t pay what’s owed, see who can stick it out, try to work around the damage by getting into honest contracts with no intention on paying in hopes these services will foolishly think they will get paid, but in reality it’s a sham to close many down? Or… something else… Help me understand what you’re saying here. - Slippin' Jimmy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:21 pm: What word said. - blue dog dem - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:36 pm: Amalia. Very good comments. When running the old widget factory, I was amazed at how many different entities in the state provided re-training, relocation services. At one point I think I dealt with 8 state agencies that seemed pretty darn similar. - Pundent - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:53 pm: Always good to hear the old waste and inefficiency crowd weigh in on this. Of course there’s an opportunity to consider other ways of delivering social services. But simply burning down the net to rebuild it according to your model of efficiency is beyond immoral. These are some of the most disadvantaged people in our society and nobody is getting rich delivering services to them. I suppose therein lies the problem. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:19 pm: OW, not in favor of squeezing. simply think there needs to be more analysis. I’ve long thought that mapping of not for profits was important to see where there are holes and overlap. the article re the group that used to be called the Donor’s Forum was sobering. I believe I read 100 groups devoted to literacy in Chicago. does that indicated a huge need? I say yes. but is 100 groups the best way to tackle the issue? that is just one example. the key is to serve the need. If you ask me about military analysis, you will hear the same thing. do we need the bases where they are? what is the real need? Policy analysis includes organizational analysis. Not for profits are organizations that serve needs not met by government. but, their existence is not the need. the need is the need. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:26 pm: - Amalia - Analyzing isn’t going into s contractual obligation knowingly to default to reduce and eliminate social service providers without those social service providers knowing that. That’s exactly what’s happening. Not what you are describing. It’s not even close. This governor misled, by stiffing signed contracts to reduce social service providers, forcing the closure of many, that unbeknownst to them, the contract they signed was designed to ruin their organization or agency. Big difference. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:33 pm: OW, get that. and agree. but looking at the bigger picture. with limited funds, that is always the thing that must be done long term. - JPC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:34 pm: @Amalia: Your general point that there might be overlap in NPs seems like a basically sound one. However, there are two issues. First, who will oversee an organized system of NPs? The whole point of the fact that the NPs and not government services is that the market for their services, such as it is, will sort itself out. Second, starving them off one-by-one doesn’t seem to be the most efficient, reliable, and just way to find out. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:36 pm: ===but looking at the bigger picture. with limited funds, that is always the thing that must be done long term=== With great respect, What you are saying is going on. Right now. Today. If you agree with me, then what you’re saying above makes no sense. Rauner has decided to do that, in a scheme using a contract. - Responsa - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:45 pm: Amalia –you speak for and have your finger on the pulse of a lot of citizens who want these kinds of issues to be looked at– wonder why they have not been addressed as the crisis unfolded, and you have articulated it all very well. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:45 pm: @JPC, I think funders need to do that. that often means government, but it also means private funders. there is a start going on with what is happening at Forefront (Donor’s Forum to us old school folks) The Crain’s article is “We have too many nonprofits. Here’s why that matters.” There are money needs, volunteer needs, leadership needs, and only so much to go around when the only need that matters is the need to be met in people to be served. the question is how. With over 100 literacy NFPs in Chicago alone, is that the best way to solve a problem? If I were Mayor of Chicago, I would be mapping the groups, finding ways to make them work together/merge. every time there is a shooting, someone talks about starting a not for profit. it’s always in the news. not the best way to solve a problem. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:48 pm: @Responsa. thanks, but be sure not to misinterpret my approach. it is likely that what would be identified is more holes in need, greater money, but delivered differently. what I’m after is efficiency in service. clarity to those in need. the public sector that is not government run must be more efficient. it is the job of government to figure out how to do that. it is often quite political. it needs to be geographically driven, but not electoral district driven. - Honeybear - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:48 pm: Amelia The vast number of these NFP Orgs are getting money from the United Way which make them undergo a rigorous evaluation process each year judged by a trained group of evaluators which are volunteers and have no association with the NFPs they are evaluating. This the process you propose is already being done with the vast majority. Poor NFP rarely make it far. This is personal first hand knowledge, not hearsay. - JPC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:54 pm: @Amalia, I think people get your basic point–maybe there are too many NPs. NPs are not government-run–that’s the whole point if I’m not mistaken. They’re private, market-based kinds of things. No one can tell you that you can’t have one if you want to have one. Naturally, the government is free not to give you money, as they do in lots of cases, I imagine. But maybe you’re suggesting we centralize the work of NPs by turning it over to the state. That places burdens now on the state that the NPs were supposed to address (including, er, budgetary burdens). Maybe, to be somewhat deflationary, a stronger point might be this: people should support efficient not for profits. Someone should open a NP that evaluates the efficiency of NPs. - Honeybear - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:58 pm: I used to say this all the time. Please understand I am an expert in this field. The damage done to the private social service agencies Will take Decades To repair and rebuild. Republicans are solely to blame. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 2:05 pm: Bruce Rauner: “We’ll take short-term pain for big long-term gain.” It’s a real shame that those folks in adult day care & nursing homes don’t take a more long-term view of things. – MrJM - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 2:37 pm: and the United Way is losing money, cutting staff. there must be a broad look at need and how to serve need. One hostage at a time is sad, but the whole picture is worse. In my life I have been on the boards of multiple citywide not for profits and I’ve also been in the position of overseeing delegate agencies for services. Government funding is necessary. analysis is also. - Ron - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:01 pm: And United Way is one of the worst non profits out there. I completely agree with Amalia. At least in my experience there are way too many non profits out there trying to do the same thing. Many are far too small with little experience and resources. I believe MacArthur Foundation has recently cut back on the number of non profits it works with. This is good. Many need to go close as they are generally useless. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:10 pm: @Ron. to be clear, I don’t have a problem with the United Way. They are losing money as part of the bigger issue. as to whether groups are “useless,” I would not use that characterization. I do think the effort for service that is not for profit based needs more focus. And probably more money. - Lynn S. - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 5:37 am: I’m a member of the Junior League in my town, and spent the last year serving on the committee that evaluates proposals and issues grants to local non-profits. We do 2 rounds of funding–fall and spring– and by the second round I was starting to get rather annoyed with the “me too” aspects that seemed to be the reason for the founding of some non-profits. Several of them should have been programs or divisions of the local YMCA or the Girl Scouts, not 501(c)3’s. But it’s a lot more prestigious to start a 501(c)3… (Just ask Chris Kennedy) - Amalia - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:11 pm: except the Chris Kennedy group is doing some spectacular work treating those in need of food with dignity in addition to serving need. - Chicago Barb - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 3:32 pm: In my experience, nonprofits try very hard not to step on each others’ toes. Collaboration and partnership is how we work together. Chicago is a big city with a lot of schools. If small groups are tackling individual school territories, more power to them. State contracts are usually based on geography so little overlap. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.