No result found
COVID-19 has had an immediate and dramatic impact on the economy, and especially on nonprofit organizations. Public Allies' is an intermediary working with hundreds of nonprofits in communities across the country. It is uniquely positioned to understand how this crisis has affected the nonprofit sector. With this survey Public Allies set out to primarily focus on three questions:
Are organizations anticipating an increase in requests for services moving forward because of the economic impact of the crisis? If so, what are the types of services they anticipate being in demand?
Do organizations envision needing to deliver services and programming differently going forward? If so, what supports will they need to make that happen?
Not including financial support, what resources are needed at this time to help organizations through this crisis.
Key findings from Public Allies' survey of 320 nonprofit professionals, the survey tool, and charts and data are available in the full report.
John S. and James L. Knight Foundation;
In 2016, nearly 100 million eligible Americans did not cast a vote for president, representing 43% of the eligible voting-age population. They represent a sizeable minority whose voice is not heard in our representative democracy. Most of our attention, in politics and in research, tends to fall almost exclusively on "likely" voters perceived to make the most difference in the outcome. As a result, relatively little is known about those with a history of non-voting. Yet their non-participation is a key feature of our democracy, and raises important questions about the basic health of a participatory society.
To help understand this large segment of the population, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation commissioned Bendixen & Amandi International to develop a comprehensive study of those who do not vote. This study surveyed 12,000 chronic non-voters nationally and in 10 swing states, soliciting their views, attitudes and behaviors on a wide range of topics. For comparison purposes, a group of 1,000 active voters who consistently participate in national elections and a group of 1,000 young eligible voters (18-24 years old) were also surveyed. Findings were further explored through in-depth conversations with non-voters in focus groups held around the country.
John S. and James L. Knight Foundation;
A crisis faces local newsrooms across the nation. News publishers have, for over a decade, competed with search engines and digital platforms, not only for their readers' attention, but also for advertising revenue. At the same time, we have seen decades of growing distrust and partisan antipathy toward institutions of all kinds, including journalism. Local newspapers are especially vulnerable to these trends. As a result, there have been waves of consolidation, often resulting in fewer newsroom jobs. Particularly controversial have been acquisitions of newspapers by private equity investors, often followed by debate about how the newsroom is managed by its new ownership.
This Gallup/Knight Foundation study seeks to better understand whether Americans care about the fate of local news organizations, what they value about these organizations and what could be done to make more of these organizations financially sustainable. The results are sobering, but they also point toward potential solutions for addressing some of the economic challenges facing many local news organizations.
Nearly every day, Americans are confronted with evidence that our politics are broken and our democracy is not working as it should. So what do Americans think we should do to improve our politics and renew our democracy? This is the question that Public Agenda, in partnership with the Kettering Foundation, is exploring in the Yankelovich Democracy Monitor.
This report summarizes findings from the first Yankelovich Democracy Monitor, a nationally representative survey of 1,000 American adults 18 and older. The survey was fielded from September 14 through October 15, 2018, by telephone, including cell phones, and online. Respondents completed the survey in English. Before developing the survey instrument, Public Agenda conducted three demographically diverse focus groups with adults 18 and older in July 2018 in Hicksville, New York; Fort Lauderdale, Florida; and Earth City, Missouri. In total, 31 adults participated in these focus groups.
BBB Wise Giving Alliance;
In this special report on Disaster Relief Donor Expectations, BBB's Give.org hones in on attitudes related to disaster relief appeals. The organization also surveys U.S.-based disaster relief charities to compare their self-reported practices and experiences against donor attitudes. Disconnects between donor expectations and charity practices can lead to donor distrust and may impact fundraising efforts. Through this report, BBB's Give.org wants to shed light on disaster relief donor attitudes that may not be understood by the sector and to identify gaps between the donating public and disaster relief charities.
John S. and James L. Knight Foundation;
This report examines trust in media, showing that many young adults use news media to make decisions on policies and voting. It reveals that a majority of young adults are concerned about the impact of news on democracy and unity in the country, expressing that news organizations might divide and polarize citizens. Conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago, the report analyzes the findings of a survey of 1,660 adults between the ages of 18 and 34. It also surveyed large samples of African American and Hispanic participants to explore beliefs and behaviors across races and ethnicities.
The study shows that young people believe some news sources are actively hurting democracy and corroding national unity. Sixty-four percent of young adults say their least-liked news source hurts democracy and 73 percent say their least-liked news source divides the country. Only 47 percent say their favorite news source helps unite it. When comparing partisan attitudes, 51 percent of Democrats say their favorite source unites the public, while 42 percent of Republicans say the same.
IUPUI Women's Philanthropy Institute;
This study examines, in a comprehensive and quantitative manner, the impact of women's fund and foundation donors on women's and girls' causes.
This research can beneft donors—especially those who give to women and girls, or who are interested in doing so—as well as fundraisers and other nonprofit leaders who seek to propel social change and work with gender-based issues.
One of the most compelling questions asked after every election year is "what will it take to get young voters to head to the polls?" Every year is an important year for voters. Which means every year the important question to ask is, how do we ensure the most eligible citizens turn out to vote?
Nonprofit VOTE's updated "Engaging New Voters" report tackles that question and proposes a simple but hard-fought answer: "contact." The report looks at 64 nonprofits across six states who reached out into the communities they serve via nonpartisan voter engagement activities and found amazing results:
Voters contacted by nonprofits are TWICE as likely to be nonwhite, TWICE as likely to be under 25 and TWICE as likely to have $30,000 in household income. These voters were also MORE likely to vote – 11 percentage points more likely. Asian, Latino and Black voters contacted by nonprofits show up 13-16 percentage points higher than those who weren't; those under 25 turned out 20 percentage points higher.
Building Movement Project;
This brief shifts focus to those who have already reached positions as nonprofit EDs and CEOs to explore how nonprofit executives grapple with the real-world demands of leadership when they attain it. The survey data and insights shared through interviews and focus groups highlight key areas where the pressures of executive leadership seem to be increased for people of color. Despite these challenges, nonprofit EDs and CEOs demonstrate remarkable determination and resilience.
Center for Disaster Philanthropy;
In 2017, the U.S. experienced the costliest year of major natural disasters on record; 2018 was the fourth costliest year. In this two-year period, how many Americans donated to disaster aid and how much? What are the main drivers for disaster giving? Does giving to disaster aid come at the expense of other causes? Based on new data on American household giving, this forthcoming research brief answers questions about the patterns, preferences, and practices of individual charitable giving for disaster aid.
Wheelhouse: The Center for Community College Leadership and Research;
IN PREVIOUS RESEARCH, we found that one in five California community college (CCC) students who are seemingly eligible for federal Pell Grant funds do not receive them.1 While the reasons students forgo these funds are not entirely understood, the consequences are quantifiable: Eligible CCC students pass up $130 million in financial aid in one semester alone. The amounts of forgone Pell Grants vary significantly by student characteristics and by college campus, suggesting that campus financial aid policies and practices may play an important role in whether or not students receive awards. Eligible students can receive as much as $6,095 in Pell funds each year. Because many low-income CCC students receive a state fee waiver that covers tuition, the Pell Grant can help them cover food, rent, transportation, and other expenses, thus allowing them to focus on school. To dive deeper into the phenomenon of forgone aid, we conducted a statewide survey of CCC campus financial aid directors. We sought to learn more about these administrators' perceptions of students' challenges in seeking aid, their general orientation as either conduits or gatekeepers of aid, and also about their institutions' policies and procedures, including methods of outreach to students who are flagged for a verification process that can pose significant challenges for students.
One of the benefits to California schools participating in CalSCHLS is that a district/school can compare local results with those from other districts/schools and to county and state norms. Such comparisons can help in interpreting trends and guiding program decisions by placing the results in a larger context of what is happening elsewhere. By participating you also contribute to a statewide dataset that can be analyzed to provide insight into broad factors affecting student success that benefit all schools.
Standard district student and staff reports are produced in less than three weeks for 90% of districts when the survey is administered online. When the survey is administered in paper-and-pencil format, reports are produced in less than seven weeks after print answer forms are received at WestEd. Reports based on custom survey configurations can take longer. District reports are publicly posted to this website by the end of November of the year following administration. Parent survey results are not posted on the website.