Mario Osava, IPS Latin America correspondent (pictured at front of boat)

A typical day for Osava includes traveling by plane, boat or car to the far reaches of Brazil to interview people face-to-face about economic and social issues, such as poverty, human rights and the environment. Oftentimes, he talks with indigenous people living in the Amazon Basin once routinely excluded from local media reports. But today their viewpoints, along with those of leaders from the public and private sectors, are shared with IPS’s global audience.

Sometimes, Osava’s articles trigger e-mails, phone calls and even visits from inquisitive readers around the world. He is frequently asked to connect journalists and researchers with hard-to-reach indigenous groups. In the past, for example, a group from the U.S. wanted to see firsthand how the country produces ethanol. In another instance, a team of documentary filmmakers from Argentina was researching agricultural methods used during the past 80 years.

“It is very rewarding for me to visit projects. These stories were not based on other people’s testimonies or from phone interviews, but by contacting people in their local reality, far from the big cities such as in the Amazon,” he said. “I could finally travel along the Xingu River and hear from some of its oldest settlers with their fabulous stories.”

Among other issues, Osava has reported on the following topics during the past few months:

• the vast number of canals, aqueducts, dams, tunnels and pumping stations that would be used to divert a small portion of the water in the São Francisco River, the longest river that runs entirely in Brazilian territory;
• a proposed biofuels processing plant designed to produce 80 liters of ethanol per ton of babassu coconuts, which is being challenged by representatives for the 400,000 families dependent upon those coconuts for their livelihood; and
• the Belo Monte hydroelectric dam, planned for Brazil’s Xingu River, would be the world’s third largest dam with a projected cost of more than $12 billion. The dam has provoked concerns from environmentalists and local indigenous communities and is unlikely to generate as much energy as initially estimated due to the annual dry season in the Amazon jungle.

More than 100,000 subscribers — including staff from mainstream and online media outlets, academic institutions, environmental groups, other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the general public — access IPS’s daily reports via radio, print and the Internet.

Based in Montevideo, Uruguay, IPS Latin America is a locally owned and operated NGO and a member of the IPS News Agency consortium, with member offices in Africa, Asia, Europe and North America.

Read an interview with Mott Foundation Program Officer Amy Shannon in which she discusses examples of Mott grantees’ work — their challenges and successes — in helping move the Foundation’s Environment program toward its goal for the International Finance for Sustainability (IFS) focus area, which is: “to shape international investment and trade to support sustainable development and reduce environmental degradation.”

Joaquin Costanzo, IPS Latin America’s regional director, says Brazil’s economy has grown steadily despite the worldwide recession, surpassing Italy as the world’s seventh largest economy. Costanzo has watched the number of proposed mega-projects increase dramatically since he was named to his current IPS post in 2006. The growth, he says, has catapulted Brazil onto the global economic stage as an important player among a group that is often called the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

“Traveling to do these stories about how projects affect marginalized people is expensive because some places don’t have highways,” Costanzo said. “When Mario reports from the northern area — the Amazonia state — he travels six or seven days because it is very isolated, but he has noticed things that are not well known at all. The only way to know about them is to go there and see it.”

IPS strives to keep the public informed about the potential impact of dozens of development projects in Brazil, he says, including those funded by international financial institutions (IFIs), such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. IPS also reports on projects within Brazil — and elsewhere in the world, particularly on the African continent — that obtain loans from the country’s own funding arm, the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES).

In 2010, BNDES disbursed $R168.4 billion reals ($96.6 billion USD), which was a 23 percent increase compared with 2009 — and more than double the World Bank’s 2010 loan distribution of $44.2 billion.

It is challenging for IPS staff to keep abreast of the many IFI-funded projects, but its role is to report whether the development requirements are being met for the projects as well as the potential risks and benefits, Costanzo says.

So assigning a Brazilian reporter such as Osava, with four decades of experience, was crucial. Respected for his journalistic accuracy and professional integrity by local residents, developers and government officials, Costanzo says, Osava was the perfect correspondent for the Mott-funded position.

“We are journalists because we believe in the power of communication. We trust that if IPS produces accurate information, it allows us to increase people’s consciousness and helps them make decisions,” Costanzo said. “Good communication is the beginning for all processes of change.”

Nick Deychakiwsky, Program Officer for the Mott Foundation's Civil Society team

Mott: Mott’s grant to the National Council of Nonprofits is funded through the Foundation’s Civil Society program. Discuss how the nonprofit sector differs in the U.S. from the sector globally.

ND: The nonprofit sector is not the same as civil society, but certainly it is a really big component of it. [See related Q&A with Mott’s definition of civil society.] Globally, and in the U.S., the nonprofit sectors are pretty much the same in a structural way. Sometimes it might be called something different. In the U.S., we tend to say “nonprofits” all the time, which is really a legal way of looking at it. In other countries, you will hear “NGOs” or “non-governmental organizations,” or often you will hear the term “CSOs,” which is civil society organizations, and in some countries they will just call them “charities” or “voluntary organizations.” In the U.K. [United Kingdom], they say “the voluntary sector.” The nomenclature might be different, but it is basically the same thing.

In the U.S., the nonprofit sector tends to be bigger than in most other countries because we have more institutions that are included as non-governmental institutions. In the U.S., the biggest ones are universities and hospitals, which in most other countries tend to be governmental or government-run institutions.

Mott: The Foundation’s new Civil Society program plan for the U.S. states, it “focuses on ensuring the nonprofit sector’s vibrancy and responsiveness to social needs through maintaining a robust infrastructure.” What does the Foundation mean when it says “infrastructure” and why does Mott fund infrastructure organizations?

ND: “Infrastructure” is a tricky word. You might think instead in terms of “intermediary organizations.” That is, organizations that support individual nonprofits in enhancing their effectiveness, providing information that all nonprofits need, and helping maintain a favorable policy environment – a legal and regulatory framework that allows nonprofits to do their good work.

These organizations tend not to be the ones that are directly serving communities or advocating for particular causes or dealing with very specific populations, such as environmental groups or youth. The National Council of Nonprofits and Michigan Nonprofit Association are two examples of these. [See related article.] If they were business organizations, they would be called trade associations. Infrastructure organizations can deliver technical assistance or offer education and training for nonprofits, or they might be research organizations that provide information about the entire sector. We believe a strong infrastructure helps individual nonprofits work more responsibly.

Mott: Leaders of nonprofit organizations in the U.S. are increasingly discussing the need for partnerships, especially in the country’s current economic condition. What benefits can come from partnerships with governments and/or businesses – and what are some of the challenges associated with them?

ND: There are limitations to the three-sector model – that is, the business sector, the government sector, and the nonprofit sector. Partnerships are typically a good thing, but sometimes we get caught up in our own sectors and forget it is about people. Look at the local community level; we don’t have people walking around saying, “I am government” or “I am business” or “I am a nonprofit.” Hopefully, we have people just saying, “I live in Flint.” While they play certain roles because of where they are employed, we all care about our communities and, more broadly, about its causes.

Nevertheless, there is some use to the three-sector framework in order to understand partnerships.  There are different power dynamics: government still is the most powerful and has the most money. Government can also bring the force of the law. Business also has huge financial resources compared to the nonprofit sector. They can outgun the nonprofit sector financially, so when we have partnerships, that power dynamic could be there.  Government often has a bureaucratic approach that is rooted in its accountability to voters, which it has to have. Sometimes that can influence the flexibility/versatility of the nonprofit organizations with whom they are partnering. 
 
There’s another thing. We don’t have too much of it here in the U.S., but I have seen it in countries like Russia where I worked before. It is when partnership with government means the government is going to control it and call the shots. Something that might be benign for the benefit of everybody can quickly turn into something political when government uses it for that purpose. With business, the partnerships can be challenging because a business’ main purpose is making profits; that’s the bottom line. Nonprofits might unwittingly become a tool of some company’s good marketing.

Mott: What are a few of your current concerns regarding the nonprofit sector and your hopes for its future?

ND:  Related to the previous topic is this blurring of the lines between the sectors. We are getting more for-profit companies going into areas that were traditionally nonprofit and we’re also seeing nonprofits creating for-profit arms because they have to earn revenues. They also are behaving in a more businesslike way. There is nothing wrong with being businesslike, but sometimes it can lead to a very technocratic approach, a very managerial style of doing things, which sometimes means losing the soul of the mission.

 I sometimes wonder, Are nonprofits becoming too transactional, just delivering services for a particular fee?
  
We need to nurture the kinds of processes where things are win/win and mutually beneficial for all concerned. These can be strong and productive partnerships. While the nonprofit sector is the least resourced sector financially, it is as resourced as the other two, if not better, in its commitment and its people power. In many ways, the caring and compassion of people working in the nonprofit sector bring hope to our society. They are best situated for exhibiting compassion and care that reaches out and helps build communities. Nonprofits give us a way to work together so each person is not doing it alone. They promote the common good. My hope for the future lies in people trying to do good together with others in common cause.

• The National Council of Nonprofits (council) advances the role, capacity and voice of charitable nonprofit organizations through a network of state associations with more than 25,000 members.
• Council members share information about proposed policy issues of concern, such as Payments in Lieu of Taxes, whereby local governments seek payments from tax-exempt organizations to help balance government budgets.
• The council helped nonprofits and funders save millions of dollars in late filing fees last year by making sure they had filed their federal income tax returns on time, avoiding the possible loss of their tax-exempt status.

By MAGGIE JARUZEL POTTER

The National Council of Nonprofits’ succinct tagline – “National voice. State focus. Local impact.” – describes how the council serves nonprofits through its network of state associations across the country, says Tim Delaney, the council’s president and CEO.

Tim Delaney, President and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits“We have an extended network of nonprofit organizations that sees and hears what’s happening on the ground. By exchanging and sharing information, our network is learning together from coast to coast and border to border,” he said.

“The national council also gets that information out to other nonprofits, the public and elected officials. That way, when legislators vote on issues affecting nonprofits they can make informed decisions.”

The council is an example of the nonprofit infrastructure organizations the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation funds through its Civil Society program.” [See related Q&A with Mott Program Officer Nick Deychakiwsky.]

The council, based in Washington, D.C., has been a Mott grantee since 1990. To date, the Foundation has supported the council’s work with 22 grants. The majority were general-purposes grants, but six were earmarked for specific projects. All together, the grants totaled $2.5 million.

Delaney, who has led the national organization since July 2008, says being bold and nimble has kept the council relevant.

In May 2010 – just before the Internal Revenue Service planned to release a list of more than 350,000 nonprofit organizations nationwide that would lose their tax-exempt status because they had failed to file their required annual federal tax returns – council staff issued a massive alert through its members and the media, Delaney says.

The council’s quick action helped nonprofits and funders save – and keep in their local communities – more than $10 million they otherwise would have sent to the federal government in late filing fees, he says.

The council is the country’s largest network of nonprofit organizations with more than 25,000 members. While other national nonprofit membership organizations focus almost exclusively on federal government issues, Delaney says, the council’s niche is to identify issues that affect nonprofit organizations at the state and local levels.

As a former partner in a law firm and as Arizona’s former chief deputy attorney general, Delaney has gone from fighting crime and corruption to serving as an educator, cheerleader and myth-buster for the nonprofit sector.

A few of the myths he is determined to dispel:

• Employees of nonprofit organizations don’t pay taxes. (“I’m always surprised by the number of people who believe this as fact.”)
• Nonprofit organizations are not allowed to advocate for specific policy changes or comment on pending legislation. (“Attorneys, academics and accountants too often muzzle nonprofits with bad advice: In 1976 Congress made the law very clear that nonprofits can engage in advocacy.”) 
• Public and private foundations can fill the funding void created when the federal, state and local governments reduce the amount of money they spend on public programs and services. (“Even if all donated money was combined, there is still not enough to meet the needs.”)

Kyle Caldwell, President and CEO of the Michigan Nonprofit Association

In addition to educating the public about the roles and realities of the nonprofit sector, the council also helps equip and empower state associations to think and speak collectively, says Kyle Caldwell, president and CEO of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), a council member.

“When we look to make changes in Michigan’s economy, we see that it hinges on having a vibrant nonprofit sector to help make those transitions possible, especially for a state going from a strong manufacturing base to one being led by health-care institutions and colleges and universities,” he said.

A current hot-button state issue on the council’s radar screen is Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), whereby local governments seek payments from tax-exempt nonprofits to help balance government budgets, Delaney says.

Truly voluntary PILOTS have been around for decades, he says, but after the city of Boston sent its first round of PILOT “requests” in the form of simulated tax bills to the city’s largest 40 nonprofit organizations in April 2011, the practice “started spreading like wildfire” to other municipalities in several states.

In response, the council’s staff and network members shared information through conference calls, advocacy newsletters and speeches – whatever ways they could to counteract what Delaney sees as a “troubling trend.”

"An important factor frequently doesn't get figured into this PILOT conversation,” he said. “Many state constitutions and statutes exempt nonprofit property from taxation.”

But the council isn't a naysayer to new ideas. When proposed projects and programs are proven successful for the nonprofit sector in one state, Delaney says, his organization often promotes its replication elsewhere.

He cites the state of Connecticut as an example. In February 2011, the governor appointed a former state representative to serve in a cabinet-level post as the state’s – and the nation’s – first “nonprofit liaison.” The official’s public-funded job is to develop and strengthen partnerships between the state government and Connecticut-based nonprofits, making the relationships easier and more effective for both.

“Nonprofits and governments serve the same constituents and the same communities,” Delaney said. “We are all looking at common problems to gather common solutions. Anything that can help us do that better is something we want to replicate.”

¹In 2003, the State of Michigan created the nation’s first Office of Foundation Liaison through a joint agreement between Michigan foundations and the governor’s office. Like the Connecticut post, Michigan’s is a cabinet-level position. Karen Aldridge-Eason, a loaned executive from the Mott Foundation, has led the initiative from the start through both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Today, because of EkoMozaik’s presence in the region, 115 fewer residents are unemployed. While most jobs in Sekovici pay a monthly wage of $300 or less after taxes, EkoMozaik employees earn up to $500 monthly after taxes. 
 
Like EkoMozaik’s 14 other beekeepers, Grabovica has learned several new skills. She says she is pleased to earn a living wage – and even has a bit extra to pay a portion of her part-time college fees.

In addition to building beehives indoors in winter, Grabovica is responsible for tending 70 hives in summer. She also frequently joins 100 rural women who work in a massive greenhouse where lavender seedlings are grown before they are transplanted into nearby agricultural fields to attract bees.

For many women, working in the greenhouse and the fields is their first paid job, says Zoran Puljić, Mozaik’s executive director since 2001. Providing employment was one of the major reasons the business was created, he says.

Helping ensure Mozaik’s sustainability was another. From his earliest days at the nonprofit organization, Puljić says, he never lost sight of Mozaik’s need to generate a cash flow to support its many activities because he believes international funders eventually will pull out of the Western Balkans region.
 
A third and equally important reason for launching EkoMozaik, he says, is to start the process of reconciliation among the country’s major ethnic groups following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia and the war in Bosnia that resulted in more than 100,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of misplaced people between April 1992 and December 1995.
 
Today, the country’s residents are still categorized by their religious differences, Puljić says. Bosniaks are predominantly Muslim, Serbs predominantly Orthodox Christians, and Croats predominantly Catholic Christians.
 
Although the Bosnian war ended more than 15 years ago, ethnic tensions remain high, he says.
 
“Before the war, what mattered most was what kind of person you were, not what your ethnicity was,” Puljić said.
Mozaik wants to build bridges between ethnic groups.
 
“But not everybody is ready for reconciliation,” Puljić said. “Many do not want to be friends with other ethnic groups, so what happens if you use a different reason for getting them together? Needing a job and having to earn a livelihood to feed your family is a common interest everybody understands.”
 
Thus, EkoMozaik purposely hires workers from the country’s three ethnic groups, says Kristina Šešlija, EkoMozaik's director. She calls 37-year-old Puljić a “social entrepreneur and a visionary” for developing a business that can address the nation’s major issues – unemployment, ethnic relations and a need for indigenous funding for nonprofit organizations.
 

EkoMozaik beekepers working with honey collection frames.

Many of Mozaik’s 30 full-time employees, and its local and international volunteers, agree. And they are not alone.
 
In May 2010, Puljić was named “Social Entrepreneur of the Year” for Central/Eastern Europe by the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, an affiliate organization of the World Economic Forum. He and other regional winners were invited to attend the forum’s annual gathering in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2011. That meeting, coupled with the attention focused on Mozaik because of the international award, provided opportunities to share the organization’s community-driven development methodology with a broad audience, Puljić says.
 
In essence, this method strives to involve residents in analyzing their community needs, identifying solutions based on available resources, developing a plan of action and implementing the plan.
 
Initially, Mozaik provided 75 percent of the funding needed for community projects while local sources – government, business and/or private individuals – provided the other 25 percent for projects such as organizing concerts, creating or renovating local parks and sports areas, and repairing bridges. But that formula has been turned upside down, Puljić says, with Mozaik now paying 25 percent of project expenses while other partners pay the bulk of the costs.
 
He expects EkoMozaik, the for-profit business, to expand its product line to include a variety of organic foods. But for now, bees are the main business, Puljić says.
 
While selling about 44,000 tons (20,000 kilograms) of honey annually – the amount expected to be sold in 2011 – would be a huge accomplishment, it won’t be EkoMozaik’s only barometer of success, he says. The for-profit company, along with the nonprofit Mozaik, will be measured by their impact, Puljić says.
 
If several goals are met – unemployed residents obtain living-wage jobs, ethnic groups interact peacefully and productively, and local resources are generated to meet local needs – then the communities in which Mozaik and EkoMozaik operate can be showcased as concrete examples of democracy at work, he says.
 
“Our name, Mozaik, goes along with our philanthropic philosophy. A mosaic is a beautiful piece of art. But when you look at the individual pieces, they aren’t much alone. Then you put them all together and you can see its amazing value and beauty,” Puljić said.
 
“It’s the same for a local community. If you want to solve the bigger problems, every individual’s input is valuable and needed. Having people involved at the community level can make a tangible and lasting impact.”


*Grabovica was interviewed through a translator, Kristina Šešlija, director of EkoMozaik.