Browsing by Author "Quinterno, John"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Open Access
Building Better Communities: Why Do Community Foundations Engage in Advocacy?
(2020-05-27) Muse, Colleen
Executive Summary Community foundations are public charities that serve a specific location or geography. They are distinct from private foundations and therefore, have different legal protections and rights, including the legal right to lobby government. However, traditional community foundation activities are apolitical: soliciting donations and awarding funds to nonprofit partners. Some community foundations have begun to step outside the traditional community foundation role to use advocacy and lobbying to advance their missions. Staff realize that foundation giving, though important, cannot fully meet the ever-growing challenges in their communities. Advocacy with government, the public, and private businesses can multiply the impact of community foundation discretionary spending and work on solving the root causes of problems in their communities. Specifically, advocacy work can raise awareness of a community foundation and its mission, attract favorable media attention, expand government investment in important programs, mobilize the community to act on an issue, and benefit a broader number of community members than a single direct service program.1 In light of this context, Triangle Community Foundation wished to understand the following policy question: Why do some community foundations decide they should be involved in social policy advocacy? What strategies or characteristics make them effective? To answer this, I interviewed leaders of 13 community foundations across the nation that conduct some form of advocacy work. The interviews revealed how the community foundation sector uses advocacy to accomplish their goals, their divergent strategies, and the lessons that other community foundations could use to build their own advocacy capacities. Community foundation interviews emphasized the positive impact that advocacy work has had in their communities. For example, the interviewed foundations noted that their advocacy work resulted in the passage of new statewide bills, changed local regulations, stopped harmful city council legislation, and directed more state funding to their communities. Other key findings from the interviews were the following: Advocacy can be slow and labor-intensive, but the impact can be outsized for the effort; There are multiple ways to be effective in the advocacy space; Many community foundations used the same common strategy as the backbone of their advocacy plan; It is important to tailor specific advocacy strategies to the political context, organizational capacity, and specific issue of interest; Policies and procedures improve transparency and effectiveness of advocacy; Risks of advocacy can be managed; and Some legal protections are required to conduct advocacy. Interviewees advised community foundations that wish to engage in advocacy to consider the type of advocacy role they are comfortable playing in their community, the issues that are critical to their region, the policies and procedures needed, and how they will measure success. Each foundation should consider how its relationship-building and advocacy activities fit into their unique political context. This paper explores the methods, strategies, and philosophy of community foundations that advocate for social policy change. Further areas of research could explore the cost-effectiveness and success rate of community foundation advocacy efforts.
Open Access
Supporting Renters At-Risk of Eviction: A Case Study Approach to Understanding North Carolina’s Emergency Rental Assistance Programs
(2022-04-22) Hussein, Nada
Open Access
UNC System Trends in State Appropriations and Student Affordability
(2021-04) Hodges-Copple, Sally
Extensive academic and policy research has documented a nationwide trend of declining state support for higher education, particularly during recessionary periods. A review of the existing literature shows that North Carolina has paralleled national trends in shifting the responsibility for funding public higher education away from society as a whole – via the appropriation of tax dollars – and toward individual students and families in the form of tuition and fee payments. As schools receive fewer public resources, they are forced to either cut spending or increase revenue via others means; research regarding the impact of spending cuts and tuition increases on student outcomes indicates that both are detrimental. Given North Carolina's comparatively low university tuition rates relative to other states, some observers have touted the affordability of the state’s public institutions and downplayed the relevance of national trends to the North Carolinian context. To the contrary, this report finds that state appropriations per full-time equivalent student in 2017, the most recent year with complete data, were at their lowest level in North Carolina since 1995. While declines occurred during recessionary periods, the recovery in state support during expansionary periods is taking longer and longer. Students – particularly those from families that have borne the brunt of income stagnation and have been historically shut out from wealth-building opportunities – are increasingly expected to pay out-of-pocket from limited family resources or take on substantial amounts of debt to finance their education. In particular, four key findings have emerged from this study: 1) Appropriations per FTE in 2017 were at their lowest level since 1995 and are taking increasingly longer to recover following economic downturns: The expansionary period following the 2008 recession defied a previous pattern in which higher education funding in North Carolina would decline during recessions only to subsequently recover during expansions. Even as the economy grew from 2010 to 2017, appropriations per FTE fell 9 percent, or $1,509, dropping to $14,928 from $16,437. Far from recovering during a time of economic growth, appropriations per FTE in the UNC System were 15 percent lower in 2017 than at their pre-recession peak in 2007. 2) Tuition revenue is steadily replacing state dollars in UNC System funding: In 2017, North Carolina appropriated just $1.71 per FTE for every $1 in net tuition revenue per FTE. This appropriations-net tuition ratio has declined 50 percent since 2001, when the state appropriated $3.41 per FTE for every $1 in net tuition revenue per FTE. Based on this shift in the relative burden, higher education in North Carolina is on track to become a primarily individual investment that is partially subsidized by the state. 3) Students from lowest income families experienced the greatest hike in out-of-pocket costs: The best available data points to concerning distributional impacts of the above two trends: North Carolina's lowest-income families – those least able to absorb the shift away from state-funded higher education – are precisely the families who have experienced the greatest percentage increase in net price over the last decade. From 2008 to 2017, the UNC System’s lowest-income students experienced a net price increase of over 100 percent, while its highest-income students experience a net price increase of 25 percent. 4) Increased reliance on student loans and disparities across UNC campuses reflect the legacy of NC’s income and wealth gaps: Since 1999 – the first year in which data is available – UNC System students have increasingly turned to student loans to finance the cost of public higher education. The portion of UNC System students who took out student loans rose from 40 percent in 1999 to 56 percent in 2018. Persistent disparities emerge between the state’s Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) and other campuses. The portion of students receiving loans increased from 55 percent in 1999 to 77 percent in 2018 at MSIs. At non-MSI campuses, meanwhile, just 36 percent of students received student loans in 1999, a figure that rose to 51 percent of students in 2018. As North Carolina families begin to heal from the dual crises of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated economic recession, state leaders will confront important budget decisions influencing the trajectory of the state’s recovery. While state revenue collections are exceeding worst-case projections, costs – especially in higher education – have risen as well, while other streams of revenues have declined. A post-COVID-19 response that continues to shift burdens onto students may be particularly concerning for students who are less able to absorb these increased costs due to familial job and income losses stemming from the pandemic. Today, North Carolina has the opportunity to more closely examine its historical commitment of state dollars to UNC System students relative to its levels of present-day investment in a student body that is more racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse than any generation before it.