oecd -理解慈善事业中的灵活融资 No strings attached - Making sense of flexible financing in philanthropy_第1页
oecd -理解慈善事业中的灵活融资 No strings attached - Making sense of flexible financing in philanthropy_第2页
oecd -理解慈善事业中的灵活融资 No strings attached - Making sense of flexible financing in philanthropy_第3页
oecd -理解慈善事业中的灵活融资 No strings attached - Making sense of flexible financing in philanthropy_第4页
oecd -理解慈善事业中的灵活融资 No strings attached - Making sense of flexible financing in philanthropy_第5页
已阅读5页,还剩74页未读 继续免费阅读

下载本文档

版权说明:本文档由用户提供并上传,收益归属内容提供方,若内容存在侵权,请进行举报或认领

文档简介

THEMATICRESEARCH

Nostringsattached?Makingsenseof

flexiblefinancinginphilanthropy

OECDCENTREONPHILANTHROPYDataandanalysisfordevelopment

Nostringsattached?

Makingsenseofflexiblefinancinginphilanthropy

2l

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

Thisdocument,aswellasanydataandmapincludedherein,arewithoutprejudicetothestatusoforsovereigntyoveranyterritory,tothedelimitationofinternationalfrontiersandboundariesandtothenameofanyterritory,cityorarea.

©OECD2024

AuthorisedforpublicationbyRagnheiðurElínÁrnadóttir,Director,OECDDevelopmentCentre

TheopinionsexpressedandargumentsemployedhereindonotnecessarilyreflecttheofficialviewsofthemembercountriesoftheOECDoritsDevelopmentCentre.

l3

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

Foreword

ThisreportispartoftheOECDCentreonPhilanthropy’sthematicresearchprogramme,whichaimstoshowhowphilanthropycontributestospecificdimensionsofdevelopmentacrosstheworld.Itoffersactionablerecommendationsandlessonslearntfrommultipleorganisations.

ThereportwaswrittenundertheguidanceofBathylleMissika,HeadoftheNetworks,PartnershipsandGenderDivisionattheOECDDevelopmentCentre.NelsonAmaya,PolicyAnalyst,OECDCentreonPhilanthropy,ledresearch.MadeleineLessard,JuniorPolicyAnalyst,andValeriaStrusi,ResearchIntern,preparedthereport.RebeccaCambrini,RossanaTatulliandEmmaCislaghiprovidedkeyinputsforresearch.

WewouldliketothankGaëlleFerrant,Co-ordinatoroftheNetworkofFoundationsWorkingforDevelopment(netFWD),forhelpfulcomments.Wewouldalsoliketothankourpeerreviewers:YasminAhmad(Manager,DataCollectionsandDisseminationUnit,OECDDevelopmentCo-operationDirectorate),NatashaRidge(ExecutiveDirector,SheikhSaudbinSaqrAlQasimiFoundationforPolicyResearch)andAndrewHeiss(Assistantprofessor,GeorgiaStateUniversity).Finally,wearegratefultoHenri-BernardSolignac-Lecomte,DelphineGrandrieuxandAidaBuendíafromtheDevelopmentCommunicationsteamfordesignandeditorialcontributions.

ThisresearchwasmadepossiblethroughthecontributionsofSheikhSaudbinSaqrAlQasimiFoundationforPolicyResearch,FondationCHANELandtheLemannFoundation.

4l

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

Tableofcontents

Foreword3

Executivesummary6

1Introduction8

2Framingflexiblefinancinginphilanthropy9

Whatisflexiblefinancing?9

Advantagesanddisadvantagesofflexiblefinancing10

Grant-makingasacontract11

Grant-makingcanbuildtrustbetweenphilanthropicdonorandgrantee14

3Flexiblegivinginprivatephilanthropyfordevelopment15

4Flexibleportfolios:Thecaseoflargeinternationalphilanthropicdonors21

5Keytakeaways28

AnnexA.Glossary31

AnnexB.Data32

AnnexC.Probabilityofflexiblegivinganalysis37

AnnexD.Flexiblefundingportfolioanalysis41

References44

FIGURES

Figure2.1.Donor-granteerelationshipasacontract12

Figure3.1.Flexiblevs.earmarkedfinancinginPrivatePhilanthropyforDevelopment,2016-1917

Figure3.2.Probabilitiesofgeneralsupportbychannelofdeliveryandsector19

Figure3.3.Probabilitiesofgeneralsupportbyrecipientregion20

Figure4.1.Flexibleportfoliovs.flexiblegiving22

Figure4.2.Timetrendinflexibleportfoliosamonglargephilanthropicdonors23

Figure4.3.Predictedflexibleportfolioforlargephilanthropicdonors24

Figure4.4.Flexibleportfolioinrelationtoannualgivingandnumberofgrantees26

Figure4.5.TheAtlanticPhilanthropies,1982-202027

l5

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

FigureAB.1.Flexiblefundinginphilanthropybygeographicalregions32

FigureAB.2.Flexiblefundinginphilanthropybydevelopmentsector33

FigureAB.3.Flexiblefundinginphilanthropybyorganisationtype34

FigureAC.1.Scatterplotofthedummyvariableforgeneralsupportwithalogisticregressionline38

FigureAD.1.Posteriorpredictivecheck43

FigureAD.2.Posteriorpredictivecheck-forestimatedproportionsinthe[0,0.05]range43

TABLES

Table3.1.Generalsupportfunding:Textidentifiers16

Table3.2.Fundingmodalitiesandchanneltypes16

TableAB.1.Dataonlargeinternationalphilanthropicdonorportfolios35

TableAC.1.ConfusionmatrixfortheBayesianlogitregressionmodelofgeneralsupport38

TableAC.2.Probabilityofaflexibledonation:Resultsfromthelogitregressionmodel39

6|

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

Executivesummary

Increasingly,philanthropicdonorsaremovingfromsupportingspecificprojectstoprovidinguntiedgeneralsupporttotheirgrantees.Inresponsetotheshift,thisreportshedslightonflexiblefinancing–thepracticeofprovidinggranteesunearmarkedfunding.Itexamines“trust-basedphilanthropy”tobetterunderstandbothadvocacyfor,andscepticismtowards,thisapproach.Insodoing,ithighlightstheneedforanempiricalunderstandingoffinancingpracticesinphilanthropy.

Thereportfocusesononeformofflexiblefinancing:corebudgetsupport.Itassessestheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofthisapproachforbothphilanthropicfundersandgrantees.Tothatend,itexploresboththedynamicsofgrant-makingasacontractandtheimplicationsofflexiblefundingondifferenttypesofgrantees.

ResearchisbasedonevidencefromtheOECDdatabaseonPrivatePhilanthropyforDevelopment.Itlooksatflexiblefundingfrommorethan180privatephilanthropicdonorsfrom32countries,andhistoricalyearlygivingfrom20largefoundations.Basedonthesedata,itanalysesthefactorsthatinfluencephilanthropicfinancing,usingBayesianstatistics.

Findings

•Flexiblefinancingisinfrequent,representingaround16%ofallphilanthropicdonations,or19%ofallfundingbetween2016-19.Mostphilanthropicdonorsadopttargeted,project-specificapproachestogrant-making.

•Non-governmentalorganisations,particularlythoseheadquarteredinlow-incomecountries,emergedasthemostlikelybeneficiariesofgeneralsupport.Thiscouldbeattributedtotheirfinancialconstraints,theirclosetiestophilanthropicdonorsandtheirproximitytoon-the-groundoperations.Multilateralinstitutionsanduniversities,ontheotherhand,showalowlikelihoodofreceivingsuchdonations.Thelarge-scale,structurednatureoftheiroperationsandthepresenceofmultiplephilanthropicdonorswithspecificagendaslikelycontributetothisresult.

•Theanalysisidentifiesdifferencesintheprobabilityofflexiblefundingacrosssectors.Organisationssupportingtheenergysector,aswellasthosesupportingcivilsociety,weremorelikelytoattractgeneralsupportanddonationsfromphilanthropy.Thehealthandenvironmentsectors,whichtendtooperatewithmoreconstrainedfunding,receivedlessgeneralsupport.Thefundingstrategiesofphilanthropicdonorsmaybeconsideringthecharacteristics,needsanduncertaintiesassociatedwitheachdevelopmentsector.

•Recently,afewlargeUS-basedfoundationshavemovedtowardsmoreflexiblegiving,whilemostcontinuetooperatethroughearmarkedfunding.Basedonhistoricaldatafrom20largeinternationalphilanthropicdonors,thereportidentifiesarecentupwardtrendtowardsmoreflexiblegiving,peakingat20%ofyearlygivingin2021onaverage.Thetrendisdrivenbyafeworganisationsthathaveincreasedtheproportionofgeneralsupportintheirannualfunding.Flexiblefinancingamonglargephilanthropicdonorswentfromabout5%to20%between2000and2021.Therewaslarge

|7

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

variabilityacrosstimeandphilanthropicdonors:fromthosethatdonotprovideanyflexiblefinancingtothosethatdevotemostoftheirfundingtogeneralsupport.In2021,forexample,theFordFoundationprovided80%ofitsgrantsasgeneralsupport.

•Thereportidentifiestypesofflexibledonors.Somephilanthropicdonorspredominatelyworkthroughearmarkedgrants,whileothersoccasionallyprovideflexiblefunding.Interestingly,afeworganisationsliketheFordFoundation,OakFoundation,andWilliamandFloraHewlettFoundation,havedrasticallyshiftedtheirgivingtowardsmoreflexibilityinrecentyears.Furthermore,philanthropicdonorswithlargerbudgetsandalargerpoolofgranteesareassociatedwithasmallerflexibleportfolioonaverage.

Recommendationsforphilanthropicdonors

•Assessthebalancebetweenflexibleandearmarkedfundinginaphilanthropicdonor’sentireportfoliotoensureitbestsuitsitsobjectivesandthoseofthegrantees.

•Considerthecompliancecostsandadministrativeburdenofgrantagreementsandreportingrequirements.

•Evaluatehowcommitmentstoflexiblefundingmayinfluencethetypesoforganisationsthatreceivesupport.

•Ensuretransparencyintheuseoffundsprovidedtore-granters,includingintermediaryfunds.

•Forfutureresearch,lookindepthatcharacteristicsofgrantees,extendingtheanalysisofflexiblefundingportfoliostootherorganisations,andinvestigatingthelong-termimpactoftheCOVID-19pandemiconphilanthropicfundingstrategiestowardsmoreorlessflexibility.

8|

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

1Introduction

Traditionalphilanthropicfinancingworksthroughatop-downframeworkinwhichphilanthropicdonorsdictatethetermsandprioritiesoftheirsupporttograntees.Yetmanygranteesandphilanthropicdonors,particularlyintheUnitedStates,haverecentlyadvocatedforashiftto“trust-basedphilanthropy”.Thisterm,coinedin2014bytheWhitmanInstitute,refersto"anapproachtogivingthataddressestheinherentpowerimbalancesbetweenfunders,nonprofits,andthecommunitiestheyserve[…]Onapracticallevel,thisincludesmulti-yearunrestrictedgiving,streamlinedapplicationsandreporting”(emphasisadded)(TheWhitmanInstitute,2022[1];Trust-BasedPhilanthropyProject,2022,p.1[2]).

TheWhitmanFoundationwentontoco-foundtheTrust-BasedPhilanthropyProjectin2020,inpartnershipwiththeRobertSterlingClarkFoundationandtheHeadwatersFoundation(allUS-based).Thispeer-to-peerfunderinitiativehasdefinedasetofgrant-makingpracticesforphilanthropicdonorstoengageintrust-basedgiving.Thefirstpractice:providingmulti-year,unrestrictedfundingtograntees(Trust-BasedPhilanthropyProject,2022[2]).

Morerecently,someofthelargestphilanthropicdonorshavepledgedtoincreasetheirflexiblefunding,particularlysincetheoutbreakoftheCOVID-19pandemic.In2020,forexample,theFordFoundationledajointcommitmentinwhichphilanthropicdonorspledgedtoreducegrantrestrictionsandincreaseflexiblegiving.Thispledgereceivedover800signatories(CouncilonFoundations,2020[3]).

Othershaveexpressedscepticismtowardsthisapproach,questioningitsfeasibility,scopeofapplicabilityandeffectiveness.In2022,SimonSommer,Co-ChiefExecutiveOfficeroftheSwitzerland-basedJacobsFoundation,criticisedthetrust-basedphilanthropymovementasmisleadingandUS-centric.Heargueditperpetuatedinequalitiesingivingandchannellingfundstoafewfavouredorganisations(Sommer,2022[4]).Hepointedoutthattrust-basedphilanthropists,infact,relyontheduediligenceperformedbyotherfoundationsandconsultants.Forexample,theunprecedentedlylargeunrestrictedgrantsgivenbyMackenzieScottthroughherfoundationYieldGiving“wouldnothavebeenpossiblewithouttheknowledgedevelopedandsharedbyotherfunderswithspecializedexpertise”(Levine,2021[5]).

Furthermore,themethodologyforprovidinggrantsmayneedtobetailoredtotheneedsofindividualrecipients.Advocatesoftrust-basedphilanthropyfocusontheimportanceofunrestrictedgrant-makingforgrassrootsnon-governmentalorganisations.However,foundations’granteesencompassabroadrangeoforganisationtypes–fromsmallnon-profitstolargeinternationalorganisationssuchastheGavi(theVaccineAlliance)orTheGlobalFund.Giventhatgranteeshavedifferentsizes,legalstructures,focusareas,geographiesandinternalstructures,thegrant-makingmethodologyappropriateforonegranteemaynotbeoptimalforanother.

Suchacontextisvitaltounderstandfinancingflexibility.Whogivesflexiblefinancing?Whoreceivesit?Whatfactorsinfluenceafoundation’schoicetotightenorloosencontroloverthegrantsitprovides?

Thisreportdelvesintothenuanceddynamicsofphilanthropicfundingapproaches.ItdrawsontheOECDPrivatePhilanthropyforDevelopmentdatabaseandonpubliclyavailablegrantportfoliosoflargefoundationstoshedlightonthefactorsinfluencingphilanthropists'choicesacrossthesefundingparadigms.Insodoing,itoffersinsightsintothemotivations,benefitsandpotentialchallengesassociatedwitheachapproach.

|9

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

2

Framingflexiblefinancingin

philanthropy

Whatisflexiblefinancing?

“Trust-basedphilanthropy”and“flexiblefinancing”canencompassarangeoffinancingtypes,butthisreportfocusesoncorebudgetsupport–themostfullyflexibleform.Itthenusestheterms“flexiblefinancing”and“generalbudgetsupport”interchangeably.Thus,flexiblefinancingisconsideredanyfinancingfromaphilanthropicdonor,intheformofagrantorotherinstrument,thatisnotearmarked.InOECDterminology,“anearmarkedgrantisagrantthatisgivenundertheconditionthatitcanonlybeusedforaspecificpurpose”(Bergvalletal.,2006,p.116[6]).1Thus,flexiblefinancingoccurswhenphilanthropicdonorsoffergrantswithoutimposingrestrictionsormandatesregardinguseoffunds.

Fundingmodalitieshavefurtherconsequencesforgranteesintermsofcompliancecosts,administrativeburdenandreportingrequirements,aswellasprojectimplementation:

•Byprovidinggeneralbudgetsupport,philanthropicdonorsoffergranteesmoreflexibilitytoadapttheirstrategiesandusefundsinwaysthatbestalignwiththeirexpertise,theiroverallprojectportfolioandtheevolvingneedsoftheirbeneficiaries.

•Incontrast,foundationsprovidingrestrictedorearmarkedfinancingseektoexercisegreatercontrolovertheuseoftheirresources,ensuringtheyaredirectedtowardspre-determinedobjectivesandoutcomes.Thisapproachaimstoenhancealignmentbetweenphilanthropicdonorintentandgranteeimplementation,minimisingpotentialdeviationsfromenvisionedgoals.Restrictedfinancingprovidesclearexpectationsandaccountability.However,itcouldlimitanorganisation'sflexibilitytoadapttochangingcircumstancesorseizeopportunitiesthatmightariseduringaproject.

Eventhoughthisreportfocusesgeneralbudgetsupport,itwouldbemoreaccuratetodescribeflexiblefinancingwithinawiderspectrum.Forinstance,theflexibilityofearmarkedgrantscandependontheirdegreeofspecificity.Agranttotheeducationsectoringeneralortoabroadgeographicregion,forexample,offersmuchmoreflexibilitythanonerestrictedtoasingularproject,suchasbuildingafixednumberofschoolsinaspecificsetofcities.Throughthematicfunds,philanthropicdonorscanensuretheirfundinggoestowardstheirgoalswithoutimposingproject-levelearmarking.TheInternationalFederationofRedCrossandRedCrescentSocietiesusespooledthematicfunds–whichitcalls“themostflexibletypeoffundingafterunearmarked”–todirectandreallocatefundstowheretheyaremostneededwhilestillworkingtowardstheoutcomessupportedbytheirphilanthropicdonors(IFRC,2018[7]).

1Similarly,intheDevelopmentAssistanceCommittee’sStatisticalReportingDirectivesforofficialdevelopmentassistance,contributionstomultilateralorganisationsmustbeconsideredasearmarkedifthedonorcountrymaintainscontrolovertherecipient,purpose,amountorloanconditionsofthefundstoberegrantedorlentbythemultilateralorganisation(OECD,2023[49]).

10|

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

Evenwithinproject-basedgrant-making,philanthropicdonorscanloosenrestrictionsongranteesinseveralways.Theycanreducegranteereportingrequirements,forexample.Theycanalsoallowformid-projectdeadlineextensionsorbudgetincreasesratherthanholdinggranteestoapre-determinedbudgetortimelineforprojects.Lastly,multi-yeargrantscanhelpgranteesplanlong-termbudgets,reducingthetimeandresourcesspentinre-applyingforgrants.

TheMAVAFoundationdefinesthreeformsofgrantsthatarenotproject-specific:

•programmaticfunding:“flexiblefundinggrantedinthecontextoftheexistingstrategicplanofanorganisation–eitheratthelevelofaprogrammeorthewholeorganisation”

•corefunding:“flexiblefundingfororganisationaladministrationanddevelopment,toincreasetheoverallfinancialsecurityoforganisations”

•emergencyfunding:given“intheeventofacrisis(e.g.COVID-19)fororganisationstobemoreresilientandabletoovercomethecrisis”(Baetal.,2023[8]).

Whileprogrammaticfundingwouldtechnicallybeconsideredasearmarked,itismoreflexiblethanproject-basedgrants.Inprogrammaticfunding,philanthropicdonorsandgranteesalignstrategiesandagreeongoals.However,granteesarestillfreetoadjusttheprogramme,makepersonnelandorganisationalshifts,andadapttochangingcircumstances.

Thenextform,corefunding,canbefurtherdividedintotwovarieties:

•organisationaldevelopmentgrantsstrengthenagranteeorganisation’sleadership,financialmanagementorotheragreed-uponaspectsofitsorganisationaldevelopment

•generaloperatingsupportisfullyflexibleandcanbeusedatthegrantees’discretion(MacLeod,2021[9]).

Thesedifferentformsoffinancingcanbeadaptedandcombinedinvariousways.Forexample,philanthropicdonorsmaycombineorganisationaldevelopmentgrantswithprojectgrants.Thiswouldprovidebothlong-termfundingtobuildthegrantee’sorganisationalcapacityandsupportforitscurrentwork.Inanothercase,aphilanthropicdonorthatusuallyoffersgeneraloperatingsupportmayalsoprovideorganisationaldevelopmentgrants.Thiscouldhelpreinforceaparticularaspectoftheorganisationthatneedsattention.Confusingly,differentphilanthropicdonorsmaydescribeallthesecombinationsas“programmegrants”(MacLeod,2021[9]).

Advantagesanddisadvantagesofflexiblefinancing

Flexiblefundingoffersdistinctadvantagesforeachparty:

•Forthephilanthropicdonor,theuseofflexiblefundingcanreducetransactioncosts,sinceanyrestrictionsimposedonagrantwillneedtobeidentified,monitoredandenforcedbythefoundation(Thornton,2010[10]).Furthermore,itcanbemorecostefficienttoprovideonelargegrantratherthanmanysmallerprojectgrants(MacLeod,2021[9]).Withlowertransactioncosts,philanthropicdonorscanredirectresourcestowardsbroaderstrategicgoalsoridentifypromisingnewgranteesratherthanmicromanagingspecificallocations.

•Onthegranteeside,theadvantagesareevenclearer.First,corefundingprovidesgranteeswithoperatingstability,supportstheirorganisationaldevelopmentandallowsthemtoplanforthelongterm(MacLeod,2021[9]).Nolessimportantly,unrestrictedgrantsallowgranteestoallocatefundsaccordingtotheirownprioritiesandneeds.Thiscontrastswiththeconstraintsofrestrictedgrants,whichcanleadtooverfundingsomeprogrammesandunderfundingmorecriticalones(Thornton,2010[10]).Furthermore,flexiblecontributionsreducethetimeandresourcesgranteesspendinfundraising,andcanmakethemlessdependentonindividualphilanthropicdonors(Rose-Ackerman,1987[11]).Earmarkedfundinghasbeenshowntounderminebothcosteffectivenessand

|11

NOSTRINGSATTACHED?©OECD2024

projectperformanceininternationaldevelopmentorganisations(Heinzel,CormierandReinsberg,2023[12]).Flexiblefundingalsoincreasesgrantees’resiliencetounforeseencrisesandopennesstounexpectedcircumstances.

Philanthropicdonorsthatprovidecorefundinggenerallyrecognisethesebenefits.A2021studyoncoregrantscommissionedbytheLaudesFoundationfoundthatphilanthropicdonorscitedfivegeneralmotivationsforprovidingcoregrants(MacLeod,2021[9]):

•helpingorganisationscovertheircorecosts

•allowinggranteesthefreedomtomakekeydecisionsinresponsetochangingcircumstances

•supportingarobustandindependentcivilsociety

•helpinggranteeorganisationstoscaleuptoanewlevelofoperation

•changingtherelationshipwiththeirgranteestobemoretrust-basedandlong-term.

However,flexiblefundingalsohasdisadvantages,includinghigherrisksforthephilanthropicdonor.KrehelyandHouse(2005[13])identifyfourmainreasonsforfoundations’reluctancetoprovidegeneraloperatingsupporttotheirgrantees:difficultyinevaluatingeffectiveuseoffunds;riskofgranteesbecomingoverlydependent;desiretoencouragecompetitionamonggrant-seekerstooptimiseperformance;andtheviewthatphilanthropyshouldfosternewandinnovativeprojectsratherthansimplysustaincurrentprogrammes.

Thornton(2010[10])summarisesthedifficultiesofprovidinggeneral,unrestrictedfunding:“ifnon-profitorganisationsneverbehavedopportunistically,thenunrestrictedgrantswouldbeefficient”.Unfortunately,numerousexamplesexistofnon-profitsactingagainstdonorgoalsandinterests–fromcross-subsidisingtheirownpriorityprojectswithfundingfromearmarkedgrantstooutrightfraudandembezzlement(Castaneda,GarenandThornton,2007[14];FismanandGlennHubbard,2005[15];Fremont-SmithandKosaras,2003[16])

Givenphilanthropicdonors’seemingpreferenceforrestrictedfunding,granteeshavesomeincentivesforenteringintosuchcontracts.Helms,ScottandThornton(2012[17])foundthepossibilityofrestrictedgivingledtohigherdonationrevenuefornon-profitorganisations.Thismaypartiallyexplainthewillingnessofgranteestoacceptearmarkedgrants.However,theymaybewillingsimplybecausetheyhavenochoice:thedonorholdsmorepowerintherelationship(OstranderandSchervish,1990[18];FairfieldandWing,2008[19]).Furtheranalysisofthisdynamic,whichcanbeframedasacontractbetweenaphilanthropicdonorandagrantee,canhelpshedlightonwhyfoundationsrestrictorloosentheirgrant-making.

Grant-makingasacontract

Contracttheoryprovidesausefulframeworkforunderstandingthedecision-makingdynamicsbetweenphilanthropicdonors(theprincipals)andtheirgrantees(theagents)thatexplainsflexiblevs.inflexiblefinancing.Inabasicprincipal-agentmodel,theprincipaldelegatestaskstotheagenttoachievecertaincommonobjectives.Therelationshipisoftencharacterisedbyinformationasymmetry(whereonesideholdsprivateinformationtheothersidecannotobserve)andmisalignmentofinterests,whichcanleadtoinefficiencies(Holmstrom,1980[20]).Inphilanthropicdonor-granteerelationships,thedonorprovidesfundingtoachievecertaingoals,maximisetheimpactofitsgrant,andensureitsresourcesareusedeffectivelyfortheintendedpurpose.Theagentisthecharitableorganisationornon-profitthatreceivesthefundstoimplementtheactivitiesorprogrammestoa

温馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
  • 2. 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等,如果需要附件,请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸,网页内容里面会有图纸预览,若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
  • 4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
  • 6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
  • 7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。

评论

0/150

提交评论