University Research

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 14 oct 2015

According to a recent report by Commonwealth Fund, 'U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective: Spending, Use of Services, Prices, and Health in 13 Countries', based on data by OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) and other cross-national analyses, the US spent US$ 9086 per person on healthcare in 2013, which corresponds to 17.1% of GDP. This was about 50% more than the second highest spender (France-11.6% of GDP) and almost twice of what UK (8.8%) spent. In US if the patients are unable to pay their healthcare bills, it either becomes a bad debt for the patient or is written off as 'charity-care', adding up to US$ 57 billion in uncompensated care. To study and analyse this aspect of healthcare, researchers from Northwestern University - David Dranove, Craig Garthwaite, and Christopher Ody - as part of The Hamilton Project by Brookings Institution, argue that there is room for efficiency improvement in the charity-care system and the supply and demand for charity care are not geographically inclined. This means that hospitals that have more resources available for charity-care, ones mostly located in high-income areas, are not located in the places where people most need it, i.e. the low-income areas. To rectify this situation, researchers propose a 'floor-and-trade' system, in which all hospitals are required to provide some charity-care to low income patients. One of the researcher, Craig Garthwaite, comments 'As the Affordable Care Act has rearranged the flows of patients to hospitals and decreased the number of uninsured Americans, it's a good time to reconsider how hospitals commit themselves to serving their surrounding communities.' Read on...

The Atlantic: Who Pays Hospital Bills When Patients Can't?
Author: Bourree Lam

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 10 oct 2015

According to Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN), 'Impact investments are investments made into companies, organizations, and funds with the intention to generate social and environmental impact alongside a financial return...The growing impact investment market provides capital to address the world's most pressing challenges in sectors such as sustainable agriculture, clean technology, microfinance, and affordable and accessible basic services including housing, healthcare, and education.' The recent report by Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, 'Great Expectations: Mission Preservation and Financial Performance in Impact Investments', based on the evaluation of financial performance of 53 impact investing equity funds that include 557 individual investments, explores the two most important aspects of impact investing - financial returns and long-term impact. The study suggests that - in certain markets segments - investors might not need to expect lower returns as a tradeoff for social impact. According to authors of the report, Wharton finance professors David Musto and Chris Geczy, certain market segments of funds in the sample yield returns close to those of public market indices. Prof. Geczy explains, 'Our research fills a near-void of rigorous analysis of private investment and social impact outcomes and most importantly the link between the ideals of doing well and doing good. The study examines the tension between profits and purpose, also bringing to bear analyses characterizing relative performance as well as statistical certainty about the result. It represents an exciting initial advancement in our ongoing social impact research agenda.' Read on...

GlobeNewswire: New Wharton Research Shows "Doing Well While Doing Good" Is Viable Investment Strategy, Investors Seeking Social Impact Can Receive Comparable Returns
Author: Peter Winicov

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 09 jun 2015

Diversity in nonprofit boards and leadership is an essential element of governance. It helps in bringing different perspectives and expertise in the decision-making process and affects the culture and dynamics of the nonprofit boards. Team of researchers led by Professor Garry W. Jenkins of The Ohio State University undertook the study to understand the ways in which the composition of the nonprofit boards has evolved in recent years in US. They examined the biographies of governing directors in 1989 and 2014 of three sets of nonprofit organizations: major private research universities, elite small liberal arts colleges, and prominent New York City cultural and health institutions. According to Prof. Jenkins, 'The most striking finding was the sizable presence and growth on charitable boards of those whose primary professional background and skill set were drawn from the financial services industry. The tally indicates that the percentage of people from finance on the boards virtually doubled at all three types of nonprofits between 1989 and 2014.' Another important takeaway from the study is the presence of high percentage of board leadership positions from the finance sector (Liberal Arts Colleges - 44%, New York City Nonprofits - 44%, Private Universities - 56%). Prof. Jenkins while mentioning the 2012 figures for finance sector contribution to GDP (7.9%) and employment (6% of private non-farm workforce) explains, 'If nonprofit boards were composed of a representative group of people from society, one would expect trustees with a finance background to represent roughly 6 to 8 percent of board members. Instead, according to our research, trustees with professional backgrounds and skills primarily from the financial services industry represent about four times that number.' While answering about this shift in composition of nonprofit boards, Prof. Jenkins says, 'Nonprofit organizations are simply following the money. Driven by the heightened pressure and expectations to raise ever larger sums, nonprofit boards and managers are selecting new board members with an eye toward those with the greatest capacity for making "transformative gifts."' The dominance of financiers in the nonprofit boards also influences the working dynamics of the board with inclusion of specific practices, approaches and priorities (Data-driven decision making; Emphasis on metrics; Prioritizing impact and competition; Managing with 3-5 years horizons and plans; Advocating executive-style leadership; Compensation etc). Although these practices do have benefits for nonprofits, but at the same time too much financial and business-like emphasis in the functioning of the board may have adverse impact on charitable goals and objectives. For the long-term success and effectiveness of the nonprofit boards the need would be to balance the composition of the board with inclusion of individuals that have expertise and skills in different fields alongwith consideration of racial and gender diversity, minority representation etc. Read on...

Stanford Social Innovation Review: The Wall Street Takeover of Nonprofit Boards
Author: Garry W. Jenkins

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 25 apr 2015

The survey of 924 nonprofit board directors conducted by team of researchers (David F. Larcker, William F. Meehan III, Nicholas Donatiello, Brian Tayan) from Stanford Graduate School of Business supports a long-held hypothesis that many nonprofit boards are ineffective. The study revealed that a significant minority are unsure of their organization's mission and strategy, dissatisfied with their ability to evaluate their organization's performance, and uncertain whether their fellow board members have the experience to do their jobs well. According to Prof. Larcker, the lead researcher, 'Our research finds that too often board members lack the skill set, depth of knowledge, and engagement required to help their organizations succeed.' Researchers offer following recommendations to improve nonprofit board governance - (1) Ensure the mission is focused, and its skills and resources are well-aligned. (2) Ensure the mission is understood by the board, management, and key stakeholders. (3) Establish explicit goals and strategies tied to achieving that mission. (4) Develop rigorous performance metrics that reflect those goals. (5) Hold the executive director accountable for meeting the performance metrics, and evaluate his or her performance with an objective process. (6) Compose your board with individuals with skills, resources, diversity, and dedication to address the needs of the nonprofit. (7) Define explicitly the roles and responsibility of board members. (8) Establish well-defined board, committee, and ad hoc processes that reflect the nonprofit's needs and ensure optimal handling of key decisions. (9) Regularly review and assess each board member and the board's overall performance. Read on...

Business Wire: Stanford Research Offers Nine Tips to Improve Nonprofit Governance
Author: Heather Hansen

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 28 feb 2015

According to National Council of Nonprofits, 'Nonprofit board members are the fiduciaries who steer the organization towards a sustainable future by adopting sound governance and financial management policies, and ensuring adequate resources. The board of directors have three primary legal duties known as the "duty of care", "duty of loyalty", and "duty of obedience".' To make changes to various aspects of the organization and take decisive actions is a challenging task and requires experienced, capable and effective individuals to be members of the board. Professor Eugene Fram of Rochester Institute of Technology, defines three main groups of board members who are part of the decision making process - (1) Directors who want change (2) Directors opposed to change (3) 'Process Directors', individuals who are uncomfortable with major decisions and always want more data or information before voting. The third type of directors, although well-intentioned individuals, can sometime become obstacles in the board's decisiveness. According to Prof. Fram, 'The board has to be careful that these directors don't allow the board to continually examine one angle after another until they lose sight of the board's main job. They can keep action in limbo indefinitely!' Board chair have to optimize the board processes and don't let them go out of hand, as it may result in loss of talented volunteers. Read on...

Huffington Post: How Can Nonprofit Boards Overcome the Inertia of Certain Directors?
Author: Eugene Fram

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 30 nov 2014

Nonprofit boards play an important role in providing direction and guidance to the organization by developing policies and plans to achieve their goals. They also bring accountability and oversight to the organization. Eugene Fram, Professor Emeritus at Rochester Institute of Technology, provides outcomes of one of the sessions organized by National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) focusing on board 'challenges and opportunities expected in the next five to seven years.' According to Prof. Fram, the results of the session, although for for-profit boards, can also be applied to help nonprofit boards focus on culture, leadership and achieve strategic success: (1) Inherent in the board-management relationship is an information imbalance. (2) With an expanding board agenda, process and expectation settings are critical. (3) An empowered lead director... can help mitigate the risk of information imbalance. ... and can break down some of the roadblocks that may develop between the management and directors. (4) Ultimately, the board has to make winning decisions that are informed by data. (5) The board should identify which stakeholders are critical to the strategic plan and target communications to those groups. Read on...

Huffington Post: Strong Culture and Leadership Critical for Nonprofit Board Strategic Success
Author: Eugene Fram

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 12 sep 2014

For the better development of society, it is important that kids, who are the future, spend time in community service activities. Leigh Ann Errico, founder & CEO of Kidkind Foundation & 'Wear the Capes', points out, 'Volunteering with your kids touches hearts, teaches important life lessons and engraves fond, lifelong memories of family bonding. Understanding and participating in activities to benefit the community is crucial to weaving one's moral fiber.' Based on extensive research, Dr. Philip Brown of Rutgers University & 'Wear the Cape', provide reasons to encourage kids to serve others. According to him, 'As young people get older, they need to stretch their abilities, including their moral sensibilities. Engagement with other kids and adults in meaningful service activities can support healthy development in a variety of ways, providing opportunities for both growth and positive fulfillment.' The 10 reasons suggested by him are - (1) Volunteering helps foster empathy (2) Volunteering helps develop a sense of self-efficacy (3) Volunteers gain experience working with other people (4) Volunteering develops new skills (5) Volunteering provides the opportunity to explore new interests and develop new passions (6) Volunteers learn a lot (7) Volunteers actually make a difference in other people's lives (8) Volunteering encourages civic responsibility (9) Volunteering offers you a chance to give back (10) Volunteering is good for you. Read on...

EIN News: TOP 10 REASONS TO ENCOURAGE YOUR KIDS TO VOLUNTEER
Author: NA

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 08 apr 2014

A team of economists, Esther Duflo & Abhijeet Banerjee (both from MIT) and Arun Chandrashekhar & Matthew Jackson (both from Stanford), in their research paper 'The Diffusion of Microfinance', explain the effects of providing information first to the well connected people on the popularity of socially beneficial programs. They termed this new measure of social influence as 'diffusion centrality'. Researchers examined the spread of microfinance in India through word of mouth and found that when socially well connected individuals were the first to know and gain access to these programs it increased the participation by 11%. The surveys for the study were mainly conducted in the select villages of the state of Karnataka in India. The study also found that participants in the microfinance programs are more effective in dissipating information to others - 7 times more than those who know about the programs but not participating. The research can be utilized by microfinance institutions and nonprofit poverty alleviation groups to evaluate the most effective methods to introduce and implement such programs in local settings. Read on...

Asian Scientist: How Anti-Poverty Programs Go Viral
Author: Peter Dizikes

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 27 jan 2014

Harvard University's Center for Nonprofits estimates that US-based nonprofit organizations have about US$ 40 billion fraud losses every year. While a Washington Post analysis of filings from 2008 to 2012 found that top 20 nonprofit organizations have a combined loss of more than half-billion dollars due to unauthorized uses of funds. Professor Eugene Fram of Rochester Institute of Technology have some suggestions for the boards of charitables - Audit committee to review annual audits; Supervise executive compensation & other financial activities; Annual review of conflict of interest policies; Honesty background of new hires; Interactions with external auditors without the presence of management. He also suggest a list of questions that should be asked with the auditors to ascertain any financial wrongdoings and ensure fraud prevention. Alert, attentive and proactive boards can create environment of honesty and deter happenings of fraud. Read on...

Huffington Post: Nonprofit Fraud Robs Charities of Substantial Dollars
Author: Eugene Fram

---

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 22 dec 2013

According to a study by Margaret Ormiston of London Business School and Elaine Wong of University of California at Riverside, for every five cases of good CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) that Fortune 500 CEOs undertake they commit one act of CSiR (Corporate Social Irresponsibility). For their study they considered the 2002 list of Fortune 500 CEOs, obtained detailed background information available through various media, conducted assessment tests like California Adult Q-sort (a forced distributed methodology) and narrowed the list to 49 CEOs for the study. Then they used KDL (Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini) scale to assess CSiR. KDL rates companies in seven qualitative areas from a scale of -2 to +2 on aspects like environmental behavior, community relations, employee relations, corporate governance, diversity, human rights, and product. Researchers suggest that CEOs should always be aware and vigilant of their organization's activities from all aspects and companies should have CSR board or an oversight committee to check on their CEO more frequently. Read on...

THOMASNET News: Study - How CSR Leads to Corporate Social Irresponsibility
Author: Michael Lewis

Latest             ⊲ Newer Posts             University Research             Older Posts ⚬             Last

---

the3h | glomc00 | ilmeps | mawdesigns | anasmark | ilmeds | read | contact