►
From YouTube: Imagine Boston 2030 Forums of the Future: The Role of Philanthropy in the Future of our City
Description
Imagine Boston 2030's Forums of the Future series looks at how philanthropy will shape Boston's growth in the coming years. Boston Globe journalist Sacha Pfeiffer moderated the panel discussion at Faneuil Hall with Jim Canales, Paul Grogan, and Jocelyn Sargent - three key people involved in Boston philanthropy.
A
A
Thank
you
so
much
for
being
here
tonight.
My
name
is
Joyce
Linehan
I
work
in
the
mayor's
office
and,
on
behalf
of
the
mayor,
I'm,
very
happy
to
welcome
you
here
to
San
Yule
Hall
for
the
second
of
our
third
forums
on
the
future,
which
seems
a
little
kind
of
cognitive
dissonance
right
forms
on
the
future
here
in
Faneuil
Hall.
But
but
we're
really
really
happy
to
be
here.
So
imagine.
Boston
2030
is
a
comprehensive
plan
and
it's
Boston's
first
citywide
plan
since
1965.
So
it
was
about
time
we
did
a
new
one.
A
It
covers,
or
it
seeks
to
cover
all
aspects
of
how
local
government
can
best
serve
a
changing
City.
So
we're
looking
at
things
like
creating
housing
for
a
growing
population
and
making
it
affordable
preparing
for
extreme
weather
patterns,
growing
job
opportunities
into
the
neighborhoods,
supporting
our
waterfront
and
Park
System,
and
identifying
the
transportation
needs
of
the
21st
century
of
21st
century
Boston
and
doing
all
of
that
through
the
lens
of
ensuring
equity.
A
The
plans
been
informed
by
more
than
14,000
Boston
residents,
hundreds
of
policy
experts,
hundreds
of
community
organizations,
a
lot
of
city
staffers,
including
a
very
dedicated
staff
of
two
who
run
the
entire
program
natalia
or
today,
and
Rebecca
Emanuel,
who
are
both
here
tonight.
Who've
done
an
amazing
job
to
get
us
to
the
point
that
we're
at.
A
So
why
are
we
doing
these
conversations
as
we
get
ready
to
release
the
final
draft
for
public
comment?
We
wanted
to
engage
the
public
one
more
time
and
think
about
some
of
the
sectors
that
most
impact
the
development
of
the
city.
So
last
week
we
did
the
history
and
future
of
planning.
We
had
a
really
great
plan
panel
over
it,
Edward
M,
Kennedy
Institute
very,
very
enlightening,
and
we've
got
one
more
May
9th
over
at
the
Boston
Public
Library
in
Copley
Square
with
the
academic
institution.
A
So
we've
got
five
college
presidents
who
are
going
to
talk
about
the
role
that
universities
play
in
this
kind
of
development.
So
without
further
ado,
I'm
going
to
introduce
our
moderator
for
the
evening,
Sacha
Pfeiffer
got
her
first
reporting
job
in
1944
in
sari
at
the
Dedham
Times.
Before
joining
the
Boston
Globe
in
1995,
she
was
a
member
of
the
spotlight
investigative
team
that
won
the
2003
pilot
surprise
for
public
service
for
its
stories
on
clergy,
sex
abuse.
A
You
probably
saw
her
in
the
movie
recently
well,
not
her,
but
somebody
playing
her
after
leaving
the
globe
in
2008
she
hosted
All
Things
Considered
in
Radio
Boston
for
WBUR
and
for
her
work
at
WBUR.
She
won
a
national
Edward
R
Murrow
Award
for
broadcast
reporting
today,
she's
back
at
the
Globe
recover
as
a
reporter,
covering
nonprofits
philanthropy
and
wealth,
so
she's
exactly
the
right
person
for
this
panel
tonight
tonight.
Please
welcome
Sacha
Pfeiffer.
B
Thanks
Joyce,
as
Joyce
said,
part
of
what
eye
covers:
nonprofits
philanthropy
and
wealth,
I
love
what
I
cover
and
part
of
that
is
because
for
many
people,
when
they
work
in
the
nonprofit
sector,
it's
really
out
of
an
instinct
to
do
good.
Now,
I
know
from
covering
the
sector
that
the
nonprofit
world
can
be
as
bureaucratic
and
Pollok
political
as
anything
in
the
for-profit
world.
But
I
like
that.
B
I
like
philanthropy,
because
it
shows
that
when
people
feel
like
they
have
extra
money
rather
than
just
buy
something
for
themselves,
another
car
another
house,
they
want
to
try
to
use
their
money
to
do
good
and
I,
like
covering
wealth,
because
again,
I
write
about
people,
often
who
are
in
a
position
where
they
have
much
much
more
money
than
they
need
on
a
daily
basis
and
they're
thinking
really
hard
and
creatively
about.
How
can
I
do
something
meaningful
with
my
money
and
that
plays
out
in
a
lot
of
ways.
B
Some
people
write
a
check
to
the
Museum
of
Fine
Arts.
Some
people
want
to
give
money
to
the
Pine,
Street
and
homeless.
Shelter.
I
wrote
a
story
about
a
sort
of
brash
venture
capitalist
in
Boston,
who
is
used
to
having
young
entrepreneurs
pitch
their
company
ideas
to
him
and
his.
He
reached
this
point
in
life
where
he
felt
like
I
want
to
do
something
more
meaningful
than
what
I
do
now.
B
So
he
decided
to
create
a
shark
tank
type
competition
for
the
nonprofit
sector,
where
people
who
had
interesting
nonprofit
ideas
would
pitch
them
to
him,
and
the
investors
would
potentially
give
those
nonprofits
money.
Well,
I
wrote
about
this,
and
the
nonprofit
sector
largely
hated
the
idea
because
they
felt
like
just
because
you're
charismatic
and
can
and
can
pitch
a
good
idea
on
a
stage
does
not
necessarily
mean
that's
the
best
idea
for
a
non-profit
but
I
like
what
I,
because
you
can
write
about
those
kind
of
creative
things
and
I
think
tonight's.
B
B
But
what
was
interesting
to
me
is
that
some
of
the
online
comments
said
things
like
I
will
never
donate
money
to
that
foundation.
But
what
people
didn't
realize
is
that's
not
the
kind
of
foundation
you
can
donate
money
to.
So
that's
part
of
what
I
want
our
panelists
to
talk
about
tonight
is
what
exactly
our
foundation
is.
What
is
the
difference?
So,
let's
have
our
three
panelists
come
up.
We
have
a
Jocelyn
Sargent.
She
heads
the
high
end
foundation,
Paul
Grogan.
B
So
I'm
going
to
sit,
and
if
this
feels
awkward
police
say
and
will
will
change
so
I,
wonder
first,
the
three
of
you
could
talk
a
little
about
your
foundations
because
Paul
the
Boston
foundation
as
a
Community
Foundation,
is
different
than
what
the
bar
and
the
hyams
are
as
private
foundations.
The
bar
in
the
Hyams
were
basically
founded
by
families
or
individuals
of
great
wealth
who
wanted
to
use
their
some
other
money
in
a
charitable
way.
Paul
yours
is
a
very
different
animal.
C
We're
really
in
a
different
sub
branch
of
the
philanthropic
world
of
community
foundations,
which
are
all
public
charities
as
opposed
to
private
foundation.
So
we
are
regulated
very
differently.
We
also
have
a
geographic
mission
as
opposed
to
a
topical
mission,
which
many
private
foundations
adopt.
Another
difference
is
that
part
of
our
mission
is
to
try
to
expand
philanthropic
resources
in
Greater
Boston,
and
so
in
addition
to
giving
away
a
lot
of
money
as
private
foundation
sue,
we
raise
a
significant
amount
of
money
every
year
seeking
to
add
to
that.
C
To
that
wealth,
that's
available
for
community
purposes.
Yet
another
difference
which
has
been
very
important
I
think
in
Boston,
is
that
public
charities,
community
foundations
have
a
much
broader
ability
to
engage
in
public
policy
than
private
foundations,
really
very
sharply
limited
by
law
and
what
they
can
do
now.
We
don't
get
involved
in
partisan
politics
who
are
backing
candidates,
but
we're
able
to
be
very
engaged
in
public
policymaking,
and
we
try
to
do
that
at
the
Boston
foundation
so
where
we
are
a
different
animal.
B
C
Right,
most
private
foundations
are
formed
with
the
fortune
of
an
individual
or
a
family,
and
that's
the
sole
source
of
the
capital
that
the
foundation
has
Community
Foundation's
gather
the
resources
we
have
from
literally
thousands
and
thousands
of
contributors,
so
she
had
another
important
day.
Indeed,.
D
So
the
bar
foundation,
which
is
celebrating
its
20th
anniversary
this
year,
was
created
in
1997
by
Amos
and
Barbara
Hofstetter
Amos
Hofstetter
came
into
his
wealth
having
founded
continental
Cablevision
and
then
sold
the
company
in
the
mid
90s,
and
they
decided
to
put
a
significant
portion
of
their
wealth
into
the
creation
of
the
foundation.
For
those
of
you
who
have
been
in
Boston
for
much
of
this
time,
you
may
know
that
the
bar
foundation
was
anonymous
in
its
approach
for
roughly
ten
to
twelve
years
of
its
existence.
D
So
it's
really
only
been
in
the
last
seven
to
eight
years
that
people
knew
who
was
behind
the
bar
foundation,
because
the
Hofstetter
wanted
to
raise
their
family
without
necessarily
having
all
of
the
Foundation's
activities
be
part
of
their
kids
upbringing.
That
was
really
the
reason
that
bar
started
anonymously
in
about
2009
2010.
The
foundation
became
more
public.
D
One
of
the
reasons
that
it
did
so
is
because
in
2010
it
made
the
decision
to
focus
on
climate
change
as
one
of
its
core
areas
of
interest
and
felt
that
lending
its
name
as
well
as
its
wealth
to
the
issue
was
important
and
I'll
speak
about
that.
A
little
later
and
then
I've
now
been
here
for
about
three
years
and
in
that
period
of
time
the
foundation
has
also
taken
a
much
more
open,
transparent
and
communicative
approach
to
its
work
and
I.
B
E
Unlike
bar
or
the
Boston
foundation,
the
hyeon's
foundation
is
a
private
foundation
that
was
endowed
in
1921
by
Godfrey
hyams
and
he
and
his
family
were
active
in
the
charitable
giving
for
a
number
of
years,
and
they
did
not,
however,
stipulate
that
family
would
be
on
the
board.
So
we
are,
you
know,
in
a
very
important
sense
and
independent
private
foundation,
our
board
and
organization.
Our
staff
is
led
by
people
of
color
we're
very
excited
about
that.
E
It's
a
it's
a
journey
that
has
been
in
the
making
for
over
a
decade,
and
we
are
at
a
point
where
we're
able
to
do
very
exciting
things
around
racial
justice
in
the
Boston
and
Chelsea
communities.
So
you
have
a
founder
who's
no
longer
alive.
Absolutely.
We
do
not
have
family
members
on
the
board
and
can.
B
E
The
foundation
when
it
when
it
started
has
always
had
its
roots
in
paying
attention
to
marginalized
community,
so
immigrant
communities
and
low-income
communities,
where
the
focus
of
Godfrey
Hines
when
he
started.
However,
over
the
years
we've
continued
our
focus
on
low
income
communities
and
youth,
and
in
the
last
decade
we've
shifted
our
focus
to
racial
justice
and,
with
our
last
strategic
framework,
two
years
ago,
we've
identified
the
tactic
which
is
through
systems
change.
E
E
Three
of
our
focus
areas
are
dismantling
the
school-to-prison
pipeline,
that's
very
important
to
us
that
young
people
have
a
good
start
and
that
they're
not
tracked
unjustly
into
the
criminal
justice
system
before
they've,
had
a
to
really
get
their
full
education
and
have
the
types
of
opportunities
that
will
make
their
them
have
successful
outcomes.
Another
goal
of
ours
is
to
work
to
make
sure
that
that
communities
are
able
to
live
and
in
neighborhoods
where
they
have
been
committed
to,
and
they
are
affordable
housing
rates.
E
So
we
are
looking
for
making
sure
that
communities
are
able
to
afford
their
their
housing
cost.
We
all
know
that
housing
cost
of
major
cities
like
Boston,
have
been
increasing
over
the
last
two
decades
and
for
some
people
that
means
that
it's
no
longer
affordable,
natively
their
homes.
A
third
area
that
we
concentrate
on
is
unfair
wages,
and
so
we've
done
a
lot
of
work
to
support
community
organizers
to
work
with
business
leaders
to
identify
ways
to
bring
cost
of
living
community
efforts
together.
One
organization
that
was
funded
recently
I'm
really
excited
about.
E
It
is
the
Boston
recycling
center
and
they
are
actually
pushing
for
livable
wage
green
jobs,
and
it
comes
very
much
in
alignment
and
coordination
with
some
of
the
work
that
Barr
is
funding
around
climate
change.
So
I
am
so.
Those
are
our
three
priority
areas,
but
we,
we
are
very
much
interested
in
the
community
being
the
center
of
the
work,
and
so
we
also
do
allow
for
community
to
define
some
of
the
issues
that
are
facing
them.
I
met.
B
Jocelyn,
for
the
first
time
in
February,
we
had
a
cup
of
coffee
and
you
said
something
interesting
related
to
organizing
she
talked
about
community
organizing
you
had
talked
about
how
organizing
today
is
different
than
it
used
to
be.
You
talked
about
black
lives
matter
and
occupy
Boston,
but
if
you
want
to
fund
those
things,
they're,
not
traditional
groups
that
can
accept
a
grant.
So
what
do
you
do
if
you
want
to
back
something
like
that?
But
it's
not
a
conventional
nonprofit,
so.
E
That's
an
interesting
question:
I'm
glad
you
brought
that
up,
because
that's
something
we've
been
struggling
with
I
think
the
sector
as
a
whole
is
we
think
through.
How
do
we
support
communities
that
are
threatened
now?
Communities
are
facing
harsh
immigration
policy
and
some
of
those
groups
are
not
organized
as
501
C,
3s
and
so
for
a
private
foundation.
That
has
to
be
our
focus.
So
what
we've
been
looking
at
is
how
do
we
support?
E
How
do
we
resource
the
supportive
efforts
around
so
beyond
a
grant
so
at
AIIMS
I
love
that
we
have
a
philosophy
that,
yes,
we
are
grant
makers,
but
we
are
also
resource
providers
and
we
support
our
groups
with
our
community
partners
with
our
influence.
We
support
them
with
training,
so
we
can
provide
training.
E
You
can
pay
for
a
consultant
to
come
in
and
share
with
the
community
how
they
can
know
what
their
rights
are,
and
we
can
do
other
things
like
provide
stipends
for
groups
to
go
to
different
workshops
or
to
participate
in
different
development,
individual
development
pieces.
So
we
have
to
be
creative
in
the
way
that
we
do
our
work,
but
I
think
you
know
the
team
and
it's
new
for
me,
but
they've.
My
team
is
very
experienced
in
season
and
so
we're
very
resourceful
and
thinking
through
innovative,
innovative
ways
to
help
our
communities
need
their
goals.
E
B
D
So
up
until
2010,
the
foundation
had
a
broad-based
Environment
Program,
which
did
work
in
conservation,
did
work
around
supporting
broad
environmental
organizations
did
work
around
community
health
impacts,
environmental
impacts
on
health
and
in
2010.
The
trustees
made
the
decision
that
climate
change
was
one
of
the
most
urgent
issues
facing
us,
and
indeed
being
here
in
Boston,
as
many
of
you
know,
particularly
because
of
some
of
the
good
work
that
the
city
of
Boston
has
done
through
the
climate
ready
Boston
effort.
D
As
some
of
you
know,
this
is
a
particularly
vulnerable
community,
vulnerable
to
sea
level,
rise
of
ulnar,
Abell
to
other
kind
of
weather,
event
impacts,
and
so,
with
that
context,
the
foundation
made
the
decision
to
focus
on
climate
and,
in
particular,
to
focus
on
mitigation
strategies.
That
is,
strategies
that
would
reduce
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
the
two
principal
areas
of
focus
in
2010
were
around
transportation
energy,
because
those
are
the
two
greatest
contributors
to
greenhouse
gas
emissions.
D
When
I
arrived
in
2014
as
part
of
the
leadership
transition,
we
went
through
a
strategic
planning
effort
and
looked
at
the
work
that
we
had
done
took
stock
of.
It
also
looked
at
how
the
broader
context
had
changed,
and
we
made
the
decision
that
staying
focused
in
those
areas
made
sense,
but
we
made
some
modest
refinements
to
our
strategies.
D
The
energy
effort
became
much
more
of
a
focus
on
clean
energies,
and
how
do
we
scale
renewable
energy
and
how
do
we
scale
energy
efficiency
in
our
work
and
the
transportation
work
became
more
broadly
framed
around
mobility
around?
How
do
we
not
only
think
about
transportation?
That
is
how
people
move
around,
but
also,
how
do
we
think
about
places
where
people
live?
How
do
we
think
about
making
places
smarter?
How
do
we
think
about
transit
oriented
development,
a
number
of
factors
in
the
whole
mobility
context?
D
B
D
The
waterfront
effort,
which
is
more
of
a
special
initiative
for
the
foundation,
has
a
piece
of
it
that
is
indeed
about
climate
resilience.
That
is
how
can
we
do
development
in
a
smarter
way?
That's
attentive
to
resilience.
So
in
that
effort,
for
example,
we
work
in
partnership
with
an
entity
called
the
green
ribbon
Commission,
which
is
co-chaired
by
one
of
our
trustees,
Amos
Hofstadter
and
the
mayor,
and
the
green
ribbon.
D
Commission
is
a
collection
of
business
leaders
and
also
representatives
from
the
university
community
who
come
together
and
basically
think
about
the
ways
in
which
their
sectors
can
contribute
to
addressing
both
the
greenhouse
gas
emission
issues,
as
well
as
the
resilience
concerns
that
we
have
so
specifically,
some
of
the
work
that
we
have
done.
There
is,
through
the
climate,
ready,
Boston
effort.
D
B
The
Boston
foundation
is
easily
the
oldest
and
most
established
in
terms
of
the
three
foundations
represented
here
and
its
funding.
Errors
are
pretty
sweeping.
It
does
education,
health
and
wellness
jobs
and
economic
development,
neighborhoods
and
housing,
arts
and
culture
with
her
Jocelyn
and
Jim
talk
about
how
their
foundations
have
sort
of
to
be
remained
nimble.
When
you
know
Jocelyn.
Switching
to
racial
justice
bar
focusing
on
climate
change
is
the
Boston
foundation
doing
things
to
to
stay
nimble
as
issues
change
as
time
goes
on
in
terms.
C
Of
what
it
funds?
Well,
that's
that's
a
great
question
like
a
lot
of
foundations,
we've
pushed
ourselves
to
commit
to
achieving
specific
results
and
our
board
of
directors
is
very
focused
on
that
and
we
have
five
priority
areas
that
Sasha
just
went
through
where
the
lion's
share
of
our
resources
are
going
and
in
each
of
those
areas.
We
are
committed
to
a
big
idea,
a
potentially
transformational
development
in
that
in
that
arena.
C
C
We've
set
aside
a
pool
of
funds
which
we
call
the
open
door
fund,
which
is
kind
of
the
renewed
invitation
of
the
community
that
whether
your
ideas
coincide
with
our
priorities
at
the
moment
doesn't
matter
bring
those
ideas
to
us
and
we
will
try
to
be
helpful,
and
so
we
will
see
if
the
balance
that
we've
struck
is
the
right
one,
but
I'm
very
happy
that
we
have
returned
to
kind
of
an
open,
an
open
door
concept
where
folks,
who
have
great
ideas,
can
potentially
get
backing
to
try
those
ideas.
I
also.
B
Think
of
the
Boston
foundation
as
having
an
incubator
aspect
in
a
way
because,
for
example,
there's
some
philanthropy
group
in
Boston
focused
on
Hispanic
philanthropy
organizations
focused
on
helping
or
run
by
Latino
or
latina
people
and
I
believe
that's
based
within
the
Boston
foundation.
So
it
kind
of
benefits
from
the
umbrella
of
the
Boston
foundation.
That's.
C
Right,
that's
another
wonderful
resource
that
the
foundation
can
be
to
specific
organizations.
So
we
do
have
a
Latino
fund
which
Latino
community
has
gotten
behind
and
decided
they
wanted
to
have
a
resource
specifically
for
organizations
that
are
addressing
issues
in
the
spanic
community.
There's
a
black
philanthropy
fund
at
the
foundation
focused
on
african-american
issues.
C
There's
an
equality
fund
is
focused
on
gay,
lesbian
and
transgender
issues,
and
so
it
can
be
a
home
for
people
want
to
have
some
backing
some
support
some
logistics
and
that
can
be
very
important
to
making
a
difference
between
whether
an
organization
or
an
idea
can
go
forward
or
not.
So
that's
another
I
think
very
important
dimension
of
your
community
validation.
One.
B
Of
the
issues
I've
written
about
in
the
past
few
months
is,
if
the
fears
that
the
nonprofit
sector
has
about
the
Trump
administration
there
are
Trump
has
proposed
tax
reforms
that
have
the
potential
to
decrease
incentives
for
charitable
giving
which
could
hurt
nonprofits.
Clearly
we
know
that
there's
been
a
crackdown
on
immigrants
and
that's
often
a
constituencies
that
nonprofits
serve.
If
you're
going
to
minimize
the
size
of
government,
then
that's
a
chances
of
you,
federally
funded
nonprofit
will
be
cut
off.
Can
each
of
you
talk
about?
B
E
You
know
it
has
been
a
very
shifting
landscape
for
us
over
the
last
several
months.
What
I
think
and
I've
been
in
philanthropy
for
over
20
years,
so
I
have
noticed
from
this
philanthropic
community
in
Boston
that
we
have
really
band
together
to
begin
to
coordinate
and
to
align
our
efforts,
because
we
all
do
a
number
of
things
differently.
E
We
all
have
different
missions,
but
we
all
care
about
our
communities
and
so
we're
trying
to
figure
out
what
are
their
approaches
and
how
do
they
all
work
together
so
that
we
can
support
the
communities
that
we
serve.
So
that's
one
thing
and
I
mean
it
seems
minor,
but
I
have
to
tell
you
a
lineman
coordination
in
philanthropy
is
huge.
It's
like
it's
the
problem
that
I've
been
grappling
with
in
the
20
years,
I've
been
in
philanthropy.
What's.
B
E
Part
of
what
happens
is
we
actually
Mesa
time's
foster
conflict
and
competition
on
the
ground.
So
you
know
if
we
back
one
group
and
you
don't
back
another,
you
know
we're
not
making
these
choices
in
alignment
with
each
other.
Then
we
can
unwittingly
create
those
conflicts
in
the
field.
That's
good
anything
any
of
us
want-
and
we
have
definitely
been
talking
about
it.
E
I
think
the
sector
as
a
whole
for
many
years,
but
I
think
the
last
several
months
have
given
us
an
opportunity
to
stimulus
and
incentive
to
really
move
more
quickly
on
collaboration
in
a
real
way,
so
that
we
should
we
think
about
common
applications.
So
we
talked
about
common
applications
and
we
even
have
designed
one
I
mean
we
participated
in
one
those
conversations
go
on
and
off,
but
now
it's
really.
E
We
have
to
figure
out
a
way
to
be
nimble
and,
as
you
mentioned,
and
to
actually
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
the
communities
that
are
facing
the
most
change
and
the
harshest
the
aspects
of
the
policy.
So
we
don't
want
our
application
process
in
our
reporting
process
to
make
it
more
difficult
for
them.
Comment.
E
A
common
application
is
one
in
which
the
same
type
of
information
is
asked
on
every
application
for
the
for
no
matter
what
silence
up
against
attrition
you're
applying
to.
So
as
we
think
about
revamping
our
common
application.
We've
been
looking
that
bar
we've
been
looking
at
T
V
F
we've
been
looking
at
the
Associated
grantmakers
common
app
form
that
a
number
of
philanthropic
institutions
use,
because
we
want
people
to
be
able
to
focus
on
the
work
as
opposed
to
how
do
we
get
some
money
out
of
these
different
institutions?
D
This
is
not
a
space
that
bar
was
active
in
in
any
way,
and
yet
we
felt
that
we
needed
to
be
responsive
to
this
moment.
So
the
trustees
authorized
several
million
dollars
to
do
a
number
of
things.
One
was
to
provide
support
to
those
very
organizations
and,
frankly,
to
do
it
in
a
way
that
was
going
to
be
as
nimble
and
was
going
to
be
as
user-friendly
as
we
could.
So.
D
The
grants
that
we
made
were
general
operating
support
grants
and
they
were
multi-year
grants
for
those
of
you
who
are
in
the
nonprofit
community.
Both
of
those
are
kind
of
like
manna
from
heaven
to
hear
those
terms
general
operating
support,
meaning
unrestricted
support
and
multi-year,
meaning
it
wasn't
just
a
12-month
grant
in
all
of
the
cases
they
were
three-year
grants.
The
other
thing
that
we
did,
because
there
was
another
sector
that
was
being
Dell
used,
and
this
is
Sasha
sector-
is
the
media.
D
The
media
had
been
declared
the
enemy
of
the
American
people
to
use
a
quote
from
the
President
of
the
United
States,
and
there
was
concern
about
investments
in
the
media,
investments
in
investigative
journalism
and
investments
in
protecting
freedom
of
the
press,
which
is
indeed
the
cornerstone
of
our
democracy.
So
we
then
proceeded
to
make
1.5
million
dollars
of
investment
in
a
number
of
organizations.
This
was
more
of
a
national
effort,
but
there
again
we
partnered
with
other
foundations
that
had
much
more
expertise
that
we
then
we
did.
D
We
piggybacked
on
work
that
they
had
already
done,
and
we
simply
sought
to
augment
contributions
that
they
were
making.
I
think
this
is
important
because
to
to
Jocelyn's
point,
this
is
not
how
foundations
behave
and
I.
Don't
say
this.
What
bar
is
doing
I
simply
say,
because
I
think
joseline
is
right.
That
part
of
what
this
era
calls
for
is
that
we
need
to
think
about
our
work
in
very
different
ways.
D
B
D
You
and
I
were
on
a
panel
a
month
ago,
where
one
of
the
panelists
said
foundations
if
it
takes
longer
to
get
a
grant
than
it
does
to
have
a
child
something's
wrong,
and
it
is
true
that
there
are
foundation
processes
that
take
more
than
nine
months,
and
that
should
just
not
be
the
case.
So
I
think
that's
the
kind
of
thing
that
we're
talking
about
as.
B
You
mentioned
one
of
the
things
bar
has
decided
to
fund
is
journalism
now
places
like
the
globe
can't
benefit
from
this
because
we're
a
for-profit.
We
can't
take
terrible
money,
but
you
may
know
there
are
many
journalism
initiatives
now
that
are
nonprofit,
so
WBUR
got
money
from
bar
to
create
an
investigative
unit,
Pro
Publica,
which
is
a
great
national
reporting
website,
Center
for
Investigative
Reporting,
New,
England,
First,
Amendment,
Coalition
Committee
to
Protect
Journalists.
That's
a
pretty
unconventional
way
of
thinking
about
what
philanthropy
can
support
and
what
is
a
civic
cause.
B
D
Just
say
before,
Paul
chimes
in
that
that,
what's
critical
about
those
decisions
and
I
think
all
three
of
us
are
thinking
about
this
at
the
end
of
the
day,
whatever
we're
doing
in
response
to
this
administration
and
to
the
era
in
which
we
find
ourselves
has
to
be
grounded
in
our
values
and
for
us,
our
values
are
about.
How
do
you
invest
in
a
healthy
democracy
and
that's
what
leads
to
that
kind
of
grant?
Make
and
I.
B
C
But
I
want
to
point
out
first
that
I
think
that,
in
answer
to
your
question,
Sasha,
what's
what's
the
effect
of
on
on
Philanthropy?
Is
we
know
a
lot
less
than
we're
going
to
know?
You
know
we're
at
the
very
early
stages
and
a
lot
of
what
the
president
has
proposed
has
not
been
approved,
but
the
one
area
for
us
where
there's
clearly
been
a
huge
impact,
even
though
what
he
wanted
to
do
has
not
been
approved.
C
There
either
is
in
the
area
of
immigration,
just
because
of
the
spontaneous
organic
reaction
of
the
community
to
the
multiple
threats
that
seem
to
be
bearing
down
on
them
and
the
Boston
Foundation
has
been
very
involved
with
the
immigrant
community.
For
ever,
we
were
formed
during
the
period
of
the
greatest
immigration
to
this
country
between
1880
and
1920.
C
If
you
look
at
the
Renaissance
of
Boston
today,
for
instance,
it
wouldn't
have
happened
without
the
immigration
that
occurred,
the
entire
positive
increment
of
population
that
has
come
into
the
city
in
the
last
15
years
or
so
is
almost
exactly
equal
to
the
immigrant
migration
into
the
city.
So
you
can
say
truthfully:
no
immigration,
no
boston,
Renaissance,
that's
how
big
an
issue
this
is,
and
so
we
have
been
deeply
deeply
concerned
and
we're
working
on
three
levels.
C
One
is
a
set
of
emergency
grants
to
the
organizations
that
we
know
are
really
carrying
the
weight
in
trying
to
respond
to
this.
You
know
tremendous
fear
and
apprehension.
That's
out
there.
We've
also
held
major
forums
at
the
foundation
to
explore
the
different
dimensions
of
this
and
what
people
can
do
about
it,
what
the
what
the
legal
distinctions
are
and
all
of
that
and
finally,
we're
trying
to
work
with
a
much
broader
constituency
out
the
foundation
about
this
issue,
because
you
look
at
the
demographics
of
this
part
of
the
country,
immigration
is
so
vital.
C
C
B
C
Well,
one
of
the
one
of
the
big
issues
and
most
of
the
organizations
were
supporting
are
doing.
This
is
getting
legal
services
to
to
individuals
and
and
family.
So,
and
you
know
we
were
the
founders
of
founding
funders
again,
that's
there
at
the
beginning
of
the
Massachusetts
immigrant
and
Refugee
Association
Mira
we're
working
very
closely
with
organizations
like
that
that
have
a
track
record
that
have
the
relationships
in
place
and
our
funding
allows
them
just
to
ramp
up,
particularly
in
the
legal
services
area
and.
D
So
Mira
is
a
good
example
of
the
work
that
we're
doing
in
that
zone.
We've
also
made
grants
to
the
Lenny's
a
combined
and
that's
actually
permitted
us
the
opportunity
to
actually
do
what
and
sorry
to
get
into
jargon
here,
but
to
do
regrain
ting,
which
is
often
how
we
can
work
with
organizations
that
also
have
the
capacity
to
do
grant
making
themselves
and,
in
addition,
Sasha
noted
a
number
of
the
grants
that
we've
made
in
the
in
the
investigative
journalism
and
the
protections
of
freedom
of
the
press.
D
B
Been
talking
a
lot
about
writing
checks,
foundations
that
can
give
money
to
organizations,
but
foundations
also
have
influence
in
ways
that
it
doesn't
involve
money
and
Jocelyn.
When
you
and
I
met,
you
actually
said
something
that
was
very
memorable
to
me.
You
said
in
our
society.
Money
has
power.
So
when
wealthy
people
say
something
there's
power
behind
it,
can
you
give
us
some
examples
of
the
ways
you
feel
like
the
wealth
of
the
foundation
and
the
influence
of
the
foundation
can
have
impact
without
just
writing
checks?
What
else
can
you
do
well.
E
I
mean
one
of
the
things
that
we've
been
looking
at
and
we
have
funded
a
number
of
groups,
particularly
and
I'm,
going
to
highlight
this
in
the
Muslim
Arab
South
Asian
community.
That's
a
community
that
is
smaller,
relatively
speaking
and
it
is
growing
and
it
is
particularly
under
siege,
and
so
we
support
groups
like
the
Islamic
Society
of
Boston
cultural
center,
and
we
work
with
national
groups
that
connect
Mossa
communities
across
the
country
like
the
Proteas
fund.
So
we
are
concerned
about
making
sure
that
we
do
support
fledgling
groups
that
that
need
our
help.
E
We're
also
looking
at
other
ways
to
support
groups.
So,
for
example,
I
did
say
that,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
thought
about
is
we
could
be
influential
in
getting
people
to
the
tables
that
they
would
not
ordinarily
be
at.
We
have
been
working
closely
with
the
city
I'm
thinking
through.
How
do
we
do
more
of
that?
How
do
we
bring
more
community
voice
to
policymakers,
I
think
a
lot
of
times
the
way
the
community
voice
happens
in
policy
decision.
E
If
there's
protests,
however,
we
have
a
receptive
city,
government
and
I
think
there's
a
way
to
engage
communities,
and
so
we're
problem-solving
together.
We're
identifying
solutions
together,
as
opposed
to
always
needing
to
be
conflictual,
not
that
it
doesn't
need
to
be
conflict,
I'm,
so
I
think
bringing
our
influence
to
providing
that
space
where
we're
bringing
the
business
sector
to
the
table
to
talk
with
the
community
partners
about
what's
happening
in
their
community,
how
business
practice
are
impacting
them.
E
Another
thing
that
we're
looking
at
I
have
to
mention
this
because
recently
Ford
Foundation,
they
did
a
big
press
announcement
that
they're
they'll
be
spending
a
billion
dollars
on
PR
I--'s
on
program
related
investments
from
their
endowment,
and
you
know
that
made
a
big
splash
and
it's
great
and
I.
Ford
really
I
have
to
give
credit
to
Darren
Walker
their
president,
because
he
really
has
shifted
the
way
the
sector
thinks
about.
Well,
we
have
5%
that
were
required
to
give
out.
But
what
do
we
do
with
our
corpus?
E
What
do
we
do
with
the
ninety
five
percent?
That
sort
of
sits
in
the
bank
so
at
high
ends?
We
have
a
tradition
of
making
program
related
investments.
We
actually
did
our
first
one
in
1986,
I
think
Paul.
You
are
involved
in
that
one
and
we
have
always
done
our
our
program.
Related
investments
out
of
our
endowment.
So
what's
interesting,
is
that
it's
a
shift
in
the
sector
because
program
land
investments
are
usually
done
out
of
the
five
percent
of
the
grant
making
budget.
So.
B
We
should
explain
that
a
rule
for
a
foundation
is
that
they
have
to
give
away
at
least
5%
of
their
money.
Now
that
can
include
I,
believe
salaries.
It
can
include
salaries
because,
because
it's
viewed
the
people
you're
paying
or
doing
charitable
work,
so
that
counts
for
your
shuttle
output.
Well,
what
happened
is
that
for
many
foundations,
that's
become
the
ceiling.
5%
was
meant
to
be
the
floor.
At
least
five
a
lot
simply
stopped
at
five
and
the
rest
sits
in
the
bank
and
that's
controversial.
B
E
E
So
we
have
always
felt
that
commitment
to
the
community
I
mean
it's
been
a
small
community,
but
what
we
have
to
do
at
high
ends,
and
what
are
my
incredible
board
has
tasked
me
to
do-
is
to
become
more
visible
because
by
simply
making
the
statement
by
Darren
Walker
saying
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
invest
our
Ardoin
Dalaman,
because
we
think
communities
will
give
us
return
on
investment.
We
think
equality
pays.
That's
basically
what
it
means.
We
think
that
justice
and
equality
pays.
E
We
think
you
can
get
return
on
your
investment
for
that,
and
so
we're
willing
to
take
that
chance
with
our
endowment
dollars,
and
so
we've
done
that
and
so
for
high-end
we've
just
got
to
get
out
there
and
tell
the
story
so
that
we
can
actually
encourage
other
parts
of
the
sector.
Who
might
not
be
as
anxious
to
do
that
so
Jim.
B
D
I
think
one
of
the
important
obligations
that
foundations
have
foundations
have
an
enormous
amount
of
latitude
and
I.
Think
with
that
comes
the
obligation
to
think
about
the
ways
that
we
can
use
our
voice
to
advance
the
issues
that
we
care
deeply
about.
So
yes
and
it's
Jocelyn
noted
earlier,
we
are
grant
makers,
that's
part
of
what
we
do.
D
We
make
grants,
but
I
think
we
leave
a
lot
on
the
table
if
we
don't
also
find
ways
to
complement
that
grant,
making
activity
with
opportunities
to
bring
our
voice
and
our
perspective
and
the
perspective
of
those
we
support
to
critical
issues
that
are
facing
the
areas
that
we
work
in
or
our
region.
So,
to
give
an
illustration
that
Sasha
alluded
to
earlier
in
the
panel
one
of
the
things
that
we've
done
in
the
last
year
has
been
to
launch
a
waterfront
initiative,
it's
an
effort
that
is
very
much
about.
D
How
do
we
take
a
long
term
view
and
think
about
the
responsible
stewardship
of
Boston's
waterfront?
It
is
truly
one
of
the
treasures
of
this
area.
It's
also
a
treasure
that
was
ignored
for
many
many
years
because
of
an
elevated
expressway
with
that
being
gone
on
and
the
city
being
opened
up
to
the
water,
it
creates
tremendous
opportunity
to
think
about
how
do
we
create
open
space
so
that
all
of
our
residents
and
citizens
and
visitors
can
enjoy
the
beauty
of
that
waterfront?
D
How
do
we
do
it
in
a
way
that
is
resilient
and
that
is
sensitive
to
the
kind
of
climate
impacts
that
we're
going
to
have?
How
do
we
think
about
the
waterfront
being
another
form
of
mobility
that
actually
moves
people
around
in
a
city
that,
as
we
know,
is
deeply
congested
in
so
many
different
ways
and
makes
mobility
a
real
challenge,
and
how
do
we
to
come
back
to
Joyce's
term
when
she
opened
this
panel?
D
How
do
we
think
about
the
role
of
equity
and
how
do
we
think
about
making
this
a
waterfront
that
is
accessible
to
all
and
not
just
accessible
to
people
who
can
afford
to
live
in
high-rise,
condos
that
are
being
built
upon
that
waterfront
so
for
bar?
Our
motivation
is:
how
do
we
take
a
50-year
view
about
the
waterfront?
How
do
we
ensure
that
we
are
stewarding
it
for
future
generations
so
that
we
are
not
making
decisions
today
that
in
20
or
30
years,
we're
going
to
regret?
D
And,
quite
frankly,
if
you
look
at
the
South
Boston
waterfront,
there
are
many
people
who
lament
what
has
happened
there.
I
was
not
here
when
those
decisions
were
made,
and
so
I
can't
speak
to
all
of
the
dynamics
that
were
going
on,
but
I
would
say
that
the
number
of
people
that
I
have
met.
Who
say
what
did
we
let
happen
there
and
how
did
we
let
that
turn
into
what
many
people
view
as
a
soulless
part
of
the
city
is
something
that
I
think
we
want
to
make
sure
doesn't
happen.
D
So
we've
invested
to
this
today
in
the
last
year,
six
million
dollars
in
a
number
of
efforts,
advocacy
efforts,
planning
efforts,
open
space
efforts.
We
intend
to
remain
a
significant
investor
in
this
work.
A
lot
of
the
planning
is
going
to
hopefully
generate
some
compelling
and
arresting
and
exciting
ideas
that
we
hope
a
multitude
of
partners
are
going
to
get
behind.
B
The
Boston
foundation
is
clearly
an
example
of
a
foundation
that
does
that
has
more
influence
than
just
its
money.
You
think
of
yourself
as
a
convener,
you
Commission
a
lot
of
reports
that
measure
the
health
of
the
city
in
a
variety
of
ways.
What's
what's
your
view
of
that
role,
the
Boston
foundation
well,.
C
This
was
something
that
was
a
change
that
was
made
very
deliberately
by
the
board
of
directors
of
the
foundation,
just
as
I
was
coming
on
and
for
most
of
its
history.
The
Boston
foundation
had
been
a
quiet,
behind-the-scenes
organization,
making
grants
and
stewarding
philanthropic
assets
and
doing
an
incredible
job
in
Boston.
Boston
foundation
is
a
stellar
reputation
nationally
for
a
very
long
time,
but
the
but
the
board,
you
know
reminded
themselves
that
grant-making
is
not
an
end
in
itself.
It's
a
means
to
an
end,
a
means
to
solving
problems
and
that
there
are
waves.
C
Besides
grants
where
one
can
make
progress
on
issues,
if
one
has
influence,
if
one
has
data,
if
one
has
relationships
and
so
very
deliberately,
the
fact
of
the
board
of
directors
called
for,
what's
really
been
a
radical
change
in
the
role
of
the
Boston
foundation
in
in
this
community.
What
we
have
done
in
effect
is
create
a
kind
of
a
think-tank
and
grafted
it
onto
the
foundation.
So
we
have
Sasha
mentioned
we
commissioned
with
a
home
of
the
Boston
indicators
project
and
we
commissioned
a
great
deal
of
research.
C
A
new
model
of
a
community
foundation
called
a
civic
leadership
model
where
grants
grant-making
is
viewed
as
something
significant,
but
just
one
tool
in
the
toolbox
that
may
be
used
to
advance
a
cause
or
an
issue
and
I
was
frankly
delighted
at
to
witness
the
evolution
of
the
Hostetler's
and
the
bar
foundation,
because
I
think
embedded
in
and
their
move
from
anonymity
to
being
willing
to
exercise
influences
that
recognition
that
the
problems
we're
taking
on
are
very
tough,
they're
very
difficult.
They
require
maximum
effort.
C
B
They
don't
want
to
alienate
the
person
who
writes
the
check,
so
I
found
that
I
feel
like
problems
end
up
persisting
in
the
sector,
because
people
are
very
unwilling
to
talk
about
them.
Can
you,
if
you
talk
about
something
you
think
philanthropy
does
wrong
or
does
badly
or
should
be
better
jossen?
You
want
to
kick
off
if
something
comes
to
mind,
right
away,
something.
E
Does
come
to
mind
right
away,
it's
one
of
the
issues
that
I've
struggled
with
the
whole
time.
I
think
we
have
a
huge
platform,
and
this
is
what
you
alluded
to
a
minute
ago.
We
have
a
you
know,
a
huge
platform
that
that
do
we
can.
We
are
the
bedrock
of
civil
society
and
democracy,
so
we
hold
that
space
and
it's
incumbent
upon
us
to
use
it.
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
could
do
better
as
we
could
do
a
better
job
of
supporting
advocacy
work.
E
We
get
a
little
nervous
because
structurally
there's
not
a
way
for
us
to
directly
give
information
to
policymakers
or
to
elected
officials.
That's
not
lobbying.
However,
there
is
so
much
knowledge
that
we
have
working
on
the
ground
with
community
partners
that
we
really
have
to
be
creative
in
figuring
out
ways
to
get
that
information
to
those
decision-makers,
because
we
are
we're
holding
back-
and
this
is
I
think
this
is
not
helping
our
communities
advance
forward.
E
D
That
is
not
going
to
play
well
in
this
community.
So
I
think.
The
issue
of
how
we
retain
humility
as
a
core
value
for
philanthropic
work
is
something
that
we
all
need
to
continue
to
work
hard
on.
It's
where
the
sector
falls
down.
It's
where
the
sector
imposes
its
ideas
on
communities
and
it's
where
communities
become
resentful
of
philanthropy
for
very
legitimate
reasons.
I
remember.
B
Soon
after
you
came
to
town
Jim,
one
of
my
colleagues
call
him
to
Shirley.
Lee
Young
wrote
a
column
about
you
and
I.
Think
the
opening
line
said
something
like
Jim.
Kanellis
is
about
to
become
everybody's
new
best
friend,
because
you're
basically
giving
away
money
of
a
billionaire
right.
So
how
do
you
make
sure
you
ever
hear
the
truth?
And
people
are
really
telling
you
what's
going
on
on
the
ground
when
everybody
would
like
you
to
write
them
a
check?
Well,.
D
I
talk
to
people
like
you,
because
you
certainly
never
hesitate
from
telling
me
the
truth.
I
would
say
that
part
of
it
is
also
just
building
relationships
with
people.
I
think
I
mean
I'm
looking
out
in
the
audience,
and
there
a
number
of
you
in
the
audience
that
I've
had
the
privilege
of
getting
to
know
since
I've
been
here,
and
hopefully
we
have
built
the
kind
of
relationship
where
I
and
I
know.
D
Joplin
and
Paul
do
this
to
where
you
communicate
the
sense
that
you
are
inviting
people
to
push
back
on
your
ideas,
you're,
inviting
people
to
Descent
you're,
inviting
people
to
say
to
work
with
you
work
through
a
set
of
the
issues
with
you.
So
a
big
part
of
it
is
the
way
in
which
you
approach
the
relationships
you're,
creating
and
as
a
leader
of
an
organization.
I
think
a
big
part
of
it
is
what
is
the
tone
and
what
is
the
culture
that
you're
trying
to
create
I've
benefit?
D
Hugely
many
of
you
in
this
room
know
the
people
that
I
work
for
I
benefit
hugely
from
a
reputation
that
Barbara
name
is
Hostetter,
have
of
being
humble,
caring.
Deeply
committed
individuals
who
do
not
bring
a
perspective
that
their
ideas
need
to
win
the
day,
and
so
because
that's
already
in
the
DNA
of
the
foundation,
it's
there.
But
it's
something.
We
have
to
work
on
every
single
day
and
remind
ourselves
Paul.
C
C
That's
grown-up,
which
is
useful,
is
the
blind
survey,
and
we
do
this
every
couple
years
and
many
foundations
do
and
there's
an
organization
here
in
Boston
the
Center
for
effective
philanthropy
that
that
does
this
work,
where
you
you
go
out
and
do
blind
surveys,
so
people
can
anonymously
say
what
they
really
think
about
how
you're
doing
and
and
those
things
are
very
important.
So
that's
that's
one
I
the
accountability
problem.
A
second
one
is
the
fragmentation
of
the
sector.
C
There
are
just
an
enormous
number
of
organizations
doing
very
similar
work
or
the
same
work
of
nonprofits
proliferate
very
easily
in
our
society
and
resources
are
very,
very
fragmented,
and
then
you
add
to
that
that,
unlike
the
private
sector,
there's
no
organized
labor
market
in
the
nonprofit
sector,
it
really
has
to
be
improvised
and
there's
no
organized
capital
market
either.
Even
the
most
successful
nonprofit
organizations
have
trouble
raising
money,
whereas
if
they
were
in
the
private
sector
with
an
equivalent
to
the
profit,
they
would
find
those
resources
easily.
C
B
Paul
talks
about
fragmentation.
Another
way
to
put
it
is:
are
there
too
many
nonprofits,
that's
a
little
simplistic,
I.
Think
the
the
better
question
is:
are
there
too
many
nonprofits
doing
the
same
thing
replicating
the
same
work
I
wrote
a
story
a
few
months
ago
about
a
college
readiness
nonprofit
that
was
going
to
come
to
Boston
I
think
actually
is
in
Boston
and
there
was
a
up
cry
from
other
nonprofits
outcry
because
they
said
we
already
have
40
of
those
in
Boston.
So
it's
the
question
is:
should
they
merge?
Do
we
really
need
another?
B
Is
it
better
to
give
more
money
to
the
existing
ones
than
to
bring
in
a
new
one,
but
you
never
want
to
squelch
a
good
idea
or
a
person
with
with
a
with
an
inspirational
idea.
Joplin
is
your
view.
You've
been
here
in
Boston
under
a
year
too
many,
the
other
too
many
too
many
duplicating
efforts.
Well,.
E
It's
I
mean
they're,
not
too
many
efforts
because
there's
more
work
that
needs
to
be
done,
but
I
think
that
there's
significant
duplication
and
overlap
and
I
think
actually
communities
could
work
better
I
think
we
can
do.
This
is
where
you
can
do
a
better
job
by
providing
the
space
for
community
partners
to
have
that
conversation
with
each
other
and
figure
out
what
they're
going
to
do.
I.
Think
often
you
know
we
love
our
grooves.
E
We
love
our
leaders
and
sometimes
we
have
to
make
the
hard
decision
to
say
you
know
we
are
going
to
be
here
and
we
see
this
happening
and
we
need
you
to
think
about
how
you
might
address
that,
and
it's
not
that
we're
telling
you
to
do
that.
But
there
is
something
to
creating
dependency,
which
is
a
challenge
that
all
sectors
face
all
nonprofits
philanthropy
relationships
face,
but
I
think
that
we
we
can
do
a
better
job
of
really
supporting
that,
so
that
that
groups
are
not
afraid
to
tell
the
the
truth
about.
E
What's
going
on,
I
mean
this
is
a
great
community.
I
have
to
say,
people
are
very
generous
here,
I,
so
I
come
from
the
South
Salinas,
and
it's
not
that
people
in
the
South
are
not
generous
they're,
not
generous,
necessarily
towards
causes
of
fairness
and
justice,
and
I
would
like
to
see
more
of
that
in
that
region.
But
here
in
Boston
we
have
those
principle,
values
and
I.
Think
part
of
the
challenges
working
across
neighborhoods
and
I
know.
E
The
city
is
working
with
this
because
we
have
such
unique
individual
neighborhoods
and
to
really
get
the
community
things
broader
than
its
own
neighborhood
and
its
own
I
have
to
learn
what
village
I
was
and
I
live
in
Newton.
It's
just
like
what
do
you
mean?
Where
does
a
blue
Newton,
and
that
is
a
beautiful
and
remarkable,
and
it
also
is.
E
B
C
Was
something
called
the
catalyst
fund?
We
in
a
number
of
other
funders
put
together
to
explicitly
encourage
organizations
to
explore
consolidation
or
outright
merger,
and
the
a
number
of
great
mergers
were
supported
by
by
that
catalyst
fund.
But
I
would
say
in
general
that
the
deal
flow
was
disappointing.
There
were
far
fewer
applicants
for
this
funding
than
we
had
hoped,
so
we
did
let
that
spend
down
and
we're
not
renewing
it.
C
However,
I
want
to
say
the
Boston
foundation
remains
very
interested
in
assisting
organizations
that
are
exploring
consolidation
or
merger,
and
so
we're
going
to
keep
on
doing
that
and
we
think
there's
a
lot
of
room
for
that.
We
were
very
unpopular
a
number
of
years
ago
when
we
had
a
big
forum
at
the
foundation
and
really
raised
this
issue
a
lot
of
folks
in
the
nonprofit
community.
We're
kind
of
annoyed
with
us,
but
I
think
some
years
later,
there's
a
recognition
that
we've
got
some
things
going
on
that
don't
go
well
together.
C
For
instance,
resources
available
to
the
sector
are
flat,
but
there
are
many
many
more
resources
and
there
are
many
organizations
than
there
used
to
be,
and
what
this
means
is
that
there's
a
tremendous
amount
of
money
going
into
back
office
and
administration
and
finance
instead
of
program.
So
in
addition
to
outside
mergers,
one
of
the
things
we
have
seen
and
participated
in
is
back
office.
Consolidation,
where
groups
that
are
perhaps
engaged
in
similar
activities
can
put
their
administration
operation
together,
maintain
their
programmatic
independence,
but
saves
some
significant
money.
C
The
10-point
Coalition
and
the
black
ministerial
Alliance
did
that
some
years
ago
and
saved
a
lot
of
money
that
was
then
available
to
do
what
they
really
want
to
do
so
I
do
think,
however
uncomfortable
it
may
be
to
acknowledge
this
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
room
for
consolidation,
particularly
of
mature
organizations.
Well,
what
we
do
not
want
to
do
you
hear
people
say
we
don't
need
anymore
nonprofits.
C
Well,
the
formation
of
new
nonprofits
is
very,
very
important
in
this
community.
Think
of
the
innovation.
That's
come
from
the
city
years,
the
year
ups,
the
citizens
schools
the
belt,
and
we
don't
want
to
cut
off
that
oxygen
supply
of
innovation,
that's
coming
in
the
form
of
new
organizations.
So
it's
really
should
be
focused
much
more
on
the
mature
organizations
where
consolidation
could
be
really
beneficial.
Sasha's.
D
Story,
though,
this
weekend,
I
think
shows
what
the
problem
is
with
that
kind
of
proliferation,
when
you
don't
have
the
kind
of
oversight
that
you
need
for
90,000
private
foundations
in
this
country.
Moreover,
to
the
theme
of
transparency
and
accountability,
the
question
of
how
transparent
and
accountable
those
foundations
are
is
out
there,
but
in
addition
to
that,
you're
also
seeing
the
rise
of
new,
giving
vehicles
new
ways
of
doing
quote:
philanthropies
that
aren't
the
traditional.
D
Let's
set
up
a
donor
advised
fund
at
the
Community
Foundation
or
let's
create
a
private
foundation
rather
you're,
seeing
the
creation
of
limited
liability
corporations.
So
you
have
Chan
Zuckerberg,
you
have
the
Emerson
collective
you
have,
and
this
has
been
one
of
the
older
ones,
you'll
mid
er
Network
entities,
and
this
is
with
no
judgment
on
those
donors,
but
entities
who
do
not
have
to
report
where
their
resources
go.
And
so
the
question
of
what
that
brings
to
the
philanthropic
sector
is
I.
D
Think
and
I
raised
this
only
because
we
were
invited
today
to
talk
about
the
future
of
philanthropy
and
I.
Think
this
is
the
future
of
philanthropy,
as
you
have
younger
donors
who
want
to
see
more
impact
more
quickly,
that
the
notion
of
the
kinds
of
impulses
that
created
the
foundations
that
we
run
and
the
fountain
and
that
many
of
the
donor
advised
funds
that
Paul
has
at
the
Boston
Foundation,
which
was
an
impulse.
We
made
wealth
in
our
lifetime.
D
Now
we
want
to
leave
something
as
a
legacy
and
that
legacy
will
subsists
for
many
many
years
now
you
have
donors,
saying
we're
going
to
do
the
giving
while
living,
and
we
want
to
see
impact
for
the
dollars
that
we're
investing
today
and
that
creates
a
very
different
dynamic
into
sector.
That
I
think
is
worth
exploring.
We.
F
There,
of
course,
been
really
important
exceptions
that
all
three
of
you
represent,
given
your
longevity,
the
Foundation's
longevity,
but
that
in
general
operating
support,
the
big
operating
support
is
the
public
sectors,
responsibility,
the
federal
government,
the
state
government,
seven
out
of
eight
of
the
or
six
out
of
eight
of
those
nonprofits
are
heavily
relying
on
government
funding
and
there
are
going
to
be
potentially
significant
cuts
at
the
federal
level,
and
so,
while
normally
we
might
all
a
year
ago
of
said.
Yes,
that's
right,
we
should
keep
those
separate.
F
What
are
your
thoughts
if
there
are
the
dramatic
kinds
of
cuts
that
we're
expecting
at
the
federal
level
around
many
of
the
issues
that
are
critical
and
that
you've
historically
funded
in?
Will
there
be
a
shift?
Do
you
think
there
will
be
a
rethinking
of
how
foundations
consider
their
role?
If
we
also
consider
that
the
corpus
those
assets
were
originally
taken
out
of
the
public
taxable
funding
base
and
and
there's
been
a
dramatic
shift
in
the
federal
landscape?
What
is
philanthropies
conversation
going
to
look
like
in
revisiting
this?
Given
the
change
context.
C
So
it's
really
very
difficult
to
do
more
than
speculate
at
this
point,
but
there
could
be
some
just
stunning
withdrawals
of
resources
that
would,
and
my
favorite
example,
because
I
was
very
involved
in
creating
this
and
originally
is
something
called
the
low-income
housing
tax
credit,
which
is
the
federal
subsidy
that
is
accounting
for
the
overwhelming
majority
of
affordable
rental
housing,
that's
being
constructed
in
the
country.
It's
been
a
vital
resource
as
bad
as
our
housing
problems
are,
they
would
be
infinitely
worse.
C
Had
we
not
had
the
low-income
housing
tax,
credit
and
Hanan
cadre
of
terrific
grassroots
Community,
Development,
Corporation's
and
private
developers
who
fixed
up
the
city
to
an
extraordinary
degree
if,
in
the
in
the
tax
bill
that
eventually
passes?
If
one
does
that's
eliminated,
it
will
be
a
catastrophic
effect
on
that
on
that
segment,
and
you
know
I,
don't
know
what
we'll
do
about
that,
because
there's
no
way
that
can
be
made
up
in
any
meaningful
way.
So
it
really
does
does
depend
on
on
on
what
the
substance
ends.
Up
being
you
mentioned
core
operating
support.
D
Two
responses,
Laura
I,
think
one
just
to
echo
what
Paul
said.
I
think
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
conceive
that
private
philanthropy
is
going
to
be
able
to
fill
the
kinds
of
gaps
that
we
may
see
by
virtue
of
some
of
these
changes,
one
of
the
areas
that
we
obviously
care,
deeply
about
and
invest
in
is
the
arts
field,
and
the
National
Endowment
for
the
Arts,
as
you
know,
has
been
threatened.
That
is
one
hundred
fifty
three
million
dollars
in
annual
appropriations.
D
In
fact,
one
of
the
things
I
often
think
about
in
this
context
is
that
our
annual
grant
making
budget
of
80
million
dollars,
which
is
significant,
would
be
enough
to
fund
bps
for
about
26
days,
the
full
budget
of
Boston,
Public
Schools,
and
that's
just
one
piece
of
what
the
city
of
Boston
does
much
less
the
whole
region.
So
I
think
it
does
raise
a
whole
issue,
and
this
comes
back
to
Jocelyn's
point
about
the
role
of
advocacy
and
the
ways
in
which
we
could
be
supporting
advocacy
organizations
at
this
difficult
time.
D
We
as
private
foundations,
Paul's
in
a
different
zone,
as
he
noted
earlier,
are
not
able
to
advocate
because
of
various
prohibitions,
but
we
can
certainly
make
grants
for
advocacy
purposes.
I
guess
we
can't
directly
make
them
for
advocacy
purposes,
but
we
can
make
general
operating
support
grants
to
institutions
that
may
then
choose
to
use
those
dollars
to
advocate.
So
that's
I
think
one
role
that
we
can
play,
but
you
also
point
out
another
attention
that
we
haven't
talked
about
yet
today
and
Paul's
touched
on
it
and
I
want
to
surface
it,
and
that
is
I.
D
Think
for
foundations,
one
of
the
tensions
that
we
are
constantly
balancing
is
this
tension
of
building
long
term
partnerships
with
organizations
that
are
enduring
so
that
those
organizations
not
that
they
become
reliant
on
our
funding.
But
the
organizations
know
that
we're
there
for
the
long
term,
provided
that
they're
delivering
the
kinds
of
results
that
they
say
they
will
deliver
with
our
resources,
balancing
that
and
lots
of
people
love
to
be
in
long-term
relationships
with
foundations.
D
But
then,
conversely,
there
are
a
lot
of
organizations
that
are
not
part
of
that
network
that
are
trying
to
find
ways
in
the
door
and
trying
to
figure
out
ways
to
build
that
kind
of
relationship.
It's
a
zero-sum
game.
The
resources
are
indeed
by
night.
So
as
a
foundation,
one
of
things
we're
constantly
bouncing
is
we
want
to
be
long-term
partners.
D
We
don't
have
policies
that
some
foundations
have
where
you
say
you
can
apply,
and
if
you
get
a
grant
for
three
years,
you
have
to
take
a
year
off,
which
I
think
is
always
kind
of
a
very
curious
policy
that
some
foundations
have
I.
Don't
know
what
you
do
during
that
year
off,
because
then
you
can
come
back
allegedly
so
I
think
part
of
it
is
we
want
to
build
those
long-term
partnerships,
but
you
have
to
balance
that
with
also
the
ability
to
be
open
and
receptive
to
new
ideas
and
organizations
and.
E
Then,
just
quickly
I
wanted
to
just
build
on
what
Paul
and
Jim
have
offered,
because
I
think
that
those
are
the
ways
that
we're
going
to
have
to
move
forward
in
this
very
vague
murky
area
or
landscape
of
for
a
while,
but
we
do
have
to
begin
to
so
for
long
time
now.
Philanthropy
has
I
guess
for
the
last
decade,
or
so,
we've
been
looking
at
business
practices
and
how
do
business
look
at
results
space?
E
You
know
investments
and
how
do
we
apply
that
to
our
grant
making
and
what
we
really
might
want
to
look
at
instead
is
how
do
how
do
the
groups
that
we
work
with?
How
do
they
define
success?
How
do
they
define
the
metrics
that
are
going
to
tell
us
whether
or
not
they're
making
progress,
and,
if
they're,
not
partners
with
us
in
that,
then
you
know
we
can
fund
them,
but
we're
asking
them
to
do
things
that
may
not
even
make
sense.
E
So
part
of
what
we
have
to
do
is
really
shift
our
thinking
through
what
do
results
and
outcomes
look
like,
and
it
really
has
to
come
from
the
perspective
of
what
the
organization
is
trying
to
get
done.
The
other
part
which
really
is
funny
to
me,
because
we
adopted
that
aspect
of
the
business
sectors
application
to
investments,
but
we
didn't
adopt
risk
part,
so
we're
less
comfortable
with
risk.
You
know,
and
so
I
think
what
we'll
have
to
do
in
the
future
is
redefine
what
risk
means
for
us
like
what
what
what
will
foundation
lose.
E
Is
the
outcomes,
don't
don't
happen
and
how
long
does
change
take
so
Jim's
point
about
you
know
we
three-year
grant
is
one
thing,
but
really
some
of
these
changes
I
mean
I,
want
to
harken
back
to
the
civil
rights
movement,
but
I'll
go
and
give
that
example:
I
mean
that
wasn't
a
three
years.
Oh
wow,
you
didn't
pass
the
Civil
Rights
Acts
Oh,
oh
well,
no
more
money
for
you,
I
mean
so
you
know
I
think
we're
going
to
really
have
to
reshift
how
we
think
about
risk.
I.
B
Love
that
the
point
about
risk,
because
sometimes
in
philanthropy,
you
hear
the
expression
risk
capital
and
the
idea
is
that
this
should
be
money
that
is
willing
to
take
risks
and
money.
That's
willing
to
fail.
You
know,
businesses
don't
want
to
lose
money
so
oftentimes
they
don't
want
to
take
risks
with
their
money,
but
philanthropy
should
have
that
ability
and
I
actually
think
Jim
when
I
was
talking
to
Barbara
Hofstetter,
one
of
the
famous
and
Barbara
Hofstadter
are
the
money
behind
bar.
B
D
D
have
gotten
a
grant
from
the
Ford
Foundation
in
the
1950s,
and
the
answer
is
yeah,
probably
probably
not
because
of
the
way,
the
way
that
they
interests
the
way
the
institution
functions
and
so
being
able
to
invest
in
leaders
who
are
advancing
powerful
ideas
is
I.
Think
one
of
the
most
important
roles
that
we
can
play
but
hand
in
hand
with
that.
I
think
foundations,
and
this
comes
back
to
your
earlier
question.
Sasha
about.
Where
do
we
fall
short
I?
Think
we
fall
short
in
talking
about
where
we
have
made
mistakes.
D
I
think
foundations
are
not.
It
is
not
a
field
that
is
very
good
at
talking
about
where
we
have
failed
as
foundations
and
I.
Think
that
that's
an
area
where
you
hope
that
foundations
could
be
better
when
I
was
at
the
Irvine
foundation.
I
remember
in
2006
about
four
years
into
my
tenure
there
as
CEO,
we
were
very
public
about
a
major
multi-million
dollar
failure.
D
It
was
an
initiative
that
we
designed
and
that
basically
flopped
and
it
was
about
thirty
million
dollars
of
investment
in
it,
and
we
wrote
a
case
study
and
we
put
it
out
there
and
we
talked
about
it.
I
spoke
at
conferences
and
all
of
that
a
decade
later,
people
still
refer
to
that
as
one
of
the
examples
of
foundations,
sort
of
talking
openly
about
risk
and
I
was
amused
one
day
this
was
years
ago.
D
We
all
do
Google
searches
on
ourselves,
so
I'll
just
admit
that
doing
a
Google
search,
one
of
the
first
on
the
first
page,
like
the
third
entry
Jim
canal,
is
the
poster
child
for
failure
in
philanthropy,
and
it
was.
It
was
because
somebody
had
written
a
piece
about
you
know
what
we
had
done.
It
was
an
unfortunate
headline,
but
Soviet
esashi
knows
we
don't
write
our
own
headline
any.
G
C
Well,
we
were
involved
in
in
a
couple
of
these
experiments
and
for
those
of
you
aren't
familiar,
this
is
a
new
idea,
a
relatively
new
idea
of
involving
the
private
sector
in
in
public
efforts
that
can
be
measured
in
a
way
that
savings
can
can
occur
and
be
documented
with
savings
in
public
funding.
So,
for
instance,
of
the
problem
of
recidivism,
of
course,
is
very,
very
costly
people
going
back
into
jail
for
crimes
after
having
been
there
before.
If
you
could
reduce
the
recidivism
rate,
the
correction
systems
would
save
enormous
amounts
of
money.
C
Well,
one
of
the
papers
pay
for
success.
Programs
we're
in
is
is
just
that.
It's
an
effort
to
reduce
recidivism
quantify
what
that
savings
is
and
return
it
to
private
sector
investments
in
the
form
of
a
term,
and
this
is
a
very
young
field
there.
It
started
in
the
UK
a
few
years
ago
and
has
migrated
to
the
US
there's
a
lot
of
excitement
about
it.
C
I
think
maybe
a
little
too
much
given
the
early
and
unproven
stage
of
this
strategy,
but
it
is
very
tantalizing
to
believe
that
we
could
do
this
because
it
would
unlock
flows
of
capital
for
the
nonprofit
sector.
That
just
aren't
there
right
now
to
convert
positive
results
into
savings
into
returns
into
more
funding.
Is
that
it's
very
seductive
and
we're
certainly
very
hopeful
about
it.
It's
kind
of
a
Holy
Grail,
you
know
to
go
after,
but
I
just
want
to
caution
again
that
we're
very
early
stages.
C
B
Want
to
jump
in
and
say
that
as
a
reporter
I
sometimes
have
to
write
about
this,
it
is
so
complicated
and
difficult
to
explain
even
the
names
social
impact
bond
I
think
it
suffers
from
a
bad
name.
It's
unclear
what
that
means.
The
the
right
bit
recidivism
case
Paul
mentioned
there
was
a
very
test
case
at
Rikers,
Island
and
I.
Think
it
was
Goldman.
Sachs
that
put
in
the
money
in
a
for
citizenry's
were
reduced
a
certain
amount.
B
They
would
get
money
from
the
state
it's
incredibly
complicated,
although
in
Boston
we
have
a
big
nexus
of
this
here.
Tracy
people
engine
runs
an
organization
called
social
finance,
so
we
are
quietly
a
hub
of
trying
to
do
this,
but
I
don't
know
that
there's
any
case,
that's
completely
at
its
completion
to
prove
whether
people
feel
that
it
works
or
not.
It's
again
very
much.
E
And
that's
here
in
Boston,
so
before
coming
to
Boston,
I
was
working
at
the
Kellogg
Foundation
and
actually
we
applied
we
applied
with
the
groups.
They
are
very
complicated
because
you
have
to
engage
all
sectors,
all
community
members,
you
have
to
get
everybody
on
board
and
then
silence
and
the
state
and
federal
government
will
actually
match
some
of
the
dollars
to
put
into
it
fun
that
can
look
for
return
on
investment,
the
great
thing
about
it
when
they
work
out
and
it's
in
the
second
year
and
they're
planning
on
checking
on
it
and
another
month.
E
E
So
how
are
you
going
to
be
sustainable
after
we
don't
give
you
money
anymore,
and
you
know
I.
Actually,
don't
ask
that
question
because
I've
gotten
those
looks
you
know
like
what
are
you
talking
about
if
you're
not
going
to
be
money,
what
am
I
going
to
do
you
know
so
so
this
is
a
way
in
which
these
programs
can
get
off
the
ground
and
be
sustainable.
E
The
recidivism
one
is
particularly
exciting
because
and
I
talked
to
someone
who
works
in
the
city
who
is
looking
at
that
connect
the
city
working
with
a
number
of
community
partners
to
do
maybe
launched
a
program
like
this
and
what's
excited
about
the
recidivism
work
is
the
return
on
investment
shows
up
very
quickly.
So
I
heard
about
in
a
pilot
program
that
the
city
is
working
with.
The
recidivism
rate
is
I.
E
Think
the
program
is
about
a
year
old,
I'm,
not
sure
Joyce,
but
it's
it's
less
than
5%
and
it's
less
than
5%
with
a
small
n.
So
a
small
number
I'm
sorry
I
used
to
be
a
researcher
in
another
life,
so
a
small
number
of
cases,
and
so
one
can
imagine
that
in
the
future
that
it
is
actually
even
less
than
5%
is
like
1%
or
two
in
terms
of
recidivism.
E
But
what
is
happening
is
that
you
are
cutting
back
on
the
amount
of
money
that
you're
spending
on
to
keep
people
locked
up
in
jail
and
they're
able
to
be
in
their
communities
to
actually
be
productive
citizens
that
contribute
to
the
tax
base
and
that
helps
raise
their
kids
and
that
help
their
neighbors.
And
so
it's
it's
a
it's
a
complex,
complex
process,
but
it
actually
is
a
very
simple
idea
that,
like
if
you
make
investments
early
on,
they
pay
off
and
you
don't
spend
much
money
later
and
so
I'm
fans
there.
H
I
work
or
I
volunteer
with
Haymarket
people's
fun,
which
is
a
community
foundation
that
puts
resources
into
the
hands
of
people,
doing
racial
justice,
organizing
and
we
have
an
interesting
model
in
which
volunteers
people
who
are
community
organizers
and
activists
are
the
decision-makers,
not
the
staff,
I'm
curious.
As
you
look
at
the
future
of
philanthropy.
What
are
systems
that
you're
putting
in
place
to
be
more
accountable
to
the
communities
that
you're
giving
money
to
you.
D
Know,
there's
an
effort
that
we
are
newly
a
part
of
at
the
bar
foundation
called
the
fund
for
shared
insight,
which
was
created
by
a
number
of
national
funders,
Ford
Hewlett
and
others
prominently
among
them,
and
what
motivates
that?
What
motivated
the
creation
of
the
fund
for
shared
insight
was
this
notion
of
how
our
funders?
What
are
the
feedback
loops
both
for
funders
and
Paul,
spoke
earlier
to
the
important
role
that
the
Center
for
effective
philanthropy
has
played
to
help
get
grantee
blind
surveys?
For
us?
That's
valuable.
D
D
So
I've
been
heartened
by
this
and
we've
become
much
more
engaged
in
this
effort,
because
I
think
there's
a
lot
that
we
can
learn
and
it's
an
effort
to
try
to
develop
more
methodologies,
develop
new
tools,
develop
new
approaches
so
that
we
can
think
about
ways
to
embed
this
work
more
deeply
in
the
work
of
philanthropy,
Sasha
and
I
were
both
at
a
conference.
Actually
Jocelyn
was
there
too,
and
Paul
spoke.
D
D
We
just
the
traveling
Roadshow,
the
four
of
us
were
all
there
and
one
of
the
speakers
one
evening
was
Brian
Stevenson,
who
many
of
you
may
know
who
is
running
the
equal
justice
Institute
and
has
done
some
very
important
work
around
racial
justice,
social
justice
issues,
and
if
there
was
a
core
message
that
I
took
away
from
the
talk
he
gave
at
dinner.
It
was
this.
He
talked
about
the
important
of
the
importance
of
being
submit
to
the
work
that
we're
trying
to
do
and
I
think
that's.
D
What's
at
the
heart
of
your
question,
I
think
at
times
in
in
Thunder
land
we
can
get
pretty
removed
and
we're
hanging
out
with
consultants
and
we're
developing
logic
models
and
we're
talking
about
return
on
investment,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
not
as
proximate
to
the
people
that
we're
trying
to
help
through
the
work
that
we're
doing
and
I
think
that's
a
very
important
lesson
and
something
that
we
need
to
be
constantly
reminding
ourselves
out.
One.
C
Not
people
who
would
ever
apply
for
a
grant
to
the
Boston
foundation,
they're,
not
part
of
a
of
a
incorporated
organization,
but
they're
doing
extraordinary
things
that
perhaps
could
be
enhancer
or
scaled
up,
and
the
city
is
full
of
people
doing
extraordinary
things
without
any
notice
or
fanfare,
and
we're
going
to
try
to
do
a
better
job
of
identifying
who
those
folks
are
and
and
creating
opportunities
for
for
the
growth
of
their
idea
or
the
growth
of
their
hands.
Any.
B
D
I
Thank
you
well
I
hesitated
to
ask,
however,
in
this
kind
of
environment
in
which
you
know
we're
in
and
the,
and
you
mentioned
the
fact,
the
unique
role
that
you
have,
what
kind
of
activities
could
bring
to
a
community
building?
You
know,
how
do
we
build
community
and
how
could
some
efforts
be
put
into
that
place
rather
than
everybody
having
their
own
niche?
I
If
you
will
but
look
at
the
community
as
a
whole
and
saying,
and
then
we
also
refer
to
value
the
values
of
your
foundation,
what
our
values
is
a
community,
and
so
what
is
the
role
of
government?
Certain
things
should
be
done
with
the
government,
because
all
the
foundations
work
together,
I'm
not
going
to.
So.
Where
is
that
dialogue
to
educate
the
people
and
see
what
the
role
of
the
foundation
is
to
do?
I
Something
that's
risky,
something
that's
new
and
and
recognizes
people
and
then
bring
them
to
the
media
and
say:
look
you
should
recognize
these
people?
Let
the
community
know
the
wonderful
work
that
you're
doing
so
I,
don't
know
if
this
is
aspirational.
It's
just
a
vision
of
mine
having
work
works
both
for
the
for-profit
and
a
nonprofit
and
having
seen
that
when
it
works,
it
can
really
create.
I
Probably
we
all
know
that
you
can
create
incredible
things,
but
I
think
that
today's
environment
is
so
much
more
complex
insofar
as
finding
agreement
and
what
those
values
are
and
what
those
priorities
are.
If
we
have
dollars,
where
do
we
put
them?
Where
do
we
invest
them
in
such
a
way
that
we
can
see
the
needle
moving
in
the
direction?
The
benefits
into
a
community
I
was
hesitating
I.
D
Was
just
saying
and
not
because
we
were
invited
here
by
the
City
of
Boston,
but
the
reality
is
I
think
what
the
city
has
done
in
these
charts
in
the
back
of
the
room
speak
to
this
I.
Think
that's
exactly
what
the
mayor
was
seeking
to
do
in
initiating
a
process
to
have
our
community
come
together
and
think
about
what
we
aspire
to
be,
what
our
vision
should
be
and
how
we
translate
those
concepts
and
those
ideas
and
those
aspirations
into
tangible
changes
in
our
communities
and
I.
D
D
I
E
And
I,
actually
I
would
love
to
see.
I
think
that
the
effort
has
is
incredible:
I
mean
what
we
were
provided
in
preparing
for
this.
The
session
was
a
remarkable
report
that
the
city
put
together,
that's
over
200
pages,
so
the
number
of
people
who
were
engaged
in
developing
what
the
city
has
found
for
the
plan
for
2030
is
just
incredible.
So
really
do
take
some
time
to
look
at
that.
I
haven't
seen
anything
like
it.
E
What
I
will
say
is
that
I
would
love
to
see
that
kind
of
community
feedback
loop
be
a
permanent
structure
in
some
way.
I,
don't
know
how
its
facilitated
so
that
it
is
not.
You
know.
Okay,
we
designed
it.
Okay,
we'll
just
go
home
and
it's
a
city's
responsibility
to
take
care
of
it.
We
feel
that
it
is
not
just
the
city.
We
all
have
a
role.
E
Every
sector
has
a
role,
including
the
nonprofit
sector
and
community
community
as
individual
residents,
and
so
we
all
I
want
us
all
to
own
that
plan
and
to
feel
that
there
is
a
regular
way
that
we
can
engage
with
the
city.
Who
has
asked
us
to
tell
us
what
you
think,
but
I
want
it
to
be
less
episodic
and
more
of
a
process
that
is
that
is
regular
and
community
and
knows
where
to
go
to
give
that
feedback.