Scope This year’s report covers government and citizen participation related to the presence and activity of public charities and private foundations, contributions to those groups and participation in the electoral process in terms of voter turnout. Eventually, the authors would like to see this topic encompass efficiency and effectiveness of government, equality in government, responsiveness and quality of government, citizens’ willingness to be engaged in the community through donations, volunteering, political participation or holding public office, and citizens’ ability to contribute to the community through organizations that foster civic involvement and engagement. As data and resources become available, future indicators will be designed to cover the full breadth and depth of the theme area. Regional Context Over the last several decades, public charities and private foundations in the region have changed shape. In the past, public charities focused primarily on smaller community organizations — such as churches and faith-based groups, local organizations and grassroots entities that targeted money locally and were “hands-on” with donors. With the region’s growth, larger public charities have emerged that have a broader or regional focus. Good examples are the Foundation For The Carolinas, United Way of Central Carolinas, Goodwill Industries of the Southern Piedmont and The Lee Institute. With private foundations, the evolution has been from a variety of organizations serving particular communities to a more collective approach. Mergers in corporate America have led to larger corporate foundations serving more than one community, with many of those foundations now serving a national constituency. Similarly, the region over the years has become home to a number of large private foundations, such as the Duke Endowment, whose service areas extend well beyond the boundaries of the 14-county region. With government, services have grown to meet the region’s population growth over the last several decades. Increases can be seen in the number of programs for the disadvantaged, and greater levels of services and regulations. With government increasingly playing such a prominent role in meeting the needs of the region’s population, questions arise as to the quality of that government at the local level and how active the region’s citizens are in choosing their governmental leaders. Voter turnout is an indicator of citizen involvement. Summary of Indicator Results While findings were inconclusive about the growth of private foundations and public charities, indicators provided clear information about the giving to those organizations. Per capita giving to private foundations is doing extraordinarily well. The regional average was $107.94 for 2004. That’s 66 percent higher than the North Carolina average ($64.91) and more than seven times higher than the South Carolina average ($12.93). While these numbers reflect that many regional and national foundations are headquartered in Charlotte, the fact remains that the region is blessed with a wealth of philanthropic resources through its private foundations. Despite the wealth of foundation resources, however, the region tends to lag in philanthropic giving to public charities. Even with Mecklenburg County and its concentration of public charities and private wealth, the region still trails the North Carolina average in per capita giving to public charities ($459.99 for the region vs. $702.22 for the state). The regional figure also is not substantially higher than the South Carolina average of $351.69. Taken together, these two indicators of philanthropic giving (private foundations and public charities) suggest that the region’s financial support of its nonprofit sector is more top-down than grassroots. The inconclusive nature of the data surrounding the growth of public charities and private foundations is based on filing federal tax forms required of charities with incomes of more than $25,000. While the number of public charities has grown in the region, the number filing Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 990 has decreased, leading to a situation where nearly two-thirds of the public charities did not file a 990 Form in 2007. The growth in the number of public charities would seem to indicate an increase in citizen participation through the region’s private, nonprofit sector. However, drawing such a conclusion would depend on a better understanding of the public charities that did not file Form 990. If most of these non-filing organizations are “start-ups” with income of $25,000 or less, the argument could be made that there is indeed growth in regional civic engagement through the nonprofit sector, and that there is emerging a more grassroots-oriented nonprofit community in the region. However, if the diverging numbers reflect a growing number of “inactive” public charities that have yet to dissolve legally, an argument could be made that there has been, at best, a maintenance of the status quo, and at worst, a decrease in civic engagement through the nonprofit sector. Only a more detailed analysis of the data could determine this. As with public charities, data on the number of private foundations filing Form 990 showed a dramatic drop between 2004 and 2005. Closer analysis of the data revealed that most of this drop occurred in Mecklenburg County. Other counties in the region as well as the state averages remained fairly stable during this period. No satisfactory explanation for this drop has been identified. Was there a major consolidation of foundations during this period? Or, was there some regulatory change at the federal level that caused a significant shift in how people make charitable donations (perhaps moving from family foundations to other giving mechanisms such as donor-advised funds at community foundations)? As with the discrepancy related to public charities, more study is needed. In looking at citizen engagement in the government realm, the study examined turnout in presidential voting years and non-presidential voting years. Historically, turnout is higher in presidential years, which held true for this report. Of more interest, the survey showed that across counties in the region turnout in presidential years has been increasing, while turnout in non-presidential years has been declining. This makes the disparity in these voting scenarios (presidential vs. non-presidential years) that much greater. Comparing regional turnout to state turnout, the region was on par with North Carolina but lower than South Carolina. Within the region, rural counties tended to vote at higher rates than urban counties, suggesting that as the region continues to become more urban, voting rates may decline. Missing and Future Indicators Looking at future indicators, the authors of this study would like to see a refinement of the information related to charitable activities as well as additional information on political participation. Three new areas worthy of consideration are tracking the diversity of elected officials, gauging the effectiveness of local government and looking at attitudes within the faith-based community toward civic participation. Refining charitable information will be contingent on the availability of data. Helpful information would include a comparison of 501(c)(3) organizations to other types of IRS-designated, nonprofit organizations and segregating information on 501(c)(3) organizations by their level of operations, including budget, number of staff, volunteers, etc. The development of a methodology to assess the activity of public charities with income of $25,000 or less (thereby excluding them from the reporting requirements of the IRS) would answer many questions about an important segment of public charities in the region. Furthermore, additional analysis of donations to and grants from such regional charitable organizations as the Foundations For The Carolinas and United Way of Central Carolinas would provide a more accurate assessment of charitable activity by county. Time constraints did not permit this level of analysis for this inaugural report, but many of those organizations have offered their assistance in providing access to that information for future reports. In addition to measuring political participation by voter turnout — as was done in this year’s report — attitudinal surveys could assess direct participation in the political process. The project could survey citizens about their attendance at public meetings, such as hearings, council and commission meetings and government-sponsored information sessions. With the changing diversity of the region, are county commissions, town councils, etc. reflecting the diversity of the population? Having leadership mirror the make-up of the region is important to ensuring all interests are represented in governing bodies. How do citizens feel about the job their local governments are doing serving the public? Using secondary-source material or directly surveying regional citizens on their views of government would provide an assessment of how town or county governing boards are performing. The faith-based community is an important vehicle for citizen participation in the region, but data are difficult to obtain. Perhaps through attitudinal surveys with this group, future indicator reports could capture data on religious practices and volunteerism. |