<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rating Social Investments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/</link>
	<description>The World Affairs Blog Network</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michele Fugiel</title>
		<link>http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/comment-page-1/#comment-4385</link>
		<dc:creator>Michele Fugiel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/#comment-4385</guid>
		<description>Gerardine,

Many thanks for your comment.  In trying to be thoughtful on this topic, I always end up going in circles.  A mandated tool could very possibly be too burdensome and there is no one-size fits all approach.  On the other side, without some metrics (quanitative and qualitative) its difficult to understand how a organization is doing - making donors a bit more unsettled in writing a big check.

Any tool will only provide a certain lens - a framework for viewing the organization.  I'm skeptical that you can ever achieve full understanding.

I heard a great quote today "Anxiety is driven out of ambiguity."   Transparency really has to be at the top of the list - for both organizations and donors.  Communication is key and I think actual engagement in an organization is even better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gerardine,</p>
<p>Many thanks for your comment.  In trying to be thoughtful on this topic, I always end up going in circles.  A mandated tool could very possibly be too burdensome and there is no one-size fits all approach.  On the other side, without some metrics (quanitative and qualitative) its difficult to understand how a organization is doing - making donors a bit more unsettled in writing a big check.</p>
<p>Any tool will only provide a certain lens - a framework for viewing the organization.  I&#8217;m skeptical that you can ever achieve full understanding.</p>
<p>I heard a great quote today &#8220;Anxiety is driven out of ambiguity.&#8221;   Transparency really has to be at the top of the list - for both organizations and donors.  Communication is key and I think actual engagement in an organization is even better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerardine Luongo</title>
		<link>http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/comment-page-1/#comment-4216</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerardine Luongo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:48:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philanthropy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2008/11/14/rating-social-investments/#comment-4216</guid>
		<description>I would guess that any non-profit worth the attention of a donor will agree that measuring social impact is a critical compentent of service delivery.  The concern about mandating a specific tool is that it does account for the fact that many organizations have data-collection methods in place; the interest of funder&#39;s may be served by asking if a donor has an evalution system in place and reviewing existing data before making a requirement that an altrenative method is warrented. A mandated tool supports the donors need for ease in reviewing current and potential grantees but may be an added and unfunded burden on the NGO that is not really needed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would guess that any non-profit worth the attention of a donor will agree that measuring social impact is a critical compentent of service delivery.  The concern about mandating a specific tool is that it does account for the fact that many organizations have data-collection methods in place; the interest of funder&#39;s may be served by asking if a donor has an evalution system in place and reviewing existing data before making a requirement that an altrenative method is warrented. A mandated tool supports the donors need for ease in reviewing current and potential grantees but may be an added and unfunded burden on the NGO that is not really needed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
