Comments on: Giving vs. Free

By: Sean Stannard-Stockton

Sean Stannard-Stockton — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:09:43 +0000

Thanks for the comment David.

By: David Vitrant

David Vitrant — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:34:35 +0000

I agree with this view as well. There are many other ways that donors can make an impact as well as ways that non profits can make an impact without giving away money. Some non-profits just provide information, or support and are quite good at it (better then some for profits).

just my view.

By: Dan Moore

Dan Moore — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:07:51 +0000

Excellent point Sean.

My concern about the court case is that this is part of trend where government (at all levels) are looking to nonprofits for tax dollars to fill budget short falls. The analysis turns on the public benefit v. the tax benefit to the organization.

Your advice that nonprofits focus on measuring and communicating value is spot on in terms of how best to respond to this disturbing trend.

By: Sean Stannard-Stockton

Sean Stannard-Stockton — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:12:36 +0000

That’s a good point Dan. If we don’t know how to measure impact, then if a charity gives something away for free, at least we know they aren’t over charging. But if we know how to demonstrate impact, than we can compare the “price” with the “value”.

My beef with the court decision is that it confuses price with value. But in the end, that’s probably the fault of the social sector for not being able to figure out how to demonstrate impact well.

By: Dan Moore

Dan Moore — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:08:20 +0000

Great post Sean. Here’s my take. I think that it is worth taking another look at the Minnesota case. It seems that the court got to the “they are not giving anything away for free” line of analysis when it couldn’t find any other way to distinguish the nonprofit\charity day care provider from the other for-profit (read: “tax paying”) providers. According to the NY Times report, the fee structures were indistinguishable. They ask “where’s the difference” between a for-profit and a nonprofit provider. Or rather “where is the charity” in this work? Giving things away for free is a simple(istic) proxy for measuring the difference. From the government’s perspective, they are “giving away” tax revenue. They want to know what they are getting in return. Finding “no difference” in the Minnesota case, the government is looking to collect some tax revenue. This is clearly worth following as the Minnesota legislature defines or redefines “charity.”

By: Pete Manzo

Pete Manzo — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:21:09 +0000

Amen.

By: Kyle Reis

Kyle Reis — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:14:51 +0000

Not to mention that people (mistakenly) believe that if you give something away for free it must not have any value.