Social Entrepreneurship in Chautauqua County

Abstract

This paper begins with a review of social development projects by tracking their revolution from the traditional forms of funding of 1983 through the 2006 notion of collaborations, mergers, partnerships, and fundraising. Each of these reviews offers extensive insights into social development projects in Chautauqua County that fully captures the central focus of this paper and presents a list of collaborative activities that have taken place within Chautauqua County and the surrounding areas.

Based on the belief that social entrepreneurs are social givers, born with innate qualities and destined to lead, there has been a shift in focus from the generic characteristics of social entrepreneurs and not-for-profit organizations limited to enterprise approaches and solving critical issues as many are now considering partnerships and fundraising activities to their primary objectives.

A review of social entrepreneurship reveals an evolving series of social culture in our communities while it extends to focus on engagement strategies social entrepreneurs should use. Examples of collaborative activities illustrated throughout this paper align alternative strategies that can be reinforced to maximize efficiency and ensure their survival. The review concludes with an introduction of “Collaborations,” a strategy to finding sustainable ways of delivering services as best illustrated by Chautauqua County.

The next section, fundraising, presents a range of community activities as well as online treasure hunts such as AmazingCounty.com as a strategy to increase financial resources that would eventually be used in the development and sustainment of community projects. These define efforts mobilized by social entrepreneurs to increase awareness of what is available in the County as well as knowledge of the County members that helps inform participants what is required of them and what they can do to help. Alternatives on which collaborations can be used to maximize fundraising efforts are discussed and web links to where participants can register are included where available.

A section on Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (HHAP) gives a comprehensive analysis of Chautauqua County social entrepreneurship projects and its surrounding areas and how the program awards capital grants and loans to construct and rehabilitate housing for the less privileged members of the social community. This strategy aims to give alternatives to how different techniques can be used to develop communities within the individual and organizational level and how this relates to social entrepreneurship underlying philosophy.

The section on tax systems describes the key legal and ethical responsibilities required of not-for-profit organizations and social entrepreneurship activities. It’s argued that tax-exempt charitable organizations will now be required to file their tax returns within the coming months. With more than 200,000 nonprofit organizations across the country, it’s feared that many organizations will be forced to shut down following the implementation of the new policy.

The paper concludes by drawing together a range of materials detailing different approaches used by social entrepreneurs, the HHAP 2006 Projects Accomplishments in collaboration with the Asset Management Unit (AMU), and proposals as to alternative ways of addressing these social issues. It is concluded that although social entrepreneurship has strengthened the social fabric of our communities, it leads to a particularly communalistic notion of transformative innovations and a relatively prescribed approach of risk-taking and global transformation.

Finally, survey questions distributed among different organizations generated significant insights and awareness that could not be have been delivered through regular research. It gives first information by documenting real experiences, stories, and personal insights different organizations have experienced that can be very important in writing informative research. The appendix section presents a comprehensive analysis of raw data collected from various organizations during the survey.

Introduction

With the challenging nature of work and society, it is argued; many demand newer approaches that encourage more collective views on contributing towards “solving societal issues,” as part of the framework of developing a vision for the future.

Sharing responsibilities is increasingly becoming a common theme within organizations. The aspects of public and private sectors, as well as not-for-profit organizations mobilizing their efforts in addressing market failures, draws together a diverse, yet comprehensive set of information to act as a reference (Belbin, 1993). Their innovative skills are known to attract mass crowds of both local and international interest in influencing change and providing fertile ground for the development of improvements to society’s problems (Osborne & Gaebler, 1993; McGregor, 1960).

According to Schumpeter (1982), markets exhibit a variety of entrepreneurial characteristics that are yet to be exploited. Characterized by their ethical skills, social entrepreneurs can help identify market failures and commit their resources to help the neediest in society. Simons (2000) argues that social entrepreneurs are opportunists that harness capacities. They bridge the gap by finding market opportunities and maximizing their potential.

Their innovations provide viable options for addressing market failures by seeking opportunities to create valuable solutions. Entrepreneurs are also known to provide a transformational benefit that targets sensitive activities as well as the marginalized areas that would have never been considered by the government (Tichy & Devanna, 1986). They exhibit characteristics of innovation, risk-taking and large-scale transformation and provided fertile ground for young and upcoming entrepreneurship growth by identifying a present change in the social-economic environment (Ashoka, 2010); Roger & Osberg, 2007).

Entrepreneurs have been identified to present change in our social-economic environment by engaging businesses in their activities. They introduce new ideas and persuading others to adopt, changing social patterns that create social problems through breaking patterns. Transformative ideas can be seen through the invention of new technologies, methods of production, supply sources, and distribution outlets, and social entrepreneurs have for this case taken these innovative approaches further by devising strategies that have benefited the whole society.

They combine their innovative skills, research obtained from public sources, and political influence in attaining their goals. Their ability to involve major players in the entrepreneurship activities character sets them apart from the traditional charitable organizations. They help in testing and developing promising solutions and complement governments’ role in addressing market failures that benefit citizens (Ashoka, 2010).

Simons (2000) argues that incorporating new ideas from experts in the field of social entrepreneurship may always require capital to develop their activities. Wolk (2004) holds an argument that monetary support may not adequately sustain these organizations as the system can become strained when the organization is short of funding. Perhaps, therefore, it is time to conceive alternative ways to sustain these projects.

To this extent, the process perceived as one which is likely to see the survival of social entrepreneurship and not-for-profit organizations are collaborations and partnerships In a replication of this analysis, Amanda Walden, Director of Literacy Volunteers of Chautauqua County was quoted in Rukavina (2010) stating that “the idea of Social Entrepreneurship – bringing agencies together to share resources and build capacity within our several organizations, trying to save taxpayer dollars,”(p.1).

Authors in this research argue that a range of collaborations is sometimes necessary and appropriate for organizations finding it difficult to achieve economies of scale. This makes us re-examine the critical question; do community members, while being served, become productive and more likely to become independent? And do social entrepreneurs encourage local philanthropy?

Overview of Chautauqua County

Located in the western gateway of New York State, Chautauqua County is socially and economically divided into two regions; the North region that includes Dunkirk and the southern multi-purpose area of Jamestown. By census definition of 2000, Chautauqua County is documented as one of the most populous counties in New York state with a population of 139, 750 (Scott, 2009).

The county’s economic activities are bound in many sectors, ranging from manufacturing and processing center to several competitive business activities provided by social entrepreneurs as mentioned in my essay. As a home to many manufacturing industries, such as Cummins, RHI Monofrax, Bush Industries, special Metals, SKF Aero-engine, Hope’s Windows and ECR international, and TitanX, Chautauqua county is also a center for several farms including 229 dairy firms, ranking fifth in New York State.

According to Income and Poverty data statistics, Chautauqua County is represented as one of the poorest counties in the State. Scott (2009) classifies the County as part of the Appalachia, an area characterized as what he states as “Poverty, lack of education and difficulty accessing health care” (p.4). The Chautauqua County Workforce Investment Board (WIB) as quoted in The Chautauqua County (2010) states that

The unemployment rate has increased since the last US Census Bureau American Community Survey, particularly given the drastic economic downturn that began in the fall of 2008. As of June 2009, the County unemployment rate is 8.7%, which is similar to the state rate of 8.6%, and slightly lower than the national unemployment rate of 9.7% (p.15).

These worrisome statistics call for practical solutions, perhaps an affirmative action the social entrepreneurship to ensure the highest priority needs are served. Re-emphasis on community participation, partnerships, and collaborative activities from all sectors of the economy are needed to expand services to individuals and institutions.

Social Entrepreneurship in Chautauqua County

As one of the social entrepreneurs, David Doino is recognized for his remarkable work for opening up the Northern Chautauqua Community Foundation (NCCF) in 1986. His famous motto “give where you live” greatly motivated the community to generously give back to the community, an approach that saw the Northern Chautauqua Community Foundation experience immense asset growth of over $11, 997, 810 and $14,197, 542 between years 2008 to 2009. After his death, however, David Doino continues to be honored as one of the founders of the organization that further stimulated the 134 grants and 243 scholarships totaling $ 361,783 in 2009. Diane Hannum, executive director of NCCF as quoted in Josephson (2010) stated that “since NCCF was founded, $8.1 million in scholarship and grants have been awarded to individuals and organizations,” (p.1).

Although there have been several projects operating within New York State that seem to address critical challenges faced by the society, local businessmen and social entrepreneurs are called upon by the state’s comptroller to mobilize their efforts in implementing solutions that will reduce administrative burdens and increase the state’s accountability and oversight, (Dinapoli, 2010, p. 1). The notion of “giving” emphasizes the ability of a community to serve a common goal, a further central element of the program that may vary depending on the nature of partnership and collaborations (Josephson, 2010).

In replicating this analysis, Lin Liedke (2010), co-director of Great Lake FX was quoted saying community members engage in social activities by:

“Cleaning up their beaches, planting flowers along the waterfront, sweeping streets and parking lots, planting trees on Earth Day, shoveling snow away from fire hydrants and in front of senior citizens homes. Let’s not forget the educational aspect of what we do – and the magnificent art work our students produce which we share throughout the city – bringing nothing but accolades to our area. We have been turned down for local CDBG funds again, and not only that – Mr. Ahlstrom intimated via the newspaper, that we were mishandling the funds that we had been granted, and promptly took the small amount of funding they had awarded us back to purchase a part for the water treatment plant. Every cent of that money goes right back into the community – to put a better face on the city of Dunkirk. We never take a salary for ourselves. Our time and our vehicles are all donated” (Survey results, 4).

As earlier defined, collaboration is a situation where two or three groups jointly work together in fulfilling their primary goals and objectives. Skloot (1983) also mentions partnerships and funding as the major streams for mobilizing funds for social entrepreneurs and not-for-profit organizations. Most partnerships and collaborations are formed at program levels that seek funding through fundraising, grants, and donations.

This is due to the fact since the great recession has strained many organizations making them unable to fund their operations. Battle and Dees (2006) explain that organizations in collaborations can build go trust and social capital that places them in a better position to explore community donor fundraising and partner with other organizations (GIFT, 2010). This approach supports survey results gathered from Amanda Walden, executive director of Literacy Volunteers that stipulated that mobilizing community members enabled fundraising possibilities, generated interest from several new volunteers, and brought in funds.

As a first step in fostering community development, Chautauqua Community members donated over 1000 gifts to NCCF within the same year in aid of social development. Treasurer Daniel Reininga was further quoted in Josephson (2010) stating that “our goal is to see balance grow,” (p.1). This almost evangelist notion of social entrepreneurs as multi-talented individuals with special skills is gradually fading away as people are gaining social conscience and taking proactive approaches to work towards common goals. Social entrepreneurs are gaining leadership roles and mobilized community members in achieving community development projects (Burgoyne and Kimona, 2001; Fiedler, 1967). Katzenbach and Smith (1994) argue that:

“Leaders who know when and how to follow build deep common understanding, not superficial consensus, around the purpose, goals, and approach at hand. They submit themselves and others to the discipline of ensuring that all sides to any disagreement are fully understood by everyone, recognizing that mutual understanding is far more powerful than any particular decision to choose path A over path B. All people will follow strong, commonly understood purposes and goals more easily than the ‘put-up jobs,’ (p.57).

Members of the NCCF have also used their social entrepreneurship spirit to increase awareness of what is available in the country as well as knowledge of the county by forming a contest known as the AmazingCounty.com and Daily Weekly which involves an online treasure hunt requiring participants to solve clues and tasks, after which they are awarded points that can be converted to opportunities to enter into drawings to win prizes and the winners names were displayed in the OBSERVER for everyone to see. AmazingCounty.com was formed as a collaboration between Northern Chautauqua Community Foundation and Chautauqua Region Community Foundation to identify fundraising opportunities that would further developments in the County (Josephson, 2010 (b)).

Survey Results Analysis

The SUNY Social Entrepreneurship Program (SEP) mission is to help community-based not-for-profit organizations sustain longevity. Not-for-profits are not motivated just by financial gain, but by a sense of meeting community needs and to ensure that their organization remains viable and financially stable to continue meeting those needs. Key motivators are:

  • Changing demographics: If an organization’s staff, board, and volunteers are not representative of its community, it can directly affect its ability to provide service.
  • Demand for services: Despite challenging economic conditions the needs for the services Not-for-profit organizations provide continues to increase steadily.
  • Competition for scarce funding revenue: Traditional forms of funding are becoming smaller and less reliable thus, forcing NFPs to seek out more creative options to maintain service to the community.

By exploring the avenue of social entrepreneurship and engaging in collaborative efforts not-for-profits can continue to sustain their organization in any economic climate.

The not-for-profit environment has changed. Community needs are growing in size and diversity. Changing demographics have an impact on service delivery and programs. An organization, situated in a diverse community, can no longer provide effective service without staff and volunteers from the same communities.

More not-for-profits are competing for government and philanthropic funds than ever before. Traditional forms of funding are becoming smaller and less reliable. Between 2007 and 2008, endowments for philanthropic foundations declined by an average of 29 percent. Many foundations indicate that they will continue to decrease the number of grants and/or restructure grant-making activities as they seek to prioritize investments. Thus, many not-for-profits to need similar support required in the private sector to function:

  • Business planning.
  • Assistance with legal/environmental issues.
  • Financial management.
  • Grant writing.
  • Recruiting and supervising both paid and volunteer staff.
  • Employee/volunteer training.
  • Information technology resources.
  • Human resource management.
  • Marketing/research, community outreach, and media releases.
  • Organizing fundraising activities.
  • Purchasing supplies and services.

Without adequate financial support, some not-for-profit organizations have been forced to limit or curtail programs and services, reduce or eliminate staff and in some extreme cases, not-for-profit organizations have simply gone the way of the “dinosaur” and ceased to exist.

During a recent conference on March 31, 2010, at the SUNY Fredonia Technology Incubator in Dunkirk, N.Y., a group of 20 representatives from not-for-profit organizations across Chautauqua County participated in a survey to identify the areas which they felt their organization needed the most assistance with:

Areas of assistance as identified by not-for-profit organizations in Chautauqua County, 2010.

Areas of Concern # of Responses Received
Fundraising 15
Funding Operational Expenses 12
Marketing 14
Business Planning 10
Financial Management 3
Technology 9
Grant/Proposal Writing 15
Searching for Grants Using Online DataBase 5
Collaborations/Resource Sharing 12
Program Evaluation 7
Strategic Planning 11
Office Management 3
Volunteer Management/Recruitment 10
Mission Fish Cooperatives 11

These results did however show little inconsistency on data collected regarding collaboration strategies, fundraising, community contribution, and partnership. To further replicate this analysis, a survey and introduction letter was sent out to 62 not-for-profit organizations via email on Monday, June 7, 2010. (See appendix, pg. 34). A follow-up letter was emailed along with the survey on Monday, June 14, 2010 (See appendix, pg. 35) to verify the authenticity of data gathered on various organizations.

Of the 62 not-for-profits contacted only 12 organizations responded. The poor response was due in part to out-of-date contact information, email inboxes that could no longer accept email due to full capacity, many of the organizations are too understaffed and did not have the time to participate and some were unwilling to share information.

As one of the many Chautauqua’s County collaborative organizations, the SUNY Center for Social Entrepreneurship Program (SEP) presents a perfect example of a successive collaborative activity that has had an enormous impact on how an organization can enhance creativity and motivation. Developing a fundraising workshop that requires member registration has attracted both not-for-profit organizations and donor funding to community projects. When asked how organizations engage in social entrepreneurship, Walden (2010) stated in her survey results that social entrepreneurship:

“Stimulated a different take on fundraising possibilities, generated interest from a number of new volunteers and brought in funds. It has not grown the way I was hoping. I have only had limited success and can’t really say that I consider the project a SE success even though I think it could very well be one in future. I keep trying to ask everyone I meet if they would like to coordinate the position and get money but I haven’t found the person or persons to do it,” (Survey results, 4).

Walden’s response supports the analysis that workshops combine a variety of cultures and encourage participants to dialogue on social entrepreneurship and discuss potential collaborative fundraising opportunities. The workshop also encourages not-for-profit organizations to exploit alternatives on which collaborations can be used to maximize fundraising efforts (Snyder, 2010; Josephson, 2010).

The SEP is aimed at assisting young and upcoming community projects including the not-for-profit organization to become stable. The program provides a wide range of community projects ranging from business support services such as strategic planning, information technology, grand prizes, and communications. Josephson (2010) mentions some of the ongoing SEP programs to include MissionFish, Image Makers’ Technology, and Community Peddler.

In another Northern Chautauqua Community Foundation’s (NCCF’s) collaboration project, BICEP Project merged with SUNY Fredonia’s Center for Social Entrepreneurship Program (SEP) in encouraging social entrepreneurship to form collaborative fundraising workshops. Participants were required to brainstorm ideas that would increase financial resources and establish a framework for specific fundraising activities.

In a replication of this analysis, one of the survey respondents added that “we listen to everyone’s ideas, but you have to be able to keep them focused and on track at the same time (agendas, meeting minutes, and meeting rules!) Try to include everyone in some way, make them feel useful. Make sure decisions are made as a group when possible” (Survey results, 10). The BICEP (Building Institutional Capacity and Engaging Partnerships) project was designed to increase agencies’ capacity and effectiveness while encouraging community collaborations. In this regard, BICEP provides ongoing grant writing training, Foundation Directory Online training, resources information, capacity-building grants, and not-for-profit resources sharing directory.

BICEP exhibits social entrepreneurship spirit by committing to furthering community development through enriching the County and encouraging participation. In support of this analysis, Liedke, (2010) when asked how social entrepreneur attract talent started that:

“That is the $64,000 question. We donate our time, and always have for the past 10 years. We had a college intern this past semester from SUNY Fredonia’s FACE program who received 1 credit hr. towards his degree.”

Liedke (2010) adds that:

“We research grant opportunities and write our own grants. We also try to be very visible within our local area as we promote ourselves through community service, and art shows. We also have spoken to several groups such as Rotary Club and the Kiwanis Club,” (Survey results, 3).

Conclusively, the SEP is largely ceded to assisting community-based not-for-profit organizations become financially stable which may indeed be key to their survival (Josephson, 2010 (c)).

Dr. Laurence Johnston Peter, an educator, and an hierarchiologist were recognized as one of the best social entrepreneurs since his formulation of the ‘Peter Principle’ in which he stated in Scott (2008) that “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise his level of incompetence … in time every posts tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duties … work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence” (p.3).

This principle is a widely used principle of management and heavily quoted in most business schools. In another principle, Dr. Laurence Johnston Peter was quoted in Laurence & Hull (1969) that “noblest of all dogs is the hot-dog; it feeds the hand that bites it” (p.15). Dr. Laurence Johnston Peter principle that emphasizes members promotion depending on their level of competency is consistent with Patricia Munson, executive director of Chautauqua Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Council Inc. (CASAC, 2010) survey results that stipulated that “Extensive interviewing and checking not only references they listed but also with people we may know in common. Keep motivated by providing opportunity to help plan direction of agency and events,” (Survey results, 6).

In other words, finding the right people and keeping them motivated requires patience and time.

Dr. Peter’s principle is applied to mean that consistency and progression improves one’s ability and level of efficiency over time. He emphasizes that consistency tends to yield better results when applied effectively. In the hierarchical principle, the application of hierarchy allowed assessment of potential employee for promotion based on her performance (Laurence & Hull, 1969; Lazear, 2000).

Although social entrepreneurship has been especially beneficial to the community, the ongoing speculations about the inclusion of the tax system in their activities will greatly hurt their operations. According to Hottle (2010), more than 200,000 Not-for-profit organizations are expected to shut down following the implementation of the new policy that requires them to file their tax returns in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Word is that some of the many not-for-profit organizations may be forced out due to their razor-thin budgets. Suzanne Coffin, a spokeswoman for Guide star, was quoted in Hottle (2010) stating that “the not-for-profit in your backyard, some of them are going to be gone” (p.1).

The tax-exempt program which is to be effected on Jan. 1, 2011, applies to groups making more than $25,000 including churches and charitable organizations. Failure to comply may force some of the charitable organizations to lose their tax-exempt status and are most unlikely to be awarded grants (Hottle, 2010).

As we continue to explore strategies used by not-for-profit organizations and social entrepreneurs to meet their long-term mission goals, it’s important to note that achieving coherence and integration is equally important in sustaining these relationships.

Most organizations require multiple strategies to survive in ever-growing needy societies. These may include aspects such as participation strategies, reviewing structural strategies, decreasing expenses, and increasing revenues. However, this has not been the case for a while now since many of them are concentrating on engagement strategies where they mobilize community members as they look for ways to make the most out of their not-for-profit resources. Valerie Walawender (2010) Program Director of Dunkirk Historical Society replicates this analysis by adding that:

While wearing many hats is par for the course for social entrepreneurs, it also divides the focus needed to succeed. Marketing, product or program development, outreach, networking, sales, etc. – all takes time and money (phone, gas, bills). Ideally – the social entrepreneur would provide creative energy and direction, and others would contribute their special talents and skills to the enterprise (Survey results, 1).

Another survey responded stated that This year we wrote letters to all of the local clubs asking for donations, or volunteer help at our event. We wanted to do this last year, but time and help was an issue. This year we ended up with a new member who was willing to take on this task.

We have community pin-up events that give us a chance to go into businesses and start to get to know owners and for them to know us. We also have plans to expand this by having some short educational sessions with some of the local businesses and clubs for next year. We hope that this will help inform them of our cause and efforts ((Survey results, 10).

These statements conclusively give us the picture that community collaborations remain viable options to sustaining social entrepreneurship in the County.

Nicholls (2006), a scholar from Oxford University, defines a social entrepreneur to include both multi-dimensional and dynamic design of the economy rather than their organizational structures. On the other hand, Liedke (2010) defines qualities of a social entrepreneur to include “honesty, Integrity, an incredible work ethic, vision, motivation, and an unwillingness to give up – no matter what(Survey results, 3) while Brian Davis the President of Wishberry/Cooperative defines them as people with “will power, goal oriented and critical thinkers” (Survey results, 2).

These survey results draw upon Nicholls’s (2006) analysis that provides that gaining commitment from community members to contribute towards “community initiatives” facilitates easy communication, enhances innovations, and enables organizations to collectively work together towards getting a shared meaning.

Survey results gathered from various organizations emphasized the importance of community inclusion in organization activities. Focusing on mutual benefits derived from collective responsibility in return for the commitment or loyalty of community members or donors seems like the most viable approach. Walawender (2010) had this to say about his engagement in social entrepreneurship “we have brought our programs to diverse audiences, who now support us in a variety of ways. By benefiting the community, we have benefited,” (Survey results, 1). Conclusively, reaching shared meaning has seen many community projections come to completion and benefiting them in the long run (Sandy and Stephanie, 2009).

Engagement Strategies for Social entrepreneurs

Collective responsibility happens when all community members have a common understanding as to why they are engaging in certain activities and how their participation would impact them and the community as a whole. Engaging in activities previously regarded as not-for-profit-able facilitates education and offers companies’ opportunity to offer services that could not have been considered in the first place or regarded as government activities, (Light, 2003). In this case, therefore:

Social entrepreneurs should know where they fit. Since most of our environments are competitive and collaborative, the organization should consider if indeed partnership is the best approach. In this regard, identifying potential partners and assessing the unique contribution that should be utilized.

Social entrepreneurs should consider a culture shift when considering collaborations and partnerships to weigh in what it takes to make a successive cultural shift.

Use of social networking tools such a Facebook to attract and enlighten participants on continue projects and educate them on how they can contribute. Jenny Sullivan, the Northern Chautauqua Walk MS Committee Chairman (2010) when asked how they go about finding the right people to keep them motivated quoted that:

“I have recently posted on our Facebook page and sent out an email asking others to join our committee. We have had people reach out to us at some of our events. I don’t turn anyone away. The right people are anyone who wants to help. Anyone can be beneficial in some way. As far as keeping them motivated, this time of year is very hard, especially coming off of our major event and a lot of hard work. We are working on a committee plan to help keep us going and focused. We are also starting to discuss other events for the year,” (Survey result, 7).

The use of common communication tools such as marketing campaigns increases exposure. Davis ( respondent) when asked how he lures investors into their organization he stated that “Direct marketing. You have to fully understand your goals and express them passionately” (Survey results, 2).

It is also evidenced that social networking enlightens community members on the social welfares of their community. In providing educational opportunities, there is a whole webpage such as the National Council of Not-for-profits requiring members to join a state association (Martin and Osberg, 2007, p. 30; Sandy and Stephanie, 2009).

As already discussed, collaborations help organizations save on operational expenses. Susan G. Komen gives us a perfect example of not-for-profit mergers when she founded Cure found by joining the nonprofit village.

Engaging the community in organization welfares requires understanding the community’s most pressing needs and how they can assist each other.

Creating, building, and cultivating long term relationships with community members and sponsors require time and practice. An entrepreneur should know when to push and when to wait while keeping the original goal in mind.

Social entrepreneurs and not-for-profit organizations should classify their social activities as a form of business collaboration partnership and shun away from traditional recognition as potential corporate donors. Sandy and Stephanie (2009) argue that not-for-profit organizations should not be afraid of taking risks but concentrate on the long benefits.

Collaboration with the government in local entrepreneurship activities helps shape public policy and attracts more donors to the organization. In this regard, not-for-profit organizations and social entrepreneurs should share their interests with the government to help them shape decisions that would eventually impact the community. Sandy and Stephanie (2009) recommend passing articles to the government program officers as the first step to achieving primary goals (Martin and Osberg, 2007, p. 30; Goldsmith and Eggers, 2004).

Advocating for policies and laws that benefit the sector and organizational goals might be a viable strategy (Chase, 2000).

Partnering with schools right from high school to graduate schools should be the next move as students can be very resourceful in volunteering. Student volunteer-ship is best illustrated in Joseph’s home located in Rockland County that extends community services to local schools and universities. Liedke, one of the survey respondents supported this argument by adding that “we also solicit new participants through the local school districts and through Kid’s College at Jamestown Community College,” (Survey results, 3).

As already mentioned, engaging in collaboration helps the organization reach out and find investing partners. Partnerships help organizations reach wider markets in efficient ways. A former 1900s scholar, Joseph Schumer once commented in Fried (1982) that, “Further contemporary economist Milton Friedman has argued that free markets, competition, and consumer choices are also essential components of capitalism,” (p. 50). Here, we do however argue that starting small and simple and progressively moving upwards enables the organization to build trust with donors and learn practical experience with collaborations.

And last, considering merger possibilities on local and regional levels would be an even bigger strategy in cutting down on operational costs. Most importantly, an organization should think about ways to thrive in their endeavors rather than just dwelling on survival strategies. Bridgespan Group quoted in Sandy and Stephanie (2009) states that “mergers strengthen nonprofit organizations effectiveness, enable them to expand their reach and best spread their practices,” (p.1). It further adds that tactical strategies such as streamlining accreditation should be considered in determining whether they would make something greater in mergers (Sandy and Stephanie, 2009).

Examples of Social Entrepreneurship projects Funded by HHAP in Chautauqua County and other surrounding Areas

The Homeless Housing and Assistance Program (HHAP) is another New York’s collaborative project that offers extensive assistance to nonprofit organizations and social entrepreneurship out seeking community members’ best interest by providing capital grants and loans. HHAP offers a practical philosophy that supports people by constructing and rehabilitate housing for homeless people and unprivileged members in the society who are unable to secure decent housing without special assistance. These housing projects are aimed at serving the youth, elderly, families, and single persons as well. The project also included facilities for special needs people such as the mentally disabled, people with Aids, war veterans, and even victims of domestic violence (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.3).

HHAC was enacted in chapter 61 of the 1983 laws which later came into effect in 1990 as an organization that highly prioritizes societal needs by providing loans to charitable and religious organizations as well as not-for-profit organizations. After extensive research on this topic, it becomes apparent that HHAC is the only state resources available to fund capital development. It operates as a subsidiary of the New York State Housing Finance Agency that targets the special needs population by providing the substantial financial resource.

Since its inception, HHAC has been able to build new and remodel old structures within the city that have led to national advancement and rehabilitation of vulnerable members of the society such as the chemically addicted and incarcerated men and women. It also conducts regular inspection on the project in progress and moves families from homeless and poverty towards a formal settlement where they will be self-reliable and economically independent once the projects are completed (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.5).

  • Safe Harbors of the Hudson received an award in August 2002 for rehabilitating an old building that created 128 units for the homeless, victims of substance abuse as well as mentally disturbed individuals. The project grant opening ceremony was held in December 2006.
  • Westhab, Inc. engaged in or resolved several projects by the construction of a new building that created 29 units and 95 beds of permanent housing for homeless families in Westchester County, become operational in 2006.
  • Family Resource Center of Peekskill engaged in or resolved several projects by constructing two single-family homes that created 2 units and 12 beds in homeless families in the Westchester County
  • JCTOD Outreach, Inc. engaged in or resolved some projects by acquiring and rehabilitating a building that created 3 units of permanent housing for homeless people in Oneida County, become operational in December 2006 (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.16).
  • Joseph’s Home, Inc. engaged in or resolved several projects by rehabilitating a building that created 14 units and 40 beds of permanent housing for homeless families and single people living with HIV/Aids in Rockland County.
  • Barrier Free-living, Inc. was recognized in 2002 for the construction of the new facility that created 44 units and 86 beds for emergency purposes for homeless families and physically disabled victims in New York County.
  • Concern for Independent Living, Inc. engaged in or resolved some projects by acquiring and rehabilitating single-family homes that created 4 units and 16 beds of permanent housing with people of psychiatric disabilities in Suffolk County.
  • The Lantern Group, Inc. engaged in or resolved several projects by constructing new a building that created 116 units of permanent housing for young parent teenagers, and low-income families in the Bronx.
  • Community Counseling and Mediation Services engaged in or resolved many projects by constructing a new building that hosted 48 units and 48 beds of permanent housing for the mentally disabled in Kings County among others.
  • Buffalo City Mission engaged in or resolved several projects by constructing new facilities that created 77 units and 122 beds of emergency and transitional housing for young mothers and women with children in Erie County.
  • Albany Housing Coalition, Inc. engaged in or resolved some projects by acquiring and rehabilitating buildings that created 13 SRO units of transitional housing for disabled homeless veterans and chemical abuse people within the county.
  • Suffolk Co United Vets, engaged in or resolved many projects by acquiring and constructing new modular homes for single families that created 4 units and 20 beds of permanent housing for single veterans with HIV/Aids in Suffolk County become operational in 2006.
  • Neighborhood Coalition for Shelter engaged in or resolved several projects by rehabilitating a substantial building that preserved 65 units for homeless single people and people with mental disabilities. Become operational in 2006.
  • St. Timothy Lutheran Church engaged in or resolved some projects by rehabilitating and constructing new buildings that created 8 units and 19 beds for emergency and transitional housing for homeless families within Rensselaer County. Become operational in 2006.
  • High bridge Woodycrest Center engaged in or resolved many projects rehabilitating and creating new buildings that accommodated 40 units and 99 beds of permanent housing for families living with HIV/AIDS in the Bronx County.
  • Hands Across Long Island, Inc. engaged in or resolved several projects by acquiring and rehabilitating four single-family homes that created 16 units and 16 beds of permanent housing for people with mental disability within Suffolk County.
  • Fairview Recovery Services, Inc engaged in or resolved some projects by rehabilitating a new building that preserved 6 congregate units of transitional housing for people with mental disability and substance abuse victims in Broome County.
  • Fifth Ave Committee, Inc engaged in or resolved many projects by rehabilitated a building that crated 16 units of permanent housing for homeless and low-income families in Kings County.

Summary of awarded funds

HHPA capital funds have been primarily concentrated on what Spitzer & Hansell (2006) quotes as “Property acquisition, demolition and site work, rehabilitation or new construction, equipment costs, architectural and other professional fees (p. 6). Spitzer & Hansell (2006) also documented that since its HHPA inception; about 12,100 units of housing totaling $632 million projects have been funded. Population served by HHAP program ranges from the elderly, persons living with correction facilities, parenting teens among others.

While the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTDA) recognizes the primary focus in developing housing for homeless and special needs, HHAP on the other recognizes the needs of this special population by assisting the vulnerable groups become independent and economically sufficient by incorporating social services into the program operation. HHAP’s proactive approach of addressing humanitarian challenges through social housing programs is a social entrepreneurship spirit that seeks to address the problem of chronic homelessness among individuals and families. Through the Homeless Housing and Assistance Program, OTDA in collaboration with HHPA has committed to construct 1,000 more units for persons who are mentally ill and chemically addicted (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.10).

HHAP Funding History

Since its implementation, the HHAP program has seen the completion of about 586 projects yielding over 12,100 units of housing both for transitions settlement, permanent residents for homeless families, and individuals units on an emergency basis.

HHAP Housing Type Funded 1983-2006

HHPA grants have sponsored projects in over 56 counties throughout New York State in which the majority of them are committed and social development. This analysis reflects the greater incidents of less privileged people in the New York metropolitan area, higher costs of housing, and the not-for-profit sponsors. HHAP projects awarded between 1983 and 2006 are illustrated as follows;

HHAP Projects Awarded by County 1983-2006.

County # of Projects Amount Awarded
Erie 32 $24,448,262
Albany 23 $13,738.526
Broome 12 $11,389,732
Monroe 21 $10,160,633
Clinton 5 $6,118,080
Dutchess 8 $5,859,909
Franklin 10 $4,645,809
Oneida 9 $3,958.133
Chautauqua 8 $3,801,261
Niagara 7 $3,266,500
Jefferson 5 $2,900,378
Cattaraugus 8 $2,467,444
Columbia 5 $2,257,825
Montgomery 1 $1,550,000
Fulton 2 $1,036,558
Allegany 3 $948,297
Essex 2 $650,000
Cayuga 3 $414,179
Herkimer 1 $219,265
Livingston 3 $201,173
Chenango 1 $198,500
Chemung 1 $175,000
Madison 1 $159,909
Cortland 1 $158,672
Greene 1 $152,000

Asset Management

The Asset Management Unit (AMU) is another one of the social entrepreneurship projects in Chautauqua County that dedicates its services to managing and preserving operating projects. In collaboration with HAAP, AMU ensures that projects in progress are adequately monitored, reported, and provided technical assistance where needed. When necessary, AMU may intervene in distressed projects and inform donors on how their fundings are being utilized. While optimizing community development, AMU is well equipped to provide effective oversight, detection, and assessment of the operational issues and quickly respond to crises when needed (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.19).

Technical Assistance

AMU provides technical assistance by supporting structure and systems that reinforce the organization’s primary goals, maximizes developments, and guarantees security by assessing and approving projects operating within the counties. Most of the services include training in property management, capital budgeting, assessment of repair needs, operations e.t.c (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.22).

Data Tracking

AMU’s new system of data collection from annual reports, monitoring visits, and financial statements are introduced to bridge the long-standing tradition of grappling with things in the dark. Data on HHAP projects provides reports on vacancy rates for units and beds to ensure they are financially stable and well maintained. By gaining commitment and providing leadership, AMU also ensures that compliance issues are met and are operating within the budgets (Spitzer & Hansell, 2006, p.23)

Special Organizations Support

Moshenko (2010) and Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2006) present several social welfare projects dedicated to helping children with disabilities or adults by providing services and support they need. Since health insurance companies limit the frequency of visits to health institutions and do not cover children with such disabilities, Moshenko (2010) argues that social services such as Medicaid HCB Waiver Program, Epilepsy Association of Western New York among others are well equipped to give children the intervention and attention they desperately yearn for. In her statement, Moshenko (2010) adds that children with special needs and don’t have health insurance often experience challenges accessing medical care making their life even more difficult. These are mentioned as;

  1. Medicaid HCB Waiver Program extends Medicaid funds to community developments that offer their services at patients’ homes. The U.S Department of Health and Human Services was quoted in Moshenko (2010) stating that “Medicaid’s home and community-based services waiver program affords States the flexibility to develop and implement creative alternatives to institutionalizing Medicaid-eligible individuals” (p.1).
  2. Medicaid enables people to care in their homes at subsidized costs. The program waives fees for individuals with HIV, technology-dependent children, and some special illness.
  3. Epilepsy Association of Western New York located at 339 Elmwood Avenue dedicates its services to supporting employment services by offering comprehensive job search at no fee.
  4. Guild Care program covers include special activities such as nursing supervision, teaching, medical assistance, speech therapy for adults of 18 years or older.
  5. Neighborhood Legal Services (NLS) is a nonprofit organization aimed at providing free legal services to people with low income and people with disabilities and advocates agencies to serve them.
  6. People Inc. on the other offers extensive services such as employment opportunities for individuals and families with disabilities to become independent and live productive lives.
  7. Community Employment Office patterns with Public and Voluntary Agencies in providing employment opportunities to disabled individuals in Erie County.
  8. The VA Regional Office-Departments of the Veterans Affairs provided Vocational Rehabilitation services for Disabled veterans and special home adaptation programs. Western New York Independent Living Center concentrates on helping disabled people secure appropriate services by offering a wide range of services such as rent subsidies, home modifications, and free transport.
  9. NYS department of Family Assistance provides a variety of social security programs that includes providing a basic income for the elderly, the blind, and the disabled people.

A further central element of collaborative programs is to jointly work together to meet the organization’s primary goals, which is to foster social development. An online article documented by Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training (GIFT, 2010) mentions collaborative organization such as Big gala, auction, and street fairs to have successfully mobilized efforts and shared responsibility to helping the community. Center for Volunteer and Nonprofit Leadership (CVNL) later renamed “The Human Race” currently hosts a 5K run/walk that attracts over 100 groups and gives the funds collected to the participating organization (GIFT, 2010).

Another collaboration mentioned by GIFT (2010) includes a joint list rental for direct mail that charges participants per the number of names they submit. The website allows participants to join several collaborations such as BIG, joint capital campaigns that enable them to mobiles funds and buy buildings that suit all their needs. Here, an organization with common goals could share a common service room, such as bathrooms, kitchen, equipment, and meeting space, and if lucky, may receive overlapping donors. GIFT (2010) also argues that the use of joint staffing may be a better strategic move on saving on operational costs.

Conclusion

This makes us re-examine the critical question; do community members, while being served, become productive and more likely to become independent? And to what do social entrepreneurs encourage local philanthropy? As evidenced in this research article, collaborative fundraising remains a great way for social entrepreneurship and nonprofit organizations to raise money and share expenses. Quoted from the Center for Servant Leadership website, Bolden and his colleges (2003) stated that “Servant-leadership encourages collaboration, trust, foresight, listening, and the ethical use of power and empowerment.” (p.13).

In this regard, social entrepreneurship should not only be viewed as mass recruiters that influence change and provide fertile ground for development but also as important tools for both social and economic development. While social entrepreneurs strive to meet their long-term mission goals, it’s important to note that achieving coherence and integration is equally important in sustaining these relationships.

Collaborative strategies such as community participation, reviewing structural strategies, decreasing expenses, and increasing revenues should be highly prioritized. Focusing on mutual benefits derived from collective responsibility in return for the commitment or loyalty of community members or donors seems like the most viable approach social entrepreneurs should prioritize.

References

Ashoka. (2010). What is a social entrepreneur? Web.

Battle, A. B., & Dees, J. G. (2006). Rhetoric, Reality, and Research: Building a Solid Foundation for the Practice of Social Entrepreneurship. In Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. Edited by Alex Nicholls, 144–68. London: Oxford University Press.

Belbin, R. M. (1993). Team Roles at Work. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A., & Dennison, P.( 2003). A review of leadership theory and competency frameworks. Centre for Leadership Studies, 18, 1-44.

Burgoyne, J., & Kimona, J. (2001). Leadership Development: Best practice guide for organisations. London: Council for Excellence in Management and Leadership.

Chase, W. (2000). Cultural Diversity in Organizations and Business: Gaining a competitive advantage. Affiliation of Multicultural Societies & Service Agencies of BC, 34, 1-82.

Chautauqua County. (2010). County Overview. Web.

Dinapoli, T.P. (2010). New York State’s Not-For-Profit Sector. Office of the State Comptroller, 1-4.

Friedman, M. (1982). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gib, S. (2010). City CDBG resolutions cause stir. Web.

Goldmsmith, S., & Eggers, D.W. (2004). Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training (Gift). (2010). Collaborative Fundraising. Web.

Hottle, M. (2010). Thousands of nonprofits may lose tax-exempt status. The Seattle Times, 1, 1.

Josephson, J. (2010). NCC discusses ’09 Success. Web.

Josephson, J. (2010) (b). Social entrepreneurship-collaborative fundraising workshop scheduled. Web.

Josephson, J. (2010) (c). Social entrepreneurship-collaborative fundraising workshop scheduled. Web.

Katzenbach, J., & Smith, D. (1994). The Wisdom of Teams. New York: Harper business.

Laurence, J., Hull, R. (1969).The Peter Principle: why things always go wrong. New York: William Morrow and Company.

Lazear, E. P. (2000). The Peter Principle: Promotions and Declining. Stanford: Hoover Institution and Graduate School of Business.

Light, P. C. (2003). Fact Sheet on the New True Size of Government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.

Moshenko, S. (2010). Finances an Added Burden for the Disabled and Their Families. Web.

Nicholls, A. (2006). Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change, edited by Alex Nicholls, 1–35. London: Oxford University Press.

Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2006). Education at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, MA: Penguin Books.

Roger. M. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 1, 29–39.

Rukavina, M. (2010). Incubator graduates, Literacy Volunteers head to Dunkirk loft. Web.

Sandy, J., & Stephanie, J. (2009). Engagement Strategies: Making the Most of Working Together. Web.

Schumpeter, J. (1982). The Theory of Economic Development. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Scott,B. (2008). Schott’s Miscellany Calendar 2009. New York: Workman Publishing Company.

Scott,B. (2009). Chautauqua County New York. New York: American Publishing Images.

Simons, R. (2000). Social Enterprise: An Opportunity to Harness Capacities. Research and Advocacy Briefing, 7, 1-4.

Skloot, Edward. (1983). Should Not-For-Profits Go into Business? Harvard Business Review, 61, 20-25.

Spitzer, E., & Hansell, D. (2006). Homeless housing and assistance program. Annual Report to the Governor and the Legislature, 34, 1-23.

The Chautauqua County. (2010). Community Health Assessment Chautauqua County. Chautauqua County Health Department, 1, 1-118.

Tichy, N. and Devanna, M. (1986). Transformational Leadership. New York: Wiley.

Wolk, A.M. (2004). Social Entrepreneurship and Government: A New Breed of Entrepreneurs Developing Solutions to Social Problems. Social Entrepreneurship and Government, 59, 151-221.

Appendix

Although there was little inconsistency in the survey results collected on various organizations regarding collaboration strategies; fundraising activities, community contribution and partnership showed tremendous impact on managers. Below is the letter sent via email to every correspondent before the survey was conducted:

June 7, 2010

Dear Agency Director:

I am working on a research project concerning not-for-profit organizations within Chautauqua County as part of an internship under the direction of Richard Goodman from the Center for Social Entrepreneurism at SUNY Fredonia’s Technology Incubator. As part of my research for this project, I’ve developed a survey which I am sending out to various not-for-profits in the county. The results will be used to gauge the status of not-for-profit agencies in the county, what needs are being met, what can be improved upon and evaluate the overall, “health” of social entrepreneurship in our community.

I hope that you would take the time to respond to the survey and e-mail it back by Tuesday, June 15, 2010.

Thank you for your time and sharing your experiences.

Sincerely,

Erica Yunghans

A list of survey questions were distributed as illustrated below:

Name:

Position:

Organization:

Date survey was completed:

  1. How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
  2. What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
  3. How do you cope with setbacks?
  4. How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
  5. Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
  6. How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
  7. What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
  8. How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
  9. What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
  10. What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
  11. How do you go about planning for the future?
  12. How do you balance your social and financial goals?
  13. Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
  14. Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
  15. If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?

A follow-up letter was distributed a week later as illustrated below;

June 15, 2010

Dear Agency Director:

As you may already be aware, my name is Erica Yunghans and last week I emailed a needs assessment survey to a number of Chautauqua County not-for-profit organizations. The information obtained from this survey will be used by planners within the Program for Social Entrepreneurship to develop a strategy for addressing the most pressing of those needs. Information obtained will be reported as an aggregate and responding agencies will remain anonymous.

Although I had hoped to have the completed surveys returned to me by this week, I understand how busy everyone is at this time of year and that you might not been able to find time to complete it. Since I am working under a fairly tight deadline, I would greatly appreciate it if you could take a few moments to answer the survey questions and get them back to me by Monday, June 21, 2010. Please be assured that everyone will receive a copy of the final project report.

If you have additional questions you may contact me via e-mail [email protected] or by phone (716)-680-0102.

Thank you in advance for your kind assistance and for sharing your experiences

Sincerely,

Erica Yunghans

SUNY Fredonia Intern

Survey Results 1

Name: Ruth Lundin

Position: President

Organization: Jamestown Audubon Society, Inc.

Date survey was completed: 6-15-10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Flexible work hours, friendly work environment, dynamic job duties, authority to act.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • No avenue for advancement
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Re-engineer the process
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • Personal contact, develop an intimacy with the mission and programs of the organization.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Try to go it alone. Need to build bridges.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • There is much that goes on without my input.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Finding the funding. There are many more excellent opportunities than there is funding for.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Networking, interviewing LOTS of people. Motivation by Flexible work hours, friendly work environment, dynamic job duties, authority to act.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Flexibility. Positive attitude. Valuing each individual.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • There is no one right way
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Brainstorming with the staff. Finding ways to duplicate successful programs.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • You have to go with your gut and accept some compromises.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • Yes-it runs the organization.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • We have been struggling with sustainability for the last ten years. We try to add value and find marketable programs and products.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • It has raised the visibility in the community.

Survey Results 2

ERICA E. YUNGHANS

P.O. BOX 191

FREDONIA, NY 14063

[email protected]

(716)-680-0102 Name: Gary Travis

Position: Vice Chairman

Organization: Brocton Portland Community Festival

Date survey was completed: 06/14/2010

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Look for people that have a passion for the purpose of the organization. People with the same goals as the organization will do whatever it takes to succeed.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Lack of interest from others
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Think outside the box. Every setback gives you a new chance to succeed.
  • How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
    • It’s all about your presentation and your goals.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Don’t be afraid of hearing “NO.” Also don’t be afraid to try anything.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • I went from laborer to Vice Chairman.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Funding.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Since ours is a Community activity, we have found that the people that have attended in the past are willing to help out now.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Must have a “Can Do Attitude.”
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • By example.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • We always had a goal in mind when we started, each year our goal my change for any given reason, however we always strive to meet our ultimate goal.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • For our organization, they work hand in hand.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • No it does not, strictly donation driven.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • No.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • N/A

Survey Results 3

Name: Patricia Z. Munson

Position: Executive Director

Organization: CASAC – Chautauqua Alcoholism & Substance Abuse Council, Inc.

Date survey was completed: 6/17/10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • I am not sure. Sometimes it is by offering people the opportunity and freedom to develop something new.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Not sure.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Just look at what we did, could we have done it better or differently. Try again if possible.
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • One on one contact as much as possible.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Not sure.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • Less direct community work.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Finding appropriate staff to fill positions used to be a problem
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Extensive interviewing and checking not only references they listed but also with people we may know in common. Keep motivated by providing opportunity to help plan direction of agency and events.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Not sure. Maybe being able to change course quickly if needed and having a vision of how the projects could work. Some employees cannot “envision” end results of a project.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Provide a vision to start with and then see what rest of community or board or staff think and make changes accordingly. Depends on how exactly new it is.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Very hard in this economic climate but look at what trends are in the field for needed services and plan for them. Always remember a strategic plan isn’t written in stone and course changes can be most beneficial.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • Very carefully.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? Revenue through fees for service. How is it used?
    • To support those services.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • Working on it in this economic climate.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • Not done so yet.

Survey Results 4

Name: Judy Metzger

Position: Executive Director

Organization: Campus and Community Children’s Center

Date survey was completed: 6/16/2010

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Speak to people’s passions – something personal.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Burn out? Lack of support.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • By talking to anyone who might be able to add a new perspective or suggestion.
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • By providing the best care for children and families.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Try not to get discouraged and think outside your comfort level.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • Many more responsibilities added without extra time or funds. Stress level is high.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Money is presently our biggest challenge.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Advertising, experience interviewing, try and provide warm welcome and try to build strong teams.
  • What are the key qualities of a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Patience, true passion, building a network.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • With genuine interest and caring but make sure you take some leadership courses or seminars. Communication skills are key.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • By tapping into resources (human and financial and expertise).
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • By making difficult decisions that can affect many.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • Yes, it is used for salaries and equipment – the running of the center.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • We plan to sustain but we have had a deficit budget three years in a row.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not why?
    • We try to spread the word about the importance of early care and education in all aspects of our business.

Survey Results 5

Name: Claudia Monroe

Position: President

Organization: Centaur Stride

Date survey was completed: 6/15/10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • The applicant must be desperate and no other options, and no government support.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Lack of community support.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • One day at a time, one foot in front of the other!
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • Not looking for investors- just supporters.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Expect fast success.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • More work.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • You need to invest money to lure money – so finances have been the challenge.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Luck!
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Perseverance and passion.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Optimism
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Get a good BOD.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • Selflessness!
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • Fee for service, fundraising, used to pay staff and expenses.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • Hopes for sustainability.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • No response given.

Survey Results 6

Name: Valerie Walawender

Position: Program Director

Organization: Dunkirk Historical Society

Date survey was completed: June 16, 2010

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Offer creative control and at least a living wage.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • While wearing many hats is par for the course for social entrepreneurs, it also divides the focus needed to succeed. Marketing, product or program development, outreach, networking, sales, etc. – all takes time and money (phone, gas, bills). Ideally – the social entrepreneur would provide creative energy and direction, and others would contribute their own special talents and skills to the enterprise.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Creatively. When I can, positively – by realizing that setbacks are just part of the overall process to achieve worthwhile goals. If it was easy, everybody would be doing it.
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • Good question. Having a high quality product or program. Having a solid marketing program. Personal contacts. Leverage with funds already achieved. Also – high profile endorsements. Good track record of prestigious or interesting clients.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Don’t give up. Have a clear vision and Don’t muddy your vision with trying to please a committee. An old quote I like: In all the parks in all the cities of the world, you will never find a sculpture created by a committee.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • I have more of a leadership role.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Money. Technology. Human resources.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Intuition. Open mind. Wanting to help everyone achieve their own dreams. Staying focused and positive myself – and thereby acting as a role model – by overcoming phenomenal odds and the negativity of naysayers. Continually working on my own personal growth – staying motivated and excited myself. It comes naturally to me – and for those who are like-minded – it’s contagious.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Having a clear vision and personally meaningful purpose. Knowing yourself. Compassion, passion, acceptance, love.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Respectfully. Respecting yourself and others – and tradition as well as innovation; slow movement as well as quick decisions and action. With Clarity. Being very clear about the mission – and your own commitment to the mission. Creatively. Respond to problems creatively and lovingly. Decisively. Kindly. Ethically. Consciously. Even if you need to make some hard decisions, make them with as much thought, kindness, and ethical consideration as possible.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Look at the vision – the ultimate end goal. Develop 1 year, 3 year, 5 year – 10 year plans – with concrete steps to take to achieve the mini-goals along the way. Consider the obstacles. Don’t focus on the obstacles. Focus on your vision.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • Like an Eastern Indian juggler – spinning a dozen plates on long sticks simultaneously – going from one to the next – to keep them all going.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • Revenue comes mainly in the form of grants at this point. The grants are used mainly for presenting programs. We hope to develop products and programs that will be self sustaining.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • Yes.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • We have brought our programs to diverse audiences, who now support us in a variety of ways. By benefiting the community, we have benefited.

Survey Results 7

Name: Lin Liedke

Position: Co-Director

Organization: Great Lake FX

Date survey was completed: 6/10/10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • That is the $64,000 question. We donate our time, and always have for the past 10 years. We had a college intern this past semester from SUNY Fredonia’s FACE program who received 1 credit hr. towards his degree.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Money; Time; Affordable transportation for participants. Lack of support from local officials.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • It is sometimes very frustrating because we are a very small grassroots youth organization which meets with at-risk youth 1x/week. We are often overlooked for funding because of our small size. We do try not to “compete” with “big-box” organizations who typically receive the majority of local funding. We feel we are unique and fill a niche within the community that other groups do not. We have a proven track record of success in this area.
  • How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
    • We research grant opportunities and write our own grants. We also try to be very visible within our local area as we promote ourselves through community service, and art shows. We also have spoken to several groups such as Rotary Club and the Kiwanis Club.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Do NOT give up.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • We do everything as our mission has become more clear: soliciting new participants, meeting with parents and school officials, taking professional development courses, transporting students, writing grants, raising money, etc. the list goes on and on. The original idea of “working with kids” has been redefined several times.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Dealing with the incredible amount of negativism within this local area. It is totally amazing to me that we are met with such opposition when we are trying to provide community service to the city and also providing positive role models for the youth of this city who already have 1 strike against them. Cleaning up their beaches, planting flowers along the waterfront, sweeping streets and parking lots, planting trees on Earth Day, shoveling snow away from fire hydrants and in front of sr. citizen’s homes, exhibits at the county fair, etc. Let’s not forget the educational aspect of what we do-AND the magnificent art work our students produce which we share throughout the city – bringing nothing but accolades to our area. BUT- we have been turned down for local CDBG funds again, and not only that – Mr. Ahlstrom intimated via the newspaper, that we were mishandling the funds that we had been granted, and promptly took the small amount of funding they had awarded us back to purchase a part for the water treatment plant. Every cent of that money goes right back into the community-to put a better face on the city of Dunkirk. We NEVER take a salary for ourselves. Our time and our vehicles are all donated.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • WE are the two people who have created Great Lake FX 10 yrs ago and to be truthful, it is sometimes very difficult to keep ourselves motivated due to some of the reasons listed above.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Honesty, Integrity, an incredible work ethic, vision, motivation, and an unwillingness to give up – no matter what.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • The organization must have a board of directors that is motivated and works to promote the mission of the organization.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • We research the availability of funding- which is definitely dwindling. We also solicit new participants through the local school districts, and through Kid’s College at JCC.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • We do appear at local fundraisers for organizations that have supported us financially. We have also donated artwork our students have created to various organizations that have supported us.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • We have participated in fundraisers. Every cent goes right back into the program, to pay for supplies, materials, and professional development, and to take our students on educational field trips.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability
    • We would like to think so.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • We feel that our community service, as listed above, has benefitted not only our local community, but also tourism as what we have done is very visible. The benefits of modeling and encouraging stewardship for our students are immeasurable. Our beautiful artwork, entirely created by students, depicts not only the beauty of our local area, but points to a focus these students do not receive in school. Visitors to our city and county are constantly telling us how impressed they are with the visible products our students have produced. The invisible, that of self-confidence, scholastic honors, motivation, and the desire to succeed, are the natural by-product of an organization where the directors (leaders) have led by example.

Survey Results 8

Name: Diane K. Clark

Position: Director

Organization: Greystone Nature Preserve

Date survey was completed: June 16, 2010

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Good vibs, In our experience, people want to feel good about themselves and the direction of their lives. COntributing time and energy to a good cause is sometimes more important than recieving money.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Poor time management.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • We expect them, and don’t get ourselves emotionally tumbled.
  • How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
    • We get them connected to our mission statement; most folks want to help efforts to preserve our environment, especially trees, and to connect children with nature.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Do not forget to say thank you….several times.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • More computer work.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Ah ha! Our goal is NOT to scale up. We believe small and home based is the way to go in the current time. With no big “improvements. we are able to offer a great program, without going into the red. Our home made operation fits our mission statement and our financial one too.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • SUNY FREDONIA….CHRISTINA JARVIS… our two best and most excellent sources!!!!!!!
  • What are the key qualities of a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Honesty and a sincere desire to serve.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Listen to your board and the concerns and desires of the general public.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • By listening, I get many ideas for programming.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • My social life revolves around home cooked dinners, strolls around our preserve enjoying nature and company, etc. We are home based and try to stay away from corporate influence, like fancy restraunts, big entertainment. Good we live in a community where we can go to free concerts, and attend events with little financial cost. We strive for that!
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • We charge $2.00 per child for a day or experiential environmental education, here or in the classroom. So our main goal is NOT generating revenue, but in serving the community. The money we do receive is used for things like purple martin bird houses. Every time we receive a contribution outside of programing, we let that individual know exactly how we are spending the money, ie planting native trees, repairing the tipi, improving the pond. We send pictures of the result of the money gift do folks know exactly what happen to their contribution.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • We are sustainable, but not in the usual corporate way. We raise our own vegtables, chickens, and have agreements for our other meat with neighbors, usually using a barter system, we both shy away from the concept of making a profit, and we are interested in making a mark…. Since we don’t have a big overhead, we can look ahead to the future of the needs for children…. to appreciate and respect the natural world.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • I am not sure what this means. But every agency that has had a field trip here is eager to come back again, that includes, public schools, BOCES, the Resource Center, home schoolers, and toddlers, and several “at risk” programs.

Survey Results 9

Name: Amanda Walden
Position: Executive Director
Organization: Literacy Volunteers
Date survey was completed: 6/11/10
  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • People want to be a part of something cutting edge and different. It is a matter of educating them and letting them choose the role they feel best suits them. This is true of any volunteer.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Often it is boards of directors who are not educated or afraid of doing something outside the traditional or safe. Target and educate.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • My mantra is: Willful determination/Non-concern for results
  • How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
    • Same as #1.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • No response given.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • I am constantly asked to do more and more with less and less.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Finding a consistent volunteer base and finding adequate funding.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • See # 1 again.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Someone who wants to help and make changes from within the system.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Surrounding yourself with good people and listening to their ideas and solutions.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • As far in advance as possible but usually decisions are based on knee jerk reactions.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • I try to serve the people first-fulfill the mission first even if that means serving fewer people-better to serve a few well than a lot poorly.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • In limited book sale fundraisers-Mission Fish- right now.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • Yes.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • Stimulated a different take on fundraising possibilities, generated interest from a number of new volunteers and brought in funds. It has not grown the way I was hoping. I have only had limited success and can’t really say that I consider the project a SE success even though I think it could very well be one in future. I keep trying to ask everyone I meet if they would like to coordinate the position and get money but I haven’t found the person or persons to do it!

Survey Results 10

ERICA E. YUNGHANS

P.O. BOX 191

FREDONIA, NY 14063

[email protected]

(716)-680-0102 Name: Jenny Sullivan

Position: Committee chair

Organization: Northern Chautauqua Walk MS committee

Date survey was completed: 6/16/10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • In our organization a lot of talent is found through people who have the disease or are directly affected by it (loved one, family member, etc). We are all volunteers and not able to pay anyone (on the local level). So far we have been extremely lucky with the group we have. A lot of the help we get is from people who have the disease and are on disability, but they do not want to just sit there and do nothing. It gives them something to do, so that they do not feel helpless. They feel that they are making a difference (and they are). I think our committee even gives them a social outlet, a place to gather and meet with others that our cause is important to. It gives them a place and reason to use their talents. I think (and am hoping) that if you make being part of the group fun, if you include everyone and listen to what they all have to say and want to do, the members will want to keep helping.
    • There is a downside to this. Cognitive problems and fatigue are a big symptom of the disease we try to help people with. The group is limited by how members with the disease are feeling and doing. A lot of our members have been out of work (on disability) for a long time, and technical skills are lacking (computer mainly).
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Time, money. Money, time! Money as far as for the organization as well as this takes up a lot of time and so money personally also. It’s also difficult trying to balance out all the priorities for the organization as well as your many responsibilities to yourself and family. There is a lot on all sides that just does not get done. Education also, at least for me a lot of this is new and a lot of things would be easier if I knew where to go or look for certain information. It would also save me time. Not having a place to work out of. The stuff for our events seems to overtake my personal space and prevents me from working on other things I need to get done. It would be great if I had a workable space where my group could come and help with things too (accessibility issues). We have been meeting at the Darwin Barker Library this year and that works well, but when we need to have longer meetings to put things together (crafts, posters, etc) we do not currently have a space that works well for all of us.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • This is a little different for our group. We work directly with the National Society and their offices in Buffalo (and Rochester since they oversee the Buffalo office). Our group has only existed so far mainly to organize the main event for the Chapter in our area. This year we are really becoming a stronger more independent group. Our setbacks so far have been mainly in dealing with the Society and the support we receive from them. They also seem to have a high employment turn-over rate and in the past three years the Buffalo office has been working with a severe shortage of staff, which directly impacts programs here (has delayed starting anything).
    • So far, this year our committee spent entire meetings for nearly a month or so, writing a letter to the President of our chapter and other staff members in which we discussed the problems we have had in the past and ways we think that we could work better with them. We attended a recent meeting at the Buffalo office to meet the new President of our chapter. We are meeting with the Chautauqua group from Jamestown next month to discuss our issues and concerns with them also. After meeting with them, we are going to start further discussions of becoming more of our own separate organization. Our plan is to still work with National at the Chapter offices as well as the Chautauqua group, but we feel we might be more powerful and get more accomplished in this area if we were our own non-profit. So, I guess we are trying to be less independent on National and take more responsibility and control ourselves.
  • How do you get funders or investors interested in your organization?
    • This year we wrote letters to all of the local clubs asking for donations, or for volunteer help at our event. We wanted to do this last year, but time and help was an issue. This year we ended up with a new member who was willing to take on this task.
    • We have community pin-up events which gives us a chance to go into businesses and start to get to know owners and for them to know us. We also have plans to expand this by having some short educational sessions with some of the local businesses and clubs for next year. We hope that this will help inform them of our cause and efforts.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • I do not feel I can really answer this question as I am new to this. I will take any advice anyone has to offer!  The only thing I can really say so far is to never turn anyone who wants to help away. I would have been much more involved a long time ago, but was never given the opportunity by local organizers or the local chapter office. I always felt pushed away and not included or taken seriously. One staff member at the Buffalo office finally realized how eager I was to help and provided me with the opportunity and support. The more people you have to help, the more can be accomplished. One person cannot do everything. And anyone who wants to help has some sort of talent or skills they can contribute, even if it’s just their thoughts and ideas.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • Last year was difficult because we had no idea of everything that was involved with organizing the whole walk event (it was our first year). This year I tried to divide the work up better. This worked in some instances and failed in others. Our committee needs more members. I am hoping as we acquire more members, I can organize the workload better. I am hoping to scale back immensely on my responsibilities within the next few years since there is another project I would really like to start and will need the time for that.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • We need more committee members. Education – as far as how and what can we do. We also have a very limited email list, which we like to use because it’s greener and cheaper for us, but I think we have trouble reaching out to certain areas of the community. We are currently working on addressing these issues.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • I have recently posted on our Facebook page and sent out an email asking others to join our committee. We have had people reach out to us at some of our events. I don’t turn anyone away. The right people are anyone who wants to help. Anyone can be beneficial in some way. As far as keeping them motivated, this time of year is very hard, especially coming off of our major event and a lot of hard work. We are working on a committee plan to help keep us going and focused. We are also starting to discuss other events for the year.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Someone who is passionate about the cause, can think creatively, and is willing to try new solutions sometimes. Works well with others and on a team, listens to and is open to the ideas of others. Someone who has leadership abilities.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • Listen to everyone’s ideas, but you have to be able to keep them focused and on track at the same time (agendas, meeting minutes, and meeting rules!) Try to include everyone in some way, make them feel useful. Make sure decisions are made as a group when possible.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Right now we are working on a “committee plan” (instead of a business plan). We are detailing all of the things that we want to do as well as the problems that we have (everything!). We are writing down how we are going to go about making these things happen or fixing the problems. We are hoping that this gives us a clear idea of where we want our committee to go and provide us with a way to stay focused.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • We are currently trying to work on figuring this out. We really haven’t had any financial goals so far set by ourselves. The Society sets our goal for the walk event and we just do our best to reach it since this is only our second year organizing it. Social goals can be fundraisers. We are trying to plan an assortment of programs as well as other fundraisers in our area.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • Other than our fundraiser for the walk (all money goes to National – research & services/programs), not really. Our committee has started to try to come up with ways to raise money for operating funds (selling ribbons and collecting ink cartridges/cell phones). We get no real working money for operating costs from the Society. We have used the money for paper, ink (printing) costs, postage so far. We used some of the money along with a gift card we received from Wal-Mart to purchase a plastic folding table that we can use for events. It is helping us feel more relaxed knowing we do not have to depend on our own empty pockets for things we need. We will be using the money also to help fund other fundraisers.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • No, probably not.
  • 15. If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurism practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • No response given.

Survey Results 11

Name: Diane Hanum

Position: Executive Director

Organization: Northern Chautauqua County Community Foundation

Date survey was completed: 06-14-10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Promote quality of life in Chautauqua County.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Unsure.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Patience.
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • It depends on the investor and what his/her motivation might be. Some are motivated by altruism, some are not.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • They must engage the community in some way.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • In generally, more administrative work.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • See #6. As we grow, more of my time in spent on required admin work, which in pulls me away from work which is directly related to our mission.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • No response given.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • No response given.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • No response given.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Working with the board on planning.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • Our mission comes first.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • No response given.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • No response given.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why
    • We have sold a few items on MissionFish; I would not call it successful. We need to spend more time with it.

Survey Results 12

Name: Brian Davis

Position: President

Organization: Wishberry/Cooperative

Date survey was completed: 6/19/10

  • How can social entrepreneurs attract talent without high salaries and options?
    • Offering opportunities and experience that is rare in other careers.
  • What are the things that keep potential social entrepreneurs from succeeding to fulfilling their potential?
    • Learning curve for start up is steep. Lack of support from established business groups.
  • How do you cope with setbacks?
    • Developed skilled on my own time.
  • How do you get investors interested in your organization?
    • Direct marketing. You have to fully understand your goals and express them passionately.
  • Is there anything you’d advise new social entrepreneurs NOT to do?
    • Do not accept any information that you do not acquire first hand.
  • How has your role changed as the organization has grown?
    • I have had to get comfortable with giving up control.
  • What have been the challenges of scaling up your organization?
    • Keeping the community as impassioned as I am.
  • How do you go about finding the right people and keeping them motivated?
    • Not sure I’ve been completely successful.
  • What are the key qualities in a successful social entrepreneur?
    • Will power, organization, critical thinker.
  • What do you think is the most effective way to lead a new organization?
    • By example.
  • How do you go about planning for the future?
    • Five year chunks. Business plan.
  • How do you balance your social and financial goals?
    • The social goals are far more important but realistically they are linked.
  • Does the organization generate revenue? How is it used?
    • It is used to develop benefits for our community members.
  • Does the organization plan to achieve full profitability or sustainability?
    • Sustainability. We are non-profit.
  • If your organization has engaged in social entrepreneurship practice how has it benefited? If not, why?
    • We are continually gaining good will and strengthening our brand.