my new hobby is research. so rather than mass email and post a hundred bulletins on myspace, i will compile some findings here.

first is the perpetual job search, which is on hold-ish until august, when the decisions will be made to stay in srq and finish the obligatory associate degree, or move on to greener, more stimulating pastures. so if you are interested in some resources for non-profit and/or philanthropy job opportunities, go nuts:

http://www.communitywealth.com/about_job_listings.htm
www.cfsarasota.org
www.idealist.org

next on the google hotbed is social entrepreneurship. this is a really nebulous term, leading to more nebulous definitions and cross-lexiconian dialogs. in short, a social entrepreneur is an idealistic citizen who, in recognizing a social problem such as gross injustices, poverty,illiteracy, or what have you, takes the initiative to solve this problem. in theory, this problem is solved in an enclosed circuit, rendering the affected groups/beneficiaries fully sustainable and continuous.

the term "social entrepreneur" is part of a growing trend toward corporatizing the nonprofit world. in the past, the np's impact on the community it served was enough, and there was really little need or want for detailed reporting. the government was throwing money at these people and agencies in the hopes that problems like drug abuse, poverty, child hunger and homelessness would go away. since that approach didn't work, and now that we are facing a war budget of $3 trillion, np's have turned to foundations for help. these grantors, overseers of huge pots of money, are understandably reluctant to shell out mad cash with to ROI. since no one gets rich working in nonprofts, it is assumed Auntie and Uncle Moneybags made their money the old-fashioned way, meaning they hold to the expectation of concise reporting, prudent investments and a return on investment.

this is a partially good tactic, since it raises the bar for nonprofit administrators. it forced np's to take a long look at their work, and by quantifying one's successes, the case for continued support is all the more clear.

this is also a bum idea for nonprofits. most nonprofits are staffed with people rich with soft skills: kind, big-hearted, generous individuals who would dissolve into a crispy pile of ashes under Donald Trump's crusading ways. however, these are not people strong in the ways of quantifying. they can help, and will continue to help, but they don't know/get/care about the cold, hard numbers. this takes the softies and throws them into the big game of the hardballers, where they are chewed up and spit out. or their funding is pulled. neither of which are what the quiet girl in psych class wanted when she became a social worker.

i digress.

links:
http://www.socialedge.org/resources/edge-wiki/VenturePhilanthropy
http://www.pbs.org/opb/thenewheroes/whatis/resources.html
http://www.socialfranchise.com/
http://www.kauffman.org/
http://www.nationalcne.org/
http://www.svn.org/
http://www.ashoka.org/home/index.cfm
http://www.schwabfound.org/index.htm