The NonProfit Times - February 1, 2008 - (Page 8) PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Continued from page 6 York and Washington, D.C., the decline is not significant enough to suggest that either is actually down. “There’s a lot of vagrancy between one survey and another, who happens to be answering it, etc. So I would say that it’s probably about the same” as for 2006.And although the survey did not address specifically online continuing education, Brandel said it’s included in the category “professional development.” The study will be released later this month. Other studies indicate that nonprofits are more likely to provide continuing education support for senior staff rather than issue it as an across-theboard benefit. “Nonprofits are also more likely to make allowances not based on a standing policy,but a ‘looser’ case-by-case basis,” said Drexel’s Gambescia.“What generally works at smaller organizations is to have a pool of continuing education money available and allow employees to step forward to use it.Larger nonprofits usually issue a cap and when you max out that Alan Sutherland Stephen Gambescia benefit, that’s it for the year.” But according to Alan Sutherland, professor and program director in nonprofit and association management at University of Maryland University College (UMUC), in Adelphi, Md., he’s noticed a significant change in the student makeup at UMUC. The seventh-largest program among approximately 225 that specialize in nonprofit management offered exclusively online, UMUC during 2007 had more than 300 students declare the nonprofit management track. And, of its more than 1,000 undergrads and 650 graduate students in the program during spring ‘07, roughly 42 percent and 53 percent, respectively, received some financial assistance from their employer. “You’re seeing more and more people below the executive director level,” said Sutherland.“I don’t know if it’s because nonprofits are seeing more reason to invest in the education of people below the CEO level,or if the people themselves are seeing more reason to invest in their education, but there’s a distinct trend.” Added Sutherland: “We’re seeing people at the administrative assistant level taking UMUC’s online nonprofit management continuing-education courses.” Of course, “the job market here (in Washington, D.C.) is that it’s fairly universal (that the position of administrative assistant) requires a bachelor’s degree. This may not be true in other parts of the country.” Regardless,the numbers are up.Indiana University’s Burlingame attributed the growth to universities responding to a demand for increased flexibility -- a demand that is more often coming from working adults looking to continue their professional education. Several studies comparing the quality of online or “distance” learning against traditional face-to-face continuing education have concluded that there isn’t a significant difference at all. Moreover, the costs are generally equivalent. “Overall, the trend from employers Professional Development, page 11 GIVING Continued from page 1 (29 percent) contributed to charity in some but not all years studied. Just fewer than 15 percent did not contribute at all in any of the years studied. The study found a large difference in amounts given by households that give routinely and those that give intermittently. Persistent donors, those who gave in each of the three survey years, made total charitable gifts averaging $2,659 in 2004. Occasional donors (who gave in one or two of the three years and who donated in 2004) contributed an average of $820. These and other COPPS findings about giving in 2004 represent the latest nationally representative information about annual household giving available. Overall, 68 percent of U.S. households donated $25 or more to charity during 2004, the most recent year for which household giving data are available.Among households that gave, the average total amount given during 2004 was $2,045. “The new data also give us important insights into the ways in which people give, such as the fact that the average donor household gives money to two or three different types of nonprofits,”said Patrick M. Rooney, director of research for the Center on Philanthropy. “About 45 percent of households give to religious organizations such as houses of worship, while 60 percent give to secular organizations and 37 percent give to both types.” Other key findings about giving include: • The largest percentage of households gave to religion, donating an average of $1,858. • 28 percent gave to meet others’ basic needs, giving $482 on average. • 27 percent made contributions totaling an average of $502 to “combined purposes” such as United Way, Jewish federations, and other charities that raise funds to redistribute to a variety of recipient organizations. • 23 percent donated to health causes, giving an average of $257. • Slightly more than 24 percent of households gave during late 2004 or in 2005 for relief efforts related to the 2004 Asian tsunami, with an average gift of $121. • Higher income donor households, those with in8 comes of $100,000 or more, give a lesser percentage of their income on average (2.2 percent of income) than do those with incomes under $50,000, who give 4.2 percent of their income. • However, higher income households are more likely to give: 93 percent of higher income households reported donations of $25 or more to charity, compared to 56 percent of lower income households. COPPS has been conducted every two years (beginning in 2001) in conjunction with the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), a landmark recurring survey by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research initiated in 1968. Key results of the latest survey, including percentages of households giving in 2004, average amounts contributed broken out by type of recipient organization, such as education or arts, and other findings are available under the Center on Philanthropy Panel Study section at www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/Research/giving_fundraising_research.aspx Working papers by scholars using COPPS data are also available from the Center on Philanthropy. Topics include how parental giving is linked with their adult children’s giving; the amounts and percentage of income given to religion by adherents of different faith groups; and the relationship between living in an ethnically diverse community and charitable giving. Scholars and nonprofit professionals who would like to access the COPPS dataset free of charge online in downloadable formats may contact Melissa Brown at msbrown@iupui.edu or (317) 278-8964. NPT THE NONPROFIT TIMES www.nptimes.com COPPS Data Tsunami Relief $3.72 2% Other $4.31 3% Community & Neighborhood $1.59 1% Environment $1.83 1% International Aid $1.95 1% Arts, Culture & Humanities $2.53 2% Youth & Family Services $2.71 2% Health $6.71 4% Education $8.59 5% Combined Purposes $15.43 10% Help Meet People's Basic Needs $15.68 10% Religion $95.96 59% FEBRUARY 1, 2008 http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/Research/giving_fundraising_research.aspx http://www.nptimes.com
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.