Research into the relationship between government and nonprofit organizations Essay

The transportation of duty for service bringing from authoritiess to not-for-profits has many deductions for administration and the pattern of public administration.A A It has led to an of all time increasing trust of authoritiess upon non-profit-making organisations for bringing of services and progressively blurred lines between the populace and non-profit-making sectors, altering the nature and form of public organisations dramatically over the past two decennaries ( Brinkerhoff & A ; Brinkerhoff, 2002 ; Saidel, 1991 ) .A Government is progressively unable to present services without the capacity and proficient expertness provided by the non-profit-making sector.

On the impudent side, the non-profit-making sector can non go on to be at its present graduated table without resources and support from governmental entities.This research explores one facet of the relationship between authorities and non-profit-making organisations, administration. Boardss are frequently assembled to supply inadvertence to both non-profit-making and quasi-governmental entities and guarantee proper direction and legal conformity of these organizations.A Nonprofit organization boards ( in theory ) serve many maps which include determining the policies, way and actions of these organisations.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

In add-on, single board members are supposed to supply representation for the community and guarantee that non-profit-making organisations operate in a in fiscal matters and ethically responsible manner.A AA great trade of research has been done about the nature and determiners of contractual relationships between the two sectors and the possible effects and positive facets of these relationships ( Lipsky & A ; Smith 1990 ; Ferris 2001 ; Eikenberry & A ; Kluver 2004 ; Alexander 2000 ) . However, really small is known about the deepness of engagement by authorities functionaries and other elect histrions on the boards of non-profit-making organisations. Anecdotal and descriptive instance surveies suggest high degrees of engagement by elect persons in the administration of non-profit-making organisations. However, few empirical scrutinies have studied this issue and none have addressed the function of elites at the local degree.

Elites are believed to be particularly attractive board members because of their ability to give non-profit-making organisations entree to resources and ties to other elites including of import authorities determination shapers. These ties have of import deductions for civil society, public policy and democracy because of the function of the non-profit-making sector as an extension of the “ hollow ” state.AThe impact of elites on administration in the corporate and public sectors is good documented and studied but similar research has non been conducted about their function in not-for-profits ( Mills, 1956 ; Lindbloom, 1982 ; Burns 1992 ) .A In portion, the deficiency of research is likely due to the smaller size of the non-profit-making sector until recent decennaries when their function as delivers of public services increased the importance and visibleness of the sector..A Additionally, the field of non-profit-making research is still reasonably immature and its range therefore far, has focused more on descriptions of the non-profit-making sector and internal operational issues than on issues of democratic answerability and governance.A This research seeks to increase the apprehension of the complicated web of relationships between not-for-profit and authorities organisations.

Most significantly this analysis attempts to show the progressively critical function that elites from the community have in the administration of non-profit-making organisations and suggests possible deductions of these functions for democracy and the pattern of public administration.ARole of Elites in SocietyThe authoritative work of C. Wright Mills ( 1956 ) created a image of American elites that suggested that the upper echelons of society are enmeshed in a “ set of overlapping ‘crowds ‘ and elaborately affiliated ‘cliques ‘ ( P. 11 ) . ” Mills went on to depict a system in which concern, political, and military elites controlled of import determinations that guided the federal authorities. The convergence of influence by elites has of import deductions for the wellness of democratic administration and may do entree to determination shapers more hard for non-elites.A However, the work of Mills ( and more recent plants on the function of elites ) have non to the full examined the connexion between elites in authorities and the non-profit-making sector ( Moore, Sobieraj, Whitt, Mayorova & A ; Beaulieu 2002, other illustrations ) .Nonprofit organizations are frequently seen as one of the most of import extensions of democracy and corporate action in the United States.

One theoretical account of the function of non-profit-making organisations in society suggests that they are at that place to play a mediating function between persons and the big impersonal establishments of society such as authorities and corporations ( Berger & A ; Neuhaus, 1977 ; Salomon 1987 ) . The mediating function that non-profit-making organisations play is frequently cited as of import in the big and diverse American governmental system. Nonprofit organizations in this function allow non-elite histrions to utilize not-for-profits as a agency to show their penchants and their voice in policy affairs. The extent to which organisations in the not-for-profit sector are dominated by elites instead than representative of the larger communities may restrict their ability to function the traditional function of go-between for persons.

Administration and Elites

The administration of organisations has long been a focal point of involvement both to those within peculiar organisations and the populace at big. Administration in big portion determines the way and policy determinations undertaken by organisations, public, private and non-profit-making. The determinations of both public and non-profit-making organisations can hold the chance to make important distributional, economic and societal effects on both persons and society-at-large. Both public and non-profit-making organisations receive either direct or indirect support through revenue enhancement alleviation from the populace.

Governance, ( particularly outside of the democratic procedure ) , hence, deserves farther research consideration.A A AThe power of organisations in private and non-profit-making sectors continues to turn in relation to policy and political results in the United States.A This is particularly true in provinces in which the populace sector plays a limited function or has significantly retreated. The restrictions placed on the size or function of authorities has led to increased undertaking out of services one time supplied straight by authorities ( Saidel 1991 ; Boris & A ; Steurle 1999 ) .

A Regardless of how or why, this status of the authorities supplying fewer services and/or merchandises has led to important growing in the importance of the non-profit-making sector stepping in to make full the spread. This, in bend, calls for increased attending to the function that elites play within these organisations.The increasing mutuality between public and non-profit-making organisations has blurred the line between public organisations and private charities, frequently doing it difficult for receivers of services and the populace to understand where one sector ends and another Begins ( Craig, Taylor & A ; Parkes 2004 ; Saidel 1991 ) .A The strong ties between these sectors have besides raised inquiries about the ability of either sector to move independently from the other, since authoritiess no longer have the capacity to take back control over bringing of services and many of the services provided by not-for-profits could non be offered without continued authorities support ( Saidel 1991 ) . The unifying tendencies have strengthened the function that non-profit-making organisations play in the policy procedure ; both on behalf of their ain organisations and the populations of clients they represent ( Boris & A ; Steuerle 1999 ) .A AMany research workers have examined relationships between elites as a method of finding the impacts that intertwined relationship constructions have on organisations and the results they produce.

It has been shown repeatedly that persons in advantageous societal places obtain extra advantages socially and financially from their relationships to others ( Krackhardt 1990 ; Burt 1992, 1997 ) . For illustration, persons that are able to set down a gate-keeping function are more powerful in societal webs than other persons because they have the ability to command entree to other persons or groups ( Burt, 1997 ) .One illustration of societal ties comes in the signifier of meshing elect constructions. Interlocking elites are those persons who hold more than one formal place on two or more organisations ‘ boards. Dye ( 1990 ) radius of multiple interlockers in the book, “ Who ‘s Running America, ” and made the statement that keeping multiple places signified status.

A Multiple interlockers are those persons of considerable stature within a community or the corporate universe who possess three or more places on assorted boards. These persons serve on boards for many grounds including position and entree to other elites in the community.The function of elect interlocks in the non-profit-making sector is a topic that has merely late been a subject of interest.

A As the not-for-profit sector has grown and go a more built-in portion of the economic and societal life of communities, the grade of interconnectivity that exists between elect interlocks and the boards that govern them, besides becomes more of a concern.A A figure of articles and books have explored the form of relationships that exist among individuals in power within the non-profit-making sector but non the possibility of interlocks across the populace and not-for-profit sector ( Guo & A ; Acar, 2005 ; Brown & A ; Iverson 2004 ; Markham, Johnson & A ; Bonjean, 1999 ) .AThis paper examines meshing board of directorss that exist between non-profit-making organisations, authorities, and quasi-government bureaus runing in three southwest metropoliss of assorted sizes, Las Vegas, Nevada, Reno, Nevada, and Phoenix, Arizona.

It investigates the function that meshing elites play in the leading of non-profit-making boards and efforts to find if links exists between the board members of non-profit-making organisations and elected and appointed boards of government/quasi-government bureaus across these three metropoliss. Elites from the populace and non-profit-making sectors make attractive board members because of their connexions to the local community, resources, and their influence upon policies. We expect that elect persons are sought by non-profit-making organisations for these grounds.Moore, et Al ( 2002 ) , suggests that benefits accrue to persons functioning on multiple non-profit-making boards.A “ Research on national elite webs has shown that individuals in cardinal web places – with extended ties to other elites – are by and large more outstanding, seeable, and active in policy formation than their less cardinal equals. Network ties are sometimes viewed as societal capital, offering persons and corporate groups valuable interpersonal connexions. Similarly, organisations likely benefit from extended top-level connexions to other organisations in their ain and other sectors, ” Moore et Al ( 2002 ) .ADye ( 1990 ) lists extra grounds for power elites to draw a bead on to be on the board of a non-profit-making organization.

A He stated that beginnings of elect coherence, such as similar experiences on non-profit-making boards, can assist persons come in an elect interior circle of persons in society. Entry into this circle allowsA them to have selective benefits because of those ties. Selective benefits may include things like the ability to entree cardinal determination shapers or information that may assist an single compete for concern or personal addition.Interlocking Elites as a Network StructureWe can besides believe of meshing board of directorss as a signifier of web tie.A Each convergence in rank between the leading of one organisation and the leading of a 2nd organisation forms a tie or a nexus. If more than one such nexus or tie exists, so it is likely that the bond between the two organisations is even stronger. A Following Moore et Al ( 2002 ) , we assume that persons who sit on the same corporate or non-profit-making board or the same authorities organic structure or consultative commission know one another through common engagement in regular board or commission meetings.

These ties have the consequence of structuring exchanges between organisations within the community. The more connected an organisation and the more advantageous the arrangement of the organisation is in the resulting web construction, the more likely the organisation is to accrue benefits from these ties.Previous research into the impact of structural relationships between organisations suggests that the costs and benefits for persons, organisations and the community may change greatly by place and function. These relationships have the possible to make distributional effects for the board members, organisations, and the community ( O’Toole & A ; Meier, 2006 ) . Networks and/or web place have a positive consequence on perpetuating and increasing political influence ( Laumann & A ; Knoke 1987 ; Fernandez & A ; Gould 1994 ) .A The findings related to extra political influence based upon web place suggest that it would be advantageous for non-profit-making organisation to enroll elites as board members.A Another advantage to enrolling elect board members is the possible to heighten an organisation ‘s web place as elites gives entree ( through their ain web ) to of import others with whom they have relationships and/or entree to information that could be helpful ( Burt 1983 ) .However, some grounds suggests that interlocks between boards will hold small consequence on public presentation ( Pennings 1980 ; Burt 1983 ; Richardson 1987 ; Mizruchi 1996 ) .

A A The deficiency of positive consequence in some cases is related to the cost of keeping the societal relationships between organisations. Surveies of for-profit organisations have merely found free and inconsistent relationships between meshing boards of managers and profitableness ( Mizruchi 1996 ; Mizruchi & A ; Stearns, 1988 ; Writings, 1980 ) .Linkages between the populace and not-for-profit sector have been discussed anecdotally and seem to ease the exchange of staff, installations and supplies ( Smith & A ; Lipsky, 1993 ) .A Similar forms have been found in for-profit fabrication in which equipment ( Uzzi 1997 ) and research and development ( Bouty 2000 ) exchanges were made.A These types of exchanges suggest a resource exchange and mutuality between the sectors.

A However, that the interlock relationships between the sectors are more complex and these relationships excessively might besides signal usage of board rank for monitoring and inadvertence.The deficiency of connexion between interlocks and profitableness suggest that an alternate account of the happening of board interlocks might hold more to make with inadvertence or monitoring ( Mizruchi, 1996 ) . Studies of for-profit organisations have shown that interlocks increase as the fiscal public presentation of the organisation faux pass ( Richardson 1987 ; Mizruchi & A ; Stearns, 1988 ) . This suggests that interlocks occur so an interested party can mediate in the workings of the organisations instead than to increase profitableness or organisational effectivity. The form farther suggests that non-profit-making organisations in some fortunes might portion board members with other organisations non to derive advantage but as a signifier of inadvertence of one organisation over the other organisation. Interlock as inadvertence might be one ground that a authorities functionary voluntaries to giver clip to a board that delivers an of import good or service to that persons components.The usage of non-profit-making board rank as an inadvertence map suggests that many elites may take to sit on a non-profit-making board, non for the interest of deriving position, but for the interest of commanding their involvements in the organization.A These involvements may change widely from single to single and could include: supervising the outgo of grant money, directing policies of the organisation to progress the involvements of one group over another, or utilizing the organisation as a means to make position or electoral advantage in the community.

Elites and Nonprofit organizations

The boards of non-profit-making organisations are lawfully and ethically responsible for their governance.A Organizational boards have the duty of guaranting that organisations carry out their mission and expend resources in a in fiscal matters responsible mode. However, it has been argued that the function of board members extends far beyond their legal and ethical duties to nonprofit organisations and communities.A Abzug and Galaskiewicz ( 2001 ) argue that non-profit-making board members of non-profit-making organisations “ come to stand for the organisation and go a footing for its legitimacy claims ” ( p.

51 ) .The research of Abzug and Galaskiewicz ( 2001 ) found that the demographic features of managers of non-profit-making boards in six metropolitan countries in 1931, 1961, and 1991 were non representative of the populations of their several cities.A Alternatively, the function of manager was dominated by work forces, Whites, college-educated people, directors, and professionals. Over the 60-year period of the survey, there was an addition in non-whites, and adult females, every bit good as an addition in the proportion of board members with high educational and/or occupational status.A This suggests that even though the power of race and sex is worsening, the function of elect instruction and business is increasing in the administration of these organisations.Elect histrions have ever been portion of the administration construction of non-profit-making organisations.

The earliest non-profit-making organisations arose out of the guilded age of the late 1800s with the emerging upper category making new organisations to supply for societal public assistance and better the environment of metropoliss ( Dimaggio & A ; Anheier 1990 ) .A However, the recent displacement in the support forms of non-profit-making organisations from being chiefly dependent on contributions to progressively reliantce on authorities support ( and other societal alterations ) all suggest a worsening influence of traditional societal elites in the country of governance.A The diminution of traditional societal elites, such as the wealthy, might be giving rise to a new category of elites that includes authorities histrions and proficient specializers as progressively of import marks for board rank.There is considerable argument about the importance of elites in the non-profit-making sector but scrutiny of their function has chiefly centered on the donors.A It is argued that givers have considerable power in puting the docket for non-profit-making organisations ( Galaskiewicz 1985 ; Ostrander 1995 ; Schervish & A ; Havens 2001 ; Useem 1984, 1987 ) . Other research has focused on the function of elect service within foundations, federated givers, and local corporations that make support determinations ( Galaskiewicz 1985 ) .A While mass market fund-raising has broadened the engagement of persons in giving, elites — because of their larger gifts and greater sum of attending to not-for-profits — still play a big function in puting the docket for communities.A A A A A A A A A A A A A Other advantages besides exist for not-for-profits to try to pull elite board members.

Earlier research has besides shown that ties to elites increase the figure of new organisations and reduces the opportunity of organisational decease among twenty-four hours attention centres ( Baum & A ; Oliver 1991 ; Baum & A ; Singh 1994 ) and voluntary associations ( Singh, Tucker & A ; Meinhard 1991 ; Singh, House & A ; Tucker 1986 ) .A More late Galaskiewicz, Bielefeld, and Dowell ( 2006 ) found that ties to urban elites increased the position of non-profit-making organizations.A This form was even stronger for non-profit-making organisations that had better reputes and organisations that were more donative in nature.A A In comparing to less affiliated not-for-profits, donative organisations with ties to “ urban elites ” experienced faster gross growing ( Galaskiewicz, Bielefeld & A ; Dowell, 2006 )Neckties between board members through service on the same board benefit not-for-profits because they create position hierarchies which are cardinal to converting givers to put in the not-for-profit ‘s mission ( Fremont-Smith 2004 ) . These position hierarchies make these organisations more seeable to givers, the media and finally the populace at big. For illustration, famous person visual aspects and causes frequently receive a great trade of attending that has little to make with the general public belief in the mission of the organisation. Donors have an involvement in being associated with something worthwhile which besides helps heighten the position of the persons independent of the organisation.

So far, the research we have examined has chiefly focused on the function that private sector elites play in advantaging certain not-for-profits over other, but small research has examined the function that authorities elites. The expertness of authorities elites might be more in line with pull offing organisations to accomplish a mission. Ostrower ( 2002 ) suggests that wealthy and corporate directors believe they have the solutions for organisational jobs but these solutions frequently stem from managerial and category backgrounds which can conflict with not-for-profits ‘ missions. The presence of such board members might coerce non-profit-making organisations to take on less than ideal solutions in order to go on to guarantee contributions and continued engagement from these individuals.A Government functionaries, through their experience with public organisations, in contrast, are more likely to understand the demand to believe in footings of mission instead than cost or efficiency.

AThe function of authorities elites has been small studied in footings of their engagement on boards. The inclusion of authorities elites on non-profit-making boards might in some ways be more desirable than inclusion of their corporate opposite numbers because of specific insider cognition that these elites possess of governmental workings and priorities.A This might assist not-for-profits derive the upper manus in obtaining governmental contracts and grants or leting them to determine ordinances about service delivery.A The ability to derive inside information about these precedences or form ordinances impacting contracts or service bringing has the possible to make a competitory advantage for not-for-profits seeking governmental support.AAdditionally, governmental elites can supply insider information about governmental support and contracts that their private sector opposite numbers will non hold entree to or at least may hold less complete information about the desires of the support organisation. Government support of non-profit-making organisations has been on the rise since the 1960 ‘s through the usage of contracts, grants, and revenue enhancement credits and tax write-offs ( Boris & A ; Steuerle 1999 ) . Recent estimations indicate that authorities support histories for more than 50 % of all non-profit-making grosss ( Lipsky & A ; Smith 1990 ; Brooks 2000 ) .

The relationship between not-for-profits and authorities entities has led to concerns that the not-for-profit sector has become excessively dependent upon authorities disbursement ( Boris & A ; Steuerle 1999 ; Craig, Taylor & A ; Parkes 2004 ) .A Many non-profit-making organisations around the state benefit from direct and indirect subsidies from all degrees of authorities. These subsidies take many signifiers, including grants, contracts, and revenue enhancement benefits given to nonprofit organisations because of the particular function they play in communities. These close ties make non-profit-making organisations non merely eager to work with authorities but besides do authorities dependent upon non-profit-making organisations ( Saidel, 1991 ) .A This creates a state of affairs in which each has a vested involvement in the wellness and endurance of the other.

A

Methods

The focal point of this survey examines and traces the connexion between meshing elites of selected non-profit-making organisations and government/quasi-government bureaus in three Western metropoliss of assorted sizes: Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada and Phoenix, Arizona.

The first stage of the survey focused on Clark County, Nevada and drew a purposeful sample of 67 non-profit-making organisations and 24 governmental/quasi-governmental bureaus to analyse the frequence of board interlocks between non-profit-making and governmental entities.A The dataset for stage one of the survey included 1,424 persons that were involved on boards in either the populace or non-profit-making sector or both.A The 2nd stage of the survey efforts to analyze this phenomenon over three Western metropoliss, Reno, Las Vegas and Phoenix. This stage drew a random sample of 150 501 ( degree Celsius ) 3 non-profit-making organisations in each metropolis every bit good as all of the board members elected or appointed to governmental or quasi-governmental boards.A A

A

Data and Methodology, Phase IThe database generated in Phase I of this paper was formulated from a figure of non-profit-making organisations based within Clark County, Nevada.

A The information includes non-profit-making organisations, government/quasi-government bureaus and the persons who presently occupy places on the several board of directors.A The list of current board members names for each non-profit-making organisation, every bit good as the authorities bureaus, was obtained from the relevant not-for-profit and authorities bureau web sites. The Phase I data includes non-profit-making organisations from many different sub-sectors including: protagonism and human rights ; wellness and medical specialty ; instruction, literacy and literature ; kids and young person ; humanistic disciplines and civilization ; community ; homeless and lodging ; animate beings ; faith ; and environment.A There were a sum of 67 non-profit-making organisations and 24 authorities bureaus included in the initial sample.A AOverall, the informations included 1,424 persons, A 1,072 were functioning on non-profit-making boards and the staying 352 functioning on authorities boards.A Persons keeping places on two or more non-profit-making organisations created linkages with persons looking more than one time and being identified by the same name.

A If a name appeared with the indistinguishable first and last name and a in-between initial appeared on one board and non the other, so it was assumed that these persons were the same person.A Additionally, some of the same names of board members on the assorted web sites were abbreviated, included initials and used family names ( e.g. , Teresa for Terry or Tom for Thomas ) .

A In these instances, extra information was gathered to guarantee that this was the same individual and non a different person with a similar name.A This method used to follow the linkages between the persons and the non-profit-making organisations was conducted manually with the nonsubjective being to uncover the frequence of ties among non-profit-making organisations every bit good as the commonalty between board members who served on the non-profit-making organisations, authorities bureaus or both.A AData Analysis Phase IThe analysis found are a sum of 150 incidents of persons functioning on multiple boards.

The degree of engagement by single board members varies greatly with some persons functioning on every bit many as 10 boards and some helping on merely one not-for-profit or one authorities board.Table 1.1 reflects the figure of people who serve merely on non-profit-making organisation boards, merely on a authorities board and so the frequence functioning on both their authorities board every bit good as a non-profit-making board.

Table 1.1: Nonprofit organization and Government – Board Membership

# Of Appearances on List

# Of Peoples Per Appearance on List

# Who Serve Merely on a Gov. Board

# Who Serve Merely on a Nonprofit Board

# Who Serve on Both Types of Boards

% Of Total Who Serve on Both Type Boardss

% of No. of Peoples Per Appearance Who Serve on Both

% of No.

of Peoples Looking Multiple Times and Who Serve On Both

Once

108892100.00 %0.00 %0.00 %

Twice

127321.33 %16.67 %3.

45 %

3 times

95221.33 %22.22 %3.

45 %

4 times

119321.33 %18.18 %3.45 %

5 times

20021.33 %100.00 %3.

45 %

7 times

30032.00 %100.00 %5.

17 %

8 times

20021.33 %100.00 %3.45 %

9 times

10010.67 %100.

00 %1.72 %

10 times

20110.67 %50.00 %1.72 %

Sums

150110301510.

00 %A dislocation of the figure of times the name appears, whether that single serves on a non-profit-making or government/quasi-government bureau and the frequence of each is noted. There are a sum of 150 names occur on the boards of more than one not-for-profit or governmental/quasi governmental bureau ; nevertheless of those 150 names one individual may function on either a non-profit-making, authorities or both types of boards, while another individual may function on every bit many as 10 boards with some of those once more functioning on a non-profit-making, authorities or both types of boards. As the tabular array shows, a healthy per centum of people appear on multiple authorities and non-profit-making boards.

Therefore, our analysis reveals a strong connexion between authorities and non-profit-making boards.Table 1.2 examines the organisations that have board members on three or more non-profit-making boards. The Nevada Ballet Theatre and the Clark County Public Education Foundation had a sum of eight board members which were besides active on the boards of other non-profit-making organisations. The staying non-profit-making organisations with meshing board members had much less frequent happenings of board interlocks in the organisations examined. Of persons that served on multiple boards in this stage of the research the highest figure of non-profit-making boards an single served on was four. This is slightly in contrast with our findings in the 2nd stage of our research when the non-profit-making organisations were chosen at random ( discussed below ) .

Table 1.2 Nonprofit Board Members that Serve on Three or More Boardss

Name of Nonprofit Organization

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Entire # of Brd Mbrs in Same Org.Clark County Public Education FoudationTen

A

Ten

A

Ten

A

A

TenTen

A

A

TenTenTen8Nevada Ballet TheatreTen

A

TenTenTenTenTenTen

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

8University of Nevada Las Vegas Foundation

A

A

A

A

A

TenTen

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

3Better Business Bureau of Southern Nevada

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

Ten3United Way of Southern Nevada

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

Ten

A

A

3Foundation for an Independent TomorrowTen

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Las Vegas PhilharmonicTen

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1I Have a Dream Foundation

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

2Nevada Child Seekers

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Summerlin kids ‘s Form ( Kids to Kids )

A

Ten

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

2Volunteer Center of Southern Nevada

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Nevada Cultural Affairs Foundation

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Ronald McDonald House Charities of Greater L.V.

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Children ‘s Miracle Network

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

1Las Vegas Art Museum Foundation.

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

Ten2Goodwill Industries of Southern Nevada

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

A

1Nevada Community Foundation

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

1Westcare Foundation

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

1Westcare of Southern Nevada

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

A

1Las Vegas Natural History Museum

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

1Opportunity Village Foundation

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

Ten

A

A

A

1Entire # of Organizations Each Brd Mbr Serves On4433333333333344Overall, the first stage of our analysis demonstrated that interlocks between not-for-profits and authorities were really reasonably common in Las Vegas. Many of those persons that served in either elected or appointed places besides served on non-profit-making boards of managers. The findings from this initial analysis led us to go on to look into the subject of meshing boards of managers further through the aggregation of informations across different metropoliss.

A

Phase II: Datas CollectionThe information aggregation in stage II used the National Center for Charitable Statistics, Business Master File to pull a random sample of 150 non-profit-making organisations in each metropolis.

The research workers so collected board informations for each of these non-profit-making organisations from the organisation ‘s Form 990 information return filed with the IRS. The research workers so used the same procedure described in Phase I to place meshing board members.Phase II informations examined the interlocks between non-profit-making boards and governmental or quasi-governmental boards in the metropolis of Las Vegas. An initial scrutiny of the information found that a sum of nine interlocks existed between non-profit-making boards and authorities elected/appointed functionaries. In Phoenix, we merely found two cases of interlocks between non-profit-making and authoritiess. Finally, in Reno we saw the highest figure of interlocks between non-profit-making organisations and authorities organisations with a sum of 16 interlocks.In Las Vegas, the figure of interlocks between non-profit-making organisations is much more dramatic than those between authoritiess and nonprofits.A While Reno, by far, had the largest figure of interlocks in the random sample of non-profit-making boards, the Las Vegas interlocks held a higher figure of board places.

Las Vegas board members that were interlocked more frequently sat on non merely two boards but averaged 2.9 board places while the all of the board members with interlocks ( except one ) held merely two board places in the other two cities.A A A A

Table 2.

1 -Summary of Frequency of Interlocks between non-profit-making organisations

Frequency of Interlocks

Las Vegas

Reno

Phoenix

5 Interlocks5004 Interlocks1103 Interlocks1002 Interlocks13417The form of interlock relationships among non-profit-making boards in Reno suggest a different type of meshing relationship. In Reno, not-for-profits frequently displayed relationships in which non merely a individual member served on two of the same boards alternatively multiple board members served on the same boards together. This contrasts aggressively the form in Las Vegas in which frequently persons sat on many different boards but this type of convergence in which multiple persons sat on boards together was much rarer.

This is an illustration of multiplexity or the several ties being shared between organisations. The show of multiplexity in this instance suggests that these organisations were seeking to organize strong ties across the interorganizational boundaries instead than to try to derive entree to information across the web. The form in Las Vegas and Pheonix boards was much different.

A A Boards in Las Vegas were besides to a great extent interlocked but they tended to be interlocked with many other not-for-profits non merely a individual not-for-profit organization.A

Table 2.2 – Summary of All Interlocks Across Cities

Nonprofit organization to NonprofitNonprofit organization to GovernmentEntire InterlocksReno, NV441670Las Vegas, NV38947Phoenix, AZ729*Interlocks are counted as entire figure of non-profit-making organisations linked together ( For illustration: If an single serves on 4 boards so the figure of interlocks peers 3, if they serve on two boards the figure of interlocks peers 1 )This drumhead tabular array shows that both Las Vegas and Reno have a great many more interlocks between non-profit-making organisations and between not-for-profits and authoritiess. Reno the smallest metropolis examined had the most interlocks of all types. This is likely due to the smaller figure of elites in this metropolis.

Las Vegas likewise had a larger figure of interlocks compared to Phoenix.A It appears as the size of the metropolis increases the influence of elites and the importance of their function may diminish or go diluted.The differences in the forms of interlocks between non-profit-making organisations are even more dramatic when analyzing the web diagrams of interlocks between the three metropoliss ( Figures 2.

1-2.6 ) .[ I ]A The web diagrams display the interlocks between non-profit-making organisations. In Reno, a larger figure of organisations are interconnected to one another through their boards of managers. In Las Vegas, the interlocks seem to organize little subsets of organisations that are interconnected.

As we further examined the form in Las Vegas these smaller subsets frequently were made up of organisations that either had similar missions, e. g. instruction or related missions. Finally, the web diagram of Pheonix not-for-profits reveals that while some interlocks exist there are fewer inter-relations between organisations and organisations tend to be more stray than in the other two metropoliss.We besides diagramed the webs that resulted from interlocks between the authorities and non-profit-making organisations in the three metropoliss. Once once more we found really distinguishable forms emerged. Reno ( Figure 2.

4 ) the form that emerged was similar to the form of interconnectednesss between not-for-profits with about all of the organisations interconnected. In Las Vegas ( figure 2.5 ) , the domination of the Clark County Government became evident with the largest figure of organisations connected to the County.

Clark County in many ways is alone because of the big size of the County budget and function in Southern Nevada relative to other authoritiess and this is reflected in the web form that emerged. The Phoenix diagram ( figure 2.6 ) one time once more reveals a little figure of inter-related organisations and few forms to these relationships.

Conclusion/Discussion

A

The chief intent of this research was to analyze the prevalence of interlocks among non-profit-making organisations and between non-profit-making organisations and local authoritiess. The analysis demonstrated that many interlocks between these organisations exist. Often the linkages between organisations are associated with larger and more successful non-profit-making organisations or organisations that have significant ties to core governmental maps such as instruction or transit.Our initial non-random sample of Las Vegas not-for-profits and governmental entities suggests that the function of elites in administration of non-profit-making organisations at the local degree is reasonably permeant.

The purposive sample found that many governmental functionaries do function on non-profit-making boards and in a few instances these persons serve on every bit many as 10 different boards. The high figure of boards that these persons serve on rises several of import inquiries about the degree of influence that this little figure of persons holds over organisations in the Las Vegas country. In add-on, the high figure of organisation in which these persons participate may besides decrease their ability to regulate these organisations efficaciously. Some of the organisations involved are reasonably big and complex and the larger Numberss of organisations these persons are involved in may restrict their ability to supply equal inadvertence and administration.Interestingly, the form of interlocks across the three metropoliss suggests that elect meshing constructions might be more prevailing in smaller communities. Reno, the smallest metropolis in our analysis has by far the highest figure of interlocks among not-for-profits and between not-for-profits and authorities. The evident form is likely the consequence of two different forces: the figure of “ elites ” and the diffusion of influence of not-for-profits and other organisations in larger metropoliss. In larger metropoliss, there are a larger figure of elect histrions every bit good as a larger figure of organisations viing for the clip and endowments of these histrions.

This resulted in fewer interlocks in the samples in both Las Vegas and Pheonix. Larger metropoliss besides have more diffuse political involvements and so the demand for authorities functionaries to distribute out across groups to appeal to more specialised constituencies would be greater.Further research into whether or non the persons who serve on the board of managers of the not-for-profits are outstanding concern leaders would assist find if there is an elect power construction within Las Vegas, Reno and Phoenix. Previous surveies on the national degree have demonstrated the importance that non-profit-making organisations now play in determining the result of many policy issues. In our analysis, it is easy to see this correlativity between the two if one has lived within one of these communities for a period of clip ; nevertheless that type of cognition is non quantifiable and for another treatment. However, we believe the chief findings of this analysis demo support for a general impression that positions major non-profit-making organisations in local communities as portion of a dominant administration web.

x

Hi!
I'm Ruth!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out