Our new poll on the Philamplify website asks visitors: “Should community foundations take the lead on policy change or serve as neutral conveners?” Many foundations maintain a sense of neutrality to remain unbiased and allow for multiple perspectives or to avoid alienating a donor base. On the other hand, maintaining a neutral stance may be a missed opportunity for foundations to use their influence to advance their goals and achieve greater impact.

Between the two options, eight respondents so far have chosen “Take the lead,” and four respondents have chosen the option that foundations should serve as “Neutral conveners.”

The poll was launched with our latest Philamplify report on the New York Community Trust. The Trust purposefully uses an understated style of leadership as neutral convener to allow diverse perspectives. One of the recommendations of the report was that the Trust could increase its impact as a public leader by using the bully pulpit to take positions on behalf of marginalized communities.

How do you think community foundations should serve as public leaders? Visit the Philamplify home page to take the poll!

Stephanie Peng is a philanthropy fellow at NCRP. Follow @NCRP and join the #Philamplify discussion on Twitter.

The post New Philamplify Poll: Should community foundations take the lead on policy change or serve as neutral conveners? also appears on blog.ncrp.org.

*You are not required to register to leave a comment. After typing your feedback, indicate “Guest” in the name field and add your email address (for us to know you are a real person). Check 'I’d rather post as guest’ and your information will not be shared.