Right about now I’m sure you have some questions rattling around up there. They probably fall into one of the following basic categories.

- 1. “Who is ALF and why is he running for president?”

- 2. “Do nonprofits actually taste like cats?”

- 3. “Really, Michael. Why on earth would you dredge up an artifact like ALF and discuss it here on your nonprofit blog”

- 4. “I was more of a Perfect Strangers type of guy/gal, can you somehow relate the nonprofit sector to that show?”

- 5. “I’ll cut to the chase, is it hard being an unappreciated genius?”

Now, here comes the fun part. I will make an attempt to provide an evaluation of you based on the proximity of your thoughts to these five questions. Why? Because I find it mildly humorous… and it provides me with a quasi-interesting lead in to the topic of today’s post.

If you answered:

1- I’m sorry, but there are inherently at least two things wrong with this statement. First, if you don’t know who ALF is, that means you either were born post-ALF and therefore this and all future inquiries bear little meaning to the scribe of learnings artfully presented before you, or your life coincided with the glory of Gordon Shumway and, yet, your subconscious chose to ignore his greatness. Second, do you really need to question his quest for presidency?

2- Similar to the number above, but it shows me your thinking outside of the box. I like that.

3- Ah. You know of the ALF, but fail to see the application herein the world of the nonprofit sector. Congratulations. You are tragically hip. Now, go back to re-watching your boxed set of Six Feet Under.

4- Will you marry me?

5- My work here is done. The teacher has become student.

Ugh, get to the point already.

So, as you may have guessed it, if there was one thing that has shaped my life, for better or worse, more so than bikes, it is 80’s pop culture. It’s what I grew up with. Whether it was Magnum P.I., Murder She Wrote, or Reaganomics, I am what I am because of it.

As life has charted this path for me, so has it the journey of the nonprofit sector. I won’t get into the detailed history of organized philanthropy over the last century or so, but I would like to examine what has happened over the last several decades. Why focus on this temporal chunk of nonprofitness? Well, what has taken place recently in the sector has had a dramatic impact on the growth and future roles of nonprofits. America rode into the eighties on the coattails of many federally enacted policies and programs. The progressive nature of the 60’s and 70’s only served to incubate any number of services dedicated to the social welfare of our country. However, there seemed to be a fair amount of backlash to this liberal mindset during the 80’s. Politicians levied the goal of “getting America back on track” against many of these services that relied on federal support. The 80’s were a time in which conservatism ushered a shift within the nonprofit sector. Reagan had successfully decentralized government spending. To a point that support, which had previously fostered social welfare programs, had all but dried up. In a way this allowed altruism to do what it does best and help those now in need. Interestingly, this void left by unfunded or terminated federal programs spurred the growth of the nonprofit sector to become what it is today.

The irony, of course, is that post Reagan/Bush, we saw a massive influx of funding for both federal programs and support through federal grants to nonprofits. This accelerated the process of nonprofits filling a need in an absence of government intervention, the government eventually funding those said nonprofits, and the subsequent adoption of the nonprofits’ programs as a formal gov’t institution. It is the very model of efficiency. The government is allowed to distance itself from perhaps more radical or presently socially unacceptable programs, until the time is right to fund those programs or adopt them as their own. An example might be the needle exchange program. Junkies hooked on smack would be much less likely to contract diseases from shared needle use if the clean needles were readily available. Adopting a policy like this may have been political suicide, especially during the “war on drugs”, but organizations implemented the program, shared the results (a 2cent needle vs. a lifetime of healthcare costs) and eventually gained backing from gov’t. agencies.

What does this mean for the future of the nonprofit sector? What happens when the needs are met for social services, healthcare, and education? These questions and more to be answered, assuredly, at length, perhaps without 80’s pop references, next week. For now that’s all from The Rusty Spoke.

-michael