Remarks by Sally Osberg, President of the Skoll Community Fund, as moderator at the April 23, 2002, Commonwealth Club Silicon Valley Event, "Point/Counterpoint: The Future of Philanthropy" panel featuring Bruce Sievers and Kim Smith.

It's a pleasure to be with you all this evening; looking out over this great audience, I'm reminded how blessed the Bay Area and Silicon Valley are with doers and makers: people who create, who innovate, and who make a difference. Thanks for being here.

Tonight we're exploring the future of philanthropy.

From the perspective of standard measures-hundreds of billions in philanthropic capital, 50,000+ foundations registered-the future looks robust indeed. But if we view philanthropy from the perspective of qualitative measures-in essence, the headway we're making on the tough stuff like poverty and disease and social change-that future, and its impact, is harder to predict.

Turns out that reflecting on the challenges of philanthropy is nothing new-more than 20 centuries ago, Aristotle put it this way: "To give away money is an easy matter and in any man's power. But to decide to whom to give it, and how large, and when, and for what purpose and how, is neither in every man's power nor an easy matter."

Fast forwarding to the 20th century, most of us trace what we currently think of as philanthropy's new new thing to venture philanthropy, a phrase which gained currency in the now famous Virtuous Capital article which appeared in the March 1997 Harvard Business Review.

I say gained currency because the term was not, in fact, coined by our Harvard colleagues. In fact it wasn't even new in 1969. That's when John D. Rockefeller used the term in making the case for organized philanthropy in testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee. Private foundations often are established to engage in what has been described as "venture philanthropy," or the imaginative pursuit of less conventional charitable purposes than those normally undertaken by established public charitable organizations.

As a genre, that "imaginative pursuit of less conventional charitable purposes" has continued to evolve, with its proponents, detractors, and others somewhere in the middle. The most recent report on the sector from the Morino Institute remains bullish, stating that even with the economic downturn, venture philanthropy and its kin continue to gain momentum and maturity.

Even the term venture philanthropy is morphing: more common today are a number of dba versions: high engagement philanthropy, strategic philanthropy, high impact philanthropy, and so on.

This evening, we're fortunate to have two of philanthropy's thought leaders and practitioners with us to debate the merits and shortcomings of venture philanthropy and its implications for the field's future.

Dr. Bruce Sievers has been Executive Director of the Walter and Elise Haas Fund for almost 20 years. Bruce is a member of the Board of Directors for the Council on Foundations. He is well known throughout the foundation world for his thoughtful rebuttal to the Virtuous Capital article. Titled If Pigs Had Wings, and published in the fall 1997 issue of Foundation News and Commentary, this rebuttal launched a seminal debate in the field that continues today.

Prior to his work at the Haas Fund, Bruce was a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate and served as Executive Director for the Montana and Calfornia State Humanities Councils. Bruce has a degree in international relations from Stanford University and master's and doctoral degrees in political science. As a Fulbright scholar, he also studied in Berlin.

Our second panelist is Kim Smith. Kim is the Co-founder and CEO of the New Schools Venture Fund, a non-profit venture philanthropy fund created in 1998 and dedicated to improving public k-12 education through investments in education entrepreneurs. Kim started her career as a consultant specializing in business education partnerships. In 1989, she became a founding member of the Teach for America program, and later was founding director for the BAYAC AmeriCorps, a consortium of nonprofits serving youth across 6 Bay area counties.

Kim holds a bachelor's degree in political science and psychology from Columbia College and an MBA from the Stanford Graduate School of Business. She was featured in Newsweek's January 2001 edition of Women of the 21st Century, where she was described as the "kind of woman who will shape America's new century.

Please join me in welcoming our two distinguished panelists.

1. Kim and Bruce are both leaders who epitomize distinctive philosophies of philanthropy. First Kim, and then Bruce, will articulate that philosophy and describe its respective practices and merits.

2. Kim, you've been at this work of Venture Philanthropy for close to five years now. Why don't you give us an example of a great New Schools investment-what you looked for, what you've provided in terms of capital and involvement-and how the investment is returning results.

3. Bruce, over 20 years you've seen your share of problem statements and grants that may or may not have made a difference in addressing problems cited. And because we've discussed it previously, I know that you don't think that an emphasis on outcomes is anything new-so why don't you tell us about Haas Fund work-a program or even an individual grant-- that you think delivered great results.

4. The San Jose Mercury News ran an article the other day about a nonprofit that had acquired a dot com; a recent business magazine piece noted that on-line giving, particularly post 9-11, serves for hundreds of thousands of users as a first internet-based transaction-and may be key to their becoming on-line consumers. Many think the distinctions between the for profit and public benefit sectors are blurring; they may even be converging.

5. Kim, New Schools invests in for-profit as well as non-profit ventures. What are the implications of this strategy for the future of philanthropy?

6. Bruce, you and others have pointed to the limitations of the venture philanthropy model. Are there superior models out there-even some that hold great promise for the future of philanthropy?

7. Let's go to the issue of sustainability.
Kim-what's your time horizon for investing in an entrepreneurial educational venture, and how have you addressed the exit strategy issue.

8. Bruce, what's your take on sustainability and its implications for the future of our field?

QUESTIONS from audience. Thanks to Julie Juergens, Director of the Public Management Program at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.