Post by account_disabled on Feb 27, 2024 1:32:39 GMT -5
He now publishes the Third Study of it. It is common for Forbes editions in the US to publish articles about the philanthropy and generosity of their compatriots. Thus, for example, among the most recent articles you can consult: “The bet of philanthropy”, which is dedicated to analyzing his situation in Africa (Big Bet Philanthropy, December 10, 2016). In its September 15 edition, it was published: “Celebrities And Billionaires Talk Innovative Giving”; while on October 5, “These are America's 10 most generous philanthropists” appeared, and in the December 23 edition: “Here's a fabulous 2016 charitable donation idea: saving journalism.” It is also very common for both business life and entrepreneurship, generosity and philanthropy to be closely linked in their reports and articles. It is not journalism whose intention is to highlight philanthropy as something extraordinary, but on the contrary, it shows how altruistic acts are present in social life on a daily basis and reinforce business activity and vice versa. The reader sees the difference with Mexico. In the same aforementioned edition of the Third Philanthropy Study, it includes a list of “The most creative Mexicans in the world”, but it is not even considered a great philanthropist, a founder of a civil society organization or an outstanding volunteer even when there is an enormous list. The one who has already taken a step to include this type of exemplary Mexicans in the philanthropic sector is the magazine Líderes Sociales and in its annual ranking of the “300 leaders” there is a special section that highlights them. In the case of Forbes Mexico, in the most recent Third Special Report on Philanthropy called, “35 organizations that work just to help,” it is in charge of presenting a list that, unlike the previous two years, is no longer a ranking of “the most important” Mexican foundations, but now the reflection on whether philanthropy is responsible for solving poverty in the country? In various articles that have been published in the Business Foundations column of Expoknews, this perspective that always generates controversy has been analyzed.
It has been pointed out that this is not its New Zealand WhatsApp Number fundamental purpose, but rather to influence the creation of associations and a culture of generosity. Furthermore, in a country like Mexico that has more than 121 million inhabitants and less than 40 thousand civil society organizations, among which there are no more than 700 donor foundations, one cannot expect a great social impact as happens in nations with deeply structured philanthropic traditions. For Mexico, its philanthropy is marginal, small, disorganized, person-to-person and registers slow growth with its own nuances, aberrations and challenges. The author of the study in question, Ismael Jiménez, takes a look at the increase in poverty in England as a result of the development of industry. Although the development of philanthropy dates back to the 19th century, it is important to note that the first law in memory regarding philanthropy, the needy and the poor, dates back to 1601 and is known as the “Elizabethan Poverty Laws.” ”, perhaps the first government effort to help socially disadvantaged people. Jiménez points out that “for the great philanthropists, the main objective of their work is to help and alleviate the immediate hardships of those most in need,” but to understand the development of the philanthropic culture of England and its purposes, we will have to scrutinize its origins in faith. religious, the Protestant Reformation and the social circumstances of the transition from the rural agrarian to the urban commercial economy from whose days the famous phrase dates back: of your income, save 10%, donate 10% and spend the remaining 80% for your mention, that in the 20th century John Rockefeller was erroneously credited as its author. The Third Study study retains the methodology of including three types of categories: Business Foundations, Independent Foundations (which includes operating organizations) and Corporate Social Responsibility Programs. Although the article includes a note on the methodology, it is indicated that the selected sample is due to having a list where "the report takes into account the transparency of the financial results and the work carried out by the foundations to serve vulnerable groups of the society; also the systematization of results figures and the impact on civil society.”
Some details of the methodology: Work via shutterstock Compare business foundations and CSR programs that can finance or invest in social projects with operational organizations that carry out the actions. The study includes 4 operational organizations. That is, the scrutiny compares pears with apples. The North American nomenclature can help clarify the persistent confusion of Forbes Mexico. When investing resources, business foundations and CSR Programs are “grantmakers”, while operational organizations that request donations from the former are “grantseekers”. Each one has a different work focus. It is not clear why the study considers Nacional Monte de Piedad as, first, a foundation and then as a business (to which company does it owe its resources?); nor why the Carlos Slim Foundation, being an independent organization, considers it to be businesslike. Regarding the Quiera Foundation, it is not business, but union, like the Entrepreneurship Foundation in Mexico since they do not belong to a particular company. HSBC Bank operates its social investment through the Corporate Social Responsibility Program since there is no HSBC Foundation. Diseña el Cambio appears as a foundation when it is an operational organization that is linked to another of the same nature, the Educar Uno Foundation. The influence of the US Forbes style of analysis is felt again in this edition when it points out that the Third Study of Mexico covers “the fiscal year 2014-2015.” In the US the fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30, that of Mexico runs from January 1 to December 31, corresponding to the calendar year. Authorized grantees and organizations with CLUNI report for that period, so results from the same year can be cited for all of them. The summary table of the 35 foundations indicates that the Televisa Foundation supports… Televisa Foundation!, which may raise suspicion among readers who may believe that a company creates a foundation to support itself. Within the Third Study, there are statements that are as forceful as they are inaccurately committed: “Although in Mexico foundations are obliged to show their financial statements, many are not transparent.”
It has been pointed out that this is not its New Zealand WhatsApp Number fundamental purpose, but rather to influence the creation of associations and a culture of generosity. Furthermore, in a country like Mexico that has more than 121 million inhabitants and less than 40 thousand civil society organizations, among which there are no more than 700 donor foundations, one cannot expect a great social impact as happens in nations with deeply structured philanthropic traditions. For Mexico, its philanthropy is marginal, small, disorganized, person-to-person and registers slow growth with its own nuances, aberrations and challenges. The author of the study in question, Ismael Jiménez, takes a look at the increase in poverty in England as a result of the development of industry. Although the development of philanthropy dates back to the 19th century, it is important to note that the first law in memory regarding philanthropy, the needy and the poor, dates back to 1601 and is known as the “Elizabethan Poverty Laws.” ”, perhaps the first government effort to help socially disadvantaged people. Jiménez points out that “for the great philanthropists, the main objective of their work is to help and alleviate the immediate hardships of those most in need,” but to understand the development of the philanthropic culture of England and its purposes, we will have to scrutinize its origins in faith. religious, the Protestant Reformation and the social circumstances of the transition from the rural agrarian to the urban commercial economy from whose days the famous phrase dates back: of your income, save 10%, donate 10% and spend the remaining 80% for your mention, that in the 20th century John Rockefeller was erroneously credited as its author. The Third Study study retains the methodology of including three types of categories: Business Foundations, Independent Foundations (which includes operating organizations) and Corporate Social Responsibility Programs. Although the article includes a note on the methodology, it is indicated that the selected sample is due to having a list where "the report takes into account the transparency of the financial results and the work carried out by the foundations to serve vulnerable groups of the society; also the systematization of results figures and the impact on civil society.”
Some details of the methodology: Work via shutterstock Compare business foundations and CSR programs that can finance or invest in social projects with operational organizations that carry out the actions. The study includes 4 operational organizations. That is, the scrutiny compares pears with apples. The North American nomenclature can help clarify the persistent confusion of Forbes Mexico. When investing resources, business foundations and CSR Programs are “grantmakers”, while operational organizations that request donations from the former are “grantseekers”. Each one has a different work focus. It is not clear why the study considers Nacional Monte de Piedad as, first, a foundation and then as a business (to which company does it owe its resources?); nor why the Carlos Slim Foundation, being an independent organization, considers it to be businesslike. Regarding the Quiera Foundation, it is not business, but union, like the Entrepreneurship Foundation in Mexico since they do not belong to a particular company. HSBC Bank operates its social investment through the Corporate Social Responsibility Program since there is no HSBC Foundation. Diseña el Cambio appears as a foundation when it is an operational organization that is linked to another of the same nature, the Educar Uno Foundation. The influence of the US Forbes style of analysis is felt again in this edition when it points out that the Third Study of Mexico covers “the fiscal year 2014-2015.” In the US the fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30, that of Mexico runs from January 1 to December 31, corresponding to the calendar year. Authorized grantees and organizations with CLUNI report for that period, so results from the same year can be cited for all of them. The summary table of the 35 foundations indicates that the Televisa Foundation supports… Televisa Foundation!, which may raise suspicion among readers who may believe that a company creates a foundation to support itself. Within the Third Study, there are statements that are as forceful as they are inaccurately committed: “Although in Mexico foundations are obliged to show their financial statements, many are not transparent.”