Last week, we discussed in groups which area we wanted our philanthropy to go towards out of five categories: Unemployment, Poverty, Healthcare, Hunger, and the Achievement Gap. While our group was discussing where we wanted this money to go, we stumbled upon an interesting dilemma: could our $10,000 really help with an issue as massive as poverty? Would focusing on one of the other groups, which are arguably all tied in with poverty, be more beneficial in the long run?
On paper, some options seem like sure bets, like helping “hunger” or “poverty.” When it comes to giving away money like this, however, deeper thought is required. Not many of us really thought the achievement gap stood a chance of being selected as our issue to focus on, but when we really looked at it, we realized that helping to fix that issue could ultimately help fix a myriad of other problems, including the other topics we were given to research. As one of the mission statements we wrote in class said, a possible goal for our class is to focus on the achievement gap to help give a whole generation of children the opportunity to lift themselves out of the cycle of poverty.
Earlier this semester, we established that for something to be philanthropic, it should aim to make a long-term impact or change on an important issue. While we debated these issues, we made a point to focus on the long term. By focusing on children who are being underserved in their educational institutions, we chose to try to make an investment in our future generations. I think that, given the issues we could choose from, we selected the one with the most long-term possibilities.
-Lindy B.
The Art and Science of Philanthropy 
Your question about whether our $10,000 class fund could really make any sort of an impact is really interesting. Our class aiming to eliminate the achievement gap in PG County and the District is a very ambitious goal and a lofty undertaking, but that by no means implies that our $10,000 can’t make a difference. Even if it doesn’t close the achievement gap altogether, our class funds will still make a world of a difference to those youth who happen to be on the receiving end of the mentoring services made possible by our grant. Our situation relates to the dilemma facing Larkin Street Youth Services, a San Francisco based nonprofit that aids to assist homeless youth, in the article “Zeroing in on Impact” by Susan Colby, Nan Stone and Paul Carttar. When Larkin’s managers realized that they were strapped for funds for their philanthropic organization, they had to make tough decisions regarding which group of individuals they most wanted to assist: “youth with the most extreme disorders” or “those with less severe troubles”. As they did not have the resources to support both types of troubled youth, they decided to serve the less-troubled youth because they “had a better chance of ultimately transitioning to independent living”. Our goal of granting our class fund to an organization that provides mentoring services to youth in need has the potential to make a bigger impact than simply attempting to alleviate poverty or hunger, because, like Lindy said, by giving one generation of youth the skills they need to succeed in the workforce and in life, we are enabling them to pass on their knowledge to succeeding generation.
I think it’s important to note that every social cause has long-term possibilities. I don’t think that our issue has the “most,” or that any cause should be labeled in this way because ultimately they’re all connected in n number of ways. We picked a great issue that I’m very excited about, but let’s not forget the context of our contribution.
I was originally in the Child Poverty group and even after doing research on the issue, did not think deeply enough into the problem. It was not until a few classes later when I was talking to a group of my classmates that I realized that addressing the achievement gap could be a solution to many bigger issues. Our class is very focused on finding an organization that can show long-term progress, but I think that by choosing to support a solution to shrinking the achievement gap, we are already working toward better the lives of children in the long run. Originally I was skeptical about funding an organization that is trying to mend the achievement gap, but now I see the benefits in the decision.
I think our decision to address both poverty and achievement gap in our final mission statement shows how the two overlap. The Achievement Gap cannot be closed without ending poverty and poverty cannot be ended without closing the Achievement Gap. When we were writing our mission statements in groups, it was very hard to convince people that we should focus on the achievement gap since most believed that we should focus on the overall issue of poverty. I am really happy with our final mission statement because I think there are a lot of organizations in the DC area that work to focus on both. The future generation will determine which direction the achievement gap and overall poverty will go and the money that we are donating will be a influence in making sure that direction is positive instead of negative.