across the nonprofit blogosphere

I read a lot of blogs [note to self:  get going on that blogroll].  While many of them are purely hedonistic, I love reading about what other nonprofit folks are doing.  As part of Blogging for Branding’s 31 Days to a Brand New Blog” challenge, I compiled a list of  posts that recently  inspired and educated me. 

Nonprofit Leadership

Jessica Journey offers new insight into the diversity of the sector with “Major Perspectives.”  Forensic science? English? We are definitely a motley crew! This just proves that there is not one set path to a nonprofit career. 

Getting to the Point

Katya Andresen’s (who describes herself as “impatient to do good”) nonprofit marketing blog always makes me think, and I mean hard.  She examines her profession with a critical eye, yet proposes solutions.  Her most recent post addresses the fact that while organizations that rate charities believe that the practice is unsound, many donors still unfairly rely on rating nonprofit organizations’ effectiveness based solely on “overhead” costs due to the lack of a comprehensive national assessment tool.   


Peter Campbell writes from the perspective of a nonprofit technology professional, bringing awareness and insight to a much-maligned career.  I’m a bit of a technophile, so I have nothing but respect for the people who take our grandiose ideas and make them reality.  Although I recently wrote about Rush Limbaugh’s ill-informed attack on nonprofit employees, this latest post takes it a step further by demonstrating how such irresponsible bluster can potentially lead to violence.

Let me know what nonprofit blogs I should follow in the comments!

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

should art museums be family-friendly?

nimg (not in my gallery)

Some believe that museums, particularly of the art variety, are solemn, sacred spaces akin to churches where respect, decorum and good taste should prevail.   What could be worse than attempting to appreciate the subtlety of pointillism with a cranky baby as your soundtrack? There’s plenty of places for them to go.  Don’t disturb this groove!

If you want your kid to crawl all over something and make a bunch of noise, take them to the zoo.  –Name Withheld By Request, via Twitter.

Anyone who has spent considerable time with children knows that the characteristics most conducive to silent, contemplative gazing are developed over time.  Besides, young people do not have a lock on bad manners.  But even the most well-behaved child is capable of a meltdown-worthy moment or two.  So considering the awesome and unpredictable nature of young people, should museums be encouraging this lot to grace their doors?

Um, yeah.

Consider that the traditional entrée into art museums for children is via school-sanctioned visits.  It is not uncommon for schools to designate only one grade to visit a museum each year.  This practice has many reasons, including budget restraints, No Child Left Behind requirements and the perceived unworthiness of museum visits.    That ultimately results in a large amount of young people through the doors, but does not even begin to compare to the numbers of families with young children living in metropolitan or regional areas who may potentially visit, and these are the museum members of the future.

When I meet visitors who say, “I haven’t been here in 30 years”,  I ask them how they came to visit all those years ago.  They almost overwhelmingly respond it was with their elementary school.  Now don’t get me wrong, I am a huge proponent of school art museum visits (I schedule over 14,000 students for visits each year) and their value in terms of future visitorship has been well-documented, but while many museums expend commendable effort to increase the number of school visits and/or bring that experience to schools directly, depending solely on the traditional school-visit model to supply young visitors is unsustainable.   Whether they like it or not, museums have to accept the fact that families are a large and important audience that warrants attention.

I work in art museum education, so it makes sense that I am preoccupied with this subject.  My duties are split across areas that serve school-based populations and the general public (and all of the overlap inherent within.)  I am in a unique position to observe most of the ways in which audiences are introduced to an art museum, and it has become apparent to me that it is no longer sufficient to just direct families to the artwork and say “good luck.”  Although some bemoan this development, believing that museums are no longer just about art, I am constantly asked if there is anything for young people and families “to do” while they visit.  By that they mean engaging, interactive activities that will help them interpret and enjoy the art together, not as separate entities.   Is that really too much to ask?

what does a family-friendly museum look like?

Kid-friendly museum = strollers allowed, play areas available, noise encouraged, healthy food @ cafe.  Not having those accommodations makes it much less likely that I’ll be a museum visitor and donor. —RobynFehrman via Twitter

Kids in Museums, an organization that promotes “family-friendly policies and attitudes throughout Britain,” was founded after a writer and her son were given the bum’s rush at the Royal Academy of Arts for being “too noisy.”   Their suggestions for ensuring a positive experience culminates in a yearly crowd-sourced manifesto and they frequently send families undercover to determine which museum best fulfills the criteria, an honor sponsored by the U.K. newspaper, The Guardian.

I find these suggestions from the manifesto most critical:

  • Be interactive and hands-on.  Aim to connect all activities, events and interactives directly to the collection.  Galleries of shiny do-dads and please-touch-me trinkets mean nothing if  no one engages with the art.
  • Give a friendly goodbye.  A lot of attention is paid to greeting, but the parting interaction is just as–if not more–important.  Why not make their last impression a good one? When families depart from education programs, I make a point of saying “See you next time” or “Thank you for coming.”  And I sincerely mean it.   Altruistic joy from sharing art with them aside, I would not have a job without their support and I appreciate that.
  • Provide healthy, good-value food.  Often, museums will do a stellar job of communicating a family-friendly vibe, but the restaurants serve menu items catering to a distinctly adult palate.   You can still provide high-quality food that young people will recognize without sacrificing taste and presentation.  Put that PB&J on wheat bread, not brioche.
  • Answer kids’ questions.   Adults usually give me funny looks when I do this, but the kids seem to appreciate it.  I remember feeling annoyed when adults talked about me like I was invisible.  And if you’re trying to get information on art classes, why shouldn’t I ask the potential student what kind of art (if any) he or she enjoys? I prefer going to the source.

Focusing on families does not mean that they are above the rules, but making them feel like annoying house guests who have worn out their welcome is counterproductive and just plain rude.   If the museum’s mission states that art is for everyone, actions have to speak louder than words.

In a recent post, I suggested ways to make art museum visits enjoyable for everyone.    Which art museums make you feel the family love?

adding “lazy rapist” to my résumé

In his August 12, 2010 diatribe-du-jour slandering democrats, the Obama Administration, leftists, liberals and “what have you” (anyone else he couldn’t stand that day), Rush Limbaugh claimed that nonprofit organizations and their employees “siphon contributions as their salaries” and have the nerve to consider themselves “good people” even though they are “rapists in terms of finance and economy.”  Please take a listen while I check my blood pressure.

It’s common knowledge that Rush (may I call you Rush?) could care less about black folks, is indifferent to gender inequality unless it involves making a blonde female 26 years his junior his “better half” and really digs bashing black women.  Finally, I represent all that he truly despises: a black, brunette woman working for a nonprofit organization  

It would have been interesting if Rush had offered some compelling evidence supporting the ills of nonprofits.  I am not above critical assessment when it comes to my bread and butter, so color  me disappointed.  Rush missed the opportunity to spark a necessary conversation regarding the sector’s response to the new American economy.   However, to do so, he would have to be  interested in exchanging ideas in the first place.  His distasteful flavor of hogwash is simply par for the course.     

See, Rush is an entertainer.  If you want a primer on how a down-on-his-luck small town guy captures the ear of a nation, Elia Kazan’s “A Face in the Crowd” shows you how its done.    

Get it, people? He’s an actor.  Spewing hate into the world and laughing all the way to the bank, it’s hard to knock the hustle.  It would be funny if people didn’t actually believe him. 

Though what people say is telling, often their behavior reveals even more.  Here’s a breakdown of Rush’s more recent nonprofit-related activities:

Gee, Rush is just like me.  When he’s sick, he seeks treatment from the best doctors and hospitals he can afford.   He uses his influence to raise money for causes he supports.  He’s driven to apopletic convulsions at the sound of “Poker Face.”    

Rush can talk out the side of his neck all he wants, but I know better.   He loves nonprofits which, truth be told, keep the “big government” he purportedly fears from getting bigger.   

 Thank goodness those “idiots” at the organizations he needed felt like working those days.    

 DC Central Kitchen employees sum up Rush’s trash talk in one word.  Is he justified in calling shenanigans on nonprofit employees?