This is not my Settlement wish list for 2010; blogs are meant to be short, and my wish list would be very, very long!  Instead, it is my short list of key challenges and hoped-for outcomes that will make this year amazingly productive if successfully addressed        

Challenge #1: Facing Reduced Resources We are all expecting reductions in resources for certain programmatic areas. Our political sense of resource entitlement, our faith in public moral or social obligation, our historic belief that services will be rescued on a timely basis, have been threatened or undermined as a result of the recent economic crisis. How can this possibly happen in a City and State with such remarkable histories of social responsibility? But it has or will soon be happening. There may be fewer subsidized spaces for child care programs. There may be less money to serve youth aging out of foster care or homeless youth or at-risk youth in any number of categories. Tighter protocols for obtaining Medicaid reimbursements or attaining eligibility for mandated services may take effect.  But perhaps this won't happen.  Maybe the worst will be avoided, maybe more creative solutions will be discovered for saving money, maybe the market and tax revenue will bounce back before it is too late, maybe different choices will be made that will even out the pain caused by fewer resources. In fact, University Settlement has been fortunate the past two calendar years in receiving more rather than less public support (see earlier blogs), but our success does not necessarily mean that the communities we serve and the needs we try to address have fared well over this time period. The challenge is to minimize the impact of the economic crisis on the people who suffer the most from reductions of publicly-supported services. The outcome we pursue, in collaboration with others, is to find the best possible strategy for reducing or eliminating any harm that comes from (hopefully) a short term crisis in our fiscal stability.  This won't be easy, and the answers may not be readily observable, but try we must.

Challenge #2:  Re-engaging the Private Supporter For those of us dependent to greater or lesser degrees on receiving private support from individuals, foundations or corporations for general support purposes, the past two years have been anxiety driven and difficult. One bad year could be ignored by funders given the larger gains made over prior successive good years; two bad years cannot be so easily accommodated; and a possible third bad year would be devastating. Will the bounce-back occur? Will optimism replace caution? Will donors quickly recognize our plight and return to their previous levels of commitment? And what about those who will, inevitably, gain a great deal from the intricacies of the emerging marketplace and turn gain into philanthropic largess? The key, the requisite factor, in our "business model" is to maintain a balance of public and private funds, and to sustain a viable ratio of general support to targeted support. While this past year resulted in growth of public support for the Settlement, private support did not keep pace. Our most loyal friends continued to be extraordinarily generous, enabling us to remain financially sound.  But we're a bit out of balance, which, in practical terms, means that the infrastructure we need to support our programs has been weakened. University Settlement grew in response to several factors, but we could be in danger of having over-extended ourselves if the funding balance is not restored. Our primary challenge is to maintain the program quality and organizational competence for which the Settlement is known. The outcome we pursue is to re-acquire and to expand the level of private general support needed to sustain this highly effective model.

Challenge #3: Rewarding Success Leaders in the non-profit field are fascinated by discussions of what people in the financial and corporate worlds receive as salaries or bonuses irrespective of the success or failure of their organizations. Unlike many of my peers, I am fine with this aspect of our market economy, especially the argument that you need to pay good people to keep them happy, loyal and productive. So how can the same logic be applied to our world?  What can I do when our performance levels are exceptionally high? What recognition is available--in concrete terms--from our public and private supporters when we do quality work even under the most difficult of circumstances? Despite the rhetoric about performance measures and outcomes with government or private funding, the fact is that quality performance only earns the organization what it needs to survive (under the best of circumstances). There is no "profit" to be had, no tangible performance rewards.  Where is our bonus pool? How does one reward excellence in our system, not just for high level management, but for all those engaged in a successful venture? Or are non-profit types expected to work only for the goodness of their efforts, for doing, as many say, "God's work?" Do these people not also wish to have more comfortable lives, or simply want to be able to pay their bills and take care of their families? The challenge is to recognize that the benefits of success in a market driven universe should be available, to some moderate degree, to those in the non-profit community who have more than met the goals they are expected to reach. This is a dilemma faced by managers and board members in the non-profit community, and perhaps this will be the year at University Settlement where some ideas (or even solutions) are discovered.

Challenge #4: Redefining Our Identity  Finally, this may well be the year that settlements in general and University Settlement in particular become comfortable with their evolving missions and roles. We will be celebrating our 125th anniversary beginning fall 2010 and going into spring 2011. During this very important year, we will host the largest international gathering of settlement workers ever held, when the International Federation of Settlements and Neighborhood Centers, United Neighborhood Centers of America and United Neighborhood Houses share a week in October dedicated to learning, exploration, and celebration. The reality is that the definition of a settlement house has become fuzzier over time, with confusing images of geography, program and purpose. At University Settlement, we don't think where we are heading is fuzzy. University Settlement has always had and will continue to have our strongest ties and commitment to our local community, our historic geography, the Lower East Side of Manhattan. But we have recognized four other factors about our history that will shape the future: our program expertise in many areas that are essential to having a strong community; our organizational strengths, requisite for sustaining an effective and viable institution;  our commitment to recognizing the promise of the individuals and families with whom we work as we try to build a stronger city; the appeal our programs have had for people in other communities who come to us via a transportation system that has a different sense of boundaries than defined by local streets.  All these factors have led us to opportunities for working in other neighborhoods which, for various reasons, have minimal social infrastructure, with neither settlement houses nor any other organizations capable of responding to overwhelming issues and needs.  Settlement houses can and should be responsive to their own strengths and capabilities, and to the emerging  issues of evolving communities. During 2010 and 2011, as part of our 125th anniversary, University Settlement will explore its future, take a fresh look at its purpose in this dynamic city, and be secure in our understanding that the values of our movement have stood the test of time.