View Research by Author - Elizabeth T. Boris

More about Elizabeth T. Boris's areas of expertise can be found on this Urban Institute expert's page.

Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/ElizabethTBoris

This brief presents key findings from the latest report on the Foundation Expenses and Compensation Project –- the first large-scale, long-term, systematic study of independent, corporate, and community foundations' expenses and compensation patterns and the factors behind them. It documents how differences in type, size, and operating activities of foundations affect their finances and charitable administrative expenses. This brief highlights the key findings of the full report, "What Drives Foundation Expenses and Compensation?: Results of a Three-Year Study."

This study presents the findings of a three-year study to analyze the expense and compensation patterns of the 10,000 largest foundations in the United States. It finds characteristics such as foundation type, size, and operating activities are important factors for understanding differences in foundation finances. Despite the economic downturn and the volatility of the stock market during the study years (2001 to 2003), the patterns of foundation expenses and compensation are clear and consistent over time. This is the first large-scale, long-term, and systematic study of independent, corporate, and community foundations’ expenses and compensation patterns and the factors behind them.

While an estimated 40 percent of nonprofits focus on the economically disadvantaged (half or more of their clients), few nonprofits serve that proportion of ethnic and racial populations, Elizabeth Boris told the House Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee. Her testimony addressed five key questions: Who gives, how much, and to whom? Who benefits from charitable contributions? How do charities and foundations identify the needs of their communities? Are there gaps between needs and services? How can we improve the quality and scope of data on charitable beneficiaries?

At the Association for Research on Nonprofits and Voluntary Action 35th Annual Conference, Elizabeth Boris received the 2006 Award for Distinguished Achievement and Leadership In Nonprofit and Voluntary Action Research. In addition to expressing her gratitude, her remarks challenge ARNOVA researchers to address three policy challenges: defining charitability, developing realistic performance indicators, and tackling issues related to nonprofit financing.

The past several decades have seen unprecedented growth in the scope and complexity of relationships between government and nonprofit organizations. These relationships have been more fruitful than many critics had feared and more problematic than many advocates had hoped. Nonprofits and Government is the first comprehensive, multidisciplinary exploration of nonprofit–government relations. The second edition of this important book is fully updated and includes two new chapters. The authors address a host of important issues, including nonprofit advocacy, direct regulatory and tax policy, the conversion of nonprofits to for-profits, clashes in government interaction with religion and the arts, and international nonprofit–government relationships. Practitioners, researchers, and policymakers alike will benefit from the authors’ wide-ranging discussion.

An interview with Elizabeth T. Boris, director of Urban Institute’s Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy (CNP). Boris is a national expert on the charitable sector. Now marking its 10th year, CNP has enriched the field with analyses on the scope and dimensions of nonprofits.

The essays in this collection grew out of the 14th Emerging Issues in Philanthropy Seminar, "Charities' Response to Disasters: Expectations and Realities," held on December 2, 2005. Authors discuss the strengths and weaknesses of charities’ responses to the Gulf Coast hurricanes, lessons learned from previous disasters—the September 11th attacks and the Asian Tsunami—and how well those lessons were applied. Authors note the need to have realistic expectations of charities' role in disaster relief and rebuilding, given the resources of the charities—particularly small local secular and faith-based agencies—and their inability to control the content or amount of voluntary assistance. The critical role of government in coordinating and leading disaster response efforts is a major theme.

This study documents how foundation characteristics such as giving amount, asset size and staffing, and activities such as international giving and operating a "charitable" facility or research program, affect the expense levels at the 10,000 largest independent, corporate, and community foundations. The report shows that most foundations report modest expenses; the vast majority are unstaffed; and many are run largely by unpaid trustees. Staffing is the most significant factor affecting expenses, regardless of type. The largest foundations tend to compensate at the highest amounts, but their median percentages of compensation to giving are among the lowest.

This interim report summarizes the findings to date from the Foundation Expenses and Compensation Study, a partnership of the Urban Institute, the Foundation Center, and GuideStar. Examining the expense and compensation patterns of the nation's 10,000 largest independent, corporate, and community foundations (by giving) circa 2001, this report documents how major differences in operating styles affect the expenses of philanthropic foundations. The findings suggest that, along with foundation type and size, the missions and goals of foundations that lead to different staffing levels and types of expenses should be considered when assessing foundation expenditures.

In response to a Senate Finance Committee Staff Discussion Draft of June 21, 2004, which made suggestions aimed that strengthening transparency and accountability of the charitable sector, the Center on Philanthropy submitted comments covering three major points: (1) Electronic filing of Forms 990 will improve the quality, access, and timeliness of data on charities, and will reduce costs for the IRS, the states, and charities. (2) Gaps and omissions in Forms 990 and Forms 990-PF must be eliminated and better reporting must be enforced. (3) An accurate list of tax-exempt organizations must also be a priority.

Return to list of authors