Formal social movement organizations became significant phenomena in the late 20th century. This article is part of a large national study that examines the historical evolution of one such organization, the Women’s Funding Network (WFN), which is connected to an “industry” of social change funds. WFN includes over 70 women’s funds across the United States and Canada that define fund-raising and fund allocation as a strategy for empowering women and achieving social change. Using the resource mobilization framework of Zald and McCarthy, the author considers critical issues that women’s funds have faced since their emergence as a network (1985) dedicated to social movement goals. Examples from case studies, surveys, and participant observation are used to compare individual funds and to analyze the impact of increasing institutionalization on mission, structure, resource mobilization, leadership, and programmatic activities of WFN as a social movement organization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boisture, R. A.
& Mayer, L. M. (1997, October 21). Special report: IRS issues proposed regulations on disclosure of Forms 990 and exemption application. Washington, DC: Independent Sector.
2.
Brilliant, E.
(1990). The United Way: Dilemmas of organized charity. New York: Columbia University Press.
3.
Brilliant, E.
(1992). Fund raising as an empowerment strategy for women. In A. Cancedda (Ed.), Cittadini, societa e stati: La soggetivita socialeeiprocessi di sviluppo (pp. 61-75). Proceedings of the International Conference, October 1991, Bari, Italy.
4.
Brilliant, E.
(1996). Looking backward to look forward: The Filer Commission in perspective. In Toward a stronger voluntary sector: The ‘Filer Commission’ and the state of philanthropy. Proceedings of the National Board of Visitors of the Indiana University Center on Philanthropy, New York, December 8, 1995. Indianapolis: Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
5.
Brilliant, E., Van Alst, D., & Voerhoeve, L. (with Katherine Kraft). (1998, March). Preliminary findings from a survey of grantees of women’s funds. Unpublished report of the Women’s Funds Research Project, Rutgers University School of Social Work.
6.
Buechler, S. M.
(1990). Women’s movements in the United States: Woman suffrage, equal rights and beyond. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
7.
Capek, M. E. (1998). Foundation support for women and girls: Special interest’ funding and effective philanthropy: Vol. 2. In M. E.Capek (Ed.), Women and philanthropy: Old stereotypes and new challenges (Monograph series). Unpublished report.
8.
DiMaggio, P. J.
, & Powell, W. W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 63-82). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Gamson, W.
(1975). The strategy of social process. Belmont, CA: Dorsey.
10.
Gamson, W.
(1987). Introduction. In M. Zald & J. McCarthy (Eds.), Social movements in an organizational society: Collected essays. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
11.
Jenkins, C. J.
(1983). Resource mobilization: Theory and the study of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 527-538.
12.
Jenkins, C. J.
, & Halcli, A. L. (1999). Grassrooting the system: The development and impact of social movement philanthropy, 1953-1990. In E. C. Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
13.
Joh, C. (1997, June). Diversity in feminist organizations: Acase study of the Women’s Funding Network’s commitment. Unpublished paper written in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the master’s of arts degree in public affairs, Hubert A. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.
14.
Kaplan, A.
(1998). Giving USA 1998. New York: AAFRC Trust for Philanthropy.
15.
Kaplan, A.
(Ed.). (1999). Giving USA 1999. New York: AAFRC Trust for Philanthropy.
16.
McCarthy, J.
, & Zald, M. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 1212-1241.
17.
National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP)
. (1986, spring). Two dozen women’s funds launch national network. Responsive Philanthropy, pp. 14-14, 16-16.
18.
Odendahl, T.
(1990). Charity begins at home: Generosity and self-interest among the philanthropic elite. New York: Basic Books.
19.
Piven, F. F.
, & Cloward, R. (1991) Collective protest: A critique of resource-mobilization theory. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 4, 435-458.
20.
Schein, E. H.
(1983, summer). The role of the founder in creating organizational culture. Organizational Dynamics, 13-28.
21.
Schoenfeld, H. M.
, & Repass, D. (1996, August 19). Special report: ‘Intermediate sanctions’—Issues, pitfalls, and protective measures. Tax Notes, pp. 1033-1042.
22.
Shaw, S.
, & Taylor, M. (1995). Reinventing fundraising: Realizing the potential of women’s philanthropy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
Skocpol, T.
(1999). Advocates without members: The recent transformation of American civic life. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 461-509). New York: Russell Sage.
24.
Staggenborg, S.
(1995). Can feminist organizations be effective? In M. M. Ferree & P. Y. Martin (Eds.), Feminist organizations: Harvest of the of the new women’s movement.(pp. 339-355). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
25.
Women’s Funding Network (WFN). (1995, October). Celebrating the start of our second decade 1995. Unpublished document distributed to WFN members.
26.
Women’s Funding Network (WFN). (1999a, Fall). How can you help…. Give to Women’s Funding Network [Brochure]. WFN, St. Paul, Minnesota.
27.
Women’s Funding Network (WFN). (1999b, December). The Women’s Funding Network membership directory. Unpublished list from the WFN.
28.
Zald, M. N.
& McCarthy, J. D. (Eds.). (1987). Social movements in an organizational society: Collected essays. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
