Philanthropic foundations have assumed prominent roles in revitalizing distressed U.S. cities raising questions about their ongoing effects on governance and policy, institutions, access to decision-making, and outcomes. This exploratory, qualitative study examines foundation interventions in eight cities where foundations account for a substantial share of community and economic development financing. Foundations have significantly altered interventions which, when combined with their substantial giving and government austerity, significantly increases their potential for enduring influence on city governance and policymaking and fosters the growth of nonprofit governance in these cities.
AdgerW. N. (2003). Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography, 79(4), 387–404.
2.
AgranoffR. (2006). Inside collaborative networks: Ten lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review, 66, 56–65.
3.
AhnT. K.OstromE.SchmidtD.ShuppR.WalkerJ. (2001). Cooperation in PD games: Fear, greed, and history of play. Public Choice, 106(1), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005219123532
H. K.AnheierD. C.Hammack (Eds.). (2010). American foundations: Roles and contributions. Brookings Institution Press.
6.
AnsellC.GashA. (2018). Collaborative platforms as a governance strategy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(1), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux030
7.
BabiakK.ThibaultL. (2009). Challenges in multiple cross-sector partnerships. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(1), 117–143.
8.
BartleyT. (2007). How foundations shape social movements: The construction of an organizational field and the rise of forest certification. Social Problems, 54(3), 229–255.
BrecherC.WiseO. (2008). Looking a gift horse in the mouth: Challenges in managing philanthropic support for public services. Public Administration Review, 68(S1), S146–S161.
BrownP.GargS. (1997). Foundations and comprehensive community initiatives: The challenges of partnership. Chapin Hall Center for Children.
13.
BrysonJ. M.CrosbyB. C.StoneM. M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66(s1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00665.x
ChengY. (2019). Exploring the role of nonprofits in public service provision: Moving from coproduction to cogovernance. Public Administration Review, 79(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12970
17.
ClarkeS. E. (2001). The prospects for local democratic governance: The governance roles of nonoprofit organizations. Review of Policy Research, 18(4), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2001.tb00210.x
18.
ClarkeS. E. (2017). Local place-based collaborative governance: Comparing state-centric and society-centered models. Urban Affairs Review, 53(3), 578–602.
19.
ClemensE. S. (2020). Nonprofits as boundary markers: The politics of choice, mobilization, and arbitrage. In PowellW. W.BromleyP. (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (3rd ed.). Stanford University Press.
20.
ClemensE. S.LeeL. C. (2010). Catalysts for change: Foundations and school reform, 1950-2005. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 51–71). Brookings Institution Press.
21.
Cleveland Foundation. (2009). Report to the community.
22.
ColomboM.TobinB. (2017). Changing in place: The Skillman Foundation, Detroit, and the Good Neighborhoods Initiative—How did a hometown grantmaker conduct and conclude its largest-ever initiative?The Foundation Review, 9(1), 92–102. https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1353.
23.
DanticoM.SvaraJ. (2015). Professionalized government: Institutionalizing the new politics in Phoenix. In StoneC. N.StokerR. P. (Eds.), Urban neighborhoods in a new era: Revitalization politics in the postindustrial city (pp. 108–130). University of Chicago Press.
24.
ElkinS. L. (1987). City and regime in the American republic. University of Chicago Press.
25.
ElsonP. R.HallS. (2016). System change agents: A profile of policy-focused grantmaking foundation engagement in public policy. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 7(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjnser.2016v7n2a222
26.
FainsteinS. S.FainsteinN. I. (1983). Restructuring the city: The political economy of urban development. Longman.
FerrisJ. M.HopkinsE. (2015). Place-based initiatives: Lessons from five decades of experimentation and experience. The Foundation Review, 7(4), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1269
30.
FischerM. (2014). Coalition structures and policy change in a consensus democracy. Policy Studies Journal, 42(3), 344–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12064
31.
FischerM.SciariniP. (2016). Drivers of collaboration in political decision making: A cross-sector perspective. Journal of Politics, 78(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1086/683061
32.
FitzpatrickD. (2002, August13). Murphy, foundations in spat over LTV site: Mayor’s letter threatening eminent domain catches nonprofit leaders by surprise. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
GulatiR.GargiuloM. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from?American Journal of Sociology, 104(5), 1439–1493. https://doi.org/10.1086/210179
35.
HamiltonM.LubellM. (2018). Collaborative governance of climate change Adaptation across spatial and Institutional scales. Policy Studies Journal, 46(2), 222–247.
36.
HammackD. C.AnheierH. K. (2010). American foundations: Their roles and contributions to society. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 3–27). Brookings Institution Press.
37.
HansonR.WolmanH.ConnollyD.PearsonK.McmanmonR. (2010). Corporate citizenship and urban problem solving: The changing civic role of business leaders in American cities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 32(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2009.00480.x
38.
HeilM. (2018). Community development corporations in the right-sizing city: Remaking the CDC model of urban redevelopment. Journal of Urban Affairs, 40(8), 1132–1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1443012
39.
HemmingB. (2005). The Detroit Riverfront Conservancy: A public-private partnership striving to reclaim the Detroit River. Golden Gate University Law Review, 35(3), Article 6.
HeydemannS.KinseyR. (2010). The state and international philanthropy: The contribution of American foundations, 1919-1991. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 205–236). Brookings Institution Press.
42.
KubischA. C.AusposP.BrownP.DewarT. (2010). Voices from the field III: Lessons and challenges from two decades of community change efforts. The Aspen Institute.
43.
LeachW. D. (2006). Collaborative public management and democracy: Evidence from western watershed partnerships. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00670.x
44.
LevineJ. R. (2016). The privatization of political representation: Community-based organizations as nonelected neighborhood representatives. American Sociological Review, 81(6), 1251–1275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416670655
45.
LoweJ. S. (2004). Community foundations: What do they offer community development?Journal of Urban Affairs, 26(2), 221–240.
46.
Martinez-CosioM.BussellM. R. (2013). Catalysts for change: 21st century philanthropy and community development. Routledge.
47.
MattiS.SandströmA. (2011). The rationale determining advocacy coalitions: Examining coordination networks and corresponding beliefs. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 385–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00414.x
48.
MinkoffD.AgnoneJ. (2010). Consolidating social change: The consequences of foundation funding for developing social movement infrastructures. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 347–367). Brookings Institution Press.
49.
MosleyJ. E.JarpeM. (2019). How structural variations in collaborative governance networks influence advocacy involvement and outcomes. Public Administration Review, 79(5), 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13037
50.
MurrayM. (2010). Private management of public spaces: Nonprofit organizations and urban parks. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 34, 179–255.
51.
O’ConnorA. (2010). Foundations, social movements, and the contradictions of liberal philanthropy. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 328–346). Brookings Institution Press.
52.
OstromE. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585925
53.
O’TooleL. J.MeierK. J. (2004). Desperately seeking Selznick: Cooptation and the dark side of public management in networks. Public Administration Review, 64(6), 681–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00415.x
54.
ParmarI. (2002). American foundations and the development of international knowledge networks. Global Networks, 2(1), 13–30.
55.
PillM. C. (2019). Embedding in the city? Locating civil society in the philanthropy of place. Community Development Journal, 54(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsx020
QuinnR.Tompkins-StangeM.MeyersonD. (2014). Beyond grantmaking: Philanthropic foundations as agents of change and institutional entrepreneurs. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(6), 950–968. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764013488836
58.
RavazziS. (2016). Philanthropic foundations and local policy making in the austerity era: Does urban governance matter?Lex Localis—Journal of Local Self-Government, 14(4), 917–935.
59.
ReckhowS. (2012). Follow the money: How foundation dollars change public school politics. Oxford University Press.
60.
ReckhowS.DowneyD.SapotichneJ. (2020). Governing Without Government: Nonprofit governance in Detroit and Flint. Urban Affairs Review, 56(5), 1472–1502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087419847531
61.
SørensenE.TorfingJ. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43(8), 842–868. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399711418768
62.
SørensenE.TorfingJ. (2018a). Co-initiation of collaborative innovation in urban spaces. Urban Affairs Review, 54(2), 388–418. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087416651936
63.
SørensenE.TorfingJ. (2018b). The democratizing impact of governance networks: From pluralization, via democratic anchorage, to interactive political leadership. Public Administration, 96(2), 302–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12398
ScottT. A. (2015). Does collaboration make any difference? Linking collaborative governance to environmental outcomes. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34(3), 537–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.21836
66.
ScottT. A.ThomasC. W. (2017). Winners and losers in the ecology of games: Network position, connectivity, and the benefits of collaborative governance regimes. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), 647–660. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux009
67.
ShiauE.MussoJ.SellersJ. M. (2015). City fragmentation and neighborhood connections: The political dynamics of community revitalization in Los Angeles. In StoneC. N.StokerR. P. (Eds.), Urban neighborhoods in a new era: Revitalization politics in the postindustrial city (pp. 131–154). University of Chicago Press.
68.
StokerR. P.StoneC. N.WorgsD. (2015). Neighborhood policy in Baltimore: The postindustrial turn. In StoneC. N.StokerR. P. (Eds.), Urban neighborhoods in a new era: Revitalization politics in the postindustrial city (pp. 50–80). University of Chicago Press.
69.
StoneC. N. (1989). Regime politics: Governing Atlanta 1946-1988. University of Kansas Press.
70.
StoneC. N. (2015). Reflections on regime politics: From governing coalition to urban political order. Urban Affairs Review, 51(1), 101–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087414558948
71.
StoneC. N.StokerR. P. (2015). Urban neighborhoods in a new era. University of Chicago Press.
72.
ThomsonD. E. (2013). Targeting neighborhoods, stimulating markets: Exploring the role of political, institutional, and technical variables in three cities. In DewarM.ThomasJ. M. (Eds.), Remaking the city after abandonment (pp. 104–132). Penn Press.
73.
ThomsonD. E. (2019). Donor-driven democracy? Governance implications of foundation-dependent revitalization. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(4), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1451254
74.
ThomsonD. E. (2020). Philanthropic funding for community and economic development: Exploring potential for influencing policy and governance. Urban Affairs Review, 57(6), 1483–1523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087420926698
75.
ThomsonD. E. (2021). Foundation activism in urban revitalization: Effects on institutions and political agency. Journal of Urban Affairs. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2021.1909423
WaltersP. B.BowmanE. A. (2010). Foundations and the making of public education in the United States, 1867-1950. In AnheierH. K.HammackD. C. (Eds.), American foundations: Roles and contributions (pp. 31–50). Brookings Institution Press.
78.
WilliamsN. P. O.FerrisJ. M. (2019). Scaling up: How philanthropy helped unlock $4.7 billion to tackle homelessness in Los Angeles (Cases in philanthropic leadership). The Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy.
79.
WuV. C. S. (2021). Community leadership as multi-dimensional capacities: A conceptual framework and preliminary findings for community foundations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 32(1), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21467
80.
YoungD. R. (1999). Complementary, supplementary, or adversarial? A theoretical and historical examination of nonprofit government relations in the United States. In BorisE. T.SteuerleC. E. (Eds.), Nonprofits and government: Collaboration and conflict (pp. 31–67). Urban Institute Press.
81.
ZafonteM.SabatierP. (1998). Shared beliefs and imposed interdependencies as determinants of ally networks in overlapping subsystems. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(4), 473–505. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951692898010004005
