With the looks of it, the 1st ODI between India and England is likely to be called offWelcome to the coverage of the 1st ODI between India and England from the County cricket ground in Bristol.ScorecardBAD News: The officials have decided to abandon the 1st ODI between India and England due to relentless rain in Bristol. We’ll have to wait for the highly-anticipated action in the 2nd ODI on Wednesday. guess if its raining a lot, we could have had a swimming competition in Bristol. Jaddu would have won!! #IndvsEng ROHAN R SHANBHAG (@rony619619) August 25, 2014Rain Update: The boundary edges resemble a lake. It is still spitting down at Bristol. The cut-off time is 15:47(BST). Well, it has been that kind of a day! will be very surprised if we get a ball in today. super soppers working but rain unrelenting. Harsha Bhogle (@bhogleharsha) August 25, 2014BAD NEWS: It has been raining all night in Bristol and there’s no relief on the match day. The covers are on and a handful of spectators are in the stands with their umbrellas providing the much-needed cover. There’s no news on the toss as of now and the chances are we might not see the two teams in action today. Stay tuned for more updates.It seems Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar has come in the form of rain to save the Indians from a defeat in the 1st ODI. #EngvsInd #IndvsEng #God Rust In Peace (@RustedHandle) August 25, 2014India: The Indian setup would look to rekindle the fond memories of winning the Champions Trophy 2013 that took place in England. However, it would be an uphill task for the Indian think-tank to lift the sagging morale of the team. They need to show a bit of character after the thumping India received at the hands of England in Tests.advertisementIn the batting line-up, Dhawan and Rohit Sharma are expected to open the innings in the first match. With field restrictions in place, good batting tracks and pacers generally bowling dry lengths, it can help the opening duo to play through the line and accrue runs.Kohli, who found runs hard to come by in Tests will look to show his worth in the ODI series. He is proven performer in this format. Kohli, when required, can pace the innings and in the end overs, plays with that raw boyishness to flay the opposition ranks all over the ground. Ajinkya Rahane and the experienced campaigner, Suresh Raina, bring solidarity to the middle-order. Of course in Dhoni, India have arguably the greatest finisher of all time in this format. India may also use Stuart Binny or Sanju Samson as a floater in the batting order.India’s bowling will depend on the swing merchant, Bhuvneshwar Kumar. In fact, it is largely an inexperienced pace attack. So, it is imperative that Mohammed Shami delivers the goods and bowls well in tandem with Kumar upfront. Mohit Sharma, the medium pacer has shown that he has a few variations up his sleeve.With umpires ready to give batsmen lbw on the front-foot, Jadeja, has made his mark during the last few years. He also bowls with good control. Ravichandran Ashwin can also come in handy with his off-breaks. Both of them can put up fine performances with the bat too. There is an inkling that leg-spinners can trouble English batsmen. However, it doesn’t seem likely that Karn Sharma will be preferred to Ashwin or Jadeja for the first game. India dropped a lot of chances during the Test series, but in recent times, the ground fielding has been of acceptable standards in ODIs.England:With seniors like Jonathon Trott, Kevin Pietersen and Graeme Swann missing from the line-up for different reasons, England are in a rebuilding phase. Their go-to man in the ODI format, Stuart Broad, too won’t take part in the series due to a knee injury.England selectors have tried to bring in a few new faces into the squad, and one of them is Alex Hales. The towering giant from Nottinghamshire, known for his whirlwind knocks in T20Is hasn’t yet played for England in ODIs. Hales, on his day, has the ability to rip-apart the opposition attack with a compendium of eye-catching strokes. He mainly targets the area between long on and long off region. Hales, can also play debonair pulls and hooks.It would be interesting to see whether England will open with Ian Bell and Cook or plump for Hales to bring in a dash of bravado to their line-up.The southpaw, Eoin Morgan, will continue to be the engine room of their middle-order. It has to be said though, Joe Root has shown that he can change gears as and when required. Moeen Ali, likely will find a place in the line-up, as he can twirl his arm over and take wickets with his brand of off-spin. Jos Buttler will be expected to go for the jugular and provide the finishing touches in the end overs by playing with vitality and vigour.advertisementIn the bowling department, James Anderson, will look to torment the Indian batsmen yet again with seam and swing. Since struggling in 2011 World Cup in the subcontinent, Anderson seems to have altered his modus operandi ever so slightly, as he generally hits back of a length in the shorter version of the game. Only when he finds some movement in the air or off the track, he tends to pitch it up further. It has certainly helped the stalwart of the England attack, as he has taken 65 wickets since 2011 World Cup at an average of 21.04.With Broad not in the squad, Steven Finn gets a chance to prove his worth. Finn, has all the required attributes to take wickets in the ODI series against India. If anything, he struggles a bit against left-handed batsmen. Harry Gurney is a fine addition to the setup. Gurney, being a left-arm quick, brings that much-needed variety to the line-up. Chris Jordan too has been among the wickets. James Tradwell is the main spinner in the squad.It is also intriguing to note that Ravi Bopara, a fine performer for England in the last few years has been dropped, and they have shown faith in the young all-rounder, Ben Stokes.Teams(from):India: Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane, Ambati Rayudu, Suresh Raina, MS Dhoni(c/wk), Ravindra Jadeja, Ravichandran Ashwin, Bhuvneshwar Kumar, Mohit Sharma, Umesh Yadav, Mohammed Shami, Dhawal Kulkarni, Sanju Samson, Stuart Binny, Karn SharmaEngland: Alastair Cook(c), Alex Hales, Ian Bell, Gary Ballance, Joe Root, Jos Buttler(wk), Moeen Ali, Chris Jordan, James Anderson, James Tredwell, Harry Gurney, Steven Finn, Eoin Morgan, Chris Woakes, Ben Stokes
New Delhi: Shooting legend Jaspal Rana on Wednesday lauded Narinder Batra for backing his sport but did not agree with IOA chief’s suggestion that India should stop competing at the Commonwealth Games.Batra triggered a debate on the issue with his comment that the CWG was a waste of time and the country should consider a permanent pull out from the quadrennial event. Batra is of the view that the level of competition at the CWG is not good enough.”I second him (Batra) because he is supporting my sport. You (2022 CWG organisers) cannot just withdraw a sport that has been part of the roster for so many years,” Rana, who is also national junior pistol coach, told PTI.”But this can also have a negative side to it because pulling out altogether is going to affect the athletes. Winning a medal, irrespective of the magnitude of the event, is huge for an athlete.”It’s a platform for them to prepare for bigger events like the Olympics. Moreover, from shooting’s point of view, it is a case of Indian shooting improving a lot in the last few years than anything else. So it has both negative and positive sides,” he added.Batra had earlier called for an Indian boycott of the 2022 CWG in Birmingham over non-inclusion of shooting in the Games roster.His suggestion on pulling out from the CWG, though, didn’t find many takers. Get the best of News18 delivered to your inbox – subscribe to News18 Daybreak. Follow News18.com on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, TikTok and on YouTube, and stay in the know with what’s happening in the world around you – in real time. Commonwealth gamesjaspal ranaNarinder Batrashooting First Published: September 25, 2019, 9:32 PM IST
There are three Cs to getting the kind of job you want and earning the kind of money you want to earn. These three Cs basically remain constant throughout your working career. They are contacts, credibility, and competence.First, the more contacts you have in the marketplace, the more likely it is you will find the job you want. The more people you know and who know you, the more likely it is you will uncover one of the 85 percent or more of job openings that are never listed anywhere.This is why it is so important for you to network continually. Join clubs and associations. Ask people for referrals and references. Tell your friends, relatives, and associates that you are in the market for a new job. Make sure that everyone you know is aware that you are available and looking for a job.Nothing is more important than your circle of contacts. The great majority of jobs that are filled in the hidden job market are filled because someone knows someone. And you can expand your range of contacts just by telling people that you are available and asking for their help and their advice.Your Reputation is ImportantThe second C is credibility. This is made up of your reputation and your character. Your credibility is the most important single quality about you in terms of getting recommendations and referrals from your contacts.Make sure that everything you do is consistent with the highest ethical standards. Make sure that you never say or do anything that could be misconstrued by anyone as anything other than excellent conduct and behavior.Remember, people will only recommend you for a job opening if they are completely confident that they will not end up looking foolish as a result of something you do or say.Be Good at What you doThe third C is competence. In the final analysis, it is how good you are and how good you have been in your previous jobs that will determine, more than anything else, how good you can be at the job under consideration. Next to your character, your level of competence will be the single most important factor in determining your success in your career. This is why you must be continually working to maintain and upgrade your levels of competence through personal study all your working life.The Seven Qualities Most in DemandEvery employer has had a certain amount of experience with both good and bad employees. For this reason every employer has a pretty good idea of what he or she wants more of. Here are the big seven:1. The first quality that employers look for is intelligence. In every study, it has been found that fully 76 percent of the productivity and contribution of an employee will be determined by his or her level of intelligence. Intelligence in this sense means the ability to plan, to organize, to set priorities, to solve problems, and to get the job done. Intelligence refers to your level of common sense and your practical ability to deal with the day-to-day challenges of the job. The key to demonstrating your intelligence is for you to ask intelligent questions. One of the hallmarks of intelligence that is immediately evident is curiosity. The more you ask good questions and listen to the answers, the smarter you appear.2. The second quality sought by employers is leadership ability. Leadership is the willingness and the desire to accept responsibility for results. It’s the ability to take charge, to volunteer for assignments, and to accept accountability for achieving the required results of those assignments.The mark of the leader is that he or she does not make excuses. You demonstrate your willingness to be a leader in the organization by offering to take charge of achieving company goals and then committing yourself to performing at high levels.3. Integrity is the third quality sought by employers. It’s probably the most important single quality for long-term success in life and at work. Integrity begins by being true to yourself. This means that you are perfectly honest with yourself and in your relationships with others. You are willing to admit your strengths and weaknesses. You are willing to admit where you have made mistakes in the past. Especially, you demonstrate loyalty. You never say anything negative about a previous employer or a person whom you have worked with or for. Even if you were fired from a previous job, never say anything negative or critical.4. The fourth quality that employers look for is likability. Employers like people who are warm, friendly, easygoing, and cooperative with others. Employers are looking for people who can join the team and be part of the work family.Men and women with good personalities are invariably more popular and more effective at whatever they do. Teamwork is the key to business success. Your experience in working as part of a team in the past and your willingness to work as part of a team in the future can be among the most attractive things about you in applying for a job.5. Competence is the fifth quality sought by employers. We spoke about this earlier. Competence is terribly important to your success. It is really the foundation of everything that happens to you in your career.In its simplest terms, competence is the ability to get the job done. It is the ability to set priorities, to separate the relevant from the irrelevant tasks, and then to concentrate single-mindedly until the job is complete.6. Courage is the sixth quality that employers look for. This is the willingness to take risks. Courage also means the willingness to accept challenges, the willingness to take on big jobs or even new jobs where there is a high degree of uncertainty and the possibility of failure.Courage also means the willingness to speak up and say exactly what you think and feel in a difficult situation. Employers admire men and women who are not afraid to speak their minds. And you demonstrate this in a job interview when you ask frank and direct questions about the company, the position, and the future that you might have with the organization7. The final quality employers look for is inner strength. Inner strength means that you have the determination and the ability to persevere in the face of adversity. Inner strength means that you have the quality of persistence when the going gets rough. You demonstrate inner strength when you remain calm, cool, and relaxed during the job interview. If you are calm and cool during the interview, it is a good indication that you will be calm and cool in the inevitable crises that occur during the day-to- day operations of the company.Above all, it is your character, which is the sum total of all your positive qualities, that will have the greatest impact on whether you get the job you want. Your job now is to continue working on your character by practicing the behaviors of top people at every opportunity. – Originally posted on the Personal Branding Blog by Brian Tracy
1. When you’re about to start the job hunt and reality sets inThe downside of quitting your job and going travelling is when it’s all over you have to go job hunting again… #jobhunt #helpme pic.twitter.com/FVipTtUUQO— JESSICA KEYNES (@jckeynes) February 5, 20182. And it’s time to get all your professional documents together but you don’t even know where to beginI need to make my portfolio more professional, for the real world. Spoiler alert, I have no idea what to include. #JobHuntStruggle pic.twitter.com/pKeniYsyyL— monica (@phact) August 28, 20173. And you realize you need a PhD equivalent for an entry level customer service job Looking for a job?#funny #memes #comedy #humor #jobsearch #jobhunting pic.twitter.com/Ftx8xZ49Jj— JabberKing (@jabber_king) August 10, 20174. But you start to feel inspired and are ready to crush your applications When you’re caffeinated and motivated enough for a cover letter #hireme #youknowyoushould pic.twitter.com/t4ic2oa9b3— Annette Lucero (@annettelucero24) January 31, 20185. And you’re persistent so you know how important it is to follow up with every job application Following up on job applications like pic.twitter.com/FFZ7qEAXOa— Becca Rose (@BecRose13) February 1, 20186. But you’re not getting any traction and you start to wonder if your career expectations need some adjusting My dream job: #PuppyBowl Referee. pic.twitter.com/0LHREWHaLK— Mike Welch (@RealMikeWelch) February 4, 20187. And you really can’t stand it when people ask you how your job hunt is goingwhen your mom asks you how your job search is going and you just burst into tears pic.twitter.com/aBwgdrPPlk— Morgo Huncho (@MizzMurrgan) September 17, 20168. But then you finally start hearing back, and when it rains, it pours! Why is it when I’m looking for a job for months I have no luck, then once I finally get one interview, I get five? #whatismylife— cara corsaro (@carathegrouch) March 19, 20149. So you start preparing your list of strengths and weaknesses*Job Interview*“Tell me about yourself”*flashback to when I used to pull out USB drive without clicking safely eject*“I’m risk taker”— Paridecay (@sarcastictroler) February 21, 201710. And your answers to your typical interview questions interviewer: why do you want this job?me: I’ve always been passionate about being able to afford food— justin (@justinnlailai) February 20, 201711. And you start the interview process which can definitely feel painful at timesInterviewing for multiple jobs is almost like being on a really stressful dating show.— Hilary (@hilarywaite) January 25, 201812. And your interview skills might be a little rustyJob interviewing after years of security must be like dating for the first time post-Tinder. Such a different landscape. Or maybe I’m old.— Rebecca Pate (@rpate) November 7, 201713. But after all your hard work and what seemed like an eternal job search, you finally get the call with a great company extending you the offer for a great job! #ClaimingIt: That job transition is coming. The job you’ve been searching for is coming. Be expecting that “Congratulations! We would like to welcome you!” email. Be ready for the blessings and breakthrough! pic.twitter.com/LuUXIZIx8f— Sierra Shantè (@sierrashante) January 31, 2018 We’ve all experienced the highs and lows of searching for a new job. This rollercoaster experience can sometimes go a little like this…
Everton are confident signing Malaga striker Sandro Ramirez.The Mirror says the Toffees have splashed £53m this week on Jordan Pickford and Davy Klaassen.And now a deal for Malaga forward Sandro is close.The Spaniard, who is away at the Under-21 European Championships, passed a medical last week.Everton are confident of settling on a fee for former Barcelona striker Sandro with Malaga.
New Everton shot-stopper Jordan Pickford remains focused on his next challenge at international level after England bowed out of the U21 European Championships.The 23-year old, who signed with the Toffees from Sunderland earlier this month, wants to make a case to be named in Gareth Southgate’s England squad.Pickford said: “We’re all disappointed but we have a lot of lads who will have the chance to come again to the tournament in two years.”And then there’s others like myself who have to try and kick on and get in the senior squad.”
ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on February 20, 2018February 27, 2018By: Mebrahtu Abraha Gebremikael, Elke Konings and Christie Roberts, Management Sciences for Health (MSH)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Even as more women in Ethiopia are receiving antenatal care (ANC) services, coming earlier in their pregnancies and more frequently for care, maternal mortality remains high. The leading causes of maternal death include hypertension, eclampsia, hemorrhage and obstructed labor, all of which are more common among women with gestational diabetes, or high blood sugar that is detected during pregnancy. Gestational diabetes can also have serious effects on babies, including abnormal birth weight, congenital malformation, respiratory distress syndrome or stillbirth. Evidence suggests that gestational diabetes is highly treatable and, since it is associated with other conditions, there may be opportunities for integrated treatment approaches. But pregnant women in Ethiopia are rarely screened for this condition, which contributes to gaps in diagnosis and the measurement of prevalence. In fact, it is not clear how widespread the problem is around the world: Varying estimates show gestational diabetes affecting less than 1% to as many as 28% of pregnant women globally.Prevalence and risk factorsTo address this knowledge gap, Management Sciences for Health (MSH) carried out a study assessing how common gestational diabetes is in Ethiopia and identifying its associated risk factors. We also examined the feasibility of integrating low-cost services for gestational diabetes into ANC. The study was conducted at three health centers in the Tigray Region—two serving primarily urban women and one serving mainly rural clients—where we trained ANC providers to collect demographic and health data from the pregnant women, including outcomes of previous pregnancies, personal and family histories, blood pressure levels as well as results of urine, glucose, anemia and HIV tests.Each woman was asked to return for follow-up testing early in the morning after an overnight fast. Women who were diagnosed with gestational diabetes were then provided advice on diet and exercise, and 79% of the women who followed the dietary and exercise regimen were able to bring their blood glucose levels to normal after two weeks. Health center staff referred those who did not respond well to a hospital for further treatment. Among the 1,242 pregnant women who were tested, more than 11% were found to have gestational diabetes—higher than previous estimates among pregnant women in Ethiopia of between 4% and 9%. We found no significant difference between women with gestational diabetes and women without the condition in terms of age, occupation, education or marital status. Urban women, however, were diagnosed with gestational diabetes at a rate two-and-a-half times higher than rural women. Women with gestational diabetes were also significantly more obese than those without gestational diabetes, and they were also nearly three times more likely to have a close family member with diabetes. Furthermore, 22% of women living with HIV were diagnosed with gestational diabetes, compared with only 11% of HIV-negative women.ImplicationsWhat does this tell us? The unexpectedly high rate of gestational diabetes suggests that the condition may be a neglected factor contributing to Ethiopia’s continued high maternal and infant mortality rates. And the findings that urban residence, obesity and family history were the main characteristics associated with gestational diabetes diagnosis point to lifestyle as a potential risk factor.The high rate of gestational diabetes among women living with HIV suggests both the importance of screening this group and the need for further study. This is especially true because Ethiopia has expanded antiretroviral treatment coverage for HIV patients and has adopted Option B+, through which all pregnant women living with HIV receive lifelong antiretroviral treatment. With more HIV-positive women receiving treatment, integrating testing for gestational diabetes into HIV care could help health services identify and treat women at high risk.Our study showed that integrating screening and counseling on nutrition and exercise into routine ANC can be effective in managing gestational diabetes, especially when followed by support and mentoring from health professionals. More research is needed to assess rates of gestational diabetes in other regions of Ethiopia and to test the care model on a larger scale. Further study should also examine specialized treatment services to support women—21% in our study—who do not respond to treatment models such as the one tested, especially women in rural and low-resource settings, and at special services for women living with HIV. Investments in diagnosing gestational diabetes can improve maternal, newborn and child outcomes in both the short- and long-term.—Learn more about identifying and treating gestational diabetes among women living with HIV>>Access key resources related to gestational diabetes>>Browse published posts in the MHTF’s “Noncommunicable Diseases and Maternal Health” blog series.Photo Credit: Warren ZelmanShare this:
Dinesh Chandimal-led Sri Lankan squad arrived for their six-week tour of India, which starts here with the first of the three-Test series, beginning on November 16.Sri Lanka will play three Tests, three ODIs and three T20 Internationals against Virat Kohli’s India. The 15-member squad will hit the nets from tomorrow ahead of their two-day practice game against Board President’s XI at the JU (2nd Campus ground), starting November 11.”They will take rest today and hit the nets tomorrow afternoon,” the local manager added.The last time Sri Lanka played Test matches in India was seven years back in 2009, a three-match series that they lost 0-2. Earlier this year, India beat Sri Lanka 3-0 in Tests followed by clean sweep in ODIs and lone T20 International.However the islanders had a better show against Pakistan winning away Test series in UAE 2-0. But in the ODI series that followed they were routed 0-5 by Pakistan.Sri Lanka squad: Dinesh Chandimal (captain), Dimuth Karunaratne, Sadeera Samarawickrama, Lahiru Thirimanne (vice- captain), Niroshan Dickwella (wicketkeeper), Dilruwan Perera, Rangana Herath, Suranga Lakmal, Lahiru Gamage, Dhananjaya de Silva, Angelo Mathews, Lakshan Sandakan, Vishwa Fernando, Dasun Shanaka and Roshen Silva.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
England thrashed defending champions Australia by 8 wickets to enter their first World Cup final since 1992 at Edgbaston on Thursday.England will face New Zealand at the Lord’s as the game is set to have a new Champion on July 14. New Zealand had stunned India by 18 runs in a low-scoring thriller to reach the Cricket World Cup final for the second time in a row on Wednesday.Hosts rode on Jason Roy’s blistering 85 to chase down the modest target after bowling out Australia for 223 in the 2nd semi-final of World Cup 2019.In the past, England have hosted the World Cup four times but are yet to win the world title. England will be playing their first 50-over World Cup final after 27 years after the 1992 edition in which they had lost to Pakistan in the summit clash. Before that England had played the finals in 1979 and 1987.The final on Sunday will be the fourth instance when two sides, who had previously never won the World Cup, will be facing each other after 1975 (West Indies vs Australia), 1987 (Australia vs England) and 1992 (Pakistan vs England).If England beat New Zealand in the summit clash, then they will become the third nation after India and Australia to lift the trophy on home soil. India was the first team to achieve the feat in 2011 while Australia replicated it in 2015.The 2011 edition belonged to the co-hosts – India and Sri Lanka – with both making the finals. But Gautam Gambhir and MS Dhoni’s heroics with the bat helped India lift the coveted trophy for the second time after 1983 in a tense final at Wankhede Stadium.advertisement2015 World Cup final also saw two host nations bidding for the title. Trans-Tasman rivals New Zealand and Australia saw off South Africa and India respectively in the semis.The final turned out to be a lop-sided affair after New Zealand was bowled out for 183 and Australia chasing it down with 101 balls remaining for a seven-wicket victory.Can England make it a hat-trick of World Cup wins for the host nation or will New Zealand break the host trend to clinch their first World Cup title?Also Read | How victory over India gave England confidence vs Australia in World Cup semi-finalAlso Read | Australia lose a World Cup semi-final for the first time in historyAlso See:
Professor Kash Rangan is one of the pioneers of Harvard Business School’s Social Enterprise Initiative, now 15 years old. Back in 1993, most people took a “spray and pray” approach to philanthropy—writing checks to charities and hoping something would happen. But Rangan and HBS professor Jim Austin, picked by Dean John McArthur to lead the new initiative, saw the potential for research, curriculum, and career development around the challenges of social enterprises, including both nonprofit and for-profit organizations. Over the ensuing years, the initiative flourished as did the nation’s social enterprise organizations.Today, the United States has more than 1.4 million non-profit organizations, and they account for 5 percent of GDP. Annual contributions have grown faster than the economy for years, and experts predict an avalanche of cash ahead. By 2052, an estimated $6 trillion will flow directly to social enterprise organizations. Concurrently, a new generation of business leaders and philanthropists is experimenting with hybrid forms of social enterprises while demanding more transparency and accountability from the organizations they are funding. In Rangan’s view, the sector is poised on the brink of transformation, a topic he enthusiastically expounded upon during a recent interview in his Morgan Hall office.Roger Thompson: The terms “social enterprise” and “nonprofit” seem to be used interchangeably. Are they synonymous?Kash Rangan: No. There’s an important distinction. Very early in the program we decided that we wouldn’t focus purely on nonprofits. We thought it should be about social enterprise, regardless of whether it’s for-profit or nonprofit. We defined social enterprise as an entity that’s primarily in the business of creating social value. As long as an organization creates significant social value, we don’t care how it sustains itself—with internally generated surplus or with donor funds.Americans give roughly $300 billion a year to nonprofits, yet we really don’t know much about what charitable organizations actually accomplish. Why aren’t nonprofits more accountable and transparent with all this money?That’s a very big issue in this sector because there is no common measure or framework to assess whether these organizations are accomplishing their mission. Even simple measures are not widely reported, like we got X donations, and we took care of 1,000 children at a cost of $80 a child, which is less than $120 a child spent by comparable organizations. Even that amount of reporting would be very useful, but it is not the norm.By and large the reporting focuses on the costs of raising money. The lower the better, with the logic being that more money can then go to actual programs. So an organization might report, “We spend 6 percent on fundraising, whereas the industry average is 12 to 14 percent.” That’s typical, but beyond that, we don’t know how the other 94 percent is used. How many people came into the program, and what benefits did they get? And then the even bigger question beyond cost efficiency and effectiveness is, what impact did the organization have? Granted it is very complex to get all the way to that level, but even signposts along the way could be very useful.Q: Which is harder: raising money, building a successful organization, or achieving real impact?A: They are all interrelated, but raising money is not the hardest of the three. Getting money is hard, but it is not more difficult than the other two. That’s why there are over 1.4 million nonprofits, each with some amount of funding.Putting the money to good use, building a successful organization, showing that you have a demonstrable impact in achieving your mission, and then scaling the organization are the hardest to accomplish. When you show impact, more money will flow in.Q: Given how few nonprofits can document impact, would you say these organizations suffer from a leadership deficit?No, I wouldn’t put it that way. Many nonprofit leaders are fantastic, more than is acknowledged. They work hard, and they are very passionate about what they do. So I wouldn’t call it a leadership deficit. I think there’s an imagination deficit.“I wouldn’t call it a leadership deficit. I think there’s an imagination deficit.”Leaders typically ask, “Am I accomplishing my program?” But that is too narrow a view. Nonprofit leaders need to be more visionary. They need to stretch themselves more and worry about mission impact. I believe nonprofit leaders get too bogged down in operational issues, be it fundraising, or managing the board, or program execution. They need to be more strategic.Q: What role can HBS and other business schools play in helping develop the next generation of social enterprise leaders?A: I don’t think the business schools by themselves are going to solve this problem. Whether it’s HBS or any other business school, ultimately I think students come to learn how to be leaders in the business arena. Right now 5 percent of our graduates go to work in the nonprofit sector. To expect 20 to 30 percent is asking too much. Maybe we could pump the percentage up to 7 to 10 percent. But at the end of the day, even counting graduates from other business schools, if you produce 2,000 to 3,000 MBAs a year to work in a sector with more than 1.4 million nonprofits, it’s just a drop in the bucket. There are huge salary discrepancies as well.Ultimately our impact lies beyond directly producing leaders for nonprofits. At least half of our graduates between ten and fifteen years out are quite involved with nonprofits. They might not be directly engaged as leaders, but they sit on boards, provide donations, and serve as volunteers. And they can influence and bring about change. That’s where the education we impart at HBS is so important. Our approach to social enterprise has broad appeal to students who may not even go to work directly in the sector. Without it, they would always approach nonprofits as philanthropy. I believe our curriculum conditions our graduates to ask the difficult questions on performance, and even go beyond and recall cases, frameworks, and solution approaches. It is quite a different approach to participating in the sector. In a way they become the catalysts for internal change.Q: Many alumni get involved with corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. Critics of CSR often cite Milton Friedman, who famously said that “the social responsibility of business is to increase profits.” Do you agree?A: I absolutely think it’s too narrow a view. In the decade of the ’90s, maximizing shareholder value became a corporate mantra. But the notion that the corporation exists only to maximize shareholder value lasted only a decade. It was a historical anomaly. In almost every other decade business leaders have acknowledged that corporations exist within the larger fabric of society. The School’s second dean, Wallace Donham, said that the focus of a business is to make a decent profit decently.Q: Venture philanthropy, which applies principles of venture investing to social enterprises, has become a hot topic lately. Is venture philanthropy a good idea?A: The first generation of venture philanthropy had its roots in the success of venture capital. Investors were carried away by the notion of gaining economic returns on their investments, not huge returns but some returns, as a way of forcing an efficient use of their capital. The shining example was microfinance, which provided attractive returns, so why not otherforms of social enterprise?I don’t think that’s a realistic view of the work of nonprofits in general. If you look at social service organizations working at the cutting edge of where markets have failed, the idea of venture philanthropy clicking is a little hard for me to buy into. Venture philanthropy has to come of age and reorient itself by defining what measures of social return it is looking for. In some instances social and economic returns could be correlated, but in many cases they won’t. If you are looking for a social and not an economic return, then loyalty to the program rather than an exit strategy may be a better use of funds. The venture philanthropy community has some translation work to do. Right now venture philanthropy is only a small part of the landscape.Q: Another hot topic in the nonprofit world is the idea of creating a for-profit business to help underwrite the cost of operations. Is this the way to go to secure a reliable stream of funds?A: I don’t think so. There’s a lot of charitable money available. Family foundations now number more than 34,000, an increase of 22 percent between 2001 and 2005. Big foundations have more money in their endowments than they can give away. And there is an intergenerational transfer estimated at $6 trillion over the next fifty years specifically earmarked for social enterprises. None of these sources of money is actually looking for an economic return. They’re definitely looking for a social return. That being the case, I don’t think that nonprofits should quickly jump at creating for-profit enterprises. In certain segments like health care, and even arts and culture, it might make sense when the for-profit and nonprofit parts are tightly linked by a common purpose or platform. For example, in health care several very successful social entrepreneurs have created a hybrid model where paying clients subsidize the “free” clients. The whole organization, however, is doing only one thing, eye surgery or heart surgery or orthopedic surgery and so on.But to think that an environmental organization could sustain itself by selling mugs and T-shirts is a bit of a stretch. It is not that hard to put together a for-profit arm, but to have it be a significant contributor to the core mission requires considerable strategic work. It may not be possible for a vast majority of organizations in this space. It could be an unnecessary distraction.Q: Where do you see social enterprise heading over the next decade?A: I am an optimist, and I believe we will see refreshing changes in that time frame. The new cadre of donors, the new family foundations, the folks who are involved in venture philanthropy, the new generation of entrepreneurs, and business leaders engaged in corporate social responsibility initiatives all will start attacking social issues in a much more disciplined way. Nonprofits too are very adaptive organizations. I expect to see some common understanding in the sector of what performance means, and how social value creation is measured and reported. From there on it is only a matter of aligning the money with the causes they care about. Perhaps investment intermediaries will emerge to ease the introductions and connections. There may be some consolidation of nonprofits at the top, but the sector will be a lot more vibrant with many new players and actors helping to facilitate the transformation.About the authorRoger Thompson is editor of the HBS Alumni Bulletin.Copyright © 2008 President and Fellows of Harvard College
Fiscal sponsorship is a practice that has evolved as an effective and efficient means of starting new charitable initiatives, delivering public services, and seeding social movements. Fiscal sponsors are nonprofits that enable the movement of resources from funders and donors to projects, activities, ideas, and organizations that share the fiscal sponsor’s mission.One way to find a fiscal sponsor is through your current affiliations, such as theaters, libraries, community organizations, or professional societies that are familiar with your work. In addition, several websites have information on finding a fiscal sponsor, along with examples of policies, procedures, and guidelines for fiscal sponsorship agreements. Here are some reccomended resources:Guide to Fiscal Sponsorship from the Foundation Center Fiscal Sponsorship Resources from the Tides CenterGuide to Fiscal Sponsorship from Community Technical Assistance Center (CTAC)Fiscalsponsordirectory.org is a tool created by the San Francisco Study Center to help connect community projects with fiscal sponsors; it is also a forum for fostering understanding of that relationship and its impact on the nonprofit sector.Finally, below are tips for finding Fiscal Sponsorship from Kim Klein of Grassroots Fundraising:Dear Kim:I belong to a small “Women in Black” group that has been considering doing minimal fundraising for our organization for banners and signs, buttons, fliers, etc. for use at our vigils. We are all volunteer, we have no office and we use a PO Box. We are truly “grassroots.” Is there a way that we could find an organization that would be our “sponsor” so that we could do this kind of minimal fundraising without becoming a “non-profit corporation” ourselves? Are we too political for anyone to take us on?~Seeking small money and smaller hassleDear Seeking:The relationship you are looking for is called “fiscal sponsorship” and it should be relatively easy to find someone to do that for you. The fiscal sponsor handles donations and assumes fiduciary responsibility for you. They charge a fee, usually a percentage of the money you raise, for doing that work. Donors make their checks out to the name of the fiscal sponsor, which sometimes confuses people, but that is a minor problem. I don’t think you should have trouble finding a fiscal sponsor because Women in Black, if memory serves, does not engage in electoral politics, and mostly uses the witness of a silent vigil to do your important peacemaking work. To find a fiscal sponsor, you should contact your local community foundation or Volunteer Center. If you have a number of peace and justice groups in your area, ask them for leads to fiscal sponsors. Here in California, we are blessed to have the Agape Foundation which sponsors small peace groups, and probably is aware of other similar organizations in the rest of the United States. (www.agapefn.org)I don’t know all the reasons you want access to nonprofit status, but if it is so that you can allow donors to get a tax deduction for their donations to your organization, you may want to consider this: 70% of Americans file a short form and do not receive any tax benefits for their charitable giving. You could also set up a checking account as a “DBA” (Doing Business As) and not have formal tax status at all. Someone in your organization will need to provide the bank with her social security number and that person will be responsible for managing the finances and keeping track of income and expenses. You may need to file some forms with the city where you live, following the same laws as a small business. However, if you are simply raising small amounts of money, mostly in cash, from a broad cross section of donors, most of whom are not going to use their gift to you as a tax deduction, even having a fiscal sponsor may be more trouble than it’s worth. If you go this latter route, I would seek the advice of a small business accountant or even someone at your bank about how best to do it. I definitely do not recommend seeking your own nonprofit status.Good luck!~Kim Klein
ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on May 17, 2011June 20, 2017By: Kate Kerber and Ribka Amsalu, Save the ChildrenClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)The following post originally appeared on the Healthy Newborn Network blog. It is reposted here with permissionImagine you are eight months pregnant with your third child with two other young children at home. The ground starts moving violently beneath you and panic sets in. You flee your collapsing home with your children. The aftershocks are intense and dramatic. You have lost family members and friends in the chaos and confusion. The earthquake devastates the healthcare system, leaving you no choice but to deliver your baby alone, or if you are fortunate, in a mobile or temporary clinic.Natural and man-made disasters grab the attention of the masses, and individuals from all walks of life are compelled to donate their time and money to rebuilding efforts. The last twelve months have seen an unprecedented number of natural disasters in high income countries (earthquakes in Japan and New Zealand, tornados in the US, flooding in Australia). These events, no matter where they occur, are destabilizing. In the poorest countries an emergency event – be it conflict, earthquake, or flood – usually leads to humanitarian crisis that can be devastating to the health, safety, security and wellbeing of a community or whole country. Those who are most vulnerable to natural and man-made disasters are pregnant women and newborns who are dependent on access to reliable, skilled care.Solange has just given birth to her 10th baby at the maternity clinic set up in the grounds of the largest displacement camp in Côte d’Ivoire, in the Western town of Duékoué. About 27,000 people have sought refuge here after fleeing heavy fighting. Last month 100 babies were born in this classroom turned into a makeshift maternity clinic. Photo: Laurent Duvilier / Save the Children.Public health in complex emergencies is an increasingly important area of work. Over the last decade experts have demonstrated priority actions, including how to measure the severity of a crisis and how to evaluate the effectiveness of humanitarian response. However, reproductive health – particularly ensuring care during childbirth – has only been recently recognized as a key gap and priority in these settings.Of the top 10 countries with the highest risk of newborn death, 8 have had recent major destabilizing events. Similarly, out of the “10 worst places to be a mother” according to Save the Children’s Mother’s Index, 6 are also suffering the world’s worst humanitarian crises (Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, and Yemen) according to Médecins Sans Frontières.It is no coincidence that countries affected by humanitarian crisis and conflict are the riskiest for mothers and babies. Essential factors such as access to care before, during and after pregnancy in these settings are severely restricted. Survey data from conflict settings have at-times shown a twofold increase in under-five mortality from baseline rates. But it’s not necessarily the conflict itself that is harming mothers and their babies – women in Afghanistan are 200 times more likely to die during childbirth than from bullets or bombs. In Afghanistan on average 1 woman in 11 will eventually die from pregnancy-related causes.So what can be done?Information – reproductive health and mortality surveys in emergency settings should use standardized definitions and data collection methodology that capture pregnancy and newborn indicators. Surveys in emergency settings tend to concentrate on measles vaccination coverage, mortality, or nutrition, but are generally lacking in coverage of antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care, as well as indicators that reflect quality of health services provided or the strength of the health system. This discrepancy can lead to a misinterpretation of the relative importance of reported indicators versus unreported indicators.Implementation – The global health cluster that is lead by the World Health Organization has agreed on the Minimum Initial Service Package for reproductive health in crisis situations. The joint CDC and Save the Children Emergency Health and Nutrition toolkit establishes best practices around when and how to act to save the lives of women and their newborns.Innovation – Robust, fit-for-purpose technology for delivering care and gathering and using real-time data is crucial. Clean birth kits is a key intervention that needs continued testing and refinement for different settings. It has been shown that women do use emergency obstetric services when they are available – Save the Children has successfully supported these services in crisis settings in Pakistan and Sudan. Novel methods of bringing skilled care closer to home in complex emergencies should be prioritized for operational research.Ten worst places to be a mother: Afghanistan*+Niger*+Guinea-Bissau+Yemen*Chad*Democratic Republic of the Congo*+EritreaMali+Sudan*Central African Republic**countries with recent wide scale humanitarian crises+also among the ten countries with the highest risk of newborn deathShare this:
Posted on October 25, 2011November 13, 2014Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Quality of care is often a difficult thing to measure, especially in low resource settings. The data are generally good to show us if women have four antenatal care visits or give birth in a facility. However, this does not tell us anything about the information provided at antenatal care visits or the competence of staff at a facility. Nor, does it tell us anything about how mothers feel about the care they received. Not only is the quality of care provided important, but also the perception of that care, as evidenced by patient satisfaction, matters.A new paper published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth investigates the satisfaction of mothers who give birth at a referral hospital in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia:The overall proportion of mothers who were satisfied with delivery care in this study was 61.9 %. This percentage is very low compared to other studies in developing countries – 92.5% in Côte d’Ivoire  but it is comparable to a study in Nairobi, Kenya-56% and greater than a study in Sri Lanka 48%. This variation may be because of a real difference in quality of services provided, expectation of mothers or the type of health facilities…The overall satisfaction of hospital delivery services in this study is found to be suboptimal. The study strongly suggests that more could be done to assure that services provided are more patient centered.Share this: ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read:
I just read some reports from the CMO Council, which is a professional think tank for marketing executives (CMOs=chief marketing officers) in the private sector. The striking thing was the areas in which CMOs struggle are so like our own in nonprofit marketing. It might make you feel better to know that the CMO at a Fortune 500 company often feels she doesn’t have her marketing act together on customer experience or social media or data management! We are not alone in our challenges.In fact, a survey of CMOs found most companies still lack a “seamless multi-channel journey for the customer.” Translate this jargon to us and the story is the same. We don’t have one view into our donors across channels, and their experience is doubtless far from seamless. CMOs feel under enormous pressure to do better with engagement and social – and to measure those efforts in a far more sophisticated way. Sound familiar?Since we apparently share struggles – and priorities – I thought I’d share the top five areas CMOs are seeking to master. This makes for a good to-do list for our own sector:1. Making over digital marketing2. Aligning marketing and sales (read: marketing and fundraising or communications and fundraising)3. Integrate social media channels4. Better analyze customer data5. Better measure performanceIt’s a tall order but there is some comfort in knowing everyone else finds it a challenge, too.
With the Network for Good team, I just created a mini-course on thanking donors. It’s a self-guided tour to writing great thank-yous and treating donors well all year – so they will give again! (It’s not free, but I immodestly think this guide to stewardship is worth every penny. Learn more here.)So do you treat your donors well? To figure it out, take this quiz. (It’s free.)And remember the rock bottom, bare minimums when it comes to donor stewardship!1. ALWAYS THANK YOUR DONORS: Always. No exceptions.2. THANK THEM EARLY: You should thank your donors within a few days of their gift.3. THANK THEM OFTEN: Thank your donors several times, over time, and keep reporting back on the difference they have made.4. THANK THEM ACCURATELY: Make sure you have correctly spelled the donor’s name, stated the amount and date of the donation, included appropriate language for taxes and carefully noted if the gift was made in honor of someone else.If I had a dollar for every charity that didn’t do these four things when I gave…
One of my favorite blogs, Branded Out Loud, has an excellent primer on your online color choices. Here’s what I learned:1. Certain colors convey certain meanings. Here are a few common ones. Check out Branded Out Loud for the full library.2. You need to be careful with your color combinations. Red, white and blue are overdone so mute them with gray. Orange and brown are always going to look like Halloween, so check out Branded Out Loud’s examples of how to use colors well in combination.3. You can get some great color palette suggestions at Branded Out Loud’s Pinterest page!And last, remember the concept of visual saliency bias, or bias toward brighter-colored items. Just as simple, easy to read type can make people more friendly to your words, I think bold, recognizable colors may help make people pay attention to you. Have at least one color that pops.
In a recent commencement speech, novelist Jonathan Safran Foer lamented the risk of isolation in our wired culture. As technology becomes more ingrained in our daily lives, simple actions that have traditionally involved face-to-face communication have been transformed by apps and interfaces. As we’ve become more connected than ever, it’s become easy to avoid true connection.For nonprofits, it’s ironic that just as we have the ability to reach so many more people in the world, it’s increasingly tempting to opt for generic messages and efficiency. Resist this urge! If we want to inspire action and support for our causes, we must continue to appeal to the emotions of our fellow man. Passion. Hope. Empathy. So how do you ensure your digital outreach has a heartbeat? Keep these tips in mind:Tap into emotion by featuring a human face in your communications. Avoid jargon. Talk like a real person to connect with real people. Make it clear that your emails, social media channels and website have a living, breathing person behind them. Stir passion through story. Focus on an individual’s struggle and illustrate how your work has helped. Don’t neglect the interactive part of online interaction.There are so many ways to get it wrong, yet as agents for social change, we have the best opportunity to get it right. Use the tools of technology to amplify the heart, soul and emotion of your cause, not avoid it. Your message and mission depend on it. (Thanks to Allison McGuire for the inspiration for this post.)posted by: Caryn SteinEditor’s note: While nonprofitmarketingblog.com will get an updated look in the next few weeks, the team at Network for Good will continue to bring you the latest trends, tips and inspiration. Don’t worry — all of Katya Andresen’s posts will remain online and accessible just as before. Thanks for reading!
ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on January 7, 2013March 21, 2017By: Kate Mitchell, Manager of the MHTF Knowledge Management System, Women and Health InitiativeClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Yesterday, WBUR, Boston’s NPR news station, aired a story, Mexico Aims To Save Babies And Moms With Modern Midwifery, about a new public midwifery school in southern Mexico. The goal of the new school is to increase the number of trained maternal health care providers across the country and to boost access to maternal health services in difficult-to-reach areas of the country. From the story:In Mexico these days, the majority of babies are born in hospitals. That hasn’t helped reduce the number of maternal deaths, though. So health officials are re-making the centuries-old tradition of midwifery. They are betting a new kind of midwife, one trained in a clinical setting, can offer a solution. At a newly opened school in southern Mexico, young women sit up straight in tiny desks and answer their teacher’s questions in chorus. Their round brown faces and thick black hair are typical of this mostly indigenous region in the state of Guerrero. Many are the daughters, granddaughters or nieces of traditional midwives. They are also the freshman class of the country’s first public midwifery school…Read the story here. Listen to the story here.Share this:
Posted on October 21, 2013August 15, 2016Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)The MHTF and USAID’s Translating Research into Action (TRAction) project are hosting a technical meeting focused on the challenge of measuring advocacy, with the specific aim of applying lessons from other global health advocacy efforts to respectful maternity care. Along with the in-person event, discussion highlights are being posted on Twitter at #RMCAdv. To view presentation and background materials and other resources, or just learn more about the meeting, please visit our meeting page. And, if you are interested in joining the MHTF as a guest blogger, check out the call for submissions to our upcoming blog series on advocacy and maternal health.Share this: ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: