Santa Barbara Foundation Losing Four Positions in New Partnership

Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

The Santa Barbara Foundation announced it will soon team up with the Silicon Valley Community Foundation to handle its administrative and back-office duties. Four Santa Barbara Foundation employees will be laid off under the partnership, a change referred to as “the transition of four positions” in a statement released by Jan Campbell, the nonprofit’s senior vice president of philanthropic services, communications and marketing. Peter MacDougall, the organization’s chair of its board of trustees, said the axed positions are in technical support in the financial area. “A determining factor in the Santa Barbara Foundation’s board decision to restructure and outsource some administrative functions is a trend within the social sector to collaborate and partner with organizations with similar or complimentary missions,” Campbell wrote in a statement. “Reducing overhead ultimately drives more impact to those served.” MacDougall added there will be annual salary increases for all employees in January.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Santa Barbara Foundation losing Santa Barbara would be the better title.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
November 27, 2013 at 8:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Has anyone asked:

1. Why is the SB Foundation filled only with women except for 2 men, one of whom runs it? What kind of gender discrimination is potentially going on there?

2. Why is it over staffed by 300% vs similar sized Foundations, even after these 4 layoffs?

3. Why do friends and family of people that work there hear about a toxic work environment filled with intense office politics, undermining, inconsistent management strategy and constant internal gossiping?

4. Why is there no receptionist to greet donors but there are dozens of staff in the back that are either underworked or overworked on the wrong things?

realitycheck88 (anonymous profile)
November 27, 2013 at 8 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The reason women predominate is because it was named after a woman, St. Barbara. The Franciscan friars all all men, named after St. Francis.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
November 27, 2013 at 8:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why was there money for very fancy new headquarters, but no money to keep classical radio KZB in Santa Barbara? What is their mission. What is their funding?

Are they now self-sustaining or do they run primarily on donations. Name their top 20 projects over the past years that actually made difference versus just maintaining staff positions or a negative status quo.

What is their administrative overhead? How much of the donor dollar actually goes for projects that fulfill their mission.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
November 27, 2013 at 10:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Relax. SB Foundation is one of the most legit non-profits we have in SB and I am glad they are around.

Bajades (anonymous profile)
November 28, 2013 at 10:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The SB Foundation supports many worthy endeavors, especially in education. Foo likes to appoint himself a one-man interrogation unit; go ahead and look this all up on the public record, foo. The administrative overhead of almost all these big non-profits gets higher and higher over time, I'd expect that may have happened there. Go for it, do the research.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
November 28, 2013 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Foo are you a donor to the Santa Barbara Foundation? Have you ever given them any money? If not, why are you so concerned with their finances?

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
November 28, 2013 at 7:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The S B Foundation has become a super-corporate, cutthroat organization, who, along with their millionaire/billionaire overlords, decide which SB charities are important to the rest of us. They certainly had the money for their high end corporate penthouse.

banjo (anonymous profile)
November 28, 2013 at 10:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey DrDan: why has the administrative overhead gone up over time?
Why is that acceptable? Why is overstaffing OK?

Also being one of the most legit in SB doesn't give much comfort because that's a relative scale/measurement. Just giving money to groups doesn't make things legit or good or OK.

And again, since it seems SO uncomfortable for this group: why are there almost no men on staff?

realitycheck88 (anonymous profile)
November 28, 2013 at 11:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Searching the SBF website gives a lot of info about how to donate but no ready info about what they actually do, except support THRIVE which duplicates First Five tobacco tax efforts which seems like an odd project.

But when I see any non-parental agency claiming they want to control children's lives "cradle to college" I do get creeped out. But if THRIVE is a non-socialist alternative to First Five, I should just shut up and be happy there is a counter-punch out there to undo fabian socialism now running rampant with government funding.

It also appears they coordinate with other local foundations like Orfelea and Hutton-Parker, but again not real info about what top 10 things they have done with their non-profit investments and metrics showing these investments paid off for their donors. They maybe there but it is not clear up front.

Researching the non-profit rankings by the ranking systems show SBF is good, but not the very top of its class, and looks like it has been running in the red for some time according to the charts online. There must be more to this story since they did have funds for this new headquarters make-over, or at least a good donation for it.

It also pays a quarter of a million dollars salary to the CEO to run a $16 million organization. Compare that to school superintendents, city managers or Cottage Hosp. Seems high, but it is realistic to understand it takes money to make money. Sorry SBF chose to defund classical radio KZB but obviously they need to get their financial house in order.

Realitycheck88 asked penetrating questions about SBF. I hope they get their answers.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2013 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

good work, foo... I do know there has been a spate of articles muckraking the extremely high rates of pay for CEOs and top-tier administrators at the big non-profits. How much does Tighe make at DRI, a terrific organization? Spread your criticism around, foo.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2013 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The SBF has changed immensly under Mr. Gallo's leadership. Unfortunately, it is not the direction I care to support with my giving. The foundation is outsourcing its services so it may focus on earning fees through asset management. Examples: the current article, leadership education is done through a Ken Saxon's Leading From Within (interestingly started while he was on the board and SBF is the main financial supporter of his organization), Goldman Sachs (very Santa Barbara, cough cough) has recently been hired to invest their endowment.

SBF is now an asset gathering organization. Just look at their website. Layer upon layer of how you can give to them, yet very few links about how you can learn about philanthropy, or a community organization can get support. You have to go to the bottom of the staff page before you see who actually works with the community non-profits. SBF 'encourages' local non-profits to have their endowments combined with theirs (and if you want to get a grant, you better!), tells seniors to give their legacy gifts to SBF and they will distribute to the organizations in town. Unfortunately, for charitable gift annuities and other gifting tools, SBF wants a larger and larger percentage of the proceeds to go in their coffers, instead of the local non-profit the donor cares to support.

Hopefully this great organization can regain its bearings soon.

sbdriftwood (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2013 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The more I look into this the more I realize how little I know about the Santa Barbara Foundation - it sounds more unappealing with every discovery. Looking into Leading From Within sealed the deal.

I wish them the best IF they are spending their own money but agree, this no longer sounds like a nice little local foundation doing good in this community. More like a self-serving vanity project for a tight little inner circle. What is Gallo's vision for this organization and why was he brought in?

foofighter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2013 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Considering the numbers of non-profits operating in this community it would be interesting to learn what their collective value of assets are, what their metrics of success are and why people keep claiming "we are not doing enough" in this community to tackle social problems.

What are there organizations doing, how much money goes out for CEO and staff support and in the final analysis do they grow problems, instead of curing them.

Residents/voters become interested in this private sector when they use public monies, get special zoning variances and obtain approval for dedicated land use that takes even more city property out of normal market forces. Dedicating a hyper-density housing project for "nonprofit workers" is but one example of this partnership impacting all of us.

This city badly needs a Economic Impact Reports that crystalizes the direction this city has taken these past few decades when all it demanded were Environmental Impact reports.

Meanwhile the wholesale give-away of our city's future with these piecemeal social engineering approvals, projects and funding demands has reached a crisis point and we need to step back and take a good hard look at what was created during these years of uncoordinated social programming and feel-good legislation from the city council majorities.

We may well have dug a hole and sold out the city's future for a long, long time. While continuing project approvals for dedicated low-income populations undermine this city's economic future even further.

City staff needs this information more than anyone, since they had a direct interest in the city's future solvency. If the promises made to them are running on ether fumes and no hard fiscal realities that can be documented and projected over a 20 year time frame, they should be the first to know and plan their lives and future careers accordingly.

foofighter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2013 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: