Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
In Time
Joined
·
3,070 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
NY groups find causes abroad
City emerges as center to aid world's poorest people



By: Elizabeth MacBride
Published: June 17, 2007

When surgeons of hope decided to set up shop in the United States, there was never much question about where. The leaders of the European nonprofit, which brings heart surgeries to children in the developing world, figured it would find in New York City the two keys to success in the global health field: money and passion.

It found the first in the form of a startup grant from the Central Presbyterian Church. It found the second in people like Jillian Kirkpatrick. The pediatric cardiac ICU nurse from Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital uses her vacation time for aid trips, such as a recent one to Dakar, Senegal.

"It made me think, and it made me learn," she says. "And I love taking care of children with cardiac problems."

Surgeons of Hope, which sent its first U.S. aid team abroad in 2005, is one of a growing number of New York City nonprofits pouring resources into global health. As they take aim at the health problems of the world's poor, their efforts are turning New York into a center of the global health movement.

"Everything is here: the foundations, the researchers, the United Nations," says Laurie Garrett, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, who has called this the "age of generosity" for global health issues.

Along with nonprofits, such as Surgeons of Hope, that operate programs in the developing world, New York City is also home to a large number of research institutions trying to solve the world's health care problems from the science side. And a growing number of idealistic medical and public health students in the city are taking on the issues of global health care, demanding that more attention be paid to developing countries.

Experts say that New York City might become an even greater center of global health if nonprofits active in the field worked together more. Some look to the mayor, long a public health philanthropist, for leadership.

"There's a considerable concentration here," says Dr. David Ho, chief executive of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center. "But who's going to assemble the masses and champion the effort? Conceivably the mayor could."

At previous points in its history, New York City has been the base of efforts to improve health care across the world. In the early part of the 20th century, New York institutions, including the Rockefeller Foundation, helped spread public health ideas. In the 1960s, the Peace Corps experience launched a whole generation into careers in global health, many with New York nonprofits.


Getting more involved


Now, spurred by concerns about infectious diseases and enabled by huge sums of money flowing from the United Nations, the U.S. government and the Seattle-based Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, nonprofits and institutions long established in the field are increasing their involvement, and smaller nonprofits are joining the fight.

Some of the new efforts are ambitious. The Earth Institute at Columbia University, led by famous economist Jeffrey Sachs, has selected 79 "research villages" and is spending $300,000 a year in each on economic, health and education reforms, such as deworming the population and feeding schoolchildren. Dubbed the Millennium Villages project, it aims to establish development models.

On a countrywide scale, drugmaker Merck & Co. has committed $56.5 million through 2009 to an HIV/AIDS campaign in Botswana.

While the Earth Institute and Merck have been global health players for some time--Merck reaches 60 million people a year with its program to treat river blindness--other New York organizations are just entering the field with major commitments. The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation later this summer is set to announce a $100 million African health initiative.

David Rockefeller, one of New York City's most prominent philanthropists, in 2006 announced a $225 million donation to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The gift, which will address poverty, health and development, adds nearly a third to the fund's endowment and moves into the health arena for the first time.


AIDS was the spur


Experts trace the surge in global health activism to groups at work on the AIDS epidemic. Having won recognition and funds for research in the United States, AIDS activists were horrified to find that lifesaving drugs were not widely available in the developing world. Many local AIDS organizations now have an international component.

Dr. Ho, a native of Taiwan, led the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center to, among other things, establish a model program in Yunnan Province, China, to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Dr. Ho is one of the world's leading AIDS researchers, but he finds the rewards of helping people outside his ivory tower equally gratifying. "We see the healthy babies," he says.

Many nonprofits are focusing new programs on infectious diseases, such as AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health is treating more than 150,000 people in Asia and Africa through its International Center for AIDS Care and Treatment Programs, begun in 2004 with money from the U.S. government and foundations.

Other programs aim to improve the health infrastructure of developing countries. Even in countries devastated by AIDS, the most common causes of death are the most mundane health problems: complications of pregnancy and childbirth, and respiratory and intestinal infections among children. Surgeons of Hope, too, wants to leave behind more than it brings. It raises money to establish hospitals and then sends U.S. health care workers to train local staff. The nonprofit hopes the hospitals eventually will be self-sustaining.

Of course, New Yorkers who are passionate about global health, like Ms. Kirkpatrick, aren't driven by abstract philosophies. The image that comes back to her is of 16-month-old Esperance, a Senegalese girl who was born with a big hole between the chambers of her heart. After it was fixed and she was out of surgery, the little girl took off her own oxygen mask and composedly laid it aside.

"She just had her own opinion: `I'm through with that; I don't need it anymore,' " Ms. Kirkpatrick says. "By doing this repair, we have changed her life."


TOP GLOBAL HEALTH GIVERS
Ranked by amounts donated to health causes in 2005.


1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WA $895 million

2. The Ford Foundation, NY $23.9 million

3. The Rockefeller Foundation, NY $22.4 million

4. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, CA $17.9 million

5. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, CA $12.6 million

6. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, IL $10.3 million

7. The Merck Company Foundation, NJ $9.9 million

8. The Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation Inc., NY $9.7 million

9. ExxonMobil Foundation, TX $9.4 million

10. The Starr Foundation, NY $8.3 million

TOTAL: $1 BILLION


Entire contents © 2007 Crain Communications, Inc.
 

·
I love my life
Cuyi Lastrassi
Joined
·
15,034 Posts
:eek:kay: Good for NYC! I'm glad that it's citizens are using their economic power to hel the world.
 

·
Journeyman
Joined
·
16,933 Posts
Seattle is also a center, and arguably a bigger one. Gates Foundation, the University of Washington's growing prominence in world health (including a 2007 donation of $105m by Gates), World Vision, PATH, SBRI, Fred Hutch, et al.

A comparison was made a few years ago. I think it was along the lines of a third axis being added to the global health arena -- United Nations (NY) and Unicef (Atlanta) were the other legs, and Gates was the third leg. But Gates is doubling in size because most of Warren Buffett's money is being routed through it, something like another billion per year for 30 years.

A big key for us is that, historically, 25% of the Gates research money has gone to Seattle researchers such as Fred Hutch, SBRI, and the UW.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
192 Posts
The principle of Christian charity is splendid.
But what an American should do is to pay a tax.
The tax burden of millionaire and the big business are too light.
A nation should assist it through ODA and financial contributions to the United Nations.

It has a limit to depend on personal good will.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
 

·
Proud Torontonian
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
The principle of Christian charity is splendid.
But what an American should do is to pay a tax.
The tax burden of millionaire and the big business are too light.
A nation should assist it through ODA and financial contributions to the United Nations.

It has a limit to depend on personal good will.
If I'm reading this correctly, he's talking about income taxes. I side with income taxes to an extent, but there is a point where I feel they're a kick in the ass. I agree with the concept of the advantaged aiding the disadvantaged, but people who have worked hard to become wealthy are almost slapped on the wrist by having to pay such a hefty portion of their net income. It's really tough to strike a perfect balance.
 

·
Journeyman
Joined
·
16,933 Posts
Speaking of Gates, he, like his father, is a big proponent of taxing the wealthy, and also keeping (returning) responsible tax levels on inheritances.

One of the main reasons -- low taxes on the wealthy means you get a larger permanent "ruling class" of people who don't need to contribute to society. The US is great because most individuals need to work to prosper, and few feel like they're immune to the challenges other people face.

PS, goodness isn't all christian. Sometimes it's about being good for good's sake.
 

·
In the bog.
Joined
·
7,918 Posts
Interesting article,
not meaning to be facetious, but this bit made me laugh:

"It made me think, and it made me learn," she says. "And I love taking care of children with cardiac problems."

- as opposed to most people who absolutely hate taking care of children with cardiac problems. :lol:

..but anyway, this kind of philanthropy is great, but I don't think it should be relied on solely to fund these kind of projects. I can see how huge tax burdens on the rich and ultra rich can be seen as excessive. But I'm not sure about America, but in Britain, every year bigger and bigger bonuses are given out to corporative executives and share holders(£10 billion last year) and it is not as if it's a reward for smart management or competitiveness, most of these are given to failing companies by the benefactors themselves.

80% of charitable donations still come from the average income members of society. Anyway a millionaire paying 40% tax still has a lot more money than someone paying 25% bringing in £20,000 a year.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
192 Posts
Even if Madonna and Bono build an orphan home with an individual, there is not the big influence.

I make much of a national role more.

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,536 Posts
It's great that NYC can help the poor when it comes to the world, but they should also be doing this at home in which Mike Bloomberg has been constantly ignoring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,536 Posts
I only said this it b/c it's best to start in your own backyard on what you tend to preach to the world otherwise these people would be hypocrites.
 

·
In Time
Joined
·
3,070 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
It's great that NYC can help the poor when it comes to the world, but they should also be doing this at home in which Mike Bloomberg has been constantly ignoring.
It is not the city government that is helping the poor around the world, just a bunch of nonprofits that are making NYC their headquarters.

Also I think Bloomberg has done more in trying to help the poor in the city than any other mayor in recent history. So I don't know why you think that he is not doing anything.
 

·
In Time
Joined
·
3,070 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Bloomberg gave $205 million to charity in 2007
New York City mayor moves up to No. 7 on Chronicle of Philanthropy list



Tues., Jan. 15, 2008

NEW YORK - Mayor Michael Bloomberg donated $205 million to 1,100 nonprofits last year, an increase of tens of millions of dollars from previous years, according to a new ranking.

The billionaire ranked No. 7 on The Chronicle of Philanthropy's 2007 list of the country's Top 50 donors. He was No. 10 in 2006, when he gave away $165 million to more than 1,000 charities.

In 2005, Bloomberg ranked No. 8 and gave away $144 million. In 2004, he placed No. 10 after donating $138 million, according to The Chronicle, a Washington, D.C.-based publication that reports on giving and nonprofits.

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser said Monday the mayor's increased donations last year "speak to just how seriously he takes the challenge of trying to make the world a better place."

Bloomberg, who founded the Bloomberg LP financial data and news service, declined to name any of the charities to which he gave money last year, The Chronicle said. But most of the charities to which he gave in previous years focus on the arts, education, health care and social services, the newspaper said.

Last year, Forbes magazine's annual list of the richest Americans ranked Bloomberg No. 25, estimating his wealth at $11.5 billion, up from 40th place in 2006 with a net worth believed to be $5.5 billion. The magazine said the significant jump in Bloomberg's worth was based on its estimate of the value of his company, of which he retains 68 percent ownership.

Other New Yorkers on the 2007 philanthropy list included Sanford I. and Joan H. Weill (No. 6), John W. Kluge (No. 5) and George Soros (No. 4). Hotelier William B. Hilton, of Beverly Hills, Calif., ranked No. 1, committing $1.2 billion, The Chronicle said.

The two-term mayor, who has been mentioned as a potential third-party presidential candidate, in part because of his ability to self-finance a campaign, insists he plans to focus full time on philanthropy once he leaves City Hall at the end of 2009.

He established the Bloomberg Family Foundation and has asked the city's Conflicts of Interest Board to advise him on whether he can diversify his investments and those of the foundation without violating his mayoral responsibilities, The Chronicle said. Last month, the board ruled he could diversify his investments as long as the identities of money managers and the investments were kept secret from him.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22667326/
 

·
chek ur hed
Joined
·
473 Posts
I work with a girl who is only 30 and started a foundation a few years ago to build schools in Uganda. People like her are amazing and a big reason why this city is so giving.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
125,560 Posts
We shouldn't count out the NGOs either, and in that regard I think Geneva can give New York a run for first place. Philantrophy is only one and not the only way to help the world's poor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
522 Posts
But isn't the US private sector charity to the developing world only half of what the official US development aid is? And US offical development aid is lousy as a share of GNI. Imagine if the US gave like the Netherlands, about 0,8% of its GNI. It would mean 110 billion dollars in ODA in 2007. Instead it only gives like 23 billion or something.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top