Board adopts Future Vision Plan

At 3:27PM on 13 August 2008, The Rotary Foundation wrote: The Future Vision Plan pilot phase does limit some opportunities to participate in projects and activities in many different areas of the Rotary world where clubs and districts are currently working. Some of Rotary's super-user districts may find it challenging because pilot districts will be required to partner only with other pilot districts for club- and district-developed global grants. Rotary Foundation District Grants will allow pilot districts the flexibility to fund projects in nonpilot districts. It is important for districts interested in the pilot to coordinate their pilot applications with other districts they would like to work with. This feedback in the pilot application process will be critical in selecting pilot districts.

At 3:14PM on 13 August 2008, Frank Mayhew wrote: It would seem that the Future Vision plan is a damned it you do, damned if you don't type choice. If we apply and are selected, we cannot do any grants with the districts that we normally work with if they don't apply and get accepted. Likewise if we don't apply and and a district we want to work with does and is accepted, we cannot work with that district. I would hope that in the final format that these restrictions are lifted to allow us to work with any district regardless of the pilot program participation.

At 4:14PM on 27 June 2008, Dick Briggs wrote: The changes invisioned will not help Clubs recruit and involve members in humanitarian activities. To move member's donated resources away from Clubs to more centralized control is counter produtive for Club operations. It is also indicative of the top down approach of our management structure. While change is needed, to change to become perceived as a major player is counter produtive. A short example. Yesterday I received an e-mail progress report on the training of 57 women preparing to start a micro loan program in rural Africa. Heart warming! No bank before, now a local village bank and money to loan. This would never happen in the proposed stucture. It is easy to stop donating to top down management practices.

At 10:43AM on 20 June 2008, Scott Mills wrote: What a Convention. The breakout session on the Future Vision Plan completely changed my opinion of what the plan will achieve, and I now am hopeful my district can be part of the pilot program. When I make a boneheaded mistake, I need to admit it. And, boy, did I make one by rushing to judgment about the plan. Please forgive me. I am excited about the Global Grants: They will substantially improve the delivery of financial support for international projects, while apparently reducing TRF's overhead/administrative costs, making the foundation stronger in the process (and delivering more donation dollars to projects, not administration). Thank you TRF Trustees for delivering an imaginative plan for the future of Rotary, and please forgive my rush to judgment. I'm a true believer now!

At 8:46AM on 17 June 2008, PDG Bharath Reddy wrote: The Rotary Foundation always finds ways to address the needs of community in a better way and Future Vision Plan is one of them. But, the role of international partner in Matching Grant Project is a beauty that creates lot of Goodwill and better world understanding. Iam sure this will not get diluted in Future Vision Plan. I look forward for more news on FVP and Congratulations to The Rotary Foundation for taking yet an another bigger step to serve people.

At 3:56PM on 16 June 2008, DG DR. HARSHAD UDESHI wrote: I believe the decision of Rotary to have Future vision plan is realistic and need of the time. Especially in countries like India and Africa, this plan will help to enhance the image of Rotary in the community.

At 2:02PM on 17 June 2008, Raj Ghuman wrote: NO WAY it can be called a step in right direction.This may kill the very spirit of giving.Clubs in developing countrycan only implement better and worthy project through MATCHING GRANTS.which shall be a thing of past once the change takes place. Now there shall be more fractions in all District about the distribution of funds to each club.Which may result in less or negligible fresh contributions to TRF. The VolunteersService grant should always be under TRF or Rotary Foundation Global Grants,Otherwise it will open a Pandora box of controversies.( Individuals are involved to offer their time & skill ). I hope the Trustees with reconsider their decisions or at least modify it soon.

At 10:37AM on 16 June 2008, Tom Agee wrote: I believe the new future vision plan does not provide adequate resources or leadership to crisis/disaster relief. This vital role helps more people exist/survive. there are many worth while project that deserve our help. Survival of people requires more than money. We have quality leaders all over the world in our clubs. Why not incorporate Rotary leadership capacities in plans for assistance in disasters?

At 9:21AM on 16 June 2008, Lalit Mohan Gupta wrote: I think it is an excellent step forward by the Foundation and it will go a long way to help small clubs specially in places like India to carry projects which are of urgent need though small in size. I am sure this will also generate more contribution to Rotary Foundation by the Districts. Lalit Mohan Gupta Past District Governor & DRFC R.I. Distt. 3100

At 8:46AM on 16 June 2008, Lalit Mohan Gupta wrote: I think it is an excellent step forward by the Foundation and it will go a long way to help small clubs specially in places like India to carry projects which are of urgent need though small in size. I am sure this will also generate more contribution to Rotary Foundation by the Districts. Lalit Mohan Gupta Past District Governor & DRFC R.I. Distt. 3100

At 8:39AM on 16 June 2008, DrJayant Kulkarni wrote: As DGN 2010-11, with increasing contributions from & demand for various TRF programs in my district,I find the plan innovative & excitng with a welcome change towards more effective utilization of available funds, hopefully using simplified procedures. Changes in DSG will be a great boon for smaller clubs.

At 8:38AM on 16 June 2008, PDG RAJKUMAR RAJGARIA wrote: IT IS A REAL BOLD DECISION TO SUPPORT CLUBD AND THE DIST AND I HOPE ROTARY WILL BE BENEFITTED BY THIS CHANGE

At 12:54PM on 15 June 2008, Brian Baxter wrote: I campaigned at the 2007 COL on behalf of Clubs in District 1080, for the DSG to be increased up to 50% to encourage greater flexibility and spending power and to motivate clubs to increase their contribution. I am delighted to say this is a great step forward.

At 12:54PM on 15 June 2008, Todd Lindley wrote: I am excited to learn more about the FVP and look forward to be able to have a larger portion of our district's DDF right here in our District's Foundation account to be able to start small "Matching Grant type" projects without the six-month application/approval process that now often occurs. I can envision our clubs could still write MG applications, contribute some club funds to the project to be matched by our district's DDF, with the same occuring on the International partner side. BUT, the key difference being that once the two district's grants committee approves the application and signs it, a check could be immediately written or funds wired to the sponsor club and work could begin - in a matter of 2 weeks instead of 6-9 months. Larger grants could still be done in much the same fashion as now, with club funds and DDF still receiving a match from the World Fund as long as the projects are focused on one of the six subject areas and 90% of our projects ARE. I believe the glass is still half full and we have been given more control of more of our donations. Am looking forward to seeing much more training materials online in the near future.

At 12:31PM on 15 June 2008, Doug Rudman wrote: As a Major Donor, I have struggled for a while with trying to find a way to add "bigger picture", larger concept projects to the scope of work of The Rotary Foundation. Many small clubs are excluded from doing much with Matching Grants because of their size. The Future Vision Plan will facilitate the participation of all clubs to join in major projects.

At 9:43AM on 16 June 2008, Larry McLaughlin wrote: As a Major Donor, Paul Harris Society member, Benefactor (Since 1986) and Bequest Society member, I am deeply disappointed. In my club, the way I've gotten 7 more members of the Paul Harris Society, more than 60% of the club to be "sustaining members" , about 50% Paul Harris Fellows, and all but one member to contribute to the RI Foundation is to emphasize how their gifts get magnified when we do Matching Grants by first getting a District match, then a RI match. Now the RI match is going away, to be replaced by monster projects none of my members can relate to in a personal way. For instance: One of my PHS members, who is a multiple Paul Harris Fellow has a son who is a Rotarian (who just won the Service Above Self award) in the Dominican Republic. My club had done many matching grants in the DR, and several of our members have visited there to participate in the good we're doing. Under the new program, we MIGHT get a District Grant to match our input, but no RI Foundation match. I tell you that's going to seriously impact my giving, and my ability to promote the Foundation to my members.

At 10:48AM on 16 June 2008, Cliff Peake. PDG wrote: While we still, at this advanced stage in the process of change, do not have a clear idea of how the grant side of the revised program is going to function I see this as the most devastating blow to Rotary. We are moving the focus away from service above self. Many clubs that have been able to provide relief to destitute people using matched funds are now being excluded. Very few of the districts we match with have large reserves of DDF and many of the clubs do just not have the expertise available to manage large projects.

At 4:13PM on 13 June 2008, The Rotary Foundation wrote: Points of Clarification: The Board and Trustees’ intent in the Future Vision Plan is to provide greater focus in achieving the organization’s mission. The plan is intended to help clubs and districts continue to create projects and activities that will have greater impact and sustainability while still offering funds to support smaller, local projects. The Trustees recognize that this shift in focus and direction will challenge the Rotary world to change http://www.rotary.org/en/MediaAndNews/News/Pages/080523_news_FutureVisionPlan.aspx their approach in creating and implementing projects. Smaller, locally focused grants can still flourish as they do today by using Rotary Foundation District Grants to match locally generated funds (a local matching concept). These grants may be used for international projects also. Strategically focused Rotary Foundation Global Grants for clubs and districts will be matched or funded entirely by World Fund. The new model will incorporate the current matching concept but will require Rotarians, clubs, and districts to focus their work. Group Study Exchange and Ambassadorial Scholarships will continue to be offered in some form as Rotary Foundation Global Grants related to the areas of focus. Alternatively, Rotary Foundation District Grants may be used to fund these activities outside of the areas of focus. The Trustees have agreed that international partners are still an important element of the new model, especially in global grants. Ultimately, the Trustees believe that the new plan will create a stronger reputation for global leadership and enhance Rotary’s image. The Trustees will be considering the operational details (or how the processes will work) at their October 2008 meeting. A new brochure, "The Future Vision Plan of The Rotary Foundation," http://www.rotary.org/RIdocuments/en_pdf/future_vision_plan_en.pdf includes this and other information about the Future Vision Plan and the new grant-making model. The Rotary Foundation

At 3:49PM on 13 June 2008, RTN CHRISTY OPARA wrote: I congratulate the Rotary Foundation on the implementation of the Future Vision Plan and I am happy of 50% for District DF increase for better projects.

At 11:03AM on 12 June 2008, Rtn U B Bhat wrote: Excellent idea to increase DDF to 50%. This will motivate Clubs to contribute more to TRF every year. Such move will empower DGs and will bring sense of responsibility and accountabilty in them.

At 4:19PM on 13 June 2008, Scott Mills wrote: Over the last four years (since the last major change in grants was announced by TRF), my club has incrased its donations to TRF by over 400 percent, exceeding $530 per capita in APF giving, and averaging more than $850 per capita in total giving. My club's Paul Harris Society membership has grown to 20--i.e., 28 percent of the 71 club memberships give $1,000 or more to TRF each year. This remarkable rate of growth in club giving to TRF is directly linked to the success of matching grants and the club's participation in other TRF programs. However, with the TRF Board's June adoption of the Future Vision Plan, 2007-2008 will likely be the last year that many clubs, maybe even my own, will have much incentive to work to achieve Annual Fund campaigns. The Board's action appears to result in the total evisceration of Matching Grants at the club level. So, there leaves very little reason, other than Polio Eradication, for clubs and Rotarians to continue to donate to TRF, rather than to their own club Foundations. After all, why should clubs continue to give to TRF only to get 50% back of that money back in DDF with no opportunity for a World Fund match? Gone will be the day when a club with an international partner can drill a well in a remote village in India or Africa or buy or ship books for a small community library. Frankly, I cannot imagine a worse result than if the trustees had intentionally made a very cynical attempt to play on the desires a very small minority of Rotarians' to keep more of their money for use at the local level, thereby avoiding matching any grants from the World Fund. International projects will virtually dry up for most clubs; clubs will have much less flexibility; and Rotary will lose its reputation for global leadership--a reputation built because TRF Matching Grants allowed local communities greater financial flexibility to build partnerships that addressed local needs. The Foundation trustees essentially have removed International Service from a club's Four Avenues of Service, and they have left the decision-making process to third-party so-called "Global Partners" (who will decide whether to participate or fund a large project) or to the District (without any available "match"), depending on which funding source is used. Under such circumstances, why would a club continue to raise funds for TRF rather than keeping their funds in their own foundations? It's a very wrong-headed decision--one I am afraid all of Rotary will learn to regret. I only hope that time will prove me wrong. [Editor's note: Please see clarification from The Rotary Foundation.]

At 8:42AM on 12 June 2008, Peter Garrett wrote: Congratulations -- I am particularly pleased at TRF's willingness to partner strategically with other NGOs that are already successful in their particular area of expertise. That approach has enabled our success in eradicating polio (through strategic alliances with UNESCO, CDC, WHO and others). It is bound to increase the value of our Rotary Foundation contributions.

At 8:43AM on 12 June 2008, Clive Bartram wrote: This sounds great! Districts must be charged with more responsibility in the grant allocation in order to give them a tool for encouraging foundation giving. 21st Century, here we come!

At 8:44AM on 12 June 2008, DG Errol Wildman wrote: The Future Vision Plan will empower Districts to be involved in larger Globe Projects, that previously they would not have considered. Empower Rotarians at the grass roots to raise their expectations.

At 8:44AM on 12 June 2008, Ray Brand wrote: Congratulations on increasing the percentage of DDF to District Simplified Grants Local Clubs will feel more involved in local community projects

At 4:25PM on 13 June 2008, PDG (06-07) Richard A. "Dick" Foster wrote: I am very dissapointed with the decision of the trustees and directors to adopt the Future Vision Plan, esp. the Rotary Foundation District Grants. Recieving up to 50% of DDF with no match from TRF is not in the spirit of Rotary and not altruistic to reach out to help others less fortunate than our selves. This is especially true if the funds are to be spent locally rather that internationally which has been the case with the DSG. Why would the districts want to recieve the same dollars back that they contributed to the Annual Fund three years back and recieve them with requirements on how they can be spent in addition to anticipated reporting requirements? In fact why would they want to contribute them to TRF in the first place? The districts or clubs would be better off retaining the funds in their own Foundations and spending them as they saw fit without restrictions. The Global Grants take the clubs and individual Rotarians out of the decision making process as to how to use their DDF. The decision process will have to be at the district level to determine which of the Global grants to select. Dissapointing in deed !!! Our district has previouisly related this to the trustees and directors in formal format. We have great concern about the acceptability of this new plan among our clubs and Rotarians. In spite of the above comments, I and I believe out district, will try to put a positive spin on this to our district's clubs and Rotarians, however, it will be difficult. I feel it will not be well recieved. Also, the announcement by RI does not address the status of GSE and the scholarship programs. My previous district positions in addition to serving as DG, have been to serve for three years as our District Rotary Foundation Committee Chairman and District Grant Subcommittee Chairman. Our district (D5470) has been very active with the scholarship, GSE and humanitarian grant programs. We have great interest in the decisions of our Directors and Trustees and respect their decisions, however, difficulty is seen with decision. I hope it will not cause a decrease in contributions to TRF. [Editor's note: Please see clarification from The Rotary Foundation.]

At 8:46AM on 12 June 2008, John Rasmussen, RRFC wrote: Congratulations to everyone who worked so hard to move our Foundation to the next century of service. The new plan will simplify our humanitarian grants structure and steer us to larger and more sustainable projects. I hope my district applies to be a pilot district!

At 2:57PM on 11 June 2008, Bill Grimes wrote: I congratulate Rotary and The Foundation on implementing the Future Vision Plan as I fell it will move Rotary in to The next Century.

At 4:21PM on 13 June 2008, Scott Allen wrote: The death of our foundation! Clubs want smaller locally focused grants with MATCHing funds. This is top down leadership at it's worst. A sad day for members of Rotary International. [Editor's note: Please see a clarification from The Rotary Foundation.]

At 11:48AM on 12 June 2008, Robert Novell wrote: The quality of the communications, the clarity of the explanation of how the new system will work, the interviews that have been posted, have been completely ineffective in explaining how the new system or "vision" will function. The above press release seems to be another example of the lack of clarity.