Philanthropic Deserts
About half of Pennsylvanians live in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and the suburban counties surrounding those two cities, but more than ninety percent of all foundation assets in Pennsylvania are geographically restricted to benefit residents of those two metro areas. This pattern can surely be found around the country, with nonprofits in places like upstate New York and outstate Minnesota operating in virtual philanthropic deserts compared to their big city colleagues.
And the problem goes well beyond just foundation dollars. Most university-based technical support centers for nonprofits are in urban areas. Unlike rural and remote communities, big cities tend to have a constant influx of young professionals that can potentially expand and diversify the volunteer talent pool available to nonprofits. Corporate giving is bigger when corporations are bigger, and the biggest ones are usually in metro areas.
These disparities between the nonprofit sectors in rural areas versus those in urban areas can result in a less strategic, less collaborative approach to regional problems. With less resources and support to draw upon and more parochial concerns driven by localism, nonprofits in rural and remote areas might understandably tend to narrow their perspectives and focus on their own survival. In contrast, with more interconnected issues and communities in metro areas, urban nonprofits have more reasons and opportunities to develop deep and meaningful partnerships, and the large foundations that fund them frequently use their leverage to foster such collaboration.
While some funders like community foundations and united ways in rural areas may be inclined to commit their resources to regional concerns and promote long-term, comprehensive approaches to addressing them, there is pressure on them to continue to serve as ATMs for local nonprofits with limited fundraising capacities.
To some extent, private sector market forces seem to be in play here. Smaller towns should have smaller problems, and they should need a smaller nonprofit sector to address them. But the question is really one of quality more than quantity. Problems rural communities face related to poverty, substance abuse, and youth delinquency, for example, are no less complex or intractable than they are in urban areas simply because there are fewer incidents of them. Rural nonprofits need to be as well equipped and supported as their urban counterparts to deal with these problems, and arguably more so given the likelihood of a less aggressive governmental response to such problems in more conservative political environments.