study of the nonprofit community in camden for the united ...as part of the study of the nonprofit...

Study of the Nonprofit Community in Camden

for the United Way of Camden County

June 2004

With the support of

United Way of Camden County Study of Nonprofit Community in Camden

1


for the United Way of Camden County


2

United Way of Camden County Study of the Nonprofit Community in Camden

Table of Contents Acknowledgments

4

Executive Summary

5-8

Detailed Findings: Key Informant Interviews with Nonprofit Leaders in Camden

9-30

Detailed Findings: Database of Nonprofits in Camden

31-54

Appendices 55-76


3

Appendices

Appendix 1: General Review of the Evolution of Non-profits in the United States

Appendix 2: Study Participants

Appendix 3: Nonprofit Study Interview Protocol

Appendix 4: Cover Letter for Study

Appendix 5: Bibliography


4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to acknowledge all of the leaders from Camden’s nonprofit community

who participated in this study. Without their deep insight into the history, challenges,

and successes of the nonprofit sector in Camden, this report would not be possible. We

also would like to thank Dr. Jon Van Til of the Department of Urban Studies at Rutgers-

Camden and Dr. Howard Gillette of the History Department at Rutgers-Camden, for

their assistance in developing the survey instrument. We’d also like to offer a special

thanks to Ms. Kristy Cohen, Vice President, Community Impact Division, and Mr.

Michael Moynihan, President and Chief Financial Officer of the United Way of Camden

County, for their knowledge, support, and collaboration in this endeavor.


5


Executive Summary


6

Executive Summary

The United Way of Camden County (UWCC) engaged the Senator Walter Rand

Institute for Public Affairs at Rutgers-Camden (WRI) to conduct a research on the

nonprofit community in the City of Camden. The major goals of this Study are:

Obtain information about evolution of the non-profits in Camden;

Describe the nonprofit community, its capacity, challenges, and opportunities;

Suggest possible ways to improve the effectiveness of the nonprofit community.

The Study of the Nonprofit Community in the City of Camden is a valuable addition to

the recently completed Comprehensive Community Assessment of 37 municipalities in

the Camden County. By indicating the weak and strong sides of the non-profits in

Camden, the Study promotes the UWCC goal of moving beyond its traditional roles of

fundraiser and fund distributor and evolving into an impact-driven community change

agent.

As one of the findings of the Study indicates, the UWCC can play a vital role in

increasing the effectiveness of non-profits’ service provision in the City of Camden.

Leaders of nonprofit organizations interviewed for the study suggested that the UWCC

could become an umbrella organization and play a leading role in building effective

collaboration among nonprofit organizations. As an example of such collaborative effort,

some respondents recommended that UWCC hire a person responsible for organizing

regular meetings among non-profits.

Some of the other major findings of the Study include:

Reliable data were collected for 611 nonprofit organizations currently operating in

the city. The majority of these organizations (89%, N=548) provide social

services, while the remaining 11% are almost equally divided between housing


7

providers (5%, N=28) and economic community development providers (6%,

N=35).

Approximately 50% of respondents said they believed the number of non-profits

in Camden is too high. However, the respondents also recognized that the

nonprofit community as whole remains fairly effective.

There is a potential in developing more collaborative and supportive relations

between non-profits and neighborhoods, as well as city and state governments.

However, relations with businesses remain quite weak, without any prospects for

positive development. One of the major obstacles for bringing non-profits together in addressing the

needs of the city is the distribution of funding. The majority of the nonprofit

leaders interviewed said that the distribution of funding to Camden non-profits is

unfair. Non-profits compete with each other for funding and this competition

jeopardizes the effectiveness and cooperation of nonprofit organizations.

Other pressing problems that need to be addressed are: the growing level of

bureaucratization in non-profits; their detachment from the community; lack of

communication with government; and lack of communication among non-profits

themselves.

Regular meetings, strong leadership, and an existing or new umbrella

organization could improve the performance of the nonprofit community in the

city. Respondents suggested that evaluation of the activities of the nonprofit

organizations and merging and eliminating weak and unproductive organizations

could help to focus resources in the more effective and successful organizations.

The findings of the Study challenge UWCC to address the issues of the nonprofit

community in Camden. If problems of communication and collaboration among non-

profits in the city were addressed properly, the nonprofit community could become the

effective and leading force in improving the quality of life in Camden. The UWCC can

initiate the improvement process and play a major role in facilitating coordination and

communication among nonprofit service providers.


8

It should be noted that it was difficult to establish the evolution of non-profits in Camden.

Generally, interview respondents could not provide accurate historical information,

especially about the origins of the nonprofit organizations in Camden. In many cases,

they explained it by the fact that they are “not so old” or not from Camden, so they could

not remember or know the history of nonprofits’ development. However, 25 out of 30

respondents were able to provide an answer to the question, based on their current

experience working in Camden and knowledge gained by communicating with other

non-profits and governmental organizations.

The Study is divided into three sections:

The Description of the Nonprofit Community based on the database of 611 non-

profits currently operating in Camden;

Detailed Findings from the Survey of Leaders of the Nonprofit Organizations;

Appendices providing data on the Database of Non-profits and the Survey of

Leaders of the Nonprofit Organizations.

In addition, WRI staff reviewed an existing literature on the history and effectiveness of

non-profits. The Literature Review is provided in the Appendices.


9

Detailed Findings: Key Informant Interviews with Nonprofit Leaders in Camden


10

Introduction As part of the Study of the Nonprofit Community in Camden, The Senator Walter Rand

Institute for Public Affairs (WRI) interviewed 30 leaders of the nonprofit sector in

Camden. These leaders came from a variety of organizations, including foundations,

advocacy and civic groups, service-providing agencies, faith-based organizations, and

housing organizations. The study sought to obtain information in three specific areas:

1) The nonprofit community’s capacity as it has evolved from 1960s until the

present;

2) The challenges and opportunities of the nonprofit community today;

3) Ways to improve the effectiveness of the nonprofit community.

Methodology The Study uses data collected from qualitative interviews to explore nonprofit leaders’

perspectives on the evolution, current status, and future of nonprofit organizations in the

City of Camden. A qualitative interview with open-ended questions had several

advantages over a structured survey approach. A qualitative interview process allows

obtaining more depth and detail in a narrow range of topics. Interviews provided the

opportunity to capture insights that may not otherwise be brought forward.

In September 2002, a focus group with five community leaders was conducted for the

purpose of identifying leaders of the nonprofit community for the study. The participants

of the focus group also reviewed the research proposal and provided suggestions on

the possible questions for the interview.

As a result of the focus group, 30 leaders of the nonprofit community were selected

based on:

1. Knowledge and experience relevant to the objectives of the Study;

2. Active involvement in the nonprofit sector;

3. Capability of engaging in direct conversation.


11

The 30 participants in the Study are listed in Appendix 2.

In October 2002, using information received from the focus group and several

professors experienced in the field of social research, WRI researchers developed an

interview protocol for the Study. A copy of the interview protocol is included in Appendix

3. Under this protocol, respondents were first asked five questions about the history and

evolution of the nonprofit community in Camden. The second part of the interview asked

respondents to comment on the current environment and relationships among nonprofit

organizations in the City of Camden. Next, respondents were asked to provide

suggestions on improving the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations. Lastly,

respondents were asked several close-ended questions designed to validate the

information received in the qualitative, open-ended section of the interview.

Since the information was collected from leaders of the nonprofit community using an

interview protocol, the process may best be described as semi-structured interviews.

Semi-structured, one-to-one interviews aim to obtain feedback or to explore an issue or

service. Interviews of this type enable the interviewee to bring to light and consider their

own feelings and concerns. The interviewer aims to cover a range of pre-set topics,

without asking the interviewee to answer specific questions from a limited range of

possible answers. The advantage of using a semi-structured interview is that it enables

the researchers to establish the common trends in responses.

On October 28, 2002, an interview initiation letter was sent on UWCC letterhead to 30

identified leaders introducing the study and informing the recipients that WRI

researchers would be calling to schedule an appointment for the interview over the next

few weeks. The letter was signed by Michael Moynihan, President and Chief Financial

Officer of the United Way of Camden County, and by Dr. Richard Harris, Director of The

Senator Walter Rand Institute for Public Affairs. A copy of the cover letter is included in

Appendix 4.


12

WRI research assistants made telephone calls and scheduled interviews over the next

month. Due to the busy schedule of some respondents, several interviews were

rescheduled a number of times, which led to delays in collecting data for the study. As a

result, a total of 30 interviews were completed by February 28, 2002. The majority of

the interviews (28 of 30) were conducted in person.

The length of the interviews ranged from 12 to 90 minutes, with the average interview

lasting 35 minutes. Initially, interviews were conducted by two interviewers. One

interviewer took the leading role in the process, providing the background information to

the respondent, explaining the purpose of the study, assuring the informant of

anonymity, and engaging the interviewee throughout the process. The second

interviewer focused on taking notes. However, later in the process of collecting data, the

interviews were conducted by one researcher. Audio recording was used instead of

taking precise notes. The research team transcribed the audiotapes and notes as soon

as possible after conducting the interviews. One document file (MS Word) was made for

each respondent.

After the interviews had been completed, the research team reviewed the transcripts

and began the data analysis. A separate file for each question was created, so that all

responses to every one question were merged into one file, allowing for comparisons

among respondents. The research team read through the question files and developed

response categories for each questions. Then, the new files with categories were

imported into TextSmart (a qualitative data analysis program) for content analysis. The

last four close-ended questions were evaluated using SPSS program. The results of the

data analysis are presented below.


13

Findings

Based on the typology that was developed for the database of nonprofit organizations

operating in the City of Camden, the breakdown of the respondents is as follows: 2

respondents were from neighborhood-based housing secular organizations (NHS), 1

respondent was from neighborhood-based community and economic development

secular organization (NCS), 4 respondents were from neighborhood-based social

service secular organizations (NSS), 2 respondents were from citywide housing faith-

based organizations (CHF), 1 respondent was from citywide housing secular

organization (CHS), 5 respondents were from citywide community and economic

development secular organizations (CCS), 6 were representatives of citywide secular

social service providing agencies (CSS), 5 respondents were from large secular social

service organizations (LSS), and 4 respondents were representatives of foundations

(O). It is important to mention that the study did not aim to create a representative

sample of the nonprofit organizations, therefore, proportionally the number of

interviewed organizations does not reflect the real distribution of the nonprofit

organizations’ types in Camden. As it was previously mentioned, the Study participants

were selected by a focus group based on their knowledge of the nonprofit sector

operating in Camden.


Chart 1: Respondents by Type

2 14

21

56

5

4NHSNCSNSSCHFCHSCCSCSSLSSO

The first part of the study focused on the history and evolution of the nonprofit sector in

Camden. Participants provided various opinions on the factors that contributed to the

growth of nonprofit sector in the city. They also described several ways in which

relationships between nonprofit organizations and government, businesses and

neighborhoods evolved over time. Second part of the study asked respondents to

analyze the current environment within nonprofit sector. In general, there was a strong

agreement on the question of how nonprofit organizations perceive each other.

Respondents also achieved a high level of consensus on the question of effectiveness

of nonprofit organizations. The last part, which focused on the recommendations for the

improvement of nonprofit community, provoked a variety of suggestions.

1. How would you measure a successful nonprofit in Camden? Why?

The first question of the survey asked respondents to define the indicators for

measuring a successful nonprofit organization. The most frequent responses were as

follows:

14


15

• Achieved objectives (40%, N=12)

• Measurable objectives (30%, N=9)

• Responsiveness to community (22%, N=7)

• Positive community perception (16%, N=5)

• Total number of people served (16%, N=5)

For example, in describing the achieved objectives as an indicator, one director of

community and economic development nonprofit organization said, “I would measure it

in terms of achieving specific goals that they’ve set. Nonprofit organizations should be

goal oriented. They should have a particular mission rather than be like a social club.”

With respect to measurable objectives, one leader of the housing nonprofit

organizations mentioned, “There are a couple of things that would measure success in

the eyes of people. If they have a mission, what are they going to do to produce an

outcome, in respect to housing – how many houses are they going to build by the end of

the year 2010. If it is related to HIV prevention – how many people are going to get

tested.” Talking about responsiveness to the community, a director of the social service

providing nonprofit said, “A successful nonprofit should have community involvement, it

should have clear deliverables, and it should be a collaborative entity. The very first

point involves community because the best way to know what people want is to involve

the community, to ask them, so you have a sense of what their values are, and have

some sort of participant structure to work upon.” Additionally, respondents mentioned

collaboration with other nonprofits (N=3), quality of service (N=3) and

sustainability (N=2) as the criteria for measuring a successful nonprofit.

2. How has the nonprofit community in Camden evolved from 1960 until today?

The second question asked respondents to comment on how the nonprofit community

in Camden has evolved from 1960 until today. The most frequent response to this

question was experienced a substantial growth (30%, N=9). As a director of social

service organization noticed, “It’s certainly much bigger and covers many more problem


16

areas, the downside is that it is much more bureaucratic.” The second most frequent

response was evolved according to the needs (26%, N=8). For instance, a leader of

community and economic development organization commented, “From the 1960s, they

evolved from a social need in the minority community that was not being reached.” The

third most popular response was evolved independently without partnership (13%,

N=4). For example, a leader of a social service organization said, “It started with

everyone doing his/her own independent kind of thing. As a result, now nonprofits do

not seem to be working together, they know one another exist and that they are there,

but there appears to be a natural competition.” Respondents also mentioned that the

nonprofit community in Camden originated from grassroots initiatives and evolved into a

more bureaucratic structure detached from the community. Generally, respondents

could not provide accurate historical information, especially about the origins of the

nonprofit organizations in Camden. In many cases, they explained it by the fact that

they are “not so old” or not from Camden, so they could not remember or know the

history of nonprofits’ development. However, 25 out of 30 respondents were able to

provide an answer to the question, based on their current experience working in

Camden and knowledge gained by communicating with other non-profits and

governmental organizations.

3. What conditions in the City prompted the growth of nonprofits?

The third question asked respondents about the conditions that prompted the growth of

nonprofit organizations in Camden. The most frequently mentioned conditions were:

• Business decline (36%, N=11)

• Lack of social services (30%, N=10)

• Low government capacity (30%, N=10)

• Housing problem (23%, N=7)

• Poverty (23%, N=7)

In commenting on the business decline, one respondent stated, “A majority of

businesses left the city, most industry and big businesses have left the community and


17

what's left behind is a small job market leaving little room for economic growth.” Another

respondent said, “People moving away, businesses closing up, and taking away the tax

structure became the catalyst for the development of nonprofits in the proliferation that

they have become.” With respect to lack of social services, a representative of the

foundation said, “The growth of nonprofits is a result of social needs in the community.

With Camden as with other troubled areas the growth of the nonprofit sector emerged

out of needs within the community.” Providing a comment on low government capacity, a leader of the faith based organization said, “I think the major condition was

the breakdown of government itself. The system of government in Camden is broken, it

can not sustain itself.” Another respondent mentioned, “The city government has been

totally insensitive and incapable of responding to the city’s problems.” The majority of

respondents (N=24) agreed that decline of the city, which includes a lack of businesses,

extensive poverty, and high level of unemployment, led to the development of the robust

nonprofit sector that was meant to address the growing needs of the city’s population.

Other conditions respondents named included: crime (N=3), drug markets (N=2), riots (N=2), and neighborhood decline (N=2).

4. How has the nonprofit community contributed to the City of Camden? The fourth question asked respondents how the nonprofit community has contributed to

the City of Camden. The indicated contributions were:

• Substituted government (26%, N=8)

• Provided services (16%, N=5)

• Outreached to the community (16%, N=5)

• Improved quality of life (10%, N=3)

• Little contribution (10%, N=3)

For example, describing the contribution as a substitute for government, a leader of the

social service organization said, “They have done almost everything that you would

normally expect the city government to do.” One representative from the foundation

mentioned, “They are very important because of the poor state of governmental


18

services. The nonprofits basically carry the city.” Commenting about services as a

contribution a director of the economic and community development organization said,

“Nonprofits were the ones providing services caring about population, doing the things

that nobody else was doing for a good 20 years.”

This question also provoked a certain level of disagreement among the respondents.

Even though the majority of respondents voiced the positive comments about the

nonprofits’ contribution to Camden, four respondents provided an opposite response to

the question. One of the respondents, who suggested that there was a little or no

contribution from nonprofit organizations, said, “I think it currently makes very little

contribution. As a whole, as in terms of enriching the city, I don’t think we have vaguely

done as good a job as we should have.” A director of the community and economic

development organization even mentioned that there is a negative impact of nonprofits

on people’s attitude toward life: “Sometimes, from my perspective, they add to the

problem. We are talking dependency mode, philosophically speaking, they prohibit

people from living on their own.”

5. How have relations with governments (local, state and federal), neighborhoods, businesses, and nonprofits changed over time? The fifth question asked respondents to address the evolution of relationships between

nonprofit community in the city and government, neighborhoods and businesses. For

the purpose of analysis this question was broken down into three sub categories. In

characterizing the relationship with government, respondents split into two camps, 59%

had positive comments about the relationship, while the smaller half criticized

government and its relationship with the nonprofit community. The most commonly mentioned positive characteristic of relations between nonprofits

and government was mutual understanding (26%, N=8). As a leader of the social

service organization commented, “With my institution I think we have a decent

relationship with the government, they recognize the work that we are doing and the


19

work that we could be doing and they want to invest in it.” The second popular positive

comment was support from the State Government (20%, N=6). 4 respondents (13%)

even said that nonprofit organizations have strong support from local and state levels of government. Majority of respondents agreed that relationship with

government has improved over time, especially with the state government.

More than 40% of respondents (N=13) characterized the relationship with government

as deteriorating, complicated and lacking of understanding. The most common

negative comment was lack of support from the City Government (20%, N=6). For

instance, a leader of the neighborhood based organization said, “The administration of

the City, and the politics, and corruption coming from the last three or four mayors have

created an element of suspicion in everyone. Now the relationship with government isn’t

as strong as it used to be.”

Several respondents added that there is a weak financial support from the City (20%,

N=6). As one of the respondents said, “For the past ten years nonprofits have operated

with almost no help from the City government. The only city money available are the

block grants, may be $1million a year for all nonprofits.”

Characterizing the relationship with neighborhoods, respondents achieved a very high

level of consensus. Twenty-four out of 30 respondents agreed that the relationship

between nonprofits and neighborhoods significantly improved over the past years. The

most common responses included stronger neighborhood involvement (53%, N=16),

improving relationships (16%, N=5), relations became more respectful (10%, N=3).

With respect to stronger neighborhoods involvement, a director of the community and

economic development organizations said, “When you want to do something, you want

them to contribute and participate. They still have a lot of connections in the city; people

from neighborhoods have a great stake in the projects.” One of the respondents, who

characterized the relationship as becoming more respectful, said, “The nonprofit


20

community has been very well received in all neighborhoods throughout Camden where

the nonprofits are trying to build up the community.”

Respondents from foundations and faith-based organizations voiced an opposite

opinion and characterized the relationship as deteriorating (13%, N=4). To illustrate, a

foundation representative commented, “Since resources are so scarce, nonprofits focus

more on the funding source then on the needs of the community. And that caused some

tension in the neighborhood.” In respect to the same issue, a leader of the faith based

organization said, “People do not have deeper understanding of what has been done by

nonprofits.” The question on the relationship between nonprofit organizations and businesses also

provoked some degree of disagreement. In addition, the question created certain

difficulties for respondents: 20% (N=6) of respondents did not provide the answer for the

question. The majority (60%, N=18) of respondents provided negative comments on the

relationship. However, 10 respondents agreed that relationship is improving (16%,

N=5) and supportive (16%, N=5). A leader of the community and economic

development organization said, “There has been a great support. Campbell soup has

given us close to one million dollars over the past ten years.” Several social providers

mentioned that they do have collaborative and supportive relationship with businesses,

but all of these business organizations are located outside of Camden. The most frequent response on this question was minor interactions (23%, N=7). For

example, a leader of the neighborhood-based organization commented, “With many

businesses having left the city, there do not appear too many interactions between the

business and the nonprofit community.” Commenting on the second negative response,

resentment (10%, N=3), a leader of the faith based organization said, “Most of the

businesses here are not, what I would call, community friendly. It’s a difficult situation

we have with the businesses on the waterfront that have received tax breaks and do not

have any positions to hire city residents.”


21

6. How do nonprofits view each other? Why?

The sixth question opened the interview’s second section, which focused on the current

situation in the nonprofit sector of Camden. The question asked how nonprofits view

each other. The top five responses were: • Competitors (46%, N=14)

• Cooperative-competitors (30%, N=9)

• Collaborators (20%, N=6)

• With respect (13%, N=4)

• With jealousy (13%, N=4)

The majority of respondents agreed that nonprofit organizations compete with each

other in certain ways. Those respondents, who characterized nonprofit organizations as

competitors, stressed the fact that nonprofits compete mostly for funding. For example,

a leader of the faith-based organization said, “There’s definitely a rivalry, the

environment is very competitive for money, and nonprofits have to figure out how to

survive as well as produce something, and it’s hard.” A foundation representative

commented, “There is a limited amount of funds coming in, therefore, there must be a

lot of competition for these limited funds. There is not always full trust in some of the

nonprofits, it makes it difficult getting things done.” Nine respondents concurred that

nonprofits compete, but they also mentioned that the competition does not prevent

nonprofits from collaborating with each other. As a respondent from the foundation said,

“In a sense they are competitive allies. On the one hand, you have different

organizations competing against one another for the limited funds available, but you

also have organizations wanting each other to be successful and be able to provide

their desired services to the community.”

Several respondents (20%, N=6) provided an opposite opinion, concluding that

nonprofit organizations in the city do not compete, but collaborate with each other.

For example, a leader of the social service organization said, “I think they work well


together as a whole. I think organizations that have survived, have there own niche.”

Another leader of the social service agency commented, “Amicable and peaceful to one

another, friendly I do not think they see each other as competitors.”

The analysis of the close-ended question, which asked whether competition for funding

limits the effectiveness of nonprofits, also illustrates that the majority of respondents

believe that nonprofit organizations compete with each other and many times this

competition is not productive. The frequencies of responses to the question are

presented in Chart 2. Seventeen respondents (57%) agreed that competition for funding limits the effectiveness of nonprofits.

Chart 2: Opinion on Competition for Funding

4

17

8

1

0 5 10 15 20

no response

yes

no

sometimes

Question: Does competition for funding limit the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations?

7. Usually people categorize nonprofits as housing, social services or economic/community development organizations. Which of these categories is most effective? Why?

The seventh question asked respondents to identify the most effective type of nonprofit

organizations. Thirty percent (N=9) of respondents did not provide the answer for this

question, explaining it by the fact that they felt uncomfortable judging other nonprofits.

The remaining respondents by majority agreed that housing (33%, N=10) is the most

effective type of nonprofit organizations. For example, a director of the community and

economic development organization said, “Definitely housing, because that is were the

22


23

most money goes to from funders, because the funders like to feel good, and when you

provide housing to people, that is how you feel.” Even though this leader mentioned

housing as the most effective type, he also points out that housing is successful only

because the largest portion of funding goes into this sector. A leader of a housing

organization also named housing as the most effective type, “I think the housing

organizations in the city are very effective. For example, Saint Joseph Carpenter

Society has rebuilt three hundred properties in the neighborhood and raised the

property value by twenty percent.”

Among other respondents the most frequent answers to this question were all effective (13%, N=4) and social services (13%, N=4). In regard to social services, a leader of

the social service providing agency commented, “Social service is so needed at all

times. So, in terms of numbers, they are probably the most effective sector.” One

respondent mentioned that there is not a single effective nonprofit organization in the

City of Camden, “I think all three types have been big failures in Camden.” It is

important to mention that organizations which do not belong to housing sector in many

cases recognized that housing is the most effective, but with a caveat that the housing

sector gets the biggest amount of funding and is the most visible.

8. From your perspective, how effective is the nonprofit community?

The eighth question addressed the issue of the effectiveness of the nonprofit community

as a whole. The most frequent responses were:

• Varied effectiveness (33%, N=10)

• Very effective (26%, N=8)

• Effective (23%, N=7)

• Not effective (6%, N=2)

The majority of respondents (82%, N=25) agreed that the nonprofit community is more or less effective. With respect to varied effectiveness, one respondent said, “I think it

depends on what organizations you are looking at. You have certain organizations that


24

are thriving, and serving, and helping their clients and then you have others who appear

to be stuck.” Those respondents, who characterized nonprofit sector as being very effective, emphasized the importance of nonprofits to the stability of the City. For

instance, a leader of the faith-based organization commented, “The nonprofit

community is very effective. It is what keeps Camden alive. It sort of provides the live

blood to those whom government cannot serve. It is a great success story without glitter

in the end.” Another respondent said, “Without nonprofits the city would fall flat. They

are doing a large amount of work throughout the city.”

Two representatives of the housing sector voiced an opposite view. They concluded

that the nonprofit community has a lot of room to improve its effectiveness. For

instance, one of them said, “We are not as effective as we can be, because we are

motivated by the politics of Camden and the state of New Jersey; we are dependent on

their money. We are just able to live along and say: at least we did this amount, even

though we did not do 20% of what we intended to do. We could be a lot more effective.”

Two close-ended questions asked in the end of the interview indicate that a lot of

respondents actually do not think that nonprofit sector in the city is effective. One of the

questions asked if there is a lack of services in Camden, and the second question

asked if the number of nonprofit organizations is too high, about right or two low. The

majority of respondents said that the number of nonprofits is too high, and the larger

share of them also agreed: there is a lack of services in the city. As Chart 3 indicates,

15 respondents out of 26 who answered the question agreed that the number of

nonprofits is too high. In the same time, 23 respondents (Chart 4) agreed that there is a

lack of services in the city.


Chart 3: Opinion on the Number of Nonprofits

2

9

15

4

0 5 10 15 20

too low

about right

too high

no response

Question: Would you say the number of nonprofits in Camden is:

Chart 4: Opinion on Services in the City

6

23

1

0 5 10 15 20 25

no

yes

no response

Question: Is there a lack of necessary services within the City?

The ninth and tenth questions concluded the interview. The questions asked

respondents to provide suggestions to improve the nonprofit community.

25


26

9. If given the opportunity, what changes would you make to the nonprofit community in order to improve service to residents?

The most frequent responses were:

• Improve collaboration (43%, N=13)

• Funding redistribution (26%, N=8)

• Combine nonprofits according to the needs of community (13%, N=4)

• Improve communication among nonprofits (13%, N=4)

• Improve communication between government and nonprofits (6%, N=2)

Describing a need for better collaboration, one respondent said, “I would suggest that

they organize into city-wide advocacy groups and see how they can better collaborate

to spend funding dollars effectively.” Another respondent commented on the need for

partnership as follows, “I would look at the City and community as a whole, not just

pinpoint one specific area or need or issue, we need to create real partnership, really

look at how we can strategically deal with all the issues.”

In describing the need for funding redistribution, a leader of the community and

economic development organization noted, “Reverse the proportion of funding provided

to housing and economic community development: $12.5 million to economic

development and $0.5 million to housing. There is too much public housing and that

creates a lot of problems.” Chart 5 also illustrates that the majority of respondents (21

out of 26) are not satisfied with the distribution of funding among nonprofits.


Chart 5: Opinion on the funding distribution

5

21

4

0 5 10 15 20 25

yes

no

no response

Question: Is funding distribution to Camden's nonprofits fair?

10. How could nonprofits collaborate with each other to improve services in Camden?

The last question of the interview asked respondents to provide suggestions on how

nonprofits could collaborate with each other to improve services in Camden. Meetings (30%, N=9), strong leadership (23%, N=7), umbrella organizations (13%, N=4) and

shared database (10%, N=3) were the most frequently mentioned ways of

collaboration. Discussing the importance of regular meetings, a social service provider

said, “I think it’s important that any charity communicate and meet on a regular basis,

like the nonprofit housing providers do.” A leader of the community and economic

development organization pointed out the information sharing side of the meetings,

“They should have quarterly conferences where they all come together, where social

services come together or housing come together learn about the latest programs of

federal and state governments.” Several respondents mentioned a lack of strong

leadership among nonprofit organizations and suggested that a person with strong

leadership skills could help to bring nonprofits together and to improve their overall

performance. As a foundation representative commented, “I guess someone could set

up sort of newsletter and try to get everyone together and organize a committee.” In

addition, respondents provided examples of existing organizations, such as CCOP,

CPAC, Saint Joseph Carpenter Society, Cooper Hospital, and Camden Neighborhood

27


28

Renaissance, that bring nonprofits together, and suggested that such effort should be

expanded.

Some respondents (16%, N=5) suggested that there is already a satisfying level of collaboration among nonprofit organizations. For instance, a director of the community

and economic development organization said, “We do collaborate. Social service

organizations can contact economic development organization for help that they need.

The collaboration is there. We find that everybody has their own niche.” One

respondent, also a representative of community and economic development

organization voiced a completely opposite position. Suggesting that it is impossible for

nonprofits to collaborate, he said: “I do not think you can collaborate because of the

money. What you think may be done is not always done, and therefore collaboration

does not always work.” Several times respondents mentioned that the number of

nonprofits should be minimized by eliminating unproductive organizations and providing

more resources to stronger nonprofits.

Conclusions

Overall, respondents agreed that the contribution of nonprofit organizations to the city is

hard to measure. The history of nonprofits is inextricably linked to the history of

Camden, and at this point, the stability of the city depends on nonprofits. Nonetheless,

respondents also accepted the fact that the nonprofit community has a variety of

problems to solve in order to improve the effectiveness of service provision.

Several conclusions may be drawn from the study.

Capacity of the nonprofit organizations First, based on information received in the first part of the study, throughout the period

of its presence in the city, the nonprofit community grew from a grassroots initiatives

into a vast government-substituting structure that provides services to communities and

improves the overall quality of life.


29

Second, even though 50% of respondents believed that the number of nonprofits is too

high, respondents recognized that the nonprofit community as whole remains fairly

effective. Twenty-one respondents identified achieved and measurable objectives as

the indicator to measure a successful nonprofit. At the same time, 25 respondents

agreed that nonprofit organizations in the city are more or less effective, while 15 out of

this 25 said that nonprofits are effective or very effective. One may conclude that the

majority of respondents believe that currently a lot of nonprofit organizations establish

measurable objectives which they mange to achieve. However, a lack of connecting

indicators between these two observations does not allow making such conclusion.

Challenges and opportunities of the nonprofit organizations

A lot of respondents saw a potential in developing more collaborative and supportive

relations with neighborhoods and city and state governments. However, relations with

businesses remain quite weak, without any prospects for positive development.

Fairness of funding Moreover, the relations among nonprofits themselves have a variety of problems,

especially with regard to the distribution of funding. Respondents mentioned 23 times

that nonprofits compete with each other for funding, and 17 respondents agreed that

competition for funding jeopardizes the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations. Some

respondents even mentioned that the competition leads to jealousy and hostility among

nonprofit organizations. To add to the problem, the majority of respondents agreed that

the distribution of funding to Camden nonprofits is unfair. Even the suggestions that

some of the respondents made about solving the funding problem illustrate the negative

attitude that nonprofit organizations have toward each other. A good illustration of such

an attitude can be the comment of a community and economic development leader

about switching all the funds from the housing sector to the community and economic

development sector (see more on page 15). In addition to funding problem, respondents

also mentioned: the growing level of bureaucratization in nonprofits; their detachment

from the community; lack of communication with government; and more importantly,

lack of communication among themselves.


30

Suggestions for Improvement To address these pressing problems, respondents agreed that nonprofit organizations

should improve communication and collaboration among themselves through:

• regular meetings;

• strong leadership;

• existing or new umbrella organizations.

With regard to funding, beside the comments about the redistribution of funding,

respondents suggested that evaluating the activities of the nonprofit organizations and

the merging and eliminating of weak and unproductive organizations could help to focus

resources in the hands of the more effective and successful organizations.


31

Detailed Findings: Database of Nonprofits in Camden


32

The Assessment of the Current Nonprofit Environment in Camden Introduction The extensive database of all nonprofit organizations operating in the City of Camden is

one of the major components of the study. The database aims to describe the

environment among the nonprofit organizations currently operating in the City of

Camden. It is also expected that the database will provide a valuable information

resource not only for organizations already operating in the region, but also for all

prospective organizations and general public.

Methodology

In January 2002, WRI research assistants began the process of collecting data on

nonprofit organizations in Camden. The data was collected from Internet, phone calls,

phone books, and from knowledge of WRI senior staff. By September 2002 more than

700 organizations were entered in the database. Initially, it was planned to collect the

variety of both directory and descriptive information on the nonprofit organizations.

However, the project’s budget did not allow to conduct an expanded survey of all

nonprofits in the city in order to gather such information as contact person, address,

website address, and foundation year. As a result the researches were able to collect

the following information:

• Directory information: phone, base

• Descriptive information: type, size as a function of annual budget∗

Typology of Nonprofit Organizations

Organization’s type is one of the descriptive attributes in the database. There is a

variety of approaches that can be taken to categorize nonprofit organizations. For ∗ The budget information was hardly accessible. Only 31 organizations provided this information. The remaining organizations did not agree to share the financial information for the reasons of privacy and security.


33

instance, IRS identifies 26 types based on the tax status. Florida State University’s

Center for Civic Education and Service recognizes 12 types based on the kind of

service organization provides. However for the purpose of this study a new typology

matrix most suitable for the studies’ level of analysis (one city) was developed.

The matrix divides nonprofit organizations into 18 types based on the level of service,

type of service, and religious versus secular orientation. There are three levels of

service:

• Neighborhood (N) level includes organizations which provide services

exclusively within one or two communities.

• City (C) level includes organizations that operate citywide and provide services

to the population of the whole city.

• Larger (L) level includes all organizations that serve at county, country and

international levels.

Neighborhood and city level organizations are organizations that originated from the

City of Camden, while larger level organizations may be considered to be outsiders that

have a branch office or another type of representation in Camden.

By type of service organizations are also divided into three categories. It is recognized

that the variety of services that nonprofits provide substantially exceeds three

categories. Nonetheless, for the purpose of creating broader representation in each

category this variety of services is narrowed down to housing, human and social

services, and community and economic development. The types’ definitions are

provided below:

• Housing Organizations (H) are organizations whose primary mission is to

preserve and expand quality affordable housing for families with low and

moderate incomes.

• Human and Social Services (S) are organizations which encompass a wide

range of assistance to different population groups including youth, children,

families, disabled, elderly and homeless, with the purpose of enhancing their

personal growth, health, education, and leadership. This category includes


34

educational organizations, health organizations, art, cultural, historical societies,

and advocacy groups.

• Community and Economic Development Organizations (C) are organizations

whose primary goal is to promote economic development of communities and

low- and moderate-income persons through training assisting them in starting

small businesses and expanding existing ones.

Lastly, nonprofit organizations are divided according to their religious or secular

orientation:

• Faith-Based Organizations (FB) are religious organizations such as churches,

temples, congregations, mosques, and ministries whose primary mission is to

improve peoples’ lives through spreading religious values and norms

• Secular Organizations (S), all organizations not belonging to a religious order

fall under this category.

Findings Considering the fact that the number of nonprofits in the city fluctuates (new

organizations appear, some already existing organizations disappear), the WRI

research team updated the database in the Fall 2003. The current distribution of

nonprofit organizations is presented in the Table 1. As the table illustrates, the reliable

data was found for total of 611 nonprofit organizations in Camden. 4 out of 18

categories are empty. All neighborhood level faith based organizations provide social

services, which leaves housinf and economic development categories empty.

Table 1: Typology Matrix of the Nonprofit Organizations Type of service Level of service Total NeighborhoodCity wide Larger FB S FB S FB S Housing 0 9 5 6 0 8 28 Social Service 114 34 76 91 19 214 548 Community and Economic Development0 1 6 16 0 12 35 Total by level of service 114 44 87 113 19 234 611


All religious organizations on the neighborhood level usually can be characterized as

small churches serving the primary social needs of the community they are located in.

There are a total of 19 large religious organizations and all of them provide social

services leaving two more categories empty: larger housing providing faith based

organizations, and larger community and economic development faith based

organizations.

Chart 1 illustrates the distribution of nonprofits by size. The percent of outsiders or large

organizations in the city is pretty high, 41% (N=253). However, the organizations

originated within the city and serving specifically citizens and neighborhoods of Camden

outnumber the large-scale organizations, 59% (N=358). Referring to the matrix, 73% of

all organizations on the neighborhood level are neighborhood based churches (114 out

of 158). The most numerous category on the city level is secular social service

providers, 45% of organizations on the level belong to this category (91 out of 200). At

the larger scale the majority of organizations also belongs to secular social service

providers, 85% (234 out of 253).

Chart 1: Distribution of nonprofits by size

41%

33%

26%

large city neighborhood

As the typology matrix and Chart 2 illustrate, 89% (N= 548) of nonprofit organizations in

the city provide social services. The remaining 11% are divided between the other two

types of services: 6% (N=35) provide community and economic development and 5%

35


(N=28) provide housing. Based on the interviews with the leaders of the nonprofit

organizations, the least numbered category, housing, considered being the most visible

and effective in the city.

Chart 2: Distribution of nonprofits by type

5%

89% 6%

hosing social service community and economic development

More that a third of the whole nonprofit sector is represented by faith based

organizations. As Chart 3 illustrates, 36% (N=220) of nonprofits in the city are religious

organizations. The most numerous type of both faith based and secular organizations is

social service.

Chart 3: Faith based versus secular nonprofits

36%

64%

faith based secular

Conclusion To conclude, the current nonprofit environment in Camden is characterized by the

overwhelming presence of social service providers (N=548), specifically large secular 36


37

organizations (N=214) and neighborhood based churches (N=114). Housing (N=28) and

community and economic development (N=35) organizations are almost equally

represented in the city.

Please see the complete Nonprofit Database below.


38

Name Type Zip Phone 200 Club Camden City Hero Scholarship CSS 08009 (856) 546-0607 4-H Youth Development Program LSS 08021 (609) 265-5052 A.P.M. Provecto Boriquen NHS 08105 (856) 338-9492 Abba Pregnancy Center LSS 08065 (856) 829-0202 Abilities Center of Southern New Jersey, Inc. LSS 08093 (856) 848-1025 Abundant Grace Ministries NSF 08103 (856) 541-3767 Abundant Living Fellowship NSF 08033 (856) 541-3767 Abundant Living Fellowship Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-3767 Adoption from the Heart LSS 08002 (856) 665-5655 AIDS Coalition of Southern New Jersey LSS 08031 (856) 933-9500 Al-Anon Assembly, Inc. LSS 08035 (856) 547-0855 Alcoholics Anonymous CSS 08103 (856) 486-4444

Alcove Addiction and Chemical Dependency Services at Virtua Health System CSS 08104 (856) 246-3505 Aletha Wright Center of VOA CSS 08104 (856) 966-0909 American Cancer Society - Camden County Unit LSS 08035 (856) 546-1600 American Diabetes Association LSS 08034 (856) 482-9047 American Heart Association LSS 08106 (856) 546-5600 American Red Cross - Camden County Chapter LSS 08102 (856) 365-7100 Ancora Psychiatric Hospital LSS 08037 (609) 561-1700 Angel Flight East LSS 19462 (610) 940-1717 Animal Welfare Association, Inc. LSS 08043 (856) 424-2288 Anna M. Sample House CSS 08103 (856) 963-0430 Annointed New Journal NSF 08104 (856) 963-0650 Anorexia Nervosa & Bulimia Support Group LSS 08033 (856) 429-3930 Antioch Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 966-0221 ARC of Camden County LSS 08009 (856) 767-3650 Archway Human Services LSS 08004 (856) 767-6039 Arthritis Foundation - New Jersey LSS 08034 (856) 482-0600 Asbury United Methodist Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-7180 Asociacion Puertorriquenos En Marcha (APM) LSS 19122 (215) 2356788 Aspira, Inc. of NJ - Southern Regional Office LSS 08102 (856) 964-9115 Associated Services for the Blind LSS 19107 (215) 627-0600 Atkins Temple Church of Love NSF 08102 (856) 964-5364 Bacharach Institute for Rehabilitation LSS 08240 (609) 652-7000 BANCROFT NEURO HEALTH LSS 08033 (856) 429-0010 Baptist Temple Church NSF 08102 (856) 365-3177


39

Name Type Zip Phone Bergen Lanning Health Center CSS 08103 (856) 757-0134 Bernice Miller Day Care Center CSS 08105 (856) 541-3060 Bestwork Industries for the Blind, Inc. LSS 08078 (856) 939-5220 Bethany Baptist Church LSF 08021 (856)784-2220 Bethel Tabernacle NSF 08103 (856) 963-8231 Bethel Temple NSF 08103 (856) 963-8231 Bethel United Methodist Church NSF 08105 (856) 963-1481 Better Business Bureau of South Jersey, Inc. LCS 08108 (800) 585-0499 Beullah Church of God Seventh Day NSF 08104 (856) 365-8536 Bible Church of God NSF 08103 (856) 338-1114 Big Brother/ Sister of Camden & Gloucester Counties LSS 08106 (856) 546-1221 Bright Star Christian Center CSF 08103 (856) 757-9097 B'nai Brith Youth Organization (SJR) LSS 08003 (856) 757-9097 Boat People SOS CSS 08105 (856) 486-7770 Born Again Ministries, Inc. NSF 08101 (856) 365-9411 Boy Scouts of America, Southern New Jersey Council LSS 08332 (856) 327-1700 Boys & Girls Club CSS 08103 (856) 966-9700 BPUM Child Development Centers, Inc. CSS 08102 (856) 966-8006 Brain Injury Association of NJ, Inc. LSS 08837 (732) 738-1002 Bright Memorial Disciples of Christ Church NSF 08103 (856) 964-2552 Bright Star Christian Center CSF 08103 (856) 757-9097

Bright Star Housing & Community Development Corporation CHF 08102 (856) 757-9097 Broadway Family Center CSS 08103 (856) 635-1111 Broadway Pentecostal Church NSS 08103 (856) 966-1258 Broadway United Methodist Church CSF 08103 (856) 964-7445 Brookfield Academy LSS 08034 (856) 795-8228 Burlington Comprehensive Counseling, Inc. LSS 08060 (609) 267-3610 Burn Foundation LSS 19107 (215) 629-9200 Calvary Bible Tabernacle Church NSF 08105 (856) 966-2470 CAMCARE Health Corporation, INC. LSS 08103 (856) 541-4926 Camden County Youth Advocate Program LSS 08102 (856) 541-4300 Camden Area Health Education Center (AHEC) CSS 08102 (856) 963-2432 Camden Bible Baptist Institute CSF 01804 (856) 541-9074 Camden Bible Tabernacle Church NSF 08102 (856) 507-9773 Camden Center for Law and Social Justice CSS 08102 (856) 966-8896 Camden Churches Organized for People (CCOP) CHF 08105 (856) 966-8869


40

Name Type Zip Phone

Camden City Chamber of Commerce CCS 08102 (856) 225-1400 Camden City Fire Chiefs & Fire Officers Association, Inc. CSS 08110 (856) 665-0774 Camden City Fireman's Association CSS 08035 (856) 547-0404 Camden City Garden Club CSS 08103 (856) 541-5323 Camden City Historical Society CSS 08103 (856) 964-3333 Camden City Independent Living Center, Inc. CSS 08104 (856) 966-0800 Camden City Redevelopment Corporation CHS 08102 (856) 966-1849 Camden City Youth Orchestra CSS 08104 (856) 541-9889 Camden Community Service Center CSS 08103 (856) 757-2658 Camden County Bar Association LSS 08102 (856) 964-3420 Camden County Bar Foundation LSS 08102 (856) 964-3420

Camden County Council on Alcoholism & Drug Abuse, Inc. LSS 08043 (856) 427-6553 Camden County Council on Economic Opportunity (OEO) LCS 08103 (856) 964-6887 Camden County Emerald Society Pipes and Drums LSS 08030 (856) 456-2999

Camden County Family Development/Job Training Resource Center LSS 08104 (856) 968-4200 Camden County Housing Association, Inc. LHS 08034 (856) 427-6166 Camden County Workforce Investment Board, Inc. LSS 08034 (856) 627-3667 Camden Day Nursery Association CSS 08103 (856) 365-2200 Camden Dental Health Center (CDHC) CSS 08102 (856) 966-1714 Camden Development Collaborative CCS 08102 (856) 225-1441 Camden Empowerment Zone Corporation CCS 08102 (856) 365-0300

Camden First Spanish Church of the Narazene AUREA Pablo Muniz CSF 08105 (856) 541-7585 Camden Free Dental Clinic, Inc. CSS (856) 966-1714 Camden Greenways, Inc. CCS (856) 757-7267 Camden Home for Children & SPCC CSS 08108 (856) 854-3970

Camden Industrial Development Corporation Office of County Council CCS 08102 (856) 757-7000 Camden Lutheran Housing Corporation NHS 08102 (856) 342-8088 Camden Neighborhood Renaissance CHS 08102 (856) 635-9500 Camden Optometric Eye Center CSS 08103 (856) 365-1811 Camden Organization of Police Superiors CSS 08102 (856) 964-2216 Camden Regional Legal Services, Inc. CSS 08102 (856) 964-2010 Camden Rescue Mission CSS 08104 (856) 966-2495 Camden School of Musical Arts CSS 08105 (856) 541-6375


41

Name Type Zip Phone Camden Trust Foundation LSS 19103 (215) 585-5597 Camden Starr Program, Inc. CSS 856-857-1291 Camden to Camden CSS 08035 (856) 546-4603 Camden Town Civic Association NSS 08102 (856) 964-0475 Camden Wellness CSS 08105 (856) 365-8603

Camden/Gloucester Directors of Volunteers in Agencies (DOVIA) LSS 08108 (856) 667-4550 Campbell Soup Foundation CSS 08103 (856) 342-4800 Cancer Care, Inc. LSS 07041 (973) 379-7500 Caregivers Support Group, Audubon LSS 08106 (856) 546-0005

Caregivers Support Group, Barry Brown Health Education Center LSS 08043 (888) 847-8823 Cathedral Soup Kitchen CSS 08102 (856) 338-1529 Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception CSF 08102 (856) 964-1580 Catholic Social Services Diocese of Camden LSF 08105 (856) 663-9800 Center for Children's Support LSS 08084 (856) 566-7036 Center for Family Services CSS 08103 (856) 964-1990 Center for Independent Living of South Jersey LSS 08093 (856) 853-6490

Center for Outreach & Services for the Autism Community (COSAC) LSS 08638 (609) 883-8100 Center for the Treatment of Eating Disorders LSS 07039 (973) 740-0234

Cerebral Palsy School & Treatment Center of Camden County LSS 08110 (856) 662-7300 Challenge Square Academy CSS 08094 (856) 966-5130 Chelton Terrace Resident Management Corporation NHS 08102 (856) 541-0672 Cherry Hill Women's Center LSS 08034 (856) 667-5910 Cherry Street Neighborhood Development Corporation NHS 08103 (856) 757-7618 Chestnut Street UAME Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-8374 Children's Academy Preschool LSS 08052 (856) 667-9050 Children's Home/Mary Dobbins School LSS 08060 (609) 267-1550 CHILDREN'S SEASHORE HOUSE LSS 19104 (215) 895-3600 Christ Evangelical Lutheran Church CSF 08104 (856) 966-0153

Christian Day Nursery Preschool of the First Baptist Church of Collingswood LSF 08108 (856) 854-4343 Christian Ministries, Inc. NSF 08102 (856) 541-9074 Christian Pentecostal Church NSF 08102 (856) 541-8843 Church of Christ NSF 08105 (856) 541-1556 Church of God & Saints of Christ Tabernacle NSF 08103 (856) 963-4589


42

Name Type Zip Phone Church of God's Prophecy NSF 08102 (856) 757-0049 Citizen Advocacy Program LSS 08084 (856) 346-4433 City Chamber of Commerce CCS 08102 (856) 225-1400 Collingswood Adult Activity Center LSS 08108 (856) 858-4984 Collingswood Manor LHS 08108 (856) 854-4331 Committee for Children with Special Learning Needs LSS 08033 (856) 429-7510 Community Baptist Church CSF 08104 (856) 964-3330 Community Church of Faith Pentecostal NSF 08103 (856) 964-5347 Community Health Law Project, Inc. CSS 08108 (856) 858-9500 Community Planning & Advocacy Council (CPAC) CSS 08109 (856) 663-3998 Camden County Council on Economic Opportunity LCS 08103 856-964-6887 Compassion for Camden LSS 08003 (856) 751-1571 Compassionate Care Hospice LSF 08053 (856) 985-0202 Compassionate Friends Camden County Chapter LSS 08003 (856) 428-3674 Concerned Citizens of East Camden NSS 08105 (856) 966-3557 Concerned Citizens of North Camden NSS 08102 (856) 966-3360 Concerned Parents of South Jersey, Inc. LSS 08002 (856) 482-8508 Cornerstone Bible Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 966-8837 Congregacion Amor De Jesus Cristo NSF 08104 (856) 365-0335 Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Delaware Valley LSS 19102 (856) 482-9644 CONTACT Community Helplines LSS (856) 317-1200 Cooper Foundation CSS 08103 (856) 338-0101 Cooper Grant Neighborhood Association NSS 08103 (856) 966-5340 Cooper Health Systems CSS 08103 (856) 342-2197

Cooper Hospital University Medical Center Workers Compensation Trust CSS 08103 (856) 342-2000 Cooper House The Family Center NSS 08103 (856) 968-7280 Cooper Lanning Civic Association NSS 08103 (856) 541-6426 Cooper Plaza Neighborhood Association NSS 08103 (856) 963-7432 Cooperative Business Assistance Corporation (CBAC) CCS 08102 (856) 966-8181 Cooper's Ferry Development Association CCS 08103 (856) 757-9154 Cooper's Point NSS 08102 (856) 966-5370 Coriell Institute for Medical Research LSS 08103 (856) 966-7377 Cornerstone Bible Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 966-8837 Cornerstone Pregnancy Centers of South Jersey LSS 08079 (856) 935-0300 Cramer Hill Action Committee NSS 08105 (856) 964-2462 Cramer Hill Little League NSS 08105 (856) 963-0646


43

Name Type Zip Phone Cramer Hill Neighborhood Advisory Council NSS 08105 (856) 966-0153 Crestbury Residents Coalition, Inc. NSS 08104 (856) 541-9710 Crestbury Social Services NSS 08104 (856) 541-9710 Crossroads Program, Inc. LSS 08060 (609) 261-5400 Dayton Manor RHCF CSS 08104 (856) 964-1770 Deaf Services, Inc. LSS 08012 (856) 228-1900 Delaware Valley Project with Industry, Inc. LSS 08012 (215)-587-3080 Deliverance House of Prayer for All People CSF 08102 (856) 964-3400 Divine Temple of Love Church NSF 08103 (856) 338-0057 Dooley House, Inc CSS 08102 (856) 541-9050 Drenk Mental Health, Inc. LSS 08060 (609) 261-8000 East Camden Concerned Citizens NSS 08105 (856) 966-3557 Easter Seals New Jersey LSS 08816 (856) 346-1192 Eastside Civic Association NSS 08105 (856) 541-5243 Echelon Mall Ministry LSF 08043 (856) 772-0434 Eden Family of Services LSS 08540 (609) 987-0099 El Bethel Church of Christ Apostolic Faith, Inc. NSF 08103 (856) 966-0464 El Centro Catholic Social Services CSS 08104 (856) 964-2133 El Centro Comunal Boricano Daycare CSS 08102 (856) 541-3696 El Shaddai Day Care Center CSS 08103 856-756-0175 El Silo Iglesia Christiana Pentecostal NSF 08105 (856) 966-0464 Emmanuel Cancer Foundation LSS 07076 (908) 322-4323 Emmanuel United Pentecostal Church NSF 08103 (856) 541-3690 Epilepsy Foundation of NJ LSS 08611 (856) 858-5900 Epiphany Lutheran Church NSF 08102 (856) 963-2308 Evangelism Today Christian Center CSF 08104 (856) 338-0078 Everlasting Praise Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-1350 Fair Share Housing Development CHS 08002 (856) 541-9609 Fairview Community Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 541-6611 Fairview Historic Society NSS 08104 (856) 966-9899 Fairview Village United Methodist NSF 08104 (856) 962-9169 Faith Baptist Church CSF 08103 (856) 541-4774 Faith Cathedral FBC NSF 08103 (856) 541-1845 Faith Farm, Inc. LSF 08302 (856) 455-6145 Faith Holy Temple Church of God in Christ NSF 08105 (856) 541-9588 Faith House of God LSF 08104 (609) 964-2802 Faith Tabernacle Church CSF 08103 (856) 365-1153 Faith Tabernacle Church of the Living God CSF 08102 (856) 541-9847 Family Life Outreach Ministries CSF 08103 (856) 307-1702


44

Name Type Zip Phone Family Service-Gentle Harbor Group Home LSS 08060 (609) 267-5928 Fannie Mae Housing and Community Development LHS 19103 (215) 575-1804 Fathers and Children's Equality, NJ (FACE) LSS 08077 (856) 786-3223 Federation of Pentecostal Churches CSF 08105 (856) 225-0081 Fellowship House of South Camden CSF 08104 (856) 964-4545 Ferry Avenue United Methodist Church NSF 08104 (856) 541-0449 Fettersville Neighborhood Association NSS (856) 964-8106 First Baptist Christian Schools & Daycare Center CSF 08109 (856) 665-1790 First Born Church of the Living God, Inc. NSF 08104 (856) 541-3382 First Church of Deliverance NSF 08104 (856) 964-8518 First Church of God NSF 08103 (856) 964-4165 First District Community Policing Partnership NSS 08102 (856) 365-8081 First Hispanic Pentecostal Church, Inc. CSF 08105 (856) 963-6115 First Nazarene Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 365-1228 First Refuge Baptist Church NSF 08102 (856) 365-4343 First Spanish Baptist Church, Inc. CSF 08105 (856) 663-3620 Florence Crittenton Residential Group Center LHS 08618 (609) 777-3292 Focus On Literacy, Inc. LSS 08021 (856) 629-7989 Food Bank of South Jersey LSS 08103 (856) 963-3663 FOP, lodge #1, Camden LSS 08101 (856) 541-4044 Foundation 2000 LSS 08102 (856) 541-4932 Foundation of Life Pentecostal Church NSF 08103 (856) 963-2226 Fountain of Life Center LSF 08016 (856) 499-2131 Fourth District Camden Pubic Safety Council NSS 08104 (856) 964-7978 Free Gospel Church of Jesus Christ CSF 08104 (856) 365-8402 Friends of Camden Animal Shelter CSS 08021 (856) 435-9116 Friendship Baptist Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-9414 Gamma House CSS 08105 (856) 541-2846 GateKeepers Fellowship Church CSF 08105 (856) 342-8045 Generations, Inc. LSS 08102 (856) 966-7444 Genesis Counseling Center, Inc. CSS 08108 (856) 858-9314 Genesis Elder Care, Adult Day Services CSS 08043 (856) 424-7575 Genesis School of Business CSS 08103 (856) 963-1311 Gethsemane Independent Baptist Church NSF 08103 (856) 963-1671 Gift of Life Donor Program LSS 19130 (800) 366-6771 Girl Scouts Council Camden County LSS 08034 (856) 795-1560 Girls on the Move Youth Foundation, Inc. LSS 08105 (856) 486-4366 Global Substance Abuse Coalition CSS 08105 (856) 541-3114 Golden Cradle Adoption Services, Inc. LSS 08034 (856) 667-2229


45

Name Type Zip Phone Goodwill Industries of Southern NJ LSS 08052 (856) 439-0174 Gospel Temple Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-4708 Grace Apostolic NSF 08104 (856) 541-1509 Grace Lutheran Church CSF 08102 (856) 963-3547 Greater Camden County Reinvestment Corporation LCS 08102 (856) 365-9038 Greater Collingswood Children's Center CSS 08108 (856) 858-5970 Greater El Bethel Church of Christ NSF 08103 (856) 966-0464 Green Thumb, Inc. - NJ Unit LSS 08012 (856) 228-4000 Grief Management of Camden County LSS 08102 (856) 756-7900 Group Homes of Camden County LSS 08105 (856) 541-9283 Grow Program CSS 08103 (856) 881-2008 Guadalupe Family Services CSS 08102 (856) 365-8081 Guidance Center of Camden County LSS 08034 (856) 428-1300

Guidance Center of Camden County Development Corporation LSS 08043 (856) 346-1800 Habitat for Humanity LHS 08101 (856) 486-9177 Handicapped Advocates for Independent Living, Inc. LSS 08108 (856) 854-7781 Harleigh Cemetery Association CSS 08103 (856) 963-0122 Harris Temple AME Zion Church LSF 08104 (856) 541-6608 Haitian Community Development Organization of Camden CCS 08105 (856) 365-1364 Healing the Children Greater Philadelphia LSS 08088 (609) 889-3679 Healthy Mothers/Healthy Babies Coalition LSS 08109 (856) 963-2432 Heart of Camden CHS 08104 (856) 966-1212 Helping Other Parents in Normal Grief (HOPING) LSS 08043 (888) 847-8823 Helping Other People Evolve (HOPE) LSS 08107 (800) 955-2446 Hemophilia Association of New Jersey LSS 08816 (732) 238-5250 Hendricks House NSS 08102 (856) 845-5437 Hepatitis Patients Support Group LSS 08107 (856) 931-8312 Highland Park Church of God NSF 08030 (856) 456-3364 Highway Church of Christ NSF 08105 (856) 541-7590 HireAbility CSS 08102 (856) 342-7444 Hispanic Clergy of Philadelphia LSF (215) 634-4311 Hispanic Counseling and Family Services of NJ, Inc. LSS (856) 964-3883 Hispanic Family Center of Southern NJ LSS 08105 (856) 365-7393 HiYa! (Hearing Impaired Young Adults) LSS 08021 (856) 783-3230 Hogan House, Inc. CSS 08102 (856) 541-9050 Holy Bethel Pentecostal Temple, Inc. CSF 08104 (856) 541-3693


46

Name Type Zip Phone Holy Name Catholic Church CSF 08102 (856) 963-1621 Holy Name Little League NSS 08102 (856) 963-1621 Holy Name of Camden Jesuit Urban Service Team, Inc. NSS 08102 (856) 963-1621 Holy Name School NSS 08102 (856) 365-7930 Holy Spirit Cathedral NSF 08105 (856) 338-1327 Holy Temple Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ NSF 08105 (856) 964-4327 Holy Trinity Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 966-6743 Home Port Alliance for the USS New Jersey CCS 08104 (856) 966-1652 Hope Memorial Baptist Church CSF 08102 (856) 365-6552 HopeWorks 'N Camden CSS 08101 (856) 963-1621 Hosanna AME Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-7710 Hospice Care of South Jersey LSS 08360 (856) 794-1515 Hossanna AME Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-7710 Hosts for Hospitals LSS 19066 (610) 660-6667 Humane Vegetarian Church & Bible Tract Society NSF 08105 (856) 541-1223 Hynes Community Center CCS 08104 (856) 966-9617 I.C.S. El Bethel NSF 08052 (856) 727-0357 IAFF #3249 Camden County Uniformed Firefighters LSS 08108 (856) 875-7540 Iglesia Christian Pentecostal Church NSF 08102 (856) 963-1739 Iglesia Christiana Pentecostal Movimiento NSF 08104 (856) 966-1051Iglesia de Dios de la Profesia NSF 08102 (856) 757-0049Iglesia de Dios Pentecostal NSF 08105 (856) 635-0217Iglesia de Dios Pentecostal Mission International NSF 08105 (856) 541-5418Iglesia del Nazareno NSF 08105 (856) 541-7585Iglesia Dios Pentecostal NSF 08105 (856) 365-6922Iglesia Luterana Cristo Nustro Salvado NSF 08105 (856) 963-0204Iglesia Luterana La Trinidad NSF 08104 (856) 365-0507Iglesia Menonita Mantial De Vida NSF 08105 (856) 365-9236Iglesia Metodista Unida Asbury NSF 08105 (856) 541-7180Iglesia Nednita Mantial de Vida NSF 08105 (856) 365-9236Iglesia Pen Palabras De Vida Alpha y Omega NSF 08105 (856) 541-6697 Iglesia Pentecostal Mi Arca De Salvacion NSF 08105 (856) 964-1757 Iglesia Pentecostal Puerta De Salvacion NSF 08101 (856) 963-0146 Iglesia Pentecostal Rois De Agua Viva NSF 08105 (856) 541-1565 Integrity, Inc. LSS 07102 (973) 623-0600 Islamic Center NSF 08103 (856) 541-6782


47

Name Type Zip Phone

Islamic Temple NSF 08103 (856) 541-6782 Jehovah's Witnesses East Camden Congregation NSF 08105 (856) 541-8747 Jehovah's Witnesses South Camden Congregation NSF 08103 (856) 661-0915 Jersey Housing Counseling, Inc. LHS 08104 (856) 541-1000 Jewish Federation Housing Corporation LHS 08002 (856) 667-6826 Jewish Geriatric Home CSS 08002 (856) 667-3100 Job Corps LSS 08104 (856) 963-0431 Junior Achievement of South Jersey LCS 08046 (609) 880-1885 Juvenile Diabetes Foundation South Jersey Chapter LCS 08002 (856) 429-1101 Juvenile Resource Center LCS 08102 (856) 963-4060 Kaighn Avenue Baptist Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-4496 Katz Jewish Community Center of Southern NJ LSF 08003 (856) 424-4444 Kellman Academy LSF 08002 (856) 667-1302 Kennedy Gerontology Center LSS 08084 (856) 346-7777 KENNEDY HEALTH SYSTEM LSS 08043 (856) 566-2000 Khmer Kampuchea Krom Association of NJ, Inc. LSS 08105 (856) 488-7979 Kid's Academy Learning Center LSS 08002 (856) 486-1320 Kids World Child Development Center CCS 08103 (856) 966-0060 Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witness CSF 08105 (856) 365-4457 King's Dominion Church NSF 08104 (856) 541-7822 La Leche League of New Jersey LSS 07856 (856) 218-9218 Kingsway Learning Center LSS 08033 (856) 428-8108 Lanning Square West Neighborhood Corporation NHS 08102 (856) 365-9038 LARC School, Inc. LSF 08031 (856) 933-3725

Latin American Economic Development Association, Inc. (LAEDA) CCS 08102 (856) 338-1177 Learning Tree CSS 08104 (856) 541-2554 Leavenhouse CSS 08102 (856) 966-4596 Lester's Voice of Hope Deliver NSF 08104 (856) 342-7917

Leukemia Society of America, Albert Einstein Medical Center LSS 19141 (215) 456-3822 Leukemia Society of America, Southern NJ Chapter LSS 08059 (856) 931-8500 LifeTies, Inc. LSS 08638 (609) 771-1600 Literacy Volunteers of America - Camden County LSS 08043 (856) 757-7648 Little Rock Baptist Church NSF 08103 (856) 757-0440 Littlest Angels School CSS 08081 (856) 629-0196 Looking Forward Ministries CSF 08103 (856) 966-0802 Lourdes Home Health Services LSS 08108 (856) 869-0900


48

Name Type Zip Phone Lourdes Regional Rehab Center LSS 08103 (856) 757-3877 Love Fellowship Tabernacle Church CSF 08103 (856) 635-1997 Lutheran Social Ministries of NJ LSF 08016 (609) 386-7171 Lutheran Social Services LSF 08108 (856) 854-0824 Macedonia AME Church CSF 08103 (856) 365-3840 Make a Wish Foundation of New Jersey LSS 07083 (908) 964-5055 Man to Man LSS 08081 (856) 616-1650 Manic Depressive Support Group LSS 08012 (856) 227-5678 Manic Depressives Anonymous LSS 08060 (856) 582-6908

March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation SJ Chapter LSS 08034 (85) 666-7220 Martin Luther Christian School LSF 08109 (856) 665-0231 Martin Luther King, Jr. Child Development Center CSS 08104 (856) 541-9399 Mary H. Thomas Day Care Center CSS 08104 (856) 365-0040 Maryville, Inc. LSS 08094 (856) 629-0244 Masdiun Nur, Inc. CSF 08104 (856) 365-1551 Mental Health Association in Southwestern NJ LSS 08102 (856) 966-6767 Metro Camden Habitat for Humanity, Inc. CHS 08101 (856) 486-9177 Mi Casita Day Care Center CSS 08103 (856) 541-4772 Miller's Memorial F B C CSF 08103 (856) 541-1845 Mission Teens, Inc. LSS 08029 (856) 691-9855 Moorestown VNA Care LSS 08054 (856) 235-0462

Morningstar Pentecostal Church of the Apostolic Faith - PAW CSF 08104 (856) 338-1908 Mother/Child Residential Services, Inc. LSS 08096 (856) 853-1761 Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) LSS 08096 (856) 845-1121 Mount Ararat Pentecostal Church CSF 08104 (856) 541-7755 Mount Zion Highway of Holiness CSF 08103 (856) 365-0098 Movement Pentecostal Christian Church CSF 08103 (856) 541-8152 Movimiento Iglesia Christiana Pentecostal la Hermosa NSF 08102 (856) 541-8152 Mt. Ararat Pentecostal Church CSF 08104 (856) 541-7755 Mt. Calvary Baptist Church CSF 08102 (856) 541-0949 Mt. Calvary Church of God in Christ NSF 08102 (856) 963-4670 Mt. Carmel Holy Church CSF 08102 (856) 964-6833 Mt. Hope UAME Church CSF 08103 (856) 541-7122 Mt. Olive CME Church CSF 08103 (856) 541-3005 Mt. Zion Baptist Church CSF 08103 (856) 338-6968 Multiple Schlerosis Association of America (MSAA) LSS 08002 (800) 833-4672


49

Name Type Zip Phone Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) LSS 08043 (856) 770-1227 My Brother's Keeper Drug Rehabilitation Center LSS 08102 (856) 365-1332 NAMI Camden County LSS 08034 (856) 667-1522 Nancy's Rest Home CSS 08104 (609) 966-1384 Narcotics Anonymous LSS 08035 (800) 992-0401 Nation of Islam Study Center LSF 08103 (856) 365-0175

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) LCS 08103 (856) 342-8862 National Federation of the Blind of NJ LSS 07109 (856) 482-0865

National Muscular Sclerosis Society, Greater Delaware Valley LSS 19147 (215) 271-1500 National Organization of Women LSS 08034 (856) 770-8832 Neighborhood Center, Inc. CSS 08103 (856) 365-5295 Neighborhood Housing Services of Camden, Inc. CHS 08103 (856) 541-0729 New Beginnings CCTS LSS 08109 (856) 663-1040 New Beginnings of Somerdale LSS 08043 (856) 354-6019 New Freedom Full Gospel Church NSF 08104 (856) 964-0799 New Hope of New Jersey- Mental Health Clinic LSS 08102 (856) 225-1200 New Hope Temple Assemblies of Christ CSF 08104 (856) 968-0508 New Horizons Counseling LSS 08057 (609) 702-0625 New Jerusalem Baptist Church, Inc. CSF 08104 (856) 365-5160 New Life Lutheran Church NSF 08104 (856) 963-4279 New Mickle Baptist Church CSF 08103 (856) 365-1107 New Philippian Baptist Church NSF 08105 (856) 662-6622 New Pilgrim Baptist Church NSF 08101 (856) 757-9494 New Pilgrim Full Gospel Baptist Church NSF 08103 (856) 757-9494 New Visions Community Services of Camden CSS 08101 (856) 963-0857 New Wesley AME Zion Church CSF 08103 (856) 365-7443 Newton Creek Civic Association for Morgan Village, Inc. NSS 08104 (856) 541-7567 Newton Friends Meeting NSF 08101 (856) 966-1376 Newton Meeting Religious Society of Friends NSF 08102 (856) 966-1376 NJ AIDS/STD Hotline LSS 07112 (800) 624-2377 NJ Community Water Watch LSS 08102 (732) 249-4108 NJ Council for Children’s Rights, Inc. LSS 08857 (800) 266-8162 NJ Eating Disorder Hotline LSS 07039 (800) 624-2268 NJ Foster Parents Association LSS (800) 222-0047 NJ Foundation of Dentistry for Persons with Disabilities LSS 08902 (856) 456-1064 NJ Minority Educational Development LSS (856) 541-3926


50

Name Type Zip Phone NJ Poison Information & Education System LSS 07112 (800) 7647661 North Camden Community Builders NHS 08102 (856) 966-3328 North Camden Concerned Citizens NSS 08102 (856) 966-3360 North Camden Land Trust NHS 08102 (856) 966-3401 Northgate I Residents Association NSS 08102 (856) 966-0430 Northgate II Residents Association NSS 08102 (800) 917-1419 Northgate Park, Inc. NSS 08102 (856) 963-4343 Nuevas de Gran Gozo NSF 08102 (856) 342-7717 Osborn Family Health CSS 08103 (856) 757-3700 Our Lady of Fatima Catholic NSF 08102 (856) 635-1977 Our Lady of Lourdes Health Care Services LSS 08103 (856) 757-3500 Our Lady of Lourdes Health Foundation LSS 08103 (856) 757-3500 Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center LSS 08103 (856) 757-3500 Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Fatima Catholic Church CSF 08104 (856) 635-1977 Overeaters Anonymous LSS 08043 (609) 239-0022 Parada San Juan Baptista NSF 08101 (856) 365-8888 Parents Anonymous of NJ, Inc. LSS 08540 (609) 243-9779 Parents Without Partners LSS 08034 (856) 435-3537 Parkinson's Support Group of Southern NJ LSS 08096 (856) 488-6768 Parkside Business and Community in Partnership NHS 08103 (856) 964-0440 Parkside United Methodist Church NSF 08103 (856) 964-2254 PBA #277 Camden County Sheriffs Officers LSS 08099 (856) 233-3510 PBA #351 Camden County Department of Corrections LSS 08099 (856) 225-7629 PetPals of Southern NJ LSS 08031 (856) 931-4399 Planned Parenthood of Southern New Jersey LSS 08103 (856) 365-3519 Poet's Row Headstart Center CSS 08102 (856) 365-8433 Pregnancy Care Center CSS 08106 (856) 547-0055 Pre-School for the Handicapped Camden City CSS 08102 (856) 966-2011

Professional Educational Development Corporation (PEDC) LSS 08104 (856) 338-0812 Promise Alternative Care, Inc. CSS 08003 (856) 751-4884 Providing Assistance To the Homeless (P.A.T.H.) LSS 08102 (856) 365-6597 Puerta de Salvacion NSF 08104 (856) 963-0146 Puerto Rican and Latino Culture & Arts Center NSS 08102 (856) 966-1880 Puerto Rican Unity for Progress (PRUP) CSS 08103 (856) 541-1418 Ranch Hope for Boys & Girls, Inc. LSS 08001 (856) 935-1555 Rancocas Hospital LSS 08046 (888) 772-4656


51

Name Type Zip Phone

Reality House, Inc. LSS 08043 (856) 428-5688 Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic LSS 08540 (609) 452-0606 Refuge Church of Christ CSF 08103 (856) 424-7829 Respond, Inc CSS 08103 (856) 365-4400 Robin's Nest, Inc. LSS 08028 (856) 881-8689 Rock of Ages Holiness Church NSF 08103 (856) 963-1100 Roman Catholic Church of Camden CSF 08102 (856)756-7900 Ronald McDonald House of Southern NJ, Inc. LSS 08103 (856) 966-4663 Rosedale Baptist Church NSF 08105 (856) 966-0852 Rural Development Corporation LCS 08360 (856) 327-3143

Rutgers University Law School Alumni Association Camden LSS 08102 (856)225-6028 Ruth Gottscho Kidney Foundation LSS 07078 (973) 564-6060 Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Church CHF 08104 (856) 966-6700 Sacred Heart School CSF 08104 (856) 963-9341 Saint Andrew Episcopal Church CSF 08105 (856) 365-0111

Saint Andrews Nursery School & Kindergarten CSF 08002 (856) 429-4470 Saint Anthony of Padua Catholic Church CSF 08105 (856) 963-5884 Saint Augustine Episcopal Church CSF 08103 (856) 365-3243 Saint Bartholomew Roman Catholic Church CSF 08103 (856)365-0573 Saint James Apostolic Temple CSF 08103 (856) 964-5443 Saint Joan of Arc Roman Catholic Church CSF 08102 (856) 962-8642 Saint John Baptist Church Corporation CCF 08105 (856) 963-0962 Saint John Baptist Church Day Center CSF 08105 (856) 365-3385 Saint John Baptist Youth Development Center CSF 08103 (856) 365-1772 Saint John Born Again Church CSF 08105 (856) 365-9411 Saint John of God Community Services CSF 08093 (856) 848-4700 Saint John the Baptist Prenatal Clinic CSF 08102 (856) 757-9540 Saint Joseph Carpenter Society CHF 08105 (856) 966-8117 Saint Joseph Church CSF 08104 (856) 963-1285 Saint Joseph Nursery School CSF 08105 (856) 963-0452 Saint Joseph Pro Cathedral CSF 08105 (856) 964-2776 Saint Luke’s Catholic Medical Services CSF 08102 (856) 365-4642 Saint Luke’s UAME Church CSF 08103 (85) 696-4198 Saint Paul Baptist Church CSF 08103 (856) 964-7921 Saint Paul Episcopal Church CSF 08102 (856) 365-5880 Saint Rosa Primitive Baptist Church CSF 08104 (856) 966-2669


52

Name Type Zip Phone

Saint Wilfrid's Episcopal Church NSF 08105 (856) 365-4924 Salvation Army Church CSF 08103 (856) 338-1700 Salvation Army Citadel Corps LSS 08103 (856) 338-1700 Samaritan Hospice LSS 08053 (856) 596-1600 Samost Jewish Family & Children Service of Southern NJ LSF 08003 (856) 424-1333 San Miguel School CSS 08103 (856) 342-6707 Sanctuary Church of the Abiding Presence NSF 08104 (856) 365-4109 Save Our Waterfront CCS 08102 (856) 966-3360 Scott Methodist Church NSF 08105 (856) 365-1632 Seabrook House NSF 08302 (856) 663-0010 Seamen's Church Institute LSF 19106 (215) 922-2562 Segaloff Substance Abuse Center of Southern NJ LSS 08103 (609) 757-9190

Senior Citizens United Community Service of Camden County LSS 08059 (856) 456-1121

Service Corps. of Retired Executives (SCORE) Southern NJ Chapter 254 LSS 08109 (856) 486-3421 Seventh Day Adventist Spanish Church CSF 08105 (856) 365-3540 Shalom Baptist Church CSF 08103 (856) 541-9666 Shalom Development Corporation, Inc. CCF 08103 (856) 966-3360 Shriners Hospital for Children LSS 19140 (215) 430-4000 Sikora Center for Child Development LSS 08103 (856) 963-1312 Sincerity & Truth Bible Ministry Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-3083 Sincerity & Truth Economic Development Group CCS 08103 (856) 365-8083 South Camden Christian Fellowship, Inc. CCF 08102 (856) 964-4545 South Jersey Behavioral Health Resources, Inc. LSS 08101 (856) 541-1700 South Jersey Council on AIDS, Inc. LSS 08035 (856) 547-6600 South Jersey Drug Treatment Center LSS 08302 (856) 455-5441 South Jersey Federal Credit Union LCS 08101 (856) 232-9000 South Jersey Performing Arts Center LSS 08103 (856) 342-6633 South West Jersey Polio Support Group LSS 08021 (856) 784-7741 Southern Jersey Family Medical Centers LSS 08037 (609) 567-0200

Southern New Jersey Development Council Foundation, Inc. LCS (856) 541-7500 Southern New Jersey Medical Institute LSS 08084 (856) 784-2583 Southern New Jersey Perinatal Cooperative LSS 08109 (856) 665-6000 Southwood Counseling Service NSS 08097 (856) 845-5114 Spanish Nazarene Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-7585 Spanish Pentecostal Church, Inc. CSF 08105 (856) 963-6115


53

Name Type Zip Phone Spaulding for Children - South Jersey Office LSS 08102 (800) 400-2192 Special Olympics of NJ LSS 08540 (800) 650-7665 Starting Point of NJ, Inc. LSS 08108 (856) 854-3155 State Street Headstart Center LSS 08102 (856) 541-1906 State Street Housing Corporation NHS 08102 (856) 365-4403 State Street United Methodist Church NSF 08102 (856) 964-3390 Steininger Center LSS 08034 (856) 541-2222 Step By Step CSS 08105 (856) 966-8840 Step-Up CSS 08103 (856) 225-5070 Stroke Club CSS 08103 (856) 757-3619 Stroke Support Group LSS 08035 (856) 546-0005 Substance Abuse Center of Southern New Jersey, Inc. LSS 08102 (856) 757-9190 Support Group for Caregivers of the Frail Elderly LSS 08084 (856) 346-7777 Sword of the Spirit Christian Center CCF 08103 (856) 342-7729 Tabernacle Of Faith Church CSF 08102 (856) 963-6611 Morton St. Community Organization NSS 08104 (856) 541-7953 Tender Loving Care University LSS 08007 (856) 546-6969 Tenth Street Baptist Church NSF 08104 (856) 964-1851 The Bridge LSS 08108 (856) 869-3122 The Neighborhood Center, Inc. CCS 08103 (609) 365-5295 The Work Group CSS 08105 (856) 486-7390 Tower of Faith Mission, Inc. LSS (856) 338-1007

Training Options for Pregnant Parenting Students (TOPPS) LSS 08060 (609) 265-7798 Tri-State Community Development Resource Center LCS 08103 (856) 541-5974 Underwood Memorial Hospital LSS 08096 (8568) 450-1000 Union Organized for Social Service (UOSS) LSS 08109 (609) 663-2888 United Cerebral Palsy Association of NJ, Inc. LSS 08608 (888) 322-1918 United Churches for Christ CSF 08103 (856) 338-0343 United House of Prayer CSF 08103 (856) 964-1710 United Neighbors of Liberty Park NSS 08104 (856) 541-9889 United Neighbors of Whitman Park NSS 08104 (856) 541-7656 United Way of Camden County LSS 08103 (856) 963-2720 Unity Community Center CSS 08104 (856) 365-1226 Unity Place CSS 08104 (856) 964-1034 Urban Education Cooperative Corporation CSS 08102 (856) 365-0776 Urban Promise Ministries, Inc. CCF 08105 (856) 661-1700 USO of Philadelphia, Inc. LSS 19153 (215) 365-8889


54

Name Type Zip Phone VFW #1297 Clarence Hill of the US LSS 08103 (856) 757-0090 VFW Post #705 East Camden of the US LSS 08105 (856) 365-9561 Victory Baptist Church NSF 08105 (856) 966-2104 Victory Temple Community Church NSF 08102 (856) 365-6689 Vietnamese-American Cultural & Education Center CCS 08104 (856) 966-8383 Village Apartments of Cherry Hill, Inc. LHS 08101 (856) 424-7913 Virtua Health & Rehabilitation Center at Berlin, Inc. LSS 08009 (856) 322-3000 Virtua Health & Rehabilitation Center at Mount Holly, Inc. LSS 08060 (856) 241-6740 Virtua Health System LSS 08104 (856) 627-1311 Virtua Home Care Community Nursing Services, Inc. LSS 08060 (609) 267-1950 Virtua-Memorial Hospital Burlington County, Inc. LSS (609) 267-0700 Vision Care Consultants of NJ LSS 08102 (800) 977-0436 Visionaries, Inc. LSS 08059 (856) 931-1625 Visiting Nurse Association of Camden County LSS 08102 (856) 235-0462 Visiting Nurse Service Systems, Inc. LSS 08078 (856) 939-9000 Voice of Hope Deliverance Church NSF 08104 (856) 342-7917

VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA DELAWARE VALLEY, INC. (VOADV) LSS 08107 (856) 854-4660 Walt Whitman Association CSS 08103 (856) 541-8280 Walt Whitman Cultural Arts Center CSS 08102 (856) 964-8300 We Care About Centerville NSF 08104 (856) 541-1905 Wesley AME Zion Church NSF 08103 (856) 365-7443 West Jersey Renew CHF 08104 (856) 338-0367 Westminister Presbyterian Church NSF 08105 (856) 541-7965 WIC - Bergen Lanning Clinic- Camden CSS 08103 (856) 757-0021 Women Against Rape (WAR) LSS 08108 (856) 858-7800 Women's Shelter LSS 08103 (856) 227-1234 Woodland Avenue Presbyterian Church NSF 08104 (856) 963-7538 Woodland Community Development Corporation CCF 08104 (856) 963-4324

Young Men’s Christian Association of Camden County (YMCA) LSS 08043 (856) 772-9622

Young Women’s Christian Association of Camden County (YWCA) LSS 08084 (856) 435-6606 Your Food Shelf CSS 08105 (856) 365-6475 Youth Advocate Programs, Inc. CSS 08102 (856) 541-4300 Youth Consultation Services CSS 08109 (856) 963-7644 Youth on the Move, Inc. CSS 08104 (856) 966-0343 Zion Baptist Church A457 NSF 08102 (856) 541-4448


55

Appendices


56

Appendix 1:

General Review of the Evolution of Non-profits in the United States


57

Introduction In the times prior to and during World War II, industrial and manufacturing cities

experienced a golden age in their respective histories. These cities benefited from high

employment rates, a strong middle class, secure economic development, and a stable

infrastructure. The days of the factory, however, were numbered. After World War II, a

social trend emerged that changed the make-up of the urban inner cities. This change

was the development of suburbanization.

Identifying the reasons behind this human migration is an area of much analyses and

debate. Federal policies during the 1940s and 1950s played a large role. For example,

after World War II, GIs coming back to the United States were looking to buy homes

and settle down. At the time, the federal government began offering certain financial

entitlements to armed service through the new GI Bill. Using funds from the GI Bill,

many soldiers purchased homes. With the suburbs offering larger homes and property

for less money, former soldiers began moving out of the city. The suburbs grew as

these former soldiers raised their families and the "baby boom" phenomenon occurred

and as more and more families began to trade in the noisy blue-collar neighborhoods

around industrialized inner cities for the more "family-oriented" environment of

suburbia1.

The urban exodus also was facilitated by the Eisenhower Administration’s vast highway

construction campaign. By building a vast network of highways throughout the U.S., the

federal government helped to spread development beyond city lines and into rural

areas. With the abundance of land, developers were able to build and sell homes at

cheaper prices. Cities were unable to compete, and suburbia began attracting more and

more potential homeowners.

1 American Dreamscape pg. 48


58

The expansion of the country’s highway system in the 1950’s was paralleled by

aggressive urban renewal. These programs resulted in the elimination of large portions

of city housing. The problem was that there was no complementary plan to replace

these homes. This created numerous displaced residents who found housing in

suburbia, where housing was developing at a rate that could accommodate the increase

in demand2.

Effect on Urban Areas and Nonprofits This massive migration to the suburbs had a serious effect on cities such as Camden,

NJ, Oakland, CA, East St. Louis, MO, and the South Bronx. Those able to move out of

the cities, usually middle-class white residents, did so. With the removal of a qualified

middle class-working force, many factories went bankrupt. The prime pump for the city's

economic growth dried up. Unemployment skyrocketed, crime and drug trade

increased, racial segregation spread, incidents of domestic violence and family

instability grew, and the cities' political systems were plagued with corruption and poor

leadership3.

The impacts of these events resulted in rapid deterioration within inner cities. Under

these changes in societal behavior, urban specialists like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, E.

Franklin Frazier, Gary Orfield and Douglas Massey, argue that certain factors, such as

economic restructuring, racial discrimination and social programs, have effected the

psyche of those living in the inner city. These programs created concentrated poverty

and the feeling of hopelessness that can accompany being poor. This emotional

2 American Dreamscape pg. 53-55 3 U.S. Census Bureau: Camden: population - 53.3% - black, 38.8% - Latino/Hispanic, 16% - Caucasian, 2.5% - Asian Poverty rate - 32.8% (three times State and National average) Decline of Jobs (20th century until today): 135,000 to 23,000 Adults without high school degree: 50% (New Jersey 14%, National 17%) Arrest of two mayors in last twenty years due to corruption (Errichetti & Milan)* * Walsh, Jim - "Camden area experience turmoil, hope," Courier Post Online)


59

distress created a population of unemployed and welfare dependent people in the inner

cities. The roots of these problems, which originated between the 1940 and 1960, set

the stage for the fiscal, social, and economic troubles endured by the inner cities today4.

Roles and Challenges Facing the Nonprofit Community Cities struggling in the postindustrial age were in need of assistance. Assistance came

in the form of governmental programs, such as Housing and Urban Development

programs, or from national and local nonprofits, such as the United Way.

Nonprofits contributed significantly to the level of services offered to residents in inner

cities. In some cases, however, the role of NGOs (non-governmental organizations) in

the redevelopment of inner cities was criticized, leading to numerous ideas on nonprofit

reform.

In E.B. Knauft's book, Profiles of Excellence he describes what separates effective and

efficient nonprofits from mediocre and misguided NGOs. The first characteristic that a

nonprofit should strive for is that of primacy of mission. This means having a clear

articulated sense of their program's objectives. This focal point is the basis on which the

organization makes its decisions. A study done by the National Assembly of National

Voluntary Health and Social Welfare Organizations on nonprofits concluded: "Belief in

the mission is one of the key factors that distinguishes excellent leadership from the

run-of-the-mill."5

More often than not, funding issues bring about this transformation within organizations.

For example, if money is being given to housing programs, NGOs involved with social

services will expand to fit the requirements for a housing program. This procedure gives

nonprofits access to funding in other fields. The temptation for NGOs to expand

services to acquire additional funding is justifiable. But this also stretches funding and

4 Sugrue pg. 5-8 5 Profiles of Excellence pg. 4


60

NGO resources over a broad area, resulting in less than adequate execution of

services6.

Resources are very limited, and competition within the sector is great. This Darwinistic

element to the nonprofits’ existence causes a sense of frustration and mistrust within

the sector. With the lack of resources, under-qualified personnel, and inexperience

within new areas of services, many of these multi-tasked nonprofits find themselves in

over their heads. Therefore, the question becomes: how can nonprofits specialize in a

particular area while receiving sufficient funding to maintain their primary objective?

Potential Solutions The answer is - looking for new sources of capital. This means updating funding

sources. Government spending for human service agencies has continually been on the

decline ($27 billion since 1980)7. The reprioritizing of Federal and State budgets has

lead to drastic cuts in areas active in nonprofit involvement (the arts, the environment,

education, and health and human services). With decreased funding from the

government, the market for the philanthropic dollar has become highly competitive.

Therefore, nonprofits have to find new sources of funding for their organizations8.

Individual contributions are extremely important to the nonprofit sector. Charitable

donations make up 80% of the entire sectors contributions. This is a valuable and often

times underestimated source of funds9. Along with the usual "bread and butter" sources

(government & individual), nonprofits must learn to effectively court and attract spending

from the private sector. With its immense size and spending capabilities, the private

sector is the next logical step in the evolution of nonprofits. They will have to rely on the

support of corporations. NGOs must learn to sell their services to create a financially

successful partnership with the private sector.10

6 Innovative Leadership in the Nonprofit Organization Pg. 25-6 7 Filthy Rich pg. 9-14 8 Building a Strong Foundation pg. 1-5 9 Building a Strong Foundation pg. 10 10 Filthy Rich pg. 50


61

Nonprofits have much to offer to corporations once they market themselves effectively.

First of all, the general public sees nonprofits as caring, sympathetic, and unselfish.

These are traits corporations lack, but truly desire. By attaching themselves to

nonprofits, corporations can increase their appeal to their customers and, even more

importantly, the media. Joint ventures between nonprofits and corporations, due to their

positive and unusual nature, draw media attention. One example is the partnership with

American Express and the Statue of Liberty Restoration Committee. American Express

proposed that every purchase made using their card, $1 would be donated to the

committee and $5 would be donated for every new card application. Within three

months, American Express card use increased 28% and new card applications rose

17%. This venture proved not to be just profitable from a financial standpoint, but also

very successful from a public relations perspective. By raising $1.7 million for the

renovation project, American Express’ public appeal increased drastically.11

For corporations to succeed they have to sell to consumers. The more customers, the

more profit. This is an equation that can increase exponentially through effective joint

ventures. Nonprofits have access to what is referred to as closed and specific

audiences. Using a well-planned joint venture, nonprofits can help businesses reach

these markets12.

To find a possible corporate partner, a nonprofit must in turn act like a business.

Nonprofits have to sell themselves to the private sector. They have to familiarize

themselves with company-buying habits. They have to know what companies are

looking to sell and what type of consumer is buying their products. By getting in the

heads of these businesses, a nonprofit has a better chance of developing a proposition

that will create interest by addressing a corporation’s needs13.

11 Filthy Rich pg. 56 12 Filthy Rich pg. 26-28 13 Filthy Rich Pg. 127


62

Becoming more efficient is another way nonprofits are becoming more competitive. In

Paul C. Light's book, Making Nonprofits Work, he discusses that there are many ideas

on how to make nonprofits more efficient, but the topic is still unexplored. He illustrates

that the sector’s lack of a unified plan on improving effectiveness and accountability has

caused inertia.

One trend affecting nonprofits today is a push to install national standards within the

sector.14 This has made room for reform in the sector, an effort embraced by national

nonprofit organizations. By using their political weight, these organizations are imposing

specific reforms on nonprofits.15 Areas being targeted include technological capabilities

(i.e. internet, networks, etc.), continuity of leadership (to combat the high turnover rate in

sector), and management organization.

Another feature of this new reform agenda is to promote accountability through outcome

measurements. With the increasing number of service organizations, a variety of

feedback must be collected to improve services. Through identification of outcomes,

development of outcome indicators, data collection, data analyses, and regular

reporting of findings, there will be a better understanding of the current status of the

nonprofit sector. According to a study done by Independent Sector and the Urban

Institute, this outcome-based process is very new and still unfamiliar to many

nonprofits16. To produce a substantial impact on the process, technological assistance

must be provided. Funding from national associations, local foundations, and local

government can serve as the lifeblood to these projects while acting as a failsafe on

nonprofit accountability. Funders can state that any organization receiving their funding

must provide outcome measurement to them and to the public. However, to accomplish

this successfully, funders must lift restrictions on how funding is spent. Currently, some

funders limit spending to direct services only. By designating a portion of funding to the

14 Making Nonprofits Work, pg. 19 15 Making nonprofits work pg. 19 16 Outcome Measurement in Nonprofit Organizations pg. 5-7


63

collection of outcome measurements, this will facilitate outcome measurement as

common practice.17

These reforms are intended to enhance collaboration between agencies, transparency

of information, and create a more structured nonprofit community. This idea of a

homogeneous third sector can in many ways have a normalizing effect, but it can also

hurt the community’s organizational diversity. This syndrome, referred to as “institutional

isomorphism”, is the tendency for nonprofits in the same field to become more similar

than different. This conformity comes from national pressure, professionalism, or a

desire to improve the sector.

Overall, however, the trend toward change is slow. There is outward support from

national and governmental agencies for changes in the nonprofit community, but there

has been little concrete support, financially or in terms of capacity building. Capacity

building is very expensive and time consuming. Most nonprofits, due to the size and

competition of the market, do not have the resources or the time to designate to such

projects. Such ventures would prove unproductive for most nonprofits.18 In addition,

capacity building would increase administrative costs exponentially. With capacity

building comes higher salaries, higher cost for services, and more expensive upkeep.

But, again, there has been insufficient response from governments (national, state, or

local) to provide aid for these agencies.

The public’s opinion of nonprofits, however, remains supportive. In recent polls the

percentage of citizens that believe nonprofits are making important contributions to the

community, are up.19 Therefore, it appears it is becoming politically and socially

acceptable to address and support the needs of nonprofits. However, currently neither

the public nor its representatives are willing to make those changes that will allow

nonprofits to become more effective. This puts nonprofits in a tough position. With

17 Outcome Measurement in Nonprofit Organizations, pg. 9-10 18 educating managers of nonprofits, pg. 77 19 Making Nonprofits Work pg. 11


64

growing demand from external forces (public, government) nonprofits are struggling to

meet the requirements set upon them. They lack the infrastructure to harness these

sweeping reforms, and this leads to a breakdown of strategy and accountability.

The need for cooperative capacity building between government and nonprofits is

imperative to the progression of the sector. For capacity building to begin, both sides

must have the information needed to act efficiently. Nonprofits must give feedback to

government on issues being discussed, the progress of their programs, the mechanics

of the partnership, and instruction on how government should manage these

partnerships. The nonprofit sector’s duty to inform has to be paralleled by government’s

duty to invest in their growth. This can come in the form of allocated funds, education,

and supporting research.20 Therefore without serious commitment of funding the

nonprofit community will be unable to alter its present course.

This allocation of federal grants is another issue that affects the nonprofit community.

Under the block grant programs of the 1970’s, many felt that there was an equalization

of federal aid distribution to needy cities. Programs like CDBG, which were enacted in

1974, extended entitlement status to cities with populations of 50,000 or more. The

programs target big cities, Frostbelt cities, and distressed cities. Under these block

grant formulas, 103 new cities that had no previous urban renewal or model cities

experience became eligible for funding under these programs.21 Of the cities nearly

90% had populations between 50 thousand and 100 thousand, 2/3 are suburbs, and

more than one half rank among the best-off cities according to composite city needs

index.22 These results show that the CDBG program extends federal funds to many well

off places while neglecting cities that could use the additional capital.

In Andy Merrifield’s book Dialectical Urbanism, he argues that Urban Development

Action Grants (UDAG) had a similar low impact effect on poverty-stricken areas. These

20 The Nonprofit Sector and Government, (Aspen Institute), pgs. 10-11 21 Study conducted in 1989; number of cities receiving aid is expected to have increased since. 22 Distributive Politics and the allocation of Federal Grants, pg. 205


65

UDAGs, interest free leverage grants, were given to corporations to help revitalize

poorer neighborhoods. UDAGs were intended to stimulate local economies, create jobs,

and attract potential investors23. These funds, however, were restricted for use in

specific developmental projects. Money that could have been used to build low-income

housing or strengthen social infrastructure, was being passed on to more extravagant

eye-grabbing ventures. UDAGs financially supported the construction of convention

centers, hotels, and marinas. While attracting investment, the situation for needy

residents failed to improve. Jobs created by these projects consisted of menial minimum

wage positions that lacked job security. Remaining a source of cheap labor, resident’s

standard of living around these developed areas failed to improve24.

The size of nonprofits is another topic of debate. Camden’s nonprofit community

consists of both large and small organizations. With over 800 nonprofits operational

within the city, which type of nonprofit is most effective, large or small? Small nonprofits

are fragile and unstable, and more susceptible to the effects of shortage of funding and

turnover in leadership. The survival rate for small nonprofits after the initial leadership is

replaced is 50-50. To survive small nonprofits must grow. They must learn to

successfully acquire subsidiary resources and expand their organizational structure.

There are no “old” small nonprofits.25 This idea of growth is even more relevant to their

existence in an increasingly technical environment. Without the ability to afford technical

assistance and more experienced personnel small nonprofits will begin to vanish from

the nonprofit community.

Large nonprofits, which are more stable and experienced than smaller nonprofits, have

a distinct advantage in that it is easier for them to access broader and more substantial

sources of funding. They are noticeable institutions in the community and many times

carry significant political influence. However, these agencies face problems in

organizational effectiveness. Due to their large size and bureaucratic set-up, they

23 Dialectical Urbanism pg. 70 24 Dialectical Urbanism pg. 76 25 Educating Managers of Nonprofits, pg. 105


66

cannot respond quickly to opportunities or troubles. Sometimes this inability to act leads

to fossilization within the agency. This can result from conflicting interests within the

nonprofit or due to the special interests of powerful constituents.26

To improve management a small nonprofits can consider many paths: merger, growth,

cooperative networking with agencies doing similar services, or dissolution. The larger

nonprofits can use decentralization and long term strategic planning as vehicles to

preserve momentum within the program.

The nonprofit community has many questions to answer, ranging from sources of

capital to size of organizations. In formulating a best practice strategy for the third

sector, one must remember that it is a living entity. It is constantly changing and

evolving. Therefore the inability to conclude on a best results strategy seems

reasonable. In Camden city alone there are over 800 nonprofit organizations. These

institutions ranging in size, purpose, and financial resources create a complex network

of social services. Many of the issues mentioned above are forces acting on the vast

social service sector within Camden. Through this study, perhaps new ideas and issues

will be revealed helping the nonprofit community decide on the future direction of

Camden’s third sector.

26 Educating Managers of Nonprofits, pg. 110-111


67

Appendix 2:

Study Participants


Latin American Economic Development Association,Inc. (LAEDA) CCS C (856) 338-1177 Woodland Community Development Corporation CCS C (856) 963-4324 Camden Empowerment Zone Corporation CCS C (856) 365-0300 Eastside Civic Association NSS C (856) 541-5243 Cooper Lanning Civic Association NSS C (856) 541-6426 Fairview Historic Society NSS C (856) 966-9899 Newton Creek Civic Association for Morgan Village, Inc.NSS C (856) 541-7567 Cooper Grant Community Development Corporation NCS C (856) 966-7222 HopeWorks 'N Camden CSS C (856) 963-1621 African American Advisory Committee LSS C (856) 379-2200 Walt Whitman Cultural Arts Center CSS C (856) 964-8300 Leavenhouse CSS C (856) 966-4596 Respond, Inc CSS C (856) 365-4400 Center for Family Services CSS C (856) 728-0404 Camden Area Health Education Center (AHEC) LSS C (856) 963-2432 Camden Regional Legal Services, Inc. CSS C (856) 964-2010 North Camden Land Trust NHS C (856) 966-3401 Camden Churches Organized for People (CCOP) CHF C (856) 966-8869 Fair Share Housing Development CHS C (856) 541-9609 Food Bank of South Jersey LSS C (856) 963-3663 American Red Cross - Camden County Chapter LSS C (856) 365-7100 Youth Golf and Academic Program LSS C (856) 756-0222 Cooper's Ferry Development Association CCS C (856) 757-9154 Parkside Business and Community in Partnership NHS C (856) 964-0440 William Penn Foundation O PA (215) 988-1830 Annie E. Casey Foundation O DV (410) 547-6600 The Fund for NJ O NJ (732) 220-8656 Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation O NJ (973) 5408442 Save Our Waterfront CCS C (856) 365-0300 Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Church CHF C (856) 966-6700

68


69

Appendix 3:

Nonprofit Study Interview Protocol


70

Nonprofit Study Interview Protocol Introduction: External funders regard Camden’s nonprofit community as an essential sector for the socio-economic development of its residents. Hundreds of nonprofit organizations of varying sizes, capacities and resources work to serve the people of Camden. Meanwhile, those same funders, both public and private, are interested in finding ways to improve effectiveness and collaboration among the City’s nonprofits. Our study seeks to understand the origins of these organizations and their interrelation, in order to provide recommendations for achieving those improvements. History: 1. How would you measure a successful nonprofit in Camden? Why? 2. How has the nonprofit community in Camden evolved from 1960 until today? 3. What conditions in the City prompted the growth of nonprofits? 4. How has the nonprofit community contributed to the City of Camden? 5a. How have relations with governments (local, state and federal), and nonprofits changed over time? 5b. How have relations with neighborhoods and nonprofits changed over time? 5c. How have relations with businesses and nonprofits changed over time?

Nonprofit Environment: 6. How do nonprofits view each other? Why? 7. Usually people categorize nonprofits as housing, social services or economic/community development organizations. Which of these categories is most effective? Why? 8. From your perspective how effective is the nonprofit community? Suggestions for Improvement: 9. If given the opportunity, what changes would you make to the nonprofit community in

order to improve service to the residents? 10. How could nonprofits collaborate with each other to improve services in

Camden? Close-ended questions: 1. Is the distribution of funding to Camden’s nonprofits fair? yes / no 2. Would you say the number of nonprofits in Camden is:

a) too high b) about right c) too low

3. Is there a lack of necessary services within the City? yes / no 4. Does competition for funding limit the effectiveness of

nonprofit organizations? yes / no


71

Appendix 4:

Cover Letter for Study


[Name Position Organization Address Address] Dear [Name], United Way of Camden County has provided a recent grant to the Senator Walter Rand Institute for Public Affairs, to study the evolution and current status of the nonprofit community in the City of Camden. Our final objective is to provide local nonprofit organizations and donors with recommendations for improving efficiency, effectiveness and service delivery. As an active member of the nonprofit community in Camden, we would like to invite you to participate in the interview process. Several nonprofit organizations working directly with the Rand Institute identified you as a resource on the history of the City of Camden and its nonprofit community. Your knowledge and experience with local nonprofit organizations would be an enormous asset to our study. We know there are a considerable number of nonprofit organizations, of varying size and capacity, currently working throughout the City of Camden. Understanding the local nonprofit professional environment is important for the improvement of services provided to Camden residents. Therefore, the Rand Institute is undertaking this historical review. In addition to documenting the historical evolution of Camden’s nonprofit organizations, we also foresee using this information to aid local community organizations with their important missions. Your input and interview participation can assist us in understanding the history of local nonprofits and in providing advice for the effective management of these agencies. All participants of this study will receive a complete synopsis of interview context for final approval. Please contact Dina Nurmukhmaetova at the Walter Rand Institute for Public Affairs by telephone, at (856) 225-6311 (ext.16) or by email at [email protected] to schedule an appointment for an interview. We hope you will agree to participate in this important study and look forward to hearing from you. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,

________________________ ____________________________ Dr. Richard A. Harris Mr. Michael E. Moynihan Director, Walter Rand Institute President/Chief Professional Officer

For Public Affairs United Way of Camden County

72


73

Appendix 5:

Bibliography


74

Bibliography

1. Biggar, J. C. and Biasiolli, F. C. (1978). Metropolitan Deconcentration: Subareal

Immigration and Central City to Ring Mobility Patterns Among Southern SMSAs. Demography, 15, 589-603.

2. De Vita, C. J. (1997). Viewing Nonprofits across the States. The Urban Institute,

1, 1-5. Retrieved October 16, 2002, from: www.urban.org/periodcl/cnp/cnp_1.htm

3. Edwards, Richard L.; Benefield, Elizabeth A.S. Building a Strong Foundation.

National Association for Social Workers Press: Washington D.C. 1996

4. Espy, N. (1986). Handbook of Strategic Planning for Nonprofit Organizations. New York, NY: Praeger Publishers.

5. Flanagan, J. (1981). The Successful Volunteer Organization. Chicago, IL:

Contemporary Books, Inc. 6. Fletcher, K. B. (1987). The 9 Keys To Successful Volunteer Programs. Frederic,

MD: The Taft Group. 7. Garbarine, R. (2002). A Plan to Revitalize Historic Enclave in Camden. The New

York Times, January 6, 2002. 8. Goodman, M. D. and Monti, D. J. (1999). Corporately Sponsored Redevelopment

Campaigns and the Social Stability of Urban Neighborhoods: St. Louis revisited. Journal of Urban Affairs, 21, 101-27.

9. Grogan, S. P. and Proscio, T. (2000). Come Back Cities. Boulder, CO: Westview

Press. 10. Hula, R.C. (2001). Governing Nonprofits and Local Political Processes. Urban

Affairs Review, 36, 324-35. 11. Kirp, D. (1995). Our Town: Race, Housing, and the Soul of Suburbia. New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.


75

12. Kluger, Miriam P.; Baker, William A. Innovative Leadership in the Non Profit

Organization. Child Welfare League of America: Washington D.C. 1994

13. Knauft, E.B., Berger, R. A., and Gray, S. T. (1991) Profiles of Excellence:

Achieving Success in the Nonprofit Sector. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

14. Light, P. C. (2000). Making Nonprofits Work. Washington, DC: Brooking Institute

Press. 15. Martinson, Tom. American Dreamscape. Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc: New

York. 2000

16. Merrifield, Andy. Dialectical Urbanism. Monthly Review Press: New York, 2002

17. Morley, E., Vinson, E., and Hatry, H. (2001). Outcome Measurement in Nonprofit

Organizations: Current Practices and Recommendations. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute & Independent Sector.

18. O’Neil, M. and Young, D. R. (Editors). (1988). Educating Managers of Nonprofit

Organizations. New York, NY: Praeger Publishers. 19. Rich J. M. (1989). Distributive Politics and the Allocation of Federal Grants. The

American Political Science Review, 83, 193-213. 20. Roelofs, J. (1995). The Third Sector as Protective Layer for Capitalism. An

Independent Socialist Magazine, 47, 4, 16-25. 21. Rubin, H. J. (1995). Renewing hope in the inner city: Conversations with

community-based development practitioners. Administration & Society, 27, 127-34.

22. Sauter, Van G. and Hines, B. (1968). Nightmare in Detroit. Chicago, IL: Henry

Regnery Company. 23. Shralow, B. (2002). Camden Still Struggles to Regain Lost Glory. Courier Post

Online. Retrieved October 15, 2002, from: www.courierpostonline.com/125anniversary/camhistory.html

24. Steckel, R. D. (1989). Filthy Rich & Other Nonprofit Fantasies. Berkley, CA: Ten

Speed Press.


76

25. Sugrue, T. J. (1996). The Origins of the Urban Crisis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

26. Van Til, J. (2002). A Study of Two Inner City Neighborhoods in Camden.

Retrieved October 15, 2002, from: http://crab.rutgers.edu/~vantil/papers/census.html

27. Walsh, J. (2002). Camden, area experience turmoil, hope. Courier Post Online.

Retrieved October 20, 2002 From: www.courierpostonline.com/125anniversary/camden.html

study of the nonprofit community in camden for the united ...as part of the study of the nonprofit...

Documents