After a decades-long partnership that saw the Jewish Agency for Israel serve as the official, exclusive Zionist arm of North America’s Jewish community federations, the federation system is getting ready to date other partners.
But Jewish Agency officials say it feels more like the beginning of a divorce.
At the conclusion of its General Assembly in Denver last week, the Jewish Federations of North America board approved a plan that will dramatically transform the historic commitment of the federations to fund the agency.
Under the new model, representatives of North America’s 157 federations on a so-called Global Planning Table will make spending decisions for overseas allocations, deciding together how the money they raise will be doled out to various organizations and programs.
For decades, the federations’ overseas allocations had gone automatically — in a 75-25 split — to the Jewish Agency and the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee.
Under the new arrangement, the Jewish Agency and JDC still will get a share, but they will have to compete for it with other groups. They also will have less discretion than they do now about how to spend their allocations; the federations will be dictating more of the spending program to them.
“We will set the meta priorities,” said Jerry Silverman, JFNA’s CEO. “The people who raise the money get to be part of the discussion of allocating the money.”
In recent years, individual federations increasingly have been opting out of the historic overseas funding arrangement — cutting funding to the Jewish Agency or giving directly to causes in Israel and elsewhere around the world. Backers of the plan hope that the new arrangement will keep federations doing things together by offering collective decision-making and more options for overseas spending.
From the perspective of the Jewish Agency, however, which gets approximately 50 percent of its $270 million annual budget from the federations and has no real fundraising apparatus of its own, the change is seen as the beginning of a shift that could deal a significant blow to the agency.
Some federation executives suggest that’s not such a bad thing.
“I see this as an opportunity for [the Jewish Agency],” said S.F.-based Jewish Community Federation CEO Jennifer Gorovitz. “I don’t see this as a zero sum game for them. If JAFI is focused on the largest challenges facing our people as a whole, and has a plan for addressing them, they ought to benefit from this approach.”
Officials at the Jewish Agency, whose mission is to settle immigrants in Israel and promote Zionism around the world, declined to comment for this story except to express concern about jeopardizing the collective commitment of diaspora Jewry to the Zionist enterprise.
The change will not impact the S.F.-based federation. That organization abandoned the automatic 75-25 split to JAFI and JDC decades ago.
“We have our own approach to Israel philanthropy,” Gorovitz said, “one based on areas of need in Israel that form the pillars of our strategic plan there.”
She noted that the S.F.-based federation was the first Jewish federation to open an Israel office, and today oversees committees here and in Israel to best determine Israel funding priorities.
Also, Gorovitz said, the federation continues to fund both JDC and JAFI projects in the realm of education and job training for Israel’s disadvantaged, as well as projects that fight hunger and provide medical care to poor Jews in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.
Rabbi James Brandt, the CEO of the Jewish Federation of the East Bay, sees the changes as in line with general shifts in philanthropy.
“We’re moving away from the traditional emphasis on undesignated giving to a system in which donors are demanding designated giving opportunities,” Brandt said. “Today’s donors want to be able to follow their dollars. This is a way for JFNA to offer their federations the same kind of additional control over their dollars.”
For its part, the JDC welcomes the change. Unlike the Jewish Agency, whose governing board is controlled in large part by the federations, the JDC has an independent board, a robust fundraising apparatus and a strong reputation in the federation world. The JDC, which has a $300 million annual budget, has not been happy with its 25 percent share of the federation system’s overseas dollars, and JDC officials think they can do better with the open field that the Global Planning Table represents.
“Competition isn’t evil; it’s healthy,” said Steve Schwager, CEO of the JDC. “The JDC doesn’t mind competing for designated dollars. The JDC delivers high-quality, important programs that benefit the Jewish people. I believe that when I get to make that case, we will at least maintain if not increase the level of funding.”
What is almost certain is that the Global Planning Table will add a layer of complexity, work and deliberation to federations’ overseas giving. But ultimately, according to federation executives, it will be worth it.
“The world is a more precarious place,” Gorovitz said. “Our community is demanding greater impact. We think it’s time for the federation system to try new things.”
J. staff writer Dan Pine contributed to this report.