• Military Family Voices

    1.) Will an accelerated deployment of funds increase the chances of triggering a better immediate solution or overall a more effective long-term impact by pressing resources over a critical threshold? –Simply spending more and faster on the same approaches has traditionally not resulted in better use of funds unless the bolus of resources opens a critical pathway or shifts the momentum of an issue on a critical eradication scale.

    2.) Will funding the same “solutions” over and over again really solve the problems or just perpetuate the accepted “solutions”, as is so prevalent today? –Practical innovation, on more issue-relevant timescales, are rarely identified, encouraged and nurtured, when traditional efforts receive the lion’s share of the resources because slow solutions are assumed and accepted.

    3.) Is spending toward a legacy diminishingly likely to result in a true legacy, if it does not involve practical, innovative solutions which are cutting edge? -A building with a name on it or a perpetually funded traditional program historically gets lost in time which is at crossed purposes to a meaningful legacy.

    4.) Is the permanence of a funding source the legacy or are the solutions it inspires, stimulates and gives life to actually the foundations for greatness in impact philanthropy that reflect on the collaborative effort of the philanthropist/charitable entity combination? -When the great solution is choked off because it is not the vogue, there is great loss. When a fund is developed into perpetuity but loses its way for solutions, there is greater loss. When a fund stops actively searching for high concept/solution initiatives, all that is left as a legacy is the distribution of funds.

    5.) Is it not self-evident that the solution to the conundrum of the role of timing and funding acceleration is easier for the forward thinking and caring philanthropist, if they always demand that Job One is practical innovation and it’s perpetuity? -Legacies get lost in bureaucratic timelines. They burn brightly for a moment but no amount of immediate or perpetual funding can overcome the complacency of growth without innovation. Legacy is never tradition. That is old school, and that is why there is great hope when philanthropists stop listening to their best practices of solution investment and start following their own sense of how we change this world in timelines relevant to the needs.

    Military Family Voices