Sources of foundation funding vary, but the basic goals are the same: to use private resources and ingenuity to serve the public and to support alternative solutions to pressing social problems.
ELIZABETH T. BORIS
Boris, Elizabeth, 1989. "Working in Foundations". In Richard Magat , ed., Philanthropic Giving. Studies in Varieties and Goals. New York: Oxford University Press.
-----, 1992. Philanthropic Foundations in the United States: An Introduction. Washington, DC: Council on Foundations.
Carnegie, Andrew, [ 1889] 1990. "The Gospel of Wealth". In David L. Geis, J. Steven Ott, and Jay M. Shafritz, eds., The Nonprofit Organization: Essential Readings. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks-Cole.
Commission on Foundations and Private Philanthropy, 1970. Foundations, Private Giving and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Commission on Private Philanthropy and Public Needs, Department of the Treasury, 1975. Giving in America. Washington, DC: GPO.
-----, 1977. Department of the Treasury, Research Papers. Washington, DC: GPO.
Council on Foundations, 1993. Foundation Management Report. Washington, DC: Council on Foundations.
Cuninggim, Merrimon. 1972. Private Money and Public Service: The Role of Foundations in American Society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Edie, John A., 1987. "Congress and Foundations: Historical Summary". In Teresa Odendahl, ed., America's Wealthy and the Future of Foundations. New York: Foundation Center.
Foundation Center, 1994a. The Foundation Directory. New York: Foundation Center.
-----, 1994b. The Foundation Grants Index. New York: Foundation Center.
Freeman, D., and the Council on Foundations, 1991. The Handbook of Private Foundations. New York: Foundation Center.
Hall, Peter Dobkin, 1989. "The Community Foundation in America". In Richard Magat, ed., Philanthropic Giving: Studies in Varieties and Goals. New York: Oxford University Press.
Heimann, Fritz. F., ed., 1973. The Future of Foundations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kaplan, Anne, ed., 1994. Giving USA 1994: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 1993. New York: American Association of Fund-raising Counsel.
Karl, Barry D., and Stanley N. Katz, 1981. "The American Private Philanthropic Foundation and the Public Sphere, 1890-1930". Minerva, vol. 19: 236-70.
-----, 1987. "Foundations and Ruling Class Elites". Daedalus 116 (Winter): 1-40.
Lagemann, Ellen Condliffe, 1989. The Politics of Knowledge: The Carnegie Corporation, Philanthropy, and Public Policy. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Nielsen, Waldemar A., 1972., The Big Foundations. New York: Columbia University Press.
-----, 1985. The Golden Donors: A New Anatomy of the Great Foundations. New York: Dutton.
Odendahl, Teresa, ed., 1987. America's Wealthy and the Future of Foundations. New York: Foundation Center.
-----, 1990. Charity Begins at Home: Generosity and Self-Interest Among the Philanthropic Elite. New York: Basic Books.
Odendahl, Teresa J., and Elizabeth Boris, 1983. "The Grantmaking Process". Foundation News 24 (September-October).
Odendahl, Teresa J., Elizabeth Boris, and Arlene K. Daniels, 1985. Working in Foundations: Career Patterns of Women and Men. New York: Foundation Center.
Renz, Loren, and Steven Lawrence, 1994. Foundation Giving.Yearbook of Facts and Figures on Private, Corporate, and Community Foundations. New York: Foundation Center.
Salamon, Lester, 1991. Foundation Investment and Payout Performance: An Update. Washington, D C: Council on Foundations.
U.S. Congress, 1965. Treasury Department Report on Private Foundations. 89th Cong. 1st sess., 2 February.
FRAGMENTATION. The division of governmental authority among jurisdictions, agencies, and programs, with the degree of fragmentation determined by (1) the number of jurisdictions that share authority or compete, (2) the number of programs serving essentially the same purpose, (3) the number of agencies with overlapping or competing authority.
Fragmentation of political authority and programmatic effort can take many forms. It begins with the federal design of the American system, continues with the proliferation of general- and special-purpose local governments, and ends with the multiplication of programs, largely serving the same ends and administered by multiple agencies. It affects the ability of government to address complex problems, deliver coherent services, innovate and experiment with policy initiatives, and respond to the varying needs and preferences of geographically dispersed and socially differentiated populations.
Fragmentation of authority and responsibility is often a design characteristic of modern democracies. Founders of the political systems of nations such as the United States, Canada, Germany, and Korea created federal systems of government that divide responsibility between national and regional units of government. Such designs are specifically intended to foster democracy by providing multiple points of access, by inhibiting the excesses of democracy by checking power with power, and by enhancing responsiveness to localized preferences; they are based on the notion that there are some things better handled for the nation as a whole and other things better handled at some level below the nation.
Authority and responsibility are further fragmented by the system of checks and balances that exists in the United States and other presidential systems of governments. Provisions that allow the executive, legislature, and judiciary to involve themselves in each other's activities are designed to dilute power and diminish the possibility of tyranny. Some conclude that these provisions also prevent effective action to address major public problems by so diluting