Issue link: https://blog.providence.org/i/1367431
16 The majority of funds came from outside of Sonoma and Napa Counties and drew from indi- vidual and corporate donors, meaning that for the most part, the resources coming in were not being drawn from other important needs in the area. Several funders were themselves located outside of Napa and Sonoma. Furthermore, due to the nature of philanthropy, there was more flexibility and responsiveness around how these dollars could be used, as com- pared to FEMA or other government support. One consistent example is that the undocu- mented members of the community are not eligible for FEMA support, and may fear seeking any government support. This allowed for the philanthropic dollars to fill gaps, address unexpected needs, or change according to the evolving situation. However, the philanthropic response was not without challenges. The scope and emergent nature of the fires made it difficult for many organizations to plan, and certainly made it dif- ficult to think strategically as a philanthropic community. This was particularly true in Sono- ma, where the impact was especially devastating. Unlike Napa, which had been prompted by the 2014 earthquake to lay a disaster response framework including Continuity of Oper- ations (COO) plans and MOUs with select CBOs, Sonoma did not have a broadly accepted plan in place. Compounding the scale and fast pace of the destruction, the funding com- munity was decentralized without a clear leader or backbone organization. As difficult as it was for individual organizations to plan, it was much harder for 20 to 30 organizations to coordinate their fundraising or response. Each organization went out to their likely (and in sometimes unlikely) supporters and revenue sources, with their own approach and messag- ing. Each was successful. However, without a unified message, approach, or fund, there was a large amount of duplication of effort, no systematic identification of gaps, and even some tension and conflict. This tension was consistently identified throughout the evaluation process. There were sev- eral organizations that were either not based in Sonoma County, were new to philanthropy, or both. In some cases, more established local organizations felt that the newer organiza- tions were not being as effective in their giving as they could have been. In addition, they believed the new organizations were diminishing the impact the established organizations could have, because their own fundraising efforts were being crowded out by either messag- ing or the new organization getting to traditional donors first. The effects of this tension are explored further subsection about perceived divisions in the community. Methodology To gather data on the philanthropic support, a survey was administered in April and May 2019 to foundations that provided disaster relief funds in Sonoma County. The survey was not anonymous and covered areas such as how dollars were raised, how they were allocated, evaluation, partnership and coordination, and future plans. 14 foundations responded to this survey; the respondents are listed in Appendix II. Charitable Ventures staff met with the Sonoma County Funders Circle to review the results of the survey. In the summer of 2019, 11 one-on-one interviews with funders were conducted; interviewees are listed in Appendix III. Survey Findings The Sonoma-based funders alone reported raising close to $90 million dollars, with individual foundations ranging from $75,000 to $34 million. The median amount raised was 1.2 million.