Nonprofit Tweets of the Week – 4/24/15

Beautiful woman face close up with planet Earth texture

The past week was highlighted by Earth Day, a day for reflecting on the actions we are willing to take to protect our planet, our communities, our families. Conserving personal use of resources is great, but supporting, advocating, and effecting changes to policies, business ethics, and laws are critically necessary. Have a listen to Peter Gabriel’s Down to Earth (from the Pixar movie Wall-E) while perusing our curated nonprofit tweets of the week:

  • Stanford CorpGov: To improve governance and board-level performance, nonprofit organizations can incorporate nine recommendations: #corpgov
  • Stanford Business: 32% of nonprofit directors are not satisfied with the board’s ability to evaluate the performance of the organization #StanfordNBGI
  • Gene: Court of Appeals to Directors of Nonprofits: “Nonprofit” Does Not Mean “No Risk for You” NPQ … #governance
  • Phil Buchanan: This is 1 of most honestly self-critical & important pieces I have ever seen from a foundation exec. @ColoradoTrust [Ed. We hope you also look at the Center for Effective Philanthropy Report referenced in the article – Assessing to Achieve High Performance.]
  • Efram Bycer: “8 Ways to Better Board Meetings” via @CP_change #brdnxt
  • Tony Martignetti: 7 jaw dropping things I learned at AFP ICON | @GuideStarUSA #fundraising
  • Gene: Redefining capitalism (and prosperity)
  • Melissa Mikesell: This article: on @NRA fundraising highlights how corporations skirt federal PAC fundraising rules
  • Harvard Business Review: A must-read for any social entrepreneur: @RogerLMartin @SallyOsberg @SkollFoundation
  • McKinsey on Society: The first challenge for every #socent: “How do they get the initial financing?” @gennypi via @Entrepreneur
  • B Corporation: This piece in @guardian might be the best we’ve seen at breaking down #BCorp v benefit corporation! #BtheChange The Guardian
  • Gene: NY Times Opinion: Corporations Don’t Have to Maximize Profits [Ed. This is one of a series of opinions on this corporate governance issue.]