Endowment Books

Public schools in the United States are faced with all kinds of funding challenges. Many are seeking creative ways to harness community support and increase funding availability, especially to fund "non-core" areas such as arts, in-service professional and paraprofessional training, athletics, and capital expenditures.

Over the last 20 years or so, about one-fourth of America's 16,000 school districts have established some form of endowment or private foundation (either district-wide or school-specific) to supplement other school revenue to meet identified needs and expand opportunities for students and teachers.

Rarely have I found a book on a specialized subject so accessible and easy to use. The book's authors take the reader through the process of conceptualizing, developing, and implementing a public school foundation, often using a plausible question and answer format to communicate concepts and steps in an almost conversational way.

The book assumes that the reader is an individual who is interested in starting a public school foundation -- a teacher, administrator, PTA or school board member. Two excellent points are made very early in the book. First, it doesn't take a lot of money to make a real impact in a school district -- $10 or $20 per student can translate into some very useful, innovative, and change-provoking projects. Second, it's not necessary to "front-load" a school foundation with lots of money in order to generate a trickle of grant awards. The enthusiasm of the anticipated reader is matched and bolstered by the authors' enthusiasm for the subject.

Creating Foundations for American Schools also addresses the issue of existing foundations that have lost momentum or otherwise failed to meet expectations. One of the real keys to success is building and maintaining interest and momentum behind the foundation and its mission. The importance of coordinating foundation activities with alumni associations and other school-based fundraising is discussed as well.

The appendices include a wealth of forms, checklists, sample letters, etc., to use in the foundation-building process. Appendix E was a real surprise -- an annual survey of state laws governing charitable solicitation, complete with contact information for each state's regulators.

This is a well-executed book on a timely subject. It deserves to be used -- not just on the shelf -- wherever public school foundations are in place or contemplated.

Appendix F, Sample Bylaws flawed. Section 3.11 states "Directors have no voting power"; which is contradicted by section 10.04 which states that a "majority vote of a quorum consisting of directors"....

Many more flaws - if you use the book be vigilant of misinformation.

Public schools in the United States are faced with all kinds of funding challenges. Many are seeking creative ways to harness community support and increase funding availability, especially to fund "non-core" areas such as arts, in-service professional and paraprofessional training, athletics, and capital expenditures.

Over the last 20 years or so, about one-fourth of America's 16,000 school districts have established some form of endowment or private foundation (either district-wide or school-specific) to supplement other school revenue to meet identified needs and expand opportunities for students and teachers.

Rarely have I found a book on a specialized subject so accessible and easy to use. The book's authors take the reader through the process of conceptualizing, developing, and implementing a public school foundation, often using a plausible question and answer format to communicate concepts and steps in an almost conversational way.

The book assumes that the reader is an individual who is interested in starting a public school foundation -- a teacher, administrator, PTA or school board member. Two excellent points are made very early in the book. First, it doesn't take a lot of money to make a real impact in a school district -- $10 or $20 per student can translate into some very useful, innovative, and change-provoking projects. Second, it's not necessary to "front-load" a school foundation with lots of money in order to generate a trickle of grant awards. The enthusiasm of the anticipated reader is matched and bolstered by the authors' enthusiasm for the subject.

Creating Foundations for American Schools also addresses the issue of existing foundations that have lost momentum or otherwise failed to meet expectations. One of the real keys to success is building and maintaining interest and momentum behind the foundation and its mission. The importance of coordinating foundation activities with alumni associations and other school-based fundraising is discussed as well.

The appendices include a wealth of forms, checklists, sample letters, etc., to use in the foundation-building process. Appendix E was a real surprise -- an annual survey of state laws governing charitable solicitation, complete with contact information for each state's regulators.

This is a well-executed book on a timely subject. It deserves to be used -- not just on the shelf -- wherever public school foundations are in place or contemplated.

I did not find this book helpful at all. I guess I should have known better, but I thought maybe it would have one piece of useful information. It didn't.

This book lists sources of funding or assistance for both profit and non-profit organizations. Naturally, most of these funds are allocated to community development, social issues, conservation and economic development. Each listing includes relevant information such as the contact person, address and phone number, proposal deadlines, information on amounts previously given, and the required qualifications for receiving the funds. Resources can be in the form of cash awards, endowments, continuing support, grants, loans, matching funds, consulting services or technical assistance for operating budgets, seed money, emergency funds, building, equipment, research or special projects, for example. Most sources are restricted to certain geographical regions and these are categorized in the book under its respective state. However, there are some programs which fund national and international projects and these are categorized by topic, such as: agriculture, finance, health, conservation and real estate.

This book is a great refrence for the many small business owners who are looking to expand on their great businesses. This is a great book in a overall perpective. I belive that this book will help a lot of business people out. I will gladly thank you for making this book for small business people like my self.

As the previous reviewer suggests, this is a good place to start looking at issues related to the implementation of democratic aid programs. Unfortunately, the book is founded on several unspoken assumptions. The most important of these are a certain blind faith that the governments supporting these programs are truly interested in their success, and, similarly, that the governments being "democratically reformed" are similarly interested...

One area where Carothers makes good points is his explanation of the need to build within a populace a sense of what democracy means to them. Oddly, though, he then writes a chapter suggesting that civic education is ineffective. Despite the attempt at critique, I put this book down with a feeling that Carothers still basically believes in the "magic hand" of democracy despite having written a book that is supposed to be a critique of such thinking.

If democratic development requires a process of developing democratic principles within a nation's citizenry, it seems antithetical if not mad to exclude civic education as an integral component of this process. Of course, after reading the activities Carothers considers civic education, it is no wonder that his evaluation is that it doesn't work. Namely, he gives examples of projects that had U.S. democracy experts come into countries, create pamphlets and posters extolling a very American view of democracy (with a primary emphasis on voting), attempt to push these pamphlets and posters primarily upon adult groups, and then sit back and wonder why their efforts failed. It strikes me that even a moderately thoughtful development worker would know beforehand that efforts such as these would fail. There are decades worth of development literature suggesting this is exactly the wrong method for introducing change. A proper civic education program is much more open-ended, assists the participants in developing their own authentic concepts of what democracy and human rights means to them, and includes youth as well as adults. Unfortunately, Carothers seems to associate civic education with only the first case and claims it doesn't work. You wouldn't have to extrapolate his argument too far to reach a conclusion that U.S. schools should stop teaching social studies, political science, and government courses...

It seems suspect to me that Carothers would reach these conclusions... The U.S. government has put a great deal of money into limiting access to quality civic education worldwide, particularly in its efforts to stamp out liberation pedagogy and liberation theology by largely labelling it socialist propaganda. Further, it's simply too easy for aid programs to ignore this field, as many of the host country governments are patently uncomfortable with encouraging the development of a citizenry that has the tools to critically analyze policy and act upon this analysis.P>If you are looking for a first or yet another analysis of the bureacratic failings of development agencies, this is a decent start. If you want a more in-depth analysis of the difficulties associated with the development of democratic governments that truly listen to their people and respect human rights...look elsewhere. Carothers has some serious blind spots.

This is a wonderful book for anyone interested in the controversial and critical world of democracy promotion. Carothers offers subtle insights into US efforts to promote democracy abroad and elucidates many of the complicated dynamics involved. It's the first book I have read that moves beyond democracy theory to look at the facts of assistance--the political agendas, the lack of donor coordination, the difficulty measuring results, etc. I highly recommend it.

This is an excellent resource for libraries seeking big bucks for large projects. The indexing and state by state information provides for easy searching for local grant giving organizations. Future publications of this resource may wish to add company information in state by state format instead of alphabetical so one doesn't wind up going back and forth. Though the information is absolutely marvelous the cost is overpriced, especially for libraries seeking funds! Smart librarians should resource share in order to fully reap the benefits without wiping out the budget.

This guide is chock-a-block full of great info, but it's all to typical of trade books for fundraisers -- if you can afford these overpriced guides, maybe you don't need to be raising money after all. How many libraries have the resources for this?

The book begins with an explicit comparison between Mrs. Cheney and "Goldstein," the subject of the daily 'minute of hatred' in Orwell's 1984 (where citizens are required to hurl abuses and invectives at photos of a symbolic, anonymous enemy of the state). While on a partisan level such a comparison is blatant rhetorical martyrdom, it may also be a refreshingly honest glimpse into how Mrs. Cheney sees herself in relation to the 'educated elite' in the US -- innocent effigy incurring the wrath of a totalitarian regime.
In fact, Cheney has more or less co-opted Orwell, liberally sprinkling her chapters with quotes from his works. The quotes underlying intent seems to be to undermine a liberal social agenda and support compassionate conservatism -- a fact which Orwell, a staunch socialist and member of the Workers Party of Marxist Unification who fought for the party in Spain during their civil war, would probably abhor.
Her comparisons of the PC trend to the 'Thought Police,' (in which the most aburd of absurd, and unfortunately true, examples of PC militarism are drudged up), quickly devolve into sweeping condemnation of any intellectual endeavour that cannot be reconciled to her particular brand of political and social conservatism.

Cheney begins the book with a revealing quote. If you already agree with the quote (to follow), there's no need to read "Telling the Truth" unless you particularly enjoy hearing someone repeat what you already believe -- and if you disagree or haven't yet formed an opinion, no need to read "Telling the Truth" because all of her arguments already presuppose you agree on this fundamental level:

"Any attack on intellectual liberty, and on the concept of objective truth, threatens in the long run every department of thought."
George Orwell, "The Prevention of Literature"

Nowhere does Lynne explain how philosophical arguments against objective truth are simultaneously an attack on the freedom of intellectual liberty, but most people intuitively grasp that replacing the idea of Objective Truth and The Answer in the humanities with an absurdly extreme 'anything goes' relativism in which any and all ideas are equally valid just doesn't hack it. Mrs. Cheney tries to tap into fears of this extreme relativism, and at one point claims that children, somewhere in the United States, are being taught that Egyptians flew in gliders. Presuming all archeological and scientific evidence points to the exact opposite, the idea would indeed be absurd. As absurd as, say, Creationism, a subject Cheney does not address on her quest for absurd relativism in our schools. (It's a 'theory' like evolution is 'just a theory' only if the two ideas can't be judged by the same criteria, i.e. the scientific method).

The book is cleaved along partisan lines, and occasionally slips into political bickering involving current (well, 1980s-90s) events and people -- all negative and dastardly examples happen to be of liberal politicians, all forthright and righteous and right examples happen to be of conservative politicians. If you buy this book, be wary of Truths that are so intensely partisan -- and rhetoric that is so intensely political.

This review is being restored after it was deleted by someone at Amazon several months ago- at that time, it had more "helpful" votes than either of the two "Spotlight Reviews." As stated by Amazon on the "Unfit for Command" page, (particularly) during an election year, it is inappropriate for them to engage in book-review burning.

Attempts to suppress free speech are particularly misguided in the Internet age; (literally) at Amazon's expense, I simply used my considerable presence on the 'net to publish a longer essay that ultimately was read by far more people than will ever read this.

That online essay may be read by clicking on my name, then "see more," which gives the link. It also has links to additional information (indicated by the ^'s in the text below)... AND it's more fun 'cause it doesn't suffer from Amazon's restriction of making fun of imbeciles by name!

Frankly, I wrote my "Telling the Truth" review after a long day of computer programming, and 2 or 3 beers, and I was having a bit of self-indulgent fun by being exaggeratedly arrogant- hopefully at the expense of "reviewers" who obviously never read the book (usually, their non-reviews merely comment on the book's title, then launch into an anti-administration diatribe about subjects that Dr. Cheney's book doesn't address).

Paul Simon once wrote a cute song, 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover:

She said, "It grieves me so to see you in such pain-
I wish there were something I could do, to make you smile again!"
I said, "I appreciate that,
and would you please explain about the fifty ways?"

She said, "Why don't we both just sleep on it tonight?
And I believe in the morning, you'll begin to see the light..."
And then she kissed me, and I realized she probably was right-
There must be fifty ways to leave your lover!
Fifty ways to leave your lover!

And it seems there must be at least fifty ways to be a liar.

Without further ado:

Well let's see, my cousin Mike is also Lynne's cousin Mike, which is neither here nor there. Mike used to work at Bethesda Naval Hospital, where he did surgery on Reagan, Bush #1, etc., and I was the first person from SC^ to make the top 10 in the Science Talent Search^ (I had as many 800s on my college boards as I'm ranking this book). Bad genes SOMEWHERE... or so my fellow alum Leroy Hood^ would say.

Caltech- U.S. News & World Reports decided to Tell the Truth for once, a few years back, and rank it #1^- used to have the motto "The Truth Shall Make You Free", but that had religious connotations, so they got rid of it.

But back in 1986, a Caltech professor warned- in a Challenger Commission appendix that was granted as a concession to him by the lawyer that headed it (in order to prevent Dr. Feynman's resignation from the commission)- that "In any successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."

It's because the failure of engineers and scientists to deal adequately with reality (i.e., "the truth") often produces such spectacular and undeniable results (e.g., Columbia, February 2003) that someone having such a background cannot afford the same level of flippancy in this regard (e.g., "I did not have sex with that woman" ... or- at the very least- "It depends upon what your definition of 'is' is." ... an actual Bill Clinton quote! ;-) as those whose careers depend upon their ability to:

1) absorb some tiny grain of truth,
2) relieve the ensuing irritation by embellishing this particulate with layer upon layer of diseased nacre, then
3) gild the resulting twisted-lump-of-garbage with the thinnest coat of dark and malignant grease,
4) so that when they finally regurgitate it, it can readily be swallowed by those they wish to deceive, who otherwise would recognize it as unfit for consumption.

My father- who spent most of his career as an honest cop- referred to a subset of such persons as "lieyers."

And as one who has been a genuine victim of the kind of "diseased minds" alluded to in a previous^ review (can you Google, "when he lies, he speaks in his native tongue, for he is a liar, and the father of all lies"?), I particularly identify with Dr. Feynman's sentiment, which is generalized in Dr. Cheney's book.

Some say the dEvil be a mystical thing...
I say the dEvil be a walking person!
S/he a fool, a liar, conjurer and a thief!
Try to tell you what you want-
try to tell you what you need!

All you folks think you run my life!
Say I should be willing to compromise...
I say all you demons go back to Hell!
I'll save my Soul, I'll save myself!

-Tracy Chapman

The criticism that I would make is that Dr. Cheney does not acknowledge the significantly positive aspects of the 1960s; notably, the opposition to the war in Vietnam that would not have been possible had the United States been anything like the Soviet Union, and generally alluded to by Timbuk3's Big Shot in the Dark: "you used to believe in the power of music, and all that revolutionary stuff... now you're just a big shot in the dark... well, you got it right the first time."

In other words- as echoes the essential message of her book- in a solar system whose sun^ will eventually burn out- or else be swallowed by a supermassive black hole, when in 3.5 billion years the Andromeda galaxy collides^ with the Milky Way- and in a universe^ that will expand forever into a freezing nothingness, philosophy is all that matters.

Unfortunately Dr. Cheney's book is only a book; it's not a magic wand you can hit people over the head with, and instantly raise their IQs by 100 points. If that were the case, then in a few years, there could be far fewer liars in the world, and all universities (with the exception of any associated lie school) could have an Honor System^ like that of Caltech, where virtually all exams are "take-home" exams, and- despite the intense academic pressure- one can feel confident that any limits on time, and access to reference materials, specified for the exam will be observed by 99+% of one's classmates... though unfortunately, the correlation between intelligence and lying & cheating is far from absolute (Teddy Kennedy nearly got booted from Harvard after being caught in a cheating scandal, but he got into Harvard thanks to his family's political and financial pull, rather than his brains).

Some wits recommend "The Bride of Frankenstein" in addition to, or instead of, "Telling the Truth."

I recommend:

"400 Hours of Counseling with Bill & Hillary's Shrink" in addition to "Telling The Truth"
or
"Voting for John Kerry" instead of "Telling The Truth"

Here are a couple more tunes- in celebration of the re-election of Bush/Cheney (yeah... 4 more years ;-) that may help explain Dr. Cheney's book to a few left-brain challenged Kerry Kids, and Soviet Union nostalgists living in western Europe. (Just as a little right-brain IQ test, see if you can identify the references.)

I have legalized robbery- and called it a belief...
I have run with the money, and hid like a thief!
I have re-written history, with my armies and my crooks...
Invented memories- and I burned all the books.

And I can still hear his laughter; and I can still hear his song...
The man's too big, the man's too strong!

---

Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners are Saints...
As I end this tale, just call me Lucifer, for I'm in need of some restraint!
So if you meet me have some courtesy, have some sympathy, and some taste.
Use all your well-learned politesse, or I'll lay your soul to waste!

Now if all y'all Barbra Streisand-type folks would just hold your breath & wait for President Bush to take away my Mama's Social Security check, reinstate the draft, etc., like John Kerry (the lawyer) told you over-and-over Bush is gonna do... (I have the INSIDE SCOOP; it won't be long now- I PROMISE! ;-)

The problem with Cheney's book is that she does not practice what she preaches. She encourages a balanced education that offers various perspectives, and then she denounces multiculturalism in the classroom. How are we to recive a balanced perspective if we ignore the voices of marganilized cultures?? Furthermore she denounces the use of words like "holocaust" and "genocide" in teaching history. How is that fair? Ultimately while Cheney's message of balanced education is good it is not practiced in her literature. Futher more (for someone who perscribes a balanced education) she points to obscure factoids to prove her case while she fails to point out that most history books still sugarcoat the atrocities of the world. Ultimately Cheney has the right idea but she is very hypocritical in her execution. If you think opposite of her then you liberalize education if you agree absolutely then you hand education to the conservatives. Neither is right and neither is the universal solution.
To sum it all up, the true path to a great educational system is to respect all perspectives and thus exist in harmony rather than jump to the left or right.
Dont waste you time on this book.

This is hysterical nonsense typical of right-wing ideologues posing as scholars. As a professional geographer, I shudder when I think that an accredited university gave this blowhard a Ph.D. This rant is full of ridiculous generalizations and misrepresentations. To take just one: she claims environmentalists are critical of science because of its dedication to objectivity and rationality (p.12). Of course, the reality is environmentalists make extensive use of cutting-edge science while right-wing activists like the author's husband are doing their best to undermine the use of science in the environmental policy decision-making process, whether its forest policy, pollution control, endangered species recovery, or global climate change. This is just one small example of the many mistruths Cheney perpetuates. Indeed, she rewrites history with more zest than most self-styled revisionists. Having spent all of my adult life in academia, I have encountered my fair share of flaky "postmodernists" and man-hating radical feminists. But one would get the impression from some of the reviews posted here and from Cheney's book that the academy is made up of nothing but America-haters, revisionist, anti-truth, anti-morality professional liars who brainwash our kids on a daily basis. Of course, only someone who hasn't spent any time in the classroom could possibly believe this absurd nonsense. I think my GIS professor would have been surprised to find out that his forest management research was nothing but politically correct lies, and my history professor would have been shocked to learn how "relativistic" and "perverted" his research on state constitutions was. Simply put, Cheney's book is utter and complete nonsense. It should be retitled: "Telling a Very Skewed Version of the Truth, While Turning a Blind Eye to Anything That Might Be Considered Objectionable in the History of White People, Particularly Conservatives." Please don't buy this book--you'll only encourage this pseudo-scholar.

Got it! Radical Feminism, bad. Multiculturalism, bad. Afrocentrism, bad. Queer Theory, bad. Academics, BAD. Its funny how people of Lynne Cheney's extreme political persuasion are so stuck on that what's-wrong-with-our-culture and what-happened-to-our-values? talk. They are soooo fixated on education and children. It's almost like some sort of perverted fetish. Maybe she needs to start one of those nationwide youth clubs. That way she can put her race theories into practice.

This book doesn't exactly give the other Art Marketing books much competition but I think it's a little older so it may have been one of the first on the scene. It has a lot of fluff but it also has a few helpful tips that make it worth my time. To me, you can't have "too many" suggestions.

The format of this book is not "10 quick things you can do". It is mostly a discussion, from different people, attacking different subjets. It is not uniform. There is a lot of repetition. However, being a lawyer, I find that it is a good start for people who have little concept of technical aspects of the art market.

There is a lot of info in this book. However, the information seems jumbled. I say that because, one chapter seems to be more for the emerging artist and the next for the established artist. I did not care for the chapters about the dealers (ex. one chapter in New York dealer, one is Houston dealer, etc.)
I would recommend other business of art books first and save this one for last if your starting a reference collection of art business books.

When I was Special Assistant Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts, visual artists had few ways to support themselves except for grants. Apart from the special few, little hope existed for selling their art, and most artists had no idea of how to "go about it." I assembled an internationally respected group of artists, dealers, art lawyers and accountants and put them in front of tens of thousands of artists nationwide. Through questions and answers, speeches and demonstations, a distilled book's worth of unique knowledge and advice came into being. Unlike any other books that give one artist's opinion, or one "art advisor's advice" this book does something different: the straight story comes directly from the most outstanding and respected authorities in the field. No other book does this. No other authority can provide this knowledge in a single volume. The Business of Art is now the basis for college level courses on the business side of art. There is also a companion video sold by Phoenix Flms at 800-221-1274. Used together, they provide artists and art groups with a wealth of learning material for either immediate use or continuing education of artists worldwide.

Some great information hidden in a bunch of rambling useless information. I wish someone would write a book that you don't have to search for the information you need. Alot of filler.

I used this book 3 years ago when I took a class in Harvard. This books allows me to understand the most important subjects in politics today, and also give me a lot of bibliography, so f I was interested in one of the subjects I could go deeper. I used for my thesis and Is a very good tool to do research I extremly recomended!

This book was assigned in a graduate level international relations class. While the aim of the book is laudable - to give practical solutions to foreign policy problems - the execution leaves much to be desired. The editors make each contributing author shoehorn their essays into a rather clumsy outline. There are countless "no **** Sherlock" moments when reading this book. Overall, it is not insightful and an utter waste of time.

This is by far, without a doubt, the single-handedly most God-awfully, hideously sterile, boring piece of literature ever produced by mankind. I have heard a rumor that hospitals are going to start making patients read this book in lieu of anaesthesia before conducting surgery.

Did anyone who gave this book 5 stars actually read it? Or are they good friends of the editors? The comment attributed to Professor Gaddis located above these reviews was especially disappointing. His books about the Cold War are wonderful but this book would bore even incoming freshmen at his university. Someone must have called in big favor for that quote.

There is nothing new in this book unless you are surprised by statements like "the internet has changed the way we communicate." On the other hand, this book may be for you if you didn't realize the U.N. Security Council has five permanent members and they all have a veto. My point is this: the book is marketed to people with backgrounds in security issues but insults the intelligence of anyone who knows anything about the field (and I don't mean academic background either; reading USA Today would surpass the insight provided in this book).

If you are a professor putting together a class syllabus, please save your students' sanity and do not make them read this book. If you are just looking to buy it for fun, you need to reassess your life. Save your money and time and choose another book. Take it from someone who actually read it...one star is generous.

This book is an absolute must-read for a wide range of readers from foreign relations expert to absolute neophyte. As a lay person, I found it extremely readable and accessible. The book offers thought-provoking insights through thoughtfully organized essays and introduced by the authors in such a way that gives the reader a useful context for analysis. A definite 5 star publication!

When considering creating a private foundation for my family I found it very useful to know what other people who created a foundation thought. The book is loaded with statistics on private foundations gathered from national research. It was very comforting to know that my concerns were also the same concerns that others had. I feel very strongly about my charitable activities and this book was considerable help in deciding to create my own foundation.

If you want any specifics about setting up foundations, this book is NOT for you. It is so short on any specifics, that anyone could have written it, whether or not they had any real knowledge in the subject. It was a big filibuster. It took me all of 30 minutes to read it.

The reader would be better of looking up definitions in a dictionary. For FREE.

Please, Please do not waste your money on this book, unlesss you have NO clue as to what a foundation is and are so wealthy that you just have to have someone spoon feed you insipid advice.

On the bright side, the author sure has profited from a great title!

If you want to understand why people set up private foundations and if you're thinking about setting one up yourself, then this book is an excellent source of information. After reading the book you know what it takes to establish and manage a private foundation.

The subtitle of this book, "How to Establish Your Own Private Foundation," should be subtitled "Why to Establish Your Own Private Foundation." The book is long on generalities, and the so called "conversations" that the authors call "case studies" are insulting. An example: "Cool," said Danny. "Can I smoke a big fat cigar?" "Get Serious," said Debbie. "The foundation will take some time and effort." "Anything's easy after a two-year-old, then twins," said Danny. Please note that there are also factual errors in the book, not the least of which is computing the IRS 1-2% excise tax on a foundation's earnings instead as 1-2% tax on assets owned by the foundation (an error of a factor of 10). Don't waste your time or money on this book.

It took a long time for me to find a book that both educated me on private foundations and addressed my concerns about setting one up for my family. This book is exactly what I have been looking for. If you are considering setting up a private foundation yourself, I highly recommend reading this book.

except for Nigeria.
For an "analytical work" the book has a few noticable biases and faults :
1. The book asserts certain claims that are either unreasonable or completely out of hand with the reality. For example, in 1991 Alash Party attempted to assasinate!!! Mr. Derbesaliev, who now became head of Kazakh moslems. FYI: Alash party existed in 1917-1918 and fought for independence from Russian Empire and later Communist Russia, however, the leaders of the party were murdered later by bolsheviks. Alash party was revived very recently (with a different agenda) as part of opposition in Kazakhstan. I am not going to touch on opposition here, because the book doesn't directly address the existence of opposition in Kazakhstan (both constructive and ultra-right/left).
2. Ms. Olcott is surprised at the fact there were no uprisings in Kazakhstan during the period of economic and political turmoil in early/mid 90's (actually, there have been none until this very day). I suppose that would in itself tell something about stability in the country. I understand that for her (or perhaps funds that sponsored her) it would have been better if there was an uprising and as a result the country would see "friendly" forces of NATO coming into the country to take care of the rich natural reserves of oil/metals/uranium/you name it, but at the same time install "democracy". I think people do remember the experience of the US in making democracies in post-WWII world; the list of Latin American and Asian countries would be a little overwhelming to be included.
3. Ms. Olcott claims that lately the difference between rich and poor grew immensely (notice, that under communism Gini index is supposed to be as low as possible). Isn't it a natural process to be observed in a country trying to go from communist society to capitalist society? Notice, Gini index in Kazakhstan is 35.4, in the US Gini index is 40.8 (data from CIA World Fact Book). Hence, the spread of incomes between rich and poor is smaller in Kazakhstan than in the US. Would that mean by Ms. Olcott's logic that the US has more issues with the layers of the society than Kazakhstan?
4. Ms. Olcott notices existence of Kazakh nationalism in the fact that Kazakhstan encourages Kazakhs to immigrate into the country. When any EU country gives a right for permanent residence/naturalization to foreign citizens based on the right of birth/ethnicity it is considered normal (of course, Ms. Olcott doesn't mention this in her book). However, Kazakhstan approved the same rights for Kazakhs living abroad, so for Ms. Olcott it is an epitome of Kazakh nationalism and attempts of Kazakh "dictator" Mr. Nazarbayev to make the country mononational.
5. The usual rule that the language of titular nation is always the state language elicits fury from Ms. Olcott when such regulations happen in Kazakhstan.
6. Ms. Olcott essentially equates the terrorism and Islam. For her, the fact that there are more Kazakhs these days who claim to be moslems is worrying and may signal the coming of terrorism. Basically, if the Americans go to church every weekend it is freedom of choice, but if Kazakh goes to a mosque that is a reason to worry. Of course she fails to mention that Kazakhstan doesn't prohibit different mainstream religions. While travelling through Kazakhstan, one can see a lot of Christian Orthodox churches, as well as a few Catholic churches and synagogues, which in Kazakhstan is certainly considered to be perfectly normal.
It seems that this book is biased in presenting the situation in Kazakhstan. I wonder who are the sponsors of this book (sounds like some oil companies could be)...

If you no background whatsoever on Kazakhstan then it might be a bit difficult to follow all the events. Having said that, Martha Olcott is by far one of the biggest experts on Kazakhstan and if you want to see the opinion of the best then you should give this book a shot.

A big pile of lies that Ms. Olcott put together is nothing but a political order intended to badmouth and misrepresent this country. I was infuriated by this book, I lived in Kazakhstan for 20 years and nothing in this book is close to being true.

We are adopting a baby from Kaz and wanted a little background on the country. This is not a light read by any means. It gives you a lot of info on the current Kaz president (and his corrupt ways), oil reserves and who's competing for them, ethnic struggles between the Russians and Kakahs, and the apathetic ways of the Kaz voters to name a few of the many topics it addresses. Get it for good background on a variety of important topics vital to Kaz's future success.

How can democracy be encouraged among the Soviets and in Eastern Europe? Underwriting Democracy: Encouraging Free Enterprise And Democratic Reform Among The Soviets And In Eastern Europe is a start, advocating positive change and using George Soros' own efforts in eastern Europe to describe how such changes may be fostered. Chapters examine America's foundation network, links between philosophy and practical democratic applications, and how Soros' early foray led to his acclaimed Open Society initiatives.

Underwriting Democracy is a reprint of the book that first appeared in 1991 as the former Soviet Union was spiraling into oblivion under Gorbachev. In the book, international speculator George Soros (best known for his successful run on the Pound a number of years ago) describes his activities in setting up foundations to encourage democracy in formerly communist countries, his attempts to advise on how to create new democracies in these countries and his philosophy for how thought and action can change the "normal" course of human events (which is to run to harmful extremes).

I have known a number of people who have funded foundations in formerly communist countries and the materials here ring true with what others have told me. There was usually an attempt to subvert the money for other purposes, a bureaucracy had to be avoided and there were many difficulties in putting funds to work in useful ways. Anyone thinking about encouraging governmental reform through nonprofit organizations can learn useful lessons from reading the first part of the book.

Throughout the book, Mr. Soros makes informed guesses about what will follow in each of the former communist countries. I was fascinated to see how well he understood the social and economic forces at the time . . . and how frequently he called the future quite accurately. Fortunately, his worst pessimism about what could happen in the former Soviet Union did not come to pass.

His attempts to help direct reform in the Soviet Union as an advisor come across as very optimistic, determined and naive. But sometimes Don Quixote can produce results where no one else can. He can at least feel good that he tried to help.

The least satisfactory part of the book is his explanation of the theory of reflexivity, which he describes in detail in part three. I think I followed the argument. It could have been stated much more simply and better explained with more government-related examples. The financial market examples are very clear.

At the end, I found myself wondering what nations could be doing today to encourage democracy in other areas where it has not done well. A number of helpful solutions are contained in a new book, Soft Power, which I encourage you to consider.

Soros argues here that he helped fund democracy in order to 'open up' the economies of the eastern bloc, including Russia. Nevertheless any study of Soros's multi-billion dollar Hedge fund style investments will show that he has not only funded democracy but he has invested heavily in these countries to earn a profit. Keeping democracy alive mostly is in self interest to the Soros pocket book, rather then any benevolent idea of helping the 'people' of Eastern Europe, who mostly remain poor and starving, subjected to terror and mafia style corruption that did not exist under totalitarian Communism. In the end the people of Eastern Europe traded the false-god of Communism for the equally false-god of investment banking and cowboy capitalism, with Soros at the forefront.

A dangerous text full of self obsession and slight of hand regarding Soros's personal investments in these societies, smacking of conflict of interest.

Seth J. Frantzman

Soros was convicted for insider trading in December 2002. He was convicted with the late Robert Maxwell and a few others. Maxwell jump of his huge yacht off of Europe after his billion dollar scam collapsed. Thousands of UK pensioners lost their life savings thanks to Soros pal Maxwell.

Ask quite a few people in Eastern Europe if they want Soros help in encoraging "Democratic Reform." They don't want the help of a convicted criminal.