February 22, 2007 | Read Time: 4 minutes
A grant-making organization established by Pierre Omidyar came under fire this month when several nonprofit leaders complained that the group had treated them unprofessionally.
The public spat over the Omidyar Network is unusual in the often congenial world of philanthropy, where most charities remain quiet about such concerns for fear of alienating donors.
The commotion began with a letter titled “Deep Disappointment With Omidyar Bubbling Up Everywhere” that was posted on an Internet message board established by Mr. Omidyar. The letter, written by Ami Dar, founder of the Idealist Web site, said that despite good intentions, “over the past couple of years many organizations have been hurt and disappointed by ON’s [Omidyar Network’s] behavior.”
He said the network’s staff members have often appeared to be signaling that money would be forthcoming to his group and other grant seekers, but then they abruptly cut contact.
“E-mails and calls go unreturned, often for months at a time, meetings get canceled, and people are led on for a year or two until they finally give up,” Mr. Dar wrote. “You guys need to STOP doing this. Give people a Yes or a No, but do not lead them on like this. Please.”
Daniela Rief, a spokeswoman for the Omidyar Network, said in an e-mail message to The Chronicle that the organization’s “due diligence is rigorous and thorough,” but that “there surely are instances in which our execution falls short of our ideal.”
“For example, in some cases, as in Ami Dar’s, our response times could and should have been faster,” she wrote. “We acknowledge this, consider the feedback constructive, and will incorporate it in our work going forward.”
Ms. Rief said Mr. Omidyar, who is the founder of the Internet auction site eBay, was unavailable to comment.
Similar Experiences
In part prompted by Mr. Dar’s public complaint, four other charity officials stepped forward and said they had had similar experiences with the network. Each one emphasized they were upset by how they were treated, not that the Omidyar fund may have declined to support their charitable projects.
“My experience was much like Ami’s,” said Paul Schmitz, chief executive officer of Public Allies, in Milwaukee. Last year Mr. Schmitz’s group had hoped the Omidyar Network would extend support for his group, but his organization has been in limbo for months as the philanthropy has failed to give a straight answer on the request, he said. “We still don’t know if we’re in or out. My guess is we’re out.”
To be sure, other charities who have worked with the Omidyar Network describe their interaction with the group as positive.
“Suffice to say, I have a really good working relationship with Omidyar,” said Gillian Caldwell, executive director of Witness, a human-rights group based in New York. “I’ve never had promises made that haven’t been fulfilled.”
The network has awarded $1.7-million to Witness.
This is not the first time charitable efforts by Mr. Omidyar have received criticism. In 2004, several nonprofit leaders expressed frustration when he decided to close his eponymous foundation to set up the Omidyar Network, which supports both for-profit and nonprofit ventures.
Mr. Omidyar also created Omidyar.net, a Web site designed for people to share ideas about how to help solve the world’s social ills.
His innovative approach to philanthropy may confuse some grant seekers, said some nonprofit officials.
Unlike traditional foundations, which have a strict schedule for deciding grants and an application procedure, the network prefers to find potential beneficiaries on its own and support them as opportunities arise.
The network is “reinventing itself constantly,” said Ms. Caldwell. “That’s in the DNA of the organization.”
For his part, Mr. Dar is a little uncomfortable that his letter on Omidyar.net has triggered such a response.
“I wasn’t trying to cause a stir in the whole sector,” he said in an interview. “I was trying to definitely put it out there for them” — the Omidyar Network staff members. “I went up to the wall and put some graffiti on it.”
Mr. Dar said he bears no ill-will toward the network’s employees; he said their biggest fault may be that they are too kind to grant seekers by not being adamant about which projects do not fit their priorities.
And, he added, like many grant makers, they don’t understand the power they wield over charities.
“They are giants, and we are small, little fleas,” he explained, “and when they move around, we jump, we fly.”
Mr. Dar’s letter is available online at http://www.omidyar.net/group/communitygeneral/news/1657.
