ANNUAL REPORT 2010

Board of Directors

James Allen Smith, ChairmanMargaret C. Ayers, PresidentClara Miller, TreasurerJoanna D. Underwood, SecretaryPaul R. DolanWinthrop R. MunyanJohn Hoyt Stookey

Staff

Margaret C. Ayers, Presidentand Chief Executive Officer

Roslyn Black, Program OfficerLaura Wolff, Senior Program OfficerAlicia Sylvia, Office Manager

Report Covers the Year Ended October 31, 2010

2

Report of the PresidentAnd Description of the Foundation’s Fields of Interest

In 2010, the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation appropriated $4,155,000 in support of the efforts of55 grantees conducting work in our three program areas:

• Promoting International Arts Engagement 17 grants totaling $1,515,000• Protecting Reproductive Rights 15 grants totaling $1,295,000• Improving the Performance of Public Institutionsin New York 23 grants totaling $1,345,000

In addition, some $243,250 supported arts organizations for capacity building projects, a programthat has, as of the end of 2010, been discontinued. Further, $12,000 was made available toorganizations that provide a variety of services to the philanthropic community. Finally, $66,000was appropriated for other purposes.

In the sections below, I have described our fields of interest within the context of today’s politicalenvironment, the goals we hope to promote, and the strategies we have developed to achieve thesegoals.

Promoting International Arts Engagement

Historically, the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) was the major player in the fields of publicdiplomacy and international arts engagement following World War II. Created in 1953 by theEisenhower Administration, USIA spent countless millions during the period of the cold war toproject a positive image abroad of the United States and the democratic principles upon which itwas founded. But with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in1991, and a severe recession in the United States during the early 1990s, many members ofCongress began to question whether USIA, an agency with a $1.4 billion budget, was necessary.With few champions to promote the need for global understanding in the post-Soviet era,

3

government expenditures for these purposes began to decline. By the turn of the century, USIAhadbeen dissolved and its functions scattered among multiple agencies, leaving substantially reducedinfrastructures through which the U.S. government could build constructive relationships withpeoples and nations abroad. A further consequence of United States disinvestment in internationalcultural engagement has been the demise of many of the private U.S.-based international exchangeorganizations that had long been sustained through government support. Funded by USIA, ArtsInternational was probably the most important of the organizations that were ultimately dissolved.At the same time, the largest private funders of such work began to reduce their support, with theconsequence that their grantees began to have difficulty, and many closed their doors.

At this point, there is relatively little public or private support for international arts engagement.While the ObamaAdministration has demonstrated increasing interest in public-private partnershipsthat function globally, annual expenditures for international arts engagement hover around the $10million level, a small fraction of the funds that were expended for similar purposes during the coldwar. Within the private foundation world the story is much the same. According to the FoundationCenter, only 19 foundations in the United States gave more than $100,000 for such purposes in2008. It is within this context that we have initiated our new program as described below.

The objective of the program is to help promote global understanding through the arts. TheFoundation has initial plans to support international engagement between U.S. visual andperforming arts organizations and their counterparts in Africa, Latin America, and parts of theMiddle East. While we will consider support for projects that bring international artists to theUnited States, we will give preference to projects that send representatives of U.S. arts organizationsabroad. Our strategies to promote international arts engagement include support for:

• Public–private partnerships involving federal agencies such as the State Departmentand the National Endowment for the Arts working in conjunction with U.S. culturalorganizations and foundations to develop arts engagement projects here and abroad;• Partnerships with the corporate sector through intermediaries such as Americans forthe Arts or the Arts and Business Council to promote corporate support forinternational arts engagement;

4

• Partnerships with foreign entities to conduct arts engagement projects that bringU.S. artists to the country where the foreign entity or host organization resides;• Partnerships with U.S. regional arts organizations that build transformative bilateralrelationships with local arts organizations and international partners. Programs shouldengage the community beyond the artistic work, including sustained and interactiveresidency activities such as collaborations, master classes, workshops, seminars,dialogues, symposia, and management assistance;• U.S. performing and visual arts organizations that develop international collaborationsin contemporary performance and exhibitions practice;• Partnerships with Grantmakers in the Arts and other foundations to developfunding consortia in support of international arts engagement; and• Development of internet technology that advances global arts engagement.

Protecting Reproductive Rights

Since the 2010 midterm elections, the overall legislative environment for reproductive health hasbecome seriously compromised and poses a substantial danger to the pro-choice movement. Somechampions of choice in Congress and in the states were not re-elected or did not choose to run, andmany of their successors, who hold extreme anti-choice views, are putting at risk hard-foughthistoric pro-choice gains. These political shifts are sure to jeopardize women’s access to safe, legalabortion and other reproductive health care. Many newly elected anti-choice members of Congressare already using efforts to amend national health care reform legislation as an opportunity toimpose new limitations on women’s reproductive freedom, unleashing a barrage of anti-choice billsintended to entrench the ban on federal funding for abortion, limit access to contraception, anddefund reproductive health care providers.

A threatening trend in 2010 was the introduction of legislation in 14 states to ban abortion coverageby private insurance plans or those offered through the proposed state insurance exchanges. Otheranti-choice measures that were passed in some states include a ban on abortion after 20 weeks ofpregnancy without any exceptions, and the elimination of abortion coverage for state employees.In addition to legislation that bans access to abortion, many other anti-choice bills have beenintroduced that would force women seeking abortion to undergo ultrasound procedures, place

5

burdensome requirements on abortion providers, and restrict young women’s access to familyplanning services.A number of anti-choice state provisions have been upheld by the courts, furtherlegitimizing harmful laws and inviting other states to enact similarly restrictive measures.

The objective of our work in this field is to protect and expand women’s reproductive rights in thebelief that the ability to control one’s fertility and prevent unintended pregnancy is fundamental tothe advancement of women’s opportunities. Strategies used to achieve this objective includesupport for policy analysis, advocacy, and/or litigation including:

• Promoting the implementation of laws, policies, and practices that will enable allwomen to have access to reproductive health information and services, includingemergency contraception and abortion;• Challenging laws and legal decisions that undermine reproductive rights;• Developing legal theory in support of these rights;• Informing the development of a judicial selection process that will producenon-ideological courts; and• Undertaking opposition research and conducting programs to prevent clinic violence.

The Foundation makes support available to organizations working on these issues at the nationallevel as well as in New York State.

Improving the Performance of Public Institutions in New York

The underlying premise of the Foundation’s interest in government performance is that governmentagencies will deliver better services to the public in a more cost-effective manner if their activitiesare examined, evaluated, and held up to public view. While there are many public sector entitiesthat monitor government spending, we believe that outside organizations play a critical role inexamining policies and promoting reforms that are responsive to changing societal needs. At times,this function has been conducted by the press, but for ongoing attention to complex social problemsand the responses of public bureaucracies, we have come to rely on non-profit organizations thatmake use of the following strategies to advance the public good:

6

• Conducting research to determine the efficacy of existing government programs;• Communicating research results to the media, policymakers and the general public;• Organizing citizens to bring collective pressure on public agencies to be responsive;• Helping government officials develop and implement sound policies and programs; and• Litigating when other actions fail to improve government performance.

In supporting advocacy organizations, the first of our objectives is to safeguard the well-being ofthose who are most dependent on government programs. During this period of financial turmoiland a rapidly changing economic environment, many of our grants are focused on the improvementof policies that affect low-income NewYorkers and other vulnerable individuals served by publiclyfunded agencies (e.g. families attempting to move from welfare to work). We are particularlyinterested in promoting the implementation of programs to help the adults in such families obtaineducation, training, and job placement as well as access to child care. A second objective of thisprogram is to ensure that all children in the State receive adequate care and education from birthonward, and that young people receive the training and other supports necessary to becomeproductive workers and community members. In addition, we recognize that government affects thewell-being of the entire public by shaping the physical and environmental characteristics of thecommunities in which we live. Thus our grant making also supports efforts to improve city and statepolicies and government operations in areas such as solid waste management, land use planning,and environmental protection.

In the sections that follow, grants appropriated during 2010 are described by program category. Itis our expectation that the collective efforts of our grantees will bring us closer to achieving the goalsset forth above.

August 1, 2011 Margaret C. Ayers, President

Descriptionof GrantsAppropriatedby Field

8

Promoting International Arts Engagement

Americans for the Arts $75,000Washington, D.C.; www.americansforthearts.orgRobert L. Lynch, President and CEO

Formed in 1996, Americans for theArts (AFTA) is the nation’s leading arts advocacy organization andthe largest centralized resource for arts information and research. As such,AFTAhas created a networkof public and private partnerships with state and local governments as well as various private sectorentities. In 2009, AFTA, in partnership with the Redford Center at the Sundance Preserve, broughttogether over 40 leaders from business, philanthropy, and government for the 2009 NationalArts PolicyRoundtable on “The Role of the Arts in Strengthening and Inspiring the 21st Century GlobalCommunity”. Following the Roundtable,AFTAorganized two focus groups to determine future actionon the Roundtable’s recommendations, and later participated in the U.S. Summit for Global CitizensDiplomacy to help advance American volunteerism in international activities. Meetings are beingconvened with Business for Diplomatic Action, the Business Council for International Understanding,and others to develop strategic alliances that promote international arts engagement. Our grant supportsAFTA’s efforts to work with these and other business partners to advance reinvestment in internationalcultural projects through meetings and conferences; webinars and press events; and through thedevelopment of technical assistance programs. In addition,AFTAconducts federal advocacy to removerestrictive visa barriers and to increase federal appropriations for international touring through theDepartment of State.

9

Battery Dance Company $60,000New York, NY; www.batterydanceco.comJonathan Hollander, Artistic and Executive Director

Battery Dance Company is dedicated to broadening the availability of the arts through local programsand performances, national and international tours, and international arts engagement programs. Led byits founder, choreographer Jonathan Hollander, BDC has performed, taught and collaborated withinternational partners in 33 countries for over 15 years. Through itsDancing to Connect program, BDChas engaged thousands of young people throughout the world in creating and performing their ownchoreography. Our grant will help BDC expand its international engagement activities by adding staffto assist with tour logistics, communications, and tour development. In addition, BDC plans to createan internet “tool box” that will make use of webinars and web-based resources to help other companiesdevelop, plan, and undertake successful tours. The “tool box” will also include programmingopportunities as well as strategies for building an international network of advocates, collaborators, andsources of support.

Brooklyn Academy of Music (DanceMotion USA I) $60,000Brooklyn, NY; www.bam.orgKaren Brooks Hopkins, President

Founded in 1861, the BrooklynAcademy of Music is one of the largest, most influential arts presentingorganizations in the country with a long history of international engagement. In 2009, BAM wasselected by the State Department to administer DanceMotion USA, a new international partnershipprogram to tour American dance companies abroad. BAM conducted a selection process that resultedin the choice of three companies, each of which toured three countries on three separate continents.DanceMotion USA sent Urban Bush Women to Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela; Ronald K. Brown’sEvidence to Nigeria, Senegal and SouthAfrica; and San Francisco’s ODC/Dance to Burma, Indonesia,and Thailand. The tours included workshops, master classes, and discussions withAmerican and localartists and the community. Our grant is being used to produce a DVD of all tours; to translate tourmaterials into six languages (Spanish, French, Portuguese, Thai, Indonesian and Burmese,) and toreformat and translate BAM-curated dance resource materials given to U.S. Embassies and Consulatesin advance of the tours. Our support will also enable all of these materials to be incorporated into a newdedicated DanceMotionUSA website, thereby extending the life and impact of this work.

10

Brooklyn Academy of Music (DanceMotion USA II) $200,000Brooklyn, NY; www.bam.org Over 2 yearsKaren Brooks Hopkins, President

Following a highly competitive process, BAMwas again selected to partner with the State Departmentto produce an expanded second round of DanceMotion USA. BAM plans to send fourAmerican dancecompanies—Jazz Tap Ensemble, Rennie Harris PureMovement, Sean Curran Company, and TreyMcIntyre Project—to 13 countries located in the Middle East, Africa, South Central Asia, and the FarEast, where this work is not readily accessible. Companies will perform and participate in outreachprograms and arts management seminars—all of which are expected to deepen engagement betweeninternational and U.S. artists. Following the tour, a new U.S.-based project component will bring aforeign company from one of the tour countries to the U.S. to work with one of the participatingAmerican companies over a four-week period. This program will include a performance at BAM andoutreach activities with local schools. Our grant supports the second round of DanceMotion USA forthe translation of program materials into six to eight languages; the development of two archivalDVDs—a documentary video of the tours and an annotated dance library; and the placement of thismaterial on the DanceMotion USA website, ensuring that the work has a sustained presence on theinternet.

CEC ArtsLink $100,000New York, New York; www.cecartslink.org Over 2 yearsFritzie Brown, Executive Director

Founded in 1962 to help open doors between the U. S. and the Soviet Union, CEC ArtsLink is aninternational arts organization that supports and encourages exchange of artists and cultural managersin the United States and abroad. With lasting partnerships in 32 countries, CEC ArtsLink promotescommunication and understanding through innovative, mutually-beneficial collaborative projects,including arts management training, conferences, festivals, and public exhibitions. CEC’s ArtsLinkResidencies offer international performing, visual, and media artists and arts managers a five-weekresidency at established arts organizations in the U.S. The Independent Projects program supports artistsand arts managers from other countries to undertake special projects in the U.S. This year CEC willexpand the regions of theArtsLink Residencies and Independent Projects intoAfghanistan and Turkey.In preparation for this expansion, CEC is redesigning its website; upgrading its database toaccommodate new programs; and making research trips to visit artists in the new countries. Our grantsupports these efforts.

11

Cuban Artists Fund $10,000New York, New York; www.cubanartistsfund.orgBen Rodriquez-Cubenas, Chair

The Cuban Artists Fund (CAF) was established in New York City in 1998 by members of the Cuban-American community to promote Cuban art throughout the world, to share its culture, and to showcasethe work of Cuban artists. CAF has had a long history of involvement with the National Ballet of Cubawhich began over a decade ago when it sent MerrillAshley to Cuba to teach master classes in Balanchinetechnique to the company—the first time that Balanchine was taught in Cuba in more than 40 years.Most recently, CAF and the National Ballet of Cuba partnered to present the exhibition Alicia DancesHere Tonight in NewYork, celebratingABT founderAliciaAlonso’s 90th birthday. Our grant supportsCAF’s ongoing involvement with ballet to help send eight of NewYork City Ballet’s principal dancersand choreographers to the 22nd International Ballet Festival at the Teatro Mella in Havana. This is thefirst time that a corps of New York City Ballet dancers will perform in Cuba, and they will be dancingworks by George Balanchine, Jerome Robbins, and Christopher Wheeldon. A joint project with theNational Ballet of Cuba, the tour includes performances, open rehearsals, and interactions with localCuban dancers, choreographers, and arts administrators.

Dance Theatre Workshop $75,000New York, New York; www.dancetheaterworkshop.orgCarla Peterson, Artistic Director

Dance TheaterWorkshop has been a vital presenter of contemporary dance artists and companies in NewYork and worldwide for 45 years. In 1985, DTW established The Suitcase Fund: A Project of Ideasand Means in Cross-Cultural Artist Relations to create international avenues of collaboration amongindependent artists, producers and community organizers. International artists, often with no previousaccess to the United States, come here for performances and extended residencies while Americanartists teach, perform, and engage in residencies abroad. Our support makes possible the expansion ofthis program to the Middle East and Africa, specifically Mali, Lebanon, and Senegal, whose artists aremaking contemporary work under difficult circumstances and have not yet been recognized on theinternational landscape. Activities include a convening of African and Middle East-based artists at theAPAP conference to help develop arts networks and infrastructure; an artist residency in Lebanon to plana contemporary Arab dance festival at DTW in 2012; and a partnership with 651 ARTS’s AfricanExchange program as part of the Danse L’Afrique danse! Festival.

12

Film Forum $60,000New York, New York; www.filmforum.org Over 2 yearsKaren Cooper, Director

Film Forum began in 1970 as an alternative screening venue for independent films. Forty years later,it is a three-screen cinema with nearly 280,000 visitors annually. Film Forum is the only stand-alone,full-time nonprofit cinema in NewYork City, and one of the few in the nation. A central component ofFilm Forum’s programming has been theatrical premieres of foreign art films and documentaries thatexplore diverse social, political, historical and cultural realities. Our grant supports travel byprogramming staff to Latin American, Asian, and African film festivals to expand the Film Forum’sinternational programming to parts of the world that have been underrepresented onAmerican screens.The selected films often garner the attention of distributors who can then give the films nationwideexposure before American audiences. Our grant also supports the creation of a limited edition 40th-anniversary commemorative journal, celebrating important Film Forum milestones.

Independent Curators International $50,000New York, New York; www.ici-exhibitions.orgKate Fowle, Executive Director

Since 1975, Independent Curators International (ICI) has worked to expand the reach of exhibitionsacross the U.S. and beyond, producing 116 traveling exhibitions by 3,700 artists in 48 states and 25countries. ICI has been building on its extensive international network to implement new programs thatfocus on the exchange of ideas, rather than the circulation of objects. The Curatorial Intensive is a low-cost training program for independent curators to work with today’s leading curators and artists to helpthem develop viable exhibition proposals. Two Curatorial Intensives took place in New York and onein Mumbai, India that together involved 52 emerging curators from all over the world. The Curator’sPerspective is a lecture series that gives a platform for international curators to discuss their researchand exchange exhibition ideas. Six Curator’s Perspectives took place in New York, including ICI’sfirst touring series to sevenAmerican cities. The Curator’s Network is an online resource that connectscurators around the globe through online forums, and includes ICI’s online journal DISPATCH. Ourgrant supports these initiatives to create peer communication and collaboration for international curators.

13

International Foundation for Art Research $75,000New York, New York; www.ifar.orgSharon Flescher, Executive Director

Founded in 1969 by art scholars, attorneys, and civic leaders to deal with issues of attribution andauthenticity, the International Foundation for Art Research’s purview later expanded to include art lawand stolen and looted art. IFAR currently serves as an impartial and authoritative body, a combinationof think-tank, information clearinghouse, “watch-dog” and trusted educator. IFAR is knowninternationally for its expertise in ethics and legal issues in the art world. It has an active agenda ofresearch and public programs; its publications are frequently incorporated into university curricula;and, over the past decade, its signature publication, the IFAR Journal, has been honored with numerousawards. In 2004, IFAR began to develop the Art Law/Cultural Property Website Initiative (ALWI) toprovide a comprehensive searchable database of information about international legislation and U.S.case law governing the acquisition, exchange, ownership and authenticity of art, including culturalproperty legislation from 80 countries. ALWI is the only resource to include historical legislation sothat users can identify the law in effect at the time of the acquisition of a given object. Our grantsupports an expansion and evaluation of the ALWI database.

Merce Cunningham Dance Company $100,000New York, New York; www.merce.org Over 2 yearsTrevor Carlson, Executive Director

Merce Cunningham (1919-2009) is widely considered to be one of the greatest choreographers of ourera and a leader of the American avant-garde. In his more than 200 dances and 800 site-specific“Events,” he was noted for his collaborations with contemporary visual artists and musicians,particularly Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns and John Cage, redefining the way audiences experiencethe visual and performing arts. The Legacy Plan, which was fundamentally informed by Cunningham’sown wishes during his lifetime, lays out a bold architecture for protecting the assets of both artist andorganization, including digital preservation and public dissemination of artistic content after the artist’sdeath. The Plan is serving as a catalyst and model for other artist-driven organizations to beginaddressing the artistic, legal, and financial challenges of legacy planning and transition to a post-founderexistence. The Cunningham Foundation has launched an $8 million campaign to fund The LegacyPlan, which includes a two-year world tour, the creation of online “Dance Capsules” that will providecomplete documentation of Cunningham’s work, and the webcast series Mondays with Merce. Ourgrant supports these Legacy Plan projects.

14

Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation $200,000New York, New York; www.midatlanticarts.org Over 2 yearsAlan Cooper, Executive Director; Adam Bernstein, Deputy Director

MidAtlanticArts Foundation is one of six regional arts organizations in the United States and is closelyaligned with nine state arts agencies, as well as the National Endowment for theArts. As a regional artsorganization, MAAF supports touring programs across the nine partnering states and jurisdictions. It alsooperates internationally and, in recent years, has made an institutional commitment to internationalcultural engagement. MAAF’s signature program, USArtists International®, is the only significantnational initiative dedicated to the promotion ofAmerican performing arts through international festivalsand engagements. In addition to supporting the export of American artists, MAAF regularly includesinternational artists in its regional touring programs. Our grant supports a new partnership programwith the National Endowment for the Arts entitled Global Cultural Connections that will bring artistsand performing arts groups from Latin America to a broad audience in the United States. Artists willbe sought from countries that have had limited opportunities to present their arts and cultural heritagein the U.S. Our grant is being used to document, translate, and present online the work of our LatinAmerican artist neighbors.

Museum of Arts and Design $150,000New York, New York; www.madmuseum.orgHolly Hotchner, DirectorLowery Stokes Sims, Curator

For nearly half a century, the Museum ofArts & Design (MAD)–formerly theAmerican Craft Museum–has served as one of the country’s premier institutions dedicated to the collection and exhibition ofobjects created in clay, glass, wood, metal, and fiber. In an effort to open the long-closed doors toengagement with historically neglected regions of the world such as Africa, MAD has curated TheGlobal Africa Project, a major collection of over 200 works of contemporary African art, design andcraft produced by more than 200 artists, designers and artisans drawn from the African Diaspora. Thegenres represented inGlobal Africa are decorative arts and design objects including ceramics, basketry,textiles, jewelry, furniture, architecture and fashion; as well as photographs, painting and sculpture.Our grant supports this ambitious project, which represents the largest exhibition at MAD to date,covering three floors of gallery space and the creation of a 260-page full-color exhibition cataloguethat includes profiles of the artists and essays by the curators and contributors. MAD plans to tourGlobal Africa to other cities including Baltimore,Atlanta, Nashville, Tacoma, Seattle, and LosAngeles.

15

National Performance Network $100,000New Orleans, LA; www.npnweb.orgMK Wegmann, President and CEO

The National Performance Network is an artist-centered, field-generated community of presenterssupporting the touring of contemporary performing and visual arts in the context of communityengagement. The 61 member organizations represent every region of the country and support morethan 500 contemporary performing artists each year who tour both here and abroad. However, the historyof U.S. cultural isolation, together with language difficulties and lack of funding has made it difficultfor artists to sustain cultural dialogue with their international counterparts. With our encouragement andsupport, NPN is reviving its Performing Americas Program, an international partnership with thepresenting network LA RED, headquartered in Lima, Peru. In an attempt to create sustainable artsengagement between the U.S. and Latin America, the partner organizations are building on paststructures to create a collaborative working relationship. Both are committed to reciprocal culturalexchange, and are supporting touring residencies with genuine community engagement. Thus far, in2010, Performing Americas has provided support to 13 U.S. artists and companies touring to 37 LatinAmerican venues; and 13 Latin American artists and companies touring to 46 U.S. venues.

New York Foundation for the Arts $75,000New York, New York; www.nyfa.orgMichael Royce, Executive Director

The New York Foundation for the Arts (NYFA) was founded in 1971 with the mission to empowerartists at critical stages in their creative lives. NYFA provides over $1 million annually in cash grants;offers professional development programs that reach over 4,000 artists; makes available a plethora ofonline resources to 1.5 million users each year; and helps 560 artists and organizations raise and manage$3 million annually through NYFA’s Fiscal Sponsorship Program. To expand its reach nationally andinternationally, NYFA is upgrading its technical capabilities and creating a new, best-in-class websitethat will enable it to increase earned income and to double the number of artists and organizationsserved. The new website, Artspire, will house the Fiscal Sponsorship Program; Source, NYFA’sdatabase of grants and professional development opportunities; Current, NYFA’s online magazine; andvarious classifieds that include employment listings. With this upgrade and redesign, NYFA’s databasewill be available globally and will include information about performance and exhibition opportunities,as well as festivals and international funding. Artspire will expand the resources of NYFA’s growingglobal audience, facilitate social networking, and advance international cultural engagement. Our grantsupports this work.

16

New York Theatre Workshop $50,000New York, NY; www.nytw.orgJim Nicola, Artistic Director

For more than 25 years, New York Theatre Workshop (NYTW) has produced plays that expand theboundaries of theatrical form and address critical issues in the contemporary world. NYTW has a longhistory of international collaboration, providing international theater artists with a home in the U.S.where they can work on a production from start to finish with a team of American artists. Members ofNYTW’s community of 460 affiliated theater artists, known as the Usual Suspects, travel with theircolleagues to different countries to experience contemporary theater in a range of cultural contexts.Launched in 2005, the Suspects Abroad program has created opportunities for American theater artiststo engage with international theater artists in Eastern Europe, Japan, and the Middle East. Our grantsupports a collaboration between NYTW and the Freedom Theatre of Jenin, located in the West Bank,including three teaching residencies by the Usual Suspects at The Freedom Theatre, and a ten-daySuspects Abroad trip to Israel and the Palestinian territories.

St. Ann’s Warehouse $75,000Brooklyn, New York; www.stannswarehouse.orgSusan Feldman, Artistic Director

Now in its 30th anniversary year, St. Ann’s Warehouse is an award-winning presenting and producingorganization that fills a vital niche in New York City’s cultural landscape as an artistic home forinternational companies of distinction, the American avant-garde, and talented emerging artists readyto work on a grand scale. In 2001, St. Ann’sWarehouse relocated from a landmark church in BrooklynHeights to DUMBO, converting a former spice-milling factory into a fully outfitted cultural facilitywith rehearsal and performance space that can be adapted for multiple configurations. This versatilityhas a strong appeal for international companies that rarely find this kind of flexible venue in the UnitedStates. While St. Ann’s international collaborations have focused on the U.K. and Eastern Europe, thetheater is now building relationships with artists and companies in other parts of the world. Our grantsupports the Druid Theatre of Galway’s Penelope and the National Theatre of Scotland’s BeautifulBurnout, along with related community engagement programs, as part of St. Anne’s 2010-2011 Season.

17

Grants for Strengthening Cultural Institutions ThroughCapacity Building (Program Discontinued as of 10/10)

Acting Company $30,000New York, New York; www.theactingcompany.orgMargot Harley, Producing Artistic Director

Alliance of Resident Theatres/New York $43,250New York, NY; www.art-newyork.orgVirginia Louloudes, Executive Director

Ballet Hispanico $75,000New York, NY; www.ballethispanico.orgVerdery Roosevelt, Executive Director

Eye on Dance $40,000New York, New York; www.eyeondance.orgCelia Ipiotis, Director

Museum of the City of New York $55,000New York, New York; www.mcny.orgSusan Henshaw Jones, President

18

Protecting Reproductive Rights

Advocates for Youth $50,000Washington, D.C.; www.advocatesforyouth.orgJames Wagoner, President

Advocates for Youth (AFY) was founded in 1980 to improve the health and well being of young peopleby helping them prevent pregnancy and sexually-transmitted diseases. AFY offers technical assistanceto adolescent reproductive health service providers, informs policymakers about the benefits of realisticpublic health policies, and works with media to educate the general public about these issues. Duringthe Bush administration, the federal government channeled hundreds of millions of dollars intoabstinence-only programs, much of it flowing directly to religious and conservative nonprofits. Duringthis period, AFY worked to advance policies that promoted comprehensive, science-based sexualityeducation, focusing its efforts in key states that had the potential to make positive policy changes. Morerecently, Advocates and its colleague organizations have increased their focus at the state and locallevels to ensure that the current administration’s federal funding of $170 million for comprehensivesex education is actually used for this purpose. AFY has helped 25 state-based coalition partners buildtheir capacity to educate policymakers about the importance of sex education, and has provided in-depth assistance to partner organizations in five states. Our grant supports these efforts.

19

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation $100,000Reproductive Freedom ProjectNew York, New York; www.aclu.orgLouise Melling, Director

The Reproductive Freedom Project was created in 1974 by the American Civil Liberties UnionFoundation. The Project provides legal advice, technical assistance, and public education materials tosupport affiliates working to protect access to reproductive health care in their states. Project attorneysalso conduct litigation on reproductive rights issues in federal and state courts. This year, the Projectcontinues to pursue litigation and public education strategies that will strengthen support for abortionrights and sexuality education. As part of this effort, staff members are working with other advocatesand researchers to develop more effective communication and policy frameworks. Project litigation,policy analysis, and advocacy focus on derailing abortion bans and restrictions; ensuring access toinsurance that covers abortion, and protecting the reproductive rights of prisoners, refugees,undocumented immigrants, teenagers, and poor women. Our grant supports these activities.

Center for Reproductive Rights $150,000New York, New York; www.reproductiverights.orgNancy Northup, President

Established in 1992 as the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, the Center for Reproductive Rightsuses litigation, public policy analysis, and a multi-faceted communication program to advance women’saccess to comprehensive reproductive health care. Center attorneys promote pro-choice policies at thefederal level, drawing when appropriate on international human rights standards; track state policydevelopments; and pursue legal challenges to restrictions on reproductive health care at the state andfederal levels. This year, Center attorneys are litigating a dozen cases, including challenges todiscriminatory restrictions on abortion procedures, biased counseling laws, illegal protest activity,harassment of clinic patients and providers, restrictions on minors’ access to reproductive healthservices, and fetal personhood initiatives. In addition, the Center expects to file cases challenging newstate restrictions, including those related to the implementation of federal health care reform. TheCenter is also preparing reports on its investigations of the Hyde Amendment’s impact on women’saccess to abortion, and the availability of reproductive health services in communities served primarilyby Catholic hospitals. Our grant supports this work.

20

Feminist Majority Foundation $90,000Arlington, Virginia; www.feminist.orgEleanor Smeal, President

The Feminist Majority Foundation is a national public interest organization founded in 1987 to promoteequal rights and opportunities for women, including the preservation of reproductive rights. TodayFMF is considered a national leader in on-site clinic defense that combines volunteer recruitment andtraining, a sophisticated communications system, and briefings to law enforcement and the media.Through its National ClinicAccess Project, it has directly challenged the efforts of anti-choice extremiststo shut down abortion clinics throughout the country. FMF monitors over 60 extremist websites andreviews an average of 200 listserv emails weekly to track planned extremist activities, warning clinicsand law enforcement agencies. The organization also maintains comprehensive files on anti-choiceextremists as well as an extensive library of photographic and video footage. Community volunteersaround the country are trained by FMF to provide emergency financial, legal, and security assistanceto clinics; and to document anti-abortion demonstrators’ activities for possible future litigation. Sincethe murder of Dr. George Tiller in May 2009, the demands for the Project’s work have increaseddramatically. Our grant supports the FMF's Clinic Violence Watch Field Research and InvestigativeUnit’s data gathering on possibly criminal anti-choice activities aimed at abortion clinics.

Law Students for Reproductive Justice $35,000Oakland, California; www.lsrj.orgJill Adams, Executive Director

Law Students for Reproductive Justice is a national network of law students and lawyers founded in2003. Dedicated to engaging and training future reproductive rights lawyers and advocates, LSRJorganizes pro-choice law school campus groups, works to expand professional training in reproductiverights law, and links student activists to internships, jobs, and mentors in the field. Recognizing that veryfew American law schools offer reproductive rights law courses on a regular basis, LSRJ beganorganizing student campaigns calling for such courses. As a result of these campaigns, 17 law schoolsincluding Harvard, Georgetown, and Berkeley now offer course work in reproductive rights law. LSRJis currently assisting law students at other universities in advocating for new courses on reproductiverights topics, as well as greater attention to these issues within the general law curriculum. Staffmembers are also preparing and disseminating curricular materials and organizing tools for campusactivists, and arranging training, internships, and networking opportunities for law students and alumni.Our grant supports these activities.

21

MergerWatch $70,000New York, New York; www.mergerwatch.orgLois J. Uttley, Director

The MergerWatch Project was established in 1996 by Family Planning Advocates after a merger witha religious hospital forced a nonsectarian clinic in New York to eliminate its contraceptive services.Since then, the Project—now affiliated with Community Catalyst, a national health advocacyorganization— has assisted dozens of communities facing mergers and closings of nonsectarianhospitals in communities where the primary remaining provider is a religiously restricted institution.With our support, MergerWatch is helping local activists analyze proposed hospital restructurings,organize coalitions, and identify possible accommodations and intervention strategies to safeguardaccess to reproductive health care. Because they cannot provide hands-on support to all who requestit, project staff members are undertaking initiatives to expand the resources available to communitiesfacing problematic mergers, including the preparation of a briefing paper and guide describing advocacystrategies and institutional arrangements that have helped preserve reproductive health services whensecular hospitals have been subsumed by Catholic health care facilities. The staff is also creating anonline forum where those seeking assistance can receive peer coaching from community activists whohave successfully confronted similar situations.

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation $80,000Washington, D.C.; www.naral.orgNancy Keenan, President

The NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation was created in 1977 to advocate for the repeal of lawscriminalizing abortion. In recent years, its mission has expanded to include efforts to guarantee everywoman the right to make personal decisions regarding a full range of reproductive choices. NARALhas been focusing much of its energy on combating anti-choice activities at the state and local levels.As part of this effort, the organization developed a computerized database to track the growing body ofabortion and other reproductive rights legislation and court decisions nationwide. The informationcontained in the legislative tracking database and the legal research is incorporated into an annual reportentitled Who Decides? A State-by-State Review of Abortion and Reproductive Rights.With advancesin reproductive rights at the federal level under the current administration, anti-choice lawmakers areaggressively pursuing their agenda in the states, making the monitoring of state initiatives and legislationall the more crucial. Our grant supports the production and dissemination of the 20th edition of thisstate-by-state report.

22

National Abortion Federation $50,000Washington, D.C.; www.prochoice.orgVicki A. Saporta, President and CEO

The National Abortion Federation (NAF) is a professional membership association of abortion serviceproviders in the U.S. and Canada, serving thousands of physicians, nurses, counselors, and other healthcare professionals at over 400 facilities. NAF develops standards of performance for counseling andmedical services, conducts professional training workshops, and provides information on abortiontechnology to its members and the public. As access to abortion continues to come under severe attack,NAF has taken a more vocal role in presenting the pro-choice argument in public policy debates. NAF’sparticular strength lies in its ability to offer the medical, provider, and patient perspectives on legislativeand regulatory assaults on abortion access. Recently NAF was successful in opening up new avenuesof communication with the White House and the Executive branch. However, some federal and statelegislators have continued their attempts to enact a range of legislation designed to place more obstaclesin the way of women seeking abortions. Our grant supports NAF’s ongoing federal and state publicpolicy work on a broad range of issues relating to women’s access to quality reproductive health careand abortion.

National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association $100,000Washington, D.C.; www.nfprha.orgClare Coleman, President and CEO

Founded 40 years ago, NFPRHA is a membership organization representing more than 300 publiclyfunded family planning service providers—nurses, nurse practitioners, administrators, and other keyhealth care professionals—operating 3,700 clinics in 48 states. Funded by the federal government underTitle X of the Public Health ServicesAct, these clinics are the primary source of reproductive health carefor millions of low-income women, providing contraception, breast and cervical cancer screening,treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, and AIDS testing and counseling. NFPRHA educatespolicymakers and the general public about reproductive health issues through its extensive conveningsand publications, including an annual review of federal legislative and regulatory action on reproductivehealth. Our grant was instrumental to NFPRHA’s advocacy, outreach, and education efforts as it workedin a changing political landscape to maintain and expand comprehensive family planning services forthe nation’s low-income women. Specifically, the grant is being used to undertake research and policyanalysis to ensure critical improvements to the configuration of both Medicaid and Title X in theaftermath of health care reform, and to disseminate this information to the field.

23

National Institute for Reproductive Health $100,000New York, New York; www.nirhealth.orgCatherine Steck, Board Chair

The National Institute for Reproductive Health is the research and education arm of New York State’sNARAL affiliate. Over the past three years, through its Urban Initiative for Reproductive and MaternalHealth, the Institute has been identifying successful approaches to reproductive health issues, includingsexuality education, in cities across the country. Unfortunately, despite overwhelming public supportfor sex education and the recent launch of promising new curricula in a few schools, NewYork City lagsbehind many urban school districts in ensuring that this education is available to all public schoolstudents. This year, the Institute hopes to take advantage of opportunities offered by a new federalfunding initiative, and lessons learned from other cities, to expand the implementation of comprehensivesexuality education in NewYork. With our support, project staff members are investigating the content,availability, and cost of the City’s sex education programs, and producing a report on the findings. Theyare convening policymakers, advocates, and educators to discuss expansion strategies, and helping theDepartment of Education apply for new federal funding to support this expansion.

National Partnership For Women & Families $90,000Washington, DC; www.nationalpartnership.orgDebra Ness, President

For nearly 40 years, the National Partnership for Women and Families has advocated for equalopportunity and civil rights important to low-income women and families, with particular attention toemployment and health care. The federal health care reform law enacted this year includes provisionsthat have the potential to expand access to family planning services, but it also includes cumbersomerestrictions on abortion coverage by plans offered through the new insurance exchanges. Early in thegrant period, the Partnership played a key role in advising public officials about the likely consequencesof proposed restrictions, less harmful alternatives, and various strategies to strengthen family planningservices and maximize flexibility for states and insurers to offer abortion coverage. Since the law’senactment, Partnership staff members have been preparing education and advocacy materials andadvising policymakers about regulatory and administrative options to accomplish these goals, withparticular attention to ensuring access to care for low income women. In addition, they continue toexamine the records of potential federal judicial and agency appointees and publicize the importanceof these appointments to the fate of women’s reproductive health and rights.

24

National Women's Law Center $100,000Washington, D.C.; www.nwlc.orgMarcia D. Greenberger, Co-President

The NationalWomen's Law Center (NWLC) is an independent organization whose litigation, research,public education, and advocacy aim to ensure that federal and state policies address the rights and needsof women, with an emphasis on low-income women. The Center is a valued source of legal expertisein many policy areas of central concern to women, including income support, employment, education,and child care. In recent years, as abortion rights have continued to come under attack in the courts andin Congress, the Center has become a key player in the reproductive rights debate. In this capacity,Center attorneys analyze proposed legislation, brief legislators and their staffs on legal aspects ofreproductive health and rights issues, and provide legal analysis and assistance to other pro-choicegroups as well as the press. The Center is a go-to resource for policy makers in the Administration andon the Hill, as well as for the media; Center analyses carry considerable weight with decision makersaround the country. Our grant supports NWLC’s Reproductive Rights and Health Program, whichadvocates at the federal and state levels for progressive action on reproductive health and rights andplays a leadership role in promoting pro-choice judicial nominations.

New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation $70,000Reproductive Rights ProjectNew York, New York; www.nyclu.orgDonna Lieberman, Executive Director

New York State has long been a leader among states in ensuring its residents access to reproductivehealth care. However, New Yorkers are still affected by federal policies and Supreme Court decisionsthat threaten reproductive freedom, particularly for teenagers, poor women, and those in need of second-trimester procedures. To address these challenges, the New York Civil Liberties Union established aReproductive Rights Project. The Project conducts litigation, public education, and legal analyses ofNew York court decisions, administrative policies, and legislative proposals. This year, in addition toits ongoing efforts to protect minors’ rights to confidential care and expand access to comprehensivesexuality education and later term abortions, the Project is investigating and advocating for state policyand administrative options to minimize the negative impact of federal health care reform on insurancecoverage for abortion in New York. The Project is also conducting research and educational activitiesregarding ways to strengthen abortion rights in New York and safeguard them against potential futurerisks to Roe at the federal level. Our grant supports this work.

25

Planned Parenthood Federation of America $150,000New York, New York; www.ppfa.orgCecile Richards, President

From its inception, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) has advocated in the courts,corridors of government, and media to enable women at all income levels to obtain family planningservices. PPFA’s Public Policy Litigation and Law (PPL&L) team is comprised of attorneys who litigateon behalf of, and provide legal advice to, Planned Parenthood affiliates across the country as well asother pro-choice entities. Started as a “Litigation Project” during the early years of the Reaganadministration, PPL&L has since evolved to become a widely respected source of legal counsel andadvocacy – not just within the Planned Parenthood community, but for the larger field of reproductiverights advocacy, including PPFAaffiliates in the states and public policy staff inWashington, D.C.Withhealth care reform enacted, PPL&L has been working with the Department of Health and HumanServices on implementation issues, including the development of federal guidelines for compliancewith abortion coverage restrictions. Our grant supports PPL&L in its federal and state advocacy andlitigation work.

Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S. $60,000New York, New York; www.siecus.orgMonica Rodriguez, President and CEO

The Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS) is one of the primary sexualityeducation information resources in the country, with a 40-year history of improving sexuality educationcurricula while playing an increasingly important role in shaping public policy. Over the past decade,legislators appropriated federal and state funding for abstinence-only sex education programs that havebeen shown to be at best, ineffective, and at worst, the source of medically inaccurate information.SIECUS takes the position that abstinence should be taught, but that it must be part of a comprehensiveand medically accurate sexuality education program, based on research showing that a comprehensiveapproach is the most effective way to help young people behave responsibly.With a new administrationthat supports science and public health, the prospects for lasting change in the national approach tosexuality education are brighter than they have been in years. SIECUS has worked with the Obamaadministration and Congress to bring about an end to federal support for abstinence-only programs andto create the first federal funding stream for comprehensive sexuality education. Our grant supports thepublic policy work of SIECUS to establish strong systems nationwide that support comprehensivesexuality education.

26

Improving the Performance of PublicInstitutions in New York

Alliance for Quality Education $55,000Albany, New York; www.aqeny.orgWilliam Easton, Executive Director

The Alliance for Quality Education was founded in 2000 to mobilize public support for a statewidesolution to the inadequate state funding of public schools highlighted in the Campaign for Fiscal Equitylawsuit. Today, AQE is a coalition of 200 organizations of parents, advocates, educators, businessleaders, labor, religious congregations, and other community groups. At the end of 2006, the Court ofAppeals issued its final CFE decision mandating greater aid to New York City. The Governor andLegislature then increased school aid to all school districts for the 2007-08 school year by $1.76 billion,and promised to raise the annual increase to $7 billion statewide within four years. However, the state’smassive fiscal woes resulted in postponement of the promised CFE increases for the past two years. A$1.1 billion cut in education spending was averted only through the use of federal stimulus funds.Additional federal funds are anticipated this year for use in schools considered in need of “turnaround”because their students’ test scores place them in the bottom 10% of schools in the state. With oursupport, AQE is advocating for the preservation of existing education funding commitments andadvising policymakers about oversight needed to ensure that these funds, and the new federal funds forfailing schools, are spent wisely. Through its educational and organizing activities, AQE is publicizingthe consequences of further cuts to needy school districts, ways to reduce education spending withoutcompromising program quality, and the importance of investing in research-based strategies most likelyto improve student outcomes.

27

Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development $50,000New York, New York; www.anhd.orgBenjamin Dulchin, Executive Director

TheAssociation for Neighborhood & Housing Development (ANHD) is a coalition of 98 community-based housing organizations working in neighborhoods throughout NewYork City. Since its foundingin 1977, ANHD has monitored City housing policies and programs affecting the management anddisposition of tax delinquent properties, federally subsidized projects, and other sources of affordablehousing. Despite significant investments by the Koch and Bloomberg Administrations, the shortage ofhousing for low- and moderate-income NewYorkers continues to grow as many older units fall victimto deterioration or gentrification. In addition, most of the units created under thisAdministration’s NewHousing Marketplace programs are not required to remain affordable for more than 30 years. Over thepast two years, ANHD has conducted research on financing and regulatory mechanisms that couldensure long-term affordability for future subsidized housing projects. The analyses andrecommendations that emerged from this work informed the emphasis on long-term affordability in the2010 revision of the Mayor’s New Housing Marketplace Plan. During the current grant period,ANHDis publicizing its findings and recommendations, conducting additional research, and advocating withpublic officials to ensure that this commitment is translated into viable policies and program guidelines.

Center for an Urban Future $40,000New York, New York; www.nycfuture.orgJonathan Bowles, Executive Director

Established in 1976, The Center for an Urban Future is an independent policy research institute focusedon economic development challenges and opportunities facing New York City. After eight years ofdiminishing federal funding for workforce development, theAmerican Recovery and ReinvestmentActof 2009 included nearly $4 billion for employment and training programs. New York City is expectedto receive approximately $70 million of these funds, in addition to its annualWorkforce InvestmentActallocation. Drawing on interviews with employment services providers, clients, and employers, andanalyses of program data, the Center is examining how the City is using these funds, and what can belearned about program practices and impacts, systemic reforms, and inter-agency coordination to guidefuture policymaking, expenditures, and program design. Center staff will publish a report, brief cityofficials and journalists on their findings, and work with other advocates, business, and communityleaders to advance their recommendations. Our grant supports this work.

28

Child Care & Early Education Fund $55,000New York, New YorkPatti Lieberman, Chair

Fueled by research documenting the significance of early education to later school success, and by theburgeoning numbers of working mothers with young children, jurisdictions all over the countryincluding New York State and City have expanded and enhanced their child care and pre-schoolprograms. Ten years ago, a group of NewYork City funders and government representatives establisheda Child Care and Early Education Fund, administered by UnitedWay of NewYork City. To date, it hasprovided over $4 million to support program development, policy analysis, and advocacy initiativesaimed at expanding access to care and improving program quality. In partnership with three Cityagencies, the Fund established an Early Childhood Professional Development Institute at the CityUniversity of New York and supported the creation and testing of a unified assessment system for allcity-funded early care and education providers. With our support, the Fund is helping to fund the fieldtest of a similar state quality rating and professional development system known as Quality Stars NY.Fund grants are also being used to promote large-scale implementation of Quality Stars and otherelements of a robust quality infrastructure for early childhood education in New York.

Children’s Rights $100,000New York, New York; www.childrensrights.orgMarcia Robinson Lowry, Executive Director

Following the 1998 settlement of itsMarisol litigation, which led to some notable improvements in theCity’s child welfare operations, Children’s Rights (CR) established a policy research program to helpaddress remaining deficiencies. Its 2009 report, The Long Road Home documented many of the failingsof the city’s child welfare and family court systems that leave thousands of children in governmentcustody for years of their lives, and offered recommendations for improvements. In response, theAdministration for Children’s Services announced a “One Year to Family” initiative aimed atstrengthening the child welfare workforce and reducing the length of time children spend in foster careand the number who leave it without a relationship with a caring adult. During the grant period, CR isworking with City and State officials and children’s advocates to promote the report’s recommendationsand monitor the implementation and impact of reform efforts. Based on examination of governmentdata, CR will issue progress reports on how well all the responsible agencies are expediting familyreunifications and adoptions for children in care.

29

Citizens Union Foundation $60,000New York, New York; www.citizensunion.orgDick Dadey, Executive Director

In 1990, Citizens Union Foundation (CUF), a non-partisan research and education organization, begana City Council monitoring project to foster public understanding of Council deliberations and members'performance. In 1999, CUF created the Gotham Gazette website, featuring original articles on policyissues, a database of City laws and Council member voting records, maps and information on eachCouncil district, and a daily digest of news stories about City government. Recognizing the role ofstate government in deciding many issues of direct concern to City residents, two years ago GothamGazette launched an “Eye on Albany” e-newsletter and website section covering State policy issuesand government actions. With our continued support, Project staff is reporting on the activities of theLegislature and Executive branch and the 2010 election campaigns, with particular attention to theirimplications for New York City. In addition, CUF is expanding its promotion activities in order tobring its Albany coverage to the attention of a wider audience.

Commission on the Public’s Health System $35,000New York, New York; www.cphsnyc.orgJudy Wessler, Director

The Commission on the Public’s Health System was established in 1991 to represent the interests ofpatients who use publicly funded health services. NewYork State allocates nearly $850 million throughits Indigent Care Pool to support hospitals in caring for patients who do not fully pay their bills.However, because the current allocation method relies primarily on hospitals’ estimates of their losses,the subsidies each hospital receives bear little relation to the amount of unreimbursed care it provides.Three years ago, a Department of Health taskforce recommended that subsidies from the Indigent CarePool be based on hospitals’ documented costs of serving these patients. The new system was initiallyapplied to ten percent of the Pool’s allocations, with the expectation that it would be fully phased in thisyear, but hospital lobbying derailed those plans. To inform further consideration of indigent care reformoptions, the Commission is now examining hospitals’ actual charity care costs, the subsidies they havereceived, and their compliance with a 2007 State law requiring all hospitals to establish and publicizepolicies enabling low-income uninsured people to obtain care. Drawing on the research findings, theCommission will prepare a report and organize coalition advocacy efforts on behalf of reforms in statefunding and oversight of hospitals to ensure that needy NewYorkers receive essential medical care. Ourgrant supports this work.

30

Common Cause Education Fund $55,000New York, New York; www.commoncause.orgSusan Lerner, Executive Director

The Common Cause Education Fund is the education arm of Common Cause, a national citizens’ lobbythat works to improve federal and state government operations. The $787 billion American Recoveryand ReinvestmentAct (ARRA) is expected to infuse nearly $30 billion into state and local governmentprograms in NewYork, including over $1 billion for TemporaryAssistance to Needy Families (TANF).Spurred by ARRA reporting requirements, as well as growing public demand for transparency andevidence of the impact of public spending, Governor Paterson established a Stimulus Oversight Paneland an Office of Taxpayer Accountability. Taking advantage of the opportunities presented by thesedevelopments, Common Cause New York is convening a Government Performance Roundtable andpreparing a policy paper recommending outcome measures for ARRA-funded programs. The paperwill also discuss how these measures could be utilized to improve the administration of the state’s TANFprogram, which distributes some $390 million in monthly benefits to hundreds of thousands of needyNew Yorkers. Our grant supports this work.

Community Service Society $40,000New York, New York; www.cssny.orgDavid Jones, President

The Community Service Society (CSS) serves thousands of needy New Yorkers and conducts policyresearch and advocacy to promote systemic changes aimed at strengthening the economic security oflow-income NewYorkers. Its 2005 report,Out of School, Out of Work, Out of Luck?, revealed that morethan 150,000 16-24 year olds are neither attending school nor working. Nearly 20% of these youngpeople are estimated to be eligible for public assistance as heads of households, more than the numberserved by any other City program for disconnected youth. In addition, New York City’s HumanResources Administration (HRA) administers millions of dollars of workforce development fundingthat supports services for teens and young adults. Yet preliminary research suggests that HRA oftenwrongfully discourages young people from applying for assistance, or denies them benefits andeducation and training opportunities for which they are eligible. With our support, CSS is conductingmore extensive research about the experiences of these young people, ways to reconnect them toeducation and employment, and relevant laws, HRApolicies, and programs. CSS will publish a reporton its findings and advocate for policy and practice reforms that would enable more needy youth toreceive the benefits and services most likely to set them on a path toward self-sufficiency.

31

Donors’ Education Collaborative $120,000New York, New York; www.nycommunitytrust.org Over 2 yearsSusan Cahn, Administrative Consultant

In 1994, several local and national foundations formed the Donors’Education Collaborative to supportsustained advocacy, organizing, policy analysis, and public education aimed at effecting systemic changein NewYork City’s public schools. Since then, DECmembers have renewed their commitments severaltimes and allocated over $12 million in grants to 18 project teams. DEC grantees have been veryeffective in mobilizing support for increases in state and city school aid, with particular emphasis onimproving services to the neediest students, greater public participation in determining spendingpriorities, and stronger oversight of school district actions. Building on these successes, DEC is nowhelping NewYork’s education advocates use their influence to promote reforms that are most likely toimprove teaching in City schools and prepare students to succeed in college and careers. Based ondiscussions with leading researchers about teaching and school management strategies that are mosteffective in promoting college readiness, DEC members designed a Request for Proposals. DEC thenawarded grants for advocacy and education activities aimed at broadening awareness of the researchfindings and translating this knowledge into policies that embody the most promising reform strategies.Our grant supports this work.

Empire Justice Center $70,000Albany, New York; www.empirejustice.orgAnne Erickson, President & CEO

As the Great Recession takes its toll on state and county budgets, and rising numbers of the unemployedseek public assistance, many eligible applicants are not receiving critical help in a timely fashion. TheEmpire Justice Center was created in 2005 through the merger of the Greater Upstate Law Project, a30-year old support center for legal services programs across New York State, and the Public InterestLaw Office of Rochester. Empire Justice conducts advocacy and class action litigation and provideslegal resources to other advocates to defend the rights of needy NewYorkers and ensure that they receiveall benefits to which they are entitled. With our support, Center attorneys are educating state and localofficials and advocates about the laws and regulations governing eligibility for benefits and workrequirements -- particularly for immigrants and those with disabilities. They are advising State Officeof Temporary and Disability Assistance attorneys, pursuing litigation, and monitoring theimplementation of negotiated settlements, with the aim of protecting and enhancing access to publicassistance, child care, and other benefits for low-income New Yorkers.

32

Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies $45,000New York, New York; www.fpwa.orgFatima Goldman, Executive Director/CEO

Founded in 1922, the Federation of Protestant WelfareAgencies (FPWA) currently provides resources,advocacy services, and management assistance to nearly 300 member agencies in New York City thatserve over 1.5 million people each year. Last year, FPWA published The State of New York’s SocialSafety Net for Hard Times documenting numerous administrative barriers that prevent poor andunemployed NewYorkers from receiving the public assistance to which they are entitled. Recognizingthe vital role of public benefits, particularly at a time of high unemployment and cutbacks in governmentand nonprofit services for the poor, FPWA is now undertaking anAccess toAssistance Campaign. Withour support, project staff members are conducting additional research, advocacy, and education activitiesto mobilize support for policy and procedural reforms aimed at eliminating onerous applicationrequirements and erroneous benefit denials, and expanding access to education and training for low-income New Yorkers.

Long Term Care Community Coalition $50,000New York, New York; www.ltccc.orgRichard Mollot, Executive Director

The Long Term Care Community Coalition was established in 1982 and is currently comprised of 26consumer, professional, and civic organizations. The Coalition works to protect the rights of residentsof long term care facilities, and to improve the quality of care they receive. As part of the state’s currentrestructuring of long-term care, it plans to eliminate public funding for 6,000 nursing home slots andredirect those funds to support assisted living programs in adult homes. These facilities, which nowhouse some 31,000 elderly, disabled, mentally ill, and other people, have been the subject of significantpress attention and consumer concern over the past decade. Partly as a result of this attention, licensurerequirements were extended so that all assisted living programs and adult homes are now regulated andinspected by the Department of Health (DOH). The Coalition is examining the quality of life in thesehomes, consumer concerns, and the extent to which those concerns are reflected in DOH’s inspectionsurveys and addressed by its enforcement actions. Staff will publish a report on their findings andadvise state officials about changes needed in state laws and regulations--or in their interpretation andimplementation—to ensure adequate protections and care for all adult home residents. Our grantsupports this work.

33

Make the Road New York $60,000Brooklyn, New York; www.maketheroad.orgAndrew Friedman, Co-Director

Make the Road NewYork is a membership organization of nearly 8,000 low-income and immigrant NewYorkers dedicated to enforcing their legal rights, promoting economic opportunity, and organizing forpolicy change. There are over one million rent-stabilized and 40,000 rent-controlled apartments inNew York City. Their tenants have median household incomes of $36,000 and $24,000 respectively,and pay about a third of their income for rent. Advocates estimate that tens of thousands of these tenantsare paying illegally high rents due to inadequate oversight by the State Division of Housing andCommunity Renewal (DHCR). In order to systematically document this problem, MRNY is workingwith tenants of 150 randomly sampled units to obtain detailed rent histories from DHCR and comparethe legal regulated rent for their apartments with the rent charged. The researchers will prepare a reporton the findings and on their analyses of DHCR’s current data management system and enforcementprocedures. They will brief state policymakers about the impact of illegal rent overcharges on low-income NewYorkers and advocate for administrative reforms that would strengthen state oversight andenforcement of rent regulations. Our grant supports this work.

Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance $100,000New York, New York; www.waterfrontalliance.org Over 2 yearsRoland Lewis, President and CEO

The Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance (MWA), a coalition of nearly 400 organizations, was founded in2000 as a project of the Municipal Art Society, and became an independent organization in 2007. Inrecent years, New Yorkers have become increasingly aware of the value of our once neglectedwaterfront. Communities are reclaiming abandoned shorelines for public use, and dozens of projectsare underway to develop waterfront properties for commercial, residential and recreational purposes.At the same time, the Port of New York and New Jersey remains the largest port complex on the eastcoast, generating more than $18 billion per year in economic activity. Yet all too often, plans to build,conduct business, or play on the waterfront are stymied by the complexity of the regulations and permitprocedures promulgated by some 17 local, state, and federal agencies with jurisdiction over its use.Last year, with our support, MWA conducted extensive research and prepared a Users’ Guide toWaterfront Permitting and a policy paper examining NewYork’s permitting systems and recommendingreforms to address the problems identified. MWA is using our current grant to disseminate its findingsand work with advocates, agency officials, and policymakers to advance its recommendations.

34

National Center for Law and Economic Justice $90,000New York, New York; www.nclej.orgHenry Freedman, Executive Director

The National Center for Law and Economic Justice was established in 1965 as a legal services supportcenter to ensure that needyAmericans receive adequate public assistance benefits. Following the 1996abolition of theAid to Families with Dependent Children entitlement and transfer of most responsibilityfor welfare programs to the states, the Center embarked upon Project Fair Play NewYork to safeguardthe rights of poor New Yorkers facing benefit cuts, inappropriate work placements, and abusiveadministrative procedures. In recent years, the Project expanded its focus to advocate for the supportslow-income workers, those transitioning from welfare to work, and young people exiting foster careneed in order to climb out of poverty. Following a number of successful New York City cases, theCenter responded to requests from other advocates to take on similar litigation in counties around thestate. With our support, Project staff members are pursuing litigation, monitoring the implementationof court orders and settlement agreements, and advising policymakers about administrative reformsneeded to comply with these agreements and with federal and state law.

National Employment Law Project $50,000New York, New York; www.nelp.orgChristine Owens, Executive Director

In 2005, The National Employment Law Project (NELP) co-founded the New York UnemploymentInsurance Coalition, and, the following year, produced a report and blueprint for reform of the state’sUnemployment Insurance system. Since then, Project staff members have been assisting leaders at theState Department of Labor (DOL) in crafting strategies to address the problems identified in their report.A number of important reforms have been instituted, including changes affecting limited Englishspeakers, unemployed workers who had been paid off the books, and those wishing to participate intraining programs; and in the burden of proof criteria for all unemployment insurance claims, enablingmore claimants to receive benefits. Nevertheless, thousands of eligible New Yorkers are still notreceiving benefits, and the benefit level—unchanged since 1998—replaces only 28% of the averageworker’s paycheck, placing NewYork 48th among states on this measure. With our support, NELP andits partners are monitoring the implementation of recent policy reforms, and advising agency officialson additional changes and staff training needed to fully institutionalize them. They are also educatingpolicymakers and the public about the consequences of New York’s inadequate UI financing system,and options to strengthen it.

35

Natural Resources Defense Council $50,000New York, New York; www.nrdc.orgFrances Beinecke, President

Since 1981, the Urban Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council has focused much of itswork on developing sustainable solid waste management policies for NewYork City. In 1989, the CityCouncil passed legislation establishing a citywide recycling program. In the program’s first decade theportion of residential waste that was recycled grew from one to nearly 20%, before dipping to its currentlevel of 17%. Recently, City policymakers, with research and assistance from NRDC, enacted 11 newlaws expanding the program, and State lawmakers passed legislation prohibiting the disposal ofelectronic products in landfills and requiring manufacturers who sell these products in New York toestablish an e-waste collection and recycling system. During the grant period, project staff membersare advising City and State officials on the implementation of these policies, and the development of asolid waste component for the revision of the City’s PlaNYC. They are advocating for additionalreforms that would make waste management operations more cost-effective and reduce the amount ofgarbage that ends up in landfills. NRDC is also preparing a report on the implementation of Cityprocurement regulations favoring environmentally friendly products, and possible improvements.

New Partners for Community Revitalization $40,000New York, New York; www.npcr.netJody Kass, Director

New Partners for Community Revitalization emerged from the deliberations that shaped New YorkState’s 2003 Brownfield Cleanup legislation. Its mission is to ensure that the law is implemented asenvisioned to promote the revitalization of low- and moderate-income communities surrounding urbanBrownfield sites. A critical component of the law is the Brownfield OpportunityArea (BOA) Program,a State grant program to support community-led planning for the cleanup and redevelopment ofneighborhoods with multiple polluted sites. To date, some 100 communities have received nearly $25million for planning and other pre-development activities. During the grant period, NPCR staffmembers are investigating the kinds of support that are most critical to the implementation of theseplans. They are advocating that relevant City and State funding streams and the City’s revised PlaNYCshould accord “preference and priority” to development projects that are consistent with BOA-supportedplans. In addition, NPCR is advising state officials about reforms needed to expedite the use of BOAfunds, ensure that tax credits are targeted appropriately, and encourage private developers to cooperatewith local community planners.

36

The Osborne Association $40,000New York, New York; www.osborneny.orgElizabeth Gaynes, Executive Director

Founded in 1931, The Osborne Association today offers a wide range of services to help prisoners andformer prisoners overcome addiction, strengthen their skills, secure employment, and maintain familyrelationships. On any given day, there are more than 100,000 children with a parent in a NewYork Stateprison or local jail. To focus attention on the needs of these children and the impact of criminal justicesystem practices on their wellbeing, in 2006 Osborne launched a NewYork Initiative for Children withIncarcerated Parents, bringing together public officials, advocates, and service providers from criminaljustice, child welfare, health, education, and family service agencies. Focusing initially on improvingthe treatment of children when a parent is arrested and enhancing family communication and visitationwhen a parent is incarcerated, the Initiative has conducted research and developed model policies,protocols, and educational materials for City and State agencies. With our support, the Initiative iscontinuing this work on arrest and visitation issues, and promoting reforms in sentencing and prisonplacement that will better support ongoing family relationships.

Pratt Center for Community Development $40,000Brooklyn, New York; prattcenter.netAdam Friedman, Director

Created in 1963, the Pratt Center for Community Development supports community organizations incombating poverty through locally planned development, and promotes systemic reforms in city landuse policies. This year, the City Charter Revision Commission requested information and advice fromthe Center regarding land use issues as it considered what ballot proposals would be offered to votersin November and which issues would be studied further for possible future action. In addition, the CityComptroller asked the Center to provide research support for his task force on community benefitagreements—side agreements negotiated between developers, community groups and/or city officialsto provide jobs, housing, parks, and other benefits to community residents as part of a proposeddevelopment project. With our support, the Center has been producing issue briefs and policyrecommendations on how to create a meaningful land use planning framework and procedures thatmeet the needs of developers and community residents. Project staff members are informing civic andcommunity groups, labor unions, and elected officials about land use issues and policy options, andengaging them in advocating for reforms that strengthen public involvement in the planning process.

37

Regional Plan Association $50,000New York, New York; www.rpa.orgRobert D. Yaro, President

In recent years, most of the major building projects in NewYork City have been initiated and designedby private developers. Even though these projects will have significant impacts on the City’s physicalappearance, environment, infrastructure, economy, and quality of life, municipal government has notdelineated clear planning standards and oversight mechanisms to ensure that each new developmentadvances the broad goals of the City’s sustainability plan, PlaNYC, or of individual communities andeconomic sectors. To guide policymakers in formulating such standards, the Regional PlanAssociation(RPA), the nation’s oldest metropolitan planning organization, is examining several recent developmentprojects, and preparing a report highlighting the key components of the most successful ones, and theimplications for policy reform and for the development of particular sites. RPA staff will brief city andstate officials on their findings and advise them on changes that could be made to plans for such sitesas Coney Island, Aqueduct, Sunnyside Yards, and the far West Side of Manhattan to ensure that thesedevelopments will become sustainable assets to their communities and the city for generations to come.Our grant supports this work.

Urban Homesteading Assistance Board $50,000New York, New York; www.uhab.orgAndrew Reicher, Executive Director

The Urban Homesteading Assistance Board (UHAB) was created in 1973 to assist in the developmentand administration of low-income housing cooperatives in neighborhoods throughout New York City.To inform its work with tenant groups and its policy advocacy, UHAB maintains databases on varioustypes of affordable housing. One tracks some 100 federally- and state-subsidized properties at risk ofenforcement action and foreclosure due to failing inspection scores. A second tracks buildingscontaining nearly 70,000 rent-regulated and subsidized units purchased by “predatory equity” investorsintending to deregulate the property and replace low- and moderate-income tenants with those who canpay the much higher rents needed to support the outsized debt on the property. Over the past few years,UHAB has persuaded City, State, and federal officials to take action to protect several buildings fromphysical decline, foreclosure, or unrestricted sale to predatory equity developers. With our support,UHAB staff is working with government officials to formulate policies and programs thatinstitutionalize these and other strategies for preserving over-leveraged affordable housing.

38

Grants and Membership Dues for Servicesto the Philanthropic Field

Foundation Center $ 8,000Funders Network on Population, Reproductive Health and Rights $ 2,875Grantmakers for Children, Youth & Families $ 1,000Grantmakers in the Arts $ 6,000Nonprofit Coordinating Committee $ 3,000Philanthropy New York $ 6,650

Discretionary Grants

Advocates for Youth $ 5,000Dancing Classrooms $ 5,000Friends of High School for Environmental Studies $ 1,000The Marie Walsh Sharpe Art Foundation $30,000New York Studio School of Drawing, Painting & Sculpture $10,000Philanthropy Roundtable $ 5,000Symphony Space $10,000

39

Foundation-Supported Publications – 2010

The following publications released over the past year were supported in whole or in part bygrants from the Foundation. Please contact the sponsoring organization about the availabilityof specific publications.

Alliance for Quality Education and Public Advocate Bill de BlasioBreaking Down Barriers: An Evaluation of Parent Engagement in School Closures andCo-Locations, 2010.

Americans for the ArtsThe Role of the Arts in Strengthening and Inspiring the 21st Century Global Community, 2010.

Association for Neighborhood and Housing DevelopmentA Permanent Problem Requires a Permanent Solution: New York City’s Next AffordableHousing Expiring-Use Crisis and the Need for Permanent Affordability, 2010.

Center for Children’s InitiativesStrengthening the Pre-K Investment: Next Steps to a Winning Beginning for Every Childin New York State, 2010.

40

Center for Reproductive RightsWhose Choice? How the Hyde Amendment Harms Poor Women, 2010.

Center for New York City AffairsManaging by the Numbers: Empowerment and Accountability in New York City’s Schools, byClara Hemphill and Kim Nauer, 2010.

Citizens Union FoundationEye on Albany, Gotham Gazette, http://www.gothamgazette.com/albany/, weekly, 2010.

Dance/USADance America: An International Strategy for American Dance, by Carolelinda Dickey andAndrea Snyder, 2010.

Film ForumKaren Cooper Carte Blanche: 40 Years of Documentary Premieres at Film Forum, 2010.

Empire Justice CenterMending the Patchwork: A report examining county-by-county inequities in child care subsidyadministration in New York State, by Saima Akhtar and Susan Antos, 2010.

Law Students for Reproductive JusticeGuide to Internships and Fellowships in Reproductive Rights Law and Justice, 6th edition, 2010.Reproductive Rights Law & Justice Course Survey 2003-2010, 2010.

Foundation-Supported Publications—2010 (Continued)

41

Make the Road New York and The New York Immigration CoalitionStill Lost In Translation: City Agencies’Compliance with Local Law 73 and ExecutiveOrder 120, 2010.

Museum of Arts and DesignThe Global Africa Project, by Lowery Stokes Sims and Leslie King-Hammond, 2010.

NARAL Pro-Choice America FoundationWho Decides? The Status of Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States, 19th edition, 2010.

National Employment Law ProjectAlbany’s Chance: Restoring the Solvency and Stability of the UnemploymentInsurance Trust Fund, 2010.Working Without Laws: A Survey of Employment and Labor Law Violations in New York City,by Annette Bernhardt, Diana Polson and James DeFilippis, 2010.

National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association2010 Federal Legislative and Regulatory Analysis on Reproductive Health, 2010.Family Planning Matters, 2010.

National Partnership for Women & FamiliesThe New Political Landscape for Reproductive Health: Federal Legislative andRegulatory Action in 2009, 2010.Women’s Health Policy Report, 2010.

Foundation-Supported Publications—2010 (Continued)

42

National Women’s Law CenterDon’t Take “No” for an Answer, 2010.Partners in Access, 2010.

New Partners for Community RevitalizationSmart Growth Outlook 2011: Challenges and Opportunities in Brownfields, Area-WidePlanning & Implementation, 2011.

Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S.The SIECUS State Profiles, 2010.

Teachers College, Columbia UniversityHealthier Students are Better Learners: A missing link in school reforms to closethe achievement gap, by C.E. Basch, 2010.

Foundation-Supported Publications—2010 (Continued)

43

FinancialInformation

44

To the Board of Directors ofRobert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.

We have audited the statement of financial position of Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc. (the “Foundation”) as of October 31,2010, and the related statements of activities and cash flows and functional expenses for the year then ended. These financial state-ments are the responsibility of the Foundation’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statementsbased on our audit. The prior-year summarized comparative information has been derived from the Foundation's October 31, 2009financial statements and, in our report dated May 12, 2010, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standardsrequire that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of ma-terial misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financialstatements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, aswell as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opin-ion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Robert Ster-ling Clark Foundation, Inc. as of October 31, 2010, and the changes in its net assets and its cash flows for the year then ended inconformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

As discussed in Notes 7 and 10 to the financial statements, certain errors resulting in an understatement of unreported postretire-ment benefits obligation as of October 31, 2009, were discovered by management of the Foundation during the current year. Ac-cordingly, the 2009 financial statements have been restated and an adjustment has been made to unrestricted net assets as ofNovember 1, 2008 to correct the error.

Buchbinder Tunick & Company LLPJune 15, 2011

Independent Auditor’s Report

45

October 31, 2010 and 200920090000

20100000 (Restated)00ASSETS

Assets:Cash and cash equivalents $ 000003,166,019 $ 000002,078,550Investments 87,032,104 82,638,765Accrued dividends and interest receivable 24,000 27,000Prepaid expenses and other assets 88,361 111,121

90,310,484 84,855,436Property and equipment:

Cooperative (office space) 1,007,766 1,007,766Furniture, fixtures and equipment 146,660 141,769Less: accumulated depreciation (483,457) (440,267)Net property and equipment 670,969 709,268Total assets $ 000090,981,453 $ 000085,564,704

LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS

Liabilities:Accrued expenses and other liabilities $0000000308,200 $0000000399,700Postretirement benefits obligation 1,344,000 1,142,000Grants payable 1,155,000 790,000Total liabilities 2,807,200 2,331,700

Unrestricted net assets:Income 2,412,261 755,936Principal 85,761,992 82,477,068

Total net assets 88,174,253 83,233,004Total liabilities and net assets $ 000090,981,453 $ 000085,564,704

See notes to financial statements.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Statements of Financial Position

46

For the years ended October 31, 2010 and 200920090000

20100000 (Restated)00Income000(Loss)000 Principal 00 Total000 Total000

Revenue:Net realized and unrealized gainson investments $00000000000- $ 0010,548,142 $ 0010,548,142 $ 0005,502,050

Interest and dividends 980,253 - 980,253 1,152,495Rental income 46,065 - 46,065 48,396Net partnership (loss) (68,542) - (68,542) (152,410)Other income 45,189 - 45,189 11,591Total revenue 1,002,965 10,548,142 11,551,107 6,562,122

Expenses:Program services 5,185,695 - 5,185,695 5,016,096Administrative and general 1,057,749 - 1,057,749 958,682Federal excise tax 121,224 - 121,224 6,977Depreciation expense - 43,190 43,190 31,343Total expenses 6,364,668 43,190 6,407,858 6,013,098

Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenses (5,361,703) 10,504,952 5,143,249 549,024Other changes in net assets:Benefit change other than net periodic benefit cost (202,000) - (202,000) (49,000)Transfers to (from) income 7,220,028 (7,220,028) - -

Change in net assets 1,656,325 3,284,924 4,941,249 500,024Unrestricted net assets:Beginning of year 755,936 82,477,068 83,233,004 82,732,980End of Year $000 2,412,261 $ 0085,761,992 $ 0088,174,253 $ 0083,233,004

See notes to financial statements.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Statements of Activities

47

For the years ended October 31, 2010 and 20092010000000 2009000000

Cash flows from operating activities:Change in net assets $0000000 4,941,249 $ 000000000500,024Adjustments to reconcile change in net assetsto net cash (used in) operating activities:Depreciation 43,190 31,343(Increase) decrease in operating assets:Net unrealized (gains) on investments (5,335,124) (11,816,610)Net realized (gains) losses on investments (5,213,018) 6,314,560Decrease in accrued dividends and interest receivable 3,000 112,000Decrease in prepaid expenses and other assets 22,759 277

Increase (decrease) in operating liabilities:(Decrease) increase in accrued expenses and other liabilities (91,500) 38,000Increase in postretirement benefits obligation 202,000 49,000Increase (decrease) in grants payable 365,000 (246,500)Net cash (used in) operating activities (5,062,444) (5,017,906)

Cash flows from investing activities:Purchase of property and equipment (4,891) (38,097)Purchase of investments (46,638,782) (65,189,715)Proceeds from sale of investments 52,793,586 71,305,726

Net cash provided by investing activities 6,149,913 6,077,914Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 1,087,469 1,060,008

Cash and cash equivalents:Beginning of year 2,078,550 1,018,542End of Year 3,166,019 2,078,550

Supplementary cash flow information:Cash payments for:Federal excise taxes $000000000 080,000 $00000 0000000000-

See notes to financial statements.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Statements of Cash Flows

48

October 31, 2010 and 2009Note 1 - Nature of Organization

The Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc. (the “Foundation”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York as a pri-vate foundation. The Foundation was organized to provide grants to charitable organizations.

Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of AccountingThe Foundation maintains its records on the accrual basis under generally accepted accounting principles. As of October 31, 2010and 2009, the Foundation did not have any temporarily or permanently restricted net assets. On September 17, 2010, the State ofNew York adopted the New York Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (“NYPMIFA”). The adoption of the act shouldnot have a significant effect on the Foundation’s operations.

Use of EstimatesThe preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to makeestimates and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilitiesat the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Accordingly,actual results could differ from those estimates.

Prior Period Summarized Financial InformationThe financial statements include certain prior-year summarized comparative information in total but not by net asset class. Suchinformation does not include sufficient detail to constitute a presentation in conformity with generally accepted accounting princi-ples. Accordingly, such information should be read in conjunction with the Foundation’s financial statements for the year ended Oc-tober 31, 2009, from which the summarized information was derived.

Cash and Cash EquivalentsFor purposes of the statements of cash flows, the Foundation considers all highly liquid investments purchased with an original ma-turity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Investment Valuation and Income RecognitionInvestments in U.S. Treasury bills and equity securities are reported at fair value based upon quoted market prices. Mutual fundsare valued at the net asset value of the shares held by the Foundation at year end. Investments in limited partnerships are reportedat estimated fair value as reported by the general partner or the custodian.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

49

Purchases and sales of securities are recorded on a trade date basis. Interest income is recorded on the accrual basis. Dividends arerecorded on the ex-dividend date.

Property and EquipmentProperty and equipment are recorded at cost.

The Foundation depreciates the cooperative, furniture, fixtures and equipment using the straight-line method. The general range ofestimated useful lives used in depreciating is as follows:

Cooperative 39 yearsFurniture, fixtures and equipment 5 years

Grants PayableGrants payable represents all unconditional grants that have been authorized prior to the year end, but remain unpaid as of the state-ments of financial position date. Conditional grants are expensed and considered payable in the period the conditions are substan-tially satisfied.

Income TaxesThe Foundation is a charitable organization within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “IRC”). TheFoundation is exempt from Federal income tax under the IRC as a private foundation, but is subject to Federal excise tax on its netinvestment income.

The Foundation is no longer subject to Federal income tax examination by tax authorities for years prior to 2007.

Subsequent EventsThe Foundation has evaluated subsequent events and transactions through June 15, 2011, the date that the financial statements wereavailable to be issued.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

50

Note 3 - Investments

The Foundation states its securities at fair market value instead of historical cost, presenting the net unrealized gains(losses) on securities as revenue in the current period. Total net unrealized gains (losses) recorded are as follows:

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Alliance00 Deutsche00 Beck, Mack0 Capital000 TotalCapital 00 Bank0000 & Oliver0 0 Guardian00 CIPEF V, L.P. October 31,

201000 0 200900 0Net unrealizedgains $ 00 0863,767 $0000000000- $ 004,077,139 $ 000000 000- $0000394,218 $ 005,335,124 $0 11,816,610

Net realized gains (losses) 1,368,927 - 3,844,091 - - 5,213,018 (6,314,560)Net realized and unreal-ized gains 2,232,694 - 7,921,230 - 394,218 10,548,142 5,502,050

Interest income - 5,647 17,304 - - 22,951 58,645Dividend income 252,403 432 704,467 - - 957,302 1,093,850

Total interest anddividend income 252,403 6,079 721,771 - - 980,253 1,152,495

Net investmentincome $ 002,485,097 $0000006,079 $ 008,643,001 $0000000000- $0000394,218 $ 011,528,395 $006,654,545

Unrealized Gains (Losses)Alliance00 Deutsche00 Beck, Mack0 Capital000Capital00 Bank00 0 & Oliver 00 Guardian00 CIPEF V, L.P. Total0000

Net unrealized gains (loss-es) at October 31, 2008 $0(2,505,776) $0000000000- $0016,881,558 $0 (4,391,198) $000(488,000) $0009,496,584

Net increase inunrealized gains 4,528,213 - 2,804,928 4,391,198 92,271 11,816,610

Net unrealized gains(losses) atOctober 31, 2009 2,022,437 - 19,686,486 - (395,729) 21,313,194

Net increase inunrealized gains 863,767 - 4,077,139 - 394,218 5,335,124

Net unrealized gains(losses) atOctober 31, 2010 $00 2,886,204 $0000000000- $0 23,763,625 $0000000000- $000(1,511) $0026,648,318

The following schedule summarizes the investment returns and their classifications in the statements of activitiesas of October 31, 2010 and 2009.

51

The Foundation has a capital commitment agreement with a private equity fund as a limited partner. The original commitmentsigned on July 24, 2007 is for $5,000,000. As of October 31, 2010, approximately $4,000,000 has been contributed.

Note 4 - Fair Value Measurements

Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820, Fair Value Measurements andDisclosures, provides the framework for measuring fair value and clarifies the definition of fair value within that framework. It de-fines fair value as an exit price, which is the price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the Founda-tion’s principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability, in an orderly transaction between market participants on themeasurement date.

The fair value hierarchy generally requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobserv-able inputs when measuring fair value. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the assetor liability and are developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity. Unobservable inputsreflect the entity’s own assumptions based on market data and the entity’s judgments about the assumptions that market participantswould use in pricing the asset or liability, and are to be developed based on the best information available in the circumstances.

The Foundation determines the fair market value of its investment in securities based on the established fair value definition andhierarchy levels. The three levels within the hierarchy that may be used to measure fair value are:

Level 1: Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2: Observable inputs, including Level 1 prices that have been adjusted; quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quotedprices in markets that are less active than traded exchanges; and other inputs that are observable or can be substantially corrobo-rated by observable market data.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are a significant component of the fair valueof the assets or liabilities.

Judgment is required in evaluating both quantitative and qualitative factors in the determination of significance for purposes of fairvalue level classification. Level 3 amounts can include assets and liabilities whose value is determined using pricing models, dis-counted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as assets and liabilities for which the determination of fair valuerequires significant management judgment or estimation.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Note 3 - Investments (Continued)

52

The following tables set forth, by level, the Foundation’s assets that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as ofOctober 31, 2010 and 2009:

Significant Other0 Significant Other0Total00000 Quoted Prices0 0 Observable Inputs0 Unobservable Inputs

Fair Value000 (Level 1)0000 (Level 2)0000 (Level 3)0000Assets carried at fair value:Investments:U.S. treasury bills $00000010,496,115 $ 00000010,496,115 $ 00000000000000- $ 00000000000000-Equity securities:Energy 10,845,814 10,845,814 - -Financials 13,528,727 13,528,727 - -Health care 15,128,673 15,128,673 - -Industrials 13,869,702 13,869,702 - -Information technology 12,747,776 12,747,776 - -Materials 2,700,866 2,700,866 - -Consumer discretionary 3,592,788 3,592,788 - -Consumer staples 470,823 470,823 - -Partnership 337,605 337,605 - -

Private Equity Fund (CIPEF V, L.P.) 3,313,215 - - 3,313,215Total assets carried at fair value $00000087,032,104 $ 00000083,718,889 $ 00000000000000- $00000003,313,215

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Note 4 - Fair Value Measurements (Continued)

October 31, 2010

In many cases, a valuation technique used to measure fair value includes inputs from multiple levels of the fair value hierarchy. Thelowest level of input that is a significant component of the fair value measurements determines the placement of the entire fair valuemeasurement in the hierarchy. The Foundation’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurementrequires judgment, and may affect the classification of fair value assets and liabilities within the fair value hierarchy levels.

53

Note 4 - Fair Value Measurements (Continued)

2010 000009 200900 000Balance—beginning of year $00000001,702,263 $00000001,360,066Capital contributions 1,285,276 402,336Income 23,861 4,942Expenses (92,403) (157,352)Unrealized gains in investment in PrivateEquity Fund held at year end 394,218 92,271

Balance—end of year $00000003,313,215 $00000001,702,263

Significant Other0 Significant Other0Total00000 Quoted Prices0 0 Observable Inputs0 Unobservable Inputs

Fair Value000 (Level 1)0000 (Level 2)0000 (Level 3)0000Assets carried at fair value:Investments:U.S. treasury bills $00000011,647,670 $ 00000011,647,670 $ 00000000000000- $ 00000000000000-Equity securities:Energy 7,542,469 7,542,469 - -Financials 17,595,201 17,595,201 - -Health care 13,356,714 13,356,714 - -Industrials 10,458,549 10,458,549 - -Information technology 12,981,909 12,981,909 - -Materials 3,063,275 3,063,275 - -Consumer discretionary 1,799,792 1,799,792 - -Consumer staples 2,160,119 2,160,119 - -Partnership 330,804 330,804 - -

Private Equity Fund (CIPEF V, L.P.) 1,702,263 - - 1,702,263Total assets carried at fair value $00000082,638,765 $ 00000080,936,502 $ 00000000000000- $00000001,702,263

The reconciliations for the years ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 of the investments in the Private Equity Fund measured at es-timated fair value and classified as Level 3 are as follows:

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Significant Other UnobservableInputs (Level 3)

October 31, 2009

54

Note 4 - Fair Value Measurements (Continued)

The investment objective of the Private Equity Fund (CIPEF V, L.P.) is to generate superior long-term capital appreciation prima-rily through privately negotiated equity and equity-related investments in emerging markets companies.

Potential portfolio companies are analyzed by broad criteria, including the following:

• Strong local management with a proven track record, or in some cases, a strategic partner whoadds value through technological, managerial or marketing/financial expertise;

• “Like-minded” key shareholders;• A demonstrated ability or potential for profitability and relatively stable and predictable cash flows;• Strong prospects to sustain or achieve a leading local market position and/or sustainable competitive export advantage;• Superior growth potential;• Attractive valuation; and• A clear and identifiable range of exit possibilities at the time of investment primarily relying on

either a trade sale to a potential list of multinational, regional or local strategic buyers expected to seek toconsolidate market position, and/or a local or global “money center” IPO.

Note 5 - Risks and Uncertainties

The Foundation invests in various investment securities. Investment securities are exposed to various risks such as interest rate, mar-ket, and credit risks. Due to the level of risk associated with certain investment securities, it is at least reasonably possible thatchanges in the values of investment securities will occur in the near term, and that such changes could materially affect the valuereported in the statements of financial position.

Note 6 - Pension Plan

The Foundation sponsors a defined contribution plan. Any employee, excluding students and those who work less than 20 hoursper week are eligible for employer contributions after completing 1 year of service and attainment of age 21. Voluntary contribu-tions can be made at any time. Contributions to the plan must be made on a non-discriminatory basis. The Foundation contributesto the plan on the employees’ behalf in the amount of 15% of eligible compensation as determined by Internal Revenue Service("IRS") regulations. Employee voluntary contributions can also be made up to the allowable maximum contribution as determinedby IRS regulations.

Pension expenses for the Foundation for the years ended October 31, 2010 and 2009 were $68,421 and $78,323, respectively.

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

55

Note 7 - Postretirement Health Benefits Plan

The Foundation maintains a postretirement health benefits plan (the “Postretirement Plan”) for qualified retirees. A qualified re-tiree is defined as an employee who has attained age 55 as an active employee of the Foundation with a minimum of 15 years full-time employment, and whose years of full-time employment with the Foundation plus attained age at retirement total 75 or more.

For the years ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, the amount of the Postretirement Plan expense recognized in the accompanyingstatements of activities amounted to $27,189 and $16,021, respectively. In addition, other changes in unrestricted net assets include$202,000 and $49,000 for the years ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, to reflect the change in postretirement healthbenefits plan obligation not charged to current year’s expense.

The funded status of the Postretirement Plan as of October 31, 2010 and 2009 is as follows:

2010 000009 200900 000Fair value of qualified plan assests $000000000 00000- $00000000000000-Less: projected benefit obligation 1,344,000 1,142,000

Funded status $000000(1,344,000) $000000(1,142,000)

The Postretirement Plan expense computation assumes a future medical cost inflation of 10% and discount rate of 5% as of Octo-ber 31, 2010 and 2009.

The following schedule of benefit payments, which reflects expected future services, as appropriate, are expected to be paid in eachof the next five years and in the aggregate for the five years thereafter:

Years EndingOctober 31, Amount 00

2011 $ 0000024,9642012 26,2122013 27,5232014 28,9002015 30,344Five years thereafter 212,032

Total $ 0000349,975

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

56

Note 10 - Prior Period Adjustment

During the fiscal year 2010, the Foundation determined that the liability attributable to postretirement health benefitswas not accounted for properly for the years ended October 31, 2009 and prior. As a result, the following restatementwas made to the net assets as of November 1, 2008:

The following represents the effects of the restatement for the year ended October 31, 2009:

Unrestricted net assets,beginning of year as previously stated $00000083,825,980

Projected benefit obligation (1,093,000)Unrestricted net assets,beginning of year as restated $00000082,732,980

Before 00009 After00 000Benefit change other than net periodic benefit cost $000000000 00000- $000000000 49,000Postretirement benefits obligation $000000000 00000- $00000001,142,000

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Notes to Financial Statements

Years EndingOctober 31, Amount 00

2011 $ 0000045,6002012 19,250

Total $ 0000064,850

Note 9 - Rental Income

The Foundation leases out a portion of its office space under a lease that expires March 31, 2012. Rental income totaled $46,065and $48,396 for the years ended October 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Future rental income under the lease is as follows:

Note 8 - Concentrations of Credit Risk

Financial instruments, which potentially subject the Foundation to concentrations of credit risk, consist of money market accountsand investment securities. The Foundation places its cash and temporary cash investments with financial institutions. At times, suchbalances may be in excess of the FDIC and SIPC insurance limits.

57

Acting Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 0,030,000Advocates for Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000Advocates for Youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000Alliance for Quality Education (Public Policy and Education Fund) . . . . . . 55,000American Civil Liberties Union Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000American Civil Liberties Union Foundation -Reproductive Rights Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000

Americans for the Arts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000ART/New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,250Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000Ballet Hispanico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000Baruch College Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000Battery Dance Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Brooklyn Academy of Music . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Brooklyn Academy of Music . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000CECArts Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000Center for Children's Initiatives (formerly Child Care, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000Center for Reproductive Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000

Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, Inc.Schedule of Grants Paid

For the Year Ended October 31, 2010

Names in parentheses indicate payee where two organizations are listed.

58

Center for an Urban Future (City Futures, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Child Care and Early Education Fund (United Way of New York City) . . . . 27,500Children's Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000Citizens' Committee for Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000Citizens Union Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Coalition of Behavioral Health Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Commission on the Public's Health System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,000Common Cause Education Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,500Community Service Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Cuban Artists Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000Dance Theatre Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000Dancing Classrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000Donors Education Collaborative (Community Funds, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Empire Justice Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,000Eye on Dance (Arts Resources in Collaboration, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,000Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,500Feminist Majority Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,000Film Forum (The Moving Image, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Foundation Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,000Friends of High School for Environmental Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,000Grantmakers for Children, Youth and Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,000Grantmakers in the Arts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,000HERE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Independent Curators International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000

Names in parentheses indicate payee where two organizations are listed.

59

International Foundation for Art Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000Law Students for Reproductive Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,000Long-Term Care Community Coalition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000Make the Road New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000Merce Cunningham Dance Company(Cunningham Dance Foundation, Inc.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000

Merger Watch (Community Catalyst) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000Museum of Arts and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000Museum of the City of New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,000NARAL Pro-Choice America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000National Abortion Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000National Center for Law and Economic Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,000National Coalition Against Censorship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000National Employment Law Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80,000National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association . . . . . . . . . 162,500National Institute for Reproductive Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000National Partnership for Women and Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,000National Performance Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000National Resources Defense Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000National Women's Law Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000New Partners for Community Revitalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,000New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000New York Foundation for the Arts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000

Names in parentheses indicate payee where two organizations are listed.

60

New York Studio School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000New York Theatre Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000Nonprofit Coordinating Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000Osborne Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Philanthropy New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,650Philanthropy Roundtable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000Planned Parenthood Federation of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000Pratt Center (Pratt Institute) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000Regional Plan Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,000St. Ann's Warehouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,000Symphony Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000The Marie Walsh Sharpe Arts Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,000Urban Homesteading Assistance Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,000Urban Justice Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,000

Matching Gifts Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,070

Totals grants paid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,153,970

Names in parentheses indicate payee where two organizations are listed.

Proposal Guidelines

We are interested in learning as much as possible about the applicant. This includes budgets (past, current, projected), audited financial statements, an IRS letter explaining tax status, names and occupations of trustees, and examples of past accomplishments. The individual project proposal should include, in addition to a description of the planned work, a budget, precise expectations, plans for evaluation, background of those involved and a statement of plans for future support. Also, a one page summary is required.

The Board of Directors meets four times per year: January, April, July, and October. The Foundation receives and reviews proposals year-round.

The Robert Sterling Clark Foundation welcomes proposals within the areas of its present concentration. Proposals should be addressed to:

Margaret C. Ayers Robert Sterling Clark Foundation 135 East 64th Street New York, New York 10065-7045.

We look forward to hearing from you and hope we can be of assistance.

ROBERT STERLING CLARK FOUNDATION 135 East 64th Street New York NY 10065T 212.288.8900 F 212.288.1033 rsclark.org