Unfunded obama programs

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected]. The opposite of transitory is permanent. Nothing is permanent except the sheer idiocy of democrats. All else is transitory! Don't have an account? Support Conservative Daily News with a small donation via Paypal or credit card that will go towards supporting the news and commentary you've come to appreciate.

Experts can debate whether future Congresses will suspend Obama's Medicare cuts and whether the long-range cost of extending coverage to more than 30 million uninsured will outpace the revenue to pay for it. As the reactions of the GOP candidates at the debate demonstrated, no one is seriously considering repeal of the prescription program. Thanks to taxpayers, about 90 percent of older people now have affordable access to medications that help keep them out of the hospital.

Roughly two-thirds of those are enrolled in Medicare's benefit; many others are in former employers' prescription plans. Ironically, repealing Obama's overhaul would take away the most important improvement to the program since it was created. Obama's law gradually eliminates the dreaded coverage gap known as the doughnut hole.

Millions of people will each save thousands of dollars as a result. Republicans like to point out that the cost of the prescription program is well below original estimates. They attribute that to competition among the private insurers providing the benefit.

While competition is part of the story, experts say it's not the only reason. The shift to cheaper generic drugs among people of all ages has been a powerful contributor. That may not last forever. The trustees who oversee Medicare's finances warn in their latest report that spending on drugs will rise more rapidly in the future. Said Walker: "Basically what's happening is we're mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren, and borrowing the money from China.

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser. Currently, our evaluation committee has over members from all over the world. We do not provide direct funding of proposals. Everyone who submits a proposal to us is guaranteed a comprehensive feedback report and receives equal attention from our committee.

Whenever possible, we connect proposals with potential funders and this often results in the funding.. Additionally, it is not uncommon for our reviewers to follow up with organizations directly in order to become more involved as supporters, advisors, donors, etc. Professional consultants who perform this service often charge five figures or more. Unfunded List believes that good advice should be for everyone, not just for those who can afford it. The Unfunded List operates with the generous support of our board of directors, donations from our evaluators, and some grants from grantmakers.

This fee is usually waived with co-review opt-ins. Unfunded List reviews hundreds of proposals every year. The proposals come from all over the world and cover nearly every conceivable topic. To ensure that we can provide the most helpful and candid advice to each proposal, we are constantly recruiting members to our evaluation committee. We currently have over evaluators in our pool with a wide variety of experience and interests.

We believe all perspectives are important and we regularly seek to add to the diversity of the committee. Our members include program officers at grant-making institutions, members of family foundations, founders of giving circles, directors of notable prizes and competitions, fundraising consultants, communications professionals, engineers, doctors, lawyers, as well as formerly homeless and incarcerated evaluators, LGBTQIA members, people from every continent and over 50 countries and, at last count, 9 different faith traditions.

We also actively recruit our applicants to become reviewers. Approximately one-fifth of the committee has also been reviewed by us and most reports include someone who is also fundraising or has experience fundraising on the same issue or topic. Everyone lives in the world and feels its effects. Your perspective has value and we would love to share it with social entrepreneurs and nonprofit founders trying to make the world a better place. Our committee already has dozens of experienced grantwriters as well as professional philanthropists.

Those backgrounds are always welcome but we want to include as many perspectives as we can in each report. If you have no experience whatsoever in philanthropy this is a great way to gain some. You can check out our library of resources , attend our free events , or contact us for a quick one-on-one consultation.

One hour on average. Some of our speedier evaluators can review a proposal in under half an hour. Others do deeper research and might spend a few hours on their reviews. We encourage our evaluators to take as much time as they need. Just please hit our deadlines and give honest feedback to the proposals you have been assigned. You can tell us your preferences and we will do our best to match you with proposals that fit your interests and expertise.

The more you tell us, the better we are at matching. SInce we review several hundred proposals a year covering a breadth of topics, we are usually able to come up with interesting matches. This is why we have such a high approval and return rate with our committee.

Since , we have reviewed nearly 1, proposals covering nearly every conceivable topic and even some inconceivable topics! Common topics are education both US and international , healthcare again both US and international , conservation issues, civic advocacy issues, anti-racism efforts, the arts, disability inclusion, youth service programs, homelessness and food security programs, and socially-focused businesses.

Co-review is when we partner with a grantmaker and offer our independent review to their applicants. There are two ways to submit a proposal to Unfunded List. The first is through our website, which anyone in the world can do any time of year. We will review whatever is submitted to us. The majority of the proposals we review come through co-review partnerships with grantmakers. Our grantmaker partners conduct their philanthropy according to their own procedures and our committee simultaneously reviews the same submissions.

Applicants are given the chance to opt-in and request feedback from us and our staff aligns the timelines and reports with our partners. Since we began co-reviewing, the number of proposals we review each year has increased from dozens of submissions to hundreds. Such a diverse group of inclusive grantmakers ensures that we will have a wide variety of interesting proposals to review every round.

We have written a lot about co-review. Read more:. Co-Review Throughout History. Evaluators are volunteers who support the field of philanthropy and give a few hours of their time a few times a year to advise grant proposal writers and lend their experience, perspective, and connections to social sector actors who are looking for advice and support.

While we do not directly compensate evaluators, we recognize that many of them are for hire. Evaluators are given the opportunity to offer a follow-up conversation as part of the review process and if the reviewed group agrees we can make that connection.

We have helped forge many productive relationships in this way, including paid consultancy work, grants, partnerships, and more. They search for the next great solutions, award funds, and support the winning grantees.

Meanwhile, Unfunded List focuses their support on everyone else who applied. Each opt-in receives one of our helpful and candid feedback reports including reviews from multiple evaluators as well as the opportunity to have a report discussion with Unfunded List Staff.

Read more below:. Our independent evaluation committee offers our review to all of the applicants of our partner program. Once a group opts in, we do not choose winners, but instead we provide helpful and candid feedback and suggestions for everyone, along with recommendations and feedback for the grantmaker after we are done.

Each co-review partnership is unique. But they always require staff time and resources. With each co-review partnership we will work to develop a comprehensive memo of understanding MOU and will consider all the ways a partnership can provide value to our program. Unfunded List is a c3 not-for-profit based in Washington, DC and founded in