ding environment driven by private donations, dues, and service fees may lead nonprofit organizations to act as profit seekers.” With this thought in mind, it is not difficult to understand how public/government funding has fueled significant increases in the service functions of nonprofits (Jang & Feiock, 2007, p. 177). Furthermore, Frumkin ( as cited in Jang & Feiock, 2007, p. 177) reported that government grants and contracts are responsible for over one-half of the revenue of nonprofit organizations, regardless of their altruistic, political, or religious origin. However, funding responsibility varies by sector, accounting for 66 percent of revenues for health-related nonprofits, 52 percent of revenues of social welfare organizations, and over 65 percent of human service organizations (Boris, de Leon, Roeger, &Nikolova, 2010). In addition to funding obtained from private sources, “some research has argued that the flow of public funds into nonprofit organizations allows nonprofits to expand substantially their operations and to achieve greater levels of operational efficiency and improved effectiveness” (Frumkin & Kim, 2002, p. 8). Furthermore, Gazley (as cited in Jang & Feiock, 2007) collaboration creates other opportunities to serve clients with potential gains from interorganizational cooperation to also include “economic efficiencies, more effective response to shared problems, improvements in the quality of services delivered to clients, the spreading of risks, and increased access to sources” (p. 178). While the benefits of collaboration are collective in nature, there are monetary costs to the individual organizations and their managers as well as the loss of managerial autonomy (Gazley, as cited in Jang & Feoick, 2007, p. 178). Whereas private funding tends to reinforce the individual organizational focus, therefore the benefits of collaboration will not outweigh the costs factor imposed on the notprofit organization (Gazley, as cited in Jang & Feoick, 2007, p. 178).
非营利组织为社会各群体服务的能力是通过个人/私人捐款、费用、私人基金会、政府拨款和合同等多种来源的资金实现的。在已经竞争激烈的筹款领域，获得资金的过程可能相当昂贵。因此，许多非营利组织寻求最具成本效益的方法来获得捐助者，以努力维持资源，从而实现使命目标并为客户提供服务。出于多种原因，必须仔细考虑利益相关者的期望和对非营利组织的要求。例如，Salamon报告称，主要依赖私人资金（如客户费用和商业收入）的非营利组织与那些严重依赖政府资金提供财政支持的非营利机构的处境截然不同。Salamon进一步解释道，“由私人捐款、会费和服务费驱动的融资环境可能会导致非营利组织充当利润寻求者。”，不难理解公共/政府资金是如何推动非营利组织服务职能的显著增加的。此外，Frumkin报告称，政府拨款和合同占非营利组织收入的一半以上，无论其利他主义、政治或宗教出身如何。然而，资助责任因部门而异，占健康相关非营利组织收入的66%，占社会福利组织收入的52%，占人类服务组织收入的65%以上。除了从私人来源获得的资金外，“一些研究认为，公共资金流入非营利组织使非营利组织能够大幅扩大其运营，并实现更高水平的运营效率和提高效率”。此外，Gazley的合作创造了其他机会，为客户提供服务，并从组织间合作中获得潜在收益，其中还包括“经济效率、更有效地应对共同问题、提高向客户提供的服务质量、分散风险和增加获取来源的机会”。本篇留学生作业指出虽然合作的好处是集体性质的，但单个组织及其管理者也会付出金钱成本，并失去管理自主权。私人资金往往会加强个人组织的关注，因此合作的好处不会超过强加给非营利组织的成本因素。
Public Funding: An Obstacle to Nonprofit Organizations 公共资金：非营利组织的障碍
Although public/government funding is at the center of many nonprofit organizations, several researchers including Frumkin, Rushton and Brooks (as cited in Jang & Feoick, 2007, p. 177) have explored the dependence of these nonprofits on government funding as a subject of debate. Studies conducted by Frumkin and Rushton and Brooks (as cited in Jang & Feoick, 2007) have raised concerns that government funding detracts from the distinctive purposes of nonprofit organizations within the service system therefore “creating inappropriate accountability relationships and results in the loss of professional autonomy” (p. 177). According to Smith and Lipsky (as cited in Brown & Troutt, 2004) an ongoing tension exists in government’s relationship with the nonprofit sector because of the “competition between government’s need to ensure equity and accountability in its spending of tax dollars and the nonprofit’s emphasis on responsiveness and flexibility in meeting clients’ needs (p. 9). Additional research by Smith and Lipsky (as cited in Frumkin & Kim, 2002, p.3) explained that the acceptance of government funding often requires nonprofits to agree to serve clients who are di
