[Data-modeling] Non-profits, once more with feeling

Jeff Prucher jeff at metaweb.com
Fri Aug 8 20:46:39 UTC 2008 

I'll try putting "sector" on "organization", and see what that looks like.
I'll hold off any special properties for NTEE-CC-type stuff until someone a)
figures out the licensing and b) wants to load the data.  As far as
endowments are concerned, the property on the other end is just a dated
money value; tracking things like where endowments come from would be
interesting, but I think we can leave that for another day.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com 
> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of Tim Kientzle
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 12:39 PM
> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Non-profits, once more with feeling
> 
> I was indeed thinking of putting "sector" on "organization", 
> but that's clearly inappropriate for existing taxonomies with 
> restricted application.  It would make sense for the NTEE-CC 
> property to be associated with the "non-profit" tag, although 
> I would suggest being more specific with the property name: 
> "NTEE-CC sector" rather than just "non-profit sector."
> 
> Whether it makes sense to separate "endowment" properties 
> depends a lot on the data at the other end of that link.  If 
> there are endowments that fund a variety of types of 
> entities, then putting "endowment" on an "Endowed Entity" 
> type does simplify cross-domain queries.  I can't say I know 
> enough about endowments to be sure.
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> On Aug 8, 2008, at 11:34 AM, Jeff Prucher wrote:
> 
> > I like Faye's suggestion, too, and I'm looking into other 
> countries to 
> > see what kind of patterns there are.  And thanks for catching the 
> > duplicate "geographic scope" property on organization.
> >
> > In terms of sector, are you proposing that it go on "organization", 
> > instead?
> > It's sort of the organizational equivalent to "industry", 
> so I could 
> > imagine it going there.  (That said, taxonomies like the 
> NTEE-CC are 
> > explicitly for non-profits, so linking to them from another 
> type might 
> > be semantically weird, assuming of course that they have compatible 
> > licenses.) In terms of
> > endowments, what type would you propose putting that property on?   
> > "Endowed
> > entity"?  I guess I don't see how the having an "endowment" 
> property 
> > on the "College/University" type precludes an "endowment" property 
> > being on "Non-profit organization".
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com
> >> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of 
> Tim Kientzle
> >> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 6:09 PM
> >> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
> >> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] Non-profits, once more with feeling
> >>
> >> Faye makes a good point.  It seems quite possible that the only 
> >> property of "non-profit" would be the tax framework under 
> which it's 
> >> recognized (e.g., "US Government 501(c)(3)").  Every other 
> property 
> >> of your proposed "non-profit" type applies to things other 
> than non-
> >> profits:  Harvard has an endowment, the Organization type 
> already has 
> >> a "Geographic scope," and there are philanthropic and/or 
> charitable 
> >> organizations that are not non-profit but to which your 
> "non-profit 
> >> sector" classification would still apply.
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >> On Aug 7, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Faye Li wrote:
> >>
> >>> Technically a non-profit is just an organization that's not 
> >>> commercially motivated. :)
> >>>
> >>> Legally though, the term has very specific definitions in the US, 
> >>> state-defined definitions, actually, which means a CA-based
> >> nonprofit
> >>> may very well not qualify as a "non-proft" under say, 
> Montana state 
> >>> law. To sort through the state-to-state discrepancy the 
> IRS has the 
> >>> final say on nationally recognized non-profit 
> organizations through 
> >>> section 501(c) codes. There are over a million
> >>> (!) of them registered with the IRS today. Even 1% of that
> >> data will
> >>> make a nice chunk in Freebase. :)
> >>>
> >>> But that's besides the point, which is: a non-profit has a
> >> privileged
> >>> status which has to be qualified by the system that
> >> recognizes it as a
> >>> non-profit, much as a protected site needs to specify the
> >> park system
> >>> under which it is protected. Without that data, or at least
> >> a property
> >>> to input that data, the claim of being a non-profit 
> becomes...well, 
> >>> unqualified, and legally weak.
> >>>
> >>> Kirrily, I'll have to check out your charities domain. :)
> >>>
> >>> -- Faye
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Kirrily Robert wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Not all non-profits take donations.  However, I have 
> been modeling 
> >>>> charities in a domain of my own (/user/skud/charities) and
> >> I've got
> >>>> properties for religious affiliation as well as 
> geographical focus.
> >>>>
> >>>> K.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Aug 7, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Alexander Marks wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> How about a Religious Affiliation property? Applies to any 
> >>>>> organization, I guess, but seems especially relevant for
> >> those that
> >>>>> take donations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Al
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: "Jeff Prucher" <jeff at metaweb.com>
> >>>>> To: "Freebase data modeling mailing list"
> >>>>> <data-modeling at freebase.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 7, 2008 9:24:29 PM (GMT) Europe/London
> >>>>> Subject: [Data-modeling] Non-profits, once more with feeling
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I sent a note about this a couple weeks ago, and received no 
> >>>>> responses. I'm figuring that either things are slow 
> because it's 
> >>>>> summer (in the Northern Hemisphere anyway) or that nobody
> >> cares much
> >>>>> about this schema one way or another.  Just in case it's
> >> the former,
> >>>>> I'm reposting my non-profit organization schema to
> >> sandbox; if it's
> >>>>> for the latter reason, I'll go ahead and upload the 
> schema at my 
> >>>>> leisure. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >> 
> https://sandbox.freebase.com/type/view/organization/non_profit_organ
> >>>>> ization
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's pretty basic; it includes the types Organization 
> (to get the 
> >>>>> board members and parent/child organizations, among other
> >> things),
> >>>>> and Employer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jeff Prucher
> >>>>> Type Librarian & Ontologist
> >>>>> Metaweb Technologies, Inc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Data-modeling mailing list
> >>>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >>>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Data-modeling mailing list
> >>>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >>>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Data-modeling mailing list
> >>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Data-modeling mailing list
> >> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Data-modeling mailing list
> > Data-modeling at freebase.com
> > http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing list
> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>

More information about the Data-modeling mailing list