Open source software for NGO's - neverneverland or the next big thing?

I finally read through Jonathon Peizer's Realizing the Promise of Open Source in the Non-Profit Sector Report. The article essentially lays out the difficulty in developing, implementing, and supporting open source software in the non-profit community. The report is extensively researched and Peizer really hits it. His solution to this difficulty is a centralized platform with sweeping strategic direction that will provide both leadership, resources, and organization to open source directed at non-profits. He outlines his clarion call near the end of the paper:

"1) A home base for development activities designed to meet a broad base of prioritized, mission focused application needs.
2) A place to actively foster a mission focused development community.
3) A documentation and training material depository for all applications on Social SourceForge.
4) The arbiter of open standards for the NGO sector across application platforms.
5) A catalyst spawning individual development efforts conforming tostandards.
6) A place where individual developers come if they wish to interact with a vibrant mission focused developer community for support."

While Peizer's analysis is clear and accurate, "socialforge" is perhaps ahead of its time. Socialforge is a great idea but given that the organizations that really need open source the most cannot currently even leverage the most basic technologies, an entire site dedicated to NGO-related open source is several steps beyond where we are right now. Also, Sourceforge, the existing (and robust) site for all open source projects provides tremendous support to the open source community. The article does not give a convincing reason for moving away from that support (not to mention centralization of other resources and pagerank).

To even consider accessing open source technology of any kind, non-profits in the US really need simple, and free or very cheap technology training and education, particularly focused on those newer technologies like internet data-driven applications and communication tools. Also, open source groups needs to do some evangelizing with the non-profits in human form and not online or in a paper. At the same time (and perhaps by the same group), someone should study whether we can supplement or replace key programs, such as blackbaud and etapestry, with open source versions.

When (and if) there is critical mass among developers of replacement programs, then a "socialforge" will organically grow out of the burgeoning movement (just as a similar site, schoolforge, has evolved for education-related open source software). If I have learned anything from working on PhPCollab, it is that the organic nature of the open source movement is an unavoidable character trait, for better or worse, of this kind of development. Spontaneous organizing around individual ideas is in some ways the basic countermajoritarian and reactionary impulse of developers trying to escape the corporate/proprietary software model. While this kind of organization often leads to some chaos, ultimately the movement can only survive and certainly thrive on these energies. The challenge for managerial types is how to bring enough order and regulation, such that an open source project can continue to move in a positive direction, without killing that organic energy.

So in sum, my response to a "socialforge" is that open source software directed at targeted audiences (whether little league teams, car rental agenices, or blood banks) is in its nascent stages right now and is too young and perhaps even a little too wild for massive top-down management. Baby steps, baby steps.