One could argue that the start up funding required by new and smaller nonprofits, looking to elevate their organization to the next level (which is very different than struggling nonprofits looking to get profitable), is similar to the start up funding required for tech and other entrepreneurial corporate ventures.
The similarity continues when we look at the risk factors in funding start ups and nonprofit organizations: a tech start up is a risk for investors, who subsequently require tremendous insight and evidence of feasibility. Similarly, the nonprofit startup risk is addressed by funders who ask them to produce feasibility as well. Most nonprofits understand and experience this, making feasibility studies the bread and butter of many firms like Harvest Development Group.
Start up tech firms require industry expertise. Nonprofits starting up and those taking their sustainability to the next level also require expertise, not only in the program area of their specialty, but in business management experience as well. Both require a well designed, justified, and articulated detailed business plan. Investors on both sides of the aisle want to be certain that the organization has a well thought out plan, has explored the possible pitfalls, and have every aspect of their journey defined. They would prefer that each is lead by passion. In fact, it is this passion that will ultimately define their success. Leaders of tech start ups and of nonprofits need have a “never-say-die” spirit, a determination to make their plan work against all odds.
With so many similarities, one would think that nonprofits and business start-ups could benefit from collaborating, sharing insights, learning lessons and gaining experience from these shared efforts. To this end, Harvest Development Group has partnered with like-minded business owners to open the shoreline’s first ever co-working space. This co-working space will bring both nonprofit and for-profit startups and growing organizations together.
Shared space= shared experiences= stronger outcomes= more success! Want to learn more, send us an email at firstname.lastname@example.org or call us at 888-586-1103.
Does this sound familiar? You are leading your board in a discussion about strategy for fundraising, outlining what is known about your organization’s current philanthropy program. As you ask them to take some time to review the strategic imperatives recommended from the findings, one member raises his hand and says “I think we should just do two mailings a year, no more, and then focus on doing more events. And I think we need more publicity, no one knows about us, that’s the big problem.”
Somewhere along the line your board was lead to believe that their role is to problem solve. And by problem solve, I mean to direct the organization’s fundraising. And by directing fundraising, I mean doing your job. But, if this sounds all too familiar, how do you refocus your board on the important role they play in governance and oversight?
Getting boards focused, all looking in the same direction, and looking towards the bigger picture is not for the faint of heart. If you don’t have the intestinal fortitude, I suggest bringing in a professional. If you are up for the challenge, however, you need to begin with a self-assessment. A self-assessment must be completed and reviewed by the board, and it is only through this effort that they will find the necessary solutions hidden in the information they uncover as they move through the process. Finding an assessment tool is easier than you think. There are a lot of boxed self-assessment tools out there, and Harvest Development Group offers one on our website.
Keep in mind that it is important that the assessment process is driven from within. Board leadership should be suggesting and encouraging the process, not you or the organization. Assuming you have a good working relationship, with authentic dialogue and shared vision with your chairperson (if not, that’s another blog post), then having a candid conversation about the challenges you experience working with the board, accompanied by justification, both qualitative and quantitative, is the starting point. Suggest that the organization will benefit from a board self-review, just as the rest of the organization is reviewed annually. If everything else in a nonprofit is to be measured, it is unwise to exclude the board. With the chairperson leading the effort (or a board development committee, if you are that sophisticated), the medicine may go done a tiny bit easier. Expect some resistance and some sensitivity, because no one likes to be judged, least of which people who have come to not expect it. Once your board is committed to the self-assessment, ask your chairperson to recruit an Assessment Committee who will:
• Review the self-assessment tool and make recommendations on changes. You should provide them with findings showing why certain assessment sections are necessary
• Communicate to the full board the reason for the assessment, the process and the expected outcomes
• Implement and calculate the assessment
• Report on the findings and lead the discussion of the board on the actions to affect change.
Tai chi, is the ancient practice of war by submission. Letting go, allowing leadership in others, encouraging action through quiet movement, can change the board’s role in the organization, improve their performance and enhance the value they bring to your mission. In the end, they will be proud to be a part of your effort.
PBS has been blogging about crowdfunding – the practice of funding a project or venture by raising many small amounts of money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet – and their latest post engages nonprofits in thinking about the significant opportunity for financial success in crowdfunding.
From PBS’s post:
“The need for alternative fundraising methods clearly varies a lot across organizations. But even comfortable non-profits accept that crowdfunding has the potential to deliver a deep engagement between fundraisers and backers. And, as emergent civic crowdfunding models suggest, it has the potential to produce new alliances”
The post goes on to highlight success stories in the the crowdfunding sphere:
” The Long Now Foundation is using this model for its Salon campaign, which has raised just over half of its $495,000 target. “
The post ends with this note of validation for many nonprofit’s marketing savvy and the opportunity to leverage that expertise for crowdfunding success. “Many non-profits are established experts in these areas. Many of them have stronger and more-established brands than even the best-known crowdfunding platforms. The quality and scale of crowdfunding campaigns would undoubtedly increase if they decided to apply their expertise to the field.”
While I appreciate what these types of articles do for innovative thinking, when they are sent out into the npo-sphere such as this, with no context to the implementation or integration of such a strategy into a broad range of tactics, it sends most charities desperate for money on a wild – and often disappointing- goose chase for their tens of thousands of dollars from ‘the web’. At best this is a distraction and a waste of resources which could go toward raising real money. At worst, it could be the straw that crumbles an already ailing organization.
In reality, what is new is not always relevant. What is relevant is not always new. Basing revenue development on scholarly data and best practices is essential to helping our nonprofits prosper.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Our friends at Network for Good have prepared this easy to digest guide to Year End Fundraising Essentials 2013 filled with things you can do right now to ensure you get your 30 percent.
If you need some assistance with a plan or executing your strategy, we can help. A third of your years revenue could depend on the next 6 weeks.
Our programs and services offer professional guidance for all requirements and budgets. Wherever you find your challenges, we have the experience and talent to bring you to a more profitable outcome.
Contact us for a no obligation consultation about your organization
[contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]
Download PDF of
Year End Fundraising Essentials 2013
When it comes to making charitable donations, boomers do things a lot differently than members of Gen X and Gen Y, according to a fascinating new study. Maybe it’s time we take a page or two from those younger generations.
BestTED Talk ever, by Dan Pink. It WILL change the way you think about leading your work team, and just about anyone else in your life!
Spirited presentation this morning at the Ct Philanthropy Day Conference, around the translational opportunities with Events. It just takes a new perspective, for everyone, to make what has become a drudgery of futile transactional activities (events) into an amazing value added Long Tail translational opportunity!
Let me tell you what I mean by Long Tail. Webster defines Long Tail as:
A frequency distribution pattern in which occurences are most densely clustered close to the Y-axis and the distribution curve tapers along the X-axis. The long tail refers to the low-frequency population displayed in the right-hand portion of the graph, represented by a gradually sloping distribution curve that becomes asymptotic to the x-axis. In most applications, the number of events in the tail is greater than the number of events in the high frequency area, simply because the tail is long.
Did I lose you yet?!?
What it’s saying simply is the value of what is at the head (left) of a graph is not equal to and is less than the value of what exists collectively within the long line to the right. Here’s what that looks like:
In our theory on the Long Tail of Events, that equates to the Event itself being the head and the value from that event being greater than the event, that’s the tail.
Measuring the value of our events is a long term view- we don’t measure the value of our acquisition appeal against that single appeal. If we did, we would determine that our ROI was a negative and we would stop. We measure the value of our acquisition appeal against a long term view that includes the cost benefit of collecting new prospects in our major gift pipeline and the cash value of those major prospects over time. Similarly we don’t measure the value of grant writing against a single grant submitted. Losing proposition financially. Instead we measure the value of grant writing against a long term aggregate of return on investment.
Then why do we allow our organizations to continue to measure the value of an event against itself as a single activity?
To expect your event to have a long-term financial value to your philanthropy requires a different perspective on event planning. It changes the way you think about and plan objectives for your events. It turns your inviting process on its head, giving a you a laser focus on attendees, and it places your board central to the development of this Long Tail. It demands data driven strategy on donor engagement and a commitment to numbers and dates as deadlines.
It can be done.
We’ll be developing a webinar on the Long Tail of Events in the coming months. We’ll show you what we mean and I guarantee you’ll walk away wanting to chase the Long Tail.
AFP 2013 Fundraising Effectiveness Survey Report
From the Foundation Center, this series is interesting and provides insight into the next generation of philanthropists: young people from families of wealth. Despite my misgivings listed below, it is well worth the time invested in listening to the series.
It misses the mark in my opinion on two fronts- it focuses too narrowly on the next generation of philanthropists from a very small slice: those families already heavily invested in philanthropy. I would argue that many leaders of the next generation will find their own path in philanthropy and I would want to know their thoughts as well.
Secondly, it is disappointing in who they interview….. many of these individuals are not necessarily the key age demographic I would position as the next gen of philanthropy. I had hoped for a younger crowd, but many leaned more toward 40 years old.
However, its a start! I suggest listen to this one and then migrate out to the website at Grantcraft.org to hear the remainder of the podcasts.