Category: Finance

There’s a phenomenon in our communities public or local education foundations (PEFs or LEFs) that have been created/designed with political agendas the politics of education, and the politics of inclusion.

People in communities all over the country, espousing one educational philosophy or another, are working to influence their school boards and local political structures to improve/change their public education systems; but, because of a narrow focus, they are missing out on a major opportunity.

Many of these EFs, have been highly effective in sensitizing Boards of Educations and Public School Administrators to the different components and needs of the various segments of their constituencies — ethnic, religious, national origin and linguistic. And, of course, the way change is encouraged is through vocal exhortations directed at local and state political figures.

This method of social activism has resulted in modifying courses of study, adding new subjects and subject material, and increasing mutual awareness and respect among diverse segments of our communities.

It is, however, not my intention to comment upon or evaluate the performance of these organizations, but to suggest a way that they could have a greater impact on the quality of education in their communities.

Many of these EFs, no matter what they are called, are non-profit corporations that are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions, but are not raising anywhere near the dollars that can be raised.

As examples of what can be done, there are a number of public high schools in New York City whose alumni bodies have created foundations that raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for everything from textbook replacement to construction of robotics laboratories and computerized language learning centers.

To be successful in the fundraising process, and the above examples didn’t happen with book sales, cakes sales, dinners or other special events, takes a different focus than for the social activism — not that they are mutually exclusive.

To get corporations to fund reading programs, to get foundations to fund college preparation courses, to get wealthy individuals to support equipment purchase, to get senior citizens to bequeath their homes to those EFs — to get anyone to give major bucks to supplement public education, you need Board Members who are networked into those (potential) constituencies.

You need leaders who are committed to the fundraising process, and who are willing to take the time to plan for and execute (individual, corporate and foundation) major gift solicitations — who are willing to give of their own resources and get others to do the same.

Only through such a program, with such committed people, can major gifts be secured for public schools. Only through networking, through personal connections, can this happen.

Don’t assume that just anyone can successfully ask for the big gifts. As with all skills/talents, not everyone is good at everything.

For your organization to be effective, it must have a cadre of volunteers who can help advance the fundraising agenda. They must be trained in the workings of a non-profit corporation and its fundraising procedures. They must understand their roles and responsibilities. And, they must passionately believe in the mission of the corporation.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? With over 30 years of counseling in major gifts, capital campaigns, bequest programs and the planning studies to precede these three, I’ll be pleased to answer your questions. Contact me at [email protected]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

I have found it necessary, far too many times during my years in the non-profit world, to face/deal with the nearly impossible challenge of helping an organization to maximize efficiency and effectiveness when a single person is required to be the executive director, the fund-raising development professional and the marketing/communications/PR professional … all at the same time.

This is the classic, and often deadly,

“One Person Shop.”

Coming exclusively from a fund-raising background, I felt that was where I could only place my total focus because of my scores of dealings with those two other types of professions.

I am acutely aware of the many organizations that have an Executive Director who is not only responsible for, but must function in all other operational activities.

From extensive personal contact with such heroes and heroines, I have nothing but the fullest admiration and regard for them — regard that is always accompanied by deep concern … because many of their Boards often insist that they apportion their duties to focus mainly on fundraising.

Good Executive Directors work hard to see that the organization fulfills its mission effectively and efficiently. It becomes all the more impossible for them to succeed when they need to represent each of the different parts of the organization at different times in different ways.

To consider that one person is driven by the Board to meet programming and operational needs, be responsible for raising the money to keep the books in balance, and to market and publicize its programs and services, has me taking off my own hat to such people — while, at the same time, heaping deserved scorn/criticism on a Board of Trustees that would create/allow such a deplorable situation.

Organizations would be far better off if leadership would recognize the unreasonable and counter-productive demands they are placing on the one individual who is responsible for management, marketing and fundraising.

To employ a “One-For-Three” fix for those needs is penny-wise and pound-foolish. If an organization is cash-strapped, unable to pay for three professionals’ salaries, they must accelerate their fundraising activity and make provision in the operating budget for three professionals performing their respective duties 100% of the time.

You cannot get 300% from anyone, and you risk burn-out if you try.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you have a question or comment for Tony, he can be reached at [email protected]. There is also a lot of good fundraising information on his website: Raise-Funds.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

CFC Charity Results
In my last post (June 28), I reviewed some of the general CFC statistics, and the results for the 2011 campaign. But, while overall campaign totals may be interesting, what every CFC charity wants to know is, “What are our results?”

CFC charities receive this information in the April/May timeframe, first with their overall totals/results, and then the individual information from donors who have chosen to release their contact information.

Keep in mind that a CFC donor has the option of remaining anonymous, and I mean truly anonymous. No one in the CFC charity will receive any information at all about the anonymous donors. This is a very popular choice by CFC donors, and as many as 60% of your donors may be anonymous … and those are some of your best supporters!

CFC Donor Communication – Say Thank You Early & Often
For those donors who have released their contact information, it will include name, address, and e-mail, and the donor has the option of releasing the specific amount they have pledged to your non-profit, or they can choose to “Not Release” the amount which shows up on the CFC donor sheets as “$NR.”
The information will look like this:
    CFC of the Regional Name
    Jane M. Doe
    1220 Main Street
    Town, ST Zip
    [email protected]
    NR or $650 (which represents this donor giving $25 per pay period for 26 pay periods)

Now that you have that information, obviously the first thing you need to do is send your identified donors a “Thank You.”

It’s your choice as to whether you want to send the thank you via a postal service letter, or via e-mail. You should thank your CFC donor the same way that you thank your other donors, however you do that.

And, whatever donor tracking software you’re using, use it, and make sure to have a separate code for your CFC donors.

Thanking Your Anonymous Donors
Now that you thanked your known donors, it’s also time to update the workplace giving section of your website, and any/all of your publications — newsletters, etc. — to thank your anonymous donors.

Depending upon your level of satisfaction and/or comfort you can tell your supporters your specific results or you can keep it general and just say you were pleased with how well your non-profit did in the fall campaign. Share any highlights you have from your current year, and share any exciting news you have about upcoming events.

In both the “Thank You” letters and reports, it’s also time to plant the seeds about how you would like your donors to support you in this fall’s campaign, and let them know of whatever opportunities there might be for them to become more involved with your organization.

Since a donor will contribute more through payroll deduction than they will with a one-time gift, it’s always worth highlighting the value/desirability of giving through payroll deduction. And, while you cannot solicit a CFC donor directly, you can invite them to other non-fundraising events/activities your non-profit is having, i.e., an open house.

Within your organization, it’s time to start thinking about who on your staff is going to be involved in this fall’s campaign, and what their roles will be. We’ll take a look at that, in depth, in upcoming posts.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

During his 25-year career in the Federal sector, Bill Huddleston, The CFC Coach, served in many CFC roles. If you want to participate in the Combined Federal Campaign, maximize your nonprofit’s CFC revenues, or just ask a few questions, contact … Bill Huddleston

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

I Recommend The Guide
One of the many pleasures in attending the recent national conference of the Association of Proposal Management Professionals (APMP) in Dallas was visiting the Shipley Associates booth. Over the past few decades, Steve Shipley and Shipley Associates have probably done more to advance the proposal profession than any other company. The new Shipley Proposal Guide 4.0 (2011) by Larry Newman exemplifies this contribution.

There are many excellent proposal guides available today, but I believe that the Shipley Proposal Guide is the best. I have kept earlier editions close to my desk. This one will be no exception.

Although this book is designed for companies, I strongly recommend that it be used by nonprofit organizations too. Most of Newman’s advice equally applies to grant proposals to government agencies.

Guide Contents
According to Larry Newman, the new guide has three aims:
(1) Help win competitive business more effectively, efficiently, and consistently;
(2) Offer clear and practical advice to business professionals about proposal development; and,
(3) Provide best-practice guidelines.

The Guide will help you and your nonprofit organization to:
• Align your proposals with the government agency’s evaluation criteria.
• Use a disciplined development process that emphasizes up-front planning.
• Schedule proposal development steps and maintain fidelity to the schedule.
• Orient your strategy to the government agency’s perspective.
• Focus your effort by writing an early executive summary.
• Apply proven process and management processes to proposal development.
• Write to the government agency.
• Use color reviews to control your development process and improve your proposals.

The Guide accomplishes these goals clearly by dividing the proposal development process into six topics: document design, proposal management, pricing and costing, process design, proposal writing, and sales and capture management. Within these six topics are over fifty subtopics that are each presented in a few pages. Two of these topics are described below.

Example 1: Executive Summaries
Under the topic “proposal management” there are six pages devoted to the all-important topic of “executive summaries.” The section begins with a strong, forthright statement: “Executive Summaries are the most important pages in a proposal. They set the tone for individual evaluators and are often the only pages read by the decision makers.”

The rest of the section breaks the development of good executive summaries into eight steps: (1) always include an executive summary; (2) maintain a customer focus; (3) build on your existing process and strategy; (4) organize the content to be clear and persuasive; (5) expand the four-box model template into a single- or multiple-page draft; (6) develop based on best-in-class practices; (7) follow sound writing guidelines; and (8) follow a defined process when preparing on short notice.

Each of these eight steps in clearly explained and illustrated with examples, pictures, charts, and tables. At the back of the Guide, there are three model executive summaries that will help anyone envision their own executive summaries for particular proposals.

Example 2: Gobbledygook
Under the topic “proposal writing,” there are about two pages devoted to “gobbledygook.” First, the word is defined and illustrated. Then Newman recommends two antidotes to proposal gobbledygook: (1) use specific words; and (2) avoid long, complex, and convoluted phrases.

Both antidotes are presented with all-too-familiar examples. There is even a table of common gobbledygook with its antidotes. “Activate” should be replaced by “start” while “heterogeneous” should be replaced by “different.”

The entries on executive summaries and gobbledygook are typical of the Guide. Everything is presented very logically and briefly with plenty of bad and good examples. These entries are a pleasure to read and easy to follow.

I strongly recommend the Shipley Proposal Guide 4.0. It can be ordered online at ShipleyWins.com. This book is indispensable. For NPOs, it will improve your government grant proposals, and for proposal professionals, it will advance your career.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Dr. Jayme Sokolow, founder and president of The Development Source, Inc.,
helps nonprofit organizations develop successful proposals to government agencies.
Contact Jayme Sokolow.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

As your NPO looks to increase its revenue from corporations, it is important to distinguish between grants from corporate foundations and corporate sponsorships.

Both are important sources of revenue, and both come from corporations – many even from the same corporation… But, since they differ in many significant ways, it will impact how you prospect, cultivate, solicit, and steward the corporate donor.

First let’s take a look at some facts about corporate giving published in the GivingUSA Foundation, “Spotlight” Issue 2, 2008. Corporations give a mixture of cash donations, in-kind gifts, and cash from corporate foundations. Approximately 44% of total corporate giving is cash gifts, 20% is in-kind gifts, and 36% is from corporate foundations. Corporate matching gifts, event sponsorships, and cause-related marketing all fall under the category of cash gifts.

Also according to this GivingUSA report, corporations tend to give for philanthropic, strategic, commercial, and political reasons. Where “in small companies, giving is often an extension of the owner’s generosity … giving by large, publicly owned companies is almost always influenced by enlightened self-interest.” The business benefits of philanthropic giving can include: increased employee loyalty, public goodwill, increased sales, and community or public infrastructure support.

The following table looks at how prospecting, cultivating, soliciting, and stewarding of corporate foundation grants differ from the same activities in securing corporate sponsorships:

Corporate Foundation Grants	Corporate Sponsorships
Funded through the corporate foundation	Generally funded through the corporation’s marketing budget
Generally from larger corporations	From small and large corporations
Prospect using online resources such as Foundation Center or Guidestar, annual reports from NPOs with similar missions, and foundation 990s	Prospect using annual reports from NPOs with similar missions, and local media advertising of fundraising events
Usually publish grant submission and reporting guidelines, and deadlines	Usually have minimal or no guidelines and deadlines
Solicit the foundation manager, and submit grant request following corporate guidelines	Solicit the marketing department with a sponsor packet that outlines the value proposition
Typically want recognition for the corporation	Definitely want recognition and advertising value for the corporation, and naming opportunities depending on sponsorship level
Typically want employee volunteer opportunities at the NPO	Definitely want tickets to the event, and may want employee volunteer opportunities at the NPO
Important to follow-up with outcomes for the program that was included in the grant request	Important to follow-up with event outcomes (how many attendees, dollars raised, etc.) and corporate recognition outcomes (media mentions, website hits, e-mail open rates, etc.)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Lynn deLearie Consulting, LLC, helps nonprofit organizations develop, enhance and expand grants programs, and helps them secure funding from foundations and corporations. Contact Lynn deLearie.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

We are preparing to enter into a capital campaign for a Christian Camp. We do not have a budget for a feasibility study, but we do have some capable people. What resources or materials can you recommend for us to do a feasibility study ourselves?

========================================

I have two immediate/automatic reactions to that question:

1. Feasibility Studies are obsolete. What you should be doing is a Planning Study — see this
   series of postings: Fundraising Planning

Not having money budgetted for a study should not keep you from looking for and finding someone or some corporation, foundation, church or church congregation to fund a study.

Then, in gratitude for that initial support, appropriate recognition could/should be given to that funding source(s).

When conducting the study, giving mention to the fact that a specific person, church or institution has already supported your project (by funding the study) adds credibility to the process.

2. As is most often, when organizations do their own pre-campaign studies, they don’t
   know what information to seek and how to use what information they get; and, planning
   a capital campaign based on faulty/inadequate/insufficient information is a formula for failure.

Fundraising consultants (the good ones) who work with clients to design and implement planning studies write the questions for each individual study after meeting with leaders of and learning as much as is reasonable about the non-profit. They don’t use all of the same questions for each client/situation. Questions must be designed to get interviewees thinking along specific lines.

Sure, there are some questions that could apply in many studies, but most of the questions for a study are/should be specific to that study.

A proper planning study is an investment in success. Identification (and the initial cultivation) of potential leaders and major donors and the setting of an attainable goal are the key results of a proper pre-campaign study … a study that will tell you whether or not you should be entering into a capital campaign, and suggesting what strategies and tactics would be most effective in-and-for each individual major-gift prospect and each distinct set of circumstances.

The only advice I can offer to an organization in the circumstances you describe is that if you’re going to do it, you should do it right. Doing it wrong gets very scary.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? With over 30 years of counseling in major gifts, capital campaigns, bequest programs and the planning studies to precede these three, I’ll be pleased to answer your questions. Contact me at [email protected]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

For a very long time I wanted to write something which championed the cause of overworked, underpaid, and under appreciated staff development professionals. But while I was still working as a member of that glorious “clan,” I felt that I was not in the best position to make the case for my many (often) under-appreciated colleagues.

Being retired, I can now better voice my opinions than I could while still working as a DOD – when perhaps I might have been seen as self-aggrandizing.

For my colleagues, still at it today, however, I wanted to bring to the surface some of the feelings I know they must keep to themselves.

I am reminded of the many times I was sitting in the back seat of a box in our Cleveland Orchestra concert hall with my donor/prospect guests nicely ensconced up front in the choice seats. (They were, earlier that evening, our guests at a festive reception and an excellent dinner.)

On stage, the finest Orchestra in the world was playing the best in classical music … “just for them,” and they were looking forward to meeting the conductor and other Orchestra notables at a party following the concert. I knew they were greatly satisfied. It was the perfect setting for building donor loyalty and setting the stage for even bigger future gifts.

All of which would have me serenely survey the scene in front of me, then lean back in my chair, and say to myself, “I made all of this happen! I’m really, really good at this job! They’re lucky to have me!” (No one knew I felt that way until now!)

Hopefully, you feel that way too !!

No matter what (type of) organization you work for, you should be (privately) patting yourself on the back when you have those magic moments – when you see the good things that happen because of your hard work and dedication.

Maybe it’s when you see an otherwise severely physically challenged youngster find new vitality and strength as she/he is put astride a horse at your Therapeutic Riding Center; seeing the smiles from the hungry as they are fed in your hunger center; as you breathe the clean air your organization is making possible for all in your community; when you are saving and preserving a wildlife refuge; while attending another graduation class ceremony at your school or college; helping to reclaim and repair the life of a rape victim.

In short, whatever the mission of your organization, you should/must have those secret, personal and justifiably proud moments regarding whatever your organization is able to do … because of what you do !!

Think of it. You are helping to enhance/enrich the quality of life for scores of people or animals, and you are generally helping to make life more fulfilling for broad segments of our society.

Remember, the work you do behind the scenes makes it possible for others to be in the spotlight … as your organization makes positive differences in the quality of life. You will find that your acceptance of who rightfully gets the public rewards and recognition for success will more than ever be personally and professionally satisfying to you.

And you should feel good about what you do — very good — but keep it to yourself, and savor every moment of it. You are really, really good at your job. “They” are indeed lucky to have you.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you have a question or comment for Tony, he can be reached at [email protected]. There is also a lot of good fundraising information on his website: Raise-Funds.com

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

“There are lies, damned lies and statistics.” -– Mark Twain

Here are some statistics about the CFC, and some common sense observations as to why you should almost always not base your actions on numbers that reflect the entire non-profit sector.

It would be like getting a weather report for the Northern Hemisphere, perhaps interesting, but usually not too valuable for letting you know what you should do about your outdoor plans!

2011 CFC Results
The 2011 Combined Federal Campaign results were just released by the Office of Personnel Management, Office of CFC Operations (opm.gov/cfc), and the total raised was $272,679,280. In terms of actual giving, if the CFC were a foundation, that level of giving would make it the 14^th largest foundation in the USA … ahead of the David and Lucille Packard Foundation.

Nonprofit Research Collaborative 2012 Report
Another report that was released in April is the Nonprofit Fundraising Survey by the Nonprofit Research Collaborative, which is a consortium of seven different organizations: Association of Fundraising Professionals, Blackbaud, The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, The Foundation Center, Giving USA Foundation, GuideStar, and the National Center for Charitable Statistics at the Urban Institute. This REPORT provides a really good snapshot of the current fundraising environment.

Federated Campaign Statistics
In the Nonprofit Fundraising Survey, one of the questions that was asked was, “Does your non-profit participate in federated campaigns?” Federated campaigns include the Combined Federal Campaign, United Way campaigns, Jewish Federation campaigns, and others. The response: 48% of non-profits participate in some type of federated campaign.

A subsequent question in the federated campaigns area, was, “If you do participate in a federated campaign, what percentage of funds do you receive from that campaign?” Here the numbers get interesting and misleading, all at the same time.
   53% receive between 1-9% of their revenue from federated campaigns.
   11% receive between 10-25% from federated campaigns.
     3% receive between 26-50% from federated campaigns.

At first glance, it appears that the majority of organizations are not doing too well, since more than half (53%) are only in the 1-9% range. Here’s where the problems with statistics start to show up. While I do not know if the American Red Cross was a respondent to the survey, if they were, they would be in the less than 1% category for the gifts they receive from their CFC donors. However, that “small percentage amount” is actually $5.5 million dollars, which, I think, even the Red Cross notices !!

One client, with an annual budget in the $125,000 range, followed the tips and techniques that I’m sharing in these blog posts and generated approximately $8,500 in 2011 pledges. They are very pleased with those numbers – as that was their first year in the CFC.

The point I hope I’ve made is that you should not be swayed by someone else’s success (or more the case, someone else’s lack of success) to affect your CFC action plan and steps. The blueprints and positive steps I’m sharing with you have been proven to work.

And, as I regularly emphasize, workplace giving is the only type of nonprofit fundraising that is subsidized, low risk and high leverage.

In the next post, I’ll be talking about what specific next steps you should be taking regarding your CFC campaign.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

During his 25-year career in the Federal sector, Bill Huddleston, The CFC Coach, served in many CFC roles. If you want to participate in the Combined Federal Campaign, maximize your nonprofit’s CFC revenues, or just ask a few questions, contact … Bill Huddleston

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

We’re taking next week off to celebrate the Fourth. We hope to see you back here on July 10. Also, for the Summer, we will be posting only once each week, Tuesdays. We’ll be back to our twice/week posting on Thursday, September 6.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

From an email: I am scheduled to interview with a staffing company who is helping a non-profit organization fill the position of Director of Programs and Grant Development for a Chicago nonprofit. I’ve never held this position before, but I have over 10 years of IT experience and over 8 years of Sales experience. What is your opinion about starting salary for this position?

This was a question with many implications, so I addressed the several questions that I saw implied….

1. A person with the experience, skills and track record to be Director of Programs and Grant Development could be eligible for a salary of $75-$90,000 in the Chicago area.

2. How does your work history qualify you for that position?

3. No matter how bright and how much of a quick learner someone may be, a person without the experience, skills and track record, if hired by the nonprofit organization, would be doing that NPO and the people it serves a major disservice.

4. The eighteen years of work experience that you describe, where highly desirable in other occupational areas, should only qualify you for an entry level position in development at $25-$30,000.

5. If you have a strong desire to serve the nonprofit community in a development position, you’d be better off volunteering with a large NPO that would be willing to give you some training/mentoring – the nonprofit community would also be better off.

To take a position with a nonprofit organization for which you are not qualified, by virtue of training and/or experience, is to violate the ethics of the sector … but that’s a whole ‘nother posting.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? With over 30 years of counseling in major gifts, capital campaigns, bequest programs and the planning studies to precede these three, I’ll be pleased to answer your questions. Contact me at [email protected]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Because words are so important in federal grant proposals, your proposal narrative should avoid clichés – words/phrases that have been worn out and have lost their meaning and effectiveness … especially the latter.

Clichés distract reviewers from the core of your proposal. They also waste the reviewer’s time, which can be very frustrating. Eliminating clichés, therefore, will help make your prose more persuasive, effective, and easier to read.

These are just a few of my “favorite” clichés:

Best of breed
If you are not selling puppies, why claim that you solution is the “best of breed?” The phrase comes from the world of show dogs.

Utilize
Sports announcers frequently use the word “utilize.” That is a compelling reason to drop it.

Well-seasoned
Managers who are “well-seasoned” probably have been consuming too much pepper and nutmeg.

Hit the ground running
Are you training for the Olympics or trying to get a grant?

Leverage, World Class, Uniquely Qualified
This is how you write an hour before the deadline. Quite simply, these words are meaningless.

Such words and phrases, which could be multiplied forever, are examples of wordiness, a lack of precision, and the inability to discuss topics of substance. Studiously avoid imprecise language that makes you appear unfocused and inept.

Clichés are the kinds of words that organizations frequently use to cover up problems, difficulties, or a lack of qualifications. That alone is a good reason to avoid them.

Choose Effective Wording

– some simple rules to help you avoid mind-numbing clichés in your grant proposal prose:

• Focus on what’s most important to your reviewers, and avoid unnecessary or overly long set-ups.
• Be as specific as possible while avoiding pompous words and phrases.
• Eliminate redundant words.
• Use the correct word in context.

Here are two examples of how you can turn your clichés into good prose. Clichés are in bold.

Before: The Jones building is the shining jewel in our downtown.
After: The Jones building is an outstanding example of early nineteenth-century classical style architecture in downtown Centerville.

Before: The J. D. Smith Center is widely admired as a fiscally responsible family planning organization.
After: The J. D. Smith Center received a #1 rating from Charity Navigator for “outstanding financial management” for the fourth year in a row.

If you use clichés, reviewers may conclude that you are not likely to communicate clearly and effectively on your proposed project because you cannot communicate clearly in your proposal. Avoid clichés, and your proposal will be more persuasive.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Dr. Jayme Sokolow, founder and president of The Development Source, Inc.,
helps nonprofit organizations develop successful proposals to government agencies. Contact Jayme Sokolow.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.