Category: Finance

The Senior Development Person functions in four broad areas:
•  Long- and Short-Term Planning
       Working with Leadership
•  Operational Planning and Analysis
       Working with Leadership, Administration and Staff to identify
       and select the (marketing, public relations and development)
       programs that will best address established goals and
       objectives.
•  Coordinating Development Activities with those of the other depts.
•  Program Supervision
       Working with Staff and/or vendors to plan and oversee Events and Mass Mailings —
       Solicitations and other Communications, and Coordinate the activities of the
       Volunteer Leadership.

The Operational Development Person functions in four specific areas:
•  Long- and Short-Term Planning
       Working with the senior development person
•  Operational Planning and Analysis
       Working with Leadership, Administration and senior development person to identify and
       select the (marketing, public relations and development) programs that will best address
       goals and objectives.
•  Program Planning
       Working with Volunteers and vendors to plan Events and Mass Mailings
•  Program Implementation
       Working with Volunteers and vendors to implement specific relationship-building and
       fundraising activities, and Coordinate the Activities of the Volunteer Leadership

The Development Support Person functions in two general areas:
•  Data Entry
       Information on gifts, donors and prospects
•  Communications
       Contact with donors, prospects, volunteers and vendors to obtain/confirm information,
       and facilitating the communications of the operational development person with donors,
       prospects, volunteers and vendors.

(This piece has been on my hard drive for so long, I don’t remember if I wrote it or if someone else did, but it’s information worth having, and I’ll be happy to give recognition to its author if I’m informed it wasn’t me !!)

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

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? Contact me at [email protected] 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.

Developing a grant proposal to a government agency is a risky undertaking. However, there are predictable risks that you should anticipate and address. If you do not address them at the beginning of your effort, your may have trouble submitting a competitive grant proposal by the deadline.

Risks and How to Address Them
Below are the four most common risks and strategies for addressing them.

1. Insufficient Information about the Government Agency
•  Conduct electronic research about the government agency
•  Engage the government agency outside the office at professional meetings, conferences,
and other venues
•  Use ethical and reliable people and legitimate sources to provide more information and
insight about the government agency

2. Tight Schedule
•  Create a schedule that works backward from the deadline to the kick-off meeting
•  Build time into the schedule for delays and other problems
•  Get the resources you need to meet the deadline

3. Scarce Resources
•  Establish a realistic proposal development budget
•  Identify and secure needed resources to do the proposal well, from equipment to people
•  Use consultants when necessary to bolster your proposal team

4. Incompetent and/or Delusional Senior Management and Colleagues
•  Use a solid bid/no bid process to reject grant opportunities that you have little or no
chance of winning
•  Create a plan to address major risks
•  Provide sufficient time within your schedule to resolve difficulties and bottlenecks
•  Maintain a good sense of humor and a stoical attitude about the proposal effort

Risks are common and predictable when you develop government grant proposals. Anticipate them and you will be more successful.

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

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

The Development Office and its staff functions with-and-through a volunteer cadre, and:

•  Participates in the strategic planning process to address the
    feasibility of attaining specific long-range and short-term
    funding goals.
•  Is responsible for working with Leadership and Administration
    in planning and implementing the activities needed to generate
    the funding required to meet the goal established by the
    strategic planning process.
•  Participates in the process that links the setting of cash flow goals to the fund raising process.
•  Works with Leadership in the creation/adoption of Short- and Long-Term Development Plans
    designed to identify, educate, cultivate and involve major gift prospects in the activities of the
    organization, so that short- and long-term funding goals can be met.
•  Works independently and with Leadership in researching prospective major donors.
•  Coordinates and tracks activities of Leadership in that process, and in the evaluation of
    solicitation of those prospects.
•  Maintains and coordinates the use of the organization’s database.
•  Works independently and with Leadership in designing and implementing broad-based
    marketing, public relations and fund raising programs.
•  Coordinates, via the research process, the identification of which individuals, foundations
    and corporations should be donor prospects for which programs and activities.

(This piece has been on my hard drive for so long, I don’t remember if I wrote it or if someone else did, but it’s information worth having, and I’ll be happy to give recognition to its author if I’m informed it wasn’t me !!)

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

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? Contact me at [email protected] 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.

Recently, a disgruntled grant seeker I know told me that he was so upset with what he said was a “blatant” turndown from a foundation Program Officer that he was going to go over that official’s head to appeal to a board member of the foundation — someone whom he knows.

My immediate reaction was that he needs to know how to take “No” for an answer. By not doing so, he increases the likelihood that he will poison that foundation’s “philanthropic well.”

The rejection should be followed by a gracious acceptance of that program officer’s decision.

It’s best to leave the grantor better conditioned for the next time the organization wants to go back to that “well” for funding — which will probably be sooner than later. To do otherwise risks burning that “funding bridge” beyond repair.

Going over the head of a program officer promises nothing but trouble. My rule of thumb is never leapfrog over anybody. In general, woe befalls the fund-raiser who goes around the program officers.

There could be double trouble, should the higher-level contact be displeased to be put in the middle of such a thorny issue – that of needing to rule on what a subordinate has already decided.

Consider that some program officers may zealously guard their positions of authority – even to ensure they are the last resort in the granting process.

For us not to accept that stance can imply that we question their expertise and judgment – even their integrity. Any instance of real or perceived criticism, or the suggestion that a program officer can do a better job or that they did not do the job at all, may well evoke the real risk of a seriously negative reaction to the next proposal we submit.

We should have it fixed in our minds that program officers always do a great job, even when they deny our requests for funding and we think they erred in their judgment.

Even if we think they made a major error, we should not be foolish enough to suggest that by going over their heads. We have got to be smart, and not to risk making an enemy of a person who could very well have a commanding position to decline our future grant requests.

A highly regarded foundation authority once said: “The grant seeker always comes to grantors, psychologically, on their knees. Most grantors work with care and diligence to find a way to lift them to their feet.”

To that I say, “While on our knees before grantors, even if we don’t like being in that position, we don’t bite them on their ankles.”

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

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

A reader asked:
If my 501 (c) 3 organization receives a check/donation in January 2012 (postmark is also for January 2012), but the check has a December 2011 date, is it correct that we are to record that donation as 2012 income … even though the intent of the donor may be for the gift to be considered a 2011 donation?

Christine responds:
Here is what the IRS has to say about the timing of contributions, in Publication 526 Charitable Contributions (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p526.pdf):

If the envelope is postmarked 2012, the contribution is for 2012. If the envelope is postmarked 2011, the contribution is for 2011. This is called “constructive receipt.”

The organization is deemed to have constructively received a gift the moment the promise is made or when the money leaves the control of the donor, i.e. placed in the mail. Back-dating a check does not prove that the gift was made in the prior year.

It is possible, however, that an envelope placed in a post office box may not be picked up for a day or two during the holidays!!

Even if you do not normally make copies of donation checks during the year, be sure to do so when you are depositing December donation checks in January.

Many organizations try to stretch the year when individual donors fail to mail their gifts before the actual end of the year. Many others play it safe by adhering to a strict policy of dating a gift by the date of receipt. Some judgment on the part of the organization may well be needed in a few cases. The safe and conservative approach is to attribute the gift to the later date when there is confusion.

The reader also asked:
If a check used to make a donation has two names on it, do we write the tax receipt only to the person who signed the check or to both people whose names are on the check?

Hank responded:
Assuming you didn’t get a note with the check indicating that it came from one (not both) of the people named on the check, and assuming that you have no record of prior giving from one-or-both of those named, the acknowledgment/receipt/thank you should be addressed to both.

How they use that receipt is up to them. If you’ve gotten prior gifts from one of the people named on the check, but not the other, then you can use your judgment as to whether to thank just the prior donor. It never hurts to thank someone !!

BTW, you are not sending them a “tax receipt,” you are sending them a receipt they can use for tax purposes … an important distinction !! For the purposes of donor relations, it would also be best for the receipt to be in letter format, with some warm words of thanks.

See IRS Publication 1771 (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1771.pdf) for guidance on providing acknowledgement of a donation.

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

Christine L. Manor, CPA, wrote QuickBooks for Not-for-Profit Organizations, available from The Sleeter Group … at www.sleeterstore.com. Christine can be reached at [email protected]

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

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

When Does A Foundation Really Mean “No”?

Unfortunately, the answer is most of the time. Let’s go through a couple of scenarios from my recent real-world encounters to see how this can play out.

Scenario A: You’ve done your prospecting homework and have identified a foundation that’s a good fit with your organization. Unfortunately, you don’t have a connection between one of your board members and one of their trustees, but the foundation does accept unsolicited proposals.

So you go ahead and submit a well-written proposal, following all of their guidelines. Several months go by and you’re wondering when you will receive notification. Probably still too soon. So you wait until six months go by and still nothing. You call the contact number listed in the foundation’s 990 (or in the Foundation Directory) and leave a message, asking about the proposal that you submitted six months ago. They don’t call back. This is a, “No.”

If you’re absolutely, 100% sure that this foundation is a perfect fit for your organization, then go ahead and submit another proposal. If you get the same result this time, then cross them off your list!

Variation on Scenario A: You do get in touch with the foundation manager after submittal and they indicate that your proposal was not accepted. Although this news is disappointing, feedback from the foundation manager is valuable for your grant program.

Ask them if they can share any reasons why your proposal was denied: were there too many other submission this grant cycle and you just didn’t make the cut; did you leave something critical out of your submission; or, is your organization just not a good fit with their foundation? And, thank them for taking the time to discuss your proposal!

Scenario B: Again, you’ve done your homework. This time you’ve identified a foundation that doesn’t accept unsolicited proposals. So you submit a letter describing a little about your organization and asking about the possibility of applying for grant funding. You indicate that you will follow up by phone. You do, and you leave a message. They don’t call back.

A couple of weeks go by and you leave another message. They still don’t call back.

This is a, “No,” and until you can make a connection through a board member, staff member, involved donor or volunteer, then better to delete this foundation from your list.

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

Lynn deLearie, owner of Lynn deLearie Consulting, LLC, helps nonprofit organizations develop, enhance and expand grant programs, and helps them secure funding from foundations and corporations. She can be contacted at [email protected]..

Online fundraising happens

…when people come to your website and make a gift. While you can reach previous donors and prospects with email, the vast majority of online donors are not on your email list – yet.

While you can pay for ads to bring traffic to your website, Google and other search engines will bring the best possible traffic to your site — people who care about your issues.

That’s why up about 50% of new visitors to a non-profit website come via a search engine, and the granddaddy of all search engines is Google … with more than 60% of the traffic.

The best way to draw quality traffic to a web page has always been the “simple” way – have great content. With Google Panda, their new search engine, it’s even more true.

Google used to place more emphasis on links from other sites, especially those that get a lot of traffic. That created the “link swapping” industry, which encouraged links to lots of pages in a reciprocal strategy, designed to create links, even those that didn’t result in clicks.

Google has changed the way it measures “good content,” from one that placed more emphasis on what other sites thought about your page, to one that places more emphasis on what users think about your page.

Google’s new “Panda” search engine places value on what people do at your site, as well as how they get there. It measures:
•  Time on Site: how long visitors spend on pages they get to from Google
•  Bounce Rate: the percentage of users that leave your site without doing anything
•  Page views per visit: How much they poke around your site

It also measures how many times a page is “shared” via FaceBook and other social networks. So make sure that you make it easy for people to share your key pages with tools like “ShareThis” or “AddThis.”

Finally, it also measures what it calls “Branded Search Traffic” – the visits that result when people enter your site name or organization name in Google to get a link to your site. That implies that people are being directed to your site from offline conversations, and come to Google to find your page.

Remember that Google ranks web pages, not web sites. So find the pages that get the most “entry traffic” from search engines and review them using questions found on Google’s own blog: Google’s Guidance On Building High Quality.

What is still important?
•  Original, useful content – tell your organization’s stories
•  A meaningful page title (the headline that shows up in search results)
•  A helpful page description (the first dozen or so words that show up in a Google search)
•  Good calls to action within your popular pages. Getting people to subscribe to your
email list, donate, sign a petition, or share your content on FaceBook all reduce your
“bounce rate” and increase your Panda score. They also produce meaningful results to you.

Do your own mini search optimization audit to see how your audience will or won’t find you in search.
1.  Create a list of keyword phrases that describe your issues, e.g. “hunger Cincinnati”
or “helping left-handed Lithuanians”
2.  Enter them in Google and see where your top page on that issue scores. See who
else is ahead of you and look at their pages to find out why.
3.  Look at your web site traffic reports to see which phrases are bringing people to
your site, and what pages they’re landing on. Those are the best places to start.

More questions about search engine marketing? Send me an email!

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

Rick Christ has been helping nonprofit organizations use the internet for fundraising, communications and advocacy since 2009, and has been a frequent writer on the subject. He delights in your questions and arguments. Please contact him at: [email protected] or at his LinkedIn Page

A reader wrote:
Our non-profit, faith based social service agency is going to split from the identity/brand of the church, but continue under a new name and separate 501(c)(3) to offer the same programs and services. The only difference is that it would no longer be associated with the church or considered part of the church’s social ministry.

The way I see it, there are two major obstacles a development team would face. My questions to you are: (1.) how would you communicate this change to your current constituents? And, (2.) how would you go about revising your approaches to fundraising …?
=========================
For the purpose of responding to your question as completely as I can, I’ll assume that your questions relate to foster care services and that the new 501(c)(3) will comply with State laws regarding non-discrimination of prospective foster parents.

First, who, now, are your constituents/donors?

The people who gave to support the church and its good works, within the church’s beliefs/restrictions, will be unlikely to support a nonprofit that does not apply the same “restrictions.”

People who are interested in supporting foster care services for children, no matter the (prospective/qualified) foster parents, are likely to continue to support you and the children you serve.

For those folks, and for lots of people who have not yet been donors, a simple explanation that you’ve created the new nonprofit organization to make sure that there is as broad a base of quality/caring prospective foster parents as possible … to be able to provide homes for the greatest number of children.

And, to be sure that your (potential) donors are reassured and fully informed, let them know that the board of the new (c)(3) is a “diverse” group with the needs of the children uppermost in their minds and with the intention of complying with all applicable laws.

I have no doubt that the majority of your current donors (and a great many prospective donors) have read the papers, heard the reports, and are aware of the “controversy” about same-sex foster parents. Don’t beat the “issue” to death, just be open with them.

For your second question, since I’m not familiar with your prior fundraising methodology, my immediate response is to suggest that you stay with what has worked in the past. And, if you don’t already have a major gifts program, now would be a great time to create one.

I would also suggest the necessity of a regional marketing effort to get your new brand/identity known/accepted.

And, as a result of the changes/turmoil, it would also be a good time to ask donors to increase their giving … to account for any drop in income that the program has experienced … and to help you provide foster care services to as many children as possible.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? Contact me at [email protected] 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.

An Executive Summary must be compelling and persuasive, as it introduces your narrative and provides a roadmap for reviewers. If it isn’t, reviewers will likely not pay much attention to the rest of your proposal.

Writers of good Executive Summaries avoid four common mistakes:

#1: Poorly written Executive Summaries very often begin with some flowery language about how pleased you are to submit this terrific proposal, and how you look forward to its review. These summaries tend to be very general, contain far too much marketing hype about the wonderfulness of your organization, and usually don’t focus on the needs of the government agency.

#2: Hastily written Executive Summaries, especially those written at the last minute, do not allow for proper review and rewriting. You need time to think, polish, and refine. This cannot be done at 2 A.M. the morning of the proposal deadline.

#3: Not addressing how you plan to carry out the contract is THE major mistake. Your Executive Summary must answer two important questions: Why am I bidding? What am I offering the government agency? It is, of course, important to discuss the positive qualities and services of your organization, but not to the extent of glossing over what the gov’t agency really wants to know.

#4: Bad Executive Summaries are dry and boring, and suggest to the reviewer that there is more of the same in the rest of the proposal. Your Executive Summary is a short sales pitch. Your challenge is to hook your reviewers and engage them in the rest of your narrative. You do that by demonstrating, in a relatively few paragraphs, that you have something special to offer the government agency.

This “introduction” to your proposal is too important to treat lightly. A well written Executive Summary should get the proposal reviewer to want to read your entire proposal.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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

Previously, we looked at some of the important considerations for a nonprofit in deciding if it wants to enroll in the CFC for the 2012 solicitation season.

For local charities, however, the application deadlines vary among the more than 200 regional CFCs, with charities in the Washington, DC metro area having the earliest deadline of January 31, and the deadlines for many of the other regional CFCs coming in February or March.

The CFC is a Government Program … That’s Big On Acronyms (surprise!)

As mentioned previously, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is the agency responsible for regulating the CFC, and administering the application process for national and international charities.

For local charities, it’s important to be aware of two other entities:.

The OPM Office of CFC Operations has a small staff and the actual responsibility for the management and conduct of the CFC campaigns is designated to the Local Federal Coordinating Committees (LFCCs) and to community agencies called Principal Combined Fund Organizations (PCFOs), the latter being contracted to provide year-to-year management/administration and financial services for the local CFC campaigns.

In many regions of the country, the PCFOs are often the local United Ways.

The regional LFCCs have the responsibility to evaluate the local CFC charities each year for determination about being included in the CFC catalog of charities. The LFCCs function as the “Boards of Directors” for the local CFCs and have oversight and governance responsibilities over the Principal Combined Fund Organization (PCFO).

Many local CFCs conduct workshops on how to apply to the CFC in their region. On the OPM.gov/CFC website, the tab labeled “Campaign Locator” will help you identify your local CFC.

One nonprofit in the DC area that does an excellent job is “Martha’s Table” — www.marthastable.org. I have no affiliation with them, but if you take a look at their website you will see an example of a nonprofit that has a real handle on workplace giving, including how they thank their donors and volunteers.

This is their 25 word description from the CFC Catalog of Caring:

Martha’s Table works with low-income children, families

and individuals to meet their basic needs through food,

clothing, daycare, and after-school learning activities.

Remember, while it must be accurate, your 25 word description is the marketing message that you write.

Having addressed the various aspects of the application process, there are two points I feel must be emphasized: With the CFC you are developing multi-year donors; and, there’s much less red tape on the backend than with grants.

CFC Donors are Multi-Year Donors

The reality is that most CFC donors are multiple year donors. Once they start giving to the CFC charities they check off, they tend to become loyal supporters who, for the most part, check off the same charities every year, even if/when they remain anonymous to the nonprofit to which they are giving.

I have seen thousands of CFC pledge cards during my Federal career, and the reality is that most of the donors made minimal changes from year to year, once they became donors.

Less Red Tape Than Most Grants

A nonprofit must apply each year, but there are no required “quarterly progress reports” or other funder required documentation. Not bad for a government program!

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

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