Category: Finance

Hoping that, between last Tuesday and today, you haven’t used the four illustrations of bad fundraising technique, we continue with the theme/intent of this three-part posting.

Once in a while, the response to the cold Letter, the cold Call, the Invitation (out of the blue) or the Visit (not preceded by the appropriate education and cultivation) might be, “Of course, let me write you a check.”

That check, whether in 4 or 5 figures, is a “gift” that most non-profits would consider “major.” E.D.s and D.O.D.s often look upon a 4-5 figure check as a “gift-from-on-high,” and don’t realize that, as good as it might feel to get that check, they’ve wasted (at least, misused) a lot of time and effort.

If the contact was a suggestion by someone close to Mr./Ms. Gotbucks, the “gift” is likely to be a quid-pro-quo — a dilemma in which many Directors of Development and Executive Directors find themselves. The “prospect” knows that if s/he gives to his/her friend’s pet charity, then the friend will give to his/hers.

That 4-figure-check, by some amazing coincidence, is likely to be for the same amount as the check his friend/partner/acquaintance wrote to the non-profit organization that contacted him/her at Mr./Ms. Gotbucks suggestion.

If his/her name was provided by an acquaintance or was obtained from a “list,” there would be (much) less likelihood that Mr./Ms. Gotbucks will write a check — there would be less motivation, if any, to do so.

Whatever the size of the check you manage to solicit/obtain/wheedle/beg from this “prospect,” it will be for an amount that the “donor” considers a token — doing-what-has-to-be-done-to-keep-the-scales-balanced, or just to get rid of you. It’s “Go Away Money.”

In other words, “Here’s a check. It’s all you’re going to get. Now, Go Away!!” And, from then on, you have a donor who doesn’t return your calls, respond to your mail or show any interest in learning about or becoming involved in what you do.

Now, don’t get me wrong!! I’m not suggesting that you shouldn’t take the check, or even that you shouldn’t make the effort to get it in the first place. The point is, by the above method, you will not realize sufficient/appropriate value for your investment — you (may) end up with a check, but not a constituent.

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

This three-part posting concludes next Tuesday … with an emphasis on “real” major gifts fundraising.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If 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.

While the Internet has not changed “everything,” it has changed how we shop, how we get directions, and most relevant to the CFC … and all nonprofit fundraising, it has changed where we get our news and information.

And even though video is an increasingly important method of sharing information, the written word is how we acquire most of that data.

Free Press Release Distribution Sites

In that regard, there is one type of tool that can be invaluable for nonprofits in getting the word out about their mission: Internet based press release distribution sites. PRWeb and 24-7 Press Release are two of the better known of those sites … many of which have free options for non-profits.

One thing to keep in mind about the Internet is that it has a voracious appetite for content, and that should change how you get the word out. If you can tell your nonprofit’s stories to more people, you will generate more exposure and hopefully more positive attention as well.

You may not remember the old way of developing a press release distribution list, where NPOs compiled a contact list of the media outlets in their region; and, when they had something newsworthy to report, they would print and mail copies of their press release to that media list.

With that method, you might have gotten a story published if one of those outlets was interested in your topic and issue. That was “push” marketing — you pushed out your press release to whatever publications you thought/hoped might be interested.

Now we have press release distribution sites, where, instead of distributing your press release to outlets you think/hope might be interested … newspapers, magazines, other publications and websites looking for content come looking for your information.

They sort the volumes of information based on the keywords associated with each press release. This is the “pull” method of distribution versus the “push” method.

Telling your stories this way can afford you incredible leverage. For example, working with one client, we submitted one press release to 7 sites on April 8 … by April 11 it was on 426 sites; 2 days later on 876 sites; and, within 3 weeks it was on 12,000 sites. This particular press release had a good selection of keywords, including family friendly, volunteer appreciation and mission related terms.

Aside from the simple fact that no one has the time to actually contact thousands of media outlets, you cannot always predict which sites will actually be interested in your content.

For the nonprofit in my example, the big surprise was that a national news service was interested in visiting their site and doing a story about one of their activities – and this organization is a “local” nonprofit.

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

The next post in the CFC series will discuss creating the CFC project team within your nonprofit, including leadership development opportunities for your staff and volunteers.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ + + NOTICE + + +

The Office of CFC Operations will conduct an application training for national and international charities on November 18, 2011, 10AM — Noon, at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (1900 E Street NW, Washington DC). The session is free and open to everyone as long as seats are available. Send an email with your name, organization and telephone number to [email protected] to reserve a seat.

The Office of CFC will also conduct a similar training via webcast on December 1 at 2PM (EST). To participate, send an email with your name, organization, and telephone number.

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

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

In our definition, we suggest that, no matter its size, unless a gift met certain parameters, it wasn’t “major.”

We emphasize the requirement that the process that obtained the gift had to be based on a plan/strategy that included face-to-face cultivation and solicitation components, and that the gift had to significantly help in attaining fundraising goals.

We also provided our definition of major donors, people (for the most part) who feel passionately about wanting to see your mission achieved, and who derive satisfaction from using their wealth to advance that mission. They are people who have a level of involvement with your organization and/or its programs, and they have a need that will be satisfied by making a significant gift in pursuit of your mission.

These definitions exclude all large/significant gifts that don’t meet those parameters.

Why?? For the same reason that “Development” is not a synonym for “fundraising.” “Fundraising” is what happens after sufficient cultivation and involvement — it is the “asking” part of the Development process.

How often has a friend said to you, to your executive director, or to a client, that they know someone who would probably (want to) give your NPO a bucket of money, a real Mr./Ms. Gotbucks that you should contact immediately?

And, how often did it become, “Let’s-drop-everything-and-focus-on-this-prospective-‘major-donor’”? So much time and energy got invested in acquiring this “guaranteed” major gift that other processes/projects/systems were deprived of what was needed to achieve already established goals.

Efforts to acquire this gift usually take one or more of the following forms:

A. The Introductory Letter (with “package”)– “Dear Mr./Ms. Gotbucks. Your friend/business partner/acquaintance/etc. suggested that you’d be interested in learning about all the good things we do. We are enclosing a brief 53 page description of all the wonderful things we do for society. Please use the enclosed return envelope to send your extra-large check to help us continue to do all those good things.”

B. The Introductory Call — “Dear Mr./Ms. Gotbucks. Your friend/business partner/acquaintance/etc. said that we should contact you, and that you’d be interested in learning about who we are. I’d like to stop by and tell you about all the good things we do.”

C. The Invitation to See/Visit (by phone or mail) — “Dear Mr./Ms. Gotbucks. Your friend/partner/acquaintance/etc. said that we should contact you, and invite you to an upcoming meeting/program/event….”

D. The Visit to the Prospect — ….more of the same….

Bottom line, the end result of going into the “drop-everything-else” mode is, most often, a rejection, a delay, or an, “I’ll get back to you.”

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

This posting continues next Tuesday; but, just to be clear, we are not recommending the four “approaches” described above. To the contrary, they are illustrations of how so many NPOs waste their time and resources in misguided, ineffective fundraising efforts.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If 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.

What does every prospector need to “hit the mother lode?” A good map!! And prospecting for foundation funding is no different.

Here’s the good news: with a couple of key tools, you can create your own map to lead you to some very good sources of funding.

The two that top my list are annual reports of your competitors and foundation 990s. Note that the IRS Form 990s is a document that public charities and foundations use to report financial and operational information to the federal government.

“The Foundation Directory,” published by the Foundation Center, can be quite useful, and is often a good place to start … but isn’t absolutely necessary if you are on a tight budget. It’s also available on-line, at FCOnline

The first step in this iterative process is to look at the annual reports of other organizations that provide the same or similar services as your organization, and identify the foundations listed as their funders.

Foundations that fund these organizations are good prospects for you. If you can’t find the annual report on your competitor’s website, give them a call and ask for a copy. If this seems unfair, don’t worry. It’s not. It’s just best practice. And, if your competitor organizations have good grant managers, they’ve probably already studied yours.

After identifying the foundations, download their IRS Form 990s from Guidestar, and start mining them for all the useful nuggets of information they contain. In particular:
• total net assets or fund balances at end of year – this will help you determine
  if they are large enough to invest time in pursuing for funding
• total annual giving – ditto on usefulness of this information
• whether they accept unsolicited proposals or only contribute to preselected
  organizations
• contact name, address and phone number for grant submissions
• grant application information – submission date, application format, required
  attachments (note that this information is not always included in 990s)
• trustee names and addresses – that could be quite useful during grant
  cultivation
• list of grantees and addresses for the year
• grant amounts and grant purposes (project support, general operating,
  capital campaign, etc.)

You can loop back around, and look at the annual reports of organizations listed in the 990s, but don’t spend too much time down this mine shaft. Prospects that look good on paper still require cultivation, proposal development and submission, and stewardship before they will yield up their riches.

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

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]..

An email indicated that “Our capital campaign has concluded. We’ve reached our goal, but we still have some prospects that have not been met/solicited and we have identified additional capital needs. We’re also looking at creation of a major gifts program.”
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
If you’ve just declared success/completion of the campaign, I assume that:

• Your major donors have gotten good visibility;
• All donors have been thanked/treated well;
• You have engendered lots of good feeling among staff and volunteers; and,
• The success of the campaign and the resulting benefit to your organization
   and its constituents has gotten some good press.

If my assumptions are correct, this would be a good time to institute a series of small (non-announced/non-public) mini-capital campaigns.

Target a small number of prospects for each capital need. Use a small number of volunteers — hopefully those who have achieved some success working for the just concluded campaign — or some of those who were major donors to that campaign. And, define a limited timeframe for each mini-campaign.

Give the appropriate publicity/thanks/stewardship to the leaders of and donors to each of those mini-efforts, at the completion of each.

Immediate prospects would be the folks who were identified as likely major donors to the capital campaign but who either couldn’t commit at the time or were not solicited for the campaign.

Since the people who were major donors to the campaign will likely be paying off their campaign commitment over a number of years, that will get many of them in the habit of giving more, on a regular basis, than they did before the campaign.

Then, once they’ve completed their pledge payments, and they’ve gotten comfortable with the concept of making major gifts, there’s a good chance they can be “encouraged” to continue giving at the “campaign” level.

Another part of the preparation for a capital campaign is the design/creation of a program for the recognition of the leaders of and donors to the campaign. A similar effort must precede a major gifts program.

A major gifts program is based upon some considerations/factors that are different from those of a capital campaign. And, the transition from a capital campaign to a major gifts program is not as smooth as it might appear on the surface.

Another part of the preparation for a capital campaign is the design/creation of a program for the recognition of the leaders of and donors to the campaign. A similar effort must precede a major gifts program.

(See: Fundraising For Nonprofits: Major Gifts)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If 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.

Clear/concise writing is an important component of the government grant proposal development process. But, as John C. Lauderdale – the author of The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Getting Government Contracts (2009) – points out, there are some tried and true maxims that you should follow to write well.

Two of those maxims are:

• Proposal quality is greatly improved by a structured, disciplined review of the writing process.
• No one should ever say, “My work is so good that it does not need to be reviewed by anyone else.”

Critical Steps in Government Grant Writing

A good way to address those “rules” is to follow these simple but critical steps:

1: Outline your proposal first. This should be based on the instructions in the grant guidelines. If there are no instructions about organizing your narrative, use the evaluation criteria to create your outline.

2: Review your outline.

3: Revise your outline.

4: Have your outline reviewed by others and approved.

5: Begin identifying good graphics/visuals to support your outline. Good graphics increase understanding and enable reviewers to understand your main points quickly and effortlessly. For example, if you are writing about a growing increase in the number of people using your services, include a bar graph depicting this increase over the years.

6: Write your narrative.

7: Have your writing reviewed by others. Your best reviewer may be someone who knows the subject of your application well but who has not been involved in developing the proposal.

8: Revise what you’ve written.

9: Receive constructive advice about your revision.

10: Rewrite and review again.

Good government grant proposal writing is a repetitive process that should include plenty of revision, and it involves stepping back from your keyboard as much as it involves writing.

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

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

When I began my career in development, over 30 years ago, the certificate program that provided my initial training emphasized that Board Members of NPOs are Trustees, not Directors.

The rationale was that, unlike a for-profit corporation where Directors could be compensated and often were involved with directing aspects of corporate operation, Board Members of NPOs represented the community, held the NPO (as a community asset) in trust for the community, were not supposed to be compensated, and (with the exceptions of very new and/or very small NPOs) were not supposed to be involved in the day to day operation of the corporation.

In my experience, the vast majority of EDs who complain about Board micromanagement have Boards of Directors, not Boards of Trustees. In that context, if you can get Board Members to understand their roles, they’re more likely to function as Trustees, not Directors.

I have also found that when I meet a Board of Trustees for the first time, they are more likely to understand their roles, responsibilities, liabilities and limitations than have been the NPO Boards of Directors I’ve met for the first time.

And, in relation to the question of Board “Giving-And-Getting,” my experience has been that Trustees are much more likely to understand and participate in the process than would be Directors.

I expect that there might be a bit of “halo effect” impacting my perceptions, but I believe I’m objective enough to notice a difference that’s really there.

In addition to the difference between the duties and responsibilities of directors and trustees as perceived by experienced development professionals, there are also legal definitions of the terms.

So, I’m looking for a word, without legal entanglements, that we can adopt/use to refer to the “ideal” non-profit board member.

I like “trustee” because of the relationship to an NPO being a public trust and, of course, because it’s a thirty+ year habit. But, because of the legal definitions in a number of States, I’d be willing to go with another term if we (the professionals in the sector) can agree, adopt a word/term, and agree to spread the word.

I submit this question to you, and hope that this posting will engender a substantive discussion. Look forward to your comments.

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

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.

The Usability of FaceBook

“My organization’s website is static and boring, frankly. Our FaceBook page is updated all the time and very popular.” The Executive Director of a local nonprofit told me that.

This local humane society has 1,214 friends on FaceBook. That’s 3.3% of the rural population of the county it serves! That’s equivalent to a national organization having just over ten million FaceBook friends!

When I pressed her for details, the following additional contrasts arose:

 • One reason our FaceBook is updated more often than our website
   is that it’s easier to update FaceBook.
 • There are many more people, even our own supporters, on
   FaceBook at any one time than there are on our website. Of course
   there are more potential supporters on FaceBook!
 • It’s easier for supporters to share thoughts with us on FaceBook
   because of the ease of leaving comments and tagging us in photos.
   (FaceBook users are already “trained” in using your FaceBook page;
   they may have trouble navigating your web site.)

Taking these observations to actionable recommendations, it makes sense to put some serious effort into “FaceBooking” your nonprofit:

 • Build and maintain your organization’s FaceBook page. Add photos,
   use the FaceBook involvement widgets like surveys, and
   encourage friends to tag you in their posts (friends bring friends).
 • Consider FaceBook ads, which let you target to a great degree and which
   only cost money when people click on them (and come to your
   FaceBook page).
 • Create a “welcome” tab for your FaceBook page that new visitors come
   to first. It can entice them to “friend” your page and encourage
   their involvement.
 • Add FaceBook’s widgets to your website, which will update with your
   FaceBook activity and encourage web visitors to join your FaceBook crowd.
 • Consider adding donation tools to your FaceBook page.
   PayPal has some tools, and third-party widgets like Razoo and FundRazr
   allow you to use the PayPal interface to set up fundraising pages that your
   FaceBookfans can promote on their walls!

The humane society takes a photo of every family as they leave with the animal they’ve adopted, and posts it to FaceBook immediately. Can you think of similar ways to use FaceBook to demonstrate the effectiveness of your organization?

Questions about online social networking? Or, how to improve your results?
Ask Me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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 recent email posed the question:

I am the Director of Philanthropy for a small nonprofit foundation. Our Board of Directors and committees are all comprised of physicians. I am beginning to build a lay component and am working on developing a Development Advisory Council – made up of lay members. I am looking to create a job description for this group the purpose of which is to expand our lay base and raise money. We are also having discussions on whether the Foundation should pay for travel and expenses. I am having difficulty with the advisory council description. Can you help guide me in the right direction?

==================
1. Since it’s all about perception, a director of philanthropy is seen as the person whose job it is to raise money; a director of advancement is understood to be working to help advance the mission of the organization.. (In addition, the D.O.P. title is more than a little pretentious !!)

2. An Advisory Council is created to provide advice. If you ask people to join such a group, you’d better be prepared to take their advice. If the primary purposes are to broaden the base of non-physicians and raise money, then call it just a Development Council or Advancement Council.

3. An essential question you must be able to answer is: Why would any non-physician want to be part of such a “council”? And the answer should probably not have anything to do with your Foundation.

4. If this volunteer group you’re assembling will be constituted to raise money, then one can assume that they have the money to set an example. With that as a given, they should also pay their own expenses.

5. I don’t know the difference between your development committee and the soon-to-be-created council. So I can’t offer a lot in the way of suggestions regarding a job description. I would say, however, keep it simple — i.e., The mission of this “council” is to help provide the resources needed to pursue the Foundation’s mission by providing direct support to the Foundation and encouraging others to do the same.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If 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.

Relationships Are Key.

Those three words summarize all practical and academic research about fundraising.

It takes a great deal of effort, thought, capability, energy, systems, and committed people to actually develop a sustainable, growing, and effective development program, but the idea that relationships are key is one that is at the root of all successful development efforts.

When people ask me which books I recommend for learning about fundraising, the first one on my list is not about fundraising, it’s about communication: “The Tipping Point, How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference,” by Malcolm Gladwell.

In the book, Gladwell shows how word-of-mouth communication can proceed more rapidly and more effectively than any other type of communication, and he describes three types of people necessary for this to happen: mavens, connectors and salesmen (or “persuaders”).

“Mavens are data banks. They provide the message.
“Connectors are social glue: they spread it.
“Salesmen are a select group—they have the skills
to persuade us when we are unconvinced of what we
are hearing, and they are as critical to the tipping point
of word-of-mouth epidemics as the other two groups.”

These principles apply to how your non-profit develops its messages and communicates with the public. Ideally you want all three types of people in your non-profit network: mavens, connectors, and persuaders.

In terms of developing a CFC revenue stream, here are some of the key items to consider as you develop your communications plan and messages:

1. Which Supporters Have a Federal Connection?
How many of your supporters have a Federal connection (Federal employees or former employees or retirees; or their spouses, children, or parents are Federal employees)? Please note that “supporters” are not restricted to “donors.” You may very well have supporters who think well of your organization, but, for whatever reason, are not in a position to be a donor at the present.

2. A Thank You Program for Those Anonymous Donors
A basic principle one learns in Fundraising 101 is to say, “Thank you.”

Do you have a creative program for thanking CFC donors, even when you do not get their individual names until May (or perhaps never)? Create a program where you publicly thank your supporters who have given to you through the CFC, not by individual name but by group, in your publications, website, and programs for special events:

THANK YOU CFC DONORS
Last year CFC contributions to our great non-profit helped
us keep the doors open and continue to provide services
to our clientele, even in times of economic hardship.
Please support us again this year through the CFC
with your gift through payroll deduction.
Our CFC Number is 00000

Messages similar to this should run throughout the year, in the spring when you learn the totals for your organization, and again in the publications that your supporters will see in the fall, during the CFC solicitation season.

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

In the next post about the CFC, I’ll talk about the most powerful tools
available to non-profits in the 21st century – and the tools are free!

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

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