“Non”profit? Maybe not for execs… September 30, 2009

Doing good AND doing well?

Bill Gates announced this week that he has hired a new CEO for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Despite the fact that his predecessor didn’t take a salary at all, and that he wasn’t seeking a salary, Jefferey Raikes will be paid nearly $1 million for his service.  When asked why, Gates said that he did not want to set a precedent that his leadership would work for free AND that people should be paid what they are worth.

With so much of the news lately hovering over the corporate CEOs taking $2 million bonuses and wallpapering their offices with $100 bills, non-profit executive compensation has flown pretty well under the radar. But this news about the Gates Foundation is sure to bring the issue into sharper relief.

Of note: Only 30% took paycuts last year, according to a CHRONICLE OF PHILANTHROPY poll,  and some actually got raises. J. Mongan, CEO of Partners HealthCare Systems of Boston took home over $3 million in salary and benefits last year–up 100%. Non-profit hospital execs make the most of any group, averaging $830,000 a year.

As the number of people in need grows and as non-profit employees are getting laid off in droves, is it right for leadership to receive such extravagent pay packets?

Consider this:

First, non-profits have always lagged behind the rest of the economy which means many of these salaries were locked in a year ago and the economic status of these NPOs hasn’t changed much–even if giving was down for them last year. Second, these CEOs are now forced to  do more work than ever before–more people in need and few colleagues to help. And third, as the lines between for-profits and non-profits blur, is it fair that we expect CEOs and EDs to run their NPOs like mega-corporations while paying like they run a mom and pop shop?

Definitely  something to think about as non-profits seek out the best and brightest to lead their organizations through these dark days.

Money Still Grows on Trees–or Hedges September 25, 2009

Hedge fund cultivation

With one of the worst years in history for hedge funds, fundraisers would expect that giving from these giants would be in the cellar. On the contrary, found a recent article in THE ECONOMIST.

The June 27th issue of the British publication  noted that London-based Children’s Investment Fund Foundation has received a–brace yourself–$812 million gift  from a hedge fund called TCI.  Here in the US, the Robin Hood Foundation raised nearly $73 million in a single night’s gala, owing most of that success to a $50 million pledge from “the original hedge fund philanthropist” George Soros.

Over the last year, the common refrain among fundraisers has been that there is simply no money out there. Why bother asking? Shouldn’t we just sit tight and wait this out?

This story turns these sentiments on their heads. There IS money out there–even among those funds that suffered near collapse and ruin. Why bother asking? Because if you don’t ask, you’re all but guaranteeing you’ll not receive a gift. Sit tight and wait this out? Absolutely! But only if you want someone else to beat you to this transformationally huge gift.

Just a little something...

So, as the Brits would say, “On your bike!”  Get back out there and start asking. Maybe money really DOES grow on trees. Or well-manicured bushes, anyway.

THE PHILANTHROPIST: Great mascot or tough on non-profits? September 17, 2009

 

There is a terrific piece in THE CHRONICLE   OF PHILANTHROPY today about that NBC show, The Philanthropist. This show has drawn mixed reviews from our industry. Some think it’s a great way to make the idea of philanthropy less elite and more mainstream. Others murmur that “this is simply not how philanthropy is done.” This article addresses how the main character faces down the notion that fundraising is a profession, not merely the action that results from a charitable urge. 

 

A few excerpts to stir the pot:

 

“Instead of scoffing at The Philanthropist, establishment philanthropy might pay attention to its underlying message. For all our insistence that giving has become ever more complex, demanding, sophisticated, and professionalized, simply hiring experts to do it for us may not be enough to satisfy the human charitable impulse.”

 

“Perhaps the elaborate institutional edifice of modern philanthropy ultimately rests upon this most personal and intimate of human bonds.”

 

“American philanthropy can heap contempt upon The Philanthropist’s short-sighted, sentimentalized, amateurish understanding of charity. Or philanthropy can pause long enough to consider that, in its determined and single-minded drive toward professionalization, it may in fact be systematically cutting itself off from its own deepest wellsprings.”

 

What do you think? Have you seen the show? Do you agree with the writer of this piece? For the complete article, visit: 

http://philanthropy.com/premium/articles/v21/i19/19003102.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Extreme Makeover: Case for Support Edition September 14, 2009

The test Case. The study Case. The interview Case. Whatever your organization calls this draft—yet critical – document, it’s a far cry from the sleek, bold, attractive and brief document you’ll begin sharing with prospective donors once your capital campaign is in full swing. Rather than

Need to go medieval on your case writing?

 a smart, eye-catching tool designed to truly sell your campaign, this more modest cousin has long been used in advance of a campaign to test the waters, to plumb the likelihood your campaign would succeed. Unfortunately, this document is often relegated into the “just the facts, ma’am” style of writing with all the color and flair of a bulleted shopping list.

 

 

But it doesn’t have to be.

 

In fact, if you want to have an engaged pool of prospective donors clamoring to give even before your official launch, devoting ample time to creating a meaningful and useful case is absolutely essential.

 

To learn about breathing new life into this old hat document, please visit AFP’s newly designed Resource Exchange at http://afpnet.org/files/secure/index.cfm?FileID=13578

 

How good is your Case? Find out how yours compares to others in your field.

 

 

Still have questions about writing a Case for Support that moves and shakes ? Ask your Captive Consultant!

Giving by Generation or “I’m a Smith Corona. I’m a PC. I’m a Mac.”

With many of the “go to” donor generation (Boomers) hit hard by the economic downturn, a good number of our clients are forging inroads with younger generations of donors–they’re just not quite sure how to do it.

Give away Rubik’s Cubes? Show up to gift request meetings in flip flops and a Killers t-shirt?

 

Diversifying your donor pool for today’s fundraising effort is a challenge but reaching this younger generation is crucial to building the pipeline of prospects for campaigns and annual giving down the road. There are two important things to remember when constructing a strategy for reaching different donor segments:

1. Different generations give differently.

2. Segmenting donor groups by age is only half the battle.

 Essentially, these guidelines deal with stereotypes and customization. In general, we’ve found the following stereotypical behaviors hold water.

 Baby Boomers:

• Rarely seek a place to give online.
• Respond well to personal requests, especially if that request comes from someone they respect.

 

 Generation Xers:

• Are skeptical of “authorities” and would rather give to an organization their friends support than to one recommended by “an authority.”
• Expect a return on investment from their gifts.
• Give online but also through traditional channels.

 

 Millennials:

• Are more likely to participate as volunteers first and donors second.
• Not only give online but research non-profits and engage their friends in their philanthropic efforts online.

 

So, what can you do to address these idiosyncrasies without forgetting that you are appealing to people and not faceless stereotypes?

 1.  Clean up your data. Make sure that when you input a new prospect into your database, you include information like age (and generation) but also communication style preference, level of involvement etc. Update your data often.

2.  Don’t assume. Just because a prospect is 23, don’t assume she is only interested in volunteering or giving $15 to the annual fund. Not asking remains the top reason for not getting a major gift and assuming everyone has been wiped out by the economy is a sure fire way to leave gifts (major and “gateway”) on the table.

3.  Get connected. Over 60% of Boomers have been to YouTube and over 40% visit at least one social network regularly.  We all know that Millennials and Generation Xers are well connected but if you want to reach everyone, you have to make the effort to get your message and your mission out into cyberspace.

4.  Let others tell your story. Make sure your brand is solid and your message easy to articulate. Part of the appeal of using the internet as a tool is you’re enlisting an army of people you may never have met to share your story with friends, colleagues, and strangers. The key is to arm them with the right information; content is king but it is also alterable and subject to the whim of those spreading it online. So make sure your message is clear and easy to share.

Still have questions about generational giving? Tell the Captive Consultant your story!