May 8, 2009

Free Time Friday: On hiatus

The Nonprofiteer could use a break, so she’s taking one.  Publication will resume when she feels refreshed, or whenever she gets a particularly intriguing “Where’s the Beef?” or “Dear Nonprofiteer” inquiry.

Meanwhile, please troll around in the archives or search your favorite topic and see what she’s had to say about them over the course of the past two years.  And to make sure you get the word the very second she starts making noise again, please subscribe by e-mail or RSS feed.

A happy and feckless spring to all.

May 7, 2009

Dear Nonprofiteer, How can I get my piece of stimulus pie?

Dear Nonprofiteer,

I’ve heard about the stimulus package, but where, exactly, is the money?

Signed, Hungry for My Share

Dear Hungry,

Check out the Foundation Center’s new map, which connects to a list of links and resources relevant to nonprofits seeking money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  Dig in!

ARRA–we do our part.

May 6, 2009

A holiday we’d just as soon not celebrate

A regular reader tips us off about a missed holiday:

Fair Pay Day [was] Tuesday, April 28, which symbolizes the day in 2009 when the average woman’s wages will finally catch up with those paid to the average man in 2008.”

But what could be more appropriate than to say, “Happy belated Fair Pay Day!” when fair pay itself is so incredibly late in coming?  And not just in the wicked for-profit world, either: as long as women are consigned to leading small nonprofits while men lead the large ones, we’re going to continue to make less–a lot less–than our brothers in arms.

May 5, 2009

Another casualty of Great Depression II

Charities that depend on tribute galas–fancy events at which the Man or Woman of the Year underwrites the cost of being honored–are discovering that fewer and fewer corporate executives are able to be so honored.

It’s always been true, but now it’s obviously true: any nonprofit whose fundraising rests on events (instead of an annual campaign plus major individual gifts) is riding for a fall.

May 4, 2009

No reserves at the charity, and no room at the inn

This piece about the lack of reserves at nonprofits appeared in the same issue of the New York Times as a story about a growing number of cities playing host to shantytowns–Hoovervilles, they used to be called.  Coincidence?  The Nonprofiteer thinks not.

In case anybody wonders whether we’ll notice when 100,000 nonprofits go belly-up.

May 1, 2009

Making your nonprofit a star–or a pigeon

It’s not just Susan Boyle and “Britain’s Got Talent”–the nonprofit world, too, is full of ugly ducklings eager to turn into YouTube swans.  So it’s not surprising that two different groups have just announced plans to assist nonprofits in telling their/our stories on video. The first of these is genuine; the second is a concealed ad for fundraising software.

  • Animoto for a Cause (http://animoto.com/cause) is a new program “that will give non-profit organizations and humanitarians the ability to create dynamic, professional-quality online videos from their own photos and music – for free. . . .Animoto for a Cause will donate pro accounts to groups and individuals who are working to improve their community and the world at large, kicking off with more than 20 launch partners, like Help the Children and Susan G. Komen Foundation. . . . Animoto is encouraging all types of community activists to apply for an Animoto for a Cause account – everyone from college fundraisers to large non-profits will be considered . . . . Now organizations can use the service to promote their cause online in a multitude of ways, from posting and sharing videos on websites, YouTube and social networks, to downloading them to DVD for distribution at events.”
  • Meanwhile, an outfit called www.nonprofitnetworknews.com has created a “customizable video for nonprofits to make their wishes come true. The video then links to free nonprofit resources to help them get through these tough times.”  Well, if by “free nonprofit resources” one means “a commercial Website that doesn’t charge you for visiting,” that’s absolutely true.

April 30, 2009

Dear Nonprofiteer, I’ve got a treasure-house of knowledge and no one appreciates it

Dear Nonprofiteer:

I was just reelected as Treasurer of our social-service nonprofit.  You’d think this would make for smooth sailing at Board meetings, but instead everything’s been really bumpy.  We have a new Secretary, who doesn’t seem to understand anything I say so her summary of my financial reports is always wrong, and a new President.

Our previous Board President trusted me completely, and I’d make a report and recommendation and he’d immediately move to have it approved.  This new guy is always saying, “Well . . .” and “I don’t know . . .” and “Let me see . . .” and so we go from one meeting to the next without deciding whether to pull the plug on losing programs or increase the size of our reserve.

There’s not much point in having an experienced Treasurer if they’ve stopped being willing to benefit from my experience!  How can we get back to where we were?

Signed, Eager to Get Something Done Again

Dear Eager:

Not to get all Zen about it, but you CAN’T get back to where you were–you can only go forward.  And if you want to get something done in a democracy–and remember, nonprofit Boards are democracies–you have to persuade people it’s worth doing.

Under the old regime (it sounds like), they were persuaded because the Board president was persuaded, and conversely right now they’re not so sure because the Board president isn’t so sure.  So the first thing to do is figure out what’s most urgent of the things you want to accomplish (pulling the plug on a program?  increasing the size of the reserve? something else you didn’t mention?), and the second is to talk to the Board president before you go to the meeting and explain exactly how you think the numbers back up your position.

If the president’s been saying, “Well, I don’t know . . .” that’s probably because he doesn’t know, and rather than find your expertise reassuring he just finds it intimidating.  So boil your position down to words of one syllable.  Don’t be condescending, but don’t be technical, either.  Say, “Look, here are the costs of this program.  And here are our revenues.  It’s clearly a loser, and remember we started it three years ago because we thought it was going to make us money.  If it were central to the mission that would be one thing, but it’s actually kind of beside the point; so I don’t think we ought to drain the Treasury for it.  What do you think?”

And then listen to what he says, and answer his objections, so you guys walk in the room a united front.  Or, if you don’t, make sure he understands that you intend to recommend this and ask how he’d like to handle it: refer it to a committee including you?  Discuss and resolve it on the spot?  Agree to decide at the following meeting?

In other words, your task is to give the Board president all the information he needs to make, or recommend, or at least defer to, the decision you think is best.  I’d say your task was to “build trust,” but that sounds a little Zen, too.

As for the Secretary: if you want her to write down three specific key items in your report, then confine your oral report to those three items: “We have only 4 months’ worth of operating expenses in reserve when most experts recommend 6 months’ worth.  Our bank balance is $2162.  I analyzed the midnight volleyball program and it’s losing $300 every month, so it will drain us dry in 7 months.”

And if you need to correct her account of your previous report, try to do it in private: if you get the minutes before the meeting, call or e-mail the Secretary and say, “I must not have been clear last time: I meant to say that our reserve was too small, not our bank balance.  How do you want to handle this? Should we correct it in advance, or do you want me to clarify it when we review minutes at the meeting?”  She’ll pay more attention to what you say in meetings if she’s not worried the whole time that you’re going to yell at her if she gets it wrong.

Sure, there are lots of other things you could say about every and any financial report.  But your job as Treasurer is not only to understand the books but to translate them into small chunks of decision-making information.   The good news is, because you’re organizing the information, you can present it in such a way that it seems indisputable that things ought to be done your way.

In other words: you have just as much power and influence as you did under the old President and Secretary; you just need to wield it with a bit more subtlety until everyone gets comfortable once again with making decisions on your say-so.  Remember: when in doubt, people will default to NOT making a decision; they figure (falsely) that they can’t get in trouble if they do nothing.  If decisions are important to you, you have to figure out how to make them palatable to decisionmakers.  If getting something done matters, concentrate on reassuring your fellow and sister Board members that doing something is safe–and that doing nothing would be worse.

April 29, 2009

Specter!

Low on inspiration this morning, but the Nonprofiteer assures her readers that nothing she could think of to say about the sector is nearly as important as the news that Senator Arlen Specter has joined the Democratic party.  Once Al Franken is seated–maybe before the summer solstice, maybe just after, but it will occur–the Democrats will have free rein, and that means health care reform and education funding and appropriate attention to energy use and climate change and a shot at the Employee Free Choice Act.

Good news for all of us in the business of helping people.

April 28, 2009

The best thing we can do for nonprofits–and ourselves

Have you seen Rick Cohen’s typically smart and on-target piece “The Worst Thing We Can Do for the Obama Administration”?  While he’s speaking about the nonprofit sector and its/our special-interest-group needs, there’s a broader point: that those of us who supported the President’s election because we share his basic principles and values should express that support by remaining independent and criticizing when necessary, rather than by becoming supplicants to or apologists for the people we put in office.  That’s an idea relevant to each and all of us as citizens.

The Nonprofiteer’s own version of this insight struck her while she was raging at news of the Administration’s refusal to investigate and prosecute allegations of torture.  Abruptly she realized she had two choices: struggle to construct a rationale for a constitutional law professor’s apparent indifference to violations of the Constitution, or struggle to make it impossible for such apparent indifference to continue.  So she’s now volunteering with the ACLU,  whose legal work contributed to the release of the torture memos and which is helping to orchestrate public pressure to bring to justice the people who violated our laws in our name.

Politics, it is said, is the art of the possible.  The citizen’s job is to define for politicians what’s possible, and to make sure that the definition encompasses everything that’s essential.

As nonprofit leaders, we know first-hand how much of what’s essential requires the government’s support.  But as Cohen says, our primary job is not begging for that support; it’s giving or withholding our own based on how well the government–our government–lives up to our ideals, and its own.

April 27, 2009

Where’s the beef?: Why are women getting all the gravy?

Hey, Nonprofiteer, here’s my beef:

All of a sudden a number of colleges have received completely anonymous donations in the millions of dollars, which is great–but it turns out all the colleges in question are run by women.  Now, why should something as irrelevant as the gender of the CEO determine who gets support for education?  Aren’t other colleges entitled to the same help?

Signed, Concerned With Merit

Hey, Concerned,

First of all, no one is “entitled” to a gift, as my law professors used to point out when we studied battles over wills and estates: the daughter may be a better person, but that doesn’t mean she “deserves” anything; if the giver intended to benefit the son, that’s the end of the conversation.

Second, and more important, what makes you think the anonymous college donor isn’t concerned about merit?  Maybe s/he thinks women are better stewards of resources than men (per this suggestion in the New York Times’ coverage of the same issue), which certainly is a reasonable posture given that the only sane things being said about the banking crisis are coming from the woman who oversees the TARP program and the woman who runs the FDIC.  (Meanwhile their male counterparts are busy making sure no squash partners or prep-school roommates are discomfited by inconvenient regulation.)

Or maybe s/he thinks colleges which act on their rhetoric about equality for women by hiring one as CEO are more likely to act on their rhetoric about equality for women in treatment of students and faculty.  (As opposed, say, to colleges whose presidents announce that women aren’t any good at science.)

In other words, this gift is all about merit, and about rewarding virtue.  If you find it hard to recognize as such, because the virtue in question is “acknowledging people who are often marginalized, even if we’re the majority,” that just makes the anonymous donor’s point: people still have a hard time with the idea that women matter.

But as it is written, women hold up [more than] half the sky; why shouldn’t good treatment of us be considered important enough to be worth millions?