Archive for the ‘Arts Organizations’ Category
October 21, 2010
Dear Nonprofiteer,
Several friends and I have started a new musical arts ensemble and are seeking to incorporate as a non-profit. There are 8 artists in the ensemble, so we are a very small organization. Since starting the ensemble was my idea, I have been serving as “Artistic Director,” choosing music, organizing rehearsals and performances, etc., as well as being an Artist in the ensemble.
We are currently working on our Bylaws and so have been thinking about how to structure our Board. We have decided to have all the usual positions (President, VP, Secy, Treas) plus an Artist Representative, and a variable number of at-large Board members (no more than 5). We have a provision in our (in-process-of-being-written) Bylaws where the Board can only select or remove the Artistic Director with a 2/3 consensus of the Artists.
At this point, all of our Artists will serve on the Board in some capacity (either as Officers or as at-large members), though we want to allow for a future time when the Artists get to be just Artists and let other people run the business side of things. The other Artists want me to have a say-so in the running of the organization since the group was formed by my “vision”.
So my question is this: Is it legal, ethical, practical, etc., for me to serve as both President AND Artistic Director (and an Artist in the ensemble)? Or should one of the other Artists serve as President and I (as Art Dir) be only ex-officio with no vote?
I should also mention that my husband is also an Artist in the Ensemble, and so would also sit on the Board (for now).
Thank you very much for any advice you can give. Signed,
Wearing Many Hats
Dear Hats:
Last issue first: it is never a good idea to have a married couple on the Board of a nonprofit, nor is it a good idea for one-half of the couple to serve on the Board while the other is employed by the agency. (I gather you’re not getting paid as Artistic Director, but if you can be selected or fired by the Board, you’re an employee.) A husband and wife on the Board stacks the voting since more often than not they will vote together, and the more important the issue the more likely they will march in lockstep. Majority or not, they constitute a bloc, and blocs or factions create trouble on any Board.
And if your husband’s on the Board and you’re the Artistic Director, you’ve stacked the deck in your own favor on every issue while at the same time guaranteeing the maximum damage to the Board (your husband’s resignation) in case of any disagreement. Don’t start out your nonprofit life with a built-in conflict of interest.
Further, as you seem to realize, no staff member (including the Artistic Director) should serve on the Board at all (whether President or not) except in an ex officio, non-voting capacity.
But let me suggest that you pause here to consider why you want to create a nonprofit structure at all. Don’t become a nonprofit because “all arts groups are nonprofit;” the Nonprofiteer did that for a client once and it was a disaster. As soon as there’s any money involved, you’ll find yourself fighting with the Board over whether those dollars should go directly to you, as Artistic Director; to the artists, in some proportionate way; or back into the institution. So imagine yourself confronting that question now, and build the structure that will get you the answer that you want.
It’s fine to fill your Board with ensemble members and thus guarantee complete artistic and financial control of the agency by its artists. But if you do, an “ensemble representative” would be redundant and should be omitted from your bylaws.
You might further consider that if you’re entirely ensemble-governed, you’re missing the opportunity to use the Board for its central purpose, which is to connect the group to the wider community (and, yes, raise money from that wider community to support the work you do). You do your art for people; perhaps some of them should be represented on the Board—not just to do “the business stuff” but to help you maintain perspective about the relationship of your work to its audience.
In other words, as the Nonprofiteer has said in other contexts: nonprofit and 501c3 status are not mere legal trivialities to permit you to collect donations tax-free. They’re statements about the kind of organization you are, namely, one answerable to the community through its Board. You’re trading a certain amount of freedom for a certain amount of stability. If you’re not ready to do that, skip nonprofit status and live hand-to-mouth til you’re ready to be a full-blown community institution–or until you figure out how to support your art entirely at the box office.
Tags:501c3, arts groups, Board of Directors, charity, Conflict of Interest, Executive Director, Fundraising, governance, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, personnel, volunteer, volunteers
Posted in Arts Organizations, Boards of Directors, Conflict of Interest, Earned income, Executive Directors, Fundraising, Management Advice Day tip, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Personnel Issues, Volunteers/Volunteerism, Women's Issues | 8 Comments »
August 18, 2010
While it’s not yet true that “Illinois Does A Few Adult Films To Make Ends Meet”, the state has begun to cast lascivious glances at its nonprofits. Those property-tax exemptions look mighty comfortable. Why don’t you push that cushion over to my side of the bed? And with most interactions taking place behind closed doors, don’t expect a warning before the moment of truth arrives—or to be kissed while you’re getting screwed.
Unlike other localities re-evaluating nonprofit tax exemptions, Illinois has bypassed the legislative process, allowing county assessors and the Department of Revenue to take the initiative. And this spring the Illinois Supreme Court decided that the state’s constitutional provision exempting charities from property taxes applied not to all nonprofits but only to genuine charities.
When the Court ruled that Provena Covenant Hospital didn’t merit a property tax exemption because it failed to provide adequate charity care, there was a brief frenzy of press speculation about the decision’s impact on hospitals—but hospitals only. Rarely do the media connect the dots between the budget crises of state and local governments and their relationships with nonprofits, and then generally the focus is on the governments’ failure to pay nonprofits for contracts they’ve already performed.
But revocation of property tax exemptions poses an even bigger and longer-term threat than governments’ failure to pay. And it’s a threat of which few nonprofit executives—let alone members of the public—are aware.
Two cases of denied exemption, one in nearly-bankrupt Chicago and the other in one of its suburban counties, are now working their way through the Illinois courts. Each concerns a luxury retirement community, and either could break new ground by clarifying what qualifies as “charity” and how much of it a nonprofit has to provide.
The state legislature hasn’t specified a percentage of charitable services required to support continued property-tax exemption. And though the Provena court ruled that the hospital’s practice of charging fees for nearly all patient care meant it could not be considered a charity, it too stopped short of prescribing when enough charity will be enough.
“The property-tax assessors out there are going to be aggressive, because they need you back on their rolls,” said Elaine Waterhouse Wilson, a partner at the Quarles & Brady law firm. “They’re going to make you come in and prove” charitable work. Ms. Wilson said the charities that may be at risk “include organizations that are supported primarily by fees . . . . It was very clear [under the ruling] that you had to be giving things away rather than providing general charitable benefits,” she said.
It’s not a tragedy that people are asking whether Illinois nonprofits are worthy of favored tax treatment. What would be a tragedy is if the challenge came as a complete shock, catching agencies unaware with the sudden need to prove their charitable nature. Yet that’s what seems likely to happen.
Executives at several Chicago-area nonprofits seemed incredulous at the idea that Provena would be applied to them. “We provide human services and all our activities are nonprofit,” said Karen Singer, Executive Director of the Evanston/North Shore YWCA. “So it’s not on my radar screen at the moment. It probably should be, but there are only so many things I can think about.” William Ratner, Executive Director of Lawyers for the Creative Arts, and Alvin Katz of Mayer Brown LLP, the attorney for Victory Gardens Theater and the Chicago Architecture Foundation, both expressed confidence that the organizations they represent are secure in their exemptions. “They’ll keep going after the hospitals because it’s easy, and because that’s where the money is,” Mr. Ratner said.
But there’s also money in, or rather under, many other nonprofits. The Chicago retirement development sits on prime Gold Coast real estate. Can YMCAs in gentrifying neighborhoods withstand challenges to their exemptions when they look and feel—and charge—so much like for-profit health clubs? Can settlement houses be considered charities if they get paid, by government or clients, for all the services they provide? Can arts organizations be considered “charitable” just by offering art, or do they have to give out a certain number of free admissions? (Churches and schools are immune from this calculus because the Illinois constitution separately exempts them; but the educational programs of arts groups aren’t considered “schools.”)
Perhaps the charities will organize and persuade the Illinois legislature to clarify the amount of “charity” necessary to retain tax exemption. But Professor Phillip Hablutzel of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, co-author of the Illinois Not-for-Profit Corporation Act, doubts it. Though he predicted Illinois nonprofits other than hospitals will soon find themselves battling efforts to withdraw their exemptions, “In the twenty years I’ve been involved, there hasn’t been a coherent front among charities in facing the legislature. It’s hard to get these people to make common cause–the museum people don’t see what they have in common with the churches.” Nor, apparently, do many human services agencies or arts groups see what they have in common with the hospitals.
If and when a Provena-style loss of exemption hits another nonprofit, the impact on its operation will be substantial. “In the current economy,” said Professor Hablutzel, “it would be hard to do fundraising for another one-third of your budget so the taxes could be paid.”
Maybe there’s something to be said for making adult films after all.
Tags:501c3, arts groups, charity, Endowment, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, Real Estate, social services
Posted in Advocacy groups, Arts Organizations, Coverage of nonprofits, Current Affairs, Disease charities, Education, Endowment, Finances, Health care, Higher education, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Real Estate, Social Service Agencies | 8 Comments »
July 23, 2010
[An excerpt of this posting appears on the Huffington Post, in the Impact section.]
The Chicago Tribune’s Chris Jones notwithstanding, the problem with the Chase Community Giving program isn’t that it lets “civilians”–non-expert non-critics–decide which theater companies deserve a $20,000 one-time no-strings grant. The problem is that it pretends to do that–Let the People Decide!–while actually turning theater companies into marketing satellites of Chase Bank. Institutions poor and weak enough to be moved by a $20,000 carrot–to which the competition was explicitly restricted–recite the bank’s name relentlessly to their audiences. That’s a lot of advertising for very little money. Of course, all corporate giving is advertising–but this is of a special, insidious kind.
The Nonprofiteer doesn’t believe in “crowd-source philanthropy,” because it’s not philanthropy at all: it’s “crowd-manipulation marketing.” Chase has gotten hundreds if not thousands of little charities to demand that their audiences provide contact information to the bank and subject themselves to commercial targeting for the good of the cause.
These crowd-manipulation marketing programs (pioneered by Pepsi and American Express, doubtless with many more corporate behemoths yet to come) also set up a system which rewards the nonprofits with the greatest Internet presence or savvy, which is not the same as giving the money to the neediest, or best, or most diverse, group of people doing important work in society. Again, the issue isn’t who gets to define “best;” it’s whether the agencies competing for that designation have a fair and equal opportunity to receive it. Upper-middle-class people may imagine that “everyone” has access to the Internet, but in fact if you reward clicks and responses to e-mail and Facebook postings, you reward organizations with wealthy white audiences and disadvantage those whose audiences are nonwhite and/or poor. Way to magnify the digital divide. Way to make sure that the rich get richer and the poor have babies.
This lazy and manipulative approach to corporate giving diverts nonprofit attention from real fundraising–which involves relationships over the long term–to point-and-click fundraising, which costs “donors” nothing and therefore gives them no stake in the institution.
The argument about who’s entitled to judge art is a side-show, doubtless one Chase would be happy to have theaters and critics debating from here to eternity. Meanwhile, the bank laughs all the way to–the bank.
[Unable to resist, the Nonprofiteer dons her critic's hat and argues that, though she believes her opinions about theater are better-informed and therefore more useful than those of the guy standing next to you on the train, she's also open to the possibility that her prejudices and blind spots make this false in a significant number of cases. In any case, if she didn't believe theater was the essential human art form--because it involves words, the very thing that separates us from all other species--and therefore belonged to everyone human, she wouldn't spend so much of her life seeing and reviewing plays. So she refuses to concede that others' engagement with theater--in whatever form, and without any credentials whatsoever--is unwelcome or inappropriate.]
“Crowd-source philanthropy” doesn’t mean the people get to decide; it means they get the illusion of deciding while actually being used to serve someone else’s commercial purposes. We know that’s a bad thing when the issue is what corporations give to, and get from, politicians. Let’s not fail to notice when the issue is what they give to, and exact from, us.
See also Barbara Talisman’s posting on the subject, which links to an entire discussion of the pros and cons.
Tags:advertising, arts groups, charity, charity promotion, corporate giving, donors, Fundraising, grants, Marketing, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, philanthropy, Relations with funders, theater
Posted in Arts Organizations, Campaign finance, corporate giving, Coverage of nonprofits, Fundraising, Marketing, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Private Philanthropy, Relations with funders, Technology | 6 Comments »
July 21, 2010
Dear Nonprofiteer:
We are a small non-profit music school. We have been running into a problem with grants strategy–as in, we aren’t getting any.
I am consistently getting feedback:
1. “Lovely program but we are only funding projects that can promise to reach 500-1000.” We are small with 350 students and while I can conceive of a program that would reach a larger audience, I don’t feel I can creditably offer that in a proposal.
OR
2. “Great ideas but we only fund people who we funded before.”
Previous executive directors in more generous times had decided that grant seeking was not worth the effort. I think we need to make a big push but I am starting to wonder if they were right.
We have a subsistence existence with only earned income and I feel we are desperately in need of a more diverse income stream if we are ever going to grow or prosper. Operating at less than break-even is not an option with my board.
What’s the small non-profit to do?
Signed, Stymied at Every Turn
Dear Stymied,
The Nonprofiteer suspects, as you’re starting to, that your predecessors were right when they gave up seeking foundation support. At the best of times, foundations have the attention span of fruit-flies, which means even agencies receiving support spend the whole grant term sweating blood over whether they can get it next time–nonsensical program-officer-speak to the contrary notwithstanding. (What kind of response is, “We only fund those we’ve funded before,” anyway? It’s barely lucid, let alone reasonable–unless it’s just a bald-faced lie.)
And these aren’t the best of times. (Like you hadn’t noticed.) Some foundations are stepping up and spending a larger percentage of their income on grant-making to make up for a loss in their portfolios; others can’t, or won’t. And as aggravating as it is to have a foundation ask you to provide services on a scale beyond your capacity, the Nonprofiteer will defend that point of view: foundations are in the business of trying to have broad impact with narrow means, and your program simply doesn’t meet their needs.
So you have to seek funds from another source. Earned income is all very well, but of course you’re required to raise one-third of your budget in contributions simply to maintain your 501(c)(3) status. How?
Well, as the Reverend Mother did not say, “When a foundation closes a door, somewhere an individual donor opens a window.” Stop pounding your head against the foundations’ doors and get thee to an individual gifts program. This may be your only option; it’s certainly your best one. Seek small gifts through an annual campaign, and big ones through individual appeals made by you and members of your no-deficit Board. (They made the rules, now they have to play the game.)
The annual campaign: Ask your students and their families, as well as any alumni you may have, to help you make up the difference between what it costs to provide this first-rate music education and what you charge in tuition. (If you don’t know that number, figure it out: it’s magic. Not only does it encourage contributions, it makes future tuition increases easier to swallow. Why do you think colleges keep repeating, “Tuition covers only a fraction of the cost of educating a student”? Though at $40,000-plus a year, one might begin to wonder what fraction, exactly.)
Ask at “Back to School” time, and again around Christmas, and again before or during recital/graduation season. Also, ask at performances. Don’t be shy: remember that most people say they give because “Someone asked me.” Your school is just as deserving as any other charity, and with 350 people in the program someone connected to you should be willing to cough up some dough.
Major gifts: Identify anyone who’s already been giving you money and take him/her out to lunch and ask for more. If your Board members aren’t already giving, conspire with your Board president to get them to do so–and once they’ve given, ask each of them for the name of one person who could be asked. Remember the Nonprofiteer’s rule: Board members don’t ask their friends for money–they ask each other’s friends for money!
Individual gifts come in smaller chunks than foundation gifts (though not in your case, actually). Moreover, they’re infinitely renewable and will sustain your school for years to come. Good luck, and let us know how you do.
Tags:arts groups, Board of Directors, charity, charity promotion, donors, foundations, Fundraising, grantmaking, grants, IRS, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, philanthropy, recession, Relations with funders
Posted in Arts Organizations, Boards of Directors, Current Affairs, Earned income, Education, Finances, Foundation Hall of Shame/Stupid Foundation Tricks, Fundraising, Management Advice Day tip, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Private Philanthropy, Relations with funders | 2 Comments »
June 14, 2010
Dear Nonprofiteer,
I work for a storefront theater company (though this could apply to any arts organization), and we want to encourage people to donate while they are waiting for the show to start, or as they are walking out of the theater. However, we do not want to “ruin” the art by including a verbal appeal in the pre- or post-show announcements; though we have information on how to donate in our program and on our website, we feel that we can raise some income from our immediate audience after every show. I’m sure this goes for museums, galleries, and dance companies as well—how can we influence our audience to donate at the door without being too pushy or discounting the art?
Signed,
The Tactful Fundraiser
Dear Tactful,
The Nonprofiteer had a law professor whose motto was, “Passive lawyers don’t eat!” Well, the Nonprofiteer’s motto is, “Tactful fundraisers don’t eat!” It’s true that most people would rather talk about their sex lives than talk about money, but the only way to raise it is to make clear that you not only deserve it, but need it.
So the Nonprofiteer disputes your entire premise that a request for funds can “ruin” an art form. Obviously you wouldn’t insert it in mid-play (though product placement in the movies and on tv makes that less obvious than it once was); but a pre- or post-show pitch is completely appropriate. People who want to ignore it will, but no one will be able to say that s/he didn’t know you needed money.
Now, how to actually get that money? There’s the Southwest Airlines approach: make the expected pitch in an unexpected manner, e.g. “Please take all your personal problems with you when you deplane.” There’s the National Lampoon guilt-trip approach: its cover showing a terrified canine at gunpoint with the caption “If you don’t buy this magazine we’ll shoot this dog” was at the very least unforgettable. A Chicago theater company does its own equivalent of this by announcing at curtain that the actors don’t get paid so unless you stuff money in the cashbox you’re just exploiting them by attending (not the precise words); it seems to work quite well.
In other words, there’s nothing dainty or secretive about a nonprofit arts organization’s need for money, so the more directly and entertainingly and memorably you state it, the better your chance of actually receiving the money.
Or you can ignore everything I’ve said, offer a door-prize of a bottle of wine to whoever wins your nightly raffle, and have people enter the raffle by dropping their business cards in a bowl. Then send follow-up appeals (by e-mail, as it’s cheapest) to everyone whose card you got, thanking them for attending and asking them to donate. This is good list-development strategy; whether it’s good money-development strategy remains to be seen. It’s far too easy to ignore an appeal once you’ve had the entertainment and have gone home.
Finally, you can try a bit of reverse psychology. Admit everyone for free and then ask them to pay what they think it was worth on the way out the door. (Post a “suggested donation,” of course.) You’ll get some free riders, but you’ll also get some people who are so impressed with what they’ve just seen that they give you something more than the suggested donation. Those are people you can expect to see again–whereupon you offer them a door-prize if they win the business-card raffle, and you have their names so you can dun them long into the future.
Tags:arts groups, charity, charity promotion, donors, Fundraising, Marketing, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, philanthropy, public funding for the arts, Relations with funders, theater
Posted in Arts Organizations, Finances, Fundraising, Management Advice Day tip, Marketing, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Private Philanthropy | 1 Comment »
May 28, 2010
Everyone in the sector–no kidding, everyone!–should read this Nonprofit Quarterly piece by Clara Miller of the Nonprofit Finance Fund about the practices most likely to make nonprofits vulnerable to financial disaster. Pay particular attention to Ms. Miller’s skepticism about the value of owning one’s own building.
The Nonprofiteer has argued for years that the likelihood of a building’s being a good investment is significantly smaller than the likelihood of its being a money pit, particularly for arts organizations who make over-optimistic estimates of their likely rental revenue. But now someone who actually knows what she’s talking about is saying the same thing.
So listen up! Please.
Tags:arts groups, Board of Directors, Executive Director, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, Real Estate, recession
Posted in Arts Organizations, Coverage of nonprofits, Current Affairs, Endowment, Finances, Investment, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Real Estate | 2 Comments »
April 22, 2010
If the Kresge Foundation isn’t giving matching grants for brand-new arts buildings anymore–and it’s not–the arts-building bubble is over as surely as the housing and financial-industry bubbles. Granting funds instead for renovation and repair means the new Kresge posture will benefit the arts groups that got while the getting was good (or, perhaps, have some other basis for grantworthiness, e.g. re-purposing of an historic building). But arts groups which have been thinking about building from scratch are now stuck contemplating Max Bialystock’s mantra: “He who hesitates is poor!”
Tags:arts groups, charity, donors, foundations, grantmaking, grants, nonprofit, nonprofits, not for profit, philanthropy, Real Estate, recession, Relations with funders, theater
Posted in Arts Organizations, Finances, Fundraising, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Private Philanthropy, Real Estate, Relations with funders | 1 Comment »
October 23, 2009
This is the most innovative idea I’ve heard to date for modifying the nonprofit model to better suit organizations which aren’t properly “charities” but still serve the public interest. The conversation has been about theater companies–and I salute Stolen Chair‘s leadership for introducing it–but it would work equally well for the newspaper business, where very little else seems to work. The Nonprofiteer promptly and shamelessly cribbed the idea for a “Whither journalism?” discussion, and intends to do so again.
H/t to Thomas Cott of “You’ve Cott Mail” for passing along the Artful Manager‘s coverage of this intriguing concept–the first notion in many a day to tempt the Nonprofiteer out of her lair.
Tags:arts management, charity, community supported agriculture, newspapers, nonprofit, not for profit, theater management
Posted in Arts Organizations, Current Affairs, Executive Directors, Fundraising, Investment, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Private Philanthropy, Relations with funders | 4 Comments »
September 24, 2009
The Nonprofiteer received this note from the soon-to-be-ex-Executive Director of the Guild Complex, a Chicago nonprofit focused on highlighting and diversifying contemporary writing. It’s the strongest possible statement about what one dedicated and capable person can accomplish in nonprofit management–and about when and how it’s time to let go. Thanks to Ellen Placey Wadey for her kind permission to edit and reprint it.
September 10, 2009
I think that we can agree that birthdays are moments of reflection. Mine is tomorrow. . . .
When your birthday is September 11, you can’t help but pause a bit. I turned 40 on that fateful day of the Twin Towers attacks . . . . I realized then that aging is a privilege that not everyone gets. I’ve come to embrace that realization in the time since to mean that every year should count. After wonderful years of success and accomplishment, even after very difficult years–we’ve all had them–a birthday gives you the chance to turn the corner and look to the next bright moment.
So, it felt right for me to announce today–on the eve of my birthday, on the eve of the possibility for the next bright moment–that I will conclude my tenure at the Guild Complex on December 31, 2009 (yet another date for reflection and also my 15th wedding anniversary.)
My transition from the Guild Complex has been in the works for the past year. Personally, I don’t believe an executive director should be in place for more than a decade–particularly for very small organizations. You run the danger of creating too much dependency on one person. A healthy organization, like a healthy person, should not only endure but embrace change. For a small non-profit, the healthiest scenario is that any one person can step away–a director, a key board member–and the organization moves forward with strength because the mission is greater than any one person.
When I look back at what I set out to do at the Guild Complex in comparison to what has been accomplished over these eight years, I’m content that much of the ‘to-do’ list has happened or is in process. Some times it’s hard to see it from the outside–nobody revels in your neatly organized closet but you–but we’ve done a lot at the Guild Complex. We updated our mission, our logo and our website. We made the transition into electronic marketing and audio archiving. We established on-going performance venues that serve important neighborhoods such as Pilsen and Humboldt Park. And we accomplished the two most important things for me on the list. We rethought our programs and launched fresh efforts that not only continue our legacy but are leading edge in the promotion of under-represented poets and writers. I’m particularly proud that Palabra Pura and the Poetry Performance Incubator were inaugurated during my tenure. And, we’ve brought on six amazingly talented, charismatic, smart and energetic new board members. The Guild Complex has always been supported by a close-knit group of people, but I wanted to make sure that we made room at the table for new voices and new ideas and that we continued to make that a priority. With the recruitment and robust involvement of these new board members, we have turned that corner too.
Though I will no longer be executive director, I will always be the Guild Complex’s biggest fan. I was a part of the organization years before my time on staff, and I expect to be a part of it for many years to come. But, my role from 2010 forward will be to cheer from the bleachers and offer my assistance to the new managing director the best that I can–but only when asked. (No new coach likes the old coach looking over their shoulder.)
As for me . . . . I’d like to work with non-profits on a project basis. I’ve developed a breadth of knowledge in my 15+ years working at grassroots, heart-and-moxie-driven organizations, and I would like to continue to contribute to this important sector, especially in the face of upcoming challenges to the arts.
. . . . There are not enough words of appreciation to extend to all those who have supported the Guild Complex and me over these last eight years. Artists have plenty of fire and passion, and they are also a generous bunch through and through. I thank each of you so very much.
. . . . So, here we stand–the Guild Complex and me–leaning over the birthday cake. I feel very honored to have worked at a place that I love so much. These next steps will be exciting, and a little scary, but I trust in the next bright moment.
With all gratitude and affection,
Ellen
Tags:arts group, career transition, charity, Executive Director, executive succession, nonprofit, not for profit
Posted in Arts Organizations, Boards of Directors, Executive Directors, Management Advice Day tip, Mission, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Personnel Issues | Leave a Comment »
September 17, 2009
Dear Nonprofiteer,
I am just finishing a year as an ED for a small nonprofit arts organization which has been struggling for almost all of its 30 year history. We have a 2-person admin team and most things seem to fall to me–from grant writing to plumbing.
While we have met our challenges this year and will not go into the red, I have not been able to realize the high hopes that I started this job with last September.
We face the challenge of an old, crumbling and uncomfortable building. We have a board-–of people I personally like–which is resistant to fundraising responsibility but eager to micro-manage small details. I have tried hard to develop a grant campaign but found no funders willing to support our projects. So we limp along on tuition revenue–enough to secure breakeven but not enough to undertake new initiatives.
I try to keep telling myself that this is the way of things in this economy but I am becoming very depressed and am having a hard time getting myself motivated this fall. I am not in a position to walk away from this job and as an older woman in this job market I am not optimistic about other prospects.
And more whining – my office is a broom closet.
Any advice?
Signed, Depressed in the Dumps
Dear Depressed:
The situation you describe is serious but not hopeless. It only feels hopeless because you’re probably trying to solve all the organization’s problems at once, when they need to be solved step by step. The central problem you identify is the Board–for without its fundraising support, you’ll never be able to expand, or repair your building, or get out of the broom closet.
Sit down with your Board president and explain, in the straightforward terms you’ve done here, that the only reasonable source of expansion capital for the group is the Board of Directors and that this Board of Directors seems unwilling to answer your urgent calls for its participation. Propose two things: that you and the President get the Board engaged in a serious effort at recruiting new and motivated Board members, and that once you complete this effort (which should be doable in about 3 months) you conduct a training session for new and veteran Board members alike in which they will learn to ask for money. If the President agrees (and there’s no reason why s/he shouldn’t), this will give the Board something to do that will keep it from micromanaging you AND will result in a new focus on fundraising, even before the current members have been trained to do that work themselves. Most Boards–and most EDs–find the process of brainstorming about new recruits and then conducting recruitment breakfasts or lunches or dinners or midnight snacks an exhilarating one, and it sounds as though a bit of exhilaration wouldn’t come amiss right now.
Once you’ve set this in motion, stop pounding your head against the wall with general-purpose grant applications and go looking for funders who will pay for “capacity building,” a phrase encompassing everything from updating your computer system to teaching your Board how to do its job. Ask for money to hire a Board development consultant, and use that person to help push the Board through the recruitment process or to give them training or both. Your grant proposal should stress that the function of this activity is to enable you to reduce your dependence on grants in the future; this goes over big with people whose job it is to give out grants, contradictory as that may seem.
Finally, consider the possibility of framing this entire project as a prelude to a campaign to improve or replace the building. These are terrible times for capital campaigns, and your Board will figure that out soon enough; but they’ll be more excited about expanding their number, and more expansive in their thinking about who in the community should join them, if they think there’s a possibility someone will want to put a name to a bricks-and-mortar project. You can always disabuse them of this notion later–or, if you don’t, maybe they’ll become properly agitated about the condition of your “office.”
If there is anyplace else in the building your desk can be placed, move there now–being in a windowless space makes everything seem darker, both literally and figuratively, than it actually is. You’re the ED–pull rank and choose someplace better to sit. “Better” may be a term of art meaning “loathesome instead of positively grotesque,” but at this point a change is as good as a feast.
And if all the foregoing sounds exhausting rather than energizing, then do two more things: take a week off NOW and spend it sitting in a bubble bath or hiking through autumn leaves and not thinking about this place at all; and then come back and use the computer in your broom closet to start job-hunting. It’s a bad economy and older women do face discrimination in the workplace, but you’ll be able to find small arts organizations with better attitudes and atmospheres which will be thrilled to have you. You’ll also be able to find large arts organizations whose development, marketing and education departments could all use someone with your background–and which won’t expect you to fix the toilet.
Finally, please try to remember what made you take the job in the first place. If you love this art form, see if you can’t get back in touch with that fact and with the way that working for this agency contributes to the art form’s growth. If you don’t love the form–if you took the job because it was a job, or because you love “the arts” and figured any one was as good as any other–then this is never going to satisfy you, no matter how well-restored the building or cooperative your Board or spacious your office. Conversely, if this kind of artistic work is the love of your life, then you’ll fix toilets and make coffee and browbeat Board members to make sure it thrives.
Check in and let us all know how things go for you.
Tags:arts, Board development, Board of Directors, capital campaign, Executive Director, funders, Fundraising, nonprofit, not for profit, recruitment
Posted in Arts Organizations, Boards of Directors, Earned income, Executive Directors, Finances, Fundraising, Management Advice Day tip, Mission, Nonprofit management, Nonprofits--General, Relations with funders, Women's Issues | 12 Comments »
