by Angela E. White

Want to know what 15,000 donors said could influence them to be more generous in 2010 than they had originally planned?

Want to know how these donors are feeling about the recession and its impact on their philanthropy?

Want to know if direct mail campaigns are dead?

These are just a few of the questions addressed in the latest research released by Penelope Burk, President of Cygnus Applied Research, Inc., in her new study The Cygnus Donor Survey … Where Philanthropy is Headed in 2010.  

You can review an executive summary and purchase the full report at http://www.cygresearch.com/.  As always, Penelope provides us with very interesting and helpful information to set the stage for our work.

For example, her research shows that the impact of the recession on philanthropy seems to be moderating; however, among the top 10% of select donors, 17% said that they would give less in 2010.

We know that a decrease in giving from our most generous donors has a large impact on our overall fundraising success and thus may indicate that we will not see our total giving bounce back right away.

Now that we are 7 months through the year, how do your philanthropic results compare to last year? Review Penelope Burk’s latest research and see how you compare to national donor trends.

Learn something interesting in the study? Discuss it with Angela and others by posting in the JGA comments section.

by Meg Gammage-Tucker

We all get in such a hurry these days that we often forget to take that all important step back and think about how we affect the multitudes of other people whose lives we touch each and every day.  You would think that in this business of philanthropy—which literally means for the love of mankind—that we would take that time and assess our impact a bit more often….but alas, we so very often do not.

Several events of this week have encouraged me to think about the impact that my actions have on the lives of others.  Most are personal and not interesting to many of you.  Two have been very public and deserve a broader audience’s attention. 

The first is a story that was on this morning’s news about an organization named Operation Beautiful, founded by 24-year old blogger Caitlin Boyle.  The organization’s whole purpose is to eliminate “fat-talk” and negative self-imaging.  It’s done one post-it note at a time.  The founder simply asks that you place positive self-image messages in random locations to make others feel better about themselves.  Simple kindness—what a concept!  And all accomplished by writing a random note and leaving it somewhere—for a specific person or for anyone who just passes by and needs to feel better about themselves and this world that we all live in.

The second event was attending the premiere of Rob Reiner’s latest movie, Flipped, in Indianapolis.  The event was coordinated by Heartland Truly Moving Pictures , an Indiana-based nonprofit “dedicated to recognizing and honoring filmmakers whose work explores the human journey by artistically expressing hope and respect for positive values of life.”  Flipped certainly deserved an award for its life affirming values as it reminds us that  focusing on negative perceptions only serves to undermine some of what can be life’s most positive and enjoyable moments and opportunities.  Kudos to Heartland (and all its staff and supporters) and Mr. Reiner (and his cast and crew) for holding on to those values and reminding us of their importance. 

Hopefully, as I was this week, a few others have been reminded of the positive impact a few affirming words and/or ideas can have on the lives of others they touch…

Let Meg know how Sharing Affirming Words has helped you or your organization by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Dan Schipp

Forging a Strong Relationship between the CEO and CAO

Recently I was asked to coach a new chief advancement officer (CAO) on how to work effectively with her chief executive officer (CEO).  The goal for a strong CEO/CAO relationship is to forge a partnership that enables each to be as effective as possible in their respective roles and with their unique skill sets.

The relationship between the CEO and the CAO has been called by some the most critical relationship in a not-for-profit organization. As Michael Gaylor outlines in his chapter in the book, Transformational Leadership, edited by Stanley Weinstein, the two leaders must have an authentic relationship, based on mutual respect, genuine interest in one another, and a deep commitment to the organization, its mission and values.  They must be comfortable spending time together and be able to work out the conflicts that inevitably will rise up between them. The CEO and CAO need to be headed in the same direction.  They may disagree on some of the tactics for getting to their destination, but they must be aligned when it comes to strategic goals.

The CEO and CAO have different roles to play in advancement.  The CEO is the visionary. She ensures that the organization’s mission is fulfilled efficiently and effectively.  She articulates the organization’s aspirations.  She exercises judicious oversight of the organization’s resources.  She builds relationships and seeks the resources necessary to fulfill the organization’s aspirations.

The CAO is the “bridge” between the organization and its external constituents.  He is the donors’ advocate.  He is the facilitator and supporter of the CEO, board members and other volunteers in their roles in advancement.  He is the developer, implementer and evaluator of fund development strategies.  He also is a builder of relationships and lead participant in seeking philanthropic support for the organization.

A strong relationship between an organization’s CEO and CAO is a key element of a successful advancement program.  What kind of relationship do your CEO and CAO have?  What do you see as the essentials for forging an effective CEO/CAO relationship?

Look for more info on this subject next month as I provide you with practical exercises on forging a stronger CEO/CAO relationship in your organization.

Let Dan know how helpful  “Forging a Strong Relationship between the CEO and CAO” is for your organization and share your results by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Kris Kindelsperger

A Double Dip for the Summer?

In my last blog I wrote about the impact of what some have called the loss of “psychological wealth.”  I described how donors a year and a half ago had described despair which was followed by concern and with the relative recovery in the market had moved to cautious optimism about their philanthropy this spring.  A new factor appears to have emerged this summer; the fears of a double dip in the recession.  I spoke to a small business owner who is heavily dependent on the construction field.  He told me about the apparent upswing in his business this spring which has for all intensive purposes evaporated this summer due to concerns about both the slowness of the economic recovery and the potential for another down turn. 

So add “double dip psychosis” to the lexicon of philanthropy.  Will there be a genuine worsening of the recession that will qualify in the language of economists as a double dip or will double dip be confined to your order request at the ice cream parlor?  What’s your opinion?  

“Let Kris know how helpful  A Double Dip for the Summer is for your organization and share your results by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Meg Gammage – Tucker

Managing to Repay Debt with Capital Funds

“How can we move ahead and buy or build something and then have our clients repay the debt?”  We have historically, and still regularly do, advise strongly against this strategy. 

We have advised against this strategy for two very important reasons—

1.)     Donors often do not want to fund something that has already been built thus reducing both their financial and personal influence over its development.  This is also why we test the “preliminary” case for support.  And,

2.)    Given the recent recession and its fallout, funding activities through debt is considered by some to be a precarious strategy, at best.

Today, however, it is a reality and one that more and more clients are asking us to address.  It may not be the best way to do our work, but it is a reality with which we must deal and strategies must be devised.

Debt repayment through philanthropy is not easy, and it requires organizations to be extra thoughtful and strategic to make it possible.  It requires the following:

Mission and Program Impact

How has this investment made the world a better place? 

How has it helped achieve our mission? 

What programs have we developed or improved? 

Financial Justification

Clear and sound reasoning as to why the investment was necessary.

Why did you invest first and ask later?  Or, in other words, what did you save and how did the organization benefit financially by buying or building before the dollars were available?

Potential Donors

Knowledgeable and entrepreneurial donors –who are both already committed to your cause and who appreciate and understand that your organization can be entrepreneurial as well.

It is not an easy path—nor one we readily recommend.  But it is one that is part of our philanthropic world and one which requires both thoughtful consideration and action.

“Let Meg know how helpful  Managing to Repay Debt with Capital Funds is for your organization and share your results by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Angela White

Philanthropy  =  The Love of Humankind

We know the general definition of philanthropy as the love of humankind.  I recently read a story that brought this definition to life for me.  ESPN’s award-winning reporter, Rick Reilly, featured this story in his column For the Love of the Game on May 25, 2010.  And, amazingly enough, this story is about a high school that is located just 3 short blocks from my house. The story is about the junior varsity softball team of Roncalli High School in a game vs. inner city Marshall Community High School.  What happened during this game was truly philanthropy in action – a group of young women who made the decision to be philanthropic leaders on the softball field.   To quote Rick Reilly, “Yes, a team that hadn’t lost a game in 2½ years, a team that was going to win in a landslide purposely offered to declare defeat. Why?  Because Roncalli wanted to spend the two hours teaching the Marshall girls how to get better, not how to get humiliated.”  I encourage you to read the entire article at  http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=5218228 and to think about the powerful lessons learned on this softball field and how they can apply to our work in philanthropy.

“Let Angela know how helpful  Philanthropy = the Love of Humankind  is for your organization and share your results by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Ted Grossnickle

The “generosity pulse” in America – How is the patient in 2010?

Giving USA has released its Report for philanthropy in 2009. As always, this work which is compiled by the Center on Philanthropy, provides terrific information about the “generosity pulse” of America. In the spirit of full disclosure, I am Chair-elect of the Board of Visitors for the Center. But the work done by the Center on so many fronts – the Giving USA Report just one of them- is outstanding and so helpful  to so many in our field.

There is some debate about the perspective of this report and what some other scholars say. Some ask if Giving USA paints an overly rosy picture of giving with a decrease of only 3.2% in 2009. Gifts in some categories dropped by much more – nearly 18% to higher education and gifts to the organizations that raise the most money dropped by 10%- are two examples.

But there are other factors to consider. What some would call mega gifts – those in the $100 million range- often go to private foundations which do not typically distribute funds immediately. And most high net worth donors continued their support. Most tellingly – at least to me- is the fact that much of what we may be seeing in an over-all drop relates to gifting at the highest end. Gifts of more than $1.0 totaled $4.4 billion- which was a drop of nearly 64% from 2008. Donations of less than $5000 fell by a median of 4.8% (according to an analysis by Target Analytics.)

This suggests to me something very healthy. The broad and deep impulse to help – across a nationwide population seems strong. Is that impulse impacted by this very tough economy? Yes. Is it likely to continue to be impacted for awhile? Yes. But gifting at that level is posting a lower decrease than the gifts at higher end levels.

Philanthropy is by and for everyone –at all levels of capacity to give. This is an “and” not an “or.” But it seems to me we ought to keep our eye on the base from which so much is expected and which – year in and year out- shows that generosity of spirit – the pulse – remains strong and vibrant.

“Let Ted know how helpful  The “generosity pulse” in America – How is the patient in 2010?  is for your organization and share your results by posting in the JGA comments section below.

by Angela E. White

by Dan Schipp

The board member’s frustration was palpable. 

“I want to do my fair share,” he told me, “but I have no idea how I stack up with other board members in my giving and I really don’t know what [the organization’s] expectations are of board members when it comes to giving.  If [they] shared some facts and figures on the financial support they receive from the board, it sure would help me to see what I need to do.”

This board member understands that he has a responsibility to assist his organization financially, but he wants (and deserves) some clarity and guidance on what is expected of him.  I suspect he also wants some reassurance that other board members are stepping up to the plate, and his requests are not unreasonable.  His organization and all other not-for-profits would do well to be more clear and upfront about board giving. 

So, what should not-for-profits communicate to board members about giving?  First and foremost, it needs to be said that each and every board member is expected to make a generous, annual gift.   If the board has a tradition of board members giving at a defined level, that practice should be reported to the prospective board member at the time they are being recruited for the board.  The board member’s expected role in identifying, cultivating and soliciting prospective donors must also be discussed.

In reporting on board giving, organizations certainly need to note the percentage of board members making an annual gift and the total amount contributed by them.  In addition, not-for-profits might consider reporting the range of gifts received from board members as well as the medium and median gifts.  Another valuable statistic to share with the board is the percentage of board members who have included the organization in their estate plans.

So, is your organization clear about what it expects from board members when it comes to giving?  Are any of your board members frustrated because they don’t have the “facts and figures” they need to help guide their giving?

If you’ve encountered this challenge or have more tips on keeping your board informed, let us know by posting your thoughts in the JGA comments section below.