CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Business Giving, Donor Support, Donors, Fundraising, Reading, Uncategorized

THREE WAYS TO RAISE MORE MONEY

As you probably know I enjoy reading articles, tips and hints from Market Smart, so here’s another one – I’m sure you’ll gain some insights from this.

 

THERE ARE ONLY THREE WAYS TO RAISE MORE MONEY

Every nonprofit organization needs more of two things: time and money. Okay, every organization (nonprofit or for-profit) could use more of those two resources. Hey, now that I think about, I could use more of those two myself…

Time and money are the most valuable resources in the world, and for nonprofits the impact of having more of either can be immeasurable. Of course, time is finite — we all are limited to just 24 hours in a day, but money (funding) is theoretically uncapped, and having more of it generally equates to having a larger impact on the world. That’s not to say that uncovering efficiencies, prioritizing activities, and increasing productivity are all for naught (they aren’t), it simply means that “saving time” plays a direct role in increasing funding. If I’m more efficient, I can raise more money.

Fundraising professionals power the financial engine that sustains millions of nonprofits across the globe, but they all face one common question: how do we raise more money? Of course such a broad question can’t be addressed in a blog post, nor should it be. Increasing the “growth in giving” is an issue worthy of industry boards and committees, not blog posts or ad hoc analysis.

Yet, as with most things, there is one simple answer to this question that can have a resounding impact and actually make a substantial difference on your funds raised. Yes, the answer to the “how do we raise more money?” question is incredibly complex, but no that doesn’t mean there isn’t anything you can do today to affect it.

Let’s start with a universal truth; there are only three ways to raise more money. Now, before you scroll to the comment section of this page and begin typing your, “there are more than three ways to raise money, bozo!” comment, please bear with me.

Any organization, nonprofit or for-profit has only three ways to increase the amount money they receive. They could:

  1. Acquire new donors/customers
  2. Retain existing donors/customers
  3. Monetize their donors/customers

It’s really that simple.

I’ve appended “/customers” to each of the three strategies above for a reason. As you continue reading this blog post we’ll address each strategy with both a nonprofit example and a for-profit example. You’ll quickly realize that for-profit companies are employing each of these three strategies on you every day.

 

Keep reading here

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Boards, Charity Sector, Governance, Reading, Reports, Uncategorized

2016 Fraud Survey – BDO

I’ve talked about fraud in the charity sector before, and my personal take on it is that it under reported, because charities don’t want their donors to know that there are people committing fraud (no matter the level.)

Yes, there is a risk to funding if general donors (mums and dads) learn that there has been fraud committed at a charity they support, but in reality isn’t honesty the best policy, shouldn’t donors be told what’s been happening?

It seems that the majority of charities have systems in place, especially given the new reporting standards required of them, and know they can get help and support from Charity Services; so maybe the message is getting across, especially with smaller organisations, that there is help available to them and that there’s no shame in asking .

Read the summary of the BDO Not-for-Profit 2016 Fraud Survey here.

If your organisation detected fraud, what would you do, would you take action, would you let your supporters know? Either leave a comment below or email me charitymattersnz@gmail.com.

 

 

 

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Charity Sector, Communication, Opinions, Sector news, Uncategorized

Looks Like a Charity Beat Up

A New Plymouth (New Zealand) charity – Roderique Hope Trust which provides emergency housing has recently leased a property to house people in urgent need of housing. But, this doesn’t seem to have gone down too well with others who have properties on the street.

One person, who’s daughter has a property on the street, has apparently threatened to sue if the value of her property decreases because of the Trust providing accommodation.

How can this be ok to even think about? As one person who commented on the item on Stuff.co.nz has said, “Do the residents of the street vet ALL people buying or renting in “their” street?  I bet they don’t!   How do they know that “that sort of person” became homeless due to accident, illness, redundancy or other reasons, and are perfectly respectable people?   This looks like a severe case of Nimby-ism”. This commenter is right in his/her thinking.

All too often we see community organisations taking action to help others in the community only to face a backlash, this time it seems as though the threat of legal action is only one part of the potential backlash, but it also seems that this could be a media beat up.

It would appear that Roderique Hope Trust have tried to keep the local residents informed, the fact that a meeting was planned for a long weekend is perhaps not a good thing, although it wasn’t organised by the Trust; but whoever organised it should have taken into account that some “players” wouldn’t be available.

We need organisations like Roderique Hope Trust helping in the emergency housing area, but we run the risk of others taking a step back if threats such as the one in this article are made to other providers.

Let’s hope there’s a good outcome to this and that the Trust moves ahead with their plan, it would seem that the owner of the property has no issues, only a handful of local residents who seem to feel they have been left out of discussions.

Let’s hope common sense prevails.

 

 

 

 

 

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Emails, Time Management

Email When Do You Check Them?

We all do it, get into the office – or for some, we dive onto our emails as soon as our feet hit the floor.

Is this something we should do, or should we be more like the example in this article … “Why I Don’t Allow My Employees to Check Their Email Until 11 AM”.

Often if we check our emails as soon as we hit the floor we can get caught in a cycle of emails which takes us away from the work that really needs to be done. Perhaps we should be looking at doing something like what’s suggested in the article – would you look at making a change to when/how you check your emails?

Have a read of the article, and let me know if you would make the change.

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Awareness, Communication, Management

Building Blocks of Strong Nonprofit Brands

A while ago I wrote Branding; when a refresh is in order and had some interesting feedback, with many saying it’s important to look at a refresh of an organisation’s brand from time to time, but that often people are afraid to refresh as it can be seen as a waste of time, money and other resources.

I came across The Eight Building Blocks of Strong Nonprofit Brands on Nonprofit Quarterly and thought it was a great piece and wanted to share it.

“To some, the very idea of nonprofit branding is a vulgar topic. No doubt, the nonprofit sector should be about mission, about performance, about excellence. We all want nonprofits to get the support they deserve, and we may sincerely wish that effectiveness were the coin of the realm—but it rarely is. Not only are measures of performance imprecise in many fields, the metrics we do have are incommensurable across fields. For all the talk of social investing and venture philanthropy, the reality is that brands still dominate the capital markets in the nonprofit sector. Decisions about support are a function of what the public thinks a nonprofit is doing far more than what it actually knows about what the organization is accomplishing.

“So, what is a brand? It is the construct that stakeholders hold about the identity, including the character, of a nonprofit organization. It is the sum total of perceptions about what a nonprofit stands for, what it does, and how much social impact it is thought to achieve. Brands are connected to reputations, in that recognizable brands are often, though not always, associated with good reputations. Brands can be tarnished and reputations ruined after scandals or bad press—and in that case, the brand may endure in the awareness of stakeholders but it will no longer be able to contribute to the organization’s ability to pursue its goals. Should one be fortunate enough to have a great brand, protecting it becomes an absolute organizational priority. Arguably, it is the most valuable asset in the nonprofit sector, because it is the gateway to all other assets, both human and financial.

Read the full article here

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Boards, Charity Sector, Events

Need People at Your Event?

We all struggle to get the number of people we want at events; we send invite after invited, make the calls yet we’re don’t get the numbers.

There’s all manner of way to get people to attend, but having just re-read

3 WAYS TO BUILD AN INVITE LIST… AND GET PEOPLE TO COME ALONG by Lou of Loud in Public, I thought it worth sharing.

I’m not going to say any more than – READ it …

You will gain some good tips and hey what you got to lose, your time spent reading is an investment in your next event …

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Charity Sector, Opinions

What Makes a Charity a Charity

Talk to anyone in the street about charities and they’ll say “there’s too many” “I’m always being asked for money for something” – and that’s just from people who comment about the “visible” charities. Wait until you start talking about the Big Business Charities – the first to come to mind are Churches.

They’re registered as charities, have, in the main massive resources, they have charitable status which means they don’t pay taxes like you or I.

Then there’s the likes of Sanitarium which is exempt from paying tax on its business earnings, simply because it’s owned by the Seventh Day Adventist Church, which is a registered charity.

When Big Business, yes, Sanitarium is a business, is exempt from paying taxes on earnings, it can make people question whether this is making a mockery of the whole charity sector.

I could write screeds about this, but having stumbled across Kate Russell’s (no relation) piece on LinkedIn, I see no point in repeating what she has to say.

I agree with what Kate has to say in “Is it time to reform the Charities Register?” and, it would seem those who have comment on her piece are of the same mind.

Have a read of what Kate has to say – do you agree that it is time to reform the Charities Register?

“In recent years, there have been various moves by Government to ensure that charities are more accountable and transparent in their financial management. The new accounting standards that come in shortly will ensure that charities are clear and open about investment returns and outcomes reporting.

“We as a sector should welcome these moves as adding credibility to what we do, but isn’t it time the Government attacked the more complex issues of what constitutes a ‘charity’ here in Godzone?

Read Kate’s full piece here

What do you think – is it time for reform?

Leave a comment below and let me know what you think, I’ll also gladly pass your comments onto Kate.

CharityMatters-NZ Boards, Governance, Management

Your Board – Investors in Your Organisation

I’ve talked before about having your board onboard; and have thought from time-to-time about whether boards are truly invested in the work of the organisation.

When thinking about board members and their investment in organisations; one thing that I’ve often wondered is how many are on the board of more than one organisation and whether this truly works.

Another thought has been about whether board members financially contribute to the organisation, sure – many do by attending events etc; but do they donate to your cause more than they donate to others?

So finding “My ONE Wish For Boards – the Secret Revealed” on Asking Matters made me realise I’m certainly not the only one who thinks along these lines.

Have a read and see what you think …

My ONE Wish for Boards – the Secret Revealed

For 15 years now, I’ve harbored a secret wish. My one wish for the non-profit world. Here it is.

If I could snap my fingers and make one change in our community, it would be to have every board member sit on one board only… and give 75% of his or her charitable gifts to that board. I can dream, can’t I?! 

Here are the impacts that would have:

Board members would feel like investors.

We talk about how to encourage our board members to truly feel vested in our organizations, yet how can they when their attention and their giving is so broadly focused? If one of your board members gives $10,000 to charity and gives $2,500 of that to you, that’s a solid gift. Now imagine if that board member gives $7,500 to you. That would be quite an investment, and I can guarantee that this board member would then be laser-focused on helping your organization succeed.

Board members could stop the painful quid-pro-quo fundraising.

What a gift that would be! Can you imagine how much negative energy would be avoided? I’ve never met a board member who likes all that quid-pro-quo fundraising – every gift to your organization means a gift he or she makes to someone else’s. And then your organization has all these gifts from people who don’t care about you and don’t want to be cultivated…and will never have a direct relationship to your organization.

Read the full article here

CharityMatters-NZ Communication, Reports, Research, Sector news

Charity Shakeup – A New Zealand Initiative Discussion Paper

If you haven’t seen “Giving Charities a Helping Hand”  by Jason Krupp at the New Zealand Initiative, take the time and have a read now.

Download Research Notes (PDF)

“These are significant privileges, which is why it is important that only groups with a genuine charitable purpose be entitled to receive them.

“Yet as Giving Charities a Helping Hand argues, the regulations governing the sector have set the test of charitable purpose so high that many small groups cannot attain, or struggle to maintain, registered charity status. At the same time, commercial firms owned by charities are allowed to retain profits without paying tax on these funds. Indeed, there is little oversight over how these funds are used, and the current regulations create the potential for unfair completion in the market.

“This report puts forward three policy proposals to remedy this situation, namely to:

  • re-examine the centuries-old definition of charitable purpose,
  • restore much needed procedural fairness to the legislation, and
  • Tax all for-profit firms equally, but make all donations to charity tax deductible.

“These reforms are aimed at helping the sector, with the benefits accruing to charities, and ultimately the communities and causes they serve.”

CharityMatters-NZ Appeals, Campaign, Donor Support, Donors, Fundraising, Management

Are High Dollar Donors More Loyal ?

Have been wondering recently whether high dollar donors are more loyal than low dollar donors, and while pondering this, an email popped up with a link to an article on this very subject from from Gregory Warner of Marketsmart.

Although it doesn’t show New Zealand examples, it’s worth a read and hopefully I’ll soon be able to share some local examples.

Here’s Gregory’s article …

PROOF THAT HIGH-DOLLAR DONORS ARE MORE LOYAL THAN LOW-DOLLAR SUPPORTERS

Recently I made some new friends at The Fundraising Effectiveness Project and they shared some awesome research findings with me.  You can see the first one below proving that high-dollar donors are actually more loyal (stickier) than low-dollar supporters.

I think what this chart implies is this: The fundraising pyramid is dead

The idea that nonprofits should first seek to gain low dollar donors and move them up the pyramid is just not a wise strategy. Low dollar donors are clearly less loyal and don’t repeat at nearly the same rate as high dollar donors $1,000 – $4,999 (at 87%). Plus, low dollar donors are very expensive to acquire yet they are much more fickle. Therefore, they clearly can’t deliver enough returns for the long haul compared to the other givers.

4 things you should do today:

1- Develop a strategy that emphasizes efforts to gain more high-dollar donors instead of low-level supporters.

2- Focus on customer service and retention by providing value everywhere (especially in your engagement offers).

3- Search for ways to move mid-level donors up (again by providing value especially in your engagement offers).

4- Aim for referrals. Encourage your current high-dollar donors to introduce you to other high-dollar donors. This will be the lowest cost marketing you can implement and it will deliver the greatest return for your investment. The ice bucket challenge did this for low-level donors. But most of them never gave again. What can you do to get referrals from major and mid-level donors? Figure that out and you’ll be a fundraising rockstar!

Read the full article here