Non-profit

, , , , , , , ,

Dine Out – Give $2

snip20161124_12Americans are labelled as “aggressive”, especially when we share our fundraising ideas. Perhaps this is a term of endearment. Perhaps it is meant as a label and some are truly turned off by campaign tactics shared out of the US. Nonetheless, I was surprised to see one tactic employed last week when I was dining in Newtown with some friends.

When the check arrived, we were asked by the server if we wanted to make a $2 donation to help the homeless (StreetSmart Australia). $2 is nothing – especially after enjoying a wonderful meal of wine and good food! I agreed and the server informed me the $2 had already been added to the bill.

I was surprised. In fact, I was shocked.

dineout-2-1dineout

Why was I surprised/shocked?

This type of fundraising tactic works and is rarely employed in Australia. I was surprised and shocked in a good way!

Why does it work so well and resonate with an audience? Rarely will someone ask that the $2 be taken off the bill. Also, rarely will people remember, at the end of the evening, to add the $2 to the bill. So, by adding it in, proactively, the charity is likely to raise more money. This is not misleading to the consumer, either, because the consumer is fully informed of the charge and has the ability to opt out should he or she desire.

Each of us were given a small pocket-size brochure on the charity so we could read more about the charity and about the campaign. #Success.

I have only one criticism of this campaign and, perhaps, this brings out the “aggressive American” in me. I would like to see the charitable organisation collect my contact details to have the ability to engage me as a true supporter rather than receive just a one time $2 gift. Without my contact details, this type of campaign mimics the gold coin collections in a theatre or at a street fair.

, , , , , ,

Why are BPay and PostPay not widely used by charity?

careflightYou and I have the opportunity to use BPay and PostPay™ daily to pay our mortgages, rent, utilities, and credit cards. Yet, why are BPay and PostPay not widely used by charitable organisations across Australia?

I received the Christmas Appeal from CareFlight recently and noted an ability to give a donation by BPay on their response device. I also received one from Royal Institute for Deaf and Blind Children, which contained BPay.  Their biller code and my reference number are printed prominently on the response device. Easy, convenient, and part of a menu of options to give quickly. But, this is not the norm. Most non-profit organisations lack this convenience payment facility for their constituents.ridbc

What are the reasons BPay and PostPay™ are not widely offered?

  • Lack of internal knowledge to create a BPay and PostPay™ process.
  • Organisation’s CRM is not capable of producing a BPay or PostPay™ number for each constituent.
  • It goes in the “too hard” basket.

Let’s take them in order:

  • Creating a BPay number for your organisation is as easy as contacting your bank to find out the required makeup of the BPay sequence to match your bank.
  • While at it, acquire the configuration makeup for PostPay™ from Australia Post.
  • Once you have the required makeup, the next step is contacting your CRM supplier to find out if they have written a customisation to do the following:
    • Create a BPay and PostPay™ number for every constituent in your current database (using a batch or bulk facility).
    • Create the same for new constituents upon saving the new record in the CRM.
  • If your CRM supplier has created such a customisation, acquire it for your organisation and ask that it be configured to meet your bank’s required standards.
    • Remember, charitable organisations utilise a variety of financial institutions and your bank will not necessarily have the same BPay configuration as another organisation. Thus, the supplier needs to configure the customisation to meet your bank’s requirements.

Action BPay and, if appropriate for your organisation’s supporter base, PostPay™ for your next appeal. At a minimum, BPay ought to be part of the menu of options a donor or prospective donor has to support your charity.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No funding to measure outcomes? Seriously?

snip20161105_2I have been on a bit of a soapbox lately about measuring outcomes. Since FundraisingForce is conducting more than 5 concurrent CRM searches for Australian universities and non-profit organisations, I have noted the lack of outcomes measurement across these and other marquis organisations. Additionally, I served as a guest lecturer for both University of Technology Sydney (UTS) and Queensland University of Technology (QUT) where I lectured on the importance of measuring outcomes related to both programs and fundraising.

I was alarmed to see a recent study out of the Centre for Social Impact at the University of Western Australia (UWA), which suggests the reason non-profit and social impact organisations do not measure outcomes is a lack of funding for such measurement.snip20161105_3

Seriously?

This is problematic for three key reasons:

  1. Our funders expect we are measuring the impact. So, why aren’t outcomes measurements part of the funding equation at the outset? Further, why wouldn’t funders insist they will not fund a project unless the outcomes are measured?
  2. How do we expect to get continued (or greater funding) for programs if we cannot demonstrate impact of those programs?
  3. Our corporate counterparts would not get by telling their shareholders they cannot measure impact of programs because of a lack funding.

Ellie Cooper reported in Pro Bono Australia this last week about the UWA study conducted by the Centre for Social Impact, which suggested 9 out of 10 organisations lack the funding to as a key barrier to measuring the impact of their work.

According to the Centre for Social Impact, “in a resource constrained social system, it is vital that we ensure our capital and capabilities are directed to the right places and purpose – and measurement is key to this understanding”. The Centre goes on to say “Organisations are measuring and reporting what they do and that is to be applauded. Much of what is measured is reporting activity as opposed to outcomes. What we need for a stronger social system in Australia is to better define what it is we measure and why”.

Marc J. Epstein, co-author of a book titled Measuring and Improving Social Impacts: A Guide for Non-Profits, Companies, and Impact Investors, suggested to Forbes Magazine “donors and investors also want the accountability and performance excellence that they expect in the for-profit world. And they want evidence that they’re making a difference. These leaders want more clarity on the objectives, the paths to success, and measures of success. They know that without clear performance measures organisations usually cannot determine whether they have succeeded or failed”.

Which Australian non-profit organisations are measuring impact? What tools are they using to measure impact? Finally, how did they convince leadership the importance of not only funding the programs, but measurement of the program’s objectives?

Perhaps the topic of outcomes measurement is finally picking up steam? I noted recently even Blackbaud has booked in a day-long outcomes online conference. This looks like a great session for many of us to get even more familiar with this important topic. The 30 November session will likely raise the level of the conversation in our nonprofit organisations.

, , , , ,

#GivingTuesday – Australia, jump on board

Snip20141108_1What is your charitable organisation planning for #GivingTuesday? #GivingTuesday occurs in just 25 days – on 29 November 2016.

If you have not already jumped on board, it is not too late. And, if you have decided to participate in Giving Tuesday, it is time to create a concise plan of activities for that date.

#GivingTuesday is one day when Australian businesses, non-profit organisation, community groups, families and individuals come to together to celebrate a day of giving and to kick off the giving season.

This effort harnesses the collective power of a unique blend of partners to transform how people think about, talk about and participate in the giving season. #GivingTuesday will inspire people to take collaborative action to improve their local communities, give back in better, smarter ways to the charities and causes they celebrate and help create a better world. #GivingTuesday will reinforce the power of social media to create a global moment that is dedicated to giving around the world.

Are you a supplier to the Australian charitable sector or do you work for an Australian charity and want to know how to get involved in #GivingTuesday? Do not let another day go by – sign up today and become part of this global campaign to encourage philanthropy across the sector.

, , , , , , , , ,

How do you measure up? Outcomes measurement is lacking in NFPs

During a recent guest lecture for the QUT Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies, I suggested Australian non-profit organisations do not spend near enough time measuring to outcomes. Program staff and fundraisers are equally guilty of this fact. This might be painting the non-profit community with a broad brush, but I truly believe most organisations do not measure and their analyse programs. I believe most staff go through the motions of program management and/or fundraising, but do not take the time to measure and analyse the outcomes in order to make educated decisions as to whether to:

  • Continue the programs or fundraising as they exist.
  • Make further investments or increased investments in the programs or the fundraising activity.
  • Decrease funding of programs or fundraising activities.
  • Eliminate programs or fundraising activities.

Instead, staff are making decisions not on data, but on “gut feel’ for programs or for fundraising activity.

Why is there little measurement occurring on the program side of NFPs? The following reasons come to mind:

  • Lack of unified metrics across our sector.
    • Our sector has spent little or no time determining what we ought to measure.
  • Lack of knowledge of metrics.
    • Staff of NFPs lack the knowledge of metrics and, therefore, the data to measure.
  • Lack of tools to measure and report.
    • CRMs, alone, cannot be relied on as tools to measure outcomes.
  • Lack of time and/or energy to report and analyse.
    • Staff put this in the “too hard” basket rather than tackle the issue.

Isn’t it time we as a sector work together to come up with common metrics? Also, isn’t it time we explore and embrace some tools in the market that actually assist us to measure and analyse our programs? Perhaps then we can cut out activity which is not working; further invest in activity which is outperforming expectations; and develop new areas for programs and/or funding?

, , , , , , , ,

Wisconsin Alumni Association offers a great donor care example

waaI recently gave a donation to the Wisconsin Alumni Association (WAA), which is the alumni association for my alma mater – the University of Wisconsin. The gift is a small token of my appreciation for the way the university set me up for success in life. It is also my way to recognise the terrific work the WAA does to mobilise its alumni base and to keep us engaged with the University of Wisconsin.

WAA could have sent me a form letter to thank me for my contribution. Instead, I received a very personalised thank you letter with a hand- written note from the CEO of the WAA, Paula Bonner. The note invites me to come back to campus next summer when the WAA Alumni Park is finished. The WAA and Paula Bonner know how to continue to engage its base of active Alumni who “bleed Wisconsin red”.

Whether you work for a university or a non-profit charitable organisation, each of us can learn from this type of donor care or stewardship. It might seem simple and, even, basic. But, personal outreach holds high value for your constituencies.

 

, , , , ,

Customer complaints – not necessarily a bad thing

Staff of not for profit (NFP) organisations appear to fear complaint calls. No one loves them. But, I believe complaint calls are a good thing. Complaints via telephone calls, letters, Emails, and social media give you something to respond to and to action. Wouldn’t you rather receive a complaint than have someone agitated and no tell you. Those are the types of people who tell ten more people about the situation.

Whenever a NFP receives a complaint, the following five steps ought to be done:

  • Ensure the proper personnel are in contact with the complainant.
  • Contact the person making the complaint in a more personal manner than the complaint was received. i.e. If the complaint came in writing, call the person.
  • Attempt to resolve the situation and maintain the engagement of the party. The situation may often times be “turned around” for the benefit of the complainant and the charitable organisation.
  • Document the complaint in your CRM, tracking the type and subject of the complaint for later analysis.
  • Review and analyse complaints on a monthly basis. Improve internal processes to reduce and eliminate complaints accordingly.

A recent article in the Sydney Morning Herald highlighted NSW Fair Trading Complaints Register and how the likes of Groupon, Valuebasket.com.au, Grays Online and NRMA were able to address complaints, reduce them, and no longer appear on the list. Whereas Ray White and Anytime Fitness appeared amongst the most complained about business.

The NFP industry lacks a list similar to the NSW Fair Trading Complaints Register. In some cases we are lucky there is no actual complaint list for NFPs. That said, shouldn’t each NFP have a process in place to address complaints, reduce complaints, so we are ensuring a register does not become necessary?

, , , , , ,

You are my customer and I am yours

Why is it people do not respond to telephone calls, email communications, or requests for meetings? Some take weeks to respond and others do not respond at all. It’s a source of frustration across most non-profit organisations – internally and externally – when people make contact with others and there is no response or the response takes days or weeks. The frustration is within our non-profit team members and also between non-profits and suppliers. We hear excuses like “I am flat out”, “I have been really busy”, “My schedule has been nuts”, etc.

Yet, these same people who are non-responsive often times expect others to be responsive to one another. They have a different standard for others than they have for themselves.

There may be legitimate reasons – holidays, meetings, and other tasks. These can be managed via out of office messages or other outbound notifications to set expectations. It’s the radio silence that is aggravating to people. The unknown.

You are my customer and I am your customer. We need to treat one another as customers. We ought to set service level agreements or standards of communication whereby we pledge to ourselves, and others, to be responsive in a certain length of time for online and offline communications. We can’t expect people to adhere to our standards when we do not have them for ourselves.

Snip20160829_12

, , , , , , , ,

Criticism of Australian Olympic Athletes is sickening

Snip20160829_12I’ve watched, with anger, the criticism of Australia’s Olympic athletes over the last two weeks. Many in the Australian public and the media have criticised Australia’s premier athletes.  The criticism occurred while the athletes were still in Rio and, even more, upon their return to Australian soil. Kitty Chiller, 2016 Chief de Mission, spoke eloquently each and every day from Rio about the pride she had for the athletes, whether they won or lost, and held off the daily criticism of her team. Chiller was a class act at each and every press conference.

Chiller became not just Chief de Mission, but cheerleader in chief. Imagine the job she had to do in front of the athletes each and every day in this age of social media.

The barrage of criticism about Australia coming in tenth in the medal count has been sickening to watch and mind boggling to try to understand.

How many Olympic medals do you have in your home?

Last time I checked, I had zero. I would guess the same is true for every single person reading this blog post. So, who are we to criticise these young people who worked day in and day out to make the Olympic team and to compete on the world stage with the world’s finest athletes? Further, who are we to criticise any of them for coming home with less than Gold or no medal at all.

It is sad to see the conversation occurring in the public forum, including the airport hanger when the Qantas jet arrived from Rio. Imagine how this must have made the athletes feel knowing they were under such scrutiny despite having worked their hardest to make their country proud.

The conversation has been all about the funding of the “elite athletes” and whether Australians received their money’s worth. The discussion became about ROI and a debate about how Australian’s athletes should be funded in the future.

The Australian Olympic Committee is a non-profit organisation. Like any non-profit in our country, the committee should raise money from the private sector. Like the US and other countries, money should be raised from individuals and from corporations to fund training programs, training centres, and sending the athletes to compete in various games. I also believe a lottery must be created for mass participation.

Investing in these athletes, just as we invest in the mission of any non-profit organisation, is a choice we can make to demonstrate our national pride. First, the AOC must invest in talented fundraisers to generate the necessary funding.

«< 16 17 18 19 20 >»