Giving in the digital age

Posted on June 29, 2020 by Abby Rolland

The Women’s Philanthropy Institute’s (WPI) new podcast series, “Philanthropy Plugged In,” invites scholars and practitioners together to discuss the intersection of gender, giving, and technology.

One of the episodes focuses on giving in the digital age, and featured Una Osili, associate dean for research and international programs at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, interviewing Scott Jackson, president and CEO of Global Impact.

Global Impact was founded to support workplace giving with small donors. It supports charitable ventures by conducting advisory work to support campaigns and fundraising initiatives, acting as a support team for those fundraising programs, and providing tools to everyday donors.

Jackson and Global Impact have sought to expand philanthropy by using Growfund, a giving tool that acts as a personal foundation to donors and allows them to be strategic when investing their dollars in philanthropy and the community.

To relate the work of Growfund to WPI and its new study Women Give 2020 – New Forms of Giving in a Digital Age: Powered by Technology, Creating Community, Jackson pointed out that women are giving on a more regular basis to philanthropy, which is why Growfund is targeted more toward women donors and their busy lives.

“Women see philanthropy as part of their everyday lives,” Jackson said. “Women also are quickly becoming a dominant donor in terms of the size of their gifts and the size of their grants they’re making.

“While men still currently edge women on the size of donations, women are more likely to give more frequently. In the future, I believe that women will lead men in their giving while also growing their own philanthropy.”

Jackson also imagines that technology will provide crucial access to expanding philanthropy.

“We’ve seen tremendous growth in online giving as a whole, and so technology is playing a role in providing access to philanthropy,” he said. “In addition, we’re seeing that donors are willing to give more and more of their philanthropy online and trust online programs as effective and safe tools for giving.

“We’re also seeing an increase in building community. With COVID-19, we’re finding new ways to create community with one another online. As we build community, women donors will lead the way in giving circles, collaboratives, and other forms that will not only bring giving to life, but will also have the ability to focus on causes and the ability to create social impact within a community.”

Jackson noted that Growfund supports over 250 giving circles on its platform. He thinks that it allows individuals to join together with others to leverage similar interests and funding in order to give larger gifts together, thus making even more of an impact.

In the future, he says that technology can act as a tool for individuals to give together and to be strategic about philanthropy: “We’ll be able to see the social impact that we can have by coming together in giving communities.”

According to Jackson, technology can also serve as a way to democratize philanthropy.

“The research from the Women Give 2020 report helps show us that women give to smaller nonprofits and community organizations, and also give to equity and inclusion-focused groups,” he said. “Using technology to create community allows people to find each other, build community, and share in philanthropy together. I hope that as a result, we’ll see greater impact on the core elements of gender and equity in society.”

Listen to the full podcast, or learn more about gender, giving, and technology in WPI’s newest report

Fundraising expert shares tips to navigate COVID-19

Posted on June 26, 2020 by Abby Rolland

What does an experienced fundraiser have to say about the COVID-19 crisis and fundraising? We spoke with Gasby Brown, CEO and executive consultant of The Gasby Group, Inc., and faculty member at The Fund Raising School.

Brown has 30 years of working as a fundraising executive and consultant with organizations such as YWCAs, Salvation Army, National African American of History and Culture Museum, Kevin Durant Foundation, Miami Children’s Hospital Foundation, Kid’s Hope USA and many others. She shared her knowledge and experiences with participants in webinars with The Fund Raising School, as well as her recent book Business of A Spiritual Matter: What All Leaders of Faith-Based Nonprofits Should Know.

In the webinars, podcasts and the book, Brown advises nonprofits to make a case for why they benefit the community.

“Essential businesses have made a case for why they should remain open during this time,” she says. “So, what is a nonprofit’s reason for why they matter? Be precise, sincere, intentional, and loud about why you matter. Explain why you exist and what the community would look like if you weren’t around. Find your space and your place in order to standout to your donors to explain why you matter.”

Brown encourages nonprofits to make a case to donors and potential donors for investing in tomorrow.

“It’s not business as usual; you can respectfully and empathetically solicit potential donors, while finding ways to stay in front of your constituents and show them that your case is still relevant,” she says. “In addition, invite them to a discussion about how your organization might look at fundraising moving forward.”

Think about the work as an invitation, Brown explained: “Ask them to join you, to make an impact and investment in your organization and the community. Then continue to use your fundraising cycle to encourage donors to get into the habit of giving.”

Engaging your board is an essential step, and it starts with building an effective board. Brown emboldens nonprofits to consider board members who can best advance the vision and mission of the organization, and then involve them in the fundraising process. For example, invite them on those fundraising Zoom calls at the appropriate time.

She also advises organizations to diversify fundraising channels.

“For private, faith-based schools, how can you go beyond bake sales to use best practices to raise money?” Brown asks. “How can you maximize fundraising through major gifts, corporations, foundations, digital fundraising, the capital campaign, and planned giving? The bake sale will never be enough.”

Nonprofit fundraisers should also demonstrate leadership within and outside of their organizations. Brown advises fundraisers to “be intentional about the kind of culture you want to create. How are you evaluating your team during this time? Are you setting them up for success? What goals do you have, and how can you use scenario planning for the future?”

Long-term, Brown hopes to empower organizations through the “next normal” and beyond COVID-19. She and her team are engaging their clients in reflection, reimagining, and recalibrating where necessary.

“I hope that all organizations are able to operate at their maximum with optimum excellence, because they are already doing good work,” she says. “Nonprofits are accustomed to meeting challenges, and they are up to the task to look at the problems we face today and find creative solutions, even during a time of uncertainty.”

Brown’s upcoming book project, Think Like a Nonprofit, Act Like A Business is anticipated for release in 2021. She is also the podcast host of NonProfit Thursdays, an offshoot of her popular in-person luncheon series that was sponsored by Merrill Lynch Bank of America for 10 years.

Digital fundraising in our new world

Posted on June 24, 2020 by Andy Ware

Digital fundraising podcast with Nathan Hand

Read a transcript of a podcast produced by The Fund Raising School, narrated by Bill Stanczykiewicz, assistant dean for external relations and director of The Fund Raising School, and Nathan Hand, chief advancement officer at The Oaks Academy, as they discuss the current state of digital fundraising.

Bill Stancyzkiewicz (BS): I’m joined today by Nathan Hand. Nathan is an accomplished fundraiser for a leading educational organization in Central Indiana. We’re here today to talk about digital fundraising.

Nathan, how do fundraisers adapt online now?

Nathan Hand (NH): I think it’s highly important for folks to remember to continue to practice relationship-based fundraising. So before all this, you may have sent notes, you may have engaged folks, given a tour, gotten coffee. Just like you’re trying to hopefully engage with your own family and friends over distance, you should be using these technologies to engage in relationship-based fundraising with your donors. I’d suggest if you haven’t already, reach out to your top 20, 30, 50 or even 100 kind of major supporters and setting a time for a Zoom call.

We did that in the first few weeks. Had about 50 conversations with folks. And it wasn’t to ask for support specifically, it was more just to touch base. We are in relationships with them. We care about who they are, how they’re doing, and we want to ask those questions. And they were very responsive and wanted to know the same about us, how our organization is doing, what we’re working on, what we’re thinking about. Those conversations just went really well and kind of set the stage that we’re going to continue doing the work and they’re going to continue engaging with us.

And again, we didn’t come out of that with raising money for something specific, but that was a stewardship opportunity to stay in touch with folks that really care about our cause.

BS: How would you describe the reaction when you first reach out to donors? Were they hesitant to meet with you online, were they glad to hear from you? How would you describe that overall?

NH: I was nervous that they may not be interested, or may not have the time, or may be preoccupied. And thankfully, I was proven horribly wrong. They were almost all very interested and excited to hear from us, very willing to work through the technology and really had kind of good and insightful questions about how the organization was doing, how our families were doing, both within the organization and personally.

Again, when we’re in relationship with folks, they want to know this. And it also allowed for some conversations from folks that are normally a little harder to get a hold of. They’re home too and they’ve got time and they are seeking human interaction. So it worked out really well.

BS: You know, that is a great point. It can be so difficult to establish a face-to-face meeting with our donors back in the day as we were meeting in person. It sounds like perhaps donors maybe have a little bit more flexibility to meet with us. Has that been your experience?

NH: Absolutely.

BS: Nathan you’ve been associated with The Fund Raising School for such a long time. To go back to 1974, Dr. Rosso, our founder, has always taught that meeting in person is the best way to cultivate the relationship with the prospective donor, make the philanthropic request, and currently steward the relationship with the donor after gifts have been made. It sounds like even though we’re moving primarily to digital, it’s not to say we don’t have a donor who might allow us to meet within six feet of them in a lunch. But as we’re moving more and more into these online formats, that it’s not so much that we’re redefining fundraising and fundraising techniques, but that we’re redefining the meaning of the term in-person because now this means in-person.

NH: Yeah, I think it kind of emphasizes to me not to be stressed about your words, but to still watch for kind of nonverbal cues.

I would encourage folks to tell people that you would rather be doing this in person, right? It shows them that you do respect that process and their time. But at the same time, this is our new reality. And everyone, I think will understand that.

BS: That’s a great point. We talk about the emotional intelligence that fundraisers need to watch, to read between the lines of what’s being said. We’re not just listening for content, but observing the donor as well. It seems like those skills need to be sharpened in this online format. I’m here watching you now and I can watch for some verbal cues and some body language, but it’s not exactly the same. Have you noticed that as you’re fundraising with your donors?

NH: You can tell pretty quickly if folks are really dialed into you. Or if there are noises or distractions in the background. It gives you clues into how personal to get, and maybe if they’re really ready to receive a request or not. And I would say, depending on where your organization is in these times and the needs, many of the same principles still apply. Meaning if you have not been in touch with that person for a while, a Zoom call out of the blue, making a large request is probably not the right move. It’s probably better to touch base and re-engage and kind of see how they’re doing and ask about their other philanthropic portfolio and how they’re thinking about their other organizations.

I find that I think a lot of our fundraising community finds it interesting how people navigate their philanthropy when environments change. And so that’s a great conversation to have. Not only is it enlightening and interesting, but it helps you understand kind of where your organization sits on their radar. If it’s truly about making donors feel comfortable, then you can have that kind of open, candid, personal conversation. You can do that over these mediums.

BS: And we’ve been talking about this face-to-face, that we’re not redefining fundraising and fundraising techniques, we’re actually redefining what in-person means. But then also Nathan, what about the other platforms? Have you adapted at all in those formats? Are you hearing anything out in the field on how fundraisers are now using those vehicles in this new reality?

NH: You’ve got to be really good at email marketing. You’ve got to be really good at social media marketing now because there’s even more posts. So really dialing into that. I’ve seen a lot of organizations already ramp up their kind of horsepower and hire some additional help because they know that’s going to be how their message comes out. Specifically for raising money online, there are many different softwares that you can use. It’s important to choose the correct ones.

BS: Our case study has always been important. It demonstrates why your nonprofit is unique, and incorporate data and stories about the impact that you’re having. In this digital world, our case statement becomes our friend in a whole new way, doesn’t it?

NH: Absolutely. And I think it needs also a quick review, because it’s all about relevance today. And so the question is, look at your case statement and naturally, does your work rise to an important and urgent level in these times? Or if you’re not directly affected or things haven’t changed a lot, you may want to kind of revise some of your case statement to make sure people understand why you are either still important or more important than ever. Because as people are flooded with information and flooded with community needs, you’ve got to make sure that your case statement is still strong and lasting but relevant today so that people still include it in their thinking and their conversation now, as opposed to punting their interest in your efforts for a year or more until things get back to normal.

Youth taking action

Posted on June 22, 2020 by Andy Ware

By Cathy Brown, associate director, The Fund Raising School

Join in #IUyoungphilanthropists this summer!

There is a lot of conversation these days around taking action. But what can kids do? Join our celebration of #IUyoungphilanthropists this summer.

#IUyoungphilanthropists invites elementary and middle school aged youth to explore, learn, and understand philanthropy through a series of self-guided and/or family activities. Participants read, watch, listen, observe, and act. Then with permission, these #IUyoungphilanthropists share their experience and action on social media using #IUyoungphilanthropists.

Download the philanthropy curriculum for elementary and middle school students

According to Learning to Give, “Youth flourish from being active in philanthropic initiatives (Rosen and Sedonaen 2001). Philanthropic deeds give kids ownership and pride. When young people are not involved in the community they often feel marginalized and unimportant (Crestinger 1999).

Children and adolescents serving their community are given the control and assurance that is needed to build their sense of self-worth. More tangibly, there is evidence that young people that volunteer, write grants, or fundraise, learn life skills, responsibility, and commitment as well as improve their grades and behavior in school (Safrit 2002; Rosen and Sedonaen 2001).”

Youth philanthropy is, well, relatively young, having gotten its start in the late 1980s as a desire by the nonprofit sector to build and ensure the future. Today, there are many valuable curricular resources on youth philanthropy for classrooms, youth groups, and clubs.

As we continue to voluntarily self-isolate through the summer, we at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy invite individuals and families to take their own actions and become #IUyoungphilanthropists.

After the protests, will philanthropy do the right thing this time around?

Posted on June 20, 2020 by Les Lenkowsky

This article was originally published in the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

By Suzanne Garment and Leslie Lenkowsky

For those of us of a certain age, the realization hits right between the eyes: This is where we came in.

It was more than 50 years ago when the last big wave of civil unrest hit this country. In its wake, the well-meaning people in U.S. foundations and nonprofits ramped up to respond to what they thought were the lessons of the upheaval.

But they may not have learned the right lessons. Half a century later, the complaints from today’s protesters are nearly identical to those we heard back then—income inequality, wealth disparity, educational gaps, divergent health outcomes, discriminatory administration of justice.

The question is obvious: Can we do it better this time? The answer is fiendishly complicated.

In 1967, as Detroit and other cities burned, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed a National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders—better known as the Kerner Commission, after its chair, Illinois Gov. Otto Kerner—to investigate what was happening and recommend ways to prevent it in the future.

The report criticized failed government policies in education, housing, social services, and other areas, but principally blamed the unrest on the persistence of racism in American life. “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and unequal,” the commission concluded, calling on “white institutions” and “white society” to change. Creating more diverse and better-trained police forces was among the report’s key recommendations.

Not everyone agreed with this diagnosis. Some scholars, such as sociologist William Julius Wilson, argued that race was of “declining significance” compared with the effects of living in low-income communities, where jobs were scarce and families fragile. Others cited the destructive effects of often well-intentioned but misguided public policies in areas such as welfare, urban development, and public housing.

Yet a third body of opinion saw a history of discrimination, going back to slavery, as the primary barrier to progress for Black Americans. Special measures such as “affirmative action” or “reparations” were needed to overcome this sorry history and provide a measure of justice for past wrongs.

At one time or another in the past 50 years, philanthropy, like public policy in general, has embraced each of these approaches to improve the prospects for Black Americans. It would be wrong, and needlessly disheartening, to overlook what they accomplished. Poverty rates went down. Educational achievement improved. Black Americans attained leadership positions in the nation’s largest companies, wealthiest foundations, most prestigious universities, city halls and state houses, and, of course, the White House.

Still, the Kerner Commission’s central point—that Black and white people in the United States inhabit largely different societies—remains distressingly accurate, extending to disparities not only in economic and social circumstances but also in the communities where they live.

Addressing policing has proved especially difficult. No one familiar with the workings of law enforcement in this country can doubt that Black Americans are treated differently than other Americans, and that more than occasionally, the results are shocking, as George Floyd’s death illustrates.

But Black Americans are also victims of crime and disorder and have supported strengthening measures to protect their communities. Moreover, in the time since the Kerner Commission report, the diversity and training of police officers have improved. Both these facts suggest that the persistent problem may reflect not so much who wears a badge but our inconsistent expectations about what police should do.

Yet, as many have noted, the current protests seemingly offer another—and perhaps more promising—opportunity to close these gaps. In the 1960s, reaction to the Kerner Commission report split along racial lines.

A majority of Blacks accepted its findings, while a majority of whites (including President Johnson) rejected them. By contrast, today’s marchers appear to come from a broad spectrum of backgrounds and age groups. Most Americans, regardless of their race, condemn the treatment of George Floyd and others. At the same time, the view expressed often after the 1960s riots that looting was a form of political action, a justifiable response from people who endured oppression, so far has little support. Instead, more attention is focused on the harm caused to Black- and immigrant-owned businesses whose stores were vandalized.

Since the nation’s federal leadership looks incapable of responding constructively, foundations and nonprofits, along with businesses, need to seize the moment. Doing so effectively will require focusing on three things:

Examine the many programs undertaken in the past to find out what has worked and what has not. As Marcus Walton, CEO of Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, wrote, “Hope is not a strategy for change.” Nor is protest. Nor, it must be said, is simply hiring more diverse board members and staff. All these efforts—especially, in these bleak times—can help. But there is no substitute for honest, concrete analysis of what works.

Build on the coalition of support that has developed during the protests. America’s racial divide took hundreds of years to create and won’t be erased quickly. Success will depend not just on the depth and fervor of commitment but also its breadth and staying power.

A good example is the growing numbers of foundations and nonprofits focusing on criminal justice. They range from George Soros’s Open Society Institute on the left to the Koch Foundation on the right. While their ideas about how to address the problem may differ, these organizations agree that a major overhaul is needed in the treatment of offenders — not to mention those who have done nothing wrong. This is hugely significant and should not be ignored, let alone wasted.

Guard against supporting measures that do more harm than good. An example of what not to do can be seen in the Ford Foundation’s 1967 effort to foster “community control of the schools.” After the unrest of the 1960s, a number of activists called for the creation of measures to topple American political and economic institutions and give “all power to the people.” They failed, and, in failing, they set back more promising efforts to deal with racism and poverty. Advocates of “defunding the police” should take note.

Yes, we’ve been here before. But if philanthropy and allied institutions in American society take a focused and thoughtful approach to the current moment, we may not need to come back again.

Leslie Lenkowsky is an Indiana University expert on philanthropy and public affairs and a regular contributor to these pages. He and Suzanne Garment, a visiting scholar at Indiana University, write frequently on philanthropy and public policy.