3 x 3 A Better Way of Training Your Board
Three 60-minute sessions held as part of existing board meetings
Three 30-minute coaching meetings between board sessions
Three compelling concepts : 1. Strengthen partnership among board and staff
2. Increase participation and engagement to realize your mission and vision
3. Create processes to foster effective decision making, buy-in and fundraising.
|
|
GET GRANTS!
A comprehensive and easy-to-follow guide to writing winning proposals that will teach you to:
--Assess your organizational readiness for grant funding
--Develop programs that are fundable
--Turn those programs in successful grant proposals
--Find appropriate funders
|
|
|
Greetings!
In a couple of weeks, I'm going to visit my daughter and grandson...in Wisconsin. I'm ambivalent--at best--about the Midwest in winter, but it's been a few months since I've seen them, and a (grand)mother's gotta do and all that. Deciding to bite the bullet and book the flight made me think about all the things we prevent ourselves from doing. Things that feel too hard; too scary, too much effort. If I had a dollar for every time I didn't do something that I then wished I had pushed myself to do, I wouldn't have to worry about paying my mortgage ever again. So this New Year, my resolution is just this-let less get in my way and do more of the things that I know I should. (Another resolution has to do with giving up the thought that I could ever get "should" out of my vocabulary. It is, I fear, here to stay.) If I think back to the days when I was on staff somewhere, those things that I would keep from getting in my way would have been those urgent, but not necessarily important, things that kept me from fundraising. Often, during those staff years, I was responsible for a host of things tangential to fundraising: marketing, public information, government relations, alumni relations, community relations. Often, things not so related were also on my plate: extended education, videography, and other random programs that didn't fit anywhere-including with me! None of the things were UN-important. But without the funds to move our mission forward; to build new and better programs; and yes, to fill the gap, we weren't going to be as effective as we needed to be. I'm not suggesting that I should have ignored my other functions. I am suggesting that I might have re-prioritized. Oddly, it wasn't that I didn't want to fundraise--I rather like developing relationships and allowing others to be part of something that matters to me (and, presumably, to them). It was everyone else who really didn't want fundraising to happen. Don't get me wrong-everyone wanted the fruits. No one, however, wanted to be involved with the labor. And that meant that it was best for them if little happened on that front. And too often, I let the other things come first. How do you deal with all that you have to accomplish? Everything for which you are responsible? I think the truth is that you don't. What you do is figure out what is most important, and focus the bulk of your energies on that. Where you can, you make activities work for more than one purpose. For example, an open house at your organization could attract new donors, cultivate and/or steward those who are already giving, get your Board members more involved and be great PR for what you do. Most of all, this coming year, be daring. Big dreams lead to big actions. And big actions can produce amazing results. ************** This month, amazing things will happen if you follow the advice of our contributors. Mitch Dorger has some great suggestions for improving board performance, while David Lewis shows how you can improve employee retention. Major Gifts are what's on Sherri Morr's mind--and her advice will help you stay the course to raise those important funds. Happy reading--and happy fundraising! ************** Need help in increasing your fundraising capacity or getting your Board to participate? Help is here. Email me or call 310-990-9151. |
|
|
Mitch Dorger, Principal at Dorger Consulting, has more than 40 years of work experience, including 20 years as the chief executive officer in organizations as large as 1800 people with operating budgets up to $100 million. His special expertise in the nonprofit sector includes board development, strategic planning and change management. Connect with Mitch at mitch@dorger.com
I spend a fair amount of time each week meeting with nonprofit leaders - both staff and board. Invariably, I ask how well they think their board is performing and to what level they think the board is contributing to the success of the organization. More often than not, I hear about problems the board is having or how they are not contributing effectively to the success of the organization. Most all report areas of board performance that could stand significant improvement. I then ask what they are doing about improving the performance of their board in the areas indicated. The interesting thing is that very few are doing any type of performance improvement program for their board. To me, this seems so contrary to the normal way of running an organization. Why would any good leader choose not to improve an area of significant organizational weakness? I doubt any CEO in the for-profit world would identify an area in their company that needs improvement and then choose to do nothing about it. So what causes this phenomenon in the nonprofit world? I have been kicking this question around in my mind for some time now and have come to some preliminary conclusions about this lack of effort when it comes to improving the performance of the board. To help explain this I have come up with five quotes that relate to the various problems. In the 1981 movie "History of the World, Part 1" Mel Brooks, playing Louis XVI, utters the now famous phrase, "It's good to be the king." I think all-too-often this applies to nonprofit organizations where one individual -- either an executive director or board chairs -- has garnered the bulk of the power in the organization. Often, this may be the founder of the organization. These individuals are not particularly interested in the sort of shared partnership that takes place in an organization with a good executive director and a strong engaged board. Instead, they are interested in the board not interfering with what they want to do with the organization. These individuals often restrict the flow of information to the board and make the bulk of the key decision outside of the board environment. More often than not, the "king (or queen)" is actually aided and abetted in achieving total control by a board made up of friends and cronies who are perfectly content to let them run the organization. It is telling that many, if not most, of the horrific scandals appearing in the press about nonprofits feature the existence of a "king" or "queen" in the organization who operates outside of the oversight of a board. (READ MORE)
|
Employee Retention
David Lewis, a 17 year nonprofit professional and Founder/CEO of Nonprofit Career Connect. A job posting site that allows organizations to advertise an unlimited number of jobs for 12 months for $249, Nonprofit Career connect uses a proprietary job matching system that identifies corresponding job seekers and communicates the opportunity to them.
I'm sure we've all been in the position where we are about to lose one of our best employees and wonder what could have done, if anything, to keep them. In many cases, especially in the nonprofit world where attrition can be high, it may simply be a matter of moving up the ladder. The employee may love working for the organization, but they got another offer that was too good to pass up. You may feel as though there was nothing that could have been done differently; it's unavoidable and part of doing business. However, there is one thing you can do to reduce losing your best employees. Treat them like valued partners in the organization and involve them at all levels from entry to higher-end management. Here is what that looks like:
- Include them and make them feel as though they are part of the team. Let them know what's happening and why, and give them a chance to voice their thoughts in decisions that affect the organization and their job directly. (READ MORE)
|
|
Flying Horses and Major Gift Fundraising
Sherri W. Morr is principal in the full service fundraising firm, MORR Fundraising, Inc. Her decades of fundraising expertise has emphasized training and enhancing cultivation and stewardship through systematic individual plans. Of late she has worked with nonprofits to identify new prospects. . She can be reached at smorrinc@gmail.com.
What you may wonder do these two very different concepts have to do with organizations? At first glance you may think, not much. But if you understand the major gift process in nonprofits in connection to staying the course then you may think again. In the mid 1900s a horse jumping off a ledge on the Atlantic City Steel Pier was a great feat and a huge crowd-pleaser. Hundreds of people would watch the horse way up high with a practically naked rider jump into the water. Back then animal rights people were either nonexistent or silent. Then years later a promoter, seeking to again draw crowds to Atlantic City (before Super storm Sandy) in today's sluggish economy announces this crazy stunt is coming back...with no thought to the public or the horse who actually faced grave danger way back when.
Fortunately even in our depressed society where the near poor face daily challenges, the unemployed still beg for jobs, and the one percent does not worry about the poor, our animal rights folks are vigilant, and far from silent. Not even a week after the big Flying Horse announcement the protests are so loud and so strong, the idea is quickly shoved under the rug, and that's the end of the Flying Horses. Making donations have been part of American Society for a very long time; organizations have been making gifts to the poor, to disasters both here and abroad, way before Flying Horses. It's been consistent; major gift fundraising has not disappeared, or taken a back seat or a lull, since at least as early as the mid 1800s. As early as 1915 community chests, or federated campaigns were born, but prior to that Andrew Carnegie and other benefactors like John D. Rockefeller set the tone for giving 'surplus" money to social causes. As long as there were issues, people in trouble, or lacking resources, society responded to requests. Nonprofits figured out early on how to establish group giving through March of Dimes and the Red Cross, thus inviting others to be part of such a group. Giving became a door to acceptance, belonging, and social status. Donors saw the benefits of giving (because someone explained them) even though they were not packaged in a fancy brochure. "Why give" did not have to be explained in several different forms. Donors were smart enough even way back when to know that networking (aka schmoozing) would help their businesses, increase their own notoriety, and maybe even get them invitations for dinner. (READ MORE)
|
|
- Are your fundraising results down?
- Board members bored?
- Or are thinking about a campaign?
Whatever your capacity building needs, Janet Levine Consulting can help.
Send me an email or give me a call at 310-990-9151 to schedule a free 30-minute consultation.
I look forward to meeting with you.
Sincerely, 
Janet
Janet Levine
Janet Levine Consulting
|
|
|