Tricky Pledges

by:

Joe Patti

Yesterday I linked to an entry on Where Most Needed blog detailing how to protect against donors who may renege on their pledges. Where Most Needed and the accompanying linked Wall Street Journal article talk about how it can be tricky to broach the subject of a legally binding pledge agreement lest you offend your wealthy and influential benefactor.

What they don’t mention is the possible public relations problems you might face as well. Some years ago I worked for a theatre that a well known celebrity had pledged to in return for the naming of one of the performance spaces. Unfortunately, his wife filed for divorce. Seeing large alimony payments in his future combined with some other financial troubles, he chose to discontinue his payments.

The theatre was undergoing some financial problems of its own so the board felt it was irresponsible not to pursue the collection of the pledge and chose to sue the celebrity.

The way it ended up playing out in the newspaper editorials and letters to the theatre was that the organization should be grateful for the money it had already received and stop kicking a favorite son when he is down.

This seems to be one of the trickiest points for non-profits. When someone makes a pledge, I think we would all agree they are doing it out of the kindness of their heart. (With perhaps some advice from their accountant.) I think we can all at least empathize with the point of view that if you, as a donor, run into financial problems, you are going to want to reserve the right to hold on to the money you have earned. You are probably going to feel bad about it, but you are going to see your choice as logical.

The problem for non-profits in situations like the one I mention is that people can empathize. This type of thing easily happens on the family level. You promise your child a car when they turn 18, you run into financial trouble and you find you have to tell your child that if they want to keep the car they are going to have to get a job to continue making payments. The child has to work harder or see if grandma can help with the money.

I think this might be partially what happened in the case of my experience. People in the community could imagine themselves falling upon hard times and didn’t like the idea of the theatre coming after them, even for a $100 pledge, because they made a generous gesture.

The public may have sympathy for your non-profit organization because you built based on a promise of money but there is a good chance they are going to see the donor’s decision as practical. The expectation is going to be that you will work harder and find other benefactors. The consequence of not doing so in my car example is to take the bus or bum a ride from friends. The equivalence for a capital project is tougher- scaling back activities (not easy if you don’t even have a roof on yet) or performing in other facilities.

It would be extremely important to have a good solid public relations plan in place before deciding to legally pursue a large lapsed donation. One wrong move and you can poison the well for donations from an entire community.

I am going to peer around philanthropy blogs to see if there are any detailed suggestions of how to be well prepared in these instances. I would be very interested to learn if anyone has come across any good plans or has executed a public relations campaign that preserved the communal good will in a situation where it may have been lost. (Instances where the donor reneges due to their own financial malfeasance tends to create sympathy for the deprived recipient.)

Deeper into the Philanthropy Blogs

by:

Joe Patti

My intent yesterday was to report a bit further on some of the entries I caught a glance of while listing Philanthropy Blogs in Monday’s entry. For those who read such blogs regularly what I saw might seem mundane, but as a new reader I was excited and engaged by what I saw.

As I began to plumb a little deeper into the blogs I became convinced that the philanthropy industry blogs were the site of contentious debate. First was this entry on Gift Hub about the writer of Wealth Bondage calling philanthrophy bloggers Uncle Toms beholden to the wealthy.

I got so wrapped up in reading both sides of the story on the entry and learning about the Wealth Bondage blog that I found myself short on time to do an entry. White Courtesy Telephone notes that WB writer Happy Tutor styles himself as a modern day Diogenes challenging all who linger too close to the blog while on the information superhighway.

It wasn’t until I happened to go back and read the comments section on Gift Hub that I saw the author, Philip Cubeta, claim to be Happy Tutor. The satire tags on the entry seem to bear it out as far as that goes. Apparently he is a man at war against himself, casting aspersions at his alter egos. Or may be not.

I am still a little confused and unsure about the truth of the matter. It is intellectual elitism or intellectual rigor rarely seen in these days. Let’s just say I walked in a little late on a joke and caught the last line and punchline. I thought I would just shed a little light on the situation, as dim a bulb as I might be, in case others were exploring those blogs and were also taken in/confused.

Among the more interesting entries I came across during my explorations was this one on White Courtesy Telephone about Power and Powerlessness in Foundations. The entry was revelatory for me because it didn’t touch upon the relationship between grantors and grantees as I assumed it would, but rather on the internal power struggles of foundations.

Over time I came to believe that my colleagues and I acted out of a sense of powerlessness. Think about it. We start our foundation careers with a diminished sense of self-worth. Many of us … were lackluster community organizers or so-so [nonprofit executive directors]. We weren’t up for the challenge of real work 🙂 And for reasons that had little to do with actual talent, we found ourselves in foundation jobs that paid well and were very secure. We were fooling ourselves because as program officers, our jobs were never 100 percent secure. There were always a hundred other people out there ready to replace us.

There was also a great entry on Donor Power Blog- Marketing: No Longer A Department. Blog author Jeff Brooks points out that “It’s everyone’s job to tell the story [of the organization] in a motivating and exciting way.” Not only that, it is incumbent on the marketing department to let them rather than trying to wholly control the transmission of the message themselves.

Where Most Needed blog had two entries that really caught my eye. One on protecting against donors who renege on pledges. The other entry is on dealing with demanding donors.

The final blog entry I wanted to cite today is from Charity Governance where author Jack Siegel makes a case for why the Sarbanes-Oxley Act shouldn’t be applied to non-profits. His basic argument is that non-profits lack the monetary and personnel resources (as well as availability of external auditing firms) to comply. The entry is well written and cross-referenced with Security and Exchange Commission and Government Accounting Office publications. (Be warned, you can’t avoid finding out about the book he wrote.)

Philanthropy Blogs

by:

Joe Patti

The Chronicle of Philanthropy for this week features an article about non-profit blogging. The blogs it mentions aren’t on my favorites list (ones I read already) but might be of interest to you. Some of the blogs give tips about fundraising, others are more watchdog in nature and others are more general in focus.

I will list a couple of the ones mentioned since the article doesn’t provide links. Each blog has its own list of links so my small list will start you on your way to greater exploration. Some of the material is more appropriate for people running huge charities and foundations than for development staff of individual arts organizations. There is something for everyone in this little list-good ideas, thoughtful analysis, words to the wise and a couple chuckles.

I wanted to suggest taking a look at the story too as it discusses the different motivations people have for blogging. Some of the reasons might resonate with you and inspire you to blog. The field is pretty empty according the article. Only about 100 non-profit blogs in a sea of millions.

Watch Dog and Critical Eye Blogs

White Courtesy Telephone
Charity Governance Blog
Where Most Needed
Don’t Tell The Donor
(Not mentioned in the article. Came across via someone else recently. Can’t recall who or where.)
Trent Stamp’s Take (written by president of non-profit watchdog, Charity Navigator)

General Resource Blogs

Gift Hub
The Agitator -Written by Direct Mail Fundraisers
Donor InSite
Donor Power Blog – Just a caveat about the advice– it is written by a for profit consulting firm according to the article. That said, very interesting reading and I there doesn’t seem to be a hard sell for their services or areas only available to clients.

Shrinking The Universe

by:

Joe Patti

As you read or listen to the news you probably hear a lot about how MySpace.com is getting bigger and bigger and even bigger still. You may also hear about how the whole point of joining is to see how many friends you can accumulate.

It may come as a surprise to you that Six Apart, the folks who brought you the Typepad, Movable Type and LiveJournal are offering a new social network service intended to limit what you blog to a small number of people. (Though that was the intent of Myspace.com too)

It took me a few minutes to realize that Six Apart was doing the smart thing and not trying to compete with MySpace.com but rather was going after the market of people who didn’t want to be associated with MySpace’s size and controversies.

The new free service called Vox promises highly customizable privacy features which lets you set limits on specific entries, photos and videos or globally restrict everything you do.

If this is true, there are some great applications for arts organizations. It can be used for a members-only site to let subscribers know about specific specials offers coming up. Not that I would encourage any more appearances of stratified levels of elitism in the arts, you could also set different levels of access for different groups of people. One area for subscribers only, another for donors who subscriber perhaps. (Although it appears that the only categories you can use are the pre-set family and/or friend, I will bet future versions will have customizable categories if they are smart.)

Another use might be for inexpensive project management and information sharing. Directors and designers located around the world geographically could share information at initial stages of performance planning. Script revisions can be posted as they are produced. Design sketches can be shared. The light grid and stage dimensions and inventory lists can always be stored there for continual reference. A choreographer can film what he/she envisions for dance and fight scenes and post it for comments.

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that something like what I proposed in my last entry can be viable. Whether it is something open to the whole world like Myspace, smaller like Vox or all the blogs and websites in between, people want to express themselves to others. It’s in the music collections on iPods, YouTube videos included on webpages, and lists of favorite everythings in the margins. People are curating what they like and want to show it off.

People may view a chance to do live collaborating with a noted arts group as an opportunity to have a little respectability rub off on them and may jump at the chance. Some may be a little more reticent to become involved. Just as there is a place on the web for people who want to boast about having lotsa friends, groups that tailor their interactive programs for the talented but shy can find interested audience-partners, too.