by Shari Finnell, editor/writer, Not for Profit News
The profile of students who attend Martin University is anything but traditional. The average age is 38, and more than half are Millennials. Many are juggling low-wage, part-time jobs and parenting responsibilities as heads of household. And it’s not unusual for them to be carrying student debt after transferring from other colleges, according to Ezell Marrs, vice president for enrollment management for the Near Eastside Indianapolis educational institution.
Those unique circumstances led Martin University to introduce a work college model that has been primarily limited to rural and small-town communities until recent years. Under the work college model, students pursue their degree while making a commitment to work and provide service for the university or university partners.
Martin WORKS, the urban work college established with the assistance of a $1 million Lilly Endowment grant, improves students’ odds of better post-graduation outcomes since they will be paired with companies that provide relevant work experience. “They are not paying tuition as part of this program — and they are getting paid a competitive wage with top-tier corporate employers, in some cases, Fortune 500 companies,” Marrs said. “They will engage in learning and work-related experience that will set them up for full-time employment in more profitable careers.”
In some historic work college models, everyone who works at the campus is a student with the exception of faculty, Marrs said. Over the decades, many have evolved to meet new career demands. Warren Wilson College in Asheville, N.C., for example, was founded in 1894 as the Asheville Farm School to give underserved and, in some cases, previously uneducated young people, more solid job prospects through a low-cost education. In 1967, it became a four-year liberal arts college. Today, Warren Wilson College, which has been touted as a “best buy” by Fiske Guide to Colleges, continues its focus on “learning by doing” through a work program and community engagement.
“The work college model has been around for some time, but It’s a fairly new concept for an urban setting,” Marrs said. “Paul Quinn College in Dallas pioneered the urban work college. We are now pioneering an urban work college for post-traditional students.”
Martin Works, which will accept its first students in the fall of 2021, is centered around three pillars to ensure that its students succeed — academics, relevant employment with corporate partners, and community service, with a focus on serving its surrounding neighborhood in the 46218 zip code, Marrs said.
The program also requires that participants first engage in a summer training session to ensure they are prepared to work in corporate settings, Marrs said. “The Martin WORKS Academy, the preparatory piece that proceeds enrollment, will help students learn the skills and foundational courses that will go into their jobs. When we send a student off to a Fortune 500 company, we will ensure they have basic employability skills, including communication skills and other soft skills.”
The work college model addresses some of the inequities inherent in some traditional internship programs in which students are not paid or underpaid to gain experience in their preferred careers, Marrs said. Historically, that has been a challenging prospect for students who can’t afford to forego a steady paycheck. “I know of a student from Ball State who was working in media and not getting paid,” Marrs said. “His situation allows him to be agreeable to that because he needs the experience. Our students have more responsibilities and need both experience and compensation.”
Another component of the program is designed to equip the students for home ownership through affordable housing provided by community partners that specialize in housing, Marrs said.
Martin Works will ultimately give a student the ability to graduate with better job prospects, and the foundation for a stable life — critical steps to addressing racial and social inequities in the community, Marrs said.
“They will walk across the stage with a resume with relevant work experience, a diploma and a job — and very little or no school loan debt,” he said.
Prospective students interested in the program can apply by visiting Martin University’s site.
by Sarah Gregory, CPA, CFE, director, Alerding CPA Group
With COVID-19 having an unprecedented impact on the operations of nonprofit organizations, it’s critical, as a nonprofit leader, financial/accounting professional, auditor or board member, to consider the impact it may have on your year-end financial reporting for 2020.
As your team closes out its financial records for 2020, make sure you take into account the following key accounting and auditing considerations prior to your financial reporting engagement:
Determine options for remote auditing. While access to records may be limited, auditors will still need to gain access to certain records. Ensure that your financial team takes the necessary steps to accommodate remote auditing. Prepare for this type of engagement by reviewing various remote options beforehand.
Assess existing internal controls and segregation of duties over financial reporting. It’s likely they may have been impacted during the year due to staff absences or reductions.
Analyze your organization’s risk for fraud. Your vulnerability to fraud risk may be heightened as a result of the current environment for added incentive or pressure to perpetrate fraud, opportunity to commit fraud, and rationalization to justify a fraudulent action. Examples of risks could include:
Fictious revenue – creating incentives and opportunities to record revenue that is fictious. An example could be an individual who inflates their sales since their compensation is directly tied to meeting sales targets.
Improper timing of revenue and expenses – improperly recording revenue and/or expenses in a period in which the revenue was not earned or delaying the expense to a later period in which the services were not performed.
Federal relief program applications – increased pressure to apply for Paycheck Protection Program funds, including forgiveness due to economic downturn.
4. Prepare for variances in auditing inventory. With COVID-19 disrupting operations, inventory observations may need to be postponed, conducted remotely or performed under different circumstances than prior years.
5. Account for additional disclosures. Be prepared to account for significant financial impacts related to COVID-19. They may require you to include additional disclosures within your financial statements and potential evaluation of going concern issues related to the organizations ability to continue indefinitely and being profitable.
6.Account for delayed ASU. Accounting Standard Update (ASU) 2020-05, Revenue from Contacts with Customers (Topic 606) and Leases (Topic 842): Effective Date for Certain Entities, allowed organizations to delay the effective date these ASU’s for one year. If your organization did not early adopt as of your most recent fiscal year end, you will be required to adopt these ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) in the current year. ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021 and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022.
7.Identify delayed payments and waived fees. If your organization received relief from creditors and lessors in the form of delayed payments, waived fees, or adjusted amortization schedules, you will need to ensure you are correctly accounting for these modifications or extinguishment of liabilities.
The impact of COVID-19 will continue to be felt for years to come. As you close out your financial records and prepare for your financial reporting services, make sure you include these considerations as part of your process.
por Brian Payne, presidente de la Fundación Comunitaria de Indiana Central (Central Indiana Community Foundation); Tom Kilian, presidente de la Fundación Comunitaria del Condado de Hamilton (Hamilton County Community Foundation); y Jennifer Pope Baker, presidenta del Fondo de Mujeres de Indiana Central (Women’s Fund of Central Indiana)
Los titulares están diseñados para captar nuestra atención. Los titulares de 2020 hicieron que las personas de esta comunidad y del país confrontaran la historia racista de Estados Unidos, además de nuestra realidad actual. Desde la destrucción única de la pandemia de la COVID-19 en las personas de color hasta la vigilancia excesiva y la protección insuficiente de estas mismas comunidades, las historias en todo el país destacaron el racismo sistémico que se encuentra arraigado en los cimientos de nuestro país.
Reconocer y sanar las heridas de más de 400 años de opresión sigue siendo desafiante y doloroso. Desmantelar los sistemas que mantienen vivas estas prácticas racistas bajo un velo de daltonismo y una ingeniosa reinvención, a menudo, parece inviable. Pero, citando a James Baldwin, “nada se puede cambiar hasta que se enfrenta”.
A pesar de estos desafíos, la Fundación Comunitaria de Indiana Central (Central Indiana Community Foundation, CICF) y sus filiales, la Fundación Indianápolis (Indianapolis Foundation) y la Fundación Comunitaria del Condado de Hamilton, y el Fondo de Mujeres de Indiana Central, continúan comprometidos con orgullo con los esfuerzos que crean una comunidad que funcione para todos, independientemente del lugar, la raza o la identidad. Cuando creamos nuestros fondos de ayuda equitativa para la crisis económica y de salud ante la COVID-19, nos probamos a nosotros mismos que el principio de “equidad primero” se ha arraigado verdaderamente en nuestras organizaciones. Hemos estimulado a nuestros directivos, al personal y a los embajadores, para que sean innovadores en el apoyo y enriquecimiento de los activos de los vecindarios. Reestructuramos nuestras políticas y prácticas para satisfacer las necesidades de la comunidad. Nos asociamos con directivos corporativos y cívicos para hacer compromisos, con el fin de erradicar el racismo dentro de sus puestos de poder y en sus vidas personales.
Así que, sí, estamos orgullosos de lo que hemos logrado, pero también reconocemos todo lo que aún nos falta en este trabajo. Necesitamos el compromiso de todos para hacer que la equidad se convierta en una realidad. Si se sienten inspirados, y pueden hacerlo, hagan un aporte a nuestro Fondo de Aliados en la Equidad (Equity Partners Fund).Este regalo ayudará a empoderar a las personas, a cambiar los sistemas y a hacer de Indiana Central una región conocida por ser la comunidad más antirracista del país.
Tenga en cuenta que cuando estos titulares hayan pasado, mantendremos nuestra misión de equidad y continuaremos nuestro trabajo para desmantelar el racismo sistémico. Seguiremos eliminando las barreras que separan las oportunidades de muchos de nuestros vecinos. Y crearemos una ciudad incluyente y una comunidad de Indiana central para todos.
Haga clic aquí para ver más de nuestras noticias destacadas.
by Brian Payne, president of Central Indiana Community Foundation; Tom Kilian, president of Hamilton County Community Foundation; and Jennifer Pope Baker, president of Women’s Fund of Central Indiana
Headlines are designed to catch our attention. The headlines of 2020 made people across this community and the nation confront America’s racist history in addition to our current reality. From the unique destruction of the COVID-19 pandemic on people of color to the over-policing and under-protecting of these same communities, stories across the country highlighted the systemic racism ingrained in our country’s foundation.
Recognizing and healing the wounds of over 400 years of oppression continues to be challenging and painful. Dismantling the systems that keep these racist practices alive beneath a veil of colorblindness and clever reinvention often seem unfeasible. But to quote James Baldwin, “Nothing can be changed until it is faced.”
In spite of these challenges, CICF and its affiliates, The Indianapolis Foundation and Hamilton County Community Foundation, and Women’s Fund of Central Indiana, continue to proudly commit to efforts that create a community that works for everyone — no matter place, race or identity. We have proven to ourselves that “equity-first” principles have truly become embedded in our organizations when we created our equity-based relief funds for the COVID-19 health and economic crisis. We’ve galvanized our leadership, staff and ambassadors to be innovative to support and uplift neighborhood assets. We’ve restructured our policies and practices to meet community need. We’ve partnered with corporate and civic leaders to make commitments to end racism within their seats of power and in their personal lives.
So, yes, we’re proud of what we’ve accomplished, but we also recognize how far we still have to go in this work. We need everyone’s commitment to make equity a reality. If you’re inspired to — and are able — please make a contribution to our Equity Partners Fund. This gift will help empower people, change systems, and make Central Indiana a region known for being the most anti-racist community in the nation.
Know that when these headlines have passed, we will hold to our mission of equity and continue our work to dismantle systemic racism. We will continue to remove the barriers separating opportunity from so many of our neighbors. And we will create an Inclusive City and a Central Indiana community for all.
Cuando los voluntarios prestan un servicio invaluable a una organización sin fines de lucro puede ser un desafío decirles que se equivocan en algunas áreas fundamentales, especialmente cuando han estado operando de ese modo durante años o, en algunos casos, décadas.
Ese fue el dilema que enfrentó la Junta Directiva del Museo Estatal de Indiana después de la reunión del 6 de marzo de 2019 en la que el presidente anterior de la junta, Greg Pemberton, describió la necesidad de actualizar el plan del Memorando de Entendimiento (Memorandum of Understanding, MOU) para los grupos de Amigos conectados a su red de 11 lugares históricos de todo el estado de Indiana.
“Muchos de estos grupos han mantenido al estado a distancia durante varios años, y algunos desconfían cuando los grupos de Amigos y la organización del Museo Estatal de Indiana y los lugares históricos tienen la misma meta”, dijo Pemberton, antes de dirigir la discusión de la junta sobre las principales áreas de preocupación:
Los grupos de Amigos no pueden operar independientemente del sistema general del museo. Sin embargo, muchos habían estado actuando de forma independiente durante décadas: desarrollaron su propia marca para sus sitios web y material de mercadeo, llevaron a cabo actividades relacionadas con la junta para sus respectivos lugares y, en algunos casos, se identificaron como organizaciones 501(c)3 apartes.
Algunos de los grupos habían estado entregando de manera inconstante información fiscal al estado, lo cual es requerido por la ley.
Cada grupo había estado operando de conformidad con MOU obsoletos, los cuales se redactaron antes de que el sistema de museos se convirtiera en una agencia cuasi estatal en 2011. Todos estos MOU se deberían actualizar para que se alineen con los requisitos legales descritos por la oficina del fiscal general. El nuevo MOU dictaría que todos los fondos y donaciones del sistema de 12 redes, incluido el Museo Estatal de Indiana, deben provenir de un fondo unificado.
Cathy Ferree
Los miembros de la junta parecían tener una actitud optimista porque muchos de estos problemas se podrían abordar rápidamente con un nuevo MOU y una serie de discusiones con sus grupos de Amigos. Al final de la reunión de la junta, Cathy Ferree, Directora Ejecutiva (Chief Executive Officer, CEO) y Presidenta del Museo Estatal de Indiana (Indiana State Museum, ISM), y Kate Brownlee, Directora de Desarrollo del ISM, habían acordado reunirse con los directores regionales y la Junta Directiva de Amigos durante un período de dos meses. La meta final era que los grupos de Amigos operaran de conformidad con los nuevos MOU antes del 1.º de julio de 2019.
Se encontró resistencia en el camino
Resulta que cambiarse al nuevo MOU no fue una propuesta sencilla.
De manera abrumadora, la respuesta de los grupos de Amigos al operar de conformidad con las nuevas pautas fue: “¿Por qué queremos cambiar las cosas?”, recordó Andrew Briggs, quien ha sido miembro de la junta del ISM durante 10 años aproximadamente.
“Muchos de estos grupos se establecieron hace años”, dijo Briggs, un banquero de Geneva, Indiana, quien también se desempeña como Presidente de la Asociación de Banqueros de Indiana. “No tenían una estructura que propiciara una entidad cuasi gubernamental. Hicieron las cosas a su manera, ‘bajo nuestro amparo y número de identificación fiscal’”.
Al menos un grupo de Amigos acudió a sus legisladores para que bloquearan la implementación del nuevo MOU entre los lugares históricos.
“Fue complicado”, recuerda Ferree. “El cambio es difícil para las personas. Muchos de ellos estaban confundidos; no entendían por qué las reglas habían cambiado de repente”.
Muchas de las complejidades habían precedido a este asunto de gobernanza en particular. Casi nueve años antes, el Museo Estatal de Indiana y los lugares históricos emprendieron los pasos para convertirse en una organización cuasi estatal, y funcionar como una agencia estatal y una organización sin fines de lucro.
“Necesitábamos recaudar nuestro propio dinero de una manera que no habíamos hecho antes. Actualmente, el setenta y cinco por ciento de la organización recibe financiamiento del estado y el veinticinco por ciento lo recaudamos nosotros mismos”, dijo Ferree.
Ferree señaló, además, que antes de ese momento, los grupos de Amigos habían operado como organizaciones independientes 501c3. El estatuto que rige las entidades cuasi estatales dictaba un cambio en la forma en que funcionaban y, efectivamente, cambió las relaciones a largo plazo del museo con sus organizaciones de Amigos, según Ferree.
Otro nivel de complejidad se remonta a 2009, cuando el entonces Gobernador de Indiana, Mitch Daniels, anunció un plan para fusionar el Museo Estatal de Indiana y 12 lugares históricos en una nueva agencia. Muchos de los miembros del grupo de Amigos habían participado activamente en sus respectivos lugares, mucho antes de que cualquiera de estas decisiones diera resultado.
“Necesitábamos recalibrar nuestras relaciones”, apuntó Ferree. “La colaboración estaba presente, pero habían podido operar de manera más independiente. No es ni malo ni bueno. Solo necesitábamos estar seguros de que estábamos en sintonía y de que había cosas que todavía teníamos que hacer para convertirnos en una cuasi organización completa”.
“Fue un proceso difícil”, agregó Ferree. “Realmente tuvimos que conversar mucho, escuchar y entender para que pudiéramos hacer este cambio. Y es una propuesta aún más compleja cuando se trabaja con diferentes grupos y cada uno tiene su propia cultura y necesidades”.
Los miembros de la junta invierten en un esfuerzo intensivo para llegar a una resolución
Según Briggs, aunque hubo una fuerte resistencia al nuevo MOU, la junta y el personal sabían que no podían dar marcha atrás. “Queríamos asegurarnos de que todo estuviera bien, y era hora de poner todo en línea para que coincidiera con los códigos del Servicio de Impuestos Internos (Internal Revenue Service, IRS)”, dijo. “Sin embargo, todos estos grupos diferentes hicieron lo que les correspondía. No queríamos correr el riesgo de informar de algo incorrectamente. Eso nos pondría a todos en riesgo”.
Con Ferree y Brownlee encontrando un retroceso significativo como empleados del Museo Estatal de Indiana, varios miembros de la junta, incluso Briggs, asumieron el desafío de acercarse a los grupos de Amigos en lo que resultaría ser una serie de reuniones y conversaciones durante 2020.
La miembro de la junta, Nancy Jordan, dijo que era imperativo que la junta interviniera para resolver el conflicto. “La junta tiene la responsabilidad final de procurar que esta agencia cuasi gubernamental esté cumpliendo con nuestra misión y con los deberes de cuidado”, dijo Jordan, quien es Vicepresidenta Sénior de Lincoln Financial Group. “También queríamos escuchar de primera mano las necesidades, pensamientos e inquietudes de todos estos grupos de apoyo. Su voz es fundamental para nuestro éxito colectivo”.
William A. Browne, Jr., Presidente de la junta del ISM, dijo que era especialmente importante reconocer el valor del grupo de Amigos y, al mismo tiempo, ser directo sobre la necesidad del cambio.
“Los grupos de Amigos han tenido la buena meta de cuidar estos lugares históricos, pero no todos operaban de conformidad con las mismas reglas”, explicó Browne, quien también es Director y Presidente de Ratio Architects, LLC. “Tenemos que justificar cada dólar que generan los lugares y el museo para poder presentar los impuestos de manera adecuada. Eso se convirtió en un problema durante años porque cada uno de los grupos de Amigos operaba de forma libre, por así decirlo. No es el tipo de estructura que se necesitaba establecer para un cuasi gobierno”.
Cuando los miembros de la junta comenzaron a reunirse con varios grupos de Amigos entendieron que la línea de tiempo original no sería suficiente para lograr una verdadera colaboración.
“Empezamos a meternos en esto y nos dimos cuenta de que las personas estaban muy apegadas emocionalmente y estábamos agitando las cosas porque les pedíamos que operaran de manera diferente”, dijo Browne. “Algunas personas se opusieron a eso. Tuvimos que idear una estrategia porque, al final, sabíamos que no sería más que algo positivo para nosotros”.
Enfoque en escuchar a los demás y en colaborar
Según Ferree, el compromiso de la junta de involucrar a miembros de los grupos de Amigos, líderes comunitarios y legisladores locales en las difíciles conversaciones fue clave para lograr una verdadera colaboración.
“Los miembros de la junta hicieron todo lo posible y más, viajaron por todo el estado, pasaron mucho tiempo hablando con las personas y resolviendo las cosas”, dijo. “Se tomaron su tiempo para hacer avanzar la institución en una situación complicada. Propusieron habilidades muy diferentes en la reunión, uniéndose en torno a las fortalezas de cada uno”.
Ferree dijo que como consecuencia de las reuniones, los equipos establecieron pautas para los socios comunitarios, organizaron reuniones trimestrales en las que se podía recibir a cualquier persona de la comunidad y garantizaron la transparencia en todos los niveles.
“Nos dimos cuenta de que necesitábamos formalizar las comunicaciones de una manera que nos hiciera responsables ante los grupos de Amigos”, dijo. “Si vamos a pedirles que nos ayuden a hacer cosas en todo el sistema, debemos ser transparentes”.
Jordan dijo que el enfoque de colaboración final derivó en un resultado beneficioso para todos. “Un gran beneficio intangible ha sido la oportunidad de reunir a los Amigos y grupos de apoyo para aprender unos de otros”, dijo.
Browne dijo que la clave para cualquier asociación exitosa radica en la capacidad de comunicarse y conectarse. “Con el marco adecuado para que esa comunicación pueda ocurrir, puedes superar muchas brechas y problemas”, dijo. “Establecer una estrategia de comunicación es realmente fundamental para tener una relación y un diálogo exitosos a través de la distancia”.
When volunteers are providing an invaluable service to a nonprofit, it can be challenging to tell them that they have it all wrong in some critical areas — especially when they’ve been operating in that mode for years or, in some cases, decades.
That was the dilemma facing the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites’ board of directors following a March 6, 2019, meeting in which its past board president, Greg Pemberton, an attorney, outlined the need to update a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Plan for the Friends groups connected to its network of 11 historic sites across the state of Indiana.
“Many of these groups have kept the state at arm’s length for several years, and some are untrusting when both the Friends groups and the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites (ISMHS) organization both have the same goal,” Pemberton said during the 2019 meeting, before leading a board discussion on numerous areas of concern:
Friends groups cannot operate independently of the overall museum system. However, many had been acting independently for decades, developing their own branding for their websites and marketing collateral; operating board-related activities for their respective sites; and, in some cases, identifying themselves as separate 501(c)3 organizations.
Some of the groups had been inconsistently reporting tax information to the state, which is required under law.
Each group had been operating under outdated MOUs, which were drafted before the museum system became a quasi-state agency in 2011. All of these MOUs would need to be updated to align with legal requirements outlined by the attorney general’s office. The new guidelines would dictate that all funding and donations from the 12-network system, including the Indiana State Museum in Indianapolis, must come from one unified fund.
Cathy Ferree, ISM President and CEO
The board members seemed optimistic that many of these issues could be quickly addressed with new Community Partner Guidelines, and a series of discussions with its five Friends groups. By the end of the board meeting, Cathy Ferree, ISMHS president and CEO, and Kate Brownlee, then ISM chief development officer, had agreed to meet with ISMHS regional directors and friends’ board of directors over a two-month period. The ultimate goal was to have the Friends groups operating under the new guidelines by July 1, 2019.
Encountering resistance along the way
As it turns out, shifting to the new agreement wasn’t a straightforward proposition.
Overwhelmingly, the Friends groups’ response to operating under the new guidelines was, “Why do we want to change things?,” recalled Andrew Briggs, who has been an ISM board member for about 1o years.
“A lot of these groups had been set up years ago,” said Briggs, a banker from Geneva., Ind., who also serves as the chairman of the Indiana Bankers Association. “They didn’t have a structure that was conducive to a quasi-government entity. They sort of did things their own way — ‘under our umbrella and tax ID number.’”
According to P. Garrett Adams, President/Board Chair for the T.C. Steele State Historic Site Friends group, the site in Nashville, Ind., had been operating independently for nearly 30 years. The members of the volunteer organization had developed close ties with the site staff and community, actively recruiting volunteers, raising funds for capital improvements and seeking grants to support enhancements, including a recreation of Steele’s studio wagon, and the purchase of AV equipment and golf carts for visitors.
When that model of operations was threatened to be disrupted, members of the Friends group feared that their long-term relationship with the site and its staff also would be impacted, said Adams, who is a pharmaceutical project manager for Eli Lilly & Co. “We were not as concerned about losing autonomy,” he recalled. “We needed a better understanding of the impact on members and membership benefits. The larger focus was on seeking to understand what it meant for our relationship to the site.”
Because of those types of concerns, at least one Friends group appealed to its local legislators to block the implementation of the new MOU among the historic sites, Ferree recalled. “It was complicated,” she said. “Change is difficult for people. Many of them were confused; they didn’t understand why the rules had suddenly changed.”
Many of the complexities had preceded this particular governance issue. Nearly nine years prior, the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites undertook the steps to become a quasi-state organization, operating as a state agency and a nonprofit organization. In the face of declining financial support in state dollars, the new structure gave them the ability to apply for grants and invest in fundraising initiatives.
However, it was all new territory. “We needed to raise our own dollars in a way we had not done before. Currently, 75 percent of the organization is funded by the state and 25 percent we raise ourselves,” Ferree said.
Also, before that time, Friends groups had operated as independent 501c3 organizations, Ferree pointed out. Since the statute governing quasi-governmental entities dictated a change in the way they operated, it demanded a shift in the museum’s long-term relationships with its Friends organizations.
Another layer of complexity dated back to 2009, when then Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels announced a plan to merge the Indiana State Museum and 11 historic sites under one new agency. Many of the Friends group members had been actively involved in their respective sites long before any of these decisions came to fruition.
“We needed to recalibrate our relationships,” Ferree said. “The collaboration had been there, but they had been able to operate more independently. It’s not bad or good. We just needed to be sure we were on the same page; there were things we still needed to do to become a full quasi-governmental organization.
“It was a difficult process,” Ferree added. “It really took a lot of conversation and listening and understanding for us to make this shift. And it’s an even more complex proposition when you’re working with different groups that each have their own culture and needs.”
Board members invest in an intensive endeavor to reach resolution
Although there was strong resistance to the new agreement, the board and staff knew they couldn’t back down, Briggs said. “We wanted to make sure everything was right, and it was time to bring everything in line to match up with IRS codes,” he said. “We had all these different groups doing their own thing. We didn’t want to take the risk of not reporting something correctly. That would put all of us at risk.”
With Ferree and Brownlee encountering significant pushback as employees of the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites, several board members, including Briggs, embraced the challenge of reaching out to the Friends groups in what would turn out to be a series of meetings and conversations throughout 2020.
Board member Nancy Jordan said it was imperative that the board stepped in to resolve the conflict. “The board has ultimate responsibility to ensure this quasi-government agency is delivering on our mission and meeting the duties of care,” said Jordan, who is a senior vice president at Lincoln Financial Group. “We also wanted to hear first-hand the needs, thoughts and concerns of all these supporting groups. Their voice is critical to our collective success.”
William A. Browne, Jr., ISMHS board president, said it was especially important to recognize the value of the Friends group while, at the same time, being direct about the need for change.
“The Friends groups have had the good goal of taking care of these historic sites but they were not all operating under the same rules,” explained Browne, who also is principal/president of Ratio Architects, LLC. “We have to report every single dollar the sites and museum generates so we can file taxes appropriately. That became an issue over the years because each of the Friends group was operating in a free-form manner, if you will. It’s not the kind of structure that needed to be put in place for a quasi government.”
As board members started meeting with various Friends groups, they understood that the original timeline wouldn’t suffice to achieve true collaboration.
“We started to wade into this, and realized that people were very emotionally attached and we were stirring things up because we were asking them to operate differently,” Browne said. “Some people took exception with that. We had to figure out a strategy because, in the end, we knew it would be nothing but a positive thing for us.”
A focus on listening and collaboration
According to Ferree, the board’s commitment to drawing Friends group members, community leaders, and local legislators into difficult conversations was key to achieving true collaboration.
“The board members went above and beyond, traveling throughout the state, spending a lot of time talking to people and sorting things through,” she said. “They took extended time to move the institution forward in a complicated situation. They brought very different skills to the table, rallying around each other’s strengths.”
As a result of the meetings, the teams established the community partner guidelines, and set up quarterly meetings — to begin in mid-March — and attended by Ferree, board members, and other ISMHS staff. The agenda is set by site staff and the meetings will be run by site managers and regional directors. The meetings are open to anyone in the community, and will provide increased transparency at all levels, Ferree said.
“We realized that we needed to formalize the communications in a way that held us accountable to the Friends’ groups,” she said. “If we were going to ask them to help us do things systemwide, we need to be transparent.”
Jordan said the resulting collaborative approach resulted in a win-win outcome. “A great intangible benefit has been the opportunity to bring the Friends/supporting groups together to learn from each other,” she said.
Browne said the key to any successful partnership lies in the ability to communicate and connect. “With the right framework for that communication to be able to occur, you can bridge a lot of gaps and issues,” he said. “Just setting up a communications strategy is really critical to having a successful relationship and dialogue across distance.”
As a result of that collaborative approach spearheaded by the ISMHS board, the Friends groups are overall pleased with the outcome, Adams said. “We were able to get to a very good place,” he said. “The board did very well in bringing everyone together, talking through ideas, concerns and questions. It worked out very well. We are all now looking through a common lens, and we’re excited about things moving forward and the future of our collaboration.”
Local experts say transformative change demands a comprehensive strategy
by Shari Finnell, editor and writer, Not for Profit News
With the events of 2020 heightening awareness around the need for racial equity and social justice reform, nonprofit organizations have been at the forefront of efforts to institute transformative change.
Yet, no matter how much progress was made in 2020, achieving racial equity in the workplace will continue to be one of the most important issues organizations must tackle for at least the next decade, predicted Ben Hecht, the CEO of Living Cities, a collaborative of foundations and financial institutions, in a Harvard Business Review article.
The work toward racial equity must be comprehensive and deliberate, according to two local experts who are immersed in racial equity initiatives.
“It’s important for organizations to do an assessment of all their systems, including policies and procedures, how you recruit and hire, how you promote, and what ongoing training looks like,” said Tim Nation, executive director of the Peace Learning Center, which works with schools and organizations on educational initiatives around equity, social and emotional learning and restorative practices. “Not-for-profit organizations also need to assess how connected we are to the community. Do we act as saviors who know all the answers? Or are we really connected to the community in a way that we’re able to truly understand what their needs are?”
Nation also said it’s important to determine if the composition of the organization’s board and staff is representative of the communities they serve.
The Peace Learning Center, which has been at the forefront of racial equity initiatives since its inception in 1997, continues to assess itself against those measures. “We have, at the Peace Learning Center, established a racial equity committee that is assessing where we are on all of those different components — determining our strengths and weaknesses, and identifying areas that we can improve.”
Michael Twyman
Michael Twyman, principal/owner of InExcelsis, a consulting firm, said the work to achieve racial equity within the workplace can seem daunting but nonprofits and other organizations must commit to it as they would with any other major initiative.
“It’s a lot of work, but it’s necessary work,” said Twyman, who also is an associate faculty member of the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. “If we’re willing to do the work for other initiatives because we believe they’re important, we must put forward the resources to make racial equity happen.”
“We have resources at our disposal. How we deploy them or allocate them is a matter of choice,” Twyman added. “It can be something as simple as shifting the mindset. Most organizations will need professional assistance.”
Nation said anti-racism training is only the start in achieving substantive change. “When it comes to racial equity, the first step is awareness. You have to be aware of the issues and appreciate why it matters. A lot of training programs serve that purpose.”
All of Peace Learning Center’s staff members recently underwent training with Crossroads Against Racism in Chicago, which involved a rubric on how to become an anti-racist organization. “It identified where you’re at and what you need to work on,” said Nation, noting that the team followed up by reviewing all of its policies and recruitment practices.
Nation also said that people, particularly non-minority individuals, need to understand how deeply rooted racism is in American society. “It’s not as much as individual racism as it is institutional racism. An individual may not consider themselves as prejudiced, but the systems they work in, the history of racism in our country, which goes all the way back to slavery, have shaped the way institutions operate, including our government and organizations.
To illustrate the complexities of addressing racial inequities, Nation used an analogy involving fish. “If you go to a lake and see a dead fish, you say what’s wrong with the fish and you start trying to figure out how to fix the fish instead of addressing what’s wrong with the lake — the groundwater,” he said. “In the same way, we have a lot of initiatives to fix fish but we haven’t been getting down to the policies that created the problems.”
Educational systems, for instance, have devoted a lot of time trying to fix children instead of assessing the problems with the systems they must function in, Nation said.
The disparities between minority and white populations, including wealth gap and school suspensions, are examples of institutional racism at work, Nation said. Even with infant mortality rates, the richest black women have the same negative outcomes as poor white women, he pointed out.
“It’s racism,” Nation said. “All the evidence is there. Unfortunately, since it seems white people benefit from racism, some of them don’t want the system to change. There’s not a consciousness of how a changed system can benefit them.”
He also said that people often are confused about the definition of racial equity. “Equal is not always equitable,” Nation said. “When you have had 400 years of oppression for black people, it’s not difficult to understand why there is a wealth gap. It’s like a game of Monopoly. If you’re starting the game after all the properties have hotels on them, how in the heck are you supposed to catch up?”
Twyman, who has consulted organizations through diversity, equity and inclusion work, said that each organization must develop a customized approach to addressing those issues.
“If you’re serious about it, it really is a comprehensive approach to working and operating in a different way,” Twyman said. “It can’t be limited to ‘Sign me up for the workshop, check my name off the list and I’m good.’ We need to gain a deep understanding of the larger historical context that got us to the place where we are. There needs to be an acknowledgement of who we are as a nation. How it has brought us to where we are.”
Next, Twyman said, an organization needs to establish a mutually agreed upon definition of the terms racial equity and racial justice — the ultimate goal of what an organization will look like as it embraces those qualities. “How do you want to be operating differently?” he asked.
Lastly, an organization must work to define the journey, Twyman said. “How do those two things intersect — where your organization is now — the historical context, and the aspirational goal. What is the journey in between?” Twyman said. “How do you come together as part of a journey that takes you to a place where you’re no longer complicit and you’re advocating for racial justice? That can look different for every organization.”
The process can be challenging because it may require putting the organization under a microscope, Twyman said. “There has to be a sense of humility about accepting the possibility that we don’t know it all and that we unintentionally have been complicit in creating inequities, as well as helping to perpetuate them,” he said. “There also should be a willingness to hear the voices of people who have had the experience of being marginalized or oppressed … listening and accepting that at face value.”
The process could include a mix of ongoing professional development, training that focuses on changing organization culture, addressing the composition of the board and staff, and assessing policies, processes and procedures that unintentionally or intentionally serve to put people of color at a disadvantage, Twyman said.
Any assessment must be specific about issues around equity, sometimes in ways that may not immediately be obvious, Twyman said. For example, he said, a well meaning initiative to invest $5 million in a neighborhood to benefit minorities could have the opposite effect — gentrifying a neighborhood that, in the long run, doesn’t benefit them.
With nonprofits, businesses and other organizations putting in the work to achieve racial equity on a consistent basis, Twyman said, real change is possible.
“I am hopeful,” Twyman said.
“I think the promise of every new generation is that it will be a little smarter, a little wiser. Those who have joined and supported movements like Black Lives Matter are raising the questions around racial justice and demanding changes in a way that I haven’t seen in my lifetime. There’s urgency, clarity and energy,” he said. “Not to say that it didn’t happen previously. Now, it’s a broader and a more diverse movement that makes me very hopeful because I think that’s what it’s going to take.”
In the past, “We’ve all put this onus on people of color to fix this thing,” Twyman said. “As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said, ‘ We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.’ White people also have to demand change and be committed to the work that goes along with it.”
Study also shows that charitable giving for these organizations reached $7.1 billion but represents less than 2% of total giving
by Shari Finnell, editor, Not for Profit News
When more than 3 million people around the globe gathered on Jan. 21, 2017, in support of the Women’s March on Washington, it was designated among the largest one-day social movement protests in history. Several months later, the #MeToo hashtag movement ignited a campaign that gave women a voice on issues related to sexual violence and harassment.
Those events not only raised awareness on women’s rights, they seemed to contribute to an increase (85.2%) in charitable giving to organizations that support women’s reproductive rights during a five-year period, from 2012 to 2017. Those were among the findings of The Women & Girls (WGI) Index 2020 report, recently released by the Women’s Philanthropy Institute at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at IUPUI.
“For a long time, the work at the Women’s Philanthropy Institute has been focused more on the donor side of the equation,” said Tessa Skidmore, a Women’s Philanthropy Institute visiting research associate who led the study. “We have examined the unique characteristics of women’s philanthropy. With this research, we focused on women and girls as the recipients of charitable giving. There have been studies that have examined the percentage of giving for religion, education and the arts, but not the dollar amount of giving to organizations that are dedicated to primarily serving women and girls.”
Skidmore said that organizations that met the criteria of the study included those in which 80 percent of program expenses were allocated to programs for women and girls, such as Girls Inc., Planned Parenthood, women’s auxiliary organizations, and women’s philanthropic organizations, including the Junior League. Nearly 47,000 organizations met that criteria for the 5-year period of the study.
The research, which was funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, represents the first multi-year look at how giving to women’s and girls’ organizations has changed in recent years, according to the institute. The giving measured donations from individuals, foundations and corporations from 2012 to 2017, which grew by 36.4% — similar to other charitable organizations during that time period.
Although the report revealed an overall increase in charitable giving for women’s and girls’ causes in the United States — up to $7.1 billion by 2017, it also noted that it remained at 1.6% of total giving.
“While women’s and girls’ organizations saw steady growth in philanthropic support from 2012 to 2017, contributions to these organizations continue to comprise a relatively small share of overall charitable giving,” said Debra Mesch, Ph.D., professor of Philanthropic Studies and Eileen Lamb O’Gara Chair in Women’s Philanthropy at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. “For any organization or donor invested in women and girls, the WGI provides powerful empirical data and stories of growth and challenges that can help the sector work collectively to address gaps in funding.”
According to Skidmore, the report also revealed the impact that government funding has had on organizations that primarily focus on women’s and girls’ causes.
During the study period, from 2012 to 2017, government grants to women’s and girls’ organizations increased by 34.4% — significantly outpacing the 14.6% rate of growth in government grants to other charitable organizations.
With the collection of more data in 2018 and ensuing years, the WGI Index report may continue to show correlations between movements that raise awareness and, as a result, lead to an uptick in giving in certain categories, Skidmore said. “In future years, we may begin to see the impact from the pandemic and racial justice protests.”
Jeannie Sager, director of the Women’s Philanthropy Institute, also noted that the research could be used by advocates to support future initiatives.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected women and particularly women of color. In light of this, women’s and girls’ causes —particularly those addressing the intersection of race, gender and other areas of inequality — will need more resources,” Sager said. “The WGI’s insights can kick start discussion and action to generate philanthropic support for these critical organizations,”
Other key findings of the report include:
● Growth in philanthropic support for women’s and girls’ organizations was especially strong in 2017 (9.4%).
● While philanthropic support for women’s and girls’ organizations increased across the board from 2012 to 2017, particular types of organizations — such as those focused on reproductive health and family and gender-based violence — saw especially strong growth. Support for reproductive rights organizations increased 85.2% from 2012 to 2017, and 33.7% in 2017 alone — more than triple the rate of other WGI organizations (9.4%).
● Although the composition of women’s and girls’ organizations based on nonprofit subsector and mission focus largely held steady in 2017, organizations dedicated to general and reproductive health received an increased share of philanthropic support.
The full report and visual summary are available here.
In our everyday lives, we constantly ask questions and use data to help us make better, smarter decisions. Can we say the same about decision making at our nonprofits? Think about your last staff or board meeting. What information did you have to inform your decisions? Maybe you were considering what expenses to cut due to COVID. What data did you have at your disposal? Budgets alone can’t tell you what programs are the most impactful to those you serve, why your donor retention is going down, or what inefficiencies are causing bottlenecks for your team. To get that information, you need real-time feedback.
Why feedback is a game changer.
According to a survey conducted by Stanford Social Innovation Review in 2019, 88 percent of nonprofit leaders prioritize gathering client feedback while only 13 percent use it as a “top source of insight for continuous improvement.” Two-thirds of organizations not collecting client feedback said their greatest barrier was limited staff time and/or resources, and 20 percent said collecting feedback was “too complicated” or “too expensive.” If these statements resonate with you, consider the following:
Collecting feedback will make your organization more efficient in the long run. Gathering feedback from the people you serve will not only make your programs more impactful, but make your service-delivery more efficient. You might learn families don’t need or want something you’ve been providing for years or would rather participate in your program virtually so you could cut food and transportation expenses while boosting engagement rates. Feedback data might help you recognize how different programs can be combined, pared down, or supported by volunteers. In addition, having satisfaction data direct from your participants will make your grant proposals more appealing and your impact reports more compelling. That’s right, collecting feedback can both lower your administrative expenses and increase your fundability. Win, win.
How should you collect participant feedback? To collect in-depth, qualitative feedback about your services, organize a focus group with the individuals who participate in your programs or receive your services. Use a time and space with minimal barriers such as a community center (with social distancing) or video conferencing. Alternatively, if you want to collect high-level, quantitative data, consider surveying your participants. The survey should be brief and easy to access. For both focus group and survey options, consider offering incentives for participation and using third-party facilitator to ensure participants can be fully transparent.
What should you ask participants? Ask program participants if and how your services are making a difference for them; what about your services is most meaningful to them; what, if any, barriers complicate receiving your services; and what could improve their overall experience with your organization.
Collecting feedback is great donor stewardship. By the end of the year, your donors are tired of being asked for money. The majority of American donors give to three or more organizations, so their inboxes are inundated with #GivingTuesday emails and asks for support. But remember the saying—”Ask for money, get advice. Ask for advice, get money twice?” December and January are great months for collecting feedback from your donors. Asking your donors to share their input makes them feel valued and engaged in your work. Plus, their feedback should help you determine what information is meaningful to them, why they support you, and how they feel connected to your mission. All of this data will help you build relationships with your donors, keep them engaged, and prepare for larger asks in the future.
How should you collect donor feedback? Digital surveys are excellent tools for collecting feedback from your donors. Send out a survey to your general donor list and consider posting the survey on your social media. For your major donors, gathering their feedback should be more personal. Enlist Board members to share the survey with one or two donors using a personalized email or set up a Zoom meeting to go through the questions in an interview style.
What should you ask donors? Ask donors if they feel well-connected to your organization, if they can see the impact of their giving, why they choose to give, whether they would recommend your organization to others, and how they prefer to be recognized. If the survey may reach lapsed donors, ask why they don’t currently give and what might inspire them to give in the future. Sound scary? Remember, if lapsed donors take the step to even open your survey (and many do), odds are they’re still interested in supporting you. Asking for their feedback can be the perfect way to reach out without making it awkward.
Collecting feedback could solve your turnover problem. We hear a lot of nonprofits talking about their staff turnover rate and setting aggressive goals to curb turnover. However, not all turnover is bad turnover. What really matters is why staff members feel the need to move on. Is it a culture issue? A salary issue? Perhaps some teams are constantly overwhelmed while others are bored. Collecting staff feedback is an important and effective way to monitor your organizational health and assess what is working and what is not. These insights give you the “why” behind a turnover rate and help you get to solution faster. Feedback can help you get ahead of an issue before it becomes worse, identify blind spots, and even give you statistics to strengthen your staff recruitment.
How should you collect staff feedback? Whereas you might collect feedback from your participants and your donors once or maybe twice per year, you should collect staff feedback at least once per quarter. Many organizations use a “pulse survey” to collect essential, real-time feedback on a handful of key indicators. Pulse surveys allow you to identify issues as they occur and take more immediate action. It’s important to use the same questions in each survey so that data can be compared over time. If you don’t have a designated Human Resources professional on staff, consider using a third-party to ensure staff members can be fully transparent.
What should you ask staff members? Using the Net Promotor Score is a great place to start. You should also ask staff about their satisfaction with workplace culture, if they can maintain appropriate work/life balance, whether they feel connected with other employees, whether they feel appropriately valued, and if they see opportunities for professional growth. Consider asking about pain points as well — for example, how does your team feel about remote work or coming back to the office?
Collecting feedback can breathe life into your Board. Halloween is behind us, but maybe your Board meetings still feel like a scene out of a zombie movie. You ask a basic question and get a sea of blank stares. It’s painful, we know. But often times, Boards become disengaged and zombie-like when members either don’t understand their role, or there is no clear structure of accountability to ensure everyone is doing their part. Many Board members feel embarrassed to admit what they don’t know so they don’t ask, and then the cycle of uncertainty continues. Gathering Board feedback can be a great way to break that cycle and get an honest sense of what Board members are thinking in real-time. Feedback data might tell you some members are ready to roll off while others are ready to step up into leadership roles. You might learn simple solutions — for example, maybe members would be more engaged if Board meetings were scheduled in the mornings instead of the evenings. Feedback results can give you an objective base to start from so that no one has to feel singled-out and you can address the elephant in the room with a positive, solutions-focused attitude.
How should you collect Board feedback? Ideally, the Executive or Governance Committee is accountable for collecting and analyzing feedback. However, the Board Chair may also lead or outsource a confidential feedback collection process. Similar to staff feedback, Board feedback is most effective when it is captured regularly. Consider using the pulse survey format to gather feedback quarterly. At a minimum, all Boards should complete an annual engagement survey.
What should you ask Board members? Ask Board members about their satisfaction with the Board’s culture, communication, and effectiveness; what they perceive to be the role of the Board; what they need to be an effective and engaged Board member; whether they feel valued; and what they would change about Board meetings. You can also ask about committee involvement, leadership goals, and satisfaction with their personal giving.
So many organizations have had to completely reimagine their work this year. Many have had to pause or cut programs, cancel fundraising events, and toss out their strategic plans. Maybe your organization is approaching 2021 with nothing but question marks. No survey or focus group will tell you what the future holds, but feedback can help you make informed decisions. Meet your stakeholders where they are and ask for their input. With their feedback, you can assess where organization is strong and what you need prioritize so that your decisions are made with greater reliability, clarity, and certainty.
Hannah Gooding has been a Consultant with Hedges since 2017. With a background in nonprofit program management, her expertise in research and strategic thinking has supported dozens of nonprofit organizations in Central Indiana.
After more than 15 years at the helm of the IndyFringe, Pauline Moffat decided it was time to activate a succession plan — identifying and hiring her replacement as CEO for the annual theater arts festival. While Moffat previously had given some consideration to this phase in IndyFringe’s development, the events of 2020 — a global pandemic and racial injustice protests — triggered a more serious look at the implementation of a succession plan, she recalled.
“The world is changing,” Moffat said. “It reminded me of my duty. We did not have a succession plan in place to take IndyFringe through the next 10 years. I knew it was time for us to start seriously thinking about it.”
As Moffat spends her final few weeks at IndyFringe — assisting its new CEO, Justin Brady, with strategic planning, she leaves behind a case study of how to transform a fledgling street festival into a vibrant arts organization with two theaters, zero debt, an active army of supporters, committed sponsors and donors, and a strategic plan to ensure its long-term viability.
When she took on the roles as IndyFringe’s co-founder and leading executive in 2005, Moffat knew little about Indianapolis and the business of running an arts festival. “I didn’t come from an arts background,” said Moffat, a marketing professional who had just moved from Australia at the time.
Setting the foundation through a fundraising education
Moffat determined that a formal education in fundraising was a good place to start. She had already heard about the reputation of the Indiana University School of Philanthropy. “One of my major clients told me that the IU Fundraising School is the best in the world,” she recalled. “That piqued my interest because there is nothing like it in Australia.”
The courses didn’t disappoint, said Moffat, who considers them foundational for anyone operating as a leader in the nonprofit industry. Moffat initially took one course and, as she faced new milestones as CEO, she enrolled in additional courses that aligned with the leadership’s goals at the time — from strategic planning to successfully managing capital campaigns.
As part of a fundamental course on fundraising, she gained a critical understanding of the differences in communicating supporters and donors. “It provided the techniques and principles of fundraising, including language, terms and references you need to understand when communicating with constituents and patron. Your conversation must be couched in different terms, depending upon who you’re talking to,” Moffat said.
Moffat also stressed the importance of adopting a “constant learner” mentality when guiding a nonprofit through different stages.
“When we got to the point of doing a more comprehensive plan, I enrolled in that course,” she said. “The IU School of Fundraising provides a wonderful learning opportunity. It’s a great investment.”
Strategic board selection and planning fueled IndyFringe’s growth
Developing a strategic plan for IndyFringe’s growth, including identifying the right board members at every phase, has been critical to the organization’s successes, Moffat said.
“It’s important to come up with a good solid plan that’s achievable, something that everyone can feel good about, like 10 percent growth year over year,” she said.
The composition of the board was an area that demanded close attention, Moffat said. “For each stage of the organization’s strategic growth, efforts were made to get the right board members,” she said. “At the grassroots stage, it’s important to have board members and volunteers who are willing to work hard, putting in a lot of physical effort and energy.
When the organization set a goal to secure property, Moffat said, they recruited board members with real estate knowledge.
Next, the focus turned to how to become a sustainable organization. “At that point, we needed people who are much more experienced than us, people with experience and wisdom. Educators. We did that and the results were fantastic,” Moffat said. “When we decided to build a second theater, we needed expertise on how to do that while leveraging and protecting what we already had. If we always have to rent, how do we protect the festival? We went to the phase of capital fundraising — how do you build a building and then become debt free?
“I would tell a young executive that those are the key goals — get a great board, don’t carry debt and develop a good plan so that you can achieve results,” Moffat said. “We’ve had challenges, absolutely. But the festival has never suffered. We have always had affordable ticket prices to ensure that people can attend but at the same time asked the question, ‘How do we operate without debt?’”
Navigating uncertain times in 2020
As the spread of COVID-19 forced organizations to cease their operations and programs, IndyFringe was in an enviable position. The theater group did not have to worry about significant bills since it owned its properties. Moffat said that she believes it will be key to IndyFringe being sustainable in the theatrical space in the coming years.
While its debt-free status helped IndyFringe better navigate shutdowns caused by COVID-19, Moffat relied on advice from other international Fringe organizations to help her team determine whether to cancel all programs or move forward with some shows with restrictions in place. The World Fringe association includes more than 250 Fringe festivals from around the world.
“We have the support of all the other Fringes around the world — this huge network of people doing problem solving,” Moffat said. “We could see that COVID was hitting Australia in a big way while it was still just a blip in the United States. In Asia, everybody was prepared for this. We were engaged in a lot of discussions about how they were able to navigate it. As a result, it was pretty easy to make a call to cancel the festival early. Performers didn’t have to wonder what we would be doing.”
As IndyFringe approached the prospect of reopening earlier this summer, it considered a balance of streaming shows and live theater. “We were exploring who’s doing it well and how do you do it better,” Moffat said.
The organization decided to move forward with outdoor performances. “With our second theater, we designed it so that it had a wall that opened to the park,” she said. “The moment they said you could have up to 250 people gathered outdoors, we started working on the logistics of how to host programs, including festivals, music, dance and theatrical performances.”
IndyFringe was able to sell out all but two of its shows, with a maximum of 100 people in attendance. Procedures included temperature checks and social distancing checks. “It was stressful,” Moffat recalled of the experience. “It didn’t get any easier because COVID cases kept going up. Nothing was getting better.
“It probably was the hardest four months in my life,” she added. “You’re fraught with anxiety about whether you’re doing the right thing.”
Maintaining personal connections with donors, volunteers
During the pandemic, Moffat said, the IndyFringe team also committed to keeping personal connections with their donors, volunteers and other supporters. Without the ability to engage with them frequently during in-person events, Moffat and the team focused on reaching out, including with telephone calls.
“You need to know your donors. It was important to keep the conversations going,” she said. “It was time to be personal, starting with the top people you know, those who understand your organization and mission, and are connected to it. It’s also a great time to get to know your volunteers by picking up the phone.”
The feedback was overwhelmingly positive. “They appreciated it. If they couldn’t be close to people, it was great to have that personal connection,” Moffit said. “It gave me just as much pleasure.”
Choosing the right successor at the right time
With the reduction in programming created by the pandemic, Moffat said the timing was right for a succession plan. “The more I thought about it, the more I realized that now is a good time. It would give them (the successor) the freedom to create their festival and build their own team because it would be such a long time between festivals.”
As the leadership team worked on identifying a replacement, they were committed to finding someone who had close ties to Indianapolis. “They also needed to understand that Fringe is not a 9-to-5 job,” Moffat said. “It’s a way of life and it demands a world connection. We’re a community … we share everything. It’s an open book. We’re very noncompetitive.”
Justin Brady clearly fit those requirements, she said. Brady, a graduate of Butler University and Indiana University, had worked in theater in New York City. He also was intimately familiar with IndyFringe, having been a part of the organization’s growth in its early stages.
Moffat will work with Brady throughout December, focusing on strategic planning with assistance from an award by Lilly Endowment. “That was very important to get the strategic plan done, and it does require both of us,” she said. “The future and the past have to come together to determine what does 2021-22 look like?”
