SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Individual donors; major event (annual luncheon featuring silent auction
with 100 donated works of art); luncheon underwriters
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 2001
GRANTS: First
given in 2006, total to date, $258,000
HOW MANY
MEMBERS: 200 attend annual luncheon
GOVERANCE:
No formal structure; luncheon committee determines luncheon theme and grant recipients
RESEARCH: Informal
PROUDEST OF:
“When we started, we had no idea it would grow to be
what it is. We just thought that there was a need. We had seen women’s foundations in different
places, and we wanted this. We’re a small community of 35,000, our county’s
about 50,000. We wanted it to make a difference in our community. I’m proudest
of women who have been changed.” — Mary Jo Clark, co-founder Women’s Fund
FUND
NAME: Women Helping Other Women
TYPE: Giving
circle
SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Annual membership dues of $500; individual donors; endowment
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 2008, added endowment in 2011; has just over $15,000 in assets
GRANTS: To
date, nearly $72,000
HOW MANY
MEMBERS: 22
GOVERNANCE:
Group consensus; Wayne County Foundation staff person executes
RESEARCH: Informal,
shared by foundation staff
FUND
NAME: Girls That Just Want to Give
TYPE: Giving
circle
SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Annual membership dues of $300
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 2014
GRANTS: To
date, $21,450
HOW MANY
MEMBERS: 15
RESEARCH: Informal,
shared by foundation staff
FUND
NAME: Women with a Purpose
TYPE: Special
interest
SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Endowment; annual women’s conference; option
to donate individually
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 2007
GRANTS: First
$400 given last year; endowment of $12,800 started in
year five of conference
HOW MANY
MEMBERS: 103 conference attendees in 2019
RESEARCH: Informal,
shared by foundation staff
GOVERNANCE:
Workshop at the conference with attendees becoming the grants committee; aim is
help attendees understand the grant selection process and the difficulty of
saying “no.”
RESEARCH: Informal,
shared by foundation staff
PROUDEST
OF: Growth from the women’s conference. “When I came here, I realized that we
still have the good old boys’ network too much.
We were talking to the men when we were talking about charitable giving
but weren’t including women in those conversations. I started trying to make a
difference in how we approached that, and trying to get the women involved
more. I set up the women’s conference, a one-day conference. It’s a day of
networking, and learning and honing skills and being together with other women
from the community.” —Rachel Hughes, Wayne County Foundation development
officer
COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION OF CENTRAL INDIANA, Indianapolis
SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Donations to endowment and operating fund
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 1996, now has a $16 million endowment
GRANTS: To
date, $7 million
GOVERNANCE:
Advisory board with officers; grants committee of about 20
RESEARCH:
No original research, but uses research that’s compiled by others; will
occasionally fund research, particularly through the Indiana Institute for
Working Families to help inform the work the fund does with economic mobility
PROUDEST
OF: “We’re really proud of the work we have done with Grameen to establish a
branch of Grameen Indianapolis to help women who are living in poverty become
small-business owners and to become economically independent and really change
the trajectory of their lives. We’ve made a very bold investment with Grameen.
We gave them a half million dollars along with the Indianapolis Foundation and
some other funds, and we gave them their first money in 2011. Over 5,000 women
have been served, $37 million dollars of loans have been deferred and 5,359
jobs have been created with a 99 percent repayment rate. That’s 5,300 people
whose lives have been changed immeasurably because they had a small loan. The
average loan size is $3,200.”.” — Jennifer Pope Baker, Women’s Fund
executive director
COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN INDIANA, New
Albany
RESEARCH:
Commissioned a research project by Indiana University Southeast on the actual
needs of women in the community. Reinforced that there was a need for
affordable housing, day care, health care and good transportation.
PROUDEST OF:
“Being a person who’s been involved in philanthropy and many different
fundraising efforts, working with a group of women that are singularly focused
on helping other women in the community has just been really an amazing
experience. I just think when women get together with a real purpose, amazing
things happen.” — Lori Lewis, Women’s Foundation
of Southern Indiana president
SOURCE OF
FUNDS: Century Club; annual luncheon event; endowment of over $100,000
WHEN
ESTABLISHED: 2005
GRANTS: Still
actively growing endowment
HOW MANY
MEMBERS: 200
GOVERNANCE:
Committee that meets monthly to plan luncheon
RESEARCH: Informal
PROUDEST OF: “That it started from scratch, it started from nothing and
look where we are. In the last couple of years, we had a drive to increase our
endowment to $100,000 and we reached that in no time flat, so we just said,
‘Hey, you did so well on that, let’s go for another $100,000 in the endowment,
and we’ll be able to start giving away some significant money.’” Sally
DeVoe, Madison County Community Foundation executive director and founder of
Women in Philanthropy
The need was out there. It was just flying a bit under the
radar until a women’s group took it upon itself to recognize it and do
something to fill it.
Like many parts of Indiana, Wayne County, in the eastern
part of the state along the Ohio border, had a growing Hispanic population.
That also meant a growing set of language challenges for Hispanic women
and their families when it came to medical care, specifically in the maternity
ward.
At a time when communication is vital, especially during
impending deliveries, doctors had trouble getting their messages across and
their instructions understood. A stopgap solution was to have Earlham College
students serve as translators. But babies don’t always arrive on a timetable,
and students weren’t always available.
Enter the Wayne County Foundation’s Women’s Fund.
The women’s solution was to provide a grant to train medical translators
for the maternity ward.
“We sent two
women (to be trained as medical) translators, and today one of them is working fulltime
at the Wayne County Health Center after receiving more training. At that
point, the doctors were all men and (change) was slow with the hospital. They were surprised that we identified
that need,” said Mary Jo Clark, one of the co-founders of the Women’s Fund. “We
have been able over the years to identify a lot of needs in the community.”
The fund’s first
grants were given in 2006, and since then, the group has given out over
$258,000. The Women’s Fund is one of four funds targeted to women and girls at
the Wayne County Foundation.
And this isn’t the only Indiana community where women
provide funds to make their communities better places for women and girls.
There are seven community foundations that host women’s funds, according to
Elizabeth Gillespie, a doctoral candidate in the School of Public
Administration at the University of Nebraska-Omaha, who has just completed a
study in partnership with the Women’s Philanthropy Institute based at the Lilly
Family School of Philanthropy.
While women’s funds started in the 1970s, it
wasn’t until 1991 that the National Network of Women as Philanthropists was
established. It would later become the Women’s Philanthropy Institute (WPI),
and a free-standing nonprofit. WPI moved to the Lilly School of Philanthropy in
2004 and expanded its mission to include research and education. Its signature
series, Women Give, is an annual publication.
The report, Women’s Foundations and Funds: A
Landscape Study, was released
in May. A companion publication, based on the second
phase of in-depth interviews with fund leaders will be released in December.
Gillespie found patterns studying more than 200 women’s
foundations and funds to demonstrate the positive change for the broader
community from an investment in women and girls. Five funds from Indiana were included in Gillespie’s
report. Of these, four – the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana (Indianapolis);
Southern Indiana Women’s Fund (New Albany); Women’s Fund of Wayne County
(Richmond); and Women in Philanthropy of Madison County (Anderson) – were
interviewed for this story.
They vary in
size and activities, but all support nonprofits in their local communities,
reflecting the idea, according to the report, that women’s foundations and
funds “connect the well-being and success of women to the well-being and
success of their communities.” All talked about the collective impact
beyond grantmaking their efforts are having, and most rely entirely on
volunteers for events and committee work.
The first in
Indiana, the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana, was launched in 1996. At the
time, a feasibility study led a group to action, and Julie Cagle, the
consultant who led the study, became part of the inaugural staff. Jennifer Pope
Baker, its executive director since 1998, said the impetus came from the
grassroots level, not from the foundation where it is housed.
According to
Pope Baker, a group primarily of women wondered why the needs of women and
girls were not receiving the same attention as boys and families. They wanted
to learn why that was the case and what could be done about it.
“The why
really was that women typically have silent problems that are easy to ignore
— teen pregnancy, domestic violence, hidden addictions and those sorts of
things. They weren’t violent problems that were tearing at the fabric of our
society,” said Pope Baker.
“The idea was let’s change the thinking around the needs and
issues of women and girls and the thinking around philanthropy to benefit women
and girls. Let’s be bolder in all those things and not place blame. Let’s just
accept responsibility for creating change,” Pope Baker said.
And accept the challenge, they did.
The next step was to seek a home. Serendipitously, Ken
Gladish, the then-Indianapolis Foundation president, thought that joining
forces could be mutually beneficial. He recognized that the foundation lacked
diversity, and believed a partnership could give the Women’s Fund instant credibility
and provide the foundation gender diversity. He sweetened the pot with a $1
million match to launch fundraising and the group accepted his offer and the women’s group became a special
fund of the Indianapolis Foundation.
Shortly after, the foundation merged with the Hamilton
County Community Foundation to create the Central Indiana Community Foundation
(CICF).
Other funds in Indiana started in similar ways with a woman
or group of women identifying the need to focus on women and girls and a desire
to make a difference with their donations.
For example, Richmond,
which has had a women’s fund since 2001, last year awarded a grant to two high
school seniors. For four years, the girls had enrolled in what traditionally was
considered the boys’ domain – an auto mechanics class. Both had landed jobs in the
profession after graduation. Recognizing that a lack of strength put them at a
disadvantage, the girls requested money to purchase a car lift. At the fund’s
annual luncheon, the girls were awarded the funds, and in addition, received a classroom
plaque to acknowledge for future generations their barrier-breaking efforts. In
response, the awardees arranged a meeting with underclassmates sanctioned by
the school’s administrators to interest more females in the coursework.
Each of Indiana’s women’s funds has developed its own
grant-giving approach to fit the needs of its community. Several have taken a giving-circle
approach, raising money through dues memberships and then distributing the
funds in the calendar year.
New Albany began its efforts in 2005 with an endowment, but
after careful study in 2017, made the shift to a giving circle. Two of the four
funds at the Wayne County Foundation are giving circles. The others –
Indianapolis, Anderson and two in Wayne County – are set up as special interest
funds of the community foundation.
New Albany’s initial effort was a biannual dinner. President
Lori Lewis said it was a successful dinner, but the growth was slow.
“We know that the founding women wanted to involve women in
philanthropy, and they wanted to make a difference in the community. And around
2005, the only way they saw to do that was to get an endowment going. We saw
the giving circle as a way to
involve more women and to be able to make a bigger impact in the community
quickly. There’s ownership in being a member. I think it just makes them more
aware of what’s going on in the community, more aware of us trying to change
the community,” she said. Cincinnati, which has a giving circle, mentored the
group.
Earlier this
month, at its annual dinner, the women awarded its third grant — $106,000. Each
year the number of women has grown, enlarging the distribution. Lewis said the change
has also caused grantees to dream big. Its first awardee, St. Elizabeth
Catholic Charities, put in a commercial teaching kitchen for women to teach culinary
arts skills, and as a result, find good paying jobs. Last year it funded
self-esteem camps for girls in Floyd, Clark and Harrison counties. The group
has also committed to fund the original endowment to respect the fund’s originators.
Initially, the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana had a cadre of women investigate
different models of women’s funds to determine its best course of action. Their
recommendation was to create an endowment of at least $4 million before making
any grants to ensure it would be a growing fund. Today, the endowment is about
$16 million.
Over time, it
has awarded not only program funds, but also general operating, believing that
a nonprofit cannot provide quality programming without operating dollars. Recently,
it changed the language for its grant initiatives to caregiving, violence
against women and economic mobility. It has also provided significant support
for several initiatives, including a commitment of $10 million to Bellfound
Farm.
“Our First
Next Initiative helping to incubate and launch Bellfound Farm, a residential urban farm designed to help young women
coming out of the criminal justice system with re-entry and a lifetime of
economic security coupled with extraordinary mental health support, will be
extraordinarily significant,” said Pope Baker.
“The work
that we’re doing with our next initiative to help women and girls who are 18 to
24 years old who are underappreciated and fall through the cracks to really
engage in a thoughtful path to economic security is incredible.”
For all,
community foundations have been the incubators. In fact, Sally DeVoe,
the executive director of the
Madison County Community Foundation in Anderson, started the effort in 2005
with the first task of raising visibility.
“We started the endowment, but we never made an issue out of
the endowment until much later. We looked at it and said, ‘The money doesn’t
need to be paramount. What needs to be paramount is that women understand they
need to give the money and why they need to give the money,’” said DeVoe. The group is actively growing
its endowment through its Century Club and its annual luncheon.
“We’re raising $10,000 a year, and certainly more than that.
But we’ve just set that as a doable goal in a community like Anderson in
Madison County where we haven’t been on the best side of the economic fence for
a while. We’re coming back and stronger than ever, so we’re beginning to
address some things and able to address them financially and, you know,
emphatically,” she said. The group’s annual luncheon draws close to 200 women.
All the funds
see the need to democratize philanthropy and create buy-in from the women in
their communities. They have all found innovative ways to cultivate
philanthropy. From silent art auctions to annual luncheons to a conference, all
with the goal of raising the profile of women.
In the
beginning, Pope Baker said women were not as good at asking for the funding
they deserve, but she has seen a big difference and credits the women’s
fund for being part of that difference.
DeVoe agrees.
“Women are
not good at giving money to themselves, treating themselves well or donating to
other women. What they want to zero in on is children, families and caregiving
without looking at the fact that there are an awful lot of women in need,” she
said. “I think a different look at women’s roles has been the thing that I’ve
seen change the most.”
Wayne County Foundation’s development officer Rachel Hughes
recognizes that more women are giving after the establishment of the different
funds.
“I feel good about the fact that we have empowered them to
give philanthropically, and that doesn’t have to be to the foundation. We are helping
them to gain their voices to be heard philanthropically in our community, whether
that’s supporting strictly women’s organizations and programs or anything that
they care passionately about.”
From day one, the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana has
planned for the future with philanthropy education.
“I believe that you do not turn 50 or 60 years old and start
writing big checks to organizations to whom you don’t have a connection. So we
have been cultivating and developing relationships since the day we opened up
our doors to engage people so they will want to support our work in a way
that’s meaningful for them and the right time. We are always excited when more
people want to join us in making positive change, join us in helping women and
girls have all the tools they need to be economically successful. When a
woman’s successful, a family is successful, and when a family is successful our
community is as well,” said Pope Baker.
By Annmarie Novotney, senior audit
manager, Blue & Co.
A strong board of
directors will oversee implementation of strategic objectives for the
organization, but also has ultimate responsibility and liability. Building a
strong board is challenging, yet crucial to setting the right tone for success
of your organization.
Have you assessed
your organization’s overall governance model recently? Generally, it’s best
practice to review governance policies regularly but at least every three to
five years. For newer organizations, this time period may be shorter as
circumstances and strategic positioning may change more frequently.
As you review your
organization’s governance model, consider the following:
Board size: The IRS generally requires a minimum of three board members but
does not have requirements on term limits. Many organizations have at least
five members, with an average throughout our client base of 15. As you consider
what board size is right for you, also consider if term limits are appropriate.
If your review determines changes to board structure need to be made, be sure
to amend your organization’s bylaws (for maximum board members and term
limits).
Type of board: You may also consider whether your board is a working board or a
governing board. Working boards have members that are heavily involved in the
implementation of the mission, and often perform duties that paid staff would
perform. Governing boards have a big-picture focus and work to delegate tasks
to staff in an effort to govern the strategic mission, not implement it
directly.
Skillsets needed: A diverse and skilled board of directors can serve its
organization more effectively. In all areas, ensure that you are focused on nonprofit
(NFP) expertise. Attorneys and accounting professionals are especially
important in this regard as nonprofits are unique in many ways. Some examples
of areas include:
Financial – This expert
would be able to provide guidance on the creation of a budget, financial
statements, and accounting policies and procedures, and insurance
considerations.
Legal – As there are
many requirements for a nonprofit organization, a legal expert can ensure
the board stays up to date on all compliance requirements and provides
guidance on any legal matters that may arise.
Marketing – Ensuring your
organization is well-known throughout the community can provide
significant growth opportunities for recognition and future funding. An
expert in marketing can help accomplish this.
Technology – A technology
expert can ensure the organization is doing its best to protect its assets
and information from cybersecurity threats. Cybersecurity threats continue
to plague NFP organizations of all sizes, so having an expert here could
keep the organization up-to-date on security options and policy ideas.
Fundraising – An expert in
fundraising is a must for any NFP board. This person should not only have
connections in the community, but also know how and be willing to ask for
donations in an effective manner.
Program/Industry– Having a
board member familiar with your programs, or with industry knowledge that
could assist in growing or expanding current programs, can be an asset to
review plans for future programming within your organization. He or she
can review and identify red flags in planning, as well as provide
realistic expectations on how quickly a program can be started or
expanded.
Board committees: Board committees are also an important part of a Board of
Directors. The size and responsibilities of committees vary greatly between
organizations based on their needs. For some committees, it may be best to have
a committee chair, responsible for communicating decisions to the board and
ensuring the committee remains focused on its goal. The following are suggested
committees, but should be tailored to your current needs and long-term goals:
Executive – This group acts
on behalf of the entire board as the steering committee and prioritizes agendas.
They also manage urgent matters between meetings.
Finance – These individuals take on an expanded role of the financial
expert mentioned above. Preparing or assisting with the budgeting process,
reviewing internal financial statements, and presenting these items to the
Board would be included in the responsibilities of the finance committee. This
committee can also provide insight on whether goals are achievable based on the
financial performance of the organization.
Audit – If an audit becomes necessary for the organization, having
an audit committee can ensure it is clear who is responsible for staying
current on financial requirements, chooses the audit firm, ensures there is no conflict of interest and has a
clear understanding of the audit results.
Fundraising/program – This committee is
focused on driving and monitoring the organization’s fundraising performance
and can also track the effectiveness of specific programs to determine if any
changes need to be made.
Governance/nominating – This group
determines the requirements and qualifications of board members, nominates
them, and ensures they receive proper training. This committee also drives
board expectations and performs regular self-assessments of the board.
Annmarie Novotney is an audit senior manager in Blue
& Co.’s Carmel, Indiana office. She’s been with the firm for over nine
years and works exclusively with nonprofits, specializing in assurance and
consulting services.
If you are
considering a review of your governance policies, or if you have questions or
need guidance on how to incorporate these suggestions, please contact Annmarie
Novotney (anovotney@blueandco.com) or your local Blue & Co. advisor.
By Ryan Olson, senior accountant and CPA, VonLehman
Passage of the federal income tax law in late December 2017 brought
into reality a variety of concerns
that nonprofits raised as the bill worked its way through Congress. In
addition to the increased standard deduction that’s expected to depress
charitable giving, the final Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) includes several
other provisions that prompted objections from charities.
Calculating UBTI
The corporate tax rate under the TCJA is a flat 21%. This change
will benefit some nonprofits paying unrelated business income tax, because the
tax is imposed at the corporate rate.
Those nonprofits with unrelated business-taxable income of $50,000 or
less have an increased tax rate. It has increased from 15% to 21%. Those nonprofits with unrelated business-taxable
income of $50,000 or more have a decreased tax rate from anywhere from 25-35%
to 21%.
Under the TCJA, nonprofits must calculate their unrelated business
taxable income (UBTI) separately for each unrelated business. As a result, they
can’t use a loss from one unrelated business to offset income from another
unrelated business for the same tax year. But they can use one year’s losses on
an unrelated business to reduce their taxes for that business in a different
year (subject to certain restrictions).
In addition, the law includes certain fringe benefits in UBTI.
Nonprofits now must include certain expenses in UBTI incurred to provide
employees with qualified transportation fringe benefits (for example, transit
passes), a parking facility used in connection with qualified parking fringe
benefits and any on-site athletic facility.
And under the TCJA, reimbursements to employees for moving expenses
or any activity considered to be entertainment can’t be excluded from that
employee’s taxable compensation.
Excise tax on excess compensation
The TCJA creates a 21% excise tax on nonprofit executives’
compensation (including most benefits and any payments from related
organizations) in excess of $1 million considered paid to a covered employee
plus certain large payments made to that employee when he or she leaves the
organization (known as “excess parachute payments”). “Covered employees” refers
to current or former employees who are among the five highest paid employees
for the taxable year or who were covered employees in 2017 or later. Once
considered a covered employee, an individual is always a covered employee.
A payment generally is considered an excess parachute payment if:
It’s
contingent on the employee’s departure, and
The
total present value of all such payments to the employee equals or exceeds
three times his or her average annual compensation for the preceding five
years.
The
excise tax applies to the amount of the parachute payment, less the average
annual compensation.
Reduced charitable-giving incentives
The near doubling of the standard deduction was expected to reduce
the number of taxpayers who itemize their deductions and, therefore, the number
who can deduct their charitable contributions. In fact, Charitable giving by U.S. individuals
fell 1.1% to $292 billion in 2018, according to Giving USA.
The TCJA includes further disincentives to giving. The law could
hurt major contributions because it increases the estate tax exemption to $10
million, annually indexed for inflation, through 2025. Some wealthy individuals
make major gifts to reduce their taxable estates, and the larger exemption
means they won’t need to shrink their estates as much to avoid the tax. The
TCJA also repeals the deduction for donations made in exchange for the right to
buy tickets to college athletic events.
While the TCJA raises the limit on cash donation deductions from
50% of adjusted gross income (AGI) to 60%, that change isn’t predicted to have
much of an impact. Cash donations of even 50% of AGI are already uncommon.
Certain tax-exempt bond interest repealed
Tax-exempt bonds usually pay lower interest rates than other bonds.
The tax-exempt nature of the interest makes such bonds attractive to investors
despite the lower rates.
A bond that is issued to pay principal, interest or the redemption
price on an earlier bond issue is called an “advance repayment bond.” The TCJA
repeals the tax-exempt treatment for interest paid on advance repayment bonds
that are issued to repay bonds with more than 90 days remaining before the
redemption date.
For example, if you issue tax-exempt bonds at 5% interest but
subsequently learn you can refinance the bonds at 4% interest, the interest
payments on the 4% advance repayment bonds won’t be tax-exempt for investors.
You’ll probably need to pay more interest to cover the investors’ increased tax
liability.
Next steps
Although the final guidance and procedures have yet to be issued by
the IRS, the TCJA may have some negative repercussions for your organization
going forward. Consult with your CPA now to determine the best steps to
minimize any potential damage to your bottom line — and your ability to
accomplish your mission.
What didn’t make it into the Act
Some of the provisions that caused concern among nonprofits didn’t
make it into the final tax act. They include:
Johnson
Amendment repeal. The House of Representatives’ version of the TCJA would have
repealed a prohibition against nonprofits engaging in political campaign
activity. Many nonprofit leaders had mobilized in opposition to this repeal.
Private
activity bond tax-exempt treatment termination. The House bill would have
eliminated the tax-exempt treatment of interest on the private activity bonds
some organizations use to finance capital projects.
Expanded
donor-advised fund reporting. Under the House bill, sponsors of donor-advised
funds (DAFs) would have been required to report additional information on their
Forms 990, including the average amount of grants made from DAFs during the
taxable year.
Excise tax rate on private foundation net investment income. The
TCJA left out a House provision establishing a streamlined rate of 1.4%,
sticking instead with the two current rates of 1% and 2%.
Ryan Olson is a senior accountant
working out of VonLehman CPA & Advisory Firm’s Indianapolis office. Olson
specializes in tax and works with a wealth of nonprofits.
The fallout
was immediate and severe. Since New Yorker reporter Ronan Farrow broke a
story in early September about the donor relationship of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Media Lab and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, the
prestigious school has been on the defensive. Ultimately, the Media Lab’s
attempts to conceal the extent of its contact with Epstein, both publicly and
within the university, were exposed, resulting in its longtime director
resigning and a deeper investigation by the university.
But after the headlines,
what lessons are there for nonprofits? Just as the MIT scandal raised questions
about that institution’s ethics, it can be a teachable moment for nonprofits,
encouraging them to scrutinize fundraising efforts and practices and to
evaluate their own organizational ethics.
Jim Langley has worked in higher education
since the 1980s, and until 2010, was Georgetown University’s vice president of
advancement. Since leaving the world of higher education, he founded Langley
Innovations, a consulting company that advises clients on an optimal philanthropic
path. Recently, he spoke with Charitable Advisors to share
thoughts on ethics and to suggest ways for nonprofits, large and small, to
shore up their fundraising practices. In short, Langley believes that integrity is everything, and when it is maintained,
it is the most powerful personal and professional brand.
“Ethics are something that will protect you
over time or add value to your career, will add value to your employability and
be prized by an institution,” Langley said.
For him, if
all things are equal, it’s also one way for a nonprofit to differentiate and
find a trusted partner, and thinks that each organization needs to reinforce
its ethics and raise awareness of ethical lapses or situations that start to
create potential ethical compromises.
“The consumer
then has the assurance that they’re dealing with somebody who will safeguard
their time, their talent, their treasures, their sensitivities and their trust.
I believe that, and this was triggered by the Epstein case, how profoundly
stupid it is to behave in a short-term expedient way with the hopes that you
never get caught. You put yourself on thin ice and the consequences are
potentially enormous,” Langley said.
And while organizations like the Association of
Fundraising Professionals published principles and adopted enforcement
procedures in 2015, there haven’t been consequences for those in violation. Langley
thinks there is need for an accrediting body that will censor flagrant
violations and raise accrediting questions about those “that are wobbly and
affirm those doing an exceptional job.”
“There are several organizations that have
codes of ethics for fundraising, but then remain silent when those ethics are
violated or trounced on. So, you kind of wonder, what’s the point of a code
without teeth?” asked Langley.
“I think the standards are pretty clear. ‘Thou
shalt not take from pedophiles’ doesn’t need a lot of nuance, but who speaks
up? There’s a lot of tsk-tsking behind the scenes, but who speaks up and says,
‘The MIT Media lab should be censored in a public way so that everybody knows
if you think of doing something like that again, there may be consequences
greater than the dollars you’ll secure.’”
Langley said a
public calling out will put organizations on notice and they might lose money
as a result of their behavior if they are seen as being on a slippery ethical
slope if not in a complete violation of something that so unimpeachably clear
and important.
One contributing factor is the fundraising landscape
and a contraction in philanthropic participation. Giving by
individuals decreased as a percentage of total giving in 2018 to 68% (down from
70% in 2017), despite achieving its third-highest total dollar amount on
record, adjusted for inflation. While there are
fewer people giving, it’s masked by people giving larger gifts.
“If the volume of giving contracts, then the
importance of big giving in terms of safeguarding the institution or advancing
the institution’s mission becomes ever more important,” Langley said.
Couple that with what Langley sees as utterly
false expectations surrounding fundraising.
“The top seems to inspire delusional thinking,
and then that gets passed on in the form of goals imposed on development staff.
‘Thou shalt go out and get all of this money’ that we think is out there
without any concrete evidence that it is. You put pressure on the fundraisers,
the board puts pressure on the CEO, and it becomes what I learned as a boy in
Catholic education is the occasion for sin.
“The
circumstances create more wobble, more unethical behavior. You put pressure on
people and they want to elevate the pressure, so I’d say all of those factors
are now coming to play in a greater form than ever before. And so as
philanthropy becomes less democratic, then the aristocratic few, at least some
of them will then say, ‘Oh, then what leverage do I have?’”
One way to
combat that is to learn the difference between high and unrealistic standards
and that there are analytics that help determine what is reasonable within
certain timeframes.
“In other
words, a $1 million gift is generally 21 to 24 months in the making, not three
months,” Langley said.
“I’d add one
more point, and that is that when you don’t have a strong case for support,
when you cannot point to where money will make a difference, when you think the
only way to raise money is through ingratiating yourself with the rich, then
you’re inclined to make these mistakes. If you’re more of a performance-driven
organization, you’ll have far more confidence in the fact that as long as you are
able to define differences to be made and as long as you prove that investment
in (your organization) yields a significant sustainable societal return, you’re
not going to be so quick to compromise yourself,” said Langley.
Langley offers these
take-away lessons for nonprofits:
1.Include ethics as part of the staff onboarding process.
“An organization has to have an orientation process that emphasizes the importance of character in both personal career development and in protecting the credibility of the institution.”
2. Develop an accountability policy.
“Spell out the larger the gift, the more comes with it. A
large gift sort of out of the clear blue, we might want to go ‘Does this person
have an ulterior motive? Is he or she trying to redeem or cover their own wont
of character by aligning with us and appearing to be charitable? You have to
have something like that in place. It’s all too easy to get around via big gifts
and want them so badly that you suspend credulity and then you pay for it
later.”
3. Determine who will administer the accountability policy.
“Have a devil’s advocate. Someone outside the advancement
operation, maybe in the legal staff, maybe somewhere else, but outside. It
needs to be someone who could say ‘While I have no personal interest in receipt
of this gift, I want to protect institutional credibility.’
“In my ideal world, I want nonprofits to have an office
of accountability — someone reporting directly to the president — and I want
them to start projecting the philosophy that ‘We are accountable to a code of
ethics, we are accountable to keep our promises to donors. It’s not just
thanking donors. It is too many unkept promises, too much glib transactional
fundraising and not enough conscience commitment in delivering on commitments,
not enough taking the convictions of donors as seriously as we should have.’”
4. Hire the right development people.
“There are two
schools of thought, which I’ve characterized as the hunters and the growers. If
you’re hunting, you don’t really worry, because you just drag home the carcass,
but if you’re growing, you say, ‘Well wait a second, I need to think about the
implications of this over time.’ Too many organizations hired fundraisers for
the wrong reasons. They thought it was all about asking and not about a process
of relationship building. So, they hired people who they thought were
presentable, persuasive and had the courage to ask. But over time, sheer
experience started to prove that donors actually liked the curious frontline
gift officer much better than the aggressively persuasive one.”
5. Develop board fundraising training modules.
“We need board onboarding. A board must orient itself.
It’s something that everybody thinks they know, and they don’t know at all. So
there has to be some schooling, and then second, there has to be the raising of
questions and the monitoring of areas that might be predictives of ethical
problems. Boards are often the guiltiest in terms
of putting pressure on the CEO to produce magical fundraising results. I spend
a lot of my time trying to orient boards to reality and say, ‘Yes, clamor for
high achievement, but don’t throw out arbitrary metrics or suggest something is
possible without having it grounded in sound analytics and a solid
understanding of philanthropic behavior.’”
6. Help boards ask the right questions.
“What should really
be happening between a CEO and a board is each asking the other intelligent
probing strategic questions. So, for instance, ‘What are we doing to retain the
loyal support that we have?’ That will open up a lens to how accountable an
institution is. ‘How affective are we at retaining our gift officers?’ If
they’re turning over a lot is that an indication of discomfort or unrealism.”
7. Listen to the testimony of frontline gift officers.
“Listen to complaints coming in from
external constituents and log those complaints because those can be early
warning signs. Don’t get into a cocoon or to an echo chamber. Be very open to
evidence that disrupts your thinking or shakes up your complacency and treat it
very seriously. Understand that by definition the conscientious person is in
the minority, so don’t dismiss internal discontent as the few soreheads. The
minority are always the ones who make the majority of difference, who always
preserve the integrity of the institution.”
8. Have a written gift policy with steps spelled out before formal acceptance.
“This should include reviewing the conditions of the gift and
scrubbing the ethical character of the donor. The organization should say, ‘Make sure we don’t compromise ourselves unwittingly
or wittingly in such a way where we’ll lose credibility and that will diminish
our ability to do other great things going forward.’”
9. Pay attention to anonymity.
“It’s a flag that we should pay more attention to. If
there’s not a longstanding relationship with an institution and someone starts
to give, ask, ‘What is that about?’ Is it in fact some sort of laundering
situation in which (the donor) is laundering that money to redeem (his/her) reputation
or to create some standing that (he/she) wouldn’t have otherwise. But you have
to juxtapose that with remarkably modest loyalties. People give to institutions
for years out of spiritual motivation and nothing for themselves, and any kind
of review of that ground would quickly reveal which was which.”
Researchers have found that storytelling practices are
linked to positive outcomes for children’s development, and that fathers who
tell family stories enrich their children’s development.
Consider, too, that the African
culture is rooted in oral cultures and traditions, and that since ancient
times, storytelling in the African culture has been a way to pass on
traditions, codes of behavior and maintain social order.
So, when Fathers and Families Center married the two, it
resulted in Story Telling,
its program funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Forward Promise
initiative.
The project is
designed to guide young males of color through a process of self-discovery and
reflection that can help them address trauma. These fathers have choices, and
can tell their story through poetry, journals, letters, music, videography and
other creative approaches.
When the
program began two years ago, many fathers did not see the connection. It took staff
members to create the bridge. Anthony Patterson, a program coordinator, had his
own story. By telling his, he shared the power and helped dads make a connection.
According to
grants manager Anna Melodia, his efforts springboarded the program. Many
decided to open up and tell their stories. Facing their trauma, they discovered
more options in life, and inspired others through their art.
Since early
2018, these creative workshop sessions have been taught by Stephinie Johnson, a poet and
counselor who is a contract consultant. Later, she wrangled her husband, Milton
Johnson, a music composer and producer, to join the effort.
Participants
start with Terrence Harper, the center’s health and
wellness manager.
Before the Robert Wood Johnson grant, Harper was practicing cognitive behavioral therapy or
psychotherapy, but through this initiative has developed a hybrid of narrative and narrative exposure therapy.
With a focus on historic and systemic trauma on boys and
young men of color, ages 16 to 24, the center’s program was designed to buffer
the effects.
“What we found is these men weren’t necessarily in the
heat of that trauma, so I had to do some adjustments where I did a hybrid
between narrative therapy and narrative exposure therapy.”
Harper uses several survey instruments, like Life Events
Checklist, to identify and hone in on specific trauma. Through the survey, he’s
found that the majority have experienced things like family dysfunction,
abandonment of fathers, lack of education and judicial trauma.
“I do a lot of person-centered therapy with them and
individual therapy by way of the arts to further express that narrative in art
form — painting, the music studio or poetry. What’s interesting is a common
theme that continues to emerge is resiliency and perseverance,” said Harper.
“Some of them have actually disconnected from it. It was
traumatic at the time, but as far as the ongoing and lingering effects, I think
that a lot of time they don’t realize how it is still hindering them and
holding them back because they’ve moved on. But they’ve moved on in a mode of
survival. ‘Yeah, it happened but I just need to keep it moving.’”
Initially the men and boys talk about their childhood to
illustrate some of the challenges they have faced, and Harper tapes the
sessions to pinpoint specific traumas that are still barriers. By the time they
return for the second session, he reviews the stories with the individuals.
“And so by telling their story and helping them to slow
down, there is a form of healing
that begins to take place. Unfortunately, though, because of the transient nature
of our population, generally I’ll keep them about three to four sessions. We’re
just hitting the tip of the iceberg. But hopefully as a result of that, they’ll
want to continue on even after their narrative is completed,” said Harper.
“They may list
that they witnessed a violent event. What I want to do is make sure within the
context of their story that I address it on some level. ‘Hey, you said on that
checklist that you had witnessed a violent event, can you share a little bit
more with me about that?’” said Harper, who has worked at the center for 12
years.
“This is not necessarily about adverse childhood
experiences, this is about adverse experiences that have historically
manifested as trauma. Everyone who comes in doesn’t necessarily tell a story
because they may not be ready. So, I have to use discretion on whether or not
they’re ready versus moving them on. Maybe they don’t tell their story in this
way, but maybe they are ready to share and express it through art or through
music.”
Along with
counseling work, the creative sessions with the Johnsons help put experiences
in context and into words. The fathers acquire new skills and develop confidence
to craft and share their stories.
“I think that it works very well because a
lot of the youth when they work with me, they’re able to break down barriers
that they didn’t even realize they had. They’re able to open up, they’re able
to express themselves and have something tangible. I think it has a tremendous
effect on the youth that we work with,” said Stephinie Johnson who has a
counseling background.
Milton Johnson grew up in Virginia and
understands these young fathers. He
and Stephinie were in the Army stationed at Camp Atterbury, and after leaving
the service, decided to put down roots in Indiana.
“I
grew up kind of how they grew up. My goal has always been to go back to the
same type of neighborhoods and communities that I grew up in and show that you
don’t have to be a product of the environment, you can be different,” said the
music composer and producer.
Music, he believes, is therapeutic.
“What happens with a musical connection is
that we build a relationship that allows them to build trust and they share
things that they wouldn’t normally share with an instructor. We’re able to dig
deep, and as they talk and relive some of the things they’ve gone through, they
kind of see where they might have messed up and it gives them more of a
motivation to fix the things that were broken in the past,” he said.
Harper believes that once fathers come into the program,
and see the authenticity of the staff, it helps them lower their inhibitions
and guard.
As they relate the things they’ve done and what’s
happened to them, they begin to see what they’ve survived. Then they go from
being a victim to a hero of their story. It’s not “here’s what’s happened to
me, poor me, but here’s what I’ve overcome. Strong me.”
In the end, it is the hope that each client produces a
retelling of his story.
“And the hope is at some point, they’ll be able to pass it on to their children and let their children know, here’s where dad started, he’s what he went through and the challenges, and this is him as he’s emerging and received his own healing.”
For Anna Melodia, the process began in 2017 with
a chance phone call from a friend in the nonprofit world. The alert colleague
happened upon a grant request by Forward Promise, an initiative of the
nationally respected Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The foundation, the nation’s largest
philanthropy dedicated solely to health, was seeking organizations to develop
culturally responsive programs to buffer the effects of historic and systemic
trauma on boys and young men of color. Its plan was to have nonprofits test
innovative approaches to treating trauma.
As the grants manager for Indianapolis-based
Father and Families Center, Melodia reviewed the request and was intrigued. So
was Terrence Harper, the center’s health and wellness manager. Father and
Families had an innovative idea to treat the problem of trauma. Perhaps, just
perhaps, Forward Promise would be willing to give the local nonprofit the funds
to implement it.
According to the American Academy of
Pediatrics,
historical and contemporary oppression, discrimination, and poverty have led to
negative physical, mental and emotional health outcomes across life spans and
generations. The Forward Promise initiative was designed to find culturally responsive
healing solutions.
At the time, the center, under Harper’s management,
was primarily using cognitive behavioral therapy with clients. Staff members,
however, wanted to test a new method. Harkening back to the African tradition
of storytelling, their idea was simple – design a program to help young fathers
of color find their voices through written, spoken or visual arts as an
alternative to counseling.
Melodia said Forward Promise was not
prescriptive in the application process.
“I think that freedom allowed us to be really
creative in our approach and talk particularly about some of the strong African
traditions that we continue to invest in,” said Melodia.
Even though Melodia and her staff believed
they had a solid idea, they knew that securing a grant from the national
foundation was a long shot. The process was competitive, and
Forward Promise received over a thousand applications. After Forward Promise whittled the pool to 50,
Fathers and Families was still in the running. After each program was paid a visit
by national staff, Fathers and Families was among the organizations asked to
submit a full application.
“I was happy to be in the club,” Melodia said.
Ultimately, nine organizations received grants,
and Fathers and Families Center was awarded $450,000 over
two years.
The long shot made it to the finish line.
“The whole process was just amazing,” said
Harper.
Grounded in
oral traditions of storytelling, the project guides fathers or expectant
fathers ages 16 to 24 through a process of self-discovery and reflection that
can help them address trauma. These fathers have choices, and can tell their
story through poetry, journals, letters, music, videography and other creative
approaches.
The resource program for fathers originated at Wishard Hospital in the
early 1990s, and moved to its current location on North Illinois Street in
2003. Its signature three-week Strong Fathers program helps fathers or
expectant fathers prepare for their responsibilities. After three weeks and course completion,
fathers may move to job search activities or participate in continued education
and training programs.
According to Joseph Palus, the center’s
director of programs and evaluation, the national grant complemented the center’s
existing work. With a background of supporting nonprofits in program evaluation
and research, Palus came on board shortly after the grant was awarded and is
responsible for ensuring that the center hits its program targets.
According to Melodia, it took time to get the right
people around the table to launch it properly. While the center isn’t a
stranger to working with outside support, this opportunity allowed the center
to create deeper connections with participants and develop some new relationships.
“The biggest
thing is we don’t do this work alone,” said Palus. “We work with a range of
partners. Those partnerships
developed both organically and intentionally. Organically meaning we saw a need
and found an organization to fill it, and intentionally meaning this is
something we felt we should do based on best practice and evidence, and so
we’re going to reach out and find somebody who will help us do it.”
The other eight
awardees provide support, too. One organization, Drexel University’s Center for Nonviolence and Social
Justice, is most similar to the Indianapolis-based nonprofit. Many had existing
programs designed to heal from trauma, and used the grant to tweak their models.
Unique to Fathers and Families is its narrow participant pool – it must be male
and fathers or expectant fathers.
Among the other
differences between programs, according to Melodia, is its length of
intervention.
“Ours is more
short term. It’s a transient population, they’re dads and their lives are
complicated. So, we have to get them where we can, when we can, versus some of
the other programs that had a nearly yearlong intervention and in some cases a
captive audience,” Melodia said.
With the grant’s cycle ending in October, the center has
applied for continued funding from Forward Promise, and will receive
notification in November.
The center’s second proposal focuses on determining
effective quantitative and qualitative measurements to compare those who
receive cognitive behavioral therapy versus men who go through the narrative
process and to learn how the outcomes differ. The center will investigate
whether fathers are able to keep a job longer and earn higher wages than peers who
have been traumatized but not gone through treatment. The center will also look
at participant’s self-importance and possible increase in parenting time and
quality.
“I actually identified a measurement instrument, but it
was so painful, it was almost re-traumatizing. It would start with, ‘Here are
the things I came here to address, here’s how I did it.’ When you look at it on
a week-by-week basis, it can be very traumatizing, and so we dispensed with
that and stuck with the model and our own observations just to how guys have
been doing,” said Palus.
Melodia said
Forward Promise is poised to learn how systems, like education, criminal
justice or health care, can be affected by acknowledging trauma. Many of the dads have trauma that was
inflicted by these systems. One goal is to help participants interact with
those systems and not be a victim to them.
“I think we’ve
done a really good job doing that, and I think one of the other important
measures is recidivism and criminal justice engagement. We actually have a very
low recidivism rate, we’re very proud of that. Right now, it’s less than 7
percent,” she said.
The funding has
also helped the center figure out ways to identify trauma, and to some extent,
quantify.
“We never looked at trauma systematically before. This
gave us a chance to look at that more closely and figure out what is actually
going on,” said Palus. What they’ve learned over two years is that 50 percent
had been physically assaulted and assaulted with a weapon, and 22 percent had
experienced sudden accidental death, sudden violent death or death of someone
close to them.
With the support of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,
the center learned other things, including how to continue engagement with
certain participants beyond the three-week program.
“It’s strengthened our systems for making sure that kind
of relationship lasts longer, so we can continue to work with guys to continue
to address issues that may be more long term,” said Palus.
“The second thing is that we’ve incorporated the
storytelling aspects into the class. It is my hope is that we will continue
that so that those stories get told, because you’ll see some of the things that
guys have experienced, and some of the things that they’ve done themselves,
that have affected them. Having that information helps us to tell the story,
but it also helps the guys, at least in some way to process what happened to
them.”
Through connections to other organizations and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, it helped the center realize it didn’t do advocacy well.
“One of the things that we have started to do is to take
the men down to the Statehouse and have them understand that they have a vote
and a voice, and they also have a responsibility to their community,” Melodia
said. “And even to the point when we do a voter forum, we get the men
registered to vote as well as prep them to meet the candidates.”
“Again, I think it’s really shifting their sense of worth
and confidence and realizing that they are just passive participants in this
process and walk. And I think that’s made a big difference as well.”
We’ve all experienced it,
and we know exactly what it feels like. Having a disengaged board is
disheartening and can be a strain on already limited resources. It takes
precious time away from the reason why the organization exists.
Disengagement is hard to
define, and it’s even harder to fix. It takes time and intentionality. Before
we dig in to why your board may not be
engaged, let’s first paint a picture of what a disengaged board might look
like:
Board meetings
are an update session where the board is being talked at and passively listening
to reports.
Executive directors
feel like they are managing up to the board.
Board meetings
feel like a scene out of “Groundhog Day”,
the same challenges being shared by staff and the same questions being asked by
the board.
The same two or three
board members are doing everything, and they are exhausted. It’s likely you are
ignoring term limits just to keep these board members, because you can’t
imagine what would happen without them.
Board members
only see each other in the board room. There are no social events for board and
staff to get to know each other personally and build respect and connection.
Ignite your board
At Hedges, we hear about
these and other challenging board scenarios from board and staff leadership on
a weekly basis. Through our experience working with nonprofit boards, we have
identified four specific reasons board members may not be engaged and clear
actions you can take to ignite your board to provide what your organization
needs.
Your board does not know what they should be doing. They don’t understand their roles and responsibilities as either a board of directors or as independent board members. BoardSource (Ingram, 2015) published a comprehensive list of 10 basic responsibilities nonprofit boards should follow:
Determine the mission and purposes, and advocate for them.
Select the chief executive.
Support and evaluate the chief executive.
Ensure effective planning.
Monitor and strengthen programs and services.
Ensure adequate financial resources.
Protect assets and provide financial oversight.
Build and sustain a competent board.
Ensure legal and ethical integrity.
Enhance the organization’s public standing.
Additionally,
board members are required to follow three legal duties also described by BoardSource;
duty of care, duty of loyalty, and duty of obedience. Lastly, there should be several
set expectations that are determined by the needs of the organization, such as:
Actively
participating in board meetings and on committees, according to participation
and attendance policies;
Understanding
the organization’s mission and programming through program immersion opportunities
like volunteering or shadowing;
Attending and actively
promoting all organizational events; and
Contributing to
the organization’s fund-development efforts through personal giving and
fundraising.
While
staff leadership might have a clear understanding of these roles, board members
don’t automatically come to the board room knowing these things – roles need to
be taught early and reiterated often. Board roles, responsibilities and
expectations should be shared and echoed in the following ways, much like when an
employee starts a new job:
In the board member application: Ensure potential board members know the full expectations and requirements, before joining the board.
In the board member job description: This tool not only sets expectations, but it can also be used as an accountability tool for board members
At board orientation: Just like an orientation for a new job, board orientation should include discussion about roles and responsibilities and include comprehensive training about the organization.
Through occasional board assessments: Organizations should consider conducting a board assessment every 2 to 3 years to measure current understandings and practices against set goals and best practices. Assessing the board can occur through electronic surveys or one-on-one interviews and may be conducted by a third party.
2. Board members don’t know why they are on the board.
We’re
talking about two different whys here:
The why that fuels passion: This refers to the reason why each board member chooses your organization to invest his
or her time. What is it about your organization’s mission, programs, and impact
that inspires him or her to volunteer time and talents?
The why that fuels productivity: This refers to why the organization wants a specific
individual to join the board. What specific skills or experiences of the
individual will the organization be hoping to tap into that will best support
and enhance the organization?
Determining
these whys will help ensure your board is made up of the right people who are
willing and excited to commit to your organization. Understanding why 1)
someone wants to join the board and 2) why you want that person on the board
requires intentionality and can be identified in different ways:
Utilize a board matrix: Use this tool to capture a snapshot of current board skills, demographics, experiences, etc. that are determined as a priority for the organization. Doing this will allow you to determine what gaps exist on the board and should inform how you are recruiting board members.
Interview potential board members: Spend time getting to know potential board members by conducting a meet-and-greet with the executive director and board chair. Ask the potential board member why he or she is interested in joining the board and share exactly why the organization needs him or her.
Ask intentional questions in the board application: Asking questions like: “Why do you want to serve on this board?” and “What interests you most about our mission?” is an important step to determine if the relationship will be best for the organization.
Schedule check-ins with each board member: Have one-on-one meetings with board members annually to ensure all board members have a positive experience and feel utilized and valued. This conversation can be led by the executive director, a board member or a third party.
Keep board members connected to the mission: Every single board meeting should include a mission moment that reminds board members why they are investing in the organization. At a minimum, mission moments should include sharing program impact data or stories, hearing from program staff, or even better, hearing from someone immediately affected by the organization’s work.
3. Your board members don’t feel like they have what they need to be a successful board member. We often assume that because board members are successful professionals, they will automatically be successful board members. What we need to remember is that board members need to be taught how to be good board members by explaining the roles and responsibilities and giving them the resources they need to be successful. The resources board members need parallel the types of resources employees need to do their jobs:
Education: Board members can benefit from being educated on specific topics that would support their role as a board member. As an example, every board member should fundraise for the organization, but not every board member knows how to fundraise. For fundraising education, take the time to teach board members how to talk about the organization within their network, identify potential donors and steward current donors.
Tools: Do members of the board have what they need to get their jobs done? Do they have talking points, like impact data and stories? Do they have brochures, hand-outs, or the executive director’s business card? Do they have easy access to policies and procedures that they are required to follow? Ask your board what resources they need during the annual check-ins or board assessments.
Support: It’s important to set-up a strong support network for board members that will foster strong inter-connection and accountability. Some organizations have implemented a “board-buddy” system, pairing up new board members with seasoned members for information sharing and connection.
4. Your board is bored. Board membership is a serious responsibility, but it should be a fun experience. If board members are not having fun in their volunteer position, why should they continue to enthusiastically invest? If your board seems a little down, consider these three strategies to boost the board.
Encourage socializing: Board members should get together outside of the boardroom at least once a year. We’re talking about a strict “no business” policy at these gatherings. Board members need opportunities to get to know each other on a personal level to build respect and comradery that will hopefully result in robust discussions in the boardroom. Don’t assume relationships will automatically build at the organization’s annual fundraising event. Be intentional in planning social gatherings and consider opportunities that will also include your board’s family members.
Shower them with gratitude: We get so caught up in the roles and responsibilities of board membership, we can forget to take a step back and remember board membership is a volunteer position, and might be one of the biggest investments anyone is making to your organization. Those volunteer hours are critical and should be appreciated like any donor. Treat your board members like major donors and show them they are appreciated by sending handwritten thank you notes, celebrating their successes and publicly praising their hard work.
Experience the impact: Keep the board motivated by giving them plenty of opportunities to see the impact of their work directly. Opportunities look different for each organization, but could include; having special volunteer times for board members, shadowing program staff and connecting with clients. Build as many personal connections between the organization’s impact and the board as possible to boost the board’s motivation and inspiration.
An engaged board is the
foundation of the organization, giving strength and supporting the overall
health of the organization. When the board is effective, the programs can
efficiently change the lives of those they serve. When the board is supportive,
the organization has a better chance of being financially healthy. When the
board partners with the executive director, the organization’s staff and
volunteers feel valued and fully supported. When the board is active, more
people know about the organization’s impact. Every nonprofit deserves an
engaged board that will propel the organization’s mission forward.
Kara Harrison has a passion for activating conversations,
decisions, and actions that result in great governance. She believes that having
an engaged board can be the most important strategy to an organization’s
success. Harrison has been a consultant with Hedges since 2017. As a former executive
director, she approaches board services and strategic planning with both real
experience and best practices.
When it comes to fighting homelessness in
Indianapolis, there’s a new mindset in town. And since early 2018, Lillian
Herbers-Kelly and Horizon House have been on the front lines.
This intensive approach at Horizon House, for
which there was no blueprint, involves a team assembled by Herbers-Kelly from
the ground up.
“With Housing Trust Fund money, we have literally built
it from scratch, which was kind of amazing to do,” said Herbers-Kelly, a
trained social worker.
As supervisor, she leads a team of two
housing navigators and six caseworkers. Each day, she and her team support
chronically homeless individuals and families as they navigate the various
issues that may seem trivial to the general public, but can be potential
minefields for those more used to living in shelters or on the streets. It’s an
example of the city’s housing-first strategy, and is one of three such programs
in Indianapolis designed not only to find housing for people but to ensure that
they are able to keep the roof over their heads.
The approach actually begins when potential
candidates for permanent housing complete a coordinated entry application. Before
this coordinated system, there was a housing application, but each provider
kept its own waiting list. Herbers-Kelly said it wasn’t efficient or fair and
certainly not effective.
Candidates are helped with their applications
by one of over 100 housing navigators at multiple agencies trained by the
Coalition for Homelessness Intervention & Prevention (CHIP). These
navigators’ work is different from those at Horizon House. Completing the
application is complicated, so CHIP regularly trains and meets with these
agency workers.
“If you’re doing those things in a system
where you’re requiring a vulnerable resident to go find their own housing, fill
out the application on their own and come back to you, that is not something
that we can require our most vulnerable residents to do,” said Indianapolis
Deputy Mayor Jeff Bennett.
After someone
completes the application process and is deemed eligible for a rental
assistance voucher, that’s when Horizon House gets involved.
Today, Horizon
House works with 108 households, which include 155 people of which 20 percent are
families. In the first year, the program worked with 60 people. Herbers-Kelly
is proud of the fact that since the beginning, only one person has left the
program.
Rodney
Stockment, the city’s strategy director for the homeless, said it is a phenomenal
success and cites national rates at more like 80 percent. Over time, the
Indiana Housing Authority (IHA) has become more and more flexible, but he said just
providing Housing Choice vouchers alone wouldn’t solve everything, the cultures
had to mesh.
“Previously, IHA was about screening people
out, and we managed to create a culture under Lillian’s leadership where the
two cultures are learning to work together, and that’s why the vouchers have
been so powerful,” he said.
“It’s just incredible to
see that we now have a partnership with dedicated vouchers for people
experiencing homelessness. It’s a beast to learn, and after a year and a half,
we are still learning it,” said Herbers-Kelly.
The housing navigators at Horizon House,
according to Bennett, help cut through the bureaucratic red tape.
Alycia Broda and Danielle Washington serve as intermediaries at
Horizon House for those approved for permanent housing. With the applicant, they
help gather a long list of documents and complete voucher paperwork for an
interview with the IHA. They hang on to the voucher until it is needed for a
landlord.
Broda is Housing Quality Standard certified (HQS) and can
also conduct housing inspections as a third party for IHA, which helps because
the agency is overloaded with inspections.
Together with applicants, Horizon House navigators
conduct placement searches and visit potential rentals. They help sign leases and
do rental checklist walk-throughs and stay in regular communication with the IHA
and landlords. They also spend time educating folks about leases, so they understand
their rights, what they are agreeing to and understand IHA rules. This process
takes anywhere from 30 to 90 days, with the goal of 30 days or less. All data
is tracked on a CHIP dashboard to have ongoing data.
Another thing
that Herbers-Kelly is proud of is that housing navigators do regular landlord
check-ins.
“Landlords and
property managers know we’re here, we’re not waiting for them to reach out to
us if there’s a problem,” she said.
Horizon House communicates routinely with potential
landlords about working in tandem with Horizon House’s services and benefits. In
the past eight months, Horizon House has secured eight new landlords and
property managers, which Herbers-Kelly said given the population’s previous
eviction record is good.
“We try our
best to develop new relationships so that people have more of a pool of options
to choose from,” she said.
Over the two years, one thing that’s been
learned, according to Chelsea Haring-Cozzi, CHIP’s executive director, is there
isn’t a prescriptive model. When you are focused on the most vulnerable and
chronic population, there has to be flexibility.
To that end, Horizon
House doesn’t leave its clients. Along with permanent housing comes one of six case
managers who ensure applicants are connected to service providers as needed.
It’s hard work and success is incremental. Herbers-Kelly
shared an example of one client, a gentleman who has struggled with addiction.
He is well-known in homeless circles and has worked with five or six agencies. His
Horizon House team found him housing in a 55-and-up apartment complex.
Initially, they struggled a bit with his placement because it removed him from
the center of the city, but agreed that eliminating his external influences was
a positive. Recently, he relapsed. But his case manager who was in touch regularly
got him help and worked with the landlord to keep him housed.
After
treatment, he returned to his apartment. “I know some people might not see that
as a positive because he relapsed, but he has struggled with alcoholism so long.
The fact that he didn’t lose his housing over the relapse is just a beautiful
example of housing-first,” said Herbers-Kelly.
Another
example was a female client who struggles with mental health issues and also lives
with a special needs child. The family was staying with Family Promise, but
couldn’t remain in the shelter because the child’s behaviors would put others
at risk. Family Promise worked to temporarily house the family outside of the
shelter. At her previous agency, this was one of Herbers-Kelly’s clients.
“It took a
while to get her housed because she has several evictions, but I was in
constant communication with Family Promise’s executive director explaining that
we were close. She got housed, she’s done exceptionally well, and her child is
engaged in services. We’ve had no complaints from the landlord.”
Horizon House
has had the benefit of ongoing technical assistance from Corporation for
Supportive Housing (CSH), a national organization that provides housing-first
training. Locally, the agency has access to an online training center, attended
a summit and conference and received assistance to develop additional documents
needed for the program. CSH also conducted an assessment to determine caseload
maximums.
Herbers-Kelly
said because of varying levels of need, intense criminal histories and
landlords with strict rules, caseloads are capped at 20 in order to provide
quality case management and ensure that people are kept housed.
“That’s the ratio
we need. I think we’ve shown over the year and a half that that’s working, so I
feel strongly to not budge on that. You have to have to have the combination of
housing with supports, and I don’t mean required services, I mean like someone
that’s going to just walk alongside you and offer support, however that looks. It
really matters to have someone in your corner.”
Around the country, homelessness continues to
be a chronic, complicated problem. Despite their best intentions, cities and
agencies have struggled to find solutions to an issue for which there are no
easy answers.
Rodney Stockment is well aware of the difficulty.
Since
1981, Stockment has immersed himself in federal housing rules and regulations.
He has worked for nonprofits and government agencies at both the city and
state levels. In Indiana,he’s helped craft five plans to reduce
homelessness, all with varying
degrees of success. Nationally, he has seen the community mental health system
promised by the Kennedy administration never be adequately funded. He’s seen a
sharp slowdown in the building of public housing.
So why
now is Stockment excited?
For the past two years, he’s been the
senior strategy director for homelessness for the city of Indianapolis. And despite
a few starts and stops, he believes Indianapolis has a five-year plan that just
might work.
Indianapolis’ Community Plan to End
Homelessness, which was announced in 2017 and covers the period from 2018 to
2023, provides a checklist and demands action, Stockment said. If he has one frustration,
it’s that it is a slow-moving process.
The
plan evolved as the result of a local funding crisis in 2016 that served as a
wakeup call.
Since 1995, communities seeking homeless
assistance grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) do so through a single application. In Indianapolis, the application is
submitted by Continuum of Care (CoC), a regional
or local planning body that coordinates housing and services funding for
homeless families and individuals.
It was CoC’s 2015 submission that caused
Indianapolis problems. In recent years, HUD has altered its priorities and
requirements for how its grant money should be used. HUD’s priorities and
requirements have evolved, but Indianapolis’ had not. As a result, the city’s
homeless funding was cut by approximately 15 percent.
“It
seems like that was probably due to the application just not measuring up to standards
that the federal government had set. So the federal government (HUD) had been
evolving in its funding priorities for years, and it seems like maybe our
community was not responding to that evolution fast enough,” said Indianapolis
Deputy Mayor Jeff Bennett.
Job number
one that year was to work to get that funding back, said Bennett. First tasks were
to dig into the application, the scoring criteria and the metrics that HUD uses.
Then with support and funds from the Coalition of Homelessness Intervention and Prevention (CHIP), the city
hired a grant writer with federal expertise who understood HUD’s requirements.
“We just tried to put all the right people
around the table over a period of months to turn in the best application we
possibly could in that funding cycle. And that succeeded. We got a little bump,
and the money back that we lost. And funding has increased steadily in each
round since. It’s up 27 percent now over the last three years,” said Bennett,
the deputy mayor of community development under Mayor Joe Hogsett. It also
helped the CoC realize it had to diversify funding.
Chelsea Haring-Cozzi, who was named CHIP’s executive
director last November, agreed.
“I think the reduction of funds did a lot of
things, but one of the things is it helped us realize we cannot put all of our
eggs in one basket. We cannot look to the federal government and HUD to be our
sole funding source. We really have to build on our own local capacity and
start to leverage local funding. I think that has helped kind of push
collaboration and partnerships in new directions,” said Haring-Cozzi.
The bottom line, said Haring-Cozzi, is not
just increasing the funding, but decreasing homelessness. One of HUD’s measurements
is whether you are serving and housing more people.
Strategic shift
Armed with a restoration of funding, the city
has also made a strategic shift, said Bennett. By shifting to a housing-first
strategy, and introducing technology to support data-informed
decision-making and establishing a coordinated entry system, pieces are falling
in place to get as many people housed permanently as quickly as possible. The
goal is to get people off the streets and out of shelters. Housing-first is a
coordinated-care approach that works to address the root causes of homelessness.
“We have never fully embraced housing-first as
a community. But if you think about homelessness as a housing issue, then you
can solve it with three pieces – housing, rental assistance and supportive
services,” Bennett said.
Early in 2017, the mayor challenged the city
to locate 400 additional housing units. Stockment, who was hired in June of
that year, was assigned to help identify them.
What this did was to create a housing pipeline,
and now the city requires developers who want the city’s support on applications
for housing tax credits from the state or to use vouchers in affordable-housing
developments to have a permanent supportive component.
“Not 100 percent of the units, but if you’re
developing 100 units, can we get 10, 15, 20 of the 100? When we do that we can
fulfill the pipeline and the commitments that we need for the five-year community
plan. It’s roughly 200 units a year that we need to either continue to identify
or to develop through new construction,” said Bennett.
In addition, there was a need to identify
sources of long-term sustainable sources of rental assistance. In 2017, Alan
Witchey, CHIP’s then executive director, worked with the Indianapolis Housing
Agency (IHA) to identify ways to provide rental assistance not from HUD’s CoC
grants, but mainly through housing vouchers that IHA oversees and deploys,
Bennett said.
That led to the third part of the
housing-first equation – with added housing, there was a significant lack of
service-provider capacity. It was imperative to provide services for the hundreds
more residents who had acute needs in order to stay housed.
Earlier this year, the Central Indiana
Community Foundation (CICF) announced that it would raise funds to provide
supportive services for former homeless residents. Called the Housing to
Recovery Fund, local service providers will receive funds in 2020 for outreach,
housing navigation, help in getting benefits, negotiating with landlords and
learning daily living skills.
“It’s $5.5 million over four
years, and that’s going to enable us to create a flexible pool of service money
where we’re doing a pay for success model where you don’t grant for activities,
you pay for outcomes. And I think this money is going to allow service
providers to have flexible money to do whatever it takes to keep people housed.
It’s the most exciting thing that has happened to me in my career,” said
Stockment. “We’ve got the bricks and sticks, the operating money from IHA for
the first time in history, and now we’re getting the services lined up.”
Stockment
said an RFP was issued for this pool in mid-July, with service provider responses
due by the end of July. Right now these responses are being reviewed, and then service
providers will be brought together to create a network.
“We
will ask them, ‘Are you OK with us funding this network as opposed to you as
individual agency?’ We will have this network of service providers that we can
invest in. I’m really excited about this, it’s going to radically change the
way we do work here. It’s going to really mix it up,” said Stockment.
“We’ve
gotten largely out of the mindset of ‘This is my space, you cannot come into my
space because this is what I do,’” said Bennett. “I think we have service
providers who are now thinking differently about how they might partner with
the housing provider or how the housing provider might now be willing to accept
vouchers because there is a service provider attached to that residents. We
were not as a community, forcing those connections,” said Bennett.
In February, the Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Foundation announced
a $74,900 grant to CHIP to fund the Street Reach Indy program. The grant will
help nearly 150 people overcome the financial and health care barriers that
often prevent them from finding permanent housing and provide financial
assistance for security deposits, mental health or substance abuse treatment
and other costs that are barriers that prevent individuals from obtaining
permanent housing.
The
Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department has also played a role with its homeless unit, sometimes called
FLEX. Four officers are based out of the downtown district.
“They’ve been huge in particularly in terms
of street outreach. They meet people where they are and really try to
understand the complexities of the issues people are dealing with and work in
true partnership with our homeless service provider community,” said Haring-Cozzi.
When there have been problems with panhandling or increased homelessness
downtown, they’ve been a pretty great resource.”
Embracing
housing-first also meant that in 2017, the city launched a coordinated entry system with the goal to quickly move people from
emergency shelters and match them with permanent housing. Two years in, CHIP is
working to evaluate and then refine the process to shorten the time from when people
first come into the system to get them connected with appropriate housing
interventions.
In the last two years, there has been a reduction
in the Point in Time (PIT) count number, which Haring-Cozzi said is the first
barometer of success. Before
the last count in January, based on what other cities were reporting, the city fully
expected an increase. It’s actually has reached a five-year low, dipping below
1,600 with a 7 percent decrease from the previous year.
“It was really eye-opening for us to see that
what we’re doing is working. It’s been really encouraging because we can point
to some real systemic changes in the last 18 months that we can attribute this
to,” she said.
Bennett said the city is at a unique moment.
The conversation has moved beyond scarcity of resources, and he believes it’s building
trust with its follow-through and willingness to pivot when something hasn’t
worked as planned.
“We
have resources now. Now, it’s a challenge to deploy resources in as fast a time
as we can. Let’s use everything that we’ve put on the menu over the last 30
years, and get more people housed permanently, as quickly as possible with
high-quality services attached. Let’s just get better at the stuff that we’ve
worked on in earnest over the last two to three years,” he said.
