Skip to main content
Category

Feature

In giving, who asks makes a difference

By Feature, Fundraising

By Carl Sygiel, special to Charitable Advisors |

Bob Karnak isn’t the type to back down from a challenge or a chance to get in a little exercise. The retired quality assurance consultant at Elanco recently made a trip from Indianapolis to Cleveland to visit family. For some, that would mean flying; for most, it would be a five-hour car trip. For Karnak, it was just an extra-long bicycle ride.

Dr. Robert Pascuzzi, a physician in the department of Neurology, kicks off the Ice Bucket Challenge at the I.U. Neuro Science Center in August. The ALS Certified Center is at the I.U. Neuro Science Center and where patients go to be diagnosed and evaluated using a multi-disciplinary approach for their ALS journey.

Dr. Robert Pascuzzi, a physician in the department of Neurology, kicks off the Ice Bucket Challenge at the I.U. Neuro Science Center in August. The ALS Certified Center is at the I.U. Neuro Science Center and where patients go to be diagnosed and evaluated using a multi-disciplinary approach for their ALS journey.

The 68-year-old Indianapolis man doesn’t make a habit out of going out for 300-mile spins, but it is in his fabric to stay active. Karnak averages about 3,000 miles a year on his bike, mostly for pleasure, but there’s often a deeper, more important goal.

Karnak’s two-wheeler isn’t just a vehicle to get from Point A to Point B. It’s a vehicle to raise money for charity – for causes that are important to him. Causes that can make the world a better place.

“Is altruism the right word?” Karnak asked. “It’s really doing something for somebody else. I’m healthy, my kids are healthy, my wife for the most part is healthy. I don’t have any life threatening diseases. I think it’s incumbent upon those who are healthy to help others.”

In many respects, Karnak, and others like him, are a charities’ best friends. They do the heavy lifting. They ask and the charity receives. In the nonprofit world, it’s called peer-to-peer fundraising, and while the concept has always been around in one form or another, it has grown to new heights over the past decade.

Over the years, Karnak has raised money locally through various biking events for charities such as Habitat for Humanity, the Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) and most recently, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. The total is north of $160,000 and still rising.

Ways to get up, get involved

Looking for an event to participate in to raise money for a charity dear to you? There are many opportunities in Indiana, in the Midwest and nationally.

Most organizations have already held their 2015 events, but will be setting dates soon for 2016.

Here is a partial list:

AIDS
Indiana Aids Walk
www.indianaaidswalk.org

ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease)
Walk to Defeat ALS
Ice Bucket Challenge
webin.alsa.org

ALZHEIMER’S
Walk to End Alzheimer’s
www.alz.org/indiana
Longest Day
www.longest.day

BLOOD CANCER
Man/Woman of the Year
Light the Night Walk
Pennies for Patients
Team in Training
www.lls.org/indiana

BRAIN TUMOR
Head for the Cure 5K
www.braincure.org

BREAST CANCER
Komen Race for the Cure, April 16, 2016
www.komenindy.org

CHILDHOOD CANCER
Trek 100
www.trek100.org

COLON CANCER
Get Your Rear in Gear 5K
www.coloncancercoalition.org

CROHN’S AND COLITIS
Take Steps for Crohn’s and Colitis
www.ccfa.org
Spin 4 Crohn’s and Colitis Cures
www.spin4.org

CYSTIC FIBROSIS
Great Strides
www.fightcf.cff.org

DIABETES
Tour de Cure, June 4, 2016
http://main.diabetes.org/site/TR/TourdeCure/TourAdmin?fr_id=11068&pg=entry

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
Cover Indiana Bike Tour
www.indyhabitat.org/cover-indiana

HEART DISEASE
Heart Walk
www.heartwalk.org

JUVENILE DIABETES
JDRF One Walk
JDRF Ride to Cure Diabetes
www.jdrf.org

LUNG CANCER
Beards for Hope (begins Nov. 1)
Free to Breathe run/walk
Walk your Socks Off
www.freetobreathe.org

LUPUS
Walk to End Lupus Now
www.lupus.org/indiana

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
Bike MS
www.nationalmssociety.org

PROSTATE CANCER
Movember Foundation
https://us.movember.com
www.1400miles.com

Karnak is persistent.

“If I’m out on a training ride, and somebody says, ‘Hey, what are you doing?’ and I get a chance to talk to them for more than five minutes, they are probably gonna get a letter from me asking for a donation,” Karnak said. “If you can bend someone’s ear, you’ll find everybody has a connection. Everybody. There’s not one person on this green earth anymore that doesn’t know someone who’s afflicted with something.”

Nonprofits rely on contributions to stay afloat, and under the peer-to-peer philosophy, rely on their supporters to play major roles. Who hasn’t been asked by your neighborhood Girl Scout or their parent to buy cookies? Or candy bars, wrapping paper, or poinsettias? We buy these things because someone we know asked us.

In today’s world, nonprofits that ignore the power of peer-to-peer fundraising do so at their own risk.

“It’s actually very simple in its core,” said Taylor Shanklin, the director of marketing and “peer-to-peer boss lady” at raisemore.com, a fundraising consulting firm in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. “It’s just people asking people to support them in what they are doing and support a cause they care about.”

In most cases, peer-to-peer fundraising revolves around an event: a run, a walk, a bike ride, a triathlon, a swim-a-thon. Participants sign up, agree to raise money and ask their friends and family to donate.

The Indiana chapter of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society receives 88 percent of its funding through events such as its Man and Woman of the Year programs, its Light the Night walk and Team in Training, said Executive Director Amy Kwas. The challenging TNT program, where participants are trained to run marathons, compete in triathlons or 100-mile bike rides, was among the pioneers in this respect, having started in 1988.

“There’s the old adage – that people give to people, and that’s why it works in our case,” said Kwas. “Most people are affected directly, and it’s a way of showing support, perhaps for someone who’s going through treatment.”

Today, just about every nonprofit has gotten into the act. If you have a favorite charity, chances are there’s a specific event lined up to raise money for it. The figures may vary slightly, but there’s no doubt that the response rate from one donor asking another far exceeds that of traditional email or snail-mail solicitations from the charity itself.

Kimbia, a Texas-based fundraising consulting firm, estimates that 1 in 4 peer-to-peer emails will result in a donation, as compared to 1 in 1,250 appeals directly from a charity.

“In peer-to-peer, it’s a friend asking a friend,” said Shanklin. “I’m more inclined to give to my friend than some random organization. Peer-to-peer is always going to win in terms of (return on investment).”

Despite its effectiveness, not all charities have jumped on the bandwagon with both feet. In Indianapolis, Gleaners, which operates multiple local food banks, sends out solicitations frequently and still gets the majority – as much as 60 percent – of its donations from individuals. The charity has a donor database of more than 60,000, said Debbie Russell, the director of donor engagement.

“We’ve talked about it, but we’re not doing a lot in that regard,” said Russell, of peer-to-peer.

Gleaners did have a recent golf outing, however, that raised $7,500, and is putting in place a Building Hope initiative that is moving in the peer-to-peer direction, Russell said.

Gleaners is looking for key donors to become “ambassadors.” Russell said the ambassadors will spread the Gleaners’ message and bring others into the circle with the hope of creating a steady revenue stream.

For those charities wanting to enter the peer-to-peer world, there are no shortage of advisers. A simple Google search turns up page after page of companies marketing their services. Fundraising professionals can attend national conferences on the subject and there are numerous blogs devoted to the topic, mostly focused on the power of social media.

There are some red flags, however. According to the Peer-to-Peer Professional Forum, the top 30 peer-to-peer fundraising events in the country raised more than $1.6 billion in 2014, but that is a 2.47 percent decline from the previous year. The biggest player, the American Cancer Society’s ubiquitous Relay for Life program, brought in $335 million, but was down nearly 12 percent, or $45 million from 2013. The traditional Susan B. Komen Race for the Cure was down 10.78 percent, and its sister event, the Komen 3-Day walk, was down 38 percent or about $16 million.

Other events, such as LLS’ Team in Training program and the JDRF One Walk also took major hits.

Shanklin, of raisemore.com, thinks part of the decline is because the market is simply overcrowded.

“There are so many events now. Sometimes I feel that everybody is doing a walk,” Shanklin said. “I think that donors and participants are looking for something more interesting. Quite frankly, walks don’t bring in a lot of money, and they can be kind of boring. Although the walk thing is something everybody can do.”

Shanklin says charities must be more innovative, and many are, she said.

“Some organizations are trying different things, like animal shelters doing a dog walk,” she said.

The Alzheimer’s Association, which has a traditional walk that raised nearly $68 million across the country last year, has branched out with an event called the Longest Day. The initiative is on June 21, the summer solstice. On that day, participants pick an activity to take part in from sunrise to sunset, a reminder of the daily challenge facing those with Alzheimer’s.

“One of my friends had a daylong karaoke party,” Shanklin said. “They are doing a lot of do-it-yourself campaigns.”

Another popular event is the Movember movement where men grow mustaches in November and raise awareness (and money) for prostate cancer research.

“Movember is something that’s new. It’s fun, it’s quirky, it’s interesting. I think people are shifting their giving around because there are so many options out there,” Shanklin said.

The target for most charities is to catch lightning in a bottle similar to the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge that swept the nation a year ago. The ALS Association, which works to fight Lou Gehrig’s Disease, raised $115 million in 2014 after donations of just $23 million in 2013. In contrast, the movement has brought in barely a half million dollars in 2015.

“The Ice Bucket Challenge took off in the peer-to-peer world like nothing else,” Shanklin said. “I don’t know if we’ll ever see something like that again. It wasn’t even a fundraising campaign, just a way to raise awareness, but people got involved and interested, and it became a fun thing.”

“We broke the glass ceiling when it comes to awareness,” said Cindy Wise, executive director of the Indiana chapter of the ALS Associated. “Now if I mention “Ice Bucket Challenge,” everybody knows what I’m talking about.”

Shanklin doesn’t believe traditional fundraising is dead, but charities that continue to send out solicitations must be mindful of their audiences. While older donors may still like letters, younger people may prefer emails or to be contacted strictly through social media.

“Knowing the analytics of your audience is really important, and that’s something charities can really, really mess up,” Shanklin said. “When I feel they aren’t listening, and they bombard me – like if they send something to my 4-year-old son and me – I’m thinking, ‘If you are misusing your resources, I actually don’t want to give you my money. I might want to give it to someone else.’

“I want to see organizations do a better job of tailoring their communications,” Shanklin continued. “Nonprofits must look at generations and generational-giving trends and reports and how they are connecting to those generations.”

Knowing your audience carries over to the peer-to-peer world. Much attention has been focused on the innovative fundraising techniques of Charity: Water, which provides wells and drinking water for Third World countries. The 8-year-old nonprofit has become overwhelmingly popular with millennials and has drawn raves for its videos, vivid graphics, compelling stories, its social media presence and its revenue model in which 100 percent of all donations go to its programming. Charity: Water’s operating costs are paid for privately.

Charity: Water’s September campaign asked that people born in that month forgo any birthday gifts and ask friends to donate to the charity instead.

Even Charity: Water’s approach, however, goes back to the core of peer-to-peer fundraising. Friends asking friends. Neighbors asking neighbors.

Karnak, the bicycle veteran who has been raising funds this way for more than two decades, is a believer.

“I think a lot of people give because I’m coming out with a request and a valid reason,” he said. “And I make a case for it. I’m not doing it for myself. People are willing to give if you ask.”

Three ways to engage millennial donors

By Feature, Fundraising

By Kathleen Kelly Janus for Stanford Social Innovation Review |

For many nonprofit organizations, getting young people to support their work seems an insurmountable challenge. Millennials are a mystery to them. As the stereotype goes, what is the use of involving the lazy, unemployed, social media-addicted generation, anyway? Even so, it’s widely understood that millennial engagement is vital to cultivating a pipeline of support for the years to come.

The good news is that engaging millennials does not have to be such mystery. In fact millennial supporters can become an organization’s most avid champions. At Spark, an organization I co-founded, which is now the largest network of millennial donors in the world, we’ve proven that while they may not have as much to give, collectively their impact can be powerful. In nearly 10 years, we have raised more than $1.5 million to support women’s issues, mostly in contributions of less than $100, and probably even more importantly, we have inspired a large group of young people to support gender equality issues who will likely continue to contribute to women’s organizations for decades.

Button Text

Funding innovative breast cancer treatment

By Feature, Fundraising

By Tom Jackman, reporter, The Washington Post |

The journey started in the gym at West Springfield High School in 2004. The rookie coach of the girls volleyball team wept as he told his players he was struggling not only with teaching the sport but also with his mother’s recent diagnosis of Stage 4 breast cancer, the deadliest stage. The girls were speechless, stunned by Rick Dunetz’s raw display of emotion.

But they rallied around the coach in an electrifying run to the district championship, galvanized by his mother’s first appearance at the title game. Dunetz was struck by how the players and the patient fed off each other: The team’s underdog winning streak, he said, seemingly inspired his mother to keep fighting cancer.

Button Text

Harnessing the power of the crowd

By Feature, Fundraising

By Patricia Campbell, content manager, The Guardian |

In the years since Barack Obama’s crowdfunded presidential campaign put this alternative form of fundraising on the map, crowdfunding has diversified dramatically. In the UK, digital innovation, particularly across social platforms and the financial tech (fintech) industry, has engendered a flourishing sharing economy, disrupting the natural ebb and flow of traditional finance streams. Peer-to-peer models are thriving, with the crowdfunding sector showing substantial growth.

Crowdfunding can neatly be described as the practice of financing a project or venture via small amounts of money from a large number of people. It’s most commonly understood as a means to fund grassroots businesses, with “backers” recouping financial rewards. But, driven by uncertain economic times, a new crop of donation-based crowdfunding sites for personal causes is booming.

Button Text

Local nonprofit “incubators”

By Feature, Trends

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

Business incubators have been around since the late 1950s. Their goal: to lend a helping hand to start-up companies through a variety of services that may include a working space, seed money, management assistance and networking capability. Incubators were especially busy in the past decade due to resurgence in the tech industry in Boston and the Silicon Valley in California.

With the downturn of the tech economy, there has been a rise in non-tech incubators and an adapted model for nonprofits. Unlike most for-profit incubators or accelerators, which exchange space and services for equity share in their clients’ companies, most nonprofits are charged fees.

While there are several business incubators in the Indianapolis area, this year two sites emerged that are primarily focused on nonprofits and social entrepreneurs.

The Hub for Innovation, Vision and Entrepreneurship (HIVE) opened in January at Christian Theological Seminary on the Northwestside. Launch Cause was announced by Bloomerang this year and will occupy 6,800 square feet of the company’s new building near Fort Harrison State Park in early 2016.

Brenda Freije is director of networking and recruitment at Christian Theological Seminary and Steve Shattuck is marketing vice president at Bloomerang and Launch Cause’s executive director.

While both have used the word incubator to describe their spaces, both think it overstates the mission, but simply calling it a co-working space sells it short.

“We don’t want to just call ourselves a co-working space because that is very passive. We don’t want to be a space that is described as ‘Come in, and good luck to you. We’ll keep the lights on.’

“We’re sort of in this in-between, where we want to offer some guidance, coaching and services and things like that, but we don’t want to put someone through some sort of rigid programming. We also don’t see ourselves as an equity stakeholder as an incubator would,” said Shattuck.

Neither site provides grant or seed funding or has a competitive process to become a member.

“From a nonprofit standpoint, we didn’t want to be that rigid but also didn’t necessarily have the resources yet to incubate fully,” said Shattuck.

“We’ve not gone down that path because that will be a big fundraising initiative. We’re not going to close the door to that, but right now we’re not there,” said Freije. “We’re not going to jump in the deep end before we really figure out what we can offer.”

There are, however, some values that a nonprofit has to agree to in order to be housed at CTS. “We are a Christian institution. If that offends you, this is not the place to be. It doesn’t mean that everybody has to be a Christian or the organization has to be, but that can be a deal breaker.”

Both locations offer open working spaces and different levels of service targeted to new nonprofits.

floorplan After outgrowing its current space, and working with the Fort Harrison Reuse Authority, Bloomerang will complete its own building next month, but will not occupy the entire 20,000 square feet. The extra space, Shattuck said, is a way to use a company asset for something “cool.” The space, still a shell, has potential for build-out specifics for nonprofits.

Modeled after the Nonprofit Hub in Lincoln, Neb., the center will have three types of work areas – 30 open spaces, 21 cubicles that are semi-private, 14 offices and two conference rooms. Tenants may pay daily ($10) for short-term use or enter into longer-term agreements with prices ranging from $75 to $650 a month depending on the office services and type of space provided.

In 2007, Freije was pastor at Lockerbie Central United Methodist Church, which started the Earth House Collective for nonprofit ministries. When it closed in 2012, she began a conversation with CTS’s president. The HIVE has made seminary unused space available for external members.

“Basically, we had a boardroom that was not being used. It was a large space that we could be using as a gift or a blessing to others if we just set it up,” she said.

Everything in the space is movable, and fees, listed on the HIVE’s website begin at $75 a month, and include a desk, access to the building, WiFi, a mailbox and other basic services like cleaning. The space, which officially opened in January, has five tenants. A CTS student who has started a nonprofit is the most recent member. This week, when Henry Timms the founder of Giving Tuesday is in Indianapolis for several public events, CTS will host a smaller lunch to which HIVE members are invited.

“The next step is to start helping emerging ministries and nonprofits become better at what they’re doing. Are there things we can do as an educational institution? So slowly, we are adding programming that HIVE members get discounted rates to attend,” said Freije.

CTS students are also working with the center. One student is researching best practices for social entrepreneurship centers around the country. Seminarians can also see nonprofits in action, see alternatives ways of ministering or volunteer with the nonprofits.

When Shattuck and Bloomerang’s co-founder Jay Love started talking about their idea, they met Jacob Schpok, the executive director of Indiana’s Office of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. The state established the office in 2013. Schpok told them that there are 100 co-working spaces in Indiana, but none exclusively for nonprofits.

Launch Cause will have business members who may or may not be tenants. Shattuck said his board of directors will help screen this group and possibly recommend them to the nonprofits as vendors.

Both sites welcome social entrepreneurs. This summer HIVE, together with Butler University’s business school, hosted a community think-tank discussion about social enterprise. In part, they wanted to learn with community partners how to empower those who are taking pretty big risks.

At CTS, Freije said entrepreneurship is now a gateway class for entering students, recognizing that an effective pastor or community leader has to understand entrepreneurship and how to run nonprofit organizations.

‘We’ve just reinvented our master’s of divinity program and one of the five gateway classes that all new students take is entrepreneurship. We’re starting to see that at other seminaries,” she said.

“Our students need to know is there’s no guarantee of a job when they graduate. You can pursue ministry in a lot of different ways and there’s all kinds of opportunities, but it won’t always look like you stepped into a salaried position in a church. If it does, that’s really good.”

Nonprofit incubators: guidance and support

By Feature, Trends

By Tracy Kaufman, engagement specialist, Foundation Center |

If you’re in the early stages of forming a nonprofit and struggling to find your footing, you may be in search of people or organizations to help you along the way. One option that some new nonprofits pursue is the assistance of a nonprofit incubator, which helps to guide you at the time when you need support most.

What is a nonprofit incubator? A nonprofit incubator is an organization that helps to nurture and facilitate the development of a young nonprofit through the provision of resources, services, and seed funding. The use of an incubator improves the chances that a new organization will be able to remain sustainable over time, and also provides strong opportunities to build relationships with other organizations in the sector.

Button Text

An incubator for labor

By Feature, Trends

By Suzie Boss, writer, Edutopia

Could digital gaming be used to retrain fast-food workers for better-paying waiter jobs in fancy restaurants? Could an Uber-like “sharing economy” app help freelance workers boost their income?

Today’s napkin sketches might well become tomorrow’s solutions to the challenges faced by the American working class. That’s the hope behind the Workers Lab, a first-of-its-kind incubator launched this past October with $1 million in start-up funding from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). “We’re looking for audacious ideas about how to rebuild the middle class,” says Carmen Rojas, CEO of the Workers Lab. Winning applicants will receive $150,000 over a nine-month period to develop and pilot their ideas. They’ll also get access to mentors and introductions to investors who might provide next-round financing. The first cohort of winners — to be announced early this year—will include up to five projects.

Button Text

Next Mile Project, an incubator and co-working space for nonprofits

By Feature, Trends

By Nidhi Subbaraman, senior staff writer, BetaBoston |

Boston tech entrepreneurs can choose from a variety of havens in which to grow their young businesses: They could seek admission to Somerville’s green-tech incubator, Greentown Labs, or apply to join the state-sponsored MassChallenge accelerator.

Now a group seeks to bring the incubator concept so common in the tech space to new groups that are launching nonprofit endeavors. The Next Mile Project is a new Boston co-working space for young ventures in the not-for-profit world. Founder Vilas Dhar’s goal has been to bring the same network, training, mentorship, and camaraderie available to tech startups to organizations working on issues like social justice and global development.

Button Text

Former leaders reflect on change, progress

By Feature, Leadership

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

Nonprofit careers can start in a variety of ways.

— Willis Bright initially was a social worker, which developed his listening skills.

— Ellen Annala worked for multiple nonprofits, which helped shape her understanding of community.

— Jim McClelland was trained as an engineer but made the transition after a tutoring gig.

— Betsy Bikoff worked in the for-profit sector, but served on nonprofit boards.

— Hoagland Elliott had a lengthy for-profit care before taking on the challenge of leading a neighborhood health clinic.

All five retired from prominent nonprofit careers in the Indianapolis area. Combined, they spent over 150 years in the field.

During their careers, there were changes in the economy, technology, laws and regulations, competition and American culture. The number of nonprofits grew to over 1.5 million nationally, and between 1977 and 1997, increased 115 percent, or about 23,000 organizations per year.

This summer, these longtime leaders sat down with Charitable Advisors to share their know-how, discuss changes they have seen and offer input on what still needs to be changed in the nonprofit world. This is the second story from the conversation.

Two former leaders noted an evolution of executive titles. In the ’60s and ’70s, leaders at both Goodwill and United Way were called executive secretaries. The original titles, according to Annala, made it clear that the executive worked for the board. They have also witnessed a shift in executives’ roles in the community.

“While the executive is still hired by the board, I think over the years, the role, too, has evolved, not just within an organization, but in the city and in the community,” said Annala, who retired in 2012 after 23 years in leadership at United Way of Central Indiana.

In the 1970s and 1980s, nonprofit leaders were casual players in civic projects and in the transformation of Indianapolis. The movers and shakers, mostly from the corporate world, were called the city committee, and generated the ideas that would change the city’s future.

Today, nonprofit leaders have been asked to sit at that table.

Annala thinks that happened because corporate leaders could no longer spend 25 percent of their time in civic leadership roles.

Today’s nonprofit leaders deserve a lot of credit, said Bikoff.

“It takes real talent to be an executive director or CEO of a nonprofit when you think about it. The board chair changes every couple of years, sometimes every year,” she said.

“It’s quite a feat to be excellent, and fortunately, we have some excellent, excellent CEOs and executive directors of nonprofits in our community and we have for a number of years,” said the former Fairbanks Foundation vice president and chief grant-making officer who retired in January.

Another area that has changed during their careers is the boards’ responsibilities. As the numbers of nonprofits increased, so has regulatory scrutiny. In the 1960s, there were concerns about the growing universe of charitable, tax-exempt organizations. By the 1980s, nonprofits supported by grants, contracts and earned income were governed by insider boards. The governance structure of nonprofits has become more professionalized, and the level of expectations for leaders has changed, too.

“There are boards that I have observed that the nonprofit’s leadership was trusted so much, nobody asked any questions,” said Bright who retired in 2012 after spending 25 years at Lilly Endowment.

“When there was an implosion, everyone was scurrying around trying to figure out how to save this organization where a few questions along the way might have enabled the organization to have not only a real purpose that it was serving in the community and adding value, but it would not have gotten into the difficulty it was experiencing at the time,” he said. “There has to be trust with accountability.”

McClelland, too, thinks questions from board members are critical. Earlier this year, McClelland completed 41 years as president of Goodwill of Central Indiana.

“I would tell people on our board, many times the best thing you can do for us, is to ask us the right hard questions. That is hugely valuable. Make sure that we’re thinking things through, that we’re not missing something,” said McClelland.

All five leaders worked through difficult financial times. During their watch, there were a half dozen recessions, including the major recession of 2008. The bursting of an $8 trillion housing bubble and the financial market chaos led to a downturn in nonprofit contributions and return on investments.

But not all the changes that resulted were bad.

“In the nonprofit sector, you don’t have those same market forces and some nonprofits can hang on long beyond their usefulness and, quite frankly, beyond their demand,” said Annala. With the recession she saw clarity and in some nonprofits’ cases, a nimbleness or willingness to change.

“The shift in accountability and competition has forced a sense of being clearer about what you’re doing, who you’re serving, what you’re trying to accomplish and whether you’re doing it. I think there’s a new clarity,” said Annala.

According to Bikoff, planning for the future has become more the norm.

“Since the 2008 recession, more nonprofits and more nonprofit boards are taking planning more seriously, and trying to pay attention to what the organizational strength is, and are leaving behind those things that they used to do that they are no longer doing as well,” she said.

“That’s not all organizations, but a great many of them have tried to narrow their focus and many are also paying attention to their ability to implement those plans, which is almost more important than the plan itself. That is a good sign.”

Bright believes there is an incredible amount of pressure on executive directors to raise money, which has challenged program quality, because leaders have to spend so much time identifying resources.

“I’m not sure resources have increased to the same level as the number of organizations that are out there. For all the talk of sustainability, it makes it very difficult for that to occur,” Bright said.

While urban planning began in the early 20th century, strategic planning is relatively new for the nonprofit sector. Annala said even that planning has changed in order for organizations to remain competitive.

“I think there’s a role for some strategic planning or at least being clear about strategic direction. Before it was like ‘plan, do, plan, do.’ Now I think it’s a little more like plan, do, plan, do (faster). It’s like you’re going roughly west or roughly east and you may zig and zag along the way, as you try different things, but it’s not the long strategic planning that some of us used to go through.”

For Elliott, who retired after a decade as CEO at Raphael Health Center, a quality needs assessment is critical for any group thinking about starting a nonprofit.

“When Tabernacle Presbyterian Church decided to do something to help the health care in the neighborhood, they did the best needs assessment I have ever seen. When I came in a year later, I was just amazed at what a thorough job attendees of the church did. They traveled to other cities, looked at other health care sites. They did door-to-door neighborhood surveys. Right from the start, there was a need,” said Elliott.

But the economy made others take notice, too. Returns on foundations’ investments saw the same downturn.

“I think a number of the forces that you talk about were initiated by the funding community, private, public and others. I think it’s made boards of directors take their stewardship more seriously. They are not just there but try to give some direction, to do some planning and to figure with the staff how they are able to achieve outcomes and impact,” said Bright.

McClelland believes the nonprofit sector is incredibly fragmented and that over his career, there has been a proliferation of nonprofits, and an enormous increase in public spending to address major social problems. In his opinion, there are good things happening, but each one addresses one problem, issue, or one target population. They have difficulty aggregating capital or talent, replicating what works and getting it to scale.

“If you look at a lot of major social indicators, they’re worse today than they were 40 years ago,” McClelland said. “There’s a lot of data supporting the notion that these major social problems are related to poverty, low education levels, crime rate and teen pregnancy. As a society, we don’t tend to treat them as if they’re related. The public sector operates in silos. We have got to stop operating as little independent fiefdoms.

“I don’t think the answer is more money. I think the answer lies in making much more effective use of the existing resources.

“We have got to start working in a much more focused manner to leverage and combine the capabilities across the sectors. It could be within the sectors and focus. Not just collaboration for the sake of collaboration, but focused efforts to achieve something that right now is proving to be very difficult to achieve. I think this could happen. I really do. And I see some examples of it now. There needs to be a lot more of it,” said McClelland.

What is each proudest of?

  • For Annala, it is bringing a greater focus to community-level outcomes and watch as is the case with earlier childhood.
  • For Bikoff, it is helping the Fairbanks Foundation grow in the early years, and establishing strong, ongoing relationships with grantees and making a difference in the community.
  • For Bright, it is working to create a funders’ collaborative that supports high-quality summer programs for youth and influencing others around the country to do similar things.
  • For Elliott, it is building a staff from four to 15.
  • For McClelland, it is how Goodwill has adapted and improved over time.