Skip to main content
Tag

survey

Sep 05

Our 2023 survey reveals many nonprofit employees continue to struggle with challenges

By Feature

As a local nonprofit veteran put it, COVID-19, inflation, and organizational flaws all contribute to an inability to thrive in the sector

(This is the first of a two-part article series based on our recent “How Are You Doing?” survey).

With more than three years passing since the outbreak of COVID-19, Charitable Advisors’ Not-for-profit News decided to revisit the survey question we asked of Central Indiana nonprofit employees in 2020: “How are you doing?”

Of the 366 survey respondents, 38.5 percent said that they are feeling “Upbeat and positive about the future.” However, 14 percent said that “Not good, hard to get through the day” was a more accurate definition of how they’re feeling in 2023. And the majority — 47.5 percent said their mindset is “Acceptable, getting by.”

More significantly, 21.5 percent said that they are “doing worse” than they were two years ago — at the height of the turmoil caused by the pandemic and social justice protests. The remaining respondents were evenly split between the choices “Doing better” (40.4 percent) and “About the same” (38 percent).

Some of these varying sentiments were conveyed by a survey respondent who has been working in the nonprofit sector for nearly 20 years. The past several years have been so challenging, she said, that she is planning to leave her organization.

“The nonprofit world is near and dear to my heart,” the survey respondent said during an interview in which she requested anonymity. “But the last three to four years have been so rough in our agency that I am currently looking to leave.”

The main reason? Leadership, said the survey respondent, who described the need for a leadership team that is positive, genuine, trustworthy, diverse in any area, puts aside pride and sets a good example.

“I believe COVID exposed problem areas,” she said. “When there is denial of the root cause, there cannot be correction to the path.”

However, she also pointed to external factors that have contributed to her dissatisfaction with working in the nonprofit sector.

“Overall, as a sector, it is worse due to staffing shortages and the quantity/higher needs of clients,” she said. “Inflation plays a role as well. For the most part, non-for-profit careers are not high paying.”

With the rising costs of living, brought on by inflation, nonprofit organizations have been struggling with fundraising while, at the same time, facing an increased need for services from people who need assistance, she said.

“It has been a constant drain,” she said.

Another anonymous survey respondent shared similar concerns, particularly from the perspective of expanding job demands, particularly for those who work for community foundations.

“I’ve been in the nonprofit sector for almost a decade, and this has by far been my hardest role,” the survey respondent said. “In the past, I’ve been told the workload ebbed and flowed around grant cycles, but since I’ve been here it’s felt more like climbing a constant mountain and never reaching the peak.”

Much of the increased demands can be attributed to the changing role of community foundations, she said.

“As community foundations move away from being ‘just a funder’ and into more leading/convening spaces surrounding community leadership, it requires much more from the staff than grant/scholarship review and coordination,” she said. “We are now required to have other sets of skills like strategic planning, coalition facilitation, capacity building, collective impact, research, and evaluation. We also will never have enough funding for all the needs in our community, so having the skills and emotional intelligence to navigate those hard conversations and situations as well as the IQ to piece together other opportunities or support from the foundation is crucial and required.

There’s a real feeling of having to be ‘on’ all the time, she said, including knowing the pulse of the community, understanding the needs of every nonprofit, connecting with various sectors in the community, attending evening and weekend events, and being available for emails and phone calls throughout the day.

Overall, the survey revealed that 36 percent of Central Indiana’s nonprofit employees feel “excellent or very good” about finding purpose in their work, while 45 percent rated it as “pretty good.” However, 18.3 percent said that they were no longer connecting to a purpose in their work.

Jul 03

Nonprofits must prioritize marketing efforts

By Feature

The sector still has significant work to do to get its message across, IU philanthropy expert says

by Shari Finnell, editor/writer, Not-for-profit News

It’s no surprise that nonprofit organizations have struggled to gain the same brand recognition as their for-profit counterparts. With marketing budgets that traditionally far exceed those of nonprofits, many B2B and B2C companies are able to invest in marketing teams and strategies to elevate their brands.

But it wasn’t until the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy released a recent report did many industry leaders fully understand the impact of that investment gap, said Dr. Bill Stanczykiewicz, senior assistant dean of external relations and director of The Fund Raising School.

The report, What Americans Think About Philanthropy and Nonprofits, included several surprising findings, which the Not-for-profit News recently highlighted in the article “Do Nonprofits Have an Image Problem?” The survey revealed a general lack of understanding among the public about what defines a nonprofit. For example, when it came to philanthropic entities like foundations, donor-advised funds, and giving circles, a majority of survey respondents said that they had heard of them but were not familiar with them.

But most alarming, Stanczykiewicz said, was that only 5.4 percent of survey respondents said that they or someone in their immediate family has been helped by a nonprofit organization in the past year. “That caught the attention of all of us quite quickly,” he said.

With a significant number of people regularly interacting with various nonprofit organizations, including religious services, museums, theatrical productions, educational programs, and public hospitals, there appears to be a gap in understanding a basic definition of nonprofits, Stanczykiewicz said. Also, one out of every Americans work for a charitable organization.

While the survey didn’t capture the reasons behind these poll responses, Stanczykiewicz said that there may be numerous factors contributing to the public’s lack of knowledge about nonprofits.

“Nonprofits may be so effective in doing their jobs that we don’t know what life would be without them,” said Stanczykiewicz, comparing them to outstanding referees during a game.

“In most cases, if they’re making good calls, fans don’t really pay attention to them,” he said. “In the same way, nonprofits can be so effective in doing their jobs that we don’t know what life would be without them. We don’t always realize their impact.”

Another factor is that the nonprofit sector hasn’t traditionally done a great job of educating the community about the sector. “When people think of receiving services, they may think, ‘Well, I’ve never gone to a food pantry or received direct help from a medical clinic,” he said. “It raises the point that nonprofits have work to do to communicate that there’s so much more that the philanthropic sector does than provide services.”

Raising nonprofits’ profiles amid declining charitable giving

Misconceptions about nonprofit organizations, coupled with declining giving during the past 20 years — another statistic highlighted in the philanthropy report, should be a strong signal that nonprofits will need to prioritize educating the public about their mission and message in the coming years.

“Nonprofits have work to do to communicate the message there’s so much more to the philanthropic sector than “providing services,” he said. “There also is a lack of awareness. Most Americans just don’t seem to know who we are and what we do.”

Stanczykiewicz said nonprofits can consider numerous pathways to elevating their message and educating the public about the work they do — starting with encouraging their board members to actively lead in communicating the organization’s value.

Another challenge facing teams is the matter of budgeting for marketing. “Many nonprofits are focused on the resources needed for the programs, services, and materials,” he said. “Marketing may be something that ranks very low when it comes to the budget. It may not be in the budget at all.”

Community advocates and nonprofit supporters also may assume that everyone is equally passionate about their cause, such as eradicating food insecurity and homelessness, he said. “They might think, ‘Well, clearly everybody must be passionate about this cause so I don’t have to talk about it.”

Lack of confidence is yet another factor that may impede efforts to inform the public about the work of nonprofits. “At the Fund Raising School, we teach you to fundraise with pride. You should be very confident about the way you’re making a world a better place and, therefore, be very willing to talk about it.”

“With human behaviors, there’s usually not just one magic bullet explanation, but the study certainly does reveal we’ve got work to do to help more people become aware of who we are as a nonprofit sector and all that we do as a nonprofit. Sector,” he said.

Apr 17

Do nonprofits have an image problem?

By Feature

Most Americans don’t think nonprofits are making much of an impact, according to recent IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy survey

by Shari Finnell, editor/writer, Not-for-profit News

Now, more than ever, nonprofit organizations have comprehensive insights about how the American public perceives them, thanks to a poll recently conducted by the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy.

And the results point to a need for nonprofit leaders to do a better job of conveying the story of their impact and educating the public about nonprofits overall, according to Una Osili, associate dean for research and international programs at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy.

The new report, What Americans Think About and Nonprofits, revealed the following perceptions among the 1,334 adults who were interviewed for an average of about 17 minutes each. 

  • 80 percent of survey respondents said that in-kind, charitable, and direct person-to-person giving were very or somewhat important.
  • However, nearly 30 percent of respondents said that they believe nonprofits are on the wrong track; 17.6 percent said they are moving in the right direction; while 52.5 percent responded that they didn’t know. When the unsure responses were removed from the analysis, nearly 63 percent indicated that nonprofits were on the wrong track.
  • About 30 percent believe charities contribute a lot to society.
  • Only 5 percent said that they think they or someone in their immediate family has been helped by a nonprofit organization — a low rate, according to the report, considering that one out of every 11 Americans work for a charitable organization.

Osili noted that the survey also revealed that many people do not seem to grasp the definition of a nonprofit organization, especially when so few believe they have been helped by the industry.

“Even when people think about services that they received, they don’t always know that those come from nonprofits,” said Osili, noting that many survey respondents did not seem to understand that colleges, hospitals, cultural organizations, religious congregations, or groups that participate in advocacy drives related to the environment and civil rights can all be part of the nonprofit sector.

“There is a big information gap,” Osili said. “The nonprofit sector is a mix. Some nonprofit organizations, like many hospitals, actually have a fee-for-service model but people may not think of them that way.”

The survey respondents seemed to readily acknowledge their lack of knowledge about the industry. For example, when asked what they know about philanthropy, about two-thirds categorized themselves as “novices.”

However, according to the survey results, Americans seemed to have a better grasp of the work performed by certain groups, such as community foundations.

“Community foundations stood out because they are in close proximity,” Osili said. “People seem to understand what they do because they’re supporting their communities. These groups have more visibility.”

Other survey findings included the following:

  • 39 percent said they trusted nonprofit organizations completely or very much. The level of trust in nonprofit organizations varied depending upon the type. For example, 36 percent trust religious institutions; 31 percent trust community foundations; 23 percent trust secular nonprofits; and 20 percent said they trust private foundations. 
  • 14.3 percent said they had a great deal of confidence that nonprofit organizations could “solve societal or global problems, now and in the future.” That compared to 12.6 percent for religious organizations; 7.2 percent for state and local governments; 6.5 percent for the President/federal executive branch; 5.8 percent for Supreme Court, federal judiciary; 3.4 percent for Congress/federal legislative branch; and 3.3 percent for large corporations.  

Increasing awareness about nonprofits

The report by the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy comes amid increasing concerns about the overall health of nonprofits.

In the report’s introduction, the researchers noted that they initiated the research during a time that the public’s perception of nonprofits have diminished. “Despite philanthropy’s long, deep traditions and importance to many Americans, recent data trends have surfaced that have rekindled concerns about the health of the sector,” the report authors noted. “Two such challenges are the declining number of donors and the general decline in trust in all institutions.”

Osili said nonprofits have an opportunity to increase awareness about their programs and impact without investing a significant amount of funds. “All organizations can do a better job of telling their stories, especially how they’re making a difference in the community,” she said. “It’s important not to assume that everyone understands this.”

She noted that nonprofit organizations can increase their storytelling efforts on social media and websites, and encourage employees, volunteers, community members, and board members to share the posts.

“Use the resources you do have,” Osili said. “It doesn’t always involve hiring a marketing firm or PR firm. Your website and social media can be powerful ways of communicating. During the pandemic, we saw even small organizations doing a good job of mobilizing support, recruiting volunteers, and getting their donors involved.”

Nonprofits also can develop creative collaborations and partnerships to enhance awareness about their efforts, Osili said. Instead of soliciting a cash donation from a corporate partner, consider asking for in-kind support for a marketing and PR strategy, she said.

“Make sure you get your message out, sharing the stories about how you’re making a difference because ultimately that is what makes for a vibrant and thriving nonprofit sector,” she said. “It can help in building trust in the sector.”

Oct 11

2021 Charitable Advisors salary survey reveals 57 percent of Central Indiana nonprofits expect to offer pay raises; 34 percent do not

By Feature

The 2021 Charitable Advisors Central Indiana Nonprofit Salary Report is now available to the public online

by Shari Finnell, editor/writer, Not-for-profit News

Although annual pay raises are often considered essential in keeping valued employees, about a third of Central Indiana nonprofits reported that they would not be offering pay raises in 2021 — in the midst of one of the most competitive job markets in recent history.

Those statistics were among the findings of the Charitable Advisors 2021 Central Indiana Nonprofit Salary Report, issued after a tumultuous period marked by the COVID-19 outbreak, government stay-at-home orders, social protests and an economic crisis.

With 286 Central Indiana organizations represented in the anonymous survey — a record response, HR executives, CEOs and other leaders provided insight into the salary levels of 26 positions of nonprofit institutions varying widely in size and in annual budgets — from less than $250,000 to more than $10 million.

When asked whether they expected to increase wages for employees at their organizations, 285 of the respondents revealed a mix of answers in the 2021 survey. They are as follows:

  • 2 percent expected a decrease in wages
  • 32 percent expected no increase in wages
  • 8 percent expected a wage increase of 1-1.9 percent
  • 18 percent expected a wage increase of 2-2.9 percent
  • 25 percent expected a wage increase of 3-3.9 percent
  • 2 percent expected a wage increase of 4-4.9 percent
  • 4 percent expected a wage increase of 5 percent or more
  • 9 percent had not yet decided or did not know if they would offer a wage increase

Based on the previous Charitable Advisors Central Indiana Nonprofit Salary Report, released in 2019 before the pandemic, the number of nonprofits planning to offer some type of wage increase had declined — from 63 percent t0 57 percent. However, a larger number of nonprofits in the 2019 survey had not yet decided on pay increases — 24 percent compared to 9 percent in the 2021 survey.

Salary ranges across job levels

As part of the 2021 survey, respondents gave detailed wage information for 26 position categories, from executive level positions to administrative and facility/maintenance support positions, for organizations of varying sizes, budget levels and nonprofit categories (arts, culture and humanities; community development; health; foundation, etc.)

For a full list of salary comparisons, read the 2021 report here.

The following is a sampling of some of the salary comparisons for organizations with operating budgets of $250,000 to $999,000 (the largest group represented at 35 percent):

Executive Director/President/CEO
Average – $79,348
Minimum – $30,000
Maximum – $224,430

Vice President of Programs
Average – $60,475
Minimum – $30,000
Maximum – $140,000

Vice President of Programs
Average – $60,475
Minimum – $30,000
Maximum – $140,000

Case Manager
Average – $42,641
Minimum – $31,200
Maximum – $65,000

Volunteer Coordinator
Average – $38,737
Minimum – $32,136
Maximum – $52,744

Office Manager
Average – $43,970
Minimum – $33,000
Maximum – $74,000

Facility/Maintenance Manager
Average – $51,521
Minimum – $32,600
Maximum – $75,0005

HR executive perspectives on moving forward in 2021

According to several HR executives for the organizations that participated in the annual salary survey, 2020 triggered a significant shift in the evolution of hiring, retention and employee engagement practices in the nonprofit industry.

During conversations with prospective employees, Ponda Sullivan, director of human resources for Tangram, dedicates time to understanding the reasons behind why they left their previous jobs. She also thoroughly reviews exit interviews from current employees.

“When I’m interviewing individuals, I try to capture some of the things that led them to look for another job,” said Sullivan, who previously worked at a for-profit healthcare organization for 18 years. “Some of the concerns expressed were related to child care, career development, flexible schedules and not feeling appreciated.”

Sullivan said nonprofit organizations that can’t compete must focus on those types of areas — the intrinsic appeal of working in the nonprofit industry — to be competitive. 

“People are looking for a company that does the right thing,” Sullivan said. “They want to be treated a certain way and they’re OK with a pay reduction as long as the company provides those other work-life balance benefits. You definitely have to be creative and innovative, and ask, ‘What are those intrinsic awards we can offer?’.”

Discovering new opportunities in the midst of challenges

While the pandemic prompted a series of unexpected “pivots” in the way the Children’s Museum of Indianapolis has traditionally operated, the outcome was a team that emerged better because of the experience, according to Debbie Aull, director of human resources for the organization.

“It definitely changed the world of human resources — in a good way,” Aull said. “We had to rethink everything. We’re much more focused, more transparent, and more purposeful about inclusion with all of our policies and practices.”

In addition to assessing its diversity equity and inclusion (DEI) practices by hiring a consultant, appointing a DEI task force and undergoing an audit to increase transparency, the Children’s Museum expanded into uncharted territory by bringing many programs online.

“One thing that was a challenge — and an opportunity — was moving the majority of our recruiting, hiring, onboarding, training and educational programs to virtual platforms,” Aull said. “At one time, we would have said, ‘There’s no way we can do that,’ but we did. And it’s great for the museum and the community.”

Aull also said that the museum is mindful of the need to adapt to remain relevant — and HR is core to that strategy.

“HR has proven to be the key to the success of the organization. Our people really are the most precious resource,” she said. “We have to provide them with a safe environment which is going to mean different things to different people. We all need to be open-minded in our thinking.”

For example, while HR professionals at organizations of all sizes will likely consider flexible, hybrid and remote options moving forward, it’s important to be mindful of employees who aren’t able to take advantage of those benefits, Aull said. 

“We have to consider it but we also must be open to ensuring there is equity and collaboration for hybrid and remote options,” she said. “We should be mindful of how it would impact employees who don’t have that option. We definitely don’t want an ‘us vs. them’ situation, especially for the staff members who are going in and working, facing visitors harping about having to wear masks, or complaining when they close the restrooms to clean and sanitize them. They’re on the receiving end of all that while I’m sitting in my second bedroom on a computer.”

To ensure that the front line employees felt supported through a challenging period, employees from other departments helped with some of the in-person responsibilities of operating the museum, such as cleaning laundry used in the facility, Aull said.

Rethinking HR strategies

Shelby Slowik, director of human resources at Conner Prairie, said that the living museum has had the advantage of operating many of its programs outdoors, which resulted in fewer disruptions in the team’s ability to continue welcoming visitors. The museum shut down for only two months in 2020 as a result of the pandemic, Slowik noted.

Also, as a larger organization, Conner Prairie is able to compete with many for-profit organizations on the wages it offers salaried employees, Slowik said. “It’s a rarity that we can’t compete at the professional and leadership levels,” she said. 

However, like many other businesses and nonprofits, hiring part-time and entry-level employees — primarily seasonal workers at Conner Prairie, has been challenging, Slowik said. 

“We rely a lot on seasonal employees and that’s where we see a bit more of the pay competition,” she said. 

After more than a year of adhering to new COVID-19 guidelines, streamlining programs, rolling out new policies, and ensuring that employees feel supported through the challenges, many HR departments have been pushed to evolve — perhaps much quicker than they would have without the pandemic, Slowik said. 

“I don’t think I have ever experienced anything like this in my 30 years in HR,” she said. “When you look at it from an HR perspective … the new policies and procedures we had to implement, the expenditures to support filtration, handwashing stations, hand sanitizers, dealing with fear factor of staff, the mental stress, lockdown, safety issues, immunizations, exposure … all that falls under the HR umbrella.”

In the past, Slowik noted, HR departments were comparable to policy enforcers. “Especially for those who have been in HR for some time, we tend to have a black and white viewpoint on how things should be handled when it comes to following policies and procedures, and guidelines on what you need to do to be successful,” she said.

That mindset has evolved significantly, she said.

“Maybe in the last 5 to 10 years, we’re no longer the person there to derail creative ideas. We have switched to being more like a business partner that’s willing to embrace creative ideas, whether it’s telecommuting and attractive benefits that may not have been previously considered. We’re much more approachable in collaborating.”

Just 10 years ago, Slowik said, she would never have considered telecommuting as an option for employees. The pandemic effectively changed her perception.

In the near future, Slowik predicted, HR managers will continue to struggle to find clarity on how much they should pay entry-level employees. “We’re all experiencing staffing challenges. Many hourly positions, which pay anywhere from $12 to $16 an hour, have remained vacant.

“This has caused us to review our entry rates of pay,” she said. “What do we need to do to be competitive if everyone else is raising their rates?”

Conner Prairie has hired a firm to evaluate their wage structure to ensure they’re competitive. “The pandemic pushed me to look at that a year earlier than I probably would have.”

Sep 27

Does DEI matter?: More than 70% of Central Indiana nonprofit employees say, ‘Yes’

By Feature

NFPN survey reveals support for continuing DEI initiatives

by Shari Finnell, Not-for-profit News editor/writer

(First in a series of articles about Charitable Advisors’ NFPN “How Are You Doing?” survey)

Many nonprofit organizations are still grappling with how to address diversity equity and inclusion (DEI) policies — more than a year after protests erupted nationwide after the death of George Floyd at the hands of a police officer.

And that work still matters, according to nearly 70 percent of about 450 nonprofit employees who responded to a recent Not-for-profit News survey about how they’re coping in the aftermath of one of the most tumultuous periods in the nation’s history.

When asked if their organization’s stance on DEI personally impacts them as an employee, 30 percent responded it impacts them “a great deal,” 42 percent said it impacted them “somewhat,” and 28 percent responded, “not at all.”

However, based on the survey responses, employees also said that their employers likely think that they are doing better than they actually are — or at least in comparison to how the employees perceived they were progressing with DEI issues.

When asked, “What do you think your leadership would say about your organization’s progress on DEI?,” nearly 35 percent of employees responded that their leaders probably would feel that the work isn’t new — “we have always valued inclusion and equity.” About 34 percent said that their employees would believe that they “are having some hard conversations and making important changes,” while nearly 24 percent said their leadership probably would feel that “we are talking about it but not doing anything, not doing much,” and 7.75 percent would say, “we aren’t talking about it.”

In contrast, employees’ perceptions about that question, “What do you think about your organization’s progress on DEI?” was as follows:

  • This work isn’t new to us — we have always valued inclusion and equity — 23.06 percent
  • We are having some hard conversations and making important changes — 29.37 percent
  • We are talking about it but not doing anything, not doing much — 36.17 percent
  • We aren’t talking about it — 11.41 percent

Survey respondents weigh in on DEI successes and challenges 

Some respondents said that their organizations have been committed to undertaking DEI work not just since the social justice protests — but for some time.

One survey respondent said, “The organization has been working for a while now on DEI. I feel like we are on the right track, but we still have more to improve on. We need more diverse leadership and board representation.”

Others shared a wide range of thoughts about DEI, revealing various challenges such as coming to a common understanding of what it means. Some believed that the solution requires an extensive undertaking, while some believed it is much less complicated to undertake. Here are some responses:

  • “We need to stop arguing about the reality of racism and accept that systemic racism is real and that we must address it to succeed in our mission.”
  • “We need to judge people based on their character and not their color, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. It’s really simple.”
  • “We need to be more modern … stop letting the older Baby Boomers make decisions that affect a wide swath of people. This group (in our organization, at least) doesn’t want to make changes or doesn’t understand why they’re important.”
  • “We need to weave it into our daily practice, educating ourselves in it, holding each other accountable.”
  • “Add diversity to the team, address a misogynistic work environment, stop training our organizations on topics we refuse to even talk about. Dismantle the good ‘ol boy stronghold.”
  • “We need more internal communication, so everyone understands it.”

While many respondents said that their organizations are committed to DEI, some pointed out that it can be challenging to seriously invest in it to create substantial change. Others felt that their organizations weren’t fully committed to the work.

“It’s tough when we are remote,” one survey respondent said. “Not to do DEI, but to do SERIOUS anti-racism work. DEI is a facade in most cases. Equity is the only part I think impacts systemic change. D and I are just an illusion. We need transformation.”

Another survey respondent said, “We have really avoided this conversation as a team and board despite my repeated attempts at raising concerns. We should at a minimum be looking at our internal policies and having some hard conversations about how we operate.”

One nonprofit employee said that conversations about DEI are difficult because they have become politicized. “There is a reluctance to take a public stance on DEIA (diversity, equity inclusion and accessibility) issues — especially addressing them head-on,” the employee said. “However, general public statements do not protect those of us who have had to accommodate the feelings of others for decades. Being a leader today on issues around DEIA is just seen as too political. This is so very antiquated in perspective. My human rights to be myself don’t have anything to do with politics. But at the same time, my employer is diversifying hiring. So, I’m no longer the only native Spanish-speaker in the building apart from the cleaning staff. There’s that, at least.”

Personal perspectives also came up as challenges that may be difficult to overcome, according to numerous nonprofit employees:

  • “I struggle deeply with issues of DEI. I believe it’s incredibly important, and support DEI efforts wherever I encounter them, but as a white male do not know how to contribute effectively and with respect to colleagues of color, nor do I understand my own position or allowable expression as it relates to accepting or advancing my own career. As a first-generation, college-goer from a blue collar background, I can see how DEI efforts can gain wide acceptance among the white-collar workforce while causing confusion and backlash among so many who take great pride in what they’ve accomplished (and are understandably confused about issues of privilege). The lack of personal connection due to COVID has exasperated this confusion on my part, as my interactions with colleagues feel less genuine and more awkward, while DEI issues have become increasingly important and widely discussed.”
  • “I am the only person of color in my organization. It puts a great deal of pressure on me to perform at a near inhuman level.”
  • “I wish we were doing more. I’m in the majority and I don’t think people in the majority can do much to make positive change.”

Implementing DEI in the workplace — perspectives from two nonprofit organizations

For nonprofits undertaking DEI initiatives in recent years, the process is continually evolving as teams better understand what it takes to achieve successful outcomes, according to two survey respondents who agreed to be interviewed.

Sally Bindley, MSW, founder and CEO of School on Wheels, said the 20-year-old organization in Indianapolis started focusing on DEI initiatives in 2016. At that time, the team developed a diversity task force to broaden and diversify School on Wheels’ volunteer tutor base. “We wanted it to be more representative of the students we served,” Bindley recalled. School on Wheels received a grant from Lilly Endowment, Inc., to support the work.

It didn’t take long for the School on Wheels team to realize that diversity, equity and inclusion needed to be integrated into all aspects of the organization’s operations — not just as a side project, Bindley said.

“Diversity is not a task. If you approach DEI as a standalone initiative, you check the box. This way it’s more of a thought process,” she said. “We made it a standing committee of the board of directors — a diversity committee led by a member of the board. Just as we have regular reports from other committees, finance, executive, development, we have regular reports on diversity.”

As a result, employees and board members have become increasingly more aware and intentional on how to include diversity in all areas — from identifying where diverse volunteers are living and working to ensuring diversity in marketing, messaging and operations, Bindley said.

When asked about advice she would give to other nonprofits on embarking on DEI work, Bindley said that it is important to acknowledge that it is an ongoing process.

“Being intentional for us is being aware. Review your language,” she said. “Whether it’s job posts, or messages circulating on your website, make sure you’re mindful of what you’re putting out there. Do you have a commitment to DEI? A statement against racism and hate? We also realized our volunteer recruitment flyers needed to be in English and Spanish. If you don’t have a DEI program, that’s OK. Start with training: What is diversity? What is inclusion? What are microaggressions? Then analyze how you’re doing with all of that. Once we had the in-depth fast training, it brought so much awareness to our language and conversation.

“We’ve made strides, but there’s always more work to do,” she added. “It’s constantly evolving.”

Bindley also said she is a strong believer in hiring a consultant to help assess where the organization stands with incorporating DEI, as well as ensuring that she, as a leader, is fully engaged in the process. Although School on Wheels designated a person to undergo DEI training, Bindley said that she makes sure to personally engage in DEI initiatives.

“I want to have the most opportunities to grow and to impact change as a leader,” she said. “I have zero time, but I can’t say, ‘You’re in charge of this and let me know how it’s going,’” she said. “If you’re a leader of a nonprofit, this messaging starts at the top. If you don’t make it a priority, it’s obvious. I can’t say I’ve always done it right, but you have to be vulnerable as a leader and say this is what I know, what I don’t know, and this is what I need to learn.”

Guenevere Kalal, MSM, director of foster care services for Damar, said that DEI has been at the top of the nonprofit organization’s list of priorities for some time. The team members want to ensure that they are culturally aware of the clients they serve. 

“Our foster families are very diverse,” Kalal said. “Over the past couple years, we have seen more children from Hispanic, Burmese and other cultures coming into light for support in the child welfare system.” As a result, they have initiated discussions on how to gain a better understanding of the various cultures and ensuring that they are always culturally and racially sensitive, she said.

Open, candid conversations and acknowledging personal biases must be a priority, Kalal said.

“My approach to many things, not only with my staff, is to be as professionally transparent as possible. It can’t be the elephant in the room. We need to learn how to be comfortable with uncomfortable conversations,” she said.

That process also includes checking in with families for feedback on their interactions with staff, including asking if they have felt any disparities from staff members.

The team also committed to undergoing training, including a two-day workshop, Interrupting Racism for Children, offered by Child Advocates. “The Department of Child Services also did an excellent job of doing their research on what potential trainings are out there to help our providers navigate conversations about racism, including series on Netflix and PBS,” Kalal said.

“We need to understand where we came from as a country. I don’t want to dwell on the past, but it has a huge influence on where we are,” she added. “I need to understand that so I know how I can focus on becoming part of a positive change.”

Aug 30

From the front lines: Nonprofit employees share highs and lows of working during a pandemic, social unrest

By Feature

NFPN survey reveals employees’ perceptions about how they’re coping during a crisis — and why some are thinking about leaving their jobs

by Shari Finnell, editor/writer, Not-for-profit News

Second in a series of articles based on a “How Are You Doing?” survey conducted by Charitable Advisors

As reported in a previous Charitable Advisors’ Not-for-profit News (NFPN) article, a survey revealed that nearly 54 percent of Central Indiana nonprofit employees are thinking about leaving their jobs within the next 12 months. Of the 461 employees who responded to the survey, 40 percent said that timeline would apply to a 90-day timeframe.

With high employee turnover impacting everything from productivity to overall employee morale, numerous survey respondents gave further insights on why they left their job, why they’re thinking about leaving their job and, in some cases, why their employers are getting it right and, consequently, why they’ve decided to stay.

One survey respondent, who asked to remain anonymous, said that the pressures of shut-down orders, downsizing, lack of direction from leadership, an increased workload, and, later, a demand to return to the office amid rising COVID-19 cases led her to resign from her previous position.

The employee, who agreed to a telephone interview, said that she always has been drawn to the nonprofit sector because it’s rewarding to support the Indianapolis community she grew up in. “I have been working with nonprofits for 10 years,” said the employee, who furthered her education by graduating from the Lilly School of Philanthropy in 2018. “I worked briefly in for-profit, in sales, and I really didn’t feel like it was fulfilling for me as an individual.

However, she recently faced the challenging decision of leaving a nonprofit job before securing another. “Going through the pandemic was a time of great uncertainty. It was difficult,” she recalled. “Our organization didn’t have good leadership. While everyone was reacting in the moment, employees’ fears and concerns were not addressed until it was past time to address them. People’s concerns seemed to be dismissed. There’s something to be said for leading with empathy and acknowledging the unknowns, while at the same time accomplishing your goals and getting things done.’

The employee said that she experienced bouts of high anxiety during the pandemic, especially when the outbreak was first reported in Indiana in March 2020. “Uncertainty is a difficult spot for me,” she said. “I was concerned about my own health conditions, and I raised concerns with HR. When I did get answers, the response was, “Hold tight.” She also faced similar challenges in connecting with her direct supervisor. “They were very dismissive of our concerns,” she said.

When employees were asked to come into the office — before the city’s “stay-at-home” order was lifted. “I flatly rejected,” she said. To her, that request reflected “tone deafness” to employees’ fears and concerns.

Searching for job satisfaction

After quitting her job, the employee said she devoted time to self-care and volunteering for other organizations. “My first step was to reflect and to give myself breathing room to deal with the trauma and the incredible unknowns that were happening,” she said.

For her next job, she decided to be more selective about choosing her next employer. “I was looking for culture first and foremost, and compassionate leadership,” she said. “I also was looking at organizations that addressed some of the inequities that were being highlighted. Fair compensation also was on the list. Given my level of education and expertise, I was so burned out (with my last job) that it wasn’t worth it to continue with that compensation. I was looking for something more established.”

As part of the culture, the employee said, a flexible work schedule was essential. “Having gone through collective trauma, we now better understand that burnout is an issue that we should take seriously,” she added. “I don’t think a lot of organizations put time and resources to truly combat it. They don’t put time, effort and research to ensure it results in real action.”

In many cases, she said, you must show up for work — no matter what. If people call in sick, we don’t take them seriously. We now have a better understanding of how deeply connected we are. We need to make health a priority — both mentally and physically. We learned we can trust our coworkers, more and we can still accomplish things even if they’re not sitting there next to us. Understanding work-life balance is a huge issue.”

Getting it right

Although a significant number of employees indicated that they were poised to go after another job, others were positive about their jobs and employers. Of those surveyed, 36 percent said they “gained new respect for our leadership and our mission over the past year.”

Ashley Ross, development coordinator at Visually Impaired Preschool Services (VIPS), said she committed to the nonprofit sector because of the rewarding work. Her organization always has been supportive of understanding employees’ need for work-life balance, Ross said. “Before the pandemic began, my organization was already pretty understanding of remote work/flexible schedules. I worked in the office every day, but if I ever needed to be at home because of an appointment, there wasn’t push back; in fact, we are encouraged to make our work-life fit around our personal life,” she said.

While the flexible work schedule was a “nice-to-have” option for Ross, she now considers it a priority for any employment. “Since the pandemic started, I have now been working entirely from home for about a year and a half.,” she said. “I truly love working from home. Before the pandemic, I would only work remotely if I needed to be home for a specific reason. I would not have told my boss, ‘Hey, I don’t feel like getting out of my pajamas, so I will be working from home today.’ But now, knowing how much I can get done from the comforts of my home, I don’t feel the guilt I felt before by saying, ‘I would prefer to work from home today.’”

Ross said she also recognizes the benefits of collaborating with co-workers in the office. “My organization is in a very unique position because we are now finishing up our capital campaign to build a whole new facility for the families we serve and to also have a larger office space,” Ross said. “I am excited to get moved into our new space, have my own office, and engage with my co-workers again. However, I still intend to work at least a couple of days a week from home once we do move, and the organization is very understanding of that. The pandemic has shown employers that if you have trust in your employees, they can do their job well no matter their location. Having that freedom to choose where I work has been a huge reason why I plan on sticking around at my organization long term.”

Mark Koopman, executive director at Hoosier Burn Camp, Inc., shared the benefits of working for a smaller organization during a pandemic. “When you’re working for a smaller nonprofit, you can be more nimble because most folks are already wearing multiple hats. There wasn’t a paralysis,” Koopman said in a telephone interview. “We were able to come together and, say, ‘Let’s figure this out. How can we still serve our population in a way they deserve and need to be served?’ but, at the same time, realizing that business as usual needs to change.”

Because of the trust that already had been established within the organization, Koopman said that there was an ability to collaborate and move quickly as a team to come up with new ideas to reach constituents. “That’s part of our secret sauce,” he said. “Going through a challenge like that together, there’s an appreciation for the struggle. We were working in sync as a team. When you get through it, it’s not just an individual level of satisfaction. It was a collective satisfaction. There’s a sense of belonging. We felt like we got sucker punched as we made alterations to our programming, but we got smarter and better at it. In hindsight, we did a lot of things pretty well.”

Koopman also said that it was important to expect others’ opinions and stances during that time, whether based on religion, politics or COVID. “It’s important to meet people where they need to be met and respect where they’re at, whether it’s based on religion, politics or COVID,” he said.

Coping with burnout while focused on the mission

Patricia Cortellini, director of agency relations for Second Helpings, said the critical mission of the nonprofit organization was significantly heightened in the wake of the pandemic throughout 2020. Second Helpings distributed 1.8 million meals — up 75 percent from the 1.1 million distributed in the previous year.

“Our work became more important personally to each one of us,” Cortellini said. “Food is such a basic need. We all believed in the mission but the pandemic brought it home. We hear from a lot of people who were saying things like, ‘We didn’t get COVID because of your meals,’ ‘I’m home with COVID, so I can’t get out,’ or ‘We couldn’t leave the building because we’re immunocompromised.’”

Throughout 2020, the team at Second Helpings navigated numerous challenges, including implementing a hybrid work schedule and changing the model of how they delivered food. “Everything changed,” Cortellini said. “This year is harder than last year when our model included having the national guard here to get us in a rhythm.”

While the mission makes it all worthwhile, the day-to-day challenges can take a toll on employees on the frontlines, especially with the Delta variant resulting in another surge in COVID rates throughout Central Indiana, Cortellini said.

“People are getting burned out,” she said. “We don’t see the light at the end of the tunnel. It isn’t over yet.”

Some of that stress has been alleviated with hybrid work schedules, with employees alternating working from home and in the office. “Being able to work from home two days can give you a break from the day-to-day stress. and focus on projects without all the interruptions. We found staff can be very effective at home.”

However, she said, the clear advantages of meeting in person can’t be underestimated. “When we are able to meet face to face, so much more information gets relayed. You can read people’s expressions. It’s also hard to jump into a conversation during a Zoom meeting. I believe the hybrid model of working will stay with us.”

Developing a strategic retention/recruitment plan

Deirdre Byrd, director of HR consulting for VonLehman CPA & Advisory Firm, said nonprofit employers can gain a significant number of insights about what it takes to attract and retain employees as a result of the pandemic.

“COVID highlighted for employees and employers that much of the work that takes place can be done remotely,” Byrd said. A flexible schedule also allows for more work-life balance, she noted. “Instead of starting the day with a commute to the office, an employee could start earlier and take a break during lunch time to help kids with assignments,” Byrd said. “It’s not surprising that, on the side of it, we’re not going back to the way things were.”

As part of Byrd’s work, she’s hearing from many prospective employees who are prioritizing remote work, hybrid work or flexible schedules when vetting employers.

Nonprofit employers will need to move forward by being realistic about what they can and cannot offer current employees and new hires, Byrd said. “Value doesn’t necessarily have to come in the form of straight compensation,” she said. “It can be non-monetary, such as development … the opportunity to grow with the organization. It may not mean vertical growth; it may be lateral growth, with opportunities to further build skills.”

Byrd said leadership teams need to outline five key areas to have an impact on retention and recruitment, including making sure that each employee has the right skills for the position to increase alignment; identifying what sets you apart as an organization; connecting goals and expectations to the organization’s mission and performance; offering employee development plans and providing attractive compensation, including non-monetary benefits such as hybrid work/remote work, flexible work schedules, childcare or elder care and similar benefits to assist with employees’ personal lives.

Developing clear ways to address burn out also is critical, Byrd said. Throughout the organization, there should be efforts to ensure relationships are constructive, with schedules including one-to-one employee meetings and regular team meetings.

“It’s important to talk to employees, not only about work but get to know them as people,” she said. “Create an environment of trust, which is foundational to a safe environment where employees are supporting one another and can be their authentic selves. They should feel safe to experiment and try something new.”

Nov 30

Stakeholder feedback takes the guess work out of decision making

By Sponsor Insight

by Hannah Gooding, Consultant, Hedges

In our everyday lives, we constantly ask questions and use data to help us make better, smarter decisions. Can we say the same about decision making at our nonprofits? Think about your last staff or board meeting. What information did you have to inform your decisions? Maybe you were considering what expenses to cut due to COVID. What data did you have at your disposal? Budgets alone can’t tell you what programs are the most impactful to those you serve, why your donor retention is going down, or what inefficiencies are causing bottlenecks for your team. To get that information, you need real-time feedback.

Why feedback is a game changer.

According to a survey conducted by Stanford Social Innovation Review in 2019, 88 percent of nonprofit leaders prioritize gathering client feedback while only 13 percent use it as a “top source of insight for continuous improvement.” Two-thirds of organizations not collecting client feedback said their greatest barrier was limited staff time and/or resources, and 20 percent said collecting feedback was “too complicated” or “too expensive.” If these statements resonate with you, consider the following:

  1. Collecting feedback will make your organization more efficient in the long run. Gathering feedback from the people you serve will not only make your programs more impactful, but make your service-delivery more efficient. You might learn families don’t need or want something you’ve been providing for years or would rather participate in your program virtually so you could cut food and transportation expenses while boosting engagement rates. Feedback data might help you recognize how different programs can be combined, pared down, or supported by volunteers. In addition, having satisfaction data direct from your participants will make your grant proposals more appealing and your impact reports more compelling. That’s right, collecting feedback can both lower your administrative expenses and increase your fundability. Win, win.
  • How should you collect participant feedback? To collect in-depth, qualitative feedback about your services, organize a focus group with the individuals who participate in your programs or receive your services. Use a time and space with minimal barriers such as a community center (with social distancing) or video conferencing. Alternatively, if you want to collect high-level, quantitative data, consider surveying your participants. The survey should be brief and easy to access. For both focus group and survey options, consider offering incentives for participation and using third-party facilitator to ensure participants can be fully transparent.
  • What should you ask participants? Ask program participants if and how your services are making a difference for them; what about your services is most meaningful to them; what, if any, barriers complicate receiving your services; and what could improve their overall experience with your organization.
  1. Collecting feedback is great donor stewardship. By the end of the year, your donors are tired of being asked for money. The majority of American donors give to three or more organizations, so their inboxes are inundated with #GivingTuesday emails and asks for support. But remember the saying—”Ask for money, get advice. Ask for advice, get money twice?” December and January are great months for collecting feedback from your donors. Asking your donors to share their input makes them feel valued and engaged in your work. Plus, their feedback should help you determine what information is meaningful to them, why they support you, and how they feel connected to your mission. All of this data will help you build relationships with your donors, keep them engaged, and prepare for larger asks in the future.
  • How should you collect donor feedback? Digital surveys are excellent tools for collecting feedback from your donors. Send out a survey to your general donor list and consider posting the survey on your social media. For your major donors, gathering their feedback should be more personal. Enlist Board members to share the survey with one or two donors using a personalized email or set up a Zoom meeting to go through the questions in an interview style.
  • What should you ask donors? Ask donors if they feel well-connected to your organization, if they can see the impact of their giving, why they choose to give, whether they would recommend your organization to others, and how they prefer to be recognized. If the survey may reach lapsed donors, ask why they don’t currently give and what might inspire them to give in the future. Sound scary? Remember, if lapsed donors take the step to even open your survey (and many do), odds are they’re still interested in supporting you. Asking for their feedback can be the perfect way to reach out without making it awkward.
  1. Collecting feedback could solve your turnover problem. We hear a lot of nonprofits talking about their staff turnover rate and setting aggressive goals to curb turnover. However, not all turnover is bad turnover. What really matters is why staff members feel the need to move on. Is it a culture issue? A salary issue? Perhaps some teams are constantly overwhelmed while others are bored. Collecting staff feedback is an important and effective way to monitor your organizational health and assess what is working and what is not. These insights give you the “why” behind a turnover rate and help you get to solution faster. Feedback can help you get ahead of an issue before it becomes worse, identify blind spots, and even give you statistics to strengthen your staff recruitment.
  • How should you collect staff feedback? Whereas you might collect feedback from your participants and your donors once or maybe twice per year, you should collect staff feedback at least once per quarter. Many organizations use a “pulse survey” to collect essential, real-time feedback on a handful of key indicators. Pulse surveys allow you to identify issues as they occur and take more immediate action. It’s important to use the same questions in each survey so that data can be compared over time. If you don’t have a designated Human Resources professional on staff, consider using a third-party to ensure staff members can be fully transparent.
  • What should you ask staff members? Using the Net Promotor Score is a great place to start. You should also ask staff about their satisfaction with workplace culture, if they can maintain appropriate work/life balance, whether they feel connected with other employees, whether they feel appropriately valued, and if they see opportunities for professional growth. Consider asking about pain points as well — for example, how does your team feel about remote work or coming back to the office?
  1. Collecting feedback can breathe life into your Board. Halloween is behind us, but maybe your Board meetings still feel like a scene out of a zombie movie. You ask a basic question and get a sea of blank stares. It’s painful, we know. But often times, Boards become disengaged and zombie-like when members either don’t understand their role, or there is no clear structure of accountability to ensure everyone is doing their part. Many Board members feel embarrassed to admit what they don’t know so they don’t ask, and then the cycle of uncertainty continues. Gathering Board feedback can be a great way to break that cycle and get an honest sense of what Board members are thinking in real-time. Feedback data might tell you some members are ready to roll off while others are ready to step up into leadership roles. You might learn simple solutions — for example, maybe members would be more engaged if Board meetings were scheduled in the mornings instead of the evenings. Feedback results can give you an objective base to start from so that no one has to feel singled-out and you can address the elephant in the room with a positive, solutions-focused attitude.
  • How should you collect Board feedback? Ideally, the Executive or Governance Committee is accountable for collecting and analyzing feedback. However, the Board Chair may also lead or outsource a confidential feedback collection process. Similar to staff feedback, Board feedback is most effective when it is captured regularly. Consider using the pulse survey format to gather feedback quarterly. At a minimum, all Boards should complete an annual engagement survey.
  • What should you ask Board members? Ask Board members about their satisfaction with the Board’s culture, communication, and effectiveness; what they perceive to be the role of the Board; what they need to be an effective and engaged Board member; whether they feel valued; and what they would change about Board meetings. You can also ask about committee involvement, leadership goals, and satisfaction with their personal giving.

So many organizations have had to completely reimagine their work this year. Many have had to pause or cut programs, cancel fundraising events, and toss out their strategic plans. Maybe your organization is approaching 2021 with nothing but question marks. No survey or focus group will tell you what the future holds, but feedback can help you make informed decisions. Meet your stakeholders where they are and ask for their input. With their feedback, you can assess where organization is strong and what you need prioritize so that your decisions are made with greater reliability, clarity, and certainty.

Hannah Gooding has been a Consultant with Hedges since 2017. With a background in nonprofit program management, her expertise in research and strategic thinking has supported dozens of nonprofit organizations in Central Indiana.