A list of the essential articles that I posted to Twitter from January 17, 2010 – January 23, 2010.  This week’s categories: Crisis in Haiti; Nonprofit Governance & Strategy; Internet, Social Media & Fundraising; Israel & Jewish Nonprofits; and Israel Economy & Finance.

Tizku LeMitzvot [May you continue to merit doing good deeds],

Shuey

<break>

Crisis in Haiti

RT @fundermentalist: New post: Where to give for Haitian relief http://twurl.nl/kak4nz

<break>

Nonprofit Governance & Strategy

New blog post: “Dear Mr. Foundation, Please Reject My Application.” http://ow.ly/YUFM

->@eJPhil: NPO investment committees want more direction & accountability from investment consultants. http://ow.ly/Xrwt

How an org can conduct a Self-Evaluation on a shoestring budget (Good tools, tip sheet & slides). http://ow.ly/XVoN via @LJacobwith

College president receives %-based bonus of money he raised, sparking controversy http://ow.ly/Z9mF via @Philanthropy // Good incentives?

<break>

Internet, Social Media & Fundraising

<break>

Donations to Israel Foreign Min. for Haiti aid NOT tax-exept. Expert: Why is gov competing with NPOs? http://ow.ly/YUul

Fighting the Handout Culture: What solutions available when 50% of eligibles for free food don’t take? http://ow.ly/ZY9U #Israel

RT @religion_state: -> @eJPhil: Is Start Up Nation Also the Big Lesson for Jewish Nonprofit Sector? by @GaryWexler http://ow.ly/Yu1P

<break>

RT @Israel_News: Bank of Israel will raise interest rate to 3.25% by end-year (current rate is 1.25%). http://ow.ly/XrkL

The best test to judge Israel’s economic health: The Beer Index (it slipped into the negative).http://ow.ly/XAqz

RT @Israel_News: Globes: Shekel-dollar exchange rate at 13-month low. Dollar now trading at 3.689. http://ow.ly/Y7zK

Israel Gov Ministries now on Twitter. Answers back almost immediately! http://ow.ly/Yvrt The list: http://ow.ly/YvHq

Israel is poorest of OECD countries (if it joins). 9 recommendations from OECD, incl. cutting child allowances. http://ow.ly/YUz8

Four separate times in my life, I have hit the proverbial pavement looking for a job.  I remember very clearly the two types of rejection that I received:

1. The “Outright” No – Painful and deflating but leaving no doubts. I moved on, hoping the future had something better in store.
2. The “We Were Very Impressed but Need Time to Decide How Best to Employ You” No – Slow and dragged out.  A lot of positive energy and upbeat words professed.  Encouraged, I even stopped looking at other prospects. Yet, despite all the enthusiasm, in the end no position was offered or available.

Give me the “Outright No” any day of the week and twice in a recession; you win some, you lose some.  The second, drawn-out no, is still a no, but wasted my time and got my hopes up over nothing.  Why not tell me no from the beginning instead of playing achy-breaky games with my heart?

Unfortunately, nonprofit organizations are being subjected to this same treatment, even more so now after the recession and the Madoff scandal.

I am hearing too many stories of charities that have been promised or reassured by private donors and foundations, alike, that it’s “business as usual” and the “check is in the mail.”  Not having any reasons to doubt, the organizations strategize their fundraising and structure their budget accordingly – only to find out later that:

• “business as usual” = reorganizing our priorities (a.k.a your organization is no longer a priority) or some other vague-sounding rejection.
• “the check is in the mail” = you ain’t getting squat.

To say that these stories upset me, is an understatement.   Donations and grants (should) serve one purpose and one purpose only: to help a nonprofit. In what Scrabble® dictionary or farmer’s almanac does this delayed surprise translate as helping a charity?

Last week, I shared the shock with a Nonprofit CEO of an organization that I am close with as she related a story with a painfully, similar theme: Earlier in the year, the charity received a letter from a foundation telling them that their grant had been reduced by $10,000 but that “it is still business as usual” and that thankfully the foundation wasn’t hard hit by recent economic events.  Then, out of the blue, the organization received a letter two weeks ago – an impersonal, standard letter mind you – telling them that the foundation was “rethinking its priorities” and, unfortunately, would not match its previous commitments.  And just like that, one-sixth of this organization’s budget had disappeared.

If any readers of this post are donors or foundations, please believe me that the “Outright No” is the preferred method of rejection by both recipients and applicants.  If nothing else, it gives an organization some additional time to adjust its fundraising goals and budget constraints to this new reality.  Even this can be charity.

Tizku LeMitzvot,

Shuey

N.B. An article entitled, “Working with Foundations, Never Taking Support for Granted” in eJewish Philanthropy details a similar story and how the charity responded.

Isn’t it amazing that the meeting we have the most often is the one that we are least prepared for? We dress up in our best and spend hours preaching to the couch in hopes of nailing that “really big” meeting. But when it comes down to that little meeting of the first impression, we often find ourselves caught totally unprepared, wishing we just had another shot. It is if we are surprised by the fact that life puts us in contact with a throng of strangers every day. This is no Murphy’s Law chance-happening; this is us simply not being prepared.

My grandfather Rabbi Abraham Fogel, of blessed memory, used to say that the letters comprising the Hebrew word for congratulations, mazal tov, stand for three things: place, time, and study. The first two are out of our hands, but the third, study, is our ability to make the best of the situations that life present us.

About five years ago I was speaking to a good friend who was a passionate and successful fundraiser. She lived in Israel but spent huge amounts of time flying to and from the United States on various fundraising trips. Her frequent travels earned her upgrades to first or business class every now and then. During the conversation, she said something I will never forget, “I never let an upgrade go to waste.” Surrounded by wealthy passengers, she took advantage of her situation to always make a new connection.

Or, perhaps, said a little differently from the other end of the spectrum. Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff to President Obama, was quoted in the NY Times as saying “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”

And how true it is. The next person we share an elevator with, bump into, cut-off, or spill coffee on could be the connection/donor that we’ve been waiting for our whole lives.

I was thinking of this idea when reading an article recently posted on eJewish Philanthropy written by Stephen Donshik entitled “Whose Responsibility is Fundraising Anyway?” In the article he details how important first impressions are. From the receptionist to the program coordinators to the CEO, one can never underestimate an initial impression. The first sound a potential donor hears on the other end of the telephone could, literally, make or break the deal. And more than just making sure that the employees answering the phones are polite and helpful, never make the caller “work” to give a donation.

These two attributes alone, being polite and helpful, have netted me bids to set me up (alas, I was already married by then), home-baked cookies, and even a few job offers — all from total strangers. I kid you not about the cookies.

But these principles are not enough.

I remember interviewing for a position at a large nonprofit organization about four years ago. Part of the interview process required me to prepare a two minute presentation on program material that I had been given. They explained to me that two minutes is approximately the time one has to describe what they do when meeting someone for the first time. The goal being, of course, that these two minutes can interest someone enough to take the next step.

First impressions are all around, like gravity, happening whether you want them to or not. So why not have them work for you instead of against?

On a similar note, how much thought have you put into describing what you do for a living? It is not a coincidence that a business card is a relatively small piece of paper. Can you succinctly define what you do and what your title is? If you can’t, you better figure it out because people’s attention span is a short and fragile thing.

And, of course, the best way to be prepared for the first impression is to prepare. Techsoup.org a number of years back listed the surefire ways “How to Deliver a Bad Presentation.”  It wasn’t a surprise to see the number one spot occupied by “skipping the practice sessions.”

The hundreds of pages of Dale Carnegie books out there tell us that there is a lot more to say about making the right first impression. However, I believe that (1) recognizing the tremendous opportunties in our everyday lives (2) being polite and helpful and (3) being prepared, are the main ingredients needed to transform our most frequent type of meeting into our most fruitful.

Tizku LeMitzvot [May you continue to merit doing good deeds],

Shuey