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.

The holiday season of November & December has nonprofits both excited and nervous at the same time. Gaily Perry writes that:

For many nonprofits, one out of every two gifts comes in the last three months of the year…Online Giving is even more important at year-end. About 40 percent of online gifts are made in December. And 40-60 percent of those gifts are made the last two days of the year.

So naturally, everyone is rushing to find the best fundraising medium that will net their organization the most donations possible.  But charities need to take a step back because, believe it or not, proper fundraising encompasses more than just “direct mail vs. email solicitations” and even “Facebook vs. Twitter.”

A few weeks ago I was sitting with Nirit Roessler, Director of the Pradler Empowerment Program.  During the meeting she summarized her five strategic sources of fundraising, or what she calls the chamsa of fundraising (referring to the five fingers of the hand incorporated into the chamsa symbol).  They are:

1. COMMUNITY – private donations from individuals that identify with or benefit from a particular charity.
2. BUSINESS – funding from companies that either agree with a cause or see value in the publicity gained by associating with a cause or organization.
3. INCOME – revenue gained from selling a product or service that benefits others and that advances the mission of the organization.
4. FOUNDATION – grants from local/international foundations and institutions.
5. GOVERNMENT – grants or contracts from either local or federal governments where the nonprofit operates.

These are the points that should be driving the fundraising policy of an organization; these different areas can help an organization decide whether to play to its  strengths or work on its weaknesses.  As with anything else, fundraising after all,  is a question of strategy. Only after a well thought out approach should the medium or mediums to carry out this plan be discussed.

Is it too late for this holiday to rethink strategy? Perhaps.  But with the world’s economies seemingly on the rise and organizations rethinking their fundraising goals and focus, it is vital next year to adopt a pertinent and responsible fundraising strategy.  But don’t be too lazy, next year is only three weeks away.

Good hunting and happy Holidays.

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

Shuey