The launch of Google for Nonprofits in March seemed like a boon for organizations. Qualifying nonprofits would be able to use many of their popular services--including its office programs and Gmail--for free or at discounted rates. The key here, however, is the word "qualifying." Google placed some restrictions on which nonprofits would be eligible for their new program and, according to a report in Christianity Today, religious nonprofits were one of the groups that got the axe.
Faith-based groups that already had access to Google's free resources will be "grandfathered in" according to the report, but the search engine giant has made it a policy not to give these resources to any new group that considers religion, politics, or sexual orientation in hiring decisions. This practice has created headaches for organizations like Living Hope Baptist Church. The Christianity Today article reported that the Kentucky-based organization had hoped to connect 50 paid staffers and 270 volunteers with customized Gmail and office software, among other things. Those plans now have to be nixed.
The report says that Google is evaluating future changes. Religious organizations will now have to wait and see if any of those include them. To read the full article, head on over to Christianity Today. You can also read more articles about faith-based organizations on The NonProfit Times.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Thursday, August 25, 2011
"Jewish Indiana Jones" Reined In
File this one under "bizarre but true." Menachem Youlus, a self-proclaimed "Jewish Indiana Jones" who co-founded a Jewish charity to rescue Torah scrolls, has been arrested according to a report in The Wall Street Journal. Youlus will be prosecuted in New York City on charges of defrauding donors of hundreds thousands of dollars.
According to the charges against him, Youlus made up accounts that his charity, Save a Torah, found Torahs in Europe. These scrolls were said to have been lost or hidden during the Holocaust, and the charity claimed to have found some in concentration camps. Youlus used these stories to get money for Save a Torah, which raised $1.2 million between 2004 and 2010. To make matters worse for him, he is accused of embezzling $145,000 of those funds to the personal bank accounts of his Maryland business, the Jewish Book Store.
But wait, there's more! Youlus was also said to have claimed that Torahs he bought from dealers were rescued, using those claims to submit inflated and doctored invoices to his charity. This allowed him to be reimbursed at a far higher price than he actually paid for the scrolls. If convicted, Youlus will face up to 20 years in prison. No word as of yet if he claimed to have found the Holy Grail.
You can read the full article of this bizarre story in The Wall Street Journal.
According to the charges against him, Youlus made up accounts that his charity, Save a Torah, found Torahs in Europe. These scrolls were said to have been lost or hidden during the Holocaust, and the charity claimed to have found some in concentration camps. Youlus used these stories to get money for Save a Torah, which raised $1.2 million between 2004 and 2010. To make matters worse for him, he is accused of embezzling $145,000 of those funds to the personal bank accounts of his Maryland business, the Jewish Book Store.
But wait, there's more! Youlus was also said to have claimed that Torahs he bought from dealers were rescued, using those claims to submit inflated and doctored invoices to his charity. This allowed him to be reimbursed at a far higher price than he actually paid for the scrolls. If convicted, Youlus will face up to 20 years in prison. No word as of yet if he claimed to have found the Holy Grail.
You can read the full article of this bizarre story in The Wall Street Journal.
The 10 Commandments Of Nonprofit Communication
It's pretty incredible how much can change in a decade. Back in 1999, the Internet was still a new phenomenon; people still didn't know what to make of it. In 2011, the thought of doing anything without the it seems absurd. The rise of social media and mobile technology has allowed us to be plugged in at all times, for better or for worse. This has made the world of nonprofit communication much simpler, but it's also made it more convoluted. That's why Herschell Gordon Lewis, author of Hot Appeals or Burnt Offerings and frequent contributor to The NonProfit Times, wrote a new column which we just published on our site. He outlines "10 Commandments" that all nonprofits should follow if they want to survive in this new era of technology. Let's take a look at some of them:
The First Commandment: Thou shalt make response simple.
We’re deep in the Internet Era, in which attention spans have shrunk to minuscule size. Don’t ask for more information than you need until you have the prospect at least comfortably secured in your own web. And, avoid the nasty and too-common word “Submit.” Right now, before facing “Submit” head-on, start thinking about a substitute.
The Second Commandment: Thou shalt stay in character.
A peculiar development is what some veteran fundraisers call “The Facebook Effect.” The projected mood bobs, weaves, and shifts as the appeal thinks it progresses but actually generates confusion for what should be the most probable donors.
The Third Commandment: Thou shalt not steal, except from noncompetitive sources.
Yes, yes, all nonprofit appeals are competitive with all other nonprofit appeals. But if you’re a hospital in Albuquerque and see a usable bright idea in an appeal by a college in Pittsburgh (you should be decoying every nonprofit mailing and email you can find), grab it and run with it.
The Fourth Commandment: Thou shalt not fall for fads.
This is back to Facebook and Twitter. If with dollars spent, against dollars returned, these media work for you, stay with them. But if you’re there because you subscribe to the dangerous dictum “That which represents a change automatically represents a profitable change,” be more than observant. Be critically comparative.
The Fifth Commandment: Thou shalt never again start a fundraising letter with the ancient cliché, “Dear Friend.”
If this Commandment puzzles you, you’re in trouble.
Don't stop here, there's still 10 more commandments to go! Read the rest of them over at The NonProfit Times.
The First Commandment: Thou shalt make response simple.
We’re deep in the Internet Era, in which attention spans have shrunk to minuscule size. Don’t ask for more information than you need until you have the prospect at least comfortably secured in your own web. And, avoid the nasty and too-common word “Submit.” Right now, before facing “Submit” head-on, start thinking about a substitute.
The Second Commandment: Thou shalt stay in character.
A peculiar development is what some veteran fundraisers call “The Facebook Effect.” The projected mood bobs, weaves, and shifts as the appeal thinks it progresses but actually generates confusion for what should be the most probable donors.
The Third Commandment: Thou shalt not steal, except from noncompetitive sources.
Yes, yes, all nonprofit appeals are competitive with all other nonprofit appeals. But if you’re a hospital in Albuquerque and see a usable bright idea in an appeal by a college in Pittsburgh (you should be decoying every nonprofit mailing and email you can find), grab it and run with it.
The Fourth Commandment: Thou shalt not fall for fads.
This is back to Facebook and Twitter. If with dollars spent, against dollars returned, these media work for you, stay with them. But if you’re there because you subscribe to the dangerous dictum “That which represents a change automatically represents a profitable change,” be more than observant. Be critically comparative.
The Fifth Commandment: Thou shalt never again start a fundraising letter with the ancient cliché, “Dear Friend.”
If this Commandment puzzles you, you’re in trouble.
Don't stop here, there's still 10 more commandments to go! Read the rest of them over at The NonProfit Times.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Kellogg Co. To Nonprofit: Lay Off Our Toucan!
What does a nonprofit created to defend indigenous Mayan culture have in common with a sugary cereal? According to Kellogg Co., a toucan.
In a report in The Battle Creek Inquirer, the cereal company is requesting that Maya Archaelogy Initiative (MAI) stops using an image of a toucan in their logo, claiming it infringes on Toucan Sam, the mascot that promotes their Fruit Loops cereal. MAI has denied the charge, saying that the image in their logo is made up of "iconic images."
It does seem slightly strange that this would even be an issue. Kellogg and MAI have absolutely nothing in common, so there is really no competition there. What do you think? Battle Creek Inquirer has both images posted in their article, so check it out and decide for yourself.
In a report in The Battle Creek Inquirer, the cereal company is requesting that Maya Archaelogy Initiative (MAI) stops using an image of a toucan in their logo, claiming it infringes on Toucan Sam, the mascot that promotes their Fruit Loops cereal. MAI has denied the charge, saying that the image in their logo is made up of "iconic images."
It does seem slightly strange that this would even be an issue. Kellogg and MAI have absolutely nothing in common, so there is really no competition there. What do you think? Battle Creek Inquirer has both images posted in their article, so check it out and decide for yourself.
Retro Article of The Week: Shock And Awe Makes An Impression
For this week's Retro Article, we go back to September 15th, 2008. On this day in history, the largest bankruptcy filing in US history occured when Lehman Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This was one of the many financial institutions that fell because of the impact of the Great Recession. In happier news, The NonProfit Times published their September 15th issue, which contained the following article about controversial ad campaigns:
A poster featuring a busty, D-cup model will turn heads. Couple it with a precocious, pig-tailed face of a little girl and it will stir an Internet frenzy.
That's what happened to The United Way of Greater Milwaukee's (UWGM) statutory rape awareness campaign when the faces of adolescent girls were imposed on full-figured, adult female bodies. But before the campaign could launch, the ad images leaked on the Internet and the campaign was tossed, even though the ads tested well in focus groups.
"It was obvious that the ads were being misconstrued," said Nicole Angresano, the community impact associate director for UWGM. Angresano said that changes were made to the images and text and the leaked versions represented earlier design prototypes.
"If we were to move forward, those were not the versions they would have seen," said Angresano, who explained that the ads were created to discourage adult men from having sex with under-aged girls.
Some 71 percent of babies born to teen girls in Wisconsin are fathered by adult males older than 20. In 20 percent of those cases, the fathers are at least six years older than the mothers, according to the Wisconsin Subcommittee on Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention study. The UWGM assumes that the statistics have stayed relatively the same since 1998, through case studies and anecdotal evidence from law enforcement, said Angresano. A new study is under way but results have not yet been released.
If you wish to read the full article, simply head on over to NPT's back-issue archive.
A poster featuring a busty, D-cup model will turn heads. Couple it with a precocious, pig-tailed face of a little girl and it will stir an Internet frenzy.
That's what happened to The United Way of Greater Milwaukee's (UWGM) statutory rape awareness campaign when the faces of adolescent girls were imposed on full-figured, adult female bodies. But before the campaign could launch, the ad images leaked on the Internet and the campaign was tossed, even though the ads tested well in focus groups.
"It was obvious that the ads were being misconstrued," said Nicole Angresano, the community impact associate director for UWGM. Angresano said that changes were made to the images and text and the leaked versions represented earlier design prototypes.
"If we were to move forward, those were not the versions they would have seen," said Angresano, who explained that the ads were created to discourage adult men from having sex with under-aged girls.
Some 71 percent of babies born to teen girls in Wisconsin are fathered by adult males older than 20. In 20 percent of those cases, the fathers are at least six years older than the mothers, according to the Wisconsin Subcommittee on Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention study. The UWGM assumes that the statistics have stayed relatively the same since 1998, through case studies and anecdotal evidence from law enforcement, said Angresano. A new study is under way but results have not yet been released.
If you wish to read the full article, simply head on over to NPT's back-issue archive.
Some Data On Religious Donors
In case you missed it, we posted two new articles from our August 1st issue yesterday. One of these was an exclusive study done with Infogroup about religious donors. There's a lot of information in this study, but the most interesting thing to me is that those who give to religious groups are more likely to give to more charities than those who don't. Let's take a look at the numbers:
It's clear from these numbers that, for whatever reason, religious donors tend to give to more charities than secular donors. Why this is happening is not so clear. Perhaps the religion they follow encourages giving? One theory, which is explored in the article, is that a large percentage of religious donors come from high-income families. In fact, 97 percent of respondents with households incomes of $100,000 or more said they gave to other groups in addition to their religious charities.
What are your thoughts on this study? Do you have any theories as to why religious donors give more than secular ones?
- Nine out of 10 people who gave to religious organizations said they also gave to at least one other charity. This is compared to seven out of 10 who did this but did not give to a religious group.
- Of the 90 percent that gave to other groups, three-quarters of them focus their giving on one to five charities besides their religious groups; 11 percent give to six to 10 charities, and only five percent give to more than 10 charities.
- Forty-seven percent of respondents said they gave to religious groups.
- For those 65 and older who gave to religion, only six percent did not give to another group. This is compared to 21 percent of seniors who did not give to religion.
It's clear from these numbers that, for whatever reason, religious donors tend to give to more charities than secular donors. Why this is happening is not so clear. Perhaps the religion they follow encourages giving? One theory, which is explored in the article, is that a large percentage of religious donors come from high-income families. In fact, 97 percent of respondents with households incomes of $100,000 or more said they gave to other groups in addition to their religious charities.
What are your thoughts on this study? Do you have any theories as to why religious donors give more than secular ones?
Monday, August 22, 2011
Management Tip: 3 Ideas For Transformative Major Gifts
It's the constant question for all nonprofits: How do I get a donor to give a major gift? They are the engine for nonprofits, yet it can be intimidating to ask donors to give more and more money. There has to be an easier way, right?
At the 2011 Bridge Conference, Nina Fascione, executive director for Bat Conservation International, and Martha H. Schumacher, president of Hazen, Inc, explained what nonprofits can do to improve their success with major gifts. We covered these suggestions in our most recent management tip:
* Cultivate -- Nonprofits can cultivate major donors through education and outreach activities. By demonstrating the value of a philanthropic investment and by highlighting value-added benefits, donors can be put into mid-level donor track.
* Upgrade Mid-Level Donors -- Once you’ve added mid-level donors to your organization, it is important to try to upgrade them. Show them outcome measurements and demonstrate mission impact, while giving monthly giving options to provide a multitude of giving options.
* Introduce Your New CEO to Your Major Donors -- After you’ve upgraded your mid-level donors, make them feel like they are playing an active role in the organization. With active listening and including transparency, your donors will feel more attached to the organization.
And remember the Three E’s: Enthusiasm, Energy, Economic Accountability.
As you can see, cultivating relationships with donors is a major part of these suggestions. You have to start at the ground level before you start seeing the results you want. There may be no quick fix to start seeing those major gifts flow in, but these tips might be the next best thing.
At the 2011 Bridge Conference, Nina Fascione, executive director for Bat Conservation International, and Martha H. Schumacher, president of Hazen, Inc, explained what nonprofits can do to improve their success with major gifts. We covered these suggestions in our most recent management tip:
* Cultivate -- Nonprofits can cultivate major donors through education and outreach activities. By demonstrating the value of a philanthropic investment and by highlighting value-added benefits, donors can be put into mid-level donor track.
* Upgrade Mid-Level Donors -- Once you’ve added mid-level donors to your organization, it is important to try to upgrade them. Show them outcome measurements and demonstrate mission impact, while giving monthly giving options to provide a multitude of giving options.
* Introduce Your New CEO to Your Major Donors -- After you’ve upgraded your mid-level donors, make them feel like they are playing an active role in the organization. With active listening and including transparency, your donors will feel more attached to the organization.
And remember the Three E’s: Enthusiasm, Energy, Economic Accountability.
As you can see, cultivating relationships with donors is a major part of these suggestions. You have to start at the ground level before you start seeing the results you want. There may be no quick fix to start seeing those major gifts flow in, but these tips might be the next best thing.
Three Nonprofit Hospitals Are Denied Tax-Exempt Status
On the heels of the recent report that some California nonprofits were being denied tax-exempt status, FierceHealthcare.com reported last week that 3 nonprofits hospitals in Illinois lost their claims for tax-exemption. According to the report, the Illinois Department of Revenue shot down the request because the hospitals didn't provide enough charitable care to their patients. The three hospitals were Northwestern Memorial Hospital: Prentice Women's Hospital, Edward Hospital, and Decatur Memorial Hospital.
The decision by the state of Illinois is hardly surprising given its recent history on these matters. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled last year that Provena Covenant Medical Center didn't fit the requirements of a nonprofit because only one-half of a percent of patients received charitable care during 2002. Provena flatly denied this charge, saying they provided $38 million in free care and benefits.
Similarly, the three hospitals in this most recent decision have released statistics to fight the charges from the state. They now have 60 days to have a judge review the state's decision. We will be sure to provide an update should that happen. In the mean time, read the full article from FierceHealthcare.com.
The decision by the state of Illinois is hardly surprising given its recent history on these matters. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled last year that Provena Covenant Medical Center didn't fit the requirements of a nonprofit because only one-half of a percent of patients received charitable care during 2002. Provena flatly denied this charge, saying they provided $38 million in free care and benefits.
Similarly, the three hospitals in this most recent decision have released statistics to fight the charges from the state. They now have 60 days to have a judge review the state's decision. We will be sure to provide an update should that happen. In the mean time, read the full article from FierceHealthcare.com.
Friday, August 19, 2011
NJ Will Not Pursue Disclosure Requirement
The NonProfit Times reported last month on a proposal by the state of New Jersey that would have required nonprofits to provide donors an opportunity to designate a specific program when they made their gifts. After receiving a wave of negative comments from concerned nonprofits, the state no longer plans to pursue this proposal.
In an article just posted on the NPT website, we learn that the comments garnered by the pre-proposal process made it clear to the state that nonprofits were not at all excited about the proposed rule. They were able to successfully convince the state that the rule would have been very difficult to implement, and also proposed alternative ways to generate donor awareness about the right to designate.
If you would like to read the full article, which includes a list of why nonprofits felt the proposed rule was unacceptable, head on over to The NonProfit Times.
In an article just posted on the NPT website, we learn that the comments garnered by the pre-proposal process made it clear to the state that nonprofits were not at all excited about the proposed rule. They were able to successfully convince the state that the rule would have been very difficult to implement, and also proposed alternative ways to generate donor awareness about the right to designate.
If you would like to read the full article, which includes a list of why nonprofits felt the proposed rule was unacceptable, head on over to The NonProfit Times.
Heifer CEO Suing Board For $5 Million
We just put an article up on our website in which we learn that Heifer International Foundation CEO Domingo Barrios is suing the organization's board for $5 million in damages. Barrios was suspended for allegedly violating confidentiality rules. He claims that the real reason stems from his questioning of their governance practices. Here's an excerpt from the story:
In his lawsuit, Barrios alleges that Williams and Smith encouraged him to “violate his fiduciary responsibilities” to the foundation by directing him not to reveal “certain pertinent information which would be detrimental to the foundation.” In June, the board approved a resolution that would give Heifer’s CEO the power to decide on unrestricted bequests, permitting the organization “to control and participate in planned giving,” Barrios said, and essentially destroying a primary purpose of the foundation.
Barrios claims he was asked by Smith and Williams not to share the proposal with the foundation until Heifer met to approve the resolution, which he believes violated rules of governance. He informed the foundation’s board of the adverse effect the resolution could have and subsequently was suspended for allegedly violating confidentiality rules and claims by the board chairman that he was “ripping the organizations apart,” according to court documents.
Shannon Boshears, director of communications and research at the foundation, said the organization has not been served with legal papers and does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.
These situations usually turn out pretty ugly; when bad blood builds up, you never know what can happen. Get the full scoop on this story at The NonProfit Times.
In his lawsuit, Barrios alleges that Williams and Smith encouraged him to “violate his fiduciary responsibilities” to the foundation by directing him not to reveal “certain pertinent information which would be detrimental to the foundation.” In June, the board approved a resolution that would give Heifer’s CEO the power to decide on unrestricted bequests, permitting the organization “to control and participate in planned giving,” Barrios said, and essentially destroying a primary purpose of the foundation.
Barrios claims he was asked by Smith and Williams not to share the proposal with the foundation until Heifer met to approve the resolution, which he believes violated rules of governance. He informed the foundation’s board of the adverse effect the resolution could have and subsequently was suspended for allegedly violating confidentiality rules and claims by the board chairman that he was “ripping the organizations apart,” according to court documents.
Shannon Boshears, director of communications and research at the foundation, said the organization has not been served with legal papers and does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.
These situations usually turn out pretty ugly; when bad blood builds up, you never know what can happen. Get the full scoop on this story at The NonProfit Times.
Amy Winehouse Foundation Hits A Snag
Mitch Winehouse, father of the late Amy Winehouse, told the BBC Newsbeat blog that plans to create a foundation in his daughter's name have hit a snag. The problem? The proposed name, 'The Amy Winehouse Foundation,' has already been registered. Winehouse insists the foundation will still be created, but he's going to hold off on his plans until this issue has been resolved.
Foundations created in celebrities' names are often meant to promote a cause that was important to that individual. In this case, Mitch Winehouse had planned to have his foundation help those who were struggling with substance abuse. Amy Winehouse, who died last month at the age of 27, had long struggled with addictions to drugs and alcohol. Her father said that she had gotten past her drug addictions at the time of her death, but that she was having trouble with alcohol. The cause of her death has yet to be determined.
If you would like to read more about The Amy Winehouse Foundation, head over to BBC Newsbeat. If there is any update on the status of the foundation, we will be sure to post about it here.
Foundations created in celebrities' names are often meant to promote a cause that was important to that individual. In this case, Mitch Winehouse had planned to have his foundation help those who were struggling with substance abuse. Amy Winehouse, who died last month at the age of 27, had long struggled with addictions to drugs and alcohol. Her father said that she had gotten past her drug addictions at the time of her death, but that she was having trouble with alcohol. The cause of her death has yet to be determined.
If you would like to read more about The Amy Winehouse Foundation, head over to BBC Newsbeat. If there is any update on the status of the foundation, we will be sure to post about it here.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Tim Nelson, CEO Of Hammer Residences, Dies
Tim Nelson, CEO of Hammer Residences, died yesterday while on vacation in Colorado, according to a report by KARE 11 NBC. He was 58. At this writing, the cause of death was not revealed. Lisbeth Armstrong, who is currently Hammer's Director of Program Services, has been selected as interim CEO.
Nelson worked at the Minnesota-based nonprofit for 34 years, and was well known for his work on disabilities. He was appointed as CEO in 1998, and led Hammer to be selected for NPT's Top 50 Best Nonprofits To Work For in 2011. You can read the full obituary over at the KARE 11 website. Our thoughts go out to Nelson's family, friends, and colleagues.
Nelson worked at the Minnesota-based nonprofit for 34 years, and was well known for his work on disabilities. He was appointed as CEO in 1998, and led Hammer to be selected for NPT's Top 50 Best Nonprofits To Work For in 2011. You can read the full obituary over at the KARE 11 website. Our thoughts go out to Nelson's family, friends, and colleagues.
NPT At The 2011 New York Nonprofit Conference
The 2011 New York Nonprofit Conference just ended today, and The NonProfit Times was there to cover all of the action. One particular event took the interest of our staff writer Sam Fanburg. It was a presentation by James Mapes designed to introduce a new way of thinking. Mapes, who wrote the book "Quantum Leap Thinking: An Owners Guide to the Mind," said the skills he would teach the audience would help improve their abilities as fundraisers:
Mapes, a speaker, performance coach and imagination expert, began his speech by discussing the realm of the conscious and subconscious. By understanding the two separately, Mapes argued, we could help influence our subconscious, through visualization so that we can live out our goals in the conscious.
Mapes likened the struggle between our subconscious and conscious to that of an elephant and its rider. The rider is our conscious, you can rationally see what is coming ahead of them, yet cannot control the elephant, our subconscious. The elephant or “subconscious,” wants what is wants, “now” and does not give up a short-term sacrifice for a long-term payoff.
Mapes' methods might have been a bit unorthodox, but the 500-member audience took him very seriously by the end of the presentation. What changed? Mapes had the audience perform an exercise where they were told to move a metal washer attached to a string--with their minds. Many in the audience were able to successfully do this by concentrating deeply on imagining the washer move in circles. His presentation wasn't just gimmicks, though. Mapes gave the audience five steps for living an exceptional life:
• Make friends with reality- Turn your fear into positive action and control what can be controlled.
• Adjust your attitude- Have a positive attitude with co-workers, your team and clients, your family and friends and social network.
• Create a solid support system- Build your support system by helping others achieve their goals. Surround yourself with people who have a positive attitude.
• Ask for help and express your gratitude- Set aside your ego and ask for help from your friends.
• Create a vision that will carry you on through crisis- Use the power of imagery to quiet stress and fear to create a positive expectation for the future. Visualization is a very this very tool that can help serve you, your family and team. Vision and clear communication of vision is the mark of a true leader.
Want to learn more about Mapes' presentation? Head on over to the NPT website for the full scoop.
Mapes, a speaker, performance coach and imagination expert, began his speech by discussing the realm of the conscious and subconscious. By understanding the two separately, Mapes argued, we could help influence our subconscious, through visualization so that we can live out our goals in the conscious.
Mapes likened the struggle between our subconscious and conscious to that of an elephant and its rider. The rider is our conscious, you can rationally see what is coming ahead of them, yet cannot control the elephant, our subconscious. The elephant or “subconscious,” wants what is wants, “now” and does not give up a short-term sacrifice for a long-term payoff.
Mapes' methods might have been a bit unorthodox, but the 500-member audience took him very seriously by the end of the presentation. What changed? Mapes had the audience perform an exercise where they were told to move a metal washer attached to a string--with their minds. Many in the audience were able to successfully do this by concentrating deeply on imagining the washer move in circles. His presentation wasn't just gimmicks, though. Mapes gave the audience five steps for living an exceptional life:
• Make friends with reality- Turn your fear into positive action and control what can be controlled.
• Adjust your attitude- Have a positive attitude with co-workers, your team and clients, your family and friends and social network.
• Create a solid support system- Build your support system by helping others achieve their goals. Surround yourself with people who have a positive attitude.
• Ask for help and express your gratitude- Set aside your ego and ask for help from your friends.
• Create a vision that will carry you on through crisis- Use the power of imagery to quiet stress and fear to create a positive expectation for the future. Visualization is a very this very tool that can help serve you, your family and team. Vision and clear communication of vision is the mark of a true leader.
Want to learn more about Mapes' presentation? Head on over to the NPT website for the full scoop.
Purchase NPT Back Issues
Picture this: There was this great article on fundraising tips in The NonProfit Times a few months ago, and you wanted to show some of your colleagues. There's only one problem: You lost the issue. To make matters worse, it wasn't one of the articles featured in the online preview of that issue. What a disaster.
Luckily for all of our subscribers, this scenario never has to play out. That's because we offer back issues via our online store. We currently sell all of our magazines from 2009-2011 at $6.95 per issue. If you need an article from a much older issue, you can always contact us directly and request it.
Visit our online store today and get back your lost issues!
Luckily for all of our subscribers, this scenario never has to play out. That's because we offer back issues via our online store. We currently sell all of our magazines from 2009-2011 at $6.95 per issue. If you need an article from a much older issue, you can always contact us directly and request it.
Visit our online store today and get back your lost issues!
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Online Game Helps Charity
Who said gaming has no real world value?
Mashable.com, the online technology/entertainment news site, recently wrote a report on an online game called Funky Nurse. It was developed by Miniclip and the UK-based charity Teenage Cancer Trust. The player takes the role of a nurse in a cancer care unit and must do whatever possible to help keep the patients happy. This includes everything from taking them to entertainment rooms to finding upgrades for the hospital. The game is meant not just for entertainment purposes, but also for education: Both on the disease and the charity.
At the end of each level, players are given statistics about cancer amongst teens in the UK. The Mashable story lists one of the statistics: “Every day in the UK, six young people aged 13 to 24 are told they have cancer. That's about 2,100 per year." Players are then given the option of learning more about Teenage Cancer Trust before moving onto the next level. The game is currently played by 65 million people on Miniclip.com, giving the charity a lot of visibility.
This is not the first time gaming has been use to advance a cause. The annual Games For Change conference is devoted to giving developers a platform to showcase games that are meant to serve a purpose beyond simple entertainment. NPT covers this conference every year, most recently when we covered Al Gore's keynote address at this year's event.
If you want to learn more about Funky Nurse, read the full article over at Mashable.
Mashable.com, the online technology/entertainment news site, recently wrote a report on an online game called Funky Nurse. It was developed by Miniclip and the UK-based charity Teenage Cancer Trust. The player takes the role of a nurse in a cancer care unit and must do whatever possible to help keep the patients happy. This includes everything from taking them to entertainment rooms to finding upgrades for the hospital. The game is meant not just for entertainment purposes, but also for education: Both on the disease and the charity.
At the end of each level, players are given statistics about cancer amongst teens in the UK. The Mashable story lists one of the statistics: “Every day in the UK, six young people aged 13 to 24 are told they have cancer. That's about 2,100 per year." Players are then given the option of learning more about Teenage Cancer Trust before moving onto the next level. The game is currently played by 65 million people on Miniclip.com, giving the charity a lot of visibility.
This is not the first time gaming has been use to advance a cause. The annual Games For Change conference is devoted to giving developers a platform to showcase games that are meant to serve a purpose beyond simple entertainment. NPT covers this conference every year, most recently when we covered Al Gore's keynote address at this year's event.
If you want to learn more about Funky Nurse, read the full article over at Mashable.
Retro Article Of The Week: Unique Items Drive Fundraising Auctions
It's all well and good to keep our readers up-to-date on the latest articles on our website, but we shouldn't forget about those articles from the past. That's why I'm going to start posting excerpts from some of our older articles. So let's go back to April 15th, 2008. On this date, the then Bush White House gave $200 million in aid to help with the food shortages in Africa. On our website, we had just put up a preview of the newest issue of The NonProfit Times. One of the articles included in this issue focused on some pretty interesting items sold at an online fundraising auction:
An autographed copy of the speech by Barack Obama after his victory in the Iowa caucuses; two torn, plastic Wal-Mart bags; Stephen Hawking in zero gravity. Even "Carnac The Magnificent" might have been stumped by the answer: Name three items sold by nonprofits via online auctions.
With an estimated $16 billion a year being spent during online auctions, there is no shortage of wacky stuff you can find. But what items are nonprofits (or their supporters) using best to raise money for their charity?
Sports tickets and sports memorabilia have a proven track record when it comes to online auctions. The New England Aquarium in Boston got a hold of tickets to this year's Super Bowl three days before the big game. The tickets were posted on Thursday morning, with bidding reaching $4,200 by noon that day, before someone used the Buy Now feature and purchased them for $8,000. "You can't do that in a room, because the event might not be for another few months," said Jon Carson, CEO of cMarket, an online auction company in Cambridge, Mass.
Tickets to opening day at Fenway Park in Boston were going for about $900 on cMarket a month before the game. Boston Red Sox World Series tickets were also big last fall. Lance Armstrong's autographed yellow jersey from the 2003 Tour de France raked in $36,000 for the Pan Mass Challenge.
Sports memorabilia is a big seller, particularly among men, but items linked to a celebrity also bring in their fair share. Just ask Oxfam America, which is fortunate to have actress Scarlett Johansson as a supporter. With a little effort, she could be good for raising six figures for the charity by herself this year.
I'm not sure about the rest of you, but that sounds like it would have been an amazing auction to be a part of. Interested in taking a trip further down memory lane? Read the rest of this article on the NPTimes website.
An autographed copy of the speech by Barack Obama after his victory in the Iowa caucuses; two torn, plastic Wal-Mart bags; Stephen Hawking in zero gravity. Even "Carnac The Magnificent" might have been stumped by the answer: Name three items sold by nonprofits via online auctions.
With an estimated $16 billion a year being spent during online auctions, there is no shortage of wacky stuff you can find. But what items are nonprofits (or their supporters) using best to raise money for their charity?
Sports tickets and sports memorabilia have a proven track record when it comes to online auctions. The New England Aquarium in Boston got a hold of tickets to this year's Super Bowl three days before the big game. The tickets were posted on Thursday morning, with bidding reaching $4,200 by noon that day, before someone used the Buy Now feature and purchased them for $8,000. "You can't do that in a room, because the event might not be for another few months," said Jon Carson, CEO of cMarket, an online auction company in Cambridge, Mass.
Tickets to opening day at Fenway Park in Boston were going for about $900 on cMarket a month before the game. Boston Red Sox World Series tickets were also big last fall. Lance Armstrong's autographed yellow jersey from the 2003 Tour de France raked in $36,000 for the Pan Mass Challenge.
Sports memorabilia is a big seller, particularly among men, but items linked to a celebrity also bring in their fair share. Just ask Oxfam America, which is fortunate to have actress Scarlett Johansson as a supporter. With a little effort, she could be good for raising six figures for the charity by herself this year.
I'm not sure about the rest of you, but that sounds like it would have been an amazing auction to be a part of. Interested in taking a trip further down memory lane? Read the rest of this article on the NPTimes website.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Some California Nonprofits Denied Tax Exemption
Think your organization has it rough? According to a recent report in The New York Times, a number of California nonprofits are being denied property tax exemptions because the state's chief tax collector says they aren't doing enough to help the state's residents specifically/directly. It's not known how many nonprofits are being affected or why this is now an issue, though the report cites California's budget crisis as a possible reason.
Nonprofits clashing with government on tax exemptions is hardly breaking news. The Times article brings up the case of Hawaii attempting to impose a 1 percent tax on nonprofit groups, or when Boston asked nonprofits to pay what amounted to a property tax. There was also a report on our website about how most nonprofits paid some form of tax.
It is worth noting that the process to apply for tax-exemption in California is much different than other states. The Times piece describes it as a "two-tiered system." Applicants first have to apply to the Board of Equalization, which collects state-mandated fees and certifies whether you are eligible for an exemption. The final decision, however, rests in the hands of assessors in the state's 58 counties. They make their decision by determining whether the property in question will have a "primary benefit" to the state. If that sounds vague, there is a reason for that. The article quotes Anita Gore, spokesman for the Board of Equalization, as saying that some things nonprofits do can't be "quantified in that sort of easy way."
If you are interested in reading the full story, head on over to The New York Times.
Nonprofits clashing with government on tax exemptions is hardly breaking news. The Times article brings up the case of Hawaii attempting to impose a 1 percent tax on nonprofit groups, or when Boston asked nonprofits to pay what amounted to a property tax. There was also a report on our website about how most nonprofits paid some form of tax.
It is worth noting that the process to apply for tax-exemption in California is much different than other states. The Times piece describes it as a "two-tiered system." Applicants first have to apply to the Board of Equalization, which collects state-mandated fees and certifies whether you are eligible for an exemption. The final decision, however, rests in the hands of assessors in the state's 58 counties. They make their decision by determining whether the property in question will have a "primary benefit" to the state. If that sounds vague, there is a reason for that. The article quotes Anita Gore, spokesman for the Board of Equalization, as saying that some things nonprofits do can't be "quantified in that sort of easy way."
If you are interested in reading the full story, head on over to The New York Times.
Schumann To Leave Lutheran Services in America
Jill Schumann of Lutheran Services in America (LSA) announced yesterday she would leave the Baltimore, MD-based organization on December 31st. She is leaving to pursue an opportunity at ParenteBeard, an accounting and consulting firm. The company is developing a Mid-Atlantic nonprofit consulting practice, and Schumann will be heading it. In announcing her decision to staff, she said:
Nonprofit CEOs have seen a lot of changes in the past couple of months, both planned and unplanned. We learned over the weekend of the tragic passing of Peter Goldberg of Families International, but there was also the death of former Red Cross CEO Bernadine Healey just a couple of weeks ago. We also saw Steve Gunderson step down from the Council on Foundations, Carolyn Woo take over at Catholic Relief Services, and Gary Bass step down from OMB Watch.
“My work at LSA has brought together my faith, my passion for the church’s work in the world, my earnest desire that all people have the barriers removed that allow them to put their gifts in the world, and my real love for social ministry organizations and their leaders. I am quite certain I will never have work I love as much.”Prior to her work with LSA, Schumann launched Kairos Health Systems, a nonprofit post acute care alliance, and served in executive roles with nonprofit and for-profit organizations including on the senior team of Tressler Lutheran Services. She created programs in post acute healthcare, behavioral health and chemical dependency treatment. She has consulted with church organizations, healthcare, aging services and social service providers particularly around innovative programming for the future. She was just selected to NPT's Power & Influence Top 50 for the ninth year in a row.
Nonprofit CEOs have seen a lot of changes in the past couple of months, both planned and unplanned. We learned over the weekend of the tragic passing of Peter Goldberg of Families International, but there was also the death of former Red Cross CEO Bernadine Healey just a couple of weeks ago. We also saw Steve Gunderson step down from the Council on Foundations, Carolyn Woo take over at Catholic Relief Services, and Gary Bass step down from OMB Watch.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Management Tip: 5 Trends In Individual Giving
This week's nonprofit management tip focuses on 5 recent trends in individual giving:
Giving is changing. That is, if it’s not staying the same. Or, maybe it’s changing and staying the same.
Trying to keep up with giving trends can be an endless exercise, but at 2011 Fundraising Day in New York, Margaret Holman said there are certain discernible trends in individual giving, and knowing them can be helpful.
Holman offered the following:
• Major donors continue to give, but they are narrowing their focus to fewer charities for bigger impact.
• People give when they have a sense of security and optimism about the future. Few Americans do right now.
• Some trends are still true. For example: Lower-income people tend to be more generous than higher-income individuals; The most generous donors are likely to give by mail and less likely than average to give online; More generous donors are more intentional about planning their support; and, Giving still happens because donors are involved with organizations; 42 percent of donors volunteer with their organizations.
• Demographics still matter. There will be a tsunami of Baby Boomers moving into planned giving territory. There is the challenge of feeding the donor pipeline of younger donors.
• People check out charities in the following ways: Talked to someone who supports it; Visited the website or searched the Internet for news; Checked with a watchdog organization; or, Visited the organization in person.
To read more tips like this, head to the Donors section of our management tips page.
Giving is changing. That is, if it’s not staying the same. Or, maybe it’s changing and staying the same.
Trying to keep up with giving trends can be an endless exercise, but at 2011 Fundraising Day in New York, Margaret Holman said there are certain discernible trends in individual giving, and knowing them can be helpful.
Holman offered the following:
• Major donors continue to give, but they are narrowing their focus to fewer charities for bigger impact.
• People give when they have a sense of security and optimism about the future. Few Americans do right now.
• Some trends are still true. For example: Lower-income people tend to be more generous than higher-income individuals; The most generous donors are likely to give by mail and less likely than average to give online; More generous donors are more intentional about planning their support; and, Giving still happens because donors are involved with organizations; 42 percent of donors volunteer with their organizations.
• Demographics still matter. There will be a tsunami of Baby Boomers moving into planned giving territory. There is the challenge of feeding the donor pipeline of younger donors.
• People check out charities in the following ways: Talked to someone who supports it; Visited the website or searched the Internet for news; Checked with a watchdog organization; or, Visited the organization in person.
To read more tips like this, head to the Donors section of our management tips page.
Does Mexico Have A Charitable Giving Problem?
Mexico has all the trappings of a perfect tourist destination: Beaches, great weather, beautiful scenery, and plenty of fun activities. This doesn't mean it's without problems. Gruesome murders and violence have plagued the country in recent years, sparking policy makers and advocacy groups to try and find a reason for it. There are plenty of theories out there, but The Washington Post has reported on one that I find very interesting: A lack of corporate and individual philanthropy.
The article cites a report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that lists Mexico as having very weak charitable giving numbers. This is despite the fact that the country has the lowest taxes and second-highest inequality of income of the 34 nations in the OECD. Although philanthropy levels have improved since a 0.04 percent mark in 2003, they are still lower than they should be.
Much of the charitable giving that does go on in Mexico is very informal, according to the Post article. Philanthropists don't want to take public credit for fear of extortion and kidnapping. This has led to a population that is eager to donate because of the recent outbreak in violence, but one that is also weary of attracting too much attention to themselves. There is also a serious corruption problem among Mexican officials, leaving potential donors skeptical of charities. Mistrust is one of the core reasons behind Mexico's philanthropy problem.
It's anybody's guess as to how to increase Mexico's charitable giving. Some will say that decreasing the violence is key, but that's a whole problem in and of itself. The article ends with a suggestion from the executive director of the Mexican Center for Philanthropy, who says that Mexico needs tax reform. This is a very fascinating issue, and I suggest heading over to The Washington Post to read the full article.
The article cites a report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that lists Mexico as having very weak charitable giving numbers. This is despite the fact that the country has the lowest taxes and second-highest inequality of income of the 34 nations in the OECD. Although philanthropy levels have improved since a 0.04 percent mark in 2003, they are still lower than they should be.
Much of the charitable giving that does go on in Mexico is very informal, according to the Post article. Philanthropists don't want to take public credit for fear of extortion and kidnapping. This has led to a population that is eager to donate because of the recent outbreak in violence, but one that is also weary of attracting too much attention to themselves. There is also a serious corruption problem among Mexican officials, leaving potential donors skeptical of charities. Mistrust is one of the core reasons behind Mexico's philanthropy problem.
It's anybody's guess as to how to increase Mexico's charitable giving. Some will say that decreasing the violence is key, but that's a whole problem in and of itself. The article ends with a suggestion from the executive director of the Mexican Center for Philanthropy, who says that Mexico needs tax reform. This is a very fascinating issue, and I suggest heading over to The Washington Post to read the full article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)