Board development – Page 13 – The Healthy Non-Profit

All posts pertaining to the identification, cultivation, gap analysis, recruitment, orientation, and evaluation of new and or existing board volunteers in addition to board governance issues

Goldilocks and the three board members: Part 3

December 7, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Planning, resource development

On Monday, I posted about boards who fail to review their executive director every year. On Tuesday, I posted about boards that get a little muscular with their executive directors and typically abdicate all of this to one overly aggressive board volunteer. Today, I’d like to finish our discussion by talking about what feels right to me.

First, let me say that I don’t think that there is a perfect process for creating an executive director’s annual performance plan or conducting their year-end evaluation. So, I thought that today’s post could just be a laundry list of things I’ve seen really good boards do and then you should weigh-in using the comment box with things you’ve seen that are particularly awesome. So, here we go . . .

The annual performance plan is rooted in the agency’s various written plans (e.g strategic plan, resource development plan, marketing plan, budget, etc)
The objectives in the performance plan are very measurable. So, much so that the executive director knows exactly what they need to do in order to move their evaluation score from a “meets expectation” to “exceeds expectation”
The executive director writes the draft performance plan, turns it over to a board committee (e.g. Human Resource committee), and after massaging the performance plan they take it to the entire board for input, discussion and approval. This way everyone has touched it and owns it.
The performance plan is completed and a final version is the executive director’s hands by the beginning of the year.
The HR committee asks the executive director for a mid-year update on how they’re coming along with their performance plan. Any red flags are brought to the entire board’s attention by the committee chair in executive session. The entire board engages in discussions such as: amending the performance plan, increasing oversight of the executive director, creating a corrective action plan, etc.
There are 360 degree feedback opportunities from both direct staff reports and the board of directors.
The annual performance plan doesn’t just look at “quantitative” success (e.g. fundraising goals achieve, membership targets hit, etc), but it also finds a way to blend into the evaluation “how the executive director” does their job. Do they use scorched earth tactics to get results (which will bite them later down the road) or do they do a nice job using best practices (which might not immediately translate into results but might pay big dividends down the road).
The year-end evaluation doesn’t have any surprises because it is based on the exact performance plan handed to the executive director 12-months earlier.
Just like the performance plan development process, the year-end evaluation starts with the executive director doing a self-evaluation. The HR committee makes adjustments and seeks input from the entire board.
The question of who sits down with the executive director and conveys the evaluation results rarely looks the same from organization to organization. I’ve oftentimes seen the board president do it, but I’ve seen the HR committee chair also do it almost as often. I’ve seen it done in a committee setting (but I must admit that it looked like someone was getting ganged up on). I think the board should recruit anyone they like as long as that person: 1) has a good working relationship with the executive director and 2) has a track record of having successfully done employee evaluations (e.g. they have some HR acumen).
The year-end evaluation is always signed by the executive director, and a board volunteer personally witnesses it being deposited into the employee folder.

I have always tried to live my life according to this simple HR rule:

If anyone is surprised throughout this process, then it wasn’t done correctly and there needs to be some serious changes heading into next year.

I am a firm believer that the annual performance plan and year-end evaluation of the executive director is one of the biggest keys to organizational success. If done right, everyone knows far in advance what is expected of them. If done right, there are no surprises and usually very little emotion in the process. If done right, everyone is on the same page and the organization is powered strongly into the future with everyone’s sights set on visionary goals and performance indicators.

So, how does your organization evaluate its executive director? Are there best practices that you think I missed? Please use the comment box below so we can all learn from each other.

I hope you agree that today’s “bowl of porridge” compared to Monday and Tuesday’s posts tasted “just right”. 😉

Here’s to your health!

Erik Anderson
Founder & President, The Healthy Non-Profit LLC
www.thehealthynonprofit.com
erik@thehealthynonprofit.com
http://twitter.com/#!/eanderson847
http://www.facebook.com/eanderson847
http://www.linkedin.com/in/erikanderson847

Goldilocks and the three board members: Part 2

December 6, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, resource development

Yesterday, my post titled “Goldilocks and the three board members” talked about a very cold bowl of porridge that involves non-profit boards who fail to evaluate their executive director every year. In doing so, they set their agency up for failure, liability and <gulp> perhaps even personal liability if the D & O Insurance carrier deems coverage null and void because the board failed to make a “good faith effort” to carry out its fiduciary responsibilities.

Today, I would like to talk about that VERY HOT bowl of porridge. This, of course, is when a board goes way overboard with the annual performance plan and year-end evaluation.

In this scenario, the board president thinks they “own” the organization and take their leadership position way too seriously. They decide that their time at the helm of the ship will go down in the history books as the “Golden Age” of your non-profit organization. They see the executive director as a “direct report” and use the performance plan and year-end evaluation processes to micro-manage OR change behavior of the person occupying the executive director’s chair OR drive the executive director screaming from the room (so either they or a friend of theirs can take over).

If this seems far-fetched, please trust me when I tell you I’ve seen it happen more often than I care to admit.

It is typically true in my experience that the board member who is being very aggressive usually has some very legitimate issues. However, their aggressive approach makes them look like an egomaniac or a big jerk. Sadly, those issues never get dealt with because the focus becomes personal rather than organizational. As a result, the organization and the clients it serves end up the big loser.

The interesting thing I’ve seen is how the other board members in the room deal with this individual. The group usually tries to “pacify” and give them total authority to do whatever they want with the executive director’s performance plan or year-end review.

This “accommodating move” by the board is meant to shut the instigator up, but it never seems to work out that way. The annual performance plan and year-end evaluation resemble something straight out of a carnival fun house with those weird mirrors. Annual performance objectives turn out unmeasurable and read something like this:

Improve staff morale
Be a leader in the community
Move all of our accreditation scores up one level

It looks and feels really muscular and accountable, but when you peel the layers of the onion back nothing makes any sense. How do you measure improved staff morale? Is it realistic to focus on all accreditation categories (even the ones you’re already doing well in)? What is a leader and how do you determine that?

Next thing you know everything feels subjective. Feelings get hurt. Emotions run high. And the board volunteers who thought they solved the problem by “brushing off” the loud squeaky wheel in the board room, find themselves in a much worse situation. It always turns into a trust issue between the board and their executive director. However, it sometimes turns into impending legal action involving things like: harassment, hostile work environment, or retaliation.

Trust me when I say the really hot dish of porridge is not the solution. Please tune in tomorrow, and we’ll talk about what a normal situation might look like.

Have you ever been involved in a situation where one board member is really “hot to trot” about the annual performance plan or year-end evaluation for the executive director? Have you ever seen it turn out OK? Do you have any examples of just “horrible” performance plan objectives that just didn’t make sense?

Please share . . . we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Goldilocks and the three board members: Part 1

December 5, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising

I suspect we all remember the story of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears“. This porridge is too hot! This porridge is too cold! This porridge is just right! I’ve recently stumbled upon a very similar version of this story involving non-profit executive directors and board volunteers around the related concepts of annual performance plans and year-end evaluations. For the next three days, I thought it would be fun to look at each of the bowls of porridge and talk about the pros or cons.

Today’s bowl of porridge deals with when board volunteers shirk their fiduciary responsibilities and fail to evaluate their executive director.

I have run into a number of friends recently who confided in me that they haven’t been evaluated. In some cases, they haven’t been evaluated in a number of years. Of course, in many of these cases, it has become an issue because it is a tough time to be at the helm of a non-profit organization. As criticisms increase and board volunteers try to ratchet up accountability, up pops the ugly revelation:

“Ooooops, if things have been getting so bad, why haven’t you felt the need to evaluate me. We might have been able to make some course corrections if you had taken your fiduciary responsibilities seriously before we got to this point.”

The other side of this coin, of course, deals with the executive director’s annual performance plan (e.g. chart of work). In my experience, when executive directors aren’t getting evaluated, they typically don’t have a very well-defined performance plan with measurable metrics. This management tool is developed and handed to the executive director 12-months prior to their review. This way they know exactly what they need to do to succeed and how to proactively affect their year-end evaluation.

Again, in my experience, boards end up passing on the year-end evaluation because they didn’t do a good job of developing a performance plan, and now they don’t feel like there is anything concrete to measure their employee against. So, they end up taking a pass.

And the vicious circle continues until the non-profit organization skids into the ditch and fingers start getting pointed.

While it is easy to throw board members under the bus, I also want to hold my executive director friends accountable, too. Good non-profit professionals know how to support a board and keep them from falling down on the job. I’ve seen many non-profit CEOs pencil draft their own performance plans and year-end reviews and hold their board’s hand through these processes.

All of this also ties into fundraising and resource development. Rest assured that when fingers start getting pointed, donors ask tough questions and judgements get passed. Remember, the executive director is probably the face of your non-profit organization and many of your donors have likely fallen in love with this person.

I’ve seen it too many times. The organization fractures, accusations get made, donors ask tough questions, and everyone comes out looking bad. In the final analysis, public trust gets violated and donors put their checkbooks away until things get cleared up.

There is one cautionary word that I need to toss out there to board members about this very cold bowl of porridge. I know many of you think you don’t have any personal liability that comes with sitting on a non-profit board of directors because your agency purchased Directors and Officers Insurance. However, it is not outside of the realm of possibility that your D & O insurance company will not cover you in an employment related lawsuit if you failed to complete annual performance reviews of your executive director. It is foreseeable that the insurance company will say “there was a lack of a good faith effort” on the part of the board, and then you will be personally on the hook.

So, get off the couch and take that cold bowl of porridge to the microwave oven and warm it up before it is too late! For those of you who might be looking for a resource guide, click here for a great manual from The Enterprise Foundation. Tomorrow, we’re going to look at that next bowl of porridge which is way too hot. So please stay tuned.

Does your board of directors struggle with evaluating its executive director? If so, what strategies are you using to bridge this gap?

Please use the comment box below and share your thoughts. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Welcome to a new philanthropic era: The Age of Women Power!

December 2, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, Planning, volunteers

I used to jokingly say to various board members at my former agency that if our non-profit needed to get something done (e.g. organize a special event, put together a strategic plan, etc), then we should recruit a bunch of women to help us do it. I’d usually finish making my point by saying, if you want to talk an issue to death and get nothing done, then put a bunch of men in the room. (Note to readers: Whenever I said this it was always said “tongue in cheek” and I was kidding. Of course, I was only kidding slightly because I think there is some truth to it.)

I share this story today because my good friend, Boys & Girls Club of Oshkosh Development Coordinator Anne Lemke, sent me a fabulous email a few days ago about “What Women Want” which is whitepaper written by Katherine Swank from Target Analytics, a Blackbaud Company. After reading the paper, I just could resist sharing a few of the highlights with you today:

nearly half of the top wealth-holders in the United States are women,
women have increased their combined wealth by more than fifty percent in the last 10-years, and
women have a net worth of over $6 trillion.

Katherine does a masterful job of profiling what an affluent woman looks like. I suggest you read the whitepaper and burn that picture into your head because it is surprising. In fact, you probably know a number of women who fit the profile. Having this profile picture burned into your non-profit brain is important because as Katherine says so perfectly:

“Affluent women may also be identified by their willingness to both donate and volunteer at higher levels than their male counterparts. Women, on average, donate twice as much to charity and make three times the number of donations as men.”

So, some of you might be reading this post and thinking to yourself: “OK, I just need to start asking women for money and I’ll be fine.” If this is what you’re hearing me say, then please stop yourself! The reality is that women are different from men, and you’ll need to change your resource development strategies and tactics if you are going to appeal to this very powerful donor segment. Again, Katherine puts it best when she said:

“While I can’t claim to know what all women want in every situation, over twenty-five years in philanthropy has taught me that what women want is simple: to be asked their opinion and for their answers to be listened to and acted upon. They seek equality in the workplace, an ever-equal sharing of the ‘load’ from their male partners and counterparts, and to make the world a better place, both close to home and halfway around the world. Elementally, women want their lives to make a difference in the lives of others. To accomplish this through philanthropy makes women feel empowered.”

Translated into language men might understand better: “You need to cultivate, solicit and steward women different from.” Oh heck, who am I kidding . . . let me translate this even more clearly for my non-profit male friends out there: “Go hire and recruit some women to help you with this incredible important and transformational shift that your non-profit agency needs to make.”

I suspect this trend will change more than just your agency’s approach to resource development. It will also likely affect your board development, marketing, and volunteer recruitment & management efforts. Right?

Oh yeah . . . go download Katherine’s whitepaper and read it. Click here to get your copy. It really is a great read!

So, what are your thoughts? Are you already seeing this philanthropic trend in your community? How are you responding to it? Have you addressed it in your strategic plan or resource development plan? If so, how?

Please take a quick moment and share your thoughts using the comment box below. After all, we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Non-profits and Sunshine Laws?

December 1, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, resource development

Have you ever participated in an interesting conversation that inspired you enough to go do some research? Last night I had one of those moments, and what I found was so interesting I just had to share it with you this morning.

So, last night I was out enjoying a nice dinner with a non-profit board volunteer when the conversation turned to the subject of board meetings and how the local newspaper covers their agency.

He said, “Erik, the problem with making difficult discussions in the board room is that we’re subject to the Open Meetings Act.”

I said, “Really? I don’t think so. The Open Meetings Act is aimed primarily at government and public institutions.”

He responded with, “Erik, with as much government money as our agency takes, we are covered by this law and have to let the public and press into our meetings.”

If you know me well, then you know that not knowing an answer to something like this just drives me crazy. So, when I got back to my hotel room, I just popped open Google and started digging.

Ah ha! The first thing I found validated my point of view. The Illinois Open Meetings Act specifically exempts non-profit organizations. Click here to read more.

However, as with most things in life, nothing is simple or that clear cut. The next thing I found online was from Ann Taylor Schwing. She provided a dizzying number of bullet points pointing to various numbers of possible scenarios when the Open Meetings Act might extend beyond government entities and into board rooms of private organizations.

Click here to read more and see if your agency might fit into some these exceptions. After I consumed Ann’s work, my head started spinning and went into overdrive. For example:

One of the exceptions that Ann points out is: “whether the functions performed by the private entity would otherwise be performed by a public body, or were performed by the public body before the creation of the private entity“. Well, this certainly should give many agency’s a moment to pause and consider.
Another of the exceptions Ann highlights is: “the extent to which public entities may control the entity in question and the extent to which the entity is autonomous“. This got me to start counting the number of non-profits in my hometown who were recently quoted in the newspaper as saying, “If my city funding gets cut, we’re going to end up closing our doors.” As the Church Lady used to say on Saturday Night Live, “Well now. Isn’t THAT interesting?”

OK, you’re probably wondering what all this means and if it necessitates any action on your part. Here are just a few of my thoughts:

I would click the aforementioned links and do some research. No one wants to be surprised by a newspaper report or a disgruntled donor or client who demands access to your board room. I like to live by the general rule that “Prior Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance”. 🙂
If the second bullet point sounds like it might describe your agency (e.g. your agency is so reliant on government money and your ‘independence’ is compromised), then you should engaging board members in a discussion around whether or not this is OK with them and what to do about it. After all, this is a quintessential “board governance” issue that the law calls on them to wrestle with. Right?
There is a bigger picture issue here as it pertains to non-profit transparency. You might want to start engaging board volunteers in a discussion around whether or not opening your board meetings to the public (e.g. donors, clients, neighbors, etc) is a good idea. And if it is, then how do you function in that public space and still get sensitive board business accomplished.

Some of you are probably thinking “Erik, are you crazy?” Well, maybe I am, but ask yourself this: “do donor have a right to attend governance meetings as an investor in your organization?” More to the point, I’ve seen some non-profit organizations model themselves after publicly traded for-profit organizations by hosting an annual meeting that is open to the public and is seen as a stewardship opportunity for donors.

Does your agency host an annual meeting that is open to donors and the public? If so, please tell us what it looks like and what is discussed in the comment box below. Has your agency ever been pressured by the press or the public about the Open Meetings Act? If so, please share with us what happened.

Come on folks! We can all learn from each other. Please take a moment to weigh-in.

Here’s to your health!

Gobble Gobble … pass the stewardship please?

November 21, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, volunteers

This non-profit professional loves Thanksgiving! Yes, as you can tell from my picture, I love the epicurean delights that grace my table for this holiday. However, what I really love has almost nothing to do with food . . . it is the idea of taking time to simply say “thank you” that really appeals to my inner non-profit soul. It is for this reason I believe Thanksgiving is quintessentially a non-profit holiday.

What are you doing this Thanksgiving holiday to reach out to your donors and volunteers and express your thanks and gratitude?

When I worked for the Boy Scouts more than a decade ago, I found tremendous joy in cooking a full-blown Thanksgiving meal for my District Committee. Mmmmmm . . . I remember it as if it were just yesterday. Turkey, ham, stuffing, mashed potatoes, beans, rolls, dutch oven cobbler . . . prepared and served with my own two hands in the church basement we used to meet every month.

After feeding 50 of my best donors and volunteers, I relished the opportunity to take 2- or 3-minutes and tell them how thankful I was for their help and support. I also highlighted a handful of our collective successes from the last year.

Years later, as I worked with local Boys & Girls Club affiliates throughout the Midwest region, we worked on developing “thank-a-thon” events to steward donors around the Thanksgiving holiday. This was simply a handful of board volunteers who were armed with a list of donors, short script, and telephone. The message was short and sweet . . .

thank you for your support,
your support made a difference,
we accomplished X/Y/Z and couldn’t have done it without the support of caring and generous people like you,
we hope we can continue to count on your support in the future, and
this Thanksgiving we give thanks for people like you. Enjoy the holidays!

There was no solicitation for money. There was no guilt. It was an expression of simple gratitude. It demonstrated that donors and volunteers were part of a larger family — our “non-profit family”.

What are your personal plans to steward board volunteers, donors and volunteers this holiday season? I see many non-profits doing something. So, please take 30-seconds and share your favorite Thanksgiving stewardship activity of all time. If you’re a volunteer or donor, please share the best Thanksgiving stewardship activity that your favorite non-profit has ever included you in. We can all learn from each other . . . but that requires using the comment box below to share. Please?

Here is to your health! Enjoy your Thanksgiving with both your immediate family as well as your non-profit family. 🙂

Erik Anderson
Founder & President, The Healthy Non-Profit LLC
www.thehealthynonprofit.com
erik@thehealthynonprofit.com http://twitter.com/#!/eanderson847
http://www.facebook.com/eanderson847
http://www.linkedin.com/in/erikanderson847

Working for boards is tough stuff

November 17, 2011 DonorDreams Board development

We all have friends who work for bosses who are absolute nightmares. As a matter of fact, I was on a business trip a few months ago driving in my rental car listening to a call-in radio program all about horrible boss stories. While I sympathize with friends in those situations, I can honestly say they have no idea what real workplace pain is like until they’ve had to work for a cantankerous non-profit board of directors.

I believe in my heart of hearts that working for a board has got to be one of the most difficult things I’ve ever had to do in my life. Here are just a few reasons I’ve come to this conclusion:

If a board has 15 members, then the non-profit CEO is working for 15 different people.
15 different board volunteers have 15 different personalities.
15 different board volunteers can have 15 different ways of wanting to do something.
Have you ever tried to appease 15 different egos? OMG

Don’t get me wrong . . . working directly for a board has also yielded some of the best experiences in my life. However, I’ve seen too many of my non-profit friends reduced to a puddle of tears recently as a result of “politics” in the board room and “personal agendas” run amok.

So what is the solution? Where is the silver bullet? What can a non-profit professional do to make working with a board of directors less difficult?

Let me start by saying: not everyone is cut out for this kind of work. So, get your feet wet early in your career possibly by helping your agency’s CEO with a board project. Take this time to assess whether or not you like it not. If it doesn’t feel right, then chalk it up to a learning experience and decline future opportunities to interview for non-profit executive leadership jobs.

If you currently sit in the big chair and are looking for tips on how to work with boards more effectively, then here are just a few quick thoughts:

Get in front of your board volunteers regularly. If you are just seeing your board members at monthly board meetings, then you’re doing yourself a tremendous disservice. Set a goal of being in front of every board member at least once in between board meetings (and I go back on forth on whether or not committee meetings count). During these meetings, do more listening than you do talking. Gandhi told us to be the change we want to see in the world. So, if you want the board to listen to you, then you better listen to them.
Respect boundaries. Too many of us want to befriend our board members, and I think this blurs boundaries. These people are your boss. Being social is one thing, but partying all night with them might cross a line. Establishing boundaries is tough stuff, but they always need to see you as a classy professional. These people can become part of your “extended non-profit family,” but never forget how dysfunctional families can get. Are you sure you want to bring “dysfunction” into your employment situation? Carefully thinking through boundaries makes a lot of sense to me and it will probably look different for each of you.
Use planning tools to build consensus. There is nothing more challenging than having to work with 15 people who have 15 different ideas about how to do something. So, a good non-profit leader needs to possess “consensus building” and “facilitating” skill sets. If these are things they are good at doing, then their leadership toolbox needs to include planning strategies and tactics. Guiding a divided board through a strategic planning, resource development planning or marketing plan process can produce consensus and direction. Ahhhhh . . . happy days!
Get serious about every part of your board development process. Approach board building like you would a chemistry experiment.

What do you believe is the most difficult thing about working for a board of directors? What strategies do you use to help make this a little easier?

Please share your thoughts using the comment box below because we can all learn from each other.

Here is to your health!

Nothing personal but you’re fired?

November 16, 2011 DonorDreams Board development

With the economy being what it is, I’ve sensed a very strange undercurrent in the non-profit sector recently. Fundraising is challenging for those agencies that have used fear tactics and guilt to raise money. Government dollars are drying up. Boards have been cutting-cutting-cutting and now there is close to nothing left to cut in their agency budgets. In a nutshell, things feel like they’re coming to a head and it feels intensely personal.

In the last 6-months, I’ve personally witnessed/heard about a few different staff-board encounters that has me very concerned:

A board president putting their finger in the face of the executive director during a heated discussion over budget cuts involving salaries and benefits.
An executive director flat-out yelling at the board (it was described to me as a temper tantrum) during the board meeting because they didn’t think board volunteers were raising enough money and were too focused on cutting-cutting-cutting.
A board volunteer yelling at a donor and leveling personal and hurtful accusations.
A group of board members coordinating their resignations and then running off to the newspaper to tell their story.
A board president secretly plotting to fire their executive director.

I get it . . . tough times lead to tough decisions and these decisions are intensely personal which mean they are riddled with emotion. However, the one thing everyone needs to keep in mind is that we all have FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES when we agree to work or volunteer for a non-profit corporation.

This means acting in the best interest of those who our organization’s mission calls us to serve. It means exercising the highest standard of care. It means putting personal interests to the side (which I think also includes setting aside personal agendas).

Exercising your fiduciary responsibilities does not mean engaging in emotional battles all in the “name of mission” with those whom you disagree . This slash-and-burn strategy is dangerous, destroys working relationships, and eats at the very foundations of our organizational. In the end, the people who really get hurt are those that we aim to serve — the client.

Here is a some advice that I recognize is easier said than done:

Board volunteers: Please remember that staff are people, too. They have families, mortgages, and a personal life just like you. You are charged with making tough decisions around finances, but a little compassion goes a long way and adding more emotion on top of an emotional bonfire only makes matters worse.
Non-profit CEOs and staff: Please remember that board volunteers are exactly that — volunteers. You were not hired into a lifetime position. Different situations call for different types of leadership, and this might be a time for a different leadership style at your agency. Don’t take it personal. A little bit of professionalism goes a long way.
Board volunteers: Times have changed and the economy we once knew blew up many years ago. There is a “new normal” that we need to get used to. This means changing your non-profit business model. It means rolling up your sleeves, fundraising, and asking people in your social circles to be philanthropic rather than sitting back and watching staff beg for non-existent government dollars. GET INVOLVED!
Non-profit CEOs and staff: Fundraising isn’t just a board responsibility. You play a huge role in supporting these efforts. It also isn’t something you can usurp from the board and do by yourself in hopes of making yourself indispensible. You are responsible for engagement of board volunteers. START ENGAGING!

Focusing on collaboration and consensus building is a start. Taking the personalities, egos and emotion out of decision-making is important. Keeping mission-focused is imperative in order to avoid hurting those we care about most — the clients.

What do you do as a staff person or board volunteer to keep emotions from getting too high during these difficult times in the board room? How do you keep perspective? Is it possible to extricate ego and personality from these discussions? How do you keep everyone focused on the client and mission?

This is an unusual blog post for me because it involves emotions and feelings; whereas, I normally write more fact-based stories blended with opinions. However, there are many of you and your non-profit friends going through some very difficult times, which is why taking 1-minute to answer some of these questions using the comment box below is so important. We can all learn from each other!

Here is to your health!

All non-profits are Penn State?

November 14, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, Planning

It has been a week since the Penn State child rape scandal broke, and I’ve been stewing in my emotions like most of you. There are so many aspects to this story, and it never dawned on me that any of these many storylines fit within the context of this non-profit blog until I read this quote from Moody’s in Forbes on Friday:

“Over the next several months, Moody’s will evaluate the potential scope of reputational and financial risk arising from these events. While the full impact of these increased risks will only unfold over a period of years, we will also assess the degree of near and medium term risks to determine whether to downgrade the current Aa1 rating. We will monitor possible emerging risks emanating from potential lawsuits/settlements, weaker student demand, declines in philanthropic support, changes in state relationship and significant management or governance changes.”

OMG . . . this story is so big that it blinded me to the fact that Penn State is a non-profit organization belonging to the higher education portion of the sector. Once this realization hit me, I saw the story from a whole different perspective. Here are some of the thoughts that ran through my head:

I wonder what it must be like for a board volunteer to sit on that board right now with all that liability hang over the university’s head?
I wonder what the fundraising professionals must be doing to prepare for and mitigate the impact this scandal will likely have on its resource development program?
I wonder what university staff must be doing to minimize the impact this scandal will likely have on volunteer, booster and alumni program recruiting?
How does a scandal like this affect the university’s strategic plan, and what are they doing to adjust their plans and factor in this new head wind?
How much money will this scandal cost the university in lawsuits, increased insurance premiums, philanthropic losses and an adjusted bond rating?

After processing all of these questions, it dawned on me that ALL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS ARE PENN STATE and this is a “clarion call” for all non-profit agencies to take action immediate!

Take action? Huh? What are you talking about Erik?

Regardless of how big or small your agency is, this scandal should strongly motivate you and your board to immediately take action on development of a crisis management plan. No one ever thinks that tragedy will strike. It is always something that happens to other non-profit organizations. And when it happens your world changes in a blink of an eye.

Penn State administration didn’t see this coming. One day they were on top of the non-profit world, and in a flash they are looking at a financial catastrophe (not to mention the human collateral damage done by the action and inaction of just a few men).

The non-profit organizations in Joplin, Missouri couldn’t have predicted a devastating tornado. One day their agency was there, and the next day they were gone.

The non-profit sector is naturally chaotic because most agencies are under-resourced. One person is typically asked to do multiple jobs. There never seems to be enough time to do those necessary capacity building things like preparing for future crisis. In a word, most non-profits are “reactive” and not “proactive,” which is typically our undoing when disaster strikes. So, take a moment to ask yourself these questions:

Is my agency’s Director & Officer insurance up-to-date? When is the last time we looked at whether or not we have enough coverage?
Who is our organization’s spokesperson in the event of a crisis?
Do we have a “crisis team” that can be activated in the event of tragedy? Are there a diversity of people on that team (e.g. lawyer, psychologist, PR professional, board members, staff, etc)? Do they know they’re on that team? When is the last time this group went through an orientation looking at the “what if” types of questions?
When is the last time staff reviewed your agency’s disaster contingency plans? Do you even have those plans in writing?

I encourage you to read this great blog post by Joanne Fritz at about.com titled “Top 5 Tips for Effective Nonprofit Crisis Planning“. It is a good to place to start as you use this national news story to motivate your board of directors to take action around developing a plan and putting systems in place to deal with whatever lurks ahead for you on the path of life.

Look at it this way . . . developing a crisis management plan could be a great cultivation or stewardship opportunity for certain fundraising prospects or existing donors to your organization.

If you look at this project as “one more thing that you don’t have time to do,” then it will be a burden and likely something that sinks to the bottom of your task list. If you look at it as an opportunity, then I suspect good things will happen for you and your agency.

Does your agency have a written plan? What is in that plan? How often do you review that plan? Is your plan posted online? If so, would you share that hyperlink with other readers of this blog so they can see a sample?

Please take a moment to answer one or more of these questions using the comment box below. It will only take a minute or two out of your very busy schedule and it could make a difference for another agency. If you don’t have time to comment, then click the forward button on your email and send this post to another non-profit professional who you care about and tell them that it isn’t too late to prepare for the apocalypse. After all, we can all all learn from each other.

Here is to your health!

Capping nonprofit CEOs salaries and bonuses?

November 9, 2011 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising

For the last two days, I have blogged about the impact of government funding on non-profit organizations’ fundraising programs. All of this talk about Uncle Sam and the non-profit sector got me thinking about government funding and the for-profit sector (e.g. bank bailouts, farm subsidies, Occupy Wall Street, etc). So, it wasn’t a big leap in my head when I jumped from for-profit corporations taking public funds to limiting CEO compensation and then back to how this all relates to compensation of non-profit CEOs who accept public funds.

LOL … yes, my mind has been wandering a lot lately. I blame the sugar rush from Halloween. 😉

You only need to go back a few years in the news cycle to recall that segments of the public were incensed by the federal government’s TARP program, which was our country’s bank re-liquidation and bailout program. Part of that public debate (and it is being rehashed by the Occupy Wall Street protesters) is that for-profit corporations that accept public funds subject themselves to a different level of accountability and regulation by “We The People”.

Well, if you buy into this argument, then don’t you need to logically do the same for non-profit organizations who accept government funding?

While the IRS is currently charged with monitoring 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations’ executive compensation to ensure it is in line with similar size agencies in similar sized communities through a provision called the “private inurement rule,” the question I pose goes a little bit further. The aforementioned question asks if local city councils, state legislatures and Congress can or should legislate concrete rules around non-profit executive compensation for those who accept public funding. For example, if “non-profit agency X” accepts a grant from their local city council, then that board of directors of “non-profit agency X” agrees to abide by a local ordinance that defines what the city council sees as reasonable and acceptable compensation.

This debate was well frame by two individuals who I saw commenting on a Charity Navigator blog post.

Here is how one side of the coin sounds:

“I would suggest that we put some of these salaries in context (just as you did with the American Red Cross). Some of these CEO’s are managing organizations that are multi-million dollar “businesses.” As such, their salary compensation is reflective of the size of the organization’s revenue and project stream.”

Here is how the other side of the coin sounds:

“Comparing these salaries to “for-profit” salaries is just ridiculous. These organizations exist out of the goodness of the people who contribute. We give under the impression that we are Helping others….NOT Helping CEOs to get rich.”

Of course, neither of these points-of-view deal with the issue of what to do with non-profit organizations who accept public sector funding like the for-profit banking sector did when they accepted TARP funds.

So, here is the deal . . . I sometimes write blog posts with a very specific point of view. Other times I’ll approach a subject without any idea of what my opinion is and organically let things unwind. I am approaching this subject with a very open-mind, and I’ll use tomorrow’s and Friday’s blog posts to focus on this subject.

What this means is that I would like a spirited discussion among the readership of this blog. Please use the comment box below to weigh-in with your thoughts. You are even encouraged to post questions if you’re as undecided as I am.

If you want to read more on non-profit compensation best practices, our friends at “Nonprofit Law Blog” did an outstanding job with their posts titled: “Compensation Strategies and Best Practices for Non-Profit Organizations” . . . click here for Part One and here for Part Two.

How does your agency currently ensure that its compensation is in-line with community standards and in compliance with IRS rules? Does the acceptance of public funding “change the math” in your head when you look at this issue? Do you see similarities or differences between the comparisons I draw between for-profit corporations accepting public funds and non-profit organizations doing the same? What role does the donor play in all of this? Should donors expect total transparency for the non-profit organizations they support?

Please take a few moments to weigh-in using the comment box below. It will only take a minute or two out of your day, and doing so will enrich the discussion tomorrow and Friday. Besides, as I always say, we can all learn from each other.

Here is to your health!