Non-profit boardroom diversity includes a man named Thomas

April 3, 2013 erik Board development, volunteers

Easter was just a few days ago, and I still have things like fake basket grass, plastic eggs, and empty calories on my mind. I’ve also been working hard at turning leftover ham into split pea soup. Apparently, other bloggers have Easter on the brain because I just read a great post titled “Who’s Your Thomas?” that Tom Okarma posted on the Fox West Philanthropic Network’s LinkedIn discussion board. I loved this blog post because it was better than anything the Easter Bunny brought me . . . it was the gift of “AH-HA”.

As you probably get from the title of the post, Tom talks about the value of having a board volunteer who is not a rubber stamp. In fact, this person actively doubts all sorts of things that your agency is about to undertake. They express their concerns. They ask questions . . . lots of them. They share what they believe is the “unvarnished truth” regardless of whether or not the timing is convenient.

When I was on the front line, my Doubting Thomas was a board member named Lee.

I wish I could tell you that I used Lee’s talents appropriately, but I cannot. I worked hard to silence him, and more than a decade later I now see how wrong I was.

Gosh darn it . . . hindsight really is cruel. LOL

Guarding against the rubber stamp

I cannot count how many times I’ve seen a group of people sit around a table, discuss an issue, and look like a bunch of bobble-head dolls. Let’s face it. People are busy and on any given day we can get distracted and fail to focus on the business at hand.

If you have “Board Member Thomas” sitting around the table, the odds are much higher that the bobble-head dolls might bobble at a slightly slower pace and fewer mistakes/oversights might be made.

Improving the decision

One of the things I’ve seen work when it comes to satisfying “Board Member Thomas” is answering their questions. This usually entails more than just verbally telling them what they want to know. It almost always involves data, reports, and documents. After receiving these things, it also almost always involves discussion, discussion and more discussion.

In the end, this information and discussion results in better boardroom decision-making.

Too much of a good thing is always bad

On a few occasions, I’ve had the privilege of being in a non-profit boardroom full of Doubting Thomas board members. Just thinking about those few experiences still sends a chill up my spine. LOL Would you be surprised if I told you those boardrooms brought the expression “paralysis by analysis” to life?

There are two important points that need to be made here:

Diversity is about more than just age, gender and ethnicity. It includes all kinds of other factors: profession/occupation, personal and career experiences/successes, social networks, and . . . yes . . . personality types (e.g. Doubting Thomas).
The funny thing about diversity is that if you over-pursue one thing, then you end up losing your diversity. Target too many Millennial and GenX board prospects, and you end up with a young and ineffective board. If you recruit too many Doubting Thomas board volunteers, then you end up with grid lock. So, tread carefully!

Do you have a Doubting Thomas on your board? How do you manage that asset? How do you work with your board development or governance committee to identify and target such a board prospect? Do you have any Doubting Thomas boardroom stories to share with your peers? Please scroll down and use the comment box to share a thought or two on this very important board development topic. We can all learn from each other.

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

Outcomes, impact and criminal prosecution — A harbinger for the non-profit community?

April 2, 2013 erik Fundraising

Attention non-profit professionals . . . are you paying attention to the news? There is a news story developing in Atlanta, and it may be a harbinger of things to come for non-profit agencies who take money from the government. This made-for-cable-television-drama involves a school superintendent, dozens of teachers and administrators, and a conspiracy to change thousands of standardized tests. All of this was done in the name of maintaining government pass-through funding.

Click here or on the YouTube window below to get a better explanation of what is going on, and then we’ll talk about why I believe this is relevant to the non-profit sector.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3CDcWDmbL8]

When I heard this story, my mind immediately turned to the countless number of non-profit organizations that are struggling to develop a community impact and program outcomes model. The intent behind these efforts usually include:

evolving with their local United Way community impact initiative,
becoming more competitive when it comes to foundation and government grant writing, and
being able to show individual and corporate donors a return on their investment.

Of course, one of the central questions at the center of this struggle (as well as at the center of the No Child Left Behind debate) is:

“Who cares if test scores go up if it doesn’t result in solving the greater community need?”

For example, there is some evidence that shows students doing better on standardized tests, but more and more of incoming college students are enrolling in remedial classes their freshman year because they didn’t learn what they needed to learn prior to applying for college.

Isn’t it the same question for non-profit organizations?

How many youth development agencies are running child obesity programming with government funding and using pre- and post-test methods to determine if the participant was able to digest and regurgitate the program curriculum. Of course, knowing that I shouldn’t eat Cheetos and actually not eating them are two different things. Right? So, what is the donor really paying for and are we measuring the right things?

The bigger question being begged by the Atlanta school district news story is:

“If we tie student test performance to school funding, then aren’t we creating a situation where institutions are tempted to bend rules and even cheat the system?”

As I asked earlier, isn’t it the same question for non-profit organizations?

Do I believe there are non-profit organizations who “fudge” their program outcomes evaluation in order to keep their United Way happy? Sure I do!

Do I also believe there are non-profit organizations who do the same thing with their government grant deliverables? Yes, I believe there are a few.

You can chalk this blog post up to my cynicism. Or you can use it to ward off temptation to game the system. I suggest the later and not the former because there isn’t any difference between what the educators in Atlanta did and a non-profit organization misrepresenting its outcomes data to a local, state or federal funding source.

If you buy into this line of reasoning, then keep your eyes on the Atlanta news story because I predict the plot will thicken and jail time could be in a few people’s future.

Does your agency have policies in place that help protect against any of this happening (e.g. ethics policy, whistleblower policy, document destruction policy, etc)? Are these policies just on paper or are their routinely used? Does your organization have shared values? If so, how are those values integrated into the hiring process to ensure that you’re hiring ethical employees? Do you believe the Atlanta school story is a harbinger or am I just over reacting? Please weigh-in using the comment box below. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Using a multi-channel approach for fundraising? Don’t forget ‘old school’ strategies!

April 1, 2013 erik Fundraising, technology

Have you ever intended to do something, but “life happened” and you dropped the ball? Well, this is what happened to me last week when I intended to write a post for the March Nonprofit Blog Carnival weaving together social media, fundraising and a multi-channel approach. While I missed the submission deadline, I’m pressing forward with the post because I think we can all learn something from the Community Crisis Center and their 2009 “Crisis Overnight” campaign.

In my hometown of Elgin, Illinois, our domestic violence shelter was experiencing a crisis of its own in 2009 because the nearly bankrupt State of Illinois kept falling behind on its accounts payable to non-profit organizations that it had contracted with to provide services (e.g. running a domestic violence program). In 2009, it was so bad that Community Crisis Center was owed $400,000 and cash flow management was becoming a challenge.

Years earlier, a staff person had written an article for The Courier-News newspaper focused on providing readers with a 24 hour look at what happens at Community Crisis Center. Looking a mountain of red ink, the executive director, Gretchen Vapnar, decided that a similar approach was warranted in order to generate public awareness about the center’s situation.

The only difference this time around was that it was a different world. Newspaper readership was down. Internet usage was exploding. It was a brave new world, and social media experts like Ruth Munson and Sarah Evans advised the center to take their concept online. Here is what this campaign end up looking like:

Sarah Evans spent an evening at the center. She witnessed the impact that the center makes in the lives of everyday people, and she blogged and tweeted about her experience. (e.g. #crisisovernight)
In addition to bearing witness, she communicated a powerful case for support using a number of different online and social media platforms (e.g. Twitter, blog, Facebook, and YouTube).
Other non-tech channels were used by the center. For example, volunteers set-up camp outside the center and donors were invited to “drive by” and drop off donations. Staff also attempted to integrate a pre-existing direct mail campaign into the “crisis overnight” campaign.
The initial goal was to raise $150,000 in three weeks. Unfortunately, they didn’t achieve this goal, but they kept plugging away to get the campaign to go viral.
While they didn’t achieve their original goal, they did raise $161,000 in six weeks.
In the end, there were 756 online donors and the average size gift was less than $100/donor. There also was one sizable $40,000 gift from a local foundation.

If you want to learn more about this campaign, you can do a Google search on “crisis overnight.” You can also click here to view a SlideShare presentation by Sarah Evans.

The most interesting thing to me about this entire campaign was what the executive director had to say more than three years later when looking back on the entire experience.

First, Gretchen marveled at how “everything always comes down to the same things.” What she is referring to is how the keys to success for this online campaign are many of the same best practices that work for traditional fundraising activities. She gave the following three examples to illustrate her point:

Donors need to connected. (e.g. your agency needs to be visible to the donor or your mission needs to touch/connect with them).
The “who” is still key. The person asking for the donation correlates greatly to your campaign’s success.
There is a “trust factor.” Donors need to trust the organization will follow through and do what they said they’d do with the donor’s investment. If they don’t know the agency well, then the volunteer solicitor is leveraging their relationship with the donor to create that level of trust.

Old fashion fundraising strategies and best practices

Online tactics (e.g. website, email, social media, etc)

Success

There was also one other interesting lesson that Gretchen shared with me. She said that sustained success requires that non-profit organizations put someone in charge of their ePhilanthropy strategy (e.g. hire an online community manager).

Has your agency tied to undertake similar online fundraising campaigns? If so, what were the results? What did you learn? Please share your experiences in the comment box below because we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Where will your fundraising journey take you?

March 29, 2013 erik Fundraising, leadership, organizational development

Welcome to O.D. Fridays at DonorDreams blog. Every Friday for the foreseeable future we will be looking at posts from John Greco’s blog called “johnponders ~ about life at work, mostly” and applying his organizational development messages to the non-profit community.

In a post titled “Ultimate Conquest,” John talks about the concept of conquering ourselves and our quest for self actualization. He starts by sharing a story about a king and his three sons. The king sends these three princes out into the world to “conquer dragons, maidens and black-hearted knights.” Each of princes returns to the kingdom having had a different experience. I won’t ruin the story for you, and I encourage you to click over and read it for yourself.

As I read John’s post, I realized that inside my fundraising soul I have many of the same experiences as the three princes.

When I worked for the Boy Scouts, it really was the first time I had serious fundraising goals and expectations. I learned so much from that job. All of my inexperience contributed to fear, and the way I conquered my fear was to approach fundraising as a competition. I am very proud of those years. I excelled and built an annual campaign that doubled in size over a three-year period. I received many accolades and recognition for my work. What I didn’t realize was that it was simply the first phase of my journey because I had only learned that donors were something to conquer.

The next leg of my journey brought me to Boys & Girls Club of Elgin as the executive director. I was a young executive director, and I thought that I had “made it.” LOL If I only knew then what I know now.

During my years at Boys & Girls Club of Elgin, I honed my skills as a fundraising professional. I was no longer afraid of donors, and I was adding more and more fundraising experiences to my repertoire. I was no longer the knight of annual campaigns, but I was writing grants, developing direct mail appeals, organizing special events, and building capacity with a capital campaign in mind. Much like the second prince in John’s post, I worked on becoming more nuanced and polished.

I remember thinking at the end of my tenure at Boys & Girls Club of Elgin that I had finally made it. LOL Again, if I only knew then what I know now. That experience was only one leg of my journey.

When I accepted an internal consulting job at Boys & Girls Clubs of America, my view of fundraising expanded yet again. I no longer wanted to conquer donors or nuance contributions out of them. The amazing team of individuals with whom I worked helped me see that there is a difference between “fundraising” and “resource development”. Whoa! They also exposed me to the difference between “transactional fundraising” and “donor-centered fundraising”. I also started to understand the difference between “resource development” and “philanthropy”. Huh!

As I look back over the better part of two decades, I understand that hindsight in 20/20. More importantly, I see three very distinct experiences, but I understand that they are three legs of the same journey.

I am not naive enough to believe I am at the apex of this mountain that I am climbing. However, I do feel confident enough now to say I recognize that I am on a fundraising journey. While I cannot see very far down the path in front of me, I am excited about my new realization that the non-profit world is my playground and this voyage is going to take a lifetime.

Have you had a similar experience with your fundraising career path? Where are you at? What have you learned? Where do you want to go? Did John Greco’s post trigger any great thoughts about you or our profession? Please scroll down and share some of your thoughts in the comment box.

Here’s to your health!

If philanthropy was art, what would it look like?

March 28, 2013 erik Fundraising

Yesterday, I saw a news story about actress Tilda Swinton, who is sleeping in a glass box at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City. While I’m not a huge modern art fan (but I’m not a hater either), I haven’t been able to get this story out of my head for some dumb reason. Whenever I have a free moment and my mind wanders (e.g. driving in the car, standing in line for coffee, cleaning dishes, etc), I can’t help but think about this modern art exhibit.

So, this morning while walking on the treadmill, it happened again. In a fit of frustration, I decided that I need to push past this because it is getting obnoxious. And then out of the blue, it hit me . . .

If philanthropy was art, what would it look like?

I think it would be fun if every DonorDreams blog reader took a moment to contemplate this question. Once you get a picture in your head, please use the comment box located below to share your thought or image.

Come on . . . this could be a fun little break from your very busy day!

Let me help get you started:

A painting of a child in a hospital bed with a nurse attending to their IV.
A theatrical production spoofing the life of a fundraising professional. The scene I’m picturing in my head has a donor being hit over the head and the fundraising professional’s hand reaching for their wallet. (Again, I emphasis this is a spoof. Please no hateful emails.)
Hmmmm . . . a modern art example? How about a live donor pulling his pants down around his bum with a fundraising professional trying to swipe a credit card down their backside.

Did I take it too far? Oooops. Sorry. But I bet that I brought a smile to your face on a stressful day and got your mind chewing on this question. So, come on . . . take 60 seconds out of your day and share a thought (either serious of silly) in the comment box below.

Do you need more inspiration? Click here or on the YouTube frame below to see Tilda Swinton sleeping at the Museum of Modern Art. Hopefully, it won’t haunt your thoughts like it is mine. 🙂

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXkmI-8wLCE&feature=youtu.be]

Here’s to your health!

Non-profit donors, hospital visits, and stewardship opportunities

March 27, 2013 erik Fundraising

It is the morning of Wednesday, March 27, 2013 and my soon-to-be 40-year-old brother is on his way to the hospital for hip replacement surgery. He is the youngest hip replacement patient that his doctor has ever seen. With all of this going on, my mind still wanders back to non-profit organizations and how they treat their donors at times like these.

It should be no surprise to any fundraising professional that non-profit hospitals are very good at resource development. In 2011, non-profit hospitals and healthcare systems improved their fundraising efforts by 8.2 percent over the previous year’s efforts, according to the Association for Healthcare Philanthropy. That’s right. We’re talking about 2010 and 2011 when unemployment, the economy, and the housing sector were softer than they are today.

In a nutshell, I believe people are at their most vulnerable when they walk through the doors of a hospital. They are scared and their support networks (e.g. friends, family, neighbors, etc) stand by their side.

Here is the point . . . good non-profit organizations constantly message to their donors things like:

“You’re part of our non-profit family.”
“We care very much about you, and we appreciate how much you care about our mission and clients.”
“You’re a valued friend.“

If all of this is true, then shouldn’t you be by their side during their time of greatest need? And if you aren’t there, then aren’t you undercutting all of the stewardship messaging you’ve invested in throughout the years?

Non-profit hospitals have it easy in this one regard because donors (and prospective donors) are on their home turf. Of course, they still need to do a ton of hard work (e.g. quality care, bedside manner, compassion, service, etc).

My brother’s surgery this morning reminds me of a life lesson that I learned more than a decade ago when a board member, who was struggling with kidney disease, was admitted to the hospital. Not only did I not send a card/balloons/flowers, but I had left a number of emails and voicemail messages pushing him about an upcoming committee meeting.

Needless to say, the post-hospital phone call was more than a little uncomfortable for me. It was a lesson that I learned and carry with me to this very day.

Last week, I started working pledge cards for one of my favorite charities. One of the first donors I called to set-up an appointment informed me that she was being admitted for surgery in a few days. She didn’t want to schedule a solicitation meeting and asked that I call back after her surgery.

So, what did I do?

I wished her well. I asked her when I should circle back around to check-in and set-up a meeting.
I calendarized the date she told me to call her.
I offered assistance. I told her that I’m happy to help in whatever way she thinks is appropriate. I can pick-up prescriptions, run to the store, or drive her to a doctor appointment.
I called the agency to report this news, and they immediately mailed a “get well soon” card to the donor.

Did I do this because I am working the angles to secure a contribution in the long-term?

Heck NO!

I did these things because it is what friends do for each other. It also happens to be what donor-centered fundraising professionals do.

Do you have any stories about donors, hospitalization, and stewardship activities? If so, please take a minute out of your busy day to share that story or what you consider a best practice in the comment box below. Why? Because we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Is your non-profit board old? Paging all Millennials and GenXers?

March 26, 2013 erik Board development, organizational development, volunteers

Recently, I’ve heard at least three or four of my non-profit friends lament that their board lacks diversity in the area of age. It seems as if their boards of directors are primarily packed with Baby Boomer generation volunteers in their 50s and 60s.

At first, my response to each of my friends was:

DUH!!!

Isn’t it obvious that young people between 20- and 40-years-old are climbing life’s challenging career path trails? Not only are these individuals focused on career, but they are having children and raising families. In my opinion, these ingredients are a cocktail of NO TIME + NO MONEY.

So, I wasn’t surprised to learn the following facts in an article published in The Guardian titled “How can charities attract young trustees to their boards?“:

The mean age of a non-profit board member in the UK is 57.
Only 0.5% of board volunteers are between the ages of 18 and 24.
One-fifth of board volunteers surveyed said they lack age diversity on their non-profit board.

I am a fan of diversity and believe it is important, but I am not a fan of tokenism. You do yourself and your non-profit organization a great disservice when you recruit people to fill gaps just for the sake of filling gaps.

When your organization decides it is time to add more young people to its board of directors, your board development committee has its work cut out for itself because the prospects you identify, evaluate and cultivate must be able to hold their weight with other more experienced and better resourced board volunteers.

Young board members must be able to:

make a personal financial contribution;
be willing to attend board meetings, committee meetings and events;
have the ability and willingness to solicit their personal and professional network to support the organization.

In all honesty, I am a really big fan of getting young volunteers involved in special event planning, standing committees and task forces, and young professional groups first before asking them to join the board. However, if you’re determined to diversify your non-profit board of directors, your board development committee must have the following in place first:

comprehensive new board member orientation,
board volunteer training opportunities, and
new board member mentoring program.

Has your organization brought Millennial and GenX aged volunteers onto your non-profit board? How has it worked out for you? What lessons did you learn? What would you do differently? Please use the comment box below to share your thoughts and experiences. Why? Because we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

How does your community compare to others in fundraising?

March 25, 2013 erik Fundraising, technology

My side of town is doing better than people expect! Hip Hip Hooray!” In my opinion, this is cause for celebration because I live on the east side of Elgin, Illinois, which can come with a stigma or two according to some people (mostly those who live west of the Fox River). This morning I discovered an amazing online benchmarking tool from our friends at The Chronicle of Philanthropy that allows me to explore philanthropy in my state, city, and neighborhood.

So, all of my celebration this morning stems from the fact that I discovered my zip code (60120) is doing better than average in total charitable contributions compared all zip codes in the State of Illinois. We rank 3,976 out of 28,725. Woo Hoo! Of course, we’re still behind our west side neighbors who rank 2,347, but frankly I don’t care. I am thrilled to be doing this well!

I am also intrigued by all of the data that The Chronicle of Philanthropy is able to put at my fingertips with regards to philanthropy and demographics data. Here is some of what I learned about my side of town this morning:

Last year we contributed a total of $10.2 million.
The median level of contributions was $1,666 per household.
Median household discretionary income is $41,310.
Households in my zip code donate 4% of their income.
55.6% of households identify as Hispanic.
33.1% of people are under the age of 20 (which compares to 27% for the average zip code in the country).
32.8% of people don’t possess a high school diploma (which compares to 14.4% for the average zip code in the country).

I could go on and on with amazing little factoids about my little corner of the world, but I will stop here because I don’t want to take some of the fun out of you exploring this online tool.

Now some of you might be scratching your head and asking the age-old question “Who cares?”

Simply put, this online tool puts a powerful benchmarking tool in the hands of every non-profit organization in America. Powerful!!!

Again, some of you still might be scratching your head and asking the age-old question “Who cares?”

The following are just a few reasons why every non-profit organization regardless of their size or skill level should be looking at benchmarking exercises for their fundraising program:

Benchmarking allows you to see where you stand in comparison to others.
When your organization is faced with making a difficult choice between a number of different options, then benchmarking can help you make tough decisions.
Benchmarking allows you to clearly see what you’re doing well and where you might need to improve.

Let’s go back to my hometown of Elgin, Illinois for a moment . . .

Elgin, Illinois is made up of four zip codes (e.g. 60120, 60121, 60123, and 60124), and the total charitable giving reported on tax returns filed from these four zip codes adds up to $39,582,326. If I operated a non-profit organization with $1 million per year in private sector fundraising revenue, then I would know that I am capturing 2.53% of the reported philanthropy in the area. With this knowledge, I can do a better job of measuring success and progress.

There are countless other ways to slice and dice this benchmarking data, and there are many ways it can be used. We’ve already made the case for how this information can be used to evaluate and assess your fundraising program. It could also be used to make decisions on who and where to target your fundraising efforts.

Does your non-profit organization do any benchmarking? If so, please share your success stories in the comment box below. If not, please weigh-in on some of the obstacles you encounter. If you took a moment to click around The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s online tool, please also share your comments or thoughts. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Under promise and over deliver? Managing donor expectations?

March 22, 2013 erik Fundraising

In a post titled “Squeeze Out the Doubt,” John looks at both sides of the “Under promise . . . Over deliver“. Yes, there is a debate surrounding this concept. One side says, this approach is the key to producing win-win business outcomes. The other side says, managing expectations will lead to inflated expectations and the need to always over deliver in order to attain a win-win outcome (e.g. unsustainable vicious cycle).

As someone who saw “Under promise . . . Over deliver” as a basic truism, I find this debate interesting and something I mentally chewed on for the last few days. While masticating on this concept, my mind turned to the relationship that non-profit organizations have with their donors (aka investors).

As I thought about it more, I think this debate is at the center of every agency’s fundraising program. Here are a few questions that I’ve heard clients and colleagues ask themselves:

Should we tell our donors how close we are to closing our doors? Or will it set the fundraising bar higher next time we solicit them for funds?
Do we share our mediocre program outcomes data with our donors? Or should we cherry pick the data and make them feel good about ROI?
When writing our case for support, should we under state our goals for program outputs and outcomes?
When talking about our fundraising campaign goals, should we talk about the stretch goal as if it is what we’ve budgeted?

It would be easy for me to come out and proclaim that honesty and transparency are always the best policies; however, I think it is much more complicated than a black-and-white proclamation.

For example, I am not a big fan of non-profits who run around their community screaming from every mountaintop that they are running out of money and weeks away from closing their doors. On one hand, I’ve talked to some non-profit professionals who see this as a way of low-balling expectations. If they keep the doors open, then they win. It also creates a heightened sense of urgency among donors. Right? On the other hand, donors don’t like to throw good money after bad money. So, the next time your agency asks for money, donors will set the bar higher than they might have otherwise done because they want to make sure they aren’t investing in the S.S. Titanic.

OK . . . this might not be the best example, but the point that I’ve driving at is that employing an “Under promise . . . Over deliver” strategy takes careful thought and application.

Please use the comment box and share examples of where you successfully employed this strategy with your board members, donors, volunteers, or staff. Did it result in a win-win? Or do you subscribe to another school of thought entirely (e.g. honesty is always the best policy, never promise anything and just deliver, etc)? If so, please tell us how that has worked for you.

Here’s to your health!

Congratulations on the new Pope and all of your ‘Good Works’

March 21, 2013 erik volunteers

I was Baptized in a United Church of Christ congregation in Park Ridge, Illinois where my parents both grew up. I was raised in a Lutheran Church in Mount Prospect, Illinois where I took my first communion and got confirmed. In recent years, my religion has faded and it seems as if none of my religious training stuck. (Note to self: I wonder if I can get a refund? I should check into that.) However, in recent weeks I’ve been bombarded by all things Catholic thanks in large part to our news media who is stuck in overdrive. All of this coverage compels me to write a little something about our Catholic brothers and sisters, who work by our sides in the non-profit trenches.

Pope Francis: A sight for sore eyes

This Pope’s namesake is Francis of Assisi, who is one of the better known saints. He is the patron saint of animals and the environment, and is synonymous with the concepts of poverty and humility. In taking the name “Francis,” it is widely believed the Pope is sending a message to the world. Many have speculated this message is that one of the church’s major initiatives will be its focus on social justice and its work with the poor.

As someone who has spent almost his entire life in the non-profit sector working in the social services/human services sub-sector, this is welcome news.

You don’t need to be a Catholic to appreciate this development. I am excited about the future and can’t wait to see where this all leads. I hope you are, too.

Beware of false prophets

As I confessed in the opening paragraph of this post, my Baptismal water didn’t take and the church that I now attend on Sunday morning is Meet The Press on NBC. David Gregory is my pastor (which is kinda funny since he is Jewish). Go figure!

This last Sunday one of the roundtable participants was former Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, who is a Catholic and served on one of the church’s child abuse task forces. During my hour-long mass, I heard Keating saying something that really caught my attention:

“In the United States, 50 percent of social services are provided by the Catholic church.”

This declaration stuck with me for days until I couldn’t resist Googling around in my free time in an effort to fact check this statement. I guess I wasn’t the only person who was bothered by this statement because PolitiFact has already done the research and posted an article titled “Does the Catholic Church provide half of social services in the U.S.”

If you have a minute or two to spare in your busy schedule today, I strongly recommend that you read the PolitiFact post. It is super interesting and a quick read. It drives home the point that we all need to beware of false prophets. Damn politicians . . . you can’t believe a word of what comes out of their mouths! LOL

Here is the long and the short of what PolitiFact found out:

“So by our estimate, Catholic-affiliated charity amounts to 17 percent of the funds spent by nonprofits on social services — well short of the 50 percent Keating cited. Even doubling this share to create a generous margin of error brings it to 34 percent — still well short of half. But even this may overestimate the footprint of Catholic-supported charities, since it doesn’t include social-service expenditures by the government. In his comment, Keating didn’t specify that he was only talking about social services funded by private groups.”

Truth be told . . . I knew that Catholic-affiliated charities did a lot of work, but I never understood how much work it does. I am still impressed with 17 percent! I think you should be, too.

Celebrating ‘Good Works’

One of the core tenets of the Catholic faith is that “good works are done to glorify God and are done in honor of him.”

There is a lot of confusion around this concept and what it means to Catholics. I found a really good blog post that explains it really well. Click here if you want to learn more.

As a non-profit professional, I really appreciate the fact that there is a network of 1.2 billion people who dedicate their lives to doing good things for other people.

With the media in overdrive about all things Catholic, I encourage all non-profit professionals to take a moment out of their busy day to appreciate the good works of the church and its members. When you’re in the car commuting, simply ask yourself the following questions:

I wonder how many of our board members and volunteers are Catholic?
I wonder how many of our donors are Catholic?
I wonder how many of our clients have been impacted by other Catholic-affiliated charities?

After scratching your head and contemplating these questions, simply end your thought with a simple “Thank goodness for good works!”

Did the “Festival of All Things Catholic” by our news media inspire other non-profit related thoughts for you? If so, please share those thoughts in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!