The Zoo

The presentation today in class about the Sunset Zoo made me think a lot about city-funded agencies and their limitations. I learned that because the zoo is owned by the city they cannot accept certain donations, but rather must have the Friends of the Zoo accept on their behald. What’s going on? Why is this?

Honestly, before this presentation I had not considered the differences among agencies, who runs them, who technically owns them, and how this might affect their fund raising abilities. Similarly, I learned that the Boys and Girls Club must adhere to blackout dates determined by the United Way during which they cannot both fund raise. This makes sense so that the United Way will be more sucessful in their campaign, but September through December seemed like a very long blackout period and a very key time when fund raising is easier (i.e., the holiday season).

In the end I do not see these issues as problems, but rather wanted to say that I am a victim of “the more you know, the more you don’t know.” Today is my last day of undergraduate school and suddenly a world of fund raising issues has opened up to me that I’m curious to know more about. Yet, I move away this afternoon.

St. Jude

I have been working on my major case study for the past few weeks, and never thought there was as much going on with St. Jude as there actually was. I know they need millions to keep the hospital open for a week, but it is so incredible to think that they successfully fund raise millions and then some in order to not only keep the hospital open, but to be able to do additions, treat more patients and treat more and more diseases as the years pass. It really is overwhelming to try to understand everything that involves St. Jude. I feel like they set an example for every nonprofit organization because of the immense success they had beginning with ALSAC, along with the success they continuously have.

K-State Proud

I’m a little disappointed with the K-State Proud campaign this year. Don’t misunderstand me, I think it’s a great idea. I’ve donated both years and I think that t-shirts really entice students to donate. I also think it’s a great idea that it’s students helping students. Overall, it’s a great campaign and helps a lot of students in need.

However, this year I don’t think it was a good idea to put those huge banners all over campus. They could have told us how great the campaign did by putting it in the collegian or maybe putting posters all over campus. Instead, they put HUGE banners on several buildings on campus. In the last two weeks I’ve noticed a few more as I’ve been on campus. While this is a great idea for letting us know how well the campaign did, I don’t agree with it. I know those banners couldn’t have been cheap and I don’t think that it was a good idea to spend the money on them. I don’t think that getting the message out that way is the best route. Even if the banners were donated I think the money from those donations should have gone towards the cause instead of advertising how well the campaign did. I know I’m not the only one who thinks this because last week I saw a message in the fourum asking how much the banners cost the campaign. Obviously, at least one other student thinks the banners were a waste of funds. I know that when I saw them my first thought was how much money it took from the scholarships for students. I know the campaign is new and getting the message out is important but I don’t think this helped the campaign for those people who are wondering where the money went to. The banners say where the money went but they don’t say how much was spent on advertising and things like that. Now I’m wondering how much money was really raised and where ALL of it went?

Searching for Ideas

This blog post might be a little week. Considering we had no class Friday, and no presentations, my brain is working slow to think of something to blog about.

While I was Google searching some news stories of non-profit or philanthropy I came across an online newspaper for the non-profit world. I thought I might blog about this, just so I could share this with everyone.  It’s interesting for several reasons, I think it might give people an idea of what is going on out there, (give them something to clog about), also gives organizations ideas of what other people are trying for fundraising-lets them know whats working and what is not.

The website is called:   http://www.philanthropy.com/    The Newspaper of the non-profit world.  I am sure a lot of people have heard about  it, but I don’t really know if they realize how great of a tool this is.  It covers everything from, grant tips, celebrity philanthropy, philanthropy careers to suggestions on where to donate.

They have a specific section of careers, and they list over 650 avalible positions.  You can type in your zip code and find a non-profit job near you. And I remind you this is ALL free. It will even break it down into fundraising positions, administrative, executive etc…

One of my favorite sections was the “suggested books” section: It has a list of books about non-profit, and fund raising that are good. You can click on the title and get a review of that book.

This is a great site, and people should take advantage of it!

Buying contributes to charity

I did my article presentation this week over some websites that give back to charity when you buy through them.  Most of the class thought this was an “ok” idea. It is not a life changing fund-raising tactic, but a lot of people would take advantage of this but, not go out of their way too.  Two of the websites I found were ebaygiving and goodshop.com Some other people have heard about other things such as  Toms Shoes, that for every pair you buy, they send a pair to someone in a third world country. 

I think that one way that this on-line buying could really benefit people is that if a non-profit org. used it as a fundraiser. I think that if they took donations of gifts, or things people would buy off e bay, and then sold them, and they got all the money for the organization that would be great. I can really see someone like FHCC using this, and making a few hundred off of it. 

I belive that one of the reasons it is not working or blowing up right now, is that people have not heard about it.  The general conscience I got from the class was if they had two items in front of them they could buy, and one the profit would go to charity and the other would go to Joe Brown’s pocket of course they would by the one for charity, even if it meant no tax deduction for them. 

I think this is a great idea, and hope that larger corporations start to grab on to this.

Volunteer

I am writing this week, continuing our discussion on adults volunteering their time. I think another big reason that adults have trouble finding time or actually getting motivated to volunteer is because of what they might be passionate about. As a youth you might get involved with your church and go to a homeless shelter or soup kitchen and think that’s good enough.

As an adult you have more experiences and may have a passionate cause. Such as, breast cancer, it is very hard to donate your time to breast cancer research. It is easier to just send in a check and feel good about that. Most adults are so busy, they cannot find time to volunteer their time. But, in the long run this is really going to take a toll, because it all starts with youth. If the kids see their parents volunteering they will want to go along, or get involved as well.  I am sure we will see a much bigger Delcine as time goes on.

Oprah’s Big Give??

I’m jumping on the bandwagon again and going with the popular post for this week: Oprah’s Big Give

I’ve never been sure what to think about Oprah.  She uses her fame to do a lot of good things but I also think she’s a little too influential/powerful.  I like that she encourages people to read through her book of the month, but if I find out a certain book is on her list I’m less likely to read it because she’s endorsed it.  I feel like it takes away from things when Oprah steps in.  I think she’s encouraging fads and I’m completely against fads of any type.

Her new show follows her old trends.  Oprah comes up with an idea and slaps her name on it, and guess what, it’s a big hit and everyone wants to watch.  I like how people who are in need are benefiting from the money raised on the show.  However, I don’t like that it’s a reality show and people have to be kicked off.  Instead, everyone would benefit if they could stay on and learn more.  That would encourage viewers not to give up just because someone else does a better job at raising money.  I also don’t like that the winner receives money.  I think the show should have kept with its theme and instead they could make a major donation in that person’s name to any charity that person wants.  That way the person is still rewarded and they continue to give.  Because of the theme of the show, I hope the winner spends the money on helping others rather than spending on his/herself.  My last problem with the show is that it has Oprah’s name on it.  I haven’t seen it and I’m sure she makes appearances but I feel that if it was just called The Big Give it would encourage viewers to go out and do the same.  Her name on their is like an endorsement that really doesn’t help the cause.  I think being on TV alone is enough of an endorsement and all the stars making appearances will help with donations.  Oprah didn’t need to slap her name on there.  I’m sure she felt she had to since she’s sponsoring all of it but I think it takes away from the theme of giving.

Oprah’s Big Give…where is the focus?

To be honest, I had never heard of this new Oprah’s Big Give philanthropic television series until a few days ago.  I think it sounds like a great show….but I have my worries.  My worries aren’t that I know this will put philanthropic giving to the forefront of millions of viewers each week, or that this could be the beginning of even more types of philanthropy (venture, etc.).  This show will definitely be an amazing promoter towards enriching lives by fund raising.  I am, although, worried that big-time networks some times focus on ratings more than the heart and soul that is found within shows such as these.

I scanned through some of the first news articles online about this show, and many of them centered on how many viewers tuned in, or a comparison to another show that aired the same night.  This isn’t American Idol…but wouldn’t it be great if a television show could carry as many loyal followers and viewers as that show.  Maybe those followers could become motivated to turn into philanthropic activists.

Why Such a Small Percentage??

I’m new to the non-profit sector, especially when it comes to fundraising. Our talks in class have made me think about the small percentage money from fundraisers that actually goes towards the cause. Like most people, I thought the entire amount was donated to what it was being raised for. I had no idea that such a small percentage (1% – maybe 10%) actually goes to charity. I can understand why people don’t trust fundraisers because they see that very little of their donation goes towards the cause. So my post this week is mostly me asking two questions and posing some solutions. Please feel free to add to it and correct me where I’ve misunderstood.

1. What I don’t understand, is where all the rest of the money goes? We have talked about how if a person was hired to raise the money then some of the funds go to that person. But if the fundraiser is put on by people already involved with the organization, then where does around 90% of all the money go? I understand if some of it goes towards paying for bills (electricity, water, rent/mortgage on a building, etc) or to pay for the things that went into the fundraiser (caterers, renting a building, buying food for a blood drive, etc) but if several thousand dollars are raised then I think that’s more than enough for bills. I can also understand if the money goes towards paying employees. But if the organization is small then I don’t understand. I’m an unpaid intern at the Manhattan Arts Center and the marketing/education director, secretary, and electrionics people are all part time. I also think the director is too. So if a lot of money is raised for a small non-profit then I would think more than a small percentage would go towards the cause because there are less people to pay.
What I would like to see, is non-profits posting exactly how much of the funds (dollar amount or the percentage) goes towards what. It could help donors feel better about how their money is being used. As of now, their money could be being used for anything. It could be going straight into someone’s pocket or to help the organization. Showing where the money goes could reveal money being used for bad things. I do understand that people could lie about where funds are going but I think it would be a good step forward.

2. My second question is: are there any organizations where 100% of what’s donated actually goes towards the cause? I’m going to assume that all the blood donated to the Red Cross goes to help people, even though it might not be used it’s still there for people who need it. I’m wondering about fund raisers that just raise money. In my point of view, I can’t see why every organization has at least one fundraiser a year has all of its funds (100%) go straight to the cause. If the organization is honest about where all the money goes on its other fundraisers then this one would help with donor relations. Donors might be more likely to donate to this fundraiser because they know their money will actually help the cause. I would be more likely to donate if I knew that all of my donation goes to where I intended it to go.

What percentage goes to operation?

Our talk in class about where our money really goes and how important it is to donors to know exactly what happens with their gift inspired me to do a little research.  First, my favorite organization, the National MS Society Mid America Chapter (in Kansas City), pulls into the lead with only 4% of all money going to operations.  Of my three-organization study, the Fred Hollows Foundation of New Zealand takes second with 8% going to administration. And, the Humane Society of Seattle and King Counties in Washington comes in third with 13% going to general administration.

This may seem like an unlikely trio to compare, but I wanted to look at percentages nationally and globally rather than focus just on our area for this blog.  It is truly amazing how non profit organizations can keep costs low enough to truly give so much to the cause itself.

We may yet cover this topic in class, but it begs the question: how much is too much?  Current salaries in non profits are much lower than their for profit counterparts.  On many levels this makes sense because donors want more money to support the cause, but I believe it is becoming critical for non profits to recruit intelligent, trained professionals to operate the non profits.  As salaries currently stand it is often far too tempting to accept a higher paying position in the for profit world.

So what does this all mean? I wish I had a clever answer to end with.  I suppose, in my opinion, it is important to look at how much money goes toward administration, but donors should keep in mind that this percentage is supporting someone’s livelihood and should never be erased completely.