Faustus’ Neighborhood

Probably the best book I've read on how the Internet has changed our world is Groundswell, Similar to my posting last week on how donors are bypassing traditional nonprofits to make direct contributions, authors Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff define groundswell as a social trend in which people use technologies to get the things they need from each other, rather than from traditional institutions like corporations.

The main idea is how organizations can use tools such as blogs, social networks, wikis,  forums and other web 2.0 technologies to listen and to communicate with customers.  Many examples are offered such as Salesforce's IdeaExchange and Dell's IdeaStorm where customers participate in an online community to help develop products.  This is a very different approach to how communication and branding have traditionally been handled since no longer is the organization controlling the messaging vehicle and the content.

How can we apply these ideas to nonprofits?  By engaging with our constituents all year, not only when we are seeking a donation.  By having a presence on social networking sites.  By communicating through blogs and paying attention to what others are blogging about our cause.  By rewarding constituents who not only support our organizations, but also spread the word to others.

It's not so important that we figure out which tools we should use, but instead utilize whatever technologies are available to connect with our audience.  As the authors point out, Even though you may have a clear vision of what the company needs to do, getting the company to embrace the groundswell will take a lot of small steps and a lot of time.  The first step is to find others in your organization who already understand the value of these strategies and can help win management support, which is essential for successful implementation.

See the Groundswell blog for more ideas on how to get started. .    

While reviewing an online donation form recently, I came across this default question: "keep me informed about how my gift is being used."  This seemed like an opportunity to find out exactly how a donation would be used by our organization. e.g. to support research, to sponsor an event, to provide constituent service.  However it turned out that this question was actually intended as an opt-in for email communication.  Needless to say, I advised that we revise the language so the constituent isn't promised something that we aren't prepared to deliver.

Yet in a recent Chronicle of Philanthropy article, Give and Take (subscription required), many new nonprofits were profiled that can tell donors exactly how their funds are used by allowing constituents to contribute directly to a project of their choice.  This trend is referred to as 'direct giving' or 'peer-to-peer philanthropy' and is utilized by organizations such as GlobalGiving, Kiva, DonorsChoose and ModestNeeds.

These nonprofits are maintained through mostly optional fees added to the donation, although GiveMeaning is trying the advertising route. Since none of these organizations are self-supporting yet, it's unsure whether this concept will survive and, if so, which of these charities will remain.  However, the ability to donate directly to a cause is an area where many traditional nonprofits cannot compete, especially when donations for specific causes are discouraged so funds received are not 'restricted' in their use.

Without the Internet, this type of philanthropy would not exist.  Make a donation to one of these organizations and see how your constituent experience compares to what you've received from most traditional nonprofits.  For a profile of these types of sites, visit Peter Dietz's Social Actions

While not specific to ephilanthropy, Stacy Jones recent article in Philanthropy Journal, Mistakes Nonprofits Can't Afford to Make, highlights many important marketing basics that nonprofits often neglect:

• focusing only on the mission and not using story-telling to connect emotionally with constituents
• targeting messaging on how constituents can help rather than on the organization
• not using a clear call to action to show ways donors or volunteers can help
• using consistent messaging across all communications
• not providing enough funding to support marketing efforts

For more ideas on this topic, take a look at Network for Good's many nonprofit marketing resources as well as Katye Andresen's non-profit marketing blog and book Robin Hood Marketing,  Small changes in how we interact with our constituents can make a huge difference in how connected they are with our organizations.

Guidestar summarizes recent Giving USA online fundraising survey:

• while Internet giving is widely used, it still represents a small portion (under 5%) of overall fundraising
• most common way organizations raise money over the web is through an online donation page
• best results come from organizations that combine an online donation page with email appeals

Overall, social networking tools aren't contributing much - yet, but an organization that utilizes online 'communities' is likely to improve results.

Care2's FrogLoop blog interviews Phillip Artez, President of Artez on how to choose an eCRM.  Phillip says that successful nonprofit fundraisers "aren't afraid to share brand, content and promotion with their supporters" and reminds us that a large portion of funds will come from a small group of fundraisers so we should "treat them differently."  He mentions three areas where nonprofits should especially pay attention to: potential of social networking sites such as Facebook, donations originating from mobile devices and more organizations utilizing SalesForce (which has excellent connectivity to other systems and provides up to 10 free licenses to nonprofits).

Finally, the Nonprofit Times explains the importance of using multiple channels since many donors will visit the web before making a donation - even if it's offline and, surprisingly, even more so for constituents 65 and older.  Per Donordigital's Nick Allen, "more people are online, more people are doing research online, checking out charities they support or are thinking about supporting."   But NPAdvisor's expert Rick Christ warns that "nonprofit's Web site should try to support direct mail, but not replace it." and that direct mail is still how many first hear about a nonprofit.  Convio's Vinay Bhagat adds that while blogs and social networking are getting more attention, the core web site is still the main way constituents will evaluate a nonprofit.

Many contributors to the Nonprofit Times article, including Nten's Holly Ross stressed the importance of integrating the web site with email appeals.

Michael Hoffman, CEO of See3 asked this question on the Nten elist this week: how [do] other organizations create a balance between the Communications and the Fundraising departments when it comes to online initiatives. How should Communications and Fundraising interact without having turf battles?

A fascinating discussion has resulted, which is nicely summarized by Nten.

What ideas do you have for improving collaboration between departments that have traditionally operated separately?

Congratulations to the winners at the recent New York Times Company Nonprofit Excellence Awards: Community Health Action of Staten Island (overall management excellence), Harlem RBI (communications), Itefayo Cultural Arts (culturally based management strategies) and the Institute for Public Health (use of technology / focus on mission). Below on the overall areas of nonprofit excellence on which these organizations were judged:

1. overall management focus on results
2. governance structure that moves the organization forward
3. strong, transparent and accountable financial management
4. inclusive and diverse organizational practices
5. enlightened use of human and other resources
6. regular and effective communications
7. effective, ethical fundraising and development

Note to the Nonprofit Coordinating Committee of New York and New York Regional Association of Grantmakers who collaborated with the NY Times to recognize these exemplary nonprofits - for next year, how about an additional award to congratulate the nonprofit that has best been able to integrate offline and online strategies so that the true promise of 'multi-channel' communications and fundraising is realized?  This would be a gentle reminder to those nonprofits who haven't yet realized that constituents prefer to interact with our organizations in many different ways, only some of which are online.

Ted Hart provides a look at how online fundraising has grown from $0 in 1999 to $10.44 billion in 2007.  A graph and brief write-up is available at Slideshare.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy recently pointed out that while online giving still represents a small part of most nonprofits' fundraising, for some charities they have become a major source of revenue,  These five organizations have done especially well, raising at least 10% of their donations online: Heifer International (28%), Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (27%), Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund (21%), National Multiple Sclerosis Society (15%) and Make-A-Wish Foundation (10%).

Are you waiting for ephilanthropy tools to work perfectly before taking the plunge?  If so, read Vin Crosbie's take on Ted's People to People Fundraising site on why tools are 'good enough' to use now.

ManorMeta Mash at http://inkenzo.blip.tv

Come visit anytime on Mystica! Lots of items available on AMO Island and through our Mystica pyramid base in Second Life. Best home for crystals ever.

For genocideolympics, Team Darfur and Dream for Darfur, a hope for tomorrow and the months to come as we learn to work together to bust free of our limitations and challenges.