Boards, Management and It All

Over the years, I’ve had my fair share of employees who, for one reason or another, just didn’t work out. Once I actually left a job because two of my staff—one inherited and one who I inexplicably hired—were driving me to imagine inflicting unconscionable violence against them. Worse, the only grounds for firing at this organization would have been for them to be caught engaging in acts of public bestiality.

All that aside, whenever one of my staff didn’t perform at an acceptable level, I always felt it was as much a failure of management--mine—as it was their own failure.

Ditto with Boards. Volunteers are to some degree unpaid staff, performing vital jobs for the nonprofit. Or they would if only they knew what those jobs should be.

Too often potential Board members are recruited by being told that there is “not much” they will have to do…if they have to do anything at all. I’ve been asked to serve on Boards where the Executive Director tells me that my only responsibility will be to show up to at least one of the four quarterly meetings. Really? What, then, is the purpose of having me (or anyone!) on the Board?

Most likely it has something to do with financial support. There’s always a lot of discussion about whether nonprofits should have a “give and/or get” policy for the Board. Questions range from whether this is a good idea at all to should there be a specific size contribution expected from the members or just a “generous gift?”

This issue seems a wrong thing to focus on. It fragments the real job of your Board.

What is that real job? Let’s start by identifying what it is NOT. It’s not fundraising or attending at least 3 out of 4 Board meetings a year. Nor is it “serving on a committee,” though all these things are part of what you should reasonably expect from a good member of your Board.

A Board’s main responsibility is one of governance—ensuring that the organization is both well-run and running well . A big piece of that is the Board’s fiduciary responsibility.

As a Board member, you must help to guarantee that the organization is fiscally sound: Are programs effective? Are any fees that may be charged appropriate? Is there a net gain at the end of the year? If that doesn’t happen—and it often doesn’t—and if there is a gap between money needed and money on hand, then every member of the board has a responsibility to do what is necessary to bridge that gap.

Give and get in action.

A really well-run organization, however, focuses not on gaps but on what is needed to run the programs you want and be the organization you desire. There must be a clear understanding of what it takes to run the organization as you wish it to be. In other words, the goal is to support your vision as well as your mission.

The next step is a discussion and agreement on what funds are on hand for use, what is expected to come in and what is needed to get where you want to go (all this is called the budget process). Then, once that magic number--how much do we have to raise so that we can run the organization as we want it this year, with reserves and investment for next year and beyond—is known, we can intelligently discuss what the Board's responsibility for that number is.

So yes, I come down firmly on the side of a Board give and get policy. All Board members need to understand that there is cost to be on the Board. It is divided into two parts--the part the Board member personally brings to the table and the amount that the member helps the organization to get. What I don’t agree with is a size gift that has been arbitrarily chosen sometime in the past.

Each year, at the meeting where the budget is adopted, I believe Boards should agree with how much the give and get is--and define what they mean by "Get." Do they actually solicit for gifts by themselves or do they help in the cultivation of prospects who they have brought to the table; help with continuing stewardship of the donors who had been their identified prospects, and generally help to create that culture of philanthropy.

And that brings us back to management. Good management, I believe, all boils down to two things. The first is that those you are managing buy into what you trying to do. That segues nicely to the second—that those you are managing know what needs to be accomplish and what their role is in getting there.

Regardless of what give or get policy is on the books at most nonprofits, the reality is that few enforce it. Therefore, only a minority of board members comply. Far better to open the discussion up and let the Board decide what it will take this year to fulfill their fiduciary responsibility.

In my experience, not only does the Board take a greater role than what they merely accept, they are far more rigorous in meeting their target when have been part of defining it.

And just as poor performance can indicate a failure of management, when staff—paid and unpaid—exceed expectations, management can give itself a pat on the back for a job very well done.


Janet Levine is a consultant who works with nonprofits and educational organizations. She can be reached at janet@janetlevineconsulting.com. Her online grantwriting class is available at www.janetlevineconsulting.com/classes.html.

Meeting Expectations

My sister is the chair of the development committee for a small nonprofit in the education field. She’s been the chair for a couple of years, and to tell you the truth, she’s pretty burnt out.

“How,” she asks me periodically, “can you stand to do this for a living?”

What frustrates her (and frustrates me as well) is the fact that for many people fundraising is what others(namely, you) do—even if they have it as part of their job or volunteer description.

More than that, there is this clear lack of understanding that fundraising takes time. Add these two together and you get zero, as in “we hired/appointed YOU to do our fundraising. Where is the money?”

Ahhh, I see lots and lots of you nodding your heads. You know this; you’ve been there. The big question is how do you manage expectations? The second big question is how do you engage them so they understand that fundraising really is a team effort?

I wish I had a magic bullet to offer you. I don’t. Managing expectations is hard work, but maybe not as hard as engaging your “team.” There are, however, things that will keep your stress level down to a minimum.

The first is for you to have real clarity about what you can accomplish given your resources and available time. In my sister’s case, for example, the development plan called for a certain amount of money to be raised by each board member. When the total goal was not reached (by a very long shot) because most board members did not do their job, my sister felt like a failure. Had she been an employee instead of a volunteer, that “failure” may have had an adverse effect on her job.

Since my sister could not control what board members would or would not do, she needed to clearly identify what she could accomplish. And then she needed to loudly celebrate her successes.

This celebrating serves several purposes. It proclaims that you have done what you said you would. It shows that success is possible. And both those, in turn, act as an impetus to others and can help to motivate them to do their fundraising jobs.

Okay, I get that my sister, as a volunteer, has a lot more leeway. Too often us paid workers have to live with goals that others set for us. Which is why it is vital that you take that goal and create a plan that clearly outlines how you will go about reaching it. If you don’t have a goal, writing a plan to discover your goal is even more important.

This plan needs to be very specific. None of this “Identify prospects, cultivate and solicit” stuff. Remember—a big piece of what you are doing is managing expectations of others. So, if you are supposed to raise $1,000,000 and your organization has never raised more than $375,000, well you may just have an expectation gap.

Your plan would show where you want to get, and then what resources you have to get there. That means you will need to make some assumptions about how many prospects at what levels are necessary. Then you should show how many prospects at those levels you already have and where they are on the cultivation (for this next gift) continuum.

Your plan will also take into consideration how and where you can find new prospects and how long it would take to turn those prospects into donors. What are the steps you need to take? What are the tools you need in order to take those steps?

By now you should realize that your plan may have a hidden agenda. If you are expected to move from $375,000 to $1,000,000 and you do not have the appropriate resources to be successful, where can you get with what you have? Your plan needs to show that. For example, if given the donors you have and the prospects you’ve already identified and begun to cultivate you feel confident that you could raise $500,000 you would show that in your plan.

To reach the next $500,000 (or whatever dollar amount is your nut) might take introductions from your board and/or additional staff (or more events, direct mail campaigns, whatever) you would clearly delineate that in your plan.

As you work through your plan, you need to keep the Board, your boss, whoever, informed. The best way to do this—and the way that will get heard—is to show your successes, and be very clear what it took to be successful.

If the $50,000 gift you just got came about because your Board chair introduced you to one of her clients, make sure the rest of the Board knows that. If it came from an existing donor, they need to hear about the donor’s history with your organization.

If, however, your search for new prospects is still in the search phase, get that message across. But no whining. Report that you have been to three chamber mixers and have collected 45 business cards. You’ve contacted 25 of those folks, had a meeting with 3, and think that perhaps one of them will—eventually—donate.

In this way, you can educate and explain without seeming to that fundraising takes time. It is about relationships. And those relationships need to be nurtured.

And here we are, back to the point that the more they do their part in fundraising the more successful your fundraising program will be, and the more likely that everyone’s expectations will be met.

Janet Levine is a consultant who works with nonprofits and educational organizations. She can be reached at janet@janetlevineconsulting.com. Her online grantwriting class is available at www.janetlevineconsulting.com/classes.html.

Boards in a Bubble

The question was should the board be allowed to have direct contact with the staff of the organization. I confess I was amazed that there was even a sliver of a doubt. Does anything really think we must keep our Boards in a Bubble, as if letting them talk directly with those doing the work was something bad?

Free-flow of information is vital. Damming up that raises the question: What are you trying to hide? More to the point, think of the closed-information systems we’ve recently seen (think the Bush administration or the Wall Street debacle) and what they have wrought. Making wise choices and running organizations well is where diversity really counts. Hearing different points of view always helps to make better decisions.

Yes, of course, the CEO is the primary contact with the Board. He or she should be in regular contact with every member, especially committee chairs. Frequent meetings with the executive committee should be part of the standard operating procedure. Together they should be agreeing on strategic directions and discussing in detail what is going on at the organization.

The Board and the CEO should be partners. If this is so, then there will be respect and an understanding of who is the day-to-day leader and ultimate decision maker at the organization. Steven Sample, President of USC, writes in The Contrarian Guide to Guide to Leadership writes that he will meet and listen to everyone, but decisions are made only in a strict hierarchical fashion. That means he never goes over any of his managers’ heads. That’s good advice for any leader, including board members.

But that should not mean that the Board only interacts with the CEO. This is how poor decisions get made. The Board must hear from those on the ground who are working directly with our clients and must have first-hand knowledge of how our programs are run. This is especially but not exclusively important as it relates to development.

Just as I want my major donors to have as many touch points within the organization as possible—and this always turns into a stronger relationship and, yes, more money—I want my board to have as broad a picture of the organization as possible. Otherwise they cannot either govern well or be passionate and honest ambassadors of our organizations to the public at large. Nor can they be effective fundraisers if they only see what the CEO tells them to see.

Yes, it’s messier if the board and staff talk freely with others. Yes, there is a possibility that an angry staff member may cause some problems (but let’s get real here—angry staff will always find a way to connect with board members; better you should know this is happening), and yes, it means more transparency. But that, I think, is a good thing.

Janet Levine is a consultant who works with nonprofits and educational organizations. She can be reached at janet@janetlevineconsulting.com. Her online grantwriting class is available at www.janetlevineconsulting.com/classes.html.

Board Works

Pop Quiz time. You’ve just started at a new organization. There hasn’t been any ongoing fundraising for quite some and the Board leadership wants you to get out there and start raising funds. What’s the very first thing you should do?

If you answered: Start with your Board, give yourself a solid B. To get the extra points that will move your grade to an A, you’d need to be a bit more specific.
What, then, specifically, should you do? First, make sure that every (and that means all of them—no exceptions) have made their annual give. Call those who haven’t and for that gift now.

What? There isn’t an annual giving requirement? Get your Board leadership together and then them that an annual, unrestricted gift requirement for every member of the board must be instituted immediately. The only acceptable negotiation is ho much. And do not let them sell you short.

Yes, of course you will lose some Board members. That’s good news. You can now replace them with people who will be happy to write that check.

Done? Great. You now have a grade of B+. The A comes when you ask each of your generous Board members to introduce you to someone they know who could support your organization at that annual level or higher.

Let’s be clear on a few things. First, “Introduce you,” does NOT mean that they give you a name and tell you contact the person saying, “Joe (or whatever your Board member’s name actually is) told me to call you.” Introduce means that Joe (or whoever) sets up an appointment for the three of you where you are formally and physically introduced to the prospect.

Secondly, and I know this is going to sound counterintuitive, you don’t want Joe to call on his friend and simply for a gift. You very well might get a check, but then you have the beginning of a beautiful relationship. A relationship that you may be able to bring to a higher level.

Great. You have earned your A grade. But don’t stop there. Get the gift from Joe’s friend. Then earn extra credit by asking the friend, who is now your friend, what friends of his he can introduce you to.

Janet Levine is a fundraising consultant. She can be reached at jlevine@levinemorton.com. Her online grantwriting class is available at www.ed2go.com/courses/ggr.

And get a cattle prod

Teaching Board Members to Raise Money - Philanthropy.com:

"To get board members to raise more money, the author says development officials and executives need to show them how it’s done — and set reasonable goals."