Leveraging Philanthropy

It’s the second half of "_ a-thon" Season. The time when Movember, Run for the Cure and others are gearing up for what will be a very successful period of raising a large amount of money.

Following up on the last post, I want to start exploring how we can be ‘better givers’ and ‘better askers.’ Donors have a unique opportunity to give with their head and with their heart – and the "__ a thon" season really highlights this unique challenge.

So to start, I thought it’d be wise to suggest two really simply guidelines to consider when entering, raising money for, or giving to one of these event based fundraisers. I’ll use CIBC’s Run for the Cure as a lead example here. Not because I think it’s good or bad (that’s for you to decide) but because it’ll be coming up real soon….

Know who the money is going to:
Q: Who does CIBC’s Run for the Cure support? A: Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation. What does the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation do? That’s when it gets interesting. Registered as a Charitable Org and not a Foundation (https://chimp.net/charities/canadian-breast-cancer-foundation) the CBCF seems to act kind of like a Charitable Org (in that 17% of its budget goes towards programs) but also like a Foundation (in that it granted out 34% of its income). I’ve yet to get an answer, so am at a loss to know which is which. The issue isn’t a technical one, a Foundation and a Charitable Org have very different mandates (great ones, just different). Knowing the end charity is important before you represent them in a race. You’d never promote a product you didn’t use, why would you promote a Cause you didn’t know?

Know how they spend their money & what they have to show for it:
I’m not trying to enter a debate about what ‘funding ratios’ (i.e. the amount spent on fundraising to the amount earned) is “good” or “bad” – that’s a red herring here. What’s important (I would say) is what impact they are having with their dollar – whether it’s spent on programs or granted to organizations who run programs. Knowing where the money goes is the first step, knowing what they do with it is second. Again, CBCF – spends 17% on programs, 36% on fundraising, 12% on management and 34% “granting out” to other non profits. Nothing ‘bad’ or ‘good’ in these figures alone. They are what they are. Looking at who they grant money out to – you see some universities (makes sense), some YWCA’s (ok I get it), some Elementary School (a little bit of a stretch), Dragon Boat teams (seems odd but, advertising perhaps). Again nothing inherently wrong with this – if you are OK with the impact made.

Charities are caught. Ending the starvation cycle begins with information and freeing Charity from the tyranny of branding and ‘keeping up’. It begins with donors not giving just on image or sexy fundraiser alone, or even on giving to the ‘idea’ that finding a cure for Breast Cancer is a ‘good idea’, but giving to what organization will be most effective in doing what it says it does. If that’s CBCF – awesome, if it’s not – then, if you’re truly passionate about making a dent, rally your friends and help a cause that doesn’t have the money to throw a massive event. Your money is worth way too much to be thrown at something you don’t believe in. The information is out there and it’s super easy to pick your own standard of efficacy (i.e. how well the organization fulfills its mission) and give to who earns it the most when we do this (give on merit not on ask) we’ll start restocking the pond now.

Guest Post by Jeff Golby @jgolby