Starting a New Nonprofit

Please allow me to crush your dreams...

In my last post, I asserted that not every new problem (or newly recognized problem) warrants a new nonprofit to address it.

I used the example of The Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund, which gathered more than $32 million in four months, but had yet to give a dime to help victims of the hurricane. Why? Because the foundation's leader, New Jersey first lady Mary Pat Christie, was taking the time to set up a nonprofit organization carefully - which takes far more time than disaster victims can spare.

Meanwhile, another nonprofit addressing the EXACT same problem - Robin Hood Foundation distributed almost the entire $67 million raised from the 12-12-12 benefit. As an already-established nonprofit, they able to get resources where they were needed - quickly and efficiently.

Almost every week I talk to passionate, caring people who want to make the world a better place through a new nonprofit. The latest was a man who wanted to start a nonprofit organization that addressed breast cancer - he had just lost a dear friend to the disease and wanted to honor her.

What a wonderful man and a great friend! While I had no desire to crush his dreams, I encouraged him to think through if a new nonprofit was REALLY the best way to honor his friend.

Nonprofit start-ups should look to the business world when considering a new organization. When an entrepreneur is considering a new business, they do extensive and exhaustive research on these basic questions:

• Is there a market (a need) for this business? 
• What is the unique niche my business will serve? 
• Will there be customers?
• What am I selling? 
• What do I charge? 
• Where should I locate? 
• How will I market my business?
• What is the competition? 
• How will I get the money for this business?

These are the same questions new nonprofit start-ups need to ask.

It's actually MORE important for a nonprofit. Why? Well, if the entrepreneur fails to gauge the market, he will lose his own money and the business will be one of thousands (millions?) that fail each year because they just weren't needed. But if a nonprofit organization fails, they are losing donors' money - money that could have gone to more successful organizations. When the new nonprofit fails, people in need are likely to suffer from losing whatever benefit they were receiving from the nonprofit. It hurts everyone and makes the world a worse place.

If you have a dream that will make the world a better place, don't give up on it. Just be wise in addressing it. Ensure you know what you are doing before you begin using resources.

So, what about the man who wanted to address breast cancer? I don't know if he is still interested in that or not - I haven't heard back from him. I did, however, give him a list of questions to consider. I will share that list in my next blog post. Stay posted.

Nonprofit Start-Ups

Nonprofit Start-Ups

Not every new problem needs a new charity

A story in yesterday's USA Today caught my eye: The Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund, which has gathered more than $32 million in the last four months, has yet to give a dollar to help hurricane victims.

Why? Because starting a new nonprofit or charitable foundation takes a lot of work! New Jersey first lady, Mary Pat Christie, makes no apologies for taking an appropriate amount of time setting up a new charity. According to their website, several grants are currently being awarded.

I completely agree with her that it's worth the time and effort to set up a charity correctly - get the infrastructure in place, develop appropriate policies and procedures, hire staff members, recruit the best board members and create viable strategies for addressing the problems you trying to solve. But I believe the Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund has no need to exist: not because there aren't people who need the help but precisely BECAUSE there are people who need the help. They needed it four months ago.

Taking the time to carefully and thoughtfully create this charitable organization, while theoretically admirable, is, in my opinion, poor stewardship of the $32 million in donations received. Those who donated (I'm picturing the children who opened their piggy banks and families who redirected Christmas budgets) in the hope of helping people in dire need have not seen their gift spent as they intended.

Christie responds to critics by saying, "In three years, when I'm still distributing money at Hurricane Sandy Relief, ask me if we're doing enough." I would counter that, if she is still distributing money in three years, her relief effort has been a failure.

Which leads me (finally) to my point: not every new problem needs a new nonprofit. 

There. I said it.

At least two or three times a month, I have someone approach me about starting a new nonprofit organization. While there may be a need for a problem to be addressed, there is seldom a need to create a new organization to address it. Whatever problem they want to solve, there is usually a reputable organization already addressing it. They are probably doing it with more effectiveness and efficiency than a start-up organization could.

Case in point: the Robin Hood Foundation - which received the benefit of the 12-12-12 Concert for Sandy Relief. Instead of creating a whole new charity, the concert gave the funds to an existing organization. They have already distributed almost the entire $67 million raised.

They were able to do it quickly because they have 25 years of experience and 85 employees. It's a model that is infinitely more effective than creating a new nonprofit organization.

Now, I am not criticizing Mrs. Christie's efforts - in fact, I applaud them. It seems that she is doing an excellent job setting up a nonprofit organization and doing it well. In this case, I just don't think that's what donors REALLY wanted done with their money.

Are you thinking about creating a new nonprofit organization? If so, why? Is there really no other organization that can do what you are proposing? Could your time and energy be better spent helping them?

The Dreaded Logic Model

Confession time: the words "Logic Model" used to strike terror in my heart. When a funder required a logic model in a grant proposal, I would panic for a while, and then scramble to find an example ANYWHERE that I could emulate. Secretly, I resented having to create the model -- I didn't understand why they were needed.

When I saw a session on logic models being offered at the Sarkeys Foundation professional conference, I fought my way into the packed room (apparently, I wasn't the only one who didn't get it!) That morning, the lights went on and I have enjoyed doing logic models ever since. I get it!

A logic model is a simple diagram that connects the dots: starting with the needs of a particular population and pointed to the long-term impact your program eventually provides.

There isn't a "standard" or "best" logic model to use. However, some of my favorites include:

• A model to reduce underage drinking: created by the University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension;
• A model for a self-directed learning program, created by the Harman Foundation;
• A model from the Pell Institute to improve health outcomes;
• Finally, here is a 71-page pdf guide from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation about logic models.

REQUIRED ELEMENTS:

The examples above have several things in common. I would say these are REQUIRED for a logic model:

INPUTS = The resources your organization is putting toward this effort. It may be staff time, volunteer time, facilities, money, vehicles, supplies, etc.

ACTIVITIES = Precisely what you are doing with those inputs. Offering classes, healthcare, financial assistance, education, art.

OUTPUTS = The immediate and direct result of your activities. Number of dental procedures, number of meetings held and average attendance, participation rates, hours of service, etc. You don't make any assertions about the success of these outputs at this point.

OUTCOMES = Specific changes for individuals because of the output. Such as greater understanding of victim's rights, acknowledgement that driving while texting is dangerous, improved reading comprehension, etc. Many nonprofits stop after listing their outputs - they never offer any evidence that their activities make a difference!

IMPACT = How you will make the world a better place in the long-term. Describe changes to a population, to a community or to a system. You may or may not be able to track this information at your program level - if you can't find empirical (official) data to back up your statements, then they need to be logical to the reader. For instance, if you have a literacy program and say an impact of the program is increased income, you need to explain how you know that will happen (research by other organizations).

 

OPTIONAL ELEMENTS:

When I design a logic model, I like to include a few other elements that allow the logic model to truly stand on its own:

POPULATION:  A very short description of the population you are serving - demographics, psychographics, geographic and any other pertinent "graphic" information.

PROBLEM STATEMENT: Some kind of description of the issue you are addressing. "Overweight/Obesity rates in this population exceed 70% and lead to chronic disease and early death for at least 40% of those affected."

GOAL: A statement of your goal (hint: should be pretty similar to your impact statements).

ASSUMPTIONS: I use this section for any other information I believe will strengthen the model. For instance, "XYZ Foundation is a trusted provider of health care for this population" or "An evidence-based model of behavior change has been shown to have the highest impact on this type of population."