A Small Change- Fundraising Blog

This month’s Org of the Month is Epic Change. This non-profit is a pioneer in online fundraising and has a lot of really great things to say. Below is a short YouTube video about the organization.

Help Epic Change right now. Visit Ideablob where Epic Change is competing to win $10,000. Vote on the Ideablob site for Epic Change to help them win.

What is your non-profit about? And what areas do you serve?

Epic Change helps hopeful people in need share their “epic” true stories in innovative, creative and profitable ways to help them acquire the financial resources they need to create positive “change” in their communities. We use donations to provide interest-free loans to local grassroots leaders to finance their community improvement efforts. We then facilitate loan repayment by collaborating with our partners to share their stories through products that generate income. Finally, we “pay it forward” by recycling repaid loans to help fund Epic Change in other communities. Our first project is focused on rebuilding and expanding a primary school in Arusha, Tanzania.

What are the major fundraising programs you have?

Our 501(c)(3) status was approved only about six months ago, and so far we’ve raised nearly $40,000, primarily through small individual gifts made online from our families, friends and colleagues. These gifts have been enabled through the use of a suite of online tools from Network for Good and Facebook to Care2 and LinkedIn. We recently won a $1,000 grant from the Case Foundation and raised over $6,000 in about three weeks through our successful participation in America’s Giving Challenge; we were in the top 5% of nearly 500 participating US-based nonprofits. We always have our eyes out for interesting opportunities; we’re participating in the Ideablob competition right now and we’re submitting an entry to the NetSquared MashedUp contest as well.

While our next steps are to cultivate local fundraising chapters from our current list of supporters, and to reach out to corporate donors and granting organizations for additional seed money, we’re hoping that in the next 3-5 years, we’ll be able to generate the majority of our income through loan repayments and the sales of Epic Change products based on the stories of the people we serve.

What geographic area does your charity serve and where is it located?

Epic Change is a registered 501(c)(3) located in Florida. While our first project is located in Arusha, Tanzania, our next project location is unknown. We imagine that the repayment of our original loan to a school in Tanzania may, for example, eventually fund a clinic in Peru, an orphanage in Eastern Europe or even a program for the homeless in the US. So, the impact of donations to Epic Change are not limited to a particular geographic region.

Any tips on how to approach donors in your area?

Actually, given what we’ve learned so far, and the premise on which our entire model is based, I believe the best way to approach donors in any area is with a detailed, well-told story that personally connects potential donors to your cause, which echoes recent research by Wharton marketing professor Deborah Small. That said, I believe there’s a delicate balance to be played when telling stories to generate interest and encourage donorship. Most non-profits also have compelling stories of happiness, transformation and hope to share. It seems to me that hope and inspiration may be more powerful tools in cultivating potential donors than fear, guilt and sadness.

For one example, check out this story about Glory, a 9-year-old girl who attends the school we’re building in Tanzania. While her incredibly difficult situation is presented realistically, the story is primarily one of optimism and hope. Glory’s story was taken from a blog entry I wrote during our last trip to Tanzania. To me, a blog that’s updated frequently is the single best way to keep donors involved in the story of your organization and the impact of your work. Of course, for donors who aren’t RSS feeders, blog entries can serve as the basis for emails or mailings as well.

Read more tomorrow from Epic Change.

I think that every person that gets into fundraising has the same heart as a program staffer. We believe in the issues and people that our non-profits serve. It is those issues and people that drive us to continue to do the very work we do. And we believe this so strongly that we commit to finding sustainability for the work that we do. Money is one of the closest things to our hearts and can be one of the most heartfelt responses to a need. We all want to lend a helping hand but when that helping hand is supported by financial resources we can often start to really solve problems.

Those of us that are in fundraising believe so strongly in what we are doing that simply addressing the direct issue is not enough. We need to gather other people around us to do the same thing. That is what our donors are they are the community advocates, the “evangelists,” the story tellers, of the important work that we are trying to do.

When I say that I want to treat my donors in a different way (All Donors as Major Donors) I am saying that real world change, really making a difference, happens because the entire organization is behind the same idea. This includes the donors and realizing that their giving cannot just be a one-time “payment” it has to be an “investment.” That their gift needs to signify more than just a transaction but a commitment to the mission of the non-profit. And if that investment is really going to effect the organization and make change then the development officer needs to understand and support why that investment is being made.

Fundraising is just as much about people and changing the world as a program staff position.  We need to take a real and personal interest in the lives of those that are joining us in what we do… our donors.

Wow! I was blown away with the incredible responses in the All Donors as Major Donors post earlier this week. You had some incredible feedback and ideas, if you have not read the comments from Wednesday’s post I recommend that you read it now. To be honest I thought that I was going to be laughed out of the room with that post. What surprised me the very most was that almost every comment that I received said, “I wish it could work that way.”One major point was that treating all donors as major donors is not possible either logistically or cost-wise. I think that it is more a philosophy of cultivation issue not a logistics or cost issue. Start with the change in philosophy and if you have a capacity problem then it can be solved because people are giving more money so you can hire more people. I would start doing it incrementally first change the philosophy, then start hiring to meet the demand.As we all know fundraising is all about relationships. One comment that surprised me was from Aubrey. It surprised me because it reminded me that our current “major” gifts systems don’t always work and she gave a tangible example how to cultivate a $25 donor as if they were a major donor. I wish that this idea was simple, uncomplicated, and easy to realize. But we know it is not. Here are a few questions that were raised in comments that I am going to think about a little more next week:From Cal’s comment, “To be honest, I want so much to believe in this stuff, but I see the real world for what it is. I agree with your premise, but would ask what is REAL generosity?”Roger comments, “This article could imply that if the donor (regardless of wealth) is not giving a substantial percentage of his or her wealth to your nonprofit organization, there is an attitude problem.”J. Erik Potter takes a step back and “stops time” and asks the question, “Even if you could spend all that time with a $25 donor, would you? Or is the idea of unlimited time too far out there to even comprehend?”Allena reminds us not to forget the volunteers. How would/could they fit into this?

Here is a crazy idea. What if we treated all of our donors like major donors? What if instead of cultivating and personally soliciting donors we started treating them all as if they were major donors? This is a question I’ve been pondering in my head over and over again for a number of weeks. It is linked to the concept of what is a major donor and why do we only personally cultivate donors at a specific level? To get a little more background on where this idea has developed look at Turning it Over to the Donor, and The Rich Young Ruler.  I have a follow up article for this ready for Friday and I’d love to include some of your comments, arguments for & against, and ideas. I think it is a little untraditional and want some of your expert opinions.This idea first crossed my mind when I realized that I am a “major donor” to the church that I go to. I do this out of a passion for the work of my church and because I’m connected to it’s purpose and mission. And I think that is what we want from all of our donors. I’ve struggled sometimes because in non-profit we will often set a value on each donor based on their circle of influence and their giving capacity. But we in non-profit have set our expectations extremely low. I often will spend more time cultivating a give from a wealthy person to give what equates to small gift in proportion to their wealth and forget that the “normal” donors are often giving a much higher percentage of their wealth with a gift of the same size. There are many wealthy people that are giving generously out of the money that they have-don’t misread me. All that I am saying is that percentage wise a $500 gift costs more for someone who makes $50,000 a year than $1,000 gift from someone who makes $150,000 a year.Giving is connected extremely closely to the way we think, act, and believe it is often at the heart of who we want to be.  Check out What Motivates Giving and a collection of experts answering the same question at the Giving Carnival: Motivation.  In non-profit we have a unique opportunity to partner with people and connect to the passions of their heart. This kind of connection doesn’t have a distinction between annual fund and major donor. This kind of fundraising is all about one on one relationship.I am really interested in your input here.  Please comment below if you like/dislike, agree or adamantly disagree.  And I’ll highlight some of this conversation in a follow up article.

Week two for Oprah’s Big Give and I have to say I thought things improved. Last week I was disappointed in the families that were chosen and didn’t feel that they were representative of people in the States with the greatest needs. This week worked out better. For those of you that did not watch this week each contestant was given 48 hours and $4,800 to give away. In this case each individual had a larger amount of control over where and why they were giving which I appreciated.

After my post last week I have a few really insightful comments and thought this could provide an opportunity for some good continued discussion. I had a number of great comments last week there was an overall feeling that the show made fundraising look easier than it actually is. A comment from last week:

I work for a nonprofit organization that seems to think money is growing on trees and that all the development officer needs to do is go out and pluck it. Nothing could be farther from reality.

Raising money is hard work. Especially for small local nonprofits it can be really hard to build a donor base, secure corporate involvement, and create a major donor program. Wouldn’t it be an incredible day if in 48 hours you were able to call a group of complete strangers and raise over $25,000? But that is not the traditional fund development experience.

How can we work with our boards, executive team and staff to change their perspective on fund development?  This is a really hard thing to do, many organizations have a culture that is hostel to the work of the development office and it takes years of patience and trust building to start to break that down.  Sit down with your CEO/Executive Director and/or your board chair and explain to them the need to work as a team explain the potential funding that comes through working with board, staff and volunteer’s spheres of influence.  This is important, if you cannot secure the support of the executive leaders of the organization you will never be able to build your program or reach the funding potential for your organization (read my post on More About Using Board Members to Fundraise).  Ask them if you can start a monthly development committee with board members or high level volunteers.

What did you think of this week’s show? Have you had any negative or positive feedback or change in expectation from your nonprofit employer based on Oprah or the contestant’s ability to fundraise?  How have you responded to past criticism of your fundraising work.