And we’re back! 2011 already is yielding plenty of cool weekend happenings at our non-profits. Read on to find one (or many) events in your community:
First, congratulations to Class 16 on their graduation from Operation Understanding DC this weekend! For a great performance, written and directed by OUDC’s young leaders, about their year-long journey to find their voice and passion, head to Temple Shalom in Chevy Chase on Saturday at 7:00. Email info@oudc.org to learn more.
‘Tis the day for mid-week news and notes… And let us know if you have anything to share with the Catalogue crowd!
How to Find Generous Donors — Just before 2011, the Chronicle of Philanthropy reported on three new giving studies, conducted by Blackbaud, Network for Good, and the Daily Beast. Their findings? Our area stacks up quite well! In the Blackbaud study, DC and Maryland ranked #1 and #2 respectively for the number of donors with incomes over $100K. And Network for Good reported that DC is #1 and Virginia #8 in average giving per household.
Snow has arrived! Winter is here! … Along with plenty of performance events at our non-profits. Read on for great entertainments ideas for your weekend:
Looking for Music?
On Saturday at 4:00, the Children’s Chorus of Washington will present their Bel Canto and Concert Choruses, joined by the Washington Symphonic Brass, for a performance of holiday favorites and a carol sing-along; you can also come back on Sunday and catch the Concert and Treble Choruses and the 65-voice CCW Alumni Chorus. For a Baroque Christmas celebration, you definitely should check out the Washington Bach Consort, who will be presenting a fascinating exploration of period music from Europe, Latin America, and Mexico on Sunday afternoon; more information over this way.
Welcome to Wednesday! Some mid-week news is coming your way … And rumor has it that snow may be coming our way tomorrow. What do you think? WAMU gave it a 30% chance about an hour ago.
Opinion: Here’s some philanthropy advice for Mark Zuckerberg — GoodWorks did a series of posts back in September regarding the media buzz around Facebook founder and CEO’s $100 million donation to the Newark schools. Now that Zuckerberg had signed the Giving Pledge, the buzz has returned. Yet I quite like this piece from the Mercury News by Phil Buchanan (President of the Center for Effective Philanthropy) and Stephen Heintz (President of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund), offering advice both to the 26-year-old Zuckerberg and the entire new generation of philanthropists — in particular, reminding them that the country does not simply need philanthropy, but effective philanthropy. Do check it out!
Good morning, one and all. Today on “7 Questions,” we are pleased to introduce … Jane Cohen, President of Neediest Kids in McLean, VA. Working with nine school systems around Greater Washington, this awesome non-profit makes sure that over 40,00 young students have what they need to stay healthy and stay in school. Everything from school supplies to medical care to the right eyeglasses!
1. What was your most interesting recent project, initiative, partnership, or event?
One of the most interesting projects this year has been our transition to a web based portal system used to deliver services. Through this technology, we can now get basic essentials to our students much more efficiently and we can capture user and financial data as the transactions happen. Approved school professionals can access an individual account and order eye glasses, school supplies, clothes, food or other needed products without the hassle or red tape or order forms. Neediest Kids staff then reviews and approves each transaction against the program budget. We were recognized by NPower for this innovative technology solution.
Welcome to Friday, Greater Washington! We’re trying out a new format here on GoodWorks for our weekend event listings — sorting events by type, rather than by time of day, so that you can go straight to your main interests. Let us know what you think!
Looking to … Volunteer?
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 11
ASHA for Women will be offering a training session from 9:30-4:30 in Rockville for those interesting in working directly with clients as an advocate; these sessions only come four times a year, so sign up quickly by calling (202) 683-2019. Plus Empowered Women International needs volunteers for their holiday gala, “Women of Courage: the Art and Stories of Entrepreneur Artists and Change Makers.” Call (301) 693-1346 to sign up today!
Looking to … Help the Planet?
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 11
Take this special yoga class at 5:00 in Dupont; proceeds will benefit the the Bonobo Conservation Initiative’s great work in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
In the day-to-day, I often find myself making (or attempting to make) this very point. So it certainly helps to have some solid facts and numbers to back it up! Below is a great excerpt from Sean Stannard-Stockton’s recent column for the Chronicle of Philanthropy. You can read the article in full over at the Tactical Philanthropy blog:
While the role of business in promoting social change is now attracting the spotlight, it is equally important that our society recognize the financial value created by nonprofits.
The nonprofit world collectively generates $1.9-trillion in revenue each year, which means that nonprofit organizations represent roughly 13 percent of the United States economy.
Welcome to Wednesday, Washingtonians!
“Are There Limits to Collaborations?” — this post over at Deep Social Impact definitely caught my eye. First, I wrote a quick post on the resurgence of an ethic of collaboration among disparate organizations. Second, on an intra-organization level, “collaboration” has certainly become a buzzword in recent years. But is collaboration always in the best interest of our mission and operations? As Cynthia Gibson writes, “What I — and others — are starting to see, however, is that there can be a tendency for organizations to see collaboration as an end unto itself, rather than a process, management style, or approach that’s a means to an end.”
Good morning, Washington! We’ll have more mid-week news coming your way on Wednesday, but I just wanted to share this one unusual item today. First, it honestly made me smile. But moreover, I wondered if it might mark the beginning of an intriguing partnership between the public and non-profit sector — and whether it signaled a growing awareness of the power inherent in cross-disciplinary collaboration.
As Popular Science reported this weekend: “NASA Plans to Put Non-Profit Group in Charge of International Space Station Experiments:”
As NASA prepares to put the finishing touches on the International Space Station — just as soon as space shuttle Discovery can make one last visit — the space agency is looking to outsource its science experiments.
Truly, can a troubled organization make a successful 180?
Corporate and non-profit leaders alike have tackled this question — from the staff of the Harvard Business Review to Kennedy Center President Michael Kaiser in The Art of the Turnaround. Last week, Jan Glick offered the Stanford Social Innovation Review a glimpse into his new book, Nonprofit Turnaround, which serves as a guide both for non-profit leaders and for those who advise and fund their work. In this post, he points to the case of Mary McKinney who engineered a successful turnaround of the Alcohol and Drug Council of Middle Tennessee:
… McKinney began to oversee changes to the Council’s management, meeting with different constituencies to chart a strategic planning process. The new Council management soon determined that it had lost sight of the organization’s vision by trying to be all things to all people and chasing funding. It had fallen victim to mission creep. […]
“Before the turnaround, we used to serve anyone,” said McKinney. “Over a couple of years, we switched focus to serve people who are the most vulnerable, most in need. […] These changes have actually helped us in our fundraising. We redefined who our customer is.”
In other words, McKinney actually grew and developed and, yes, turned around her organization by making it smaller.
“Smaller” is perhaps not the right word; “specific” or “targeted” is more apt. But Glick and McKinney hit upon an essential point: smaller, precise focus can lead to larger success. Frequently, organizations that serve the public — whether they provide much-needed job training or transcendent performance — want to be there for everyone. Leaders crave inclusion and diversity and openness, as well they should. But as McKinney suggests, that very craving can transform into a troubling and problematic conviction: that being “all things to all people” is the only way to stay viable.
What she and her team discovered was that exclusion could be beneficial — and that focusing on specific people with specific needs made her organization (in fact) more viable. They ultimately determined a few services that they could provide at the highest level to a targeted, needy population. And that discovery, that narrowing of focus and redefinition of “who our customer is,” helped them to develop as a service-provider and to turn around. Moreover, with all resources focused on a few key outcomes rather than several broad objectives, her fundraising efforts yielded better results. After all, what is cooler and more compelling than offering an answer to a specific and heretofore undefined problem?
The post focuses on human service non-profits, rather than cultural or educational organizations, but I believe that the idea can apply there as well. Personally, I find the Greater Washington performance community (and the Catalogue arts and culture non-profits) so exciting because each organization’s work is so specific — because our theater and dance and arts education non-profits each have landed upon a style that is so uniquely theirs, an experience that no one else can duplicate. And the creation of those incomprable experience requires the same daring that McKinney discusses. Daring to be a bit narrow, to be very specific, to be utterly clear in who you are.
In conclusion, Glick writes that “McKinney was successful because she had the courage to lead a process that involved major organizational decisions, including staff and program changes and cuts.” His book offers 100 other studies, so her example clearly cannot stand in for all of them. But he also highlighted it for a reason, perhaps to reassure other leaders that sometimes, well, you need to articulate what you don’t do. Large, comprehensive human service organizations are of course essential to our local communities and our nation, but small organizations can have a unique power and impact because they are small. And focusing and (perhaps) even cutting is sometimes a lot like growing.
What do you think? Does it “pay” to be specific and (arguably) exclusionary? What are the other essential and perhaps counter-intuitive steps to organizational development and turnaround?