Komen Lessons

The Susan G. Komen Foundation’s recent public relations disaster should sound a cautionary note for anyone in the fundraising and donor relations business. The announcement that Planned Parenthood would be disqualified from further Komen grant funding because it was “under investigation” – a violation of new rules the Foundation had put in place for its grantees – clearly touched a nerve among not only the Foundation's donors, but a substantial number of its own affiliates as well.

Reaction was swift and loud, reverberating across the news spectrum. Social media played a particularly important role in publicizing and challenging Komen’s decision. The Foundation seemed blindsided by both the volume of negative response and its emotional intensity.

However one may feel about the issues at play in the Komen Foundation’s policy decision, and its sudden reversal in the face of criticism, there is little doubt that this episode will have longer-term consequences for Komen’s fundraising efforts. 

The blogosphere has been particularly harsh – “Not another dime of my money will go to Komen, which has now shown its true colors” is a common refrain. And the Foundation’s suggestion that there were “other reasons” for disqualifying Planned Parenthood for further Komen grants in the future didn’t placate anyone.

From a fundraising perspective, there are two critical takeaways: 

1) Fail to understand your donors at your own peril; and

2) Don’t forget that social media can be a double-edged sword. 

Clearly, the Komen Foundation had not anticipated the outcry from people who had been its loyal donors and event participants for years – people for whom the fight against breast cancer is completely outside of politics, but who also see this fight in the context of larger issues related to health equity for women. They care about access to healthcare for poor women, and part of the reason they supported Komen was because it funded Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screening and referral services for those women.

Ironically, using the same social media tools that Komen has cultivated so effectively for fundraising purposes, these disgruntled donors communicated -- far and wide -- their displeasure with the Foundation’s decision.

And using the identical networking tools, Planned Parenthood had one of its best fundraising weeks ever. Actually, Komen also had a pretty good week, thanks to some counter-backlash giving. But political polarization around an emotionally charged, non-political issue in women’s health may just exacerbate Komen’s fundraising challenges.

The Komen Foundation’s most urgent priority now is restoring the trust of its donors. How it addresses that stewardship challenge could have enormous potential impact on the success of its fundraising and event-marketing in the future.

Recognition versus Gratitude

It's sometimes easy for fundraisers to focus on recognition of donors -- which can be described on paper and be part of "stewardship systems" -- but can miss the opportunity to express real gratitude to donors.  Gratitude can be simple.  It can be short and to the point.  One of the best thank you letters I ever received was for a small gift I made to a local school. The principal wrote a short note telling me how she would make use of the money and thanking me.  It stood out.

Are You Ready for Scrutiny?

Several recent articles in the Chronicle of Philanthropy describe potential new regulations to direct what charities must disclose -- from costs to raise funds to options for donors to makes gifts restricted to specific projects.  Still, few organizations seem to be taking the initiative to be more transparent BEFORE they are forced to by state and federal lawmakers.

What are people waiting for?  An organization in the private sector would jump at the chance to be ahead of the curve and use a market trend to help differentiate itself from the competition.  Why are we so unimaginative?

Customer Service: Two examples . . . for-profit and not-For-profit

Two examples of customer relations in the last two days.  Each was very impressive.

Apple, Inc.  I was purchasing a laptop computer on line and had difficulty with the process and called the -800 Apple help line.  An incredibly friendly, competent, smart young man walked me through the purchase, accessing records of mine and talking through options.  He made my on-line confusion seem like the most regular thing . . . no sense of operator error or the need for me to apologize. And he followed up the purchase with not just a form receipt from Apple, but a personal email from him at his personal Apple address.  I responded to thank him and he responded.  Wow.  I am incredibly impressed.

I can hear a not-for-profit response; actually, an excuse: "But Apple has a lot of money to do things well.". . . Right! And that's why Apple has a lot of money . . . they do things well.

My not-for-profit story is about LIFT, an organization founded by a young Yale graduate, which "combats poverty and expands opportunity."  I made an on-line gift in honor of a friend and at the suggestion of one of their major donors. I didn't get either an on-line or paper acknowledgment or receipt. But I did receive a fiscal year-end solicitation. So I wrote to them, copied the CEO, and said I thought they were missing the boat in basic solicitation and stewardship. I received an immediate response from the communication team, a follow up from the LIFT development office, and a personal email from the CEO. All within a couple of hours, all sincere, well-written, and focused on discovering the source of the problem and solving it.

I left the experience impressed and more than willing to give again.  

In each of these examples, personal attention was the key to what was a great experience with Apple and what turned out, in the end, to be a positive experience with LIFT. Both increased my willingness -- even enthusiasm -- to purchase/give again.

Great Resource

A great resource for development professionals is the American Institute of CPAs daily email update.  Here's the link www.aicpa.org  It shoots out a brief email with links to business news related to how business are managed, regulated, and AUDITing.  This has real relevance for fundraising and stewardship.

Several days ago they linked to Fortune Magazine and an article called Do Disclosure Rules Really Work? Why is this interesting?  Look to the private sector for the future of demands on the non-profit world re: regulation.  Issues like disclosing how a company selects its board members or compensation has direct relevance to non-profits. 

This is a wonderful, simple, free tool for you to use to see out onto the horizon.

Let's Lose the Industrial Model to Fundraising

Seth Godin did a webinar for Network for Good on the 12th and suggested that the industrial model of mass production and maximum efficiency may be bad for fundraising because it's time has gone.  He's right that ours is not a profession know for flexibility, delivering the unexpected or using technology to deliver the personal. However, here you have an organization like Network for Good doing ALL that by enabling practioners in the field to hear Seth and ponder his ideas (and maybe buy his books)

But don't we have potential.....we deal in a world where emotion rules, relationships abound, and proximity to the best minds (our volunteers) is close.  So how do we move the needle and ratchet it up some notches?  It's going to take risk, mistakes, investment of time and money. 

Donor Bill of Rights

Not being harassed is not specifically listed on the Donor Bill of Rights.  So, technically the Darmouth and Cornell senior class fundraisers who put a full court/class press on peers to donate to their class gift didn't violate anything official. But is that what donors want or deserve?  The Chronicle of Higher Education story included student comments which were both positive and negative (the majority included) about the experience.  We know that generation Y is more likely to vote early and vote often with their feet.  So giving them reason to feel the giving experience wasn't good in the very beginning seems to out weigh the goal of getting them to give early.