Monthly Archives :

August 2015

Fundraising and Organizational Brand

To sustain long-term fundraising success, an organization must show potential donors that its work is meaningful, relevant, and impactful. But simply doing good work that addresses a pressing social need is no guarantee that an organization will attract funders—or even get a positive response when approaching funders. Nonprofits need a communications strategy that highlights the importance and relevance of their work, but more broadly, they need to develop their organizational brand.

All nonprofits inevitably have a brand; they should work to shape it. It is the sum of associations that people have about them in terms of values, practices, and visual identity. Rather than hoping people will pick up on their good work, nonprofits can—and must—deliberately influence how people perceive them by cultivating and promoting a distinct brand. Successful companies don’t leave their brand identity to chance, and neither should nonprofits. Even though most nonprofits have tight budgets for non-programatic expenses, there is still a lot they can do to shape how they are perceived—one key area is how they describe their work.

The language an organization uses to define itself should flow from its mission. The mission statement should get to the organization’s essence; people should be able to read it and understand why the organization exists and what it does. A clear mission should be the starting point for all communication and development language, such as a case statement, grant proposals, website content, presentations, newsletters, annual reports, and an informal elevator pitch. But there is more to branding than language.

It is important to pay attention to other visual aspects of the brand. Today’s world is so digital and brand-sensitive that things like website design, social media presence, logo, and multimedia are hugely important. A potential funder will likely have a bad first impression of an organization if they find a disorganized website, no Twitter feed, and a handful of materials in different design styles. These factors are not in themselves grounds for funding, but when they are subpar, potential funders can dismiss an organization—especially since there is so much competition from other worthy organizations for their limited funding.

Luckily, many nonprofits are catching on to some of the marketing approaches that have long been standard in the private sector. They are learning how much it can improve their fundraising outcomes if they have a mission-centered brand that is reinforced by multiple channels of communication—including a well-designed visual identity and a prominent online presence. Then, when it comes time to request funding, there is already a strong brand in place that reinforces and creates synergy with the funding appeal.

Ice Bucket Therapy – One Year Later

Ice-Bucket-Challenge-ALS-Research-750x420

So how’s that cure for ALS coming along?

CONFESSION: When the Ice Bucket Challenge went viral, I was more than a little bit jealous. As a fundraiser who has spent many days and nights scraping and clawing for every dime, armed with a noble mission and compelling case statement (and not a cheesy gimmick), it filled me with envy to see all of those buckets of cash pouring into the coffers of the ALSA.

And I’m still bitter. Because the outpouring of support for ALS had much less to do with the actual cause (many people didn’t even know what ALS was), and much more to do with the vain, solipsistic, “look at me” mentality of our society, which was fed by the opportunity to film one of those inane ice bucket videos. Should it matter that people weren’t really connected to the cause? No. ALS is an insidious disease, and the association got an amazing infusion of cash that can be used for treatment and research, which is a very good thing for ALS victims and families.

So back to my original question: How’s it going?

According to this week’s edition of TIME, The Ice Bucket Challenge brought in $115 million – roughly four times the amount that the ALSA brought in the previous year.  At press time, the ALSA had spent $47 million, with about $31 million allocated toward research, $11 million spent on patient and community services and the remaining $5 million on education, fundraising, and processing fees. I won’t bore you with the geeky science of it all, but the infusion of cash has already yielded some encouraging results with respect to both treatment and cure.

So I guess it’s time for me to stop being bitter and focus on what I, and other fundraisers, can learn from the Ice Bucket Challenge.  Did the ALSA catch lightning in a bottle, or is there something there that the rest of us can use, learn from, build on in the future to make our fundraising more successful?

Sigh. I’m still bitter. Maybe another time.