Tag Archives: Boston College

Special Episode: Coronavirus & Nonprofit Fundraising

I love our sponsors!

WegnerCPAs. Guiding you. Beyond the numbers.

Cougar Mountain Software: Denali Fund is their complete accounting solution, made for nonprofits. Claim your free 60-day trial.

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

Listen Live or Archive:

My Guest:

Paul Schervish: Coronavirus & Nonprofits
Coronavirus needs no introduction. We’re recording on Monday, March 23rd. Nonprofits are scrambling and struggling. The scrambling to adapt to workflow and personal upheavals will subside. The struggle will get worse: The need among those you help has increased and will become greater. Expenses of all sorts, from helping those in need, to disinfecting offices, to increased reliance on technology, are rising. At the same time, there’s financial pressure on your individual donors, in the face of firings, layoffs and work reductions. Your institutional funders are also pressured, whether private or public. Is it wise to spend? Can you count on your donors when this is over? Can you fundraise in the midst of the crisis? My guest is Paul Schervish, retired director of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College.




Top Trends. Sound Advice. Lively Conversation.

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

Sponsored by:

Cougar Mountain Software logo
View Full Transcript
Transcript for 481a_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200323.mp3

Processed on: 2020-03-24T00:52:19.479Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2020…03…481a_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200323.mp3.924879505.json
Path to text: transcripts/2020/03/481a_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200323.txt

[00:00:16.14] spk_3:
Hello and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%.

[00:02:25.94] spk_0:
I’m your aptly named host. This is a special short episode of non profit radio Corona virus and non profit fundraising. Corona virus needs no introduction We’re recording on Monday, March 23rd on profits are scrambling and struggling, scrambling to adapt to workflow, and personal upheavals will subside. The struggle will get worse. The need among those you help has increased and will become greater expenses of all sorts from helping those in need to disinfecting offices to increased reliance on technology are rising. At the same time, there’s financial pressure on your donors in the face of firings, layoffs, work reductions as the individual donors is also financial pressure on your institutional funders. Is it wise for you to spend? Can you count on your donors when this is over, whether individual or institutional, can you fund raise in the midst of the crisis? My guest is Paul Schervish, retired director of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College, were sponsored by wegner-C.P.As. Guiding you beyond the numbers wegner-C.P.As dot com. My Cougar Mountain software Denali Fund is there Complete accounting solution made for nonprofits. Tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant Mountain for a free 60 day trial and by turned to communications, PR and content for nonprofits is their mission. Turn hyphen to DOT CEO. It’s a great pleasure to welcome back to the show. Paul Schervish. He’s professor emeritus at Boston College and retired director of their Center on Wealth and Philanthropy. He’s the author of seven books on Giving and wealth. He’s been studying philanthropy for over 35 years. He’s at Paul Schervish. Great pleasure to welcome you back, Paul. How are you,

[00:02:32.87] spk_6:
tony? It’s a pleasure to be back. I’m just doing fine. Laying low, being an elder statesman, or at least another.

[00:02:38.77] spk_2:
No, you’re You’re here to provide context. Historical context. Which eyes going to reassure all of us. So the elder statesman is appropriate on. Where are you? Ah, where you staying? In place.

[00:03:04.57] spk_6:
We’re in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, where we moved from Boston. Ah, for 1/2 year. We live in Boston the other half of the year where our two boys live. But down here, um, is where our first grandchild arrived. And so we spend half the year down here.

[00:03:12.10] spk_2:
All the reason to move only only half the year. I’m surprised your wife, your wife would like to stay longer. I’m wondering.

[00:03:15.98] spk_6:
No, not at all. Because they’re two boys live in Boston. Grandchildren there, too. So, uh, there we go.

[00:03:22.82] spk_3:
Okay. Well, I’m, uh I’m several hours east

[00:03:36.84] spk_2:
of you. I’m on the coast in Emerald Isle, North Carolina, also also in place. And the governor today just ah, closed. Um, what

[00:03:37.22] spk_3:
did you do

[00:03:40.54] spk_0:
today? Today was just Ah, we already had. Oh, that was a local. Yeah, the governor today. Locally, they

[00:03:59.24] spk_2:
had they had done some things. But the governor of North Carolina today, Governor Cooper just closed. Um, beauty salons, massage therapists, barbershops, movie theaters, Jim’s, um right Cooper, Governor. Right, Cooper. Um all right,

[00:04:09.48] spk_3:
So what, uh, what’s your star general know? What’s your what’s your sense

[00:04:10.18] spk_2:
of what non profits are facing and should look forward to?

[00:07:06.64] spk_6:
Well, I hate to quote Rumsfeld, but what we’re facing is those I’ve known unknowns that he talked about, remember? He said they were known unknowns, and there were unknown unknowns, remember? And this is a biological event of an unprecedented nature. Not in the extent that we haven’t had major plagues in history, and we can certainly trace back to the 2018. Clue 2019 flu. I’m in 1919 1918. Um, but this is unprecedented in that this is taking place in an age of dramatic globalization and interaction, coupled with the dramatic situation of biological and scientific progress and and potential insight. So right now, what we do know is that this spreads quickly. It has a death rate that we’re starting to learn may not be as great as we had once feared. But what we don’t know is its termination date and how it will exhaust itself. And so anything we’re going to talk about for charity’s contributing to their, um ah, receiving money from their sponsors or charities contributing to those that they support Our, uh, philanthropy is contributing. We don’t have a time frame for this, like we might have had for recessions and so on. And even for 2011 29 11 when we, um, actually had, uh, on increase of giving within a year. So, uh, sound like Zach and, uh, the great recession of 2007 2008 29. Um, we had about a five year decline and terrible giving. It went up in some of those years, but the trajectory of charitable giving was down for about five years. If you looked at it as going up from a year 2000 2 2007 and if that had continued to grow, um, we would have had 350 billion more dollars given to charity from 2008 to 2013. So we lost a year. Charitable giving if, um, the, um, trajectory from 27 had continued unabated. So that was a longer hiatus and terrible giving. We lost about it. Ah, whole year’s worth. Over those five years,

[00:07:13.64] spk_2:
the trajectory of charitable giving is always positive that the long term trajectory

[00:07:18.80] spk_6:
that’s correct,

[00:07:20.44] spk_2:
okay, that that in itself is grounding and and reassuring. We always it always does come back.

[00:07:37.31] spk_6:
And I also think it’s important to note that something that Patrick Rooney and I Patrick from the Center on Philanthropy in Indiana and I have talked about is that even giving us A is a low ball estimate. We think there’s a lot more giving then what we can measure Ah, in a meaningful and in a sober manner. And this giving, of course, does not include all the informal giving that accelerates at this time that people don’t realize she could be recorded his formal giving or that people are giving and shouldn’t be recorded as formal giving. And it isn’t so. There’s a lot of intra family help at times like this that actually does make up for quote unquote the decline and formal giving. Oh,

[00:08:24.54] spk_2:
interesting. Yeah. So you’re you’re yes. You’re bringing now family family support. It’s just private support. Me. Could be family. Could be friends.

[00:08:33.22] spk_6:
That’s right.

[00:08:33.89] spk_2:
That’s not recorded as a CZ. You and I talk about non profit fundraising.

[00:08:39.43] spk_6:
That’s right.

[00:08:40.30] spk_2:
Yeah. Yeah. All right,

[00:08:42.54] spk_3:
All right. So then, you know, the non profit community

[00:09:00.24] spk_2:
has greater expenses. Like I was saying in the intro, whether it’s technology or disinfecting offices or, you know, uh, you are, of course, greater need to, uh to the to those who were serving and

[00:09:13.35] spk_3:
that just that doesn’t apply only to, uh, institutions, organizations that serve individuals. But, you know, culture is important. Yeah, Theater’s air closed now, but cultural institutions need to keep themselves going, whether It’s a museum or a theater group. Okay, These these air both closed now, um, but they’re gonna come back. And so the theater group theatre company needs to have ah ah. Pipeline of directors and shows planned. Um, the museum needs to think about, you know, curating for the future on being opened again. Will they will open again. So I’m not only

[00:09:44.31] spk_2:
thinking of individuals and, you know, bring in arts groups and environment of course. Mean so

[00:09:53.94] spk_3:
the work has to continue. And, um, in some cases,

[00:10:05.77] spk_2:
there’s a special, special, greater need, but the upset cause is greater expenses, too. Like I said, possibly reliance on technology irrespective of what kind of mission. So

[00:10:11.24] spk_3:
in the face of these greater needs, whatever form they take, um, are we safe to be spending

[00:10:14.24] spk_2:
beyond what we anticipated? Beyond what we what we budgeted?

[00:14:11.09] spk_6:
Well, the answer that I told my students over all the years that is the first answer of wisdom is that it depends. It depends on what kind of organization we’re talking about. Depends on whether a hospital depends on whether we’re receiving as a nonprofit organization or as a public organization. State funds to keep going. Let’s think of it as what we’re hearing from the federal government. What we’re hearing from state governments. There’s two arenas. One is the, um the people, the employees. And there’s a certain amount of expenditure that charities are going to need to support their employees. They way they want to support people in the community. It’s hard to treat your employees more harshly. Then you want a treat. You’re, um uh, the people in the community, Uh, these are your family members, so to speak. And so Charity’s first of all have an obligation, too. And we’ll find, I think, happy response among thunders for keeping employees uh, engaged and hired. Now we’re gonna have to work out the way there is the government non profit partnership here because of people are quote laid off that has some of their salary played paid for by unemployment benefits. And so maybe there’s unemployment benefits that the state the government will provide, and then the non profit makes up for that difference. To keep people from quitting or joining another, uh, employment opportunity. You see how this can get complex In a second area is the institution itself the survival of the institution. And just as the government is providing money for businesses to continue to exist so that there’s places for employees after the troubles are over, um, the nonprofit sector has to keep going in a way that there’s a place for the employees to be working and their jobs to be contributing to the community when the crisis is over, if there is a need for layoffs and we can talk about what donors may think about, but let’s just take one place to start. Let’s start with organizations that have no endowment versus for those with the small endowment versus for those with a grand endowment and what they can do. I think most universities they’re not laying people off, especially those with it was a great endowment. Um, they have the tuition for the year, even if their tuition driven. They have there the most of their revenue already in the coffers. They’re going to continue to grant credits, and they’re going to be able to keep their income stream alive at least until the beginning of the next semester. So that’s just one example. Often organization that may not need a dramatic infusion of charitable dollars at this point, and that takes us to the donor. The donor is goingto have to be picking and choosing maybe one that has contributed ah, large amount over years to uneducated l Institution might for the next six months shift that giving away from an organization that doesn’t need the money it much immediately to an organization that is proceed to be much more in need immediately

[00:14:15.78] spk_3:
now. So, historically, have we seen a shift like that? Have we measured that?

[00:14:56.45] spk_6:
Yes, wenn er the great recession took place 2008 2009 We found, as I said, a decrease in charitable giving overall. But giving too social service is was sustained much better. And after after 9 11 1 of the reasons why charitable giving didn’t go down. It was before we had this kind of crisis Fatigue, charity, fatigue.

[00:14:59.44] spk_7:
Um uh,

[00:15:27.84] spk_6:
9 11 produced a lot of charitable giving, and if it did it for the people that were, uh, immediate loss for their, um, family life and way of making a living, and it did it for communities and for businesses that were caught in that trap. And so the money shifted in 20 in the great recession. And it also shifted for crisis relief in on 9 11

[00:15:47.24] spk_2:
Okay, Yeah. 9 11 is a bit of a different case, because the funders, whether institutional or individual, we’re not enormously impacted the way we are are all now impacted.

[00:16:02.64] spk_6:
One time shock. Yes, rather than an indefinite period of time that effects that the wealth of the donors, um, directly run in. And you’re very correct about that.

[00:16:07.33] spk_2:
Yeah. Um, so that I don’t want to discount 9 11 lessons. I’m not. No,

[00:16:12.26] spk_6:
no, no, you’re not. You’re not, But it’s a very good point

[00:16:23.24] spk_2:
context. The great recession seems Maur. Ah, more of an apt analogy. Um, for that reason, if

[00:17:18.68] spk_6:
you ever want to know what’s going to happen, the philanthropy look at the income and wealth. Gross or declines that fire outstrips any tax effects that are written about all the time in the nonprofit sector. Worries about all the time. Um, we had a natural experiment after the great recession. Um, there was no change in the tax laws that took place for those five or six years. No, except the tiny bit in the marginal tax rate for capital gains. But that was not that important. Okay, so without any tax change, we saw a dramatic decrease and terrible giving due to the decrease in wealth and an income. And the income effect and the wealth effect far outstrip any of these tax effects that the charity’s air always be moaning. Whenever they hear that there might be a decrease in taxes. They feel that the discount rate for donors is going down, and they’re going to give less. Well, in the past, that may have been the case. But today, wealth is growing normally so greatly that far outstrips any effect that the tax rates have.

[00:17:45.94] spk_2:
All right, now, people don’t feel so wealthy right now.

[00:17:49.09] spk_6:
That’s right. And that’s why that’s very important.

[00:17:51.42] spk_2:
They don’t write and they don’t know for how long. They’re not gonna feel so wealthy.

[00:17:58.24] spk_6:
Are these so wealthy? Yeah,

[00:17:58.95] spk_2:
I was. Yeah,

[00:18:03.40] spk_6:
I was returning. Dollars have been lost in the stock market, right over 1/3

[00:18:04.35] spk_2:
of value in the

[00:18:05.30] spk_6:
market has been lost.

[00:18:37.04] spk_2:
Yeah, you’re right. I’m I’m thinking of the perception you’re grounding in the reality, but e I mean, they’re both The reality creates the perception, your question of how long after the reality subs theat reality improves, Does the perception linger? But right now we’re in the midst of the reality, the reality of the perception of equal. Now we’ve lost a lot of wealth. Couple trillion dollars. Um, people are concerned about their jobs. Whether the jobs will continue or or just be reduced. Working hours be reduced. So incomes reduced so over people are not feeling wealthy.

[00:19:29.04] spk_6:
Well, I’m gonna command Is that that for that insight about the sensibility of it did not in addition to the objective reality, because our own research has shown that over a period of time, very wealthy, um have an objective view of their financial security, but also a subject of one. And the lower the subjective you, no matter what their objective circumstances, the less they give to charity. And it is also true for people who are not wealthy, for whom income studies have been done. And when people feel that their incomes were going to rise over the next few years, um, they will give more to charity than those who feel that they’re not going to be rising. So it is even without the objective circumstance. Your note about the sensitivity is very important. And that does linger just as you suggested.

[00:19:51.74] spk_2:
I’m talked to a lot of experts. I’m trainable. I’ve heard this a few times, so I Hi, I’m trainable. Um

[00:19:54.36] spk_3:
all right. So what does that mean

[00:19:59.74] spk_2:
for fundraising? Look, I don’t mean this week or this month, even still March,

[00:20:08.64] spk_3:
but what does it mean for fundraising? Thio help counter

[00:20:13.31] spk_2:
some of these increased expenses in Let’s say, you know, April, May June, do we

[00:20:17.05] spk_3:
have to just wait and see? Ah, how people feel or or can we go out and test our our constituents for for fundraising messages?

[00:24:48.84] spk_6:
I think that what we have to do is have a fundraising message that’s functional. Are we disappearing? And are my workers disappearing? Or are we going to be able to survive? Now there’s two sides of this when we talk about a arts organization, a museum or theater, they have funding from fundraise from by fundraising, but they also have revenue from attendance. And so those that are losing revenue by attendance from lack of attendance are going to be suffering more than those that are just able to keep their revenue alive. Um, for instance, hospitals will be able to keep their revenue alive over this period of time. While arts groups may not be able to, universities may be able to keep the revenue stream alive Attn least until the fall, until we find out more of what’s happening. While some social service organizations may not be able to a large community foundations with endowments, um, we’ll be able to do better than those without endowments. Um uh, organizations that have AH connection to people with donor advised funds will do better because donor advised funds are are terrible savings accounts that people will be able to contribute from even if they can’t add to them at this point. So there’s all these dimensions. But what I would advise charities to do is to be very honest about two things. Their employees and there beneficiaries are their beneficiaries being taken care of without them at this point, and they can cut back on those service is or are those service is remaining the same? Are they increasing their employees? Are their employees going to be able to because of the revenue stream, mainly continue to be employed. Supermarkets, food banks, perhaps, and so on because they’re being supported by the community, Um, or by government, um, places where school systems air, providing our continue to provide the breakfast and lunch programs. They’re different from communities that are dropping those programs and need private funding for them. You follow all of this and I hope our listeners are So what I would do if I were a donor, as I would look to a charity and how honest it is to be about its two major instrumental needs. Its beneficiaries And those programs on the one hand and the second instrumental need its employees, and I would see what needs to be done about that. And you know what’s happening out there? Is that some donors air actually contacting charities and saying, What do you need? I know one family that contributes to an inner city school in Detroit, and we were talking with them, and what they did is they found out that that inner city grade school is using the chromebooks that that family has contributed two grades five through eight, and they asked, Do you need more chromebooks for your youngsters? that the parents can use with the kids. The answer came back. Not yet, but we may. But that was something that the donor asked about a specific thing that was specifically needed for continuing education for the lowers, the lowest grades in school, the way they’re continuing education for the middle school. And uh huh. So those things are happening.

[00:24:57.01] spk_2:
Yeah. So that’s right. That’s the individual that the donor reaching out to the charity. Maybe. Can we say, you know, I don’t know. Six. Well,

[00:25:02.35] spk_3:
there’s value in keeping in touch

[00:25:03.96] spk_2:
with your your major donors. You’re

[00:25:21.78] spk_3:
even if this is not the time to be asking them to give, but explaining what the needs are. You know, like that that example. You know, we don’t need Chromebooks now, but maybe in the future, you know, we’re stable now, but six weeks from now, we the needs, maybe X y z

[00:25:26.64] spk_6:
So, yes, that’s really

[00:25:28.31] spk_3:
being not asking, but communicating the needs, sort of like you would do with a friend or a family member, you know? No, I’m okay right now, but six weeks from now, I might need some help,

[00:26:06.14] spk_6:
you know, be in touch. Done kind of messages. Yeah, we call you. Yes, and I think that’s a great week. See, sometimes donors feel, um, neglected by not being asked. Isn’t that a strange thing? You know, you know, that’s one of the major things I call the new physics of philanthropy that instead of donors having to be approached and squeezed, donors are looking for a good opportunity to give. And especially if you’re already giving to an organization. You know, they value you and approach you just mentioned is a very good one to pursue.

[00:26:20.04] spk_2:
Same same as the board members who we find unsatisfied because they’re not sufficiently asked to contribute their their time and time and talent to the accusation that not asked to do enough. It’s the It’s a paradox that I’m asked. I’m not asked to do enough, so I’m losing interest in being a board member on the charity side. They’re afraid to ask the board members to doom or because they feel they’re over taxing them. Same. But

[00:26:50.19] spk_6:
I ran into a paradox one of the Kennedys at an event, and, uh, we’re

[00:26:52.04] spk_2:
dropping names now. Look, a dropping names, Kennedy family.

[00:27:25.44] spk_6:
Oh, no, no. There are in the Boston area, and it was one of the one of the younger kids and and we were he said, What do you do? And I’m going on He said, You know, one of things that happened the other day, I was really anxious to give to such and such, and they never asked me, and I was really kind of upset about that. You know, it’s just what we’re saying, and it’s a strange thing you may think, but you want to be valued for what you can do. And if you could do something, you want to be asked about it,

[00:27:28.74] spk_2:
right? And if now is not the time to be asking, now is a good time to be

[00:27:33.76] spk_3:
communicating about what’s happening at the organization, you know, telling your stories

[00:27:57.84] spk_2:
about employee dislocation. Um, parent employees who are now have kids at home that used to be in school, um, and telling the needs of the stories of your beneficiaries the stories of your building that you can’t access, but you’re still to pay rent on, um, you know,

[00:28:13.64] spk_3:
telling these stories the needs are just gonna be be evident and you’re not asking now, but you’re sort of laying the groundwork for asking when it’s, you know, six weeks of past or so 4 to 6 weeks of past. You’re starting to lay the groundwork. Not conniving Lee, but just being honest with laying, laying out the stories of what’s happening now, so that when the need is there, um, it’s not a surprise to your funders.

[00:30:07.20] spk_6:
Well, take you picking up on exactly what you’re saying. If I were to make one recommendation to charities and I have received from charities and from newsletters and from financial advisors, I’m on all these lists because I like to read and I’m reluctant to miss anything. And and most of them are telling us about the covert virus and what’s gonna happen and wash your hands and and we don’t know exactly what’s gonna happen. But you know, it’s time for the charities to start sending letters to their donors about themselves and their beneficiaries, where we may not be in need right now, but here’s what’s happening to us. I would be interested to learn from some charities what’s happening to us. Um, if Boston College were to send out a, um ah, a letter saying financially, we do an annual report, and, uh, but this is what’s happening at Boston College these days could be partly financial. It could be party, uh, in Roman issues. It could be partly added expenses, and it may not be a request for donations at this time. But to hear about what’s happening to the groups and the beneficiaries for whom you care is, I think, a new kind of communication that can be part of this Corona virus communications network and content

[00:30:26.09] spk_2:
and then in the in the medium to long term. Um, and we don’t know what that term is. Um, the history shows us that giving will recover.

[00:31:15.48] spk_6:
That is correct. Let’s think of churches right now. Um, it is kind of a paradigm they’re not holding. Service is, um, now a lot of churches get their revenue by the collection basket each Sunday. Others get the major portion of theirs Bye pledges in November, December, and so on. Those that get their revenue by pledges and have regular communication and maybe are doing service is on the Web, or so one are gonna be more in connection with their donors and those that are supporting it. But church is an interesting thing. See churches, an organization that the donor uses, the donor and the recipient to a church

[00:31:17.83] spk_9:
is the same person, the same

[00:31:43.58] spk_6:
family. Yeah, and so there’s a close identification there. But there’s also the fact that if you’re not using the service is at the present time, does that distance you more then from the organizations whom you contribute to but you don’t use? The service is from so we’re gonna have to see right or will people say their church can continue? I don’t mind it if we have to cut back a little bit as long as our pastor is paid or our pastors air paid.

[00:31:55.27] spk_7:
Um mmm. But

[00:33:37.24] spk_6:
maybe other things are a priority, But we’ll see. And this is the uncertainty that’s plaguing the stock market. It’s played in charity. It’s plaguing donors. It’s plaguing charities. It’s plaguing foundations. Everywhere you look, it’s playing in the medical world, this uncertainty and it would just be maybe a miracle. Maybe a great lesson, maybe just the way things play out. Or maybe all of those that if this were to have a shorter six week duration in the United States or across the world. Um, it’s section of the world having a six week duration of this in which it peaks and then true tales. Or there’s some biological discovery or scientific breakthrough. Um, this could change this whole crisis. And I think behind everybody’s anxiousness is also this maybe even on reasonable hope. That is also at play. And so there is some of this. We’re in crisis now, but maybe there won’t be a crisis in two months or six weeks. I will begin to see this curtail. Um, the stock market does not seem to be saying this is short life or this is turning the corner.

[00:33:51.34] spk_2:
Yeah, they didn’t seem to be. There’s not commentary suggesting that, but that’s that is reasonable. I know you’re you’re capturing it. You’re calling an unreasonable, unreasonable hope. It’s all the All the medical commentary is that we haven’t seen the worst. It’s gonna get much worse before it gets any better.

[00:34:47.99] spk_6:
Yeah, and, ah, But if there is a biological breakthrough with some of the medications that they talk about low key at the present time, even today again, they say there’s close to more than 1/2 a dozen that they’re starting to experiment with and mixtures and so on. There just might be something there, but we’re not. We’re not a piece. By finding out the young people are perhaps more vulnerable than we thought. Our at least. Ah, the carriers more more being carriers and them congregating and not stopping to congregate could be a factor. That’s just gonna leave this to continue longer. We don’t know people after 14 days are still contagious the way they were previously. All these things you’re gonna make all the difference in the world. But I’m not a medal.

[00:35:48.74] spk_2:
Right? So bring it, bring it back to nonprofits, you know? Yeah, there’s enormous uncertainty. Um, but we don’t want you to lose your head heads. And it’s not what individual one collective head. We don’t want you to lose your heads. We don’t want you to lose your humanity. Um, share the share. What’s happening with your funders, including institutional. Um, and, um, and, you know, be grounded in the confidence that your major donors will be there for you when they can, and that giving overall will recover in the in the mid to long term And I understand. You know, we don’t know what that what those terms are, but it will. So, you know, I think you go about your work in Ah, you know, in a in a thoughtful, uh, in a thoughtful way. Even even with, uh, you know, even with uncertainty

[00:36:36.53] spk_6:
now, there’s, uh, four areas that, while hindered and lessened by the drops in the stock market, remain good potential. Um, sources of giving. Let’s start with donor advised funds. Most people in their donor advised funds have, ah, their investments invested in various kinds of stock funds, mutual funds. But that doesn’t mean that they’ve been emptied out and you can give from them a second source that charities ought to be asking and reminding people about is the required minimum distributions

[00:36:48.47] spk_2:
All right, the IRA?

[00:37:31.36] spk_6:
Yeah, that’s right. And that money has to be taken out this year. No matter what’s happening in the stock market, you’ve got to take out what they designated from last January 1st right is the amount. And if you are above a certain amount of wealth, that $100,000 that you can contribute that limit from your r. M. D is not much to you and can really be activated for large numbers of people that are pretty wealthy or higher, affluent. And the charities can educate about that. They can also put on their websites a buttons that are now being developed to contribute from RMDS and to contribute from donor advised funds

[00:37:41.81] spk_2:
before we go 23 and four. Where can you name any place where you’re seeing these

[00:37:52.43] spk_6:
buttons? I can’t. All I know is that I’ve seen in the past, um, discussions about them and advertisements for them. I don’t think it would be hard for any charity to say. Um how do I,

[00:38:03.58] spk_7:
um uh,

[00:38:05.52] spk_6:
website button for a donor advice fund for gifts from donor advice when they’re gonna be advertising to make sure you know about it so they won’t be hard to find.

[00:38:15.72] spk_2:
Okay. Okay. What’s what’s number three?

[00:38:41.72] spk_6:
Number number three would be foundations that despite a decrease in their assets right now, I still have large pools of money. They can, since they can average over a period of years, their quote 5% requirement of donation they can, without worrying about keeping us up forever, contribute 7% this year and give less next year. If the crisis doesn’t continue, Our that becomes a possibility because of the ability to average out over three years. That 5% column me on that. Okay.

[00:39:24.22] spk_2:
Again? Yes. So keep in touch with your institutional funders again. This may not be that this is not the week or maybe even the month or the couple of several weeks to be asking, but keep in touch. You know, institutions are made of people. Institutional funders are made up of people, project officers, program officers. Um, let them hear from you. Okay, what’s your number? Four?

[00:40:12.21] spk_6:
Number four is something that is really connected in a way to all the others. Um, and that’s your endowment spending from your endowment. What else is it for? I mean, it can be, ah, security blanket, but it’s time for people. Two makes some may be emotional sacrifice not just a financial one, but an emotional one that says that I don’t have to keep accumulating in my endowment. I can spend some of it for a crisis, and that’s what it’s for. In part, it’s not just to provide long term security, but don’t forget without spending from your endowment. Your long term security maybe undercut by this short term crisis.

[00:40:41.41] spk_2:
That’s a very good point. Yeah, because I’m of course, that requires board action and thoughtful planning, but yeah, that’s a very good point. You’re You may undercut your long term by being, ah, to, um, too cautious in the immediate term.

[00:40:45.01] spk_6:
That’s right. We may

[00:40:55.01] spk_2:
not be the may not be a middle long term for you if you’re not cautious in the short term. And if you have the endowment wherewithal Ah, that maybe that’s that’s worth looking at through.

[00:41:06.31] spk_6:
And And, of course, you know that’s not a bad message to your donors that you’re willing to put quote your money on the line as well. Yeah,

[00:41:10.31] spk_2:
we’re not just asking for you, right, But we’re we’re dipping into our own long term savings

[00:41:13.12] spk_6:
yet instead of grown on, have made us a good institution. And we’re going to come out of this a great institution, you know,

[00:41:58.05] spk_2:
and, ah, A footnote for organizations that don’t have an endowment when we’re through this, uh, endowment growth or endowment creation is something for you to go to make a priority again. When we’re through this planned giving can be very good at that. However, you’re gonna do it if you don’t have that endowment. That forthe problem that you just mentioned. Paul, Um, it’s it’s something to make a priority for the next the next crisis.

[00:41:59.27] spk_6:
And you will say that’s why we’re raising, you know, And then people will understand it at this point,

[00:42:05.84] spk_2:
especially after this, right? All right, again, a footnote. I footnoted. I think that’s where it belongs. Uh, footnote not an end note. I prefer footnotes. Then I want to flip to the back of the book all the time. I don’t know. I have more footnotes over in there.

[00:44:10.99] spk_6:
One more footnote would be something you hinted at earlier. So we’ll move in from the back of the book to the page. And that is, um, treating your donors in the way that you want to treat your beneficiaries. Um, I always say this to universities. When I give talks, you have the students in front of you yet Boston College and Holy Cross at Harvard wherever and Emerson College. I just think a few of University of Detroit where I will and you want to treat this student, not only to information you want to treat them to personal formation. And when they graduate, you sometimes forget that you still want to be part of their personal happiness in formation, and all you want is their money. And so this is a time to remember what you ought to be doing all the time. And you were suggesting being in contact with your donors, you’re being in contact with your donors and maybe asking him how you do it. You’re part of us. I’m not just asking you this because you’ve given us money and we hope that you will continue to honor us with your gifts in the future. We’re sincerely interested in you, and we know that those that donate tow us are as anxious and worried about their families as we are about our own. And we are about the people we serve. How about a letter like that that is sincere to the very bottom of your heart? Because these are your constituents to your donors are part of your constituents.

[00:44:46.49] spk_2:
I love it, Paul. I’m thinking about a video on that exact subject around planned giving, which is what I do. Plan to giving consulting and, uh, using this as a time to do send exactly those kinds of messages with people you’re close enough to It could be a phone call. It could be a short hand written note. Um, you know, it doesn’t have to be. Ah, Doesn’t have to be an elaborate letter. Then that’d be a long letter. It never takes length. Month never trumps sincerity. And, uh, and genuine genuineness.

[00:44:52.59] spk_6:
Your donorsnames. Right? I get letters. That’s a deer. A p

[00:44:54.69] spk_2:
Okay. Yeah, Well, that’s that’s your database. Yeah, Yeah, yeah, that’s all. Another subject.

[00:44:59.85] spk_6:
But no, don’t screw that up when you’re writing a good letter.

[00:45:06.69] spk_2:
Yeah, that’s true. You’re right. Um, yes. Keeping in touch and heartfelt ways we’re thinking about you. We hope you’re well and safe. We we wish the same for your family. We just want you to know you’re important to

[00:45:16.75] spk_6:
us. Yeah, really are about

[00:45:19.62] spk_2:
sincerely. You know, that’s it. And that comes from Ah, gift officer doesn’t have to be a CEO board member letter and president.

[00:45:27.47] spk_6:
Consign it. I mean, maybe maybe the dean signs. Um no clothes in a picture of the dean right there. So you know, you make it personal and you don’t act it. I mean, in this day and age is easy. Send an email I’m and write it well, and you know,

[00:45:44.19] spk_3:
well, it can also it also come

[00:46:08.38] spk_2:
from a gift officer. That’s right. If you know if there’s a relationship that’s right. Relationship there. That’s right. Gift officers. Good. All right, Paul, we’re gonna wrap it up. Um, so any any parting thought? I mean, we had lots of good advice, sir. I’m not We’re not looking, toe, uh, take off all the advice that you provided. But what

[00:46:08.51] spk_3:
do you want? Do you

[00:46:09.09] spk_0:
want to

[00:46:09.28] spk_2:
leave people with Final

[00:46:57.49] spk_6:
Five? Don’t do too much mission drift. Um, uh, if you were doing arts funding, um, you might want to stick with that at this time. You know, um, both as a donor and as a foundation. Um uh, mission drift can take place at this time because there’s always, well, politically correct or exigencies that seem to be so important. You can’t who ate them, And I will just say, um uh, take care of your workers and avoid mission drift. So take care of your donors. Take care of your beneficiaries. Take care of yourselves. You know,

[00:47:03.62] spk_2:
and your employees as well.

[00:47:04.93] spk_6:
Yeah, that’s what I meant. Yeah, that’s real

[00:47:14.58] spk_2:
Pool service. Sh Professor emeritus at Boston College. Retired director there. Center on wealth and Philanthropy. You’ll find him at Paul Schervish s C h E R v I s H Paul. Thank you very much for sharing elder statesman. Thank you very much.

[00:47:23.70] spk_6:
My pleasure. Good job.

Nonprofit Radio for January 20, 2017: 2016 Giving Report & 2017 Forecast

Big Nonprofit Ideas for the Other 95%

I love our sponsors!

Do you want to find more prospects & raise more money? Pursuant is a full-service fundraising agency, leveraging data & technology.

It’s not your 7th grade spelling bee! We Bee Spelling produces charity fundraiser spelling bees with stand-up comedy, live music & dance. It’s all in the video!

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

Listen Live or Archive:


My Guests:

Rob Mitchell, Paul Schervish & Doug White: 2016 Giving Report & 2017 Forecast

No need to wait until June! Atlas of Giving CEO Rob Mitchell releases the Atlas’ analysis of last year’s giving and their initial forecast for 2017. Also, insightful commentary from professors Paul Schervish from Boston College and Doug White from Columbia University.


Top Trends. Sound Advice. Lively Conversation.

You’re on the air and on target as I delve into the big issues facing your nonprofit—and your career.

If you have big dreams but an average budget, tune in to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.

I interview the best in the business on every topic from board relations, fundraising, social media and compliance, to technology, accounting, volunteer management, finance, marketing and beyond. Always with you in mind.

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

Sponsored by:

View Full Transcript

Transcript for 323_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20170120.mp3

Processed on: 2018-11-11T23:34:06.308Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2017…01…323_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20170120.mp3.710337333.json
Path to text: transcripts/2017/01/323_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20170120.txt

Hello and welcome to tony martignetti non-profit radio big non-profit ideas for the other ninety five percent it’s inauguration day today we have a listener of the week i know which is more important for non-profit radio listener of the week is more important. Karen graham she e mailed me your whole hair thing is cracking me up. Thank you for bringing that joy into my day. Well, karen, thank you for taking such an interest in my exceedingly long hair. Longest it’s ever been in my life. I’m glad it brings you joy and i would ask you to speak to my mother about this, please, because she is routinely reminding me that her salon also cuts men’s hair on dh she’s threatening scissors while i’m sleeping, so i’ll give you her contact info. Ah, now karen is executive director of idealware, which i admire very much idealware dot or ge, i did a video praising them a few weeks ago, which you’ll find at tony martignetti dot com i don’t think you’ll find the video at idealware dot orc, which i’m most disappointed about franklin att leased a link you could’ve shared the link, i thought, but idealware is a very good organization dahna karen graham, executive director congratulations on being our listener of the week. I’m glad you’re with me. I’d be stricken with keto acid urea if you rained down on me with the idea that you missed today’s show twenty sixteen giving report and the twenty seventeen forecast no need to wait until june. Atlas of giving ceo rob mitchell releases the atlases analysis of last year’s giving and their initial forecast for twenty seventeen also have insightful commentary from professor of paul schervish for boston college and doug white on tony’s. Take two videos from the non-profit technology conference we’re sponsored by pursuant full service fund-raising data driven and technology enabled, you’ll raise more money pursuant dot com, and by we be spelling supercool spelling bee fundraisers. Wee bey e spelling dot com i’m very glad to welcome rob mitchell back he’s uh, but on the show three, four times or so he’s, the ceo of atlas, of giving, you’ll find that at atlas of giving dot com he’s at philanthropy man or, as i like to say at philantech roman, which he probably gets tired of hearing me say, but it’s my show. I do whatever the hell i want. Is that philanthropy? Hman? That’s the end of it. Welcome back, rob mitchell. Thanks, tony it’s. Always great to be with you. It’s. A pleasure to have you. Thanks for coming up from texas. Thank you very much. So you’re you’re here to well, you’re here to release the the review of twenty sixteen and the forecast for twenty seventeen remind us, please. What is going on it atlas of giving. What is this all about? Atlas of giving at the atlas of giving what we do is we measure and forecast charitable giving by sector by source and by state, including washington d c and we release our information monthly it’s. Our forecast is updated each month. Our calculation of giving is updated by sector source and state each month. And our methodology is based on sixty five algorithms. What we did was we we had a team of twenty five phd level statisticians and analyst revue factors that we thought affected giving and two that they they added fifty percent mohr and they actually determined and what fact? What economic? Demographic and event factors are involved in charitable giving. And what their relative weights were for each category. For instance, the algorithm for corporate giving is very, very different from the algorithm for ah ah, church giving let’s say, so this this there are some commonalities, but they’re also. And when i say when i say correlation, this is based on what’s called correlation science a correlation, even a strong one does not necessarily indicate that that there is a relationship, and one example i’ll give you is that in our in our corporate giving algorithm, one of the key factors is auto parts sales. Now we don’t for a minute believe that auto parts sales have anything to do with charitable giving, but there is a strong there is a strong relation that variable correlates with that form of giving exactly for reasons that we could speculate. But in numerical regression analysis, those factors air correlated those two variables exactly correlated and just just so you know, this is the same kind of technology that the fed uses hedge funds use. I trust you, you’re a bona fide and and interestingly enough, the the auto parts sales is also part of one of the feds algorithms we found out so and one of the things we found recently because we’re continually trying to improve our algorithms and learned from them is that large equipment manufacturing index has a strong correlation with national giving. Okay, all right. We’re not gonna go too much into the mechanics of the details of it. Okay, but that’s, interesting large equipment manufacturing. And what was i just i’m sorry. What part in order parts sales, uh, related to fund-raising who knew, right? We do. We do now. Okay. You have a headline for us. Let’s. First talk about what, twenty sixteen looked like for fund-raising. What happened? Well, in twenty sixteen, we had a record year for dollars given, and the dollars given was just shy of half a trillion dollars. It was four hundred ninety seven point four billion dollars given nationally doll causes. How does that relate to twenty fifteen? That is a four point one percent increase. Okay, over twenty fifteen. And what was twenty fifth? Twenty fourteen to twenty. Fifteen. Remember that? What was that increase? It was it was a double digit increases. Wass it? Wass okay. We’re coming on the tail end of the recession, i guess. Well, a lot of that had to do with what was happening in the stock market. And we’ll talk more about that. Ok, as we go on, okay, maura that alright. So four point, one percent increase from fifteen to sixteen were just under half a billion, half a trillion dollars in giving for one other important point to make is that. For for most people who are affiliated with non-profits or the non-profit industry, they have assumed, based on other information, that charitable giving has been pegged at two percent of real gdp for as long as we can remember. Yes, you have an announcement for this. Go ahead, we have we have charitable giving at almost three percent of real gdp, so two point nine, seven percent of real gdp and that is huge because the country has been talking about the stalled percentage of two percent of gdp for a long time. I mean, it certainly the six years that i’ve been doing this and probably longer than that. So now you’re putting at just under three percent of gdp, which is enormous, fifty percent increase your saying yes, all right, all right. And there’s a reason why, okay, we’re gonna hold that reason, okay? Till after this break, you’re gonna hold that and we’ll go away for a moment. But of course we’ll be back. We’re talking about the twenty sixteen review the twenty seventeen forecast to professors joining us, paul service and doug white. Stay with us. You’re tuned to non-profit radio tony martignetti also hosts a podcast for the chronicle of philanthropy fund-raising fundamentals is a quick ten minute burst of fund-raising insights, published once a month. Tony’s guests are expert in crowdfunding, mobile giving event fund-raising direct mail and donor cultivation. Really, all the fund-raising issues that make you wonder, am i doing this right? Is there a better way there is? Find the fund-raising fundamentals archive it. Tony martignetti dot com that’s marketmesuite n e t t i remember there’s, a g before the end, thousands of listeners have subscribed on itunes. You can also learn maura, the chronicle website, philanthropy dot com fund-raising fundamentals, the better way. Durney welcome back to big non-profit ideas for the other ninety five percent want tease i want to do a little live list, their love just a just a touch of the live listeners college station, texas, raleigh, north carolina and multiple right here in new york, new york, of course we’ve got our listeners abroad will get to those but still it’s a little taste of live listen love for now. All right, almost three percent let’s call a three percent two point nine seven what’s three one hundred’s between friends and colleagues let’s call it three percent of gdp. Why do you believe we’ve had this fifty percent increase? Well, there are a number of reasons they’ve been growing. One is the number of non-profits continues to grow and so now we way have but that’s always been the case and we always assumed to it seemed to be a zero sum game more non-profits entered, i don’t know, fifty thousand a year, so maybe one of the professors has a better number than that. But many, many new every year, and it’s still always stuck at two percent. Well, yes, but now we have technology and so there’s so many more different ways for people to give there’s so many there’s, so many more ways for people who are raising the money to get good information and good targeting about how they’re going to solicit money so fund-raising has become much more efficient, okay? And the only moral if, if that’s if it’s related to technologies, probably more adopting technology that we’ve had for a while, except for maybe you do things like text text to give is that is that that the person that would be one of one that i one that i love is crowdfunding kind of technology where you’re using social media to raise money for a cause? And so that didn’t exist. The other thing that well, i mean, it didn’t just come into existence in twenty sixteen. No, we’ve had crowdfunding no, no, no, no, no. Several years, no and but we didn’t just jump from two percent to three percent and one year either. Okay? It’s been creeping out. So what was the percentage last year? The percentage of gdp? The percentage last year. Wass i don’t remember. Okay, but it was something less than two point nine seven it wass okay, okay. Um all right, so we’re we’re at three percent now. That’s that’s, that’s a big deal. It is a big deal. This has been stale or stagnant. Stay lt’s. Wrong word stagnant for a long time. Okay, um, let’s talk about some of the different sectors that have benefited from this this increase since since last year there four point, one percent increase. I always i’m always crease about religion because religion is you and i have talked over the past couple years has always been a shrinking proportion. It’s been the largest of all the sectors but it’s been a shrinking proportion. Yes, ten years ago, gifts to churches and congregations accounted for fifty percent of all giving in the urals. Now, it’s, what thirty would you have? A thirty one. Thirty two percent metoo and did it lose lose a percent from last year? We’re projecting that it’s going to lose a percent from this year to next year. Okay, so it stayed steady because last year it had lost a percentage. Yes, it from fifteen to sixteen and lost a percent. And i’m pretty sure from fourteen to fifteen lost two percent, so i’ve never talking about that with you. Because now it’s steady. But you’re projecting a loss for next year. Yes. Okay. But it used to be fifty. Used to be fifty now. Thirty two. Okay. And the reason why is that the united states is becoming more like western europe. It’s becoming more secularized. Fewer and fewer people are joining congregations supporting congregations. But what’s interesting is that you mentioned zero sum game? E-giving is still growing so that the gifts air going. Other places. They’re just not going to religion. Yeah, clearly right. And really one of the one of the fastest growing sector of the fastest growing sector over the last three years has been the environmental sector and it is the smallest sector. It only accounts for two percent of all giving. But at the rate it’s growing it’s, it’s, it’s astounding. And then human needs organizations have also done quite well and education. The education sector has grown. Those air the three fastest growing sectors and have been for the last three. Well, really, since the end of the recession? Um, education is explained by the way that they raise money because one of the things we found at the alice of giving is that it’s not so much about the quote economy, its factors in the economy, it’s factors of demographic that’s because about your algorithms, you’re your algorithms have found the variables, the aii factors that that car late with e-giving so are two professors air well well acquainted with the fact that most universities go from campaign to campaign and lots of campaign contributions come out of come out of aa gains in the stock market or gains in real estate. And so when the stock market does well, education does well about the environment. What what’s what’s happening there? I think that the biggest factor in the environment is awareness you can’t not. You cannot turn on any of your i once heard a guy say a few years ago that the time has come when you can pick your version of the truth through the news. Yeah, and so but truthfully, no matter what your source of news is, you can’t escape the fact that we’re always talking about the environment now, climate change, we’re talking about climate change. We’re talking about the instruments to defer climate change things like solar panel and wind power and other alternative energy sources i mean, elon musk is making ah is making billions of dollars capturing energy and batteries and using that do you see in your twenty seventeen forecast on increase in market share for the environment from larger than two percent? No, you don’t say no. You see it’s continuing to grow, it is narrowing and it’s growing faster than to grow, but not more than than its current share. Two percent not more. That’s correct. Okay. We could be wrong, though, because remember this is this forecast that we’ll talk about today. It’s just the first of eleven for forecast will do throughout the year. So we update we we update our forecast every month. And the example that i love to give is two thousand won two thousand one was bumping along to be a great e-giving your ah relatively good giving here. And then september eleventh happened. And if you were a non disaster charity what we know today having backfilled information now for fifty years is that giving dried up? If you’re a non disaster charity, pretty much for six months and then came roaring back let’s stop talking around. The forecast and let’s talk about the forecast for twenty seventeen. What do you see happening? We’re looking for growth of four point four percent nationally. Four point four versus four point one for this year. So a little bit more growth. Yes. And and what? What dollar amount? Does that come to the dollar amount over half a trillion. Right. It’s going to be over half a trillion? Yes. Okay, okay. Ah, looks like five hundred nineteen five in nineteen billion. Five hundred nineteen. Okay. Now again, we’re with the caveat. I understand this is your first forecast of eleven of eleven more to come for twenty seventeen each month. You update the annual forecasts. That is that right? We do well, so it’s a rolling twelve month forecast. So our forecast contains a forecast for next month for the next three months for the next six months for the next twelve months. And then we also update the calendar year forecast every month. Okay. What do you ah, what else do you foresee for twenty? Seventeen around around let’s. Talk about the let’s. Talk about the sources because you mentioned some of the sectors that you see sector. Growth in twenty seventeen about from sources, foundations, corporate bequest, individuals, et cetera. What do you have there for? Twenty seventeen? Well, the biggest change i see is in corporate giving and co e-giving as as many people know, is is not a large percentage of source giving in the united states, only five percent. We’re gonna talk about that when we bring the professors in, i might like to i’d like to chat a little bit about why that is to me that small maybe i’m wrong, but alright, so martignetti e-giving corporate giving this year this year just past twenty sixteen was double digit growth ten point three percent. What we’re projecting for next year for corporate giving is only one point, eight percent. All right? Uh still grow. I’m looking at that and i understand that’s growth. I’m talking about the share. The proportional share of total giving for corporations is only five percent. All right? I’ll tell you what, let’s, let’s bring in our professors because we’ve talked about the headlines let’s. Bring in doug white he’s, former professor and director of columbia university’s, master of science in fund-raising management, his most recent book is abusing donors intent, which we discussed here. I was going to tease him about that having been three years ago. And what’s happened since. But now i find out that he’s writing another book for later this year. Doug white, welcome back. Well, thank you for having me back. It’s. Good to see you again. Even with your long hair, can’t avoid it. Just call him sampson. You and karen clams. And i thought it was einstein. I prefer fabio. If you’re gonna if you’re gonna make any references. Let’s, make it fabio. Paul service she’s on he’s on the line with us from north carolina. He’s, professor emeritus at boston college, where he led the center on wealth and philanthropy. He helped to found the wealth and giving forum appear centered endeavour to deepen the philanthropic engagement of the nation’s seven thousand wealthiest families. Pull service. Welcome back. Hello. Nice to be back in a load up. Pleasure to have you all you both with us. Let’s. Uh, let’s. Give difference to the guy on the phone because he’s a slight disadvantage. Paul sharpish. What sticks out? Let’s? Start with the twenty sixteen review before we get to the twenty. Seventeen forecast which look out for you in the in the review of twenty sixteen, giving the that growth that occurred in twenty sixteen i think that the story in all of these numbers is that the amount of giving is growing twenty billion a year over the last few years and at four percent it’s going to grow faster than that. The compounding uh, this is a remarkable trendline that twenty sixteen confirms and the projections for twenty seventeen indicates the continuation of that. So you love about going the amount going charity is incredible and growing. You love this that we’re now three percent of gdp. Yes. And when we did our well transfer models, we found that if the goose’s growth and wealth and tdp the biggest growth and so after pete and so if the economy grows, we’re going to find dramatic, even greater dramatic roles in philanthropy. Doug white, let’s, let’s bring you in. But what strikes you about? Twenty sixteen? Well, what paul just said is a continuation off his studies back in the nineties and nearly two thousand with regard to what’s going to happen, and i think we’re seeing it take place. Right now twenty sixteen for me was defined by the mega gift there were so many of them and what i don’t have my fingertips is thie analysis of how the smaller gifts have grown. The number of smaller gifts have grown, but we do know that the mega gifts have have been more than they’ve ever been before. That has to be a fact er in your number’s right, rob it iss, in fact, twenty fifteen there were more mega gifts than there were in twenty sixteen, actually, so it is a factor you talk about a zuckerberg gift or another gift from the gates foundation, or or those kinds of things it’s it mega gifts are huge factor, but another factor is what we’re finding and i’d be interested in. The opinion of our two experts is what we’re finding is that millennials are a e-giving group of individuals and they’re looking for they’re not looking for cost per dollar, raised as their measurement there, looking for effectiveness and accountability on who they give, too, but they are an active force and philanthropy. The big gains that we’ve had in online giving in technology e-giving come largely from that group of people dug millennials. I totally agree with that and i think that’s one of the bigger challenges for the established charities around the united states who have become used to just the annual giving, continuing in continuing, which is fine, but i think the millennials, they’re saying they’re asking different questions, they’re not saying, am i loyal to this cause? They’re asking, even if i am loyal to this cause, how effective is my gift? And i think the question of impact we use that word, a lot of it is a topic of my new book. The question of impact is so important it should be, but now it’s important to the millennials because his roberts saying they give individually they give to causes that they can see an impact in or from paul what’s, your sense of what’s creating thiss terrific growth it’s, it’s, it’s, the dramatic growth of wealth at the very top. And what doug said is absolutely correct. Maybe gifts capture one dimension. What captures a larger slot? This is the million dollars and these air increasing and the list is getting longer, and i think, uh, that’s also helps explain the decline in religious e-giving ah, religious giving this to churches and the upper end does not give proportionately, uh, to their churches in the same ratio that the bottom ninety five percent of the population does so part of this change in religious e-giving is that so muchmore is going to education two new kinds of ventures to international to environment to social needs, and at the very top the percentage that they give to their churches is minuscule compared to how much they give the other causes. So that is part of not just the secularization which i agree with, but part of this is where the making gifts you’re going. Well, paul, how come we’re not cracking this seventy three, seventy four percent proportion that individuals account for in the total pie of giving? How come it’s it’s sticks there if we’re seeing all the us? Yeah, you? Yes, paul. We’re seeing all these mega gifts and the million dollar gifts. How come we’re not getting past the seven? The mid seventy figure? Well, one of the things is we just found out the foundation growth is is dramatic. Most of foundation growth and requests are individual gifts. And so when we’re looking at individuals, you have to understand what the is going on inside of individuals and that’s private foundations to it’s also the quest and it’s also remittances. Now, doug, i would say that report by your very astute ah research on remittances would be important. See what we’re finding out in some places that a lot of immigrants air not contributing, quote unquote to philanthropy. But the number iss between one hundred fifty and two hundred billion a year, that is sent back overseas largely to people in need buy-in immigrants recent immigrants alright, let’s, turn to let’s start to doug remittances. Well, that’s a good point that a lot of money does go back. And that’s, of course not counted in this whole process here in terms of generosity, the way we define charity, the way we defined, making the world a better place. That’s a huge part of that and it’s unfortunate. We can’t capture that. But we’re not talking about that and technical terms right now, but we really ought to, because it’s a an expression of our our society’s beneficence. And i really think that’s an important thing but there’s one other question that i just wanted to point out, or at least clarify from my own perspective, is that this really is a zero sum game. There’s only one hundred percentage points that we have to work with and so to actually ask or worry about, we’re only a seventy five percent those air living individuals, you know, on the other five percent, we have dead individuals, they’re still individuals. A question requests that’s really kind of eighty percent. I can’t. We could only go one hundred percent, but that’s on ly if nobody else gave anything, the foundations are the corporations. So i suspect it’s going to stay that way, in fact, has been their seventy five and five for the last long as i can remember. Well and paul’s point, of course, that a lot of the foundation giving is individuals directed by individuals. But it comes from the private found a it’s, just a medium. So as an expression of individual philanthropy, i think paul is correct. I would throw in the individual philanthropy into the foundation world and donor advised funds. Oh, yeah. We’re going to continue this conversation. I gotta do a little business. I have to talk about a couple of our response duitz and we’re going to get to donor advised funds after this pursuing pursuing dot com between brexit, the syrian refugee crisis and the inauguration of a new president today, the national and global climates have a lot of implications for what you can expect in your fund-raising we’re going to talk about some of those events later today. The next pursuant webinar is field guide to twenty seventeen fund-raising it’ll give you strategies that you need to keep up with. Everything is going on in the world. It’s a free web in or they always are. You register at pursuing dot com go to resource is and then webinars and i’m not too keen on that word. Webinars i don’t know it’s it’s in the lexicon now we’re stuck with it, but i don’t know i never liked it from i never like to from the beginning maybe i didn’t go public, but i’m expressing now webinars i don’t know, it’s just i think we could come up with something better than webinars. I understand where it comes from way have been seminar, but i don’t like it and i was early. I just i just wasn’t public early. We’ll be spelling spelling bees for fund-raising they have a new video up it’s from a night that raised money for hfc, which is help for children. The organisation needed help for its programs for children they turned to we’d be spelling there’s one hundred and ten thousand dollars in a spelling bee night. Check out the video it’s at wi be e spelling dot com. I’ve got video interviews for you from the twenty sixteen non-profit technology conference. Twenty twenty sixteenth. God, i need an intern, so i have someone to blame the twenty sixteen non-profit the the video is titled virtual organizations and volunteers. There are four interviews in those areas, and they are on managing remote employees, managing remote volunteers where to find volunteers and leveraging your start or tech volunteers. My video from the twenty sixteen non-profit technology conference with the links to the four interviews is that tony martignetti dot com and i, uh i suggest you check out this year’s non-profit technology conference twenty seventeen and t c this is always a very smart conference. I say it often because i believe it. Check out. Ntcdinosaur washington, d c this year, march twenty third, you get the info it and ten dot or ge, and that is tony’s take two the rest of the live listen, love, you know, it’s got to go out. I mean, there’s, no question about that. Besides the ones i already mentioned, we’ve got tampa, florida we’ve got forming ten missouri welcome farming to missouri. You haven’t been with us before. Welcome and somerville, new jersey! Welcome live listener love to you, let’s. Go abroad, of course. Seoul, south korea, always checking in so loyal south korea on your haserot comes a ham nida. We’ve got kiev in ukraine. No, i don’t know the scouts just do it live listener love to ah to kiev, tokyo also very loyal multiple. We’ve got multiple tokyo konnichi wa and the podcast pleasantries to the over twelve thousand listening in the time shift so glad that you are with us whether it’s a week later, days, months later, glad to have you with us. Pledge industries toe are over twelve thousand podcast listeners and the affiliate affections fast on the heels of the live listen love in the podcast pleasantries toe are am and fm listeners throughout the country am fm stations. Let your station know that you’re listening little feedback affections to the am fm affiliate listeners. Okay, rob mitchell, you you seem to be chomping at the bit to talk about donorsearch vise dh funds e-giving first about donor advised funds. I am a big proponent of donor advice found about and i can tell you that they’ve been the one of the biggest contributors fromthe grants that they’re making out of donor advised funds, since the depth of the recession is this tract in in your algorithms is part of the individual giving. Is that where we see dahna vice funds? What? We saved an analogue kate id on allocated. Okay, okay. Don’t advise funds are are they’re not knew they came in with the tax act of sixty eight. Yeah, they they’re not new. But this company called fidelity an investment company. I saw an opportunity and the thing that i love about donor advised funds and and paul talked about this a bit. The rise of the million dollar gift i think donorsearch vice funds have a big part of that because a za contributor myself, if my daughter’s here in the studio, listening with us if our family adopted a charitable project for which we wanted to contribute. But we did not have enough money available to us to just scratch a check, we could create a donor advice fund, a add to it, let let it be invested so that it would grow so that we could meet our our charitable mission for our family in a future year. Of course, this is a subject of controversy, because there are people who have on the other side of this, and they’ve written editorials in the chronicle, as you have, who believe that there’s too much money parked in donor advised funds is not getting out to the charities it sits. The donor gets their charitable deduction immediately, but it could sit for decades or generations, theoretically in the donor of ice fund and never get to the charities that it’s supposed to be benefiting. Well, theoretically, that could be the case. But if you read the fine print, if you set up a donor advice fund with one of the big three fidelity vanguard er schwab, or with the silicon valley foundation or ah any number. Of different true charitable organizations, community community funds are our big proponents of donor advised funds they can’t carry on perpetually, and the other thing is just a mathematical, just a mathematical equation. Donorsearch foundations are required to give five percent of their assets each year, and so what do they give a little more than five percent of their assets? You know, this is the argument against requiring donor advised phone or it five contributed percentage each year donorsearch vice funds or giving over twenty percent of their assets as grants to end use charities each year. But there are people who would say, well, let’s, make it fifty or forty or forty or fifty will see an increase. All right, we’re going, we’re gonna leave this that because i want to talk about some of the want to talk more about what you’re involved in more concretely, let’s bring doug back, doug so there’s a lot going on in the world, not the least of which is presidential inauguration today. We’ve got brexit, the a great britain leaving the european union. We’ve got syrian refugee crisis in europe. How do any or these or other things that are on your mind ah, affect our twenty seventeen philanthropy? Well, about an hour ago, the new president referenced ah, a lot of america as being in a state of some carnage, that’s his word, and whether you look at it that way or not, i do believe that philanthropy is going to have to shoulder a lot more than it has in the past, but we all know that philanthropy can’t do all of the work. And so i think one of the questions as this administration grows into its maturity, will be what kind of services will be cut back where philanthropy will have to fill in even more of the gap. So i think one of the messages and one of the reasons i think that twenty seventeenth will be a great mother where’s, my damn intern will be a great year for philanthropy anyway, is that the messages will be very concrete and very strong about the needs that society faces. That a lot of government support, as we see it right now. It may not happen this way, but a lot of government support won’t be there for. So i think the philanthropic sector will have to really step up to the plate in this in this coming here. How about you, paul? What about world affairs and twenty seventeen? I am much more optimistic. You can look up the wall of fear listeners, and that will lead you, teo. Not sleep very well at night. About your money. Uh, the the issue with, uh, philanthropy making up for government spending has been does without due respect. Um, talked about when any republican has been elected. And you have to understand that the federal budget is three point eight trillion dollars a year. Philanthropy it’s five hundred billion. And most of that doesn’t go to social services, and most of it is never going to go to social service. So it’s not going to make up very much, uh, we could hope it will, but that nothing that can touch medicaid, medicare, food stamp budgets. But that is of the non discretionary part of the federal budget is all. This is two point eight trillion. Can the discretionary part is a trillion, so i don’t i don’t have that problem in the forefront of my mind that’s making up it just can’t okay let’s, turn to doug. I just want to be clear. I i probably made on incorrect impression a moment ago. I didn’t mean to imply that ah, charity would make up for what government does or does not do and you’re right. That question has been around for ever, and the answer has been around forever charity can’t can’t step in like that. What i meant to say and i apologize for saying it badly, was that this gives thie organizations and opportunity to make their case stronger, not because they will say we will make up the difference, but because the need is there and your philanthropic support is even stronger than it’s ever been, which is, i think, a slightly different way of saying what i meant to say before, because paul, you’re so right. This is this is a question that’s been around forever, and i don’t believe it’s just for republican presidents, i think no matter what we do, ah, there will be gaps, by the way that the government does. Not feel and that’s going to be a matter of policy, but that’s always going to be the case and that those gaps will not be filled by philanthropy. But philanthropy, the organization’s themselves, if we kind of shift the mirror over there, can then say, hey, we have a big job to do support us, so i hope that bridges those two comments, okay? So you’re saying it maura’s as opportunity for round and around messaging and marketing, basically for charities, but paul’s absolutely correct. I don’t think anybody would disagree that what what charity does to help society is nothing by comparison to the amount of the government could spend to do the same kinds of things pull anything else you want to? You want to add on that? No, i think doug’s explanation is just perfect. And i appreciate see that two professors in agreement. Wow, e-giving might give them a chance. Well, i’ve always in my heart is with paul he’s. Been one of my heroes for the last two decades. All right, doug, how about you with the international affairs and impacting? I’m sorry. Yes, i’m looking at robyn. I’m saying, doug, rob international affairs twenty, seventeen and beyond. What do you see? Well, first let’s talk about twenty sixteen. The first half of twenty sixteen was dramatically different in typically do not allow anarchy on the show. When i was about twenty seventeen, expecting getting there, but but, uh, you came from texas. I’ll give you the difference. Go ahead, anarchist. There was a lot of uncertainty. I mean, we had the weirdest presidential election in my lifetime. We had distraction from the olympic games. We had an increase in in terror events worldwide and e-giving was essentially flat for the first half of the year. And then it took a spike in july, flattened out again. And then the last quarter of the year after the election. What? What are algorithms show is that giving spike xero after three months of the year? So the growth in twenty sixteen was not linear? It was not. Lin. What was what was the first six months? Like it was point nine percent growth. So just basically one percent. But we got ended up with four point four. So four point one four point one. I’m sorry for point force for next year for point one. So that extra three point one three point two came on the second half came and you’re saying there was a big spike in july first in the summer? Yes, and then again in november, right after the election? Exactly. Okay, and and the spike in november continued literally. Is that my saying that correct, but it’s a word linearly. Okay, thank you for correcting me on that. But they’re two professors with this. I’ve got to be correct. We’ll have their mikes shut off. Xero it’ll be now it’s me. That was that was a linear progression. Okay? For november, october, november and december, and right now, but that’s what? It was, but there was a spike in november right after the election. November eighth. Absolutely. It was. Okay. I get just a tribute that teo stability. You know, the raucous election is over. I i think that there was some election relief involved emotionally, i think that people were people. They weren’t sitting on the sidelines, gifts were still being made. They just weren’t growing there giving at the rate they had been growing in past years. And we’re talking mostly about individuals but corporations corporate giving grew at a good rate this last year, now for twenty seventeen, um, i think there are a lot of unanswered questions, and we’ve got the expert on the phone with us professor schervish. You know, one of the one of the things that the new president has talked about in his tax plan is an elimination of the estate tax. And paul’s paul spent a great deal of his professional career talking about generational transfer of wealth, and we’ve all talked about what what would happen if the estate tax went away with what would the impact on charitable bequest giving b and so that’s one of those unanswered questions. We don’t know what the tax plan is going to be and it’s going to be a very, very interesting year, and i have more questions than i have answers. Frankly, all right, let’s, go out for a break. When we come back, we’ll ask paul about the estate tax repeal possibility on i also want to get this corporate five percent e-giving proportion, and i got another live listen to love one specific one. Stay with us. Like what you’re hearing a non-profit radio tony’s got more on youtube, you’ll find clips from stand up comedy tv spots and exclusive interviews catch guests like seth gordon. Craig newmark, the founder of craigslist marquis of eco enterprises strong’s best from donors choose dot org’s aria finger, do something that worked. And naomi levine from new york universities heimans center on philantech tony tweets to, he finds the best content from the most knowledgeable, interesting people in and around non-profits to share on his stream. If you have valuable info, he wants to re tweet you during the show. You can join the conversation on twitter using hashtag non-profit radio twitter is an easy way to reach tony he’s at tony martignetti narasimhan t i g e n e t t i remember there’s a g before the end he hosts a podcast for the chronicle of philanthropy fund-raising fundamentals is a short monthly show devoted to getting over your fund-raising hartals just like non-profit radio, toni talks to leading thinkers, experts and cool people with great ideas. As one fan said, tony picks their brains and i don’t have to leave my office fund-raising fundamentals was recently dubbed the most helpful non-profit podcast you have ever heard. You can also join the conversation on facebook, where you can ask questions before or after the show. The guests were there, too. Get insider show alerts by email, tony tells you who’s on each week and always includes link so that you can contact guests directly. To sign up, visit the facebook page for tony martignetti dot com. I’m peter shankman, author of zombie loyalists, and you’re listening to tony martignetti non-profit radio. Big non-profit ideas for the other ninety five percent. Special live listener love is right here in the studio because that’s alexey mitchell, visiting from she’s been she’s extremely well travelled twenty four year old india, thailand, germany, switzerland what am i leaving out? It’s? Amazing. Very well travelled france student at columbia university her proud father saying france. Lexie, thanks for being with us live. Listen love to you. Okay, let’s, bring paul in. Paul, you want to you want to ah opine about the possibility of the estate tax repeal and what that would mean? Well, i have done some research on that. Yeah, i’ve heard rumors to that effect. Yes, some but about the repeal on and so has the center on philanthropy. And what we’ve done is we’ve asked people in research what would be if there is in a state tax currently, what would be your distribution of your state? And it turns out that it’s, pretty much what it would be, uh, correctly, according to what is happening to distribution two heirs to charity and to taxes. But if we say what happens if you eliminate the estate tax, what will happen? People that don’t like the elimination of the state tax the issue for them is largely that less money’s going to government. The evidence is that from these studies now these are people giving their opinion is that mohr will goto philanthropy and more well, goto airs. The loser is government by definition. Now people that think that government is philanthropy are going to object to the appeal repeal of the estate tax. But even the government has shown in one or two studies earlier on that to repeal the estate tax has not led to a decline and charitable giving, and i predict because of how wealthy people are and needing to figure out for their own sake, what to do good with that body there’s not going to be a problem with the abreu teal of latex. Okay, you’re you’re pretty well recognized as as an authority, but i love that name. All right, you got robbed, mitchell’s vote and doug is doug eyes knotting. I’m not nodding off, no nodding, nodding office don’t know. I’d say no, no, no, i just wanted to clear up. If someone’s not, i’m not. I’m not gonna touch that with it can’t happen just doesn’t happen. Non-profit radio and it’s my intuition that because although i haven’t studied it as much as paul he’s absolutely correct it’s a non answerable question, but go for it. I mean, there could be other reasons to not eliminate the estate tax. And by the way, the estate taxes pretty much eliminated for most people by far because of the extremely high yeah it’s five million dollars that’s that’s. Ten million per couple. So i mean, what are we talking about here? I know i don’t think there’s been any decrease among people who are who have a states of less than that and their request terrible giving i i’ll give you an anecdotal. A demonstration of what paul’s just said our doug’s just that that is that i unfortunately lost my mother in november. We’re now dealing with her state, which is a non taxable size to state her charitable contributions to me were all striking, actually, yeah, they and she got no tax benefit whatsoever from for creating those charitable bequests. Wait that’s widely recognized people aren’t doing it for the for the tax benefit, for the most part, mint study after study, bank of america has studies of high net worth giving, and the tax benefit is like usually the third or fourth reason that people site for leaving leaving charity in their state. I want to turn to the to the corporate this is just a little bug, a boo of mind, maybe, and you’re welcome to tell me if i’m if i’m mistaken. Corporate giving is five percent of the van you’il giving, according to the atlas of giving that seem small to me. Are you doug? Is my my off base with court corporations only contributing five percent and tell me if i am? I don’t think you’re so much off base again. We have ah xero some game here, it’s one hundred percent. So what do they represent within that? They’ve been around five percent for, you know, for a while, but i think, really your question leads me to think about what their motive in charitable giving is and their place in society. They think corporations are becoming much more aware of the role they need to play in society, but at the same time they have one primary purpose, and that is to make money for their stockholders. We don’t do that in the charitable world, but corporations do that. And so there could be a huge uproar if corporations got more charitable, all right on. And i mean to distinguish that from the newly growing be corporation segment let’s get at it this way, rob, where what proportions of the different sources of fund-raising are are growing across a bequest, individual foundation, corporate missing other sources anyway, so we’ve got this now three percent gdp. Well, you have to somebody’s giving maur what proportion? Well sources e-giving you have to consider where the proportions are. So as a cz doug and paul of both pointed out, when you add individual giving to bequest giving which is actually individuals that’s, that’s, that’s a gigantic right so that’s gigantic number ok, and so that’s, where most of the growth comes from, no matter what the growth rate iss and so if corporations, as they did this past year, they their gifts grew at ten percent, which that’s the first time i’ve seen that since we’ve started the atlas of giving and it’s way above the annual growth of four point one. Exactly so, it’s it’s more than double. Okay, except that, but but paul’s exactly right. In the case of publicly traded companies there first, their first priority is to their shareholders. And if you don’t think that a shareholder of the shareholders meeting is going to stand up and challenge a charitable gift because it could have been something that enriched their shares, you’d be wrong. Now ninety five percent of the businesses in america are not publicly traded their small businesses. I i have a couple of them i give to charity dahna through my small business, but it’s much more difficult to measure those kinds of gifts than it is the large corp large, publicly traded corporations. We just have about a minute and a half left. So i want to just touch on some some state data because you track sector source and state where’s the most generous state in the country. You know, this year what we showed was this is close to you, mike. This is going to come as a surprise. Heimans north dakota. I really love north dakota. North dakota grew seven point one percent and the states that you typically look for our texas, florida, california and new york, north dakota grew family are the most populous states, those air three most popular, of course, california number one texas tune of new york is number three, so the north dakota phenomena is also a function of their population and the and the oil play that has happened and what we’re finding from the oil play, whether it’s in texas or north dakota, is that, um, there’s a delayed effect and charitable giving and the north dakota you’re saying the population’s a factor because it’s so small it’s so small, i don’t know what the population is there but it’s it’s small what? We love north dakota. All right, gentlemen, we gotta leave it there. I want to thank you very much. Ceo rob mitchell from atlas of giving alice e-giving dot com former professor at columbia university doug white. We’ll have him back when his next book is is ready. It’s on the wounded warrior project. And paul service professor mary-jo boston college, gentlemen. Thank you so very much. Thank you, tony. Thank you. Pleasure. Next week, amy sample ward, our social media contributor returns if you missed any part of today’s show, i beseech you, find it on tony martignetti dot com. We’re sponsored by pursuant online tools for small and midsize non-profits data driven and technology enabled, and by we be spelling supercool spelling bee fundraisers, we b e spelling, dot com, our creative producers, claire meyerhoff. Sam liebowitz is the line producer. Gavin dollars are am and fm outreach director shows social media is by susan chavez, and this cool music is by scott stein. Be with me next week for non-profit radio. Big non-profit ideas for the other ninety five percent go out and be great. Kayman what’s not to love about non-profit radio tony gets the best guests check this out from seth godin this’s the first revolution since tv nineteen fifty and henry ford nineteen twenty it’s the revolution of our lifetime here’s a smart, simple idea from craigslist founder craig newmark yeah insights, orn presentation or anything? People don’t really need the fancy stuff they need something which is simple, in fact, when’s the best time to post on facebook facebook’s andrew noise nose at traffic is at an all time hyre on nine a m or eight pm so that’s, when you should be posting your most meaningful post here’s aria finger ceo of do something dot or ge young people are not going to be involved in social change if it’s boring and they don’t see the impact of what they’re doing. So you got to make it fun applicable to these young people look so otherwise a fifteen and sixteen year old they have better things to do if they have xbox, they have tv, they have their cell phones. Me dar is the founder of idealist took two or three years for foundation staff, sort of dane toe add an email address their card. It was like it was phone. This email thing is fired-up that’s why should i give it away? Charles best founded donors choose dot or ge somehow they’ve gotten in touch kind of off line as it were on dno. Two exchanges of brownies and visits and physical gift mark echo is the founder and ceo of eco enterprises. You may be wearing his hoodies and shirts. Tony, talk to him. Yeah, you know, i just i’m a big believer that’s not what you make in life. It sze, you know, tell you make people feel this is public radio host majora carter. Innovation is in the power of understanding that you don’t just do it. You put money on a situation expected to hell. You put money in a situation and invested and expect it to grow and savvy advice for success from eric sabiston. What separates those who achieve from those who do not is in direct proportion to one’s ability to ask others for help. The smartest experts and leading thinkers air on tony martignetti non-profit radio big non-profit ideas for the other ninety five percent.