The willingness and skills of people of color aren’t represented in leadership circles. That’s the main message coming out of Building Movement Project’s report, “Race To Lead Revisited.” We visit the report’s conclusions and recommendations with BMP’s co-director, Sean Thomas-Breitfeld.
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.
Transcript for 506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.mp3
Processed on: 2020-09-14T16:06:51.665Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2020…09…506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.mp3.110759374.json
Path to text: transcripts/2020/09/506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.txt
Hello and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host. This is a special episode of non profit radio to help you be the change around racism, people of color underrepresented in non profit leadership. That’s the main message coming out of building movement projects Report. Race to Lead Revisited We visit the report’s conclusions and recommendations with BMPs co director Sean Thomas Brett felled, responsive by turn to communications, PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission. Turn hyphen two dot CEO and by dot drives, raise more money, changed more lives for a free demo and free month. It’s my pleasure to welcome to the show. Sean Thomas Bright Felled. He is co director at the Building Moving Building Movement Project. He previously worked in various roles at community change, developing training programs for grassroots leaders and worked in the communications and policy departments where he coordinated online and grassroots advocacy efforts and lobbied on a range of issues including immigration reform, transportation, equity and anti poverty programs. Building movement project is at building movement, or GE, and at B L. D. I N G movement. John Thomas Bright felt Welcome to non profit radio
Thank you so much for having me.
to be here with you.
It’s good. It’s a pleasure. Thank you. So why don’t you start by describing the work at Building Movement Project?
Sure, so building movement projects been around for over 20 years, and from our founding we’ve had three main areas of focus. One is what we call movement building, looking at how organizations collaborate, how nonprofit organizations can be part of movements for social change and social justice, and what it takes for organizations and non profit leaders to really be on the forefront of making big leading some big structural changes in our society. We’ve also looked at what we call a non profits and social change or service and social change because we think there is a particular role for human service organizations in bringing about structural and systemic change in our society and that that’s really important to support on. Also encourage organizations like that to get involved in advocacy. Listen to an uplift, the voice and on power of the communities that are being served, and then the third bucket of work has always focused on leadership, so recognizing that leading a nonprofit organization is a very hard job we’ve always looked at What does it take for leaders? But also, what does it take for non profit leadership? Thio really have aligned both the practices of leadership with the values that organizations hold. And so over the last several years, we’ve been particularly focused on issues of race and leadership in non profit organization. That’s what the race to lead work comes out of.
Okay, right? And the This race to lead revisited report is really comparing a 2016 survey for the original race to lead with a 2019 survey for this report. Exactly.
Yeah, so we surveyed people working in the nonprofit sector both in 2016 and 2019 on these issues of race and leadership. So this report race to lead revisited at some comparisons between the findings from 2016 and 2019 to see how the sector’s been evolving
and you did have some new questions as well. We’ll have time to get to some of those, um, you talk about Well, first I got to say, I realize the contrast here I have long white hair and you have short, dark hair. We are. We know in the hair. We are. We’re not similar in hair. My God. Uh, yeah, OK, Sorry I couldn’t help notice. Um, you talk about we’re gonna have fun on non profit radio. I mean, it’s a serious subject, but we have fun nonetheless. So you talk about white advantage in the report versus white privilege? You mentioned white privilege once or twice, but predominantly. Talk about white advantage. What’s the What’s the difference there? What? What? What are you trying to say? A little different than the the more seems more common, you know, white privilege.
Yeah. So what’s the term white advantage? What we’re trying to focus on is some of the structural advantages that accrue to non profit organizations based on, you know, multiple people in positions of power being white. So particularly thinking about the composition of boards and the composition of senior leadership teams. Um, because, you know, I think oftentimes the analysis is very individualistic, right? So, like, there’s an individual white person in the executive director role of the organization that only paints part of the picture on DSO we wanted to have a more complicated and nuanced analysis of what’s actually happened. An organization s O, that it became less about, like, the it one person at the top of organizational hierarchy. And think about it, uh, in a way that encompasses both the board leadership and senior staff.
Okay. And then the structures as well, it seems thio less focused on an individual or individuals and mawr, uh, levers of power and processes policies.
Exactly. And it also became a way thio understand and sort of unpack. Um, how, uh, sort of whiteness of organizations that, like in our sample, right, like, 45% of respondents work for organizations where both more than 75% of the board is white and more than 75% of staff and top leadership are white on. And, you know, I think that for me, that was actually somewhat startling in surprising um, And then we also saw that those organizations tend to have bigger budgets at least was being reported by the staff. Um but then, at the same time, we’re seeing that staff were reporting more negative experiences in those types of organizations compared to organizations with more diverse leadership on both the board and senior staff levels.
And so the overall message that I got from this is that the power remains in boards and at the sea levels of nonprofits, and those are predominantly white. And that and that that really hasn’t changed from 2016 to 2019.
Yeah, that hasn’t well, it’s hard to know because we actually didn’t ask the question in this way back in 2016. But I think that this, um, sort of puts our data in the context of some of the research that board source has done that shows that boards are overwhelmingly the majority of non profit boards are overwhelmingly white
and also not reflecting the communities that they’re serving. Absolutely. Yeah,
yeah, because I think what has happened is that the function of non profit boards very often is less a function of accountability to the organization’s constituency and mission on, because organizations often have a lot of responsibility for fundraising and raising the resource is for the organization to do its work. Um, that as a result of that sort of demand, organizations often have, um, prioritized recruiting from people who holds wealth in their communities and because of racial wealth gaps that tend to be white people
on dhe. That’s recruiting for both leadership and volunteer position board with talking about boards and you make it very clear we’re talking about boards as well as C suite. You know, CEO, executive director level.
So let’s go into the three. I guess main conclusions that the report identifies first one is that things really haven’t changed that much. We’ve already alluded to it. Things haven’t changed that much in the three years.
Yeah, and you know, I’m not sure how surprising that should be. Um, for our sector. You know, I think the change is often particularly in organizations. When we’re talking about organizations where we’re talking about the composition of the staff, that kind of change is incremental, right? I think that what has shifted is that, particularly in the last year is much more consciousness raising much more awareness on the part of organizations that these imbalances, these inequities exist and needs to be addressed. Um, but recognizing that there is a problem is not the same thing is taking action to address the problem.
So you are seeing mawr alright, consciousness raising awareness. It seems like predominantly because of the diversity equity and inclusion work that Ah lot of organizations have done. But it’s just sort of, you know, I’m I gleaned from the reports, just sort of scratching the surface. I mean, ah, lot of it is trainings that raise awareness, but we’re not seeing much action flowing from that consciousness raising.
Yeah, And so one example of the increased consciousness was that in both 2016 and 2019 we asked survey respondents what impact to their race had had on their career advancement. And, uh, for white respondents back in 2016 roughly half indicated that their race. They recognize that the race had a positive impact on their career advancement. So this sort of classic recognition of white privilege that increased to two thirds of the white sample in 29 so one from half to two thirds. So you know that is e think progress, right? In terms of like people having a recognition and understanding that white privileges riel and that it’s positively the benefits of that privilege are accruing to white people in nonprofit organization. Um however, the same question also revealed that back in 2016 a third roughly of people of color felt that their own race have negatively impacted their career advancement, and that then increased almost basically half off the sample of people of color in 2019. So the increased consciousness is both, you know, I think leading people to recognize the ways that they have been disadvantaged as well as for white people the way that they have been advantaged on DSO. You know, we’re still left with this challenge. This problem. That race is clearly having an impact on people’s advancement. And so it needs to be addressed in organizations in ways that I don’t think training is sufficient. Thio thick
right? But you acknowledge consciousness, raising an awareness that that is the first step. But we have a lot more, a lot, a lot further to go. I mean, you know, it’s just
widely recognized that, you know, you don’t just do trainings a couple of trainings over six months and then check your box. You know d e. I is covered. Let’s move on, Thio. Let’s move on to the gala. You know it za process. It’s a journey, you know we’ve had other guests say the same thing. It takes time. Thio, uh, change the policies, the practices, the traditions Even if they’re not written down, that our advantage ing white folks over people of color, This takes time. But you gotta You’ve got to start somewhere.
Yes, and I think consciousness raising is is an important and legitimate starting point.
Right? And we’re just getting started, okay? It’s time for a break. Turn to communications relationships. The world runs on them. We all know this turn to is led by former journalists. So you get help building relationships with journalists. Those relationships, they’re gonna help you when you want to be heard so that people know you’re a thought leader in your field turn to specializes in working with nonprofits. One of the partners was an editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy. They know the non profit space they’re at turn hyphen two dot c o. Now back to P. O. C. Underrepresented in non profit leadership. Are you going to do this in three years again?
It’s a very good question. You know, it’s hard
know, uh, in terms of, like, capacity funding, all of those things um, but yeah, I think that it seems worthwhile to keep revisiting thes issues, given the pace of change. Um, having been pretty slow just in the time that we’ve been collecting this data.
All right, Um, anything else you want to say about you know, how the the findings from 2016 are pretty similar? Uh, yeah. Continue through to 2019 before we go on to the next. Well,
sure. I think the reason that we felt like it was worth restating on pointing out the similarity in in terms of the findings between 2016 and 2019 was because, um, you know, from our perspective, it was really important to state very clearly to the sector. But there are people of color who are in the pipeline that the pipeline is not necessarily the problem. Uh, there’s, I think, different metaphors that people have used unpack and try to understand what the problem is of why we’re not seeing more representative leadership at the top levels of nonprofit organizations. And our view has just been that it’s not a pipeline issue per se. There are people of color who have the skills training credentials to be in those top roles, but they face racialized barriers to actually moving into those top jobs to being hired for those top jobs. And so we just felt like it was important to remind the sector of that finding, Um and sort of not lapse back into, ah narrative that, like we need to train more people of color because somehow people of color are not ready toe lead. People of color are ready to lead, but are often too often not given the opportunity.
Not only have the skill sets already, but are willing to, in fact, what willing Thio want. Thio want to advance the leadership in greater numbers than the and the white respondents?
E guess. There’s narrative that, you know there’s a lack of interest in in people of color advancing toe leadership. But you’ve dashed that.
Yeah, absolutely. And I think that part of the reason that’s important is because if people hold this mental model that who wants to be a leader is, uh, not a person of color, then they’re going to ignore the leadership potential of people of color in their organization.
Yeah, it’s very convenient. Well, you know, the folks of color don’t really aspire to leadership. So no need to consider them. So Okay, so you’ve you’ve dashed that it’s not so in two respects. It’s not a pipeline issue. The skills air there and the willingness Is there a ZX? Well,
desire Thio advance and to lead. Okay, Um right. So remember your second main main conclusion, I guess, is there is white advantage. We were talking around it. Now we come right out and say there is white advantage in the nonprofit sector.
There is. And, um, you know, I think that the the white advantage takes multiple forms, right? So I think that there have been over the last several months Mawr written about like, what happened? What’s called now? Philanthropic redlining, right, that organizations that are led by people of color, particularly black led organizations, are don’t get access to the same kind of resource is as the white led organizations focused on or serving in communities of color. And so there’s really interesting research both from organizations like Abssi A ZX, well as echoing green and bridge span that really dug into that funding disadvantage. And I think that our data also showed similar findings, particularly when it comes to, for instance, e. D s of color. And this was reported on Maurin a report from based on the 2016 data but E d s of color feeling like they don’t have, they don’t get grants of comparable size to peer organization or that they don’t have access Thio relationships with funders. And so those kinds of advantages in terms of like, who funders trust who funders will give bigger grants thio all of those benefits than accrue to white led organizations that then create this financial gap between organizations, nonprofit organizations based on who’s in positions of power in that institution. And so other ways that the white advantage showed up were in terms of the sort of composition of organizations and the greater comfort that white people, uh, seem tohave in. Those organizations, for instance, on questions like Do people feel like they have a voice in their organization for people working in white, dominant organizations were both the board and senior staff are more than 75% white. That’s where we saw the biggest gaps between people of color and whites in terms of their their agreement with that statement, right? And that gap decreases as you have mawr diverse organizations. And it’s also interesting to note that the average the mean increases. So both people of color and white respondents are more likely to say they have a. They have a voice in their organizations when they work for POC lead groups. So if you know, funders want to invest in organizations that are cultivating that kind of leader full ecosystem inside of their organization that, you know, make it possible for staff to feel like they have a voice and can help to set the direction for the organization, then you know foundations would be wise to really take a hard look at their own investment and the composition of organizations that they’ve been funding on. DSI. You know, like, are these organizations largely white run or are they POC lead on. And if there are largely white one, they should start investing in more organizations that are POC ledge.
You identify five opportunities which we’ll get to, and one of those is put your money where your mouth is. You just say, put your, uh, you
where mouth is for sure. Yeah, I mean that’s a critical lever of power is funding for any anyone, whether it’s whether it’s corporate or non profit access to capital access to markets. Um, you know, what I thought was really interesting is, um, when you were identifying whether an organization was white lead or POC lead you, you chose as a threshold for white lead, whether more than 75% whether the Board of Leadership is more than 75% white. But then for for people of color lead, the threshold was just 50%. Is that because there just aren’t enough that are that are at the 75% level? So you had to reduce the yet to reduce the threshold to define it as person of color lead? Was that the reason?
Yes. I mean, I think that it reflects the sort of composition of the sector, right. So 45% of respondents reported working for organizations where more than 75% of the board and senior staff were white on then it only 14% of respondents reporting working for organizations where it was over 50% of board and senior staff where people of color, you know, like it’s
hard to have
a comparison between Yeah, exactly.
75% shoulder, 75% for PFC. Lead was gonna be too small a sample You
handful of Okay, uh, e suspected. Okay. Um, yeah. The experience was a little more about the experience. How people experience how people of color experience work in a in a white led organization.
Well, I have to say, this was surprised, Not surprising. But it was interesting that the data was so clear, um, that the these racial gaps were so much larger for respondents working for white run organizations compared toa the POC led groups. And, um, you know, I think that it reflects what we’ve been hearing from the focus groups that we’ve been doing across the country in terms of the frustration, particularly on the part of people of color working in organizations that, um, you know, I think often feel somewhat alienating. And where people feel like they, um their leadership potential is not recognized or supported on dso. It was just a really, uh it was nice to have the data show, uh, and really reflect what we’ve been hearing anecdotally through focus groups and interviews around the country,
You mentioned three organizations that have contributed to this work. One of them was bridge span. And then what were the other to save them. Save them a little slower theater, too.
Sure. So a few months ago, bridge span and echoing green partnered on a report that looked at the going echoing green,
green. Yeah, they partnered toe look at the funding that had accrued to organization organizational leaders who had gone through echoing Green’s programs. And so they were able to then really track and demonstrate that black leaders compared toa white leaders who had gone through the same kind of leadership development programs were getting very different levels of financial support on So that report came out at, you know, the earlier in the spring and last winter, an organization called Absi, which is the Organization for African Americans in philanthropy. On DSO, the acronym is a B E, and they put out a report looking at what they call the philanthropic redlining, this phenomenon of financial support from foundations accruing to white led organizations rather than to POC lead or black led organizations. So they use this terminology of redlining because it’s evocative of historical policy that led to very dramatic differences in terms of what sort of development and investment was possible, uh, in cities and neighborhoods based on this policy of redlining. And their point is that the imbalances, the inequities and where philanthropic dollars flow leads toa completely different prospects for organizations. And because some organizations grow because they get the funding and other organizations sort of. Whether on the bun
isn’t the large majority of the smaller organizations I think you’re special was under a million dollars aren’t Isn’t the majority of those POC lead?
It was, Yeah, it was striking to see that a much larger share of POC led organizations had budgets under a million
dollars compared to, for instance, what led organizations? And, ah, large, large majority of those are a million dollars or under in funding or annual budget.
Yes, okay, yeah, in terms of the annual budget
annual budget. Okay, time for our last break. Dot drives drives engagement dot drives relationships. Dot drives walks you through donor engagement. It’s a tool that’s simple, affordable and focuses you on building donor relationships and trust. There’s a free demo, and for listeners a free first month. Go to the listener landing page at tony dot Emma slash dot We’ve got but loads more time for POC, underrepresented in non profit leadership. And then the third main point is that d I. Efforts are widespread, you say, and their effectiveness is uncertain, I would say, but but their effectiveness is uncertain. You’re a little more optimistic. Um, so, yeah, we were scratching the surface of this before, but you know, say same or about what’s being done, but what the limitations of it are.
Well, first off, I think it’s important to acknowledge that three quarters of the sample reported that their organizations were doing something related to diversity equity inclusion. And so the ubiquity of D I efforts is, you know, I think good. And I think it’s a relatively new phenomenon, right? Like it’s become the topic at a lot of conferences over the past five years. And so all of which is to say that like organizations are getting started right now, Um, and maybe it’s long overdue, but this is a moment when organizations are getting started. I think that the challenge, the frustration, particularly on the part of people of color. And the younger staff of, you know, diverse diversity of younger staff is that I think for far too often it feels like organizational checklist. It feels like a sort of double. Organizations are saying the right things, but not actually changing anything about their recruitment practices or internal hiring and promotion strategy. So, yeah, I think that that is the the frustrating in that, like the ubiquity does not equal impact.
I just want to remind listeners the report is called Race to Lead Revisited and you can get it at building movement dot or ge. All right, Sean, how do you feel about talking? Oh, there’s there’s a quote. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. You You pepper the report with quotes in the margin on Dhe there. Ah, lot of them struck me that. I’m just going to read one that was probably half a dozen or so that, you know, sort of stopped me a little bit. But, uh, Pakistani woman, I don’t believe I’m taking us seriously in the workplace because I am a young woman of color. I often question things which doesn’t always go over well in majority white organizations. I’ve been used as a token brown person that za harsh reality Thio Thio read and for her to admit in a survey that, you know, I’m a token. Um So I thought the quotes were very evocative.
Well, yeah, thanks. I mean, we we really think it’s important to balance the quantitative data with, you know, hundreds upon hundreds of right and responses from survey respondents and then also the focus groups that we do. We also gain a ton of insights from those conversations as well.
You feel OK, go into the five opportunities or is there Is there mawr anything more you wanna bring out about the the report itself? Well, this is part of the report, but about the conclusions, conclusions and findings.
Well, I guess I would just add in terms of the sort of d I and, uh, there’s the both the skepticism, but also the impact, right? I think that, um, there’s, you know, I think there’s a lot of skepticism about training, often times. But our data did show that for reserving respondents that reported that their organization trained on a variety of topics. They had more positive views on the impact of training on their organization. I think that just speaks to the importance and need for organizations have, like, multifaceted well around D. I initiatives so that training is not again, like just the check box on or sort of like. Okay, we did the training on white privilege, and so we’re sort of done that the training is a way of both sparking but also sustaining critical conversations in organizations. And that’s why it’s useful for organizations to do training repeatedly and on a variety of topics.
Yeah, I think it was. It was forearm. Or if organizations had had training on four or more topics than both white, the white respondents and the people, people of color respondents, um, felt it was it was more advantageous. So they got there was more valuable training than if it was three or fewer. Could you just take off a couple of different topics that that folks should be looking to training? I mean, not not exhaustive, but you know, what are some of the some of the topics that people should be thinking about training wise?
Sure, yeah. So eso in terms of the topics that we tested for in the survey people indicated that whether the organization had done training on white privileged, specifically whether they had done training on implicit bias because that is a concept that I think has gained mawr currency in the sector. Structural racism, for instance. Um, like do people think of racism as just about interpersonal dynamics or as or as the result of structural, um, and systemic forces that are being replicated by policy? A. ZX well, as implicitly, um, also racial trauma and healing. I think it’s a training topic that is becoming more popular and developed, so there’s a variety of topics, and I think the important thing is just for organizations to be open to having and doing training on a wide variety of topics.
And again, the more topics, the more valuable people will feel. Three outcomes are, um So let’s go to the opportunities. Then why don’t you once you start us off?
I’m sure. Wait. I put you on the spot. Do you know that you may not have him off the top of your head? I have notes I haven’t written down, so I don’t need thio Put you on the spot memorized? I don’t know do you?
Yeah, I’ve got it.
First in the first one was focused on structures as well as the experiences of staff. Right on DSO. You know, I think it’s pretty straightforward, but I think the the reason that we felt felt like it was really important toe lift up lived experience of staff working in organizations is because of what we saw in terms of those experience questions, right? Like, do people feel they have a voice in their organizations or not? Right. We also thought it was important to point out that policies have to actually be in force, right? Like organizations can’t just say this is our policy. But if people don’t see evidence that actual behavior and practices air changing as a result of the policy, um, then you know, I think there are real questions about whether that has real impact.
There is, as
we said earlier,
you’re not walking the talk. Then if you have ah, policy on anti discrimination and someone says something derogatory and it doesn’t get dealt with according to the policy. Yeah, that’s a joke. Absolutely. Yeah.
Um, we also thought it was important toe, you know, really, focus on the funding dynamics, so particularly for grantmaking organizations. But put your money where, like your mouth is essentially right. Like there are increasing number of foundations, that air saying that the I is important. Ah, nde sort of signaling to their grantees. But those organizations need to take d. I seriously need to diversify their boards and staff things like that. But if the foundations have not taken similar steps, if the foundations have not to diversify their own or internal institution, or the foundations have not sort of critically examined their portfolio of grants like are there racial disparities in terms of what the amounts of funding, which organizations get access to funding that sort of thing? All of that is about foundations being very serious on reflect about being reflective in terms of their own commitments to D. I.
And you have reflecting reflecting your community, which we touched on a little bit, that that was really striking, how you know it’s intuitive. I mean, I realized it, but to see the numbers of, um, Whitelighter organizations that are serving POC communities, eyes like two thirds or something, I think, um, it’s startling that leadership does not reflect the communities that they’re serving, and that includes the board. I mean, you you wanna have voices from the from the folks you’re serving contributing to your contributing to your you’re you’re major decisions a ZX the board should be doing
Yeah, and again, like, as I said earlier, like, if organizations see the function of the board as about accountability as about setting the direction for the organization, then I think those organizations will see the need and value of having a board that is reflective of the community that’s being served. But if organizations have the sort of rationale for maintaining the board is to have access to people with wealth and connections, and there’s obvious reasons that organizations go that route. Then they’re going to stack. They’re bored with wealthy people in their communities on again because of racism. Those wealthy people are not likely to be people of color from the constituency that’s being served
and your last one responsibility and results.
Yeah, I think our sense was that organizations air pushed to track a lot of things nowadays and so, like what gets measured is often what then matters. And so our sense was that organizations should be very clear about what their commitments are going to be to race equity. And, um, you know, really track those commitments and then track the results of that come out of, like, what kind of organizational change strategies they pursue. And so, you know, if organizations they’re doing like an annual review or annual reports, are they reporting on their goals and objectives around race equity? That is one way to sort of ensure that organizations are staying on track on dhe, that its multiyear commitment
it’s gonna take
multiple years of change.
Uh, you know, just pay attention. You can move the needle on things. If you start paying attention to them, you’re saying, if you measure it, you’ll you’ll you’ll be. You’ll be accountable to it. So high attention to it. If your If your statements say that you value racial equity, then measure it, hold yourself accountable and commit to those years of change.
Yeah, and I think it’s even better if organizations do that. Make that accountability public, eso that they’re the sort of reporting is to their staff. It’s to their board. It’s to their community so that, like the statements of the organizations stand with. For instance, black lives matter, then backed up with organizations being able to say. And here’s how we lived into that commitment. Here are the things that we did over the past year that made that riel,
Sean, anything, anything at all that we didn’t cover that you want to talk about.
Um, no, I think we covered a lot.
Okay, well, we did. You know, it’s not profit radio. We cover a lot of ground, but, you know, we can only scratch the surface. I mean, we cover a lot, but what you want to read the details, So just get the damn thing. Uh, the report again is, um race toe lead racing. No race race, the lead race, the lead be visiting
the lead revisited.
Used to lead you visited. You’ll find it at building movement or GE. That’s where you’ll find building movement project. And Sean Thomas Bright felled. Who is co director, right, Sean, Thank you very much. Thank you.
Thanks so much for having me
absolutely appreciate your time. Thank you. Reminder were sponsored by turn to communications, PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission. turn hyphen two dot ceo and by dot drives raise more money changed more lives. Tony dot Emma slash dot for a free demo and a free month, Our creative producer is clear, Meyerhoff shows Social Media is by Susan Chavez Mark Silverman is our Web guy. This music is by Scott Stein and with me next week for non profit radio Big non profit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great.