Sunday, August 18, 2024
It’s easy to get confused and think that because donors have money, that money buys them the right to ask for what they want and have their needs met first.
But, dear reader, I think we can agree that the social sector doesn’t exist to serve the needs of philanthropists and donors alone.
First and foremost it exists to serve the needs of communities and the non-profits that serve them.
Philanthropists ARE NOT THE CUSTOMERS here, they are merely the financers.
Why then is it so hard for us to put the needs of our communities and non-profit leaders before those of donors and place our communities' needs at the heart, right and centre of every philanthropic decision?
Why do these get overshadowed and sidelined with policies capping how much non-profit’s salaries should be?
With many non-profit leaders working years without a salary or a team and foregoing holidays for more than 26 years, are they not arguably some of the most deserving employees?
I had worked day and night and finally it was done. I waited. And then I saw it: an email saying my grant proposal had been well received.
That cheerful feeling of a job well done filled me.
And then it started fading away as weeks dragged on answering every question our funders had, hoping every time that would be the last hoop we'd have to jump through.
Then one day, the funding gatekeeper literally bumps into me outside an ice-cream shop in Rome.
“We loved the proposal you drafted, we are so interested”
BUT
“The language needs to change...And this paragraph.... And this department has some comments for changes for you to make.... And this department still hasn’t reviewed it...”
I blurted out in disbelief…. “Waaaiit a second, are you saying you want me to tell my non-profit client to pay me to change all these things? Why? To improve the quality of the programme or because you need this information because of your internal systems?”
I received a confused and impatient “Well you know we just don’t have time. This all needs to be wrapped up before I go on secondment, and ...
"If you don’t make these changes, well I suppose the project just won’t happen”.
Those last words hurt.
But I'd heard enough!
I couldn’t contain my outrage and blurted out looking at her straight in the eyes
“OH YES IT WILL HAPPEN WITH OR WITHOUT YOU. You are not the only funder we are approaching.”
In that moment, I saw all too clearly what had escaped me before.
Up until that point, I had focused on getting non-profits a different type of funding – a greater amount of funding that matches true needs -- not the “do more with less” edition of the budget -- the full-fat budget with funding that covers core costs, risks, long term activities and is unrestricted or at least flexible.
But in that moment it suddenly dawned on me that lack of the right type of funding was merely one side of the coin.
The other side was much darker and harder to tackle: derogatory language, hero-complexes, the deep-rooted belief that money trumps knowledge and the need to exert ever increasing control because of a fundamental lack of trust.
Type of funding and type of relationships were two sides of the same coin.
There was no point pursuing one without the other.
I know we’ve gotten used to it know, but have you ever wondered how ironic that sounds?
Lack of trust in CHARITY.
Wasn’t charity supposed to be at it’s heart about trust?
About a simple gesture of love, faith, trust and belief in a better world that moves us to share?
And yet what I seem to observe, and what that more than 1,200 non-profits I have interviewed over the years seem to echo back to me is that funders gave up on trust a long time ago and swapped it for control
(Because that is more reassuring right!?!?!
Good ole reliable control!
Nothing like a good dose of that to make us feel confident and organised, does no matter, if it means no real impact is created in the end…..)
I digress.
But let’s go back to that moment in Rome. It didn’t just shed light on what the problem was, it also taught me a little something about possible solutions…
I saw my little outburst of honesty force that one funder to go through a shift in beliefs and suddenly come to terms with the fact that the purse strings were not THE ONLY strings.
And that they -- the funders and philanthropists -- were not as indispensable as they had maybe previously assumed to be.
They suddenly became one of many key players.
Not THE ONLY SUPERSIZED SUPERHERO key player.
I started testing the effects of changing my behaviour again and again and each time I saw with great satisfaction that funders DID change the way they responded to me and my non-profit clients.
They started being patient, apologising for asking so many questions, asking how they could help, even offering advance payment clauses to help with cashflow.
All because I had tweaked the way we shared information and stood up for our needs.
Amazing right?
It really was that simple.
Non-profits didn’t have to wait for the whole sector to jump on the Trust Based Flexible Funding bandwagon before they can start attracting better funders.
They didn’t need to continue to feel financially insecure or struggle to cover staff salaries just because funders continued to prefer to give short term and restricted funding.
They could interrupt the cycle with their own actions and beliefs.
The more I thought about this, the more I started to notice examples of people doing the same all around me, interrupting their funders' patterns all over the place.
I realised I am not alone, and that there are tons of non-profits that have explored many ways over decades of work to do just that.
Are you are one of them? I'd really love to know what your funding relationships are like and what's worked for you? Type reply in the comments and let me know.
Are your funders so obstinate they will not compromise on anything? Or do you have funders that listen to you and adapt their requests to your specific circumstances? Always curious to connect and learn more.
Last week I interviewed Shachar Zahavi Founder of SmartAid, and asked him what was the one piece of advice he wished he got sooner and he said:
“Don’t take anyones money, only take money from donors that believe in you and trust you and see you as a valueable source”. I totally second that.
(You can check out the full Non-Profit Power Episode here)
Penny Wilson from Getting on Board also told me earlier in the year that she felt “We had it in our power to reset the rules and that we could shift those (power dynamics) by behaving differently.”
And Anil Gupta told me a story about how he rejected a significant amount of funding because their interests were just not aligned.
Like I said you are not alone.
There are so many non-profits out there circumventing this issue to get what they need to thrive, while the sector catches up.
And it all starts with one little tiny step of setting your boundaries and standing up for your true needs.
It’s not really just about saying no (though that is one part of it).
I like to see it more as saying yes.
Yes to what your organisation needs.
Saying yes to the salary your team truly deserves.
And saying yes to taking the leap and making that unrestricted core funding request.
Because if you don’t stand up for what you need, you can’t expect anyone else to either.
I believe non-profit missions deserve to be funded through flexible trust based funding and that to do that we need to shift power dynamics in Philanthropy. Here you will see me share ideas and experiences I have developed so far to make this happen.