Donor Rights | Creating the Future!

Archive for the 'Donor Rights' Category Page 2 of 3

Debunking “Accountability to Donors” Part 4

Published

on May 13, 2008

in Capacity Building, Donor Rights, Funders, Fundraising and Stop Signs on the Road to Changing the World

. 0 Comments

In this series, I have considered the logic flaws in the argument that organizations should be holding themselves primarily accountable to their donors. So far, I have considered the following questions:

1) Are fully funded / endowed organizations with no donors accountable to no one?
2) Should different levels of giving receive different levels of accountability?
3) Do “donor’s rights” apply equally to volunteers and in-kind donors as they do to cash donors?

(If you have not read the posts leading up to this one, you can start at the beginning here.)

Today, Post #4:

Are Thousands of Organizations Accountable to ME?
There are thousands of organizations that receive large grants from the various layers of various governments - local government, state / provincial government, federal / national government.

If organizations are primarily accountable to their donors and funders, to whom, exactly, are these organizations accountable?

Are they accountable to the whole government? And what does that really mean? I understand what it means for government to be accountable to the people it governs, but to what or to whom would an organization be accountable if it is accountable TO the government?

Perhaps, then, those grantee organizations are accountable just to the division of the government whose budget provided the funding. Or within that division, perhaps they are accountable to the proposal review team, or to the individual program officer who approved the grant.

Or are those grant recipients accountable to the Division Chief that oversees all those program officers? Or to the elected officials who appointed the Division Chief - the folks to whom that Division Chief is accountable?

But wait - that money didn’t really come from the government. You and I gave that money to the government! So is each and every one of those organizations then accountable directly to each and every taxpayer?

Are they all accountable to ME?

The questions “To whom are we accountable? And for what?” are about more than just dollars and donors. These questions are at the heart of everything community organizations are able to accomplish. And the reason for that is simple: We accomplish what we hold ourselves accountable for.

Click here to go to the next post in this series.

Debunking “Accountability to Donors” Part 3

Published

Hildy

on May 12, 2008

in Donor Rights, Funders, Fundraising and Stop Signs on the Road to Changing the World

. 0 Comments

The notion that organizations are primarily accountable to their donors is a dangerous one indeed - dangerous because it misdirects organizational focus, thereby preventing organizations from creating an amazing future for their communities.

It is also a notion fraught with logic-leaps.

And so, here is Post #3, as I continue to debunk the illogical constructs at the heart of the Donor Accountability movement.

(If you have not read the posts leading up to this one, you can start at the beginning here.)

Donating What?
If an organization is first and foremost accountable to those who provide the resources to make their programs possible, are those organizations only accountable to donors who give them cash?

What about the donor who provides $100,000 in free rent every year? What about a volunteer who works 40 hours a week, every week, for free?

If we are primarily accountable to our donors, are we accountable to our volunteers and our in-kind donors to the same extent we would be accountable to our cash donors? And if not, why not?

These are not just glib arguments. Because we do indeed accomplish what we hold ourselves accountable for, the issues in this thread are at the heart of what organizations can and will accomplish for the communities we all love.

If we hold ourselves accountable for creating an amazing future for our communities, our donors will be happy, because our communities will be healthy, vibrant, resilient, humane places to live.

Yes, one of the many contributing factors towards those lofty ends is the extent to which organizations are fiscally prudent and responsive to donors. However, ultimate accountability for a Community Benefit organization means more than a focus on the dollars.

Accountability asks and answers the question, “Whose expectations matter?”

And unless the primary answer to that question is, “The Community,” we will continue to see fiscally prudent organizations creating little impact in their communities.

Click here to go to the next post in this series.

Debunking “Accountability to Donors” Part 2

Published

Hildy

on May 9, 2008

in Donor Rights, Funders, Fundraising and Stop Signs on the Road to Changing the World

. 0 Comments

In my first post on Donor Rights / Donor Accountability, here is what I said:

The notion that organizations are primarily accountable to their donors is a dangerous sidetrack from where organizations must aim their primary accountability if we are to create an amazing future for our communities.

And so here is Post #2, as I continue to debunk the illogical constructs at the heart of the Donor Accountability movement.

Bill Gates vs. My Grandmother
If the Donor Rights advocates are correct, an organization owes its primary accountability to its donors, because their dollars make everything possible.

Does that mean the organization is more accountable to the person who writes a $1 million check than to the person who gives $10? Are we then really talking about a sliding scale of accountability, where the organization is accountable to each and every donor, in direct proportion to the level of his/her gift?

And how does that work out in practice? What exactly do those “donor rights” buy in terms of levels of accountability based on gift size?

Taking that logic one step further, does the same “accountability” apply if the $1 million check came from Bill Gates, representing a fraction of his total wealth, while the $10 came from my grandmother, living on a fixed income, to whom that $10 meant giving up something else she would have purchased that week? What rights would each of them deserve as donors to whom the organization might hold itself accountable?

Which raises the next question - if two donors are making 180 degree opposite requests / demands on an organization, and they both gave the same amount, to whom is the organization accountable? Which one of those donors’ best interests should be the primary concern of the organization?

If we hold ourselves accountable for creating an amazing future for our communities, our donors will be happy, because our communities will be healthy, vibrant, resilient, humane places to live. And we will provide those results by being fiscally prudent and gracious to our donors, simply because it is impossible to produce incredible results if we do our work in any other way.

Click here to go to the next post in this series.