A common complaint I hear is that the Board is not active in fundraising. In many ways, it is an unreasonable expectation. Board members are volunteers who have a finite amount of time they can dedicate to an organization – even the organization they are most passionate about. Further, fundraising roles must be tailored to each unique organization; the type of revenue generation that makes sense for the mission; and the skills that exist within the staff and the Board. For example, a nonprofit with a primary revenue generation model of federal contracts must have Board members that are skilled in compliance and understand evaluation.
However….
There is one aspect of fundraising that must begin with the Board, no matter the revenue generation model.
Across all nonprofits, Board members must participate in fundraising by each member giving an annual financial gift from their personal funds. This is known colloquially as 100% Board giving.
It’s a signal.
Imagine with me one day you check your mailbox and find an unexpected inheritance check with many zeros. Instead of depositing it with your normal bank, you decide to shop around to various banks and credit unions. As you are writing out the deposit slip at your new bank, you hear a whisper.
“The bank president doesn’t have an account here at this bank.”
Do you deposit the check? Doubtful. If the bank president doesn’t have an account there, we assume they must have inside knowledge and don’t trust their money with the bank.
In the same way, Board members have an insider view of the financials and operations of the organization. If they don’t trust their money as a financial contribution to the organization, how can they expect that outsiders will trust the organization enough to give a donation.
What about “give or get”? This philosophy is oftentimes seen as a kinder approach. Except… it doesn’t really work. Boards that require all members to give raise more money than Boards that allow members to give or to get according to research.
Why? 100% Board giving is modeling generosity.
Nonprofits exist for the common good. As such, we expect that the nonprofit is not purely focused on profits and “maximizing shareholder value.” Being generous in how we accomplish our mission is one posture we take in the community. Board members model this generous posture when they give more than a token gift.
Additionally, it’s skin in the game.
While I shouldn’t be, I’m often shocked when I hear of a Board that is inattentive their governance responsibilities. Unscientifically, there seems to be a correlation to the Board giving. That is, either Board members are not giving an annual gift or they are giving token gifts for the sole purpose of a funder’s requirement. On the other hand, the Boards with 100% giving tend to be attentive to their other core governance responsibilities.
The premise to the question of roles in fundraising begins with 100% Board giving. With the foundation of Board giving, the organization can grow and adapt to the revenue generation model that is best suited to their mission. In some cases, the role of the Board in fundraising might appropriately end there. In other cases, this foundation allows for Board members to grow into other roles in fundraising and creates the seed for a culture of philanthropy through the whole organization.
P.S. Might you lose Board members over 100% giving? Yes. But, ask yourself, is a Board member, who does not believe in the mission enough to give, befitting the organization, mission and cause?
This post was updated to include the research on “give or get” policies.
