Past Articles

Capital Campaigns

It’s Not Rocket Science…Why Do We Need to Hire a Consultant?

As consultants working with nonprofit organizations on various aspects of nonprofit life including fundraising, strategic planning, marketing and leadership development, we are often asked why an organization should engage our services rather than just do it themselves.  My answer is that consultants bring experience, focus, perception, accountability, objectivity and style that make the realization of specific goals more likely for several reasons:

Experience: Fundraising is both an art and a science.  Key for success will be the relationships that open the right doors which quite frankly rely on the volunteer and professional representatives of the organization, whether they’re the actual door openers or the facilitator of the process.  Major gifts don’t just happen without a strategic and thoughtful cultivation plan and leadership committed to the process.  Major gift fundraising is a tedious process that requires discipline whether you’re a faith based organization with a clearly defined prospect base or an organization that may appeal to a broad audience.  A good consultant will demonstrate integrity by acknowledging she/he is not ”the rainmaker ” for an organization, rather, she/he will provide the guidance and input necessary to guide representatives of the organization through the process necessary to identify prospective donors, cultivate/nurture relationships, establish appointments and facilitate solicitation meetings, based on professional training and years of experience that has led to success in the past.

Focus:  Nonprofit organizations must rely on the involvement of others – members, donors, volunteers, etc.  Charging a consultant to be in the driver’s seat and provide experienced leadership will bring focus to the process, often measured with tools such as benchmarks and timelines.  Consultants know there is a sequential process that is key to the ultimate success of any campaign.  They can be very effective at keeping the process on track while navigating any detours, distractions, and unanticipated developments which are more likely than not given the organic nature of fundraising.  When new ideas and questions are raised and the answer is “well, that’s because it’s the way we’ve always done it” a consultant can make sure good ideas are nurtured and distractions are minimized.

Perception:   Consultants bring an automatic degree of credibility and expertise to a campaign simply by the automatic perception we enjoy when working from the outside with an organization.  Even if an organization has members and volunteers who do similar work for a living they usually don’t bring the same credibility, objectivity and time commitment that a paid consultant with a proven track record can positively affect the perception of your potential donors.  Merely by their presence alone, a consultant can convey the seriousness to which the organization is focusing on the campaign by investing time and money to work with a consultant. 

Accountability:  Working with a consultant will help hold people accountable for their respective areas of responsibility, including the consultant.   Written communication is crucial to confirm oral understandings, whether they be pledge commitments or recaps of meetings.  Most consultants recognize the importance of “CYA” (cover your ass) since we regularly count on the skeptic to question “what have you done for me lately?”  A good consultant should be committed to a strategic process that clearly demonstrates a commitment to “going the distance” to getting the job done … no excuses.

Objectivity:  Even the most seasoned and best intentioned volunteers and professional staff have an “insiders” view of your organization.  This serves you well in most circumstances but when it comes to major gift fundraising and conducting a campaign combining that “insiders view” with an objective perspective is more important than ever.  The most successful campaigns combine an “insiders” view, the culture of the organization, and solid fundraising process with consultants who do this day in and day out effectively will challenge “because that’s the way we’ve always done it.”  Capital campaigns and major gift fundraising without the objectivity a good consultant brings limits an organizations ability to get the job done, and get it done right, the first time.

Style:  Choosing a consultant with whom to work often has more to do with “chemistry” than more tangible items such as referrals and examples of existing work, which are important also.  Just as “one size doesn’t fit all” the same is true for consultants and it should be reflected through signals such strong listening skills and making the client feel as if they are unique and valued simply because it’s how we genuinely feel.  Trust your instincts when considering hiring a consultant … if you find the person to be sincere chances are more people will also which is important since you want a consultant who be a good fit for your organization.  Consultants know, “first impressions are lasting impressions” and good consultants know you usually only get one shot to demonstrate your style and personality. 

So yes, it’s not rocket science … some might even argue it’s more challenging!

Leadership

Tired of Talk about Vision

Cross posted to “At the Crossroads”.

Vision. Vision. Vision.

Everyone talks about making sure your board has a vision. To paraphrase Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady – words, words, words, I’m so sick of words…don’t talk of Vision, Show me!

Whatever happened to implementation???

Look, I’m not saying the first step isn’t important – it is! Without vision, you stagnate. If you don’t know where you’re going, you waste time spinning wheels.

But once you know what you want to become, it takes decisions and details; process and payments; learning the laws and following them; checks and balances; good management and good manners. And all the while, staying focused on the vision.

But JUST having a vision isn’t enough. Nonprofit leadership is fostering that vision, planning to make it reality, inspiring everyone to get on board, and then, well, making it happen.

Vision AND Implementation. It takes both. And a good board will recognize that, and empower consultants and staff to go beyond words, role up their sleeves, and get it done.

Leadership

“I’m not saying please, I’m not being reasonable, I’m making the decision”

[cross-posted from At the Crossroads]
Ever read or hear a statement that just begs to be quoted? When it happens to me, I may not know when I’ll use it, but it’s just so appropriate to something that I have to write it down. I may be watching TV or a movie with my husband, or reading a novel. It may be in a nonfiction book or a random sentence in a magazine.

This time, it was a line in an early episode of the FOX drama, Bones. Dr. Walker, head of the fictitious Jeffersonian Institute, was finally fed up. He had already explained, many times, the priorities of a case to his extremely intelligent and all-too-eager-to-argue staff.  He had other constituents to serve; he knew what had to be done, and he had to ensure their completion.

“I’m not saying please, I’m not being reasonable, I’m making the decision,” he declared, and walked out of the room.

Harsh. However, in a situation when someone has to stop the wheels from spinning, the executive makes that decision. Definitely, concretely, and in no uncertain terms. There may be fallout, but the job of the executive is to make the hard decisions and anticipate and mitigate any negative effects.

It’s not fun to be the dictator, but as Dr. Walker (or the show’s writers) illustrated, it is sometimes part of the job.

What hard decisions have you had to make on behalf of your organization? What might have happened if you hadn’t stepped up and taken charge?

Fundraising

When the Best, Biggest and Most Successful Can Backfire

One of the things I love about writing for a blog and posting my opinions is I can write about virtually anything I have an opinion about and picture people reading it, nodding their heads in agreement.  Hopefully as I continue to blog I’ll write something that resonates with some folks or even challenges you.  Heck, since at this point since I’d he happy if someone other than my colleagues at Bloom Metz Consulting or my mother comments so bring it on … agreement, disagreement, etc.

One of the issues I’m sensitive to that is often an important part of the nonprofit organization experience is when we praise or recognize significant accomplishes.  There are probably blogs out there devoted to the subject of donor recognition which this is not, per se although it’s worth mentioning my bias is in favor of it.  Not only do I think nonprofits should recognize donors, but I also think nonprofits should have strategies for recognizing volunteers and staff.  Enough about that … I’ll save my recognition argument for when/if I ever devote a blog topic to it.

My beef today is about when recognition can sometimes backfire because I think it’s at the expense of others.  For example, it’s not uncommon to hear at a fundraising dinner or read an article that states “it was the best ever.”  Geez Louise … how do you think this makes the person who chaired the event last year feel?  They may even agree but what about the people who worked on the committee?  Is it really necessary to define something as the best rather than “it was a wonderful night”, “a great success”, etc.

In response to the obvious argument that “the best” can be an appropriate thing to say if indeed the objectives of the initiative were met at a higher quantifiable rate than ever such as more money raised, more people attended, etc. but has the person making the comment “it was the best ever” actually researched the history so they can make this claim with confidence or are they basing their comment on recent history or anecdotal information?  I even find the same thing happens when people say “for the first time ever.”

OK, by now if you’re still reading this you either agree with me or think I’m the most overly sensitive person in the whole world and I should get over it … it’s no big deal.  So yes, I agree there are bigger deals out there and more important offenses that take place in nonprofit life but it seems to me is an easy one to correct by simply by prefacing our comments with disclaimers such as “this is one of the best”, the “most successful in recent years”, etc.

So what do you think?

Donors

Your Services Are Great, But We’re Flat Broke

If we had a nickel for every time we heard this comment from prospective clients, we would have enough money to retire.  OK, well maybe that’s an exaggeration, but you get the picture.

Perhaps the irony of needing financial resources to support a nonprofit organization is most apparent when we’re meeting with organizations to discuss our fundraising services.  Most nonprofits usually feel pretty strapped so the suggestions we typically offer will hopefully resonate with you regardless of what your nonprofit organization does or needs.  If I’ve accomplished my goal, soon the nickels will be flowing for all of us.  We’ll see.

  1. You probably already have the $ you need. Most nonprofit organizations have the ability to borrow from themselves the money you need to pay for consulting services.  Take a look at your cash flow … many nonprofits have more of a “cushion” than they realize.  Perhaps you have an operating reserve or if you’re blessed with visionary leaders – past or present – there’s an unrestricted endowment fund which you can use or at least borrow the money from, even if it means reimbursing yourselves with interest.
  2. Consulting services should ultimately pay for themselves.  Fundraising is perhaps the easiest example to understand of a service that should pay for itself once you start to reap the financial benefits of the changes your organization experiences as a result of sage advice.  The same should be true of other services … organizations that learn to communicate their messages more effectively often wind up spending less $ doing it, just as those who develop stronger leadership will benefit from the human resources enabling everything else to work.
  3. Find your “Angel.” Perhaps your organization is blessed with someone who is always there when you need something.  First, good for you … this means you’ve done your job of cultivating a relationship and you’re realizing a return on your investment of time by having someone to turn to when you need support.  Imagine how motivated your Angel will be to underwrite an initiative that is designed to make your organization even more self-sufficient so she/he is not the only one you can turn to when needs arise?   BTW, if you need more angels, we can help you with that, but um, it will cost you.
  4. Leadership leads.  This may a time to turn to your board members and ask for a demonstration of their confidence in the organization by making one-time contributions to pay for the needed service through charitable donations.  Often there are grants available from foundations or corporations to fund start-up costs … requesting a matching grant with CIF (“cash in fist”) can make a huge difference.  If it’s a capital and/or endowment campaign that will ultimately follow the immediate expense which typically doesn’t generate new $ if it’s an assessment, your organization can “credit” these donations to their ultimate pledge for the campaign.
  5. Common sense reminds all of us that “investments” are necessary for success.  Nonprofit organizations must have the courage of their convictions and realize they need to spend money to make money.

Of course all of these suggestions are “easier said than done” and not all will work for every organization all the time.  As always, I welcome your opinions, suggestions, experiences, and examples of going the distance.

Leadership

How to present a new idea without getting lynched!

I’ve been watching the dues committee at a non-profit where I’m a member spend the past year, researching, studying, analyzing, considering, projecting and estimating what impact a new membership dues structure would have on the organization. I’ve also been watching them present this new idea to board members and some of our bigger donors in approximately 2-1/2 minutes. Everyone involved seems so surprised when the proposal is met with resistance, skepticism and even hostility. Honestly, what did they expect?

When the dues committee first took up the idea to change from a flat rate to a fair share dues structure, virtually everyone on the committee reacted the same way…it seemed impossible that it would work. Would people be honest about their income? Would people self select and divulge their income range? Would those that are unable to pay at flat rate levels now pick an appropriate level? Would the more affluent members buy in to this system? Most importantly, would it generate more income for the organization and not less?

It has taken over a year of education to convince each committee member that this change would be good and is much needed for the organization. So I ask the question, why would anyone attempt to present and sell this idea in 2-1/2 minutes?

Here is a 5-Step process to presenting any new idea to an organization. The main objective here is to condense all the learning into a presentation that leads a likely skeptical audience down the same path of learning that the committee took.

1. Situation Overview or Analysis: detailing the current situation and why change is needed. Why is this proposal even being considered?
2. Competitive and/or “Model Organization” Analysis: what are other organizations doing that effectively address the situation? When possible, demonstrate positive impact through case studies.
3. Cite any industry research, write-ups or articles that document any findings pertinent to this issue. What do the experts say and what are the trends relative to this issue?
4. Project out different scenarios such as what is likely to happen if nothing changes or if recommended changes are instituted. At this point it might also be important to discuss alternatives other than the option being proposed…if there are any.
5. Now listen….really listen. Be open to what you learn and willing to apply that learning.

This method of presenting new ideas will not guarantee acceptance and approval. It will simply serve to make sure any new ideas are well understood and carefully considered based on merit and not misperceptions. It will also make sure you’ve done your homework before presenting to your board or membership. Bottom line is that when change is needed, a disciplined approach needs to be undertaken to institute that change. The first step is to successfully present the idea. When you are a non-profit and depend on member, donor and volunteer support for your existence, the way in which you present ideas for change and your skill at turning a skeptical crowd into a friendly one may mean the difference between success and failure.

Leadership

Anyone Know Why We’re Meeting?

Congratulations! You’ve limited your meeting attendees to those who need to be there.

Now, how are you going to keep from wasting their time?

Your valuable volunteers are smart. They can come up with great ideas and engage in really substantive conversations that result in good policy. That only works though, if they’ve been given time to think about the subject. If your attendees have advance time to think about the subject, they come up with more in-depth questions and analyses that will help you come up with a better decision.

So, the best way is to prep for the meeting by:

  • Limiting the meeting focus to no more than 1-3 topics
  • Making sure that everyone has all the materials they’ll need in advance.
  • Creating a timed agenda

Declare in advance the purpose of the meeting and the subjects that will be dealt with. Your volunteers should know that if the topic is not on the agenda, it will not be entertained. Harsh? Not as harsh as seeing 15 people around a table spending time on subjects they’re unprepared for, and which are really not their purview.

More about prepping a meeting, and other ways to Cheat the Meeting Reaper at Sr. Associate Susan Detwiler’s blog, Thoughtful Philanthropist:  http://ow.ly/14M3x Susan Detwiler and Vice President Susan Sherk are presenting Cheating the Meeting Reaper: How to Avoid Death by Meeting at the International Association of Fundraising Professionals annual conference in Baltimore, April 11, 2010.

Leadership

Tax-exempt groups must adapt to economic woes

Article originally published by The News Journal in the author’s column “A Broader Perspective”, March 2009,

Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s Chief of Staff, advises us not to waste a good crisis. Delaware’s nonprofits can heed that advice and emerge from the current economic crisis as stronger, more vibrant organizations.

During the Legislative Forum for Delaware’s Nonprofits in February, Governor Jack Markell and leaders from donor entities reinforced the need for the sector to reinvent itself. Too many charities and nonprofits are competing for reduced philanthropic dollars.

This crisis can generate the energy to transform Delaware’s nonprofit sector into one that more efficiently and productively serves its diverse constituency and perhaps supplements efforts to foster economic development. Many people count on the unique services they provide.

Globally, the nonprofit sector is large and growing. It has become a major social and economic force in the world, engaging 40 million people.

In the U.S., according to taxexemptworld.com, there are 1.6 million tax-exempt nonprofit organizations with assets of $4 trillion and income of $3 trillion.

In Delaware, there are 6,121 tax-exempt organizations with total income of $13.6 billion. Delaware’s ratio of nonprofits per capita surpasses the nation’s average by 35 percent, suggesting that there may be room for consolidation.

The opportunities to change and come out stronger are evident. The trend in favor of professionalism is inexorable. With consolidation, economies of scale and quality of services could improve.

Some in the sector serve the same clientele with relatively similar programs. Organizations could consider merging similar programs to increase efficiency and have a better chance of securing funding. They will need to demonstrate results towards strategic objectives and be prepared have their results audited.

Informed, sophisticated donors will seek systematic reporting and even a benchmarking of efficiency levels. The need of transformation has found in donor entities a common voice. To increase sustainability over time, nonprofits can implement more of the best practices honed over years in the for-profit sector.

Although they are in a different kind of business, social entrepreneurs in nonprofits face the same pressures as those in corporations to use limited resources effectively to deliver concrete results. Mergers, collaborations, and acquisitions should be part of the discussions particularly in a restrictive funding environment.

Beyond best practices, Jim Collins, the author of Good to Great and the Social Sectors, sustains that what the social sector needs is to embrace the language of greatness.  He outlines five important guiding principles:

  • Performance must be assessed relative to their mission, not financial returns. These organizations assemble evidence, quantitative or qualitative to track progress.
  • Leaders must make the right decisions for the organization’s long-term achievement of its mission -independently of consensus or popularity. These individuals are ambitious for the cause, not for themselves, and have a compelling combination of personal humility and professional will to create influence.
  • The right people need to come on board to advance the organization’s objectives.
  • In terms of time, money, and brand, organizations need to connect three important factors. They are what the organization stands for, what it can uniquely contribute to the people it touches, and what best drives its cause.
  •  Organizations should gain momentum by building a brand over time. Success and eventually money will come as consequence of consistent efforts.

The Federal government’s recently passed economic stimulus package might ease fund-raising concerns for certain organizations in the short term, but long term fundamental issues in the sector still need to be addressed.

A federal model that could be adapted for the state is the Office of Social Entrepreneurship proposed by Michele Jolin, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, which would ensure that all relevant federal agencies spend money to help successful social projects expand. Jolin proposes the creation of an “Impact Fund” to help nonprofit groups collect data and better evaluate their success.

Also proposed is the creation of an annual multimillion-dollar prize for the most creative high-impact solution to a defined social problem and changes to the tax code that would reward partnerships between nonprofit groups and businesses.

By adapting this model, the state government can facilitate the nonprofit consolidation process by providing guidance. Donor entities could work closely with the government to reinforce the need of collaborative work by granting funds only to organizations with unique missions and proven track records of results.

Good crises are to be capitalized on. Let us hope for a transformative crisis in Delaware that leads to greatness in the nonprofit sector and ultimately benefits those who count on their services.

Social Media

Art to spark civic dialogue in Delaware

Article originally published by The News Journal in the author’s column “A Broader Perspective”, June 2009,

The current dialogue among supporters of the arts to find the right way to fund organizations in the state in light of the recession and tight budgets reflects a deeper underlying question about the role of art in Delaware. What is the purpose of art? Is art to inspire and provoke emotions? Is it a means to economic development? Is it a way to increase civic dialogue? Is it possible that art might help build an inclusive, welcoming community? What, really, is the role for the arts in Delaware?

Arlene Goldbard, a writer on cultural policy, notes that art engages the whole person and the whole community. Art has the ability to move us in unexpected ways; it is the expression of the irrepressibility of the human soul. Art reflects the interpenetration of cultures as the intrinsic character of 21st century life and becomes the cultural expression of the community. Art is a natural convener and creator of spaces of exchange and dialogue. As such, art can continue to spark civic dialogue and inclusivity among Delaware’s increasingly diverse community.

Art can bring people to the dialogue who might not otherwise participate. It can bring the voices often silenced of left out of public discourse. It can bring together groups of people with divergent viewpoints who might not readily agree to talk or work together in other settings. Art, therefore, is a complex concept that goes beyond the expression of beauty to incorporate many elements of human nature.

In Minneapolis, the Animating Democracy Initiative (ADI) is showing that art is vital to society, that a civic dialogue is vital to democracy, and that both create unique opportunities for understanding and exchanging of experiences. As part of this initiative, thirty two organizations are examining the nature and demands of this arts-based civic dialogue work to better understand what role cultural organizations can and should play in this exchange. Their efforts aim to get people talking together, in a focused and purposeful way, about issues that affect their lives, in hopes of better understanding the complexities, dimensions and implications of those issues.

One example of ADI’s initiatives is the “Midtown Greenway” project. Residents of various Minneapolis neighborhoods, including low-income youth and families, newly arrived Latino immigrants, homeless youth and recently acclimated Hmong women explored the question, “What is safe space?” After field trips they discussed symbolism inherent in material selected, notions of safety, community and art. They then created collaborative sculptures that reflected values important to a sense of community well being. These works, exhibited for the community, became focal points for furthering conversations about safety.

From an economic development stand point, art can also be an engine to attract people and business to the state. Richard Florida, professor of economic development at Carnegie-Mellon and author of the 2002 book “The Rise of the Creative Class,” indicates that creativity is multifaceted and multidimensional. He identifies three interrelated types of creativity; technological related to innovation, economic related to entrepreneurship, and artistic and cultural. He sustains they are mutually dependent and that in order to generate entrepreneurship a region must create conditions that stimulate innovations, arts, and culture. He also emphasizes that creativity requires diversity and it thrives when the environment allows people from all lifestyles, cultures, and ethnicities to interact. Regions that wish to encourage economic creativity must also encourage diversity. Public policy implications might be the need of the government to broaden their vision of entrepreneurship policy and moving beyond the notion of business climate to people climate; a region open and tolerant of diversity and risk taking. There is a clear correlation between economic development and art; art is emblematic of culture and might be its purest expression.

Delaware is fortunate to have a plethora of artistic organizations and a supportive state government that believes in art. This should be seen in light of a broader perspective that recognizes the importance of artistic expressions to the economic development of the state. Art in Delaware allows multiple expressions of the best of the human spirit while building an inclusive, tolerant, and diverse community. It is the reflection of an integrated and welcoming community.

Leadership

A niche for corporate giving

Article originally published by The News Journal in the author’s column “A Broader Perspective”, October 2009,

Delaware, the capital corporation of America and the place where corporate news tend to flow, might also become the place where cross-polinization between the nonprofit and for-profit organizations takes place. The challenge becomes for corporations to find their call for leadership and support causes they believe in. The nonprofit sector could become corporation’s call for leadership and community involvement.

There are advantages in collaborations between both sectors. For corporations the list is important. Joseph Galaskiewicz in Collaboration between Corporations and Nonprofit Organizations indicates that companies have realized healthy corporations cannot exist in sick communities, and therefore the importance of physical and societal infrastructure. Thus giving to societal welfare serves firm’s enlightened best interest. He indicates that being part of the solution becomes part of corporate strategy.

Nonprofits might become facilitators for corporations and information channels to open up dialogue between them and local communities. It might help them develop connections with minorities who tend to use the services that community organizations provide. Companies are not asked to abandon their mission to maximizing values to its owners, but are called to take a leadership role in solving social and environmental problems, be more transparent, and accountable. The best partnerships between the for-profit and nonprofit sector bring about meaningful institutional changes and even reverse corporate abuses.

Florian Pomper from the NPO-Institut, University of Economics and Business Administration in Vienna, supports the idea and suggests a shift in managerial philosophy from only giving to the owner’s interests to a broader understanding considering obligations of the company towards employees, customers, and society. Corporate giving is a result of the responsibility of companies for society.  

Corporations and nonprofits alike need to expand their concept of partnerships particularly in a restrictive funding environment.  A Deloitte Survey finds that nonprofits and corporations are missing opportunities to offset decline in giving dollars and are not utilizing pro bono work as a type of exchange. There is a tremendous opportunity for corporations to channel their skilled employees to nonprofits as a means of social investment; for that, corporations need to improve their skilled volunteer support: is not longer about writing checks but getting customers and employees involved in initiatives that consequently speak for the brand. Corporations should not expect to bank on their involvement; nevertheless there is a clear positive correlation between corporate giving and customers’ response. 

From the nonprofit perspective there are benefits as well. Peter Drucker in Managing the Non-profit Sector defined them as the essence of the American community. He believed many lessons can be learned from successful nonprofits, like the way they spark volunteers’ interest and make them work as unpaid staff because they believe in the mission. A sense of meaning and contribution to the community is fulfilled by contributing to their causes.

Margi Prueitt, Executive Director of the Committee of 100 and former Chief Executive Officer of American Red Cross of the Delmarva Peninsula supports the idea: There is no doubt that nonprofits need to adapt businesses best practices, but businesses need to adapt nonprofits best practices as well. They have to learn how to motivate workers to the point that people essentially work for free willingly. They might also learn the passion needed for businesses success.   

For nonprofits the opportunity to adapt best business practices could be capitalized through partnerships with socially conscious corporations. Galaskiewicz mentions cause-related marketing, licensing names, logos, and patents to corporations, subcontracting with them, and some other collaboration as a means to bring financial viability to nonprofits. There is also the possibility of technology transfer, and for-profit investment in nonprofit infrastructure can significantly strengthen their capacity. The slow adoption on skilled volunteer services from corporations could be due in part to a lack of knowledge to securing pro bono projects. Nonprofits might also learn how to build business cases to make an impact on donor entities showing outcomes where they can objectively see that their social investment is paying off. 

PRWeek believes that nonprofits realize now the need to have clear identities and to raise their profile with key audiences. Those elements could also be learned through mutual collaboration. Incorporating best businesses practices should not undermine their legitimacy as mission-driven organizations.

Affiliations and collaboration between sectors bring competitive advantages for both. Boundaries between sectors are fading away. There is an expansion of interface between nonprofits and businesses and the trend continues. The task to undertake is to find the cause that triggers motivations, beliefs, and actions for corporations. Each one should find their inner call for leadership in causes that resonate with their values.  Corporation’s social investment represents a win-win situation where both sectors see return over their investment. To that extent, once the cause or nonprofit is selected, it is important to define a document that outlines responsibilities for both partners and shows mutual accountability. Even these types of collaborations need to define its business case.

The cross-polinization between businesses and the nonprofit sector might well be the next brilliant chapter in the state where corporations are established. A new type of community leadership will emerge from these collaborations.