GivingThree

CFRE Updates Certification Requirements

Jun 10, 2011 Weblog Leave a comment

CFRE International sent me an E-mail yesterday announcing two revisions to the policies for initial and re-certification. I wasn’t able to locate this announcement on the CFRE website so here is the information for anybody considering to obtain this professional fundraising credential (I recommend you do, as do others).

1) Earning Continuing Education credits.
Applicants for initial certification and recertification DO NOT have to attain 50% of their continuing education credits from CFRE Approved Continuing Education Providers.
In January 2010, a new requirement was introduced that 50% of reported continuing education activities needed to be from CFRE Approved Continuing Education Providers.  However, many candidates indicated that meeting this threshold was difficult due to the educational offerings available in their region.  In response, the CFRE Board of Directors decided to defer the implementation of the 50% CFRE Approved Provider requirement, pending further evaluation.  Based on this evaluation and continued candidate feedback, the Board since decided to discontinue the 50% policy going forward, and retroactive to March 2010.

The CFRE Approved Continuing Education Provider program enables you to quickly identify those educational opportunities which have been reviewed and deemed eligible for credit by CFRE International.  Eligibility is based on content that is reflected in the CFRE Test Content Outline, which is the identified framework of professional fundraising practice.  We encourage you to seek out these opportunities as you are able.

It is important that our global certification and recertification applicants have ample access to required continuing education activities. To that end, CFRE will continue to work with our Participating Organizations and Approved Continuing Education Providers to enhance the availability of educational offerings while encouraging certificants and applicants to take full advantage of these valuable opportunities.

Click here to view the Continuing Education Credit Policy.
Click here to view the CFRE Test Content Outline.

2) CFRE now recognizes half-time employment to meet eligibility requirements.

In response to feedback from current and prospective CFRE’s, the CFREI Board of Directors has voted to allow part-time (half-time) employment to be documented in the Professional Practice category on the application for the purpose of initial certification and recertification. CFRE defines half time employment as ½ full time employment (FTE) or greater.
This change in policy was made in consideration of the changing employment landscape in many regions, and after conducting research on the employment requirements at several international certification programs.

CFRE International appreciates the diversity of the fundraising field and is dedicated to staying abreast of trends in the profession, while maintaining the highest standards established for certification programs.

Please feel free to contact CFRE International with your questions or to discuss how this new policy may impact your eligibility.

Click here to view the Policy on Eligibility for the CFRE Credential and Policy on Eligibility for Recertification of the CFRE.

Our hope is that these changes will encourage and assist you in seeking or maintaining your CFRE certification, for your benefit and that of the profession.

CFRE is YOUR certification.  Thank you for your continued support of the CFRE program.

Warm Regards,

Denny Smith, Ph.D.

President and CEO

Ethics Rapid-fire for Your Next Staff Meeting

Jun 8, 2011 Weblog Leave a comment

I’d like to improve on a quote I often use; “philanthropy, an awkward word that does so much good” by adding “ethics, a simple word that can ruin or fix everything.”

The thing is, ethical lapses don’t have to happen. It’s helpful to be talking about general ethical issues to help your staff how to respond should something crop up. Or, at least make ethics present in your organizational culture. To help keep the discussion of ethics alive in your organization, here are some rapid-fire questions to use at your next staff meeting. Use these general examples to discuss how your organization should handle similar situations.

Ethical scenario rapid-fire – What would you do?

• A donor, whom you did not invite to your wedding, sends you an expensive wedding present, or gives you a gift when you have a baby.
• Your organization’s expense policy forbids the purchase/reimbursement of alcohol. You are having dinner with a donor and she orders a glass of wine.
• You receive a memorial gift made out to your organization praising a staff member who does not work at your agency.
• When you are running a donor’s credit card, it comes up as “stolen.” What do you do? What if the person is right there, say at your event?
• A board member wants you to issue her a receipt for all of her gifts to your organization; including $1,200 she spent at your events last year.
• You receive a matching gift for $50, the price the person paid to attend your black-tie dinner.
• You have a board member that sits on a Foundation grants selection committee. Is it ethical for them to do both?

For further consideration

• Does your organization have policies in place to guide ethical decisions?
• At what point should you release staff or donors engaged in unethical behavior?
• You know of ethical breaches in your organization, how should you respond?

For more information on fundraising ethics visit the AFP International web site.

Fundraising Ethics and Corporate Scholarships

Jun 7, 2011 Weblog Leave a comment

I entered my current professional fundraising position after it had been vacant for nine months. Knowing the importance of building relationships with those that had invested their philanthropy in the organization, I spent my first several months meeting all donors who were active at a leadership level. Included in this group were all of our scholarship donors. I noted that over fifteen new corporate scholarship funds were established just prior to my predecessor’s departure and nearly all included a specific sentence in the gift agreement terms and conditions.

Each scholarship recipient selected by the University may be given an opportunity to intern at XYZ Corp, depending on mutual need and consent.

Having worked in higher education my entire career I appreciated the way in which this statement was worded. It indicated to students that the company would like to consider scholarship recipients for an internship, but the company understood that the scholarship award was not contingent on the students’ acceptance of an internship and the University was ultimately responsible for selecting the recipient.

In theory this arrangement would be ideal. However, as I began to make my visits, I soon discovered that they had a understanding of how the scholarship selection process would function which was contrary to the gift agreement. As I made my visits I discovered that these donor companies expected an opportunity to review scholarship applications and resumes prior to the University selection process and the company would be given an opportunity to directly select the recipient. Fortunately, since my position sat vacant for so long I was able intervene before this scheme could be enacted.

I spent considerable time those first several months reestablishing the proper boundaries between benefactor and beneficiary by educating the new corporate scholarship donors on the Code of Ethical Principles and Standards (Standards 13 and 15). The majority of these donors were receptive to this news. However, there was one company in particular that, despite countless personal visits and phone calls, refused to accept the ethical standards I proposed so I would be in compliance with Standards 1, 2, 4, and 5.

The only resolution was for me release this donor from their gift commitment. Provided below are letters sent to the donor in question. Details have been changed or removed to protect donor confidentiality.

Follow-up letter sent after initial face-to-face visit

I am writing to follow-up to our discussion earlier today regarding the XYZ Corp Scholarship at the University.

Please accept my apologies for any miscommunication that might have taken place during the transition of our development office. I do not want this miscommunication to overshadow how much we appreciate the scholarship support and student encouragement created as a result of the investment of XYZ Corp at the University.

Several years ago we did have a scholarship selection committee that helped narrow the pool of potential scholarship recipients. It is on this committee that a select group including representatives from industry were invited to serve and have an opportunity to provide feedback on scholarship candidates. Your interest in establishing a presence on a future scholarship selection committee here at the University has been expressed with our scholarship office.  If we resume this method I will notify you of the opportunity.

Moving forward I would like to conduct this scholarship in strict compliance with the summary of gift terms as agreed upon when the gift was created. To clarify any miscommunication, we do not currently have a scholarship selection committee with external representatives and are unable to offer this opportunity for specific scholarships. The point at which a donor gives specific direction on the selection of a student candidate is the point at which the charitable intent of a gift is lost.

Your investment is greatly appreciated, both in the lives of our students and in the life of the University. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Final letter sent to release donor from remaining pledge and to terminate the scholarship

Thank you for your recent call regarding the outstanding scholarship gift pledge of $$$ that the XYZ Corp made to the University. I understand your interest in using the XYZ Corp Scholarship, established in 2007 as a tool in recruiting future graduates to work for XYZ Corp.

Since its inception, the XYZ Corp Scholarship has been administered in accordance with the terms outlined and agreed upon at the outset of the fund. Unfortunately, XYZ Corp has pressed the University to administer this scholarship with terms that fall well outside the original terms. Namely XYZ Corp feels entitled to select student recipients of the XYZ Corp Scholarship.

I am sure you can appreciate our disappointment in not being able to administer this scholarship award in strict compliance with the original summary of gift terms as agreed upon when the gift was created. The University is unable to accept future gifts earmarked for specific students as requested. The point at which a donor gives specific direction on the selection of a student candidate is the point at which the charitable intent of the gift is lost. Because of this, I have instructed the University to write off the remaining pledge balance outstanding for the XYZ Corp Scholarship.

Please accept my apologies for any miscommunication that might have occurred in the establishment of the scholarship. I do not want this miscommunication to overshadow how much we appreciate the scholarship investments XYZ Corp made in 2007 and 2008. The student support provided during these two years was an encouragement in the lives of our students.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

What Is GivingThree?

Jun 2, 2011 Weblog Leave a comment

I get this question a lot. This probably explains why the “about” page of this blog is among the most visited.

“Giving three” is my shorthand description for the giving of “time, talent, and treasure”–or as Martin Novom prefers, “work, wisdom, and wealth.” In 2007 when I was becoming more academically interested in the practice and understanding of philanthropy Martin encouraged me to try and articulate my thoughts through a journal or a similar exercise. I decided that writing a private cache of my thoughts would be of limited usefulness, however a weblog would allow others to challenge my ideas and allow me to grow and consider alternative perspectives.

Knowing that my professional identity should not be confined to my place of work and that I didn’t want this new adventure to be about me (e.g. Ben’s Blog), I set out to create a neutral place where I could share my reflections. It’s been my experience that fundraisers (at least in North America) focus most of their attention on the “treasure” or “wealth” aspect of philanthropy, meanwhile “time and talent” or “work and wisdom” take a backseat. In creating GivingThree, my goal is to explore all dimensions of philanthropy.

Millennial Fundraising Epic FAIL

Jun 1, 2011 Weblog Leave a comment

Typically, this time of year I see fundraising appeals from educational organizations, faith-based groups preparing for summer mission trips, and health-related (education/advocacy/research) groups that sponsor an athletic event (e.g. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Team In Training). Over the past four months I’ve received about eight fundraising appeals representing five different organizations. Of these, five have been through social media or in electronic format and stand out in my mind, but not as best practice examples.

Social media and the viral fundraising campaign is highly lauded among large national organizations with high name recognition and stellar reputations. However, a major shortcoming of peer-based appeals is that the responsibility for relationship building is transferred from professional fundraisers to an inexperienced volunteer. A trend I’m seeing among the disappointing appeals is a lack of volunteer fundraising training by these well-respected organizations (or perhaps volunteers are ignoring their training).

The downside of this is that even if a person I know sends me an e-mail or Facebook message asking for my support for their upcoming mission trip or walk-a-thon, I’m unlikely to be receptive to the request if it’s the first time I’ve heard from that person in five years.

As Millennials seek to make a difference, it should be the responsibility of non-profits to engage their volunteers in training to make clear the importance of genuine cultivation and stewardship as a preface to effective asking and engagement. Volunteer training should not focus just on building endurance for the upcoming marathon, but should also spend some time educating on the strengths and weaknesses of permission marketing and their responsibilities as volunteer fundraisers.

Where should these volunteer training programs to start? I recommend the Donor Bill of Rights and the Code of Ethical Principles and Standards.