Charities spend an awful lot of time, effort and resources courting gifts from businesses. The smarter strategy, of course, would be to court long-term relationships. I'd rather have a committed donor than a one-shot gift any day.
Solely in terms of efficiency, going after corporate gifts doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Nearly every charity does it, but the statistics aren't encouraging. Nationally, private individuals give more than 85 percent of every charitable dollar, while businesses give a paltry 6 percent. For long-term stability, oddsmakers would tell a charity to go where the money is.
PTC That being said, going for the corporate pot of gold still occupies a lot of a charity's time. When a charity does develop a strong relationship with a corporation, the results can be rewarding. Businesses can give cash awards, volunteers and other resources.
One type of corporate support that gained favor in the 1980s and continues into the '90s are partnership programs. The most common of these corporate-nonprofit partnerships is the much touted school adoption programs. In these programs, a corporation "adopts" a school, typically providing employee volunteer tutors and mentors. In many cases, these programs grow to include corporate cash gifts, help with strategic planning, and even gifts of inventory or depreciated assets, such as computers.
Other nonprofits, including youth recreational facilities and junior colleges, have been quick to jump on the partnership bandwagon, Unfortunately, many of these programs run out of steam after a year or two. In my opinion the reason for this is simple; they are euphemisms of true partnerships.
Can you imagine a relationship in which only one of the couple gives anything meaningful to the relationship? How long would that last? Can you imagine a business partnership in which only one side benefits?
In business-nonprofit partnerships, we have come to accept as a given that the flow of valued resources is one way only. Of course, the business' employees get to feel good about what they are doing for the nonprofit. But, aside from that, it's a one-way street.
Actually, nonprofits have a whole lot to offer back to their for-profit benefactors. And, some companies are beginning to recognize just how valuable the intellectual assets of nonprofits are.
Take that elementary school-business partnership, for example. Schools have some extraordinary assets to offer their business partners. They're called teachers. Elementary teachers have a wealth of knowledge about children, arts, crafts, literature, and language arts skills that are immediately useful to corporate employees who are parents.
Experienced teachers also are typically experienced in leading workshops and seminars, a constant requirement for them to be recertified. So, their skills and knowledge base is up to date and easily transferable. In fact, teachers in general are excellent sources of free-lance help in corporate training environments.
In the case of public school partnerships, teachers usually have desperate classroom needs. Ask any elementary teacher and he or she will rattle off a wish list as long as your arm of classroom materials they would love to have. My experience is that they would jump at the chance to trade skills for classroom materials from the school's business partner.
In much the same way, other nonprofits have intellectual properties that have inherent value to corporate partners. Social service agencies can offer on-site educational programs to corporate partners. Even a self-serving session that helps employees understand how the agency's clients benefit from the partnership can reap huge rewards in terms of employee morale. Some creative thought applied to the partnership issue could go long way in building long-term relationships with enduring value for both sides.
One of my favorite trading opportunities stems from a column I read by Tom Peters, the New Age business guru. Peters suggests that corporate product planners are too ingrained with the industry to work creatively. He suggests that brainstorming sessions not only include outsiders, but people with nonbusiness backgrounds or unrelated industries. That youth social worker or teacher can bring creative perspectives to new-product discussions. Partnership, anyone?
Lester A. Picker is a philanthropy consultant. Write to him at The Brokerage, 34 Market Place, Suite 331, Baltimore, Md. 21202; (410) 783-5100