The Case of 4,000 Twitter Followers Who Don't Care

Social media, social media, social media...blah, blah, blah. There is just the existence of social media (all quite fun and good) and then there's the true effectiveness of social media. Debra Askanase, a nonprofit social media consultant in Israel, takes the Twitter and Facebook craze to task by really examining the loyalty numbers on the back end of these applications. Just because someone is your "friend" or "follower" doesn't mean you have a relationship. This one is a good cautionary tale for business too! Bunnie

The Case of the 4,000 Twitter Followers Who Don't Care

by Debra Askanase, Community Organizer 2.0

This is the Case of the 4,000 Twitter Followers Who Don’t Care - and why 4,000 followers means nothing without engagement.

I recently took on a new client that wants to leverage its existing social media assets (Facebook Page/Fans, Twitter followers) to drive more visits to the website. This company has been building a social media presence for over a year, and is unhappy with the lack of website visits resulting from social media.

I was told that the Facebook Group was active with almost 500 fans, and that the Twitter account had over 4,000 followers. I was also briefed that, though there was not a lot of online fan feedback, the Twitter account included some committed followers. The highest priority for the client was to figure out why social media was not driving more people to the website – and come up with a better strategy.

I took on this challenge, and want to share a few observations about why social media isn’t working for this client:

Case Observation #1:

The most important number isn’t the number of followers, it’s the number of engaged followers.

4,000 Twitter followers seems like a lot. But how many really care about your organization? How many are willing to act on its behalf?

I evaluated “the 4,000 followers” on Twitter and “almost 500 fans” of the Facebook Page. I used Twerpscan, Twittalyzer, Twazzup, and Tweetmeme to analyze the Twitter asset, and discovered: almost 400 of their Twitter followers were pure spammers no one cared what the client was tweeting, and…most of the retweets were from twitter profiles related to the company the company did not engage in conversation online, and rarely thanked retweeters there was absolutely no Twitter strategy

What I discovered was that, of the 4,000+ followers, only three were truly interested enough in what the organization was tweeting. Three.

Twitter utilizes the concept of social media karma: give and give and then others will give back. This company didn’t offer help, advice, support or anything else personal. Obviously, Twitter did not drive people to the website – no one cared enough about the company to go there.

Of the 400+ Facebook fans, most didn’t care enough to “like” a Wall post. The ones that did comment or “like” a post were often friends of the CEO or employees. All the posted was to its Facebook Page was company stories or related news. Of the 400+ fans, only one was an (unrelated to the company) engaged fan! Facebook drove little traffic to the website, which again is not surprising.

Case Observation #2:

Be wary when the CEO or Executive Director isn’t using social media on behalf of the organization.

This CEO was absolutely unwilling to be personally involved in using social media for the company. This is indicative of a CEO that does not understand the basic principles of social media. It’s critical that everyone in the organization have some direct contact with social media. An Executive Director that isn’t directly responsible for some piece of the social media is missing important information by not connecting with stakeholders directly. Not every CEO has to be responsible, but he/she should be intimately involved with the social media activities, and understand the basic principles of social media.

This CEO was using social media to “drive numbers to the website,” which completely misunderstands the basic fundamentals of social media. They are:

Engage with people first, create relationships, then move them to act.

Case Observation #3:

Their social media sites offer no real value to fans and followers

The company hadn’t taken the time to figure out what people were interested in reading on their social sites. Since the organization was not actually creating individual relationships with its fans, then it had to offer compelling and relevant news and data. However, it wasn’t giving followers information that mattered to the followers. Not surprisingly, no one wanted to visit the website to find out more.

Case Observation #4:

You need a strategy for each and every social media platform.

Their overall social media strategy consisted of posting news and information. This is an appropriate strategy for social bookmarking sites like StumbleUpon and Digg, but not at all for social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Additionally, the company usually posted the same information on both Twitter and Facebook. Fans of both sites were not even receiving unique value or reward for following the company in two places.

It’s important to realize that no two communities are the same online. Each has its own rules, expectations, and needs. You need an engagement strategy for each one of these communities. The strategy should consider the qualities of each social media platform, the needs of followers, how to best engage, and what your organization can offer its followers in terms of both engagement and value.

It’s Elementary, My Dear Watson

Social media is a tool to help your company meet its goals. But it’s more than that: if you aren’t using these tools properly, then it doesn’t matter how many fans, followers, or linkedin connections you have. They won’t care enough to do anything for your organization or company.

This case illustrates that it’s not about the number of fans and followers. It’s about the engagement. Create a strategy that brings your organization engaged followers and real relationships.

4,000 followers means nothing without engagement. And it never will.

You can contact Debra at: debra at communityorganizer20 dot com

Conducting Due Diligence in Your Executive Director Job Search

by Bunnie Riedel, Host

There is no doubt that the competition for jobs is fierce. For some, just having a job is enough. But if you are someone who is Executive Director material, or who wants to be an Executive Director, it may be tempting to take a position with a Nonprofit organization without conducting necessary “due diligence.”

What is “due diligence?”

Due diligence is finding out as much about the organization as you can, especially the financial health and legal status of the organization. If you are under consideration for an Executive Director position remember, if you get the job, you will be the chief officer of the organization and you will be responsible for the organization through good times and bad.

If you have been called for an interview and before you say “yes” to the position, there are certain things you should do. My first recommendation is that you research the Nonprofit on sites like Guidestar or Charity Navigator. Guidestar provides IRS form 990 (the Nonprofit tax return). With the 990 you can see income and expenses, how much Board Members are paid (if anything), how much the Executive Director is paid, how much is spent on program and often what kinds of programs the Nonprofit is conducting. Charity Navigator provides a breakdown of program v. administrative expenses, how much is spent on fundraising and a rating of the Nonprofit (according to Charity Navigator). My caution here is that both sites’ records are typically two to three years behind and in the Nonprofit management world two to three years can be an eternity.

Next, I would Google the organizational name. What press can you find about the organization? Is it good? Is it bad? Is there very little? If you know the sitting or previous Executive Director’s name or Board member names; Google them. You can learn a lot about an organization by searching the internet.

Before the interview, ask the Board for the following:

• A copy of the bylaws
• Minutes of Board meetings (if they aren’t posted on the organization’s website)
• Three years of audited financial statements
• Any literature or brochures or newsletters or journals the organization prints
• An organizational chart (if they have one)

The bylaws can tell you a lot. How many Board members are there? What are their terms of service? How are Board members selected? How are Board members removed? Are the expectations of Board members spelled out in the bylaws?

Just as bylaws can provide a lot of information, so too can minutes of meetings. While minutes really are only supposed to contain action items and how they were handled, many organizational minutes will contain whole conversations. You can frequently gauge how Board members behave and interact with one another or the previous Executive Director from the minutes.

I have had organizations resistant to handing over three years of audited financials, which in my opinion is crazy because financial statements are a matter of public record for Nonprofits. If they don’t have audited statements, that will tell you something. Look at the statements with an objective eye, if you have a friend who is a CPA, ask your friend to look them over. Certainly pay attention to red flags, such as negatives noted in the management letter, but also consider that Nonprofits, like any other industry have good years and bad years. If the financials aren’t that great, the question you need to ask yourself is “Can I work with this?” Maybe you are the wunderkind who can turn the organization around. In my opinion, bad financials are not a deal breaker, the deal breaker is the conversation you have with the Board about their approach to turning things around. If it is sensible and doable, fine; if it sounds wacky…it probably is.

The literature will help you learn more about the organization’s programs and an organizational chart will help clarify the roles of the various players in the organization and may even reveal information that is not readily apparent (for instance, you may discover a field office nobody has mentioned before).

One of the critical questions you will want to ask during the interview is if there is any pending legal action against the organization. Organizations frequently face the prospect of lawsuits, so legal action (in my humble opinion) is also not a deal breaker but you must be aware of any actions so you can make an informed decision about accepting the position. Is the action going to be a huge distraction to you as you begin your new position? And if so, are you willing to deal with it?

In asking for this information you will learn a great deal about the organization. Is it transparent or is the Board trying to hide something? Being fully informed about the organization is important to your career decision; you want to make sure you give yourself the best possible chance for success, even if that means you might have to politely remove yourself from consideration.

By the way, I would love to have comments on your experience in searching for an Executive Director position, please make sure that all comments provide anonymity to the organization you may be commenting about. And if there's anything I left out of this list, let me know that too!

Multi Organization Collaboration

The old saying "two heads are better than one" is most often true. I find collaboration not only stimulating to my own creative thinking but also empowering. Norman Olshansky talks about organizational collaboration. This is a theme I have been hearing more and more of lately. Foundations and grantors are seeking organizations that are leveraging their strengths through collaboration with like-minded organizations. The days of turf wars are gone and each individual organization becomes stronger as they work together. Bunnie

Multi Organization Collaboration

by Norman Olshansky, President of Nonprofit Consulting Resources

For many years, funders of charitable organizations have encouraged nonprofits to address more of their time and resources towards:

A. Articulation and implementation of a clear vision and business plan

B. Capacity Building

C. Achieving a better return on investment on their charitable dollars

D. More focus on long term sustainability

E. Avoidance of unnecessary duplication with what is offered by other similar nonprofits

F. Collaboration with other organizations wherever possible

G. Increase Board/Staff Leadership development

Given today’s grim economic environment, poor investment performance and limited resources, funders are even more focused on ways to maximize the impact of their limited resources.

Nonprofits, have already been impacted by the declining economy and know that the conditions are likely to get worse before they get better. They are looking for ways to address flat or declining campaigns, the need to cut costs, increase efficiencies and find new ways to address total financial resource development.The current environment can be used as a catalyst for funders and nonprofits to work together to address their mutual interests. The following are a few examples of areas of potential collaboration:

Facilities

Management

Accounting, Bookkeeping and Auditing

Investing and money management

Fundraising – especially for capital and endowment

Staff and Leadership Development

Purchasing

EnergyFuel/Transportation

Insurance

Marketing and Public Relations

Human Resources, and staff Recruitment

Safety, Security and Risk Management

Information systems and Technology

Many attempts to bring nonprofits together on collaborative initiatives have failed due to initial lack of trust between and among participants and a feeling that participation could result in a loss of control over their own destinies.How collaboration is developed is the key to success.

Implementation Process

We recommend the following steps and are available to act as consultant/facilitators/project managers to the process. (Hereafter identified as “professional”)

The initial introductory process becomes critical to the creation of collaborative ventures. There needs to be a funding organization or group of funding organizations which agrees to be the initiator of the process and take on this project. They need to be a significant player in the community and be respected by the organizations which will eventually be involved. The funding organization(s) provide initial seed money to retain a professional who will be the point person to work with participants. They provide the umbrella of legitimacy, seriousness and importance to the venture. They oversee the work of the professional.

A “professional” needs to be engaged who has experience working on collaborative ventures with nonprofits and is seen by potential participating organizations as highly professional, empathetic to their needs and impartial.

Initially, a group of organizations, which have shared characteristics, should be identified by the facilitating organization with input from the “consultant”. Those similarities could be mission, size, location, relationship to facilitating group and/or type of service provided.

The first group could be seen as a pilot or test group which, if successful, could expand at a future date. The facilitating organization must be willing to step back and let participants determine if and how they want to proceed.

The “professional” initially meets with recommended organizational Executives individually, to float the general idea that the facilitating organization(s) have proposed to encourage collaboration. Examples of what has been done in other communities is shared and a request is made for them to attend an initial meeting with other agency execs to determine if such an effort makes sense and the best focus area(s) for such a collaboration. It is important that the top professional executive of each organization be the initial contact and participate in the collaborative process with his/her peers from the other organizations. During the initial private meeting, the “professional” answers basic questions about the process and assures the agency director that there will be no requests for commitments from agencies until or unless a plan has been developed by the group that has the approval of each of the participants and their leadership.

An initial group meeting of the organization Executives, who are willing to explore the idea, is convened by the facilitating organization(s) and led by the “professional” with no hidden agendas. Care must be taken that no one organization take over the process or become the “gorilla in the room”.

Patience and time is required to make sure that all questions, concerns and details are addressed and processed with each of the Executives and that they are given the time to review the ideas proposed with their own leadership.

Anything that is proposed must pass the test that it will benefit all participants, will be implemented in a fair manner, that all parties will have a say in the project and that there will be a large enough return on investment on time and resources to warrant going forward.It is critical that whatever is agreed upon also include the need for all of the participating organizations to have “skin in the game”, including financial and human resources commensurate with their size and abilities.

Ultimately, whatever is agreed to must be formalized in memorandum of understandings between the facilitating organization(s), participating organizations and each other. These agreements will need to be approved by each of the participant boards. The initial collaboration should be one that is not too complex/complicated and has a high degree of potential for success. Once organizations have participated in a successful collaboration they are more willing to consider ventures that may contain more risk but which also can provide greater reward.

Contact Norman at http://www.nfpconsulting.com/

Jack of All Trades or Master of One: Getting Donors More Involved in Your Nonprofit

Executive Directors are finding themselves having to do more with less these days and that can be a great strain. How can Executive Directors delegate some of their workload, especially when it comes to fundraising? Adam Miller provides us all food for thought when it comes to raising money. I think my favorite line in this article is "serial extrovert." We all know who they are and perhaps we can harness their gifts for the good of our organizations. Bunnie

Jack of All Trades or Master of One: Getting Donors More Involved in Your Nonprofit

by Adam Miller, Elderado Financial

Everyone knows a true Renaissance man or woman; a Jack of all trades. These are the folks that are not afraid to tackle any problem. They will jump right in and fix the car instead of taking it to the shop, or repair the broken water heater on their own. It is so easy for the executive director of a non-profit to become the Jack of all trades. The responsibility of overseeing management and fundraising is no small task. No matter how supportive your donor base, at times it can feel like your hand is constantly out asking for more. This becomes a vicious cycle that leads a director to ask less and to take on more of the work themselves.

Donors are feeling the pinch in this economy and it is more important today than ever before to rethink your role. The role of an executive director is not to do all of the work but to direct and to connect with key individuals within the community that can help. So get up, get out of the office and get folks excited about helping the organization, without having to ask for money.

Here are a few ideas to get you started:

§ Find that donor who is on every social network and who knows how to update her blog and Facebook account from her mobile phone. Perhaps she would set up a social network for your organization, have her create profiles on the internet and spread the message for you. Let this person use her skills to upload the good news of your organization to the world.

§ Think of the best hosts or hostesses you know, ask them to get involved with planning your next fundraiser banquet, or even an intimate donor appreciation night. Your guests will leave feeling welcome and your event planners will find joy in the whole process.

§ Get the local youth involved. The kids in your community know how to upload videos, pictures, and commentary to the internet. In fact, most of them can probably do the job from their cell phones without looking. Have a key donor give $10 for every YouTube® video posted about your organization and let the youth have fun, making silly videos while raising money.

§ Do you have an outgoing board member who is great speaker, ask him to get on the service club circuit and present the benefits of your organization to the community. Make sure to follow up with a letter to the service clubs requesting support.

§ My wife is the official thank you card writer for our favorite non-profit. She has beautiful handwriting and loves to keep top donors feeling appreciated. Next time you get a card from a donor or board member, make sure to ask if they would consider sending a few thank you cards each month for your organization.

§ Is anyone you know highly connected to the community? Look for financial professionals, politicians, etc. These are the serial extroverts that can’t go anywhere in the community without saying hello, the ones who aren’t allowed to shop with their spouse because they have to talk to everyone they know. Get these folks to wear your mission on their sleeves. Literally, buy them a golf shirt or a nice ski vest and keep them updated. Give them the latest news and ask them to be intentional about spreading the word. They will see more people in a day than you could see in a week.

Think about every task you do during the day, especially the ones that leave you feeling exhausted, and ask yourself, “Is there someone that cares about our organization that would have fun doing this?”

During this difficult economy supporters might be decreasing their giving but it doesn’t mean they don’t care. Find creative ways to put these folks to work. This isn’t a task to think about just for today, this is your primary role as the leader within your organization.

Adam is a Candidate for CFP® certification, a trusted fiduciary and fee-only financial planner at Elderado Financial. He works passionately to help families pay less in taxes and give more to the people and organizations they care about. Contact Adam at http://www.elderadofinancial.com/

Cleaning Up Toxic Boards

This is a subject worthy of a doctoral dissertation, probably in the field of social anthropology. Why do people do the things they do? I was just talking about this very thing with a long-time nonprofit executive yesterday. These conversations usually result in a lot of head shaking. I love the last paragraph about making "courage" a criteria for Board membership. Toxic boards aren't just harmful to the organization, they are harmful to the mission and program. Read this one and definitely pass it on (or around at the next Board meeting!) Bunnie


Cleaning Up Toxic Boards


by Margie Morris, President, Morris Ink


Every agency or organization with any level of credibility has expectations of its board of directors and clearly stated policies to explain them. Confidentiality, attendance, voting methodology, conflict of interest, ethics, open meetings stipulations, diversity – a broad spectrum of guidelines to ensure a transparent infrastructure and decision-making. But even the most fervent rules and regs can’t ensure that board members act like grown-ups. And when they don’t, it creates trouble for other directors, the agency represented, and ultimately those served by the agency. Sometimes even the community.

The most toxic situations often occur when more conversations about the agency or its staff take place outside of meetings than when sitting at the board table. Watch for red flags: Small clusters left in the parking lot long after the group has adjourned, furtive e-mails or phone calls circulating surreptitiously, offsite gatherings when board business is discussed with any willing participant. If not addressed in an appropriate manner, talking about people (or things) instead of talking to people (about things) becomes almost a kind of entertainment. It creates its own energy and keeps boards from doing the sometimes hard work of resolving challenges.

It’s a problem that can permeate the culture of an organization, and often begins because well-intentioned executive staff short circuit communications for purposes of efficiency. (And those not so well-intentioned may advocate brevity so there is little time for questions, review or discussion.) It can be exacerbated by board members who, for whatever reason, agree to play the game rather than taking a stand to redirect unproductive activity. Changing course can be as simple and non-threatening as taking ownership of a request for additional information or requesting that a discussion take place so that all can hear.

To prevent the problem from occurring, re-evaluate the board’s MOO from time to time. Conduct a self-assessment. Talk openly with the staff executive about what’s working and what’s not. Structure board meetings so that directors are not just given the opportunity, but invited to participate. Hopefully, every member of the board was selected through a strategic process that helps ensure optimal functioning of the agency. So utilize the strengths for which each director was “hired” in the first place. And for heaven’s sakes, have term limits and share leadership through short-term task forces and other avenues of involvement.

To achieve greater participation, be sure the climate allows for thoughtful disagreement. Construct committees so that their work is meaningful and recommendations include board input. No rubber stamping. Give information in an efficient and user-friendly format, but give it. Asking volunteers to peruse 10 pages of financials five minutes before a vote is not good business. Of course, neither is subjecting board members to monthly information packets that weigh 15 pounds, even if they get it a month in advance.


Consider the multiple of three. One staff person always begins his brief presentation of information at board meetings by stating, “There are three things you’ll want to consider carefully about this issue.” And then he names them. Another executive staff member periodically asks her board members to prioritize which three items in the board packet are most useful. Three is a magically manageable number.


Finally, include courage on your list of prerequisites for potential new board members. The courage to disagree. The courage to change direction. The courage to know and follow the rules of the agency and also those that come with being a mature and responsible leader. Amazingly it usually only takes one person to turn a potential problem around. Noticing is the first step.

You can contact Marjie at margiem@cableone.net

Cultures That Nurture Commitment, Enthusiasm and Creativity

I once worked in a nonprofit in which the behavior of the day was back-stabbing, one-upmanship, intrigue and gossip. This behavior was encouraged by the Executive Director who seemed to take great pleasure in pitting people against one another. It really was a toxic environment. When I became an Executive Director of a national organization, I was determined that the culture I created would be collegial, supportive and cooperative. One of the things I discovered was that you can get a lot of work out of people who are happy in their job. And a happy crew made me happy. Dianne Crampton writes about core values that should be practised in every organization, not for profit or for profit. A good read for you, your employees and your Board Members. Bunnie

Cultures That Nurture Commitment, Enthusiasm and Creativity

By Dianne Crampton, President TIGERS Success Series

What is necessary to build an ethical, quality-focused, productive, motivated, and enthusiastic group of people? This is a question I asked before entering a Masters program in Organizational Leadership in 1987.

What I discovered was interesting. Emerging from business, education and psychology group dynamic studies were six repeatable principles – trust, interdependence, genuineness, empathy, risk and success -- TIGERS. What I also discovered is that these themes are anchored by behaviors that are easily recognized by how people treat one another and the organizations they serve.

Later, two independent validation studies concluded that these values are reliable, measurable and predictive. This means that if the values are present in an organization’s culture there will be predictable outcomes. If they are not there will also be predictable outcomes. The first, however, produces a culture that stimulates commitment, enthusiasm, creativity, and high levels of collaboration and teamwork among leaders and their teams.

Take for example, trust. Trust is a core human need. It is the belief and confidence in the integrity, reliability and fairness of a person or group.

As a core need, it is necessary for a person to grow into their full potential. In other words, people need to be able to trust one another and the groups they serve in order to be creative, motivated, committed, willing to collaborate, and able to resolve conflict so that they can forgive when problems arise.

Trust and the other five values are also interdependent with the three management functions that support the service the group performs – workforce, strategies and systems.
This means that if one of these functions is out of alignment, the others will be, too. The result is reduced productivity and damaged morale.

For example, if systems (how you do things) are out of alignment with strategies (what you do) and workforce (proper staffing levels) what will be evident is overworked staff and insufficient systems. If the behaviors that support trust, interdependence, genuineness, empathy, risk and success are apparent then collaboration, information sharing, and problem solving among all employees will help bring the business functions into alignment.

If distrust, competition and lack of input from employees exist, strategic goals are jeopardized. Morale will be low. And unbalanced work loads with unsustainable systems will produce stress for employees, which reduce creativity, enthusiasm and commitment.

An example is relying on grants alone for funding service goals without regard for strategies and systems that support ethical and sustainable workforce issues (health care, retirement and fair compensation). This means that the values trust, empathy, interdependence, and risk would be low.

Therefore, the values trust, interdependence, genuineness, empathy, risk and success addresses core principles people need to work collaboratively and to their highest potential, which translates into productivity for the organizations they serve.

One or all of these values may be named in the organization’s operational value system or not. Either way, the behaviors that support them are measurable and support a culture that nurtures ethical, quality-focused, productive, enthusiastic, and creative employees or not.

A free white paper is available at http://www.corevalues.com/ that explains the six values and behaviors that support and undermine them.

Dianne Crampton has been working with motivated leaders and their teams helping them to consistently achieve goals with high levels of collaboration and teamwork for over 20 years. She is a published author, speaker, team consultant, leadership coach and president of TIGERS Success Series. She was nominated for Inc. Magazines regional entrepreneurial award for developing a game that teaches the six values and behaviors to leaders and teams. To get more information, go to http://www.corevalues.com/.

It's Never Good to Play With the Tax-Man

Nonprofits throughout the United States are in audit season, getting ready for their 990 filings in May. This time of year always reminds me of a nonprofit I interviewed with a few years ago.

Being the kind of due diligence gal that I am, before the interview I asked for three years of audited financial statements. Financial statements give you a good snapshot of the organization such as: where the revenue comes from; what programs cost; how much is spent on administration vs. program; are there problem areas or could there be belt tightening; etc. I hope there are no potential executive directors out there that would take a job without looking at the financials. Even if the organization is in financial difficulty, you need to know that so you can intelligently decide whether or not to take the position.

I didn’t get audited statements, instead I got Quickbooks Profit and Loss statements. A part of me thought maybe the board members didn’t understand what I was asking for and I could make it clear during the course of the interview.

The interview itself went swimmingly until we turned to the subject of finance. I again, politely requested three years of audited financials. At that point I was told by the board chair that the organization, that had been in existence for over fifteen years, had never had an audit conducted. I was a bit surprised and I think I said something like “You might want to consider having an audit done.” I mentioned that it didn’t necessarily have to be every year but perhaps at least every two or three years.

I brought up Sarbanes-Oxley, the law that had been passed after the Enron scandal that was supposed to bring transparency to a corporation’s financial operations. A result of that law is that nonprofits now have stricter standards that they have to meet, such as setting up audit committees and getting audits. I was summarily told that they didn’t believe Sarbanes-Oxley required audits, it just suggested audits.

Still curious as to why there was such resistance to having an audit, I said something like “Well what about your funders or potential grantmakers?” I was told that they had never had a problem since their large donors were businesses they dealt with regularly.

Realizing I was getting nowhere, I moved on to a line item that I had questions about. That item was a type of commission they had set up with equipment suppliers, in other words, when those suppliers sold equipment as a direct result of being present at their conference or through advertising in their newsletter, the organization would receive a modest commission on the sale.
The Treasurer then informed me that they preferred not to call them commissions, but rather donations as they didn’t want to have to pay Unrelated Business Income Taxes or UBIT.

I have no clue what expression must have swept across my face, I’m sure it was odd, since I immediately visualized my having to sign a 990 that had false information in it. I stopped asking questions about the financial statement and began wrapping up the interview with “Thank you so much for your time, it was great to meet you,” or something like that.

The next day I called and removed myself from the running. It wasn’t so much that their shady practices made me nervous as it was I sensed a complete unwillingness to clean up their behavior and a resistance to my advice.

Whatever you do nonprofits, don’t play fast and loose with the Internal Revenue Service, it ain’t a good idea. There are consequences that include loss of your exemption, heavy penalties and even jail for the person who signs the 990. In simple parlance, falsifying a tax return is fraud.

While audits can make some nervous, there's nothing like getting a clean management letter. You can proudly take that to funders and members as your report card that you are managing the organization with care and responsibility. I know that smaller organizations often don’t feel they have the money to be audited every year, but certainly should make sure they have the money to be audited every couple of years. It is also highly recommended that you set up an audit committee, even if it’s only three people, just to make sure that money is being accounted for correctly and that the organization’s finances are transparent.

Managing a nonprofit, whether as the chief officer or board member, requires ethical practices and stewardship. After all, people give their money charitably in the belief that their money will be well spent.

Bunnie

contact Bunnie at info@riedelcommunications.com