News and Views

IT Without IT, Part 3: Operating Systems and Office Software

Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:00:00 GMT

by Ero Gray - This is one post in a continuing series aimed at nonprofit organizations with limited access to IT staff. The advice and opinions here will tend to be most useful to small and startup nonprofits, which often need to make IT decisions and accomplish IT tasks despite not having qualified folks to help. It should be assumed that all suggestions here are my attempt to recommend the simplest/easiest/most effective options for most offices. Your office may be quite different (or it may not even be an office). Also, as I'll frequently note, IT staff are necessary for any organization to function for long. Links to all posts in the series follow this post.

Now that we've talked about computers, let's talk about basic software. The most important is the Operating System. This is what runs when you start up the computer, and provides the background for everything else that happens. I'm going to only discuss Windows, for reasons discussed in a previous post. Email me if you feel argumentative about this (or anything else), I'm happy to discuss.

Most of our client base currently uses Windows XP, which is much less demanding in its hardware requirements than Windows 7. Vista is pretty much already obsolete-- if you're not already using Vista, don't start. Windows XP is nearing the end of its useful life (it's been around a long time) but it's still a mature and very useable platform. Windows 7, still pretty new, shows signs of being a great operating system, but won't work well on old computers and may provide some compatibility issues. Here at CRE we've begun moving toward Windows 7, but slowly. Note that in most cases you'll want to make sure you're getting the 'Pro' version of Windows; even if you don't use the features that differentiate this from the home version now, you may need to later.

Operating system software is available from Techsoup for startlingly low prices; XP downloads are available at $8 per license, and Windows 7 is only $9 per head. The approval process at Techsoup, which you'll need to do before ordering, can be tricky and time-consuming, but their staff are helpful and patient: give them a phone call and you're likely to get a real person on the line. Note that most software donors (including Microsoft) institute strict restrictions on how many software products you can buy, and when. Some research should be done if you wind up planning a purchase; if you feel overwhelmed by this, ask Techsoup staff for help.

Installing an operating system usually isn't too tricky; most new computers come with one preinstalled and even installing or reinstalling from scratch largely involves clicking 'Next' and 'OK'. If you've never done it before, though, you may want to borrow an IT person to be on hand or at least on call, just in case you see question marks. You'll want to set up Windows with a password-protected Administrator account and a password-protected User account (name it the job title of the primary user, i.e. Development Assistant or Outreach Worker). Before you do much else, go into the Control Panel and change your User account to make it Limited. You'll want to do any installing or uninstalling of programs or hardware, logged in as Administrator, and everything else as the limited User. Write down your passwords. Don't lose them. Don't share them.

While we're at it: don't share your software. It's very common for Windows discs or other software discs to get passed around and wind up at the brother-in-law's house. This is trouble waiting to happen for a couple reasons: 1) Microsoft doesn't like it when donated license keys find their way onto the internet; 2) You will need those discs again. Once you're done with it, lock it up in your IT Cabinet (now's a good time to designate one).

Once you've got a computer and an operating system (and, as stated previously), I'm assuming this is a Windows operating system), you'll need other software. For most staff, all you need to purchase is Microsoft Office ($20 per license at Techsoup. That's really it. Anything else they need is going to be available for free. In fact, to be truthful, almost everything Microsoft Office does is also available free, either via the ever-evolving Google Docs (which I'm using to type this, and which is a great tool for working collaboratively) or via a free downloadable package called Open Office. For a measly $20 per license, though, most organizations might as well buy Microsoft Office, if only because it's what everyone's used to. Make sure to plan this and any other TechSoup purchases ahead of time.

One exception is Adobe Acrobat: it's very helpful in most cases to have an Acrobat Professional license in the house, so that you can edit PDF documents (the Acrobat reader, as you probably know, is a free download). The TechSoup price on Acrobat Professional is pretty reasonable, and most small organizations will only need one copy. While you're at it, you might also want to look at the Adobe Creative Suites: some organizations have good reasons for purchasing stuff like Photoshop and Dreamweaver. It's still expensive even at TechSoup's low price-- but if you need it you need it. (And if you're not sure, I'd argue that you really don't need it).

Now that we've covered Operating Systems, next week we'll talk about Antivirus Software.

The introduction to the series can be read here:

http://www.crenyc.org/_blog/News_and_Views/post/IT_without_IT/

Last week's installment (IT Without IT, Part 2: Choosing and Acquiring Computers, Continued) can be read here:

http://www.crenyc.org/_blog/News_and_Views/post/Choosing_Computers_Continued/

Executive Assistant – Community Resource Exchange

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:15:00 GMT

After 30 years led by its founder, the organization has made a leadership transition and is now led by two Co-Directors who have served as Deputy Directors of CRE for a number of years. The Co-Directors are looking for an energetic and conscientious Executive Assistant to support both of them in their management of a full range of activities in program and operations. The Executive Assistant will play a key role as the initial point of contact for staff, board and all external stakeholders and will be responsible for helping to coordinate and organize the work, materials and schedules to support each Co-Director in her respective areas of responsibility, including program planning and oversight, development and marketing, internal operations and Board support.

Community Resource Exchange (CRE) is a New York City-based nonprofit management consulting firm that helps nonprofit organizations become stronger and more effective in advancing social and economic justice. Through workshops and learning cohorts, one-to-one consulting relationships and coaching, CRE works to build the ability of nonprofit organizations to attract and manage their resources for results and to make informed decisions during challenging times. We assist organizations with financial management, board development, fundraising, planning, personnel management, leadership development and everyday problem solving, and we are committed to serving target organizations regardless of their ability to pay by arranging for third party payors for our services.

Specific Responsibilities:

Serve as the point person for the Executive Office, for all internal and external inquiries and requests.
Provide all necessary administrative support to the Executive Office, including:
- Coordinating the schedules of the Co-Directors
- Organizing the flow of all materials going into and out of the Executive Office, assisting with both hardcopy & electronic filing, correspondence and dissemination of materials
- Providing support in the preparation and follow-up of meetings with Management Team, staff and board, as well as clients, funders and other external stakeholders
- As needed, assist with preparation of reports, presentations, minutes and other print and electronic communications
- Provide coordination and administrative support to CRE’s Management Team, as needed, including scheduling of meetings, preparation of agendas, occasional meeting notes and follow-up activities.
Coordinate the operations of CRE’s Board of Directors, including:
- Managing communications with the leadership and members of CRE’s Board of Directors
- Scheduling and coordinating preparation of materials for quarterly meetings of the Board and meetings with Board committees and individual members
- Providing administrative support to the Board of Directors, as needed.
- Extend the ability of the Co-Directors to accomplish tasks by providing programmatic support, including research, coordination of specific projects, reporting, and interface with staff and external stakeholders during project implementation. For example, currently, the Executive Office is engaged with a group of volunteer consultants who donate their time and expertise to nonprofits. The Executive Assistant would manage CRE’s relationship with this group and coordinate internally to engage other staff members in the work.
Serve as a member of the Development Team and carry out assignments as assigned by the Co-Directors in conjunction with the Director of Development.
Provide back up and support, as needed, to the Front Desk staff and Program Assistants, assuring coverage during staff absences and pinch hitting during busy periods.

Essential skills:

Superior writing and highly professional communication skills.
Strong interpersonal skills, including politeness, tact and grace, while dealing with a range of players and personalities.
High proficiency in Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Google Apps a must.
- Ability to troubleshoot and problem-solve.
- Ability to manage a portfolio of programmatic and administrative work effectively – to project manage, multi-task and prioritize - with confidence, judgment and an attention to details.
- Strong analytical skills, research skills

Personal qualities:

Interest in and commitment to CRE’s mission.
Highly organized, reliable, thoughtful.
Demonstrates personal initiative, independent reasoning, and motivation for high performance.
Comfortable interfacing with public officials, funders, donors, and other executives.
Good judgment and discretion in handling issues inherent to the Executive Office.
Able to anticipate needs, problem solve, act quickly.
Friendly personality, flexible, willing to help out when needed, committed to collaborating with and supporting others.

Requirements:

College degree minimum.
At least 3 - 4 years of work experience supporting administrative and project management activities.
Sense of humor.
Strong references.

To Apply:

We strongly recommend you submit a cover letter outlining why you think you might be a good fit for this job in addition to your resume, two references and salary requirements.

By E-mail – execassistant@crenyc.org or

By Fax – 212-616-4994 or

By Mail – Attn: Exec. Assistant Search, 42 Broadway, 20^th Floor, New York, NY - 10004

CRE is an equal opportunity employer

IT Without IT, Part 2: Choosing and Acquiring Computers, Continued

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:32:00 GMT

By Ero Gray - This is one post in a continuing series aimed at nonprofit organizations with limited access to IT staff. The advice and opinions here will tend to be most useful to small and startup nonprofits, which often need to make IT decisions and accomplish IT tasks despite not having qualified folks to help. It should be assumed that all suggestions here are my attempt to recommend the simplest/easiest/most effective options for most offices. Your office may be quite different (or it may not even be an office). Also, as I'll frequently note, IT staff are necessary for any organization to function for long.

Last week's entry, IT Without IT, Part 1: Choosing and Acquiring Computers, can be read here:
http://www.crenyc.org/_blog/News_and_Views/post/Choosing_and_Acquiring_Computers/

A lot of our clients wind up with donated computers that are agonizingly slow, or hang on to computers long after they've become antiques. It can be hard to know whether they're worth keeping or not. It's hard to generalize: smart and proactive IT staff can keep computers useful for a decade, while some machines are useless the moment their warranty expires. In general a five-year replacement plan is reasonable even for cash-strapped organizations, and if you've got a stack of computers with "Works with Windows 2000" stickers, you're probably not going to get much value out of them. But this, like so many other things, depends on your needs as an organization.

Evaluating PC hardware in detail is way beyond the scope of this article. One easy shortcut to guesstimating the usefulness of a computer, however, is its RAM. RAM, or memory, is the amount of quick-access brainpower available for calculations, and is the single statistic that will tell you the most about how fast a computer seems. In a Windows XP computer, you will want at a bare minimum 512MB of memory. That's a bare, unpleasant, takes-five-minutes-to-open-a-document, minimum. Twice that, or 1GB, is reasonable, and 2GB is usually great. In a Vista or Windows 7 computer you'll want 1GB at a bare minimum, and preferably 2GB. More is always better. Other components matter too: CPUs are what actually do the math, and it's good to have hard drive space for storage. But if you see a computer with 4GB of RAM, it'll probably get the job done regardless of what else is going on. (Don't get the RAM number confused with hard drive specs, which represent the amount of long-term data storage, and which tend to run in the hundreds of GB these days.

Printers are inexpensive these days but often you get what you pay for. Never buy inkjet printers; they're a scam designed to make you buy overpriced ink. For office use, you want laser printers. Personal printers can be as cheap as $125, especially if they won't see much use. However, at this price point you're mostly looking at made-to-break stuff; don't expect it to last unless you're willing to spend quite a bit more. Known name brands (HP, Samsung, IBM, Xerox, etc.) are usually reliable but not always: manufacturing trends mean pretty much everyone makes some really poor-quality stuff, and which model is which changes from year to year. There's no real shortcut to this other than reading reviews and/or asking for recommendations from folks with personal experience. Do, however, look up the price of toner before ordering a cheap printer: after a year the toner price can erase any savings.

One final note: when you get rid of computers, be aware that they're chock full of toxic chemicals and can't just be thrown away. Per Scholas (www.perscholas.org ) provides a great recycling service, and most communities and some stores have occasional recycling events, but if that doesn't work, sometimes just putting an ad in the free section of Craigslist can get the job done. Make sure to erase all data first (A good quick guide to erasing a hard drive properly can be found here: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/how-to-really-erase-a-hard-drive/129 )

Next week: IT Without IT, Part 3: Operating Systems

When and How to Create Nonprofit Board Committees

Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:15:00 GMT

A committee is simply a group that can carry out tasks on behalf of the full Board. A committee is often a subgroup of the Board itself, but it can also include non-Board members such as outside experts or even volunteers.

A standing committee is a long-term committee, usually designated in the organization’s by-laws, which carries out an ongoing responsibility of the Board such as financial oversight or fundraising.
An ad-hoc committee, or task force, is formed to perform a specific, time-limited function such as revising the by-laws or planning a special event.

The primary reason for forming a committee is efficiency. Multiple committees can focus simultaneously on their respective areas of work, with final decisions made by the full Board on the basis of the work done in a committee.

For the Board and any committee structure you develop to function effectively, there must be a degree of trust and familiarity among Board members, and each of them must possess a fair amount of knowledge about the organization. When someone on the Board says, “Maybe a couple of folks could work on this in time for the next Board meeting,” you’ve arrived at the right time to create a committee.

There are four crucial steps to establishing a committee that functions well.

Clear purpose. It is critical to define the purpose of the committee, including why its work can’t be done by the full Board, then to translate that purpose into concrete tasks with timelines and specific anticipated outcomes.
Strong leadership. A committee Chair leads the committee. This includes helping to translate the committee’s purpose into an action plan, managing its members and keeping them focused on the work to be accomplished, and connecting with the larger Board to ensure that the committee’s work supports and enhances the full Board’s agenda. A committee is as effective as its leader.
Preset meeting times. To the extent you can set up an advance schedule of meeting dates and times, or at least agree to the next meeting date and time before adjourning any meeting, your committee will have avoided a major obstacle to functioning well.
Added value. Nothing is more frustrating to a committee than to spend time and effort researching, discussing and coming to conclusions and recommendations for the full Board, and then to have the full Board re-hash all the details in a Board meeting. To avoid this problem:
1. Help all Board members recognize the importance of trusting committees.
2. Ensure that the Board Chair keeps a handle on discussions at Board meetings, and, when necessary, sends a matter back to a committee for further work rather than taking up the full Board’s time.
3. Make sure the committee provides the full Board with enough information along with their recommendations so that a Board can make informed decisions.

IT Without IT, Part 1: Choosing and Acquiring Computers

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:51:00 GMT

Last week's intro to the series can be read here:

http://www.crenyc.org/_blog/News_and_Views/post/IT_without_IT/

Let's start this series by talking about computers.

I'm going to upset a lot of people by ignoring everything except Windows PCs. I absolutely recommend Macs for personal use. You pay more but you get real quality. They're very rarely found in nonprofit offices however. Unfortunately if you're using Macs most of my advice will be useless to you... but then again, you'll need less advice in the first place, so I don't feel too bad. Linux doesn't really have a nontechnical user base at all yet. So I'll basically be assuming for this series of blog posts that everyone's using Windows, because that's what I've seen in use. Personally, I hope to see a general move away from Windows, but I don't think the time has come quite yet and this isn't really the place to push for it.

About choosing computers: the actual machines on the market continually get faster and more powerful, while what we do with them stays the same.The problem is that newer software is less efficient. So each year's computer is more powerful in theory, and about the same in practice, and costs about the same as always. This is pretty much an industry-wide scam of epic proportions but there's not a whole lot we can do about it.

What we can do, as nonprofits and consumers, is to step off the treadmill and make the most of being (a little bit) behind the times. We can use last-year's model, and save money, and our computers will work just fine. I'm going to go out on a limb and name a ballpark price: you really don't ever need to spend more than $800 for a desktop PC (including a decent flat-screen monitor), or for a quality laptop. (A half-hour ago I purchased an excellent laptop for one of our consultants, at a total price (including carrying case) of under $600). Quality PCs can be had for under $500, though I tend to aim a bit higher for better quality. Netbooks (low-powered laptops made for web use) can run as low as $300, and be reasonably functional (but tiny, which means small screens and small keyboards). The lowest prices will almost always be online, at manufacturer websites or reputable web retailers. Google is always your friend: it is easy to compare prices online.

Laptops are more expensive than equivalent desktop PCs, and they age poorly. Screens crack, hard drives fail, batteries stop charging. For this reason most budget-conscious nonprofits gravitate toward desktop PCs. But for a lot of mobile users laptops are an important tool. There are really no shortcuts here to picking what's good: consider RAM (more about this next week), overall weight (even light ones get heavy after a block or two), screen size (directly correlated to weight), and build quality/workmanship. I recommend reading reviews online, especially at a reputable website like CNET. A lot of what you'll find online if you google a product, will be reprinted manufacturer press releases, or uninformed-consumer reviews by cranky folks with axes to grind. Take everything you read with a grain of salt, but skimming many sources can often give you a good idea of the product's value.

For folks really short on funds, allow me to introduce one of the greatest tech resources available for nonprofits: Techsoup, a great organization serving technology needs for the sector. TechSoup offers donated software and hardware for sale at ridiculously low prices; it's possible at the moment to purchase several quite serviceable PCs via TechSoup for just under $200 apiece. You can also buy from the terrific Bronx nonprofit Per Scholas, who recycle, refurbish and resell computers while training youth: their basic workstation package at the moment is $225, and laptops are $300. These computers won't make your staff feel high-tech. They will however allow you to work on office documents and use email, which is almost always all you need.

More about Choosing and Acquiring Computers next week.

Presenting a Polished Pitch: Developing a Strong Case Statement

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:37:00 GMT

The core element of any successful fundraising or development program is your group’s case statement. A case statement is a brief document, no more than two pages or so that makes your “case”: it explains why potential funders (institutional or individual) should support your organization. A case statement informs your proposals or appeal letters to donors. To build a strong claim for funding, an organization typically tries to answer the following questions:

Why does our agency exist?
What are the specific problems that we have taken on, and who will benefit from our work?
What methods will we use to combat these problems?
What resources do we have that will help us achieve our objectives, such as staff, Board leadership, volunteers, community alliances and other support?
How much money will be needed to meet our goals? Where does our financial support come from now?
If you have gone through the program planning process and conducted a needs assessment, many of the answers to these questions will already be at hand. For example, the question “Why does our agency exist?” is really another way of asking “What audience and need will our agency address?” The question “What methods will we use to combat these problems?” can be easily answered if you have already outlined clear objectives and identified related activities.

Another approach to developing a case statement is to try to anticipate – and answer – the questions potential donors are most likely to ask.

If you are just starting a nonprofit organization, your first large donations will come from people or institutions acting on faith, making an investment in your group based on your vision and your case statement. To raise their confidence (and your own), support your case statement with reasonable projections of your budget and income. Be prepared to answer questions such as, “What will you do if you can’t raise all the money that you need?” Show that you’ve already begun the process of researching and contacting potential funding sources. By listing who’s already contributed money, materials and time, you will show those early donor prospects that others have already given your project a stamp of approval.

Your completed case statement should be used as the basis for all your fundraising and recruitment material, including proposals, invitations to join the Board, and letters to founding donors. This ensures that everyone in the organization is conveying the same basic message to those they contact.

I.T. without I.T.

Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:49:00 GMT

By Ero Gray - Finding money to pay for technology, and especially to pay IT staff, is a perpetual problem for many nonprofits, especially those whose budgets are on the small side. The plain fact is that it's relatively easy to come by a grant or donation to provide a few computers, but it's often difficult to fundraise for the personnel costs involved in getting an IT pro to set up computers or software, and forget about maintaining them for your program staff, once they're in use, and once you start having problems with them.

Paying expensive IT consultants for maintenance can be a real drain on the general ledger, and finding a good IT consultant in the first place can be exasperatingly difficult. But while computers and software are expensive, personnel costs are far pricier, and when systems stop working, your staff stops working too. It's hard to prove effectiveness to funders when your spreadsheets are written in pencil.

CRE consultants often observe variations on a theme: small nonprofits working hard, on computers and networks that are hardly working.

Unfortunately, it's pretty much impossible to get around the need for expertise; if you don't have at least a little bit of access to qualified and knowledgeable IT staff, you're pretty much going to have broken systems sooner or later. The tools we use in modern offices are complex; maintenance is required, and staff members often need assistance. However, there are some things you can do to make the most out of not very much, and my intent in the following series of blog posts is to help executive directors and other managers of small nonprofits know enough about common IT topics to help make good decisions. This won't mean you can do without IT staff, but with any luck it will help you assess IT decisions a little better, even when IT staff aren't around, and perhaps help you communicate with IT staff more effectively when they're available.

The overview is simple enough: you want systems that are effective, stable, and easy to use. This doesn't seem like too much to ask, right? However, the specifics can get tricky, especially when the only help you can afford is from your geeky son-in-law or a grumpy consultant who comes once a month and doesn't like people. So I'll be addressing what makes computer systems effective; what makes computer systems stable; and what you can do to ensure that they're easy to use. These, to my mind, are what’s important about IT systems: effectiveness, stability, ease of use.

At this point you may be asking yourself, didn't I leave out inexpensive? Well, yes and no. Inexpensive is important, but effectiveness, stability and ease of use will save you so much money in the long run that they really should be considered top priority. I'll point out ways to save money where I'm able, but overall I'll be focused on the big picture.

So, to start with the obvious question: what makes for effectiveness in IT systems?

The easiest answer is this: IT systems are effective insofar as they serve your mission.

More practically, this means you want systems that you don't have to spend too much time taking care of; that are appropriate to your needs, and that require little as little maintenance as possible.

Every organization has different needs. Your mission and program are (hopefully) unique, at least in your community. Your staff, inevitably, are unique individuals too, with an ever-changing set of skills and motivations. Your office is going to be a little different from every other office, and what you use your computers for will be a little different as a result. So to some extent I'm going to make generalizations here in the hope that you'll be able to apply them to your specific case. Do remember that your specific case is what counts.

Let's look at the types of things we use computer systems for.

We write documents and store and share those documents.

We send email.

We track and budget our finances.

We track our program and measure effectiveness.

We track donors and fundraising.

We access the internet.

Out of necessity, I'm going to divide this discussion into individual blog posts, by topic, which will cover the above and more:

Choosing and acquiring computers, printers, basic software
Networking, the internet, and communications
Email Document collaboration and backups;
Security, viruses, and malware
Financial software
Donor databases
Client and program tracking databases.

Next week: IT Without IT, Part 1: Choosing and acquiring computers, printers, and basic software.

Why do a Needs Assessment?

Tue, 06 Jul 2010 19:57:00 GMT

In plain language, a needs assessment will help you determine whether your proposed work is truly necessary. It is important to know this before you begin: fundraising is a challenge under any circumstances, but it will be impossible if your organization does not address a real need that other groups do not. A needs assessment is an opportunity to ask yourself (as others will ask you later): Why now and why you?

The purpose of a needs assessment is to:

Understand the extent of the problem.
Gather the information about all the services that are available to your target population.
Identify the gaps in the services available to your target population.

A needs assessment is also a great opportunity to involve current or potential program participants in the planning process. Ask them about their needs and about what gaps they see in the services available to them. This will help you design a program that is truly responsive to your target population.

Whether your data collection is formal or informal, at the end you should be able to answer four questions:

What do the individuals who are part of your target community identify as their key needs?
What needs are not being met by other organizations serving this target population?
Does the need you have identified fit within your organization’s mission or statement of purpose as captured in your incorporation papers?
Do you have within your group of skills, experiences, and connections to the target audience that will enable you to address this need effectively?

Use this chart to guide you through the process of a needs assessment. The completed chart should be used to inform your group’s choices about its programs and to form the basis for its case statement for funding.

Preparing for Succession

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:14:00 GMT

by Valyrie Laedlein-A search on the internet on the topic of succession planning yields considerable guidance and commentary for and from the corporate sector. Just this week, Forbes.com ran a story on the Chief Information Officer for Equinix, who has been with the company since 2008 and is already preparing his successor, even though the CIO has no intention of leaving anytime soon. Raising questions related to who will follow the CEO, the COO, the CIO or any other company’s leader is not considered impolitic in that sector. Indeed, it is expected and seen as exercising good business judgment. Grooming rising talent for executive positions is not disrespectful of those currently holding those positions. Failing to do so is considered irresponsible and short-sighted.

Alas, this is not often so in our sector. Growing talent from within is not a strong suit among nonprofits, and a number of reasons contribute to that.

Predictably, resource constraints make it difficult to consistently practice steps that develop talent. Built-in redundancy is difficult to achieve and has only gotten harder with the budget cuts of recent years. Cross-training requires some degree of flexibility in terms of staff time use, time that is particularly challenging to find in the current economic climate, as schedules and positions get cut and demand for services grows. Ditto for any other forms of professional development that would cultivate staff skills and experience to prepare middle managers for assuming more senior leadership roles.

The limited size of many nonprofits also makes techniques such as cross-training and career-laddering hard to implement. Building growth opportunities to prepare talent for senior leadership is tough in organizations under $2 million with limited middle and upper management tiers.

Finally, within what we all have come to know as “nonprofit culture,” we are, I believe less accustomed to thinking of staff members as interchangeable assets to be developed for the organization’s use. Lower compensation rates constrain us from demanding the overtime expected of staff in private law or consulting firms, which allows for more time in which to mentor and train and acquire professional experience. And the corporate “up or out” mentality is atypical in our world that prides itself on flatter hierarchies and more humane work environments. While Boards of Directors are often populated with representatives of the business world, it is only with reluctance (and dread) that most Boards open the question of when and how to prepare for the founder or Executive Director’s departure – in large part because it seems to suggest disrespect, a desire to “push the leader out the door,” or fear that it might even trigger the leader’s departure.

We need to get over this – and organizations who do demonstrate thoughtful staff retention, leadership development, and planned succession need to be recognized as models for how the sector can sustain the impending “leadership deficit” anticipated over the next ten years (see Tierney’s article of 2006).

Indeed, Community Resource Exchange has a Board of Directors who launched thinking about leadership succession for CRE a few years ago, even as its founder/director remained in place. And prior to the Board’s planning for executive succession, it had been an established practice to grow talent from within, with all of CRE’s program directors developed from among its ranks of staff consultants. In an environment that is highly conscious of time use and the maximizing of “billable” (= direct service) hours, CRE maintains a commitment to staff development, has challenged staff to rise to increasingly demanding responsibilities and roles, and has been rewarded with a high rate of retention of senior level talent.

Today CRE announces news that would suggest that this approach has worked. CRE’s founder/director, Fran Barrett, is announcing that she has accepted a position as Director of Capacity Building at The Atlantic Philanthropies – a position that will allow her 30 years of experience serving nonprofits and building CRE to be applied to the development of a significant new program at one of the world’s most influential foundations. Because of its preparation and planning for succession, CRE’s Board of Directors is also able to announce its decision to appoint my colleague, Holly Delany Cole, and myself as successors to Fran in co-leading CRE. We assume these new positions with a combined total of 35 years of experience at CRE and 7 years co-leading at the Deputy level. A program/organizational planning initiative that was spearheaded by us several months ago is underway and will provide guidance in terms of direction for the organization. And our Board members and we have years of experience working in partnership at the committee level, on special initiatives, and in Board meetings.

As one of our Board members pointed out at the meeting in which the Board voted to appoint us, there is something important for the sector to learn from this process for leadership succession. This blog post is the first to suggest what a few of those lessons might be.

Don’t be stalled by sensitivities about succession; address them with needed sensitivity, then move on to discuss succession long before the announcement of a departure is in sight.
Create opportunities for committed staff to develop and test their potential, and to cultivate their skills (both technical and leadership skills) and their perspective on leading.
Foster the development of relationships between “next level” staff leadership and your Board members and leadership, as well as with external stakeholders.

Keep an eye on this column for updates on this transition and what can be learned by the sector about the challenges of succession, co-leadership, and – now with our experience - executive directorship!

Dear CRE Friends

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:20:00 GMT

I have some very exciting news. After thirty years as Executive Director of Community Resource Exchange, I am handing the reins over to our two star-quality deputy directors, Holly Delany Cole and Valyrie Laedlein.

Holly and Val have shared leadership with me over the last ten years, and the board has endorsed their team leadership as Co-Directors effective July 1, 2010.

The CRE board asked Holly, Val and I to begin succession planning conversations over two years ago, and throughout that process I came to fully appreciate how lucky CRE is to have these two dedicated leaders in the wings. I am happy to leave CRE in their competent hands as I take on the title of Director of Capacity Building at The Atlantic Philanthropies. Atlantic's joint commitment to capacity building and social justice, makes it a perfect place to bring all that I have learned from CRE's clients and staff over the years.

This has come about sort of quickly, and could never have happened without the extraordinary leadership of the CRE Board, especially the current Chair, Patricia Hewitt, and the former Chair, Anne Hess. This seamless transition is all to the credit of a well-prepared staff and a flexible and facile board of directors. I will be leaving CRE officially as of June 30, and starting at Atlantic on September 1st.

You haven't heard the last of me. We are planning a 30^th Anniversary event in March 2011, and I'm hoping that all of our paths will cross there. I can reached at CRE through June.

Fran

Making Change

Thu, 27 May 2010 16:39:00 GMT

by Valyrie Laedlein - I spend a fair amount of my time working with nonprofit Executive Directors (ED) and Boards on workplans intended to make change happen within the Board of Directors. Much has been written on leading a change effort and managing change, but something I came across today made great sense in the context of some recent client challenges.

Earlier this week I had one conversation with an ED who said his Board had done a lot of work with a national consultant (for whom I have a great deal of respect), but that he now needed help making sure that the change they’d discussed and planned for would “stick.”

In another conversation with different ED yesterday, the client raved about the strides her Board had made in functioning differently after a recent Board “retreat” that CRE had done with her board – and she asked us to repeat it with those who couldn’t attend in order to make sure “everyone would begin to change.”

The desire or need for change – and for sustaining change - is not exclusive to the Board room by any means. To any Executive Director struggling with a less than effective Board, it seems to be one of the most challenging venues, however. So what does it take to really make change, lead change, and make it “stick”?

In Chip and Dan Heath’s new book: Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard, reviewed by Dan S. Cohen in the Stanford Social Innovation Review (Spring 2010), the brothers Heath suggest that successful change in any context is dependent on fundamental changes in people’s behavior. Organizations, management teams, boards of directors - and the individuals within them – don’t transform without changes in how individuals behave.

And how do individuals begin to change their behavior and then sustain those changes?

The authors of Switch suggest that three factors drive changes in behavior. These factors, while they seem obvious, provide useful insights for how any of us might make change happen.

The first is logic and rationality: What is our reason for change? How do we understand the importance and urgency for change? As Executive Director or Board Chair, how have you brought your Board members along in thinking through the need to do things differently and to bring about a different outcome? This speaks to the importance of taking time to define a commonly shared “end point,” so that the individuals whose behavior must change can see the logic and reasoning behind why that end goal is important and why their changed behavior is an element in achieving it.

The second is emotion: How motivated are we to get to a different place, and what is driving that motivation that extends beyond our logical reasoning? How have you tapped into something deeper or more instinctual in your Board members that will spur them to action? This element speaks to Board members’ passion for and personal connection to your mission, as well as the emotions that underlie our sense of a personal connection to each other. Relationships among Board members, concern about letting others down, the emotional rewards of working with others to accomplish something together, are all powerful motivators for action and change (see blog of March 8, 2010). To the extent that we create the opportunities for Board members to internalize their connection to our mission and to build relationships with those Board and staff who share that mission, we infuse the change process with the emotion needed to sustain it.

The final factor is environment: What barriers to change are likely to obstruct progress? By contrast, what can we put in place to sustain and encourage the changed behaviors we want to see? How can we aid everyone in being more aware of the progress attained as well as the path ahead? Environment, of course, encompasses those things over which we have little control – the economy; regulatory decisions; clients’ needs – all of which impact the potential and momentum for change (positively or negatively). There are environmental elements, however, which a Director or Board Chair can affect and can use to support changes in behavior, such elements as: the nature and level of information shared; whether meetings are structured to allow for and encourage new ways of behaving; and the nature of the working relationship between Board and staff.

While the book’s authors have a much more creative way of presenting these factors (which involve analogies to elephant riding… just to whet your curiosity), even the simplest extraction of themes give us much to consider in terms of how we, as leaders, inspire, motivate and support change – within ourselves, as well as among our colleagues. Disciplining ourselves to consider how we balance these three factors – logic, emotion and environment – is a valuable tool for making and sustaining changes within our Board, within our organizations, and even within our communities.

Rapid Response to Support the Sector

Tue, 25 May 2010 13:38:00 GMT

by Holly Delany Cole - A recent report by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Ph.D. and Cameron Smith, funded by the Philanthropic Collaborative, found that Foundations responded in “a targeted and timely manner”, with grants appropriately directed to recession relief to the hardest-hit parts of the country.

The study reports that while in 2008, foundations suffered a record loss of 17% of their assets, on average they only diminished their giving to nonprofit organizations by 8.4% in 2009. Overall, the greatest increases in tactical giving by foundations were seen in localities with high mortgage delinquency rates, as well as those with high unemployment rates.

In New York City, we can attest first hand to the thoughtful and rapid response of many funders during the recession. New York City’s nonprofits have a strong philanthropic tie to the financial sector, so the shock waves that occurred on Wall Street were hard felt in the third sector.

In December 2008, CRE held a town hall meeting to gather nonprofit leaders and hear directly from them about what obstacles had resulted from the economic recession, and think of proactive ways to confront these challenges. Listening to the needs of those on the ground were foundation officers, government officials and of course all of us at CRE. This town hall helped inform our ‘Hard Times Offerings’, aimed at helping preserve safety-net services in communities of need especially due to the dire circumstances they faced in the recession.

As it turns out many of the listener attendees to our Town Hall felt equally inspired to support the sector in new and innovative ways.

The Staten Island Foundation partnered with us to hold another Town Hall Meeting for members of the Staten Island nonprofit community. The result of the Staten Island Town Hall gathering was a targeted grant cycle with emergency matching grants coupled with a novel series of leadership training roundtables for the benefit of all of the organizations. The targeted and thoughtful initiative by the Staten Island Foundation serves as an example of how local foundations can support their grantees beyond financial resources.

Another innovative approach to supporting NYC nonprofits can be seen through the United Way of New York City and the New York Community Trust’s funding of the Executive Director Hotline. The Executive Director Hotline is a free management assistance resource for nonprofit leaders and proves immediate strategic advice, information and referral, guidance and coaching! Since the inception of the Hotline in March 2009, CRE has advised and/or directed more than 150 nonprofit leaders to specific resources they needed to solve a problem or be more effective. CRE Advice Line is 917-344-6678 and is connected to ‘311’ in New York City.

Lastly, the New York Community Trust gave $8.76 million in early 2009 to help New Yorkers hurt by the recession for food, emergency loans, financial counseling and housing assistance. This proactive targeted grant making helped support the social safety net in New York City and assist the most vulnerable New Yorkers. As a grantee of the New York Community Trust’s initiative CRE developed and offered “Leading Through Difficult Times” workshops attended by 400 staff of 66 agencies affected by the recession, including 47 agencies new to CRE. We also worked with membership groups to such as City Harvest and their network of emergency food providers and the New York Immigrant Coalition to ensure safety net organizations had the tools they need to weather the fiscal crisis.

The study above only touches upon what we at CRE have seen first hand – a number of foundations have, without hesitation, stepped up to support the nonprofit sector using thoughtful innovation and tactical financial resource allocation.

The ED’s Lament: How Do I Get My Board to Perform?

Fri, 21 May 2010 14:34:00 GMT

by Mohan Sikka - Executive Directors frequently tell me that they are dissatisfied with the performance of their boards.

“How do I hold them accountable for their jobs?” they say. “They raise hardly any money. They expect me to manage the organization and do the development work. They ask many questions, but they don't deliver on their commitments.” If you are the ED of a struggling non-profit, you may find this frustration all too familiar.

After the ED has calmed down, I try to help them step back and look at the framework through which they are assessing their board. It is framework, quite often, of staff accountability and performance management. In this framework, people have job descriptions. You manage them. They meet their goals, or suffer the consequences. They are accountable to you

But boards are not staff. They are not paid employees. And in a strange twist of corporate law, you as the ED are accountable to them. Also, as Mark Light has written in The Strategic Board, volunteer boards are perennially challenged by lack of continuity, lack of knowledge readiness, and varying composition and skills. If you think about it, what is the tangible consequence of “non-performance” for a board member? As the ED you can’t “fire” them. You can advocate for adding another, hopefully higher performing board member, but you can’t literally replace a board member as you would a staff member. Their leaving gains you little.

There is another way. Some of these ideas are best practices that Bill Ryan articulated in Governance as Leadership, and others have looked at, and some are from CRE's own experience of working with hundreds of boards over the last 30 years. Here goes:

Vetting is important. Before your board brings someone new on, try to understand what draws them to your organization (and to you). Relationship and trust building have to start from the first encounter. If this is not someone you or your board can imagine having a close professional and value-based partnership with, say thanks, but no thanks.

Partnership is key. Sure, they are your “boss”. Sure, sometimes it seems you’re their boss. When power dynamics are fluid in this way, the best relationship model is partnership. Would you make demands of a partner without setting up the groundwork for the relationship? How would you engage with, set expectations with, a partner? When would you communicate with them? Only when something is wrong, or when you need something?

The board has to love you, the ED. Think of the board as your support system. Your trusted advisors. Your ambassadors. If you’re lucky, your fellow fundraisers and door-openers. Respect and appreciate all the things they do, big and small. Disgruntlement is a bad place from which to move the relationship. Disappointment is too easy to fall into. Ideally, they are doing this work because they care – for you as the executive leader, for your clients and for the mission of the organization.

Make the board experience worthwhile and engaging. Work with your board chair to enliven board meetings. Business should be kept to short, critical discussions and key decisions. Unless there is a crisis, think “consent agendas.” Much pre-work and information can be shared off-line or in committees. Bring your program staff to meetings so board members can stay in touch with the work and accomplishments of the organization. Make time for strategic and generative, big-picture conversations: Who are we? Who do we want to reach with our work? How do we want to impact them in the broadest sense? How is the world changing around us? How should we adapt to these changes? These are discussion starters that may not lead to short-term actions or decisions, but they do keep the board involved in a meaningful and enlivening way – particularly around issues of mission, organizational identity and social value.

Invite the board into participation. Now we get to fundraising, and notice it’s point #5. Demands, shaming, rigid performance evaluations of board members, finger pointing, last minute appeals, “you haven't done your job” messages -- I haven't seen these strategies be sustainable in the long run. What works better is engaging the board around the opportunities that lie ahead and having board leaders invite their peers, individually and collectively, to do their part in meeting these opportunities. Ask board members what they can sign up for, given their resources and even their constraints. Be prepared to provide structured ways for them to participate, and give them choices: who can go to a donor meeting with you; or help with event planning; or organize a house party; or personalize appeal letters. And think about support and respectful follow up as a normal part of staff's job. If you’ve done #1-4 above, this work will become easier, and you’ll finally start getting real buy-in around raising money.

Evidence of Doing Good

Mon, 17 May 2010 16:03:00 GMT

by Louisa Hackett - For those of us trying to make the world a better place, figuring out a way to study, understand and assess the interventions we make is critical to improving the work we do.

Being accountable for the money we spend by knowing whether our programs work is a necessary burden. Yet, given the trade off between spending money on evaluation versus delivering an essential service, the research questions we ask better be relevant, the data collected better be valid and – if we are really trying to create positive social change – we better be open to hearing what the data says, good or bad.

The New Yorker magazine's May 17 issue profiles an MIT professor, Esther Duflo, who believes something can be done about poverty. She also believes that data is needed to understand the effectiveness of different strategies being used to solve the problem. Duflo co-founded the Abdul Latif Poverty Action Lab at MIT in 2003 which has conducted over two hundred experiments world-wide, testing social policy theories.

Some of Duflo’s studies appear to prove the obvious: increased education results in higher wages; students’ whose teachers were absent scored lower on tests than those whose teaches showed up for work. However, other Poverty Lab studies produced less predictable results. For example, giving away protective bed nets is more effective in preventing malaria than selling them at a low price. And, studying the effect of hiring low-cost remedial teachers in primary schools resulted in a policy which now serves 33 million children in India.

The Poverty Lab uses a research method called randomized control trials by which results of an intervention with one group are compared against another group picked at random. The method is said to be a simple, valid measure. It can avoid ethical issues of denying a service to a control group by comparing the ‘’treated’ group against the wider population. And, both groups if large enough allow the researcher to be certain that a change is a result of the intervention or treatment.

Perhaps one of the most intriguing issues in the article was the wary response to an evaluation of micro financing. Internationally, microfinance has been touted as a miracle: an effective way to ‘solve’ poverty. Make a loan, and businesses will start, income will rise, the loan will be paid back, and people will move themselves out of poverty. And, the ‘banker’ can even make money. Microfinance is capitalism working for the larger good.

Yet, the Poverty Action Lab’s study of 7,000 households in India showed that microfinance did not fix everything. Getting credit to the poor worked, but an overall improvement in consumption, a measure of economic well-being, did not happen. Duflo became convinced that not having a steady job most likely prevents a person from having an easier life. Again, this seems obvious. However, the wider field promoting and running microcredit programs was wary, questioned the research findings and defensively provided anecdotal evidence that microfinancing works.

The article does not state the actual cost of the microfinance research; however given the number of people required to conduct 7,000 interviews in India both before and after the program and the time to organize, analyze and report findings, it is safe to assume the expense was significant. While the agency agreeing to the study was interested and wanted follow-up research, the microfinance field in general was not; which suggests the feedback has not been widely used within the sector to improve programs.

How does all this affect our work here in New York City? Getting data about our efforts to make a more fair and just City is needed. Knowing what works and what does not is useful. But, we should not bother spending time and money on evaluations, if we’re not ready to hear what’s wrong with our programs. Evaluations should not be prompted just because a funder requires it, but because we want to learn from and make our programs better. If we are not willing to learn, the evaluation expense will be wasted. If we are open to constructive feedback, the time and money spent can be well worth the effort.

Underinvested in Leadership Development

Wed, 12 May 2010 14:43:00 GMT

by Jean Lobell

We all have a stake in leadership development if the nonprofit sector is to remain vibrant.

Have you ever been part of a conversation that goes something like this?
A: “Yes, I know that’s important.”
B: “So why don’t we do something about it? Besides it’s really needed.”
A: “I agree. We sure do.”
B: “Then, let’s move ahead with it.”
A: “I know, but we can’t really invest too much in it.”
Getting attention, time, and funding for leadership development can sometimes sound this way.

Now consider the following points:
• One would be hard pressed to hear any disagreement about the importance of leadership to the success and effectiveness of nonprofits.
• There is a lot of talk about the sector’s leadership pipeline being threatened by the projected retirement of baby boomers, by the lack of desire on the part of the next generation to take on the mantle of leadership, and by the rate of turnover of executive directors who are stressed out by low pay, less than effective boards, and the rigor of fundraising.
• And there is the wish for more data about effective leadership development opportunities since, in spite of the multitude of leadership development offerings, we don’t have enough data on what works and what doesn’t work.

And yet, our sector remains underinvested in leadership development. Securing investment in leadership development remains a challenge. Not only in securing funding but also in securing time commitment and focused attention. In Nonprofit Leadership Development: A Model for Identifying and Growing Leaders within the Nonprofit Sector, a research publication of the Looking Glass Institute, 2006, Bonner and Obergas report “historical undercapitalization by nonprofit organizations in professional development.” Most nonprofits have not budgeted adequately or intentionally for professional development of their staff or laid out individual potential career paths.

The literature is rife with opinion and data about leadership being the fulcrum on which lies the upward or downward trajectory of organizations and the clients they serve. For example, in the same study mentioned above, the authors report that great leaders outperform average ones in many ways, including higher productivity, lower employee turnover, better client services, and greater employee morale and motivation. In Investing In Leadership, Volume 2: Inspiration and Ideas from Philanthropy’s Latest Frontier, 2006,

a publication by Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, Enright points out that over the past year, a common theme in conversations with grantmakers is the “growing understanding,” a “dawning realization” or an “increased appreciation” of how leadership makes a difference. Equally important, many talked about the importance of connecting leadership development and organizational performance. In Daring to Lead 2006: A National Study of Nonprofit Executive Leadership, Bell, Moyers, and Wolfred talk about an increasing number of grantmakers who believe that strong executive leadership is essential to the effectiveness of their grantees and are searching for ways to strengthen and support current executive directors and to nurture new leaders.

As co-leader of CRE’s leadership development team, these research findings have real-life meaning in our work with nonprofit clients. We have seen accidental leaders turn into purposeful, competent, and results-oriented leaders because of their participation in the Leadership Caucus, an 8-month long leadership development program. A recent evaluation study of this program was published in the Nonprofit Quarterly last spring.

Given our economic landscape, I understand that we have to be smart about our investments. Grantmakers are looking more towards the connection between leadership development and beneficial outcomes for organizations, as well as the clients and causes they serve (Investing In Leadership Volume 1: A Grantmakers Framework for Understanding Nonprofit Leadership Development, 2006, a publication by Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, by Betsy Hubbard.)

This is what we propose. The sector needs greater investment in the following:
1. Research on what leadership development approaches are most effective in achieving individual, organizational, and community outcomes. What approaches result in improved leadership competencies? Which approaches go beyond competencies to organizational improvements? And what approaches have impact on the work that nonprofits do for their communities?
2. Creating (or further strengthening) innovative programs that build on findings about what makes for effective leadership development experiences. This work cannot happen in the margins. It requires time, energy, and the engagement of multiple players -- nonprofit leaders, leadership development practitioners, adult learning specialists, board members and funders.
3. Developing the sector’s appreciation for, and ability to improve, systems and processes that support leadership development. Leadership development alone will not sustain the organization’s need for strong and effective leadership. Systems and processes are needed such as:
• a high quality staff performance management system including individual staff development plans that map out activities and experiences that lead to high performance,
• smart hiring practices to ensure that potential leaders are brought into the organization, and
• successful retention strategies so that leadership talent remains and is nurtured in the organization.

Whether you are a nonprofit leader, a potential leader, a Board member, a funder, a leadership development practitioner, a policy maker or a client, we all have a stake in leadership development if our sector is to remain vibrant.