Balancing the Mission Checkbook

How can you appeal to donors at a time when costs and demands for services are increasing? How about a letter or email detailing your line by line budget increases? Probably not – because what it costs to provide services isn’t compelling. It’s what results from the services that makes the case. By results, though, I don’t just mean a nice story or picture. I mean results. I’ve been reading and hearing more and more frequently about measuring, quantifying, and communicating the results of nonprofit programs, but somehow we (as a nonprofit community) still seem to be coming up short in public perception.

Once again, a study reports that public confidence in charities is declining. Less than 20% of respondents expressed the highest level of confidence in charities’ practices in using financial resources or in managing programs and services. This annual survey, conducted by Professor Paul Light from NYU’s Wagner School of Public Service, was recently summarized in The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Professor Light was the speaker at Charities Review Council’s Annual Forum in Saint Paul last week. After summarizing the survey results and trends, he focused on two key factors related to confidence. The essential question about confidence, he said, is whether or not the public (and your donors) believe that charities spend their money wisely. Not about what line items are in your budget, or how much is spent on program vs. management – the concern is whether money is spent wisely to accomplish something of value. The second, parallel question is how a nonprofit conveys and demonstrates their value. What benefits occur because of your program? Harlem Children’s Zone’s annual report, for example, is full of data about results, progress, and success. The data demonstrates that money is spent wisely because the results are so real. Professor Light repeated his mantra several times - measure something!

A headline last week in Philanthropy Today read “Mass. Charities Urged to Merge and Pool Resources”. The story comments on a report just released by The Boston Foundation on the financial status and condition of nonprofits in the state. The online story offers a few nuggets from the report and summarizes that “Its findings follow what officials at the foundation have been saying less formally in the past several years: that some of the state’s nonprofit groups should merge or pool resources to reduce overhead and offset cuts in state money and waning private donations.” This summary of the report’s recommendations is accurate, but it’s incomplete. The report itself, Passion & Purpose: Raising the Fiscal Fitness Bar for Massachusetts Nonprofits, offers so much more in information, analysis, and recommendations that are important for nonprofits everywhere.

In their analysis, the authors group nonprofits in three organizational/financial categories: small Grassroots Organizations, mid-sized Safety Net Organizations, and large Economic Engines. While it is a budgetary distinction, the authors dig into the financial profiles of these three groups and point out some systemic issues. They raise alarms, for example, about the vulnerable financial condition of the essential Safety Net Organizations caused by reliance on public funding that does not cover the cost of delivering services or building infrastructure and reserves. The report also acknowledges that the growth in the number of young Grassroots organizations can be seen as evidence that there are too many nonprofits, but that this group is often the source of new ideas and direct responsiveness to niche community needs.

The report concludes with three recommendations billed as “A Call to Action” on page 15 of the Executive Summary. The first recommendation, which earned the headline, is for Restructuring and Consolidation including mergers and/or alliances to efficiently provide some administrative and operational foundations. A great Minnesota example of this is MACC CommonWealth. The other recommendations that weren’t headlined are also important. The second is Repositioning nonprofits as an influential group in the state and region through collective action, policy work, and organizing for common goals such as cost savings, efficient regulations, and access to capital. In my view, the third Call to Action is most important – Reinvention and Reinvestment. This broad recommendation encompasses three themes: appropriate program funding structures that cover the cost of services, adequate funding for organizational capacity and stability, and healthy financial management practices. These structural questions are urgent. Nonprofits can’t merge their way out of recurring deficits if the formulas and expectations continue to demand more services for less money. The three recommendations have the most impact as a set – not an either/or choice. The challenges to stable services in the community and healthy nonprofits spring from various practices, systems, and perceptions and require multiple approaches. I hope you read this report and join the call to action.

Following up on questions raised during some training workshops I presented last week, I’ve decided to start an occasional series called Mythbusters – Nonprofit Finance Edition. There are a number of pieces of “common wisdom” that I hear over and over again, and some of them are just not helpful. So starting with this post I’ll be adding my own spin to the Discovery Channel show Mythbusters (is it true that a penny thrown from the top of the Empire State Building will kill a person on the ground?).

Nonprofit Finance Mythbuster #1 – “Every nonprofit should have a cash reserve equal to three months of expenses.” There’s some truth and some myth to this “best practice.” It is absolutely true that every nonprofit needs to have adequate cash balances available to support the timing of payroll and other expenses, as well as to pay for unanticipated costs or increases. It’s a myth, however, that a single standard applies for all nonprofits. I have two issues with the “three month reserve” standard. One is that different organizations need different amounts of cash on hand. The second is that building a reserve of three months of expenses is not a practical, or even desirable, goal for all nonprofits.

First, how much should nonprofits have in cash reserves? A single standard doesn’t factor in some important variables, starting with the stability of the nonprofit’s cash receipts. Organizations that have contracts or fees with regular and reliable payments don’t need as much in cash as organizations that rely on a few big grants, fundraising events or campaigns, or seasonal activities. I’ve reviewed financial reports from large nonprofits with pretty low cash balances. They wouldn’t meet a standard requiring three months of expenses, but they also have regular cash receipts from program fees, contracts, and year-round fundraising. They also have high quality receivables and other short-term assets (which create “working capital”).

The other myth is that nonprofits can go from step one, the board adopts a policy requiring a three month reserve, directly to step two, open the savings account. Somewhere in there, voila, the cash is generated to deposit the required amount. Where do cash reserves come from? Consider a hypothetical agency that provides mental health services with a $2 million annual budget. A three month reserve is $500,000. Starting from zero, they need to generate a 25% surplus of income over expenses to build these minimum reserves. This is unattainable in the near future, and it may be far more cash than this agency needs. If the mental health services are paid for by third party insurance payments and contracts with the county government, cash flow may be stable enough that about one month in operating cash, or $165,000 - $200,000, will be enough.

Bust this myth. Rather than falling back on an easy standard, each nonprofit needs to understand their revenue sources, project month by month cash flow, anticipate any shortfalls, build in some cushion for snags or surprises, and create a workable and customized policy.

My interest in financial mythbusting is inspired in part by a series I’ve enjoyed by Paul Shoemaker at his SVP Blog at Social Venture Partners Seattle. Over the past few months Paul posted a series called “10 Things We’d Like to Tell Every New Philanthropist.” For example, Lesson #3 - “I need to be careful to not let the non-profit get too dependent on my contributions.” Each of the questions that he poses seem to make sense, but he warns that these common misperceptions and mistakes need scrutiny and discussion to avoid the problems they can cause. He’s finished the list of ten lessons for philanthropists and said he would follow this series with “10 Things We’d Like to Tell Every Nonprofit.” I look forward to seeing his new top ten list.

My last post of 2007 is a few suggestions and recommendations for your leisure time review.

Tucked in the Business section of the Saturday, December 22, 2007 New York Times was a wonderful story, Emerald City of Giving Does Exist, about the Twin Cities’ enviable amount of corporate philanthropy and commitment. I hope you don’t miss this in the flurry of the holidays. We may wish there was even more to go around, but we are the envy of many nonprofit leaders in other cities, and I thank the business community for that.I have three books to suggest. First, I recommend that everyone interested in developing great boards read Governance as Leadership: Reframing the Work of Nonprofit Boards by Richard Chait, William Ryan, and Barbara Taylor. This book, published in 2005 by BoardSource, starts with the premise that many boards do not really have a problem of performance, they have a problem of purpose. The book will open your eyes and mind to a new way of thinking about board roles and leadership.

The two other books were published in 2007 and offer interesting ideas and thinking on important nonprofit management topics. I’m still reading both of them, so my reviews will wait for another time. Forces for Good: The Six Practices of High Impact Nonprofits by Leslie Crutchfield and Heather McLeod Grant offers an analysis of twelve organizations that the authors selected based on their impact, reputation, and scale. One important finding was that the high impact nonprofits achieved this impact not only through their direct services, but also by deliberately rallying others to the bigger cause through networks.

ROI For Nonprofits: The New Key to Sustainability by Tom Ralser (published by Wiley) offers a detailed study of how to translate the work of nonprofits into the increasingly important frame of venture capital and business. Whatever your personal opinion of this trend, it is here now and it’s worth your while to understand it.

Finally, a few favorite blogs to read next year:

• Mission-Based Management: Smart, interesting, and useful management perspective
• Gift Hub: Incredibly timely and interesting references, links, and thoughts on philanthropy
• Stanford Social Innovation Review: In-depth analysis and ideas, requires some time to read and consider.
• Nonprofit Technology Blog: Even if you’re not a tech person, we all need to pay attention to trends and new uses.
• Nonprofit Accounting Boot Camp: How can I resist a regular blog about nonprofit accounting issues?
• Give & Take from The Chronicle of Philanthropy: The editors read all the blogs and compile interesting posts in one place – a timesaver.

Cheers, and Happy New Year to you all!

In the midst of the big fundraising season of the year, I’m wondering about how much nonprofits really want to be open and forthcoming about their financial information. With all the talk about accountability and transparency, I don’t see a lot of evidence of easily available, freely shared financial information from most nonprofits. While I realize that I have a unique (and probably unusual) interest in financial information, I think that it’s important to walk the walk of transparency.

The Panel on the Nonprofit Sector, convened by Independent Sector, just released their report, Principles for Good Governance and Ethical Practice: A Guide for Charities and Foundations. The report lays out 33 practices “that should be considered by every charitable organization as a guide for strengthening its effectiveness and accountability.” Number seven on the list reads:

A charitable organization should make information about its operations, including its governance, finances, programs and activities, widely available to the public. Charitable organizations also should consider making information available on the methods they use to evaluate the outcomes of their work and sharing the results of those evaluations.

In the longer description of ways to implement this practice, the panel suggests an annual report and using websites to make available information such as the IRS 990 and other financial statements.

I would strongly suggest that nonprofit organizations make the effort to make usable financial information available on their website. The IRS 990 is already a public document, so it seems like the obvious tool for financial disclosure. However, I think we should go past the 990 to share better information, especially since everyone seems to agree that the current version of the IRS 990 is overly complex, confusing, and very difficult to use. A better solution would be having the audited financial statement easily available on the website. Many nonprofits already do this, but most do not. I checked the websites of six organizations in Minnesota that I have supported financially in the last few years. Of these six, one had their audit posted, three had a detailed annual report but no audit or 990, and two had no financial information that I could find. Why not post the audited financial report?

I recommend a look at the financial section from the website of The San Diego Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Community Center. In addition to posting their annual report and audit, The Center devotes a page to describing their financial management commitments and policies what a great a model of financial transparency.

In just a few days the comment period will end for the IRS proposed changes to Form 990. Since these proposed changes will impact every nonprofit organization that is required to file a 990 (nonprofits with revenues over $25,000) it will be worthwhile to pay attention to the comments and the IRS’ process for considering and responding to the input received. IRS hopes to have the changes finalized and a new 990 form in place for the 2008 tax year and they have a mountain of comments to digest if they want to stay on schedule. Many commentators, in fact, are urging the IRS to delay the implementation date of all or parts of the new form to allow time for more review and discussion of the impact of this major change. Comments are available for review on the IRS web site. Many state and national organizations have convened their members and constituents to analyze the draft and submit thorough comments, including Independent Sector and the National Council of Nonprofit Associations. Read these comment letters to get a sense of the analysis and feedback to the IRS.

Form 990 has not had a major overhaul in many years. The need for a change is widely accepted, and summarized well in the IRS background paper on the redesign: “The current 990 has not kept pace with changes in the sector and the law. Because of its history of ad hoc revisions, the current form neither adequately describes the filing organization nor provides a basis for comparing an organization with its peers.” The proposed redesigned Form 990 consists of a 10 page core form for all filers, and 15 separate schedules that will be required only of those nonprofits for which the information applies. This format will hopefully be much easier to read and keep related information together instead of scattered on different pages and schedules. It is very different, though, and will require learning a new structure and format.

The core form begins with a summary page with the organization’s mission and activities and several key points about activities, governance, and key financial information. While comments are generally positive about the summary page, there are concerns throughout the proposed form about questions that reach into what might be called best practices. Management and governance practices are developed to respond to an individual organization’s structure, community, financial situation, and activities and any simple yes and no questions can easily be misinterpreted without sufficient context. The comments reflect this concern over and over again, on questions about compensation, conflicts of interest, and audit committees.

The 15 proposed schedules range from supplemental financial information that will be required for most filers to schedules for tax-exempt bonds or foreign activities that would apply to a small percentage. There are several proposed schedules that will require new reporting for many organizations such as non-cash contributions and gaming and fundraising events. Some of these will necessitate additional recordkeeping and could be onerous. Hospitals have commented en masse requesting a delay of the implementation for a new schedule regarding community benefits and charity care.

I suggest you pay attention to this change as it goes through review and any further drafts or discussion. A clearer, more easily understood Form 990 will be good in the end, but will require much effort along the way.