The "Nonprofit Exemption" Myth That'll Get You Sued: Which Privacy Laws Apply to Nonprofits?

Am I the only person who is obsessed with that mentalist guy, Oz Pearlman? You know, that dude who does super amazing mind-blowing tricks, like guessing your 3rd grade teacher’s name or a random number you think of, and it usually involves a social media clip of a celebrity or athlete that has a near aneurysm or exploding brain when he gets it correct or running away in fear that he’s the devil incarnate? Well today it’s my turn. I’m going to be a Fundraising Mentalist for the next few seconds, and am about to blow your mind with my accuracy as you read the following. Let me guess what someone - either a conference speaker, webinar presenter or some other professional in this nonprofit sector - told you to do this year: Start a monthly giving program. Launch planned giving. Post more often on social media. Apply for more grants. Build a major gift program. Improve the newsletter. Host another event. Create video content. Use AI. Call every single donor. Recruit better board members. Did I miss any? Probably. There’s always one more thing. There’s always someone at a conference, on a podcast, in a LinkedIn post, or sitting across from you at a board meeting saying “have you considered also doing THIS?” And every single one of those ideas might be useful. However, they cannot all be priorities. A small fundraising team usually does not fail because it lacks ideas. It fails because everything becomes urgent and nothing receives enough consistent attention to actually work. You don’t need another to-do list. You need a stop-doing list. Before you can figure out what to stop, you need to get honest about what’s actually working. And I mean honest. Not “it feels like it’s working because we’ve always done it” honest. Math honest. Here’s the exercise: list every recurring fundraising activity your organization does. Every event, every campaign, every appeal, every grant cycle, every committee, every social media effort, every newsletter, every program. All of it. Then score each one from 1 to 5 in four areas: 1. Revenue: Does it generate meaningful net income? Not gross. Net. After every expense, every staff hour, every hidden cost. 2. Relationships: Does it deepen valuable donor relationships? Does it create real human connections or just put people in a room together? 3. Strategic Value: Does it create future opportunities? New donors, new partnerships, new visibility that leads to something? 4. Staff Burden: How much time and emotional energy does it require? Score this one in reverse so that a 5 means it’s easy, a 1 means it’s eating your team alive. Now add up the scores. And I’m super duper sorry about the next statement. You have to be brutally honest about net revenue. An event that raises $80,000 but costs $52,000 and consumes four months of staff time did not “raise $80,000.” It created $28,000 before accounting for staff labor. If you paid your development director for those four months of event planning, the real number might be closer to $12,000. That’s not a fundraiser. That’s an incredibly expensive hobby. Run the test on everything. Let the math be the argument. The math doesn’t care about feelings, traditions, or Susan. And so I give you a fantastic term: Fundraising Zombies. Watch out! They hide in plain sight! Fundraising Zombies are activities nobody believes in but everyone continues. They’re not alive as they haven’t produced real results in years. But they’re not dead either. They just keep shuffling forward, consuming resources, and nobody has the courage to put them down. You know a zombie when you hear the language around it: — “We’ve always done it.” — “The board expects it.” — “A few donors like it.” — “It might work eventually.” — “We already purchased the software.” — “Stopping would feel like failure.” If any of those sentences just echoed in your head about a specific activity at your organization, congratulations! You found a zombie! Here are some common zombies I see shambling through nonprofit hallways: The golf tournament that barely breaks even but requires three months of committee management and sponsorship begging. Weekly social media posting with no strategy — content for the sake of content, reaching nobody, converting nothing, but “we need to be consistent.” Grant applications outside your mission — chasing money because it’s there, not because it fits. A printed newsletter nobody can connect to a single gift — beautiful, expensive, and functionally decorative. A committee that meets monthly but completes no assignments — a meeting for the sake of meeting. The organizational equivalent of a screen saver. An expensive database used as a glorified address book — you’re paying for a Ferrari and using it to check the mail. A Giving Day page launched without any personal outreach — posted it, shared it, hoped for the best, called it a strategy. Every zombie on this list is consuming time, money, and emotional energy that could be going toward the activities that actually raise money and deepen relationships. May I suggest a radical idea: Kill the zombies. Or at least put them on a one-year pause and see if anyone notices. (Spoiler: almost nobody will.) Now, you may want to select a VERY small number of things to keep. And for most small nonprofit organizations, the highest-value fundraising activities are surprisingly basic. — Thanking donors quickly — Calling loyal supporters — Meeting with qualified prospects — Renewing dependable grants — Giving board members specific assignments — Collecting strong mission stories — Following up when someone expresses interest Not one of those is flashy. Not one will make your board say “wow, that’s innovative.” Not one requires a new platform, a new tool, or a new committee. They work because they are directly connected to relationships and revenue. That’s it. That’s the whole secret. The basics, done consistently, beat the fancy ideas done sporadically every single time. Your job is not to do everything. Your job is to choose 3 to 5 things from this list, do them exceptionally well, and ruthlessly protect the time to do them. Everything else? Parking lot. Or graveyard. Your choice. This is the rule I wish every nonprofit would hire a local artist to plaster on the inside of their conference room wall: Do not add a major new fundraising initiative unless you can answer: what will we reduce, pause, or stop to make room for it? Adding monthly giving may be wise. But if nobody has time to welcome and steward monthly donors, you haven’t built a program. You’ve automated transactions. Adding AI may save time. But if staff adopt six separate tools without rules or ownership, you haven’t saved time. You’ve added complexity wearing a productivity costume. Adding a new event may seem exciting. But if your team is already drowning, another event isn’t a life raft. It’s another wave. Every “yes” to a new thing must come with a “no” to an existing thing. Otherwise you’re just piling more weight onto a team that’s already carrying too much. Trust me. I'm the king of "hey, I gotta fun idea we should do" here in my office. And then causing momentum everywhere else to slow and me wondering "why?" FUN IDEA ALERT: Hold a Stop-Doing Meeting This might be the most productive meeting you will ever have. And I promise that most nonprofits have never, nor will ever, hold one. Get your staff and key board members in a room. Ask five questions: 1. Which activity creates the least value for the effort required? 2. What would happen if we paused it for one year? 3. Which donor-facing work could replace that time? 4. Are we continuing anything primarily to avoid an uncomfortable conversation? 5. What are the three fundraising activities we will execute exceptionally well? That last one is the killer. Not ten. Not seven. Three. Which three activities will define your fundraising for the next year? And? You can finish the meeting with actual decisions. Not vague intentions. Decisions. Not: “We should explore making the gala more efficient.” Try: “We will not hold the gala next year. We will replace it with six small donor gatherings and 50 personal visits.” Not: “We should probably rethink the golf tournament.” Try: “The golf tournament is paused for 2027. That committee’s time will be redirected to thank-you calls and prospect meetings.” Specific. Decisive. Final. That’s a stop-doing meeting. And it might be the most liberating hour your team has had in years. Now, there is a bit of freedom you get on the other side of this. AND I know this is scary. Killing an event, pausing a program, stopping a tradition feels like failure or giving up or admitting something didn’t work. It’s none of those things. It’s simply a strategy. It’s choosing to do fewer things better instead of more things badly. It’s deciding that your team’s time and energy are too valuable to waste on zombies. It’s trusting that the basics - the phone calls, the thank-you notes, the personal meetings, the consistent follow-up - will outperform the chaos every single time. I can tell you honestly though, that that the organizations I work with that are thriving right now aren’t the ones doing the most. They’re the ones doing the right things. Consistently. Relentlessly. With an almost BORING focus. That’s not doing less. That’s doing better. SO, your turn! Tell me: What’s the one fundraising zombie at your organization that everyone knows should die but nobody will kill? And what would you replace it with? Name the zombie. Tell me what’s keeping it alive besides rage and stubbornness. And tell me what you’d do with the time if it was finally gone. Send me your answer: patrick@dogoodbetterconsulting.com And if you want help running the Return-on-Effort test, identifying your zombies, and building a stop-doing list that actually sticks – that’s exactly what we do inside Do Good YOUniversity. Templates, frameworks, weekly AMAs, and a community of fundraisers who are all learning to do less and raise more. www.DoGoodYOUniversity.com Together, we’ve freaking got this. -Patrick P.S. I can already hear someone reading this and thinking “but Patrick, we CAN’T stop doing the golf tournament, Bob on the board would lose his mind.” Here’s my question: is Bob going to lose his mind because the tournament is strategically vital to the organization, or because Bob likes golfing? Because those are two very different conversations. And you already know which one it is.

You ever have a gut feeling about something but inevitably no one has ever done scientific research about said gut feeling so you can’t really PROVE that you were right the whole time? Like, when I say that Braveheart is the greatest movie of all time, and everyone across the universe says things such as “But what about the Godfather?” or “But Karate Kid Part II is the best because they finally made Pat Morita, who was nominated for an Academy Award for his work in the first Karate Kid, became the star of the movie, and we got to finally learn about his backstory which makes this the best movie in the franchise, and of course Peter Cetera’s ‘Glory of Love’ is the single best song to have your first wedding dance to, and I dare you to say otherwise” or other similar crazy talk? Well, in the pantheon of nerdy fundraising things, I finally have actual scientific proof about what I have muttered to my nonprofit friends for the last decade. Hooray for science! It was a delightful article about the paradox of choice. The idea that when you give people more options they don’t make better decisions. They actually make NO decisions. They freeze and get overwhelmed. And even when they DO finally choose, they’re less happy with what they picked because their brain is haunted by all the options they didn’t pick. Now, was this study about donors and sponsorship packets? No. This was a study about jam. Yes, jam. Or jelly. I’m sure there was jelly involved. At a gourmet grocery store, shoppers were presented with either 6 flavors of artisanal jam or 24. The group that saw 6 options bought significantly more jam than the group that saw 24. More options. Fewer sales. Not because the jam was bad. Because the brain looked at 24 jars and said “absolutely not, I’m going to the chip aisle because Doritos are on sale, and I’ll be damned if I’m paying $8.99 for a Party Size of original flavored Doritos that I could eat in one sitting.” Same thing with 401(k) plans. The more investment options a company offered, the less likely employees were to enroll - even when the employer was literally offering FREE MATCHING MONEY. Employees left free money on the table because there were too many choices and their brain said “Cool money stuff. I’ll deal with this later.” This is literally what nonprofits do to their donors every single day. The Jam Problem Is Your Fundraising Problem Let me do my best to describe your donation page right now. There’s a button that says “Donate.” Great. The donor clicks it. And then… Sixteen giving levels. Three recurring options. A dropdown menu of seven programs they could designate to. A checkbox for “make this a tribute gift.” A field for “company matching.” An option to give by credit card, ACH, PayPal, Venmo, cryptocurrency (get that Ethereum money bruh!), and possibly a carrier pigeon / Game of Thrones-esque raven. And somewhere in the middle of all that, the donor’s brain does the same thing it did in the jam aisle: “This is too many choices. I’ll come back to this later.” Psssssst. Come closer for an fun fact. They won’t come back. They were READY to give. They had their credit card out. They believed in your mission. And you lost them because you turned a simple act of generosity into a SAT exam with a dropdown menu. Every option you add to the giving experience is a potential exit. Not because the options are bad but, because the brain actually doesn’t want to think. It wants to act. And when you make it think too hard, it acts by leaving. Oh, and this goes WAY beyond your donation page. The jam problem shows up everywhere in nonprofit fundraising. And once you see it, you can’t unsee it. Your annual appeal has too many programs listed. “You can support our after-school program, our food pantry, our job training initiative, our mental health services, our capital campaign, or our general fund!” The donor reads that and thinks: “I don’t know which one matters most, so I’ll just…not.” One program. One story. One clear thing their gift does. That’s what converts. Your event has too many ways to participate. Buy a ticket! Be a sponsor! Donate an auction item! Volunteer! Buy raffle tickets! Bid on the silent auction! Sign up for the paddle raise! Text to give! The donor walks in overwhelmed and leaves having done…kind of nothing. Because (and I’ve talked about this endlessly here) when everything is the priority, nothing is. Your board orientation has too many expectations. Twelve action items, a matrix, color-coded responsibilities, and a 15-page packet. The board member reads it, feels the weight of every single jar of jam, and defaults to the only thing that doesn’t require a decision: showing up and eating the chicken. Your email asks donors to do too many things. Share this post! Register for the event! Read the blog! Watch the video! Forward to a friend! And also donate! That’s six calls to action in one email. The research is clear: they’ll do zero. Now, here’s the part I love. It’s a bit dorky, so hold on for a second. A psychologist named Herbert Simon won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1978 for a concept he called “satisficing” which is a a combination of “satisfying” and “sufficing.” The idea is simple: set good-enough criteria for a decision and move on. Not the BEST option. A GOOD option. Pick it. Move. Done. Simon reportedly had three sets of clothes and ate nearly the same thing every day. Not because he was boring. Because he was a genius who understood that every decision you DON’T have to make frees up brainpower for the decisions that actually matter. As a Catholic School kid who HATED wearing a uniform when I was that age, I kick myself for being so dumb as to not see the genius in this. I now literally wear one of three branded shirts every day. It’s the greatest. And I probably have to send an apology note to Sister Mary for my teenage shenanigans raging against the uniform machine. Anywho, I read that and thought: I’ve been teaching nonprofits to satisfice for 20 years and I didn’t even know the word. Even now, I have had to type and retype that word over and over again. Because I am a horrible speller. Three buckets, not forty-seven tiers. One name, one action for board members. One story, not a stat sheet. A specific ask with a specific number, not “would you consider supporting our mission in whatever way feels right to you?” That’s satisficing. That’s reducing the choices so the brain can act instead of freeze. And it works in jam aisles, 401(k) enrollment, and your annual appeal. Soooooo, what can YOU do to implement some of these satisficing ideas!? I’ve got three ways to simplify the choices you’re giving your donors so they actually DO the thing instead of thinking about doing the thing. 1. One Ask. One Number. One Outcome. Your donation page should not look like a menu at the Cheesecake Factory. (IYKYK) It should look like a really good local food truck: here’s what we have, it’s delicious, pick one. Three giving levels is plenty. Maybe four. Each one should tell the donor exactly what their gift does. “$50 provides a week of meals for a family. $100 provides a month. $250 provides a full semester of after-school programming.” That’s it. No dropdown menus. No program designations. No cryptocurrency. Just: “here’s what your money does, pick the one that feels right, and hit the button.” Fewer options. More conversions. That’s not my opinion. That’s a very smart scientist telling you that. I’m just using random pop culture examples because I am a child. 2. One CTA Per Communication. That’s It. One. Every email, every social post, every letter should ask the donor to do ONE thing. Not three things. Not “share AND donate AND register.” One thing. If the email is about the event, the CTA is register. Not donate. Not share. Register. If the letter is the annual appeal, the CTA is give. Not volunteer. Not attend. Give. If the social post is about impact, the CTA is read the story. Not everything else you could possibly ask them to do in a single Instagram caption. One email. One ask. One action. Your donor’s brain will thank you. And their credit card (or check, or Doge Coin) will follow. 3. Make the Default the Right Choice This one’s sneaky and it comes straight from the behavioral science. Because my blogs need more behavioral science. When there’s a default option - the one that’s already selected, the one that requires no decision - most people take it. That’s why organ donation rates are dramatically higher in places where the default is “yes” with an opt-out, versus places where you have to actively opt in. YOU should apply this to your fundraising: Pre-select a giving level on your donation page. Don’t select the lowest. Don’t select the highest. Just pick the one that represents the most common gift amount for your organization. Listen, the donor can change it, but most won’t. Because the brain says “Oh Joy! Someone already made this decision for me! Huzzah! Moving on.” Try to pre-check the “make this monthly” box. Yes, really. Let people uncheck it if they want to give once. But the default should be recurring. Because once a donor is monthly, they’re yours for years. And the brain says “sure, that was already selected, fine.” On the Board Member Menu, circle one option in advance for each person. “Janet, based on what I know about you, I think this one would be a great fit.” You’re not assigning, but you ARE defaulting. And they’ll love you for it. Moral of the story? Simplify Everything. The paradox of choice isn’t just a psychology concept. It’s a fundraising strategy hiding in plain sight. Every time you simplify a decision for your donor you’re removing this absolute mental chaos between their intention and their action. You’re making it easier for them to do the thing they already wanted to do. Which is to give you a boatload of money. Your donors are not indecisive. They’re just overwhelmed. That’s the whole thing. A Nobel Prize winner, a jam study, and your donor’s brain all agree: less is more. Now go simplify something. OK! Now your turn! Tell me: How many choices are you currently giving your donors? Go look at your donation page right now. Count the options. Then tell me the number. I double dog dare you. Bonus points if you simplify it THIS WEEK and tell me what you changed. Send me your answer: patrick@dogoodbetterconsulting.com And if you want help simplifying your entire fundraising operation - the donation page, the appeals, the board expectations, the stewardship system - that’s what we build inside Do Good YOUniversity. Less overwhelm. More action. Come build with us at www.DoGoodYOUniversity.com . Seriously, we have a boatload of experts that hang out with us to give you ALLLLL the answers! Together, we’ve freaking got this. -Patrick P.S. Fun fact, I went to the grocery store after reading this article. Stood in the jam aisle. Counted the options. There were 31 varieties. I bought chip dip instead. Science.

Good news, nonprofits. Many privacy laws don’t apply to you! Unfortunately, that’s where many nonprofits tune out the rest of the story – a bad idea that could lead to hefty fines and lawsuits for your nonprofit. The truth is, modern nonprofits almost certainly collect personal data, and there are several privacy laws that require even nonprofits to take certain steps to ensure that data is handled with respect for the individuals it belongs to. When nonprofit leaders think about personal data, donor information may be the first thing that comes to mind. But nonprofits often collect personal data from many other people, including volunteers, members, event attendees, newsletter subscribers, and website visitors. Some of this information is collected more directly. Other data may be collected automatically by the nonprofit’s website and the third-party tools connected to it. We will get into examples of both later on. Understanding where personal data comes from is an important first step toward protecting the data of your users and meeting all your compliance obligations. What is personal data? Personal data is information that identifies an individual or can be linked to an identifiable individual. Depending on the privacy law, it may also be called “personal information” or “personally identifiable information (PII).” Many nonprofits think personal data is the same thing as sensitive data, but it is not. It is actually rare for a website to collect sensitive data like: Health information; Social Security Numbers; Information about children; and Financial information. However, it is extremely common for websites to collect non-sensitive personal data, such as: Names; Email addresses; Physical addresses; Phone numbers; IP addresses; and Payment information. Like sensitive data, personal data is also protected by several different laws. Simply collecting any of these could open up your nonprofit to having to comply with numerous privacy laws. Common Ways Nonprofits Collect Personal Data Nonprofit websites typically collect personal data directly and automatically. From a privacy compliance standpoint, it doesn’t really matter which method is used, but many nonprofits think if a user provides their data willingly (directly), then no privacy laws apply. This is not the case. Both may require you to comply with privacy laws. With that said, here are some of the most common ways personal data gets collected through a nonprofit's website: Direct methods: Donation forms – Collecting payment information for one-time or recurring donations means handling payment information, names, email addresses, and phone numbers. Contact forms – When someone fills out a "Contact Us" or inquiry form, they're typically submitting their name, phone number, and email address. Newsletter sign-ups – Capturing names and email addresses to keep supporters informed is a standard practice for most nonprofits. Volunteer or membership applications – These often collect detailed personal data, including names, addresses, and phone numbers. Event registrations – Online event sign-ups typically collect names, contact information, and sometimes payment details. Automatic methods: Analytics tools – Tools like Google Analytics collect IP addresses from every visitor to your site – often without visitors ever providing consent (i.e., no proper consent solution in place). Security tools – reCAPTCHA and other security tools automatically collect IP addresses as well to help keep your site secure. Embedded videos – YouTube and Vimeo embeds can share users’ IP addresses with Google and Vimeo. Scheduling tools – Tools to schedule appointments, like Calendly, can automatically share people’s email addresses and names with the third-party scheduling tool you’re using. Donation tools – DonorBox, Fundraise Up, and Bloomerang will automatically share a donor’s information with those third parties upon being used. Why This Matters for Nonprofits A common misconception is that nonprofits are exempt from privacy laws. While some laws do carve out exceptions for certain types of nonprofits, many privacy laws apply to nonprofits just as they do to for-profit businesses . This is especially important to understand because privacy laws are designed to protect people, not organizations. That means the laws of a particular state or country can apply to your nonprofit even if you're not based there . Collecting even a single email address from a resident of a given state or country could require your organization to comply with that jurisdiction's privacy law. So, What privacy laws apply to nonprofits? Here are some of the privacy laws that can apply to nonprofits: GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) – Applies if your nonprofit serves or monitors the behavior of European Union residents, regardless of where your organization is located. UK Data Protection Act (UK DPA) – Similar to GDPR, this applies to nonprofits that serve or monitor residents of the United Kingdom. Quebec Law 25 – Applies to any organization participating in an economic activity in Quebec (including nonprofits). CalOPPA (California Online Privacy Protection Act) – May apply to nonprofits whose websites include paid advertising, promote unrelated business activities, or solicit members who receive commercial benefits. Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 603A – Applies to operators of websites that collect personal data from Nevada residents, and does not explicitly exempt nonprofits. Some laws do provide partial exemptions for certain nonprofits. For example: Delaware Personal Data Privacy Act (DPDPA) – exempts nonprofits that provide services to victims of child abuse, domestic violence, human trafficking, sexual assault, or stalking, but not other nonprofits. Oregon Consumer Privacy Act – exempts nonprofits involved in detecting insurance fraud or providing radio/television programming –but again, not all nonprofits. Failing to comply with these laws could result in fines or lawsuits. In fact, most fines start at $2,500 per violation (i.e., per website visitor). As you can imagine, this can add up quickly and result in a huge penalty for a nonprofit to overcome. What Should Your Nonprofit Do About These Laws? Understanding how your nonprofit collects personal data and that the data is protected by privacy laws are critical first steps. Once you have that picture, you can take the right steps to protect your organization and your website users. Here's where to start: Audit your data collection points. Walk through your website and identify every place where personal information is collected (i.e., forms, donation pages, sign-up forms, and even the analytics tools running in the background). If any of these are no longer being used, remove them from your site. Understand which privacy laws apply to you. Based on where your supporters, donors, and volunteers are located, different laws may apply. Don't assume your location is the only factor. The best way to do this is through an attorney, but certain Privacy Policy Generators can also help you identify which laws apply. Get a Privacy Policy in place. A Privacy Policy isn't just a legal formality, but it's how you communicate to your community what data you collect, why you collect it, and how you protect it. It’s required by every privacy law that applies to nonprofits and each law requires different disclosures to be listed within that Privacy Policy. Once more, finding a privacy attorney that specializes in this is your best option. Attorneys can give legal advice tailored toward your nonprofit. For nonprofits looking for a more affordable option, a Privacy Policy generator is a great option. For this article, we partnered with Termageddon. Termageddon generates comprehensive, auto-updating policies for $12/month or $119/year, and automatically updates your policy as laws change. Conclusion There’s nothing wrong with collecting data. Most nonprofits rely on collecting at least a little personal data to operate smoothly. Nonprofits do incredible work and protecting the personal data of the people who support that work (your website users) should be just a part of the process. By reading this article, you’ve already taken the crucial first steps to doing just that.

Over the last several months, we've been exploring how to build strategic clarity by identifying what to stop , where to focus , and how to get your board on the same page . Now comes the practical question: how do you fund new initiatives when your budget is already stretched? The answer might surprise you: your innovation budget is hiding in plain sight. Last fall I was catching up with Kathy Kempff , CEO of Nuclavis , a mobile technology company serving the peer-to-peer fundraising space. I knew I didn't know as much as I wanted to about mobile fundraising, but until I talked to her I didn't know how much there was to know! I was impressed with the technology and with the application to mission work. I asked about the market potential and the kinds of challenges her team faces in implementation, which led to a larger conversation about planning and innovation. We were lamenting the fact that many organizations we work with don't think they can afford to innovate when Kathy said something that stopped me mid-sentence. "Some of our clients don't think they can afford mobile. But their mobile spend is hiding in their old email budget." I've been thinking about that line ever since, because it applies well beyond mobile fundraising. The Habit Trap Here's a conversation I keep having with nonprofit leaders: "We know we need to try something new. But we just don't have the budget for it." I get it. Budgets are tight. Donors are distracted, and once reliable funding sources are shaky. The pressure to do more with less is real. But what if the budget already exists—it's just trapped somewhere else? Many peer-to-peer fundraising programs I work with have email open rates hovering around ten to fifteen percent. A solid open rate might be 20%, or perhaps 25%. Which is a nice way of saying, three-quarters of their carefully crafted communications are disappearing into the void. And they're not alone. Across the sector, organizations are pouring resources into tactics that stopped working years ago, then saying they can't afford to try something new. Strategy Before Budget This is exactly why taking time to understand your strategic landscape before you set your budget is so critical. A thoughtful strategic planning process, like More For Many's own Ariadne framework, should challenge you to identify the two or three major initiatives that will define your next few years. Those initiatives require investment. And that investment has to come from somewhere. I've written before about using a simple Investment-Impact Matrix to evaluate your current activities . The exercise sorts everything into four quadrants based on what you're putting in and what you're getting out. The most revealing quadrant is always the lower left: high investment, low impact. These are the programs that absorb real budget and staff time but don't move the mission forward. That's where your innovation budget is hiding. For Kathy's clients, it's often email programs with declining returns. The email budget could fund mobile engagement that actually reaches supporters. But I see the same pattern everywhere: the annual event that costs $80,000 and nets $12,000. The quarterly report that takes 40 hours to produce and nobody reads. The legacy program that made sense a decade ago but now exists because "that's what we do every year." The Uncomfortable Math Here's a quick exercise worth trying: Pick one program or initiative that's been on autopilot for more than three years. Add up the real cost—not just direct expenses, but staff time, opportunity cost, and management attention. Now look honestly at what it produces. Not what it produced five years ago, or what it might produce if everything goes perfectly. What does it produce now? If the math doesn't work, you've found budget. The question is whether you're willing to reallocate it. Kathy shared an example that made the point concrete: One organization was paying $60,000 annually for a mobile app solution that wasn't even branded to them—a generic container app where supporters had to scroll through dozens of other organizations just to find theirs. For roughly the same investment, they could have had a fully branded mobile experience. They didn't need more budget. They needed to see what they were already spending. What Real Strategy Looks Like Good strategy isn't about doing more. It's about doing differently, focusing on the things that will set you apart and help you grow. That means making hard choices about what to stop. Most strategic plans fall apart in the middle. Teams jump from lofty vision statements straight to tactical to-do lists without ever deciding where they'll invest differently. Channel strategy is a perfect example. If your communications plan looks the same as it did five years ago, you haven't made a strategic choice. You've just kept going. The question isn't "Can we afford to innovate?" The question is "What are we funding out of habit that isn't working anymore?" And what would happen if you redirected that investment toward something that does?  Your innovation budget isn't missing. The question is whether you're ready to go find it. Kathy Kempff is CEO of Nuclavis , which provides mobile fundraising technology for peer-to-peer programs. At More For Many, we write about the tools we use and people who inspire us. In other words, we weren’t paid to write this article. Ready to take stock of what's working—and what isn't? [ Contact us ]

Over the last few months, we've been writing about the gap between where most nonprofit strategic plans start and where they end up. Plans that are too fluffy to act on, or too tactical to inspire, or worst of all, sit in a binder and never see daylight. Through our Strategy For What's Next series , we introduced a framework called Ariadne , named for the Greek princess whose thread was the solution to the labyrinth. We're happy to announce that our complete guide to Ariadne is now available as a free download. Setting Better Strategy: An Introduction to the Ariadne Strategy Framework is a free, 27-page ebook that walks you through the three layers of Identity, Focus, and Execution. It's built on 30 years of experience helping organizations close the gap between vision and action, and is a tool you can use together with your team to create an inspiring strategy that is tactical enough to execute and compelling enough to follow.

Over the last few posts in our Strategy For What's Next series, we've looked at taking stock, clearing the decks, using our strategy framework, Ariadne, and rallying your board. In this post, what to do when you have great execution but unclear direction. Too Many Meetings, Not Enough Meaning I've had three conversations in the past quarter that followed almost the exact same script. Each nonprofit had adopted a popular "operating system" and followed it faithfully for a year or two. You probably know the one I'm talking about. It includes structured weekly meetings, quarterly "rocks," scorecards, and accountability charts. And each executive director described the same frustration: "We're really good at our meetings now. Everyone knows their numbers. We hit most of our quarterly goals. And yet … I'm not sure we're actually moving forward. We're busy and we're organized, that's for sure. But something's missing." One executive director put it perfectly: "We've become excellent at executing. We're just not always sure what we're executing toward." What Operating Systems Do Well Let's be clear: operating systems can be really helpful. They can solve real problems for organizations that need to get things done. And since that's pretty much every organization, implementing some kind of standardized system to discuss and transact your work makes a lot of sense. They create meeting discipline when your calendar was chaos. They build accountability when no one was tracking results. They establish quarterly rhythms when everything felt reactive. They define roles when responsibilities were blurry. For organizations stuck in operational chaos, with too many fires, too little follow-through, and too much confusion about who does what, these systems can be transformative. The structure they provide is genuinely valuable. Weekly check-ins keep everyone aligned, quarterly goals create focus, scorecards make progress visible so that issues get surfaced and solved systematically. However, because these systems put focus on the process, over time they usually create new problems. The team becomes focused on repetition, rather than creativity. And the culture slowly starts to erode until it feels like a slog. You're making good time, and yet you never really seem to get anywhere. Strategy Isn't Paint By Numbers By definition, operating systems are designed for execution, not strategy. They help you run your organization efficiently. They don't help you decide where your organization should go. These systems typically address: Meeting structure and cadence Quarterly goal-setting and tracking Accountability and role clarity Issue identification and resolution Metrics and scorecards But they don't address the strategic issues that usually keep organizations from growing: What value you create, and for whom (beyond a general target market description) What makes you different from other nonprofits doing similar work (beyond a few surface-level differentiators) Where you'll focus resources to create the most impact (strategic trade-offs and choices) Why your particular organization is positioned to succeed (competitive advantage in your mission space) Most operating systems include vision and values work at the top, then jump straight to quarterly goals and weekly metrics. They skip the layer where strategy lives. When you have operational discipline but strategic ambiguity, you get a kind of efficient busyness. You complete your quarterly goals—but they don't connect to a larger direction. You hit your numbers—but you're not sure the numbers measure what actually matters for mission impact. You solve issues efficiently—but the same fundamental problems keep resurfacing quarter after quarter. And worst of all, your team is sitting in too many meetings, talking about issues instead of talking about people, values, culture, challenges, and dreams. Your Mission Is Not A Computer Strategy isn't a fill-in-the-blanks undertaking. You can't use a mad lib to make your organization valuable and vibrant. Clearly, I'm not impartial. More For Many helps organizations with strategic planning, not execution worksheets. But again and again, I see operational efficiency that is hollow because it isn't adding up to anything meaningful. An "operating system" is great for a device that needs to do the same thing over and over again. But your mission is not a computer. Your mission happens through passion and people. Yes, repetition and execution are important. However, for most of the groups I work with, those aren't the challenges. The challenges are responding dynamically to a shifting environment; talking openly about problems; building the patience and runway to try new things; finding the time to slow down and better understand the landscape. If you look at your strategic initiatives from three years ago and realize you're still working on essentially the same things, you don't have an execution problem. You have a strategy problem. Finding the Thread This is exactly the gap our strategy framework, Ariadne , is designed to fill. Remember the story about the thread that guides you through the maze? Operating systems give you the discipline to move through the maze methodically. But they don't give you any guidance about where to go. The Ariadne process helps you find the thread that shows you which path to take. If you know your vision, and your quarterly goals, but aren't sure how pursuing the latter gets the world to the former, then Ariadne can help by challenging you to think specifically about that connection. What specific value do you create, and for whom? Many organizations either haven't thought about this, or answer it in broad strokes: "We help people in need." Which people? What specific transformation do you create? Who needs you and why? What makes you different from other nonprofits doing similar work? We don't always like to think about it, but our donors, funders, and constituents have a choice in the groups they support. If the only thing that makes you different is "our people," then you do not have a strategic differentiator. Everyone has great people. What's defensible about your organization? What three to five strategic initiatives will drive the most impact? I've written this before, but most nonprofit strategic plans I review confuse outcomes (what you are working towards) with the actual initiatives you'll take to achieve them. I commonly read "diversify revenue" and "strengthen our brand" in strategic plans. These are not strategies, these are outcomes. How will you diversify revenue? How will you strengthen your brand? The Focus layer in Ariadne helps you get specific: Value Creation: What problem are your constituents counting on you to solve? What tangible, immediate value would they miss if you didn't exist? Differentiators: What makes you uniquely able to create that value? Not "we care more"—the actual, specific reasons people choose you over other organizations serving similar populations. Strategic Initiatives: What major directions will you pursue over the next several years? Not everything you could do. What are the few things that matter most for mission advancement? These aren't quarterly goals. They're the deeper choices that determine whether your quarterly goals actually connect to something meaningful. How to Use Them Together If you're already using an operating system and it's working well for execution, you don't need to abandon it. You just need to give it the strategic foundation it assumes you have. Here's how that works: 1. Use Ariadne to build your Focus layer. Work through the Value Creation, Differentiators, and Strategic Initiatives questions. Get clear about where you're going and why you're positioned to get there. 2. Let your operating system handle Execution. Use whatever quarterly planning, weekly meetings, and accountability structures you've already built. They're valuable. Keep them. 3. Connect the two explicitly. Every quarterly goal should tie back to one of your Strategic Initiatives. Every metric should measure progress toward your value creation. When you set your quarterly priorities, ask: "Which Strategic Initiative does this advance?" 4. Review Focus annually, adjust Execution quarterly. Your Strategic Initiatives shouldn't change every 90 days—that's not strategy, that's chasing trends. But your quarterly priorities should show steady progress toward those initiatives. The Question to Ask If you're using an operating system and feeling stuck, ask yourself this: "If someone looked at our last four quarters of goals, could they figure out our strategy?" If the answer is no—if your goals look like a disconnected list of projects rather than a coherent path toward something—you don't have an execution problem. You have a strategy problem that no amount of operational discipline will solve. Want to fix that? Start with Focus. Gather your key leaders, print out the Ariadne worksheet, and spend an hour or two creating clarity on how you create value, how you are different, and what your strategic initiatives really are. Then let your operating system do what it does best: execute the strategy you've actually decided on. Need help building the Focus layer your operating system assumes you have? We work with nonprofit leadership teams to clarify strategy before execution. [ Learn about our strategic planning services → ] This article is the fifth in our series Strategy For What's Next, designed to help you create meaningful plans and excellent results in the year ahead. Read the earlier posts: Post 1 | Post 2 | Post 3 | Post 4

Building a Smarter, More Sustainable Funding Strategy for Your Organization Today, more than ever, Nonprofits are navigating an increasingly competitive and complex funding landscape. Relying too heavily on a single revenue stream, whether that be grants, donations, or program income, can leave organizations vulnerable to shifts in federal or state policy, economic downturns, or changing donor priorities. A diversified funding strategy is essential. At the Nonprofit Fundraising Summit, our team introduced what we call the “Toy Box Approach” to funding diversification, which is a practical framework that encourages nonprofits to pursue multiple funding sources, each serving a unique purpose. Just like a well-stocked toy box, the goal is to have a variety of options available so you can choose the right one at the right time to support your mission. What Is the Toy Box Approach? The Toy Box Approach is centered on the idea that no single funding source can or should do all the heavy lifting. Instead, organizations should intentionally build a mix of revenue streams, such as: Program service revenue Congressionally directed spending (earmarks) Federal, state, and local grants Foundation funding Charitable contributions Each of these funding streams comes with its own set of benefits, challenges, timelines, and strategic value. The key is understanding how they fit together to create a stable and scalable funding model. Understanding Your Funding Tools Not all funding sources are created equal. Federal grants often offer significant financial support, but they come with complex applications, strict compliance requirements, and longer timelines. They can be transformative but require strong internal capacity to manage effectively. Alternatively, foundation grants are typically more accessible and easier to apply for. Personal connections help with foundation grants, and the initial awards are likely to be smaller. Nonetheless, they can be powerful entry points for building relationships that lead to larger, long-term investments. Congressional earmarks present another unique opportunity. While they often involve shorter applications and more flexible project design, they are highly relationship-driven and require strong community support and demonstrated need. Federal Grants High Impact, High Effort Significant funding potential, but expect complex applications, strict compliance, and longer timelines. Best for organizations with strong internal capacity. Congressional Earmarks Flexible but Relationship-Heavy Shorter applications and more flexible project design, but success depends on strong community support, demonstrated need, and the right political relationships. Foundation Grants Accessible Entry Points Easier to apply for and relationship-driven. Initial awards tend to be smaller, but they build credibility and often grow into long-term partnerships. By understanding these differences, nonprofits can make smarter decisions about where to invest their time and resources. Finding the Right Fit A successful funding strategy isn’t just about chasing opportunities; it’s about alignment. Before pursuing any grant or funding source, organizations should ask: Does this align with our strategic plan and core programs? Are we eligible and competitive? Who has been funded in the past? How many awards are contemplated? Being selective and strategic increases the likelihood of success and ensures that funding supports your mission. Start Small, Build Momentum Diversification doesn’t happen overnight. In fact, some of the most effective strategies start with smaller, more accessible opportunities. Wins, like a foundation grant or a local funding partnership, can help build credibility, strengthen programs, and position your organization for larger, more competitive funding down the line. Think of these as the building blocks that help you grow your toy box over time! By building a diverse portfolio of funding sources and understanding how each one contributes to your mission, your organization can increase resilience and create more growth opportunities for your programming. As you think about your own funding strategy, contact McAllister & Quinn so we can walk through your goals together and identify the right mix of funding opportunities to support your mission over time. Contact Us For a Free Consultation

When a new donor or potential donor decides to initiate a relationship with your nonprofit by donating or by joining your email list, something meaningful occurs. Someone has raised their hand and indicated support, or at least interest in your organization. What happens over the next few days will either draw them into a deeper relationship or push them away. This is a place where marketing automation can shine brightly, as it allows you to curate every detail of what a new person will experience. This is one of those times where marketers and fundraisers can do and say everything right to maximize impact and donor engagement. But that kind of idealistic talk is hard to live up to. So let us examine what the average nonprofit can realistically achieve by using marketing automation to nurture new donors. There is recent research that indicates how important it is to get a second gift from a new donor within 30-60 days. However, we must be cautious not to allow a correlation between timing and lifetime value to prompt hasty decisions. Automation can make it too easy to ask too soon, too strong, and too often. The big question we need to consider is, why did that donor give their first gift? Or why did they join your email list? What was their motivation? Perhaps they are trying to meet an urgent need, and your organization is the conduit. Perhaps someone referred them to you, and they like what you stand for, so they gave a token gift. Maybe they saw some of your marketing, and they thought your cause was worthy of a small contribution. There are many options. But do not assume that the donor has fallen head over heels in love with your mission, read every page of your website, and is lining up to make monthly gifts. The first interaction may be situational or non-committal. So, the next steps should be geared to deepening the relationship. Ask the question, what does a new donor need to know or feel to give a second gift? First, they need to know that their first gift was appreciated and made a difference. They need to feel like the organization cares about them and will be a good steward of their resources. This can be accomplished in many ways; an immediate thank-you email is mandatory, a printed receipt goes further, and a personal phone call from a volunteer takes it to the next level. Second, new supporters need information. They need to know what your organization does. They already know something, but it’s unlikely they have a comprehensive understanding. An automated email can deliver a long list of bullet points to check that box, but the donor needs to be inspired as well as informed. Long copy early on is rarely the best method. So, while email text can be helpful, a video may be more helpful, and infographics or other digital or print resources can work together to fill in the gaps while keeping any one item from feeling too long or overwhelming. You want the donor to know what you do, and just as importantly, connect on a heart level. Next, the donor should see evidence. This is proof that you are having the impact you claim to have. Statistics can help some here, but that alone may be too dry. Testimonies, videos, and photos of those benefited do more. For one client, we created little 4×6” printed photo cards. On one side, they look like a personal photo of someone recovering from something. On the back, they tell the harrowing story of that person who nearly died, and their life was saved thanks to the support of “friends like you.” One goes in every first-time donor receipt letter package. This process is also part of their automation. After you have thanked the donor, instilled confidence in your handling of the funds, informed and inspired them regarding your work, and provided sufficient evidence related to the impact of your work, it is time to make the case for them to engage on a deeper level. The next step is to communicate a core need that the donor can solve through their giving. Sometimes this is one email or letter. But, depending on how diverse your work is, this is likely to involve multiple communications expressing a handful of different core needs. The donor may not connect with every aspect of what you are doing, so having multiple appeals that highlight your biggest initiatives maximizes the potential connection points. After all this is mapped out, the matter turns to the actual automations. What systems, media, and timing are best will vary greatly by organization. I recommend a mix of email, print mail, and phone calls as the channels used. The content should be a mix of text, images, videos, stories, and data. But be assured, that the content and spirit of the nurture process matter just as much or more than the tools used. Here is a sample first-month automation sequence: Instantly: Thank you email receipt Within 48 hours: Printed receipt is mailed 3 days: Email with a thank you video from the founder 7 days: Thank you phone call from a volunteer 10 days: Email sharing your mission and vision 14 days: Print mail welcome package is mailed 17 days: Email with testimonies video is sent 24 days: First appeal email sent about program A 27 days: Text message sent with a thank you and story of someone helped 31 days: Second appeal email sent about program B You might think that this 10-step sample plan is a lot of work, and it is. But it is work that only needs to be done once and may be used for years with occasional adjustments. It is also work that can be done over time. If you have nothing in place now, tackling one bullet per month could get you to a strong automation sequence in less than a year. And the automation process helps ensure that every new donor thereafter has a well-thought-out experience with your organization. Need help setting up your automation process? We would be happy to chat! Click Here or call us at 724-733-1200.

Is your ministry making it easy for people to give when they feel inspired to make a gift? That question matters more now than ever before. Most donors today expect digital options for generosity. 63% of donors prefer to give online with a credit or debit card while supporting a nonprofit, making digital giving the dominant preference across age groups. Giving now happens in real time, on phones, desktop and laptop computers, and tablets. When someone feels prompted to give, friction kills momentum. If your ministry cannot accept a gift quickly and easily online, that moment often passes. Making giving simple is not about convenience. It is about removing barriers when generosity is already present. Choose the Right Online Giving Tools for Ministries Your online giving platform plays a significant role in whether a donor completes a gift. Focus on simplicity first. Mobile-friendly donation forms are essential since many donors encounter your ministry on their phones. If a form loads slowly, feels cramped, or requires excessive typing, people abandon it. Recurring giving should be easy to set up and clearly presented on the donation form, since monthly donors provide stability and tend to give more over time. Checkout matters just as much. Each extra page or required field can reduce completion rates. Fewer steps lead to more finished gifts because donors act quickly when generosity is top of mind. Think about it: How many clicks does it take to give right now on your donation pages? Integrate Online Giving into Every Fundraising Channel Online giving should never live in isolation. Donors come from different places, and every channel should make giving obvious and immediate. Email continues to play a major role in online fundraising. 33% of donors say email is the channel that most inspires them to give, making it one of the most effective ways to prompt action at the right moment. (Nonprofit Tech for Good) Social media plays a different role. 29% of donors say social media inspires them to give, even if the actual donation happens later through a website or email link. Direct mail still matters, too. Many donors receive a letter, then choose to give online instead of mailing a check. It is vital that you include a link or QR code to a donation page in all of your direct mail. The takeaway is simple. Wherever people engage with your ministry, they should see a clear path to give online without friction. Think about it: Where might donors feel inspired right now but lack a clear next step? Mobile vs. Desktop Giving: Closing the Gap Mobile devices drive most nonprofit traffic, but desktop still dominates revenue. About 53% of nonprofit website traffic comes from mobile devices, while roughly 70% of online donation revenue comes from desktop users, according to M+R Benchmarks. This gap exists because mobile visitors often browse casually, while desktop users give more intentionally. It also reflects poor mobile donation experiences. Long forms, small buttons, and limited payment options make giving on a phone feel like work. Improving mobile giving does not require a full redesign. Shorter forms, larger buttons, and mobile wallets like Apple Pay or Google Pay remove barriers. When mobile giving feels as easy as desktop giving, more donors follow through in the moment they feel prompted to act. Think about it: Is your mobile experience helping generosity happen or delaying it until later? Online fundraising works best when giving feels natural and immediate. The right tools, clear integration across channels, and a strong mobile experience help donors follow through without hesitation. When people feel prompted to give, your systems should support that decision in the moment. The real question is simple. Are you making it easy for people to act when the moment matters most? Infinity Concepts Is Your Digital Fundraising Partner! Do you need help developing a successful digital fundraising strategy for your organization? Infinity Concepts would love to help! CLICK HERE or call us today at 724-733-1200.