Social Currency

Editor's Note: This post originally appeared May 1st, 2012 on NFF's Money and Mission blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy.  

Nonprofits and their donors often see endowments as the route to financial stability, but they aren’t the right solution for every organization. Here we debunk some of the longstanding myths about endowments.

Myth #1: A strong, sustainable nonprofit needs an endowment.

The one thing that sustainable nonprofits need is enough income to run their programs and pay for salaries, facilities, etc.  An endowment is one of many ways nonprofits can generate income. But for some groups, it is unnecessary or even a bad idea.

So before deciding to establish an endowment, nonprofits should decide if doing so addresses how income will be used to achieve the mission, when it will be needed, and how much will be needed. Organizations that are in financial crisis, that have limited capacity to attract more donors, or that have short-term missions should avoid establishing endowments.

Myth #2: An endowment must be continuously funded and can never be drawn down.

Nonprofits can choose when it’s most feasible to add to their endowments. For example, if it’s important to increase direct aid during a natural disaster, a relief organization might reduce or even forgo endowment funding for some period of time and redirect donors to an emergency appeal.  Alternatively, the board might continue to fund the endowment regardless of its current needs if, for example, it has a far-reaching goal, such as to eradicate hunger.

While most endowments have permanent restrictions on the use of their principal, others have only temporarily restrictions or even completely unrestricted components that allow the money to be spent. Endowments can also have end dates rather than existing in perpetuity.

Myth #3: An endowment is the same as a board-designated reserve account.

A designated reserve account is a pool of funds established by the board to provide certain types of capital to the organization. There are several kinds of designated reserve accounts: A working-capital reserve can provide funds during normal parts of the business cycle when cash is low–for example, when awaiting payment on a contract. A “rainy day” reserve is available for unexpected challenges or opportunities. Funds can also be reserved to help an organization recover from financial distress or to expand or acquire facilities. These pools are managed internally, though the board may place restrictions on their use.

Endowments, on the other hand, are not intended to fund routine operating activities and are often managed externally or held outside of the reach of the nonprofits’ general business managers.

Myth #4: There are limits on the amount of interest income that a nonprofit can take from its endowment

There are no such legal limits. The amount and timing of distributions is determined by the governing body of the endowment. Interest income is often used to fund board-designated reserves for future projects and to expand current programs and services. Nonprofits should, however, have realistic expectations about the yield on endowment investments. Only a large endowment that is professionally invested to maximize returns is likely to generate enough earnings to make a dent in the operating budget. Community foundations are well suited to manage smaller endowments.

When nonprofits recognize how fluid money can be, they can better assess the types of capital and cash flow they need to support both short- and long-term objectives and avoid making unnecessary trade-offs. They will also be able to tell a more compelling financial story to donors, clearly articulating their rationale and timing needs for a range of funding options including endowments, reserve accounts, grants, loans, and investments.

Editor's Note: This post originally appeared November 4th, 2011 on NFF's Money and Mission blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

The economy’s slow recovery has prompted many nonprofit leaders to wonder how to prepare for what could be an even tougher and longer road out of the recession than anybody expected. While concerns about the possibility of a double-dip recession come and go, it is probably wise to follow the old adage to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

Here’s what it means to prepare:

Shore up the revenue and find your weak spots

Don’t assume that because you have always received a grant from a particular donor that you will continue to receive one next year.  Reach out to your longtime grant makers, arm them today with real information about the value of your work. Do it now even if your annual report is not due until December. Look for reasons to remind them why your work—and hence their money—is essential.

Listen and try to understand how your grant makers are thinking about this crisis; it affects them, too. Virtually every foundation has gone through a reduction of sorts. Sharing is helpful and builds different kinds of bonds.

Seek out information that can be helpful, which means asking your grant makers and your clients for constructive feedback.

If you are not measuring your results, start now. Don’t worry about being perfect or starting a rigorous 10-year longitudinal study. Push yourself to move beyond the anecdote. Jim Collins, the author of Good to Great and other books, had it right:  “It doesn’t really matter whether you can quantify your results. What matters is that you rigorously assemble evidence—quantitative or qualitative—to track your progress. If the evidence is primarily qualitative, think like a trial lawyer assembling the combined body of evidence. If the evidence is primarily quantitative, then think of yourself as a laboratory scientist assembling and assessing the data. … What matters is not finding the perfect indicator but settling upon a consistent and intelligent method of assessing your output results and then tracking your trajectory with rigor.”

Take advantage of networks you have but don’t use.

Think broadly about your networks. Look at your competitors as comrades-in-arms and find ways to complement and enhance your work through partnership. Don’t just say you’ll collaborate because you’re supposed to.

Read More

Editor's Note: The following is an excerpt from NFF's Money & Mission blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy.  It was originally published August 1st, 2011.  

As the economy continues its slow recovery, nonprofits and donors are more frequently trying to understand the role of financial reserves—a tool that may have been an option in the past but is now a must-have for organizations that hope to maintain stability in turbulent times.

In particular, people want to know how reserves compare with endowments, because both are ways for nonprofits to help secure the organization’s future.

Reserves are a lot more flexible than endowments—and often more appealing. The money and the interest from a reserve are governed by a nonprofit’s board and can be used for many purposes.

Endowments tend to last a longer time than reserves but are much more restricted. Typically, nonprofits can spend only the interest generated by investing the money in an endowment, and donors can place many restrictions on how the money may be used.

Organizations often spend a good deal of fund-raising energy building up endowments and then find they can tap only a small portion of the pool of money raised. Making matters worse, donors who have recently given to endowments often don’t want to make a second gift for current needs—so nonprofits find themselves in a squeeze to pay for current operations even when they have just completed a successful campaign.

Read the rest at NFF's Money & Mission blog >>>

In a recent post, Tactical Philanthropy’s Sean Stannard-Stockton hosted a haiku contest. At NFF, we so enjoyed reading the haikus that we decided to unleash our own inner-poets.

Because NFF supports nonprofits in achieving the business models and capital structures they need to survive and thrive, we chose the theme “Linking Money to Mission” for our inspiration. Enjoy!

On Philanthropic Equity

Will you buy or build?
Pay for execution, or
Invest in real change?

-------

Two kinds of money:
Capital and Revenue
Nonprofits need both


On Budgeting

What is a budget
but a story whose ending
is not known, but hoped?

-------

The ledger domain
is for honest accounting
not legerdemain.

On Balancing the Business Model

No silver bullet
Fundraise, earn income, cut costs
Or marry Oprah

-------

Costs aren't your problem
Your business model is whack
Make brave changes now

On Building the Balance Sheet

Liquid net assets
Why are you so elusive?
Damn you, growth and change

-------

A big endowment
So nice to have until it
goes underwater

On Financial Management

Your board is top notch,
but how long has it been since
they read the audit?

This post originally appeared on the Money and Mission Blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

As my husband and I stood surveying what seemed like 100 feet of snow that fell on our roof throughout the winter and taking bets on the likelihood of its collapse, he uttered these dangerous, divorce-inducing words, “You didn’t forget to put a new roof in our budget?”

Did I budget? Of course I budgeted, for all these kinds of possibilities. But I had also nagged about the need for us to consistently save for the work in spite our list of less practical but more enjoyable expenses. The undeniable truth is that real estate, be it a family residence, a theater, or a school, requires constant care and feeding.

Many nonprofits, like weary homeowners, defer routine building repairs or dealing with other deteriorating systems often to the point of jeopardizing the soundness of the both the facility and the program. Take, for example, a child-care center whose boiler regularly goes on the fritz.

The lack of hot water for sanitation or heating would force the center to close for days—and that in turn would force parents to lose time and income from work. For some of our most vulnerable kids, those closures also restrict critical access to healthy meals, supplemental education, and social services.

That’s why nonprofit facilities should not be viewed as static places where programs are delivered but dynamic programs in their own right that require capital, management, and planning.

Why do so many nonprofits underestimate what they need to do about the wear and tear on their building and other assets?

Read More

This post originally appeared on the Money and Mission Blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

Over the past few months, the Nonprofit Finance Fund has had the opportunity to work with several foundations and regional associations of grant makers across the nation on efforts to rethink how they can better use their grant dollars to achieve more and better results in their communities.

Time after time, I have been struck with the deep desire by foundation program officers and staff members to change what many understand is a flawed system. Too often, foundations bear the brunt of the blame for creating many of the problems facing nonprofits.

As Ann Goggins Gregory and Don Howard suggest in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, the problem boils down to “funders’ unrealistic expectations about how much running a nonprofit costs.”

Laying the blame and responsibility on the doorstep of grant makers and their “unrealistic expectations” might play well with many people who work at nonprofits, but it won’t achieve the results we want to see.

In reality, grant makers and nonprofits are actually in the same boat, ensnared by a set of dysfunctional rules and conflicted beliefs about money.

While there are certainly bad grant-making practices that undermine nonprofit financial health, I have found many program officers, trustees, and foundation managers who have a deep understanding of nonprofit economics and the realities under which nonprofits are struggling.

To really understand why nonprofits struggle to cover their full cost of doing business, why a foundation grant can actually drain an organization’s liquidity when it does not cover the full cost of a service, or why the nonprofit world lacks an equity ethic, we need to understand the broader historical and social context of money in American society.

Read More

This post originally appeared on NFF's Money & Mission blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

Too often, foundations don’t get as much out of a research grant as they could.  That’s because grantees and foundations don’t distill the lessons in ways that organizations can easily find out about and apply to their day-to-day work and conversations.

But now some grant makers are collaborating with nonprofit organizations to take different approaches. The Steppenwolf Theatre Company, in Chicago, chose to make public the results of a new report on attracting and engaging theatergoers in their 20s for the benefit of other organizations facing the same challenges.

Nonprofit Finance Fund provided assistance in this effort and asked the report’s author, Patricia Martin, to organize and publicize the findings in the report through interactive social-media channels used by creators and consumers of culture.
Read More

 

Note: This post originally appeared on NFF's blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

As a teenager, I was a paperboy, delivering copies of the Daily Homes News in my neighborhood.

It was well known in my small town that paperboys were flush with cash every Thursday, since Thursday was the day that we collected subscription dues on our routes. And, like clockwork, my friend Tommy would approach me every Thursday to borrow “some change” to purchase pastries from the corner store.

When Tommy’s tab hit a certain level, I would approach him to try to collect his debt. And whenever I approached him, his response was, “as long as I owe you, you’ll never go broke.”

I share this story because many of our nonprofits are operating with the notion that if their balance sheets contain some level of accounts receivable, they cannot go broke.

After all, those receivables will eventually become cash—someday.

Read More

 Note: This post originally appeared on NFF's blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

Even though I am nearly a quarter-century beyond my economics degree, I read the many articles in recent months on the possibility of a double-dip recession—or just a long-term shaky economy—with more than a little bit of hyperventilation.

But to avoid real panic, I have learned a few coping mechanisms, and one of the best is to stare down the thing you fear as the first step toward being able to manage it. Here are my three biggest fears–and suggestions for how all us who manage nonprofits can face down these worries:

Read More

 

Note: This post originally appeared on NFF's blog at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. 

A special type of organization, known as a community development financial institution, offers credit and financial services to organizations and neighborhoods that have trouble getting aid from traditional banks.

Traditionally, only a small universe of foundations and wealthy investors supported those institutions.

But that is changing.

For the first time, foundations and individuals are finding that in addition to a social return, these institutions are also providing a notable financial return. As a result, they are attracting new interest from unexpected places.

Historically, foundations have supported community development financial institutions through program-related investments. Such investments are typically loans or loan guarantees that foundations make to organizations that carry out programs connected to their missions — thereby preserving capital for their future grant-making efforts. Traditionally, foundations that made program-related investments had largely been motivated by social benefits, not economic returns.

But timing is everything. At Nonprofit Finance Fund, we are finding a growing interest and appetite from portfolio managers who see program-related investments as smart financial tools.

How is this manifesting itself?

Read More

Search Blog

Inquire about an NFF Loan

Find NFF here...