
|
 From the issue dated
August 19, 2004
Good to Grow
Local charities seek out best ways to expand nationally
By Eman Quotah
From the time she founded her nonprofit group, Alice Korngold wanted
her ideas to spread across the country. And now, after years of planning,
they are.
In 1993, she started Business Volunteers Unlimited, as an effort to
match the skills of volunteers from Cleveland businesses with the needs
of charities, and to train business executives to serve on nonprofit
boards.
"I personally have a passion and an interest in helping other cities
do what we're doing," she says. "And I'd like to save other cities the
trouble we went through."
But it wasn't until two years ago that she got serious about opening
other locations to spread the approach, waiting until she had a strong
staff in place in Cleveland before embarking on the expansion effort
that she knew would require her to travel frequently.
The wait, it appears, has paid off: Today, Business Volunteers Unlimited
has additional offices in Lorain, Ohio, and in Baltimore, and Ms. Korngold
says the group will open offices in five other cities this year.
Like other nonprofit leaders whose local charities have given birth
to national networks, Ms. Korngold sees expansion as an outgrowth of
her group's mission to help others. Many well-known, well-established
national nonprofit organizations, such as Planned Parenthood Federation
of America and Habitat for Humanity International, started as small
local operations. But Robert M. Zimmerman, a San Francisco fund-raising
and organizational-development consultant who works with nonprofit clients,
cautions nonprofit leaders to think carefully about getting bigger.
"Often nonprofit people are justifiably proud of their programs and
think [they] should be spread elsewhere," he says. But, he adds, they
need to plan meticulously. "Otherwise," he says, "it's going to be a
good idea that falls on its face."
Building a Track Record
Mr. Zimmerman advises that when considering an expansion into other
locales, a charity should first show that its programs can be reproduced,
and make sure that it has enough money and staff to support national
growth while maintaining local programs. And the organization should
make sure that people in its new locations support its work, he says,
to avoid being accused of "carpetbagging."
The charity should also have had measurable success in its original
home, says Kevin Jennings, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and
Straight Education Network, commonly known as Glsen (pronounced "glisten").
His group, founded in Boston in 1990, opened its national headquarters
in New York 10 years ago and now has nearly 70 chapters across the country.
"You have to be able to show that what you're bringing has worked,"
Mr. Jennings says. "You have to have some sort of track record."
The first inkling that an organization has potential to grow nationally
often comes in the form of fan mail. Charity executives say that when
people hear about a good fund-raising or program idea in another city
or state, they call or write to find out how to bring that idea closer
to home.
DonorsChoose, a New York group started in 2000 by a Bronx public-school
teacher to raise money for New York public schools, has gotten such
queries from teachers across the United States and as far away as Nepal
and South Africa, says Ilana Goldman, vice president for marketing,
development, and expansion.
Knowing that teachers wanted its services, she says, made DonorsChoose
think seriously about tailoring its approach to work in locations outside
New York. Today it has spread to North Carolina and is planning to open
two more affiliates in November.
Talking to potential supporters can help a charity determine whether
they can be turned into donors or collaborators, Ms. Goldman says. However,
she notes, "while money is always helpful, even just having a list of
people waiting for our service or wanting to help can be an enormous
help in the decision to expand."
Increased Scope
Some charity leaders fear that moving to new locations will mean forsaking
their grass roots and losing sight of their original missions. Jesse
Putnam, executive director of Eco Encore, a Seattle organization that
raises money for Northwest environmental organizations by reselling
used books, CD's, videos, and DVD's, says that though he wants others
to emulate and adapt his group's ideas, he prefers that they do it independently.
For that reason, he has turned down requests to expand.
"I don't believe that the only way to be successful is to grow," he
says. "We're focused on developing [Eco Encore] here so we can get to
know our own community."
Yet many charities see growth as a way to add scope to their work. National
organizations can do a lot of things that local groups can't do on their
own, charity managers say. For instance, they say, a national network
can share successful ways of doing things, create a reputable identity,
shape federal policy, and raise more money than stand-alone organizations
can.
CityCares, an alliance of volunteer community-service groups with national
headquarters in Atlanta, is working with Home Depot to promote community
service. By collaborating with the Atlanta company, CityCares has turned
a local relationship into a national one that provides funds for affiliates
around the country and raises their visibility in ways that a single
affiliate couldn't accomplish on its own, says Lisa Flick, director
of programs and services at CityCares.
Ms. Goldman, of DonorsChoose, agrees that going national can increase
a charity's efficiency. By starting DonorsChoose in various locations,
rather than leaving local groups to set up their own similar programs,
Ms. Goldman says, "we're saving everybody precious ramp-up time."
Strategy and Opportunity
Becoming a national organization can take a combination of planning
and serendipity.
Both played roles in the growth of DonorsChoose. The group began thinking
of expanding last year when its leaders felt it had been successful
in New York, giving money to 75 percent of all proposals the group had
received from teachers. Around the same time, Michael Brader-Araje,
a North Carolina businessman, saw Oprah Winfrey plug DonorsChoose on
her television talk show. Wanting to bring the group to his state, he
provided money to create pilot versions of the organization in 15 school
districts in his state, which started operating in February. Later this
year, the charity will move into San Francisco and Chicago.
Leaders of some nonprofit organizations that have expanded say that
if they could do it again, they would have spent more time planning
a strategy rather than simply responding to events. For example, James
Bell, executive director of the W. Haywood Burns Institute, a San Francisco
group that works to reduce the number of minority children in the juvenile-justice
system, wishes he had written a strategic plan before his group opened
10 new sites during the past three years. But, he warns, "You've got
to strike while it's hot -- you could be planning yourself right
out of the work."
Mr. Bell and others recommend setting "benchmarks" for how much growth
an organization can handle based on how many staff members are needed
to run each new location. For Mr. Bell, that means knowing that one
staff member can run four sites; any bigger ratio is unfeasible for
his group, he says.
Even exploring the possibility of growth can be a drain on limited resources,
nonprofit managers say. When he started expanding Glsen, Mr. Jennings
traveled extensively, teaching supporters how to set up gay-straight
alliances in schools, as he had done at Concord Academy, in Concord,
Mass. "I spent a lot of time on the road and on people's couches," he
says.
Not only did his travel take a toll on him, but it also made his program
managers feel abandoned, he says, resulting in what he calls a "silo
effect," with each program operating independently.
"It's a classic trade-off," he says. "You need to be out there talking
to people, but there's a price to pay."
In 2001, Glsen hired a deputy executive director to run its programs
while its leader travels to raise money and expand the organization's
reach.
Paying the Price
New chapters need start-up money as well as an investment of time, and
lack of funds can be a deal-breaker for groups that want to open satellite
offices. Debbie Mason, a consultant in Perry, Fla., who provides research,
strategic planning, and governance training to charities, once advised
a Fort Lauderdale organization that had developed a program to prevent
children from drowning. The group thought it had an unusual formula,
and wanted to open affiliates around the country, she says, but had
trouble getting people in other cities to risk start-up funds on a program
that hadn't been tested in their communities. Without donations, the
charity decided to stay local. "While their mission was excellent,"
Ms. Mason says, "they couldn't afford to hire the staff needed to go
national."
DonorsChoose asks that new host cities have $400,000 lined up to pay
for the project for two years from the start. That requirement ensures
that staff members in the new locations can get started with sufficient
resources, says Ms. Goldman.
"We want our executive directors focused on building the program, not
worried about how to keep the lights on," she says. "They do work on
fund raising, but having that base of support makes an enormous difference
in terms of meeting our programmatic goals."
Going from running one outlet to many, Mr. Bell says, "you go from 'I
just play piano' to trying to arrange a summer tour."
He felt that way as his Burns Institute grew in three years from a one-person
project to an organization with seven employees working in 10 cities.
On one particularly frenetic day last year, he says, the Burns Institute
agreed to start four sites in Illinois. He recalls thinking, "There's
no way I can do this."
Realizing that demand for his group's services had outstripped its staff
and other resources, Mr. Bell slammed on the brakes. The Burns Institute
has decided to stop opening new sites until 2005. Now, he says, "every
decision about growth is very deliberate."
Focusing on Governance
Even as they are investigating where they want to expand and how fast,
charities should think about the kind of relationship they want to have
with their new branches, nonprofit managers say.
Choosing the right governance structure, Ms. Mason says, can make or
break an expansion effort: "You need to get it right as you get out
of the gate, because it's too hard to change after that."
She says most groups choose one of two models: a federation, in which
the national office and the local offices each have their own tax-exempt
designation and the local units pay a membership fee to headquarters
to share its name and resources but have autonomy in their decision
making; and a franchise organization, in which the national office and
affiliates share one tax-exempt designation, with headquarters essentially
owning the local offices and dictating their programs.
Ms. Flick, of CityCares, advises "being thoughtful about the structure
of the national organization that best fits your mission and organizational
structure. Do you want a partnership or a parent relationship?"
CityCares, she says, chose the partnership approach. Local groups pay
the national office annual dues; in return, the local groups get a bevy
of benefits, such as access to grants and corporate sponsorships, subsidized
training, group purchasing options, free airline tickets, and use of
CityCares' online data-management system for fund raising, at a fraction
of what it would cost to buy and maintain their own software. Dues are
based on the local affiliate's size, and that structure was developed
as part of a strategic plan that the affiliates helped to devise.
Balancing local independence and creativity with national goals and
standards can be tough, charity leaders say. In Glsen's case, Mr. Jennings
says, "We weren't precise enough in our instructions. I think that we
erred a bit on the side of local customization."
For instance, he says, he knew it was important to have teenagers in
leadership roles, but he gave local chapters no directives about including
young people on their boards. In some cases, the chapters' attempts
to work with school gay-straight alliances failed because students at
the schools didn't think Glsen understood their point of view. As a
result, the national organization has sometimes had difficulty controlling
quality in its local chapters, he says.
"Sometimes local people take the wrong first step and won't listen when
I tell them 'No, do it this way,'" he says. "The only power I have is
that of persuasion."
Board Challenges
Tensions also can arise between an organization and its original board,
say nonprofit leaders.
"Sometimes the executive director can get ahead of the board in terms
of going national," Mr. Zimmerman says. Ms. Korngold says of her board
in Cleveland, "Their main interest is our local community because they
are a board of local corporate leaders." But, she adds, "seeing the
level of national recognition and interest and excitement, I think,
is winning their support."
When a local group decides to go national, says Mr. Jennings, it needs
a set of trustees that bring different skills than a grass-roots group
would need. His original board was made up of teachers and others strongly
rooted in Boston. The new board includes business leaders who bring
fund-raising and management expertise.
He says that his local board in Boston felt a sense of abandonment when
Glsen grew.
"Some of them thought we were selling out," he says. To help board members
understand the transition, Mr. Jennings brought in speakers from other
nonprofit groups to talk about organizational change.
Change will come to the charity's leader as well, he adds. "If you're
really motivated by the passion and the cause, some of that will go
away when you go national," he says. "Your job will change."
A national director, he says, has to focus on raising funds and managing
a growing organization, and has to let others carry on the work of providing
direct service. Mr. Jennings, a former teacher, acknowledged his new
role by obtaining an executive master's of business administration degree
in 1999.
Scaling Back
Not every location is hospitable to new affiliates, some expanding charities
have found. The Arts and Business Council, founded in New York in 1965
to promote partnerships between businesses and arts groups, brought
its Business Volunteers for the Arts program to Seattle in 1980. By
1993, the council had started 30 of the programs nationwide, many of
them in cooperation with other groups, says Gary P. Steuer, the council's
president. Last year, the Seattle office closed, and today the council
has only 20 chapters nationwide.
"When we first began, the BVA program was something new and exciting.
It was easier for communities to raise money," he says. "Coming up with
resources to fund a single program is harder now," he adds, noting that
grant makers are more likely now to support groups that offer a broader
arts agenda.
Entering a new market only makes sense for a group that offers an unusual
service not already available in that location, says Clara Miller, president
of the Nonprofit Finance Fund, a charitable group in New York that offers
loans and training to other nonprofit groups. The organization pulled
its Nonprofit Facilities Fund, a project to help finance real estate
for charities, out of Chicago because another group already did the
same job for the city's nonprofit organizations. "They really had it
covered," she says. "They didn't need us."
Mr. Steuer's group introduced more-stringent requirements of its affiliates
in the 1990s, asking that new offices run a feasibility study before
opening, and putting in place minimum standards, such as requiring affiliates
to train all their volunteers. So far, he says, two affiliates have
been disenfranchised for not adhering to those guidelines. The group
has also re-evaluated its national structure in recent months, and is
allowing groups that do not want to become full-fledged affiliates to
buy instruction and training materials "a la carte" from the council,
Mr. Steuer says.
"If we hadn't made mistakes," he says, "we wouldn't have discovered
the elements that make a program successful."
By sharing a proven formula, say nonprofit leaders, charities can do
more of the good work they first set out to do. That may be imperative
in these tough economic times, with private and government grants getting
harder to obtain.
Ms. Goldman points out that financial support is only one component
of growth. "I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all way to think about
this," she says. "The program model needs to be scalable, the right
staff needs to be in place. There are just so many elements that can
make or break a growing nonprofit."
To comment on this item, send a message
to comment@philanthropy.com
Copyright © 2004
The Chronicle of Philanthropy
|
|