Case Study in New Charity Start-up

I am often approached by would-be start-up nonprofits. People come looking for whatever advice they need. Sometimes people seek fundraising advice, sometimes governance alternatives.

Other times they want to know how to set up the new charity with the IRS. But rarely, if ever, does someone come and say "I'm thinking about doing this kind of work. What are some of the blocks and barriers going to be, and do I stand a chance of surviving long term?"

Mostly people seem to want self-affirmation more than anything else; they want to know that their ideas about something are, generally, in the right direction. They are rarely prepared to accept criticism or negative comments; they don't seem to like a cautious approach and they seem to have little tolerance for much analysis, particularly if it cuts across their grain of an idea about how things should be.

One case I worked with is typical enough that I'll lift it up as a case study. The charity's request for assistance in fundraising involved a long-time school teacher who had developed over the years a marvelously effective method of teaching youngsters to read. This woman has some of the highest scores available today in teaching kids to read, write and think. The results this nonprofit gets each year are unbeatable, and they do improve over time. This gives the organization a great case for support.

I was enlisted by the founder's board to assist them in fundraising, with the first step in the process being a development audit to determine past and current fundraising practices and results. In the process of the development audit, it quickly became apparent that the organization had a serious case of founder-itis.

The founder was the executive director, as well as an officer and voting member of the board. The board members were all long-time personal friends of the founder, pretty much ready to approve whatever she wanted to do. The organization's management pattern tended to follow the founder's personal pattern of disjointed, unfocused thinking and planning. No idea was acceptable unless it fit the founder's personal preferences.

Fundraising had come virtually to a halt after the first six years of operation. The board was allowed not to give; personal friends couldn't be solicited for major gifts, simply because of the "embarrassment" that would accrue to the personal relationship.

As I explored further into the organization's history, it was revealed that the founder had early on became embroiled in local school politics around the issue of the knowledge gap between white and African American students, advocating that the school system should be responsible for bringing minority students back into the literate mainstream.

At some point the frustration of dealing with the political and bureaucratic process became too much, and this woman made a precipitous decision to go out and start a literacy charity on her own, letting the schools stew in their own juices, but moving ahead to solve the problem on her own, at least for a few youngsters. Direct service to a few was preferred over an institutional solution.

Whether because of impatience, lack of political skill, lack of supporters or whatever, this charity was created to get action, now. And the resulting situation gives us a good case study in which to see the ingredients that eventually can lead to Founder-itis. More on this tomorrow.