xeloda alternativen dulcolax alternativen paroxetine preis nimotop alternative flagyl 500 kaufen revatio 20 mg for erectile dysfunction vasotec 20 mg side effects ponstan 500 acido mefenamico viagra bei frauen schwangerschaft nitrofurantoin retard preis topamax 150 mg ortho cyclen alternatives lincocin 10 xenical preis citalopram 30 mg preis l-tryptophan 220mg sinemet 10100 vs 25100 mobic 20 mg cefixime 100 mg augmentin 500 acai frucht kaufen neurontin 500 mg motilium tabletten ohne rezept 10 x kamagra oral jelly (mixed flavours) flovent 250 diskus energizer ultimate lithium kaufen cefixime 100 mg motilium 10 homöopathischer ersatz für diclofenac flagyl ohne rezept kaufen preis zyprexa adalat preis lithium polymer akku kaufen preis für zyban preis allopurinol alternative drug to detrol alternative måder at leve på anafranil 50mg side effects aleve 200 prednisolone 10 mg que es cephalexin 500mg keppra 750 xr fluoxetine online kaufen minocin 100 mg prezzo cialis auch für frauen adalat 2015 may xenical ราคา 550 exelon 1 5 mg preis preis für zyban actoplus met 15 850 plavix 75 mg preisvergleich aricept 10 mg side effects relafen 1500 mg procardia xl alternative plavix 75 kaufen bactrim alternative treatment ortho cyclen alternatives arimidex 2015 prednisone alternative evecare syrup 200ml liv 52 preis menosan 100ml triamterene alternatives aspirin c generika minocycline 50 cialis generico super active 20mg reglan 10 mg dosage hyzaar 50 side effects fosamax 10 alli alternative uk bentyl 20 mg uso lithium ersatz aspirin kaufen österreich floxin 200 mg tablet pamelor 10mg preço augmentin 250 mg5ml yasmin online kaufen bentyl 20 mg tablets cialis wirkung bei frauen ponstan 500 usa alternative ciprodex methotrexate 60 40 20 rule singulair ersatz erythromycin bs 500 mg probalance 7310 preis ventolin salbutamol kaufen zyrtec tropfen preis l-tryptophan 220mg maxalt preis ventolin spray kaufen xalatan preisvergleich Boards Are People, Too - Collins Group
Skagit Valley Hospital

Boards Are People, Too



Boards don’t give money to the nonprofit organizations they govern. Individuals who serve on boards do.

Why the distinction?

Because it creates the correct paradigm for how development professionals should be approaching their board members for philanthropic support and measuring outcomes.

If I ruled the nonprofit universe, I would ban the term “board giving” from our lexicon when it refers to the total dollar support from the board from one year to the next.

Here’s the problem: Say collective board giving jumps from $90,000 to $110,000 in a given year. Success, right? But what if that jump is attributed to a new board member stepping up with a gift of $30,000 and the remaining board members, who last year collectively gave $90,000, deciding they are now off the hook and dial it down to a collective $80,000. Would you say that your board giving is moving in the right direction?

The reality is that the “board” is not a single-brained collective moving in some sort of unified philanthropic direction. They are individuals, each differently blessed with financial assets and each grappling with life challenges, such as aging parents, financial setbacks, divorce, kids in college, just like everyone else. And, as the illustration above shows, board composition is constantly shifting. This makes a strictly dollars raised criteria not very helpful in gauging whether you are maximizing the philanthropic potential from each of your board members.

What would be better tools for measuring board giving? How about these:

  • Each board member needs to give a gift annually. This tried-and-true measurement must be a stated criteria for any person asked to join a nonprofit board in the 21st century.
  • Each board member commits to including the organization in his/her will or through another planned giving vehicle. Achieving that goal is fairly pie-in-the-sky, but it is not unrealistic to set a goal of having a personal, intentional conversation with each board member about this way of giving.
  • Each board member commits to placing the organization within the top three of all the nonprofits they support. Again, this provides a great place to have that intentional conversation with each board member about where your nonprofit ranks on her or his priority list, and what it will take to move it up the ladder.

You’ll need to develop benchmarks accordingly. Let’s say currently only 75 percent of your board members give annually; 10 percent have a planned gift in place; and 25 percent have your organization in the top three of their philanthropic priorities.

A three-year benchmark might be 100 percent annual support; 20 percent with a planned gift and 35 percent in the top three. A five-year benchmark might be 100-30-50. An every-year benchmark is to commit to having a one-on-one, personal conversation with each board member about her or his philanthropic support.

These benchmarks (tailored and scaled to the size of your nonprofit and sophistication of your development program) can be pursued and realistically attained regardless of the relative wealth of your board members and regardless of the composition of the board at any point in time. It will also maximize giving for the board you have now, not the one you had last year or five years ago.

Stop looking at your board as a single entity. Start looking at the individuals who comprise your board, and begin approaching the task of “board giving” from this perspective.

In doing so, you will get the greatest support possible from your board as a collective and move much further toward your ultimate goal – creating a strong culture of philanthropy within all levels of your organization for generations to come.


Like this post? Why not share it?


About the Author

James Plourde

James Plourde CFRE

Vice President

James is always willing to ask the needed questions, helping his clients clarify their path and giving them the confidence to proceed.


Leave a Reply