Fundraisers have long understood that giving is often a
social activity and have tapped into this with all kinds of dances, dinners and
team events. Increasingly funding is
becoming more social too with crowdfunding and Giving Circles (see link) as
well as small informal groupings.
As someone who is curious about different
ways of funding charities, I recently attended The Funding Network’s Summer
Spectacular in London to experience one of their ‘live crowdfunding’ events.
The
Funding Network (see link) has groups in 13 countries and the London event
meant they have now collectively given £8 million to good causes since they
began in 2002. Their ethos is that philanthropists don’t need to be the super
wealthy. A great impact can be made through members pooling donations. On the
night, four charities pitched to an audience of several hundred people. The
minimum pledge was £100. All the charities exceeded their targets of gaining £6k.
There
was a good buzz on the night – much like at a good fundraiser – but not focused
on one cause, but on a collective desire to make a difference. It was fun and
entertaining. One philanthropist I spoke with said she wanted to enjoy her
giving and not sit at home “bored just pushing the donate button”.
Of course, coming
from the grant making world of application forms, assessments and decision
panels I did have some questions: Was this going to be a beauty pageant with
the rewards going to the most articulate? Would I know if the four charities
were any good? How were they selected? Was the return proportionate to the
charity’s efforts? Here is what I discovered:
The pitch was important, but all
the charities were given a day’s training on presenting and an opportunity to
rehearse. This showed on the night, and will be a useful skill for them to take
away with them.
There is an assessment process and as well as the pitch. We all
had a detailed report on each charity, which certainly held more information
than I have seen some grant panels get.
I still have a question-mark over the
selection process. As members nominate the charities, it would suggest that who
you know (or who knows you) is important and could be an issue depending on how
diverse and how proactive the membership is.
With all the participant charities
receiving training and exceeding their targets, it seemed to be a good return
on their efforts. There was an option for members to offer other support as
well as funding so I am sure many charities will gain from raising their
profile and gaining new contacts.
What struck me most is that I am very lucky to
meet so many inspiring charity leaders, workers and the people they support
through my job. If you’re not in the sector, how would you get to hear about
these smaller charitable groups or hear from someone who has, for example, been
through the prison system? Everyone I spoke to found these opportunities moving
and motivating. Attending a fundraiser for one charity means you know at least
a bit about them already. In this case people were exposed to groups that they
had not heard of before.
Is there anything traditional funders can take from
this social approach? Here are my two takeaways:
- Appreciate the access we have to the great work that is going on in the charitable sector. Instead of bemoaning that those outside the sector don’t know about it, we should do more to reach out and champion the work we see.
- At the end of the next grant round or grant panel, we often end by focusing on all the projects we couldn’t fund. Instead, lets take a moment to feel good about the funding awards that were made and how we are part of the collective effort to make a difference.
Emma Beeston Consultancy
advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes;
selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring. Services for
charities include external perception reviews; bid reviews; coaching for
fundraisers and training for non-fundraisers involved in bids. E: ms.e.beeston@gmail.com; T: emmabeeston01
