Research on magpie behaviour (link
below) has shown they are not attracted to shiny things, as we like to believe,
but instead they try to avoid them. It set me thinking about the lure of the
shiny new innovative projects that can appeal to funders and philanthropists
giving money to charities.
Charities do great work that changes lives and givers big and small want to support them to do this. But behind that great work is lots of far less interesting things that have to happen. Someone needs to do the payroll; insurance needs to be renewed; minibuses taken for their MOTs; risk assessments and plans written; databases need to be maintained.
Charities do great work that changes lives and givers big and small want to support them to do this. But behind that great work is lots of far less interesting things that have to happen. Someone needs to do the payroll; insurance needs to be renewed; minibuses taken for their MOTs; risk assessments and plans written; databases need to be maintained.
Charities all say that it is hard to raise money
for their core costs yet many grants exclude them. Full cost recovery and
compacts try to address this but often charities have to find ways to package
their overheads into their project costs to get them covered. Or
they spend precious time away from the frontline to gather unrestricted funding
from events and sales.
Similarly, charities bemoan having to find ways to change
or dress up their existing work to look like new projects. What they do is
working well but lots of funders won’t consider supporting it as they want to
back something different and innovative.
As our understanding of magpies has changed, maybe
we should learn from this and be more magpie. Rather than just funding the
attractive work that gives us those shiny case studies. Perhaps we should find
reward in funding what the charity wants and needs. More funders and
philanthropists should willingly fund the photocopier service contract, the
admin worker or the office cleaner. Or be
proud to fund the continuation of existing work that is needed and getting good
outcomes. They might be a little less shiny but they are vital.
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; training for fundraisers and
non-fundraisers involved in bids. www.emmabeeston.co.uk ; emma@emmabeeston.co.uk ; emmabeeston01
Great blog this week Emma. This is so true, and really does cause problems for so many small organisations, who really struggle with the 'packaging' for what is good, solid work within their communities, but will never look 'shiny' to those outside of the day-to-day.... Sarah Taragon (Clarity CIC)
ReplyDeleteHi Emma,
ReplyDeleteThere's a recent, thought-provoking report from Collaborate CIC, Calouste Gulbenkian & Big Lottery arguing, just as you have here, that funders need to be more magpie:
http://www.gulbenkian.org.uk/news/news/279-Collaborate-launches-new-report-on-social-funding-ecology-.html
Best wishes,
Hollie
@holliesc
P.S. I've just discovered you via your weekly GRIN blog. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and ideas.
it's really good,.Thanks for sharing with us,.
ReplyDelete"content agency"
Thanks for sharing this wonderful article,
ReplyDeletenearest shoe repair store Middlesex
It's a wonderful post,
ReplyDeleteI really like it,
What to do after 12th
It was one of very informative and nice post,
ReplyDeleteBetsy DeVos Teaches Education