top of page

Over the past two to three months, non-profit organisations, like almost everyone else, have been confronted with the need to make rapid and drastic changes in the way they operate as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.


For NGOs relying on donor funds – which requires a demanding double management process even in normal times, this was and remains a particularly challenging situation. During this time, Roots to Rise has been supporting various NGOs in Europe and Africa in the framework of its free emergency support. In the following you will find a summary of the main points and priorities we worked on with our partners. These are valuable lessons learnt for risk and crisis management in NGOs that remain relevant throughout the coming weeks and months, during which we will all have to continue operating with a bucketful of unknowns. And they are also generally valid not only for better managing change, but to be one step ahead in a fast-changing environment.

The immediates: protecting staff and programme participants[1], changing immediate plans, communicating

In view of the sudden lockdown due to the health threat, all NGOs we worked with quickly took decisions on immediate issues, such as safeguarding measures for reducing health-related risks for staff and programme participants, and shifting and adapting all activities online, wherever it was possible. Project and events needed to be cancelled or adapted to respond to the new reality. Organisations providing direct services in their communities had to organise large-scale protection measures to continue serving their communities safely. Many of them put in place humanitarian aid to respond to immediate needs, such as access to nutrition and hygiene kits.

Immediate financial effects on the organisation needed to be assessed, measures taken with regard to projects, operations and staff, and all relevant stakeholders needed to be informed of the changes.


For all organisations, this posed an immediate increase in work – and less time available for other ongoing work. It is no surprise, that those, who already had agile, participatory and empowering leadership and management culture nurturing ongoing innovation in place, had less disruption and were quicker to respond. A decisive advantage could be seen with organisations with strong shared leadership and clear governance in place and those working with systematic risk management: In these organisations the communication and decision taking between the boards and the executive directors were functioning well, so that everyone was able to contribute to solving the numerous occurring issues, rather than posing an additional problem by interfering on the wrong level or leaving executive management alone with decisions they needed consultation on or that are legally in the responsibility of the board.

After first response – moving towards stabilising operations and programmes


After basic operations were secured and work could be continued, reflections on medium-term planning were initiated: What are the implications on the planned work for the rest of the year? Are there any foreseeable changes in funding? Are there any changes in staffing? What are the different scenarios that can be projected – all with continued many variables of uncertainty?

Even if these short -term scenarios are based on some “out of the blue” assumptions due to the prevailing uncertainties on a macro level, this exercise proved to be very helpful for NGO leaders to develop a palette of considerations, ideas and strategies they can draw from for managing ongoing adaptations in the coming months.



One of the key measures was to develop an outreach plan for donors and the elaboration for adapted cases for support for continued or increased funding. Institutional and private donors were contacted referring to the exceptional situation and explaining the specific needs. Grant-giving foundations were invited to exchange on needs to re-assign already approved funds to different projects and activities emerging from the Covid-19 situation. There were discussions, whether and how to make proposals, reporting and use of funds more flexible, in order to use the funds for emergency projects, but also for stabilising the organisation and/or use the funds for investing in organisational development and innovation. This is an opportunity to underline, that implementing partners are crucial for grant-giving foundations: they both need each other to be able to deliver on their mission, and flexible giving is more important than ever.


The response of grant-giving foundations has been varied – while many have signalled openness to consider more flexibility, mostly those that already had a strategic partnership approach with their grantees, many foundations remain largely top-down in their funding, leaving their grantees alone to deal with the aggravated challenges. Roots to Rise is currently conducting research among grant-giving foundations mainly in Switzerland, but also neighbouring countries in Europe and the US, to capture the considerations, restraints and trends that the Covid-19 situation might have triggered among them. The results will be published in this blog soon.


5 secrets for emergency preparedness of NGOs:

1. Leadership: Shared leadership between board and executive management with clear roles and responsibilities

2. Good governance: A board that functions as a team, cultivates the areas of board responsibilities[2] consciously and is able to focus on the right level in crisis situation and adapt all of these areas to the ever-changing situation.

3. Participatory and agile management and leadership culture with staff that is empowered to manage their areas of responsibility

4. A practise of scenario planning and risk management on strategic and operational levels and iterative approach to planning, implementation and reporting as tool for agile management

5. Shared responsibility and understanding of fundraising within the team, understanding that everyone within the organisation (staff, board members) are contributing to fundraising success (or potentially failure, if they are not aware of this), which enables quick translation of the emergency situation into effective communication to donors.

Outlook to a time after Covid-19 and shaping the future


Gradually, NGOs are moving towards assessing the potential impact of the Covid 19 situation on their programmes and organisations in the mid- and long-term. Now is the time to develop larger-scale scenarios with considerations on potential developments in funding, programme approaches and the organisation itself.


On the funding side, scenarios need to be developed considering potential decrease in funding from state funders, grant-giving foundations, as well as small donors. State revenue is likely to go down, after services/the whole economy has been shut down, and lower budgets will be available for NGO funding from governments. Also, state funding priorities may change. NGOs are advised to follow the situation closely, and to jointly advocate and continue raising awareness about the crucial role they are playing for society to be able to re-establish functioning after the crisis.


Many grant-giving foundations are conscious about the needs of their grant-receiving partners, as well as of the fact that they need their partners strong and sound, in order to be able to achieve their own goals. But they are also concerned about the long-term condition of their assets. If they distribute more money than usual, their assets will shrink and produce less revenue, reducing the capacity to have impact in the future. So, they are balancing their measures with these two competing considerations. Here, NGOs have an important role to play: They can raise awareness among grant-giving foundations, with their own donors directly and in conjunction with others, about the importance of stable NGO partners for achieving the purposes of foundations. Suggestions to grant-giving foundations in how they can strengthen their giving strategies, how they can reduce time and resources needed at their end, as well as for their recipients, by giving more strategically, more flexible and with less bureaucracy can be helpful for this dialogue. It is important that NGOs honestly disclose their challenges and also failures - the current crisis situation could be a valuable training ground for this, as everyone is affected by an external situation and it may be easier to disclose weaknesses to donors.


It is estimated that small-donor funding could also decrease drastically, due to many people having less revenue (unemployment, partial unemployment) or the funding priorities of small donors could shift dramatically due to this global event. On this level, it is important for NGOs to reiterate their case for support, but also to show, how continuation of their work – even if it is not directly related to health issues – is crucial for society to be able to find its new normal.


In spite of these actions that can be taken to prevent drastic decrease in funding, the different mid- to long-term scenarios should consider various levels of decrease, and balance them to potential increase in programmatic needs: how are you going to deliver strategically on your mission, even if there might be fewer funds available? How can you leverage impact by focusing your strategy? And what innovative approaches prove to be key for you to succeed in this?


Now is also an important opportunity for NGOs to benefit from the experiences and lessons learned in recent weeks. Due to the situation, many organizations have been forced to adapt their working methods considerably and become more agile. This is the time to scrutinise and further develop governance and leadership in order to establish an agile and participatory management. This is a way of working together that not only allows, but also enables board members, all employees, as well as program participants and partners to contribute their ideas for change and innovation. Now is a moment in time when everyone is facing the challenges of sudden change, and offering them to become active and make their own contribution to shaping the future promises to fall on very fertile ground. Moreover, this is a great opportunity for organisations to tap into the rich knowledge, ideas and resources that may have been dormant in the past due to entrenched processes. These resources are the spark for real innovation, and if the opportunity is taken to move further towards a culture of innovation, it will ensure that the organisation is able to use them continuously in the future.

5 opportunities for NGOs as they go forward to shaping the future

1. Capitalise on the experience and lessons learnt from the past months and drive innovation that helps shaping the future.

2. Influence grant-giving foundations: advocate partnership on an equal footing with funding foundations. Discuss challenges and weaknesses transparently and invite grant-making foundations to consider more sustainable funding programs, flexible donations, core funding, and grants that focus on the needs of the organisation so that it can fulfil its mission.

3. Scrutinise your governance and leadership and move towards agile and participatory management.

4. Mobilise staff and board members to contribute to shaping the future of your organisation and to drive innovation.

5. Listen to the ones you serve (programme participants, partners) to ensure you respond to their needs and invite them to be part for shaping their future and the one of your organisation.

[1] We use the term «programme participants» for groups, individuals or organisations that are otherwise often called «beneficiaries», in order to imply that organisations are taking a participatory approach: Programme participants are decisive in identifying the needs and approaches for the programmes. Many of our partners are already working with such a participatory human rights-based approach. [2] 1) Lead strategically 2) ensure financial stability 3) be an ambassador 4) support and supervise executive management 5) ensure good governance

 
 
 

The most important information for NGOs on possible adjustments in Swiss foundation law


On 30 January, the Center for Foundation Law of the University of Zurich held the 5th Zurich Foundation Law Day. At this well-attended event, representatives from academia and practice discussed the developments and challenges of the current legal environment for foundations as well as possible upcoming reforms in foundation law, inheritance law, supervisory law, regulation, transparency and compliance.


Why is Swiss foundation law important for NGOs?

Swiss foundation law is important for NGOs from two perspectives: On the one hand, the legal form of a foundation is a popular legal form for operational organizations, alongside the association. In particular, changes in supervisory law, licensing procedures and regulations have a direct impact on these NGOs.

On the other hand, changes in legislation may have an influence on the allocation strategy of grant-making foundations, which is important for resource development and fundraising for all NGOs.


Some facts and figures

There are currently over 13,000 charitable foundations in Switzerland with a capital of around 100 billion Swiss francs. 59% of these foundations are grant-making foundations. Last year 349 new foundations were established. At the same time, 216 foundations were liquidated. On the one hand, this means that the foundation landscape is renewing itself more and more, and that a foundation may even close down if its continued existence no longer makes sense. On the other hand, the number of foundations is growing, which means that the sector is in an ongoing process of renewal. In French-speaking Switzerland there were again a particularly large number of new foundations; Prof. Georg von Schnurbein of CEPS at the University of Basel speaks of a foundation boom in this part of the country.


Possible adjustments from 2021

Possible changes in foundation law will be discussed and decided under the Luginbühl parliamentary initiative until the autumn session 2021 of Parliament.


In order to increase the transparency of the non-profit sector in Switzerland, the initiative proposes to establish a national register for non-profit organisations (foundations and associations). The criticism is that there are already national and cantonal registers of foundations, and that a further register may mean additional administrative work for the organisations. However, the tenor is nevertheless positive: Such a register - if the relevant data is clearly recorded and made available - holds many opportunities. In addition to increasing transparency about which charitable foundations exist, what they do and what assets and funding values they hold, it shows potential donors which organisations (foundations and associations) are really tax-exempt and helps NGOs to make their fundraising more effective.


The current Foundation Law states (Art. 84.2) "The supervisory authority shall ensure that the assets of the Foundation are used in accordance with its purposes". In practice, this has led to different interpretations and practices with regard to the mandate of the foundation supervisory authority, depending on the location, with a tendency for the supervisory authority to control rather than supervise foundations. The preliminary draft for the new Foundation Act of the Legal Commission of the Council of States does not envisage any adaptation in this respect. On the other hand, Prof. Dr. Dominique Jakob of the University of Zurich suggests that the authority and responsibility of the Foundation Board be more clearly defined: Art. 84.2 "The supervisory authority must ensure that the management and administration of the foundation are in accordance with the law and the statutes. It observes the principles of legal supervision, subsidiarity and proportionality"..


This raises questions regarding the liability and compensation of members of the board of trustees and executive board. In Switzerland, there is a need for around 70,000 foundation board members and 600,000 board members in non-profit associations. Up to now, organisations that compensate their board members are threatened with the loss of tax exemption. Foundation board members are also liable for the organisation with their private assets. It is therefore becoming increasingly difficult to find people who bring the necessary versatile professional know-how to foundation and association boards.


This starting position is a major hurdle for non-profit organisations: The management and strategic leadership of a non-profit organization is highly complex and the moral responsibility for donated funds is by no means less, if not greater, than the handling of funds in the profit sector - non-profit organizations have obligations to both donors and recipients, as well as to society. It is therefore incomprehensible how non-profit organisations can adequately fulfil these tasks without being allowed to use part of their funds to professionally staff their strategic management.


The possibility of compensating board members would be desirable for the professionalisation of all non-profit organisations.

However, this also means that grant-giving foundations should increasingly co-finance the costs of compensating board members at their recipient organisations, together with other basic costs. Only with strong roots can NGOs achieve a sustainable impact!




Further reading on the topic (in German and French only)

 
 
 

The Swissfundraising workshop, January 22, 2020, on donor surveys and interviews, led by Tom Neukirchen from Foundgiver Social Marketing, focused primarily on direct marketing and mailing campaign fundraising. And there are valuable take-aways for institutional fundraising, as well.


Blurry images on the wall…


One of the main challenges NGOs face in fundraising was aptly compared with Plato’s allegory of the cave: NGOs usually operate with a lot of indirect information, analysing data generated through direct marketing or through general surveys conducted by survey institutions. For grant-giving foundations they rely on information in the press, tips and data from other NGOs or on what can be found on the web, which is often not specific enough.


Interaction with donors is generally a one-way communication: NGOs keep sending calls for donations, supported by information on their organisation and work. But how often do they get feedback, apart from the calls of those who are annoyed by receiving mailings? Even with institutional donors the communication is quite one-sided: Grant agreements describe in detail, when and how grantees need to report back to the donor – and rarely include anything about how the donor is going to share information about the level of satisfaction on project implementation, interaction or developments at their end. Fundraising effectiveness is measured primarily based on monetary return, and the reasons why a donor gives or stops giving often remain blurry.



Your donors are your best fundraising consultants

In order to develop a strategic approach to resource development, it is important to know your donors – they are the best fundraising consultants for you. Donor surveys and interviews, therefore, can help NGOs to become better in their fundraising and public communication.

The good news is: donors are generally interested to be heard and to contribute with their views and knowledge. They value the acknowledgement, when the organisation they support is interested in them and in their opinion.

Tom Neukirchen shared some impressive numbers from surveys conducted by numerous organisations he has been working with: Donors who had been inactive for some time responded with a rate of 0.3-0.7%. That might seem very low, but if among 1000 addresses you have 3-7 people with the potential to be reactivated as donors, that’s at least something. More importantly: Following up with those who take the time to reply promises to yield important information on why donors are leaving and what could be improved.


The full potential of surveys gets clear, when looking at the other donor categories: Among regular active small donors between 4 and 12% replied to the surveys, and among high donors the return rate was even higher: between 10 and 34%! The information provided by these individuals allows the organisation to continue the conversation with them based on their specific interest. And it opens a path to upgrade their contributions.


Donor surveys and interviews

A donor survey should be a stand-alone campaign and not mixed with fundraising campaigns. It can be distributed and collected on paper or online. It should contain 10-30 questions with a mix of open and closed questions, and it should not take more than 10 minutes to respond to. The questions need to be specific and adapted to the different kinds of donors, so that it can be used to upgrade each one from one level of support to the next.


After some general questions on the donor’s understanding of the organisation and its work, assessment of the donor service, criticism and wishes, questions on the specific following sections could be elaborated: Communication, engagement, personal information and specific questions relevant for your organisation.

The opportunity should be used, especially in the high donor segment, to include the question, whether they are interested in a personal in-depth interview. This yields another highly valuable opportunity to increase the relation with these donors.


An important point to be considered is to make sure that everyone in the organisation is part in developing the survey, including the content and the implementation plan. The time needed for such a project depends on the donor base. On average the following timeframe should be considered: 6 weeks for preparations, 6 weeks for responses and reports, as well as 6 weeks for the follow-up. It is crucial to be able to respond to wishes, questions and criticism received through the survey in a time-sensitive manner.


A very surprising fact: it is generally possible to cover the costs of such a campaign by including a general payment slip in the mailing or a donate-button in the online survey. In addition to that, the organisations received valuable information on the preferences of their donors: suggestions for channels of communication, their preferred projects and programmes, and their preferred way of donating.



And other ways to involve institutional donors

It is certainly worthwhile to make the effort and “crawl out of the cave” in order to get a better understanding of the market by creating ways to hear our donors. Surveys and interviews are an excellent means to do this.

I also recommend involving institutional donors in various other ways: Apart from the obvious invitations to events and conferences, consider, for example, consulting them for evaluating your strategy or in the process of developing a new one. The idea is not to create a donor-driven, but a donor-conscious strategy. By involving institutional donors through surveys, interviews or strategy workshops, you not only strengthen the donor’s interest and understanding of your work but benefit from new ideas that help you think out of the box. At the same time, you gain valuable insight on your donors’ views and functioning. By establishing increased two-way communications trustful partnerships can be built. They are the prerequisite for NGOs to be able to openly discuss and raise true understanding of important issues that many donors cringe at, for example the meaning and importance of full cost funding or long-term support.



Beatrice Schulter is passionate about organisational development and change management. As Founder and Director of Roots to Rise, she works to strengthen the organisational roots of NGOs/CSOs by facilitating change processes, the development of strategies, and supporting governance strengthening. Connect with Beatrice on LinkedIn and Twitter.

 
 
 

Follow us

twitter_logo_blau_grau_RVB.png
facebook_logo_blau_grau_RVB.png
linked in_logo_blau_grau_RVB.png

info@roots-to-rise.ch

Roots to Rise

Route de Recolaine 7

2824 Vicques

Switzerland

and

Geneva, Switzerland

 

bottom of page