Several years ago, before the rest of us woke up to the injustice and racism perpetuated by big philanthropy, the nonprofit advocate Vu Le began to promote a radical transformation in fundraising as a means to improve equity in American society. The approach, known as community-centric fundraising, now has many followers and aspires to “transform fundraising and philanthropy, so that they are co-grounded in racial and economic justice,” according to a website created to advance the ideas. Their movement is exciting, intelligent, ambitious, and necessary.
Over the last few months, a debate has intensified in the nonprofit and philanthropic world about whether we should replace the stalwart donor-centric fundraising model with this new approach.
Donor-centric fundraising is built on creating long-term and trusting relationships with donors. Fundraisers understand what their donors want and engage with them as people, not ATMs. This approach produces excellent results and creates giving experiences that are rewarding for donors and fundraisers.
But fundraisers and other nonprofit professionals question whether donors, whose wealth can often be traced to practices that perpetuated racism and inequity, should remain at the center of our work. They claim that donor-centric fundraising ignores community voices and promotes white saviorism, among other critiques.
As an advocate for donor-centric practices, and a fundraiser newly committed to thinking critically about equity, I believe community-centric and donor-centric fundraising are not conflicting philosophies. We don’t need to sacrifice one to achieve the other. Rather, we can and should continue to practice donor-centric fundraising, while involving our donors in our work as we strive to make our organizations more equitable and just.
Push for Systemic Change
But we’ll succeed only if leaders, starting with the CEOs and boards of nonprofits, commit to making their organizations as a whole more community-centric. What does that look like?
It starts by ensuring that their missions benefit the people they serve and that resources are available to engage in thoughtful, in-depth conversations with community leaders and members about their needs. It should also include publicly sharing detailed plans for how they will do right by their tax-exempt status through participating in genuine social change.
After all, the argument that donor-centric fundraising crowds-out community voices is only true if the organization never listened to community members in the first place. And let’s face it, many have not.
Fundraisers must agitate for this to change and serve as organizational advocates to their leadership for an improved commitment to listening to the people we serve. The nonprofit world cannot scapegoat fundraisers or donors when our organizations’ leaders haven’t made a super-charged effort to address systemic failures in health care, education, housing, and economic opportunity.
Donor-centric fundraising thrives when an organization has a clear mission, well-defined philanthropic priorities, and a gift acceptance policy that makes it okay to say “no” to gifts that don’t align with its priorities and values. All of this is crucial to success, regardless of a nonprofit’s fundraising approach. Leadership must create a culture where the needs of those in communities are listened to and acted upon.
Importantly, donor-centric fundraising acknowledges that giving is an emotional act, motivated by a range of needs and experiences.
In my field of health care philanthropy, for example, giving is often part of the healing process. One donor may give out of a desire to find answers to a disease that took a loved one too soon; another may give out of gratitude for a physician who identified a genetic predisposition for cancer and helped a family manage their risk before it was too late.
These days, many are motivated to give because of the heroic efforts of front-line staff in caring for family or community members during the pandemic. It’s impossible to separate patient-centered care from donor-centered fundraising when 70 percent of our donors have had a recent patient experience.
Earmark a Share of Gifts for Equity
So how can our approach to fundraising help tackle the inequities perpetuated by philanthropy?
We can begin by giving donors the opportunity to directly support equity efforts related to the organization’s mission and promoting such giving options in donor communications.
At my own organization, NorthShore University HealthSystem, we are translating an increased focus on health inequities into opportunities for deeper partnerships with donors. For example, like so many other health care providers, we solicit support for charity care for patients who lack insurance coverage. But our leadership has recognized that such measures do little to solve deeper systemic issues that lead to poor health in the first place, such as limited availability of preventive care and early detection of health problems.
In response, NorthShore is launching projects that address the social determinants of health—alongside our regular charity care efforts. One project analyzes colon cancer screening rates, disease rates, and patient outcomes across the region our hospitals and other medical units serve. With this data, we will develop targeted interventions that improve access to preventative care. For donors looking for results, we will paint a clear picture about how their giving to such projects supports incremental progress towards dismantling a racist health care structure.
Large nonprofits should also consider borrowing from the playbook of many universities, which take a small percentage from major and endowment gifts to cover overhead and fundraising costs. Organizations can instead put that money into programs that advance equity.
Organizations can create a board of community members and experts to allocate those funds where they are most needed. This should be done transparently, with donors joining in this process and agreeing to these giving terms. We can say to our donors, loud and proud: This is who we are. We’re tackling equity issues in our community head-on in all facets of our organization. This is what we’re committed to, and because you are a partner in our mission, we need you to invest in this work too.
We may risk losing donors who opt to take their gift elsewhere in response to this approach. But, again, are we ready to stand firm for what our organization is setting out to do? I believe we can infuse a donor-centric fundraising operation with equitable, community-centric practice and bring new levels of resources to programs that tackle injustice.
It won’t happen overnight, but we can make incremental progress and refine our fundraising paradigm as our organizations evolve with us.