1

A Strategic Communications Proposal for:

The Council of Literary Magazine Publishers

Anne B. Hollyday

December 5, 2011

2

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Council of Literary Magazine Publishers (“CLMP” or “the Council”) is a national

publishing nonprofit headquartered in New York City that helps more than 530 independent

literary journals by providing a community, informal advocacy, regranting and other funding,

and by offering business advice to member publishers. CLMP has a staff of four and lacks a

communications strategy to attract new funders; CLMP, therefore, has set modest goals of

maintaining its $476,000 in unrestricted revenue. CLMP’s efforts at corporate fund-raising are

weak. Research shows, however, that there are many publishing, media, and distribution

services corporate donors that support similar kinds of publishing and literary-minded activities

as those provided by CLMP. To appeal to this promising target, this communication plan

recommends that CLMP focus on corporations with a stated priority of giving to literary and

independent publishing causes or that have recently given to one of CLMP’s competitor

nonprofits. To do so, CLMP must reposition itself from “a technical services” provider to small

literary independent publishers to the only literary publishing nonprofit that lets corporate

decision makers support a better future for independent literary voices.

II. BACKGROUND

CLMP’s History

Headquartered on Christopher Street in New York City, CLMP was established as an NEA

initiative in 1966, and originally named The Coordinating Council of Literary Magazines (CCLM).

Later renamed CLMP, the Council originally served to regrant, or redistribute, NEA funds to

literary magazines for author payments, design, production, and marketing. The Council was

started by a handful of editors of several distinguished literary journals, including George

Plimpton of The Paris Review. It fostered a collegial atmosphere for publishers and writers. The

Council’s regranting relationship with the NEA changed in the 1980s when the NEA itself started

offering grants to literary magazines. (CLMP web site, 2011)

CLMP’s Key Mission and Goals

CLMP takes seriously its overall mission of promoting literature by making more readers

aware of works by small literary publishers (CLMP Report from the Field, 2011). On a day-to-

3

day level, as a nonprofit “technical assistance” organization, the Council offers advice,

assistance, and training to help member publishers run their businesses. CLMP “acts like a

therapist for independent literary publishers. Sometimes, it’s just talking through issues,” says

Jeffrey Lependorf, CLMP’s executive director (IDI, Lependorf, Schwartz, (G), 2011). CLMP’s

business advice to member publishers ranges from how to restructure to become private or

nonprofit, to how to create a fund-raising plan, to whether to stay in print or go online. The

Council offers LWC}NYC, an annual conference to help literary writers maneuver in the

marketplace; Periodically Speaking, small conferences for literary magazine editors; and virtual

round tables, in-person workshops and conferences for publisher members. CLMP offers

“legitimization in the field,” says Ira Silverberg, a principal at the literary agency Sterling Lord

Literistic, and this year’s moderator of CLMP’s annual celebrity Spelling Bee, its best-known

literary event.

Since taking charge in 2001, Lependorf has transformed the Council’s services by

reaching out to agents, distributors, public relations and marketing professionals, printers,

reviewers, bookstores, and online retailers to build support. “The very definition of

independent literary publishing is that it is mission-driven, not dollar-driven. It serves literature

first and the bottom line last,” says Lependorf. (Travers, 2010). The challenge lies in helping

member publishers overcome their self-perception of being second-class citizens when

compared to their commercial publisher counterparts. “There was the sense that being an

independent press or literary magazine meant to always be ‘less than,’ all the while taking

responsibility for the important work of publishing authors and work critical to the momentum

of producing great literature.” (Travers, 2010). Lependorf has instituted such initiatives as CLMP

Virtual Roundtables — virtual panel discussions around important publishing topics, such as

fiscal sponsorship, and “Big House/Small House” events where large publishers meet with

independent counterparts to share knowledge.

Testimonials of What CLMP Offers the Small Press and Publishers

After spending a decade working in the New York City public schools, Gregory Ayres,

publisher of Loudmouth Press, created his nonprofit startup to focus on books on social justice

4

and politics by artists and writers. "I'm pretty passionate about connecting schools and teachers

to social justice issues," he says. Becoming a member of CLMP allowed him to do so. “When we

first joined CLMP, we were eligible through our memberships for a redistribution of a grant, and

we got somewhere just under $2,000 that we used as seed money for development of the

startup” (IDI, Ayres, 2011). CLMP also regranted about $14,800 of New York State Council of the

Arts (NYSCA) funds in 2010; of this it gave $2,000 to Spinning Jenney to support fees for writers,

editors, and designers; $2,000 to Marsh Hawk Press to support authors’ advances; and $2,000

to Essay Press to underwrite a publicity initiative (IDI, Schwartz, 2011).

“CLMP is an advocacy group for literary magazines and now small publishers,” says

Robert Fogarty, editor of The Antioch Review, a CLMP member publisher. He says Lependorf is

skilled at advocating for favorable funding and financing for the Council before Congress and

other government bodies (IDI, Fogarty, 2011). Lependorf explains that besides routinely

advocating on behalf of CLMP to numerous funders, including the NEA and the NYSCA, he

successfully advocated for changes within the Cultural Data Project, the emerging national

program for data collection in the arts and cultural sector, “that originally did not account for

what publishers do.” CLMP is also a member of the Open Book Coalition, which worked to keep

Google in line in terms of copyright abuses.

“In my mind, [CLMP is] the most important service organization in the country for

literary journals and small presses,” says Don Lee, Editor, Ploughshares. Others share the idea

that CLMP helps its member publishers run their businesses more efficiently. Suzanna de Baca,

a CLMP board member, and Vice President, Affluent and Segment Strategies, for Ameriprise

Financial, Inc., says, “Many organizations can publish great literary works, but running your

organization is the hardest aspect of negotiating practical issues” (IDI, de Baca, 2011).

III. THE PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY: GOING-IN VIEW

In May, Lependorf said while numbers of small publishers are increasing as they fill gaps

left by large, multinational conglomerates interested in mass-market books, the main problem

for CLMP is funding. The biggest barrier he faced in obtaining increased funding was the need

to explain the concept of “technical assistance,” or business advice. Lependorf wanted to

5

maintain government funding and increase individual donors by about 10%. He was less

enthusiastic about growing foundation funding. Lependorf typically successfully applies to the

Lannan Foundation, which funds literary publishing in New York City. He routinely applies to the

Nathan Cummings Foundation, which funds art from disenfranchised communities, without

success. Research into CLMP’s contributed revenue over five years shows that foundation

support for CLMP has been volatile (IDI, Lependorf, (A), 2011). Lependorf does not have a

strategic marketing plan and focuses on cutting costs day to day. Current communications on

the CLMP’s web page are understated, academic in tone, and aimed solely at member

publishers. Except for one page on the web for onetime donors, CLMP’s web site programming,

fund-raising, and events information all focus inward for member publishers.

Unlike several competitors, including the Association of American University Presses

(AAUP) and the Association of Magazine Media (MPA), CLMP charges its member publishers

low membership fees because they are organizations that operate on shoestring budgets, says

Lependorf. As of 2011, the Council’s membership fees equal approximately $44,400, about

10.6% of its $476,235 total annual income. (CLMP Projected FY12 Budget.) The average

membership fee is about $82.50 (an amount calculated by a formula based on each member’s

annual income and expenses (IDI, Lependorf, (B), 2011).

CHALLENGES

a) CLMP’s Role Lacks Emotional Appeal for Institutional Funders

As an advisor to member publishers, the Council lacks the same emotional appeal to

potential institutional donors as nonprofits that help writers directly. While passionate about

the literature that CLMP’s efforts ultimately support (“these literary journals are publishing

some of the best writing that is out there today”), CLMP Board Member Patricia Grodd—a poet;

a relative of the Paul Stuart family (one of CLMP’s few corporate donors), and a Columbia

University English professor who teaches poetry to schizophrenics—acknowledges that, “you

need an explanation to understand us.” “We don’t have a profile like the Red Cross. . . . We

have to be seen as more mainline by donor. . . . We need a new positioning statement,” Grodd

says (IDI, Grodd, 2011). “CLMP has to figure out a way to impress funders with the service they

6

are providing,” says Harold Augenbaum, Executive Director of the National Book Foundation, a

member of CLMP’s competitive set (IDI, Augenbaum, 2011).

b) Lack of Public Awareness from Institutional Funders

The Council faces public awareness challenges that make it less likely to attract

institutional donors. Melanie Fallon-Houska, Director of Corporate Contributions for Random

House, had not heard of CLMP, although Random House Executive Editor Gerald Howard, a

CLMP member board member since 2005, will donate $1,000 from Random House in FY 2012

(IDI, Fallon-Houska, 2011). Likewise, although Starbucks has partnerships with small-business

nonprofits through Opportunity Finance Network, and posts free content from newspapers,

book publishers, and magazines online on its digital network, Joelle Skaga Nausin, Community

Investments, Global Responsibility, Starbucks Coffee Company, said, “I don’t understand how

that would work” when asked whether Starbucks would donate to or partner with CLMP (IDI,

Skaga Nausin, 2011). CLMP does not advertise on other web sites or let others advertise on its

own. “It would appear to be an endorsement on our part,” Lependorf says (IDI, Lependorf, (H),

2011). While he points to CLMP’s robust social marketing community on Twitter and Facebook,

there are few postings on upcoming business and literary events and no discussion groups

there (IDI, Lependorf, Schwartz, (G), 2011).

c) Lack of Board and Member Involvement in Funding

In twenty CLMP member/board member in-depth interviews (IDIs), no board members

had well considered answers on how CLMP might increase funding. CLMP’s contributed

revenue over five years shows a 21.5% decline from $331,869 to $260,340. Funding cuts that

lead to organizations folding can be due to nonprofits’ lack of proactive leadership. “Among

prevalent failure points, the organization’s leaders assume that continued funding from long-

term sources is a given, so they don’t diversify funding streams or otherwise lift a finger.”

(Glasrud, 2011)

OPPORTUNITIES

a) CLMP Small Publishers in Sync with Online Technology Changes

7

CLMP’s advantage over large commercial publishing organizations lies in its ready

adaptation of online media for member publishers. CLMP has offered membership to online

literary publishers since 2001, and has implemented online discussion boards, a hyperlinked

membership directory, and three online listservs. (Council of Literary Magazines and Presses

Invites Online Publishers to Apply for Membership) Lependorf “views this physical evolution (to

digital and E-books) as a way to increase access to small-press books, literary magazines, debut

authors, translated and sometimes neglected print works for more book lovers” (Travers,

2010). “Right now, our small publishing community is more stable than the large publishing

community,” Lependorf says. Admittedly, online technology is changing almost daily, but CLMP

is “poised to take advantages of those changes.”

If literary journals will flourish in a digital world, “it is because they share qualities with

many successful online ventures: skeletal staffs, low overhead and specialized audiences,”

states the New York Times. “For literary journals, the arrival of the Internet has not caused

nearly the same kind of consternation as it has in book publishing or mainstream magazines—

mainly because the profit motive has never really driven these boutique publishers” (Harmanci,

2011). Doubleday, for instance, could spend six figures on an advance to an author for a

hardcover book that ultimately fails—a big loss, says Lependorf.

b) Members and CLMP Share a Mission They Believe In

Among ten IDIs with CLMP members, all believe CLMP’s mission for literary publishers is

essential in spreading the value of art in society. “We’re gatekeepers ultimately,” says Robert

Fogarty (IDI, Fogarty, 2011). “It’s a passion and it’s a war,” says Grodd (IDI, Grodd, 2011). While

CLMP board and publisher members are passionate believers, she explains, “we’re a little bit

rogue in that we don’t cater to big publishers.” CLMP members’ literary reviews cultivate the

best writing from those such as Mario Vargas Llosa, Marilynne Robinson, and Umberto Eco.

c) CLMP’s Celebrity Spelling Bee Has Emotional Appeal for Funders

The Council’s annual celebrity Spelling Bee, “The Place to Bee!,” not only captures a fair

amount of publicity and visibility, but also offers an emotional connection for institutional and

individual donors. This year, the Bee captured press hits from The Wall Street Journal to The

New York Observer, The Village Voice, The New York Post, to Gawker and publishingtrends.com.

8

As Sophie Cottrell, Vice President and Communications Director for Hachette Book Group USA,

Inc., notes, “It’s a unique, fun event that really gets a lot of people excited. It’s quirky and

wonderful. We specifically support that event” (IDI, Cotrell, 2011). Other sponsoring

organizations could be converted to annual donors for CLMP. The Bee, over the past seven

years, usually earns about $25,000 for CLMP annually, part of which comes from corporate

sponsors. Lependorf traditionally markets corporate sponsorship packages for the Bee at the

$250, $1,000, and $5,000 levels.

IV. SITUATION ANALYSIS

Before outlining a communications strategy to help CLMP strengthen its mission of

making readers aware of works by small literary publishers, this paper analyzes both current

and potential funding possibilities from federal and state government agencies, foundations,

corporations, and individual donors—all of which currently donate to CLMP. To do so, five years

of donor funding is scrutinized to develop an accurate picture. (Appendix A).

NEA Funding for CLMP Steady, Not Sufficient

While CLMP was formed as an NEA initiative, and federal government funding from this

source is likely to remain strong, the Council cannot sustain itself from NEA funding alone (see

chart below). The NEA has donated amounts to CLMP ranging from $42,500 to $60,000 over

the past seven years, equaling 29% to 35% of the total amount of government grants CLMP

receives (Bauerlein, 2009). Overall, CLMP receives more funding from the government sector

(49% in 2011) than many competitors; for example, neither the AAUP nor the Authors League

Fund receives government funding. Many believe that the Council has become overly

dependent on NEA funding, failing to address its lack of support from other sources. “It’s our

fault that literary publishers haven’t approached fund-raising professionally,” says Jim Sitter,

former executive director of CLMP in the 1990s (Norris, 1992). CLMP should not count on

increased federal funding from the NEA going forward.

Funding to CLMP from the NEA

Year 2006 2007 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

NEA Grants to CLMP

$42,500 $ 47,500 NA $55,000 $60,000 NA $52,000 Projected

9

Total Government Grants to CLMP

NA $136,865 (35%)

$169,865 $170,120 (32%)

$205,885 (29%)

$127,154 $136,000 (38%)

State Government Funding Likely to Diminish

The balance of CLMP’s government funding comes from a handful of state government

agencies, including the NYSCA and the New York Community Trust. State funding is historically

volatile, however, and state arts council support for literature is dwindling. (CLMP’s Report from

the Field, 2011) Between 2007 and 2011, for example, NYSCA donations to CLMP shrank by

more than 25% from $91,875 to $68,834. The New York State Literary Tree web site shows 168

literary organizations in New York State, all competing for funding. The New York Department

of Cultural Affairs reports that while “the city remains a stable supporter of literary

organizations,” the number of nonprofit organizations that do literary programming and apply

to the Department for funding has increased from 33 organizations in FY 2007 to 50

organizations in FY 2012. “I’m sure we’re not counting on any increases in state government

funding,” says Elliot Figman, Executive Director, Poets & Writers, Inc., a competitor of CLMP.

With New York State still poised for cutbacks, CLMP should not aim for more city and state

government funding in 2012. (Han, 2009)

Individual Donors Likely a Struggle

Individuals are often a source of substantial funding for arts nonprofits nationwide, but

at present none of CLMP’s marketing efforts are aimed at them except for the Annual Celebrity

Spelling Bee. Of CLMP’s total 2011 $260,340 in contributed revenue, individuals donated 4%.

Lependorf says that CLMP invested in a new database this year, Constant Contact, to track

individual donors, but it will take three years to become operational. Canvassing the overall

population to identify enough new individual donors to create a huge impact on CLMP’s total

contributed revenue would prove time-consuming for CLMP’s staff of four. Individual donors to

CLMP are an unlikely source for increased funding for CLMP in 2012.

Foundation Funding for Literature Volatile

Lependorf routinely applies for foundation funding, but foundation support for CLMP is

volatile, falling from $308,170 (59%) and $267,784 (56%) in 2008 and 2009, respectively, to

10

$9,925 (3%) in 2010. CLMP received $5 million from the Lila Wallace-Reader’s Digest Fund

between 1995 and 2001. By 2003, however, that foundation’s funding priorities changed to

support after-school, extended learning time, and arts education (IDI, Dodge, 2011). The Bush

Foundation in Minnesota, which also funded literature, has also stopped. “In 2008, we

transitioned to new funding priorities, and unfortunately, literary nonprofits are no longer one

of our areas of funding” (IDI, Dirksen, 2011).

Foundation donors nationwide have other priorities. While foundation donations rose in

2011 overall, funding for arts and culture (including literature) was 10.5% in 2009, following

health (22.6%), education (22.3%), human services (13.1%), and public affairs (11.8%)

(Foundation Center, 2009). “It’s been really hard for literary nonprofits to make a case for how

they are innovating or changing the social landscape,” says Amber Withycombe, Director of

Development of the Association of Writers & Writing Programs (AWWP) (IDI, Withycombe,

2011). “I think there’s this impression that writers earn money, without recognizing that few

authors are able to live as writers from their book sales,” adds Alexandra Owns, Executive

Director, American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA) (IDI, Owens, 2011). “It’s a peculiar

form for literary nonprofits because there are few foundations that offer grants, and it depends

on who’s there and how open they are to hearing the case for literature,” says Figman. Owens

of the ASJA notes that “applying to foundations is a whole school unto itself,” explaining that

researching types of grants, crafting your proposal, and sitting back and waiting for six or nine

months is a laborious process in which “we’ve never gotten one of them approved” (IDI,

Owens, 2011). Overall, it could be difficult for CLMP to succeed at applying to new foundations

for funding in 2012.

The Corporate Donor Perspective—Promising but Challenging

CLMP’s underdeveloped financial support received from a small number of corporate

donors is noteworthy. Of the $36,000 projected from corporate donors in FY 2012, $25,000 will

come from Amazon and the rest from four or five companies with which CLMP’s board

members have relationships, says Lependorf. Among them are Paul Stuart, William Morris, and

Random House. According to the Foundation Center’s 2011 National Directory of Corporate

Giving, however, there are more than fifty-five corporate donors that help fund literature and

11

print publishing. CLMP faces a battery of challenges in reaching out to these corporate donors.

Chiefly, the Council must address the need to create marketing with a narrative to inspire

corporate donors. Lependorf and several board members admit that the Council has been weak

in pursuing this area. “We would like there to be more synergy with corporations, but it’s very

hard,” says Lependorf. (Lependorf, 2011) “Corporate grants might be efficient to apply for, but

companies will reject you quickly if you don’t prove that your nonprofit aligns with them,” says

Diane Petrino, Vice President of Donations for U.S. Trust (IDI, Petrino, 2011).

Whereas corporations donate either to nonprofits through foundations they establish,

or by using marketing department funds for events, Petrino explains that most plan which

nonprofits to give to in their annual marketing plans. Based on IDIs with corporations that

either donate to CLMP or to its competitive set (Appendix B), CLMP has several corporate

sponsors of its annual Spelling Bee that are logical targets for conversion to annual donors.

Among them, Amy Baker of Harper Collins says, “We support CLMP each year by sponsoring

their Spelling Bee. We admire what they do . . . and it’s a great opportunity to promote our

brand.”

Second, companies such as Amazon have stated Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

tie-ins to supporting literature and publishing. Amazon’s web site states, “A love of reading and

an appreciation for the people who create great books is part of our DNA. … Amazon.com offers

grants for nonprofit author and publisher groups that share our obsession with fostering the

creation, discussion, and publication of books.” Likewise, the Harper Collins’ CSR Initiative

posted on its web site states that, “As book publishers, we dedicate our charitable giving to

causes closest to our hearts—literacy and book-related charities.” Amazon both funds the

AWWP’s annual conference and donates $25,000 annually to CLMP.

When it turns to more corporate funding, the Council must look for ways to advance the

business objectives of each target organization. Harold Augenbraum, Executive Director of the

National Book Foundation, says his organization has developed a strategic alliance with

Scholastic in which both organizations will webcast a team press conference: “Everything . . .

really depends on what kind of synergy could be developed with the corporation.” (IDI,

12

Augenbaum, 2011) Scholastic supplied cash and in-kind services; The National Book Foundation

supplied content and an audience of 30,000.

“Because we print books, we are in association with all of these organizations that have

authors and books . . . but it is usually not a monetary arrangement,” says Tracy Noble, Head of

Marketing at Friesens, a book printer that offers in-kind services like free printing to the AWWP

and the AAUP. “It’s going to make sense—whether they’re retailers or publishers—to support

companies in our industry,” says Elizabeth Fielding at Ingram Content Group, Inc., which

sponsors the National Book Foundation’s annual conference (IDI, Fielding, 2011). Says Owens,

“we are focusing our efforts on corporate sponsorship money and more commercial interests,”

including Barnes & Noble, Yahoo, and Google. “Being seen as a supporter of traditional

journalism or literature is a good match for these companies.”

There is a broader argument for CLMP to turn to a wider range of corporate funding

relationships. Says Peter Kaufman, who understands that CLMP has lost its foundation funding:

“They’re going to have to overcome their strange bias against corporations and try to be much

more proactive to get that kind of support. . . . I think there’s a real opportunity for companies

that don’t have a functional stake in the book industry or in the communications technology to

create alliances” (IDI, Kaufmann, 2011). He adds that “for their part, representatives of the

commercial sector—publishers, media companies, agents, investors—often are insufficiently

prepared to search for opportunities effectively across noncommercial institutions.”

V. THE PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY, REFRAMED

While research at the outset of this strategic communications plan suggested increasing

CLMP’s contributed revenue through foundation and government support, findings from IDIs

with prospective institutional donors, donors to the competitive set, and CLMP members and

board members suggest that many corporate donors invest in other literature and publishing

nonprofits. This is the most promising target market. For example, corporations donated from

$250,000 to $300,000 to Poets & Writers last year.

To win more corporate support, the CLMP brand should continue its progression from

behind the scenes as a “second-class citizen” when compared to its commercial publisher

13

counterparts, to becoming a creative business partner for publishers, distributors and other

companies with an interest in publishing nonprofits.

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

Target Audience: Corporations

Corporations with existing corporate giving and corporate foundation departments with

a stated priority of donating to literary or publishing causes or that have donated to CLMP’s

competitors in the past two years are the target. Besides those corporations listed on web sites

of the competitive set, the Foundation Center’s National Directory of Corporate Giving (2011)

lists 55 such corporate donors. Based on IDIs with this target audience, 17 of these corporations

are added to the target audience for CLMP in Appendix C. They have the potential to add to

CLMP’s revenue if CLMP develops valuable, long-term multi-level partnerships. CLMP should

reposition itself from being a “technical services provider” for small literary magazines to being

the only literary publishing nonprofit that lets corporate decision makers support a better future

for independent literary voices.

CLMP should target enough corporate donors to increase funding by approximately 15%

in 2012. CLMP has a chance to inspire alliances with corporate funders by offering success

stories about small publishers and high-caliber writers from diverse cultural backgrounds. Two

such examples are author Sherman Alexie, winner of the 2010 California Young Reader Medal;

and Christopher Abani, a writer whose poetry, plays, and fiction examine Nigerian political

corruption. Both writers were originally published in CLMP’s literary journals.

This target audience can be further segmented by industry sector in order of priority:

Book and Magazine Publishers, Electronic Publishers

There are already tie-ins through CLMP’s board members to publishing companies,

including Random House; Little, Brown and Co.; Doubleday Broadway; Akashic Books; The Daily

Beast; and Black Issues Book Review. CLMP should also approach thought leader magazines

that publish literature, including The Atlantic, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, and Harper’s (which

hosted and helped fund CLMP in the 1980s). Many of these organizations have established

multimedia platforms that will give CLMP more visibility, while CLMP will offer them access to

more literary writers. The Atlantic, for instance, includes TheAtlantic.com, The Atlantic Wire,

14

and AtlanticLive events, not just the magazine. There is an opportunity for integrated

sponsorships and package deals, as well as participation in thought leadership conferences.

Amazon.com already sponsors literary events, through the “Supporting the Writing

Community” program on its web site.

Media and Entertainment Corporations

Media organizations such as Bloomberg LP, Time Warner, The New York Times, The Los

Angeles Times, the Independent Film Channel, and PBS, will recognize the appeal of building a

relationship with an organization that provides an “oasis of literary culture,” as well as bringing

new culturally diverse writers to the marketplace. There are considerations for small literary

works that may become films or television shows.

Paper, Printing Companies, and Electronic Distributors

There is a direct tie-in with the CSR mandates of corporations, including Friesens and

Ingram, and the nonprofits they partner with for in-kind services and donations. The

Washington, D.C.-based trade group, the Print Counsel, for instance, has alliances with more

than fifty-six corporations. (Print Counsel web site)

Self-Publishing Companies, including Amazon’s CreateSpace, Lulu, AuthorHouse,

iUniverse, and Xlibris

These organizations support leading publishers and independent authors with self-

publishing, on-demand printing, and online distribution services. As many CLMP publisher

members have moved online to save costs, self-publishing companies will want to show them

their wares.

Objective for communications

The objective for communications is to convince key decision makers (marketing

executives or corporate grant makers) in target corporations to increase corporate donations

and in-kind services to the Council so that corporations can have the most fulfilling experience

possible enjoying CLMP member publishers’ fiction, poetry, essays, nonfiction, and reviews.

Role for communications

15

The role for communications is to evoke awareness and excitement in key corporate

decision makers about CLMP’s member publisher small literary presses so that they will donate

to CLMP.

Messaging

The need among national small literary publishers for additional support is real, and

they must become more visible to corporations in a position to help. CLMP is the only

organization dedicated to securing a better future for this often overlooked, under-financed

community.

Engaging the Target with the Message / Tactics

Of the approximately forty-four corporations on their target list, CLMP should aim to

approach all of them and to aim to meet with them. Of those meetings, CLMP should aim to

garner seven to ten donations at an average rate of $5,000 per donation, which should lead to

at least a 15% increase in contributed revenue. CLMP’s communications plan includes a range

of tactics across several touch points that will be manageable for the Council’s staff of four.

1) Member publishers and board members can spread CLMP’s value to corporations

through word-of-mouth marketing, publicizing events, and offering corporate sponsors

free excerpts from select literary journal editions.

2) CLMP must tailor its media kits specifically for corporations. They should spell out what

corporate donors receive, list names of other donors, and include an annual report.

Offerings to corporate donors include free attendance at the annual spelling bee,

literary conference, and virtual roundtables for publisher members.

3) CLMP can create a fund-raising advisory board as part of its regular board, and this

board should harness personal connections to influence more corporations to write

checks to CLMP. Bi-monthly meetings for member publishers and board members

should be mandatory to initiate fund-raising methodologies.

4) Strategic alliances including affiliate marketing should be created with larger literary

magazines, including The New Yorker, Harper’s, and Vanity Fair. These larger, better

known literary organizations can help CLMP gain visibility by cosponsoring their events.

In return, these larger magazines will gain access to new literary voices through CLMP.

16

5) CLMP should create a designated web page for corporate donors with suggested

donation amounts, lists of other corporate donors, and member publisher testimonials.

This information should also be included in CLMP’s newsletter, which should be printed

and sent to potential corporate donors.

6) CLMP can publicize itself through affiliate marketing opportunities with the larger

literary magazines in item #4. CLMP will promote these groups by using their logos on its

corporate donations page, and these magazine groups will publish CLMP’s logo on their

web sites.

7) CLMP should hire a freelance strategic communications expert or designate a board

member to manage this function. Among this person’s responsibilities are to create the

“Best Small Press Publisher Awards” to be given out at the annual celebrity Spelling Bee.

This awards ceremony should be promoted for additional press coverage and to capture

corporate attention and funding. With these awards, a regional-pride connection can be

created. For instance, if a Phoenix-based publisher wins the award, a Phoenix

corporation may be motivated to donate to CLMP.

8) CLMP can use the freelance strategic communications expert to resurrect CLMP’s

annual report and post it on its web site as an added incentive for corporate donors and

sponsors. Other nonprofits use the annual report as an incentive for donors.

17

VII. APPENDICES

Appendix A: CLMP Annual Total Contributed Revenue and Expenses 2007 – 2012

Categories for Grant Income

FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Projected

*Board NA $2,150 $6,050 $6,500 NA NA

Individual NA $22,860 $7,545 $25,082 $11,579 $34,600

Corporate $5,700 $ 8,500 $11,750 $19,050 $40,920 $36,000

Foundations $189,224 $308,170 $267,784 $ 9,925 $80,687 $64,000

Government (fed, state, local)

$136,865 $169,865 $170,120 $205,885 $127,154 $136,000

Special Events Fund-Raising

$10,505 $15,745 $24,025 NA NA

Other Contribution

0 0 0 NA NA

Total Contributed Revenue

$331,869 $522,050 $478,994 $290,467 $260,340 $270,600

Total Unrestricted Revenue**

NA $678,773 $580,179 $525,931 NA $476,235

Total Earned Revenue

NA $182,505 $171,308 $153,840 NA NA

Total Expenses

NA $606,835 $579,315 $469,232 NA $482,242

Source: The New York State Cultural Data Project * Donation figures for the Board do not include donations to the annual celebrity Spelling Bee. ** Includes investments & transfers

18

APPENDIX B: COMPETITIVE SET AND ANALYSIS OF THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS

Council of Literary Magazine Publishers (CLMP)

Association of Writers & Writing Programs (AWWP): provides community, opportunities, ideas, news, and advocacy for writers and teachers. We support over 34,000 writers, 500 college and university creative writing programs, and 100 writers' conferences and centers.

Association of American University Presses (AAUP): serves scholarly communications through professional education, cooperative services, and public advocacy.

Association of Magazine Media (MPA): is a non-profit organization representing magazine media, print and digital. MPA provides an organized forum in which publishers can advance their common interests.

Association of American Publishers (AAP): is the trade association for the U.S. book publishers, providing advocacy and communications on behalf of the industry.

American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA): is the only professional association focused on independent nonfiction writers. Members share expertise, ideas, opportunities, and inside information critical to success in a constantly changing environment.

The Authors Guild (TAG): is the nation’s largest society of published authors and the leading writers’ advocate for fair compensation, effective copyright protection, and free expression.

Poets and Writers: is the primary source of information, support, and guidance for creative writers. Founded in 1970, it is the nation's largest nonprofit literary organization serving poets, fiction writers, and creative nonfiction writers.

The National Book Foundation (NBF): is an American nonprofit literary organization established "to raise the cultural appreciation of great writing in America."

COMPETITIVE SET (See Corresponding Organizations Above)

Benefit to Target CLMP AWWP AAUP MPA AAP ASJA TAG P&W

NBF

Offers best practices advise to small nonprofit publishers

++ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Participates in informal advocacy for members

+ + - + + 0 0 - -

Regrants or redistributes funding for members

+ - - - - - - - -

Creates a community for members + + + + + + + + +

19

Uses small publisher member testimony as poof of success

+ 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0

Board has corporate donor connections + + + +/- + + 0 - +

Potential to raise awareness /educate potential corporate funders

+ + + + + + + + +

Collaborates with other publishing/literary nonprofits to co-host events

+ + + + 0 0 + 0 +

Members publish a wide range of literary subject matters and genres

+ + + + + + + 0 +

Total Scores 10 6 6 5 5 4 4 2 4

20

APPENDIX C: REPRESENTATIVE POTENTIAL CORPORATE DONORS FOR CLMP

COMPANIES THAT DONATE TO LITERATURE, PUBLISHING, PRINTING (Foundation Center) Bertelsman Peoples Bancorp Foundation, Inc. Starbucks Corporation Leo Burnett Company Chicago Sun-Times Charity Trust Hubbard Broadcasting Foundation Los Angeles Times Newspapers Philadelphia Newspapers Ruder Finn Fund Kaplan Publishing Hachette Book Group USA, Inc. Ruder Finn Chicago Sun Times Chicago Tribune Dow Jones Los Angeles Times Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. COMPANIES THAT DONATE TO COMPETITIVE SET Penguin Group Monsanto Company Bank of the West Bank of America Google Disney Publishing Worldwide Booze-Allen Bloomberg Reed Business Information GlaxoSmithKline Code Mantra Ebrary Glatfelter Macmillan Publishers Pearsons Education R. R. Donnelley & Co. Simon & Schuster John Wiley & Sons Scholastic Press Boyds Mill Press Perseus Book Group

21

WoldColor American Wholesale Book Company Grove/Atlantic HBO Horizon Paper Co.

22

APPENDIX D: A. Primary Resources – Interviews In-depth interviews conducted by Anne Hollyday, May – December 2011 CLMP Staff and Board (Hollyday, phone interview with Suzanna de Baca, Vice President, Affluent and Segment Strategies, Ameriprise Financial, Inc., October 3, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Patricia Grodd, Columbia University English Professor, October 6, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview (A) with Jeffrey Lependorf, Executive Director; Jamie Schwartz, Programs Director; CLMP, May 10, 2011; in-person interview (B) with Jeffrey Lependorf, June 11, 2011; phone interview (C), August 9, 2011; phone interview (D), October 5, 2011; phone interview (E), October 12, 2011; phone interview, (F), October 20, 2011; in-person interview (G), November 15, 2011; phone interview (H), December 1, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Steph Opitz, Membership Director, CLMP, December 1, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Constance Sayre, Market Partners International, September 12, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Ira Silverberg, Principal, Sterling Lord Literistic, September 26, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Johnny Temple, Publisher, Akashic Books, September 30, 2011) CLMP Members (Hollyday, phone interview with Gregory Ayres, publisher, Loudmouth Press, September 14, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Robert Fogarty, Editor, The Antioch Review, September 15, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Stephanie G’Schwind, Publisher, Colorado Review, October 12, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Tyler Meier, Managing Editor, Kenyon Review, September 15, 2011) Nonprofit Sector (Hollyday, phone interview with Erin Dirksen, Grants Administrator, Bush Foundation, November 21, 2011)

23

(Hollyday, phone interview with Holly Dodge, Grants/Contracts Administrator, Wallace Foundation, October 14 , 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Elliot Figman, Executive Director, Poets & Writers, November 22, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Peter Givler, Executive Director, The Association of American

University Presses, November 1, 2011)

(Hollyday, phone interview with Andi Sporkin, Vice President for Communications, Association

of American Publishers, October 20, 2011)

(Hollyday, phone interview with Danai Pointer, Director of External Affairs, Department of Cultural Affairs, New York City, December 1, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Mark Rossier, New York Foundation for the Arts, November 13, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Alexandra Owens, Executive Director, American Society of Journalists and Authors, November 1, 2011) (Hollyday, Internet interview with Elizabeth Howe, Executive Director, Authors League Fund, October 10, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Amber Withycombe, Director of Development, the Association of Writers and Writing Programs, November 4, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Harold Augenbaum, Executive Director, The National Book Foundation, November 18, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Steve Schwartz, Executive Director, Witter Bynner Foundation, November 16, 2011) Corporate Sector (Hollyday, phone interview with Amy Baker, Senior Director of Marketing, Harper Collins / Harper Perennial, November 17, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Sophie Cottrell, Vice President and Communications Director for Hachette Book Group USA, November 4, 2011) (Hollyday, Internet interview, Melanie Fallon-Houska, Director of Corporate Contributions, Random House, October 24, 2011)

24

(Hollyday, phone interview with Elizabeth Fielding, Corporate Contributions, Ingram Book Content, November 17, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Peter Kaufman, Founder and President, Intelligent Television November 23, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Tracy Noble, Head of Marketing, Friesens, October 31, 2011)

(Hollyday, phone interview with Diane Petrino, Vice President of Donations, U.S. Trust, November 4, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Rachel Speilman, Vice President, Corporate and Public Trust, Ruder Finn, November 30, 2011) (Hollyday, phone interview with Joelle Skaga Nausin, Community Investments, Global Responsibility, Starbucks Coffee Company, November 17, 2011) B. Secondary Resources

About NYSCA Grants, Program Guidelines, NYSCA.org web site Anonymous, “Digital Becomes the ‘New Normal’ Fueled by Rising Collaboration Across the Entertainment & Media Industry, Says PwC,” U.S. Newswire, June 14, 2011 Frederick Barthelme, “The Web is a Gun,” The Atlantic Online, February 1997 Mark Bauerlein, Editor, “National Endowment for the Arts: A History 1965-2008,” National Endowment for the Arts, 2009 Mike Boehm, “In Taking Stock Of Arts, A Downward Trend Is Seen,” Los Angeles Times, January 24, 2011 Peter Bolton, “Corporate Giving Slow to Recover as Economy Remains Shaky,” The Chronicle of Philanthropy, July 24, 2011 Arthur C. Brooks, “Is There a Dark Side to Government Support for Nonprofits?,” Public Administration Review, May - Jun., 2000 “Council of Literary Magazines and Presses Invites Online Publishers to Apply for Membership,” clmp.org CLMP Projected FY12 Budget

25

CLMP web site, October 2011 Douglass P. Crouse, “PR Firm Finds Causes Effective; Encourages Client Ties to Non-Profits,” The Record, February 24, 2008 J. Gregory Dees, “Enterprising Nonprofits,” Harvard Business Review, January/February 1998 Laura Diamond, “UGA Press thinks ahead to stay afloat,” The Atlanta Journal – Constitution, June 29, 2009 Foundation Center, General Foundation Funding Patterns, 2009 Foundation Center, National Directory Of Corporate Giving, 2011 Mary Gannon, “Academy Suffers Cutbacks, Layoffs,” Publishers Weekly, January/February 2002 Bruce Glasrud, “The Night Your Nonprofit Died,” Nonprofit World, July/August 2011 Angela Han, “Grantmakers In The Arts, Public Funding For The Arts: 2009,” GIA Reader, Summer 2009, giarts.org Reyhan Harmanci, “Literary Journals Thrive on Paper and Otherwise,” The New York Times, April 8, 2011 Robert Harrington, “Arts and culture mergers: Trends, challenges and benefits,” Causeplanet.org, Nov 13th, 2006 Highlights Of Foundation Giving Trends, Foundation Center, September 2011 Peter Kaufman, “Marketing Culture in the Digital Age: A Report on New Business Collaboration Between Libraries, Museums, Archives and Commercial Companies,” Intelligent Television, August 25, 2005 Steven Lawrence, Foundation Growth and Giving Estimates: 2011, Foundation Center Jeff Lependorf, CLMP’s Report from the Field, 2011 New York State Literary Tree web site (http://www.nyslittree.org/). Kathleen Norris, “Small Press Publishing in the Nineties,” Publishers Weekly, September/ October 1992 Print Counsel web site

26

Calvin Reid, “Startup Loudmouth Press Offers Chance to Lay Blame,” Publishers Weekly, March 16, 2010 Staff, “In the Arts: Culture Groups Nervous Over Deduction Limit,” Chronicle of Philanthropy, September 20, 2011 Staff, “Pittsburgh’s Poetry Forum to Close,” Publishers’ Weekly, February 18, 2009 The Nonprofit Sector In Brief, Public Charities, Giving, and Volunteering, 2010, The Urban Institute, 2010 Kate Travers, “Small Press Maestro: Jeffrey Lependorf and the Ecosystem of Independent Publishing,” Publishing Perspectives.com, October 22, 2010 Scott Turow, “Would The Bard Have Survived The Web?”, The New York Times, February 14, 2011 Urban Institute’s NCCS National Center for Charitable Statistics web site http://www.nccsdataweb.urban.org/tablewiz/tw_bmf.php M. Vinocur, “Join The Print Council Crusade,” American Printer, December 2003 Emily Witt, “Ben Greenman Beats Nancy Franklin and Jonathan Burnham in Literary Spelling Bee, Occupies Alphabet,” The New York Observer, October 25, 2011