Web view2017 SVP Lead Partner Resource Guide. Section One: SVP. SVP Purpose, Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals Page 2. SVP Organizational Chart Page 3. SVP Model for

2017 SVP Lead Partner Resource Guide

Section One: SVP

1. SVP Purpose, Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals Page 2

2. SVP Organizational Chart Page 3

3. SVP Model for Nonprofit Capacity Building Page 4-5

Section Two: Lead Partner Responsibilities, Tools & Tasks

1. Lead Partner Job Description Page 5-7

2. Lead Partner Overview Page 7-8

3. Overview of First ‘Year’ of Investment Page 9

4. Summary of Lead Partner Required Tasks Page 10

5. Memorandum of Understanding/ Investee Cycle Page 11-12

6. Introduction to Planning Tools Page 13-14

7. Strategy Map Page 14

8. Investment Plan Narrative Cover Page Page 15

9. Current Work Plan Narrative Page 16-20

10. Partner Volunteer Request Form Page 21

11. Opportunity Fund Guidelines Page 22

12. Last Six Month of an Investee Engagement Page 23-24

Section Three: Theories

1. Building & Feeding Relationships, Scaling Impact & Strategic Thinking Page 25

2. Exit Strategy Page 26-28

Section Four: Lessons Learned From Those Who Have Gone Before Us

1. Lead Partner Philosophy – A Tip Sheet Page 29

2. Lessons Learned - Building Capacity in Investees & SVPs Page 30-31

3. The Eight Characteristics of Nonprofit Organizations Page 32

4. A Comparison of For-Profit and Nonprofit Structure Page 34-35

5. 15 Years of Grantmaking Lessons Learned - The Packard Foundation Page 36-37

6. Guidebook to Orient Technical/Professional Volunteers to the Nonprofit Sector Page 38-54

7. Glossary of Terms Page 55

8. SVP Self-Assessment Tool for Volunteers Attached

SVP Boulder County - Lead Partner Resource Guide, 2017 1

Purpose, Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals

SVP Boulder County Strategic Plan Highlights 2014-2017Values

To make a deep and sustainable positive impact on our Boulder County Community, SVP believes in:1) Engaging and Learning – Developing the impact of our partners and the broader Boulder County community through active engagement and education in nonprofit capacity building;2) Leveraging and Strengthening -- Leveraging the combination of human and financial capital to strengthen the internal and external capacity of local nonprofits to pursue their missions and create a positive ripple effect throughout our community;3) Connecting and Collaborating -- Connecting and collaborating with individuals, nonprofits, businesses and community leaders to strengthen Boulder County resources.4) Inclusivity and Respect – Fostering inclusivity and respect for all community members to help build the foundation of community solutions and sustainability.5) Risking and Growing – Risking change and failure in the pursuit of mission as the path to growth and success.

Vision Statement

Boulder County lives are enriched by a network of smart, efficient and impactful nonprofits.

Mission StatementSVP elevates philanthropy to create a network of stronger, more sustainable Boulder County

nonprofits through collaborative relationships.

Purpose StatementWe propel better nonprofits and better philanthropists toward a better Boulder County.

Priority Strategies 2014-2017Strengthen capacity building l Innovate to meet community needs l Grow impact

Strategic Goals 2014-2017

Goal 1: Develop and leverage human and financial capital to build the capacity of Boulder County nonprofits. Goal 2: Improve internal infrastructure and capacity to realize mission impact. Goal 3: Increase community awareness and understanding of mission, value and approach of SVP Boulder County. Goal 4: Establish SVP Boulder County as a community engagement leader in the social sector.Goal 5: Update outcome evaluation to better assess impact and to improve programs.

Social Venture Partners Boulder County, Inc1877 Broadway, Ste 100 │ Boulder CO 80302 │ 303.840.0165 │ www.svpbouldercounty.org │@svpboulder


SVP Organizational Chart


The SVP Model for Nonprofit Capacity Building

If a nonprofit program can be compared to a business product, the nonprofit’s capacity to deliver that program can be compared to the support that goes into selling a product. Marketing, management, human resources, and finance departments all work together to support the production and delivery of a quality product - so too with nonprofits. The basic infrastructure of the organization must be strong in order to provide quality programs and services for their clients.

The SVP focus on capacity building is an intentional effort to help nonprofits overcome the challenges any business faces in sustaining organizational systems. Borrowing from the practices of the venture capital world, SVP strives to build stronger organizations that run more effective programs.

Traditionally, nonprofits have focused on service delivery and improving their programs. Building organizational capacity is rarely a priority because client needs are so acute. The focus on programs drives staffing, with strong operations considered a secondary goal. Funders have added to this program focus by limiting allowable administrative costs and rarely providing general operating support. Raising funds for capital projects or program costs is much easier than raising funds to allow nonprofits to invest in their own infrastructure.

SVP helps nonprofits become as effective as possible in delivering programs and services to their community through a capacity building approach. We define organizational capacity building as:

The development of core skills, management practices, strategies and systems to enhance an organization’s effectiveness, sustainability and ability to fulfill its mission.

In short, the capacity building work we do helps nonprofits help themselves. We recognize that nonprofits are the program experts. Partners invest their skills and capacity building assistance in developing business strategy and operations, generally leaving programs and services to the nonprofit experts.

An Investee’s capacity evolves as the organization develops and changes. Over the course of a multi-year investment relationship, the nature of SVP’s investment may also change.

Categories of Capacity Building

“Capacity building does matter, and it does make a difference in a nonprofit’s ability to fulfill its aspirations. The sooner nonprofits realize this and start assessing their capacity needs, and the sooner funders increase their support for capacity building efforts, the better off nonprofits – and society as a whole – will be.” Effective Capacity Building in Nonprofit Organizations

SVP funds organizations that understand the importance of capacity-building and are willing to work with SVP Partners. In response to Investees’ needs, SVP provides skilled volunteers, technical assistance via professional consultants, or training opportunities in the broad areas described below:

Mission, Vision, Strategy and Planning- Organizational assessment, business plan or strategic plan development, long-range planning, needs assessment, and retreat facilitation.

Financial Management- Accounting procedures and systems, budget development, financial reporting, and auditing.


Fund Development- Fundraising plan development, revenue diversification, fundraising software analysis, fundraising department planning, donor cultivation, grant research and development, campaign planning, and special event planning.

Information Technology- Technology needs assessment, technology planning, software and hardware analysis, systems networking, database development, and website development.

Marketing and Communications- Communications and marketing plan development, collateral material design, media training, marketing campaign development, P/R and media outreach, and communications department planning.

Program Design and Evaluation- Outcome-based program planning, development of evaluation framework and tools, data management, data analysis, and reporting.

Human Resources- Personnel policy development, Performance reviews, hiring and recruitment procedures, job description development, staff planning, succession planning, and staff retention.

Legal Affairs- Insurance review, employment law, real estate negotiation, contract review, 501c3 creation, corporate by-laws development, and regulatory agency compliance.

Leadership Development- Executive and team coaching, peer networking, formal leadership training, and management skills training

Board Leadership- board development planning and training, policies and procedures development, skills assessment, board evaluation, and fundraising training.

Lead Partner Job Description

The Lead Partner plays a key role in SVP's virtual structure because the Lead acts as the bridge between SVP and the Investee and is pivotal to developing a successful relationship. The Lead Partner holds the relationship and exemplifies our vision for how the Investee/SVP relationship will scale impact. This person wears several hats:

1) Build trust and hold the primary relationship with the Investee (particularly with the Executive Director and Board Chair).

2) Co-design and support a common vision for the outcome of the investment.3) Work regularly with the Investee to identify and prioritize volunteer projects, make sure

everything is on-track, and ensure the whole team is headed in the same direction.4) Mobilize Partners with the passion and expertise necessary to complete discreet projects to

strengthen the Investee (based on the strategy map, work plan & mutually agreed upon goals).5) Ensure shared communication and transparency amongst all Partners working with an Investee

and between the Investee and SVP staff.6) In other words, the Lead does not complete projects – the Lead helps ensure Partners get

connected to complete Investee projects, and provides leadership from planning and orientation to follow-through and assessment.

7) Model the way SVP works and our values.


Investee RelationshipThe Lead is in the best position to build an open, trusting SVP relationship with their Investee. Initially, the Lead works with the Executive Director (ED) and Board Chair of the Investee to craft a relationship strategy map and annual work plan. From there the group defines volunteer opportunities that will meet our goals to scale the organization. The Lead should work with the Investee to ensure that all projects are truly needed and to stagger their timing so that all projects can be completed (and no one is overloaded). As resource needs or obstacles arise throughout the year, the Lead can work with SVP ED to brainstorm, find connections to outside resources, or simply provide perspective. The Lead may also initiate an application for funds from the Opportunity Fund [as funds are available; the Opportunity Fund is incorporated into an annual budget, resources permitting], if Partners have been solicited to assist with a specific project, and response has not allowed SVP to deploy internal resources to complete the project in a timely manner.

Throughout the year, the Lead is responsible for establishing regular communications (at least twice a month) with the Investee to ensure ongoing progress toward milestones. At the end of the first year, and annually thereafter, the Lead will support the ED through the reinvestment application process to the Investee Selection Committee (ISC). This will include reporting on progress made towards annual objectives, and outlining “capacity building needs” for the Investee, and how SVP will partner with the Investee in this work.

Volunteer CoordinationLeads are responsible, once volunteer projects are identified and prioritized, for directly contacting SVP Partners to let them know of strategic projects in need of Partner support. SVP ED will provide volunteer recommendations. Leads are responsible for facilitating orientation of SVP volunteers who will be working with an Investee. The purpose is to ensure that the SVP volunteers are 1) familiar with the organization, 2) understand their role and expectations and 3) know where to turn for support.

Throughout the year, the Lead has regular contact with Volunteers using emails or phone calls to support their individual efforts, discuss obstacles and help them succeed. To keep the group as a whole connected and motivated, the Lead can use a few vehicles including bimonthly or quarterly update emails or convening 2-3 meetings throughout the year to provide mutual support, opportunities for collaboration and cross-learning and group discussion of the Investee needs, objectives and future plans.

Similarly, it is important to communicate challenges and successes with the Investee to all Partners. SVP ED requests a regular report (ideally every other month).

The LP is expected to be engaged in managing the Investee team’s use of SVP Connect (intranet).

It is not necessary (or, in fact, advisable) for a Lead to work on projects underway at an Investee. The Lead catalyzes other Partners’ support.

It is essential to keep volunteers motivated and connected, and ensure that the work that SVP is doing is useful to the Investee, and that the Investee is aware of the various projects underway.

Lead Support and SVP ActivitiesLeads can use the following opportunities to further strengthen their work with Investees: Participate in an initial kickoff meeting and check-in meetings with your volunteer team. Meet with an experienced Lead Partner mentor. Seek counsel from the Lead Partner Coach. Quarterly sessions with all Leads to share learning, exchange ideas and learn about local resources.


Communicate with SVP staff to update on progress and problems, identify the best resources or processes.

Skills Needed Good interpersonal and team-building skills Business and management background a plus Some experience with managing budgets, developing plans and objectives, scoping projects Experience with nonprofit environment a plus

Roles Coach Teacher Supporter Advisor Mentor Mediator Thought leaders Facilitator Counselor

Time Requirements - Avg. 10-12 hours per month. Flexible. [See Required Tasks & Timeline for specific details on tasks that need be completed by LPs]

Lead Partner Overview

General Responsibilities: Relationship Building: developing and maintaining a trusting, productive relationship with investee

leadership (10%) Vision Building: developing a long-term vision for potential of SVP relationship (5%) Project Definition: assessing organizational capacity using SVP tools, including the Organizational

Capacity Assessment, defining capacity-building projects and Annual Objectives (20%) Project Management: ensuring projects are launched and move along successfully (40%) Volunteer Motivation: supporting, recognizing and thanking volunteers (20%) Advocate: candidly representing Investee to PGC during reinvestment process (5%)

Key learnings from Leads and Investees about this role: “SVP brings a sense of opportunities & possibilities instead of restraints.” an Investee “Trust takes time and experience, most funders don’t see (accept) our weaknesses and we have to

get used to this.” an Investee Working with SVP presents a new mode of interaction that most nonprofits are not accustomed to.

SVP volunteer projects often focus internally (organizational infrastructure); this is a shift and takes time from ED or staff.

Leads often enjoy seeing projects or agency growth from the work they facilitate It takes time and patience to learn to work together due to different styles, cultures, funder-grantee

power dynamics, and time availability.

1. Establish a Relationship with the Executive Director (ED)


a. Learn about the agency and programs- read documents, review website, do a tour, etc.b. Define working communications and meetings- how often to meet? Set up standing

appt? Email or phone?c. Discuss and identify relationship goals/a vision for the relationship – How will SVP’s

investment help the nonprofit scale? How will they be more sustainable? What would make the biggest difference in their organizational capacity? Looking ahead three years, what is the next stage of organizational growth that SVP could help them reach?

d. Discuss and identify projects – Choose about 3 defined projects that will impact the organization and help them scale impact (finite projects with near-term, tangible results).

e. Ensure that program development and outcomes are not lost- although SVP aims to strengthen org capacity, we are still interested in progress towards programmatic outcomes and client impact.

2. Ongoing Communications with Partner Volunteers – whether it be a formalized team or nota. Build team spirit and cohesiveness

Send group email as it fits to your team of volunteers, cc: SVP ED Set up periodic all-team calls or meetings Send email to all partners via SVP ED to invite partners to volunteer. Time-limited,

specific opportunities and requests are best Make personal calls or send 1:1 email occasionally

b. Keep partner volunteers specifically and all partners generally updated on Investee Send news about Investee’s successes or major changes, including volunteer project

needs/updates to Shannon for the every-other-week Partner Digest Share invitations to special events or participate in fundraising events (if

comfortable)c. Show appreciation

Thank yous – any extra email to your investee or a volunteer will be appreciated (and needed)

3. General Tips for Successa. People first, projects secondb. Get to know each other, develop a common pacec. Under-commit and over-deliverd. Start narrow (up to 3 projects) and let relationship build

4. Resources a. SVP ED and Lead Partner Coach: Defining projects, building relationships, reinvestment

process, general support, partner volunteer matching b. Leads Meetings – quarterly meetings with fellow LPs for support and resource-sharingc. Investee and General Nonprofit Resources (available in Partner Binders)


Overview of First ‘Year’ of InvestmentPlease note: First ‘year’ of investment is June of one calendar year to November of the next calendar year is 17.5 months.

1) Phase One: Start-up (30-45 days)a) Read Investee grant docs (review application and what they planned to do with SVP’s funds plus

people power)b) Review the Organizational Capacity Assessment tool results and meeting minutes.c) Meet with ED and Board Chair to:

Build relationship Review and complete Strategy Map - Craft goal(s) for the full relationship. Revisit the objectives outlined in their proposal, assign timelines to each objective, and

prioritize (request the ED do some of this in advance of you meeting to be sure the objectives continue to reflect their needs). This is easily done by completing the Current Work Plan Narrative with the ED & Chair*

Determine request for when grant will be paid out, after SVP ED approves strategy map and work plan and before Sept 30, 2017.

d) Procure Partner volunteers for projects after securing suggestions from SVP ED.e) Volunteer Start-up – provide an overview to the Partner volunteers, introduce them to the

appropriate people at the investee organization, and if needed, facilitate the first meeting for scoping purposes.

2) Phase Two: Projects and working together (2-17 months)a) Ensure progress on all objectives and projectsb) Check in with and support volunteersc) Hold occasional team meetings with the Partner volunteersd) Review and approve Opportunity Funds requests as needed

3) ‘Mid-Year’ Check-In (9 months)a) Review progress toward Current Work Plan Narrative and Strategy Map*b) Discuss vision for SVP relationshipc) Preview reinvestment process, criteria, etc.

4) Phase Two: continues

5) Investment Renewal Process with Investee Renewal Committee (14-17 months)a) Plan ahead, together, build a vision based on their needsb) Renewal Process – June through October with decisions made in November

6) Partner Activity Log (ongoing)a) Disseminate Partner Activity Log to partner volunteers – collect quarterly and turn into SVP ED*

* = required tasks of Lead Partner. Please see following Summary of Required Tasks & Timeline.


Summary of Lead Partner Required Tasks

1. Send news about Investee’s successes or major changes, including volunteer project needs/updates – regularly to SVP ED

2. Complete Relationship Objectives form and submit to SVP ED with #3

3. Complete Strategy Map and Current Work Plan Narrative and develop award disbursement schedule in concert with investee ED, within first 30-45 days, and give to SVP ED for approval

4. Secure project volunteers from the Partnership

5. Conduct Organizational Capacity Assessment Tool in concert with Investee ED, key board members, and SVP ED prior to the organization submitting a renewal proposal

6. Complete Lead Partner Assessment outlining your view of the SVP-Investee relationship and progress

7. Attend investee Site Visit for Renewal in the fall

8. Communicate with Investee ED on a regular basis, monitoring the progress made towards achieving shared SVP/Investee project goals


Memorandum of Understanding for InvestmentsThe purpose of this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is to enable Social Venture Partners Boulder County (“SVP Boulder County”) and [INVESTEE] to define the basic terms of their proposed capacity building (pro bono consulting + cash grants) relationship. The following terms are agreed to and made effective on [EFFECTIVE DATE]:

TERMS1. Investment Decision. Once selected for investment by SVP Boulder County, an organization typically receives SVP support, including human and financial capital, for three and a half years. However, as with every commitment, SVP Boulder County affirms that continued investment with [INVESTEE] is contingent on an annual review by the Investee Selection Committee as well as ongoing evaluation of SVP’s ability to add value to the organization. SVP Boulder County may terminate investment of human and financial capital at any time and [INVESTEE] may choose not to reapply in subsequent years.

2. Schedule of Essential Activities. Both parties agree to work together to carry out [YEAR X] of the following schedule of activities to the best of their abilities over the next 12-18 months:

1st Quarter(June – August)

2nd – 5th Quarter(Sept – June)

5th – 6th Quarter(July – Nov)

Year 1 - Attend orientation- Complete paperwork (MOU, Hold Harmless, intellectual property)

- Establish relationship & schedule regular communications

- Craft Strategy Map (vision/goals)- Draft Current Work Plan- Begin work on projects

- Work on projects - Track progress against strategy map & work plan and update as needed

- Maintain relationships- Attend partner mtgs in Nov & May

- Work on projects - Track progress against work plan & strategy map; update as needed

- Complete OCAT- Complete renewal application- Participate in site visit- Attend partner mtg in Nov

1st Quarter(Dec – Feb)

2nd Quarter(March – May)

3rd Quarter(June – Aug)

4th Quarter(Sept – Nov)

Year 2 - Attend orientation- Complete new MOU- Review/update Strategy Map

- Update Current work plan

- Complete Investee survey of SVP (eval)


- Attend partner meeting in May


- Complete OCAT

- Complete renewal application

- Participate in site visit- Work on projects - Attend partner meeting in Nov

Year 3 - Attend orientation- Complete new MOU- Review/update Strategy Map

- Update Current work plan

- Complete Investee survey of SVP (eval)




- Complete OCAT- Begin graduation process

- Complete case study and surveys

- Attend partner meeting to participate in graduation ceremony


3. Information Sharing. It is understood that neither party will benefit if SVP Boulder County provides inaccurate advice or commentary based on insufficient information. To that end, [INVESTEE] agrees to provide accurate, unbiased, and sufficient information to the best of their knowledge, including informing SVP Boulder County of any significant developments in the organization that might alter a project (such as changes in key personnel, financial instability, or developments that might affect the project’s outcomes or the organization’s operations).

This memorandum is not intended to be legally binding on either party.

Social Venture Partners Boulder County, Inc.By: ____________________________________ Date: __________________________

Title: ___________________________________

[INVESTEE]By: ____________________________________ Date: __________________________

Title: ___________________________________

The Investee Executive Director is expected to participate in: All activities listed above.

The Investee Board Chair is expected to participate in: Orientation Site visit Completion of MOU and hold harmless Completion of the Strategy Map and Current Work Plan Narrative Approval of Renewal application Annual Organizational Capacity Assessment Tool Case Study interview

The SVP Lead Partner is expected to participate in: All activities listed above except the Investee orientation


A capacity building investment relationship between Social Venture Partners Boulder County (SVP) and a nonprofit (Investee) is like a trip around the world. First, one decides where to travel, why, and when. Then one needs to plan how to get to each location. On most trips, the traveler has to make adjustments along the way – there are detours and roadblocks and missed flights. It is a journey with unexpected challenges and joys. The SVP/Investee relationship kicks off with investment planning and we work towards making sure it ends at the strategic destination of our dreams for the community.

Capacity building entails strengthening the strategies, systems, management practice, and core skills of an organization. In order to be successful it is important for the Investee to have a strategic plan, or at least a strategy map, upon which our capacity building plan is based. As with any strategy and plans, at times they will need to be modified or rechanneled.

Therefore we ask each investment team to start planning for our trip together by either using the Investee’s strategic plan to fill out SVP’s Strategy Map OR to identify strategy planning as the first activity on our trip together.

At a high-level our approach includes: The strategic focus and direction of our engagement, which serves as our guidepost for our

relationship together. It includes the Vision, Mission, Strategic Destination and SVP/Investee Engagement Objective. These may change little or not all during the course of the investment. (Purple section in the Strategy Map)

The Core Values of the Investee. The Core Values are at the nonprofit and provide the insight as to how the Strategic intent will be accomplished. (Teal section in the Strategy Map)

The Current Work Plans, which includes high-level goals and objectives which will be completed for each investment year. These goals will align with the Strategic destination. They are intended to be annual goals, some of which may carry over into future years. The intention built into the Current Work Plans is to have a degree of flexibility as things may emerge during the course of the year where it will be determined that goals may either, stop, have a detour, or new goals may emerge. (Blue Section in the Strategy Map) Each Goal will have SVP’s role indicated. (Pink section in the Strategy Map)

After attending the Investee and Lead Partner orientations, please conduct the following tasks in the following order:

Complete the Investment Plan Narrative Cover Page (see below) Complete the top half of the Strategy Map (see attached) Complete the Current Work Plan (see below) Complete the bottom half of the Strategy Map Submit both documents to SVP’s Executive Director for feedback; iterate Gain approval from SVP Executive Director Begin procuring Partners to work on projects (Lead Partner)

The Investee Strategy Map and Current Work Plan will be our active working documents throughout the course of our relationship. We will continually be revisiting these guides, particularly the goal sections.


These are the communication tools for the whole team (Investee staff, Investee board, SVP Lead Partner, Project Partners, SVP Executive Director, etc). Everyone will have access on SVP’s internal website called SVP Connect.

Everything that happens should be in these documents. They are our relationship database. We should be able to identify where we’re on track, where things have shifted, what we need to

be mindful of going forward, and who has been involved over time by viewing these documents.o Use this document to inform where we’ve been and where we’re going.o Will help us determine what resources to allocate/access for upcoming projects. Help us

assess our impact together, monitor quality of our relationship.o Help all parties understand what’s happening.o Will help all parties complete year-end and Investment-end reporting.

Having all of this info in one place where everyone can access it improves the experience of transparency.


Investment Plan Narrative Cover Page

Investee: (name of organization)

Investee Executive Director: (name of ED)

Lead Partner: (name of LP)

First Year of Investment: (ie. Investment Year 2017-2018)

Directions: Please complete this one page cover sheet for the investment at the beginning of the relationship. Add updates below the original content if the engagement objective changes. You are only expected to update it over the course of our time if something significant changes.

Engagement Objective with SVP (enter into Strategy Map and also enter here, deleting the guiding questions below)

Remember the purpose of the Engagement Objective will provide the overarching direction for our work together over the next three years.

To determine the Engagement Objective, agree on your vision and goals for the multi-year investment relationship. Questions to consider include:

How will our work together support the organization’s strategic direction? How will SVP assist the investee with scaling? What will be different for the investee’s clients? What new capacities and capabilities will the investee demonstrate? How will the business be different? Why are we here together?

Ongoing Communication Plan Briefly explain how the Lead Partner(s) and Investee Executive Director plan to communicate on a regular basis with each other and with SVP.


Directions for Using the Current Work Plan Narrative

Purpose: The Current Work Plan includes high-level goals and objectives which will be completed for each investment year. These goals will align with the strategic destination. They are intended to be annual goals, some of which may carry over into future years. The intention in the Current Work Plans is to have a degree of flexibility as things may emerge during the course of the year where it will be determined that goals may either, stop, have a detour or new goals may emerge. Each Goal will have SVP’s role indicated.

The Lead Partner has primary responsibility for keeping this document up-to-date. However, any member of the team from SVP or the Investee can add information.

Must be submitted to SVP Executive Director at beginning of each investment year for approval before release of cash grant. Investment Year 2017-2018 deadline is July 20, 2017.

Content is to be developed by the Lead Partner and Investee Executive Director. Include the Investee Board Chair whenever possible.

The Lead Partner is responsible for updating this document at regular intervals as noted below. First submission should be kept to one page per project. As updates are added each project

narrative will grow beyond one page. It’s ok to write N/A or Not Yet Identified. Feel free to write in narrative, phrases, or bullets. Quarterly updates can be short. This is a living document that will change as we progress through our work together. In the first year of investment, the first task will be creation of the Strategy Road Map either by

conducting strategic planning or by adapting from an existing strategic plan. The organization may have up to three additional goals.

There is also space for emerging goal(s) as new goals/objectives may emerge during the course of the year and/or you may find some goals may either stop or detour.

Any content in Blue can be deleted so you have more space to write.

If you have questions when completing this report, please do not hesitate to contact Jennie Arbogash at [email protected], or 303.840.0165. Feel free to add additional pages.


mailto:[email protected]

First Year of Investment - Current Work Plan

Project One

Title: (one of the 10 SVP capacity areas) Example: Human Resources

Desired Outcome: (What will you accomplish this year to move you toward achieving the long-term goals and strategic destination already identified)Example: Three AmeriCorp Vista positions transitioned into volunteer roles making CareConnect less reliant on AmeriCorp and more impactful in engaging seniors in meaningful volunteer activities.

Potential Milestones: (Specific, small successes along the way that you would like to see happen)Examples - New volunteer positions and all required infrastructure is created.

Positions are filled and operating.Clients receive more one-on-one attention during intake.Program staff sees reduction in time spent on intake.

People Involved and People ResponsibleExamples- CareConnect – Program Director is responsible and AmeriCorp Vista and receptionist

may also be involvedSVP – Find partners with experience in Human Resources and/or process mapping

Current Updates / Progress NotesWe ask the Lead Partner to regularly share a short update that speaks to any roadblocks being experienced, detours, pauses taken, new deadlines, new outcomes, happy successes, mini projects being completed, etc. If there has been a shift, share the corresponding change in outcomes or milestones and why. Please complete updates at least quarterly and feel free to do them more frequently if you believe it would be helpful to other team members.

September: Example A – Partner Amy watched intake calls and interviewed AmeriCorp Vistas, started working with Program Director on crafting job descriptions.

December: Example B – Completed the job descriptions but then ABC Nonprofit experienced transition in two staff leadership positions so we have put projects on hold. Meeting with the new team on 00/00/0000 to regroup.

March: Example C – Program Director was able to re-focus on this project. She worked with Amy to craft training program and then recruited volunteers for the positions. The AmeriCorp Vistas provided the training program and got the new volunteers started in February.

June: Example D - In February and March Partner Andy worked with program director to figure out how to assess success of the program. In May the program director figured out that three staff members spent 32% less of their total time on intake. Clients got an average of 45 minutes more one-on-one time during intake. Volunteers are happy in their roles.


Project Two





Best Guess for Start & End Date: (consider how it is aligned in with the whole plan, have you given yourself enough time to do the project, how will you adjust the deadline when needed, etc.)Example - Start in August, 2013. Volunteers begin November, 2014. Complete first eval April, 2014. We

may need to adjust the timeline if volunteers are hard to find.









Project Three















Emerging Project(s) (if any)















Partner-Volunteer Request Form

This form should be completed by the Investee ED or staff and given to the Lead Partner and SVP ED for dissemination within SVP, or completed by the LP (for distribution in SVP).

Brief description of project:

Required skills for project:

Timeframe (please check one): One-time

o Anytimeo This day and time(s):

From __________ until __________ Ongoing Other: please describe Urgent: why+ deadline

Location for project:

Name of project contact at investee:

Email and phone of investee project contact:Email:Phone:

Is there anything else we should know about this project in order to find the best partner-volunteer match?


Depending on your timeline (if urgent, please note and we’ll do our best to serve you), we will share with the partnership and you should hear back within three weeks of making the request.

2017 Opportunity Fund Guidelines

BackgroundIn 2004, partners created a fund to pay for consultants to complete projects SVP Partners did not have the expertise to tackle and to cover costs for Investees to participate in professional development activities. In Fiscal Year ending Sept 30, 2017, the fund consists of $4,000 and funds may be awarded to current investees by application. Need will be greater than the supply – not all requests will be granted.

The Opportunity Fund has three objectives: 1) to hire consultants to complement the work being done by SVP partners or purchase a product needed for the work to continue, 2) to teach Investee staff, board members, and/or volunteers, and SVP partners, how to do something better/more efficiently/ or advise them on a project or plan, and 3) to utilize already existing community trainings, workshops, conferences to enhance investee staff or key volunteers’ skills. We do hope with each project where a consultant is hired, there will be opportunities for SVP Partners to observe and learn through the consultant.

ProcessIn order to apply for money from the Opportunity Fund:

1. Investees must have first submitted a volunteer request (if applicable) through their Lead Partner and the response was not sufficient to complete the task in a timely manner.

2. The Investee must have consulted the Lead Partner on the project, who endorses this application for support (this is true in the case of professional development, too).

3. Please answer the following questions in no more than one page via email to [email protected] to apply for funds from the Opportunity Fund:

a. Describe the project for which a professional consultant is to be hired or a product is to be purchased; or, in the case of professional development, outline why you’d like to participate or send a key staff person or board member to participate.

b. Please describe the timeline for implementation (and in the case of professional development, the deadline for funds to be received at your organization – in most cases, we will cut a check to the investee directly, who then pays the third-party).

c. Who is the lead person (at the Investee or in conjunction with SVP Partners) to see this project through to completion (who will own it)?

d. Estimate the cost to complete the project. SVP will provide you with a list of area consultants we recommend, as well as tips on hiring consultants, in the event you'd like to get some preliminary bids. Jennie is happy to assist you in this process.

e. What other resources will fund this project? If you do not receive funds from the Opportunity Fund, what other resources might you tap to assist with this project, or training need?

The SVP Board will review and make funding decisions at their next board meeting. You will be contacted with the outcome of your request within a month of submittal.

Opportunity Funds – Past ExamplesDatabase implementation Risk Management Training Hire Evaluation Consultant


mailto:[email protected]

Website Design Software Purchase Leadership Training


Last Six Months of an Investee Engagement

The last six months of an engagement with an Investee is a time to reflect on what has been accomplished and where the investee ultimately needs to be at the end of our time together. There is still time to do a short project (or maybe even two), but attention should be most focused on relaxing ties and letting the strengthened Investee stand on their own. That said, SVP Boulder County never completely walks away from an Investee. While we may not do projects with them, we can continue to provide support in a variety of ways:

Occasional informal check-ins with the Lead Partner SVP training events open to all Special requests to the SVP Executive Director Invested EDs (Current and alumni Investee ED’s peer learning group) SVP Partners serving on Board of Directors

So in preparing for “graduation” in six months, the Lead Partner and the Investee should consider the following:

Has the SVP documentation been completed for all projects undertaken with the investee? The project documentation format can be found on SVP Connect at https://connect.socialventurepartners.org:8443/display/SBCLP/Lead+Partner+Materials under “Current Work Plan Narrative Template.docx”. This document for each project should show completion or progress toward completion. It is helpful in knowing what remains to be done before graduation.

What have we done to make the investee stronger over the time of our engagement? Using the work plan documentation, what issues still haven’t been addressed, or are in

progress? Why are these issues still outstanding and what can be done to wrap them up?

o More intense consideration/work?o More Partner engagement (i.e., another short project?)

What are the next steps for the investee to address on their own after the SVP engagement is completed?

Do the board and the ED understand what has been accomplished, or should we have a wrap-up meeting at some point to go over what’s been done, where we stand, and what the organizations next steps are?

Work with staff on the development of an investment case study Prepare to attend the next Partner Meeting and participate in a graduation ceremony

Efforts should be focused on completion of projects by the end of the engagement or the development of plans for ongoing work after graduation. Ideally, SVP partner participation should be over by graduation, but if necessary, partners can continue for a short time (with the consent of the partner.)


https://connect.socialventurepartners.org:8443/display/SBCLP/Lead+Partner+Materials

1st Quarter(Dec – Feb)

2nd Quarter(March – May)

3rd Quarter(June – Aug)

4th Quarter(Sept – Nov)

Year 3 - Attend orientation- Complete new MOU

- Review/update Strategy Map

- Update Current work plan- Complete Investee survey

of SVP (eval)

- Work on projects - Track progress against

work plan & strategy map; update as needed


- Work on projects - Track progress

against work plan & strategy map;

update as needed- Complete OCAT

- Begin graduation process

- Complete case study and surveys- Attend partner

meeting to participate in

graduation ceremony

Investee Case Study

SVP releases a full case study for each investment at graduation. This is a document about 10 pages long that will provide an in-depth analysis and report of our relationship, the impact, the lessons learned, and other relevant details. The case study will be written by a contract editor/writer named to provide some objectivity. The Lead Partner and Investee Executive Director will be provided with a form to complete and a sample of the completed form from another Investee. Completing the form does not mean crafting a well-written document. Answers could include bullets under every section, or even phrases, thoughts, and lists. Whatever is simple and fast. Next, our writer will interview the ED, Board Chair, Lead Partner, and one or two other deeply involved people. Then, the Lead Partner will help staff edit the drafted case study.

We will provide this case study to all of our folks, to Investee to use as they wish, and for promotional/marketing activities. Most importantly, we will use impact and lessons learned to inform on-going changes to our investment process, Lead Partner training, partner engagement, etc.


Building and Feeding Relationships Relationship is the MOST important part of the Lead Partner role.

Trust – We recognize trust is the foundation of a good relationship that forms a productive bond. Trust mitigates power inequalities and sets the stage for success. It requires knowing each other.

Time – We prioritize time spent on the relationship, not just on getting the work done. Respect – We recognize the knowledge, wisdom, and value the Investee brings to the

relationship and that we in SVP have a lot to learn from them. Communication – We are diligent about communicating regularly, with transparency

and mindfulness. Inclusivity – We welcome diverse people, opinions, and perspectives. This makes our

work stronger. We can disagree.

Scaling Impact Adding new areas (breadth): complementary services and skills Increasing reach (breadth): Demographics (types of beneficiaries), Locations

(geographic), Coverage (greater percentage of demographic or location or both), or all of the above

Increasing dosage (depth): Adding more activities or getting more in-depth – adding additional types of outputs

Increasing quality: Learning and Adaptive Organization(s) with loop of experimentation, measuring, evaluating, learning

Moving up or down the value chain

Scaling up requires both capacity (how much you’re able to do - scale) and capability (how well you’re able to do it – fidelity and quality)

Capacity (Reach or Scale): ability of an organization to deliver and implement the program at the targeted or desired scale

Capability: ability of an organization to deliver and implement the program according to the way it was designed (fidelity), with quality achieving the expected impact

Strategic ThinkingMost of the nonprofits we work with live in crisis-management mode. The most vital impact we have is on teaching an organization to think differently; to use six key strategic thinking skills:

Anticipate – peripheral vision Critical thinking – ask questions, reframe problems, challenge status quo Interpret – synthesize information from many sources and then develop a viewpoint Decide – using the information gathered, take a stand Align – build support and understanding Learn - celebrate, gather feedback, conduct evaluation, shift course as needed


What is A Nonprofit Exit Strategy?Authors: Kim Alter, Paul Shoemaker, Melinda Tuan, and Jed Emerson

A true nonprofit “exit strategy” in venture philanthropy is a shared commitment between funders and those funded to:

1. Determine a strategy for accessing different types of funding over the organization’s lifecycle to ensure its long-term viability

2. Provide assistance through the VP to the nonprofit to build the organization’s capacity to access these different types of funding

3. Specify capacity building milestones, time periods, and roles for the VP funding relationship given the overall funding strategy

Ideally, this exit strategy, like its for-profit counterpart, is crafted at the initiation of the investment or at least long before the end of a funding relationship. It should create a mutual working relationship and shared mindset focused toward jointly (not unilaterally) creating a positive exit scenario.

Qualities of a Nonprofit With Strong Organizational CapacityFor the purposes of this paper, the following is a summary of the qualities of a nonprofit with strong organizational capacity – which will hopefully be the result of many years of dedicated, collaborative work by both the nonprofit and the VP funder:

1. Good leadership and management, including the ability to plan strategically and respond to its market2. Solid organizational infrastructure3. A track record of meeting short-term objectives on a consistent basis 4. Positive social outcomes and evidence of progress toward meeting the mission


5. A clear vision for the future

Why is the Exit Strategy Essential in Venture Philanthropy?For VPs, being explicit about exit strategy in their own work as well as in relationships with individual investees is a vital part of the value proposition a nonprofit should expect from a VP funder. An enunciated exit strategy is not just an add-on, but an essential, value-added strategy in five specific ways.

First, an exit strategy means the funder starts explicitly discussing the “end” with an investee early in the relationship, well before the ending actually occurs. This mutual perspective leads to a focused discussion of mutual priorities; one where the VP learns how it can best invest in the funded nonprofit's sustainability.

Second, adopting a VP and exit-driven approach may encourage nonprofit investors to be more disciplined about their organizational capacity building efforts and diversify their financial products to better serve their investees and help move them along the organizational development continuum. The foundation or donor will be forced to have a conscious, thoughtful approach to doing everything possible to ensure that investees have developed substantially along all of the dimensions explained above.

Third, the exit strategy is a continuation and deepening of the close, working relationship between a VP funder and investee, which is probably the most truly unique aspect of the VP model in the first place. This clearly implies that both parties must allow sufficient time, resources, and support to execute an exit strategy. Depending on evolutionary stage, duration, level of investor engagement, and exit options available, successful exits can take up to a year or more, and the organizational capacity building required to bring about the exit may span many years in advance of the actual exit. To the degree it deepens that relationship, this shared vision of progress and a common view of the exit strategy means optimal alignment of effort and resources by both the VP and the nonprofit.

Fourth, wider and more consistent application of exits could help to effectively segment and organize the nonprofit capital market by requiring greater coordination and cohesion between funders. This would lead to greater efficiency and value creation for our limited philanthropic dollars. Nonprofit investors may also develop niche markets choosing to invest only in start up, mezzanine, or phase funding, etc., thus better linking organizations to appropriate next-stage investors once capacity levels have been successfully achieved and funding requirements change.

And fifth, as VPs partner with their investees to pursue exit strategies, the inherent frustrations and limitations of the current options may encourage VPs to advocate for a more enabling legal environment for nonprofit organizations. As evidenced by this paper, our pursuit of appropriate exits with our investees has resulted in engaging you, our colleagues, around this topic in the hopes of improving current practice!

Exit Option Description Pros ConsAccess New Funding Agents (Individual donors, foundations, government)Good option for orgs at any stage of development that have achieved predetermined targets and level of capacity, and no longer meet investor funding priorities, yet require additional or diverse funding to realize full extent of mission.

Not a definitive exit, but progress toward this end. VP helps nonprofit develop relationship with new investors corresponding to evolutionary stage and capital needs. Managerial capacity building and performance results defined to further develop organization along evolutionary continuum.

Fund diversification. Corresponds with organizational development and changing needs for capacity building and funding requirements. Allows for continuity; enables organization to have a far-reaching vision.

Organization may suffer growing pains (resistance or periods of ambiguity, mission shifts), requiring new staff; some existing staff may lose jobs. Tensions arise between players in process (i.e. parent organization, board members, VP). Can be slow and arduous process; final divestment of external support difficult once organization is deemed "sustainable." Requires cohesion and coordination in funding community.

Build Earned Income OpportunitiesA fund diversification strategy used by many nonprofits to varying degrees. Sophistication of income generating mechanisms range from simple fee-for-service payments which supplement grants to social purpose enterprises (see below).

Not a definitive exit, but progress toward this end. VP helps nonprofit create opportunities to charge fees for services it already provides or helps nonprofit develop products or services to sell for profit. A further step toward fund diversification.

Reduces donor dependence by generating revenue independent of grants. Exits are enabled by replacing grants with income, accumulating assets to access more complex financing—i.e. equity financing and loans available in commercial and quasi-commercial markets.

See below for additional “Pros”

Many nonprofit programs do not lend themselves to integrating income-generating mechanisms. Income generation, particularly sophisticated ventures, which yield higher financial returns, require strong business competency and for-profit mentality that are not often found in traditional nonprofits and threaten existing leadership. Not a quick fix, income generation requires significant up front investments in scarce resources and must be incorporated in strategic planning.

Exit Option Description Pros Cons


Strengthen Social Purpose Enterprise ActivityA savvy fund diversification strategy used by a limited number of nonprofits. Enterprise activities may be mission or non-mission related, for-profit or market-based nonprofit ventures that generate income for the nonprofit.

May be definitive exit, depending on profitability of enterprise chosen. VP helps nonprofit create and run market-based businesses.

Generates sustainable new resources to support nonprofit activities. Engages market forces to work for the nonprofit sector. Allows greater flexibility by bringing in unrestricted revenue. Decreases dependence on external funding. Devises new ways to leverage assets. Increases nonprofit accountability and management rigor. (Above for additional “Pros)

Many mission-related social purpose enterprises, especially related to employing target populations, are not able to generate excess income beyond covering social costs of operating the enterprise. Significant risk of spectacular failure, high financial losses, or mission-drift associated with operating market-based businesses.

See above for additional “Cons”

Access Debt Financing (Below Market-Rate PRIs, Loans, Market-Based Bonds, Commercial LoansPractical for certain types of projects (e.g. capital campaigns), select social purpose enterprises.

May be definitive exit. VP assists nonprofit with accessing forms of debt through building relationships with lending institutions. VP can build nonprofit’s credit worthiness through loan guarantees, extending credit lines, other.

Enables nonprofit to take on larger, capital-intensive projects. Allows greater flexibility by bringing in unrestricted source of funds. Decreases dependence on external funding. Devises new ways to leverage assets and allows for creation of new assets. Increases nonprofit accountability and management rigor.

Debt service. Risk of nonprofit not being able to handle level of accountability and responsibility of debt.

Merge with Another Nonprofit OrganizationPractical when two similar programs are competing on the same turf for clients and resources with a threat of one failing.

Definitive exit. VP assists nonprofit merger with existing like organization or company. Assumes similar mission, organizational priorities and target population. Presumes VP knows players and industry well enough to assist.

Combined resources (human, financial and asset); potential synergies and cost savings in back office; may increase likelihood of organizational success; continuity for target population and on larger scale; merging may eliminate a former competitor; and increase possibilities for funding.

Tension around leadership, decision-making power, and sacred cows; post merger fallout due to cultural adjustment, shifting staff structure - some personnel may lose jobs. Instantly larger enterprise program may tax managers and systems. Threat of compromised mission.

Transfer Programs to Another Nonprofit OrganizationPragmatic when one organization does not have the resources or interest (not seen as a priority) to continue and another organization does.

Definitive exit. VP facilitates transfer of nonprofit’s assets, client portfolio and responsibility to achieve mission to another organization conducting similar or related program.

Clean exit with assurance that mission will wholly or partially be pursued. Continuity for target population. Retain some jobs by transferring staff. Possibility for VP to continue involvement—i.e. board seat. Larger scale, better capitalized, increases funding opportunities, reduces competition. Avoids slow death by nonperformance.

Lose all control over future of organizational management; mission may change/evolve. Assets associated with organization or program are transferred. Some staff may lose jobs. Internal wars may arise if some stakeholders want to stay vested in organization.

Spin Off Program into New Nonprofit OrganizationCommon for programs seeded by parent organizations that evolve into organizations themselves. Examples include international organizations that emphasize localization or social purpose enterprises born out of other sector organizations.

Definitive exit. VP assists nonprofit/program to formally separate as independent legal entity from parent organization. New nonprofit has distinct mission, governing board, objectives and funding base.

Organization actualizes own identity, culture, priorities, and growth. Mission pursuit continues, although may change to align with other strategic allies/partners. Separate governance and funding, although parent organization and/or VP may retain board seat. Considered a success in terms of local institution.

Difficult to cut ties with parent organization. Can be a protracted and tenuous process as newly independent entity requires continued support from parent. Separation may ignite wars if parent perceives new organization as having potential for attracting large scale funding. Possible failure or collapse due to weak management/fragile systems. Requires seeking own funding and/or generating own income streams and major capacity building.

Sell Nonprofit to For-Profit EntityUncommon among nonprofit organizations, although cases exist. Possible only for profitable social purpose enterprises which demonstrate attractive financial returns and/or have significant assets.

Definitive exit. VP facilitates purchase of nonprofit by a company or individual based on valuation.

Total divestment; nonprofit receives cash or get relief from debt burden or subsidizing costs. Sustainability highly probable. Slight possibility for VP or nonprofit to retain board seat. Introduces rigor, professionalism and high expectations for performance and success.

Must find ready buyer or company. Lose all control over future of organization. High likelihood that staff and management will lose jobs, replaced by owner. Threat that mission will be completely compromised. High potential for negative impact on target population.

Close Program or Nonprofit"Old style" approach that dictates termination of program upon completion of funding, or complete failure of program/nonprofit.

Definitive exit. Nonprofit terminates operations; returns, keeps or transfers existing assets, VP severs relationship with organization.

Easy, good for non-performing organizations; those that will never achieve sustainability or wide scale impact; also organizations that are in definite decline. Clean finish. Ironically, closing a program is usually not considered a failure by donors.

Target population losses; no continuity, no assurance of services by another organization. Staff lose jobs. Learning ceases. Cop out for organizations with culture clashes over capacity building and performance objectives.


Lead Partner Philosophy: A Tip Sheet from a Network Lead Partner

As a two year member of SVP, I have already identified a distinct difference between being a Venture Capitalist on the for-profit side of business versus being involved with “social” venture work serving nonprofits / Investees. In my opinion, it is our goal to help these groups and to improve their lot. To me, time is less critical as a success-measuring device on the nonprofit side than on the for-profit side. For those reasons, I believe being a Lead Partner (LP) should be a positive experience for both the Investee and for SVP, but that it also must be educational and fun for our Partners. Below are some of my suggestions that may enhance the Lead Partner process:

1. LPs should believe strongly in both SVP and in the Investee organization. Genuine passion for the Investee’s mission will really help. If you don’t have it, don’t take the job. Perhaps explore the Investee organization first before accepting.

2. The LP should keep asking and asking the Investee what help they need from SVP and respond accordingly.

3. The LP should only communicate with the Investee group “as needed.” When demands for SVP’s services are great, be there. Otherwise give them SPACE.

4. The LP must recognize and accept where the SVP relationship (and our program) is as it relates to the Investee’s overall size, business and priorities. Once recognized, don’t underestimate or over-judge our importance. We are their Partner, not another “roadblock.” SVP obviously has more leverage with Investees in which our fiscal / “in-kind” contribution represents a significant part of their budget / program versus a minute portion.

5. The LP shouldn’t commit the resources of SVP unless you know they are readily available. Talk is cheap, so before committing, check with SVP ED on Partner availability within needed areas. You can also explore Opportunity Funds as another resource to meet the Investee needs.

6. The LP should walk the “middle ground” but serve as a genuine Advocate for the Investee. You are their only DIRECT contact into SVP.

7. The LP must demonstrate flexibility. If circumstances / priorities change for the Investee, help them as they believe they need help. After all, it is their business.

8. The LP must recognize the Investee’s limitations and our limitations. For the most part, the Investees have limited skills, resources and funding. We are Volunteers. It is difficult to expediently and dramatically enhance their operations, so be sensitive to expecting too much too quickly

9. “Simple is better, more is a chore.” – Minimize paperwork and on-going reporting; celebrate small victories with our Investees. We have joined SVP to give back to our community and hopefully, not to necessarily apply our “intense, hard driving private sector work ethic” into the Investee world.

10. The LP must have patience. Hopefully our due diligence paid off and the selected Investee will prove a fine choice. Realize that the initial forecasted outcomes might take much longer than originally expected. Relationship and trust-building come first and takes time; good work will follow.


Lessons Learned – Building Capacity in Investees and in SVPFrom the Venture Philanthropy 2002 Audit

With respect to building capacity in Investees:

Take time to understand Investee’s history, culture and personality ; andcontinuously strive for consistent, clear communication.

Investor and Investee should do a mini strategic plan to determine what are the mutual goals and benefits

Nonprofits know the who, what, where, and why. SVP partners should be able to help with the how and when: implementation and allocation of scarce resources.

Track and expect to invest a lot of time . We should be tracking our hours. Volunteer time has wide range: Seattle budgets 500 to 600 hours of partner time per recipient. Some only provide 4 to 10 hours per month

Importance of building respectful trust, prior to hands on support

Some things that are measurable are not important and some important things are not measurable

Activities we can assist with:Testimonials, scrapbook & Advisory Board for credibilityPublic Relations to educate and reach influencers for visibilityFund raising and board development for sustainability

It is oftentimes more important to strengthen organizational capacity than to scale up services (..or at least one should come before the other)

It is better if we are seen as mentors, not monitors . Encourage Investee to come to us with problems so that we may help solve rather than hide so we won’t continue funding.

Grants by themselves cannot build the capacity necessary

It is difficult to measure capacity building success, but try to assess and document, current revenue, accomplishments to date, organizational structure, intellectual capital, and board and staff infrastructure and capacity at the time of initial engagement to evaluate as a benchmark at the end. i.e. compare budget size, # of board, staff, etc.

There must be a clear division between SVP and Investee roles and responsibilities

Help them to develop sustainable revenue streams . SVP should provide for a fundraising and board development component so there is an exit strategy that provides for the organization's success and sustainability after SVP exits

Work to expand their thinking and sense of possibility

Help them to build a peer network of people working together. Isolation kills even the best-capitalized organization. Help them connect

Be patient, be visible, build alliances, and build a peer network of people working together. Advocates outside the sector bring attention to the fund

Partners will have misconceptions about the nonprofit world and need to understand the nonprofit mentality: scarcity rather than abundance mentality, risk-aversive, slow to act and lack of focus are common


Provide assistance rather than advice. Staff is stretched thin, has high turnover and lacks the resources to respond.

“Don’t teach them to fish, but build fisheries.” Bill Shore, CEO Share Our Strength

There are no silver bullets in the nonprofit world

With respect to building capacity in SVP:

Venture philanthropy is more meaningful than imagined and harder than imagined. Be willing to invest a lot of time

Small successes will encourage previously unseen and inaccessible sources of social capital to follow.

Allocate enough time to develop SVP while working with Investees. It is just as important to strengthen our organizational capacity as to scale up our giving

We need strong, active, committed, partners and a clear statement of purpose and value proposition

Administrative support and partner engagement is difficult. Providing partner time is more difficult than finding money. Consider finding a volunteer coordinator.

Most organizations need money rather than assistance. If appropriate, we can make a meaningful contribution by teaching them how to create social enterprise to generate ongoing sustained revenue streams.


”The Eight Characteristics of Nonprofit Organizations” By Mike Addison and Jude Kaye

1. Passion for missionThe passion for mission is a great source of strength for nonprofit organizations. The impulse to "change the world" has brought about much important advancement in American society. A passion for the mission taps incredible creativity, energy and dedication for the work of an organization. However, zeal for the mission can lead staff board and volunteers to discount "business" realities, to turn strategic differences into interpersonal conflict, and to work with an urgency that borders on a crisis mentality.

2. Atmosphere of "scarcity"There are factual and perceptual components to scarcity in nonprofits. Most nonprofit leaders could do more work if they had more money, more access to decision-making, more talented board members, etc. They are often, in fact, "under-resourced". Since money takes a lot of energy to acquire, hyper-cost-consciousness is often present. In addition, organizations may carry an altruistic sense that "most of our resources should go to the clients". As a result, many nonprofit organizations frequently have underdeveloped infrastructures. Nonprofit staff is often more willing to spend time (their own, volunteers', board members') rather than money to get work done.

3. Bias toward informality, participation and consensusA sense of friendliness and welcoming atmosphere with little attention to hierarchy are often described as attractive dimensions of nonprofit culture. However, taken too far, informality can limit the appropriate exercise of authority, over-participation can inhibit the division of labor, and the tendency toward consensus can bog down decision making.

4. Dual bottom lines: Mission and financialTension between mission and financial results is fundamental for nonprofit organizations, although one can debate to what extent this is unique. For-profit organizations have increasingly focused on the importance of mission, relative to the priority of return on investment. Governmental organizations have increasingly focused on the importance of mission, relative to the priority of political impact. However, not-for-profits have always focused on the importance of mission and that continues to drive their financial decisions. Internally, the tension between bottom lines influences many strategic decisions, as well as the sense of "how well the organization is doing" at all operational levels. Externally, some stakeholders of a nonprofit care about both bottom lines (funders, competitors, and regulators) and, internally, some stakeholders care primarily about mission (staff, clients and community). The complexity of dual bottom lines figures in many consulting engagements.

5. Program outcomes are difficult to assessMost nonprofit organizations have limited program evaluation capacity. This is partially caused by the absence of standardized program outcomes in most fields. In childcare for example, standards for adult-child ratios exist, but little is standardized in terms of the quality of care delivered. Similarly, arts groups, advocacy organization, mental health agencies and community development corporations face substantial challenges in measuring their effectiveness. Furthermore, most nonprofit organizations do not have the benefit of unambiguous market feedback to let them know how well they are serving their clients. (Nonprofit organizations exist because neither the market nor government is providing the service; most are funded in part or completely by sources other than the direct beneficiaries of their work.) Thus, assessing cost-effectiveness and comparing alternative actions is difficult. Different individuals also may make different assumptions about the relationship between cost and effectiveness. Some groups essentially ignore the issue assuming their efforts are as effective as they can be.

6. Governing board has both oversight and supporting rolesThe governing board of a nonprofit has dual roles: it is responsible for ensuring that the public interest is served by the organization, and--unlike private sector boards of directors or government boards and commissions--is expected to help the organization be successful. The first role is analogous to protecting


the interest of stockholders or voters. The second role complicates the distinction between governance and management because, in this role, board members do staff-like work. As helpers, board members may raise funds, send mailings, paint buildings, or do the bookkeeping. This can lead to confusion about when, and how, it is appropriate for board members to be involved in initiatives. Furthermore, board members are not usually experts in either nonprofit management or the organization's [service niche.] They may either be unprepared to make decisions, or may give up their authority inappropriately to staff.

7. Individuals have mixed skill levels As a function of passion for the mission, limited financial resources, and a shallow pool of candidates, nonprofits often hire managers with limited management training and program staff with little program experience. Though the staff is often composed of professionals (social workers, artists and scientists), because most organizations are small, there is seldom much internal capacity to provide training for staff for the particular roles they are playing.

8. Participation of volunteersMany nonprofit organizations rely on the active participation of volunteers. Members of the Board of Directors are normally not paid for their work, and [many other] individuals contribute considerable time and effort in delivering services and providing administrative support. The contribution that volunteers make to the nonprofit sector is significant; indeed, without volunteerism, many needed social services would not be available to the public. However, volunteers usually have to juggle multiple commitments, and the relative priority they assign to their volunteer job may have to be balanced with their paid job, family responsibilities, and other volunteer commitments. As a result, staff often has to be willing to meet with a Board of Directors in the evening, facilitate a board and staff retreat on the weekend, and they must also find ways to keep busy volunteers up to date. Finally, there may be resentment on the part of certain volunteers, particularly if other people are being paid for the same type of work that they are doing for free.

References

Allison, M., Kaye, J. "The Eight Characteristics of Nonprofit Organizations." This article is reprinted with permission from CompassPoint Nonprofit Services. http://www.compasspoint.org/index.html. Copyright 2001.

Deal, T., Baluss, C. "The Power of Who We Are: Organizational Culture in the Nonprofit Setting." In Nonprofit Organizational Culture: What Fundraisers Need to Know. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1994.

Maier, N. R., Solem, A. and Maier, A. Supervisory and Executive Development: A Manual for Role-Playing. San Diego, CA: University Associates, 1975.

Whetten, D., Cameron, K. Developing Management Skills. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1998.

MIKE ALLISON, MBA, is Director of Consulting and Research at CompassPoint Nonprofit Services.

CASEY SMITH BALUSS was a 1991-92 doctoral fellow at the Indiana University Center on Philanthropy and currently serves as Director of Development at the Crisis Pregnancy Support Center in Nashville, Tennessee. She is also an adjunct professor at Belmont University, where she teaches organizational theory.

KIM CAMERON is Professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the University of Michigan Business School. He recently left the position as Dean of Albert J. Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University. He also organized and directed the Organizational Studies Division of the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems in Boulder, Colorado.

TERRENCE DEAL, Professor of Education and Organizational Development at Vanderbilt University, is an internationally recognized lecturer and consultant in the field of corporate culture.

JUDE KAYE, a consultant with CompassPoint Nonprofit Services, specializes in strategic planning and management training.

DAVID WHETTEN is Director, BYU Faculty Center and Jack Wheatley Professor of Organizational Behavior. He also currently serves as the Editor of The Foundations for Organizational Science, an academic book series. He is also an active management trainer and consultant, having worked with a variety of profit and not-for-profit organizations and several major businesses, including Caterpillar and State Farm.


A Comparison of For-Profit and Nonprofit Structure

STRUCTURE FOR-PROFIT NONPROFIT

PURPOSE Produce goods/services which public needs/demands; generate profits for business expansion and personal gain.

To carry-out a defined mission by delivering services in response to identified needs; the product, in most cases, is a somehow “changed” human being.

PUBLIC IMAGE Provides a legitimate function of society; fundamental to a capitalistic democracy.

"Do-good" agencies; services for those who can’t pay; sometimes perceived as offering lower quality & less efficiently managed.

PRODUCTS, QUALITY Products and service are tangible; quality is generally apparent through hard measurements and quantifiable results.

Performance and results are gen. the service volume measured. Outcomes often are intangible changes in behavior that may take years to realize; quality often difficult to measure, i.e., some results difficult to quantify.

GOVERNANCE:BOARD OF DIRECTORS

1) Composition High-ranking business leaders and owners; high level of sophistication, management expertise.

Ranges from influential community leaders to agency volunteers to service recipients; knowledge of management & board governance principles varies greatly. If Exec. Dir. is a member, often non-voting.

2) Motivation Personal gain, business and social position --prestige in the community.

Belief in the mission, altruism, business or social networking, personal satisfaction.

3) Responsibility Ultimate authority of the corporation; not involved in operations in any way. CEO is member of board;

Ultimate authority for the corporation, legal and fiduciary responsibility, often tend to be over-involved in operations or abdicate their oversight.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES Product & service sales, selling stock; Maximizing all levels of corporation generally increases profits and there's inherent incentive to do so. Profits dependent on quality of production/services, the effectiveness of corporate planning and the marketplace.

Dependent on org. ability to attract and retain donors, individuals as well as foundations/corporations; possibly fee for services; will vary by quality, type & quantity of services provided, e.g. clients, client hrs served; gov't policies and vendor rates. Multiple public and private sources typical. Fin. resources of the not-for-profit are not its own, but held in trust & used according to the donor's wishes.


STRUCTURE FOR-PROFIT NONPROFIT

ACCOUNTABILITY

1) To Whom Board of Directors, owners, stockholders, governmental bodies, e.g., IRS.

Multiple Constituencies: Board of Directors, the community at large, governmental bodies, planning organizations & each funding source--private, public, corporate.

2) Req'd Documentation Production, sales & profit figures; inventory control, specific information required by regulatory agencies.

Service data reports – # of clients or client hrs by service, costs per service; client demographics. Monthly financial reports & yearly fiscal audit; Reports made to funders for programs funded/in required format. Specific info also req'd by regulatory agencies.

ADMINISTRATION

1) Management Often highly-trained and experienced and may have partial/full ownership.

Professional executive directors are often mid-managers who have been promoted and may or may not have received management training; substantially lower salaries at all levels as compared to for profit sector.


THE DAVID AND LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION

Lessons Learned From 15+ Years of Grantmaking to Support the Organizational Effectiveness of Grantees

(adapted from comments made at the Pacific Northwest Grantmakers Forum, Seattle, Washington, March 10, 2000)

At the Packard Foundation, we believe that well managed and governed organizations are more likely to achieve their programmatic goals and we invest in projects aimed at developing grantee management skills and organizational capacity.

After a decade and a half of targeted grantmaking in this area, we would also say that responsible/effective grantmaking demands attention to the organizational capacity of a grantseeker but that this does not necessarily lead to an obligation to provide or pay for management or technical assistance. You can be a fine grantmaker by making grants to capable organizations that have good ideas and submit good proposals. On the other hand, this is not a perfect world.

Most of us are working with a range of grantees with mostly good ideas that submit pretty good proposals. Many of these grantseekers also vary in terms of the capacity to carry out their plans. If your foundation chooses to make grants to emerging groups or to organizations that are experiencing stress (a change in leadership, rapid growth or downsizing, shifts in funding streams, etc.), then making grants and hoping for the best is a risky business. It is risky both for your foundation/giving program and for the grantee. You may be willing to take the risk but placing the grantee at risk is cause for concern.

There are many ways a grantmaker can minimize risk by addressing the capacity needs of the grantee organization. Here are three good options.

1. Ask about capacity during the proposal review process. Reassure yourself that the grantseeker is a savvy manager as well as knowledgeable in her/his field. Make your own assessment of whether or not the organization’s leaders are aware of and adequately addressing organizational issues.

2. Offer additional funds for the capacity-building priorities that the grantseeker identifies or refer them to another funder who does this work competently.

3. Build your own capacity/capabilities in organization development, nonprofit management, and governance and bring that to bear on your grantmaking.

In any case, be aware of the dangers of giving advice. In recent years, the venture capital model has been much debated and the conversation about its relevance to our work is rich. In making organizational effectiveness grants, remember venture capitalists get feedback that is tangible and immediate. If they give good advice along with their investment capital, they make money, placing them in a position to make more investments and give more good advice. In philanthropy, it is not so clear when a grantmaker’s advice is constructive. We can continue to make grants indefinitely whether our advice is good or bad. So, in the words of one very senior grantmaker, “We should be very sure that we know what we are talking about when we give advice. And even then, we probably shouldn’t give it.”

THE PACKARD APPROACHIn spite of the pitfalls, the Packard Foundation continues to work with grantees to help them address organizational issues. In part, we are building on the vision of our founder David Packard, well known as a savvy and innovative manager. More importantly, we have a growing body of knowledge, through study and evaluation, indicating that these grants operate as a kind of insurance, protecting and extending the impact of our investments on the program side.

Organizational effectiveness grants are made to current and recent Packard Foundation grantees to enable them to undertake well-defined projects to develop or refine skills, strategies, organizational systems, or structures. Grants support a variety of projects, ranging from planning and board development to technology assessments and executive transitions.

In the section below, we summarize a few of the lessons learned along the way through a process of trial and error, study and reflection, and—most importantly—direct feedback from grantees.


LESSONS LEARNED1. Management challenges are normal and ongoing for all organizations. Management challenges

emerge, not because an organization is weak or poorly run, but as a result of healthy growth, risk taking, and adaptation to a rapidly changing environment. A commitment to addressing these challenges is a sign of strength, not weakness.

2. Organizational effectiveness grantmakers should insist on thoughtfulness as grantees develop their OE projects, not on what or how grantees should think. There are many paths to competency and many kinds of capacity. Understandably, grantseekers will be less committed to our priorities than their own. And grantseekers know their business better than we ever will.

3. You will get more leverage out of coaching a grantee on how to select a consultant than from choosing the “best” consultant for the grantee. In fact, the more decisions the grantseeker makes, the more committed they will be to the process and the project. There is, in fact, a power differential and even a gentle suggestion from a grantmaker will often be heard as a directive. Corollary: there is a relationship between the skills/experience/quality of the consultant or other technical assistance provider and the outcomes for the organization. This makes the consultant search and selection process a critical step for the organization attempting to enhance its organizational effectiveness.

4. There is no quick fix and there is no permanent fix either. Effectiveness requires ongoing attention because change is the constant. Since the context for the work is always changing, the organization must change as well.

5. Renewed, even increased, commitment in times of organizational change can pay big dividends. Our success is almost entirely dependent upon the success of our grantees. We share a common vision/goal with our grantees. The bumps they encounter along the way are opportunities to rethink, reposition, and reengineer. Note: It is counter-intuitive to rush in with extra funding when an organization loses its executive director. It is understandable to feel that you should “wait and see” who the new executive is before renewing a grant. But what about helping to ensure that their search process is thoughtful and thorough? It may be the best money you invest.

6. Define the relationship and the process up front; “walk the way you talk.” Honesty in reporting and authenticity in the grantee/grantor relationship can either be enhanced or seriously damaged in connection with this work. Trust is not a static condition. For better or worse, there is a power differential in the relationship between funder and grantee. Maintaining productive and healthy relationships requires constant attention.

7. An internal champion for the capacity-building work is vital to the success of the project. Grantees have important, often urgent, work to do. Without a champion for the capacity-building work, it can easily be left on the back burner in the face of other more immediate program-related priorities.

8. Organization-building takes longer and is harder than anyone thinks. We hear this over and over again from our grantees as they reflect back on their OE work. Holding an organizational effectiveness grantee to a tight time-line can actually inhibit learning and lead to posturing and lack of candor in reporting. We reassure our grantees that we will extend a grant period if progress is being made and more time is needed.

9. A grant for planning, training, assessment, or evaluation will not help an organization in crisis. A true crisis—the result of earthquake, fire, flood, the unanticipated loss of a previously stable funding stream, or a sudden and complete breakdown in the relationship between the executive director and board—is not the right time for a thoughtful, comprehensive process. An organizational effectiveness grant will not have the desired results when what is needed is a quick infusion of cash or immediate action to deal with an emergency. On the other hand, a crisis caused by poor governance, inadequate organizational systems or structures, misalignment between programs and mission, or any other significant organizational failing, will never be effectively addressed by an infusion of cash.

10. Not enough is known about how to do grantmaking to promote organizational effectiveness or what its true impact is. Grantmakers can contribute to the knowledge base and to the development of best practices by being thoughtful, reflecting on the work, and sharing lessons learned.


Guidebook to Orient Technical/Professional Volunteers to the Nonprofit Sector: An Academic Paper

AcknowledgementsThe best practices in this guidebook are based largely on dialogue and data derived from more than a hundred interviews and web surveys of professional and technical (pro/tech) volunteers, as well as interviews with twenty of the not-for-profit organizations with whom they work. These surveys and interviews were conducted in the Puget Sound region and involved respondents associated with four not-for-profit organizations that serve in a matchmaking capacity between not-for-profits and pro/tech volunteers: Social Venture Partners, United Way of King County, Executive Services Corps of Washington and ONE/Northwest. I owe each of these respondents a huge debt of gratitude for the generous amount of time and effort they put into thoughtfully answering my questions. In many ways, they are the true authors of this guidebook.

I am indebted to Paul Shoemaker, Executive Director of Social Venture Partners, for putting his trust in me and facilitating this research in two ways: 1) By questioning, challenging and encouraging the project design and 2) by creating and facilitating the means for me to speak to both the Investees (organizations with whom SVP partners) and the Lead Partners (who act as liaisons between SVP's pro/tech volunteers and the organizations they serve.)

Many thanks again to Paul, as well as Carolyn Cunningham, Volunteer Initiatives Manager for United Way of King County, Amanda Nelson, Executive Director of Executive Services Corps of Washington and Andrew Gianni, Web University/Volunteer Coordinator of ONE/NW for their invaluable assistance with the web surveys.

Thanks, also, to my cohort in the Not-for-Profit Leadership Master's Degree Program at Seattle University, to our professors and, especially, to the person who inspired me to apply for this program, Professor Mary Stewart Hall, Ph.D. Special thanks go to one of my classmates, Ellen Nicholson, whose friendship has been a source of encouragement and inspiration. Her keen intellect and standards of excellence have challenged me throughout this entire program.

I am deeply appreciative of my mentor, Doreen Cato, Executive Director of First Place, a not-for-profit organization that provides transition schooling for homeless children and support services for their families. I am grateful for the time she took to share her wisdom and insights and for modeling excellence in not-for-profit leadership. To my way of thinking, she takes "first place" as a mentor.

I also want to express my heartfelt thanks to my husband, Greg, and our sons, Justin and Adam, for their constant support and encouragement for the past year and a half. Additional kudos go to my husband for his consulting expertise and time spent editing this guidebook. Having my own in-house pro/tech volunteer was a great bonus!

Most importantly, I thank God with profound gratitude for this incredible opportunity to meet so many people who are deeply devoted to the not-for-profit sector, have a tremendous passion for their missions and liberally share their knowledge. My life has been immeasurably enriched by these relationships.


Introduction Over the past decade, there has been increasing recognition that not-for-profit organizations must

improve internal capacity if they hope to maintain and/or maximize their sustainability. Building capacity

involves improving the infrastructure--the administrative, financial and technical functions of an

organization--and upgrading the skills of staff who provide these functions. In order to achieve these

goals, many organizations have increasingly turned to professional and technical volunteers for the types

of expertise they cannot otherwise afford in such areas as database development, marketing and public

relations projects, strategic planning, installation of technology, financial systems upgrade and legal

counsel.

The lives of both not-for-profit staff and their clients have been enhanced through the efforts of these

volunteers, who provide a wide range of skills that serve to increase organizational efficiency and thereby

free up the not-for-profit's resources. The savings in time and money are then used to improve services

and reach more people. Below are comments from both volunteers and the organizations they serve,

which illustrate the positive impact produced by a partnership between the two.1

"These people are wonderful human beings with hearts of gold--they just keep on trying until they get it

right. They have tremendous skills that we couldn't possible afford to pay for and we get to take

advantage of their expertise."

"It's important to me to give back to the community and I do that by working in organizations whose missions I believe in. The kids these agencies serve are what keep me going--they deserve a better chance in life."

"Without the help of these dedicated volunteers, we could not have accomplished our goals. We have

served more people and changed more lives because of their help. The volunteers who come in with no

ego and work incredibly hard are our quiet, behind-the-scenes heroes."

The good news is that so many people from the private sector want to share their expertise with nonprofit

organizations and it is heartening to note that, by and large, these relationships work very well. However,

the challenge is that both sides often express some measure of frustration in their relationships although,

in certain cases, clearly nothing could be done to minimize this sentiment. Due to unforeseen

circumstances, projects may fall short or fail.

However, there are best practices that professional and technical volunteers can implement to maximize

the success of their projects and improve the quality of their relationships with not-for-profits. This Best

Practices Guidebook is intended as a step-by-step guide to ensuring that level of success.

Best Practices

"As a volunteer, I have benefited from an understanding of--and commitment to--the not-for-profit sector."

"The more they know about the not-for-profit sector, the less time I have to spend fending off frustrated

professional and technical volunteers who champion unrealistic ideas. The major reason for a "best

practices" approach is that it increases my ROI (return on investment), as well as theirs."1 Throughout this guidebook, comments made by not-for-profit staff are italicized; those made by volunteers are bolded. All comments are taken from research interviews and web survey responses.


1.) Understand the Not-for-Profit Sector Clearly, there is an enormous amount to be learned about this sector and although knowledge levels will

vary at the outset, it is essential for every volunteer to have a basic understanding of the internal structure

of not-for-profits and their organizational culture. Depending on the complexity of the volunteer project, a

deeper understanding of the social services provided by an organization might also be useful, along with

research of the underlying issues those services address. Conversely, experienced pro/tech volunteers

note that it's not usually necessary to understand the not-for-profit structure or culture to make quick

technical and computer related changes. In the vast majority of cases, however, increased knowledge of

the sector will benefit volunteers and not-for-profits alike.

"When I first began my volunteer effort, the most difficult thing for me was understanding the educational system since I had never worked in this field before. I am now much more comfortable volunteering in this environment and, consequently, I'm much more effective."

"Basic understanding of the differences between the not-for-profit and for-profit sector is not just helpful, it is essential."

Since pro/tech volunteers are naturally quite familiar with the for-profit sector, a brief comparison of the

two sectors may prove useful. A table of comparison of the not-for-profit and the for-profit sectors is

included in Addendum A. This table (original provided by United Way of King County & revised by this

author) is certainly not a definitive comparison of the sectors, but is merely meant to provide a point of

reference for volunteers, especially those who are new to not-for-profit work.

In addition to identifying the basic differences between the sectors, it is important for volunteers to

understand characteristics that are common to not-for-profits. After working with hundreds of clients,

Mike Allison of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services and his colleague, Jude Kay identified eight "key"

characteristics of not-for-profits. (Please note that further explanation of each characteristic is found in

Addendum "B.") The following list identifies the eight, which are as follows:

1. Passion for mission

2. Atmosphere of "scarcity"

3. Bias toward informality, participation and consensus

4. Dual bottom lines: Mission and financial

5. Program outcomes are difficult to assess

6. Governing board has both oversight and supporting roles

7. Individuals have mixed skill levels

8. Participation of volunteers

Some of these eight characteristics result from the intrinsic structure of the not-for-profit sector, such as

the role of the board and utilization of volunteers; others result from the values upon which these

organizations are founded, such as passion for the mission and dual bottom lines. Obviously, every not-

for-profit has a unique organizational culture and the degree to which these characteristics prevail varies


greatly within each organization. Consequently, knowledge of these general characteristics should be

tempered with careful observation and a full measure of objectivity on the part of the volunteer.

"Professional and technical volunteers are quite beneficial to our organization, although they could be

even more so if they had a more thorough understanding of the sector. Once that has occurred, it would

be easier for them to understand the unique culture of specific not-for-profits."

"I think one of the most difficult parts of volunteering is trying to forget about my perspective and bias toward some of the staff's policies and practices and focus on the unique needs of the organization and its clients. This usually works and, when it does, I remember why I love to do this--it's all about working together to help the people the organization serves."

2. Obtain Background Information

When a project is proposed, volunteers can obtain vital data even before they walk in the door.

Organizations may offer all or some of the following information without prompting but, if they do not, be

sure and request it. Be sensitive to the fact that some staff may not have all of these documents readily

available. Useful background information includes the following:

Mission, vision and core values

Organization's history

Agency literature, including newsletters

Site visit and introduction to staff and clients

Business and/or strategic plan

Project or organizational budget

The last item on this list, budget, is vital information for a volunteer. If the not-for-profit readily provides a

volunteer with a project budget, it might be instructive to ask how this fits into the whole budget. If there is

no mention of budget at all, it may be a good idea to ask for financial information to determine the extent

of an organization's resources, particularly if there are additional costs associated with this project.

Although volunteer services are gratis, volunteers may recommend products (such as computer

equipment or software), which are not. Be aware that resource constraints can make even relatively

small purchases prohibitive.

"They don't understand our lack of resources, so they blame our inefficiencies on not-for-profit

incompetence instead of digging deeper. If they knew how tight the budget is, they might understand this

better--since they've never asked to see our budget, they don't realize the minute margin that we run on."

"Not-for-profits operate on a shoestring budget in order to serve as many clients as possible. We need to honor the sacrifices staff make to accomplish their mission and be as sensitive as possible to the budget constraints that they deal with on a daily basis."

"Volunteers should be more involved in defining our problems and challenges so that they truly

understand what we’re up against. That means going on site and watching our staff in action and seeing


how what we do benefits our clients' lives. Our best volunteers come to us with a yearning to know more

about the people we serve and the difficult circumstances these people face --and they come to realize

that we are intervening on the community's behalf."

Volunteers should be sure to schedule initial meetings to gather information and discuss the agency in

general. That way, they can determine if they're a "good fit" and if their values are compatible with the

organizations. If not, it might be best to defer to another volunteer.

"Know if the organization's core values line up with your own--and to thine own self be true. If it's not a good fit, decline the project."

"First, do no harm. Don't leave the agency worse off than you found it by failing to do the necessary

groundwork and discovering in mid-stream that you are not a good match for them because you have no

passion for the mission."

3. Balance Expertise with Humility

Professional/technical volunteers should approach each new volunteer assignment with objectivity and

with what one executive director calls a "learner's mind." Be prepared to suspend all assumptions and

ask a lot of questions.

Volunteers must believe that the knowledge of how to provide service to the not-for-profit's clients rests

with the staff. It is critical for volunteers to stick to their areas of expertise and not get involved in the

organization's services and program delivery.

"It's hard when volunteers come in without a learner's mind. It's doubly difficult if they don't believe that

we represent the wisdom of the community or know what we're doing."

"Some volunteers need to suspend the assumption that the for-profit world is more skilled and has all the answers. Actually, we all need to suspend the assumptions and arrogance on both sides. We each have something profound to offer and neither side knows the whole story."

"The volunteers need to have more humility and let things unfold a bit more before jumping in with their

answers. They also need to recognize that different workplaces have different strengths and

weaknesses. Instead of going in and asserting their culture, they should go in and listen with a curious

mind vs. a telling mind. We are inviting them in to share the strengths of their culture and we would

appreciate it if they would reciprocate."

"I went into my relationship with an open mind and an attitude of respect for their organizational culture. The not-for-profit did the same. The results were extremely positive and we plan to work together again."

4. Listen Actively


Volunteers need to listen actively, with no immediate rush to judgment or desire to tell the not-for-profit

"the way they see it." The intention to fully understand what the staff is telling them must be paramount.

This involves "total" listening instead of "partial" listening, which is the norm for most people. According to

management researchers Whetton & Cameron (1998, p. 208), "Being a good listener is neither easy, nor

automatic. It requires developing the ability to hear and understand the message, while at the same time

helping to strengthen the relationship between the interacting parties."

In addition, communication experts Maier, Solem and Maier (1973) confirm what common sense would

dictate: "In any conversation, the person who talks the most is the one who learns the least about the

other person."

"The ratio of listening to talking should be ten to one, particularly when volunteers first walk in the door."

"The organization is different than I expected--more confusing and harder to understand--and therefore, it's more work than I expected, as well. It takes a lot of "deep" listening to get it right."

5. Recognize the Importance of Language

Each sector has its own particular acronyms, jargon or terms that have subtle nuances, as well as words

that have an entirely different meaning from what is generally understood. Be clear about defining

language on both sides and be sensitive to the issue of how certain words are perceived. This is an area

that should be addressed immediately in order to avoid any undue confusion and establish a pattern of

clear and open communication.

"Volunteers need to consider the issue of semantics and be careful how they use words that not-for-

profits shy away from, like "competition." I have trouble thinking of other service providers as

"competitors" and I'm certainly not out to "beat" them at a game or to run them out of business. I see

others in the same field as co-laborers who are working with us to solve a huge societal issue."

"Attempting to understand our language as we attempt to understand theirs is crucial to both sides. We cannot get very far until we understand each other's professional jargon."

"Our professional and technical volunteers often ask for a definition if they don't know what a word

means, which is much different from our reaction if they use an unfamiliar word. My staff and I are

reluctant to ask for clarification because we're afraid that our ignorance will be seen as further evidence

that we don't understand business concepts. We eventually figure out what these words mean by the

context in which they're used."

6. Respect Organizational Culture

Merely by observing the staff and clients, volunteers can discover quite a few clues about an

organization's culture, including management style, work pace, decision making processes, methods of

communication and openness to change. Organizational culture is rooted in the values upon which it was


founded and volunteers need to understand the core values that drive the mission in order to understand

the people who choose to work in that organization. According to Deal and Baluss, (1985, p. 10), "Values

reveal the qualities considered worthwhile and important and define the organization's fundamental

character: [A] culture is strong to the degree that [its] values are shared and reinforced."

Deeply held values are one of the hallmarks of the not-for-profit sector. Deal and Baluss also note that,

"Nonprofit organizations, perhaps more than private and governmental institutions, are culture driven.

They tend to develop strong cultures as people work together for a cause and values to which they are

deeply committed. The rewards are great but often symbolic.

Staff members often make personal and professional sacrifices because of their zeal for the mission."

This intense passion can be all consuming and volunteers should simply be aware of this quality and how

it can affect their working relationships with staff.

These strongly-held values and resulting operational differences in the two sectors is the primary cause of

frustration between volunteers and not-for-profits and generally occurs because each assumes the other

is acting unreasonably. The following quotes illustrate the values intrinsically held by both sides.

"The pace of the not-for-profit where I'm volunteering is slower than what I'm used to. In a business, everyone's hair is always on fire. I miss that."

"These volunteers have an unrealistic expectation that not-for-profits move faster than we do. All of our

work has to be done around a full day of providing services. The work we accomplish with the volunteers

seems fast to me, but slow to them. They're used to time for planning and resources to make those

changes happen quickly--a luxury we don't have."

"Establishing good business practices in a not-for-profit is often like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole--The resistance to change causes a lot of friction."

"Several of our volunteers have a tendency to run over people, particularly during meetings--They are

quick, critical, interrupting and impatient. That style tends to squash most of our people, who need time

for reflection and process."

Learning to understand and appreciate the uniqueness of others is clearly essential to the success of any

group endeavor and this principle of tolerance should serve as the foundation for volunteer/staff

relationships. Depending on the extent to which both sides work to establish this foundation, the

relationships between staff and volunteers can be extremely rewarding.

"It's important to keep your cool and continue to be upbeat and congenial, even when you are

misunderstood. Persevere when things get rough and work through those times. You'll be glad you did

and so will the volunteer. In fact, they will begin to meet you more than half-way."


"Originally, I viewed the not-for-profit culture as ineffective and inefficient. Over time, I slowly began to understand it and, finally, I realized that it was up to me to adapt to their culture, not the other way around."

7. Identify the Decision-Makers

Volunteers need to identify the lines of authority in a not-for-profit. It's crucial to remember that a

volunteer – even one leading a project – is not the boss and cannot set priorities and policies. However,

it's sometimes difficult to figure out exactly who is promoting the volunteer's project, depending on who

has initiated the proposal. Obviously, the support of the Executive Director is vital to the success of any

not-for-profit project. If the request for a project did not originate with that individual, a meeting to

ascertain his or her commitment to the project should be scheduled immediately.

When meeting with the Executive Director, it may become apparent to the volunteer that the staff has a

lack of commitment to the project and that the board is pressuring them to accomplish something they are

not willing to "buy into." Possibly, the staff is unconvinced as to the value the project will bring to the

agency or they may be resisting change for political reasons. On the board's side, they might believe this

project is ultimately in the best interests of the agency and exercise their power to issue a directive, no

matter how unpopular. In this type of situation, the volunteer could be asked by the board to give expert

counsel to help them determine which viewpoint is more credible regarding the viability of the project.

Meet for an initial question and answer session with the Executive Director to determine who is in charge of the project and what the board's agenda is. It may be that the board is aligned with the staff's goals, but if they are not, this can be a problem. Boards have a tendency to micro-manage agencies and you could find yourself in the middle of a turf war. Doing your homework can help prevent volunteers from inadvertently stepping into politically charged situations."

"Volunteers need training in board governance in order to understand that not-for-profit boards are

different from corporate boards. It's vital to be aware of the balance/tension between the ED and the

board before working with not-for-profits."

"It's important to keep in mind that your "client" may not be who they initially appear to be. By the time you discover this, it may be too late and the damage has already been done. The true "client" will probably not be willing to work with you because it appears that you have circumvented their authority."

"I just about gave up working on a project because of a power struggle between the staff and board. The staff didn't see the need for internal capacity building, although the board believed that, without it, the doors might close. The staff's attitude has changed significantly with the hiring of a new executive director, who is a quick study and really understands the value of the work I'm doing."


Within not-for-profits, there may be staff members who, by virtue of their longevity or the respect they

engender, wield enormous influence. Sometimes referred to as the "torch-bearer" of the agency, they are

often direct service staff with whom a volunteer may not have much contact and that can make identifying

them somewhat difficult. For those volunteers who anticipate a long-term assignment with a not-for-profit,

it would be beneficial to determine if such a person exists and, if so, to cultivate a relationship with this

venerable individual.

"Knowing who the key people are--at every level-- is one of the secrets to successful project outcome."

Also, be sure to listen for the voices of dissent within an organization. There is often a great deal that can

be learned from staff members who are willing to assert a contrary or unpopular opinion. This is never

more important than when volunteers are new to an organization and cannot yet assess the accuracy of

their initial impressions.

"Be sure to pay attention to the rabble-rousers. They can be the true voices of reason and/or change within the organization but by virtue of their positions or their strident manner, they've been discounted. Don't make the mistake of doing the same."

8.) Establish Working Relationship Guidelines

Role clarification is essential for the two parties to work together well and should be included in the

discussion at the outset. It is critical to the success of the project to define "who will do what" beforehand

and to discuss which staff will be working on a project and how much of their time will be utilized. In

addition, establishing relationship guidelines can help prevent misunderstandings between volunteers and

not-for-profit staff. This should be one of the first tasks undertaken together, in order that the parties

"begin as they mean to go on."

Clarification of roles and responsibilities ensures that everyone working on the project understands the

lines of communication and authority, and produces the added benefit of distributing accountability for

problem solving. The following guidelines can help a volunteer establish good working relationships with

staff:

1.) Volunteers should request that one staff person be their primary contact. Naming one person

with whom to communicate saves time and ensures that both volunteer and staff are informed

and updated with no crossed wires. This makes setting schedules ahead of time much easier.

2.) Discuss beforehand how you are going to re-connect after a vacation or when someone is

unavailable for an extended period of time. When projects are interrupted, they can lose

momentum, so ensure that there is a firm date on which to recommence the work.

3.) Establish a protocol for cancelled appointments or missed deadlines. Be accountable to the

staff and ask the same from them.


"It has been my experience that not-for-profits can be somewhat casual about time. Meetings often don't begin when scheduled because people are talking and sharing and, when they do begin, they can be pretty long and, sometimes, there's no agenda. To counter this, send them a copy of the agenda and meeting materials ahead of time. Emphasize that you are trying to make the best use of their time, as well as your own, and that you want to focus on what's really important to the ultimate success of the project."

4.) It may be important to determine how the volunteer and staff will handle "gaps" in the

organization's internal capacity, especially if it's necessary to discuss past decisions.

Volunteers may come in and focus on areas of capacity building where the staff has not

concentrated previously or where they may have made decisions based more on the

organization's mission and not as much on efficiency. Volunteers should consider ways to deal

with this type of conversation constructively, considering that staff may feel criticized even when

that is not a volunteer's intention.

"It is sometimes hard to come in and help without suggesting that things have been done incorrectly in the past. Staff can be very protective about their organizations and each other. Try to downplay the "who" and focus on what can be done to improve the situation in order to diffuse any hard feelings."

"I wish we had planned ahead of time how we were going to solve our problems. It would

have saved us a lot of wasted time and energy, which could have been used more

productively on the project."

5.) Establish a method of conflict resolution before problems occur and ensure that it is congruent

with the values of the organization, as well as the volunteer. Deal with problems quickly and,

preferably, face-to-face.

6.) If the offer is not made, negotiate a workspace if you need one--but be sensitive to this issue.

Not-for-profits often have a lack of adequate office space.

7.) Discuss ahead of time who is going to do necessary support work, such as photocopying,

taking meeting minutes and room set-up.

9.) Act As If the Not-for-Profit Is a Paying Client

To ensure that both volunteers and staff treat this as a priority, the project should be managed as if the

client was paying. The benefits of this are twofold: 1) It will produce a higher caliber project and 2) the

project is more likely to be successfully completed.

Volunteers should draw up an initial proposal and take the time to go over it with those in charge of the

project. This ensures that expectations of both parties are clear from the beginning and both are held

accountable for holding up their respective ends of the agreement.


"When you commit to an organization, even though it's in a volunteer capacity, meet your commitment unequivocally. Keep in mind that staff has other projects they are working on and if you break your promises, you may cost them a delay which would undoubtedly drain their already limited resources."

Pro/tech volunteers should be frank and realistic with the not-for-profit about the number of hours a

project will likely take. Equally as important are a good faith estimate of hours the volunteer can commit

to this work and the number of hours required from the staff. Volunteers should be careful not to apply

pressure for a project to be completed; instead they should provide the staff with the benefit of their

advice and counsel and subsequently leave this decision in the hands of the not-for-profit.

"This is very challenging because I'm coming from a background that makes it difficult to figure out if I

should ask for something more (or less) from these volunteers. How am I supposed to determine what I

need? Without their honest assessment of a project, it's hard to figure out if I'm getting into something

that will take a lot more of my time than I initially believed it would. Their willingness to tell me the "the

rest of the story" would help me make better decisions."

"Standards of excellence and straightforward communication are not sector-specific and it is important to me that I not distinguish between the two. Not-for-profits deserve the best I can give them and I do everything within my power to convey that message, including deferring to their best judgment by fully disclosing the true scope of a project."

10.) Assess Organizational Readiness

Sometimes, it's quite obvious to both sides that a proposed project is not a good idea because the staff is

simply unprepared to deal with a certain project. Both sides may agree that the not-for-profit must do

some additional groundwork. Generally speaking, however, it's far from easy, especially if both the

volunteer and staff had high hopes for the project.

Furthermore, assessing organizational readiness in not-for-profits may be a bit more problematic than

assessing it in the for-profit sector, particularly since it can sometimes be difficult to determine the

aptitude of staff before the project begins.

"Volunteers may get the "kid-glove" treatment, due to the belief that our expertise is something so valuable, it cannot possibly be turned away. It's essential for staff to learn that not all free things are good for an agency, even when they're strapped for money. This is especially true if they simply don't have the staff resources and preparedness to pull it off."

Volunteers should be careful to look for signs that the project is simply not "doable" or, at least, not

"doable" for the foreseeable future, usually due to staff time or resource constraints. This assessment is

a fluid process, sometimes preceding the project, but often coinciding with the initial conversations on

project definition. If you become aware of a lack of readiness at any point, step back and re-assess. Be

willing to stop, change the approach, or discontinue the project altogether.


"Don’t be afraid to turn away help if you're not really ready for it. If you don't, it can be a huge time waster

for you and your staff."

11.) Define the Project

If pro/tech volunteers have engaged in the aforementioned "best practices" to the extent necessary, a

good foundation has now been laid to actually begin working on the project itself. A team meeting is

an excellent way to kick-off a large project, with both internal and external stakeholders in attendance.

This will help get everyone "on board" and ensure that the entire team's expectations are realistic and

goals are agreed upon.

Asking insightful questions to determine organizational needs is always essential to good project

definition, but it's absolutely imperative with not-for-profits. When defining project goals or imagining what

the end product will look like, it's important for both parties to articulate what they believe is a successful

outcome. Some volunteers ask for a written project proposal from the outset, while others believe that

this is better left to a group process. In either case, determining the staff's perception of the project is

crucial.

"Make sure that the same question is asked of both the staff and the volunteer: What is the "X " that will occur to ensure this project's success? If "X" isn't the same answer for both parties, go back to the drawing board--the project needs re-shaping. By using this process, everyone's time will be maximized."

"Ask each staff member what his or her view of the project is. When these answers are shared, not only will everyone be surprised at the number of different viewpoints, this exercise will also broaden the staff's ideas of what is possible. This exercise also serves two very strategic purposes: 1) It illustrates the importance of synthesizing all of their ideas before clearly defining a project and 2) it helps them to take responsibility for some of the difficulties that may arise later by making it abundantly clear how varied perceptions are, even when staff believes that everyone is "on the same page." This enlightening exercise makes it easier for everyone to understand the inevitable "course corrections" which occur."

Since some staff may not be acquainted with highly technical business solutions, they may not know how

to accurately articulate their needs and this will require more coaching from the volunteer. Just as with

clients in the for-profit sector, staff may have no frame of reference for a project's relative difficulty and

they may have "blue sky" ideas, which are not viable. The greatest value added to the organization in this

process may be to hold them to rigorous project definition, in order that they truly identify their needs,

instead of their wants. Volunteers need to be sure to define and get agreement on the purpose and

approach from the outset and ensure that there is group consensus before they begin.

"My favorite part of volunteer work is when I engage the staff in thought provoking, strategic dialogue. Sometimes I have to re-direct their ideas because they're simply not doable, but when we finally "hit the bulls-eye" and discover which course of action is best, it's magic."


"It's important to ensure that all angles have been covered when defining projects, so be sure to ask these final questions: "What else should I be asking you? What else should I know about the staff or the organization or what it will be like to work together?"

12.) Manage the Project

There are several pitfalls to avoid in development and implementation of projects in the not-for-profit

sector. They are, as follows:

1. Be prepared for how sporadic the work is. Technical work, in particular, is hard to do one or

two days a week, especially given limited staff availability. In general, this work is very

detailed, with a great deal of assessment and the need for sustained focus. The deeper into

it, the more challenging it becomes and it's easier to keep going if it's constant. Each time

there's a break in continuity, volunteers may need to re-orient themselves to the project,

which takes time and effort.

2. Both sides may want to make a problem "disappear" since there are so many other

worthwhile priorities competing for the staff's attention. It can be tempting to go for the "quick

fix" solution to an organizational problem. When short cuts are taken, particularly on projects

that affect entire systems, the potential impact can run the gamut from failure to achieve long-

term results to the risk of financial ruin.

3. Be sure to assign or recruit the staff who will be trained on this project and to maintain it after

it's completed. Ensure the organization's sustainability by providing clear documentation and

in-depth training. This is doubly important for not-for-profits, where inexperienced staff makes

training and documentation vital. Not-for-profit staff is more likely than their for-profit

counterparts to be lacking any type of technical support when a volunteer is not available or

has completed the project. Training will build their confidence and skill level and detailed

documentation will ensure that staff can solve problems by themselves.

"Projects work best when the users gain the skills, interest and motivation to work with the newly devised system so that they can continue to develop and refine the system after the volunteer has left."

4. Be flexible and ready for numerous project "course corrections." This may also be more likely

to occur in not-for-profits due to the staff's inexperience with capacity building projects.

"Don't be surprised if the proposed project changes once you get into it. Sometimes the not-for-profit staff cannot articulate their needs, despite the groundwork you do and their priorities may change over the course of the engagement. In these types of situations, the not-for-profit may need to call in another volunteer to accomplish the newly defined task because your skill set is no longer applicable."


5. Encourage honest feedback from the organization regarding how well the project is going.

Set up some type of evaluation benchmarks and have everyone involved meet to discuss the

progress

13.) Evaluate the Project

Volunteers may be able to clearly see that their projects are contributing to improving internal capacity.

However, if a volunteer was hoping to see an increase in client satisfaction and service, it might be harder

to correlate the two especially since not-for-profits tend to have "soft" data measurements.

Although it may be through anecdotal information, it is important for both staff and volunteers to ascertain

if the project has benefited the overall agency and to what degree.

"My biggest frustration with the not-for-profit I worked with was lack of hard data. You can't manage what you can't measure."

"It would be very helpful if they could understand that, for us, it's not about the numbers, it's about the

people and the process, so our evaluation methods are value-based. That's part of the education

process they must go through to understand that we view our ROI much differently. Also, they need to

realize why we can't hit targets as quickly as they'd like us to, that it takes far longer for us due to our

staffing limitations and budget constraints."

A volunteer should also do a self-evaluation at the end of a project and ask these questions:

1. What did I do well?

2. What did I learn to do during this project that I now do better?

3. What should I do differently next time?

"Every volunteer project is an opportunity to learn something new and apply those skills to help the next not-for-profit. It's a real pleasure to work together with people who are all learning together how to do this thing called not-for-profit work."

14.) Enjoy the Experience!

One volunteer summed up her experiences with this comment, which is a wonderful conclusion to these

Best Practices: "The late, beloved John Stanford, a retired Army Major General and, in his last earthly assignment, Superintendent of Seattle Public Schools, used to repeat this saying whenever he talked about inspiring others to make improvements in their lives: "You have to love them to lead them." I think it is impossible to provide meaningful and useful service to people and organizations unless you enjoy being around them and respect what they do. And in the technical and professional volunteer's role, there is a measure of leading that comes with showing others a new and, hopefully, more beneficial way to run the business side of not-for-profits."

Additional Resources


Block, P. Flawless Consulting. (2nd Ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 2001.

Flawless Consulting, the best-selling consulting book of all time, has been considered by many to be the consultant's bible for over 15 years. While other books on consulting outline theories for understanding organizations or for implementing interventions, Block actually describes and demonstrates ways of behaving with clients. This new edition includes illustrative examples, case studies, exercises, and commentary on pitfalls and lays the groundwork for dealing effectively with clients, peers, and others. Anyone who must communicate in a professional context will find scores of lessons to apply to their jobs.

Drucker, P. Managing the Nonprofit Organization: Principles and Practices. New York: HarperCollins,

1992.

The author discusses "his ideas on tasks, responsibilities, and practices necessary to manage nonprofit organizations." Drucker gives examples and explanations of mission, leadership, resources, marketing, goals, people development, decision-making, and much more. Included are interviews with nine experts that address key issues in the nonprofit sector.

Kibbe, B., Setterberg, F. Succeeding with Consultants: Self-Assessment for the Changing Nonprofit.

New York, NY: Foundation Center, 1992.

This manual provides not-for-profit administrators and boards with a step-by-step method for working with consultants to diagnose and address organizational problems. Includes six self-assessment checklists for use in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of an organization's governance, planning, fund development, financial management, public relations and marketing plans, and quality assurance operations.

Letts, C., Ryan, W. P., Grossman, A. R. High Performance Nonprofit Organizations: Managing Upstream

for Greater Impact. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.

The authors clearly and concisely show nonprofits how to make general business management guidance relevant and effective by providing a framework for analyzing management, and by translating business lingo into an accessible vocabulary for not-for-profit managers. This book outlines difficulties facing the not-for-profit sector and advocates for internal capacity building and gives plenty of information and advice on how to achieve it.

Loeb, M. & Kindel, S. "Taking the Lead as a Volunteer." In Leadership for Dummies. Foster City, CA:

IDG Books Worldwide, 1999.

This chapter describes how to be an excellent volunteer while leading others and includes the following:

Mastering the ticklish art of volunteer diplomacy. Building strong volunteer leadership eight ways. Knowing when to hand off, bail out, and start over.

Lukas, C. A. Consulting with Nonprofits: A Practitioner's Guide. St. Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder

Foundation, 1999.

A comprehensive guide for consultants working with nonprofit and community organizations. Lukas discusses the specialized skills a not-for-profit consultant needs and cursory knowledge of how the sector works. Included in this guide are an overview of the not-for-profit sector, the six-stage consulting process, key differences between internal and external consulting, when team consulting makes sense, how to run a consulting business and managing career growth.


Salamon, L. M. America's Nonprofit Sector: A Primer. (2nd Ed). New York, N.Y: The Foundation Center,

1992.

Lester Salamon clarifies the basic scope, structure, operation, and role of the nonprofit sector in the U.S and places the nonprofit sector into context in relation to government and the business sector. He chronicles the history of the sector and traces the roots of philanthropy in this country. The result is a basic introduction not only to the American not-for-profit sector but also to the social welfare system more generally.

Schein, E. Process Consultation Revisited: Building the Helping Relationship. Reading, MA: Addison-

Wesley, 1999.

The latest edition to Ed Schein's set of consultation books, this new volume builds on the content of the two that precede it and explores the critical area of what Schein terms "the helping relationship" between consultant and client. Based on an advocacy view of consulting, this book emphasizes that the foundation of good consulting is good relationships.

Wolf, T. Managing A Nonprofit Organization in the Twenty- First Century. New York, NY: Simon &

Schuster, 1999.

Since this classic work was originally published in 1984, there have been major shifts in the not-for-profit sector -- the growth of more profit-oriented ventures, the overhaul of accounting rules, new partnerships, and an emphasis on customer-oriented service and leadership. Thomas Wolf's newest edition explains how to cope with these changes, as well as deal with the traditional challenges of managing staff, trustees, and volunteers.

PETER BLOCK. Designed Learning, Inc. counts Peter Block among its founders and partners. This corporation focuses on helping staff manage the transition to becoming credible consultants within their organizations.

PETER DRUCKER, head of the Drucker Foundation, is recognized as one of the premiere management experts of the 21st century.

BARBARA KIBBE, is Director, Organizational Effectiveness and Philanthropy for the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and also chairs Grantmakers for Effective Organizations.

STEPHEN KINDEL is former President of Pull Technologies, Inc.

CHRISTINE LETTS teaches courses at the Kennedy School of Government and Executive Education in nonprofit strategy and philanthropy. Letts previously served as Executive Director of Harvard University's Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations.

MARSHALL LOEB is former managing editor at Fortune and Money magazine.

CAROL LUKAS is a not-for-profit consultant with more than twenty-five years experience.

LESTER SALAMON is a leading expert on the nonprofit sector in the U.S. and around the world. He has served as Deputy Associate Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and has taught at Harvard, Vanderbilt, and Duke Universities and at Tougaloo College in Mississippi. Dr. Salamon holds a Ph.D. in Government from Harvard University and a B.A. in Economics and Policy Studies from Princeton University.

EDGAR SCHEIN, Professor of Management at M.I.T., is considered one of the 'founders' of organizational psychology.

THOMAS WOLF is currently CEO of Wolf, Keens & Company, an international consulting firm. Dr. Wolf holds an Ed.D. from Harvard and has authored a number of books.

Web Sites


http://www.independentsector.org Independent Sector is a coalition of leading nonprofits, foundations, and corporations strengthening not-for-profit initiative, philanthropy, and citizen action. This web site offers extensive information on the sector, including "Ten Tips on Volunteering Wisely."

http://www.mapnp.library This virtual Nonprofit Management Library is a vast and well-organized collection of free nonprofit management resources. One of their categories is "Consultants," which includes quite a bit of information that translates over to volunteers working with not-for-profits.

http://www.serviceleader.org This web site provides extensive information on volunteer resources, including an excellent article, "Dos and Don'ts for Technical Assistance Volunteers."

Web sites for Pro/Tech Volunteer Matchmaking Organizations in the Puget Sound region:

Executive Service Corps: www.escwa.org ONE/Northwest: www.onenw.org Social Venture Partners: www.svpseattle.org* United Way of King County: www.uwkc.org

*SVP is a grantmaking organization in which partners contribute funds annually; those partners can then choose to become a volunteer member of a capacity building team to serve one of the grantees (known as an Investee.)


Glossary of Common SVP Terms and Definitions

Member Organization: SVP organizations who sign an agreement to be part of the SVP Network, licensing the name and agreeing to core principles and other operating standards.

Capacity Building: The development of core skills, management practices, strategies and systems to enhance an organization’s effectiveness, sustainability and ability to fulfill its mission. Capacity building support often takes an extended commitment of time (three years or more).

Investee: Nonprofit organizations receiving SVP support of time, money, and expertise. Synonym: grantee

Investment: Used interchangeably with grant. All SVP investments are philanthropic, with no financial return to the SVP Member Organization or its Partners. “Investment” instead of “grant” implies strategic and active giving, with an expectation of social return.

Partners: Individuals who become members of an SVP Member Organization by contributing time, money, expertise and resources, carrying out much of the capacity building work with Investees. Each “Partner Unit” can be made up of one or two people.

Philanthropy: The effort or inclination to increase the well being of humankind, as by donations. Synonyms: giving and social investing.

Nonprofit organization (NPO): Organizations that have tax-exempt 501(c) 3 status in the U.S. are not-for-profit registered charities in Canada, or non-governmental organizations outside North America.

Social Venture Partners: This refers to the entire network of Member Organizations and is often shortened to the acronym SVP. Member Organizations add their geographic location to this and become, for example, Social Venture Partners Portland (SVP Portland). Social Venture Partners Network Office refers to the formal organization that provides support to the entire SVP Network (formerly Social Venture Partners International - SVPI).

Venture Philanthropy or High Engagement Philanthropy: These terms, having similar meaning, involve long-term relationships between funders and grantees. Funders provide expertise and capital and focus on capacity and operational infrastructure, with measurable outcomes.

V-Team: Volunteer Team that is formed to support work of an Investee; a V-Team member may join for one specific project or may be on the V-Team for the duration of the investment relationship.

Lead Partner: This individual is the primary liaison between Investee and SVP, helping to meet Investee needs and providing partner engagement opportunities.


Documents

Web view2017 SVP Lead Partner Resource Guide. Section One: SVP. SVP Purpose, Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals Page 2. SVP Organizational Chart Page 3. SVP Model for