Aristotle recognized that political and charitable giving could be difficult and overwhelming:
"To give away money is an easy matter and in any man’s power. But to decide to whom to give it and how much and when, for what purpose and how, is neither in every man’s power nor an easy matter. Hence, it is that such excellence is rare, praiseworthy and noble."
One of the best things about being a start up in SOMA is watching ideas become companies. It is inspiring. Fundamental to each of these start-ups is the belief that there is a better/smarter/faster way. Innovation occurs when individuals are willing to step out of the current system and rethink a solution, are not tied to past patterns, and take risks on a new approach to solve a customer’s pain. Those of us who have experienced this understand a very simple, but powerful truth: Products change lives.
At NPC we want to revolutionize the way in which people make political giving decisions. Giving to organizations shouldn't just be about responding to an email asking for money or your friends “guilting” you into giving to a cause. We can no longer afford to be reactive in our political giving. Progressive change requires strategic investment. Remember what happened in the 1990's when small investors got access to financial research and expertise? A whole new wave of individuals became investors—and we desperately need a new generation of political investors supporting tomorrow’s leaders and their organizations. Here at NPC we will continue to launch products that change politics as usual; continuing to build a customer experience that enables them to create a strategic impact.
Every member of the NPC team was asked to write a quick post about "Why I Do What I Do."
I decided I wanted to work at NPC over breakfast, having just met our CEO, Kirstin Falk. I remember not only thinking that the “poached” eggs were actually hard boiled beyond recognition, but also that I had finally met someone who wanted to change the way our generation thought about political engagement: It was not only about being an ATM machine; it was critical to fund progressive infrastructure to really make an impact; and that NPC could be that catalyst and actually do it—as a business, and with amazing colleagues who are creative, entrepreneurial, and wicked smart.
I do what I do because I’ve spent years in New York and San Francisco advising Fortune 500 companies, wealthy individuals, and foundations on how to make a difference with their resources. Some were more liberal than others and some were less interested in understanding the nuances of living wage ballot initiatives or reproductive justice. But they all wanted to know that they were having an impact. I believe that my peers, even without the resources to get access to this information, also want to make a difference and deserve to be as smart and strategic about how they invest in change with their $200 as a major donor is with their $200,000.
And I can’t lie to you: I also do what I do because I was frustrated with the way politics works. I worked on a presidential campaign and left entirely dumbfounded at the level of near-sightedness, lack of organization, and waste of resources. Millions of dollars spent on campaigns and not one manila folder left! (Never mind the fact that we all parachute into states and canvass totally cynical locals in attempts to create a “community campaign.”)
I was also frustrated with the way we fund as Progressives: We talk about moving the needle on critical issues such as health care reform, climate change, reproductive justice, foreign policy—all deeply political issues. But often we refuse to use our assets to directly engage and support political change. By this, I mean non-tax deductible money, penchant for innovation, and a little tolerance for risk. What good is it to give a tax-deductible contribution to your local Planned Parenthood clinic if the state legislature prohibits access to medical care or birth control? What good is it to funnel money to the same four 20 year-old organizations at the expense of those five political entrepreneurs who will come up with the next MoveOn.org, BISC, or VoteVets.org on $5,000?
So, I do what I do because:
and
Trendwatching.com features 8 Important Consumer Trends for you to keep on your radar in 2008. One of these trends is the "Giving Sphere":
Find us one high-profile billionaire who's not deeply into 'giving' right now. In fact, whether it's giving away your riches, your time, or sharing your (content) creations with total strangers, giving is the new taking. For an excellent overview of the world's most generous philanthropists (trendsetters par excellence!), check out BusinessWeek's recent special on the topic.For us, it’s been interesting to watch giving trends grow and become more popular, especially with the release of our "Political Mutual Funds." As always, we encourage you not just to "give to give” but “give to make an impact."
Today is an exciting day at NPC. We have launched our "Political Mutual Funds" and have received amazing coverage of our launch including:
Here are some other outlets that have picked up our news, many of which are featuring us in their headline news:
As we worked to develop our PROI™ methodology over the last 18 months, we were often asked, “If organizations are reporting their own PROI™ data, how will you be able to make sure that it is accurate and they are not making up or exaggerating their data?”
Data integrity is a legitimate concern. To address this, we instituted an independent data verification process. Every organization that is selected to move on to our final round of the Political “Mutual Funds” application process will have its PROI™ data independently verified by our partner, Social Venture Technology Group.
While not every piece of data is audited, the verification process tracks the source and credibility of the reported data. It also verifies that the data is a reflection of the organization’s work. Based on the results of this independent verification, SVT Group will assign one of three ratings to each organization: 1) Data verified with no concerns; 2) Data verified with some concerns; or 3) Data provided could not be verified.
Stay tuned… Next week we will be announcing the organizations that made it to this final round of our Political “Mutual Funds” application process.
I read this NY Times article over the weekend. Many concepts struck me, but this quote left the biggest impression:
"We want to find a way to enhance the experience and services, rather than looking for a way to interrupt people from getting to where they want to go,” said Stefan Olander, global director for brand connections at Nike. “How can we provide a service that the consumer goes, ‘Wow, you really made this easier for me’?"That is exactly what we are trying to create with our products at NPC. Think about how people are often "interrupted" to make a political contribution. They receive an urgent email, a desperate call from an organization, or hear from a friend scrambling to raise money for an event they agreed to host.
I’ve been meaning to blog about how we are building out our Political “Mutual Funds” for a few days now, but I have been in Excel and Access hell trying to analyze all of this PROI™ data (along with our VP of Engineering, who gave up many late hours and a few Sundays to be my de facto tutor). In the end, after many near-breakdowns, we successfully analyzed data for over 65 organizations who took the time to collect and report on a combination of nearly 800 quantitative and qualitative fields.
It was pretty remarkable to see that the data collected can really help you understand the characteristics of these organizations, at both micro and macro levels. Are they start-ups? Do they attract volunteers? Do they have seasoned staff? Do they have the potential to be game-changing? Have they been effective in the past?
You can also start comparing their data with other organizations in their sector. What organizations have the highest rate of electoral victories? Who’s been especially effective at persuading people? Who has a healthy overhead ratio? You can even start to see trends within each sector. For example, we are seeing that that infrastructure/capacity building organizations in this round tended to have higher overhead ratios than electoral ones.
The process hasn’t been perfect. We have had to scrub, and even throw out significant amounts of data because some of our questions were not clear or, for example, organizations entered “lots” when we asked how many volunteers they had. This data analysis process also highlighted the difficulty that some organizations have in even keeping track of certain types of information that our customers need to make decisions.
The Working Group is meeting this Friday to confirm that our methodology and process is sound. We are also recommending to the group what organizations should go on to the next round, at which point SVT Group will independently verify the credibility and sources of their data. Based on the PROI™ analysis, SVT’s verification, and guidance from the Working Group, we should have the “final holdings” for our first Political “Mutual Funds” ready soon.
Over 65 organizations have completed the intensive PROI™ data collection process. NPC would like to congratulate these organizations for their hard work and participation in our PROI™ methodology. Many of the organizations told us it took more time than we originally anticipated it would, so I’d like to personally thank them for their commitment.
NPC is now analyzing the PROI™ data and it’s been interesting to see how the data helps articulate the value of their work. Soon the Political “Mutual Funds” Working Group and subject experts will be selecting the organizations moving on to the third round of the Political "Mutual Funds" application process.
We are getting close to launching the first of our Political “Mutual Funds.” Stay tuned.
Organizations that completed data collection for PROI™:
ActBlue
America's Agenda Health Care Education Fund
American Medical Women's Association
Arizona League of Conservation Voters
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center
Bus PAC
Bus Project
Campaign for America's Future
Center for Rural Strategies
Colorado Conservation Voters
Conservation Council of North Carolina
Conservation Voters New Mexico
Consumers for an Affordable Health Care Coalition
Consumers for an Affordable Health Care Foundation
Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund
Democracy: A Journal of Ideas
Democratic GAIN
Democrats Work
Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
Energize America
Energy Action
FairVote
Faithful Democrats
Focus Project/OMB Watch
Green Corps
Green Media Toolshed
Health Action New Mexico
Herndon Alliance
Institute for America's Future
Into the Blue
Justice Through Music
League of Conservation Voters
League of Conservation Voters (WA)
League of Conservation Voters Education Fund
League of Young Voters
Mainstreet Moms
MAPLight.org
Media Consortium
My Rural America Action Fund
Netroots Nation
New Voice of Business
Northwest Health Law Advocates
Oregon League of Conservation Voters
Party2Win
Progressive States Network
Progressive Technology Project
ProgressiveU.org
ProgressOhioEducation, Inc.
Rainforest Action Network (RAN)
Science & Environmental Health Network
Secretary of State Project
Sierra Student Coalition
Small Business Majority
Speak Out California
Students for a New American Politics PAC (SNAP PAC)
Take Back Red California
Tennessee Health Care Campaign
Tennessee Justice Center
Tennessee Justice Center & Tennessee Health Care Campaign Collaborative
Twenty-First Century Democrats
Universal Health Care Action Network
USAction
VelvetRevolution.us
Voter Action
Vote Solar Initiative
Wellstone Action
Western Organization of Resource Councils (WORC)
Women's Campaign Forum
Women's Campaign Forum Foundation
Young People For
Over the years, political donors we've worked with have gone through a surprisingly similar process of "disillusionment." We used to joke about what "stage" they were in based on the stories they told. But it was these tales that lead us to believe there has to be a better way to help people feel good about their engagement in politics. Does any of this sound familiar to you? We'd love you to share your giving experiences with us, both positive and not so positive.
1. Denial: The first stage of political giving is the honeymoon period. Maybe you’ve sent $50 to a state-wide candidate and felt pretty good about it. A month later you got a nice thank you note. Then you start getting invited to and attending your first candidate fundraisers. You give $100 at each event, meet some really interesting people, and are inspired by the candidate speeches. Now you begin getting random mail from candidates and political organizations all over the country asking for donations, but you feel excited to be engaged and feel that you’re really starting to make a difference. You decide to accept an offer to host your first candidate fundraiser and figure that since going to political events has been fun, hosting an event must be even more fun.
2. Anger: You give $500 to host your first candidate fundraiser and raise $1,000 from your friends. However, this time you notice that the event is poorly planned, the candidate arrives late and speaks for no more than 3 minutes before leaving. You leave feeling guilty that you asked your friends to write checks. Soon after the event, you get a phone call from the same campaign asking for yet another contribution. You’re beyond annoyed that the campaign had the nerve to hit you up for another contribution so soon after you helped host their disappointing event.
3. Bargaining: You tell them that before you give any more money you would like to talk to the candidate about your policy ideas and/or give them some suggestions for their website. After all, you have a lot to contribute beyond just your money. The campaign staffer politely tells you that the candidate is far too busy and all they really need from you is another check for $1,000. You find yourself feeling used and extorted.
4. Depression: By this time, you’ve stopped even looking at the mound of fundraising letters piling up at your doorstep. They go right into the trash. You delete the random unopened email newsletters you know you never signed up for. Overall, you’re fairly certain your whole “venture into politics” was a complete waste of time. You still have money you would like to give and are still looking for a fulfilling way to be involved with the issues, candidates and ideas you care most about, but you’ve given up on having any good experiences as a donor. You unsubscribe to all newsletters and stop going to political events. You feel less connected to or cease to find inspiration in the candidates the next time an election comes along.
5. Acceptance: You still write an occasional check to the candidates and political organizations you really believe in and you get briefly excited around each presidential election, but for the most part you’ve decided that political giving is not for you. You would rather give money to charities or your university, where you understand how your money is making an impact. You have accepted that giving money politically was unfulfilling because it left you feeling overwhelmed and under-appreciated. That said, you don’t rule out the possibility that something could come along that would inspire you to get back into politics…
Technology is quickly changing traditional philanthropy and allowing a broader audience to become engaged in social activism. This week Union Square Ventures held "Hacking Philanthropy," an interesting dialogue on the topic:
"Our idea was to bring together entrepreneurs who have exploited the capabilities of the web to disrupt markets with people working for positive social change in the non-profit sector to see if the same techniques could improve the efficiency and effectiveness of philanthropy and social action."At NPC, we're always excited to see people coming together to create innovative approaches and solutions. To read more, check out their post.
Our customers have often expressed to us their frustrations with giving to organizations. These frustrations range from not being properly thanked to not receiving expected updates. But before today, we have never heard these experiences being compared to a one-night stand. Take a look at this amusing post: What fundraising and one-night stands have in common.
