Even though temperatures in Dallas remain in the 90s and it feels more like summer than fall, I know cooler days are coming as students are back in school and football season is in full force. With the new season comes a renewed effort on my part to share and create posts I believe are relevant to the world of philanthropy and are appropriate for nonprofits and funders alike.

A passion area for me is opening the dialogue between nonprofits and funders, not just around current programming but around those wild and crazy ideas that just might work. The nonprofits, their program staff, and clients know what it takes to be successful. They have ideas for twists to the “tried and true” but implementing changes takes funding - it also takes a willingness on the part of funders to listen, ask questions, and to walk alongside their grantees on what could be a risky journey.

One place to start this dialogue is for funders to do something they, ironically shy away from - talk about money. Funders should start asking grantees about the true cost of their programs including operations and revenue generation (development) and nonprofits should be calculating these figures. All too often project based funding does not fully cover the cost of the project thus leaving a deficit for the agency to make up.

This deficit situation occurs for three reasons:

1. A reluctance to reveal that program costs don’t fit nicely within the prescribed 70%, 20%, 10% ratios for program, operations, and fundraising that has been considered a “best practice” far too long; coupled with a reluctance on the part of nonprofits to dig through the numbers and come face-to-face with the true cost of their work.

2. A reluctance to fund salaries - if you don’t pay people to deliver a program how else will clients benefit? For most agencies salaries can be as much as 80% or more of their operating budget.

3. The belief that agencies should and can make up this deficit through their general fundraising thus putting a huge strain on the executive director and development staff to supplement programs that are chronically underfunded by donors.

I’m heartened by the recent work of the Bridgespan Group and others to call out what is being termed the “starvation cycle” of nonprofits, a situation brought about by chronic underfunding of indirect costs.

I encourage you to take a look at content prepared by the Bridgespan Group and posted on the 9/4/19 issue of the Chronicle of Philanthropy - it just may change the way you view your grant making and may open new pathways for conversations with grantees.