Monthly Archive for January, 2010

The other side of the figures: Causes reaches $20 Million in Donations

Published in fundraising and issues. 14 Comments Tags: , , , , .

Earlier this week, an announcement on the Causes Application blog broke the news that over $20 Million has been donated since May 2007 via donors using the social networking application.

There’s been quite a lot of talk in the last year about the opportunities for fundraising online, generally, as well as the best practices for organizations leveraging social media for campaigns (as well as the idea to use free tools to raise money in hard economic times).  There’s also been a bit of controversy around the Causes application specifically, due to it’s decision to abandon the MySpace platform and offer it’s application/services only to the Facebook community. (You can read more about the MySpace/Facebook move here, here, and here.)

Here is the graph of donations on Causes since it launched in May 2007:

Some of the additional data provided from Causes in their announcement, includes:

  • 400,000 people have made at least one donation
  • $25 median donation amount
  • 35,000 causes have received at least one donation
  • $2.1 million raised by 2009 America’s Giving Challenge participants
  • $4.5 million raised through the Birthday Wish feature

Despite the initial awe and excitement around a number like $20 Million, I want to take a moment to think about the other side of the data.  There certainly is more to the story and I hope you’ll share your perspectives as well.

Social networks are still for engagement, not money

Fact: Of the hundreds of thousands of organizations registered as possible beneficiaries in the Causes application (Washington Post data), only 20 organizations, including the Nature Conservancy, Doctors Without Borders and St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital, have raised over $100,000 using Causes.

Context: Organizations can’t assume that applications like Causes or simply the use of social networking sites like Facebook will translate into new revenue streams supporting the organization.  Yes, of course, I would advocate that organizations who are eligible ensure that they can be listed as beneficiaries of causes on Facebook (visit the FAQ here) but doing so is an enough of an action to replace your other funding work.

Fact: Causes Birthday Wishes (make a donation campaign for a charity of your choice tied to your birthday) accounted for a third of all donations in the past 6 months.

Context: Birthday Wishes are campaigns started by enthusiastic supporters.  You may not know them, and you may have never heard of them.  But you need to get to know them fast!  Be sure that you are connecting with the passionate volunteers going out and raising money for you: thank them, support them, encourage them.  And be sure to share invitations for the fundraiser and those that donate to his or her campaign to join your organization outside of facebook (on your enewsletter, your action alerts, an offline event, or something else to keep them on your list).

Fact: 400,000 users have contributed to a cause at least once.

Context: That’s a lot of people. How many fans does your organization’s Fan Page have, or how many members are in your facebook Group?  Probably not 400,000.  How many of your fans or group members are in your database, though? The most difficult part to applications like Causes is that you don’t get the data.  With so many people donating to causes, maybe only once, it’s crucial for the benefiting organizations to reach out and encourage donors to connect with the organization directly – that way they may find out more about your work, help you and take action, or even donate again.

Skewing the numbers?

Lastly, I can’t find any data to shed light on my question but I would love to understand if the numbers Causes is touting reflect only the funds raised on facebook, since they stopped allowing the users on MySpace to access the service.  I think it would be unethical and obviously skewing their own data.  I’m incredibly frustrated at the lack of transparency from Causes, especially around this issue.

What do you think?

Would love to hear your experiences, any lessons learned or best practices, and ideas.

—–
Update:

Luise asked to see the comparison of growth of facebook users during the same growth period of Causes donations so I whipped up a simple chart:

Published on January 29, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 14 Comments

Wordpress Extras: My Favorites

Published in blogging. 4 Comments Tags: , , , .

A recent comment from Ichi (working on social media for good in Japan w/ SocialCompany.org) asked after the tools I was using on this blog to bring in comments via Twitter. He suggested I post about the plugins I use so others could check them out – and that’s just what I’m doing!

There are my three most-used Wordpress plugins:

Postalicious (Get this plugin)

Postalicious is a WordPress plugin that automatically posts your delicious, ma.gnolia, Google Reader, Reddit or Yahoo Pipes bookmarks to your blog. The exact details of how your bookmarks are posted are very customizable and are designed to meet your specific needs.

I use this plugin to create my Great Reads posts – it lets me find blog posts, stories, news and anything else online that I think is interesting to the readers of this blog and tag it with Delicious, adding my notes about the link in the field in the Delicious bookmark.  It checks for my saved items, and once I have five things it posts it for me!  I really love it :)

Twitoaster (Get this plugin)

Automatically retrieve Twitter Replies and/or Twitter Retweets to your Blog’s Posts. These Twitter mentions are handled like Posts Comments, using WP built-in comment system.

I like this tool because it brings in conversation from Twitter to the comment stream for the relating posts.  What I wish was improved was the tracking to pull in the full conversation, and not just retweets, etc.

Tweetmeme (Get this plugin)

The TweetMeme retweet button easily allows your blog to be retweeted. The button also provides a current count of how many times your story has been retweeted throughout twitter.

I like this plugin because it puts an easy-to use button at the top of posts for people to tweet out a link to the post if they want to share – it even pre-writes the tweet for you with the link!

What are your favorite add-ons, extensions, or plugins for blogs?

Published on January 29, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 4 Comments

Great reads from around the web on January 29th

Published in roundup. 2 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

I come across so many great conversations, ideas, and resources all over the web every day. Here are some of the most interesting things I’ve found recently (as of January 29th). You can join the conversations in the comments, or click through to the original posts to find what others are saying.

To follow more of the things I find online, you can follow @amysampleward on Twitter (which is just a blog and resource feed), or find me on Delicious (for all kinds of bookmarks).

  • JustGiving blog: Seven-year-old Charlie raises more than £100,000 for Haiti! – Read this great case study from JustGiving about Charlie's bike ride to raise money for Haiti relief support. "Charlie was really upset by the television footage of the Haiti disaster, so, in conversation with his mum, he came up with idea of cycling around South Park near his home in Fulham, London as many times as possible. As Charlie puts on his JG page, ‘at least 10 laps, I hope!’. Charlie set himself a fundraising target of £500 for UNICEF – not an insubstantial amount for a seven-year-old."
  • Why We're In the Age of the Citizen Philanthropist – There's a great post up on Mashable with quotes from Britt Bravo (Have Fun Do Good), Kari Dunn Saratovsky (Case Foundation), and Peter Panepento (Chronicle of Philanthropy). "Our new communications technologies have empowered the individual, and caused a disruptive effect on the non-profit sector. Here are five examples of the citizen philanthropist’s immediate impact."
  • Footnotes: Online Outreach on a Budget – January Nonprofit Blog Carnival – "This month we spent some time collecting posts about nonprofit communications on a budget. Below you'll find a combination of great resources that were submitted, and information I've found useful in my own research on online outreach. So bookmark this post and take the time to apply this knowledge to marketing and communications at your organization – it's cheap (or free) and has worked for others!"
  • Online Branded Communities: Misguided and Missing the Point – Marketing News Blog – This is an excellent review of best practices and case studies for online community management. Even though the authors (Kathy Baughman and Steve Hershberger) are focused on for-profit brands, the lessons ring true across sectors. "If you ask brand managers the purpose of online communities, the reply you’ll most often hear is “customer engagement.” Among marketers, this term is more prevalent than Frisbees at a dog beach. But the real question is this: Are brands providing meaningful and engaging experiences to their customers through their online communities? Our research on 135 online communities representing 45 major brands indicates that, with few exceptions, the answer is no."
  • Idealware Field Guide to Software for Nonprofits by Laura Quinn in Computers & Internet – "What types of software should your nonprofit be using? It’s hard to even know even what types exist, let alone what might work for you. Through a friendly, easy-reference format, this book helps you pinpoint the types of software that can help your organization based on your needs and your level of technology savvy, and provides user-friendly summaries to demystify all the possible options.

    The 84-page Field Guide includes an overview of 35 different types of software, helping you to understand what each is, how it fits in with your needs, how much you might expect to pay, and some of the most common vendors in the area."

Published on January 29, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 2 Comments

Interview: John Brennan of OpenAction

Published in interview and maps. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

I recently had the opportunity to connect with John Brennan, the driving force behind OpenAction.org, which empowers individuals and organizations by helping them tell the world about the positive impact their actions have. You can learn more about John and OpenAction in the interview below.

——

John has spent time working for Microsoft, doing R&D for the defense industry and was part of a few past startups that didn’t quite reach “critical mass.” In June 2009, John decided to sell nearly everything he owned and set out for New York City (via San Diego). With over a decade of web development experience, John channeled his skills into building something with social value. John is currently working on OpenAction, a platform that connects people to the projects they care about. It’s a sustainable solution to help create and strengthen the emotional connection between organizations and donors. The team also hopes to incentivize organizations to share knowledge and give beneficiaries a direct voice.

Where did the idea for OpenAction begin?
That’s a funny story actually, but I suppose many entrepreneurs have similar stories. Last March I met Joe Solomon and the Social Actions team through twitter. I remember leaving for Vegas and making a promise to Joe that I would submit a mashup to the 2009 Change the Web Challenge. The mashup was a map showing where people were volunteering in near-real-time. It ended up winning the competition, $5,000 and lots of exposure.

I’ve always done side projects part time, but never had the courage or funds to go at it full time. The community showed me a need for what I built, so I used this momentum as an opportunity to take what I built to the next level.

I left my 9-5 in San Diego on June 4, set out on a month long road trip with my brother across the United States to New York. On July 5 the real fun began.

How was the project developed?
Some of the foundation was built in April 2009, but the majority of the product development started in August 2009. I spent the first few months asking questions and listening to what NGOs had to say about how they did their job and what could make it easier.

I’ve spent the past few years working with the semantic web, referred to as “web 3.0″, that focuses on open standards and linking data. Many of us are aware of open source software and open architecture, but open philanthropy doesn’t exist yet. Once NGOs standardize the way they publish project data on the web, “apps” can be built on top of this data. Much like Apple did with the iPhone.

I also knew it needed to be both top-down and bottom-up. The problem with developing a standard is that it is only as useful as those adopting it. So that’s where OpenAction comes into play. Essentially, we give organizations a simple tool to manage project information, like photos and videos. The real value to organizations is that they now have a dynamically updated map they can embed on their web site. Instead of paying a web developer to add new project data, they can do it using a few simple form fields. This might put my developer friends out of a job (laughs), but it’s all about becoming more efficient.

Our application also automatically generates RSS feeds for their supporters to stay engaged throughout the life of the project. It’s similar to how one subscribes to a blog. The project updates themselves can displayed in a timeline, so people can easily follow the project’s progress as it unfolds before their eyes.

What’s next for OpenAction?
Our organization helps people find and connect with projects they care about. It makes sense to let these people connect to others working in the same space. So we are starting to map social entrepreneurs with the hopes that they might be able to make more of an impact working together than apart. This is actually how my partner and I connected several months ago. We were both doing similar, but separate mapping initiatives. We decided we’d be stronger together — and we were right.

So if any of your readers work with social entrepreneurs, or are such, I would love to connect with them as well. After all, while we might see different paths to the same goal, the goal is usually the same: positive impact on the people and the planet.

What else are you working on?
Working on trying to find time to sleep.

Do you have any lessons learned or stories you can share with other social entrepreneurs?
This is probably my sixth startup, but first as a “social” entrepreneur. So for brevity I will keep to the last year, and maybe save the rest for a separate blog post one of these days.

I would say, don’t go at it alone. This is so important. You really need to have someone that is as involved in the idea as you are. Not only to give more proof that the idea has legs, but it gives you someone to bounce ideas off all the time. And unlike friends, this person will understand the problem space. Simply put, startups will inevitably have ups and downs, and having someone else in it with you is just good for morale.

Tapping into the (right) community is also an important lesson I learned this time around. In past startups I would use friends and family to measure early success. Sometimes they were the target audience, but that was often due to the lack of product focus. I love thinking about the famous stories of Davy Crockett here. Not the tales itself, but the method used. He claimed to have killed that infamous bear, and all the towns people believed it as if he went to each and every person to spread the word face-to-face. Having a conversation with every townsperson would be a nearly impossible feat. Davy Crockett was, however, an expert story teller and community builder. Instead, he spent his time talking to the heads of each village. The key here, I believe, is to empower your community and let them be your biggest advocates.

A third, and final lesson is often used by web developers, but can easily be applied to social entrepreneurs. It’s the KISS principle. “Keep it simple stupid” — enough said. Don’t over engineer or over think a problem, let the market and your audience dictate your next move.

How can people follow your work and OpenAction?
We are actually going to be on OpenAction ourselves, to sort of practice what we preach. Things have just been super chaotic as of late. I would say the best way is to follow me @worldlyjohn and my partner Mike @wanderingwenger.

To learn more and check out OpenAction for yourself, visit:
http://openaction.org

Published on January 27, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 0 Comments

Nonprofit Marketing Report: Organizations Failing to Connect

Published in marketing and reports. 7 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

Nancy Schwartz, president of Nancy Schwartz & Company and blogger at Getting Attention, has just finished analyzing data from a nonprofit marketing survey of more than 900 nonprofit leaders, revealing that they are doing a poor job connecting with their audience and community.  Nancy explains:

“Nonprofit marketers say their key messages are failing to connect with the people who need to hear them and that is a serious problem.  The way nonprofits talk about themselves to the public is a core competency critical to any organization’s success. The bad news is that most nonprofits admittedly are doing a very poor job, despite a great deal of effort. The good news is that fixing the problem is highly do-able and promises vastly greater success than they are experiencing now.”

The survey results included:

Most Nonprofit Messages Don’t Connect Strongly with Key Audiences:
Eighty-four percent of 915 nonprofit leaders who completed the survey last month said their messages connect with their target audiences only somewhat or not at all. Respondents represented organizations of all size, issue focus and geographical location.

Behind the Disconnect—86% of Nonprofits Characterize Their Messages as Difficult to Remember:
Most nonprofits report that their messaging suffers from lack of inspiration (73%) and poor targeting to audience wants and needs (70%), and is difficult to remember (86%). Few communicators laud their messaging for its strengths: Only 13% of organizations characterize messaging as cogent while 8% describe their messaging as potent.

Here are some comments from survey participants explaining why their messages fail to connect:

  • “Our messages need to be more succinct to communicate how effective we really are.”
  • “We don’t move our base to action.”
  • “We have individual elements that are OK solo, but no unified path.”
  • “Our messages aren’t hard-hitting or targeted enough. So they fall flat.”
  • “We need to shape messages that are simple enough for staff to remember and feel comfortable in repeating it to others.”
  • “Too much jargon. I can’t even understand what we’re saying.”

Inconsistency Reigns, Leaving Confusion and Annoyance in Its Path:
Less than 50% of nonprofits report consistent use of their positioning (organizational tagline, positioning statement and talking points). That means that even though most organizations have taken the effort to craft messages, those messages aren’t used consistently across channels (website, direct mail, email), audiences or programs.

More information and complete survey results, plus specific recommendations on how nonprofits can start to immediately improve key messaging, are available at:

http://nancyschwartz.com/articles/index.php/messaging-crisis-for-nonprofits/

Published on January 26, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 7 Comments

Great reads from around the web on January 25th

Published in roundup. 5 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

I come across so many great conversations, ideas, and resources all over the web every day. Here are some of the most interesting things I’ve found recently (as of January 25th). You can join the conversations in the comments, or click through to the original posts to find what others are saying.

To follow more of the things I find online, you can follow @amysampleward on Twitter (which is just a blog and resource feed), or find me on Delicious (for all kinds of bookmarks).

  • TakingITGlobal and Nabuur Launch New Action Guide on Online Volunteering | NetSquared, an initiative of TechSoupGlobal.org – "TakingITGlobal (TIG), an organization that operates the world’s most popular online community for young leaders, and Nabuur, an online volunteering platform that links Neighbours (online volunteers) with Villages (local communities) in Africa, Asia and Latin America, announced today the release of a new Action Guide on Online Volunteering available for download on the TIG website." Check it out!
  • Chase Community Giving Contest Ends With Yet More Controversy – Beth's Blog: How Nonprofit Organizations Can Use Social Media to Power Social Networks for Change – Beth Kanter has an excellent post chronicling and compiling many posts and resources, as well as commentary and criticism surrounding the Chase Community Giving contest that just finished. "This contest was the culmination of a two-part "vote for me" cause marketing strategy that started in November and has been rife with controversy. In some ways, it comes as no surprise that the race to the finish line ended with more allegations of dubious behavior by contest participants and those watching them compete. It's left some nonprofit professionals wondering whether these types of contests are a good idea." I strongly agree with Hildy Gottleib's comment at the end of the post and urge you to read both the post and the discussion in the comments.
  • Online Fundraiser's Checklist – "FREE DOWNLOAD: The Online Fundraiser's Checklist. How Do You Ensure Fundraising Success This Year? Take advantage of Network for Good's handy new eGuide, The Online Fundraiser's Checklist, to ensure you don't miss a thing."
  • 3 Powerful Social Good Trends in 2010 – Ben Rattray, the founder and CEO of Change.org, has a great piece on Mashable showcasing the three trends he sees coming in 2010 for the social change sector. "2009 saw a proliferation of online charity events, competitions, and “friendraisers” that spilled across Twitter (Twitter) and Facebook (Facebook) and filled email inboxes everywhere with more requests for money than any Nigerian prince could ever hope to make. And while it’s hard to argue that this is a bad thing — anytime someone gives money to feed the hungry instead of buying another digital potato seed in Farmville, global karma rises, if even just by a little — this focus on using the web as an ever-more elaborate means of getting people to fork over cash misses the much bigger opportunities just over the horizon."
  • Try These Dynamic Digital Storytelling Platforms | Community Organizer 2.0 – "Nonprofit organizations can tell the best stories. Stories about the impact that a nonprofit has on people’s lives can engage, recruit and solidify donors and members. As ImpactMax writes so beautifully, tying individual stories to overall contextual problems and societal issues can really change policies. Anecdotely, I see a lot of blogs and Flickr photo streams, some YouTube and Vimeo use. Why limit yourself? There are so many other tools and platforms that are exciting, innovative, incredibly engaging, and beautiful. Here are my top digital storytelling platforms and tools for your nonprofit to try out in 2010."
Published on January 25, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 5 Comments

Interview: Scott Anderson of ClientTrack

Published in collaboration and interview. 5 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

I recently had the opportunity to connect with Scott Anderson from ClientTrack, a software solution aimed at increasing the impact of social benefit organizations and their work by “integrating people, processes, and technology.”  You can learn more about Scott and the work ClientTrack is doing in the interview below.

—–

Scott Anderson is the Director of Communications for DSI, the developer of ClientTrack. He earned his PhD in Communications from the University of Texas at Austin. Prior to his PhD, he worked as a Licensed Clinical Social Worker in community health, adolescent residential treatment, and a faith-based organization.

(I appreciate this opportunity to talk about ClientTrack and its ability to promote effective collaborations. As many of you know, Amy is a magnificent example of bringing people together through technology to make a difference. I’ve been impressed with her ability to connect people and powerful ideas. I’ve been a “taker” from her source of information, and now I hope I can be a “giver” of information that might help others. Thanks, Amy, for all you do!)

First, what is ClientTrack?

ClientTrack software products and professional services provide comprehensive solutions for the Health, Human and Social Services community.  ClientTrack is an extremely capable web-based solution that fully:

  • Enables organizational best practices and improves efficiency at a pace organizations can support,
  • Ensures and simplifies compliance reporting for funding sources,
  • Enhances outcome reporting to strengthen fundraising and build community awareness, and
  • Optimizes collaborations within and between organizations.

How does CT define “collaboration” and what is so important about it?

For us, collaboration is about using technology to smoothly and effectively bring people and community resources together to accomplish more than what any one entity could accomplish alone. Co-laboring (working together) is not just nice, but necessary in the social service world. From an ecological perspective, individuals who seek support from social services generally require interventions in multiple domains, from housing to work assistance, to counseling, energy assistance, or after school programs, to name a few. Because we want to help the “whole” person, we need to be able to provide “whole” solutions. And that’s what effective collaborations among community providers do.

The words “smoothly” and “effectively” are essential to notice. The “smooth” part refers to ClientTrack’s ability to facilitate (i.e., “make facile, or easy”) the information sharing process. Community service providers can use ClientTrack to securely and confidentially share client information (with client consent). Among other benefits, ClientTrack makes it possible for a provider to immediately check availabilities and openings with other community service organizations, instantly enroll a client in their services, provide immediate referrals, and provide intake information electronically to the other providers. When information and services are shared like this, the client doesn’t have to fill out paperwork again, and providers don’t need to spend unnecessary time re-collecting basic information (which equates to saving money… something we could all use right now!).

By “effective,” I refer primarily to the ability to track client-level information across a number of community services. A primary case-manager, for example, might be able to immediately see that a client visited an employment agency over the last week, or was able to find temporary housing through another service provider. Beyond this immediate knowledge, client outcomes (e.g., quality of life, self-reports, self-sufficiency) can be assessed based on system-wide information, and not simply a “snapshot” of services received in one location.

In summary, collaboration is critical because a client-centric approach, tied into a community of resources through technology, facilitates simplified, whole solutions that can be evaluated based on system-wide outcomes.

Do you have any specific examples about new ways organizations are collaborating more effectively or more efficiently?

Three examples showcase a few of the collaborative efforts of our current clients. Their organizations are of various sizes, and each has unique needs and means for collaboration.

>> Example One: Large Collaborations

One of our clients is the AIDS Foundation of Chicago (AFC; http://www.aidschicago.org). They are a local and national leader in the fight against HIV/AIDS, due in large part to their innovative, collaborative approach to providing services to individuals affected by HIV/AIDS. Specifically, they serve as a “lead agency” overseeing and coordinating services among more than 60 affiliated organizations in the Chicago area. Over 50 of their organizations now use ClientTrack, providing smooth, secure exchanges of client information from one service to the next. The system is configurable to each organization’s specific needs, but shares the same information pool. This translates into a reduction of duplicated information, saved time in information gathering, improved client services, and ultimately, improved organizational efficiency. Shared information allows participating providers to spend less-time in paperwork, and more time in people-work.

The scale of their collaborative efforts is inspiring, but what’s even more notable, is how it all seems to be working out so well. Through this “lead agency” model of collaboration, AFC can provide clients with excellent care across a continuum of services and decrease the gaps in service clients might otherwise experience. Additionally, through this model, AFC is in an unprecedented position to evaluate client-level information from a system-wide perspective. What this means is that they will eventually be able to track the progress of an individual as a result of receiving multiple services throughout the community. Because of their broad vision and future-looking leadership, AFC was recently awarded a substantial grant from a private foundation that will help them improve their client information systems, including enhancements to further leverage their implementation of ClientTrack.

For any who are interested, we are hosting a very relevant webinar in a couple of weeks. The Director of Program Data and Special Projects at AFC will be discussing how AFC has encouraged community programs to “buy into” their collaborative efforts, and the strategies others might consider to successfully build their own collaborative networks. (More information available on the CT website.)

>> Example Two: Resource Power through Collaboration

We are currently in the first phase of implementation with a group of three Community Action Agencies in Massachusetts. In this situation, the collaboration among the organizations is not about the need to share client information between organizations (as a result of geographical separation). Instead, they recognized that a common intake process among all the agencies would benefit policy advocacy and decision-making on a state level. That is, by collaborating to collect the same information and use the same intake assessment, they can improve the quality of information (e.g., number of individuals served, total money spent in given programs) they use in their advocacy efforts on a larger, macro scale.

As a second benefit, their collaborative efforts granted them purchasing power that they would not have had otherwise. As a group, they were awarded a state grant to assist them in implementing software that would support a universal intake solution. With those funds, they hired an agency to help them assess, find, and implement an appropriate solution. They were able to share and reduce costs along the way specifically because they were working together. Their collaborative efforts created funding and service-improvement opportunities they couldn’t have had working alone. Through collaborative efforts, this group of Community Action Agencies is accessing resources that only collaboration could provide.

>> Example Three: Collaboration Effectiveness and Excitement

A final example is Action for Boston Community Development, Inc. (ABCD) (http://www.bostonabcd.org/). ABCD is the oldest and largest community action planning (CAP) agency in the United States. The organization provides more than 100 programs through 13 community neighborhood centers that impact more than 100,000 low-income families in the Boston area.

As a tool for optimizing collaborations, ClientTrack has made a difference for ABCD in three primary ways. First, ABCD has been able to improve their internal collaborations. Specifically, the technology has allowed each of their programs to “speak the same language” in the data they collect and share. Like many nonprofits, they were using a variety of software programs to meet a variety of needs (e.g., intakes, assessments, eligibility determinations, case progress notes, scheduling, referrals). As a result, the ability to share information from program to program or center to center was challenging, given that the information—often duplicated—was created in different formats that were not easily compatible with one another. By using ClientTrack, ABCD was able to standardize the process for collecting information, bring the functionality of many programs into a single program, and share a common pool of securely accessible information about their clients. Through the shared database, workers in ABCD’s neighborhood centers are now able to conduct quicker intakes for clients already in the system, reduce duplicated information, track services received in other programs, simplify referrals, track system-wide outcomes, and many other aspects required for effective case management. By collaborating and sharing information, ABCD’s staff has simplified and automated many of their administrative procedures. This translates directly into letting them focus more on what matters most…the people they serve.

The second benefit for ABCD of collaborating and sharing data is the ability to use information for broader, organizational-wide purposes. Specifically, because their information is stored in one central database, ABCD can access the data in a variety of ways. They can use the information to create reports for various grants they receive (a very large task!), analyze the effectiveness of their programs and services, or create reports that showcase the benefits of their services to donors and their communities. By coordinating shared information among their various programs, they can show better accountability and transparency regarding their funds and the services they provide.

Finally, in developing their collaborations, ABCD has noticed that other programs affiliated with ABCD, but not currently using ClientTrack (whether due to prior investment or funding requirements), are noticing the value of their collaborative efforts. The fact that ABCD’s collaborations in case management are really happening, and are not just ideas on paper, is generating an appeal and excitement among other organizations. This excitement, in turn, will generate further collaborative efforts. When done well, collaborations can perpetuate and expand their own existence, to the benefit of all involved.

Regardless of the specific tools used for collaboration, what are some of the processes or elements to success you’ve seen?

I approach this response with a technology bias. I strongly believe that collaborative technology solutions are critical for social benefit organizations to maintain viability and avoid liability. The paper-based approaches to providing services are a liability for nonprofits, given that many funding organizations increasingly want to be certain their money is being maximized. Seeking grants is fundamentally about reducing uncertainty, and paper-based processes only open the door to greater uncertainty (regarding efficiency, security, privacy, reporting, etc.). With that said, the following is my list of specific processes and elements that lead to successful collaborations:

  1. Visualize your “ideal” collaboration before anything else. This will be the basis of implementing solutions that work.
  2. Find champions of your collaborative efforts and let them help you promote your vision.
  3. Implement a technology solution that can grow, change, and keep up with your vision and expanding collaborative efforts.
  4. Implement a technology solution that can “talk” with other technology solutions used by other organizations.
  5. Implement a technology solution that works with data the same way you work with people…client-centered (not service-centered). This approach to data makes tracking clients across collaborations much easier.
  6. For smaller organizations, join with other community organizations to increase purchasing power on your collaborative technology solutions.
  7. Be creative with collaborations: Share advertising, events, office space, or other resources.
  8. Recognize that collaborations are like marriage or getting a new roommate: you’re bringing together different systems that require mutual adjustments. Those adjustments can be difficult and take time and effort, but are well worth the outcomes.

What’s ahead for you in 2010?

As a ClientTrack team, we are looking forward to 2010 and the opportunities to again link arms with nonprofits everywhere to make a difference. I don’t want to make light of a “kumbaya” setting, but there’s a lot to understanding the power of people and communities coming together in a common cause. These are difficult times for many nonprofits, with tightened funding streams and increased demands for service. 2010 is not likely to improve.

But, we are confident that we have solutions that can help community providers make a difference. Creative collaborations will be critical in 2010; that’s why I’ve identified collaborations as one of the five things nonprofits must know in 2010. We can help organizations leverage technology to improve their day-to-day efficiency, simplify compliance reporting, enhance outcomes reporting, and build meaningful collaborations. We have outstanding products and services, developed and implemented by a group of dedicated people. We look forward to opportunities to share our solutions and work with organizations committed to providing best-practice services, quality care, and life-changing collaborations on behalf of their clients. By pushing together, we can move mountains.

—–

I’m so happy to share this interview with Scott because of the great examples he has to share from his work and the sector.  He’s been a great resource and conversation starter recently for me.  If you would like to contact Scott, learn more, talk about ideas or examples he has shared here, or just say hi, you can leave a comment here, follow ClientTrack on Twitter, or visit the CT blog.

Published on January 23, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 5 Comments

Is it really about gender?

Published in issues. 6 Comments Tags: , , , , .

Christine Egger pointed me to a very thought-provoking post today that I want to stop and noodle on a bit with you.

Venessa Miemis discusses “How to be a Woman in a Man’s World” – picking up initially on a recent post from Clay Shirky, titled “A Rant About Women.”  Shirky’s post, or rant, claims women “aren’t just bad at behaving like arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. They are bad at behaving like self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards, even a little bit, even temporarily, even when it would be in their best interests to do so.”  Some of this sentiment has been shared before in the blogosphere, especially in the conversations (debates?) about the lack of women on the presenting line up at conferences or other high-profile settings (especially in the tech sector).

In response to the comment danah boyd left on Clay’s post, Venessa poses the question: “What are the expectations for women (or what should they be) as we progress into an increasingly interdependent global society?”

Venessa ends her post with this great passage:

I think we’re seeing a shift in the values we find commendable in society, and it’s not about men or women being better. It’s about being co-designers of a healthy, equitable society. It’s about keeping an eye on the big picture, and trying to live up to a standard that’s captures the essence of what it means to be human. And I don’t think that’s going to be accomplished through acting like anti-social obsessives or pompous blowhards. It’s going to be through empathy, altruism, and collaboration.

You can read the full post, How to be a Woman in a Man’s World, here.

My comment to Venessa:

Hi Venessa -

I have been blogging for a few years (professionally – personal blogs for many years) and have reached enough people that I do feel I have a community of readers, though no where near your 30,000.  When I tried to contact Clay I received a response within the hour.  But unlike any of your methods, I emailed him.  I have never gotten a response from him on Twitter or elsewhere. And reading your introduction about your trials of making contact despite all your other accomplishments and accolades juxtaposed with mine, made me think:

Maybe I simply went where he was, or where he was comfortable, or where he wanted to connect.

As I read the rest of your post (incredibly thought-provoking!), I started to think about how my reaction to the first part, actually came back to me over and over again.

Maybe it’s because I’m a “Millennial” and we have as a generation rethought or redesigned so many aspects of public and “private” identity, but I think less about if the person I am trying to connect with, the community I am trying to serve (I work in the nonprofit sector), or the audience I’m trying to reach is a man or a woman, or if they are arrogant or shy.  I ask myself where do they want to go? How do they want me to connect with them?

This could very easily turn into a post of its own and maybe I’ll write something up – but, mostly, thank you for continuing to explore in this public place and inviting us to explore with you.

I know that my focus probably starts to wander from where Venessa originally intended the meat of her post to focus, but I’m curious what you think.

Is it really about gender?

Or is it about place, process, voice, or something else?  Looking forward to your ideas!

Published on January 22, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 6 Comments

Creating Social Change with Social Media

Published in case studies, socialchange and storytelling. 6 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

nten

Over the last week, technology has played an unprecedented role in bringing aid to and saving lives in Haiti. Over $22 million has been raised by the American Red Cross via text message (about a fifth of total Haiti-related giving to the organization so far). And then there’s the role that Facebook and Twitter are playing.

Those social media tools, along with dozens of others, have been used to help family and friends locate one another, to direct food, clothing and medical support to specific locations, and to help direct rescue workers to individuals alive and trapped under rubble.

That’s social media for social good, and that’s exactly what NTEN and NetSquared want to highlight with Beth Kanter this spring at SXSWi.

Of course, we don’t just want to talk about Haiti — we want to highlight some amazing work from around the sector, while also building a nice little library of case studies we can all learn from. So, we invite you to share your social media for social good story. We’ll choose three to highlight in our session, and we’ll share all the stories we can on our sites and at We Are Media.

Submit your Social Media for Social Good story today!

Published on January 21, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 6 Comments

Return on Engagement for your Community

Published in community. 30 Comments Tags: , , , , .

Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and I’ve been watching the time zones wake up in the US and start Twittering about the various service projects and community building activities everyone is participating in.  It’s been heart warming and also frustrating – I wish I could be so many places at once!  I can only be in one place, though – but I can start a conversation that goes many places.  Here goes…

When I think of Martin Luther King, Jr., the first thing that comes to mind is community: building it, empowering it, moving it to action, and nurturing it.  When I think of those four focus areas for community, I do NOT think of the number of fans on a Facebook page, the number of people on an email list, or even the ranking of a Google search results page.

Earlier today I followed a link from Twitter to an archived guest post on Pamela’s Grantwriting Blog by Aerin Guy.  To be honest, I often skim, and when the title of the post mentioned 15 Social Media Resolutions, I figured I’d just skip to the list :)

That’s where I found Aerin’s resolution to “consciously rephrase Return on Investment with Return on Engagement.”

Is ROI limiting our community impact?

As I explained above with the example of MLK, Jr.’s focus on community, the idea of ROI doesn’t make sense.  Then or now.  If we are after impact, we have to reevaluate the way we approach evaluation!

Look at this way:

  • ROI asks how many Facebook fans you have; ROE asks how many people are “liking,” commenting and sharing your Facebook content.
  • ROI asks how many staff and how many hours; ROE asks how many posts, updates, replies or individual responses.
  • ROI asks how many email subscribers; ROE asks how many people send you emails.
  • ROI asks how much money you raise; ROE asks how many people are campaigning on your behalf.
  • You can go on and on.

We can’t make change without community, whether locally or globally.  And in order to start making change and empowering our communities, we need to approach our work with a frame that’s focused on the same attributes as our goals (engagement) and not simply on the traditional business frames (costs).

What do you think?

And to close with a quote from Martin Luther King, Jr.: “Our goal is to create a beloved community and this will require a qualitative change in our souls as well as a quantitative change in our lives.”

Published on January 18, 2010 by Amy Sample Ward. 30 Comments