Estate Planning Letter? What else can we do?

[SamFranklin]

For thirty years, CAP was the only nonprofit in my life not to ask me to contribute at tax time and through planned giving. The development folks are doing the right things pretty much.

To Ed's original question, I think I'd like to see this: 

1). Specific need identified. Maybe serve 500 cadets with flight training at a cost of $500K.

2.). Tie the need to a mission, here that's obviously cadets and AE.

3.). Begin the campaign quietly by approaching major givers only (Cessna, Boeing) not the members or public.

4.).  Aim for 2 gifts at 50k, four at 25k, ten at 10k   

5).  That's 300k or sixty percent at the major level. When you get most of that, say 250k, go public.

6).  Now you pursue the $1k and $100 donors to bring you the final mile.


Imagine the NHQ letter saying this:   "CAP members love flying. We want to help cadets solo. X, Y, and Z major givers have taken the lead and we're halfway to our 500k goal. Please help us at the 50/100/250/500/1000 tote bag of choice to get us the rest of the way."   


I think a lot of longtime guys like me would write a check IF we saw some success at the major donor level first. 

I might be wrong but my impression is they went after the $50 givers through the brick program too soon, before winning support from the big guys. 

[Eclipse]

One thing I learned in fundraising 101 is that you ask for "things" not "money".

You can find ways to get capital grants to build a building, but it's a lot harder to find donations
for operating expenses.

Asking Boeing for flight scholarships is reasonable, asking your membership for "money", isn't.

Another factor?  NHQ doesn't even know who the "active" members actually are because they won't push the
issue of normalizing the membership categories, so they don't even know who they are alienating.

Sure, that guy who passed by the squadron for 20 minutes 10 years ago keeps writing a check, so
he doesn't feel put upon when he gets the letter, but how about the guy who just got done with an encampment
that cost him two weeks vacation and $1000 in travel expenses?

And who does CAP need more?

[DoubleSecret]

I have no angst with anyone trying to raise funds. It is an individual decision to support or not.

But I want to know  that they appreciate my time as well as my money before they get either one.

I would appreciate if they would acknowledge my intelligence a bit.

I'm still wrapping my head around how I can help my daughter by diverting part of her inheritance to someone else.

"Ways to Better Protect Your Kids" has me completely thrown, yes.  What was that first core value again?

[SARDOC]

I'm a member of the VFW and the AFA as well as a number of other organizations and believe me that the amount of solicitation material I receive from them has got to cost them more than my actual member dues in just postage alone.

This isn't an uncommon tactic in the revenue generation scheme. 

[Ed Bos]

Seems there are a few categories of responses here:

1) "CAP should spend within their means, and not ask for money."

  - Respectfully, I don't think you understand what the organization is if you believe they're over-spending... The organization exists to pursue our chartered missions, and our leadership makes hard decisions on what we will spend money on pursuing. Saying "just cut the travel budget" is like saying "don't spend any money on anything" which leaves us with no resources to do the job.

Incidentally, I think referring to your colleagues as parasites is a little extreme, Alaric.

2) " 'They' shouldn't ask the members who already do stuff for money."
  - WE are CAP. We're asking ourselves to decide if we want to support the goals of our organization. I'm tapped out this year with other charitable giving and my own participation in the national special activity I enjoy, but if I had more money to provide for a specific goal (like the Feik Scholarship), I would do so.

Don't be threatened that you can't do more... Don't disguise your disappointment with disgust or dismay. Simply enjoy what you're able to do, and appreciate the fact that our team has lofty goals and a plan to pursue them. I'm a fairly active CAP member, and I don't feel the need to resent the organization for letting me know they would like more resources to accomplish more.

3) "Let's make a plan for additional development activities."
  - SamFranklin, thanks for answering the question posed. I think your idea of appealing to the aviation industry as stakeholders is a good one, and your observation about using them as flag-bearers for a campaign is spot-on.
- NIN, your observations about transparency and buy-in are well put.

Thanks guys, this seems to be a fruitful discussion, despite some of the venom on here.

[Checotah]

I honestly don't know if I got one of those letters or not.  I pitch all requests for money, regardless of source.

As a long time member, I have had CAP in my estate planning for a long time, but not at the national level.  My local squadron is the beneficiary of part of my estate, worded such that it, and it alone, will have control of those funds, wing banking be [darn]ed.  One of the worst concepts enacted, IMHO.

[NIN]

Keep in mind, too, there are difference between appropriated and non-appropriated funds.

If CAP raises money (for, say, CP-ish stuff, technology development for new missions, scholarship, member development, etc) that is non-appropriated and can be spent differently.   That doesn't mean its not accounted for, or is some kind of "slush fund for CAP" (I have heard that phrase used) that has no oversight.   It is just in a different bucket.

CAP does a LOT of stuff, *most* of which is funded by the USAF (appropriated money).  And when the appropriated money dries up (end the FY, sequestration, Congress decides it wants to hack/slash the USAF budget starting with CAP O&M, whatever), things stop for awhile.  Remember during the gov't shutdown last year? Yeah.

You want to have cool cadet activities?  Don't expect the USAF to fund the "non-USAF-ish" stuff , but instead you need to fund it thru in-kind donations from corporations, etc. (ex.  the MKS Business Academy I believe is that probably does benefit from external support from a 3rd party sponsor)

But as we've said: Absent any cohesive/coherent messaging about "This is what we're raising funds for.." or "Look at this awesome program we want to get off the ground with your help!", we're left to go "yeah? More money? No."

[Alaric]

Seems there are a few categories of responses here:

1) "CAP should spend within their means, and not ask for money."

  - Respectfully, I don't think you understand what the organization is if you believe they're over-spending... The organization exists to pursue our chartered missions, and our leadership makes hard decisions on what we will spend money on pursuing. Saying "just cut the travel budget" is like saying "don't spend any money on anything" which leaves us with no resources to do the job.

I think saying cut the travel budget is saying if we need more money, put leadership in the same position as the rank and file, If I want to go to NESA, the National Conference, Encampment, RSC, etc.  I pay to travel, to stay at a hotel, for food.  I see no reason why a Wing Commander can't pay his own way.  If the leadership had to do the same there would be more money for supporting scholarships, etc/

[Eclipse]

Beyond the O&A of keeping the organization's doors open above the Wing level, I would hard pressed
to find any significant non-appropriated  funds that ever filtered down to the member or activity level.

I've never seen a dime at the unit or group level - all funds to maintain the building we had, not to mention
the significant outlay of upgrading an ICP trailer came from member or private donations (from organizations
those units directly supported).

The encampments were net-zero activities, fully funded by those who participated, and receiving no money
from any other sources.

ES activities are run from appropriated funds.

O-Rides are run from appropriated funds.

The wing receives in-kind donations of facilities for support it provides to the state, and gets a small annual
budget towards O&A from member dues added to annual fees.

[JeffDG]

I think saying cut the travel budget is saying if we need more money, put leadership in the same position as the rank and file, If I want to go to NESA, the National Conference, Encampment, RSC, etc.  I pay to travel, to stay at a hotel, for food.  I see no reason why a Wing Commander can't pay his own way.  If the leadership had to do the same there would be more money for supporting scholarships, etc/

Except the Wing Commander is required to attend certain events.  When higher HQ mandates that someone attend an event, then it is reasonable that funds be provided to cover the cost of such attendance.

[Eclipse]

I think saying cut the travel budget is saying if we need more money, put leadership in the same position as the rank and file, If I want to go to NESA, the National Conference, Encampment, RSC, etc.  I pay to travel, to stay at a hotel, for food.  I see no reason why a Wing Commander can't pay his own way.  If the leadership had to do the same there would be more money for supporting scholarships, etc/

Then you'd never see the majority of these people.  Differences aside, most of the eagles and stars have
regular jobs and families of their own, and would not be able to afford to pay their own travel costs.

I don't frankly know how many of them do it today.  Being a wing CC in a larger state means you spend the majority
of your time in a car.

[Alaric]

I think saying cut the travel budget is saying if we need more money, put leadership in the same position as the rank and file, If I want to go to NESA, the National Conference, Encampment, RSC, etc.  I pay to travel, to stay at a hotel, for food.  I see no reason why a Wing Commander can't pay his own way.  If the leadership had to do the same there would be more money for supporting scholarships, etc/

Except the Wing Commander is required to attend certain events.  When higher HQ mandates that someone attend an event, then it is reasonable that funds be provided to cover the cost of such attendance.

It is reasonable if we have the money, when I was Master of my lodge, there were events I was expected to attend, the cost of attendance came out of pocket.  This is a known cost and you don't run for Master unless you're willing to spend your own money.  To me its about priorities, if as a group we want to fund scholarships, then one way to do that is by lowering spending in other areas.

[Alaric]

I think saying cut the travel budget is saying if we need more money, put leadership in the same position as the rank and file, If I want to go to NESA, the National Conference, Encampment, RSC, etc.  I pay to travel, to stay at a hotel, for food.  I see no reason why a Wing Commander can't pay his own way.  If the leadership had to do the same there would be more money for supporting scholarships, etc/

Then you'd never see the majority of these people.  Differences aside, most of the eagles and stars have
regular jobs and families of their own, and would not be able to afford to pay their own travel costs.

I don't frankly know how many of them do it today.  Being a wing CC in a larger state means you spend the majority
of your time in a car.

Regular jobs and families, you mean just like the rest of the membership that is paying out of pocket?

[Eclipse]

Regular jobs and families, you mean just like the rest of the membership that is paying out of pocket?

OK, come on.  the "rest of the membership" isn't expected to be all over a given wing, or Lord help them, regional area every
weekend of their lives. 

The "rest of the membership" on the whole, attend weekly meetings, a few missions a year, and maybe an encampment
or an NCSA.  (As to you work through my above sentence, the numbers get smaller).  They write off a couple grand in
gas and misc and move on.

The expectations of the Wing and Region CC's are far and above that ofr the average rank and file member - this is
one of the reasons CAP struggles with finding effective leadership at these levels, because the pool of people
who are even capable of doing it from a time and financial standpoint is so small.

[Alaric]

Regular jobs and families, you mean just like the rest of the membership that is paying out of pocket?

OK, come on.  the "rest of the membership" isn't expected to be all over a given wing, or Lord help them, regional area every
weekend of their lives. 

The "rest of the membership" on the whole, attend weekly meetings, a few missions a year, and maybe an encampment
or an NCSA.  (As to you work through my above sentence, the numbers get smaller).  They write off a couple grand in
gas and misc and move on.

The expectations of the Wing and Region CC's are far and above that ofr the average rank and file member - this is
one of the reasons CAP struggles with finding effective leadership at these levels, because the pool of people
who are even capable of doing it from a time and financial standpoint is so small.

When someone makes the decision that they want to be a Wing Commander/Region Commander, etc it doesn't happen overnight.  If its what somebody wants to do, they save for it.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I could do it. At least the until the divorce papers.

[JeffDG]

I could do it. At least the until the divorce papers.

And the layoff notice for not showing up at your job!

[Майор Хаткевич]

I could do it. At least the until the divorce papers.

And the layoff notice for not showing up at your job!

Family business. Ecommerce.

[jimmydeanno]

Squadron members usually just spend their time driving 10 minutes to their respective units once a week.  Maybe they hitch a ride in CAP van to the SAREX, and the really committed ones add an SLS or CLC teaching opportunity to that list - again hitching a ride in the van.  Many wings reimburse the fuel expenses of those vans for their people to travel to wing events.  I've never been to an SLS or CLC that wasn't free to attend.  I've never been to an encampment as a senior where I had to pay to staff it, or an NCSA that I had to pay the activity fee.  Many wings even offer reimbursement (in some percentage) for their members to go to NSC or RSC.  Most wings even reimburse their squadron commanders for having to drive to the commander's call.

Wing Commander's, etc., aren't spending their budgets flying off to exotic destinations to drink mai-tais on the beach.  They're going from squadron to squadron to present Mitchell Certificates, Required Command Council meetings, BoG meetings, SAREXs, Changes of Command, Encampment Graduations, etc., which can and usually do take up most weekends for years at a time.  The argument that they should be well aware that they need to be able to pay for it themselves is absurd.  The organization needs someone with leadership abilities in the position, not a fat wallet.  You can't demand that someone pay their own way for things that aren't optional for them to attend (like every single one of the activities that the rank-and-file member attends).

[Ned]

Another consideration is that if we structure the travel and other policies such that only rich people can be wing and region commanders, we should not be very surprised if their policies and procedures reflect that.

Restated, highly qualified members of average means should be able to aspire to wing, region, and national command.  If we exclude the overwhelming majority of our members from command above the squadron level, we will definately hurt the organization in the long run.