Why don't NCSAs, encampments, and the like get sponsors. Let's use example inc (PLEASE NOTE THIS IS AN EXAMPLE.) as an example.
Why don't we make it, instead of National Emergency Services Academy, (I AM USING THE NESA AS AN EXAMPLE. IT CAN APPLY TO OTHER THINGS.) it is "Example's National Emergency Services Academy. Maybe we could increase the budget, and they get advertising!
Or instead of FLWG Winter Encampment, (PLEASE NOTE IT CAN BE SUMMER, FALL, WINTER, OR SPRING ENCAMPENT, ALSO IT CAN BE ANY WING) it could be FLWG and example's winter encampment.
Next thought: why don't CAP sites use ads? It could make money!
PLEASE NOTE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT CAP IS ALL ABOUT WEBSITES.
Before someone asks, the caps are cause I am tired of people thinking I think one thing. Nothing else. Here comes people raging over that last statement. ::) >:(
Why don't we? Because we don't have a full time marketing and fund rasing team at CAP NHQ.
We already do partner up with a number of organisations that foot a lot of the bill for some of our NCSA's....for example the Manufactuer and Maintenance NCSA is sponsored by Cessna.
The USAF sponsors all of the Fam Courses......which are pretty much free execpt room and board.
I am sure that if you could find a sponsor for the other others.....then I would not have a problem with the idea of going to the "Home Deport National Emergency Services Academy".
Couldn't we hire someone on commission?
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on December 27, 2011, 05:58:49 AM
Couldn't we hire someone on commission?
Sure.....got about $100K+ for his salary? That's the going rate for a good Fundraiser these days.
Dude, chill out. 8) People on the internet are going to pick stuff apart. Don't sweat it.
You're coming off a little intense at the moment.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 27, 2011, 06:03:13 AM
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on December 27, 2011, 05:58:49 AM
Couldn't we hire someone on commission?
Sure.....got about $100K+ for his salary? That's the going rate for a good Fundraiser these days.
If he bring in enough money, the 100k is more than worth it. It might be tight the first year, but after that..
Besides I know people that do fundraising part time. And we could still try at least a little to get some sponsors. If they say no, who cares? Can't hurt.
Anyway, any feedback on squadron sites using advertising?
Darkside, I believe what I write. People picking it apart is good, it lets you know if you are a crackpot or a genius. Besides, in my opinion this isn't my most intense
war debate with other people of this forum.
Oh....I agree with you.
I think that CAP ought to HIRE it's national, regional and wing commanders.....and one of their jobs would be to raise the money to pay their salary and fund CAP.
As for Squadron level advertising and sponsorship.......there is a reg on that and certain limintations....but it most certainly can be done.
So if wing, regional and nat'l commanders are fundraising who will be doing CAP stuff? To get "professional fundraisers" we will have to look outside of CAP. not inside.
Which means we'll have 60 fundraisers (50 state, 9 regions, 1 nat'l) and nothing higher than group commanders.
Like you said, a good fundraiser is going to cost more than 100k. Hypothetically they all make the same, that is 6000k. Not really the sorta cash CAP has.
Maybe a progressive hiring of say 9 fundraisers? Hire one, than have him fundraise enough for 1 guys sqalary, hire another, etc. Then we'll have one per region. That sounds better than 60 fundraisers.
There should be no problem getting sponsors to help pay for many of our non AF supported cadet activities and, having a full time team at NHQ or, with the CAP Foundation, deal with it is the proper way to go. However, last time we hired one, we ended up sponsoring a NASCAR Busch League Car. We all know how that ended...
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on December 27, 2011, 11:38:46 AM
So if wing, regional and nat'l commanders are fundraising who will be doing CAP stuff? To get "professional fundraisers" we will have to look outside of CAP. not inside.
Which means we'll have 60 fundraisers (50 state, 9 regions, 1 nat'l) and nothing higher than group commanders.
Like you said, a good fundraiser is going to cost more than 100k. Hypothetically they all make the same, that is 6000k. Not really the sorta cash CAP has.
Maybe a progressive hiring of say 9 fundraisers? Hire one, than have him fundraise enough for 1 guys sqalary, hire another, etc. Then we'll have one per region. That sounds better than 60 fundraisers.
That was more or less how I spelled it out. Start at NHQ and move down over a 3-4 year period.
As far as how is doing CAP stuff.....they do both.
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on December 27, 2011, 05:58:49 AM
Couldn't we hire someone on commission?
Just FYI, it's unethical (and explicitly against the code of ethics of the Association of Fundraising Professionals) for advancement professionals to work on any commission or percentage-based compensation. (Link. Item #21.) (http://www.afpnet.org/Ethics/EnforcementDetail.cfm?ItemNumber=3261)
Personally, I think interns would be best here at the National or Wing level. Non-paid Internships with non-profits show pretty well on resumes for young professionals to prove themselves not only to our command/management for referrals but also other hiring managers. I worked for a number of non-profits trying to fund raise (mostly Art Fairs and such) and those interns were highly utilized and extremely valuable! And they can "work from home." Might be something worth checking into. My only question is if the commanders of the activity have enough bandwidth to add one more oversight.
In most non-profits, the board is the primary fundraising source for the institution they represent. The fact that our corporate officers cost the organization more than they bring in is pathetic. Wing CC's should be fundraising, that is "cap stuff." Plus, wings have a full staff. I find that wing commanders get too far into the weeds anyway, and should probably be looking at different stuff anyway.
Who is going to set the strategy, determine the best fundraising tactics and approaches, build the campaigns, and manage the interns? Certainly we wouldn't entrust that level of responsibility to college students with little to no real world work experience. Interns are a great resource, but to function well they need the guidance of experienced professionals.
Development/Advancement/Fundraising is an area that Civil Air Patrol severely lacks when compared to our peer non-profit agencies. However, it's not an area that is best left to amateurs. The complexities of fundraising coupled with its potential to damage sensitive relationships (you can't just send an intern to cold call the CEO at Cessna and ask for a half-million dollar major gift) if not handled properly mean it's something that is best handled by experienced fundraisers. You won't find any major, national non-profit who leaves its fundraising efforts entirely unto unskilled interns or volunteer help.
It seems like an easy solution to say "Hey, we'll just fundraise and that will solve our problems!" In reality, fundraising does have great, great potential to help Civil Air Patrol in the long-term. But it's a long-term solution that needs to be approached with industry best-practices, not a quick fix.
Quote from: Extremepredjudice on December 27, 2011, 11:38:46 AM
So if wing, regional and nat'l commanders are fundraising who will be doing CAP stuff? To get "professional fundraisers" we will have to look outside of CAP. not inside.
Maybe a progressive hiring of say 9 fundraisers? Hire one, than have him fundraise enough for 1 guys sqalary, hire another, etc. Then we'll have one per region. That sounds better than 60 fundraisers.
Why don't we start out with one, perhaps even a part timer at National ??? Somehow I don't think overall companies have a great interest in donating large amounts of money to Civil Air Patrol at the national level. :-\
Lets face it if you looked at CAP's "consolidated", audited financial statements you'd be wondering where all that money was really being spent, especially with the lack of foot notes that point out without a doubt that squadrons for the most part are on their own for funding what they want to do at the local level. Also there's certain other programs that don't get much AF funding, but that is buried in this consolidation. Perhaps what really needs to be done is to add a percentage (in parenthesis) expense/program columns that shows what is NOT funded by the government grants, but by CAP members and other non government contributions. The financial statements definitely need to show what programs we "self fund" (if in fact there's any we really do). Perhaps a simple separate expanded footnote exhibit could be formulated.
Also the potential risk of having a fund raiser chief at National (which I think has already been approved by the BOG) is at the local level we could see ourselves at the unit level getting further restricted from approaching certain large retail chains IF CAP decides that they want to attempt to get funding for a larger program from the same source. Likely you can bet there will be more reporting required when we get donations, since that staffer's going to have to get a feel of what is going on in the various wings as far as donations. My personal feeling is "in kind" donations locally will be more successful. Also, I'd like to see more "friends of XXX Squadron" formed to do the fund raising and keep the money (and even in kind donations) out of CAP wing banker program's /CAP Inc's logistics reach.
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 27, 2011, 05:52:35 PM, I'd like to see more "friends of XXX Squadron" formed to do the fund raising and keep the money (and even in kind donations) out of CAP wing banker program's /CAP Inc's logistics reach.
Why? There are zero issues with WBP in this regard, and there is absolutely no need for unit-level foundations.
Just call the Doors Foundation, and accept their offer... ;-)
I don't know if they use the same one over and over...
But I seem to recall most everyone thought that wasn't the best idea. 8)
That's because most people are afraid of changing the status quo. Afterall, a proposal like that would eliminate people's fiefdoms they've built, highlight their weaknesses, and show us the shortcomings we've had as an organization for the last 70 years. When you really think about it, it's really people's personal objections to the proposal than any significant part of it that just wouldn't "work."
I'm curious to know why isn't every wing in their local CFC as a "state-wide charity."
Nebraska and Alaska are the only Wings I know of that are involved in federated fundraising, and only because I'm a professional fundraiser assisting Alaska Wing in this way. In addition, I've only seen the NatCap Wing involved in the CFC as an independent agency.
I would recommend Wing Commanders take a hard look at alternative means of raising money that already exist, and that they can affiliate with, rather than CAP hiring an individual or group to work solely for the corporation. That seems like a good place to start, even considering my obvious biases.
Colleagues,
I can assure you that development and alternate revenue streams are a primary focus of the senior leadership. One or more National Staff positions as a(n) Development Officer were recently approved. The NHQ corporate team has had one or more development officer positions in the past, and I expect it will have another in the near-to-medium future.
But as others have touched on, it is never as simple as recruiting a quality $100k + person and setting them loose upon Corporate America.
Many donors are understandably reluctant to contribute discretionary charitable dollars to a 501c3 that is 85% funded by appropriated dollars. There are multiple reasons for this, of course. One reason is that donors may come to believe that if a given need is genuine, Uncle Sam would already have taken care of it. Or that a given donation is more highly valued in an organization that survives primarily from donations. And so on.
I strongly agree with the fundamental notion that we need to strategicly establish and grow an aggressive development program to improve our services and reduce the risk of relying on a single revenue-stream, the US taxpayer, who may have other priorities in the future. Indeed, I have been touting variations on that theme for years.
(I still think with over a million former cadets out there an Alumni Association would create substantial development opportunities as well as allow us a way to re-engage former members with CP. I just haven't been able to get the project off the ground. But like Thomas Edison, I have learned several different ways to not start an alumni association. ;) )
"Hey, Man, how did you get a slot for the Tampax Honor Guard Academy?"
"Oh, I pulled a few strings." >:D
Quote from: ol'fido on December 28, 2011, 01:30:23 AM
"Hey, Man, how did you get a slot for the Tampax Honor Guard Academy?"
"Oh, I pulled a few strings." >:D
;D That's just too good... >:D
Remember we had a National Commander a few years ago that said Commanders at all levels should spend 25% of your time fund raising and writing grants. Thats why he got his own unit now.
Quote from: ol'fido on December 28, 2011, 01:30:23 AM
"Hey, Man, how did you get a slot for the Tampax Honor Guard Academy?"
"Oh, I pulled a few strings." >:D
Now that is funny. :clap:
Quote from: Private Investigator on December 28, 2011, 02:03:38 PM
Quote from: ol'fido on December 28, 2011, 01:30:23 AM
"Hey, Man, how did you get a slot for the Tampax Honor Guard Academy?"
"Oh, I pulled a few strings." >:D
Now that is funny. :clap:
Thank Larry the Cable Guy.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 30, 2011, 02:04:04 AM
Thank Larry the Cable Guy.
I knew I had heard that somewhere... but it doesn't make it any less funny.
Quote from: Ed Bos on December 27, 2011, 11:47:56 PM
I'm curious to know why isn't every wing in their local CFC as a "state-wide charity."
Nebraska and Alaska are the only Wings I know of that are involved in federated fundraising, and only because I'm a professional fundraiser assisting Alaska Wing in this way. In addition, I've only seen the NatCap Wing involved in the CFC as an independent agency.
I would recommend Wing Commanders take a hard look at alternative means of raising money that already exist, and that they can affiliate with, rather than CAP hiring an individual or group to work solely for the corporation. That seems like a good place to start, even considering my obvious biases.
I can't speak for my wing, but my unit is a member of the CFC. Last year, someone wrote us in for $250 and we weren't really enrolled. This past year, I got us approved and did a bit of solicitation. It'll be a few months before I see what the return is, but we're hoping it'll be good. I think most wings don't because most wings don't know about it. Afterall, our criteria for wing commanders focuses more around their ops qualifications, whether they are a pilot, and if they've been successful in CAP, instead of whether or not they have corporate level executive leadership experience and training, fundraising experience, etc. Granted, some of our "promote from within" guys do a great job, but I think overall, our membership lacks someone who has the expertise we need, and if they do have it, they are already employed in those jobs so they don't have time to be a CAP Wing Commander.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 30, 2011, 02:41:03 PM
Quote from: Ed Bos on December 27, 2011, 11:47:56 PM
I'm curious to know why isn't every wing in their local CFC as a "state-wide charity."
Nebraska and Alaska are the only Wings I know of that are involved in federated fundraising, and only because I'm a professional fundraiser assisting Alaska Wing in this way. In addition, I've only seen the NatCap Wing involved in the CFC as an independent agency.
I would recommend Wing Commanders take a hard look at alternative means of raising money that already exist, and that they can affiliate with, rather than CAP hiring an individual or group to work solely for the corporation. That seems like a good place to start, even considering my obvious biases.
I can't speak for my wing, but my unit is a member of the CFC. Last year, someone wrote us in for $250 and we weren't really enrolled. This past year, I got us approved and did a bit of solicitation. It'll be a few months before I see what the return is, but we're hoping it'll be good. I think most wings don't because most wings don't know about it.
Great idea :clap: :clap:
Well the information can be found here on the Combined Federal Campaign:
http://www.opm.gov/cfc/ (http://www.opm.gov/cfc/) I looked up my geographic area to see how much was contributed and it shows about $335K was pledged for CY 2010 to support various non profit groups.
I wonder if in the future individual squadrons will be prohibited by National from directly participating in this ??? (probably would prefer we sell Wreaths, candy bars or magazines). It would seem to me that no one below the wing commander level should be signing that application to be listed, since there's only one federal ID# that has to be provided. Perhaps each wing could file applications to be CFC eligible listed for every squadron in the wing (remember to look in the search box, since some states have more than one CFC office, based upon geographic location). Doesn't look like it would require that much work.
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 31, 2011, 04:38:08 AM
Great idea :clap: :clap:
Well the information can be found here on the Combined Federal Campaign:
http://www.opm.gov/cfc/ (http://www.opm.gov/cfc/) I looked up my geographic area to see how much was contributed and it shows about $335K was pledged for CY 2010 to support various non profit groups.
I wonder if in the future individual squadrons will be prohibited by National from directly participating in this ??? (probably would prefer we sell Wreaths, candy bars or magazines). It would seem to me that no one below the wing commander level should be signing that application to be listed, since there's only one federal ID# that has to be provided. Perhaps each wing could file applications to be CFC eligible listed for every squadron in the wing (remember to look in the search box, since some states have more than one CFC office, based upon geographic location). Doesn't look like it would require that much work.
RM
The only reason for units to be prohibited by any higher echelon from participating, is if that higher echelon was going to participate.
I had to coordinate with the only squadron in AKWG that previously enrolled in the CFC to find out the impact if they stopped applying to the CFC as a squadron and made way for the entire Wing to apply as a State-Wide agency.
The only issue would be if NHQ decided to apply as an Nation-Wide agency, but that seems to be against the spirit of the fundraising regulations, since:
Quote from: CAPR173-4, Para 11-a
Local CFC campaigns may publish a list of eligible organizations. If possible, units should attempt to be included.
This encouragement from NHQ seems to indicate that they won't be applying as a Nation-Wide agency in the near term.
CFC doesn't prohibit each echelons from participating. Our wing could be in the same book as our squadron. However, most CFC drives are locally driven by local non-profits, making our local chapters a better sell to the people donating.
It's really not that difficult to get enrolled. The folks at the local united way have some seminars on how to fill out the paperwork, etc. Your wing finance officer should be able to assist with the pro-forma 990.
Then its just a matter of advertisement to get people to donate. However, I've found most people flip to the "local" section of the book and start picking.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 31, 2011, 04:26:28 PM
CFC doesn't prohibit each echelons from participating. Our wing could be in the same book as our squadron.
That may vary by area.
In Alaska, there is 1 state-wide "local" section. Multiple charters of the same organization (EIN) are not permitted in the same "Local Charities" section. In the case of organizations like the United Way, each one is independent, but affiliated (different EIN). Units cannot participate because they would be a duplicate EIN in the same section of the book.
If you're in an area where the "Local" is different that "State-Wide" this may not be an issue. I also believe that there's some prohibition with duplicating an EIN in different sections of the book, but I have to do a little research to back that particular point up.