With today’s myriad social issues — political polarization, protests, diversity concerns — nonprofits are bound to face conflicting viewpoints from their constituents. Longstanding donors may bail while new donors may hop onboard. That kind of turbidity can present grave consequences to a nonprofit’s bottom line.
It’s a scenario San Diego’s Museum of Us knows well. In 2012, its mission began to shift. Historically a traditional, artifact-based anthropology museum focused on the ethnographic evolution of man, it wanted to change emphasis and examine themes across cultures and time, ones that impact humans even today (including beerology). Along with that came introspection about the museum’s role in the community and within the indigenous and worldwide native communities.
“A great deal of harm has been done to these communities, including the Kumeyaay Nation, upon whose unceded land our museum sits and whose artifacts we display,” says James Haddan, the museum’s senior director of development. “Those artifacts really don’t belong to us.” From those acknowledgments grew key decolonizing and anti-racism strategies within museum exhibits. In 2020, after decades of discussion, the radical decision also was made to change the name from San Diego Museum of Man to Museum of Us to reflect this evolving mission.
How does a nonprofit bring along its donors for such massive change, while helping them achieve their philanthropic goals in a way that doesn’t compromise the institution’s mission, vision and values?
Haddan says a lot is just basic stewardship. The museum kept constituents informed of mission shift, and during the name change — which coincided with the pandemic — they called, donor by donor, simply to check in. “We didn’t ask for money. We had conversations about their well-being and, later, about publicly announcing a name change and how they felt about it.”
What’s more, the museum allowed donors to mourn the old name, using transition branding over time that crossed out Man and inserted Us above it. The nonprofit also “blessed and released” those uncomfortable with the transition from a cultural anthropological-holdings museum to a less formal and more welcoming, accessible and inclusive museum. “We let them know we appreciated their support over the years, that we valued what they’d done for the institution.”
Adjust and Evolve
The key to fundraising in a complex social era: First and foremost, give donors the benefit of the doubt. Allow them to evolve alongside the nonprofit. Never assume donors don’t want to learn, aren’t curious, or are incapable of change. Doing so can mean turning away people with a great deal of money and with a demonstrated interest and history of supporting the institution.
In cases where donors only partially align with a hot-button social issue the nonprofit supports, it’s important to allow them to designate money in ways that do align with other shared institutional goals.
To deal with donor misalignment, David Vásquez-Levy, president of Pacific School of Religion in California, created a separate 501(c)3 — an independent organization, but still affiliated with the school — to raise funds for its Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies in Religion.
“Most universities began as seminaries as alternative paths to leadership,” says Vásquez -Levy. “Our institution has always sought to create diverse leaders within the context of religion and Christianity.” Even with his school’s historic emphasis on diversity, he acknowledges that the strongest arguments against inclusion often come from religious institutions. The separate fundraising arm bridged that donor divide.
Donor dissent can arise from complex social issues, and Haddan reminds nonprofits that it takes time to educate donors new and old about social priorities. “That’s hard when you’re a fundraiser because some years, you’re like, ‘I don’t have time. We need the funding now.’”
In those cases of complete donor-institutional mission misalignment, nonprofits may sometimes need to say no to a monetary investment or involvement that strays too far from the nonprofit’s values. When introducing socially heated areas in need of support, Haddan recommends seeking federal grants and funds to fill the financial gaps and shield from potential fallout.
Create Thriving Nonprofit Communities
The greatest tool for nonprofits in addressing tumultuous social change, says Devorah Lieberman, past president of California’s University of La Verne, is to create a thriving community within the institution. “A thriving community has, at its core, a sense of belonging for every community member.”
Those types of community ecosystems allow for the effective management of social crises because, within them, employees and leaders feel safe from physical violence; have emotional and mental health support; can communicate successfully across lines of difference; and hear regularly from their leaders about the nonprofit’s vision, values and priorities. That safety extends to donors who embrace the community and invest in an evolving mission.
Complex Social Challenges Facing Nonprofits
Organizations need to consider if it is prepared to address social topics arising from:
- A polarized American public
- Regional and global conflict (e.g., Israel-Hamas war)
- Changing social influences (wokeness, gender identity, gun laws)
- Immigration/asylum concerns
- Free speech vs. public safety concerns
Knowing about today’s biggest hot-button political and social issues can help prepare fundraisers for challenging conversations.
Richard Tollefson is founder and president of The Phoenix Philanthropy Group, an Arizona-based international consulting firm serving nonprofit organizations as well as institutional and individual philanthropists.
Did You Know: Many nonprofits have used the Federal Plan for Equitable Long-Term Recovery and Resilience to address social change in their organizations, which leverages the Seven Vital Conditions for Health and Well-Being, a blueprint curated by The Institute for People, Place, and Possibility at the online resource, Community Commons.
