Beautiful. Savor this moment; Charlottesville dressed in white.
pound foolishFebruary 22nd, 2010 | 5:03pm
ok look at it this way...
You do NOTHING and the "Don't spank the monkees" foudation gets NOTHING.
You hold a fundraiser have a hell of a time and they get 100 bucks... AT LEAST THEY GOT SOMETHING.
lots of non profits hire fundraisers at 85% commision. And they work directly for the organization.
have a party and they make a little money. alittle is better thasn nothing.
Penny WiseFebruary 22nd, 2010 | 5:21pm
I'm not talking about doing nothing, obviously a lot of people spent a great deal of time and energy on this event, but the question is: could they have used that same time and energy and raised more money without having to pay for a glitzy hollywood style ball? Are there ways to raise more and spend less --so the charity ends up with a greater % of the proceeds ? I think it would be fascinating to know exactly what was spent on this event and how much the charity received to get some real facts to look at and analyze.
Oldhoo72February 22nd, 2010 | 3:38pm
Thanks for providing the link. If you read a little further down into the comments you'll find this:
"However, a recent article in The Chronicle of Philanthropy has found that the research methodology did not include all of the funds generated by special events.
The article, "Critics Dispute Claim That Charities Lose Money on Special Events," (May 10, 2007) reveals that the research based its findings on the amount of contributions charities received, but did not include sponsorship payments, admission fees and other non-philanthropic income generated by special events.
When those numbers are included in the overall amount of money charities generated, the numbers become quite different for many organizations that were ranked as least efficient by the study."
Which essentially tells us that those conducting the study didn't do a very good job, leaving out all sorts of income raised by these events.
Penny WiseFebruary 22nd, 2010 | 4:26pm
That being said, I think this would be an interesting piece of investigative journalism, and perhaps could use this event to study and find out, if in fact, it was a cost effective way to raise money, or merely a way for the organizers to throw a fancy ball for themselves and their friends. In this economic climate charities need all the help they can get, and finding the best way to provide those dollars is a worthwhile question to ask.
The per dollar gift could actually be even lower, if one takes this into account, mentioned in the above article "To make matters worse, the reported costs used in the study (from IRS tax documents) don't include the person-hours, board time, volunteer effort, and staff distraction that such events require -- suggesting the true cost of each dollar raised is much, much higher."
Penny WiseFebruary 22nd, 2010 | 12:39pm
Fancy charity balls, are often, more about the givers than the gift. How much was spent and how much was given ?
pound foolishFebruary 22nd, 2010 | 1:44pm
people in this town always complain that the charity is never enough.
Too bad there is no charity to fix your shortcomings.
" On average, the charities we studied spent $1.33 to raise $1 in special events contributions, compared to an average overall fundraising rate of $.13 to raise $1. Only 15% of the charities that held special events were more efficient when using special events to fundraise than they were in their regular fundraising activities on the whole.
Among health organizations, the study found special event costs of $1.84 for every dollar raised."
A nocturnal view of a Darden school courtyard Saturday–- the kind of photo that might be taken by someone taking a break at fancy charity ball.
9 comments
Beautiful. Savor this moment; Charlottesville dressed in white.
ok look at it this way...
You do NOTHING and the "Don't spank the monkees" foudation gets NOTHING.
You hold a fundraiser have a hell of a time and they get 100 bucks... AT LEAST THEY GOT SOMETHING.
lots of non profits hire fundraisers at 85% commision. And they work directly for the organization.
have a party and they make a little money. alittle is better thasn nothing.
I'm not talking about doing nothing, obviously a lot of people spent a great deal of time and energy on this event, but the question is: could they have used that same time and energy and raised more money without having to pay for a glitzy hollywood style ball? Are there ways to raise more and spend less --so the charity ends up with a greater % of the proceeds ? I think it would be fascinating to know exactly what was spent on this event and how much the charity received to get some real facts to look at and analyze.
Thanks for providing the link. If you read a little further down into the comments you'll find this:
"However, a recent article in The Chronicle of Philanthropy has found that the research methodology did not include all of the funds generated by special events.
The article, "Critics Dispute Claim That Charities Lose Money on Special Events," (May 10, 2007) reveals that the research based its findings on the amount of contributions charities received, but did not include sponsorship payments, admission fees and other non-philanthropic income generated by special events.
When those numbers are included in the overall amount of money charities generated, the numbers become quite different for many organizations that were ranked as least efficient by the study."
Which essentially tells us that those conducting the study didn't do a very good job, leaving out all sorts of income raised by these events.
That being said, I think this would be an interesting piece of investigative journalism, and perhaps could use this event to study and find out, if in fact, it was a cost effective way to raise money, or merely a way for the organizers to throw a fancy ball for themselves and their friends. In this economic climate charities need all the help they can get, and finding the best way to provide those dollars is a worthwhile question to ask.
The per dollar gift could actually be even lower, if one takes this into account, mentioned in the above article "To make matters worse, the reported costs used in the study (from IRS tax documents) don't include the person-hours, board time, volunteer effort, and staff distraction that such events require -- suggesting the true cost of each dollar raised is much, much higher."
Fancy charity balls, are often, more about the givers than the gift. How much was spent and how much was given ?
people in this town always complain that the charity is never enough.
Too bad there is no charity to fix your shortcomings.
People in this town always complain. PERIOD!
Including myself. :)
Has anyone studied this on the local level ?
" On average, the charities we studied spent $1.33 to raise $1 in special events contributions, compared to an average overall fundraising rate of $.13 to raise $1. Only 15% of the charities that held special events were more efficient when using special events to fundraise than they were in their regular fundraising activities on the whole.
Among health organizations, the study found special event costs of $1.84 for every dollar raised."
http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/068567.php