Nonprofits try all manner of modes of explaining their financial need and how donations can move them from desperation to success.

But perhaps no financial appeal I’ve seen lately is so direct as the San Fransisco Mime Troupe’s “Adopt a Bill” appeal. It’s sort of a wish list on steroids. The troupe (which, BTW, does political theater in Bay Area parks, not mime) simply listed some of the debts it has coming due — with humorous explanations, so that any reader can see that bad luck, rather than bad planning, was the cause of some of its need for cash infusions.

There were, for example, the “surprise truck repairs,” and “GENERATOR RENTAL, because ours got sick and had to see the doc.”

Better yet, the group updates the page as donations come in, and thanks each bill’s adopters.

The only catch seems to be that nobody, so far, seems inspired by the idea of paying for portapotties or Parks & Rec permits. (But imagine the  complaints if the portapotties weren’t there!)

“I have to go to a pre-event training? Just to volunteer? Really?” At least, that’s what I first said (under my breath) when asked to come to an evening training in order to participate in setup at the upcoming “Bay to Barkers” dog walk and festival. Bay to Barkers is an annual fundraiser for the Berkeley East Bay Humane Society (BEBHS), being held this year in Albany, California on Sunday July 29.

Of course, I dutifully arrived at the training. And now I get it: For a big event like this one, there really is a lot of information that the organizers need to convey – and questions that volunteers like me might have.

As Ashley Hurd, President of Eventful (with which BEBHS contracted in order to put on the event), “I’ve learned from years of events-coordination that when they’ve got lots of moving parts, we can save a lot of time and trouble by getting volunteers briefed ahead of time. Once volunteers get to the event, they then know where to go and what they’re doing.”

You don’t need to hold an advance training for every type of nonprofit fundraising event, of course. If the event is small-scale or simple, perhaps with only a few volunteers (or only a few who haven’t done this event before), there’s no need to add another item to everyone’s schedule.

But now that I think back, I can remember instances where I wish the group holding the event had, in fact, held a preparatory training. There was the one where the (overworked) organizer told me, upon arrival the day of, that I’d be the primary First-Aid person. Surprise! Luckily, I’ve had First-Aid training, and don’t mind the sight of blood if it’s not coming out of me, but the organizer didn’t know that. Then, somewhere in mid-afternoon, after a participant complained that the toilet paper had run out in all the Portapotties, the organizer told me with a “didn’t you know?” tone that refilling them was part of my job, too. I bet a lot of participants wish I’d gone to an advance training for that event.

With all that in mind (or not), here are Ashley’s top tips for holding a successful volunteer training:

• Give people plenty of advance notice of the training date. “People don’t like to commit to an extra meeting too far in advance, but if you wait too long, they’re already booked. Continue following up with people about both the training and the event itself.”
• Offer food. “Pizza and sodas, for instance, are always a good way to get people to a meeting.”
• Convey information. “I like to give the big picture of what will be happening and when. I also cover things that participants might ask about, like where the bathrooms and other key things are. You can get into the details of specific volunteer positions, too. In some cases, as people have a few days to think about their job, they ask important questions in between.”
• Pass out a map of the event. “I’m a visual person, so I like to give others the chance to picture where they’ll be, and something to refer to once they’re there.”
• Leave time for questions. “You’ll get plenty of them; everything from, ‘Oh, it’s on Sunday, not Saturday?!’ to ‘Can I bring my own dog along?’”
• Make sure people are comfortable with their job assignments. “If you don’t know all the volunteers well ahead of time, this is a chance to not only make sure people are comfortable with their positions, but that they’re well matched to the work requirements. Not everyone is really suited to be a greeter, for example, or should be out in the parking lot for hours, alone.”
• Thank people. “It’s always important to let volunteers know they’re doing important work, and are appreciated. Saying thanks at a training is one more opportunity to get this message across – and doubly important if it gets inadvertently overlooked at the event itself.”

Me, I’m looking forward to putting all my advance knowledge to use on Sunday. (Yes, Sunday.) But no bandaging, this time.

The Guardian (U.K.) recently brought together a group of experts to give their top tips for holding a fundraising event, in “Best bits: making events-based fundraising work.” All of the advice is worth a look, but what intrigued me was how many experts focused on the issue of connecting the event and its participants to the ongoing work of the nonprofit.

By way of background, many nonprofit fundraising events have no thematic consistency with the nonprofit’s mission or activities. Scanning the headlines these days will give you a pretty quick indicator of this. Aside from the Cicero, New York family that’s holding a dog-washing event to raise money for their child’s service dog, most of the stories you’ll find are about events like a Relay for Life marathon to support cancer research, a dog walk and fun run to support the Salvation Army, and a bowling tournament for a children’s foundation.

I’m not saying these are inconsistent or antithetical to the nonprofit’s mission — just that they’re as likely to attract people wishing to take on a personal challenge or have fun with friends as people with any long-term desire to support the nonprofit in question.

Here’s what the Guardian’s slate of experts had to say about this issue:

• “Focus on participants: . . . It’s really important to listen to them, thank them and provide them with the tools to get more involved with the charity.” – Hywel Mills, partnership manager, Movember.
• “[When] charities bring in a new audience and add them to their main supporter database[,] [t]he events supporters then receive what feels like irrelevant and disengaging messages because they didn’t get involved due to the cause. Targeted and transition communications are essential for retention.” – Al Bell – freelance consultant, Directory of Social Change (DSC).
• “We recently conducted a study on a mass-participation run (80,000 runners) and found that the challenge of the event was more important than the fundraising for participants. Charities should find a way to keep their brand and cause central . . . .” – Simon Lockyer – marketing director, Blackbaud.
• “We have given out free DVDs with a few short films at appropriate events as they are good way of getting our charity’s message across.” – Claire McHenry – events team manager, Help for Heroes.

It’s definitely a tough balance to get right. You’re focused on making sure the event goes smoothly and on schedule, and that people are enjoying themselves. Going to an extreme like, say, sitting everyone down for a half-hour video about your nonprofit is not going to work. But in my experience, too many nonprofits head toward the other extreme. Aside from knowing the nonprofit’s name, participants may leave knowing nothing about what the group does, what it needs, and what their participation and donation did to help. Don’t let that happen at your next event.

With the Olympics getting underway in London, a whole new series of legal wrestling matches has begun: actions against charities with the temerity to use the word “Olympics” in their own event name. Greentop Community Circus found this out the hard way, after being forced to change its “Olympics Cabaret” into a plain old “Cabaret.” (See “Olympic bosses order circus charity event to change name.”)

That’s British trademark law at work, of course, but don’t think for a minute that U.S. companies — including some big-name nonprofits — are any less vigilant about using our home-grown version of trademark law to protect their brand.

McDonald’s, for example, went after 19-year-old Lauren McCluskey for naming a series of charity concerts that she organized “McFest.” Never mind that, as she said, “The whole reason I called it McFest in the first place is my name.”

As discussed earlier in this blog, the Susan B. Komen foundation has sued smaller groups for using the color pink or any variation of “for the cure.” According to Richard Eskow, writing for the Huff Post earlier this year, the foundation has “pursued high-dollar litigation and intimidation tactics against other charities. Uniting Against Lung Cancer was targeted for the offense of holding a ‘Kites for the Cure’ event. They’ve also attacked ‘Par for the Cure,’ ‘Surfing for a Cure,’ ‘Cupcakes for a Cure,’ and ‘Mush for the Cure.’”

In what must have been the greatest expenditure of time and legal fees for the smallest result, earlier this year the musical venue Wolf Trap sued “The Barns of Rose Hill” over its name, which arguably infringed on that of Wolf Trap’s venue called “The Barns of Wolf Trap.” They reached a settlement in which “The Barns” removed the “The” from its name. It’s now just “Barns of Rose Hill.” Everybody happy now? (See “Wolf Trap, Barns of Rose Hill settle suit” in the Washington Post.)

The bottom line: When developing names, themes, logos, and tag lines for your nonprofit’s events, take a look around to see what local or multinational businesses you may be echoing — whether intentionally (as is often the case, when it makes a nice pun) or unintentionally. Run some Google searches. See Nolo’s free online articles on “Trademark Law.” And when in doubt, consult an attorney.

I’m always on the lookout for graceful yet clear ways to remind donors that — let’s see, how shall I word this — they might want leave you money when they DIE. Okay, that’s an example of how not to phrase this important message.

The Yosemite Conservancy presented much better language in its Spring/Summer 2012 newsletter. The headline reads, “Anyone can leave a legacy.” That message is encouraging, not age-specific, and leaves out the “D” word.

I particularly like the use of the word “anyone” because, despite what the fundraising academics might tell you, it’s not only wealthy donors approaching old age who consider making legacy gifts. The real-world truth of the matter is that a surprising number of younger donors are happy to name a charity in their will or legacy, for the very reason that they do not yet have more immediately available assets to give.

The newsletter entry goes on to say, “Including Yosemite Conservancy as the beneficiary to your retirement or insurance plans are simple ways for anyone to make a lasting difference to Yosemite.”

This is also helpful, as it reminds donors that they don’t need to get into charitable annuities or other complex estate planning arrangements to name a nonprofit as a recipient of their estate.

Of course, you can’t just lift their text outright — but you might want to think about how you might adapt it for your group.

As someone who faints dead away if anyone bearing a needle removes even a drop of my blood, I bow in awe of the heroes and heroines who — willingly! — donate their blood.

But I also had to laugh when I saw a friend sporting not only a red bandage on her arm after giving blood, but this “Give blood” sticker.

Yes, Dark Shadows is a vampire movie. (With Johny Depp and Michelle Pfeiffer no less!) Vampires like blood. People need blood. Get it?

It’s offbeat, but humor is a great way to bring attention to a nonprofit’s cause. And, as in the ideal collaboration, both the nonprofit and the business gain. I’m assuming that the movie folks helped underwrite the ARCs efforts in some way; reports have it they at least donated some movie tickets to be raffled off to blood donors.

As for benefit to the business, I, and probably anyone who saw these stickers, will remember the name of this movie a lot longer than we would have otherwise.  (But will I go see it? Hmm, I’m not crazy about the sight of blood, either, even if it might be on Johny Depp’s lips.)

Whether your nonprofit organization holds garage sales, auctions, or runs a thrift shop, this latest news piece — “Pot donated to charity is worth £360,000 — should make you rethink how you look over the donated goods.

The charity in question was a hospice thrift shop in England. It had received a dusty Chinese bamboo brush pot that, instead of selling in their store, it was smart enough to turn over to an auction house. A “fierce” bidding war ensued. (I’m not going to do the math, but £360,000 is even more in dollars.)

Of course, that’s the sort of good luck that most groups can only wish for — resigned, meanwhile, to sorting through piles of donated ratty  T-shirts and cheap glass vases. But the real question is whether members of your group would recognize such good luck if it came your way. The article makes two things very clear:

• the shop’s workers receive regular training in how to spot items of value, and
• the charity has established an ongoing relationship with the auction house, making it easy to arrange such trainings, as well as appraisals and sales.

It’s not hard to implement something similar where you are, if you go to local experts for advise and help. And even lesser payouts can be significant — for example, if you’re able to sell a first-edition book for $50 rather than $5.

By the way, you’ll notice that the comments to the article express concern that the charity should have offered the item back to the donor. Probably true, if they knew who the donor was — but they may not have, as the article did mention that he or she was “anonymous.”

I’m regularly amazed, when talking to nonprofit fundraisers, about some of the common misperceptions held about their obligations to the IRS in order to keep the group’s 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. Things like, “You mean the donor’s entire ticket isn’t tax deductible if we feed them dinner?” and “Volunteers can’t deduct the value of their services?” (No and no.)

Those are understandable errors (though a little reading would correct them — everyone involved in nonprofit fundraising needs to get their hands on Stephen Fishman’s book, Every Nonprofit’s Tax Guide.)

Less understandable is the recent news that many nonprofits — over 15,000 of them according to a Scripps Howard News Service study — get to Question 16b on their annual Form 990, where it clearly asks about  “Total fundraising expenses,” and write “Zero.” Huh? How is it possible to spend absolutely nothing on fundraising? In a report on this issue by Thomas Hargrove (“Many nonprofits incorrectly claim no expense for fund-raising“), Robert Ottenhoff, president and CEO of GuideStar, is quoted as having laughed and said:

“It is ridiculous to think an organization could raise significant amounts of money without spending money to do it. . . . I must be doing something wrong. I’ve never seen it growing on trees.”

The question is, what are these groups thinking? Or are they just fudging the numbers, perhaps feeling the public pressure to keep fundraising expenses low?  That was the suggestion on this I-Team video, which pointed out that when organizations like GuideStar rate charities, they give heavy weight to the nonprofit’s reported ability to keep fundraising costs low. The only “compelling defense” reported in the article is when groups do all their fundraising with volunteers.

If you know of a better one, I’d love to hear about it.

Another news story came out this week about a nonprofit closing operations for lack of funding; in this case an Oakland charter elementary school called Civicorps. The headline in the Oakland Tribune, seemingly inevitably, said, “Families, teachers stunned by sudden closure of Oakland charter school.”

The members are always stunned, it seems. Just a couple of months back, a friend of mine was reeling at the announcement that a trails organization of which she was a loyal member had run out of money and was closing — and doing so almost immediately.

The decision to close a nonprofit is no doubt made after trying virtually everything, sounding alarm bells about the need for funds — hopefully without turning potential donors off by the persistent note of 0h-so-unattractive desperation — and finally giving up.

And yet. Civicorps parents and teachers told Tribune writer Katy Murphy that  “they could have saved the school if they had been given time to do so. ” My friend expressed something similar.

Where is the line between telling donors “We really need the funds, or else” and “This time we mean it?” Especially given that, once the decision to close is made, a group needs to wrap up operations fairly quickly. It may not have the cash reserves to do anything else, especially while winding down income-generating services and fundraising operations.

The lesson seems to be that, one way or another, key or loyal members need to hear that an ultimate decision on whether to close is being made. Whether they really can mobilize in time to save the ailing nonprofit is, of course, an open question.

But without an opportunity to try, and to assess the situation for themselves, member frustration, bad feeling, and very likely public statements about the incompetence of those running the nonprofit are a predicable result. (In the Oakland school instance, a teacher/parent said, “It’s just negligence, at a minimum”). And who knows, maybe they really will be able to save the nonprofit.

Not another golf tournament! That was my internal reaction when a friend of mine told me, last week, that the charter school her children attend was holding a golf tournament last weekend as a fundraiser.

I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard stories of fundraisers frustrated by trying to talk members/donors into attending a golf tournament when really only one or two of the board members are interested, or the group has always held a tournament and is afraid to stop, and so forth.

But I was prepared to suspend judgment. I asked her to fill me in on what happened, afterwards. (Notice I didn’t offer to attend. Golf? Me? Don’t think so.) Her answer:

“One lesson we already learned: don’t have a golf tournament for a charter school with a liberal/hippy type parent base! We only filled half the golfer slots–which is why I played.

“But it was fun, and they had contests on some of the holes for prizes–closest to the pin, longest drive, hole in one (of course I didn’t win any). The hole-in-one prizes are bought with special golf tournament insurance. And we had a dinner and silent auction afterward. People could come to the dinner even if they didn’t play golf. I think we made about $10,000 from all of it put together (50 golfers, 50 dinner-onlies).”

So, not bad as a final monetary take, and some good planning around making it fun for the people who came. But I stand by my original thinking: If you’re going to hold a fundraising event, don’t design the event first and then try to drum up attendees; look first at your attendees’ interests and then figure out what would draw them to come join in.