Helen Brown Group

By

The fine print that nearly tripped me up

I was planning on writing an entirely different article for today about a topic that is much in the news lately: cryptocurrency and the wealthy people who own (and donate) it.

In my research, I came across an article based on a fantastically helpful-looking white paper from a vendor in our sector. The white paper discussed in detail breakdowns of crypto-owners by gender, specific hobbies and interests, and their interest in philanthropy, amongst other things. I read it avidly. I had my whole article pre-worked out in my mind.

As I thought about it though, solid, specific info about crypto ownership demographics is some fairly detailed data for a vendor in our sector to obtain because, just like Swiss bank accounts, anonymous donor advised funds, and artwork in a free port, this sort of in-depth information isn’t generally available except to banks, hedge funds, the IRS, or cyber-crime Sherlocks who can afford access to nifty-but-pricy databases.

Unless, of course, the crypto owner just flat-out lets it fly publicly that they own it. That’s also an option.

Normally, you’ll see this kind of reporting from a financial services company or a cryptocurrency trading platform, based on customer data.

Before I got too deep into writing my article, I did my usual skip-to-the end to look at the fine print. The methodology section always tells you where the author(s) of a white paper sourced their information, and if I’m going to share it with you, I need to make sure it’s solid, right?

The source was the company’s unique database of their own research based on publicly-available information and a proprietary wealth-estimating algorithm.

Yikes.

“It’s a Secret” is not the kind of methodology I’m looking for. Here’s what a good methodology sounds like:

“These conclusions are based on our data set of crypto ownership of 15,722 high net worth clients trading on <Name of Company> platform from May of 2019 to February of 2022. The data are anonymized and represent a subset of our total 950,000+ clients.”

Or some-such language.

Maybe the white paper writers really did have hard data and were just being coy about transparency. But from our perspective as prospect researchers – well, people expect our reports to be based on solid facts, so we’ve always got to remember to check that methodology fine print on reports and white papers that we use to base conclusions about a prospect’s background, or their capacity to give.

Our research is as solid as the source data it’s founded on. I nearly got tripped up and wrote a completely different article. I’m glad I checked so you got this instead.

 

 

 

 

 

By

Front Door Locked? Use the back door!

We just celebrated my colleague Jennifer Turner’s fourteenth anniversary with HBG (!), and one of the things Jen has become known for around here is her skill at tracking down hard-to-find information. In today’s article, Jen shares some of her tactics for finding contact information when the usual resources are less than helpful. Thanks, Jen! ~Helen

Jennifer Turner

Senior Consultant Jennifer Turner

Let’s face it – it isn’t easy getting a phone number for the likes of MacKenzie Scott (trust me, I’ve tried). I’m sure I’m not the only one who’s ever been given the daunting task of finding contact information for a famous philanthropist. It’s hard enough finding all their real estate assets, disguised under the names of various LLCs, let alone a direct phone number.

While it may be difficult reaching that donor directly, I am here to let you know that there is hope! Try reaching them through what I affectionately refer to as “the back door.” Below are some examples of alternative ways to connect your colleagues with those hard-to-reach prospects:

  1. Try to find the prospect’s personal assistant

Company websites usually just list the top executives, so you may need to dig a little deeper to find their assistants. I usually begin by searching the name of the prospect’s company in ZoomInfo’s “institution” tab. From there, I click on the list of individuals. Depending on the company, the number of names listed can range from a few to hundreds of thousands. I then sort this list by title, and scroll through until I find anyone whose title matches personal assistant, executive assistant, administrative assistant, etc. With any bit of luck, you will not only find the name of an assistant, but an email address and direct telephone number for them as well.

  1. Search within the prospect’s company’s website for “hidden” email addresses

Using an extension such as Hunter, you can quickly obtain a list of email addresses within a company’s website (note: Hunter offers a variety of subscriptions ranging in price, but even the free subscription gives you 25 monthly searches, so you won’t need to ask your supervisor to pay for another resource to have success with this method). Sometimes the email address will be accompanied by a complete name, and if you’re lucky, their title. Other times it will not. When I don’t have a name, I simply conduct a new internet search putting the email address in quotation marks. If/when I find the name, I can then run it through LinkedIn to see if I can obtain that person’s title. This method may sound a bit time consuming (which it can be) but has proven invaluable when I cannot find an email address for the actual prospect.

  1. LinkedIn

And speaking of LinkedIn, whether you have a paid subscription or use the free version (I use the free version), this can be a great tool for finding personal assistants. Look up the prospect’s company, then review its list of people. From this list, you can search employees by title, or you can simply scroll through the list of people to see if any titles are for an assistant. Once you have a name, you can then try to find their contact information in ZoomInfo or via an internet search. (Just remember that sometimes people hide their full names in LinkedIn.)

Of course, with these tips also come some hiccups…. 

Caveats

Sometimes there can be lots of administrative assistants. You can handle this a couple of different ways:

  • Include them all and let the fundraiser go from there.
  • Limit the ones you pass on to the fundraiser to those for which you have found an email address and a direct phone number.
  • Check to see if you can find the assistant’s location. Depending on the size of the company, the assistants may be scattered across various locations. Try to make sure the assistant’s name you provide is in fact employed at the same location as the prospect.

 

Outdated titles

  • People change jobs. Often. And sometimes information is outdated. Therefore, whenever possible, try to cross-check titles and companies to ensure the assistant is still, in fact, employed at your prospect’s company.

 

You simply cannot find an assistant.

  • It happens. When all else fails, try to give your colleague something. You may not be able to provide them with the prospect’s personal email or direct telephone number, but putting them in touch with a person whom they can refer to by name is the first step in getting them connected.

In conclusion….

 Don’t just give your fundraising colleagues a generic email (such as info@xxx.com) found on the main page of a company’s website, or their main business telephone number; take that extra step to provide your colleague with a specific name and a title, even if it isn’t for the intended prospect.

Chances are, they will have more luck speaking to an actual person this way, which can then lead to a future conversation with the desirable prospect. While it may be premature to expect an immediate call with the likes of MacKenzie Scott, there’s no harm in having an initial conversation with those connected to her. From there, you can let your colleague work their magic to get a meeting with a billionaire prospect.

 

By

Prospect Research Analytics in Three Acts

Steve Grimes

This month for our fundraising analytics feature, Data Insight Team Leader (and aspiring playwright!) Steve Grimes brings three real-life fundraising conundrums to life and illustrates how data insight can bring clarity and direction to common situations our nonprofits face. ~Helen

The stories you are about to read are fictional. The analytical techniques, however, are all true. 

 

Act 1: Survival Analysis

[Amari, prospect research manager, knocks on data analyst Hollis’ office door]

Hollis: Come in!

Amari: Hollis, you got a moment?

Hollis: Sure, what’s up?

Amari: I’m worried about our donor retention rate. I’ve had to reduce the gift officers’ portfolios by 20% this quarter because of non-response from their outreach efforts.

Hollis: Oof! Ok, any thoughts on how to fix that, I kinda like my job.

Amari: Sort of. I’m thinking of setting up an alert system to warn us when a donor is in danger of being non-responsive, but I need a straightforward indicator that I can communicate to the gift officers to keep an eye on. I don’t want to overwhelm them with too much information.

Hollis: So, like, a number we can use as a threshold so when a prospect falls under it we can flag them for being in danger of non-response?

Amari: Yup, pretty much!!

Hollis: Well, Amari, I think I have something for you. [Hollis points to their computer] Welcome to the Wonderful World of Survival Analysis!

Amari: Sounds intriguing!

Hollis: Well, it’s actually pretty morbid because survival analysis is usually used in medical research, to…well, understand how effective a particular medical treatment is..

Amari: That does sound morbid.

Hollis: In our case, it will be wonderful! So survival analysis visualizes a curve that shows how long a population of individuals ‘survive’ after treatment. From there we can use it to identify how long it takes for our donors to be in danger of moving into non-response. ‘Treatment’, our starting point, would be the first time they give to our organization, and we would be looking for the point when the majority of our donors stop donating regularly.

Amari: Ah, I think I get it. If we know what our retention rates are, identify at what point our donors stop giving regularly or in this case ‘survive’ within our organization, then those two metrics combined could be used as a threshold indicator to alert the gift officers for special action to retain the donors and hopefully improve our retention rate?

Hollis: Indubitably!

Amari: Indubitably?

Hollis: It was my word of the day.

Amari: Well, what do you need to get started?

Hollis: Data that describes how long each of our donors have been with us and their giving history.

Amari: Lovely! Ok, next problem, what are you having for lunch, I’m spoiled for options.

Hollis: I heard marketing had catering for a meeting, want to see if there is anything left?

Amari: You’re just solving all the problems today.

Hollis: I wear many hats, Amari!

 

Act 2: Decision Trees

[Hollis joins a Zoom meeting with Amari and Lin, Chief Gift Officer]

Lin: So then I says to Mabel, I says…oh hey, Hollis! Thanks for joining us!

Hollis: Not a problem!

Amari: Hollis, now that our retention rate is up, we want to make sure that the active prospect pool is populated with the best folks, but I feel like our Recency, Frequency, Monetary Values (RFM scores) aren’t measuring our best.

Hollis: What do you mean?

Lin: Our current RFM structure really only takes into account a person’s giving, but we have other engagement points that I don’t feel like we are tapping into.

Amari: So, like, email engagement, event attendance, and our web portal metrics?

Lin: The thing is, I’m not sure which of these engagement points we should incorporate into the RFM analysis. I’m worried we aren’t capturing individuals who are not giving a high or frequent amount, but who really like us, and I want to account for that.

Hollis: Ah, Lin, I think I have a solution! Welcome to the Wonderful World of Decision Trees!

Lin: I’m listening.

Amari: Is it as morbid as survival analysis?

Lin: Survival analysis?

Hollis: That was in the last scene, and no. But decision trees are just as useful to solve this problem.

Lin: Go on.

Hollis: Well, putting aside how we define ‘best’ and ‘engagement’ for the moment, and assuming that we want to capture as many people as possible who like us – not just the frequent donors – decision trees can help us in identifying which engagement points are the most appropriate to add into a RFM model for our purposes.

Lin:  But it’s key that we have engagement points in the RFM model that takes into account as many people in our database, not just a small population of individuals.

Hollis: And that’s why I think decision trees are perfect. If you’ve ever seen a family tree, the output of decision trees sort of looks like that. What we would do is put all our recorded engagement points into a decision tree model, and the subsequent output of that analysis provides a roadmap of sorts of what engagement points are the most important, and how many people each engagement point affects.

Lin: Oh, so it is sort of a visualized way to see which engagement points are the most impactful to our prospects and how many prospects fall into that engagement point?

Hollis: Pretty much! There is some work that we would have to do to conceptualize some of these steps, but it is totally doable, and in the end we can create a more robust RFM analysis that properly ranks more of our prospect pool.

Amari: Great! When can you get started?

Hollis:  As soon as I’m able to access all data points that describe how our prospects engage with our organization. From there, we would need some conversations on your definition of what the “best” prospect is for your team. It would take some iterations to get it right, but it is relatively straightforward.

Amari: Alright, I’ll get started on getting you that access.

Lin: Lifesaver, the both of you!

Hollis: Not a problem! Speaking of..[points at candy on Lin’s desk] can I have a couple of those Lifesavers next time I come into the office?

 

Act 3: Cluster Analysis

[During their weekly one-on-one, Amari and Hollis discuss the possible expansion of the organization]

Amari: You know, I’m feeling pretty good about bringing more people on board, but this is the first time in years that the organization has expanded like this, so I’m feeling a bit uneasy about the direction Development will go in the future.

Hollis: Lay it on me, what’s bothering you?

Amari: Well, I’m particularly worried about how to segment portfolios that speak to the strengths of the additional gift officers we are going to bring on the team. I would love a way to think about their portfolios that would speak to their abilities as stewards of the organization.

Hollis: Well Amari…

Amari: Here we go again…

Hollis: …I think I have a solution.

Amari: Welcome to the….?

Hollis: …Wonderful World of Cluster Analysis!

Amari: Hollis, how do you know so many worlds?

Hollis: I like wonderful things, Amari. All jokes aside, I do think cluster analysis is exactly what you need for this particular workstream.

Amari: I feel like you’re gonna explain this to me.

Hollis: Yup, you know the drill! So cluster analysis is used to identify natural groups within your data.

Amari: “Natural” groups?

Hollis:  Well, calling them “unbiased groups” is a little misleading, but for all intents and purposes that is what a cluster analysis algorithm creates. In the end, what we are doing in a cluster analysis is segmenting the data based on groups that are most similar.

Amari: So we would group prospects based on how similar they are across categories?

Hollis:  Well, “we” wouldn’t be doing it, the algorithm would. The power of cluster analyses is that it is unsupervised, we are essentially going where the data tells us to go.

Amari: Ahhh, I see where the “unbiased” part comes in.

Hollis: Yup, so we could find clusters of prospects that live less than 10 miles from our building, those who have given less than fifteen hundred dollars in the past year, or those who like the color blue. It really all depends on what we are tracking in our database and how we structure the datasets.

Amari: [eyes widen] And because we are letting the algorithm decide the types of groups, it might show ways of looking at prospects that we are not paying attention to?

Hollis: Spot on! This way we can identify ways of grouping prospects that are “natural” to our organization.

Amari: And knowing that beforehand might help who we recruit!

Hollis: Right, so we could do a cluster analysis on our giving data, find some groups of prospects that we feel are impactful to us, run a wealth screening on each of those groups to identify the return of investment to cultivate those prospects, and then use what we found in that analysis as a guide when doing interviews to select the right candidates for our demographic of prospects.

Amari: I think that solves some other problems we weren’t even thinking about.

Hollis: Probably, it’s nice when it works out that way.

Amari: Should I just give you unfettered access to all of our data.

Hollis: Of course. The more access we have to the org’s data, the more we can think about different ways of solving problems like this.

Amari: Can it help me with what to eat for lunch?

Hollis: I can probably figure something out, won’t know until I see what data we have. There is probably a positive correlation between eating a kale salad and how productive you are.

Amari: ….are you in the mood for salad, Hollis?

Hollis: Yeah, kinda.

Amari: Alright, my treat! Although, I’m sort of in the mood for a burger.

Hollis: There is probably a negative correlation with burgers and your productivity.

Amari: Yeah, you’re probably right, better stick to kale to be safe.

By

The RiF Prospect Research Handbook is out today!

Lots of times we might have a brilliant idea to nudge forward (or perhaps even revolutionize) our profession, but then we think, ugh, is it worth it? That would take forever! And we go back to whatever it was we were doing before our daydream.

Fortunately for all of us that’s not what happened back in 2019 when Ben Rymer, then chair of Researchers in Fundraising (RiF), dreamed up the bold idea to create a soup-to-nuts Prospect Research how-to Handbook. In case you’re not familiar with RiF, it’s the professional association for prospect researchers in the UK. Just like Apra here in North America, RiF has a great conference every year (theirs is in November in London) as well as gatherings throughout the year.

The RiF Handbook (available today!), called Researchers in Fundraising: Best Practice Guide and Handbook for Prospect Research has been a labor/labour of love for many of us in the prospect research community. I was lucky enough to be one of the volunteer editors for a segment or two, and I was impressed at what a well-run machine it was, and what a great job that the project’s manager Ally Lee-Dudley, founder of Adcumulo, did of keeping the operation running so smoothly.

I was interested to learn more about the Handbook and the process of creating it, so I got in touch with Ben, Ally, and Chris Davis, RiF’s current chair, to find out more. Sincere thanks to Ben, Ally, and Chris for sharing these great insights!

Helen: Ben, how did the idea come about to do a Handbook for prospect researchers?

Ben Rymer: When I sent the initial proposal to the Chartered Institute of Fundraising (CIoF) in August 2019, I’d known for a while that a handbook/textbook/how-to guide was needed. My feeling was that prospect research was still something of a trade, rather than a profession or discipline. We have a huge amount of expertise, experience and goodwill in the community, but it had never completely crystallised into a finished product so we could build on and improve existing good practice.

HB: What was your initial plan for the scope of the project, and did that change at all as it evolved?

BR: All I knew was that the main areas of research practice should be included. Basically I wanted to create something that I would’ve found practically useful in my first job in the sector. We cast the net wide in starting, with plans for 23 chapters. The big trade-off since then has been in response to volunteer availability. All the content is crowd-sourced, and so we have to work in sequence with the expertise of volunteers who come forward … Also, Covid hit a short time after project kick-off, but we pivoted to remote working pretty well, thankfully.

HB: Ally, how did you get involved with the project?

Ally Lee-Dudley: My involvement with the project began in January 2020 when the Steering Group were looking for a Project Manager to move the Handbook from a great concept to a work in progress. At this time there were not yet any structures, processes, or resources in place so this really was the beginning of the Handbook as an active project.

HB: How many volunteers were part of it?

AL-D: To date around 90 volunteers have contributed to the Handbook, some as writers, some as editors, some as beta-readers, as some as micro-volunteers. Volunteers come from 3 different continents, and around a dozen different countries making the volunteer effort an international collaboration.

HB: How many chapters are there, and how was the decision made on which topics to include?

AL-D: At launch, 8 chapters are available for readers plus a Resource Director and Glossary of industry terms and phrases. There are another 7 chapters in progress which will be published as and when they are completed and a further 11 chapters that are yet to be started. Publishing content on a staggered basis like this means we are able to start getting useful content out and into the prospect research community far more quickly than if we wait for a ‘complete’ Handbook. The original list of potential chapters was developed through discussions between the volunteers who make up the RiF Committee. Over time several additional chapters have been added to that list as a result of suggestions made by volunteers involved with the project.

HB: Chris, as the scope of the project evolved, what changes did that cause you to make?

Chris Davis: As we added more chapters to the Handbook, we found ourselves looking beyond our immediate peer group for input and advice, to those with specific expertise or lived experience. For example, in our chapter on Strategic International Prospecting, we were aware that we needed to get as much input as possible not only from researchers with extensive knowledge of international prospect research, but also from those with experience of living or working in different countries and communities. This was definitely a challenge, but I hope we got the balance right! Similarly, when we start work on the chapter on Equality, Diversity & Inclusion in Prospect Research we’ll be seeking involvement from those who are experts in the ED&I space.

HB: What surprised you most about the process, or what created the most changes or opportunities as things went along?

CD: I think I was surprised by how much content we ended up generating! I knew that the prospect research community would be hugely generous with their time and knowledge, but I was still taken aback at times by the volume of work we ended up producing. At this point I’d have to give a big shout out to our beta-reading and editing volunteers, who were a major help in clarifying and refining the chapters and getting them to where they are now.

HB: Ben, what do you think are the top 3 things that readers will find that might surprise them?

BR: 1. Reach: it is a big thing! Chapters I’ve worked on have ended up being 10,000-20,000 words long. We also have a very broad range of topics, so I think readers will be pleasantly surprised at that.

  1. What’s still to come: by the same token, there are some big chapters in the pipeline, so reader may be left waiting for those. If anyone has suggestions, please feel free to get in touch via the Handbook website, www.rifhandbook.info.
  2. Quality: we’ve put a lot of effort into making the content as good as it can be. For a wholly volunteer-generated initiative I think it is a solid product, but I’m biased of course!

HB: Chris, what do you think are the top things that you think readers will find most useful in the Handbook?

CD: I think that will be different depending on the needs and experiences of readers – throughout the Handbook we’ve tried to ensure that content is relevant for both those who are new to prospect research and for experienced researchers who are looking to innovate and upskill.

For early-career researchers or those who are setting up a prospect research function, we hope our New Researchers Guide chapter and the chapter on The Prospect Research Role will be invaluable. Within the Data & Skills Domain of the Handbook, there is some very detailed, nuanced, and in-depth content on estimating wealth and assigning capacity ratings – topics that we know are of eternal interest to prospect researchers and fundraisers alike!

Finally, we’ve made extensive use of case studies throughout the Handbook, drawn from the real-life experiences of researchers. We hope these will really bring the content the life and illustrate how the principles and techniques outlined in the Handbook can be applied practically.

HB: Chris, what did you enjoy most about the process?

CD: I’ve really enjoyed the experience of being involved in creating content for the Handbook, especially the early stages of this where you are exchanging knowledge with your peers. I’ve been working in prospect research for over a decade, but being involved with the Handbook has absolutely encouraged to rethink some of my settled views about the work that we do, and how we do it. I think the Handbook does reflect this process of peer exchange, and I hope that everyone who uses it will find something new and different in there that challenges their assumptions.

HB: Ally, What tools did you use for collaboration on this massive project and how well did they work? If you had another large collaborative project to undertake, would you use the same tools?

AL-D: The Handbook was always intended to be primarily a remote project, so in that sense we were lucky and the pandemic didn’t significantly affect our plans. In order to help ensure both accessibility of tools at no cost for volunteers and to help embed project sustainability by keeping the financial burden of the project low for RiF, we’ve largely drawn on tools that are available for free. As a Steering Group, our project management hub is a tool called Freedcamp, and this enables us to plot and track actions, deadlines, and milestones and assign task accountability at a strategic level.

For the Handbook’s wider volunteer community, the free version of MS Teams is our collaborative workspace. Teams provides us with a place to create, share, and store documents such as meeting agendas and action plans, and to work collectively on producing and editing content in real-time whilst being able to communicate quickly and easily with each other. Within Teams volunteers can access the web versions of MS Word and Excel so we’re all using the same tools to ensure compatibility plus there is in-build versioning history and storage back-up for those ‘just in case’ moments.  We’ve recently made the switch from using Zoom for our regular meetings to using MS Teams’ video calling service; it doesn’t quite have all the same features as Zoom but it does come at zero cost rather than requiring a subscription to hold meetings for small groups for up to an hour at a time.

The Handbook itself is created using a custom-made WordPress website. We chose the route of e-publishing over hard copy for several reasons and the WordPress platform, with its almost unlimited flexibility and versatility, is the best fit to meet the Handbooks needs both now and in the future. As an e-publication it is not only much easier to keep the Handbook content up to date, it is also far simpler to ensure its availability to readers around the world who can access the content from any device with a web browser.

Overall, aside from the usual occasional IT glitch, (we’ve done the equivalent of turn it off and on again once or twice), the tools we’ve chosen have been effective and created not only a conduit for remote productivity and development, but also a space to come together a a community and experience that sense of being part of a team working towards a common goal that is so important to the Handbook.

Many thanks again to Ben, Chris, and Ally for sharing the inside scoop on the RiF Prospect Research Handbook, and for all of the hard work and coordination that went into creating it! Check out the Handbook website at www.RiFHandbook.info. If you would like to be a volunteer writer or editor for future chapters, please visit this page to learn more.

By

Getting started with corporate philanthropy research

Happy February! This week HBG’s Monique Miller shares her insights on researching companies and the various ways that they incorporate giving and philanthropy in to their community and global strategies. She found some useful resources as well, so if you research companies or engage them as philanthropic partners, you’re sure to find this week’s article helpful. ~Helen

Monique Miller

Ever since I was little, I’ve been interested in processes and complex problems – how things work, how people think, how to understand the world, and how to make it a better place for everyone. So it makes sense that I ended up working in this field, making use of various kinds of information to help mission-driven organizations do their great work.

Soon after arriving at HBG, I started on projects that involved researching corporate philanthropy such as creating company profiles, and prospecting for companies whose missions and interests might fit with those of clients. As I got deeper in, I realized corporate philanthropy is a unique creature and one that would require strategy and focus to yield useful results.

While I’m still refining my approach and tools – and I’ve found these vary depending on the organizations I’m researching and working with – I thought I’d share a few things I’ve noticed about my evolving process in case it’s useful in your work. Maybe it will further conversations at our organizations and beyond around company giving.

Starting with the organization(s)

This is pretty common sense, but I’ve found sometimes that in my excitement to get to work I can be at risk of forgetting why I’m doing this in the first place. This is especially the case when I find myself dealing with a lot of information about a particular company or companies. I’ve found it helpful to ask as a start: What kinds of information are important to my organization? How do my clients like it organized? What kinds of prospects are they looking for? Local, national, particular industries? Understanding who your organization or client is makes for much more effective work. Beyond that, I’ve found profile and prospecting templates can also be really helpful starting places to guide my thinking, especially if I keep them brief at first. I’ve noticed that, ultimately, each research product ends up being a little different depending on the context.

I also take a long and deep look at corporate websites. For me, this can be a fairly daunting experience particularly when looking at large well-established national or international companies. I’ve sometimes found it helpful to go to some trusted resources, such as Inside Philanthropy for guidance. The good folks over there have already sifted through a lot of information for us, and they provide helpful corporate and foundation summaries that have given me threads to follow.

Some other things I’ve noticed:

 Corporate Social Responsibility statements can be helpful

According to Harvard Business School, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) refers to the idea that a “business has a responsibility to the society that exists around it” (Stobierski, April 2021). These statements can be helpful in determining whether a company would be a good fit with your organization. I’ve noticed that sometimes, a company’s strategy is clear and their philanthropy clearly aligns. Other times, it seems there is poor coordination or there isn’t a coherent strategy at all. This, compounded with vast amounts of data dispersed in different places, can make it hard to make sense of what you’re reading. This is where I’ve found conversations with clients can again be helpful. Are there particular types of gifts they’re interested in, say, by dollar amount, by topic, or certain years? Giving patterns can help you deduce a strategy when one might not be explicit.

Corporations can have more than one giving vehicle

  • Foundations

According to Inside Philanthropy (2022) a corporate foundation is a private foundation whose money is contributed by a for-profit business. They rarely have an endowment and grant-making is often tied to the company’s geography or target market. Corporate foundation giving can be very focused, particularly when tied to a philanthropic strategy; sometimes company foundations have a formal grant application process and sometimes they don’t (or it’s not clear or available). Sometimes grants are administered through a donor advised fund (DAF) housed at a community foundation or other sponsoring organization such as a bank.

In researching foundations, I noticed that gift reporting in Form-990s is always a few years behind. I’ve tried to fill those gaps by doing web searching or looking for gifts from a company foundation that are reported in grantees’ annual reports. This has impacted my ability to be conclusive about giving strategies when I can’t find one on the web. I couldn’t conclude, for example, based on a few gifts I found in the news from 2020 that all corporate foundation giving was to X organization or in support of X type of organization for that year.

  • Corporate Giving Programs

Corporate giving programs seem to take the shape of grants/gifts, employee matching, company sponsored employee volunteering, event sponsorships (get ready to get cozy with your favorite web browser to find these!), and more. These programs can sometimes align with a stated philanthropic strategy or CSR statement (where they exist), but oftentimes I’ve had to try to deduce a strategy based on the philanthropy I find from a company. And sometimes that’s not possible because of the large number of varied gifts and I have to be strategic about what gets reported/analyzed. Again, checking in with my team helps here so I avoid going down a rabbit hole and potentially inundating my readers with information.

Due diligence continues to be important, possibly even more than ever

Like me, you may have noticed that the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with increasing discussion of systemic inequalities, may be pushing companies toward greater commitments to social justice causes and positive social change. These commitments inspire hope that a better world is on the way. At the same time, this moment may require us to scrutinize potential donors, ourselves, and our own organizations even more than ever before. As others have suggested (for example Scutari, June 2020), this moment of great financial vulnerability and strong need for change will require that we have thoughtful conversations and ask difficult questions. We will need to make decisions about where we want to draw the line on accepting gifts from particular donors (corporations or otherwise). My sense is that this is best done collectively and thoughtfully, and, thanks to our colleagues in prospect research and nonprofits, these discussions have already been happening. My hope is that we can keep this going and play an active role in positively shaping the future of the nonprofit world and beyond for everyone.

A couple of other resources

 

References

Inside Philanthropy. (2022, January 24). IP explainer: What is a corporate foundation? https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2022/1/24/ip-explainer-what-is-a-corporate-foundation

Scutari, M. (2020, June 25). Scrutiny of donors and ‘reputation laundering’ is growing thanks to COVID and protests. Inside Philanthropy. https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2020/6/24/scrutiny-of-donors-and-reputation-laundering-is-growing-thanks-to-covid-and-protests

Stobierski, T. (2021, April 8). Types of corporate social responsibility to be aware of. Harvard Business School Online. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/types-of-corporate-social-responsibility

By

Is There One News Alert to Rule Them All?

Are you the person on your team who sets up news alerts? If so, this week’s article by Angie Herrington is just for you. Angie has spent more time than she can count becoming an expert on news alerts, and in today’s article she shares all of her top tips and tricks with you. ~Helen

Senior Consultant Angie Herrington

Researchers have relied on news alerts for decades to help us avoid missing something potentially transformational for our organization. The problem is there isn’t one perfect resource to catch everything. Sophisticated algorithms are gamed to skew or create biased results. Most products are now curated for digital marketing professionals and focused on tracking brands, social media mentions, and analytical trends. This is great for marketing or public relations purposes but not so wonderful for what the traditional researcher needs.

I provide daily updates on board members for one of my clients. Fortunately, this is a top priority because it’s more time consuming than any other group I’ve tracked in the past 20 years. The board of directors is made up of 50 high profile executives ranging from chairs or board members of public companies, distinguished academics, public policy experts, and other daily newsmakers. In addition to the usual updates on employment or philanthropy, I look for public statements, interviews, awards, honors, published papers, op-eds, conference attendance, or speaking engagements.

I know that many of us spend time doing this, so I thought you might like a peek into how I do it. [Read more…]

By

The overlooked generation

There’s a puzzle that I’m trying to figure out. Maybe you’ve got some insight and can help me.

When I got started in my career in prospect research, it didn’t take me long to figure out that we were concentrating on people (okay, mostly men) who were in their 40s to 70s. These were the donors who were in their prime earning years or recently retired, finally able to spend their spare time on volunteering and their spare cash on donating.

We didn’t ignore their kids, of course, but since there’s only so much time in the day, it was the Boomers that got the majority of our prospect identification and research attention. It’s just Sutton’s Law.

So, okay, those Boomers are aging out of prime giving now. Most are now fully in retirement mode, so it makes sense that we look to the next generation who are in their prime earning years or recently retired.

In the press (fundraising and general audience), you can’t open a newspaper or magazine without seeing articles like Millennials And Charitable Giving: A New Approach To Philanthropy, How Millennials Are Changing Philanthropy, and How to Appeal to Millennial Supporters.

Which is great.

But that’s not the next generation after the Boomers. Gen Xers are. [Read more…]

By

Making remote work work

They’re calling it “The Great Resignation.” Millions of folks who have worked from home productively through the pandemic aren’t ready to give up their new quality of life for employers who will require them to go back to an office. According to the US Labor Department, a record 4 million people quit their jobs – and that’s just this past April.

For some professions it’s really not an option. It’s difficult for a surgeon and her team not to be in the presence of the patient, although not impossible, apparently.

But for fundraising, it’s a no-brainer. Old school ways of insisting that everyone has to be in the office all the time are losing their credibility. And for good reasons.

Keeping great staff [Read more…]

By

Shadow banks

Dark Alley. Image by Petr KratochvilThis week I watched another fascinating/informative/alarming/stellar PBS Frontline documentary called The Power of the Fed, which I highly recommend if you want to get a well-explained idea of what is happening with US financial markets right now.

One of the phrases that came up repeatedly during the program was shadow banking. It’s one of those terms I delved into pretty intensively during and after the 2008 financial crisis, but it’s one I haven’t heard come up again until recently.

I thought it was time to explain what shadow banking is here on The Intelligent Edge because it’s becoming relevant again and is more in the news. Which maybe isn’t such a good thing, you know?

What are shadow banks?

They’re called shadow banks because, in the flow of money globally, there are some financial institutions that operate outside of (or under the radar of) traditional banking regulation because they do things that traditional commercial banks don’t do.

On a very simple level, commercial banks (like Bank of America, or Fleet Bank, or Watertown Savings Bank) exist to store money from the public, invest it, and lend it back to the public. You can go into any commercial bank and deposit money in a savings or checking account. They will take that money and lend it to others and give you back some of the interest from those loans. Or they’ll take your money and hold it for you until you spend it using your debit or credit card.

How banks do what they do is intensely regulated by federal and international laws and agreements. There are things that commercial banks are not allowed to invest in, like junk bonds for example, because they’re too risky. Also, they’re required to hold a certain amount of money in reserve and to guarantee your deposits up to a certain amount. If you give them $25,000 to hold in an account for you, they are required to have insurance that guarantees that you’ll get it back.

Shadow banking is pervasive in the world and most of the activity centers on the creation and re-selling of collateralized loans and repurchasing agreements used in short-term lending between (non-bank) institutions and broker-dealers. There are no reserves backing the investments, and there’s no insurance to cover any losses. Which is why, when deals go well, investors can make a l-o-t of money because they take on a lot of risk.

Because of their description, it sounds like the participants are hiding in some shadowy back alleys, but you’ve probably heard of (and maybe even used the services of) some of them. Some of them even have banks as subsidiaries (yes, that’s as weird as it sounds). Here’s a list of examples of shadow banks:

  • investment banks, like Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley
  • mortgage lenders (ever taken out a Quicken Loan? In 2018 they surpassed Wells Fargo as the largest mortgage holder in the US.)
  • money market funds (here’s an example of a hybrid: Schwab is a broker-investor for money market funds that also has an affiliated bank)
  • insurance/re-insurance companies
  • hedge funds
  • private equity funds
  • payday lenders
  • peer-to-peer lenders, like LendingClub

Shadow banks move money around in the background. They bundle and invest in things in aggregate, like thousands of mortgages, and sell them on to others. They invest in start up companies (which banks can’t/won’t do). They invest in repossessed assets, and flip them for profit. They buy, re-bundle, and sell commercial bonds (including junk bonds). Amongst many other ways, they make money from their management fees and from betting that interest rates will go up (or down) on the assets they’re buying or selling. And by making risky deals that work out.

These money-movers use short-term, quickly-raised money to fund longer-term assets, so if the market goes bust in the long-term asset area, the shadow bank needs a bailout from somewhere or it goes bust, too, since there is little regulation and no reserve funds to guarantee the investments.

Anticipating that happening (and preventing it) is one of the jobs of the Federal Reserve, and their skill in watching the mile markers whip by on this current economy’s journey (and deciding where the economy should exit or put on the brakes) is where the Frontline program was particularly fascinating. I love hearing insights from people who either are on the inside, or recently were, and Frontline’s interviews pulling out what we should see next from regulators (and what might happen instead) was a real education.

How big is the shadow banking sector?

According to the Financial Stability Board’s (FSB’s) most recent Global Monitoring Report on Non-Bank Financial Intermediation released in December 2020, the shadow banking sector accounted for almost half (49.5%) of the global financial system in 2019. Almost half of money moving around right now is unregulated. What could possibly go wrong?

The US is the global leader in shadow banking asset holdings with China not far behind; this sector makes up nearly one third (29%) of China’s total banking assets, according to a recent article in The Banker. China’s banking regulators are currently working to keep the sector in check by banning banks and wealth managers from holding sub-investment grade assets, and time will tell how effective the legislation is. The shadow banking sectors in Brazil, Canada, and India are also growing apace. Our economies are all interconnected, so it’s important for us to understand this as we research ultra high net worth prospects involved in these sectors, and estimate their future potential giving.

And not only that, of course. It’s important to understand because we may not even realize how deeply shadow banking impacts our own daily lives and personal assets. If you have 54 minutes, I recommend spending it on the Frontline documentary this week.

 

 

By

How much is that private company worth?

Finding information about public companies is so easy! Unfortunately, the majority of companies in the world are privately-held, so finding information about them – especially how much a company is worth – is a daunting task. Thankfully, today my colleague Grace Chandonnet provides a huge hand up for those of us who aren’t professional company valuers with this enormously helpful article. ~Helen

Grace Chandonnet

                Grace Chandonnet

It’s an age-old prospect intelligence challenge. Especially if you’re new to our field, placing a value on a privately held company, and on your prospect’s stake in that company, can seem daunting. Publicly traded companies are required to report their financial information to the SEC, and that information (things like market capitalization, revenue, number of employees, and insiders’ stock holdings), is then available to the public. Privately held companies are not under the same legal obligations, so getting at their financial information is a bit trickier and less straightforward. The good news is that there are some pretty simple tricks that can help a researcher arrive at a reasonable guess as to the value of a private company.

You will need a couple of pieces of information, and the fact is that sometimes you will not be able to know enough information to make a realistic estimate. But there are some resources to help.

If you can uncover a reliable estimate of the company’s revenues, that’s a great start. The unicorn is to find a news article, often published in business or industry publications, that is talking about the company’s industry and uses your prospect’s company as an example. In this article, the exact amount of revenue is not reported, but enough information is provided about the company, a provider of solar energy, to figure it out. The company “reported a 124% gain over 2018 gross sales – an increase of $42.4 million” – when you do the math, you will arrive at 2019 gross revenue of about $76.6 million.

If I have information like this, the first thing I will do is try to find one or more publicly traded companies with a similar line of business and similar revenue, and then compare the public company or companies to the privately held one that I am researching. To find similar public companies, I use a stock screener like this one, which is a free resource.

Select Create Custom Screen and then pull down on Select Category to Current Financials and select Revenue. Enter the revenue criteria (I use a range of values, in this case between $60M and $80M). Once you’ve entered that and clicked in the box to activate the search, go back to the pull-down menu. Pull down to Company Overview and then click on Industry (scroll down in the box, it’s slightly hidden). For this example, I picked “Alternative Electricity”. As you’ll see in the image, there is only one search result, but it’s a good one – click on View Screen Matches to see results. The piece of information to look for in those results is the market capitalization or market cap, which is the total value of the publicly traded company because it is reasonable to assume that there is some similarity between the market capitalization of the public company ($373.1 million) and the value of the private one.

If I have multiple companies in my search results, I will use the average market cap for the companies in the list that are the most similar to my prospect’s company. When doing this, I leave out any outliers – where the market cap is a lot lower or higher than most of the companies in the list.

If, however, you know that your prospect is trying to sell her company or that she already has, the value you want to look for is the enterprise value rather than the market cap. Enterprise value is the amount that a company could fetch in an acquisition. You can find this number by looking up the comparison public company or companies at any number of free sources. I like Yahoo Finance, where you can find the enterprise value under the Statistics tab.

Of course, a good deal of the time, you won’t find an article that tells you exactly what your prospect’s company’s revenues are or there just won’t be good comparison public companies in your search – sometimes a close industry match isn’t available or (if you do have an estimate of revenue), there won’t be any companies with revenues in that range.

My second go-to in cases like this is the Business Reference Guide, which is a paid resource, but not terribly expensive. This resource is available as an online subscription, a book, or both. It is focused on pricing businesses and franchises and is geared toward entities that are seeking to buy a company or franchise.  It is chock full of industry benchmarks and trends, rules of thumb when assessing certain industries or franchises, and ways to assess a ballpark figure for what a company is worth using a host of different data points that you may have. If you have an estimate of the number of employees a company has, for instance, you can often find a simple multiplier to use to estimate a company’s valuation.

This of course brings us back to whether you have that information and where to find it. I like to look at my prospect’s company in several different resources, including Dun & Bradstreet and ZoomInfo, both of which are included in a Lexis Nexis for Development Professionals (LNDP) subscription, and see how these resources’ results compare to one another. If you have access to LNDP, you not only have access to both of these resources, but also to a host of others, including Gale Group Company Briefs, IAC Company Intelligence, and Lexis Nexis Corporate Affiliations.

iWave is another great source of aggregated company information. Dun & Bradstreet has often been maligned in our profession for not containing trustworthy information because its data is frequently based on self-reported numbers and/or modeling, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. I’ve been finding lately that ZoomInfo often returns data about revenues and number of employees that seem pretty accurate to me. With practice, you will be able to identify which information is probably wildly inaccurate versus information that seems quite reasonable. D&B Private Company Insight (also available in LNDP) often has information about what percentage of the company is owned by whom, and this is great to know. Estimating the value of a company is one thing, but knowing how much of the company your prospect owns is the next (and important) step to including these numbers in your capacity score.

The more you do this kind of research, the more you will trust your instincts about what seems to be relatively accurate numbers, both for revenue and number of employees. There will always be things we can’t know abut a privately held company, such as the value of inventory or machinery and other hard assets, and debt/liabilities, but I believe that we should at least attempt to understand what a privately held company could be worth when assessing a capacity rating for a business owner, and I also believe that these relatively simple calculations can result in a strong estimate.

Some additional things to consider:

  • What percentage of the company does your prospect own? If you don’t know, estimate conservatively – I like to use 10 to 25 percent ownership.
  • Is it a multi-generation family business? This could indicate that there are minority shareholders (family members) and should be taken into account when assessing your prospect’s true stake.
  • Did your prospect found, grow and continues to head the company? This could indicate 100 percent ownership for your prospect.
  • Is it venture funded? Investors will own some stake in the company if so. Sometime the percentage of company owned by the investors can be found in a news search, but not always. If not, be conservative when estimating what your prospect’s ownership percentage is.
  • A company’s valuation is not a liquid asset for your prospect until/unless she sells it, but it is an asset that should be included in your capacity rating, just as real estate values are.
  • It is conventional wisdom that privately held companies are often not as valuable as publicly traded ones, so as for all the other steps, be conservative in your estimates.

Good luck – and remember: sometimes you just will not have enough information to make a reasonable guess about a company’s valuation and this is not a bad reflection on you or your research skills!

 

The Helen Brown Group LLC
489 Mt. Auburn Street, Suite 4
Watertown, MA 02472
617-393-1983
info@helenbrowngroup.com
Helen Brown Group