Tag Archives: politics

The campaign against US nonprofits has been a long time coming. The worst of it is starting. Are you ready?

Leave a reply
a primitive figure, like a petroglyph, shots through a megaphone

Upon the election of Donald Trump to a second presidency, many nonprofits became wary about how they talk about their work, even their mission statement. Even before the election, many nonprofits rushed to remove any mention of the phrase diversity, equity and inclusion or DEI, or ANY of those words on their own, from their web sites. Now, as the Trump administration threatens to revoke tax-exempt status from nonprofits supporting racial justice efforts, it’s made it further difficult for many nonprofits to communicate at all about their work. This article from the Chronicle of Philanthropy focuses on specific nonprofits who are having to significantly alter their messaging – or put a pause on public communications altogether (note that you must register on the site to read it, but registraiton is free).

Make no mistake: in addition to trying to purge the nonprofit world of work regarding diversity, equity, inclusion, racial justice, economic justice and climate change, they are focusing on the use of the word empathy, and any work regarding such.

This is an issue I’ve been researching, talking about and training about long before the current presidency. Because this campaign against nonprofits has been a long time coming.

I first wrote about the political right’s desire to undermine the credibility and support for nonprofit organizations in 2011, in my blog Could your organization be deceived by GOTCHA media?, where I showed examples of how any cause can become politicized, and any organization can become a political target. My favorite example of this is the successful and horrifying elimination of the wonderful Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), per right-wing misinformation via doctored videos.

I wrote about it again in Growing misconceptions about the role of nonprofits in the USA in 2018. I wrote about it AGAIN in Your nonprofit WILL be targeted with misinformation; prepare now at the start of 2025. And when I watched a nonprofit consultant on an online community advise nonprofits to not just soften their language but to bend the knee to the current administration, I wrote a strategy for myself, in my own work, and it became Your Nonprofit CAN Resist. Here’s how.

I hope your nonprofit won’t back off of its commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. I hope your nonprofit won’t alter its mission statement. I do hope your nonprofit will:

  • Talk to your board of directors, staff and lead volunteers regularly, repeatedly, about why your nonprofit exists, why it does what it does, and why it has the values or commitments it does. Make sure they know how to talk about all of that from a place of confidence.

If this hasn’t been on a staff agenda or a board meeting agenda yet, then get it on there ASAP. If you had a meeting about it last year, you’re overdue to have one this year. Get busy.

Also see

Nonprofits: be honest with yourself, your staff & the public about how the November 2024 elections may affect you.

Governments cracking down on nonprofits & NGOs

Why I’m not outraged at the IRS from 2013.

Told ya. & I’m still telling you.

Told ya. & I’m still telling you.

4 Replies
a primitive figure, like a petroglyph, shots through a megaphone

Back in the late 1980s, when I got my first full-time nonprofit job, it was at a nonprofit professional theater. Within a year, Republicans began to attack the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, extending that fight to criticize a variety of live performances and art exhibits across the USA. The theater where I worked immediately joined coalitions to fight back and prepared blurbs for our donor newsletter. Management and other members of the coalition were vocal and didn’t shy away from what was happening. If it meant losing some patrons, so be it: this was too important to be silent about. It was then I learned that working at a nonprofit doesn’t mean immunity from politics. It was also then that I learned that, while it is inappropriate for a nonprofit, including any church, to tell people what person or party to vote for, they have EVERY right to say, “Please vote. And here are the statements by the candidates/parties regarding issues related to the cause we promote…”

In 2011, I wrote on my blog about Republicans plans to do what they are doing now. Yes, in 2011. And I was the lone voice among consultants and nonprofit bloggers going on record, in a big way, to talk about it. Maybe it cost me some consulting jobs. So be it.

At the start of the first Donald Trump presidency, I wrote a plea to USA nonprofits for the next four years (& beyond). I wrote about How that first term might affect humanitarian aid & development. Then I wrote, in 2017, about volunteers scramble to preserve online data before government deleted it. I wrote about Donald Trump trying to eliminate AmeriCorps and all national service programs in 2018 and again in 2019.

I wrote in 2019 about The Trust Crisis, and how there was a growing number of nefarious actors trying to get the public to stop trusting national institutions and nonprofits. The silence was deafening.

Again, I was mostly alone. YOU were silent. The Points of Light was silent. The Association of Leaders in Volunteer Engagement (AL!VE) was silent. Other consultants regarding volunteer engagement and nonprofit management and Tech4Good were silent. You were not allies. And I haven’t forgotten that. Perhaps you all thought everything would be resolved and undone in four years with a new election, and in some ways, you were right – there was a pause in the madness. But it was a pause. I warned you it would be just temporary unless you spoke out. You stayed silent.

On election day last year, I told you that folks needed post-election reassurances from your nonprofit and gave you advice on what to say. I then gave you a strategy for looking at local election results and preparing to reach out to newly elected officials.

On inauguration day this year, I told you that your nonprofit WILL be targeted with misinformation and you needed to prepare. Then I told you why your social media should focus on volunteering as much as possible. And I told you that your Nonprofit CAN Resist. Here’s how.

Some nonprofits not only ignored the advice, they wrote that it was never more important to avoid controversy. I remain stunned and outraged by such advice.

Silence will not preserve your nonprofit nor protect those it serves. It will just delay actions that will harm both.

Stop being silent. Start your redemption by following the National Council of Nonprofits on LinkedIn. Follow their President and CEO on BlueSky. They are one of the strongest voices in our sector against what is happening now.

If your nonprofit is part of a national coalition, find out what advocacy they are doing, what legislation they may be talking about in that section of “updates from headquarters” that you have always skipped over in favor of the section on upcoming grant guidelines. You have every right to tell your donors and volunteers and clients about legislation that might affect them, and how that legislation might affect them, and the phone numbers of their elected officials.

Every US conference for nonprofits, whether for wildlife centers or theaters, domestic violence shelters or hospices, museums or food banks, needs to have sessions on how to address the current political landscape. And I don’t mean just about disappearing government funding.

I don’t know what else I can say, except that I am angry about doing so much of this by myself for YEARS. I paid a price for it, and maybe I will pay an even bigger one later, with being so public in my opposition. But let me be clear: your cowardice is going to cost us all. And your silence probably goes against core beliefs your nonprofit proudly states on its web site. No more silence. Otherwise, your silence will be interpreted as approval.

Your Nonprofit CAN Resist. Here’s how.

1 Reply
A cartoonish hand is palm facing the viewer, as if to say stop.

The following comment is on a subreddit now, posted anonymously (and I have a screen capture in case it gets deleted):

Welp, it finally happened. The national office of the small non-profit I work for has asked the whole organization to remove any DEI related language from our website and social media. Not because their stance on supporting DEI has changed, but because they are afraid that the current administration will cut our federal funding.

This goes beyond removing any “diversity and inclusion” statements. They are asking us to remove all individual instances & variations of the words diversity, equity, and inclusion.

I’m pushing back. I won’t win, but I’ll push back anyways.

My advice to this web site manager, and to everyone else: say no. I wrote in directly to word his “no” this way, in writing:

I will not remove language on the web site with regard to diversity, equity or inclusion. I will not remove information from the web site regarding any aspects of human rights or civil rights. If management wants this removed, you will have to do this yourself. If you want to reprimand me, I request that the reprimand be in writing, and please detail the exact language I was refusing to remove. I cannot in good conscience commit the actions you are asking me to.

The likelihood of being fired for this is REALLY remote at a nonprofit, because they are terrified of bad publicity.

I also suggested leaking that the nonprofit HQ was asking affiliates to do this to a credible media outlet, and to keep doing so until someone picks up the story and asks the HQ for comment.

None of this is to punish the nonprofit. But if a nonprofit can be pressured “from the top”, why not from elsewhere, and to actually do the RIGHT thing? Some in senior management will no doubt be grateful that their staff is showing true character and saying no, and that the press has the story and the public can understand what is happening and pressure the nonprofit NOT to do this.

So, to be clear:

If you, a staff person, are asked by a senior staff member or your organization’s HQ to remove information on your web site or social media that affirms any commitment to diversity, equity or inclusion, or that supports racial equality or social justice, you should first ask for the request to be in writing. Say that you cannot follow-up on any such request unless it is in writing. And then, when the request comes in writing, leak it to the press and also refuse to delete the information. Tell management they can do it themselves, but you won’t.

Other ways you can stand up for core values of civility, human rights and dignity:

  • If you are asked by a funder to remove information on your web site or social media that affirms any commitment to diversity, equity or inclusion, or that supports racial equality or social justice, ask for the request to be in writing. Say that you cannot follow-up on any such request unless it is in writing. And then, when the request comes in writing, leak it to the press and also refuse to delete the information.
  • If not removing the language would jeopardize an amount of funding that, if lost, would harm your clients, then remove the language and put a press release on your web site stating that you are removing the funding at the request of whomever is making the request (NAME THEM), have a scan of their communication asking or telling you to do this linked from the web page, and tell people if they would like to see the pre-censored version of the web pages you had to alter, to go to archive.org and look such up. Be sure to share on social media that this is happening.
  • Do not comply with any request by phone from the federal government that involves turning over client or staff personal information to a federal office; tell the requester that the request must be in writing. Consult legal counsel regarding whether or not you legally have to do it.
  • Post on social media about your organization’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, or about activities your organization undertakes regarding such, or regarding related to racial equality or social justice, at least every quarter.
  • Attend public events by nonprofit in your area that are focused on serving minority communities, such as immigrants, refugees, local LBGTQ people, etc. Share a photo of yourself on social media with a member of that nonprofit, celebrating that you are together at the event.
  • Like, and if it’s appropriate, share, on your own social media account, posts of organizations in your area that support refugees and immigrants, LBGTQ people, and anyone else targeted by the current executive branch of government.
  • Go on social media using your organization’s profile and “like” the posts by your area’s elected officials and government offices that acknowledge diversity, equity and inclusion, racial equity, social justice issues, ALL religious holidays, etc.
  • Post acknowledgements at the start of Black History Month (February), Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Heritage Month (May), Pride Month (June), National Hispanic Heritage Month is annually observed (September 15 to October 15), and National American Indian Heritage Month (November).
  • Post acknowledgements of a diversity of religiously-affiliated and “patriot”-affiliated celebratory days:
    • MLK Day
    • Chinese New Year
    • Easter (and perhaps Eastern Orthodox Easter as well, depending on your community)
    • First and Last days of Ramadan (varies each year – in 2025, it may start on Friday, Feb. 28, or Saturday, March 1, 2025)
    • Armed Forces Day (People currently serving in the United States military – celebrate on the third Saturday in May).
    • Memorial Day (last Monday in May)
    • July 4th
    • Labor Day (first Monday in September)
    • Veterans Day November 11
    • Rosh Hashanah
    • Yom Kuppur
    • Christmas.
  • Tell your volunteers they have the right to refuse the Presidential Service Award. Encourage anyone who will do so to write the office in charge and your executive director to say they will be refusing it for at least the next four years.
  • If you have to refer to these regions, then make sure you call them what they are: the Gulf of Mexico and Denali. And spell it Kyiv.
  • Have a plan for what to do if the police or federal law enforcement, such as ICE, shows up at your organization. Make sure all staff know that the first thing to do is to call the Executive Director and to say, “I am not authorized to give you permission to search these premises.” Even if they have a warrant and the Executive has to relent, create time for clients and others to leave the area.

Addition on February 13, from a colleague on LinkedIn:

  • Practical protection for nonprofits – Check your recent email subscribers to see if there was recently added DEIAreports[@]opm[.]gov as a subscription, meant to monitor DEIA activity.
  • Consider temporarily filtering out anyone with .gov email, as the current executive order requires government workers to report any DEIA efforts or face adverse actions.

A final thought on the seriousness of what is happening:

Ever wonder what you would have done at the darkest times of history – when Nazis were about to take over all of Europe and were murdering millions of people, most of them Jewish? When black people were enslaved and tortured regularly and systematically in the USA? During the US Civil Rights movement? When the mass murders of ethnic groups was happening in Rwanda or Srebrenica? – Well, you are doing it now.

BTW, I’m jeopardizing my own career, such that it is, by suggesting all this. Yet, here I am.

Have more ideas? Share them in the comments.

Nonprofits: look at local election results & prepare to reach out

Leave a reply
image of a panel discussion or a presentation in front of people at a long desk

An election has happened in the USA and, by now, even tight local elections should have been resolved and winners named. And that means, nonprofits, that you have some relationship building and sustaining to do:

Update your lists of elected officials – city councils, county officials, your state legislative representatives and your US congressional representatives. They don’t take office until January, however, so don’t change the lists prematurely if you have information to send out before the end of the year.

Newly-elected officials should get at least a card of introduction from your nonprofit. An invitation to meet face-to-face would be even better. They need to know who you are and why you matter.

For officials who did not choose to run for re-election, or lost the election, especially if they ever attended any of your events or somehow showed support for your nonprofit. Thank them for their support and consider offering an invitation to continue to be involved with your nonprofit in some way – at least signing up to continue to receive your newsletter. 

Relationship building with elected officials has never been more critical for nonprofits’ to survive. You ignore doing all of the above at great risk to your nonprofits’ future.

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help. 

No excuses: give employees & volunteers all the time they need to vote tomorrow

Leave a reply
A woman holds her ballot up proudly and is standing in front of the ballot drop box where she will drop it. She has a dog on a leash next to her.

Tomorrow, November 5, is election day in the USA. Millions of people have been able to vote early and have already submitted their ballot – as you see me doing in the photo at the right – but millions more could not do that, and the only way they are going to be able to vote is to go to a polling place on election day and probably stand in line for a very long time.

Please don’t limit your employees and volunteers to trying to vote before or after work, or over their lunch hour, if you are in a state requires voting at a polling place. Executive directors: tell your staff to let their managers know what three hour slot they will need for voting during the work day, and have managers tell YOU what three hour slot they will need.

Tell staff this is done on the honor system because OF COURSE you trust your staff to take only the amount of time they actually need to vote and to come back to work when they are finished – they won’t take three hours unless that’s what they actually need. Do NOT require things like a photo of them standing in line waiting to vote.

If your nonprofit won’t do this, if you refuse to do this, then let me be blunt: unfollow this blog, and unfollow me on social media. You don’t deserve my advice on anything.

Too much text on the web? Bollocks

Leave a reply

I have always believed content drives design for any communications product, from a paper brochure to a website. What good is a supposedly “well designed” or “eye-catching” poster, billboard, flyer, manual or website if it doesn’t get the result you want – and the result is not just people looking at it and saying, “Oh, what a lovely design,” but what they DO and how they THINK after experiencing that product.

I will never forget being handed a company brochure at a nonprofit where I had just started and being told, “It won a design award!” I looked it over and said, “The text is too small for someone who needs glasses to read and dark green text on a light green background makes it really hard for ME to read as well.” I didn’t last long at that job…

Then there was the designer who so proudly presented me with his design for an upcoming event, and it was beautiful, but it was missing the date, the time and the location of the event, and it implied the event would be something that it wasn’t. But, hey, it was pretty! He was crushed when I told him he had to add the necessary info. “But… it ruins the design…” he sighed…

And then there was the nonprofit that decided it wanted to delete at least half the text off of its web site. It did so, resulting in an onslaught of email from people asking for more information, and me having to constantly cut and paste, over and over, the information that used to be on the web site.

My attitude about text – about the importance of clarity and completeness over just brevity for brevity’s sake – puts me at odds with many a designer. But it recently put me at odds with people who believe “too much text intimidates young people” and, therefore, you should cut down on the number of pages on your web site.

Bollocks.

Yes, I get it – most people don’t read everything on a web site. That has ALWAYS been true. I have always known people don’t go to a website and read it like a book – they go to a website, read the home page, and if they are enticed, or in need of certain information, they click on something and read more.

What’s great about the web is that you can create a site that appeals to BOTH of those groups of information consumers, those who just need a bit of info, and those who want to dive deeper.

Also, people often go to a web site not as a fresh, new visitor who need something shiny waved at them to be intrigued – there are those that go to a web site looking for specific details. They may be a current volunteer who wants to get clarification regarding the purpose of your organization’s community engagement. They may be someone who wants to understand more about why the issue your nonprofit addresses exists at all. They may be someone who is doing a reference check on someone claiming to be on your board. It may be a CURRENT STAFF MEMBER who wants to stay on brand/message, and to do that, needs to know what the official wording is regarding some program or practice.

How many times have I joined an organization as a new employee or consultant and my only source for vital historical information I need is the organization’s web site? And how many times has the organization not had that vital information on their new, shiny, modern, streamlined website, so I have to go find it on an old version of their site on the Internet Wayback Machine?

Absolutely, when someone opens a web page, they shouldn’t feel overwhelmed. Some are overwhelmed by lots of text. I’m overwhelmed by lots of photos – because I rarely go to a web site for photos, I go for information, and I feel like I’m lost in a sea of images and I search for real, actual information I need.

The philosophy is to put JUST enough information on a web page to get people to sign up for an event, put JUST enough to get people to buy a ticket. I get that. And, certainly, for landing pages, it’s a good philosophy. But there are many users who are going to need more information. So why not have a link to more information so people like me, who are NOT going to buy that ticket or sign up to volunteer based on just a paragraph or two, can dive deeper? Believe me, there is PLENTY of room on your web site for that additional information. There is plenty of room on the web for more web pages.

One last note: I have once again been in a position to create tasks for volunteers and then to recruit and involve volunteers in those positions. I tried the less-is-more for role descriptions – and ended up with an endless number of questions from volunteers, asking for all those details I was leaving out of my pithy recruitment posts. Lesson learned: I went back to long-form.

If you have benefited from this blog, my other blogs, or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help. 

“Gender & Politics” Panel, Washington County, Oregon

Leave a reply

Last week, I had the honor of moderating a panel discussion on “Gender & Politics” in Washington County, Oregon. The discussion was hosted by the local chapter of the American Association of University Women (AAUW) and was held at Taylor Auditorium at Pacific University.

The panel featured three women holding voter-elected offices in Washington County: See Eun Kim, a Hillsboro School Board member, Kate Grandusky of Gales Creek and the Forest Grove School Board, and Felicita Monteblanco and Chair of the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Board of Directors.

Women’s involvement in government, and their overall civic engagement, is something I’m passionate about. I’ve participated in initiatives that support this abroad, including in Afghanistan, and it’s fascinating to participate in initiatives here in the USA – so many of the challenges are exactly the same. Since moving to Oregon in 2009, I made it a personal mission to encourage more civic engagement by everyone, including women, by posting on various social media channels every publicly-announced opportunity I could find for the public to hear from city council members and county officials where I live, local state representatives and senators and national officeholders, as well as those running for any elected office. I’ve also made it a goal to engage much more myself, such as serving on the Canby Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, the Forest Grove Public Safety Advisory Commission and the Washington County Cultural Trust, as well as joining and volunteering with the League of Women Voters – Washington County Unit.

It was because of these activities that I was invited to be the moderator of this gender and politics panel here in the county where I live in Oregon. It was an opportunity to hear first hand from local women about their experiences in running for public office, the systemic changes needed they might think are needed for more women in office, and what we can do to encourage more women to run. And it was a terrific cross-section on the panel, in terms of ages and ethnic identities.

Before the discussion began, I noted a few things about women in politics in the USA and in Washington County, Oregon specifically:

  • Women make up at least half of the population here in the USA. Yet, as of now, women represent just over 20 percent of US Congress members – but that’s IS a record with just over 100 women serving. One of those members is the representative for our area here in Oregon, Suzanne Bonamichi (yeah!).
  • While it’s a record number of women overall in the US Congress, it’s the lowest number of Republican women in the House in a quarter-century (just 13).
  • Women have run for President and for Vice President in the USA, but have never held those offices. Meanwhile, many other countries, including the UK, Germany, New Zealand, and Pakistan are, or have been, lead by women.
  • In Washington County, of our 13 Oregon state representatives, 6 are women – that’s almost half.
  • There are five members of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, and two of them, including the chair, are women. The chair is Kathryn Harrington and member Pam Treece represents District 2.
  • In Forest Grove, where the panel was held, of the seven members of the city council, three are women: Councilor Elena Uhing and Malynda Wenzl, both elected, and the newest council member, recently appointed Councilor Mariana Valenzuela.

Some food for thought I offered as moderator to set the tone for the evening:

  • 2018 data from the Pew Research Center shows that Republican and Republican-leaning women are roughly twice as likely (44 percent) as Republican men (24 percent) to say that there are too few women in office, and are also significantly more likely to say that it’s easier for men to get into office.
  • Majorities of Republican women, Democratic women, and Democratic men say that women have to do more to prove themselves, compared to that 28 percent of GOP men. Likewise, while nearly half of GOP women and majorities of Democrats believe discrimination keeps women from office, compared to just 14 percent of GOP men.
  • Republican women are also significantly more likely than men in their party to say that sexual harassment, differences in party support, and voters “not being ready” to elect women keep women out of office.
  • Like Republican men, Democratic men are significantly less likely than their female counterparts to believe that Americans “aren’t ready to elect a woman to higher office.”
  • The poll also shows that Americans see women and men as having different abilities regarding both leadership and policy.

Some things I learned from the panelists’ comments:

  • None had run for office before and all said a version of, “I didn’t know how to run. I never did anything like this before!”
  • Two of the three were graduates of the Emerge program and said it was incredibly helpful in their campaigns. Those two also felt being mentored by women who had run for office was essential to their success and says there is a need for even more mentoring.
  • All three said personal connections with the community they wanted to represent and “social capital” were fundamental to their success as candidates and as officeholders. All of them knew a lot of people in their communities and were trusted by those people.
  • Two noted that women need to start asking, explicitly, for childcare to be provided at candidate forums, city council meetings, school board meetings, etc., if we truly want more women involved in politics.
  • One noted that, for many women, “We do not look in the mirror and see a candidate. But many men do look in the mirror and say, ‘I should run for office!” She also talked about imposter syndrome (something that I also suffer from!).
  • Two members of the panel noted that it was important to never be embarrassed to ask questions or to not know Roberts Rules of Order, that if someone says, “You are not following the rules!”, immediately ask for guidance and advice on how to do it.
  • One emphasized something I emphasize myself: go to the meetings of the government body you want to serve on. If you are going to run for school board, you need to be going to school board meetings. Become familiar, first hand, with how it works.

Here is the article in the Forest Grove News-Times newspaper about the event, and it does a good job of summarizing the candidates’ comments from the evening.

Questions I didn’t get to ask:

  • Do you feel like people have treated you differently as a candidate or serving in office because you are a woman and, if so, could you give an example of this?
  • How do you handle criticism?
  • How do you achieve work/life/office/family/volunteer balance?

An observation that I found startling as I listened to the panelists: they were focused on policies and actions regarding health, education, housing and the environment – and never once mentioned anything about how to help businesses. I don’t think any are anti-business, but I find it fascinating that talk of business-friendly policies that absolutely dominate political discussions with male candidates and officeholders wasn’t mentioned at all by these panelists.

As moderator, I tried to keep my statements at the event at a minimum – this was an event to hear from the panelists, not me. But what I would add to the advice about getting more women to serve in office:

  • Take your daughters, other female family members and friends to a city council meeting, to a school board meeting, to a candidate debate, or anything else that would expose them to how local government works.
  • Encourage your daughters, nieces, sisters, etc. to run for leadership roles at school or in any groups they are in. Celebrate them even if they don’t win the leadership position.
  • Discourage everyone in your life from disparaging a female candidate or an officeholder’s appearance – her hair, her makeup, her style of clothes, etc. – and her voice. Encourage discussion instead of a candidate’s opinions, positions and actions, including criticism. Watch carefully what you yourself say about any female officeholder, candidate or other leader (or aspiring leader).
  • Teach young women how to walk into a room for the express purpose of networking. Talk about how to approach a group, how to introduce yourself, how to shake hands, how to be culturally appropriate if you realize someone might not shake hands, etc.
  • If you have any doubts about your public speaking abilities, join your local chapter of Toastmasters.
  • Remember that you have EVERY right to take up space in any room, in any conversation. Take up that space and own it.

I could say so much more… I desperately want a diversity of more women on citizens’ advisory committees, including planning commissions, in addition to wanting a woman President and Vice-President. I want to support that happening anyway I can.

Also see these related blogs:

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help. 

Governments cracking down on nonprofits & NGOs

Leave a reply

Budapest, Hungary is one of my very favorite cities, and not just because I think it has the BEST FOOD IN THE WORLD. Budapest has what I consider the perfect mix of gorgeous history all around and vibrant new ideas from its young people. It feels unique and ancient while also feeling bold and progressive. It’s an energy that both preserves what’s best about a community or country (history, architecture, environment, the arts, etc.) and helps it prosper and move forward, particularly in times of great economic and cultural change.

It is with great sadness that I read about efforts by the Hungarian government to shut down the Aurora community centre.  “Now, the Aurora, which rents office space to a handful of NGOs — including LGBTQ and Roma support groups — says it has been pushed to the brink of closure by far-right attacks, police raids and municipality moves to buy the building… NGOs are routinely attacked through legal measures, criminal investigations and smear campaigns — something the Aurora told CNN it has experienced first-hand.”

“We wanted to create a safe environment for civil organizations,” said Adam Schonberger, director of Marom Budapest, the Jewish youth group that founded the community center in 2014. “By doing this we became a sort of enemy of the state. We didn’t set out to be a political organisation — but this is how we’ve found ourselves.” Schonberger didn’t think authorities had targeted Aurora because of its Jewish roots. Instead, he put the harassment down to the group’s values of “social inclusion, building civil society and fighting for human rights.”

Here’s Aurora on Facebook. And here is the Aurora’s web site.

I am very partial to these kind of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) – what we call nonprofits in the USA – that help cultivate grassroots efforts, encourage the sharing and exploration of ideas, and help incubate emerging movements and other NGOs. I believe these NGOs can play an important role in helping immigrants assimilate in a country as well and help the country benefit from the talents and ideas these immigrants may bring. I’ve had the pleasure of addressing groups like this in Eastern Europe, and in the USA in Lexington, Kentucky, and I’ve walked away feeling renewed and energized. Add in promotion and celebration of the arts, like Appalshop does in Eastern Kentucky, and I’m ready to pack up and move to a remote town in Eastern, Kentucky.

This NGO’s struggles are part of an ongoing shift all over Europe, and indeed, the world, in local and national governments that are rejecting diversity, changing times, dissent and intellectualism, and governing from a place of fear. I could think that I’m isolated from this trend here in the USA, where I’m living these days, but I am not. I remember back in the 1990s, when similar political groups went after arts organizations, even going so far as trying to defund the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) – I helped arrange for Christopher Reeve, a co-founder the Creative Coalition and then performing at a theater where I was working, to debate Pat Robertson about the NEA on CNN’s Crossfire on July 16, 1990, and the theaters where I worked back in those days all felt pressure regarding their artistic choices because of these movements. Those controversies are still here, as any search on Google and Bing shows.

Nonprofits in the USA need to watch carefully what’s happening in other countries and think about how such could happen here. Remember the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)? It was a collection of community-based nonprofits and programs all over the USA that advocated for low- and moderate-income families. They worked to address neighborhood safety, voter registration, health care, affordable housing and other social issues for low-income people. At its peak, ACORN had more than 1,200 neighborhood chapters in over 100 cities across the USA. But ACORN was targeted by conservative political activists who secretly recorded and released highly-edited videos of interactions with low-level ACORN personnel in several offices, portraying the staff as encouraging criminal behavior. Despite multiple investigations on the federal, state, and county level that found that the released tapes were selectively edited to portray ACORN as negatively as possible and that nothing in the videos warranted criminal charges, the organization was doomed: politicians pounced and the public relations fallout resulted in almost immediate loss of funding from government agencies and from private donors.

There are growing misconceptions about the role of nonprofits in the USA and this could fuel local, state and national movements against nonprofit organizations – not just arts organizations. Nonprofits of every kind need to make sure they are inviting the public and local and state government officials regularly to see their work and WHY their work matters to the entire community, not just their target client/audience. Most nonprofit organizations need to do a much better job using the Web to show accountability. In short: don’t think it can’t happen here.

Also see:

Growing misconceptions about the role of nonprofits in the USA

Leave a reply

In addition to sitting in on various local government meetings in the small town where I live in Oregon, I’ve been volunteering with a local unit of my state’s League of Women Voters, registering voters and sitting in on numerous candidate debates. My goal in these activities, which I’ve said before, is to compare what I’ve seen and experienced abroad working in international aid and development with what happens locally in my own community in the USA.

In doing these activities, I’ve noticed a disturbing trend that greatly affects nonprofits in terms of how the public, the private sector and government think about them, and how the public, the private sector and government feel about their funding and support for such. There is a growing chorus of elected officials and their supporters who say variations of the following:

There are enough resources in our region, via nonprofits and communities of faith – charity – for anyone who is homeless, who has an addiction or has mental issues to get the help they need. All someone needs to do to get help is to contact those organizations. 

There was a time in the USA when poverty was successfully and completely addressed by charity, usually through churches, not by government. Charity used to help all the people that were poor, and we should go back to that way of addressing poverty. 

People who have addiction issues, mental issues, homelessness issues or any issues associated with poverty just aren’t working hard enough. They lack morals or willpower and they could stop their drug use or their slide into mental illness simply by choosing to, by really trying.

These statements are not true.

The truth:

Programs that serve the homeless, whether they provide temporary housing or more permanent housing, or even just serve food, are utterly overwhelmed all across the USA and do not have enough resources to help everyone that needs it. Their waiting lists for housing assistance are months, even a few years. And providing food and temporary shelter does not prevent homelessness nor reduce the number of people who are homeless.

Before the creation of Social Security, most people in the USA supported themselves into old age by working. The 1930 census found 58 percent of men over 65 still in the workforce; in contrast, by 2002, the figure was 18 percent. Children and other relatives bore the major cost of supporting the aged. The Great Depression swept this world away: many of the elderly could no longer find work and their family could not afford to support them anymore. To get by in that time, the elderly took to panhandling, moving into dingy, unsafe almshouses or poorhouses, many run by charities or churches, or simply dying impoverished, which was the fate that befell 1 in every 2 older Americans in the years after the 1929 stock market crash.

Homelessness and poverty can be triggered by a range of issues in the USA, including divorce, medical bills/bankruptcy, income vs. housing affordability, decline in public/government assistance and mental health issues. Simply getting a different, better-paying job usually isn’t an option for someone facing homelessness and poverty.

Addiction is a chronic disease that creates a compulsion or even a physical need to use drugs. Drugs, including alcohol, affect the brain’s “reward circuit,” causing euphoria as well as flooding the brain with the chemical messenger dopamine. A properly functioning reward system doesn’t result in addiction. Whether a person is born with a disfunctional reward system or if the disfunction results entirely from drug use continues to be debated and researched; most agree that a combination of genetic, environmental and developmental factors influences risk for addiction, and the more risk factors a person has, the greater the chance that taking drugs can lead to addiction. The initial decision to take drugs is voluntary for most people and often relates to a medical issue rather than recreation, but repeated use of drugs, including alcohol, can lead to brain changes that interfere with an addicted person’s ability to resist intense urges to continue to use. As with most other chronic diseases, such as diabetes, asthma, or heart disease, treatment for drug addiction generally isn’t a cure. Addiction is treatable,  however, like other chronic diseases, such as diabetes, asthma, or heart disease, treatment for drug addiction requires professional intervention and guidance – a person can’t address the issues entirely on their own.

So, that’s the truth. But how did the misinformation happen, and how does this misinformation affect nonprofits now?

The misinformation happened not only because of the political agendas of the people saying such; it also has happened because nonprofits have done a poor job of explicitly, frequently talking about the issues they are addressing and educating the public about those issues.

If anyone believes any of these myths, then any sense of urgency regarding homelessness, addiction or poverty vanishes for potential donors, whether individuals or corporate giving programs or foundations. In addition to these myths creating the idea that nonprofits, communities of faith and “charity” can address all the needs of anyone at risk for harm in a community, these myths also create the idea that poverty happens primarily because of bad personal choices: if you’re homeless, then you just have been lazy and not bothered to contact a nonprofit that could help you. If you are addicted to opioids, it’s because you lack willpower.

I’ve been looking at the web sites of various nonprofit organizations serving my communities and various others, and, for the most part, all I see are pleas for support, for donations. What I don’t see:

  • a list, with citations, as to what causes a man, a woman or an entire family to be homeless, with profiles of clients (actual names can be changed and photos can be taken in such as way as to hide the identity of clients)
  • what activities precede a person becoming addicted to a substance, particularly opioids, with profiles of clients (again, actual names can be changed and photos can be taken in such as way as to hide the identity of clients)
  • a list of exactly what donations to a nonprofit pay for (emphasizing why paid staff is needed, rather than relying solely on volunteers helping whenever they might have some time)
  • information on the number of people the organization turns away, or puts on waiting lists, because it does not have the resources to help them, information on what activities or services the community needs but that the organization cannot provide because of a lack of resources, etc.

Nonprofits have got to be much more deliberate and direct in all of their communications about the issues they are addressing, why those issues exist, and what resources they lack. If tax cuts and tax breaks for corporations have resulted in less money for these critical services, nonprofits must say so. 

Our futures depend on it.

Sources:

Homelessness in Portland, Sept. 26, 2018, Travel Oregon

Roads before homes: Our Homeless Crisis, March 18, 2015, The Oregonian

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The 2016 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, November 2016

National Alliance to End Homelessness. Homelessness: A State of Emergency.Feb. 6, 2016

“A Great Calamity Has Come Upon Us”, Jan. 23, 2005, The New York Times

16 Ways People Survived Before Social Security — Could You Do It?, April 12, 2018, GoBankingRates

What causes homelessness, downloaded Nov. 2, 2018

Why Are People Homeless?, July 2009, National Coalition for the Homeless

Understanding Drug Use and Addiction, June 2018, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (and see more sources at the end of this NIH article)

Also see:

Great reasons to involve LOCAL volunteer firefighters

Leave a reply

It seems that, per the union for professional firefighters stance against volunteers in firefighting or any emergency response roles, a lot of fire stations are phasing out volunteers in these frontline roles. I’m seeing more and more stations across the USA scaling back the involvement and/or role of volunteers, allowing volunteers only in non-emergency-response roles, if at all: rolling hoses and cleaning equipment after a call, serving food and drinks to career firefighters at or after a call, staffing fundraising events, setting up for or cleaning up after events, etc. Those support roles to frontline responders are super important, and many volunteers are happy to fill them. But there are a lot of other people that want to volunteer in emergency response roles, and they are willing to go through extensive training, right alongside career firefighters, to do it. Unfortunately, there seem to be less and less opportunities for such people.

In addition, I’m also seeing fire stations that are still involving volunteers in first responder roles recruiting for volunteers only or primarily among people that want to become career firefighters and that see volunteer firefighting as a path to that. As with career firefighters, such volunteers are often from outside the town or city where they will serve, maybe far outside. They don’t stick around for long, because they are looking for a paid job: they leave the station after just a year or two for paid work elsewhere. That means such a fire station is forever recruiting and training volunteers to replace those that leave.

Career firefighters are not better than volunteer firefighters, volunteer firefighters are not better than career firefighters, and neither should be a threat to the other. Rather, these two kinds of first responders, working side-by-side, can make emergency management and risk prevention all the more powerful than just one kind or the other staffing a station.

Here are great reasons to recruit and involve local volunteer firefighters, even if a station is partially or primarily staffed by career firefighters, reasons that shouldn’t feel threatening to career firefighters:

  • Local volunteers live in the community or neighborhood, and that means they will often know things about residents, businesses, streets and locations that career firefighters that don’t live in the town or area may not know. This can be helpful, even vital, when responding to certain calls.
  • Local volunteers live in the community, and that means they can be more readily available to back up on-duty staff during an emergency than off-duty career firefighters that live outside of the town or city and have to travel several miles, even more than an hour, to staff a station when all the on-shift responders are on a call.
  • Local volunteers represent local community investment in the fire station and local support for career firefighters, many – and sometimes, most – of whom do not live in the community. Local volunteers demonstrate a kind of community endorsement as powerful as financial support.
  • Local volunteers can provide much-needed continuance and knowledge in a fire station with a high turnover of career firefighters.
  • Local volunteers aren’t career firefighters, and those that don’t have career firefighting aspirations can be a more neutral voice when making the case for a maintenance or increase in funding for a fire station or for a new strategy. They do not have a financial or career interest in funding or expansion, for instance, and that makes their voice incredibly powerful when advocating to elected officials and community members that may be voting on such a measure.
  • Local volunteers aren’t career firefighters, and those don’t have career firefighting aspirations can be a more neutral voice when addressing problems and complaints within or about a fire station, since they will not suffer financial consequences from speaking out about issues that need to be addressed. The key here is the phrase can be – does your station empower and encourage local volunteers to provide frank feedback about what they see and experience? Do you have a speak-up culture?
  • Local volunteers may end up serving on a citizen committee that advises government or even run for local office, and having a firefighter advocate in such a role can be greatly beneficial to all firefighting, fire prevention and emergency response in a community.

What are other great reasons to involve local volunteers in fire stations? What other scenarios, beyond fire stations, are good to have volunteers and career professionals working side-by-side? Please share in the comments.

And on a related note, here are four groups of questions every fire station should be asking itself:

  • If we involve career firefighters, how long are they staying, on average? Why are they leaving? Do we need to change how we recruit, manage or support career firefighters to reduce turnover? What are the costs associated with recruiting and training a new career firefighter?
  • If we involve volunteer firefighters in first responder roles, how long are they staying, on average? Why are volunteers leaving? Do we need to change how we recruit, manage or support volunteer firefighters to reduce turnover? What are the costs associated with recruiting and training a new volunteer firefighter?
  • How does the local community perceive the engagement of volunteer firefighters in first responder roles? If our station is scaling back or eliminating volunteers in these roles, how aware is the public of this change, and what are their feelings about it?
  • Does our web site have clear information about why we involve volunteers in emergency response? Are we limiting ourselves to recruiting only those people who have career aspirations and want to volunteer as a pathway to that career, or do we also have language that also encourages local people with no career firefighting aspirations to volunteer?

Also see:

Mission statements for your volunteer engagement
(Saying WHY your organization or department involves volunteers)

New online resources to help recruit volunteer firefighters

Volunteers needed, but are they wanted?

why you can’t find/keep volunteer firefighters

Making certain volunteers feel unwelcomed because of your language

pro vs. volunteer firefighters

Fire station turns away volunteers – & how it could be different

International Association of Fire Fighters is anti-volunteer