Driving More Investment to High-Performing Nonprofits

Just back from Washington and an inspiring meeting of the Alliance for Effective Social Investing where WINGS was presented as an example of a high-performing nonprofit.  Returned full of fresh hope for our future!

There were a slew of high-powered folks like Charity Navigator’s Ken Berger, GuideStar’s Bob Ottenhoff and Stanford professor Heather McLeod Grant, who wrote the book Forces for Good: The Six Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits.

These folks and many more in attendance are shape-shifters who are changing the way that donors decide which nonprofits to support. The Alliance was formed to drive more funds to high-performing organizations and share information/insights about meaningful metrics that better identify nonprofits that are effective and impactful.

Jeff Mason, who chairs the Alliance, says: “Throughout the sector, it is almost universally agreed that financial measures alone do not lead to wise giving decisions or good nonprofit performance.”

Alliance members GuideStar, Charity Navigator, BBB Wise Giving Alliance, GiveWell and Network for Good assist millions of donors each year in deciding which organizations to support; they represent the main rating vehicles by which individual donors compare nonprofits.

It’s extremely gratifying to be part of the ongoing conversation with these influential folks about the future of effective social investing, which continues online at the Tactical Philanthropy blog of Sean Stannard-Stockton, who’s been a columnist for the Chronicle of Philanthropy and the Financial Times.

Of course we were honored to be invited as one of the two high-performing nonprofit examples making presentations to this panel. So often at WINGS, we find ourselves explaining why meaningful metrics are worth every penny we pay for our state-of-the-art performance management system.

At the meeting there were thoughtful questions about whether it’s too onerous for small and lean nonprofits like ours to devote precious resources to such systematic measurement and monitoring of how well our targeted outcomes are being achieved. My answer is a resounding yes! Also at WINGS we see every day how these meaningful metrics pay off in improving our program.

As Sean Stannard-Stockton has said, overhead expense ratios should not be the most relevant evaluation metric. Charity Navigator’s Ken Berger put it another way at the Alliance’s April meeting: “Wise giving decisions rest on considering three components – financial strength, accountability and outcomes. We are happy to collaborate with our Alliance colleagues in striving to develop a charity evaluation system which encompasses all of these elements.”  And  financial strength goes beyond percent of management and fundraising expense.  At WINGS our Board requires a 6-month operating reserve – a key indicator of capacity and financial strength.

Hearing so many voices raised in support of driving more investment to high-performing nonprofits offers hope and encouragement to those of us laboring in the field to find sustainable support that will allow us to take our effective program model to scale for the kind of impact that truly transforms lives.

Visit WINGS to learn more about our own high-performing nonprofit