Bumpf

Applications: 7. Rejects: 5. Things to do before I go on holiday: 400. Sheets of paper under my control: 4,000,000,000,000

Naturally, dear fundraiser, you want everybody to know more about your work, and to develop an enthusiasm about it. And I am enthusiastic - whatever it is that you do. I wouldn't - couldn't - do this job unless I was.

But sadly, there are only so many hours in the day. Some charities send me stuff, and I always read it. Others send me things, and I just don't have the time. It goes in one of the drawers in the picture. Nineteen drawers, all fairly full with only 4-5 years worth of literature from organisations that we've given grants to. If you go "in the drawer", it's not necessarily a bad thing. I may know a lot about your organisation and be very confident in your work - only fishing out your magazine when you apply again, or send a report which will need to go to the Trustees.

Strangely, I find myself agreeing with the "don't send me glossy literature!" mob. I opposed them vehemently when I was in Marketing - naturally - but there's a measure of truth in what grumpier donors say, when they mumble into their cornflakes about not needing all this bumpf.

At the same time, it does mean that you don't get forgotten! And it is almost always good stuff. I'm not saying don't send it. But please think of the filing cabinets when you do. And the trees...

Set a communications objective, a strategy for every donor, every trust, every "account". If you get an inkling that your stuff might not be welcome, best to err on the side of caution. If I, running a medium-sized grantmaking operation full-time, find it all a bit overwhelming and have to devote some much time and space to filing it, imagine how a small family trust running out of someone's study would feel...

Keeping on track

Applications: 15. Grants approved by the Trustees: 13. Happy fundraisers: at least 13.

The last thing I would want to do is to suggest that grantmakers are anything but professional and consistent. But we all know firstly that grantmaking as a business practice hase evolved markedly in recent years, as has the voluntary sector as a whole. Secondly, charities are not like businesses that have a 'bottom line', and their objectives can be varied and unavoidably nebulous.

This makes it all the more important that there are guidelines, policies, and some sort of business or strategic plan - even if, for many Trusts, these are something of an innovation. My Trustees now get a range of "KPIs" covering the location, sector, beneficiairies of grants so as they can observe how closely they are cohering with (or diverging from) their own recently agreed policies and guidelines.

And yet, at a meeting today, we has a debate - A DEBATE - on those guidelines! I do not and cannot criticise. It derives from my earlier point, that charity is nebulous, wooly. One meeting may decree "we do not do x" but it will not stop a later meeting staying "why do we not do x?" Besides whatever objects by which Trusts are bound, these things are a matter of preference (even emotion); where for a business there are other drivers. However much one is driven by measurement and a desire to acheive impact, there will always be a human element. Let's call it "Trustee freedom". Not only would I not criticise this, I would positively encourage it - provide it does not run unfettered.

That may not help you, dear fundraiser. But it's where your job beings...

Trustees' meeting

The Trustees meet this morning.

This always makes me a bit nervous. They always seem to ask questions that I haven't considered. But I suppose that's their job, and a "good thing."

Back later - if I make it out alive...