The eight hundred pound elephant in the room at the recent 2009 Washington Nonprofit Conference was,

of course, the economy and how fundraising execs planned to cope with what could be a very tough time for charities.

To be sure, many faith-based charities and others serving human needs saw contributions rise. Perhaps media coverage of suffering caused by job cuts helped build a case for giving.

But many others are seeing a real downtown. Particularly among new donors to prospecting appeals.

Some fell into the trap of trying to compare today with the Great Depression, or the stagflation of the 70’s, or any one of a series

Volume 12: Issue 2 | April 2009

Also in this Issue

9 Branding Yourself in a Recessionary Economy 13 A New Marketing Paradigm 18 Increasing Mission Impact 23 Seniors Online: Useful Statistics and Old Myths 25 Green Marketing, Branding and the Bottom Line And MORE...

cont. on page 6

You Can See the FutureBy looking within Yourself

Tom Hurley, DMW Worldwide

3

ChAIrJo SullivanASPCA

MeMbersMary ArnoldChristian Children’s Fund

Vinay BhagatConvio

Mary BoguckiAmergent

Jennifer BielatEaster Seals

Brian CowartALSAC/St. Jude

Diana EstremeraMay Development Services

Jeanne HarrisSCA Direct

Tom HarrisonRuss Reid Company

Beth IsikoffMerkle

Karin KirchoffDefenders of Wildlife

Mimi LeClairMercy Home for Boys & Girls

Susan LothDisabled American Veterans

Steve MaggioDaVinci Direct

Kristin McCurryMINDset Direct

Matt PanosFood for the Hungry

Chris ParadyszParadyszMatera

Geoffrey PetersCDR Fundraising Group

Chris RagusaEstee Marketing Group, Inc.

David StraussNational Wildlife Federation

Atul TandonWorld Vision, U.S.

Kim WalkerMemorial Sloan-KetteringCancer Center

Kathy WardAmerican Institute for Cancer Research

Joan WheatleySpecial Olympics, Inc.

sTAFFChristopher QuinnExecutive Director

Helen LeeSenior Director

Alicia OsgoodMembership Manager

2009 LeadershipFollowing are the members of the DMA Nonprofit Federation’s Advisory Council:

News UpdateNonprofit Only News & Information

Delivered to Your Inbox Each ThursdayContact Alicia Osgood @ AOsgood@the-dma.org to sign-up!

3

It is my great pleasure to write to you as your new executive director. I’m very excited to have joined such a prestigious organization and look forward to working with each and every one of you.

I’ve worked on political campaigns, in a legislative office and a trade association. In these environments I dealt with corporate giving, political giving and individual membership, with each providing unique challenges. The one thing that has always worried the people involved in these organizations and campaigns was the unknown of what tomorrow could bring. Today’s challenges bring a level of uncertainty that no one has ever seen or even knows how deal with. While the unknown is never easy to accept and/or allow for promises, the one thing I can promise is that the Nonprofit Federation will be with you every step of the way. With such dedicated volunteers, I’m certain we’ll emerge stronger then ever.

Martin Luther King once said, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” There aren’t more truthful words to encompass our approach with these present challenges in mind.

I assure you, in this economic climate especially, our staff will be working twice as hard to make sure we develop top notch educational seminars, track legislation and provide timely information on critical issues, all while creating new and exciting ways for you to network.

We’re working around the clock to make sure that the Nonprofit Federation is the best investment you’ve ever made.

My door is always open and I encourage you to contact me with your thoughts, concerns or suggestions. This is YOUR organization and we work for you. Enjoy the April issue of our Journal and please let us know what you think.

Yours truly,

Christopher M. QuinnExecutive Director

Letter from the Executive Director Christopher M. Quinn, Executive Director

4 5

Call Mark Connors at 800-370-7500 x1920 today to learn more.

Amergent • 9 Centennial Drive • Peabody, MA 01960-7927 www.amergent.com/database.asp

Your organization is unlike any other. Your mission is unique.

You deserve a fundraising solution that sets you apart. You

deserve Portfolio™, Amergent’s CRM solution that lets you

tailor your program to meet your one-of-a-kind goals.

4 5

PosTAL rATes:The USPS has scheduled its annual rate in-crease for May 11, 2009. The annual increase is not supposed to exceed the Consumer Price Index per class of mail. John Greco, President and CEO of the DMA, recently sent a letter to Chairman Carolyn Gallagher of the USPS asking to defer these price adjustments for possibly one calendar year. Also effective in May are the USPS Move Update requirements. There will be a threshold of a 30% error rate on a mailing which will then trigger fines that could be quite severe, however, fines will not be implemented until January 4, 2010 to allow for customer feedback on the new requirements; this rate is expected to drop over time with requirements being reviewed every four months.

ChArITAbLe DeDuCTIon:In the Presidents budget, there is a proposal which would reduce the charitable deduction from 35% to 28% on individuals whose income is over $250,000 per year. During this time of economic uncertainty, we feel it is unwise to dissuade charitable giving in any way. A coali-tion letter signed by DMA Nonprofit Federation, ASAE, Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers, National Catholic Development Conference and the As-sociation of Fundraising Professionals has been sent to Capitol Hill urging legislators to oppose this proposal. Staff will be monitoring this is-

sue throughout the budget process.

Do noT MAIL:States continue to pursue legislation that would create Do Not Mail registries. This year so far, three states have introduced five bills and the Board of Supervisors in San Francisco is considering a non-binding resolution to ask the California legislature to create a Do Not Mail registry. The push for state Do Not Mail bills comes from a variety of environmental and anti-consumerism organizations that are concerned about what they see as an unnecessary activity, the sending of advertising mail. Many exempt nonprofit organizations (mainly 501c(3)’s), but the effects of a Do Not Mail law would be bad for postal volume and would hurt lists needed by nonprofit fundraisers. DMA has been on the front lines in opposing Do Not Mail in conjunc-tion with the Mail Moves America coalition. For more information on the coalition and how you can support its effort to keep the mail channel open for everyone, please visit www.mailmovesamerica.org.

FeDerAL TrADe CoMMIssIon reAuThorIzATIon LegIsLATIon:In 2008, then Chairman of the FTC, William Kovacic, testified seeking to expand FTC ju-risdiction over nonprofit organizations during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on legis-

PubLIC PoLICy sCoreCArD

6 7

lation to reauthorize the FTC. Although he stated the new jurisdiction would be to cover alleged anti-competitive practices of nonprofit organizations, the nonprofit community is concerned that the FTC could try to reach into areas such as restricting telemarketing or expanding the national do-not call reg-istry to include nonprofit fundraising calls. On March 2, 2009, Jon Leibow-itz became the new Chairman of the FTC. At this time no bill to reauthorize the FTC, such as the aforementioned legislation from the previous Congress, has been introduced, but Senate Com-merce Committee staff have indicated that such legislation is likely in the works. We will be monitoring this is-sue closely and keep you apprised of any updates.

on-LIne behAvIorAL MArkeTIng:For those organizations and agencies that use data from on-line marketing, this year will be crucial. The FTC has issued guidance on self-regulatory principles, and the DMA is working with others to create cross-industry self-regulatory guidelines, which, once issued, will be incorporated into DMA’s Guidelines for members. Online be-havioral advertising is the marketing of offers or charitable solicitations based on an Internet user’s preferences while online. Although these preferences are not personally identifiable, privacy and other interest groups are advocating for increased regulation of behavioral marketing.

For questions or concerns, please con-tact Chris Quinn at 202.861.2410 or via email cquinn@the-dma.org. Also, don’t forget to sign-up for our weekly News Update by emailing AOsgood@the-dma.org.

of recurring recessions. They sought solutions to today’s issues by comparing 2009 to the days when the world was a very differ-ent place.

I suggest you look at your own life for guidance. How are you weathering the economy? If you remain hopeful and confident of the future, shouldn’t you trans-late that same feeling into the fundraising decisions you make?

It doesn’t make sense to me to recommend cutting back on a fundraising program and still contribute to one’s 401k. The first almost certainly guarantees a smaller donations program in future years while the latter will guarantee a comfortable future when the economy and market recovers.

Sure, it’s difficult for a nonprofit to decide between program cuts versus the continued investment in fundraising. Especially donor acquisition. Many organizations that are used to paying $40 to acquire a donor now see the price rise to $60 or $70. But, so what? That donor who cost $70 to acquire will still contribute $250 or more over a 5-year life-time.

The cost of fundraising rises, but the program continues to generate net revenue. And most importantly, the contributions program will continue to fund the organization in the future.

So, if your organization’s finan-cial house is on fire, then take emergency action. Cut all fund-raising programs except perhaps renewals and sustainers and take the maximum amount of net revenue.

But if prospecting results are down and retention rates are within 5 or 10% or normal, suck it up and plan for the long run. If you’re still investing for your own personal future, then give that same advice to your execu-tive director and your board.

Tom Hurley is president of the not-for-profit division of DMW World-wide. DMW Worldwide is a full-service direct response advertising agency with offices in Wayne, PA, St. Louis, MO, and Plymouth, MA. You can reach Tom at 508.202.4007 or via e-mail at thurley@dmwdirect.com.

See The Future continued from cover

It doesn’t make sense to me

to recommend cutting back on a fundraising

program and still contribute to one’s 401k.

6 7

8 9

l ists

creative

crm

international

donors

new media

multichannelmarketing interac tive

new donoracquisit ion

August 12 – 13, 2009The Waldorf=Astoria • New York, NY

www.nonprofitfederation.org

2009 NeW York NoNprofiT CoNfereNCe

Navigating Through the present and into the future:

Fundraising 2.0

RegisteR Now aNd save Up to $100!

NY NPF full page.indd 1 4/9/09 12:11:18 PM

8 9

If you are in a job search right now, or are soon to start one, you don’t need me to tell you that jobs are tough to come by. The non-profit sector has certainly not been spared by the recession. More people are competing for fewer jobs, making it much more challenging to get noticed. Creating an effective personal “brand” is critical to making sure that you stand out from the crowd.

Some people focus all their attention on their resume and use it as their primary personal marketing tool. This is a big mistake. You should not rely on your resume as your sole communication tool. It’ll get the same discouraging ROI as your non-personalized fundraising acquisition appeals are getting right now. And responding to job postings can be almost as self-defeating because you’ll be communicating through a one-dimensional resume that may not be aligned with the organization’s needs. Do you really want someone to make a decision about your talents based on a piece of paper?

To really stand out, you must determine how to create alignment between the spe-cific needs of the employer and the value that you bring to the market, and find new ways to communicate that value. Here are some suggestions on how to do that:

Do a Deep Dive Learn as much as you can about the needs of the organizations you are interested in working for. Dig deep to better understand such things as:

• Theirculture.• Theirfundraisingstrengthsandweaknesses,includingskillsandcompetencies

they may be lacking.• Challengesthatareholdingthembackfromachievingtheirfundraisinggoals.• Initiativestheymayhavetabledforthepresent,butwillcomebacktowhen

conditions improve.

BranDing Yourself In A reCessIonAry eConoMy

Jeff Rothman, President of Management Recruiters of Moreland Hills, Inc.

10 11

• Futureinitiatives–andthetalents they will need to achieve them.

How do you find people to give you this vital information? In today’s socially networked world, it’s easier than ever. If you are not already doing it, make active use of online tools like Facebook and LinkedIn. Even if you are not in a job search, you don’t want to wait until you are to do this (see next page for some LinkedIn tips).

How should you approach some-one to help with your informa-tion-gathering? Explain that you are doing preliminary research, not calling them to ask about a job, and that you’d like their help–aretheyopentospendinga few minutes with you to share their industry insight?

analYze Your skills Concurrently with your research, commence a thorough review of your work history and begin to catalog your fundraising skills and the value you have created for past employers. Orient a piece of paper or computer screen in landscape mode and divide into three equal columns. Label the first column “Skills.” Review the work you’ve done over the last three-to-five years and list all of your skills in that column. Books like What Color Is Your Parachute are very good at guiding you through this exercise.

Label the next column “Ac-complishments.” Try to identify as many specific, measurable accomplishments that resulted from using each skill. Why mea-surable? Because anytime you can quantify the impact you’ve made, you are providing specific evidence of your skills. Since the majority of job seekers don’t bother to do this rigorously, you will stand out if you do. You may need to do some research here,

but it’s worth investing the time. Make sure you liberally sprinkle these accomplishments through-out your resume—they are much more compelling than any other general narrative you may pro-vide about your skills. Label the next column “Ben-efits.” For each one of those accomplishments, specify the value that each accomplish-ment created for your employer, constituents, or other stakehold-ers. In today’s world, employers are looking for people who make money or save money. The more value you can document, the better

ConneCt the DotsIdentify the employers you want to contact. Using the information you collected during your market analysis, figure out which of your skills are best aligned with the needs of your targeted employ-ers, then develop a plan for how you will address their needs. To enhance your credibility and support your claims, compile a library of case studies that pres-ent your accomplishments in a compelling way. Case stuDY tips:Each one should contain 3 sec-tions:

Challenge: a description of the situation you were in or project you were working on.Solution: an overview of the skills you utilized to solve the problem and the components of the solution.Results: the specific measur-able results you got as a result of your actions and the value that your organization realized from your efforts

Each vignette should not exceed onepage–ahalf-pageisevenbetter.

Be specific about your actions, not just those of your team. While it’s fine to highlight your actions as part of a team, you must remember to focus more on your individual results—your objective is to sell yourself, not your team.

Do you really want someone to make a decision

about your talents based on a piece

of paper?

10 11

CommuniCate DireCtlY Start setting up appointments. Introduce yourself with a concise statement of who you are, briefly share some of the insight you have gained about their organiza-tion, and inspire them with your ideas. Suggest that there might be value in setting up a time to talk about what you can do to enhance their effectiveness. Use your case studies and past ac-complishments to support your ideas.

Instead of presenting a general resume that may or may not be on target with a particular orga-nization’s needs, you’ll be offer-ing specific ideas and solutions that are aligned to real business needs. You’ll be able to have a discussion about the unique value you bring to the table in a more meaningful, relevant way. And most importantly, you’ll get potential employers to pay more attention to you than to other job seekers.

Jeff Rothman is President of Man-agement Recruiters of Moreland Hills, Inc., a nationally known executive search firm providing high-impact talent exclusively to companies in direct, database and e-marketing. The firm is a member of MRINetwork, an international leader and innovator in executive search for more than 40 years. He can be reached through LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com/in/jeffrothman), phone (216.591.0600), or email (jeff@MRIresults.com).

LinkedIn has become a valuable business networking tool—one that is invaluable on a job search. The beauty of LinkedIn is that it provides a quick and accurate way to identify people who work at the organizations you are interested in; it also gives you the ability to contact them directly or through an introduction.

Take the time to become acquainted with it and start building your network now! As it grows, the number of contacts in your network will expand exponentially because LinkedIn provides you access to everyone up to three levels away. For example, I have just over 230 first-level contacts in my network. If each of those people have a similar number of contacts, and each of those the same…..you can begin to get the idea. To give you an idea of the magnitude of this, I have 45,700 contacts within two levels from me, and almost 3.5 million within three levels.

Although your personal LinkedIn page is like a resume, you can make it more active and engaging with a few simple techniques; for example:

• YoucaninviteLinkedIncontactstorecommendyou,andthese references are posted on your LinkedIn page. Get as many recommendations as you can!

• LinkedInGroupsarecollectionsofpeoplewhosharecom-mon interests. For example, the DMA Nonprofit Federation, DMFA and DMAW all have LinkedIn groups. Join as many as are relevant to you—they are another way to expand the number of people in your network.

• Createa“vanity”LinkedInURL(mineiswww.linkedin.com/in/jeffrothman). Put it on your resume along with your other contact info and add it to your email signature.

• You’llfindthestatement:“ReferencesAvailableUponRe-quest” at the bottom of many resumes. If you’ve loaded up your LinkedIn page with recommendations, then replace that phrase with something like: “Selected references are avail-able on LinkedIn”, then provide your LinkedIn address.

Get started today on growing your LinkedIn network. Anybody reading this is invited to send me a LinkedIn invite. I’ll be happy to accept!

Tips

12 13

A monthly CFRE-approved learning program for professional fundraisers of all levels and from organizations of all missions, lead by experts from both the nonprofit and agency/consultancy sides of the fundraising fence.

FundRaising Success offers two free e-letters that extend the FS experience to readers’ in-boxes, providing strategic, practical information and advice in all areas of fundraising from direct mail to mobile and beyond.

The FS Advisor offers two full features, quick tips and other informational tidbits covering the full spectrum of fundraising issues and strategies, while FS Giving 2.0 focuses on fundraising technologies and incorporating them into a well-rounded fundraising program.

Discover the FundRaising Success Advantage!FundRaising Success covers a wide-range of fundraising topics that are critical to effective campaign management.

Join the 33,055* readers of FundRaising Success who engage in various fundraising activities.

Learn new fundraising ideas in every issue!

*Source: Readex On Target, April 2008, FundRaising Success

Fundraising StrAtegieS and expert ADvice

The Target Marketing Group

FundraisingSuccessMag.com

Looking to hire a qualified candidate?Looking for the perfect job?Look no further than the FundRaising Success Job Connection!jobs.fundraisingsuccessmag.com

FundRaising Success Job connection

GIVING 2.0Advisor

Upcoming topics include:�� Six-part series on Fundraising Basics, including: - Direct Mail - Major Gifts - Capital Campaigns - Planned Giving - E-fundraising - Channel Integration

�� Database Strategies�� Boards & Volunteers�� And More!

For information contact Kevin Landers at 973.956.8585 or klanders@napco.com

12 13

Unlike credit card companies, airlines or any number of other consumer-oriented businesses, nonprofits today still depend largely on employees to manually integrate all information about each constituent for marketing

purposes. The typical nonprofit operates with multiple systems from different vendors adopted on an ad hoc basis by various departments acting independently. Constituent data is scattered across the organization, residing passively in so many databases that it is nearly impossible for staff or volunteers to ever have a complete, near-real time view of any constituent who donates, visits an office, attends an event, or participates in any other way.

By contrast, a customer visiting her bank’s Web site expects 24/7/365 access to all important information pertaining to her relationship to the bank; she expects the phone service representative or drive up teller to have, at his fingertips, a complete profile and the information to recognize her as a valued client, answering all questions, and even proactively offering suggestions for additional, relevant products and/or services.

A new MArkeTIng PArADIgM: how AFForDAbLe, ACTIve AnD AgILe TeChnoLogy CAn ChAnge nonProFITsMatt McCabe, Vice President of Community, Orange Leap

14 15

An airline will automatically promote the busy traveling salesperson to the next level of “membership” in its frequent-flier program as soon as he has flown the last qualifying mile and, from that moment on, the airline automatically recognizes him as a higher level, valued customer across every system he encounters, whether it’s a self-service kiosk, the company’s Web site, or a ticketing agent

reached by phone or in person. Even the family calling to order a pizza will probably discover that the person answering the phone knows what their last order was.

Increasingly accustomed to active management of their relationships with institutions that manage their finances, travel plans, meals and more, today’s consumers also expect comparable experiences and value from their relationships with virtually all organizations -- including the nonprofits they support.

But it’s a “Catch 22” -- the proliferation of decentralized technology systems compromises the typical nonprofit’s ability to deliver simply because its databases don’t automatically integrate information about constituents for more effective marketing.

Important constituent data sits in numerous, proprietary applications and formats, and frequently is duplicated in several data repositories that can only be resolved manually by a staff member or volunteer when he or she has time to run reports and then compare and sort the results. This flawed process leaves the nonprofit highly vulnerable to sub-optimal constituent management because each organization’s business rules for this mission-critical function -- the standard operating procedures and routines that have evolved into the group’s best practices -- mostly exist in the institutional memories of individuals rather than in the infrastructure of the organization.

Many corporations use “enterprise resource planning” solutions to overcome similar business challenges. Nonprofit organizations simply have not had the resources to make use of similar solutions. Until recently, efforts to extend such opportunities to nonprofits through complex all-in-one vendor offerings have been prohibitively expensive, locked organizations and their data into proprietary systems and lengthy contracts, required extensive training of current and future staff and volunteers, forced organizations to alter their unique best practices, and were notoriously cumbersome to implement.

Today, though, innovative, affordable and easy-to-use technology is enabling charitable groups to optimize constituent management and automate internal operations with truly active solutions, unlocking the potential of every nonprofit to optimize constituent relationships and mission success.

The typical nonprofit operates with multiple systems from different vendors adopted on an ad hoc basis by various departments acting independently.

14 15

These brave and bold new solutions are founded on two simple concepts:

1. Your systems should actively recognize and classify constituents using the same language and rules as your organization. If you consider a major donor someone who gives $5,000 in a calendar year and group him or her as part of the “Founders Club,” you should not have to run queries, hack custom fields and create complex codes to translate this into your software. The software should automatically recognize them as such the moment they give that 3rd gift that puts them over $5,000 for the calendar year.

2. Your systems should share information in real-time. Simple XML messaging networks make this inexpensive and reliable. Gone are the days of complex, expensive integrations between databases. Anytime there is activity or a change in data, a system publishes a message to the network in XML (the same language and technology used in Real Simple Syndication (RSS) and that banking and financial trading systems use for sharing information, so it is obviously secure). All your other systems connected to the network can pull down and update the information relevant to that system.

The advent of open source technology, and years of use by corporations, have made these technologies inexpensive and proven they are more agile and reliable than the complex systems most vendors currently offer the nonprofit market.

We need to abandon the old model of passive data repositories that rely on manual queries to use data. You should rarely, if ever, need to request a report from your IT department or pay for it to be custom created by your vendor.

In the same manner, you should not have to run selects or queries to get a list of major donors. Your system should recognize them immediately. If Joe Donor calls you 5 minutes after he made a $500 online gift that pushed him into major donor territory, his record should come up on your screen labeled a ‘major donor’. The technology is available, affordable and effective. Organizations will

only benefit from adopting active and real-time solutions, especially considering the significant cost savings available.

Matt McCabe is vice president of community for Orange Leap, which provides an open, flexible suite of software and services for fundraising and constituent relationship management for today’s nonprofits. For more information, visit www.orangeleap.com.

We need to abandon the old model of passive data repositories that rely on manual queries to use data.

16 17

scenes from the 2009 washington nonprofit Conference

16 17

18 19

Philanthropy is thriving in the United States, helping nonprofit organizations to enrich the lives of countless people here and abroad. Generous Ameri-cans out-give their counterparts in the U.K., the next most generous givers,

by more than a two-to-one margin.1 We are doing much good. But could we be bet-ter at doing good?

It would be difficult to imagine someone making an investment in a business with-out a clear understanding of its expected return. Yet donors regularly make sig-nificant investments in nonprofit organizations without knowing what impact their investments are likely to make. In fact, while nonprofits have honed their mission statements to crisply define a compelling cause, few have been able to articulate how to measure progress toward fulfilling that mission. Philanthropists want their contributions to make a difference, but how can they be sure that their generosity is leading to desired results? Simply put, nonprofits must demonstrate and increase their “mission impact.”

The stakes are high. As the most successful and affluent Americans of the last quarter century enter retirement, the nonprofit sector has the potential to receive some $6 trillion from philanthropists over the next several decades.2 In the wake of the recent ethical failures of some well-known nonprofits, such giving is driving a movement toward greater accountability, which will increase the importance of dem-onstrating outcomes. In its 2005 report to the Senate Finance Committee, the Panel

InCreAsIng MIssIon IMPACTsM

Matt Breitenberg, President, Straight Path Management

18 19

on the Nonprofit Sector recom-mended that charitable organiza-tions establish procedures for measuring and evaluating their program accomplishments based on specific goals and objectives.3 Yet nonprofits for the most part fall short in focusing on mis-sion impact. For example, a recent study of higher education institutions found that perfor-mance indicators such as student satisfaction and employment rates were least emphasized, and recommended that they pursue “evidence-based rather than rhetoric-based” strategies.4

BENEFITS

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to measuring mission impact is that it can be very difficult to iden-tify indicators or measures that accurately show progress, and particularly ones that demon-strate the causal link between a nonprofit’s efforts and a desired result. Caring for the poor, improving health, and increas-ing appreciation for the arts are allnoblecauses–causeswhoseresults can be hard to measure.

But the upside makes the effort worthwhile. Among the benefits identified and realized by non-profits that have adopted mission impact measures are:

• Betterfocusfortheorganiza-tion’s work based on clearly specified desired outcomes

• Identificationofexistingpro-grams that need to be modified

or even eliminated• Identificationofnewprograms

and services that result in improved mission impact

• Improvedplanningandbud-geting based on clear goals and outcomes

•Moremotivatedstaffwhoobserve tangible progress and whose time is better focused on the most productive activi-ties

• Recruitmentofmorevolun-teers and partners who want to be involved with an organiza-tion that can demonstrate that it is making a difference

• Attractionofmorefinancialsupport from individual donors and foundations who seek accountability and proof of results

• Favorablepublicrecognition,competitive distinction and increased brand value

Tangible benefits are achievable. Implementing outcomes mea-sures helped Duke Children’s Hospital focus on strategies that improved results, including a 25% reduction in average length of stay, a 25% decrease in aver-age cost per case, a 9% increase in family satisfaction and an 8% improvement in whether families would recommend DCH to oth-ers.5

APPROACHES

The good news is that progress is being made in measuring mis-sion impact, leading to the ben-efits described above. A primary concept in the work of many nonprofits and foundations is to classify various types of mea-sures. For example, United Way has developed a framework that defines four types of measures:6

Inputs are resources a program uses to achieve program objec-tives. Examples are staff, vol-unteers, facilities, equipment, curricula and money.

Activities are what a program doeswithitsinputs–theser-vicesitprovides–tofulfillitsmission. Examples are sheltering homeless families, educating the public about signs of child abuse and providing adult mentors for youth.

Outputs are products of a program’s activities, such as the number of meals provided, classes taught, brochures distrib-

donors regularly make significant

investments in nonprofit

organizations without knowing what impact their investments are likely to make.

20 21

uted or visitors served.

Outcomes are benefits for participants during or after their involvement with a program. Outcomes may relate to knowl-edge, skills, attitudes, values, behavior, condition or status. In social services, examples of outcomes include greater knowl-edge of nutrition, improved read-ing skills and greater financial stability.

These groupings of measures are helpful in showing that outcomes are distinct from other typesofmeasures–andlessoften reported. Donors typically receive reports that indicate in-puts, activities and outputs. But reports that indicate outcomes are less common and tend to be anecdotal.

The Nature Conservancy recog-nized a need for better measures and, in so doing, developed criteria for selecting measures: simple, easily collected, easily communicated, and applicable across the organization.7 Using these criteria, the Conservancy created a “Family of Measures Model”:

Impact measures assess mis-sion success

Activity measures focus on achieving goals and implement-ing strategies

Capacity measures gauge the degree to which the organization

mobilized the resources neces-sary to fulfill its mission

The Nature Conservancy’s im-proved strategic focus and initia-tives have led to a doubling of estate gifts over the last six years to over $70 million8.

The Getty Leadership Institute has worked to help arts organiza-

tions measure improvement in art appreciation, an important part of their mission. Their indi-cators of progress rely on surveys of museum visitors, measuring the percentage of respondents who:• hadagreaterappreciation

of specific artworks or move-ments,

• demonstratedanimprovedunderstanding of why some artworks are more valuable than others, and

• expressedadesiretoreturnto the museum in the not-too-distant future9.

In turn, the indicators of prog-ress have helped arts leaders shape their exhibits, programs and performances to strengthen art appreciation. OBSTACLES

Without question there are many obstacles to identifying and im-plementing mission impact mea-sures. The Robert Wood John-son Foundation, which works on improving the health and health care of Americans, has seen success after implementing mission-related policies in its work with grantees. RWJF has identified five common obstacles and responses to implementing outcomes measurement:

Some of the important work has no easily identifiable quantitative measures. Response: create proxies re-lated to the goal that the work/service intends to change.

The board may be uncomfortable with imperfect measures. Response: align the goals of the staff and board by gaining input from the board early in the process, and commit to refine measures over time.

It is difficult to justify the spending of resources that could otherwise be allocated to programs. Response: assessment will drive learning and improve-ment, setting the stage for more

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has

seen success after implementing

mission-related policies in

its work with grantees.

20 21

efficient use of resources in the future.

Nonprofits having broad mission statements cannot single out their work’s unique impact. Response: focusing on people served helps establish the causal link.

Specific measures may limit a nonprofit’s ability to act opportunistically. Response: clear goals and bet-ter understanding of past suc-cesses (and failures) will help the nonprofit to choose the best combination of opportunities.10

CONCLUSION

A recent United Way survey found that only 51% of Ameri-cans trust nonprofits to do what they say they’re going to do with donations they receive.11 The Brookings Institution found that only 11% of Americans believe that charitable organizations do a very good job of spending money wisely.12 Without mission impact measures, it is difficult to envision how these statistics will change.

A lack of confidence results in lower giving to worthy nonprofits. And without the benefits of using good mission impact measures, many nonprofits will continue to under-perform in the effec-tiveness of their programs and services. Should resources and performance lag, the real tragedy

will be for those people whose health did not improve, whose knowledge and skills did not grow, and whose quality of life did not increase.

There is a solution. Our great nonprofit institutions have an opportunity to accomplish even more. Improving the way non-profits measure fulfillment of the mission will lead to increased mission impact. It is time for

philanthropists and nonprofit leaders to commit to making this happen.

Contact Matt Breitenberg at 757.412.4200 or Matt@Mission-Impact.com

(Endnotes)1 Charities Aid Foundation. “Inter-

national Comparisons of Charita-ble Giving, November 2006.” CAF Briefing Paper. (2006): 2.

2 Havens, John J. and Paul G. Schervishi. “Millionaires and the Millennium: New Estimates of the Forthcoming Wealth Transfer and

the Prospects for a Golden Age of Philanthropy.” Social Welfare Research Institute. Boston College, Boston, MA. 19 Oct. 1999: 3.

3 Urban Institute. “Building a Common Outcome Framework to Measure Nonprofit Performance,” December 2006.

4 Eduventures. “Competing in On-line Higher Education.” (2006): 43.

5 Kaplan, Robert S. “Strategic Performance Measurement and Management in Nonprofit Organi-zations.” Nonprofit Management and Leadership 11.3 (2001): 365.

6 United Way Outcome Measure-ment Resource Network, “Mea-suring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach.” 27 Nov. 2007 <http://www.unitedway.org/Outcomes/Resources/MPO/glos-sary.cfm>.

7 Sawhill, John C. and David Williamson. “Mission Impossible? Measuring Success in Nonprofit Organizations.” Nonprofit Man-agement & Leadership 11.3 (2001): 375.

8 Hall, Holly. “Much-Anticipated Transfer of Wealth Has Yet to Ma-terialize, Nonprofit Experts Say.” The Chronicle of Philanthropy 18.12 (2006).

9 Anderson, Maxwell L. “Metrics of Success in Art Museums.” The Compleat Reader.” Getty Leader-ship Institute (2004): 17.

10 Giudice, Phil and Kevin Bolduc. “Assessing Performance at the Robert Wood Johnson Founda-tion.” The Center for Effective Philanthropy Case Study Series, (2004): 5.

11 Gallagher, Brian. “Answering the Wake-Up Call: Change is Neces-sary for America’s Nonprofits.” 14 Nov. 2007 <www.unitedway.org/About/accountability_non.cfm>.

12 ibid.

only 51% of Americans trust nonprofits to do what they say

they’re going to do with donations

they receive

22 23

9 Centennial Drive, Peabody, MA 01960-7927 • www.amergent.com

• Strategic Direct Marketing• Flexible Database Management

• Insightful Analytics• Award-Winning Creative

If you are looking for new fundraising solutions, please call Jack Doyle at 1-800-370-7500.

Friends for LifeA Partnership That Creates Lasting Relationships

Our experts in direct response fundraising strategy and database analysis help you turn prospects into donors and turn donors into Friends for Life.

22 23

Sure, everyone wants a Facebook Strategy. But if you work for a nonprofit that relies heavily on direct mail contributions, then you or a colleague have prob-ably wondered whether the existing donor database –whoseaverageageisprobablymid-60’sorolder–will (a) come to the website and (b) find it useful.

So here are some useful statistics that can help you make the case.

10% of online 55-64 year olds, and 7% of on-line adults 65 and older, have a profile on one or more social networking sites like MySpace or Facebook (Pew Internet, January 2009)

While Twitter and other mobile networking use is growing among older Americans, only 4% of those 55-64 and only 2% of those 65+ are tweeting. (Pew Internet, February 2009)

65% of those 50-64 years old, and 32% of those 65+ use the internet. Only 22% of the 65+ crowd was online in 2004, and only 15% in 2000.(Pew Internet, Feb-March 2007)

Of those 65 years and older, 34% of men and only 21% of women are online. This is the only

age group where men outpace women online.(Pew Internet, 2005)

There are 17 million internet users aged 62+. They spend an average of 44 minutes per day online. Those online are better educated, have higher in-comes, and are much more likely to be married and working. They also spend 70% more each month than those offline. Of those online, 59% use search, 43% gather news online, 38% research health information, and 23% pay bills online. (Focalyst, April 2008)

Half of Americans between the ages of 50 and 64, and 19% of those 65 and older, have broadband at home. (Pew Internet, April 2008)

If you work for a health organization, Pew Internet has a number of studies you need to read about what they call the e-patient.

What do all these statistics mean? • Whileseniorsdon’tusetheinternetasmuchas

you or I, they use it more than your boss probably thinks they do.

• Ifyouthinkthatbabyboomers,66%ofwhomareonline now, are going to give up their internet as they turn 65, think again.

SENIORS ONLINE: useFuL sTATIsTICs AnD oLD MyThsRick Christ, VP of Online Fundraising with NPAdvisors.com

24 25

There are three great demographic myths that many nonprofits use to justify their under-investment in internet marketing:

1. Older Americans, the primary donor group of most charities, are not using the internet regu-larly;

2. Younger people, who use the internet all the time, are lousy prospects for fundraising;

3. Younger people today, when they get older, will somehow become direct mail responsive.

NPA has been regularly reporting on the fallacy of the first statement for years. Remember, today’s seniors were teenagers when Lindberg flew across the Atlantic. As young adults, they invented the jet engine. Later, they created the atomic bomb. After they defeated Hitler and Tojo, they invented tele-vision. Before they retired, they put a man on the moon, and returned him safely to earth. OK, maybe they regret inventing television, but the point is, they aren’t technophobes! And while they didn’t in-vent the internet (didn’t Al Gore do that?) they use it to manage their portfolios, email their grandkids,

and buy the cheapest airline tickets to Florida. They’re waiting to hear from you online… or from your competitors.

As for the second myth, you probably aren’t reach-ing young people, and if you are, you probably aren’t speaking to them in language they under-stand.Youneeda“bilingual”program–“normal”and “hip.”

The third myth surely must be obvious without explanation.

If you’ve come across other reliable sources of useful statistics about seniors online, please share them with us and we’ll update this resource: inquiries@npadvisors.com ©2009 NPAdvisors.com, LLC www.npadvisors.com

Rick Christ is VP of Online Fundraising with NPAdvi-sors.com, now part of Amergent. He has helped nonprofits succeed online since 1999 with internet strategic plan-ning and online campaign management. Reach him at Rick@NPAdvisors.com

The Top 45 Strategies and Tactics You Must Implement to Survive and Thrive in Today’s Tough EconomyA Workshop for the Nonprofit Community

May 11, 2009 | DMA Seminar Center | New York, NYThis timely workshop will give you high impact strategies and tactics to implement during these challenging economic times — with intensive instruction on HOW to do it.

Nonprofit Leadership Summit

August 11, 2009 | The Waldorf=Astoria | New York, NYThe Nonprofit Leadership Summit will bring together nonprofit Presidents, CEO’s, marketing leaders, and senior executives from the direct marking community to tackle the tough issues facing our industry today.

NY Nonprofit Conference

Navigating Through the Present and into the Future: Fundraising 2.0August 12 – 13, 2009 | The Waldorf=Astoria | New York, NY Learn to navigate through this period of economic uncertainty. You’ll hear the latest fundraising and nonprofit marketing strategies and techniques to take you to the next level.

— you’ll learn the very latest fundraising and nonprofit marketing techniques and strategies from leading experts and thought leaders.

DoN’T MISS ThESE uPCoMINg EvENTS

For more information, visit www.nonprofitfederation.org. Please mention Key code NPF

when registering.

NY NPF half page.indd 1 4/3/09 1:01:43 PM

24 25

The environmental movement within the United States is a fascinating mix of influence,missions,purposes,objectivesandtactics–andin2009,theconceptof“sustainability”ischanginghowmanybrandsgotomarketandhowtheyoperate–to positive effect.

Going green is not simply a strategy of environmental organizations, conserva-tion groups and eco-marketers whose association with green causes makes “green marketing” some sort of moral imperative. A host of businesses and organizations, among them both Fortune 500s and smaller charities, have embraced environmen-talism and social responsibility as part of their culture: part-strategy for gaining operating efficiency, part-strategy for lessening waste, some of it avoiding costs and some of it enabling innovation and continuous improvement.

Thesustainabilityjourneyincorporatespeople,processandtechnology–andtheteamwork involved often pays dividends: employees enjoy working for organizations that demonstrate such commitment, consumers prefer brands seen to be environ-mentally sensitive and socially responsible, and even investors appear to reward companies seen to be on the right side of the corporate responsibility ledger. An A.T. Kearney study earlier this year found that:

“Indeed, in 16 of the 18 industries examined, companies recognized as sustain-

green MArkeTIng, brAnDIng AnD The boTToM LIneBy Chet Dalzell

26 27

ability-focused outperformed their industry peers over both a three- and six-month period [in their stock market valuations], and were well protected from value erosion. Over three months, the performance differential across the 99 companies in this analysis worked out to 10 percent; over six months, the differential was 15%.” (AT Kearney, “Green Winners,” Febru-ary 2009, 1)

The Recession As A MoTIvATor For ‘green’ busIness PrACTICes

The economy may at first give pause: how can we pursue sustainability for people and planet when we struggle for profit and finance? (See “Fund-raising & the ‘Triple Bottom Line,’” Journal of the Nonprofit Federation, January 2009, 20-24.) The perspective of many who ask this question assumes environmental pursuits always cost money, without a payback. This simply is not the case. Indeed, the opposite may be true. The teetering economy maybethemotivatorforgreengoals–avoidingwaste, reusing and recycling, conserving energy, demonstratingefficiencywithlimitedfunds–sincethese outcomes provide immediate boosts to bottom lines, and more funds for any non-profit’s primary purpose.

In the world of direct marketing, the Direct Market-ing Association (U.S.) has been a forward-thinking planner for “green” strategies that respect the financial bottom line: the DMA’s Green 15 (www.the-dma.org/Green15) and online Environmental Planner (www.the-dma.org/envgen) offer an array of principles and practices that organizations can implement to achieve gains that serve “triple bot-tom lines.”

Since my career perspective is public relations, I am always looking for examples of brands that go onestepfurther–howtheychoosetocommuni-

cate (or not) their various environmental and social responsibility commitments, activities and results. How public each organization chooses to be in “communicating green” appears to be a function of:

1. whether or not environmental strategies have been embraced as a corporate commitment at the top of the organization;

2. whether or not the organization sees this com-mitment as a long-term strategy and one of continuous improvement;

3. whether or not there is a culture for transpar-ency, that is a willingness for the corporation to reachouttoothers–suppliers,partners,cus-tomers, associations, even non-governmental organizations–tohelpwithproblem-solvingand innovation related to environmental perfor-mance; and

4. a recognition that being seen as “green” carries a responsibility for ongoing action, measure-ment, and some form of reporting (to manage-ment, to partners, to employees and/or to donors/customers) to show substance behind green labels and claims, and in some cases, to engage participation and support.

This threshold of expectation may explain why

The perspective of many ... assumes environmental pursuits always cost money, without a payback. This simply is not the case.

26 27

some businesses and organizations quietly pursue “green”activity–theydon’twish(yet)tobeheldto public scrutiny when they are uncertain them-selves as to their ability to “measure up” to other brands already seen to be environmental leaders and innovators in their peer group. Alternatively, organizations may be uncertain if they will be able to achieve positive outcomes for their green busi-nessefforts–sotheyarereluctanttodrawattentionto them. Another impediment for publicizing is the danger of “green washing,” putting an environmen-tal claim on a “business as usual” activity. In each of these cases, however, there are ways to manage external communications effectively.

DiRecT MaRkeTing anD Being gReen: why CoMMunICATIng As InDIvIDuAL orgAnIzATIons Is A gooD IDeA

Directmarketing–alreadyinthelineoffireofsomevocalcritics–hasitsownsetofcommunica-tions considerations, because often environmental criticismsofdirectmarketing–anddirectmailinparticular–arebasedonemotionratherthanprag-matism, and grandstanding rather than science. As a result, direct marketers face somewhat of a co-nundrum about communications tone and direction when they talk about “being green”: Is it better to counter current public perceptions with information and facts (that is, challenge perceptions with real-ity), or is it better to “go with the flow” and accept critics’ arguments, some of whom are very well funded, and speak to their stated concerns (that is, accept the notion that “perception is reality”)? Certainly, the latter (education and persuasion) is more expensive than the former (go with the flow) –unless,thatis,yourcriticswanttoputyououtofbusiness! There are certainly enough “anti-junk mail” efforts out there who seek to restrict mail solicitations and marketing in general.

But just what is real about direct marketing’s environmental impact? A recent study conducted for the U.S. Postal Service, “A Life Cycle Inventory Analysis of U.S. Mail” (SLS Consulting, Fall 2008) sought to document the energy use and green-house gases associated with all classes of mail. In part, this study concluded that at the average U.S. household level, the energy and carbon dioxide

emissions associated with the production, delivery and disposition of mail received by that household are comparable roughly to those energy and emis-sions that result from operating any one of several common home appliances over the same period of time.

Further, a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report (for 2007) shows that Standard Mail makes up just 2.3% of the municipal waste stream, and 2.1%ofitemsdiscarded–bothunchangedsince2000. Also, the same study shows that the recy-cling collection rate for discarded mail has grown bynearly800%since1990–today,morethan40% of discarded mail is recovered for recycling. Simply said, the critics of direct mail in particular grossly overstate its environmental impacts.

All the same, greening the direct marketing process –andtalkingaboutit–requiressomerealwork,real business decisions, and real measurement to attain real credibility, and “win” over the public, in spite of vocal critics. Marketers need to educate

Standard Mail makes up just 2.3% of the municipal waste stream, and 2.1% of items discarded

28 29

the public about prior-to-unseen environmental benefits of the direct [mail and] marketing pro-cess, now that we know science is on our side, and that we have numerous ways to ensure the “green attributes” of the supply chain of how charities go to market. These environmental benefits only are credible, however, if they are measured and reported in a manner that equates to recognized

“green” metrics (avoidance or reduction of carbon emissions, solid waste or energy use, for example) with plans in place for continuous improvement. Anything less may well smack of “green washing.”

sTanDing BehinD enviRonMenTal coMMiTMenT: DMA hAs gone PubLIC AnD seT An InDusTry goAL

DMA again leads by example. DMA’s Board of Di-rectors has issued a publicly stated goal to reduce carbon emissions among direct marketers through

widespread adoption of list hygiene and data man-agementprinciples–therearefiveofthem–intheDMA “Green 15,” focusing primarily on how these principles help create more targeted advertising, specifically direct mail. This carbon reduction goal is the first of its kind in the entirety of the U.S. advertising/marketing field:

“Today [July 16, 2008], the DMA Board of Directors announced its first public and measurable ‘green’ goal toward achieving continuous environmental improvement in the US direct marketing community. This new, five-year goal seeks to improve the relevance, deliverability, and carbon footprint of direct mail through widespread marketer adoption of key list hygiene practices. Each practice is part of the DMA Board’s “Green 15” envi-ronmental performance resolution, which was passed in 2007.

“If DMA members in the United States implement these list hygiene practices as expected, then DMA anticipates three tangible, positive outcomes.

• First,consumernamesandaddressesregisteredon DMAChoice.org, the DMA’s free Mail Prefer-ence Service (MPS), would be removed from na-tional mailing lists more quickly and effectively.

• Second,thevolumeofundeliverableadvertisingmail (UAA Standard Mail) would fall by 25 per-cent, based on extrapolations from the US Postal Service’s (USPS) most recent UAA data.

• Third,theamountofcarbondioxideequivalentsassociated with the production and delivery of direct mail in the US would be reduced by nearly 1 million tons, from 2009 to 2013, col-lectively.”

In my mind, this stated, public goal is a power-ful message that direct marketers, collectively, are serious about environmental performance and environmental improvement. It also challenges individual marketers within the direct marketing discipline to perform. To meet this goal, DMA will

greening the direct marketing process requires some real work, real business decisions, and real measurement to attain real credibility, and “win” over the public, in spite of vocal critics.

28 29

needallitsmembers–bothfor-profitandnonprofit–toputinplaceplansforvariouslisthygieneanddata management practices, each of them spelled out clearly in the DMA Green 15.

Thus, member marketers need to make sure they are implementing these Green 15 practices, and measuring such engagements, while member sup-pliers need to make sure their clients are doing the same. In turn, there will be a reward for such documented activity (which the DMA confidentially can collect, aggregate and report publicly): effec-

tive action will generate greater marketing efficien-cies,mitigateclimatechange,and–importantly–positiontheindustrypubliclyasbeingabsolutelyserious about environmental performance. All these outcomes also may prevent misguided and misinformedpublicpolicyandregulation–donotmailregistries–frombecominglaw.

DMA already is mandating that all mail marketers post “preference” notices on their outbound solici-tations, with enforcement beginning October 2009. (No matter what the medium, marketers should always offer “do not rent” and “do not contact me” options, providing such notice to consumer and

business prospects and customers.)

Does this notice requirement mean any given orga-nization should position its publicly stated privacy and opt-out policies in the context of environmental performance? No, but each organization can feel free to test it. There is no demand from DMA that its members’ preference centers for customers and prospects be adorned in “green” messaging; only that such notices are easy to read, easy to find and easytoimplement–and,wheredirectmailisem-ployed, placed somewhere within the mail solicita-tions sent to prospects and customers (donors).

Non-profits also might consider providing donors an invitation to alert organizations for mailing address errors and any duplicate mailings. Who can afford to mail brand-killing duplicate and response-killing bad addresses?

BeyonD DaTa ManageMenT: whICh ‘green’ AreAs MIghT A non-ProFIT TALk AbouT PubLICLy?

List and hygiene is one area for communication, most certainly, but what about “going public” with greenery in other areas of the direct marketing process: energy and paper procurement, packag-ing, partnerships, recycling collection, data centers, printing, e-marketing, eco-labeling? Or perhaps other areas of an organization’s mission: partner-ships undertaken, community-based programs, workplace practices?

Such communications certainly constitute a busi-nessdecision–butperhapsitisoneworthtestingandimplementing.Consumers,donors–evenemployees–wanttoaffiliatewithenvironmentallyand socially responsible businesses and organiza-tions. So, first walk the walk, and then talk about

DMA already is mandating that all mail marketers post “preference” notices on their outbound solicitations, with enforcement beginning October 2009.

30 31

it. Just like the AT Kearney study, there are divi-dends–eveninarecession–whenbrandschooseto take a public stance on their own environmental problem-solving:

• Inarecession,consumersaremorelikelytostayloyaltocompaniesthatsupportagoodcause–

and 88 percent of consumers have identified the environment among their top social concerns (Edelman, November 2008);

• 57percentofconsumershavemadewhattheyconsider a green purchase in the past six months (Yahoo!, November 2008);

• Companieswhichconductsustainabilitycam-paigns and report their results enjoy higher gross profit margins than those which do not [in the consumer packaged goods business] (Gro-cery Manufacturers Association / Pricewater-houseCoopers, June 2008).

While there is no study (to which I’m aware) that addresses specifically donor attitudes toward orga-nizations which appear, behave and communicate being green, non-profits might consider these ques-tions:

1. Does my organization seek to be seen as a responsiblefundraisingorganization–amongdonors, among prospects, among peers, within

my community?2. Does my organization seek to be seen as efficient

in its use of resources (as a reflection of how it spends donor dollars)?

3. Does my organization seek to respect donor pref-erences about preferred channels of communica-tion?

4. Does my organization seek to be seen as a stew-ardofsustainability–inhowitconductsitsop-erations, how it communicates with prospective and existing donors, how it procures its materials and services from suppliers, and how it fulfills its mission?

Mostwouldansweraresounding“yes!”–notonlyamong those organizations with energy, environ-mental or conservation concerns (again, the moral imperative), but among all organizations.

ResouRces To heLP non-ProFITs ConsIDer TheIr ‘green’ rePorTIng To Donors

Beyond the Green 15 and the DMA Environmental Planner, there are numerous sources to help non-profit organizations, among all marketers, manage their communications with donors about how a non-profit uses resources wisely and sustainably. Currently, the Federal Trade Commission is updat-ing its “Green Guides” (www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/guides980427.htm) which offers guidance on environmentally focused advertising and marketing claims. A newly revised version is expected this year.

Further, the DMA Environmental Resource for Direct Marketers, Third Edition has two chapters devoted to “Labeling” (Chapter 5) and “Com-munications and Partnerships” (Chapter 8) (www.the-dma.org/environmentguide/environbook_2.pdf). These two chapters are “must read” documents for marketing communication with an environmental

88 percent of consumers have identified the environment among their top social concerns

30 31

focus. [See Sidebar: “Environmental Action Points: Marketing Communications,” which is page 80 of the DMA Environmental Re-source.]

The DMA also offers an Environmentally Response Certificate program to teach environmental practices for marketing professionals (www.dmaresponsibility.org/Environment/ERM_coursedescription) and is scheduled to publish a DMA Eco-Re-source Vendor Directory for Marketers later in 2009. The DMA also has resources for helping non-profits (and all marketers) craft data management notices for their mailings (www.DMAchoice.org) as well as guidance on paper procurement (DMA Paper Pledge) and its Recycle Please initiative for catalogs and direct mail (www.recycleplease.org).

In addition, the U.S. Postal Service each year publishes a “green issue” of its De-liver magazine (www.delivermagazine.com/greenroom), and has a portion of its Web site devoted to being an “environmailist” among other environmental practices (www.usps.com/green) as well as a smarter mailer (www.usps.com/ncsc/addressinfo/zip4.htm).

Sustainability is right for a recession, right forfundraising,rightforabrand–andrightfor donors.

The author, a public relations professional in the direct marketing field, is the current chairperson of the Marketing Communications & Public Outreach Strategy Working Group of the DMA Board-level Committee on the Environment and Social Responsibility. Communicating sustain-ability will be explored in greater detail during a June 16 session at Direct Marketing Conference New York 2009 as part of DMA’s Environmen-tally Responsible Marketing Certificate Program, featuring Dalzell and Cat Moriarty of the U.S. Postal Service who contributed content toward this article. Chet can be reached at chet.dalzell@yahoo.com.

enviRonMenTal acTion PoinTs — MArkeTIng CoMMunICATIons

Customers perceive added value in their relationship with a company when given information about its environmental initiatives:

•Present accurate and authorized environmental claims. Research labeling terminology and usage. Verify proper use of all recycling/recyclable logos, terms, emblems and fact-based claims by consulting numerous resources before placing labels on products or communi-cations. These resources include the Federal Trade Com-mission (FTC), state-by-state regulations, legal counsel, vendor data, etc.

• Publicize policies. Your company’s environmental mis-sion is best understood when it is shared with customers, prospects, clients and vendors. Publicize your environ-mental policies and initiatives. Publicize name suppres-sion options periodically to inform customers, and display the notice visibly and clearly. Solicit address corrections from customers.

• Educate customers. Advise them about what is or is not recyclable and, if available, where to recycle materials.

• Encourage customers to reuse, return or recycle materials where appropriate. Recyclability pertains to what can be collected in most localities. Encourage customers to get local recycling programs underway. Pro-vide information on recycling whenever possible — on a package insert, for instance. Include information in your catalogs about your recycling and environmental efforts, and a national recycling hotline number where appropri-ate. Consider providing a toll-free number for customer suggestions. Use The DMA’s “RecyclePlease.org” logo to refer them to recycling resources in their local communi-ties.

• Research other companies’ efforts. Review case studies and continue to learn about environmental best practices throughout the industry.

• Explore partnerships. Seek avenues for partnering with environmental groups, other companies or local citizen groups to help “green” your marketing efforts, and make positive environmental contributions to your local com-munity. -- Excerpt from DMA Environmental Resource for Direct Market-ers, Third Edition

The Power of DirectRelevance. Responsibility. Results.

PRESRT STDU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPERMIT NO. 47 WALDORF, MD

1615 L Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20036