Post by account_disabled on Feb 25, 2024 2:31:00 GMT -5
Access to resources is, by far, the main challenge to the survival of third sector entities. Fundraising methods are still partnerships with public bodies and private companies, but achieving success through public notices is not so easy. In fact, it is a privilege for few.
Therefore, entities tend to invest in people who help in this endeavor. But a recent study shows that there is a financial race separating civil society organizations (CSOs) that obtain resources and those that fall along the way.
What defines fundraising success?
The report prepared between March and July last year through a partnership between the Pipa Initiative and Phomenta, two organizations focused on the development of peripheral CSOs, shows that the size of the entities influences the fundraising power.
In percentages, this means that more than 80% of medium and large entities managed to raise funds via public notices in the two years prior to the survey, while 59% of CSOs classified as “nano” were not successful through public notices.
Another point that draws attention is that both the largest B2B Email List and smaller third sector organizations have an average of two to four people committed to fundraising. But why, then, are the largest organizations performing better? In the researchers' view, the difference lies in the investment.
Smaller entities make a living from fundraising volunteers, while large organizations pay these people. Automatically, your ability to reach resources increases.
The legal factor
The legal formalization of the third sector entity also contributes substantially to improving the entity's recruitment process.
The joint research by Pipa and Phomenta also points out that, among the entities that were unable to obtain resources via public notice, 58.33% were collectives or non-formalized social projects.
Among the entities that managed to raise resources by winning public notices, 63.87% were legally formalized. The study is not exhaustive in relation to this, but the idea that formalization generates more credibility with financiers is plausible.
In short, these scenarios make up some of the bases present in the conclusive summary of the report, and serve to indicate the paths along which third sector entities should take themselves to achieve successful fundraising.
But it is noticeable how all the statistics are intertwined. In other words, it is a process that involves formalization and investments in recruitment teams via notices, the success of which, in turn, tends to transform the size of the organization. These are not isolated strategies, distant from each other. And this is good news, because it highlights a supposedly easier route to overcome.
Conclusion
Bringing in a body of people prepared to leverage the organization as a business tends to help in the way it positions itself in the market, even if with purposes different from the capitalist scenario. Serving the poorest classes of society requires financial resources, and it is essential that there is a break in the immaculate view that society still has on philanthropic entities.
Philanthropy, in fact, gained a certain pejorative connection with the vow of poverty. CSOs do not have a moral duty to be poor, no matter how popular this view may be. The research does not address this, but it is clear that this controversial view of the third sector helps to make fundraising even more difficult.
Therefore, entities tend to invest in people who help in this endeavor. But a recent study shows that there is a financial race separating civil society organizations (CSOs) that obtain resources and those that fall along the way.
What defines fundraising success?
The report prepared between March and July last year through a partnership between the Pipa Initiative and Phomenta, two organizations focused on the development of peripheral CSOs, shows that the size of the entities influences the fundraising power.
In percentages, this means that more than 80% of medium and large entities managed to raise funds via public notices in the two years prior to the survey, while 59% of CSOs classified as “nano” were not successful through public notices.
Another point that draws attention is that both the largest B2B Email List and smaller third sector organizations have an average of two to four people committed to fundraising. But why, then, are the largest organizations performing better? In the researchers' view, the difference lies in the investment.
Smaller entities make a living from fundraising volunteers, while large organizations pay these people. Automatically, your ability to reach resources increases.
The legal factor
The legal formalization of the third sector entity also contributes substantially to improving the entity's recruitment process.
The joint research by Pipa and Phomenta also points out that, among the entities that were unable to obtain resources via public notice, 58.33% were collectives or non-formalized social projects.
Among the entities that managed to raise resources by winning public notices, 63.87% were legally formalized. The study is not exhaustive in relation to this, but the idea that formalization generates more credibility with financiers is plausible.
In short, these scenarios make up some of the bases present in the conclusive summary of the report, and serve to indicate the paths along which third sector entities should take themselves to achieve successful fundraising.
But it is noticeable how all the statistics are intertwined. In other words, it is a process that involves formalization and investments in recruitment teams via notices, the success of which, in turn, tends to transform the size of the organization. These are not isolated strategies, distant from each other. And this is good news, because it highlights a supposedly easier route to overcome.
Conclusion
Bringing in a body of people prepared to leverage the organization as a business tends to help in the way it positions itself in the market, even if with purposes different from the capitalist scenario. Serving the poorest classes of society requires financial resources, and it is essential that there is a break in the immaculate view that society still has on philanthropic entities.
Philanthropy, in fact, gained a certain pejorative connection with the vow of poverty. CSOs do not have a moral duty to be poor, no matter how popular this view may be. The research does not address this, but it is clear that this controversial view of the third sector helps to make fundraising even more difficult.