Monday: Mission based approaches to technology funding

Mission based approaches to technology funding.

To get things going, we want to ask the big question of how does technology fit in to your mission?

When is it appropriate to fundraise for technology, and when should your technology expenses be included in your fundraising efforts for your programs?

How does your strategic plan fit in?

These are some key questions any organization needs to address before launching a campaign to pay for technology.

Can people share examples of successful approaches? How are "technology grants" acquired? How have folks successfully convinced funders than large budget item for hardware, software, and support are justified in a grant proposal to provide services to clients?

OK, so let me throw out some statistics about funding to get this topic moving. According to a 1999 Foundation Center Survey, here is how private foundation grants break out:

Funding Areas by Percent

Human Services (includes youth) 25%
Education 20%
Health: 12%
Civil and Community: 12%
Environment: 7%
Human Rights: 3%
Religion: 3%
Technology: .4% (or 2/5 of one percent)
Other misc: 14%

In other words, funding specifically for technology is very hard to come by. While there are programs like the Technology Opportunities Program (TOP) at the US Department of Commerce, most funders still want to fund programs and services. So the issue we must address is how technology directly effects the success of your organization.

Here are some examples:

** Technology is critical to information systems for evaluation and assessment. More and more funders are requiring numbers and data about outcomes - this means databases, spreadsheets, and the infrastructure (both technology and people) to support them.

** Community Technology Centers (CTCs) use technology to achieve other goals such as improved education, youth development, workforce development, etc. To run a technology program for youth, you obviously need to spend money on technology. One way to get it funded it to approach your traditional youth development funders and pitch the great outcomes your technology program can achieve.

** Specific technologies like Geographic Information Systems (GIS) can make the work of environmental, community development, and other programs much more effective. If you can convince a funder that identifying toxic dangers in your city is important and worth paying for, you should be able to convince the funder to pay for the technology systems to make the work easier and more effective.

I think the danger in discussing funding for technology is that by separating it out as a stand alone topic, it inadvertently makes it seem as if the organization seeking funding is making technology a goal. The problem is that there is no such thing as a technology goal, only organizational goals. Technology is a strategy for achieving organizational goals. For example, an agency doesn’t build a donor database for the sake of having a database. An agency builds a donor database to improve their ability to raise and track funds, which then improves their ability to provide services.

It is essential that both nonprofits seeking funding, and the funders themselves, recognize the importance of putting technology into context so that everyone understands how it is being used to “improve” something within the organization. This is one of the main reasons why it’s important to develop a strategic technology plan. By focusing on strategic goals, a technology plan will only outline technology that facilitates improvements in the organization. This decreases the danger of implementing technology for technology sake. Additionally, by focusing on organizational goals, clear measures can be identified so that you will know when and how you are being successful in achieving them.

I totally agree Joni. One of the reason that LTC has been able to promote a broad community technology education and access agenda, is a 1998 strategic planning process that determined decentralizing our basic computer training out into the community would alleviate stressed resources within our own organization. This re-visioning helped us secure federal funds to build what is now the Lowell Community Technology Consortium. By focussing on community development and thinking beyond our organization we have been able to do so much more and not on our own.

I also see that as our partners move out of the initial mindset of "we need a computer lab" or "we need to teach computers," they begin to see how the technology they have in place feeds into their larger programmatic goals. All of a sudden the light clicks on and they realize that they are not running a computer class, but rather an after-school program. Or, they see how the computer lab becomes not an added activity to say their ESL training, but an integral part in energizing their students. Once this jump happens, many of our partners are able to place technology purchases within the context of their programmatic budgets and are comfortable making the case why the resource is needed for the success of the program.

We are even beginning to see that as technology is integrated at the administrative level, the ability to make the case for increased efficiency and capacity becomes stronger. However, it seems that this is slow work. And again this is where I agree with Joni, that creating strong strategic and technology plans would force orgs to think through these issues more deliberately. This is still a weak area for many orgs (especially small to mid-sized NPOs).

I've been asked to assist our local fire department in writing a grant. They will provide the main focus;I'll show them how information technology can be used to further their vision.

Yes, this will involve hardware and software, a new communication system, and training to use these new tools. We'll go from a paper system to a digitalized
Internet-centric organization.

So even though IT may be a large component of the grant, the focus will be on the application -- public safety

Those percentages are hard to swollow, especially when I don't see the arts even listed (I'm assuming that the arts fall under "other" at 14%) and I fundraise for an arts organization that uses media arts technologies as its medium- Street-Level Youth Media. We have our work cut out for us!

What is helpful is to look at your mission and to pick out every possible area that could be "saleable" to a funder and to not rely solely on one area to fundraise for. Funding trends come and go.

I looked at the original (which is proprietary or I would post it) and "Arts and Culture" is the Other, and it's 14%.

George

For a helpful perspective on Mission Based approaches, see the article Mission Based Technology Planning.

Re: Technology for not for profits.
Hello, I’m Wendell Moats and I represent the Indiana Academy of Fine and Performing Arts. We are a private, not for profit school that uses arts as a means to educate children and youth. We use various software programs to teach basic skills: the 3 R’s and we also use technology to pursue various artistic talents: Writing stories and plays; creating individual artistic designs, or design-your-own mechanical devices. Or whatever the students came come up with by using their imagination. We encourage them to develop their creativity. Our strategic involves looking for funding to continue the program, to continue to upgrade our technology, and furthur expand our capabiliites. I'm also interested in where to look for future technology grants. We usually have our hardware/software donated. Other than paying for our teachers and electricity, there aren't any expenses involved.

Loved your post.

We have a similar project. See www.mindspan.bizland.com and www.expertclick.com.

Put in Bo Lebo in expert area and go to psas.

Love to collaborate or talk.

Bo

bo_lebo@hotmail.com

I think this an excellent article and points out what I believe to be some real misconception held by both nonprofit and for-profit organizations; that is thinking that the technology strategy is somehow separate from and independent of their business strategy. Laudon & Laudon point out in their book 'Managing the Digital Firm,'

"where an organization wants to be in 5 years is often dependent upon their (present) information system." (my paraphrase).

As a tech manager of a nonprofit organization I know the constraints that nonprofits face, still technology leverages human potential.
Nonprofit organizations need a solid technical strategy that supports and enables the organization to reach its business goals. To see technology as something outside of or independent of what you do as an organization is to fail to understand the true power of this amazing tool.