A Monkey?

Time to lighten up the mood. I just received my Oorah Chinese Auction catalogue and couldn't resist the temptation to flip through. Last year I noted that more and more prizes come in the form of cash (mortgage payments/rent, groceries, utilities, debt repayment). Practical prizes seem to be the wave of the future.

Prize 35 caused me to do a double take! Prize 35 is a MONKEY. The fine print reads: Winner will receive a gift certificate for the value of the purchase of a capuchin, marmoset, squirrel, lemur or spider monkey. The value of the gift certificate shall not exceed $2,800. In states where licensing is required winner is responsible to license. Winner is responsible to comply with all regulations and requirements relating to monkey. Oorah makes no representation as to the legality in any state where winner may reside. Sponsored by: Anonymous

Let's face it, the people of Israel in todays day and age aren't known as dog or cat people. Many of our children are terrified by the sight of a dog. I'd love to know the thinking behind offering such a prize.

The reader with the best explaination will be published prior to the end of Chanukah.

Infrastructure is Simply too Large

A reader just went me a link to a Jewish Star Article regarding Hatzala of Rockaways-Nassau and is wondering why in the world they are building. The article reports that there is a quarter of a million dollar budget shortfall, the bank account is frequently in overdraft, they admit bills get paid in "dribs and drabs" and the proposed solution is none other than to fundraise(!). There is a series of parlor meetings planned naturally. The situation doesn't look optimistic with only 20% of the database having written any check in the past year.

Somehow budget shortfalls and projected budget shortfalls never seem to get in the way of building a building or taking on other large expenses. In my last post I laid out some rules of the road for board members who aren't functioning on "bitachon" alone including the rule "Cash is king and revenue is key." Unfortunately, for years the only rule of the road seems to have been "built it and they shall come."

Now we are suffering from this "build it" mentality because the infrastructure of the Orthodox community is simply too large and the foundation can't support it (period). My own community involvement seems to center around trying to fight the prevailing mentality of "build it and they will come" and "we can't afford not to." My response to "we can't afford not to" has consistently been, "nor can we afford to."

I haven't made many friends asking questions such as, "what happens if they don't come?" "Who are all of these people waiting in the wings?" "Has anyone worked up a realistic budget of the cost of the new *larger* facility and what type of increase in membership/fees can we expect?" "If we can't meet our operating costs right now, how do we expect to cover larger expenses in the future." Of course that last question just sends you back to square one. . . . . remember, they will come. I once asked someone what happens what happens when the money simply runs out and the response was, someone will step up as the community simply won't allow the institution to collapse. Well, I guess it is nice to have that sort of bitachon. But from my own perspective there is a balance sheet full of revenues and pledges that are unlikely to materialize.

The Hatzolah branch lists some very, very good reasons to build, but the bottom line doesn't support appear to support the feasibility. "In addition to the overall drop in contributions, the deficit is also attributable to the recent purchase by Hatzalah of a site in Woodmere where a new ambulance garage and training center is planned. $200,000 was raised for the purchase; another $400,000 was taken from the operating budget and only some was replaced." So let me break this down, the operating budget has a cash flow problem, but an expansion was taken on despite this and a new property was purchased. There is no guarantee that the zoning will be met, but if so, a fundraising campaign will ensue so that Hatzolah can build. And the new targets for fundraising: young people. The director states, "“If neither the community at large, nor an individual [steps up] to the plate then we will not be able to build this building.” Of course, if the fundraising falls through, the organization will still own the land and will have to maintain it unless there is a buyer waiting in the wings.

Let's make something very clear about fundraising: we are all trying to grab from the same pot. And that pot of money isn't growing! With larger families, bigger and bigger tuitions, greater debt loads from mortgages to student loans for credit card debts, lack of savings, late entrance into the workforce, and a recessions, there isn't much to grab at.

Perhaps hatzolah will be successful on collecting some of the money in the pot for themselves and their problem will be alleviated for the time being. But, another organization will soon need their own "financial rescue." I've reached the conclusion that our own infrastructure is simply too big, from the physical structures to the number of people dependent on it for their own income. But we have no diocese to order a restructuring, which is desperately needed. So, I guess we will keep grabbing from the same pot.

Let's Take Some Important Notes:
How NOT to run a Business or 501(c)3

Hat Tip: Thinking. Thank you!

The principal of Bais Yaakov of Boro Park allowed himself to be interviewed regarding the potential closure of this very large school. I do believe the school is slated to open, but there is little doubt that whatever emergency funds were collected will only provide a temporary bandaid. I don't think the interview was a good move from a PR standpoint, and I imagine that many of the board members who are in charge of fundraising are tearing their hair out.

I am posting the link because I think there is a lot to take away from the interview. Those of us who serve on shul boards, school boards, mikvah boards, and any other high cost operation's board should read carefully, take note, and be ready to explain to their fellow board members why business as usually simply does NOT make sense. And, of course, when you actually do go to vote, you need to be willing to oppose the majority even if it means that bad looks come your way and you gain a reputation as a naysayer, pessimist, and/or bad guy.

Here are the key lessons. The italicized print in orange are quotes from the article.

1. An organization's job is not to employ people, but to ensure that the organization is a "going concern" so it can continue to serve the needs of the kehillah down the line. "But until this year - even though enrollment went down by some 400 students - we did not reduce any classes, as we thought that smaller classes could mean more individual attention for the children."

2. You can't take care of the needs of the kehillah or the needs of an individuals until you have ensured that your needs are taken care of. "Any menahel who had difficulty with a child would say, 'Please go to Bais Yaakov of Boro Park. Rabbi [E] will find a program for you where you can excel.' This all contributed to the financial crisis we now are in."

3. Staffing costs are the MOST important costs to control. Over staffing spells death to a budget. "Total staff in Bais Yaakov is slightly over 400 [for 2100 students]. The majority are teachers, but you also have professionals, social workers, para-professionals, librarians, and assistant teachers." Note that the staff to student ratio at BYOBP is 1:5.25. This is extremely low. Even when there were 2500 students the ratio was low at 1:6.25. Granted, much of the staff is likely part time, and there is no central administration so the school maintains its own janitorial staff and business office, but I can't get over the low, low ratio, nor can I relate to that ratio given that I never attended a class with less than 20 students growing up.

4. Cash is king and revenue is key. Don't build on promises, nor is it wise to take on additional staff without revenue to cover such staff because letting go of staff is simply a nightmare. "Also, we built a new building, for which we got a lot of pledges from people, but we didn’t get the expected donations from them ." And "We put up a state-of-the-art building in one year, but were then saddled with huge debts."

5. Plan as if the seven bad years are coming (because they always do come). "For the first time we are making some cuts. Some of the programs we have been giving, we can’t give anymore. We’ll have to do some cutting on the computer program. The resource room will be primarily cut out, except for those students subsidized by the government. We are starting to consolidate some classes. Until now we have tried to have smaller classes, trying to provide more individualized attention. We’re going to have to change that, until we get out of this crisis. "

I'm Confused: Fundraising is "Underdeveloped?"

Yet another Tuition Crisis article, this one in the Five Towns Jewish Times. It concerns the new initiative being led by Yeshiva University's YU’s Institute for University–School Partnership and Affordability Teams.

The conclusion reached by the affordability team is that schools need (drum roll please) MORE MONEY! The main initiatives are restoring/maintaining government funding, energy efficiency, and (you guessed it) fundraising. The article states, "At the end of the day, however, the major focus of this effort has to be generating additional funds, both from the community that sends children to that yeshiva and from the school’s traditional donor base. " Mr. Bloom, the director of planning and performance improvement on the Affordability Team, who is leading a fundraising seminar for school professionals, is on record saying “Our research has found, that fundraising is our day schools’ and yeshivas’ most underdeveloped resource.” Dr. Goldberg states, “There definitely is money out there, [it is just a matter of being out there and] asking for the money in an organized and professional way.”

I am quite sure I am coming off as rather flippant (I don't like my tone either right now), but I'm getting more and more confused. With the exception of the "no frills" types of schools out there, nearly every larger school is knee deep in "development." We have paid fundraisers, "development directors," staff paid to coordinate volunteer activities and administer volunteer/parent organized fundraising. There are parental led fundraising initiatives. There is student fundraising. Grandparents are solicited. The wealthy in a community are most certainly asked to sign onto efforts. Even students are highly involved with fundraising (a pet peeve of mine).

Perhaps techniques can be improved. But for years plenty of $$$money$$$ has been poured into "development." How in the world can "development" be so "underdeveloped?" And where is all of this money going to come from? I can tell you this: it isn't going to come from an already tapped out parent body, of which 1/3-2/3's are receiving discounts of some type. So where is this pot of gold? And, why, haven't the staff of "development directors" been able to get their hands on that pot of gold in the past 10-20 years? What will be different going forward? I'm confused.

Are Raffles a Good Idea in this Environment

Like many of you, I am involved in at least on community institution and I think all of us involved understand one simple thing: the money is just simply not flowing in and the word insolvency is on tip of the tongue. Another thing we know is that if someone gives you a donation, they probably aren't going to give you a second donation, so there is little room for failure.

Ariella's son just came home from school with a note that in order to meet payroll, the school must engage in fundraising and that at this time each boy is expected to sell $100 tickets for a $100,000 raffle.

A little simple math is helpful in evaluating such a fundraiser. To cover the costs of such a raffle (and there are so many of them out there) the students/parents/fundraisers must sell 1000 tickets just to break even. In actuality they must sell more because there are also promised incentives for those that sell. I don't know what the likelihood of selling more than 1000 tickets is, but I believe the likelihood is rather low. Perhaps the likelihood of a loss is higher. If I was on a board where such a fundraiser was suggested, I would be at the forefront fighting the idea. Fundraisers are not my game, but I think a large expected prize combined with a very high ticket price is an equation for a potential loss.

Personally I have a distaste for gambling fundraisers and a distaste for children being asked to go door-to-door. Ariella had a more modest proposal that the boys used the time off of school before Pesach to work, helping harried parents with random chores, errands, and babysitting. As I try to get all the things I need to get done before Pesach, I can say this: I would NOT, under any circumstances, entertain buying a $100 raffle ticket (when I get calls to buy such tickets from boys or girls fundraising for their school, I always tell them I will give a small donation to the school and note their name in a note, but I don't want to feed into the pricey fundraising frenzy), but I would entertain paying a bochur to help out with some household projects that need taken care of so long as they show up with their painting clothing on.

What's Happening in the Not For Profit World in General?

I like to bring a variety of subjects to my blog and sitting on my desk in front of me are two articles on the economic crisis and non-profits (NFP). Unfortunately, there are so many newspapers and magazines in front of me that I've lost the Newsweek article which had some good substance. So, I will have to stick with the front page of the most recent Accounting Today publication: "Tough time cause belt-tightening at nonprofits." Newsweek is available to the general public anyways. I doubt Accounting Today is sitting on the desk of most of my readers, although no doubt it is sitting on some desks.

Here are my notes on the highlights from the article regarding trends in giving:

• Donor Giving is Down, especially in the social service organizations.
• Social service organizations are far more dependent on smaller donations given by individuals, and donations in the $1000 and under range have fallen. Additionally, the average amount of a smaller donation is down.
• Major donor gifts are not particularly falling (although the Newsweek article disputed this, especially considering the large gifts from financial firms). Major donors have made an investment in their favorite organization, made giving a part of their estate plan, and are generally following through according to Accounting Today.
• Large donors are reducing their gifts. Large donors often donate appreciated property (stocks, real estate) because they can take the donation at fair market value, while avoiding paying capital gains tax. However, as the value of assets plummet, large donors loose some of their incentive to donate valuable property. These donations are at stake.

• Organizations with broad missions are feeling the pinch, while organizations with a more narrow cause are still gaining support.
• Donors will give to the organizations they are most passionate about, even where the general trend of giving is down.
• More donors are giving "restricted funds," i.e. funds that are for a specific program or initiative, rather than leaving the donation open to be used as the NFP sees fit.
• Donors are seeking higher levels of accountability and are asking for more financial reports in order to track how their restricted donations have been spent.

How organizations are tightening their belts:

• Scaling back staff costs by reducing staff hours.
• Consolidating administrative offices. (Regular readers will know why I put this in bold).

Suggests for NFP Organizations from Accounting Today:

• Diversity funding sources.
• Create or strengthen major gifts programs.
• Find new ways to communicate the impact of their mission.
• Do not drop marketing. Organizations must communicate results, effectiveness, factual data (highlighted because it it important to relate the trend of donors asking for more accountability with the need to market accountability), and differentiate themselves.

Certainly a lot to consider and now that I've recorded my notes I can send this publication to our recycle bin.

990's and Less than successful Fundraising


Fundraising with overhead, especially high overhead, drains precious resources from a community. Volunteers put a lot of time into planning events, paid employees often dedicate their own working time to planning an event, parents on "give or get" hours often trade their time for scholarship dollars, and those who donate to an event will not turn around and give again if the event is unsuccessful.

Lately, I've been building up a collection of envelopes for fundraising events and after seeing the
discussion on Hirhurim regarding fiscal accountability of charitable organizations, I figured it was time to look at the latest 990s that are available for the schools that are sending banquet invitations or offering tickets to an events, etc. (Not all organizations file 990s, but those that are available can be found at Guidestar).

Now the 990 form is not the most user friendly form in the world, nor are the numbers some schools report believable, rendering the form completely useless (although as a donor it is all I've got to go by). Fundraising dollars can be shown in different places making the actual gain or loss difficult to determine, or a schedule can co-mingled special events covering up data that would show if a fundraiser is worth its while. Needless to say, it is difficult for the reader to get a complete or even accurate picture. But being more familiar that your average Joe with the fundamentals of accounting, I believe I was able to reach some conclusions about the profitability of certain fundraisers.

One major fundraiser that a certain school puts on year after year, which uses plenty of precious resources in terms of time and overhead dollars, only managed to net $2000-$3000 during two of the last the years reported. Yet the fundraiser has become an annual event nevertheless. Now a simple rule of finance is that you don't throw perfectly good money after a loosing cause. While $2000 to $3000 might not be an actual loss, after indirect costs are considered(give or get dollars, staff time, and dollars spent/donated that will not be spent donated again) it may well be a loosing cause.

Another fundraiser I saw reported that was a definite loss was a raffle. I imagine what happened was that the prizes were paid for up front and ticket sales were estimated far too high. (Wish I knew what the prizes were. When I was asked to buy a ticket I told the kids selling the tickets I prefer to give cash). As far as I am concerned a raffle should never be run at a loss.

Now I know that mistakes will happen and that sometimes fundraisers will bomb. But one has to wonder if many of the fundraisers that are being conducted are simply not worth the effort. Perhaps "name recognition" has a indirect benefit that can't be calculated and that these fundraisers really are a success even if the numbers don't reflect that. I don't know the answers. But after seeing some low net gains and even some certain losses, I'm wondering how precious hours could be used more effectively.

Eight Things Meme

I got tagged with the Eight Things Meme. Seems like I'm the last on board which is fine by me. I don't have to tag anyone. Since Memes are not part of the expected blogging material here at Orthonomics, I thought I'd tie this in to my blogging in general. Add your comments about you.

1. I wrote my first letter to the editor when I was in the 1st grade. It was my mother's idea: a thank you card. A men's service club built a little playground area in the local park and it was a bit hit. I spent a good part of my summer walking around the neighborhood collecting signatures from all of the kids for the thank you letter which was published in the letters to the editor section of our local newspaper.


2. I have attended a Chinese Auction. My neighbor asked me to accompany her and I tagged along. Watching Yeshiva educated, grown men, whooping and hollering over the winners like they were at a Monster Truck Rally, was far more disturbing than spending ridiculous amounts of time deliberating which box to put my tickets in, as if I was going to actually walk away with the set of silver that made me drool. I don't intend to ever go back.


3. I used to want a lot of children, as in more than 10. Since I've become certifiably Orthodox, the number of children that I desire continues to drop and I sometimes feel fairly guilty about it. I have to remind myself I can only have as many children as I can physically and mentally handle, and that number doesn't seem to be anywhere near 10 lately.


4. I have regular dreams. The most recent one involved one of our siblings building a tropical rain forest, complete with waterfalls, next to their dining room. Of course, everyone was ooohing and aahing the beautiful home renovations over the Shabbat meal. I too was enjoying the view until my mother-in-law turned to me and said, you should really consider doing something beautiful like this to your home. I was about to loose my temper. . . . and then I woke up.


5. I am the "spendthrift" in our house. My husband often needs convinced as to why we "need" certain things. In one of our more memorable convincing sessions, I had to convince him that we "needed" couches because I wanted to have something soft to sit on. He figured we had plenty of chairs for us and our guests and just couldn't see the need for another place to sit. Usually, these discussions are resolved when I remind him that as a homemaker, I spend far more time and home than he does and our home should be a pleasant place for me to raise our kids in (and sitting on hard chairs all day just isn't pleasant).


6. I practically run my own warehouse of non-perishable goods. I can't resist a bargain deal on things we use regularly. Lately I've been striking gold. I probably have 30-40 cans of canned tomato products in the 28 oz. size. I use no less than 2 a week it seems. I also have about 20 packages of diapers, and I'm heading out to get 3 more packages at rock bottom prices this week. After that, I probably will stop. I hope to have all children in diapers trained by the time I work through this huge supply. Instead, I will use our food budget to stock up on grape juice at the anticipated pre-Rosh Hashana sale. I'm down to 2 or 3 huge grape juices and I'm hoping the sale will be annouced before we are out. The lack of supply is making me nervous. At the anticipated $2.89, I will probably buy enough to get us through Pesach.


7. I don't think there is a countertop spice rack big enough to hold all of the spices I own (and use). I'd like to have them at arm's reach from the stove, but I'm thinking they will have to go in the pantry on an over the door organizer.


8. I dream of catering my own sons' bar mitzvah parties. I'm sure this would not go over well at all with my in-laws in the least. But I think the idea is fantastic. If I'm blogging when the day comes, I'll write up a post about the good, bad, and ugly of catering your own affair.

Gambling Addictions and Chinese Auctions

In this week's Jewish Press, a social worker wrote to the "Dear Rachel" column about gambling addictions that she has seen manifested through the ever popular Chinese Auctions. She claims that there are families who diverted needed funds for food or clothing in hopes of winning a coveted prize in a Chinese Auction.

I share her discomfort with using gambling as a form of fundraising (although the suggest that we return to the bake sale and yard sale model strikes me as ludicrous at best) and I have stated so in other forums on j-blogs like Hirhurim.

Rachel dismissed the letter writer's concerns and I think the Jewish Press should be called on the carpet for publishing her advice when it is clear that she knows very little about the subject, its many forms, and the way that the problem can manifest itself. I may have to sit down and pen a well written letter myself this week, even though I am hardly the expert and would prefer to hear from the psychologists/psychiatrists in the frum community that deal with addictions.

I am not that expert needed to address the question, but I have seen enough to know that gambling takes on many forms and that Rachel's assertions are severely mistaken. Two of the assertions include the following (please, please read the entire letter and response for full context):

• If one is a gambler at heart, his/her craving will not be satisfied at a Chinese Auction charity gathering..
• The person who was of the opinion that people need to exercise self-control is onto something. Everyone knows his/her own limits. If someone ends up spending more than what s/he originally intended to in order to secure a better chance to win a preferred item, then the money will have been well spent.

Regarding the first assertion: Gambling takes on many forms. Some people gamble in a regular way, e.g. casinos and their addiction can be more easily spotted. But other people gamble in a hidden way, under the cloak of another activity, for example "investing" or "recreation."

I know a (now ex) husband who borrowed nearly six figures against their home to "invest." He would sit in front of his computer for hours on end watching his "investments," neglecting his (now ex) wife, child, and other obligations/interests in the process. He thinks of himself as an "investor," but I believe he would be diagnosed as a "gambler." I don't believe this person has ever spent any time in casinos, but he satisfies his problem through borrowing to invest with the intention of making money.

Regarding the second assertion: I'm in shock!!! This is probably one of the most ridiculous assertions I've ever seen in a Torah Oriented Jewish Publication. "Everyone knows [their] own limits." Surely if every individual and every family knew their own limits, we would not need a program to help bochurim quit smoking. We would not have a problem with young men and not so young men drinking themselves into comas on Purim. We would not have a problem with fathers or mothers taking money needed for the basic upkeep of their homes and spending it on luxuries.

I agree with the original letter writer: we should be concerned about the proliferation of Chinese Auctions. One never knows who the blind person is and what his/her stumbling block is. While the issue of gambling is one of halachic discussion, the fact that a professional gambler is excluded from eidut should give us a clue that gambling is not a preferred way to raise funds or spend our recreational time.

The Jewish Press should have never published her response.

Solicitation Season has Arrived

Well, it is that time of year again and my mailbox is stuffed to the brink. Everyday, new solicitations arrive, and I've been taking mental notes.

What makes for an effective message? What messages inspires action? What makes a solicitation hit the "to do" bin? What makes a solicitation hit the trash bin?

Here are some of my thoughts on solicitations,
Orthonomics' list of Do's and Don'ts:

1. Do be concise. Don't overwhelm the potential donor with too much information and/or too many graphics.

-->The quicker you make your case, the more likely you are to keep the attention of the reader. We all receive tons of mail everyday, much of which is junk. So, the quicker we can read through your piece of mail, the better, lest it hit the junk pile. A recent solicitation I received has four glossy pages of small print, pictures, and side bars. This might be the norm, but it looses my attention at 10PM when I am sorting the mail before heading to head. There is a such thing as providing too much information. With the invention to the internet, I would suggest pointing those looking for more information to the appropriate website. If you don't have a website (as many organizations do not), don't use that as license to overwhelm the reader.

2. Do give the potential donor some assurance that the money is headed towards the cause they believe they are donating to.

--> One particular format that I have come to like is that of a particular organization that provides food and clothing for the poor in Israel. They send coupons for meat, groceries, etc, that are redemable at certain vendors. I think there is something nice about knowing where my donation is heading.

3. Do make a strong case for your cause or organization.

--> One recent solicitation extolled the virtues of publishing the calendar it published and what an important function the calendar served. I don't know about you, but I probably collect 10 calendars by Yom Kippur. Let's just say that I don't view calendars production as an important function of an institution. So, don't forget what your organization's actual mission is. Chances are it is not calendar production (!). And, if, for some reason, that is your institution's function, then at least make the calendar attractive.

4. Do make a brief, multi-faceted, case for your organization.

--> Recently I was pleased to receive a plea for funds for an established Yeshiva. Being that funding for Jewish education is one of my interests, I was very interested in how they would sell it! They certainly had made attempts to build a case for why their Yeshiva was important and why funding for it was important. But, they basically concentrated on the need for higher wages for Rebbeim and staff and the need to proper facilities. I doubt any of this is debatable. But, every potential donor has their own pet interest. So, it is good to look at the issues from a few other angles (briefly, of course), in order to appeal to more donors. Market research is a must.

5. Don't insult the intelligence of the potential donor.

--> I just received a solicitation with a calendar (surprise!). There were instructions in the solicitation letter on just how to a person uses a calendar to record appointments, events, etc. My goodness, if I am capable of writing a check, I hope I am capable of using your calendar. As it is said, sometimes less is more. This was definitely one of those cases!

--> Last year I received a solicitation telling me that a certain gadol had come to the headquarters and ascertained, during his brief visit, that all funds received are used properly. Now, as an accountant/auditor, my intelligence was insulted. My past work involved expending many hours testing transactions, following paper trails, verifying internal information with external sources, and more before I was able to conclude that an agency was operating properly. I guess I am not a gadol, because if I was, all I would have to do is take a look around and draw a conclusion.

6. Do welcome all donations. But, don't shoot too low if making a suggestion either.

--> One recent solicitation gave a suggested donation level that even I considered to be low for the purpose that it serves in the community. While it is terrible when an organization, or more likely a door-to-door solicitor, asks for way too much, scaring off the donor, or making them feel inadequate or cheap. It is just as bad to suggest a lower donation than most in the audience would consider giving. Since there is a fine line being walked, it might be better to refrain from suggesting an amount in the cover letter, and just include a card where donors can mark off the traditional amounts (i.e. $18, $36, etc) or fill in their own amount. But, when you are looking for greater donations, don't suggest lesser amounts.

7. Do go easy on the gloss. (In addition, do go easy of the promises of yeshuot and pictures of gedolim. Remember, your audience is much broader than those your organization serves).

--> Glossy is certainly attractive. But, while it attracts a certain segment of potential donors, it can also offend another set of potential donors. So, don't overwhelm with gloss.

--> On a related note, not everyone is impressed by promises of yeshuot, or even pictures of gedolim. So, here too, you might want to go easy and find a middle ground.

8. Do be timely. Jewish time is not the appropriate time to send out your notice.

--> Numerous times, including just this week, I received information for an event after the date of the event. Information should be timely and relevant. A person needs enough lead time to decide if they can attend an event or shiur. Each event requires its own amount of lead time. While I haven't done a study, I would theorize that the bigger the commitment, the larger the lead time needed. E.g., a banquet at $180 a head needs more lead time than a shiur or carnival that costs $5 or $10. But, I do know, that it is impossible to go to an event after the event has passed. So, do be timely.

9. Do inspire further action, especially after a successful event.

--> Once you have a donors enthusiasm and loyalty, don't leave them hanging. Follow-up and inspire further commitment before the next great organization comes along and captures their attention. (This point could inspire a post about follow-up in shidduch dating).

10. Do thank the donor in writing (the quicker the better).

--> Everyone likes to be appreciated. The quicker a thank you note (and tax receipt) is sent out, the better. Lack of acknowledgement doesn't make a donor feel wanted or appreciated and won't inspire further action (see #9). So, make sure to acknowledge all donors timely.

--> My alma mater recently sent out a newsletter thanking ALL donors, even those who gave a measly donation, and I mean measly. I am not a donor as there are just too many causes to support in my own community. But, I was very impressed that they acknowledged everyone.

Can't wait to hear your do's and don'ts regarding solicitations. I ask that no organizations be named. Any comments that reveal the name of an organization, especially in a negative light, will be promptly deleted, as I believe that most of the organizations are worthy (even if I would never write a check to them myself).

This post is dedicated to JH of JewishPros blog, who runs a valuable blog on non-profits. Check out his blog. It is a very valuable "Orthonomic" resource and I am learning a lot from it. Update: JH has posted his own Do's and Don'ts list. Fundraising is not my expertise (I just count beans). So check out his list. It is great.