Jun 6, 2017
Posted Under: Advocacy President's letter
You have likely noticed that there has been a lot to say recently about the fate and work of our nonprofit sector. In every community and at every level of government, decisions are being made that affect the work we do. While it has compelled Foraker’s board and our staff to use our voice more often to take a stand for the sector, we have also noticed a few things along the way that might inspire you and your organization to find or use your own voice more often. In this month’s article I want to highlight a few of those observations and, importantly, I want to hear from you about what you are noticing. I also want to share a tool with you that could be helpful as you chart your own course.
- Sometimes the wins are quiet and incremental. You might have read recently about a small win for the sector that resulted from our 2015 public policy priority on changing the state audit threshold. This work was not shiny or full of fanfare. In fact, when the state completed its piece of the process, we had to search to find out it had been done. But this win matters for so many nonprofits in Alaska. It will save you money, time, and energy that you can put towards mission results. This was our most recent example of a long-haul goal that we quietly pursued on behalf of the sector. We kept at it even as more shiny issues engaged us. I bet you have your own long-haul issues and achievements. Before you just check it off the list and move to the next thing, I encourage you to stop. Pause. Smile. And, share the good news. And know that persistence and focus pays off not just for you and your organization, but most importantly for the people and places you serve.
- Public policy is still not seen as a core responsibility – yet. I have noticed that our call to use your nonpartisan public policy voice is not universally embraced. More to the point, when we have made some very strategic calls to nonprofit leaders to engage in the legislative process (without violating any lobbying rules), the respectful response was variations of: “We don’t do that work.” I have heard the arguments in favor of this position: “It is too risky to be heard,” “The ripple effect could be intense,” “We don’t know how,” or the staff leader is willing but the board may not be. I understand these reasons as a starting place for the conversation. But if we stop at them, I think there is great risk for our collective work. I strongly encourage you to reflect with your team (board and staff) whether this is where you are right now. Start by asking: “If we are not standing up for our mission and cause, who will?” Or by asking: “Is it enough to hope that someone else will speak up? Is it enough to hope it will turn out okay?” Perhaps nonprofits in the past had the luxury of waiting it out in silence. But now, the risks of opting out of the dialog seem, from my perspective, more risky at many levels. Public policy is part of the core responsibilities of every CEO and board. How you do it? When you do it? How often you do it? Those are the new questions of our time.
- There is an increase in creative solutions for getting the sector’s voice heard from groups that can’t or won’t do it alone. We have savored hearing about long-standing and new public policy coalitions. They have activated their formal networks to include public policy on the agenda. They have found unlikely partners in other sectors and within the sector to strengthen their voice and provide the right messengers. The result that we can see is better data, more capacity, and a safer space. If you identified with observation #2, this might be a safer next step.
- More groups are asking us for more tools and support to strengthen their public policy voice. We realize it is a struggle to know exactly when to step into public policy. We all need to find the right balance for our organizations between a simple call and action that feels overwhelming and all consuming. Based on our recent capacity building report, we know that few organizations have public policy action plans or any sort of tool for decision-making. Is this you? I know the idea of writing another plan is the last thing you have time to do, so to that end let me offer you four options to keep you moving forward. Do one, or do them all in any order that works for you.
Option 1: Join the conversation. Recently we launched a quarterly public policy check-in opportunity. Our goal is to create a space to get from fear to facts, to understand the issues that are most affecting you, and to strategize the ways you are working on them. Our hope is that this space will be collaborative and that as others hear your ideas, concerns, and next steps, you will find new partners and new opportunities.
Option 2: Log-on and opt-in. We have increased our blog, Facebook, and policy action alert communications about overall policy issues that affect the sector. The alert emails are “opt-in” so even if you get other communications from us, you won’t get the policy alerts unless you sign-up. We value the trust you put in us, and we are committed to sharing information that is accurate and actionable.
Options 3: Schedule some time. We are ready to answer your calls and engage with your team (board and staff) on next steps. Are you just starting the conversation or do you have lots of experience? We will meet you where you are in the conversation. Contact us for more information.
Option 4: Clarify your focus. Staying grounded in your core purpose and core values is a key first step. One of the next tools we offer is creating a public policy decision matrix. It can be hard to distinguish between personal opinion and organizational/mission/cause position. A decision matrix can help. This tool does not have to be complicated or cumbersome. The questions in the matrix are asked and answered by your team, which often includes leadership staff, a public policy committee of the board, and the full board. Implementation of any decisions that come from using the matrix can also come from staff, board, strategic partners, or all of them depending on the issue and the appropriate messenger. It will be up to each team to determine who answers the questions and who takes the lead on next steps. At Foraker for example, each year a joint committee representing Foraker’s Governance and Operations Boards analyzes issues affecting the Alaska nonprofit sector. The committee uses our decision matrix in its analysis, and then recommends a position to the Governance Board during the annual meeting in January. Since each matrix is customized, perhaps the best way to share the tool with you is to share our own as an example. Our decision matrix has four areas for decision-making.
- Impact: Does this issue affect the interests of the nonprofit sector in a significant way, positively or negatively? Does it affect the entire sector, or a vast majority of the sector? Is it primarily a local issue but with a high potential for future sector-wide impact? Generally speaking, an issue has sector-wide impact if it has broad relevance to the creation, management, operation, administration, and well-being of nonprofit organizations in Alaska.
- Partner Support: Is there already, or could Foraker reasonably anticipate there will be, a general level of support among Foraker Partners on the position to be taken? Gauging Partner support is not expected to be onerous or statistically rigorous. Instead, it will rely on a simple process that takes advantage of the connections and networks that exist among staff, Partners, the Operations Board, and the Governance Board. The key is to connect with individuals who broadly represent the various sub-sectors in Alaska’s nonprofit community. While there are many ways to check the nonprofit perspective on potentially relevant issues, the primary tool for doing so will be the Foraker Operations Board.
- Credibility: Would Foraker as an organization be perceived as a legitimately concerned and appropriate advocate for the position to be taken? The answer to this question best comes from the Foraker Governance Board through its public policy committee.
- Organizational Capacity: Does Foraker have the financial and human resources to engage in the required advocacy?
Again, I am not suggesting that these questions should be in your matrix, instead I am inviting you and your team to determine your own key questions so that you are prepared to act not just respond. Your matrix can be a useful tool for years to come since it is deeply rooted in your core purpose and can, therefore, withstand the test of time. It can stand alone or be a step in your overall planning process. You decide.
Maybe you want to jump into all four of these options or perhaps one is more accessible right now. Like all new action you can learn from others while you carefully engage. There are lots of ways to get support with this work if you are willing and ready.
This is a dynamic time in our state and in our country. Perhaps the “good old days” will be remembered as a time when we could simply hunker down and do our mission work and not look around at our policy environment very often – or at all. But now, today, we live in a time when our voices must be heard on behalf of the greater good that we serve. It is not about us personally or even our organizations. It was never about us. And yet, we have the ability to use our voices and make a difference. Your mission is counting on it.
