Drakes Bay Fundraising
A Next Generation Fundraising Company

Archive for October, 2013

Part Two: Reconsidering Government Support of Nonprofits

Posted by Christopher Dann
Tuesday October 15, 2013
Categories: Fiscal Cliff, Fundraising, Politics
Share:

In Part One we addressed the immediate concern about impact on the nonprofit sector of two aspects of the crisis over the Continuing Resolution and partial shut-down of the federal government, one being the direct impact on federal funding of nonprofit organizations and the other being the impact on consumer confidence of the politics of it all. While the former will have had varying impact by sub-sector, as demonstrated by a table showing varying percentages of government funding, the latter will continue to have negative impact on discretionary spending into the fall, including contributions to nonprofit organizations

Here we are going to take longer and broader views. Sensible thinking was restored to the situation on Capitol Hill when the strategy of holding the federal budget hostage to rescind or amend the Affordable Care Act was abandoned in favor of putting the budget itself back on the negotiating table. But Congressional attention will inevitably turn again to what governments call “tax expenditures” which include revenue foregone by virtue of both tax exemption and charitable tax deductions.

We know that in matters of legislation great mischief can be made by decisions based on poor information. In the case of the nonprofit sector, a major cause of the circulation of poor information — seemingly as much inside as outside the sector — is generalization. As we pointed out in the last blog, the nonprofit sector is as diverse in its financial models as retailing is, and we showed the variable percentages of revenue by sub-sector from government sources, private contributions, and fees.

Here again is the table from the prior blog.

blog 47

Here now is more evidence of the diversity the nonprofit sector presents to those wanting to make changes in the federal budget and the tax code.

First we’ll look at the distribution of reporting public charities by sub-sector, according to The Urban Institute’s The Nonprofit Almanac 2012.  Reporting public charities are those required to file form 990 with the IRS because they had (in 2010) at least $50,000 in revenue.

2010 Reporting Charities

In 2010 there were 618,062 reporting public charities, and the probability is that number has increased. This first perspective on the sector tells us, therefore, relative weights of sub-sectors. Those weights do not, however, translate into political influence. No one in Congress is going to take any of the benefits of exempt and publicly supported status away from religion-related 501(c)(3)s; yet international affairs is a relatively easy mark. The patrons of arts and cultural organizations, if not humanities, tend to be people of powerful political influence, although there is increasing sentiment that those very people least require or perhaps deserve tax deductibility for their philanthropy while the predominantly less well-off donors to human service charities should be rewarded for their more altruistic charity.

Next, the tables below show percentages of total revenue and total public support by sub-sector, the difference between the two being revenue generated by service and other fees, investment income, and government grants.

total revenue_public support

Bear in mind that one percentage point of public support is approximately $3 billion and that sales of nonprofit goods and services now amount to almost $1 trillion. These figures make consideration of what in the argot of our times we might say clawing back some of that forgone tax revenue very attractive indeed.

With the health sub-sector, as Peter Orszag recently pointed out in a Bloomberg  online article, there is increasing notice being paid to the lack of distinction between nonprofit healthcare and for profit, something he pointed out will also occur with education both as tuitions continue to escalate and for-profit education institutions grow through digitization. Now at Citigroup, Orszag was director of the Office of Management and Budget in the first Obama administration. His has an insider’s understanding of both the tax code and its politics.

But we’re well reminded again that neither legislators nor the IRS nor often the nonprofit sector itself tends to look at these major sub-sector distinctions. That and lobbying by the well-heeled are the reasons why, for example, the National Football League and the NCAA continue to luxuriate in the status of nonprofit organizations. So if the dominating shares of health and education affect the impression that similarities in revenue generating practices make the sector overall attractive for reducing tax expenditures, all sub-sectors are likely to be implicated.

The point is that a revenue-generating activity may then not be able to hide behind the program-related shield if it looks in any way like the taxable commerce of a tax paying enterprise.

Part One: The impact of the partial federal government shut-down

Posted by Christopher Dann
Thursday October 10, 2013
Categories: Uncategorized
Share:

Nonprofit managers don’t have to concern themselves with how complex the nonprofit sector is until one of the sector’s journals writes about general trends or someone in the general media suggests something like a partial shut-down of the federal government is going to have negative impact on nonprofits.

It seems impossibly hard to get journalists — even those specializing in news of the sector — to understand it is comprised of business models as diverse as those in, say, retailing.

This is part one of a two-part blog. Here we’re going to address the impact of the partial federal government shut-down through the lens of sub-sector diversity. In part two we’ll look at more financial detail.  We’ll be using the latest data from The Urban Institute to help fundraisers and other management — and perhaps even board members — better locate their places in the complexity of the sector.

The question today is how dependent the nonprofit sector is on government. And in answering this question it’s appropriate to look at all government funding since one major area affected by the federal government partial shut-down is state and local government.

While government funding represented 24% of overall revenue for the sector in 2010, according to The Urban Institute’s The Nonprofit Almanac 2012, its shares of revenue across sub-sectors varies from a low of 13% for Arts, Culture and Humanities to 48% for Human Services. For the table below, we have selected three principal sources of revenue to show how their percentages vary across major sub-sectors.

 blog 47

*Reporting charities are those with minimum income of $100,000 in 2010 and were therefore required to file form 990 with the IRS.

Apart from reckoning what the temporary — or perhaps permanent — loss of government funding might do to one’s own organization, there are a number of other points to make about these data.

  • The data well and truly represents a broad diversity of nonprofit business models. No two of these sub-sectors is alike in configuration of sources of revenue. Each has to contend with different degrees of impact, whether directly as a result of curtailed or withdrawn government funding or the indirect but just as powerful influence of legislative activity on the general economy, particularly on how much disposable income people have and what they chose to do with it.
  • It’s ironic that the partial shut-down of the federal government was triggered by an interest in de-funding the Affordable Care Act. In terms of total dollars, the greatest impact of the shut-down is likely to be on healthcare because the Health sub-sector accounts for 60% of all nonprofit sector revenue.
  • Human Services, however, with a 48% dependence on government funding will be hurt the most, as we have already begun to hear. Human Services comprises the largest share (34%) of reporting charities, so the impact will be more broadly felt.
  • The national capitol imbroglio is sure to have impact on consumer confidence squarely in the midst of the season of giving, and that will impact private contributions, subscription sales among performing arts organizations, and fundraising events, all nonprofit sources dependent on household discretionary budgets.

Next Generation Fundraising and Drakes Bay Fundraising merged in the fall of 2013, bringing the longstanding professional acquaintances of their four principals – Tim Oleary, Carol Leister, Cindy Germain, and Christopher Dann – into a single company and combining the special resources and experiences of each to provide clients greater breadth and depth of service.

For more information about Next Generation Fundraising, click here.