"I Can See for Miles and Miles" (The Who)

The end of the year is a popular time for predictions. In the past few weeks, I have read articles predicting 2008’s top performing stocks, workplace trends, fashion influences, World Series winner, election results and celebrity divorces--just to name a few.

Never one to be left out, I am providing my top 5 predictions for trends in philanthropy in 2008.

1. Ever-increasing focus on accountability and transparency
Donors want to know how their money is being spent and what it is accomplishing. The most successful not-for-profits will continue to create new ways to share information, document success and measure their effectiveness. As a result, donors to these organizations will be more committed and engaged, and the organizations themselves will gain the resources to expand.

2. Application of business management principles
Donors who derive their wealth (and ability to donate) from business success expect the organizations they support to adhere to certain basic business principles. Charities that adapt these principles to their operations will thrive. These organizations will learn to effectively hire and retain strong staff members, while letting go of those who cannot perform. They will become more focused, create long term plans and better understand their markets. While not-for-profits are meant to address pressing societal issues, they still need to be budget conscious—“dollars in” must be greater than or equal to “dollars out.”

3. Increased partnerships
With more than 1.4 million charities competing for the market share, not-for-profit partnerships make sense. An increase in this practice will allow organizations to focus on their core competences while providing more services to their target audiences. Partnerships will also allow for increased reach without duplication of overhead. It works for business; it can work for philanthropy as well.

4. “Hands-on” philanthropy
The days of a donor writing a blank check are long gone. Today’s philanthropists are far more sophisticated. They not only feel passion for an organization’s mission, but they also want to be involved in shaping it and contributing to its successful execution. The most effective charities will learn how to leverage this trend to meet the needs of their supporters without sacrificing overall focus.

5. Shortage of quality professionals
Each of the many new not-for-profits being founded every month requires quality management to successfully translate vision into reality. At the same time, experienced leadership in established organizations is aging toward retirement. The shortage of high quality not-for-profit leaders will continue in the short term. Organizations should plan ahead—retain strong employees, continue to cultivate and train from within, and don’t be afraid to think outside of the box when it comes to hiring new staff. People with diverse career experience can bring a new set of talent to the fund-raising profession.

Who’s Watching the Watchers?

There has been a recent surge in the number of organizations and individuals providing services designed to help potential philanthropists evaluate charities. A recent article in the New York Times discusses the new GiveWell site, which is already generating controversy for its detailed evaluation and criticism of existing charity rating methodologies.

First of all, I applaud anyone who decides to dedicate their life to helping other people. Whether it’s the guys who started GiveWell or more established organizations like Charity Navigator, any sincere attempt to improve the way society takes care of its most vulnerable citizens is important and impactful.

That said, any attempt to create a universal ranking system for the approximately 1.4million 501c3 organizations operating in the United States is destined to fall short. A quick review of general statistics such as the ratio of program spending to fundraising expenses, the percentage of repeat donors, or the number of people served can’t even begin to tell the whole story of an individual charity’s impact. On the other hand, providing specific details and complex analysis can detract from organizational effectiveness, particularly for smaller charities, by diverting staff time and resources away from programs.

The answer, of course, lies somewhere in between. Top level analysis is important, but does not paint the clearest picture. Smart donors will need to ask more specific questions about documented results, long term planning and management focus. Getting advice and analysis from a third party is not a bad idea, but donors need to understand how the methodology and ratings used pertain to a specific charity. Getting the highest rating may mean that an organization excels at achieving its mission—-or it may mean that it excels at being rated.