Withdrawal symptoms: Philanthropy

By Ian Driscoll
Published: August 26 2008
Financial Times
Link:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5ecd9eb2-72fe-11dd-983b-0000779fd18c.html?nclick_check=1

At one time or another, most charities are victims of donor fatigue, when neither marketing nor the appeals of celebrity fund-raisers can stir donors to give. But for charities whose work involves social issues such as drug or alcohol abuse, donor fatigue can be a permanent ailment.

Substance abuse is viewed as a failing of the self – and an ugly one at that. Images of shadow-eyed, drug-taking suburban teens suggest hopelessness rather than helplessness. The stigma of abuse – for both sufferers and their saviours – can be unyielding.

“In some ways, it’s harder to raise money for kids with drug and alcohol issues than it is to raise money for fish,” says Donna Wiench, development director at Daybreak Youth Services, a Washington state drug and alcohol treatment charity.

“At times, I find that kind of ironic,” says the former development director of the Columbia Land Trust. “Salmon aren’t blamed for failing to jump fish ladders, manoeuvre past dams and swim up rivers. But sometimes society blames teens for becoming dependent on drugs or alcohol. It’s a disease. We don’t blame kids with diabetes or cancer for their illness.”

The mental imagery conjured by drug and alcohol abuse doesn’t aid these charities, either. As Paul Schervish, director of the Boston College Center on Wealth and Philanthropy puts it: “These organisations aren’t sexy.”

Stigma aside, several other factors undermine the efforts of drug and alcohol-abuse charities in raising donations.

There is a perception that such groups deal primarily with low-income people who require remedial help and rehabilitation rather than expanded horizons or other opportunities. Instead, “people will give to boys and girls clubs and schools where the programme is to advance the opportunities of select groups that are needy”, says Mr Schervish.

A further issue is alumni. Veterans of alcohol or drug abuse programmes are not usually a significant base for donations. “These people may be very grateful, but they don’t have the wherewithal to contribute. That is probably the major factor in not having a core group that will provide regular and sustainable funding and the basis for greater fund-raising,” says Mr Schervish.

Also, many of the charities lack a significant endowment because most of their funding goes into immediate programme expenses. And while a healthy endowment can dissuade prospective donors, conversely it can make the charity seem more advanced.

Lastly, locally based charities are usually unable to draw on the fund-raising and marketing synergies enjoyed by national bodies.

With all this against them, non-profits that tackle drug and alcohol abuse need to be especially nimble, ferreting out funds wherever they can find them. Appealing to every donor sense – visceral, emotional and rational – is essential.

When Ms Wiench was at the Columbia Land Trust, the organisation’s fund-raising efforts benefited from the environmental awareness common to inhabitants of the Pacific Northwest. In her role at Daybreak Youth Services, there is no such broad-based, naturally sympathetic constituency.

Between its Vancouver and Spokane locations, Daybreak treats nearly 1,200 children a year, in both in-patient and out-patient settings. Most are teenagers from disadvantaged homes although the organisation (www.daybreakinfo.org) also works with middle-class children. Not everyone responds to its entreaties.

While blame is one hurdle, Ms Wiench says, stigma is another. “I sometimes think that people turn off because we are dealing with children a little more troubled than they want to think about.”

Because of the stigma, Ms Wiench does a lot of person-to-person fund-raising. “I have to pay special attention to what it is the donor is responding to. If I see the eyes getting bigger, or that someone’s responding to mention of a special interest, then I’ll try and connect,” she says. If she can strike a chord on more than one level, better yet.

“We have one donor, a man who lost his father, and a lot of the kids in this programme have lost their fathers, so I will talk to him about the missing parent. But he’s also a successful businessman, so I’ll talk to him about our success,” says Ms Wiench.

About 80 per cent of the children enrolled in the Daybreak programme complete it, a better rate than at comparable institutions across Washington state, says Ms Wiench. Those figures have compelled other local business figures to give to Daybreak, where the average donation is about $300.

But Ms Wiench says that often it takes some sort of personal experience to move donors. “Whether through a friend or relative, most people have experienced drug and alcohol abuse and have a sense of what it does to people.”

Like Ms Wiench, Rosanne Slattery has seen easier fund-raising days. Now development director of the Long Island Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (LICADD), she previously worked as a fund-raiser at the Skin Cancer Foundation. “There”, she says, “fund-raising benefited from the support of grateful patients.”

At LICADD, though, she’s constantly aware of the stigma of abuse. “It affects us at every juncture. Alcohol addiction is seen as a matter of indulgence rather than a true medical condition,” says Ms Slattery.

Founded in 1956, LICADD provides chemical and dependency evaluations, treatment referrals as well as prevention education programs. Examples include a parent education workshop called “Roots and Wings” and “Footprints for Life” for primary school-age children. LICADD’s employee assistance programme provides critical services to individuals in the workplace, including services addressing alcohol and addiction.

LICADD’s direct services benefit up to 3,000 people a year, with even more touched by its education efforts. At a recent workshop for young students, LICADD used images of a well-known pop star to illustrate the impact that substance abuse can have. The effect, she says, was profound.

But maintaining the programmes through voluntary contributions is difficult. “On Long Island there are numerous non-profit organisations serving the community and seeking funding. It’s tough to sustain our efforts,” says Ms Slattery.

LICADD (www.licadd.org) uses several fund-raising avenues, including annual appeals to a pre-existing list of donors.

The charity has long relied on special events such as an annual golf tournament and the Angel Ball, an event that raised about $275,000 in 2007.

She is trying to reduce LICADD’s dependence on these high-profile functions by seeking the sponsorship of Long Island-based corporations and soliciting the support of more individual benefactors able to give large gifts.

Still, it’s at the grand events that potential donors often get to hear and celebrate the stories of success that are at the heart of LICADD’s efforts. And often it’s these tales of recovery that compel attendees to open their wallets.