The Dark Side of the Fundraising Profession

People join the fundraising profession because they are good folks who want to do good. They want to make the world a better place. That’s why I entered the profession. It’s probably why you did, also. Unfortunately, not all fundraisers are good people. Unfortunately, even good people occasionally do bad things.

Our professional organizations have created ethical codes and standards of professional practice to guide our behavior and to help earn public trust. We even have mechanisms to hold fundraising professionals accountable to those standards.

Now, a local organization has attracted national attention, but not in a good way. It’s a story that tests the integrity of the Association of Fundraising Professionals, CFRE International, and the entire fundraising profession. It’s a story that will ultimately reveal whether or not we are willing to hold fundraisers accountable. It’s a test of whether our ethics codes and professional standards are merely nice words on paper or whether they truly help define fundraising as a profession.

The story I am referring to involves the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. I won’t repeat the entire story here. The Chronicle of Philanthropy has already done some excellent reporting on the matter, and I’ll provide links at the end. For now, I’ll just take a moment to summarize the reports.

Former employees of the Foundation “accuse Mari Ellen Loijens, the Foundation’s top fundraiser, of engaging in emotionally abusive and sexually inappropriate behavior.” The Chronicle further states:

The Chronicle article, based on several months of interviews with 19 former employees, raised questions about the leadership of Loijens, who oversaw fundraising at the community foundation. While many say she deserves credit for helping raise significant sums at Silicon Valley — which at $13.5 billion in assets is larger than Ford or Rockefeller — former employees said she demeaned and bullied her staff, made lewd comments in the workplace, and on at least one occasion sought to kiss a woman working for her.”

Two days before The Chronicle published its findings, Emmett Carson, Chief Executive Officer of the Foundation, announced that an internal investigation of the allegations is being “conducted by Sarah Hall, a Washington, DC, based senior counsel at Thompson Hine and a former federal prosecutor.” According to The Chronicle, “The Foundation said in a statement that the ‘investigation into alleged incidents of misconduct will continue, and at the conclusion of that investigation SVCF will take whatever action is necessary to preserve the integrity of our organization.’”

On April 19, 2018, a day after The Chronicle published its report, the Foundation confirmed that Loijens had resigned.

On April 26, 2018, The Chronicle reported that the Foundation’s Board placed Carson on indefinite, paid administrative leave. Greg Avis, a founding Board member and former Board Chair, has been appointed interim CEO. The investigation continues and has been expanded.

On May 2, 2018, Silicon Valley Business Journal reported that Daiva Natochy, the Foundation’s Vice President for Talent, Recruitment and Culture, has resigned.

The Silicon Valley Community Foundation has many issues. The allegations of bullying and sexual harassment leveled against Loijens are just part of the problem. However, Loijens alleged behavior is not just a problem for the Foundation; it is a challenge for the fundraising profession as well.

Loijens behavior, if true, could be construed as a violation of the AFP Code of Ethical Standards. Specifically, Loijens alleged behavior appears to be in conflict with the following provisions, at a minimum:

Do You Care If I Renew My CFRE? Vote Now.

I’m frustrated.

I’ve been a Certified Fundraising Executive (CFRE) since 1994. That means I’ve held the credential longer than at least 89 percent of all current CFREs! I’ve also taught the CFRE Review Course. Clearly, I’m committed to the idea of professional certification for fundraising practitioners.

Unfortunately, the CFRE designation has failed to realize its potential. In fact, the credential is becoming less, rather than more, relevant.

That’s why I’ve tentatively decided not to renew my certification this month UNLESS you tell me I should renew.

I’ve come up with a creative way for you to vote. My method will allow you to not only register a vote in favor of renewal, you’ll be able to convey how passionately you feel about renewal. To vote in favor of my renewal, simply go to my GoFundMe site (VOTE: Michael’s CFRE Renewal Fund) and make a donation. I estimate that renewing my CFRE and running this mini-campaign will cost approximately $600. If you think I should renew, contribute one dollar. If you feel more strongly that I should renew, contribute more, up to the $600 goal.

If we reach the goal of $600 by June 14, 2015, I will submit my renewal application to CFRE International. If we do not reach the goal, I will evaluate the feedback I receive and make a final decision about renewal by June 14. In any case, I will donate any unused funds to either CFRE International or the Association of Fundraising Professionals Foundation. Donations to this mini-campaign are not tax-deductible.

If you believe that I should not bother renewing my CFRE designation, you do not have to do anything to register your vote. I’ll see how many people visit this blog post and be able to compare that number with the number of people who vote with their dollars. So, I’ll see how many readers are voting by not actively voting.

With this method of voting, I will be able to gauge not just how much casual support there is for CFRE, but how much passionate support there is.

For now, I’m not passionate enough about CFRE to continue to spend my own money on renewal. Let me explain my position:

Lack of Commitment. By tentatively deciding not to renew my certification, I’m in good company. Of the eight past Board Chairs of CFRE International, the organization that controls the credential, three did not hold the CFRE designation as of 2013, according to the group’s annual report. In other words, 37.5 percent of past CFRE International Board Chairs do not hold the CFRE designation!

While CFRE International claims to have a high overall retention rate among CFREs, there is really no way to evaluate this. All the numbers reported by CFRE International prior to 2013 are suspect, according to Eva Aldrich, CFRE, President/CEO of CFRE International.

Anemic Numbers. Supposedly, a new technology system now allows for accurate reporting. Nevertheless, Aldrich has refused multiple requests to provide counts of the number of CFREs by country. So, we have no way of knowing, for example, whether the number of CFREs in the USA is growing, shrinking, or remaining the same. However, since 85 to 90 percent of all CFREs reside in the USA, I’ll assume, for the sake of this post, that the American CFRE growth rate is comparable to the overall growth rate.

In January 2015, CFRE International issued a statement, complete with a photo of fireworks, boasting that its 5,451 CFREs in 2014 represented a three percent growth rate over 2013. (Incidentally, the number of CFREs reported for 2012 was 5,630, which Aldrich now conveniently claims, was an inaccurate number; she further claims that she cannot ascertain the real number nor can she even estimate the degree of variance.)

The 2013-2014 growth rate of three percent seemed modest to me, certainly not worthy of fireworks. So, I did some research. Using data reported by The Urban Institute, I discovered that the growth rate among nonprofit organizations with revenue of $500,000 or more — in other words, among those organizations most likely to have someone on staff doing at least some professional fundraising — the growth rate was 3.6 percent. What this means is that the universe of nonprofit organizations doing fundraising has grown faster than the number of CFREs.

I’ll express this another way: Despite its modest growth, CFRE is growing more slowly than the market and, therefore, is actually losing market share.

CFRE is becoming less relevant!

Is CFRE Spinning Its Wheels?

I’m not sure. CFRE International is either spinning its wheels or it is poised for growth. Either way, it needs and welcomes our advice.

I see articles and postings that promote the Certified Fund-Raising Executive (CFRE) credential from time to time. Most recently, I saw:

●  “New CFRE Website and Online App” posted by Garvin Maffett in the CFRE International Network Group on LinkedIn (Oct. 31, 2013)

● “Are You Certified?” by F. Duke Haddad in FundRaising Success (Nov. 8, 2013)

As someone who has held the CFRE designation longer than 89 percent of all others, I care about and support the credential. So, I’m pleased to see that CFRE International has a new, easier to use, more robust, more service-oriented website. I’m also pleased to see others promoting the CFRE designation.

However, despite my enthusiasm for the CFRE credential, I continue to be troubled. Two years ago on this site, I asked, “Does CFRE Have a Future?” My concerns persist. As of 2012, there were 5,630 CFRE holders worldwide, according to the CFRE International annual report. That’s just a 5.7 percent increase over the number of certified professionals in 2007.

That’s a miniscule five-year growth rate.

Depending on how you count larger (expenditures of $500,000 or more) and active public charities, the sector has seen growth of approximately 12 percent in the US since 2004/05.

That means the CFRE growth rate of 5.7 percent has not even kept pace with the growth rate of the nonprofit sector in the US. Every year, CFRE has been becoming less significant, relative to the market, despite its modest rate of growth.

The number of CFREs relative to the number of development professionals is modest at best. The number of CFREs in the US and Canada is about 17 percent of the number of members of the Association of Fundraising Professionals.