Aggregated External News

Digital State: How the Internet is Changing Everything
Simon Pont (Author)

Download: £12.14

(Visit the Hot Future Releases in Web Marketing list for authoritative information on this product's current rank.)

What a complete and utter farce!

The Institute of Fundraising Special Interest Group for major gift fundraisers attempted rather pathetically to organise a seminar in a business school. Perhaps they'd have had more success in the proverbial brewery, though I rather doubt it.

Instead of first come first served for tickets we were all invited to sign up and wait for the ticket allocation. I got my confirmation to attend (I thought) a few days ago. Ah.... but that was not the right list. Apparently tickets had been allocated to a few lucky takers and the rest of us (quite a few) were turned away having spent hours getting there! Paying customers, turned away. Is that any way to run an event?

You might think that, as an events fundraiser (we were after all paying for the event) you'd say yippy get a bigger room, another venue, but somehow pack them in. OR, at the very least, have the sense to let people know that the event was over-subscribed and please, don't waste your time coming.

If you can't run a seminar for a few dozen interested fundraisers, what hope is there of persuading major givers to part with their (mostly) hard earned cash. to paraphrase Charlie Brown, I weep for my generation!

What a complete and utter farce!

A certain group of fundraisers attempted rather pathetically to organise a seminar in a business school. Perhaps they'd have had more success in the proverbial brewery, though I rather doubt it.

Instead of first come first served for tickets we were all invited to sign up and wait for the ticket allocation. I got my confirmation to attend (I thought) a few days ago. Ah.... but that was not the right list. Apparently tickets had been allocated to a few lucky takers and the rest of us (quite a few) were turned away having spent hours getting there! Paying customers, turned away. Is that any way to run an event?

You might think that, as an events fundraiser (we were after all paying for the event) you'd say yippy get a bigger room, another venue, but somehow pack them in. OR, at the very least, have the sense to let people know that the event was over-subscribed and please, don't waste your time coming.

If you can't run a seminar for a few dozen interested fundraisers, what hope is there of persuading major givers to part with their (mostly) hard earned cash. to paraphrase Charlie Brown, I weep for my generation!

When Linkin Park rose to fame from their breakthrough album, Hybrid Theory, they gained an immense following, who to this day, cherish the band for their nu metal and rap metal qualities.

VIP Seats To MusiCares Event
Credit/Copyright: Omaze.com

Today, after collaborating with artists such as Jay-Z, selling over 50 million albums worldwide, and winning two Grammy Awards, the band is making themselves available to you. Omaze.com offering anyone – not just one – but two chances to kick it with the guys from Linkin Park. Read on to find out more.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10150-two-dream-day-experiences-with-linkin-park

Russell Simmons is to host a reception on race in America featuring the Center for Social Inclusion (CSI) at his new Beverly Hills home next week.

The Center for Social Inclusion works to unite public policy research and grassroots advocacy to transform structural inequity and exclusion into structural fairness and inclusion. They work with community groups and national organizations to develop policy ideas, foster effective leadership, and develop communications tools for an opportunity-rich world in which we all will thrive.

WHO: Russell Simmons, business leader and philanthropist, and the Center for Social Inclusion (CSI). Celebrities, political leaders, advocates and other dignitaries will be in attendance.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10149-russell-simmons-to-host-reception-on-race-in-america

Such reports tend to be 'deeply boring' and organisations should favour sound bites instead, says Joe Saxton, co-founder of nfpSynergy

The Elton John AIDS Foundation (EJAF) has announced its first round of grants for calendar year 2013, totaling $850,000.

The three new and two renewal grants support organizations working to address some of the most critical challenges of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the United States. 

The projects being supported include:
• efforts to improve access to HIV-related medical services in Puerto Rico, an area of the country hardest hit by the AIDS epidemic;


More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10148-elton-john-aids-foundation-announces-2013-grants

Joe Saxton tells CFG conference that 'tweets' and 'nuggets of information' are more effective in communicating impact than large 30-50 page reports

Charities should not produce impact reports but should instead concentrate on putting together soundbites to describe the impact they are having, delegates at the Charity Finance Group's annual conference were told today.

Speaking in London, Joe Saxton, co-founder of nfpSynergy, said in a session about accountability and transparency that he would encourage charities not to publish an impact report.

"If you have one everyone thinks the job is done," he said. "And by and large most impact reports that I've read are not good at telling me what the impact was."

He said charities should instead consider whether they could tweet about the impact they have had. "Turn the impact report into soundbites," he said.

Saxton said the most important part of impact reporting was knowing the audience you were talking to. "Often [impact reporting] is not designed with the audience in mind," he said.

Speaking to the network after his speech, Saxton said that if someone asked him the top 10 things a charity should do when it came to impact reporting, he would not include writing an impact report among them. "A 30-50 page impact report is not the best way to do it," he said. "It should be more about nuggets of information that are short and snappy."

Kate Lee, chief executive of Myton Hospice Group, who held the session with Saxton, said that when it came to being transparent and accountable, charities should publish calculations alongside any information on how much they spent on admin.

"Understanding how you calculated how much you spent on admin is as important as what figure you publish," she said.

She said charities should also be thinking about publishing information on other areas including complaints they had received and what they learnt from them, and the content of board meetings.

"There may be some competitive advantage in becoming more transparent," she said. "There's evidence to show that [being transparent] is one of the key traits needed to help build innovation."

Lee said it was increasingly important for charities to become more transparent in order to ensure the public understood how they worked. "As the UK public sector is becoming more transparent, the pressure is growing on charities to do the same," she said.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Voluntary sector network blog
• Impact and effectiveness
• Voluntary sector

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Yesterday, chart-dominating singer, songwriter, and actress Demi Lovato was recognized by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) for her work as a mentor to young adults with mental health and substance use challenges.

Lovato received the award from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at the National Children’s Mental Health Awareness Day press briefing, held at the University of the District of Columbia Community College in Washington, D.C.

“Every young person faces challenges as they work toward becoming an independent adult, and for those with mental health challenges, it can be even more of a struggle,” said Lovato. “I want those young adults to know that your life has meaning and you can reach out to someone you trust for support and overcome any challenges in your life.”

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10147-demi-lovato-honored-on-national-childrens-mental-health-awareness-day

On Monday, May 6, President Bill Clinton participated in two open press events about the Clinton Foundation's Clinton Health Matters Initiative (CHMI) and the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).

President Clinton participated in a panel discussion on prescription drug abuse in the morning, and hosted the CGI Mid-Year Meeting in the afternoon.

Clinton joined New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, New York University President John Sexton, and National Institute on Drug Abuse Director Dr. Nora Volkow MD, for a panel discussion moderated by the Wall Street Journal’s Melinda Beck on prescription drug abuse.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10146-bill-clinton-joins-panel-on-prescription-drug-abuse

Ian Somerhalder – outspoken actor, activist and co-founder of the Ian Somerhalder Foundation – is working hard to help change the face of media.

Ian Somerhalder With RYOT Staff
Credit/Copyright: IS Foundation

He has recently committed to the advisory board of RYOT.org, a highly progressive interactive news site that allows readers to become the news as well as donate to causes and organizations that are working to make a difference in the world.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10145-ian-somerhalder-helps-start-a-ryot

The award-winning classical trumpeter Alison Balsom took time out of her hectic schedule to pop into the Nordoff Robbins London Centre last week and check out their music therapy work.

Alison, who will be receiving the PPL Classical Award at this year’s O2 Silver Clef Awards, met with one of the centre’s clients and spoke at length with music therapists.

Following the visit Alison said, “It’s a lifetime opportunity for any artist to come here and witness first hand the importance of Nordoff Robbins and how their music therapy is dramatically changing people’s lives.”

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10144-trumpeter-alison-balsom-visits-music-therapy-centre

One Direction is a boy band from the UK consisting of members Niall Horan, Zayn Malik, Liam Payne, Harry Styles and Louis Tomlinson.

Read more about One Direction's charity work and events.

Twenty cities have more than 100,000 millionaires – but which has most? And where do the world's billionaires live?
Millionaires | Multi-millionaires | Billionaires | Country
• Get the data
• More data journalism and data visualisations from the Guardian

Where do the world's wealthiest individuals live? Well, it depends if you're talking millionaires, multi-millionaires or billionaires, according to a new list of the global rich.

Tokyo may contain the most millionaires (US$), however London is the city with the highest number of multi-millionaires - defined as individuals with over $30m each. For the fattest of the fat cats, though, look to New York where 70 billionaires have made their home - or maybe one of their many global homes.

The ranking of top global cities for millionaires, multi-millionaires and billionaires has been compiled by London based wealth consultancy WealthInsight using five years of data analysed by their team. So what insights can we glean from this latest rich list?

Millionaires

Tokyo tops the list with 461,000 millionaires at the end of 2012, followed by New York City with 389,000. London and Paris take third and fourth place respectively with Frankfurt, Beijing, Osaka, Hong Kong and Shanghai making up the the remainder of the top ten. Interestingly the second highest city for billionaires, Moscow, comes in 20th for its number of millionaires.

The report also looks at the proportion of each country's millionaires in each city. Tokyo accounts for 21% of Japan's millionaires whereas New York City accounts for only 7% of US millionaires. Cities with much higher proportions include Seoul (83%), Rome (49%) and London (42%).

Multi-millionaires

Now for the big players, those individuals with over $30m each. London is top of the list as the city with the most multi-millionaires (4,224) but Tokyo and Singapore follow in second and third place respectively.

New York makes an appearance at fourth place on the rankings – but if you're surprised by the Big Apple's slip down the rich list, WealthInsight do point out that 'many wealthy New Yorkers live off the Island in cities such as Greenwich which has over 350 multi-millionaires on its own'.

Billionaires

New York (Manhattan) contains the most billionaires according to the release with 70 in the city. Moscow has 64 billionaires and London boasts 54.

Moscow, Mumbai and Istanbul are significantly higher on the billionaire list than they are on the millionaire rankings. Moscow which is ranked 20th for millionaires and is absent from the top 20 cities for multi-millionaires, comes in at third place on the billionaires list.

Hong Kong, Beijing, Mumbai, Istanbul, Shanghai, Paris and Los Angeles all make it into the top ten.

Country

Despite Tokyo topping the list as the city with the highest total of millionaires, when it comes to country level the US boasts the most with 5,231 in 2012 – a figure WealthInsight expects to jump to 7,318 by 2020.

But the country to watch according to the wealth consultancy is China. They predict that it will overtake Japan and Germany to become the second largest wealth market in the world by 2020. India is also expected to rise up the rankings, from 11th place in 2012 to 5th place in 2020.

The tables below show the top ten cities for millionaires, multi-millionaires and billionaires. The downloadable spreadsheet contains data at country level and the proportion of country's millionaires in each city. What can you do with this?

Data summary

Download the data

• DATA: download the full spreadsheet

More data

More data journalism and data visualisations from the Guardian

• Follow us on Twitter
• Like us on Facebook

• London
• Rich lists
• New York
• Japan

Ami Sedghi
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Dan Zarrella is one of my favorite thinkers on social media, because he mines massive amounts of data and bases his recommendations on hard science. This is relatively rare yet needed in the field of social media marketing, and so he’s well worth following.

He recently analyzed 2.7 million tweets and concluded the following that people retweet when they are asked nicely as part of the original tweet.  Conclusion?  If you have something you want people to spread, ask them - with a pretty please.

We must define and rebrand 'admin' costs – as vital to a charity's management – and admit that some spend too little on the cause

There is a cold war in the charity world. On one side are the public and the vast majority of donors. The public don't like admin costs, overheads and waste, and they don't like to think of their money going to anything but the charity's cause.

Our research at nfpSynergy shows this antipathy to costs and overheads very clearly. People typically think about 10% of their donation at most should go on admin and about 20% be spent on fundraising.

They see admin costs as worse than fundraising costs. Their top worry is how much of their money goes on "the cause". They are also concerned about high salaries for chief executives and are more likely to see them as admin costs rather than the cause.

In this respect the public are very conservative. We may not like what they think, but as donors they should not be ignored.

In the opposing corner are those who hate it when donors and philanthropists tell them how they think charities should be run. The very same people who would claim that it's important to be donor-centric then bust a blood vessel when those donors tell them a home truth they don't want to hear: they think donors should be seen giving not heard complaining.

I describe it as a cold war because, for the most part, these two differing views on admin and overheads don't get discussed much. Only occasionally does a skirmish break out that symbolises the whole debate. One such skirmish was the recent interview with philanthropist Gina Miller.

When people like Gina Miller, a substantial donor, raise concerns about the levels of salaries and admin costs, it unleashes an outpouring of anger and venom from people in the sector. Yet from my experience and our research, her perspective is very close to that of many members of the public.

The polarised and subterranean nature of this debate is both sterile and unhelpful. The public appear to want no money to be spent on admin at all, while various sector commentators end up sounding as if it's fine for a charity to spend all its money on it.

There's no doubt that we have managed to end up with admin costs branded as an organisational stain impossible to remove, rather than the lubricant that makes charities work effectively. But, in my book, any charity whose formal accounts indicate administration costs of more than about 10%, and fundraising costs of more than 20-30%, has probably got the balance of its expenditure wrong.

My views matter little though – it's the public and donors we need to persuade, and telling them that there's "no such thing as admin costs" is hardly likely to change many minds.

So, here are my five steps for moving the debate forward:

1. Let's define admin costs. One key problem is admin costs appear to be poorly defined. The amount of money really spent on "admin" is fluid. Is the chief executive admin? Is the administrator to a team of service-delivery staff admin or the cause? What about the cost of buildings and offices? The list of queries is almost endless. The level of admin costs for a charity is currently what the charity wants it to be. The Charity Commission needs to fix this; hopefully the forthcoming SORP consultation will help.

2. Let's stop talking "admin" and start talking "management". We need to rebrand admin costs to indicate that they are a vital ingredient of effective charity management. As long as we give the appearance of admin being a waste we can't quite eradicate, we shouldn't be surprised that the public don't like it. I must confess that charities that go on about every penny going straight to the cause don't help, particularly when they have admin costs similar to most others, whether they like to admit it or not.

3. We need to explain more and attack less. In a battle of charities vs the public, it will be charities that need to do most of the work to change attitudes. Whatever we call admin, we need to explain why it's a necessary cost and why without it, donors' money would be less well spent. We cannot expect that the average donor will have their views changed on overheads if it isn't charities that tell them. It's a fantastic opportunity to engage donors and supporters and explain how a modern charity works. So try this simple test: count on your fingers the articles by charities explaining why they spend what they spend on fundraising and admin. Bet you didn't need two hands.

4. We need to come up with new indices to judge charities by. We can't be surprised that the public judge a charity by its admin or fundraising costs since those costs are readily available and can be understood instantly. Compare that to the lengthy and usually turgid annual or impact reports that charities produce. If we want people to stop judging charities by admin or fundraising costs, we need to give them alternatives that are as simple and available as those they replace.

5. We need to admit that charities can spend too little on the cause. Recently, a charity rang me asking for money and it only spent 5% of its income on the cause. For me, that's too little and I sincerely hope that it would be too little for most people in the charity sector. I would suggest that alarm bells should start to ring if any charity spends less than half of its income on the cause. There are exceptions to this, such as charities with high levels of trading income and, on average, smaller charities. We could start with a clear analysis of the typical level of fundraising and admin costs for the largest fundraising charities. That way, we'll know what the norm is.

We could rant and rave about people who criticise the levels of admin costs in charities, but I'd rather we accepted that their views are typical of many and work to change them. Shouting at outsiders for their ignorance may satisfy a feeling of righteous indignation, but it will do little to change anybody's views. And if we want people to donate more, we need to understand where they are coming from, not just tell them where we want them to go.

Joe Saxton is founder of NfpSynergy.

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the voluntary sector network, click here.

• Fundraising
• Voluntary sector network blog
• Voluntary sector
• Charities

Joe Saxton
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Yesterday we passed along some pointers regarding converting online leads.

One of the key bits of advice was not to direct someone responding to your online appeal to your website homepage. The appeal should link directly to a ‘purpose-built’ landing page … no distractions, direct reinforcement of your original (motivating) message, immediate closure of transaction.

It seems fitting to talk today about the direct mail analogue to the landing page … the reply form. It’s got to work. Or, as direct mail guru Jerry Huntsinger says, “…the next sound you’ll hear will be your package falling into the recycling bin”.

In one of his many invaluable ‘Tutorials” housed on the SOFII website, Jerry offers Seven golden rules for the reply form.

I’ll make it (too) easy for you and list Jerry’s rules here.

1. Make the reply device ‘easy to find’
2. Make your reply slip ‘easy to read’
3. And ‘easy to fill in’
4. Make the proposition ‘easy to understand’
5. Make it ‘easy to mark’ the choice of gift amount
6. Make the secondary offer ‘easy to understand’
7. Make your reply device ‘easy to get excited about’ the second time around

But do yourself a favor, use this link, and get the detail directly from Jerry.

Tom

P.S. BTW, much of this advice applies to that landing page as well! The magic word in both cases: EASY!

Celebrities with long track-records of supporting our troops, including Mark Wahlberg, Rosie O'Donnell, Elizabeth Shatner, Cheyenne Jackson, Real New York Housewife Jill Kamen Zarin, Buzz Aldrin and others, pitched in through this past weekend to use their social media feeds to urge support for a drive by the Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund to raise $100 million from private sources to construct nine state-of-the-art NICoE Satellite Centers for the diagnosis and treatment of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress (PTS).

Two of the nine centers are already under construction, in Fort Belvoir, Virginia and Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

The digital campaign was timed to the airing of a story on the CBS show 60 Minutes on Sunday, May 5 which told the inspiring stories of military veterans and their battle against the invisible wounds of war.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10143-stars-support-heroes-with-invisible-wounds-of-war

The Headstrong Project will host Words of War in support of comprehensive mental healthcare for military veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan on Wednesday.

This presentation of wartime poetry, literature, theater and letters articulate the exuberance and ideals that drive men to war, the thrill and horror of combat, the difficulties of returning home, and the experience of family members worried about their loved one at war. Iconic wartime images will be projected during the presentation.

Among those who are expected to take part at the event are Executive Director, Chairman of Headstrong Project, Zach Iscol, Jake Gyllenhaal, Adam Driver, Anthony Edwards, Anna Chlumsky (Veep), Jamie Hector (The Wire), Joanne Tucker (Theatre of War), Jonathan Alpeyrie (photographer) and more.

More: http://www.looktothestars.org/news/10142-jake-gyllenhaal-and-anthony-edwards-to-attend-words-of-war