Nonprofits First
News & Press
Blog Home All Blogs

How to Raise Serious Money For Your Nonprofit In the Next 30 Days

Posted By Charlotte Gill, Monday, December 5, 2016
Updated: Thursday, December 22, 2016

It’s December, the month when many of you will try to raise money. A lot. For some of you, we’re talking a third (or more) of your total individual donations for the entire year.

In one month. Jingle all the way, indeed.

It’s really hard. The pressure to get every dollar in the door can become overwhelming. A bad December can be devastating to your organization, even if every other month had been flawless.

I’m here to help.

Today, I’m going to tell you exactly how you can raise significant money for your nonprofit in just thirty days.

My three-step plan does not include the lottery or bank robbery. Rather, it’s precisely what I’ve personally done at several nonprofits with great success.

If you follow this plan, you will raise money.

December fundraising is frantic. But my 3-step plan can help. I speak from experience.

At the time, I was the Assistant Vice President of Development at New York Law School.

By December 30th, the gift still hadn’t closed. I was headed out of town and had to beg an airline employee at LaGuardia Airport to please keep the gate door open for five more minutes so I could close the gift before I got on the flight.

Amazingly, she actually did it! I closed the gift.

A million dollars. Seriously.

To this day Delta remains my favorite airline.

So how did I do it? Let’s get right to it…


There’s no way around it. The next 30 days are going to be brutal.

Self-care, and preventing burnout in yourself and your staff is key. I’ve written before about how to avoid burnout. I strongly suggest you read the post. Take this very seriously.

Self-care and preventing burnout is as much for you as it is for your staff and clients, and publicly talking about battling burnout is a sign of strong leadership.

At the end of the day it’s only when the entire fundraising team is firing on all cylinders that your clients and other stakeholders that depend on your organization truly benefit.


There’s a simple formula I use. It goes like this:

Compelling story + Credible messenger = Fundraising success.

The “credible messenger” part is easy. As a staff member of an organization you deeply believe in and care about, you are as credible a messenger as it gets.

But many get hung up on the “compelling story” part.

Focus on your compelling story by drafting a Success and Story Cheat Sheet. The SSCS is your guide to the top messages you want to hit home with individual donors over the next thirty days. It’s 1-2 pages and has the following three items:

a) Five key program successes from the past calendar year: these include key points that show off your organization in the best light and demonstrate impact. Examples:

  • This year we fed hot, nutritious meals to 90,000 people who otherwise would have gone hungry.
  • Over the past 12 months, we placed 15 guide dogs with blind or partially sighted people that desperately needed assistance.
  • The City Council publicly recognized our award winning substance abuse programs and renewed funding for three more years.
  • Thanks to our incredible staff and board we moved our headquarters to a new expanded location near public transportation, so now it is even easier for our clients to receive services.

I like to have five key successes on hand so that no matter what a donor is interested in, I know that I’ll have a great success to share. These impact successes should be macro in nature and demonstrate the broad successes your organization has had with large groups of clients or stakeholders.

b) Two transformative client or stakeholder stories: Include two full stories demonstrating the personal impact of your organization. Unlike the key program successes you compiled above, these stories must focus on impact at the individual or family level.

You are looking to answer the question, “How has an individual or family been personally transformed by your organization?”

During the holiday season, donors are bombarded by asks for money. You will raise the most money, and cut through the noise, by telling donors and prospects about how your organization is transforming lives.

c) Three to five goals for your organization in 2016: Now that you have the tools to demonstrate how your organization impacted people in the past, also have on hand three to five ways the organization will continue or expand its work next year.

Let your donors and prospects know what you will accomplish with their gifts. Give them the opportunity to join with your nonprofit to assist even more people.

Once your SSCS in drafted, feel free to share it beyond the development staff. A two-page document like this can be incredibly valuable to your board, program staff, and volunteers. Each person who loves your organization will be talking to hundreds of people over the next 30 days who could potentially make an end-of-year gift to your organization.

These people are credible messengers, and the SSCC gives them the tools they need to deliver a compelling story.


OK, before you actually start calling prospects, I have a question first. Have you been cultivating relationships with your donors all year long? Or have you made them feel like a human ATM?

If you’re getting a sinking feeling right about now, it’s time for some emergency donor cultivation. While it’s late in the game, there is still time left to update your donors before making the ask. Go read the “ATM” article I just linked to. It describes what to do.

Got the cultivation stuff down? Now it’s time for good old-fashioned elbow grease. Get on the phones (or email if the donor prefers) and ask for a gift.

Obvious? Maybe. Then just do it!

Run the list of your top prospects or donors that need to renew before the end of the year and start making calls. A few things that will make this easier:

  • Block the time on your calendar, and unless you need to meet with a donor, don’t allow a meeting to supersede your call time.
  • Block time with your Executive Director or CEO so that they can make calls.
  • Make sure your staff is blocking time for calls as well and be respectful of their call time. This time is absolutely critical to bringing in year-end revenue.

While I prefer talking to donors on the phone, if you can’t reach a donor by the middle of the month (or you know that they do not like to talk on the phone), move to a very personal email communication. Be sure to include the key points from the Success and Story Cheat Sheet and include a specific ask.

By following the above steps, you will raise significant money.

Will it be hard work? Yes.

Will it be worth it? Yes.

Please consider sharing any other tips you have to raise money during the end of the year push in the comments below.

Also, if you need some last minute inspiration, or want to bounce an idea off of me during this stressful fundraising season, please feel free to email me at I know how difficult these final weeks are and I’m happy to be a collaborator during this stressful time.

Original post can be found here.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)

Ransomware Strikes MSP Twice In One Day

Posted By Josh Hirsch, Tuesday, November 29, 2016

In a recent survey of over 1,000 managed service providers around the world, 31 percent reported they had experienced multiple ransomware attacks against their customers in a single day. Here is one such story.

Careworx is an MSPmentor, top 100 global managed service provider (MSP) that delivers ServiceNow in a managed SaaS-based offering and enables companies to extend IT capabilities through co-managed helpdesk solutions, IT automation services and Managed IT solutions including Business Continuity and cloud services. The CareWorx Senior Care division specializes in technology solutions and managed services for the senior care market.

According to Michael Zeeb, Senior Systems Engineer at Careworx, Datto is their go-to technology for protecting the data of their customers. This loyalty continues to work in their favor, especially one recent day when two of their customers fell victim to ransomware.

One morning, the Careworx engineer received a call from a client who was unable to access any of the company’s critical business files. It turned out the files had been encrypted by hackers who were demanding a hefty ransom from the client in order to access the key to regain control of the files. A few seconds later, a similar call from a separate customer came through the Careworx support line. It was going to be one of those days.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)

Do you know about #GivingTuesday?

Posted By Josh Hirsch, Tuesday, November 29, 2016

GivingTuesday is a global day of giving fueled by the power of social media and collaboration. Celebrated on the Tuesday following Thanksgiving (in the U.S.) and the widely recognized shopping events Black Friday and Cyber Monday, #GivingTuesday kicks off the charitable season, when many focus on their holiday and end-of-year giving. Which nonprofits are you supporting today?

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)

4 Key Stages for Measuring Your Media Outcomes

Posted By Josh Hirsch, Monday, November 21, 2016

What can media accomplish? What can it affect? These are questions funders often ask. Restating those questions from an evaluation perspective translates to: how can one measure the impact of media? To understand how to measure media, we must first understand the strategy behind media.


  • Draws attention to issues.
  • Improves understanding of issues and possible solutions.
  • Inspires people to care.
  • Motivates people to do something.
  • Connects people with solutions.

I previously spoke to these, diagramming the flow of media effect, where people move through various different states from awareness to action. Looking at the model, it is easy to think that one piece of content can affect change. However, it is rare that just one exposure to one piece of content affects change; rather it is the sum of multiple experiences – a subset of which is content. Savvy media professionals take into account the environmental factors in the development and distribution of their content, building on what is available, constructing multiple pieces of content for distribution, and developing a campaign for that distribution to affect their target audiences.

During the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio, NBC aired several commercials from Proctor and Gamble (P&G) in which athletes’ moms were featured as those who helped develop the inner strength of their children. The connection was to P&G’s products and the company’s role as a “proud sponsor of Moms” – a continuation of P&G’s commercials from the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics and the 2012 London Olympics. This long-running campaign seeks to tie greatness to the support of moms; Proctor and Gamble’s products in turn provide needed support for a mom’s work. In this example, P&G is targeting parents – specifically moms of children who dream – a clear target audience. The content is tied to the Olympics, where P&G can spotlight the greatness of youth affected by the support of moms. They effectively connect how moms might feel about their relationship with their children and their hope for success with the excitement and emotions of the Games. Finally, their content ran concurrent to the Games on various platforms that moms might watch, including television and the Internet.

These campaigns often consist of a series of content that have various components, which include:

  • Background awareness and education content that makes people aware of the issue and possible solutions.
  • Strong, seminal pieces that build on the background content to bring the issue and possible solutions to the forefront.

The background content tends to be short pieces, enough to convey a thought or idea and little more. The seminal pieces tend to be longer, perhaps in the form of a documentary, news piece, or town-hall meeting. They build on the content already presented, bringing attention to those issues that have been rattling around in the background.

When and What to Measure

There is no magic formula for measurement, but rather it must be tied to the work and intended consequences. The work is really defined by four key stages: design, development, distribution, and reflection. Each stage has opportunities for measurement and can engage various associated methods.


What We Do: In this stage, before content is produced, the project managers, production staff, and other engaged individuals (possibly funders or key informants) consider what changes they want to affect in the audience and how they will construct their work. The focus is on building a draft campaign plan and an initial discussion of the types of content and topics.

What We Measure: Measurement here focuses on understanding what the audience currently knows, their attitudes, and likelihood of engaging in the issues of the campaign. Various methods can be used to collect the needed information. Often surveys are employed, but other more traditional methods include interviews and focus groups of audience representatives.


What We Do: In the development stage, the production staff is considering and putting together content for distribution. The ideal content will depend on the baseline understanding of the audience from the design phase—using known industry methods for development of content for specific platforms—and the desired changes; multiple pieces of content are created, targeting the various levels in the media flow. Content may include background pieces that build a knowledge base or seminal pieces that pull information together in a more dramatic manner.

What We Measure: Measurement of the preliminary content often focuses on each piece’s individual effects with audience representatives viewing the material and providing feedback. Data collection can be in the form of pre-/post-tests (i.e., having people state their views or thoughts before and then after being exposed to the content), interviews, and focus groups. Rarely are the audience representatives exposed to multiple pieces of content with the goal of assessing the cumulative effects; that typically occurs with the actual audience in the next stage. The focus of this stage is quality of content and whether it has the expected individual effect.


What We Do: In this stage, the developed content is shared with the audiences. It is here that we focus on:

  • Dosage – How much content is being exposed to the audience?
  • Engagement – How involved is the audience with the content?
  • Effect – Are the audience members moving through the various points of the flow?

Media professionals are now concerned with learning whether the audience is experiencing enough of the content to affect change.

Audience impact can be happening at various levels within the flow. It is here where adjustments can be made to the amount and how the content is shared. Tracking where the audience is within the flow and providing feedback to the distributors, helping them identify what content should be disseminated. It is also at this stage where it might be decided that new content needs to be developed due to the responses of the audience, sending the process back to the development phase.

What We Measure: Here measurement reflects the interest to tie the content to possible changes in the audience. Often engaged in surveys, the more general audience is asked how much of the content they have experienced and where they sit in the flow. The audience is asked this on a periodic basis, allowing for the assessment of trends, moving from a baseline of having no exposure to the content to the completion of the campaign.


What We Do: Occurring at the completion of the campaign, the funders and developers of the content ask whether the campaign had its intended impact. If the processes of evaluation, data collection, and analysis have occurred in each of the previous stages, the probability of having a good outcome is pretty high at this point. It is at this stage where the media professionals and key stakeholders look at the results of the work and have an opportunity to learn from the overall experience, informing future campaigns.

What We Measure: Depending on what has been collected throughout the campaign, trends in audience knowledge, views, and activities might be considered. More likely, these are measured at the end of the campaign and compared to the audience’s baseline. More interested parties might dig deeper into the data, assessing what factors within and external to the campaign drove these changes.

Why is this Important?

Evaluation at all of these stages is helpful and in some cases critical to the success of the campaigns. The most often conducted assessment, and frankly most critical, is the baseline and post campaign comparison, assessing the effectiveness of the campaign. However, this assumes that the media developed will have the expected impact. This can have disastrous consequences. As seen in research on the effect of the well-known “This is Your Brain On Drugs” campaign, where funds went to media to promote the dangers of drug use. Rather than having the intended impact of driving youth away from drug use, there is evidence that the effect was opposite. By engaging in better testing in design and periodic assessments during the distribution phase, the funders and content developers could have caught the issues earlier and adjusted the content to better affect the audience.

AT&T’s “It can wait” campaign—an effort to discourage and reduce texting while driving—is an example of an attempt to use evaluation in a more proactive manner. Measuring changes in attitudes, changes in behavior, as well as changes in the uptake of the content, this campaign stepped beyond the pre-test/post-test structure. While the longer-term outcomes appear to not yet be affected and may not ever be affected by AT&T’s campaign, AT&T is conducting surveys, focus groups as well as using social media analytics and data available from states to assess whether there is an effect.

However, the process of capturing this data, including a representative population to initially assess the content in the design phase, is expensive and often not funded. Instead, both the funder and proxies within the organization developing the content are often used.


For you and your organization, when you consider or implement media campaigns, it is important that you do as many of the following:

Stage Task Question(s) to Ask
Design Develop clear goals and outcomes for the campaign, informed by an assessment of the target audience. What are you trying to achieve and with what audience?
Development Inform content development through the engagement of a representative group from your target audience. How did my test participants respond to the content?
Distribution Evaluate the progressive effect of your content on your target audience during the campaign and adjust your content as needed. Is the campaign moving as expected? What needs to be changed / improved?
Reflection Take the time to reflect at the end of the campaign as to lessons that could be learned. What should we do next time?
Across all four stages Invest in adequate resources to engage representatives of your target audience and assess effects of the campaign. Will your content make the difference you intend it to?

If you engage in these behaviors, you will have the information you need to increase the likelihood that your media campaign will be successful.

In the next series of blog posts, we will go more deeply into each of the steps. We will discuss measurement and how evaluation can provide you with the information you need to observe your impact, identify opportunities, and improve the chances of affecting change.

Original post can be found here.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)

The 2016 Elections | Impact on the Work of Charitable Nonprofits

Posted By Charlotte Gill, Friday, November 18, 2016

The November 8 elections produced some distinct surprises while also continuing numerous trends seen in recent years across the states. Early pronouncements from incoming and re-elected office holders suggest that policy decisions will be not only top-down from the federal government, but also bottom-up from localities and spread horizontally from one state to others.

Actions by Congress on issues like healthcare, such as altering the Affordable Care Act, will directly affect state finances – and impact the work of nonprofits beyond just those providing healthcare. State and local ballot measures on minimum wage and other policies will put pressure on Congress and other states to adjust employment laws– and affect the work of nonprofits as employers. The spread of trifecta government at the state level – as in one party controlling the governorship and majorities in both the state House and Senate – may escalate a trend among states to adopt austerity budgets and tax plans that undermine their long-term fiscal stability.

Some might see these and other changes in the policy ecosystem in which nonprofits operate as a three-dimensional chess board involving interactions between the federal, state, and local levels of government. But in fact, it is even more complex. The actions and reactions are equally dynamic among the three branches of government as judges, legislative bodies, and executives and administrative agencies exercise their separate authority and judgment. However viewed, the work of charitable nonprofits will be affected – positively and negatively – by changes in the policy ecosystem.

How these policy changes affect the ability of charitable nonprofits to advance their missions will depend on the two similarly separate yet interlocked ecosystems of the 501(c)(3) community. Charitable nonprofits must rally together to engage in advocacy at all levels and branches of government to ensure that elected officials understand the impact of policy proposals on the people and communities the politicians and their local nonprofits both serve. Also, the foundation community must make serious investments in charitable nonprofits to do that all-important advocacy work – especially at the state level that is the nexus to all policy action – to protect the work of foundations and nonprofits alike.

The following analyses of the 2016 election results at the federal level, state level, and ballot measures will be updated as more information becomes available:

Making Sense of the 2016 Federal Elections

The election of Donald J. Trump as the 45th president can be cast as a repudiation of “the establishment” – including both the Democratic and Republican parties. For the first time in American history, the party taking control of the White House actually lost seats in the U.S. House and Senate, suggesting that past actions and conventional wisdom may be of little guide in predicting and planning for federal policies. With that caveat in mind, readers are invited to consider what is known about key policy issues affecting the work of charitable nonprofits, gleaned from candidate Trump’s pronouncements and existing Congressional policy positions, particularly as announced by House Republicans.

  • Supreme Court: Once inaugurated on January 20, President Trump will be able immediately to nominate a Justice to fill the seat of Antonin Scalia who died last February. Considering that the average age on the Court is 69 years old, Trump may also have the opportunity to appoint two or more other Justices during his tenure. Scholars are predicting that his nominees, if confirmed by the Senate, are likely to create a Court more receptive to challenges to abortion rights, class-action lawsuits, environmental regulations, property use, and other issues. More immediately, the Trump administration will have the opportunity to alter the Obama administration’s position on a number of pending cases, including the case accepted for review in October concerning a school’s obligation to accommodate transgender students.
  • Executive Orders and Regulatory Reform: The Trump Transition office has announced that the incoming administration plans to pursue regulatory reform, including canceling several executive orders, issuing a temporary moratorium on all new regulation, and conducting “a thorough review to identify and eliminate unnecessary regulations that kill jobs and bloat government.” Likely Executive Orders facing harsh scrutiny relate to the status of immigrants, protections for gender identity, and numerous mandates on government contractors. The regulatory review effort may mirror the red-tape review process established by New Jersey Governor and Transition Office vice chair Chris Christie, a process that has resulted in significant cost savings for both nonprofits and state agencies over the past five years. See, e.g., testimony of the Center for Non-Profits, the state association of nonprofits in New Jersey. Regulatory review processes are common exercises initiated by new administrations at the federal and state levels, as reflected by the Grace Commission Reports in the first Reagan term, the Clinton-era National Partnership for Reinventing Government, and numerous government-nonprofit task forces in the states.
  • Spending Priorities: Early statements from the Trump Transition office suggest that the President-Elect is interested in increasing defense spending to levels that exceed the agreed-upon spending caps enacted last year and subject to the Budget Control Act of 2011. As written, that law imposes automatic spending cuts in equal measure to defense programs and non-mandatory domestic spending programs (that typically fund services provided by nonprofits on behalf of governments), an automatic process known as “sequestration.” Calls to increase defense spending, but not domestic, suggest that more money for defense could be paid for through more severe cuts to programs serving human needs. This could create a double hit to nonprofit service providers: reducing financial support for work in communities while driving individuals losing those services to turn to other nonprofits under the presumption that nonprofits and foundations will somehow, yet again, “pick up the slack.”
  • Tax Reform: The Trump tax plan, which the transition team summarizes as “lower, simpler, fairer, and pro-growth,” calls for repealing the estate tax and capping itemized deductions at $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for couples. The latter proposal, according to one analysis, would cause charitable giving to decline by between 4.5 percent and 9 percent, or as much as $26.1 billion per year. In potential contrast, Speaker Ryan’s tax blueprint “encourages charitable giving through a tax incentive” and tasks the House tax committee with developing “options to ensure the tax code continues to encourage donations, while simplifying compliance and record-keeping and making the tax benefit effective and efficient.” On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump also criticized nonprofit colleges and universities for amassing large endowments while increasing tuition costs, vowing to work with Congress to alter tax breaks or federal payments if institutions do not make good faith efforts to reduce costs for students.
  • Nonprofit Electioneering Ban: Candidate Trump and his 2016 Party Platform called for repeal of the so-called “Johnson Amendment,” the federal tax law ban on 501(c)(3) charitable nonprofits and private foundations engaging in partisan election-related activities. It is unclear whether this would be attempted through tax reform, some other legislation, or non-enforcement by a Trump Internal Revenue Service. The National Council of Nonprofits and many organizations have long recognized that 501(c)(3) nonprofits enjoy more power and independence to solve community problems by steering clear of partisanship. The current law, for instance, protects 501(c)(3) nonprofits from requests by political candidates to divert nonprofit resources away from their missions to instead fill partisan campaign war chests — which on the for-profit side can lead to “pay to play” to win government contracts. If individual organizations came to be regarded as Democratic charities or Republican charities instead of the nonpartisan problem solvers that they are, it would diminish the public’s overall trust in the sector and thus limit the effectiveness of the nonprofit community. Read more at The Power of Nonpartisanship, a blog posting from the National Council of Nonprofits stressing the legal right, power, and breadth of election activities in which nonprofits can engage, as long as they always remain nonpartisan.
  • Health Care Reform: The incoming administration promises to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). One potential detail, proposed this summer by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), calls for changing the Medicaid health care program for low-income and disabled individuals by providing states with a choice of either per capita allotments or block grants. This approach appears to conflict with repeated statements by candidate Trump that he would not touch these entitlement programs. However a new federal system is devised, it is clear that governors and state legislators will have to adjust current state programs, financing, and other health care and bureaucratic infrastructure to accommodate federal actions. All of these changes could impose new burdens on nonprofits at the state-level advocacy arena to protect individuals, and at the local level to deliver services, healthcare and otherwise, as the system is disrupted.

State and Local Election Results

It is hard to argue that the repudiation of the establishment seen on Election Day in the presidential race played out with equal force at the state and local levels. Voters re-elected incumbents to state legislatures at potentially record levels. Six legislative chambers flipped control from one party to the other, three from Democratic to Republican control, and three switched from Republican to Democratic control. Legislative chambers in a few other states are in transition as some elected officials change party allegiances and special elections are made necessary by politicians taking other positions in government.

The elections continued the spread of Republican majorities in statehouses and governorships, with Republican trifectas now controlling governments in 25 states, compared to only six Democratic state trifectas. Policies generated in the states – the “laboratories of democracy” – are likely to influence federal legislation and rulemaking just as certainly as congressional and federal administrative actions will change debates in the states.

Multiple states are already experiencing revenue shortfalls in their current fiscal years and even more anticipate dealing with budget deficits in their next fiscal year. The responses to these challenges can directly affect the finances and sustainability of charitable nonprofits. Early in 2016, for instance, Louisiana sought to close a dire budget deficit by imposing sales taxes on many nonprofits during a special session. The new taxes were ultimately repealed during the regular session, but the relationship between nonprofits and governments was changed when the legislature required affected nonprofits to make annual disclosures on the value of the sales tax exemption. Further sale-tax reforms are under active consideration in the state for 2017.

States facing revenue challenges frequently cut the level of revenue sharing provided to local governments, which then often increase pressure on nonprofits to make payments to government coffers or take on more work that municipalities walk away from. Nonprofits can anticipate increases to the already numerous challenges at the state and local levels as policymakers try to fill their budget holes by seeking to impose new taxes and fees, and demand payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) from charitable nonprofits.

Special Focus: Experience in the States on Caps to Charitable Giving Incentives

The Trump Tax Plan provision that calls for placing a cap on itemized deductions, including charitable donations, is raising concerns among foundations, donors, and charitable nonprofits that such a proposal would discourage contributions to the work of organizations in local communities. Similar proposals at the federal level have never gained much traction in Congress, but the experience in the states over the past five years shows that caps are frequently proposed by politicians seeking to increase spending or reduce taxes.

In 2011, policymakers in Hawai`i sought to fill a budget deficit by capping the state’s charitable giving incentive and all other itemized deductions. In Michigan that year, the Governor successfully championed a bill to repeal the Michigan Credit for Charitable Gifts – tax credits that supported the work of homeless shelters, food banks, community foundations, and many other Michigan nonprofits – in order to fund business tax breaks. In both cases, researchers documented significant reductions in charitable giving.

The adverse impact in Hawai`i was so distinct that the Governor joined with nonprofits in working to remove the cap on charitable giving in 2013. Also that year, legislative efforts to cap itemized and charitable deductions were proposed, but opposed by nonprofit advocates and eventually defeated in Oregon and Vermont. In Kansas and North Carolina, legislators initially proposed capping all deductions, but following intense advocacy by nonprofits legislators expressly carved out the giving incentive from a cap on other itemized deductions. Minnesota considered, but rejected the idea of switching from a charitable deduction to a tax credit. See this recap of the action in 2013.

The effort to cap itemized deductions returned in 2015 in numerous states, most notably in Vermont and North Carolina. In both states, nonprofits utilized data developed from the earlier challenges in Hawai`i and Michigan to persuade policymakers that placing a cap on charitable giving incentives creates significant negative consequences for communities and the people served by nonprofits.

Regardless whether Congress takes action in the next two years on comprehensive tax reform, state legislators and governors have already expressed interest in renewing the tax debate at the state level. To date, nonprofit advocacy efforts have been unified and largely effective in demonstrating the value of current giving incentives.

State Ballot Measure Results

Voters across the country gave their support on Election Day to issues that have seen little action in the U.S. Congress, and the results were far more progressive than the candidates they elected. As a result of the voting, for instance, the minimum wage hourly rate is going up in four states: ArizonaColoradoMaine, and Washington State, as well as in numerous communities. Arizona's Proposition 206, which passed with nearly 60 percent of the vote, begins phasing in a higher rate on January 1, 2017, and also guarantees 40 hours of annual paid sick leave to employees of businesses with 15 or more employees.

Voters also expressed support for campaign finance reforms. Four separate ballot measures asked the electorate to set the rules on campaign contribution limits and address whether to restrict the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. In that case, the Court held that political contributions and spending must be treated as constitutionally protected free speech. California's Proposition 59 and Washington State's Initiative 735, both of which passed, urge their respective state's congressional delegations or state's elected officials to use their authority to overturn or repudiate Citizens United, potentially through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Missouri, the only state without any limits on campaign donations, voted to re-impose limits on campaign contributions that had been abolished in 2008. South Dakotans approved a ballot measure that extensively revised campaign finance laws by, among other things, lowering contribution amounts to political action committees, political parties, and candidates for statewide, legislative, or county office, and setting up a voluntary publicly financed campaign system.

Original post can be found here.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
Page 36 of 44
 |<   <<   <  31  |  32  |  33  |  34  |  35  |  36  |  37  |  38  |  39  |  40  |  41  >   >>   >| 

Association Management Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal