There is a lot of discussion and opinions about donor advised funds in the US. Some people suggest that it is the democratization of philanthropy and others suggest it is just another way the very wealthy can wield influence and power anonymously.

I found myself wondering how Donor Advised Funds (DAFs) might be operating in other countries. I discovered two fascinating aspects of DAFs that I want to share with you.

1 – Another motivation behind establishing DAFs is international giving.

If you are a person of means and serious about philanthropy, you might want to have a global impact on a particular issue or cause. Making gifts outside of your home country can become complex pretty quickly, whether you want to make an individual or private foundation gift. Currency exchange rates, taxes, local regulations, due diligence and more can make giving challenging.

Another hindrance to giving globally can be the destination country’s rules about how much money an NGO (non-governmental organization) can receive from a foreign donor.

On its website, the National Philanthropic Trust (NPT) describes the services it can provide to philanthropists who want to give internationally through a DAF:

What can philanthropists do to maximize the amount of money they can give, and the corresponding influence they might have, outside home country borders? Add a DAF to the mix of giving vehicles, of course!

The DAF takes care of the complexities for the donor, and gifts made from the DAF are not attributable to the original donor, extending limitations on amounts received from foreign donors.

2 – The excitement over DAFs has been contagious, spreading rapidly around the globe.

While anonymity is one aspect of DAFs, the often relatively low minimum amount of money required to open a DAF, especially when combined with the philanthropic objectives of a community foundation,can make DAFs an attractively democratic giving vehicle.

Certainly, DAFs have gained in popularity in wealthy Western countries, such as Canada, the UK, and elsewhere in Europe, but even in Australia, Firstlinks reported in 2019 that assets held in sub-funds (the equivalent of DAFs) totaled over $1 billion.

In a 2020 podcast interview, Catherine Loh, CEO of The Community Foundation of Singapore shared that the foundation was one of the only community foundations established in Southeast Asia. Creating a DAF there requires a donation of$200,000, but this can be made in $50,000 pledge payments.

If you are researching a prospector a country, and want to learn if DAFs are a possibility, a great place to look is the Community Foundation Atlas directory. Community Foundations are often the first charitable partners that local and foreign donors seek to fulfill charitable ambitions.

For example, the Community Foundation of Western Zimbabwe, Africa, was the first grant making institution established in the country in 1998. The 3 million people who live in the three provinces of Western Zimbabwe–Matabeleland North and South and the Midlands — are the country’s poorest.

The foundation’s website specifically mentions that it can manage donor advised funds for a specific organization of the donor’s choice, offering local expertise to assist in making the right decision.

Focusing on local donors can be difficult when a community foundation’s community is not wealthy, but not impossible. Alliance Magazine published a working paper, Philanthropy in the Arab Region, that specifically mentions the use of DAFs to garner local support.

Don’t overlook the international aspects of DAFs

Whether you are focused on the affluent, high net worth, or ultra-high net worth donor population, don’t forget that your donors could be motivated to have a philanthropic impact globally. DAFs can help them fulfill those aspirations.

And if you are researching a prospect outside of your home country, consider how community foundations and DAFs might play a part in their philanthropic activity.

Additional Resources

• International Grantmaking | National Philanthropic Trust
• The 2019 DAF Report | National Philanthropic Trust UK
• The $1 billion quiet achiever in Australian philanthropy | Firstlinks, a financial services publishing company | 2019
• The rise of Donor Advised Funds in Singapore | MoneyFM 89.3 podcast | 2020
• Community Foundation Atlas | Directory
• Community Foundation of Western Zimbabwe | comfoundzim.org | NOTE: This website was marked as unsafe by malware, but you can safely view pages through the Google cache option
• Philanthropy in the Arab Region: A working paper by Caroline Hartnell | Alliance Magazine
• Dalia Association | “A community foundation founded in 2007 by diverse members of the Palestinian community committed to mobilize, invest and distribute resources according to local Palestinian priorities using community-based decision-making.”

There are many software tools for prospect research these days. Especially for newer researchers, how do you decide which one, or whether you should purchase more than one? The prices and offerings vary considerably and can make choosing feel random and confusing! There is a general rule that can help guide you and illuminate key distinctions between choices. It also happens to be very similar to a key distinction between what makes a good and credible information source.

But first, let’s talk cake!

As I was growing up in the 70’s and 80’s, my mother’s hobby was baking and decorating elaborate cakes. Sharks chased people, dolls wore cascading dresses of flowers, and cornucopias overflowed with abundance. And underneath all of the creative icing-packed designs was a delicious, moist and fluffy cake. People had to be coaxed to cut through her gorgeous designs – this demanded a great taste to complete the experience!

Did my mother bake her cakes from scratch, or did she use a boxed cake mix?

Why, she used a boxed cake mix, of course!

Her favorite brand was Duncan Hines boxed cake mixes. And the proof was in the tasting. She did bake some cakes from scratch and I could tell the difference. I know there are some amazing bakers out there who can make a moist, fluffy, delicious cake from scratch, but my mom could make one every single time — with the boxed mix.

Because boxed cake mixes are a lot like algorithms…

When you need a reliable outcome for a simple task, there is usually an automated solution available or on its way. Information solution companies can reliably give us the equivalent of a moist, fluffy, delicious chocolate or vanilla cake. The ingredients in a wealth screening, for example, are similar across products and the algorithms are always getting better. They give us a meaningful segmentation of our constituent base.

Then it’s up to us prospect research professionals to add the icing — the fundraising insight and action.

But the minute you stray from needing a simple cake, the boxed cake mixes fall short and we are back to baking from scratch with good recipes.

And herein lies the biggest distinction in and among prospect research tools.

When we use the boxed mix equivalent of a research tool, the algorithm makes the choices over what information is best matched to our prospect. This works really well, until it doesn’t.

For example, we know that a wealth screening typically underestimates the wealthiest, because the algorithm needs visible asset values to calculate a capacity rating. And yet we know that the higher the net worth the fewer the visible assets.

So, if we want to be sure we don’t underestimate our prospect’s capacity, we use the wealth screening to segment our thousands of constituents and then focus on a highly rated segment to manually research. And once again we are faced with which tool(s) to use or purchase.

If you are serious about doing serious research, you need a tool that lets you choose the ingredients for your own recipe. In other words, you need to be able to search the original source databases to craft your own customized profile.

A basic tenet of research is that you want to get as close to the primary or originating source of information as you can. Because we know that information can get corrupted as it passes through multiple sources.

Maybe your prospect uses a nickname or has other quirks that an algorithm isn’t trained to untangle. Searching through the database sources yourself will allow you to create a better profile than the algorithm alone.

As you might imagine now, hybrid opportunities for creating great tasting cakes and master piece profiles abound. But they don’t have to confuse you as you try to decide what to buy.

Many research tools offer you the option to use the information matching algorithm AND search independently within the same software platform. This is like having your boxed cake mix AND all the key ingredients available to mix and match with your mix (like chocolate chips or instant coffee, yum!).

If I drop the cake mix talk, here’s how I might lay out some of the products available to us along a normal distribution illustrated below.

This isn’t a perfect, or even scientific, illustration, but hopefully it helps you begin to sort the tools into different types. Once you are able to do this at the fundamental level of access to source information, you can now add different layers of evaluation.

You will want to do your usual assessment of items such as the following:

• How easy is the tool to navigate and use based on who will be using it?
• Can I manipulate the information the way I need to for the products I deliver internally?
• Does it have the source databases for the type of constituency we have?
• Does it test well when I enter our typical best prospects?
• Is the pricing structure a good fit for my organization?
• How responsive is their customer service?
• …and more

Machine learning has entered our field and that will add a layer of complexity to tool choices. I expect that algorithms or models created using big data will be offered for use to organizations with smaller data sets. And as this practice spreads and competition pushes prices downward, I’m going to have to eat my cake and come up with a new analogy!

As a fundraising prospect research professional, how would you approach this question:

Companies House in the UK was founded in which year? 1844, 2001, or 2015

Would you approach it differently if I told you first that Toby Savin had written on the Helen Brown blog about a fantastic resource in the UK? If you just said, “yes,” then you are in good company!

Now, just for a bit of fun, stop reading and go ahead and find the answer. Then come back to see if you’re right.

If you were part of the #ResearchPride Global Scavenger Hunt this year, you’ve already been on this quest. And like it or not, many of you got the wrong answer. Hang in there! I’m going to share why that’s okay.

The ‘Year of the Founding’ Plot Thickens!

At first this really confounded me. People gave me three different answers: 1844, 2001, or 2015. I couldn’t figure out where some of those years were coming from. So, I asked one of the most precise and detail-oriented researchers I know – Bryan Campbell – who is a member of the Prospect Research Institute.

Bryan tackled this in classic Miss Marple style. Much like Agatha Christie’s fictional detective, he used his past experiences to approach the current problem. While Bryan never lived in Miss Marple’s St. Mary Mead, he did work as a librarian. And he had to manage the “stacks” and find missing items.

At the library, he had to think like someone harried and new to the classification systems. What are the common mistakes they would make in shelving the books? Tasked with helping me figure out where these unidentified years the Companies House was founded came from, he approached it much the same way.

What was his theory?

Bryan speculated that people started by going to the Helen Brown blog post written by Toby Savin. If you were viewing the blog post in search-engine-results-style you might see these clips:

…astonishingly popular across many sectors of the economy since being introduced in the UK in 2001,

What’s more, it’s free to access this data: in 2015, a Beta version of the register – freely available to anyone with an internet connection – was launched as part of the UK…

How often are we guilty of scanning the search results and not clicking through the links to fully read the reference? How carefully do we seek out corroborating sources that are unique and not simply citing each other?

I’m not saying there isn’t a time and place to stop and take the search results at face value, but we aren’t finding a restaurant or birthday party venue. Researching gift prospects or finding scavenger hunt answers is not the time or place.

Because… it was limited liability partnerships (LLPs) that were introduced in the UK in 2001, and while internet access was opened up in 2015, Companies House was not founded in 2015. It was founded in 1844.

And really, if you stop for a second and think about it, as old and historied as the UK is, it would never have made sense for Companies House, a repository of company data, to have been founded after the year 2000.

Which brings us to Wikipedia, of all places! Wikipedia had a great article on Companies House, complete with the founding year and generous citations. And if you wanted to corroborate beyond Wikipedia, it gave you plenty of avenues to pursue.

Finding and Feeling the Research Pride

At first, I thought it was a bad idea to write about a common research error from the scavenger hunt. I don’t ever want people to feel stupid or inadequate. We researchers usually suffer from enough angst! Every one of us, myself included, make mistakes all the time.

I will never forget an exchange with a client in my first few years as a research consultant. I had delivered a profile with a pretty low capacity rating. He wanted to talk about it. He felt there was more money there. As we walked through the profile, he pointed out the very big mortgage. I had considered the mortgage as a sign of less wealth. He pointed out that the prospect had to have a pretty high income to get approved for that big of a mortgage.

Of course, he was right! I admitted as much and added another nugget of knowledge to my ever-increasing experience as a prospect researcher.

Research Pride isn’t about being perfect or 100% accurate. Research Pride is about belonging to a profession that mentors, teaches, develops best practices, and nurtures and encourages continual growth and improvement – a profession that fosters excellence.

We live in the internet age and it is both glorious and fulfilling, and also rife with misleading and inaccurate (dare I say dangerous?) information. Information technology introduces swift and significant changes to our tools and our work processes on a daily basis.

All of this can be disruptive and difficult to navigate. We need to own our mistakes, take time to untangle them, make changes, and share with others. Because we have Research Pride!

Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2021 Research Pride Global Scavenger Hunt, from the brains behind the event, to the clue holders, to the hunters. The talent in our field is jaw-dropping I am proud and honored to be considered a part of this profession.

Additional Resources

• 2021 #ResearchPride Scavenger Hunt | Learning Edge Blog | 2021 | The winners, the clues, and the answers are detailed here.
• #CareerCurious Interview with Helen Brown | #ChatBytes Podcast | 2021 | Helen shares her #ResearchPride story and more.
• Companies House: a treasure trove of info on UK companies | Toby Savin | Helen Brown Blog | 2020 | Find out about a UK research resource that might surprise you with its depth of information.

Does this statement make you cringe? “Hey! There’s a happy hour networking event in the conference center lobby tonight. Wanna go?” Or does it compel you to extend an invite to your friends? Or does it make you jump up energized and ready to meet new people?

Surprise! No matter what your answer is, you could be a networker.

According to Marissa King who wrote the book, Social Chemistry: Decoding the Patterns of Human Connection, there are three main types of networks people form:

• Conveners: Deep, close connections to a smaller group of people who are all friends with each other
• Brokers: Not quite as deep of connections, but connections among different groups of people
• Expansionists: Shallower relationships, but with exponentially more people

And I couldn’t help agree with her that networking – professional or personal – was never really about going into big crowds of unknown, strange people and collecting business cards. Networking is about creating authentic connections with other people that you want to know better.

And if you jump at the opportunity to go to that hypothetical happy hour in the conference center lobby, it probably has less to do with whether you are an extrovert or an introvert and more about yourgoals.

Here are three examples to illustrate the point of who might want to go to that hypothetical happy hour:

• Recent college graduate headed into second year of first full-time career job who wants to move out of nonprofit work with animals and into nonprofit work focused on climate change.
• Parent who just had third child that doesn’t sleep through the night and really wants to get dressed professionally and talk to other adults about the work that s/he loves!
• Accomplished professional who is exploring going solo as a consultant and wants to find out what problems people have that s/he could solve at a price they could pay.

Network for Goal

Happy Hours are the quintessential networking event, but networking happens every day in a million different ways. There is every reason to ditch the cliched happy hour and focus in on the kind of people you want to meet and in places where you feel more comfortable.

Sometimes you can even create your own places!

For example, let’s say you need to become a power user of your Salesforce database, but you haven’t found people online talking about the prospect research topics you need to learn the most. You could volunteer to host a Salesforce working group for your association chapter (like Apra) that meets quarterly on topics you need to tackle.

Now the full organizing power of your chapter is available to you. Is this selfish? Heck, no!

If you have the time and talent to offer your association chapter to organize and facilitate meetings, it becomes a win/win, not a win/lose. And it can give you the opportunity to create a convener network as you seek the skills and confidence to move forward in your career.

As an adult, developing close relationships requires more effort over a longer time because the opportunity to interact frequently, such as when attending school together, isn’t as available. To add to this barrier, in the world of prospect research, many times the people we want to connect with are geographically distant.

Creating the group you need and want to be a part of can help to
overcome these barriers. In the Salesforce working group example above, you might find that you become close to a handful of researchers, interacting socially and professionally, and meeting up live at conferences.

If you don’t want to create your own group, you can always join somebody else’s group. The Master Classes and group coaching calls at the Prospect Research Institute provide adult researchers with low pressure opportunities to connect with peers.

At the Institute you can get to know other members through video meetings and on Slack. Meetings are monthly, small, and have guided discussion, making it easy for you to participate. You share common interests and there is an expectation that you will ask for help and share great resources.

If you find yourself benefitting from different networks at the same time, you might be a broker. For example, you might be (a) active in a vendor online forum where you meet peers, (b) volunteer for your association chapter where you meet fellow members from a range of organizations, and (c) attend a course where you interact frequently with other learners.
You may have career goals that have you looking for skill building opportunities or exposure to multiple industry sectors.

Most professionals probably don’t cultivate expansionist networks, but if
you have ideas to share with the world, social media makes huge networks possible. And if you are looking for more exposure, but to the tune of thousands, not millions, you can craft content of interest to the audience you wish to attract and expand your career options considerably.

Convener, Broker, Expansionist – or a Hybrid

As prospect researchers we know all about isolating key criteria to help us identify the best prospects. Same goes with networking. Your goals could be as simple as knowing and talking research with other researchers or as complex as identifying potential mentors so you can move into a specific role, such as prospect management or fundraising analytics, or something in between.

In fact, you probably have multiple and overlapping goals. Networking can help you learn new skills, explore your profession, build confidence, and gain access to career opportunities. Think through and write down your goals, observe and experiment in different places, online and offline, and network your way to professional and social fulfillment!

Additional Resources

• Book: Social Chemistry: Decoding the Patterns of Human Connection
• Personal Website: www.marissaking.com
• Discover your own network signature: www.assessyournetwork.com
• What kind of networker are you? | Marissa King on HBR Ideacast (podcast)

If you are a prospect research professional, odds are that you have searched for the beneficial ownership of securities table in a proxy filing with the SEC. But do you really know what beneficial ownership means Why do insiders sometimes disclaim the beneficial ownership they reported? Should you care? Maybe. If you have to explain it to others, such as development officers, then definitely!

The proxy (Form Def 14a) is the document a public company files each year to explain and be transparent about the securities or stock it has on offer for purchase by the public. After all, the SEC came into existence in 1933 to restore investor confidence in our capital markets after the stock market crash of 1929. From that perspective, beneficial ownership makes a little more sense.

A beneficial owner is…

1. A person who enjoys the BENEFITS of ownership even though the stock is not directly owned in his/her name.
   
   For example, I may change the title of my stock to a trust, or a foundation, or an LLC, but still, maintain the benefit of ownership as a trustee or beneficiary or both.
   .
2. A person (individually or as part of group) who has the power to vote on shares, or who wields influence over a shareholder’s vote.

Fundraising research is less concerned with whether the prospect can influence the votes of shareholders, but we do care about enjoying the BENEFITS of ownership, because this can have an impact on our prospect’s wealth picture.

James Dimon Example

Let’s look at an example: James “Jamie” Dimon is CEO of JP Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM). According to the beneficial ownership table in the proxy filed on 4/6/2020, he owns 9,538,667 shares of company stock. Or does he?

If Mr. Dimon BENEFITS from those 115,800 shares, but DISCLAIMS this beneficial ownership, who might have legal and direct ownership of them?

A Form 4, Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership, must be filed every time an insider has a change in the number of beneficially owned shares. It often gives us greater detail on who owns exactly what shares. Could it help us with Mr. Dimon’s disclaimed, mystery 115,800 shares? Indeed, it does!

Form 4| Filing date 10/14/2020(much later than the proxy filing

Note the footnote #1 next to ownership by “LLC”? This savvy guy doesn’t want us to know the name of the LLC, just that it is an LLC.

Mystery solved?

An LLC of undetermined name legally owns title to 143,388 shares of JP Morgan Chase & Co. stock. And Mr. Dimon DISCLAIMS that ownership, even though he is legally required to report it because he benefits from the ownership.

Translation / Interpretation

In Mr. Dimon’s example above, we are discussing fewer than 200,000 shares out of more than 9 million shares. From that perspective I care a lot less about that mystery LLC. But I have researched more than one prospect where the mystery LLC owns the lion’s share of stock. Sometimes I even know the full name of that LLC.

And too often, even knowing the company name doesn’t help.

As I have described before, someone like Mr. Dimon could be a member of an LLC in Delaware and the public (and even the Delaware Division of Corporations) wouldn’t know it!

The DISCLAIMING of beneficial ownership in Mr. Dimon’s case feels interesting because he benefits from a laundry list of indirect ownership that he does not disclaim: 401(k), family trusts, spouse, etc. Since he does indicate a pecuniary (financial) interest in the LLC shares, we might speculate that he expects to profit from whatever the mystery LLC is going to do with his shares, but that he argues that he is not influencing the investment.

Is Speculation Warranted?

Speculating is fun! And sometimes it does help to put numbers into perspective, especially if you are fussing over exactly how much and what kind of gift proposal to put together for a prospect.

Following is my completely fictional speculation about Mr. Dimon’s mystery shares as written for the prospect profile. For this fictional example, assume that I discovered the name of the LLC was MiamiBeach LLC and that I knew his daughter started a real estate venture in Miami Beach.

We know that Mr. Dimon’s 32-year-old daughter recently began a real estate venture in Miami Beach, Florida. We do not know who owns Miami Beach LLC because it was incorporated anonymously in Delaware. Since Mr. Dimon disclaims ownership of the shares owned by Miami Beach LLC, we might speculate that it is his daughter’s company, and that Mr. Dimon invested those shares in his daughter’s company, expecting a financial return.

We can speculate, be we can’t actually KNOW this to be true. The information about the true disposition of those shares is NOT available to confirm our speculation.

Be Clear. Be Firm. Have Fun!

If you are going to pick apart stock holdings and speculate, just be sure to use very clear language. Words such as the following are useful:

• We do NOT know if this is true, but we are GUESSING based on…
• We can NOT know who owns this company, but we SPECULATE…
• Mr. Dimon disclaims his ownership of these shares and although we can NOT know the details of exactly who owns the shares, we SPECULATE…
• Because this is SPECULATION, you might want to consider these shares as NOT available for gifting.

The pressure on your development officers to raise the most money possible to further your mission is real and it is powerful. If you are comfortable speculating, it can help your development officer to put the stockholdings into perspective relative to the full philanthropic and wealth picture of the prospect.

But there is a limit to what we can know. And when the prospect has deliberately placed information beyond public viewing, it is worth stating. After all, our prospects are just as entitled to their privacy as we are. To attempt to pull back the veil of privacy could be construed as disrespectful with the potential to damage the relationship.

I enjoy the tangled web of financial filings and the constant rebalancing of how exact to attempt to be when presenting the information. I hope this example made beneficial ownership just a little bit clearer.

Additional Resources

• Want to dive in deep to insider SEC filings? Become a member and enroll in the Insider Stock and Compensation Course. >>Learn More
• Wish you had an SEC filings reference book handy? Purchase the Insider Stock and Compensation Workbook and focus on filings and information that matters for fundraising. >>Learn More
• Can You Really Hide LLC Ownership? You Betcha!| Jennifer Filla | 2020

I was talking through a complex wealth situation with a member of the Prospect Research Institute. While the prospect was clearly wealthy, there were some transactions and entities mentioned in a public company filing that were curious. I said, “Why not look up the LLC to find the names of the members?” Wouldn’t you know… it was an LLC incorporated in Delaware.

“Sure, you have to pay for it, but the members of an LLC are public information,” I told her with certainty. So, she pursued the matter. The website told her that this information was available on the annual reports filed each year, and to obtain these documents you must call the Delaware Division of Corporations.

She called. The man who answered looked up the record and told her that the names and addresses were not on file. They would be known to the company itself (of course) and to the company that handled the registration.

What? Could this anonymity be legal?

Turns out that it is, and has been, legal to incorporate an LLC and have the owners remain 100% anonymous. “How is it accomplished?” you might ask.

I included a source below with states who do and don’t require public disclosure of LLC members, and I didn’t look into every state, but in the state of Delaware, when you form an LLC (limited liability company) there are three places where the members or managers might be listed and available to the public. However, if you authorize someone to create the LLC on your behalf, you can circumvent any public listing of the members or manager.

1. Certificate of Formation: The person creating and filing the Certificate of Formation is the one listed in the public record. This person does not have to be the member or manager of the LLC, and Delaware does not require recording the members or managers anywhere.
2. Registered Agent: Every incorporated entity must have a registered agent. The registered agent is the official representative of the company who can receive service of lawsuits or any other official business. It does not have to be a member or manager. The registered agent must have a contact at the LLC, but even that person does not have to be a member or manager.
3. Franchise Tax: The owner of an LLC may elect an agent to pay the franchise tax so that there is no record of the member or manager name.

While a Delaware LLC can avoid any public listing of members or managers, this does not extend to creating a bank account. In order to prove ownership to open a bank account, the member can present an Operating Agreement for the LLC. The Operating Agreement is a legal, governing document and includes the names of the members and managers.

And while the members and managers of an LLC can remain anonymous to the public, officers and directors of corporations must be revealed when making franchise tax payments.

“U.S. Congress bans anonymous shell companies”

Tantalizingly, this headline appeared on Reuters.com just as the Institute member and I were investigating Delaware LLCs.

Could this be the end of anonymity? …not so fast!

Turns out that the Corporate Transparency Act passed the Senate and the House with a veto-proof, bipartisan margin in December, but it doesn’t really change anything for the general public.

According to the FACT Coalition, “The Corporate Transparency Act takes the simple, yet effective step to require corporations and limited liability companies (LLCs) to disclose to law enforcement and others with legally mandated anti-money laundering responsibilities (e.g. financial institutions) information on who is the real, natural person (a.k.a. beneficial owner) who owns and controls an entity at the point of formation and update such information upon any change.”

There are many reasons why the individuals behind an LLC might want to remain anonymous. Most often in the field of fundraising I hear people describe how donors are “hiding their wealth.” This has a negative connotation, and I would encourage you to consider and speak publicly in a way that recognizes that there are other reasons for being anonymous.

To name a few: family drama; competitive edge; and people who are private in every way, not just money.

And yet, there is at least one trick to finding those elusive LLC member owners. If the LLC is incorporated in Delaware – has a domestic incorporation record in Delaware – but is doing business in another state that does NOT allow anonymity, you might find the member names in a required foreign incorporation filing.

Of course, as prospect research professionals we like to be able to assemble as many of the facts as reasonably possible, but we know that the best information is going to come directly from the donor prospect.

Hopefully, this micro investigation into Delaware LLCs helps save you time by knowing whether you might be able to find owner member names… or not!

Additional Resources

• Which States Allow LLC Owners to be Anonymous?| Total Legal, a service of Pro Se Planning Inc.
• Delaware LLC Privacy: What’s on Public Record?| Harvard Business Services, Inc. | 7/2/2010 |This company is in the business of filing LLC paperwork to keep owners anonymous and the blog post outlines in detail how
• U.S. Congress bans anonymous shell companies| Reuters | 12/11/2020
• Congress bans anonymous shell companies after long campaign by anti-corruption groups| The Washington Post | 12/11/2020
• News Feed| FACT Coalition| Details on how and why they pushed for the Corporate Transparency Act
• Limited Liability Corporation Definition| Investopedia

No matter who you are, whether you are the CEO of a Fortune 500 company or the development coordinator at a local animal shelter, there comes a time when you need to work with someone who is uncooperative. Maybe even someone who isn’t “nice.” (It could even be a donor – gasp!)

And, of course, this is usually the exact same person you have zero authority to bend to your will.

Most of us understand the concept of reciprocity in relationships. If I do something for you, then you’ll do something for me. But knowing how to do that well in the (sometimes toxic) workplace can be really challenging for a lot of us. What works well in one workplace can bomb in another. And when the person you need to cooperate is hostile? Yikes!

What can you do about this? Go ask Deborah Drucker.

Deborah was a participant in the Prospect Research Institute’s Approach to Prospecting course and during a class discussion on communication with development officers she recommended the book, Influence Without Authority by Allan R. Cohen and David L. Bradford.

(Nota bene: This often happens in the Institute’s class meetings. The robust life experiences of participants interact with course materials and discussion to create unique learning opportunities.)

I bought the book. It’s pretty dry. And yet, the first chapter has been revelatory!

Step one on being persuasive? “Assume all are potential allies.”

It sounds so simple. And yet, it felt like being cattle-branded!

(Disclaimer: I don’t really know what that feels like, but recognizing past mistakes can be acutely painful.)

One thing I had not considered before is that my failure to persuade an uncooperative person could have been my own fault. (Ouch!)

Here are some of the things that have gone through my head at various points in my career:

• She will NEVER help me with anything!
• How can he NOT understand that this has to be done? Is he stupid? Doesn’t he care about making this project successful?
• Look how she gives him whatever he wants, just because he flatters her. That is disgusting! I will NEVER do that.
• That report had NOTHING of value in it–just a pretty cover. Mine was full of real insights and actions to take. How could he fall for a pretty cover? That’s just ridiculous!
• I’ve seen him humiliate people who put ideas forward. My idea would work, but there is NO WAY I am going to say a word. It’s not worth it.

Every single one of those statements is pretty close to things I have actually thought. And hopefully it’s( painfully) obvious how I was the one standing in the way of getting what I wanted.

“Assume all are potential allies.”

How ambitious are you? How passionate are you about your mission or your career, really?

The next time you have to get a report from IT and the person is uncooperative, or you need another team member to step-up to complete a project on time who has sabotaged you before, seriously consider whether your attitude or perception of the situation could be the problem.

If you are able to set aside your emotions (don’t throw them away; they are still valuable) and become curious about what motivates the other person, you will have begun stepping out of your own way.

And if you are eager and in a good mindset to learn more about how to Influence Without Authority, Deborah and I highly recommend the book!

Additional Resources

• Influence Without Authority by Allan R. Cohen and David L. Bradford
• How To Influence When You Don’t Have Authority| Keller Institute | If you’re really into this, you can get use the Keller Influence Indicator to measure your influence
• Your Career: The Hidden Costs of Working From Home|Jennifer Filla

You need new donor prospects. Every organization needs to acquire new donors and upgrade existing donors in order to sustain and grow its programming. If you don’t have a researcher on staff, or even if you do, at some point you may need to identify new major gift prospects at a greater scale than you have in the past. It could be a new project or campaign, or it could be an even bigger shift in program or mission implementation in response to a changing environment.

Whatever your situation, you are probably prospecting under pressure.

And that is how many clients find their way to me at Aspire Research Group LLC. You need to raise a certain amount of money and you want me to find the people who will make those gifts. How hard can it be?

To identify prospects, we could…

• Take the top-rated names from a screening and verify them [confirming the match is pretty quick, but confirming the rating takes deeper digging]
• Find out who gives to similar organizations and whip up a list [donor recognition lists don’t provide addresses; this is a time-intensive task]
• …and other tactics

Many times, I’ve received inquiries from fundraisers already in a campaign. They never included research time in their original budgeting, so exactly how low can I go on price?

Better, Faster, Cheaper. Pick Two.

Information technology has made it incredibly fast to sift through thousands of names at a time, with solutions such as prospect screenings. And over the years, the cost of these solutions has become very affordable for many organizations. But it can’t deliver the same level of accuracy as research done by a trained professional.

Sometimes the faster and cheaper aspects of a screening are enough to accomplish all or some of your fundraising goal. As long as you can contact a prospective donor, you have enough to get started. But when you need to raise more in a shorter period of time, you need greater efficiencies. You need to have prospects prioritized.

Is it okay for your development officer to call on five prospects who were mismatched and don’t have the ability to give, before reaching one person who is capable of giving the amount you need?

When you need more than an algorithm can provide, when you need the next step of deeper research, you need a person.

When you ask a trained person to research a name, it takes time.

Early in my career I wanted to know exactly how much time it took to do research. I tracked every single minute. If you’ve never done this, I recommend it–even if only for a day. Getting up for a glass of water. Bathroom breaks. Writing emails (and blog posts). It is very revealing how much time everything takes!

And research does take time, which can be averaged across a task, such as prospecting. If you are employing someone to perform research for you, or if you are employed to research, and you are not aware of the actual hours it takes to accomplish the research tasks required, how can you know how much this should cost or whether you can reach your goal on time? You don’t know.

Embrace the numbers.

It’s true. You might call that billionaire, catch her on the phone, and she says, “I’d love to give $5M even though I have never heard of you before!” Heck, MacKenzie Scott wasn’t identified or asked by many of the organizations to which she made gifts. But hope isn’t a strong strategy.

Once you understand what kind of time is involved, you can begin building that simple, but oh-so-useful, campaign-style gift table. The following gift table extends to include “outside the box” prospecting to bridge a gap in the base of donors for our fictional scenario. Read the table from left to right.

With your assumptions plainly placed in a spreadsheet like this, research and frontline fundraising can have meaningful conversations about the kind of effort–and cost–it is going to take to reach goal.

For example, the above table assumes that the lead gift will come from a board member. It also assumes that the donor base contains more than 156 donor prospects capable of a gift of up to $125,000. That leaves a gap of 8 gifts/40 prospects to be filled by external prospecting (the gap numbers are highlighted in red in the table).

Our fictional organization decides to use small events to engage people from the community. The assumption is that 200 people will need to be invited to these small engagement events to ultimately yield 8 gifts. If it took an average of an hour per name for a researcher to source one qualified name from outside your donor base, that would be 200 hours of work. No bathroom breaks or email writing included. 200 hours of prospecting research.

Assumptions can go wrong – positively or negatively. You might get an unexpected million from MacKenzie Scott, or you might stall during a pandemic. You might find a board member willing to work closely with you to leverage his network and need fewer research hours. But if your assumptions are based on your organization’s past performance or other likely scenarios, you are much more likely to reach goal.

Work with researchers who care about your success.

Time is expensive. What if you sign a contract with a researcher and discover that the prospects you want just don’t exist? Or there aren’t as many of them as you need? What if your needs change or you run out of money or lose a key employee? Things happen.

Working with nonprofit organizations as part of the development team has been an amazing experience that I am deeply grateful for. Fundraising is built on trust and at Aspire that extends to the consulting relationship.

If you need to reach your fundraising goals, why shouldn’t your research team be just as committed to reaching those goals? It’s not about getting paid to deliver a certain number of prospects each month regardless of whether you can use them. It’s about getting you the right prospects, on your schedule, and at your budget pace.

And that’s how I figure Aspire can deliver on all three improvements: Better, Faster, and Cheaper. Because there is nothing cheap about research that never turns into donors!

Additional Resources

• The Results are in! Common Wealth Screening Questions| Elisa Shoenberger at Aspire Research Group| 2019
• Relational Mapping with Wealth Quotient| Prospect Research Institute | 2020
• When Should You Look For Cold Prospects?| Jennifer Filla | 2013

“There is no health without mental health.”

-Center for Workplace Mental Health, Canada

When I worked in an office all day, I would come home and want to stay home. When I started working from home, by Friday I needed to escape the house. I learned to create room in my schedule for networking with colleagues and to enjoy my lunch outside on the balcony. Little things!

Six months into the workplace shutdown caused by the pandemic, many people were able to create a new schedule working from home. Now August brings the new school year and the chaos of children returning to school, or not, threatens to upend any calm that may have been found.

In the first four parts of this series, I talked about the opportunity to adjust how you provide online training and data security in the virtual office, and being mindful to protect your career aspirations and your physical health.

Disruption, while uncomfortable and sometimes tragic, can provide opportunities to create change. For your nonprofit, it could be the moment where you can mirror your mission through the better treatment of your employees.

In this post, I’d like to suggest how you might use social connection and proactive communication to protect your mental health and that of your employees – and even your family members! But mostly I want to give you lots of resources.

Create Social Connections

“Keep in mind that social distancing does not mean social isolation.”

-Center for Workplace Mental Health, U.S.

If you were working in an environment where you interacted routinely, if not daily, with your team members and others, socially and professionally, working from home doesn’t mean you have to stop being social. But it often means you have to be deliberate and creative about how to have social connections.

From networking to connecting with your team, the alternatives to face-to-face meetings sometimes requires a bit of extra structure to engage people, especially when it is all new. It’s not enough to have everyone on video on Zoom for a happy hour. There needs to be a game or a more formal sharing of something specific and tagging the next person.

For example, I attended a Happy Hour with my association chapter and our host customized a “Family Feud” style game using information from a popular industry report. We divided into teams and competed. It was really fun, brought up some good conversation, helped us to get to know each other, and yet was relevant to our work.

Being social online requires adapting the tried and true activities and games for the online world and for you. Likewise, it means accommodating the communication styles of others. If you’re not sure, test things out. It’s okay if it isn’t a glorious success first time. Just try again.

If people are awkward on video, use online meetings to share a game screen and let people participate via audio. If your group is large, create activities that leverage the chat or breakout rooms. If you have people who love video, create activities that emphasize the visual, such as using props.

Can’t figure it out yourself? Hire a creative concierge like Jackie Botelho! My alma mater, Neumann University, had Jackie create an online alumni networking experience. It was the first time I could ever participate in such an event from Florida. She guided us through introductions, breakouts to discuss a question, and encouraged us all to share connection information, such as LinkedIn. I connected with more people than I usually do at a live networking event!

The U.S. Center for Disease Control has a great recommendation: “Try to keep up with regular routines. If schools are closed, create a schedule for learning activities and relaxing or fun activities.” Just realize that while it sounds simple, it’s not always easy to implement and you might need to be persistent to find a schedule and activities that work for your group – whether that is your children, family, or co-workers.

Don’t Wait! Now is the Time to be Pro-Active

“In these stressful times, it is not enough to post benefit information on your company website.”

-National Safety Council

If your organization does not address mental health currently, this could be the best time to have the discussion. With most people experiencing some kind of stress, people are less likely to feel stigmatized by having a problem.

Right now, we are being faced with such a variety of stressful challenges: sudden routine changes, a barrage of new software to learn, children at home, isolation from family and friends, racism and resulting unrest, and so many more.

What elevates your stress levels might reduce someone else’s. High stress levels, especially over an extended period of time, can have profoundly negative effects on physical and mental health – which of course is going to affect work performance.

As a manager, you can proactively and frequently communicate the mental health and other services available for your employees. Even if you don’t have formal benefits like this, you can help your team create a collection of resources available. I’ve given you a head-start on that in the additional resources below.

When you ask “how are you doing?” be sure to listen carefully to the response. If you ask the question routinely you are more likely to notice changes over time. Managers and co-workers are not therapists, but proactively communicating how to access help, asking, and listening can make a difference.

There really is no health without mental health. You work for a nonprofit on a mission. Proactive communication and staying socially connected are just two ways you can help fulfill your nonprofit’s mission by taking care of your employees.

Additional Resources

• The Hidden Costs of Working from Home | Part 1 of 5 | Jennifer Filla | 2020
• Your Career: The Hidden Costs of Working from Home | Part 2 of 5 | Jennifer Filla | 2020
• Your Physical Health: The Hidden Costs of Working from Home | Part 3 of 5 | Jennifer Filla | 2020
• Your Mental Health: The Hidden Costs of Working from Home | Part 4 of 5 | Jennifer Filla | 2020
• Your Resiliency: The Hidden Costs of Working from Home | Part 5 of 5 | Jennifer Filla | 2020

• 10 Tips to Manage Re-Entry Anxiety Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic | Anxiety and Depression Association of America | 2020
• How to Soothe Your ‘Re-Entry Anxiety’ as COVID-19 Lockdowns Lift | Time magazine | 2020
• How Nature Can Make You Kinder, Happier, and More Creative | Greater Good Magazine
• 10 Team Building Games for Remote Workers | ConnectTeam.com
• Working Remotely During COVID-19: Your Mental Health & Well-Being | Center for Workplace Mental Health, U.S. | Specific suggestions and common-sense advice for employees and managers.
• Helping Children Cope [with COVID-19] | U.S. Center for Disease Control | This is a surprisingly readable and helpful article that helps to give parents perspective on their children’s behavior and includes a list of resource links
• There is No Health Without Mental Health | Poster | Workplace Safety and Prevention Services, Canada
• The Employer Role: Mental Health During COVID-19 | National Safety Council, U.S.
• Working With Benefits Providers: Mental Health Issues Checklist | National Safety Council, U.S.
• How to Collaborate Effectively If Your Team Is Remote | Harvard Business Review | 2018