Overview of Volunteer Work: For this project, I worked with the Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition (DRCC) to develop

a strategic fundraising plan (SFP). The ultimate goal of the plan was to increase revenue and expand the donor base of the organization without drastically increasing costs. I developed the SFP by first looking over the past three Annual Reports and an outline of the FY 2013 budget to do a capacity assessment of the organization. Second, through looking at their website, gathering information from local charity watchdog websites, and speaking with a few key board members, I was able to get a feel for their current fundraising rates and methods. With this information, I developed an SFP with the four primary recommendations listed below: 1) Moves management with low level donors According to their most recent annual report, the DRCC is only receiving $7,910 in individual contributions, with the majority of gifts being under $100. Of the people giving under $100, the average gift size is $37. Most of the people that donate to the DRCC do so under their own volition. There is not an annual fund or membership drive that takes place. If an annual fund driver were to be established, and the board were to participate by signing renewal letters asking people to increase their gift, and phone calls were made, again by board members, asking people to increase their gift from $35 to $50, based on local giving trends (Lewis, 2012) it is fair to access that roughly 35% of people will increase their gift, and of those 45% will increase to the requested amount. With minimal cost and slightly increased involvement from the board, the organization has an opportunity to increase giving from already existing donors. One of the primary responsibilities for a board member is fundraising for the organization (Chait, Ryan, & Taylor, 2005), unfortunately at the DRCC, most board members appear to be terrified of the idea of asking people for money. Prior to

having the board work on outreach calls, I would recommend holding a basic "how to fundraise" workshop for all board members. 2) Increase grassroots fundraising efforts at community events As previously stated, the DRCC brought in $7,910 in contributions in 2011; however, during that same year, the organization spent $10,664 on fundraising. This leaves a fundraising deficit of close to $3,000. The take away from this is that we need to find a cost effective way to increase the organization's donor base. According to Program Manager Alberto Rodriguez, the DRCC tables at roughly ten events every year without any form of fundraising element. The recommendation here is not to change the focus of booths from policy to fundraising, but rather to have some form of a fundraising presents. At least, there should be a sign that says "all of this is only possible through your support!" and at best, there should be a board member or a volunteer at the tables to assist people with making contributions. There will be no increased cost to the organization to add a fundraising element to these outreach events, so this is an extremely cost effective way to increase the number of people donating to the organization. 3) Redesign website to increase visibility of donation page As can be seen in Appendix 1, the donation call to action is buried in the lower left hand section of the webpage. When looking at web analytics, an organization's landing page (or home page) is divided into four quadrants (Figure 1). Quadrant 2 receives more conversations, or "click throughs," than the other three quadrants combined (Lewis, 2012). By repositioning the call to action next to the Facebook, Twitter and Youtube banners, the organization stands to increase its conversation rate by 30% (Lewis, 2012). By utilizing an intern from one of the local colleges instead of hiring a web developer, the DRCC would be

able to secure a website over haul with minimal capital. The benefit to using an intern over a standard volunteer is they have increased incentive (ie their grade and course credit) to complete the project by a specific deadline. Figure 1

Quadrant 1

Quadrant 2

Quadrant 3

Quadrant 4

4) Utilize new media to increase traffic going to website Increasing the organization's cyber presents will not only benefit fundraising, but it will help the organization to reach more people in a cost effective manor on policy issues as well. Facebook and Twitter can be very powerful tools for any organizer when utilized properly. In addition to working on restoration and education, the DRCC also works on legislative efforts to protect the Duwamish River. Often, city council hearings on DRCC sensitive topics are scheduled last minute, if the organization had a stronger new and social media presents, they would be able to increase the number of people they had showing up to hearings and would have a stronger presents on the issues. Review of Volunteer experience Overall, my experience was not a positive one. I was constantly kept waiting for requested materials (annual reports, a draft of next year's budget, a copy of previous fundraising letters, et cetera) which made me feel as though the board did not value the work I was doing. Furthermore, the delays caused undue stress as everything was left until the last minute, not

giving me the time I would have like to go more into detail with an organizational capacity assessment. The board of the organization appears to be missing some key elements as well. Seeing as there is no professional fundraiser or development officer on staff, the board should have at least a fundraising committee (Gill, 2005), however, they don't even have as much as a trustee with fundraising experience. A lack of board diversity is also a problem (Chait, Ryan, & Taylor, 2005). With the exception of one resident from South Seattle (where the Duwamish River is located), and one Asian- American, the entire board is made up of older white citizens from the more affluent East side of Seattle. Considering the problems facing the Duwamish River disproportionately affect poorer, working class, and minority neighborhoods, the lack of diversity on the board is hindering their ability to appeal to their target demographic for both outreach and fundraising. Before the organization embarks on another strategic planning session, fundraising or otherwise, it would behoove them to do more in board development (Chait, Ryan, & Taylor, 2005) so that they are not alienating the very community members the organization is trying to work with. 1. The organization has a clearly defined purpose of the role that volunteers have within the organization: NO. Despite the fact the organization is in constant need of volunteers to help, when a volunteer arrives, there is no clear picture about how the fit into the organization as a whole. Connecting the work of a volunteer to the big picture of an organization is key to maintaining motivation (McCurley & Lynch, 2011). 2. Job descriptions exist for all volunteer positions in the organization. NO. When I approached the organization, I had to write my own job description. 3. The organization has a well-defined and communicated volunteer management plan that includes a recruitment policy, description of all volunteer jobs, an application and

interview process, possible stipend and reimbursement policies, statement of which staff has supervisory responsibilities over what volunteers, and any other volunteer personnel policy information. Not that I witnessed. From my experience with the DRCC, volunteers were recruited only for special events, outside of that, when volunteers came into the office, they were often kept waiting as someone figured out something they could do. I was never presented with any "volunteer policies" or paper work regarding my relationship with the organization. 4. The organization follows a recruitment policy that does not discriminate, but respects, encourages and represents the diversity of the community. They do not have a recruitment policy per se, but the organization does operate and do outreach in neighborhoods that are predominantly minorities and marginalized members of the community. 5. The organization provides appropriate training and orientation to the agency to assist the volunteer in the performance of their volunteer activities. Volunteers are offered training with staff in such areas as cultural sensitivity. Somewhat. My volunteer experience was different than most. When I approached the organization about wanting to volunteer with them, the ED of the DRCC opted to have me work on fundraising instead of on other, predesigned volunteer positions. He made this decision because we know each other from when I worked as the membership manager at People For Puget Sound. I was given a brief history on the organization and a quick overview about current policy work, but that was it. 6. The organization is respectful of the volunteer's abilities and time commitment and has various job duties to meet these needs. Jobs should not be given to volunteers simply because the jobs are considered inferior for paid staff. No. Despite the fact the board and staff seemed excited to have me work on this project, and admitted that they needed help on fundraising, getting requested documentation and

assistance from people inside of the organization was like pulling teeth. I first approached the DRCC during the first week of class. When they followed up with me later that week stating they wanted me to help with fundraising, I asked for some basic documents to start my work on the SFP. It took staff at the organization almost a full six weeks before they got me the annual report and current budget numbers requested. I feel a large part of this delay was a lack of communication between the board and the staff. Even though I know a great deal of the staff through my circle of friends, many of them were left in the dark about my work with the organization. Instead of seeing themselves as a resource to the organization's staff, the board of DRCC seems to think their only responsibility is to the mission. Whereas they are responsible for generative governance, they still have a level of accountability to the staff of the DRCC (Gill, 2005). The staff should not be left in the dark when the board makes major decisions, like commissioning a strategic fundraising plan that will ultimately affect the way some staff members perform their duties (ie, Alberto now having a fundraising representative at tabling events). 7. The organization does volunteer performance appraisals periodically and communicates to the volunteers how well they are doing, or where additional attention is needed. At the same time, volunteers are requested to review and evaluate their involvement in the organization and the people they work with and suggest areas for improvement. Again, not that I experienced. While working on the SFP, I was never approached by board or staff members with any questions about content or the progress I was making. For the most part I was left to my own devises to do what I saw fit, and the just reported back at the end of the project.

8. The organization does some type of volunteer recognition or commendation periodically and staff continuously demonstrates their appreciation towards the volunteers and their efforts. Yes- After I submitted my SFP and recommendations to the ED (the final meeting with the board will be taking place after the first of the year), a few staff members took me out to happy hour to thank me for my work. Unfortunately, no board members were able to attend due to scheduling conflict.

Works Cited
Chait, R. P., Ryan, W. P., & Taylor, B. E. (2005). Governance as Leadership. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Gill, M. (2005). Governing for Results: A Director's Guide to Good Governance. Victoria: Trafford Publishing. Lewis, C. (2012). Trends in Northwest Giving. Seattle: Philanthropy Northwest. McCurley, S., & Lynch, R. (2011). Volunteer Management. Plattsburgh: Interpub Gourp Corporation .

Appendix 1