21st Century Aid: How can social media build humanitarian movements?

By Robert Moreau

Research Analyst/Outreach

social media landscape

Early on into the second decade of the 21^st century, new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are unlocking a revolution in how people understand and interact with the world. A 2008 online poll by We Media/Zogby found that almost half of respondents used the internet as their primary news source, with a majority in the 18-29 demographic. The rise of the internet and Web 2.0 has brought with it immense opportunities for increasing awareness of local and global issues, but also concerns about traditional journalism’s future as it tries to adapt.

More notable about social media’s rise is how it is going beyond simply reporting news to complementing and even creating movements, as activists are using its power to unite people. And as the examples of UNCHR’s innovations and the ongoing Haiti relief effort reveal, it is transforming how humanitarian aid campaigns are conducted and moving potential volunteers into direct action.

UNHCR

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is the UN agency coordinating refugee aid. Today, it is active helping 34 million refugees in 110 countries, with a staff of around 6,600.

Afghan refugees, deported from Iran

UNHCR is emerging as a leader in new media and networking; according to Claudia Gonzales, former head of Public Relations and Special Projects for the agency, “in the two years I was working there, I saw the transformation of an entire organization and the way they communicated about the refugee crisis…from being an organization that was conservative to be the leading organization that is using social media in the United Nations.” UNHCR’s presence today includes over 1 million followers on Twitter, putting it in the top 200 for subscriptions. It also has Facebook and Myspace pages, a Youtube channel, and Flickr gallery, enabling it to communicate information.

Two of UNHCR’s recent notable campaigns are:

Its 2008 World Refugee Day campaign, which featured a YouTube video calling for viewer responses, producing $1 dollar per posted response. A “Give Refugees a Hand” Facebook application released one day before World Refugee Day added users three times faster than a typical app. Google, MSN, and others promoted the campaign on their home pages.
The Gimme Shelter campaign, launched in December 2008 and featuring a series of short films by Ben Affleck set to the tune of the Rolling Stones’ “Gimme Shelter” and filmed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. An example can be seen here. A Facebook Gimme Shelter Cause page was also created.

The real success of UNHCR’s social media effort, Gonzales notes, is the fact that communication is a “two-way street” where “the UNHCR team engages in a conversation…where they want to know what people are saying,” even using online communities to test outreach ideas. She also says that learning how to engage potential supporters with a message of hope is important. “The tone matters…how do you actually make sure you are bringing up the refugee issues into people’s minds in a way that is human?” Through means such as enabling refugees to share their stories directly, UNHCR has met with success.

The Haiti relief effort: New media’s maturation moment?

The impact of the January 12 earthquake in Haiti is still being felt today, as the country tries to regain its footing. On

Haiti aid volunteers

February 22, Haitian President Rene Preval stated the death toll “might reach 300,000 people” with various issued estimates ranging from 170,000 to 270,000. The Al-Jazeera article Preval was quoted in also noted 1.5 million people still live in tent cities in Port-au-Prince, and over $2 billion total combined from private donors and the United Nations being pledged for the country’s reconstruction.

Immediately after the disaster and in the absence of official sources, social media played a critical role in giving the world a view of what was going on in the country, and who needed help. Rich McKinney, in a January 17 posting on Social Media Storm, noted that “Untold news stories have been published of people who are still alive and trapped under rubble and able to text, tweet or post to Facebook their location, and their desperate need for help,” then noting a NY Daily News story describing how a medical plane was able to be landed through Twitter.

Traditional media outlets also relied on online content, with the BBC tweeting from the ground and CNN using citizen-created iReports, as well as citing blog postings and twitter feeds as material for news stories. As Dallas News noted in a January 30 article “many believe the Haiti relief efforts have elevated social media from bit player to starring role” as a global communication medium during a major event.

ICT use also enabled alarmed watchers of the tragedy to make an impact as donors and even volunteers. Two major examples are:

The Red Cross’s Haiti text message campaign, which raised $7 million in its first two days, has been at the forefront of a historic mobile giving drive. By January 21, over $30 million had been donated to Haiti relief efforts, leading Verizon’s Jeffrey Nelson to call it “the largest outpouring of charitable support by texting in history-by far.”
The formation of Crisis Camps, where computer experts have volunteered to create maps of areas struck by the quake, as well improved family locator and information services. The first Crisis camp was launched at USC, and the concept has spread as far as Canada, Colombia and London.

Though social media has its limits as to what it can do, there is no doubt that it has made a tremendous impact in enabling the humanitarian aid campaign for Haiti.

The GENESIS Network: harnessing new media’s potential

Genesis education initiative, Ghana

Since its founding in 2008, the GENESIS Network has actively sought to create a new standard for using social media to make a positive difference in the world. With four current initiatives-in Thailand, Ghana, Ecuador, and Haiti-GENESIS “uses social networking to develop international human rights projects…[including] building schools, economic development and orphan protection.” By using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative project analysis, it also presents a measure of accountability that surpasses other sources.

With the launch of its new website, GENESIS is working to take its model to the next level, guided by these five principles:

“Networking: People are our greatest resource. GENESIS brings individuals, organizations and companies together to develop and collaborate on a wide range of projects. As we expand our network of people, we likewise expand the network of resources from which any one person or project may draw.

Resource Sharing: GENESIS brings people together to meet, connect and share resources all in one spot.

Local Empowerment: We enable people to better use the resources they have or are given. They in turn teach others and the cycle continues.

Sustainability: We seek long-term solutions to problems by addressing the root causes and eliminating them through people and resources.

Transparency: We’re always happy to see the results of our hard work. Project transparency and responsibility are our top priorities.”

Moving into the future, GENESIS is working to build on its successes, expanding and improving its scope of projects and its ability to use social media to ensure that potential donors and volunteers are connected with those who need their help the most.

Reader questions: Moving forward, what are your impressions of GENESIS thus far? How has using the network enabled you to build connections and gain confidence in where your donations are going? Where do you think it could improve? What would you like to see in the future? And what do you think of the new website? All questions and comments are more than appreciated, and go a long way in finding out how GENESIS is benefitting, and can further benefit, you.

Reassessing Assessment: How does GENESIS have an advantage over Charity Navigator and other monitoring sites?

Robert Moreau

Research Analyst/Outreach

With a desire to donate contrasted by an unsteady economy and an abundance of non-profits and projects, philanthropists want to make sure their money is put to good use. In response to these concerns, sites such as Charity Navigator and GuideStar have surged to prominence and media exposure.

While the increased scrutiny of what organizations do with charitable donations is a positive trend, these evaluators’ exclusive reliance on quantitative financial data says little about how people are helped on the ground, or other important components that make a project worth supporting. Because of this, a merged assessment model emphasizing qualitative as well as quantitative measurements is a better way to evaluate effectiveness.

The Charity Navigator controversy (or “is a Form 990 really THE definitive measure of success?”)

Charity Navigator, online since 2001, describes itself as “America’s premier independent charity evaluator,” which “works to advance a more efficient and responsive philanthropic marketplace by evaluating the financial health of over 5,400 of America’s largest charities.” Its overview/about us section notes accolades received from magazines such as Time, Forbes, and BusinessWeek, as well as its use on cable programs ranging from “The Factor with Bill O’Reilly” to “The Daily Show.”

Charity Navigator ranks charities that are given a tax-exempt 501 c (3) status, through their IRS Form 990’s. Four years of 990 forms are required by Charity Navigator for evaluation purposes.

From Form 990 information, Charity Navigator ranks charities from 4 stars (“exceptional”) to 0 (“exceptionally poor”), evaluating their Organizational Capacity (revenue growth, expenses growth, working capital ratio) and Organizational Efficiency (fundraising efficiency and expenses, program and administrative expenses) to come up with their final score. More information can be found here.

Rated charities can be found in nine broad categories, with their own subcategories: Animals, Environment, International, Arts, Culture, Humanities, Health, Public Benefit, Education, Human Services, and Religion. It also maintains several “Top Ten” charity lists.

The dilemma of rating organizations through financial scales, however, is that they do not necessarily tell the picture of the services they are providing. As the Wall Street Journal explained in its December 19, 2008 article “Charity Rankings Giveth Less Than Meets the Eye”:

“Like stocks, charities are typically rated by their financial numbers or by qualitative characteristics such as corporate governance-or both. Unlike stocks, charities have no single measure akin to a business profit to determine successful performance. There is a widespread search for such a number, but the challenges may be too daunting. Meanwhile, some of the measures that are used may inspire bad actors to try to game the system.”

An April 2007 posting on netsquared.org is far less charitable in the wording of its assessment:

“The cornerstone of the rating is the program expenses divided by total expenses…this may be useful in weeding out the charities that are literally trying to scam you, but it is a backwards way to figuring out who actually helps people as effectively as possible…the quality of your plan is so much more important than the size of your budget.”

The rest of Charity Navigator’s criteria are even more nonsensical. Charities are rewarded for having growing revenues (i.e., good fundraisers) and growing expenses (so apparently finishing a project or reducing costs is a bad thing)…maybe the “fundraising efficiency” metric would have some meaning if ability to raise funds were at all connected to ability to help people…but that’s just the problem. It isn’t, as long as donors have no sources of real information.

The Gates Foundation…wouldn’t rely on this stuff in a million years.”

Indeed, Charity Navigator’s own ranking system is its self-admitted shortfall. Charity CEO Ken Berger was quoted in a January 2009 article in Washington Business Journal as saying “I think what happens is that some people go to the site, they type in the name, they look at the stars, they leave” despite a website blurb explaining that users shouldn’t just take its ratings as the only guide.

Charity Navigator and similar evaluators, in summary, make an honest effort to educate prospective donors about the organizations they may send funds to. But relying on a blank financial statement or statements such as a Form 990 alone does not tell the whole story of how a project is making an impact.

So, after all this, the question can be asked: Is there a better way? Yes, there is…

The GENESIS approach: Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment

As an innovative social networker for development organizations, the GENESIS Network’s goal is to “[provide] a highly interactive environment wherein organization members, philanthropists, project community members and volunteers communicate and collaborate effectively,” taking advantage of social media technology to promote a more transparent and efficient system of accountability. More specifically, with GENESIS:

Users can create a customized profile enabling them to actively keep track of projects they support, with tools ranging from regular progress reports to quality assessment ratings from donors, project staff, and third-party monitors.
Beneficiary pages enable donors to build a connection with the people they are helping.
All projects are posted online, with all initial information ratings once approved. Regular updates on progress, including changes, successes, failures, etc. are a strong determining factor in assessing a high-quality rating to an initiative.
Project data includes a clear explanation of finances and where money is allocated, enabling philanthropists to make smart choices about where their donations are going.

Through combining a mix of quantitative and qualitative data, as well as leveraging social media through enabling constant communication between donors, project leaders, and others, the GENESIS Network is actively creating a new standard of assessment and accountability.

For readers: What would you like to see from GENESIS in terms of promoting project accountability? What do you like about what the Network has to offer and where do you think it could improve? Any and all questions and comments are welcome.

Robert Moreau is Research Analyst/Outreach for the GENESIS Network. A 2008 Master’s graduate of the University of Massachusetts Lowell in Regional Economic and Social Development, Moreau has been working for GENESIS since July 2009. His work has included freelance newspaper pieces and a newsletter published for a Lowell-area social services agency in 2008.

Can social media help nonprofits fundraise?

We live in an age where opportunities for communication are increasing faster than ever. With the rise of Web 2.0 media such as social networking sites and blogs, it has become all the easier for philanthropic organizations to build new connections, as well as publicize their activities and needs.

And charities have responded, emerging as the surprising leader in the social media landscape. A UMass Dartmouth study released in June stated

“new research shows that charitable organizations are still outpacing the business world and academia in their use of social media. In the latest study (2008) a remarkable eighty-nine percent of charitable organizations are using some form of social media including blogs, podcasts, message boards, social networking, video blogging, and wikis.”

These figures are an increase from 2007, in which “seventy-five percent of the respondents…reported they use at least one form of social media.” However, one area where charities can improve is in leveraging these tools to raise funds. In 2008, the study notes, only forty-five percent called social media “very important” to their fundraising strategy, versus forty-six in 2007. “Somewhat important” answers received a small decrease as well, with thirty-six percent in 2008 versus thirty-eight in 2007.

These figures are an interesting anomaly in what is overall a strong push among charities to adapt to and take advantage of social media. As these new forms of communication take hold and break boundaries, it is important to explore what they can bring to fundraising.

Case Study: Facebook Causes

“Causes” is one of Facebook’s most popular applications, boasting almost 34 million active users and over 174,000 fans. Active since 2007, Facebook Causes is “founded on the belief that in a healthy society, anyone can participate in change by informing and inspiring others…We strive to build tools for people to mobilize their friends for collective action…eventually [launching] movements that span local communities or even the globe.”

The application enables users to create an advocacy group, or “Cause” on Facebook, on which members can “discuss the issues, share their experience, post media, and sign petitions” as well as solicit donations to be delivered monthly to an agency of the cause’s choice, processed by partner Network for Good. It emphasizes equal access and touts itself as a way for smaller charities as well as larger ones to build an audience. It links to a page with “success stories” of organizations that have maximized Causes’ potential to grow a support base and often raise thousands of dollars in funds.

Causes is not without its detractors or controversy, however. An April 22 Washington Post article (“To Nonprofits Seeking Cash, Facebook App Isn’t So Green”) states

“Causes…has been largely ineffective in its first two years, trailing direct mail, fundraising events and other more traditional methods of soliciting contributions. Only a tiny fraction of the 179,000 nonprofits that have turned to Causes as an inexpensive and green way to seek donations have brought in even $1,000, according to data available on the Causes developers’ site…fewer than 1 percent of those who have joined a cause have actually donated money through that application.”

Among its findings, the article noted that $25 is a median donation on Causes, vs. $50 through traditional methods, and that just 185,000 members have ever contributed via the application.

The Washington Post article has been criticized by nonprofit-related blogs, as advocates emphasize that building relationships with prospective donors takes time and effort by an organization, and that the raised awareness makes the effort worthwhile. Nonprofit developer Betsy Harman of Harman Interactive is quoted as stating:

“Any nonprofit who thinks they can simply put a donate now button on their website or simply create a “Causes” page on Facebook and wait for the money to roll in, doesn’t understand online fundraising. It’s still about building relationships, telling your story, and taking potential donors through the process of cultivation, stewardship and solicitation…Causes…is just a tool for peer to peer fundraising but in order to raise money that tool has to be used by someone who is passionate about the organization and proactive about telling the organization’s story.”

Joe Green, Causes co-founder, was quoted in the Post article as saying that “Causes raises almost $40,000 a day across its groups, up from $3,000 a day a year ago” and that “the biggest successes have been tiny nonprofits who don’t have the name recognition of the big guys.”

Lastly, the Post noted that online fundraising is still in its infancy, and that less than three percent of total nonprofit fundraising is done online.

Last thoughts

The case study of Facebook Causes reveals some interesting points about fundraising through the use of social media. The takeaway for this is that, though it has much potential, it a very new field and not the instant, automatic money maker charities often hope for. But nonprofits should not discount the immense opportunites it can bring now and in the future.

The best route for charities is broaden goals long-term, talking advantage of new media in increasing awareness and building advocacy. Through convincing the global audience social networking sites can provide of the necessity of their work, organizations can help grow a support base for the future.

As final questions: How has your organization used or considered using social media to expand its audience? What have the results been? Is there any advice you would give to charities considering online fundraising?

Philanthropy 2.0

Social Media: a new way of giving
Buy tickets at: philanthropy20.eventbrite.com

Social Empowerment Organization Hosts Children’s Rights Benefit at Prana Restaurant

Genesis Network, an international human rights development organization, to hold fundraiser to help build schools in Burma and Thailand.

08.23.2009 – Prana SF in the SOMA district will be hosting a benefit to help make Philanthropy 2.0 possible. The elegant evening will include live music, a silent auction and fusion dining with a dynamic and caring crowd. Genesis Network is a social media platform that increases the efficiency of philanthropy by connecting givers with the needy. The goal of this fundraiser is to raise funds for site development and pilot projects that provide Thai and Burmese children with schooling.

Imagine if when we donated to a cause a regularly updated profile was available along with online communication with the aid recipient instead of a simple thank-you card. Imagine we could see where our money went and interact with those we helped.

Genesis Network is essentially Facebook between philanthropists and NGOs. Non-profits will be given profile pages, as will philanthropists. The philanthropists will have a massive database of NGO’s at their finger tips and be able to choose from a buffet of causes and organizations (soon to be rated by peers on the site) to donate to. Once a donation is made, representatives and beneficiaries from the project will be in communication with the donors like pen pals. This is a way to see where your money goes first hand. Philanthropists will be able to form communities and initiatives together. The aim is to connect investors, donors, organizations, volunteers, and community leaders, in hopes of building a decentralized, open source network . We are a democratically determined 501C who embrace the open-source philosophy. We want to give everyone the tools to organize and make an impact. The Network is a 501(c)3 nonprofit and was incorporated in 2008 in Providence, RI by founder Adam Swartzbaugh. www.gnetwork.org

Entry is $175 dinner and first bids (table Price $100 discount). $75 Hor d’oeuvres. Donations are always welcome. RSVPs are requested by August 10th. For more information, call 415-533-7601 or visit www.genesisnetwork.org.

How ICTs Can Change the World: Giving Every Man a Voice

telecenter, Sri Lanka

In our modern world, new technologies such as the internet and social networking platforms have served as an engine of globalization. Through giving users a way to communicate across geographic boundaries, they have brought the globe closer together than at any time in history.

“ICTs”, or Information and Communication Technologies, identifies any long-distance communication outlet, ranging from radio and television to cell phones and broadband. Along with convenience, the impact established and emerging ICTs can have on activism and social programs cannot be overstated. In particular, the United Nations is emphasizing Information and Communications Technologies for Development (ICT4D) to link populations in developing areas. Since 1992, the UNDP has taken on various initiatives including the creation of a trust fund to fund expansion of ICT use “in close to 25 developing countries, on a demand-driven basis.”

Since its inception, the Genesis Network has sought to take social networking to a new level in this regard. Genesis’s ongoing objective is to give human rights-focused nonprofits a new way to reach out to prospective donors and partners, as well as connect with volunteers and beneficiaries. Among the Network’s features:
• Users can synch Genesis with existing networks, connecting through Facebook and using Twitter feeds to update their status.
• Users can invite friends and search for members who have similar interests or projects.
• Direct communication with individual beneficiaries. Through using network profiles, donors can search for both children in need of assistance and existing programs working to help them. Ongoing connections between benefactors and those they aid can be established.
• Within Genesis, individual organizations can create their own networks with features including being able to track proposed plans and budgets for new projects.

Through growing and developing this unique platform, Genesis hopes build new connections that can make a better world possible, project by project.