 Good afternoon. So since last year, as Scott said, the members of the advocacy committee have been really hard at work and I want to thank all of them. If you haven't read Dan's books, Uncharitable Uncharity Case, you should. It's some pretty exciting stuff and it has helped us find the words to express and describe the constraints and limits that are placed on nonprofits that we deal with every day. So when we were here last year, there were a few of us in the room. There were maybe 20 or 25 of us in the room who were pretty pumped, fired up, and didn't want it to stop there, right? You come to an event, you get all excited, you want to do something about it, you leave, you go back to your normal life where you're pretty busy already and you don't do anything about it. Well, we found time. We found time to continue to figure out how to change the conversation. So over the course of the past year, our work has involved going really deep into these issues and developing tools that we know we're going to need as a community to address these issues. So the video that you're about to see is one of the first tools that we've developed and it was funded by 18 of the San Antonio nonprofit council agencies and we're deeply grateful to those agencies for their support for this project, which we hope will be an ongoing mission to address these issues. So their names are at the end of the video and I'm not going to call out all 18 of them, but I do want to thank Carlos from Key Ideas. I don't know where you are, Carlos, but I know that you're here. He's over there for sitting on the advocacy committee and developing the video that you guys are about to see. So a lot of people to thank today. We couldn't have done this. No one can do this by themselves, but I want to point out our video stars and again, I don't know where you are. I see Kathy McNaughton right there, Amy Phipps, James Castro, Christina Martinez and Doug Watson. These guys put themselves out there to make this video. So we hope that you enjoy it. Thank you very much. Coming to the nonprofit world, I wasn't very familiar with the term overhead. And what did that mean? Well, I quickly learned what that meant, you know, different funders, different organizations understands that to mean, what are your costs that quote don't directly tie to the service or the people that you are serving. And for me, that was kind of hard to accept because everything we do goes towards serving our cause. For a long time, when you're entrenched in the program, you see the deficiencies when it comes to technology or the money to do things at a really top notch level. And then all of a sudden you're in charge of the organization and you know that you'll operate so much better and so much faster if you have computers at work or you have a phone for every person in your office. And for a long time, we operated without those things because we were terrified to spend the money on those things because we had to show that everything went to the program. But in the big picture, when you have a phone that people can answer and you have computers at work, it does add to how effective you are, how efficient you are. And conveying that to funders is important, you know, they need to know that we're making the best use of their money and that every single person here, regardless if they're directly involved in the program or not, adds to the good work that we're doing. I think we need to be upfront with our salaries. We need to be upfront with our benefits. We need to put that out there on the table for our funders, for those who come to see our organizations. We need to be the first ones to put that out there and not be defensive about it. That this is what I'm worth. This is what my responsibilities are in the organization. And this is how I earn it. So I think on the fundraising side, when you see a really low percentage, you have to wonder, are they investing in the kind of infrastructure that's going to promote growth and sustainability for the organization? You know, do they really have enough fundraising chops that they're going to be able to sustain their operations? I think we need to change the conversation starting with us. We need to educate our board members about what's important and why overhead should be redefined. I think it's more important instead of asking what percentage of overhead do you have is how effective is the program? How sustainable is the program? Are you reaching the goals that you've set for yourself as an organization? You've got to have that support staff. You've got to have that infrastructure. You've got to be able to document the success of the program and all of that takes infrastructure. It's not overhead. It's part of the cost of the program. So the San Antonio Nonprofit Council, all of us that are part of it, we are all advocating that we have a collective voice when it comes to dealing with funding issues. We all struggle trying to tell our story and trying to convince the next funder that they need to invest in us. But we all collectively understand that it takes money to make money, that we have to invest in top quality databases and top quality marketing materials so that way we can leverage those things with the good work that we're doing. All of us that work for nonprofits we're go getters. We do 100 things a million miles a minute, but it helps to support us when we have the people and the staff and the supplies that we need to carry out the program. For us, we were real proud of that. And unfortunately, we took the video away before you could see that we also wanted to thank visually 13 nonprofit members of the council who stepped up and donated nearly $5,000 for our advocacy marketing efforts. And we appreciate that because without that we would not, there they are right there. And we do want to thank them. And again, that's just the beginning. We plan on this being our mission over the next few years as an advocacy committee of this council. And we hope that you will join us as we continue the conversation here in San Antonio. And this leads me into our keynote speaker. I'm ecstatic that we were able to bring him back again for a year or two to show him our work since he's been here last and knows that we will continue this work when he leaves. Dan Pallotta is a builder of movements. He invented the multi day charity event industry. He created the breast cancer three day walks and multi day AIDS rides, which raise in excess of a half a billion dollars in nine years. And we're the subject of a Harvard Business School study. The model and methods he created are now employed by dozens of charities and raise in excess of 100 million annually for important causes. He is the author of Uncharitable, how restraints on nonprofits undermine their potential, the best selling title in the history of Tufts University Press. The Stanford Stanford Social Innovation Review said that the book deserves to become the nonprofit sector's new manifesto. His newest book, Charity Case, how nonprofit community can stand up for itself and really change the world. He is the co he is the founder of the chief and chief humanity officer for advertising for humanity. It's an agency dedicated to the expansion and transformation of high impact humanitarian organizations, such as those of you in the room. He is the founder and president of the Charity Defense Council, a national leadership movement dedicated to transforming the way the donating public thinks about charity and change. As many of you know, his iconic TED 2013 talk has been viewed more than 1.5 million times. It's my pleasure to bring to the stage Dan Pilata. Thank you very much, Scott. Hello, everybody. How are you today? Scott, I was so moved by that video, you know, you do this work and you give these talks all over the place and you wonder, is it having any impact? And to see a community take on responsibility for this thing in that way, it really moves me. So thank you. So I want to talk today about transforming the way the donating public thinks about charity. And I wonder how many of you actually did see the TED talk that I did last year? Okay, great. So some of you. Well, those of you that saw the TED talk know that I happen to have triplets. They're little. They're six years old. Sometimes I tell people I have triplets. They say, really, how many? Here's a picture of the kids. That's Ryder and Annalisa and Sage. I asked them if they would say hello to you. Hi, San Antonio. Non-profit council. My daddy makes no sense to me. I hope he makes no sense to you. I bring up the fact that I have triplets because I'm asked to do a lot of speaking on the subject of social innovation and social entrepreneurship. And in addition to having triplets, I happen to be gay. And I have to tell people, look, being gay and fathering triplets is by far the most socially innovative, socially entrepreneurial thing I have ever done. So a lot's happened since I visited with you last. I've aged a little bit. This is what I look like when I spoke to you in 2013. And this is what I look like now. I think that TED talk had been viewed 200,000 or 300,000 times. It had just been released then. It's now actually been viewed 3.3 million times. It's the 15th most commented TED talk of all time. And Victor Hugo said that nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come. And I think clearly the time had come to have a new conversation about charity. About a month after I was here with you last, three of the big evaluation agencies issued a joint press release to the American public in which they said to the donors of America, we write to correct a misconception about what matters when deciding which charity to support. The percent of charity expenses that go to administrative and fundraising costs commonly referred to as overhead is a poor measure of a charity's performance. Many charities should spend more on overhead. The people and organizations served by charities don't need low overhead. They need high performance signed charity navigator, the better business bureau wise giving alliance and guide star. Now I just mentioned that I happen to be gay and this press release was issued the same week the Supreme Court struck down the defense of marriage act. So I thought I was living in some kind of an alternate universe for the week. Now this is important, but it's going to take a lot more than a press release to reverse decades of indoctrination. And sadly, the same week that that press release was issued, the Center for Investigative Reporting in cooperation with CNN and the Tampa Bay Tribune issued a typically sensational media report entitled The 50 Worst Charities in America. And how did they figure out who were the 50 worst charities in America? Not by looking at their impact or what good they were doing in the community, but by looking at their overhead ratios. And how did they figure out their overhead ratios? They looked at the tax forms that those nonprofits had completed. Now you would think that the 50 worst charities in America were among the group that don't even bother to fill out their tax forms, you know, that don't comply with their most basic legal obligations. So we have a long way to go. When I was here last I spoke about the ideas in my book Uncharitable. And in Uncharitable, I was trying to describe the nature of the box within which nonprofit organizations are constrained to try and create real social change. Buckminster Fuller once said that a problem well stated is a problem well on its way to being solved. And in Uncharitable, I was trying to take a focused, cold, hard, sober look at the nature of the problem. And today I want to talk about the solution to that problem which I've written about in a book called Charity Case. And Charity Case is about us forming a national community to stand up for ourselves and speak up for ourselves and protect one another. Because we who create community on behalf of all manner of causes lack any powerful national community of our own. We give voice to the voiceless who are suffering in poverty and hunger and disease but we don't have any powerful national voice of our own. We defend the outcast and the downtrodden but we don't have any mechanism for defending ourselves. So Charity Case is about changing the way the whole culture thinks about charity. Now some people say well that's just impossible. The way the American public thinks about charity is the way the American public thinks about charity. They've thought that way for decades, if not centuries, it's fixed and we have to adapt ourselves to that reality. And I simply don't believe that. You know John Kennedy said that the problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by the skeptics and the cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need people who dream of things that never were. I heard Bono say once when he was talking about hunger, extreme poverty, that the world is more malleable than we think it is. And I believe that. We can change the world. You know in my own case when I was 20 years old and I came out to my parents they were so sad you know because they thought you'll never have a normal life. You'll be ridiculed by your community. You'll never be married. You'll never have a family. You'll never have children. And now 30 years later you know our children their grandchildren have transformed their lives. And it's an amazing thing to see the thing that they thought was the end of my life 30 years ago has become the beginning of their life in their 70s. Things change. People's ideas about things change if we have the courage to make them change. So how many of you were here in May of 2013 when I spoke about Uncharitable? Okay so some of you. Alright so for those of you that weren't I want to do a brief recap of what I spoke about there so that you'll understand the problem at which this solution is pointed. In Uncharitable I was basically saying that these problems that non-profit organizations confront poverty, Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer, illiteracy, hunger are massive unspeakably massive in scale and these organizations that are trying to combat them are tiny up against them. John Kennedy had a little carving on his desk that said God your ocean is so great and my boat is so small. It feels like that a lot of the time. And the problem is we have these two rule books. We have one for the non-profit sector and we have one for the rest of the economic world. And I looked at the way that this separate rule book discriminates against non-profit organizations in five different areas. So the first is compensation and in the for-profit sector the more value you produce the more money you can make without limit. But we don't like non-profit organizations to use money to create incentives and charity. We have a visceral reaction to the idea that anyone would make very much money helping other people. Interesting we don't have a visceral reaction to the notion that people would make a whole lot of money not helping other people. You know you want to make 500 million dollars selling sugar water to kids in the developing world or right here in the United States go for it. We'll put you on the cover of Forbes magazine but you want to invest say a quarter of a million dollars to try and find the right leader to you know end homelessness in San Antonio and their thought of a mercenary themselves. And we think of this as our code of ethics not realizing that it has a powerful side effect which is it gives a mutually exclusive choice between doing well for yourself or doing good for the world. The tens of thousands of bright minds coming out of the best universities every year who could make a huge difference in the non-profit sector but they go marching instead directly into the for-profit sector. They'll figure out some other way to create charitable meaning in their lives and so they're lost to the sector for life. The second area of discrimination is advertising and marketing so here again we give the for-profit sector the advantage where we tell it you go spend spend spend on advertising to bring in those new customers until the last dollar no longer produces a penny of value. But we don't like to see our donations spent on advertising and charity. Our attitude is look if you can get the ad donated at three o'clock in the morning or on a billboard behind a very healthy tree I'm cool with that but I don't want my donation spent on advertising I wanted to go to the cause not realizing that the money spent on advertising if done properly or substitute forms of advertising could bring in dramatically greater sums of money to support the cause. You know Susan G. Coleman last year spent 25 million dollars on advertising and some of us would gasp and say that's unconscionable that money should have gone to breast cancer research 25 million trying to build demand for people to donate more money to breast cancer. Meanwhile Lori Al spent 1.5 billion dollars trying to build market demand for people to buy cosmetics and this is why charitable giving has remained stuck at two percent of GDP in the United States for 40 years. This is why the non-profit sector faced with solving these huge problems cannot take any market share away from the for- profit sector because we don't let it market. The third area of discrimination is the taking of risk particularly in the fundraising area trying new things that might work that might fail that might raise a lot of money that might lose a lot of money. Here again the for-profit sector gets the advantage Disney can make a 200 million dollar movie that flops and nobody calls the attorney general you know but you do a little one million dollar community fundraiser for the poor and it isn't an out-of-the-park success in the first year 70% profit to the cause and your characters called into question so non-profits are terrified of attempting any innovative brave daring new community fundraising endeavor fear that if the thing fails their reputations will be dragged through the mud. The fourth area is time take the example of Amazon went for six years without returning any profit to investors and investors had patients they knew that this was a long-term proposition low prices high volume build market dominance but if a non-profit organization think about this for a second ever had a dream of building Amazon like scale that required that for six years no money is going to go to the needy we would expect people to be indicted. Now last year three years into excuse me 20 years into its business Amazon posted three consecutive quarters of losses two days after they posted their third consecutive quarterly loss the stock went to an all-time high Twitter's worth 30 billion dollars after they did their IPO last December you know how much money Twitter made the quarter before they did their IPO they lost 188 million dollars can you imagine us giving a non-profit organization that kind of breathing room at that scale to create something magnificent and the last area is profit itself so the for-profit sector can pay people money in order to attract their capital for their new ideas or their risky ideas but you cannot systematically pay profits in a non-profit sector so the non-profit sector is left with the donation as it's only financial instrument and donors don't want their donations spent on risky speculative future looking new things so the for-profit sector monopolizes the multi trillion dollar capital markets the non-profit sector is star for any kind of growth capital or risk capital and you put those five things together and you just put the non-profit sector at the most extreme disadvantage to the for-profit sector on every level and I said that none of us wants our epitaph to read we kept charity overhead low right we wanted to read that we change the world and if we can change the way the public thinks about these things that's exactly what I believe we can do so I gave this talk all over the world two hundred two hundred and twenty five times I gave it in 29 states in the United States every province in Canada in England and Holland and Belgium and Australia and Mexico and traveled something like 300,000 miles doing it and everywhere I went you could see people felt liberated but like somebody has finally said it but liberated like in the way when your therapist diagnoses you with obsessive compulsive or disorder you know you say thank God I knew I had something you know but now what right and the message really resonated with people so I would have people coming up to me after all my talks and I would get all kinds of letters and all kinds of emails I spoke at the Gates Foundation I keynoted the Council on Philanthropies annual meeting the big United Way conferences colleges all over the place all kinds of nonprofit regional conferences and people said things like this the the head of the Association of Fundraising Professionals said the sector has fallen into a trap we created by focusing on what we don't spend and not on what has been accomplished we have completely missed the mark in our messaging I spoke at the Gates Foundation a senior executive sent me a letter the next week saying charities constantly sell themselves short by conforming to donor fads or adapting themselves to the latest government or foundation reformulation of strategy the symbiotic relationship of donor and recipient has proved to be sustainable and perpetuating to the detriment of vital social issues other representative comments were things like this one person said I can't remember being as fired up excuse me is excited about the nonprofit world since I began working in this sector I feel at once enraged and empowered you articulated many of the things I find so frustrating about the nonprofit world I couldn't be more excited that someone is not just advocating but shouting about the things you've been writing I work at an organization that spends so much time telling our donors about our overhead ratio is if that were the best reason to give thereby negating our core mission count me in Dan I'm fired up but there was nothing to count people in too and so I could see this is an issue that's ready for a movement like people are frustrated there is enormous passion and demand that we have to channel and harness and do something about this so what kind of a movement would it be well it would be a movement to transform the way the general public thinks about charity now why do I keep saying the general public because individuals give seventy five percent of the three hundred billion dollars given to nonprofit organizations in America every year it doesn't come from corporations or foundations as most of us think that's the first reason second because government really cares what the general public thinks and since the general public wants low overhead government tells charities in the three hundred billion dollars in additional contracts that it provides to the sector that we want you to have low overhead third because the board members that govern our organizations come from the general public and they come indoctrinated with these dysfunctional ideas about charity and even if they know better they feel they have a fiduciary duty to give the public the dysfunctional things the public is asking for and last but not least even foundation leaders come affected by these cultural norms so here's our baseline ten percent that's the number of people in an NYU Wagner school of public service survey that believe charities do a very good job at spending money in that same survey only 17 percent felt that charities do a very good job at running programs the better business bureau did a survey with Princeton survey research associates asked donors what information do you most want before you give to charity and 79 percent said they want to know about overhead only six percent said they want to know if it makes a difference why would that be well we've convinced the general public that the two things are the same in that NYU study 70 percent of respondents said they believe charities waste a great deal or a fair amount a fair amount or a great deal of money in a separate survey by Ellison research 62 percent of respondents said they believe charity spend too much money on fundraising and in this administration now I know of no study that shows the charities actually do waste money and those of us that work in the sector know we don't spend nearly enough on fundraising and administration so why do people think this because we've never taught them otherwise so what do we do about it how do we change this well if you take a look at it if you look at it for just about ten minutes you can see that we are lacking at least five basic functions that are critical to creating any successful movement for change so the first thing we're missing is any kind of an anti-defamation force now why would we need an anti-defamation force well because we get to famed in the media all the time and we have no articulate powerful national legitimate voice there to offer the general public an alternative point of view so this is Wolf Blitzer on CNN talking about the salary of the head of the boys and girls clubs the CEO's million-dollar salary a million spent on travel conventions lobbying fees all are raising major eyebrows among senators and this time it's not corporate executives in their sites but rather executives of a very popular and long-standing charity million dollars a year for a CEO of boys and girls club which does such important work all over the that's going to shock a lot of people and no doubt people are gonna say well why should I give money to them if that money is going to go for these kinds of sell this is going to cause a lot of consternation out there Lisa thanks for bringing us this report and follow up and see what happened well it's going to cause a lot of consternation now right now that now that he said it's going to cause a lot of consternation if we had an anti-defamation force we could have pointed out some things like the fact that Roxanne Spillett who was the CEO of the boys and girls club who resigned as a result of that whole matter is so typical instead of defending ourselves we pick some skate go and send them into exile we could have pointed out that her salary wasn't a million dollars her salary was three hundred and eighty five thousand dollars she was paid a small bonus and she was owed years of catch-up retirement pay that hadn't been funded in previous years we could have pointed out the fact that according to Reuters Wolf Blitzer's salary for that year was three million dollars or four times what the head of the boys and girls clubs was earning not for helping boys and girls but for making it more difficult for the boys and girls clubs to help them third we could have pointed out the fact that her salary was approved by her board and was in line with like-sized organizations fourth we could have pointed out that during her tenure she had tripled network wide revenues from half a billion dollars to one point five billion dollars now imagine if you had saved two hundred grand on a cheaper leader and lost a billion dollars a year in the inability to raise the revenue that she raised and most important and last that during her tenure she had doubled the number of children served but nobody got to hear any of that because we don't have any voice to say it senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa called for an inquiry because the boys and girls club received forty one million dollars a year in taxpayer funds and in calling for that inquiry he said it appears that such federal funds are not reaching the intended beneficiaries in this case the youth of the country now that's defamation that's a verdict before the inquiry has even happened and when the number of kids served has been doubled how can you say that the funds are not benefiting the youth of the country now if we had an anti defamation force we could have pointed out a few things like the fact that in 2009 Lockheed Martin took in eighty five percent of its forty five billion dollars in revenue in taxpayer funds in the form of government contracts that that amounted to thirty eight point four billion dollars in taxpayer funds that its CEO Robert Stevens was paid fourteen point six million dollars that year eighty five percent of which came from taxpayer funds that his compensation over the course of a five-year period was a hundred and eleven million dollars so before we start criticizing an organization whose CEO makes thirty nine times less and takes in nine hundred times less in taxpayer money maybe we should have an inquiry into the salary of the CEO of Lockheed Martin it is a perverse kind of oversight that on the question of exactly who is siphoning money away from children points a finger at the boys and girls club and turns a blind eye to the military industrial complex but none of this got mentioned because we didn't have anyone there to say it and when you don't defend yourself it just emboldens the other side so these are the kinds of comments that that story generated no person working at a charity is worth paying more than two hundred thousand dollars per year that's just a simple fact another way of saying that is these problems don't deserve talent worth any more than two hundred thousand dollars a year these runaway nonprofits with their exorbitant executive compensation and spending make me as sick as the for-profit organization somebody needs to rein in this reckless get rich at all expenses mentality now these comments were not in people magazine they were in our own trade paper these are from the Chronicle of philanthropy in New York in 2011 exact excuse me 2012 executives at one charity one charity were accused in the New York Times of using charitable funds for personal things two days later New York Governor Andrew Cuomo called for an investigation of executive salaries at all nonprofit organizations in the state of New York just two days later and in calling for the investigation the state legislature said this in 2010 the division of the budget found that at not-for-profit organizations under contract with state mental health agencies there were one thousand nine hundred twenty six employees with salaries greater than a hundred thousand dollars it is unconscionable that funds that could be providing badly needed services are spent instead on bloated management salaries this is before the investigation is even incurred how do you know the salaries are bloated and how do you know that those people being paid a hundred thousand dollars aren't the very ones providing the badly needed services now if we had some kind of an anti-defamation force we could have pointed out a few things like the fact that well yes there were nineteen hundred state funded employees that made more than a hundred thousand dollars but there were a hundred and fourteen thousand other state employees in New York that made at least a hundred thousand dollars one of them was the head basketball coach at the state University of New York Binghamton who made a million twenty six thousand dollars we could have pointed out the fact that there were eight thousand seventy four employees of the metropolitan transit authority who were paid at least a hundred thousand dollars that year now his mental health that much less important than transportation and is that is it that much easier a problem to solve but none of this got mentioned because we have no voice there to say it other communities do have well funded anti-defamation mechanisms the Jewish community has the anti-defamation league with a seventy million dollar annual budget the gay and lesbian community has the gay and lesbian alliance against defamation with a six and a half million dollar budget the NAACP has a twenty eight million dollar budget the non-profit sector nothing we have no organization specifically charted to educate the media or deal with inaccuracies in the media the second thing we're missing is any kind of a legal defense function now why would we need that two reasons first of all our first amendment rights are violated when we are forced to speak in all manner of government forms in the language of overhead percentages rather than in the language of impact or in plain English second because in any given year there is all kinds of dysfunctional legislation and regulation that gets proposed that undermines us and we have no mechanism for stopping that so for example in Oregon three years ago the attorney general proposed legislation that would strip the tax deductibility status of any charity that spends less than 30 percent of revenues on program over the course of a three year period now that sounds reasonable on the face of it but it has some unattended unintended consequences first it signals to the general public that overhead is the measure you should use to figure out whether a charity is any good or not secondly it discriminates against new charities that have to spend a lot of money on fundraising in the early years to acquire new donors third it discriminates against poor charities with poor constituencies who don't have access to major donors who don't have access to very low-cost major gift fundraising and have to resort to very high-cost forms of fundraising and last but not least it outlaws the kind of long-term visioning and capacity building that's exactly the sort that Amazon does now a number of us wrote op-ed pieces and convinced the state of Oregon not to pass that legislation but last year it slipped in under the radar and did pass so that's now law in the state of Oregon as a result of that the state of Florida passed legislation this past year that requires that any charity that sends less than 25 percent of proceeds to the cause in one year in just one year has to respond to an onerous set of demands about where they spend all of their money within 30 days once the state asks them to florida also passed a leg this a senate committee passed legislation that would limit executive compensation to $129 thousand dollars for any charity that received state funding in california last year the attorney general proposed eliminating the ability of charities to do joint cost allocations and in new york after the investigation andrew quomo passed an executive order that limits compensation executive compensation in any charity in new york that receives received state funding to $199 thousand dollars now last april a state judge reversed that decision saying he overstepped his authority but in august another judge overturned the overturning so the law is actually effective in addition andrew quomo's executive order limited overhead in 2014 to 25 percent and brings it down to 15 percent in 2015 now under what logic is it okay to spend 25 percent on overhead on december 31st 2014 but against the law on january first 2015 andrew quomo calls this whole plan the non-profit revitalization act now some people might say well it doesn't sound so bad it's really pointed at the bad actors you know those of us who are good don't have anything to worry about then there are easy ways to to work around some of these things well that may or may not be the case but the point is policy makers are consistently using legislation and regulation to systematically reinforce in the general public's mind that these two things overhead and executive compensation are effective tools for figuring out whether a charity is any good or not so they're using the same things that the media uses but just in a different medium you know the real reason these states limit overhead and limit executive compensation is so that they can relieve themselves of the burden of having to figure out whether these programs they're funding are actually working or not other communities have well-funded legal defense functions the gay and lesbian community has lambda legal with a 70 million dollar annual budget the disabled community has the disabilities rights and education defense fund with a one and a half million dollar budget the n double acp has a separately funded legal defense fund with a 12 million dollar budget the asian american community has one the mexican american community has one the non-profit sector has american charities for reasonable fund raising regulation it consists of two attorneys eril koppelitz and jeff peters heroic people who volunteer their time the last time they filed a form 990 was seven years ago and they had a budget of 2700 dollars that's it that's what we have as a budget for protecting the entirety of the sector the third thing that we're missing is any kind of a public ad strategy now why would we need that well because the public is fundamentally misinformed and paid advertising allows you to control your message and say very specific things in a way that anti-defamation and legal defense work don't now other industries have collected their constituent members together and use the force of their numbers in times of distress to change public perception about things so the egg industry for example in the 70s you know it was thought of as this high cholesterol food and egg producers got together hired an ad agency came up with this slogan the incredible edible egg and this is one of the television commercials that they and this year alberg I'm a free runner a national champion gymnast martial artist and a stone if you want to be incredible eat incredible eggs incredible energy for body and mind reversing the image that you have of people who eat eggs they spent in the first year 15.8 million dollars and that on that campaign it resulted in 47 million additional servings of eggs or 85 million dollars in additional revenue the pork industry you know in the 80s pork was thought of as this fatty heart attack waiting to happen so all of the individual pork producers got together hired an ad agency came up with this slogan pork the other white meat and now when you eat pork you think you're being a model of national health right if we can change the way people think about pork we can change the way people think about charity some of you who are old enough might remember this commercial who care what they eat are learning some surprising things about calories one surprising thing is that the white meat you see here contains fewer calories than anything else on the plate but the most surprising thing is that this white meat is pork the other white meat and that brings you back some some of you some of you you were not even in the womb yet but see how they're just presenting information that the public didn't have gee i didn't know the asparagus that i'm eating has more calories than the pork as a result of that campaign pork sales increased by five billion dollars a year or 20 percent if we could increase charitable giving by 20 percent in the united states that would be an extra 60 billion dollars a year that's more than all of the foundation giving in america combined you know what pork slogan is now pork be inspired by pork i mean they've stolen our message take the oil industry so about three years ago the oil industry four years ago was being blamed for high oil prices and people were picturing these fat cat oil executives getting rich off of the middle class so oil producers got together and they came up with this question do you own an oil company and this is what their ads look like and they pointed out the fact that oil companies actually aren't owned by fat cat executives they're owned by your grandmother they're owned by pension funds by individual retirement accounts by mutual of uh accounts and by individual investors and this is what their television commercial look like do you own an oil company well if you have mutual funds or a pension or other investments chances are you to learn more visit energy tomorrow dot org they spent just three point eight million dollars on that in the first quarter alone the result was a fourteen percent reduction in the number of people blaming oil companies for high gas prices we can change the way people think about oil we can change the way they think about overhead most classic example is the milk industry it was under assault by sports drinks and bottled water in the uh in the early 90s so they came up with the famous campaign got milk in the first year they spent 25 million dollars on that it resulted in 187 million dollars in additional revenue uh for milk so they took that campaign nationwide by 1996 the got milk campaign had 91 percent national recognition um this is a comparison of industry advocacy ad spending so the egg industry i don't have my glasses and that's too far what is that 15 million dollars the oil industry about 30 million dollars the milk industry about 80 million dollars the non-profit sector nothing think about that the non-profit sector in the united states trillion dollar sector we have never taken out a full page ad in the new york times never run collectively a prime time television ad to tell the general public anything about overhead or executive compensation this is how that translates into uh facebook likes so um the got milk campaign 69 000 do you own an oil company 74 000 facebook likes uh pork be inspired 149 000 facebook likes the incredible edible egg 440 something facebook likes the biggest thing we have is independent sector 2300 facebook likes the uh fourth thing we're missing is any kind of legislative vision or why would we need that very simple we're dealing with this fragmented statutory code that was developed piecemeal over the course of the last century as issues came up for people who have long since died you know and it is as if we we have forgotten that we live in a representative democracy under the rule of self-government and that we could actually come together and design a statutory code that would actually support and nurture the work we have to do so to show you how little we think about it when i asked major leaders in the sector what they thought about this issue they said things like i'm not very familiar with the legislation around charity to be honest we haven't been looking at this work through a legislative lens i don't see any need for changes in federal regulations at this time nothing very interesting comes to mine and my favorite neat idea now if we did think about it there are all kinds of things we could consider like tax incentives for mergers and acquisitions and redesigning the form 990 and the last thing that we're missing is any kind of a national grassroots organizing campaign there are 10 million people employed in the non-profit sector in the united states not only does no database of those people exist no database exists of just the two million people that are employed in the health and human services portion of the sector so we cannot bring that massive voice to bear on any of the issues we care about there are no calls to action to that non-existent database so you put those five things together we don't have any anti-defamation force we don't have any legal defense function we don't have any paid public advertising strategy we don't have any legislative vision and we don't have any national grassroots organizing capability and you've just created the perfect storm of self-inflicted censorship you have the opposite of a movement you have a standstill worse than that you have us going backwards so what do we do about this well we need to fill those five voids and that's exactly what we intend to do with something that we've created called the charity defense council and the charity defense council will fight for the people who fight for the people it will be our national grassroots organizing organization advocacy organization excuse me we got our tax exempt status two years ago and we've spent the last year really trying to establish the organization so in the last year we've raised about a hundred and seventy thousand dollars we've got two thousand people in our database mostly who have signed on to be on specific action committees and we've worked very hard at establishing the representative legitimacy of it by building a powerful advisory board so among other people this is just a partial list we have Ned Breslin who is the CEO of Water for People Tamara Copeland who's the president of Washington DC regional grant makers Peter Diamandis who's the CEO and founder of X Prize Foundation which put the ten million dollar prize up to send the first private vehicle into space Matt Flannery the founder of Kiva one of the iconic philanthropic success stories of the last several decades Jim Gibbons the CEO and president of Goodwill International Steve Nardizzi the CEO of Wounded Warrior Project Perlin Knee the CEO and founder of Great Non-profits Jason Russell who founded Invisible Children Billy Shore who is the CEO and founder of Share Our Strength and the No Kid Hungry campaign this brilliant huge campaign to end child hunger in America Roxanne Spillett the immediate past president of the Boys and Girls Clubs of America Stacey Stewart who runs the United Way in the United States Art Taylor who's the head of the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance Mark Tersek who's the president of the Nature Conservancy and just this week we were joined by Pierre Ferrari who's the former senior VP of Marketing for Coca-Cola and now runs Heifer International which is a huge hundred million dollar anti-poverty organization and the Charity Defense Council will fill these five voids so we'll act as an anti-defamation force educating the media and preventing these kinds of stories from happening we'll function as a legal defense fund we're going to work with American Charities for reasonable fundraising regulation to become their fundraising arms so that they have the resources they need to do their work we will draft the National Civil Rights Act for charity and that work actually began in charity case a number of leaders in the sector contributed very thoughtful 500 word essays to the book those include Diana Aviv who runs Independent Sector Art Taylor who runs the Wise Giving Alliance Bob Lang who created the L3C corporate structure Billy Shore who I just mentioned who runs No Kid Hungry Lawrence Mendenhall who's the general counsel for Humanity United Bob Ottenhoff the last president of GuideStar and Errol Koplevitz who has won important cases on fundraising before the Supreme Court and they've written about everything from the right to lobby new corporate structures and iTunes for charity a venture fundraising fund all kinds of other wonderful ideas that were just not out there before we started asking about it the fourth thing we'll do is we'll become an ad agency for the sector so we'll run interesting provocative ads like this one that features somebody looking directly into camera and the headline says I'm overhead you know we've dehumanized overhead so we need to rehumanize overhead my name is Martin Hodges I do fundraising for the breast cancer charity I get labeled as a negative but without me there is no cause my mother died of breast cancer I'm 100% committed to the end of breast cancer and I'm overhead you can actually buy I'm overhead t-shirts at the charity defense counsel website if you want to demonstrate your solidarity with the people in your life who are overhead or an ad like this that asks the general public do you want to be the only donor because when you discourage your favorite charity from spending money on fundraising you're saying you don't want them to find other donors do you really want to bear all of the burden yourself they'll turn people around very quickly right but we've never said anything like that to them or my favorite the ultimate emotionally manipulative picture of a little kid with his piggy bank and the headline says I'm going to donate all of the money in my piggy bank to the local homeless shelter and I want them to spend 100% of it on fundraising and administration because I want them to grow the public has sense you just need to talk to them we've just been so scared and so silent no wonder the public thinks all of these dysfunctional things and the last thing we'll do is function as a grassroots community organizer for the sector beginning with creating a database and by organizing powerful events now how do we fund all of this well that's where you come in we really want this to be a grassroots organization we don't want this to be institutionally funded some ivory tower bureaucratic thing and so we have created this purposeful powerful wonderful event called the charity defense march and we hope it will become the largest demonstration of the sector by the sector and for the sector in the history of the sector it will happen from June 26th to June 28th next year 60 gorgeous miles three incredible days it's a walk it's not a race it's cooperative it's not competitive it's not athletic it's all about building community and it starts at the border of Maine and New Hampshire and all of their summertime glory at the beautiful Piskatakwa river which separates Maine from New Hampshire and then it goes downhill as you can see all the way all the way to Salem, Massachusetts and we chose Salem because Salem is where the original Puritans landed that started all of this that is where the Arabella landed that carried John Winthrop and John Winthrop wrote the famous sermon a model of Christian charity that denigrated profit in the area of helping others either even while he was calculating how he was going to make a lot of profit everywhere else we're going to have the most amazing speakers every night we're doing a TEDx conference the day before with non-conformists who have challenged these old ideas and who will share their best practices you can register as an individual cost 99 bucks to register or you can register a team organizations can also participate by sending an ambassador and underwriting their fundraising or sending a team or organizations can use this as a three-day dream retreat imagine having three beautiful summer days in New England to walk and dream about nothing but your future with no office distractions around we're going to have the most wonderful people a lot of the people on the advisory board are marching many of them have already registered people from all walks of life all over the country all levels of organization kids are welcome to participate if you want to meet Ryder, Annalisa and Sage they're registered to march they'll tell you that their daddy's may be making more sense the goal is to have 500 marchers and net a million dollars and how do we do that well each marcher agrees to raise 29.95 as in 2,995 dollars now some people are freaked out by the idea of raising 2,995 dollars they're not really concerned about the 60 miles but raising the money scares them to death some people are scared aren't really freaked out about the money but they're scared to death of walking 60 miles most people are freaked out by both things so if you're freaked out by both things you're in good company but know that you are not alone we're here to support you Bob Dylan said it's strange how people who suffer together have stronger connections than people who are most content so we've got an amazing 45-page walker handbook that you get when you sign up that gives you all kinds of fundraising advice and training advice we've got walker coaches we've partnered with CrowdRise to help with all of the fundraising pages and this is a commercial we've produced on the march so I want San Antonio to have the biggest representation on the march of any region in the country you can go to charity thank you you know this is our moment this is our chance this is what we're called to do whether we like it in this time or not I encourage you when this is over go to charity defense march and register for the march or start a team get your organization behind it I want to close by just saying this I know that changing the way America thinks about charity will be difficult but it's important and we can't shrink from the things that are important because they're difficult I know that for some people doing the charity defense march will be really difficult but it's important to funding the charity defense council and the charity defense council is important to changing the way people think about these things and changing the way people think about these things is important to ever solving these problems so I think we understand the nature of the box that confines us and next June 26th we're going to start marching right out of it and I hope with all my heart and all my hope that you'll join us thank you very much thank you thanks thank you and I can tell you that myself Chuck Altmiller Denise Barkhurst and Sean Zacharia from Eva's Heroes will all be marching next year and I encourage you to join us if you are interested I mean obviously you can go to the website but if you're interested in joining the non-profit council members and those of you who are members and want to do it in a big way contact myself or any one of the members that I just mentioned Denise Barkhurst or Sean Zacharia from Eva's Heroes because we're doing it we're committed and I want to thank you very much for coming down again it was our pleasure to premiere the video for you because you were the inspiration we will get that to you and again that was the inspiration and that's not it we will continue to do that work and we will continue to keep you updated and Denise forgot to mention that I did mention that we got the support of 13 of our members back in May the CEOs of our organizations to commit to money to our marketing campaign and we still need more money and we are going to continue this work but it doesn't happen just you know free of charge and marketing materials don't happen and just appear and videos don't just get edited without some cost behind it while we do have partners in the room who are our for-profits like Key Ideas who produce the video and ESD and Associates who are our PR marketing firm they do give us a lot of in kind but they also are for-profits and we need to pay them for that work so that we get quality work so there are forms on your table and we typically as a non-profit council don't ask for monetary donations at this luncheon but this is different and so if you're so inclined to help us achieve better things for our community our non-profit community here in San Antonio fill it out leave it at the registration table in the back we'll invoice you and we'll keep you in the loop of what we're doing marketing material wise we're going to continue to produce more videos and we're also going to use that money to do workshops and trainings not only for our own members because those are the first defense that we need to do then to the board and then to the general public so this is a movement that Dan has started 18 months ago and we're going to continue as a non-profit council and I hope you all will join us because I'm pretty excited about it so I want to thank you all very much for coming and again thank you Dan for the trip again y'all have a good afternoon