Fund-Raising Ethics and Earning a Living

To the Editor:

While ethics matter, Henry Goldstein’s opinion piece on ethical fund raising (“Taking the Lead on Ethical Fund Raising,” June 4) largely ignores the root causes of a compensation dilemma facing the development profession.

As The Chronicle regularly reports, philanthropy is a billion-dollar industry, but most development officers are hardly compensated in proportion to or commensurately with this volume of business. Without stock options or the other financial incentives available in the for-profit world, the pressures for commissions and percentages should be viewed as symptomatic of a much larger and more deeply ingrained problem of non-profit salary scales, which are both inadequate and out of touch with current realities. It shows up in all sorts of ways — from frequent staff turnover, to individual burnout, to the repeating cycle of classified ads that appear in The Chronicle.

Mr. Goldstein’s urging to the new president of the National Society of Fund Raising Executives, Paulette V. Maehara, that she take up the ethical cudgel is only half the battle. I suggest that she also dedicate her term to making the N.S.F.R.E. an advocate for the improved compensation of its members.

As a first step, she should turn the periodic salary studies into annual events, not simply for the members’ information but as pro-active tools to be communicated to chief executive officers and board members. Perhaps, such a project could be undertaken jointly with the Association of Governing Boards.

N.S.F.R.E. has done an admirable job in elevating the professional profile of development officers, but it is time that policy makers and fiduciaries know that our ranks are filled with people other than retired clergy and dedicated alumni. We are professionals with families and mortgages and college tuition to pay, all working in a billion-dollar industry which needs to adjust its compensation standards to the contemporary economy.

Commissions and percentages are not the answer for this crisis in the non-profit sector. Mr. Goldstein’s concerns are valid in this respect. But other approaches, like merit pay, are worthy of consideration and, if appropriate, sustained advocacy. Until this crisis is addressed, calls for “fund-raising ethics” will simply strike many as attempts to turn back the clock.

David M. Goodman
Princeton, N.J.