Every nonprofit (and every nonprofit funder) wants to focus on collaboration opportunities. Traci Stanley and Joshua Fulcher are on the forefront of nonprofit partnerships and are the driving forces behind the Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative. The collaborative is an alliance of seven education and human service agencies that collectively work with more than 12,000 low-income individuals throughout some of Chicago’s most underserved neighborhoods.
The collaborative developed a set of common outcomes and a technology blueprint to track and benchmark metrics. The collected data is used to design and implement strategies for measurably better outcomes. The CBC recently published a how-to guide to its methodology, Increasing Mission Impact Through Collaboration: Chicago Benchmarking Collaborative Processes and Toolkit.
(2:30) The founding goal of the Chicago Benchmark Collaborative.
(5:10) Overcoming resistance to collect and share more data.
(6:10) Using this data to benchmark with peers.
(8:30) Working with partners that are underperforming against the benchmark.
(11:45) How the collaborative uses data sharing to create high need programs.
(13:15) How data collaboration helps participating organizations secure funding.
(15:20) Ways the collaborative uses data to learn from high performers and improve services.
(17:45) Lessons from the Collaborative’s early days that new collaboratives can learn from.
(20:45) Why a collaborative needs strong executive sponsorship (and what that looks like).
(24:45) How to handle CEO transitions that jeopardize the partnership.
Read the Episode 133 transcript here!
Dolph Goldenburg: (00:00)
Welcome to the successful nonprofits podcast. I’m your host Dolph Goldenberg. Today I am talking with a couple of people who are on the forefront of nonprofit collaboration. Tracy Stanley and Joshua Fulcher are part of this Chicago benchmarking collaborative, which is an alliance of seven education and human service agencies that collectively work with more than 12,000 low-income individuals throughout some of Chicago’s most underserved neighborhoods. Now real quick, throughout today’s episode, you may hear us refer to the collaborative as the collaborative or as the CBC, but when we say CBC, we do not mean Canadian Broadcast Corporation. That’s a few miles north of Chicago. We’re talking about the Chicago benchmark and collaborative. Now the collaborative developed a set of common outcomes and a technology blueprint to track metrics. The collected data itself is used to design and implement strategies for measurably better outcomes. Now, the CBC recently published a how-to guide to its methodology and that how-to guide is not just a guide.
It’s also a toolkit. Joshua is the director of the expanded learning programs at Erie Neighborhood House, a program member of the collaborative and one of the founding members, Tracy is the Director of Quality Assurance at Christopher House and Christopher House provides the project management and probably fiscal oversight of the collaborative. Now together they’re going to share some of the insights that they gained through the collaborative use of data. Hey Tracy and Joshua, welcome to the podcast. Thanks, Dolph for having us. Thrilled. Absolutely thrilled to have you all here. Now oftentimes when folks care about collaboration, they’re kind of like, oh, we hear so much about collaboration and I know that it can be tough. How did you all get the collaborative started?
Traci Stanley: (02:08)
Uh, so yeah, I can start. Uh, we, the collaborative started in uh, 2009, so we are celebrating our 10 year anniversary. And, uh, we really were a partnership of five social service agencies, uh, all based in Chicago that really was committed to working together to benchmark data for comparative insights and learning. Um, and, and our goal really has been right, that we want to improve the quality of services, um, so that we can increase our impact on low-income children, youth and families. And so, you know, in the initial beginning stages, uh, there were many meetings where right leadership convene to, um, talk about the software, uh, that we needed to adapt. And then the process for, uh, building the work culture at each agency. Um, so that we were developing strong data tracking systems and that, so staff had, you know, the knowledge and the skills to effectively, uh, track outcomes and analyze data. Um, and so a lot of the house, in the beginning, were around the professional development of staff as well as building that agency capacity to, uh, track the common outcomes that we all agreed to track. Okay.
Dolph Goldenburg: (03:47)
And after reflecting, I can totally understand the need for professional development. Um, most people did not go into social work, human services or education unless they wanted to be a math teacher. Thinking, I love math, I want, I want to spend 20% of my time doing the math. So Joshua from one of the, um, founding programs perspectives, what did this look like for you all?
Joshua Fulcher: (04:10)
Yeah, I think, uh, when the collaborative first started, I was in a different position. I was one of the front line staff and a, there was some hesitation on having to collect more data and put it in another system. Uh, but I think once we were able to see what it was about and Tracy’s leadership was really concreate and took a lot of the legwork out of it for all the organizations. It helped us to, to see see-through for the year. And then once we were able to see what information the data could give us, it was easier to buy into the process. And, uh, then there wasn’t as much reluctance or hesitation about having to collect, you know, all that data for a different system.
Dolph Goldenburg: (04:51)
Alright. So, Joshua, I’m sure right now there are, um, quality management directors and data management directors who are asking themselves, what did Tracy do to help overcome that resistance with some of the frontline staff?
Joshua Fulcher: (05:09)
Um, I think the bottom line is that you know, even the folks that are resistant, it’s not because they don’t want to help the kids. So, uh, selling the fact that this data is a way to help the kids and serve them better is really the biggest thing. But also taking a lot of the legwork out of the meetings and making sure the meetings are productive, um, and scheduled in advance so they can be attended and, uh, and that there’s kind of a clear agenda so that we’re getting something out of them, I think was really important.
Dolph Goldenburg: (05:39)
Right. And, and so, Tracy, from your perspective, um, did you start working on collaborative, just sort of knowing that’s what you were supposed to do or did you kind of learn as you went along?
Traci Stanley: (05:50)
Uh, so I actually started at Christopher House, uh, working in our afterschool and youth programming. Uh, I was the director of those programs and I was really jazzed by the idea of measuring our impact and, uh, you know, help that department, uh, establish systems for, uh, increasing impact on youth and families. And then from there, uh, w you know, I took on a larger role, uh, helping to, uh, write, evaluate systems at Christopher House agency-wide. And really it was our board, um, in 2008 we were sharing some outcome results with them where they started to question, you know, how this is great that this is how Christopher House is doing, but how do we compare to other nonprofits doing similar work and offering similar services, which was really sort of a catalyst for, uh, our CEO to, um, you know, reach out to, uh, peer agencies and, uh, gauge interest in benchmarking data.
Dolph Goldenburg: (07:05)
Yeah. And I was going to say, I guess that’s where benchmarking comes from in the title of, of the collaborative.
Traci Stanley: (07:11)
That’s right. That’s right. There. A nonprofit sector, uh, you know, uh, measures of success very dramatically. Uh, it is, it can be hard to come by benchmark data. And so this is a group who, you know, uh, was motivated and, and voluntarily convene themselves. There wasn’t, you know, funding for the that was allocated across agencies for the project. Um, they wanted to create a set of benchmark data for themselves. Uh, so that again, we can increase impact, um, and improve the quality of services. [inaudible]
Dolph Goldenburg: (07:48)
Joshua, did you want to jump in?
Joshua Fulcher: (07:51)
Yeah, I was going to say, uh, from the, the program side, kind of what Tracy mentioned about being able to look at other agencies doing similar work and compare data was one of the really intriguing and different things about this collaborative from the beginning that perked my interest and my organization’s interest on it from, from the get-go. Cause that was pretty unique at the time.
Dolph Goldenburg: (08:12)
Very cool. So I have a question. I’m Joshua from the program side, it would seem to me that if you’ve got seven organizations and you’re benchmarking data, there’s one organization that comes in last place.
Joshua Fulcher: (08:25)
Dolph Goldenburg: (08:25)
And what does that look like and what does that look like for the organization?
Joshua Fulcher: (08:31)
Well, I’d like to think we never, we never came in last place.
Dolph Goldenburg: (08:34)
Oh yeah. Let me be clear. I’m not saying you all came in last place. Somebody came in last place.
Joshua Fulcher: (08:40)
Of course. No, I think set the stage was set to really not use it as a measuring stick in terms of first to last, but as an opportunity to learn. Uh, I think there was, most of the organizations had different in different areas. And so we were able to learn from other organization’s strengths to improve upon our weaknesses. And I think because everybody came to it, again, knowing that the, uh, the purpose of the entire collaborative was to provide better services and programs for the children that, uh, you know, you guys were kind of set aside and coming in last wasn’t as important as trying to figure out how to do better.
Dolph Goldenburg: (09:18)
And so, Tracy, I gotta ask this question. Was there at any point that a funder came to the collaborative and said, okay, we want to see how these programs rank because we want our best return on investment?
Traci Stanley: (09:30)
Uh, I think funders have been very respectful, uh, you know, letting this group, uh, right. Establish the process that works for, for us. Um, which is as just Josh said, is really to, to learn from each other, but no doubt, right? It’s, it can be intimidating. Uh, when you know, a new partner comes to the group, the idea of the sort of, putting your scores, you know, your program results up next to each other. It can be intimidating. It’s, it’s, it’s an evolution to establish that trust among partners, uh, for sure. But I think, you know, we, we have gotten to a place where, um, you know, we’re all pretty comfortable, uh, sharing our scores and really are, are motivated by wanting to improve. So, you know, if you are in last place, um, and all of us have experienced, you know, being below the group average, let’s say, right? Uh, we, we, I, I, several agencies take that group average and incorporate into the, into their strategic plan, right? It becomes the target. Let’s at least get to the group average, which is how the benchmark data is helpful in used amount grade,
Dolph Goldenburg: (10:44)
which, and I’ll show you what I love about that is, you know, anyone who loves stats knows that when one organization or one participant reaches the group average, suddenly the group average goes up. So you know, when one gets better, everybody has to get better in order to be at or above the group average.
Traci Stanley: (11:03)
That’s right. Which is kind of cool? And you know, we also can use the data. We like to identify trends across programs where we all see we need to improve. Um, and what, you know, the benefit there is that we can, there are efficiencies and you know, sharing in professional development, uh, for example, uh, to, to, you know, increase and move the needle on those
Dolph Goldenburg: (11:26)
of course. So, um, the next question for me is, do you ever use those moments to, as a group approach funders? So, for example, say, hey, we all need to be working on x, y, or Z, and we know this because we’re benchmarking our data and, you know, hey funder, we want you to, to fund us to do that as a group.
Traci Stanley: (11:48)
We have, yes, we have, um, you know, Been successful in, uh, you know, getting funding for this initiative, um, to support many of the efforts, uh, across the service areas that we track. And so, uh, yeah, an example, uh, our early childhood programs, uh, scores were low in children’s math development. And so as a collaborative, uh, you know, we collectively agreed that we wanted to introduce some professional development to teachers to increase the math language they were using in the classroom. And so this was a you know, kind of cohort initiative that took place over the course of a school year. There were several professional development opportunities for staff. And, uh, so that’s an example of, you know, the type of, of the project that, uh, I think funders, you know, get excited about because they see the cost efficiencies there and they want to support that type of work. And my assumption is that because you are already tracking that data a year after funding and two years into funding and three years into funding, you’re able to then show funders how, how their investment moves the needle on math. That’s right. Uh, and we have because this collaborative has been together for so long, we have that longterm data to, uh, be able to show increases in scores over time. So also, obviously, sorry, go ahead, Joshua.
Joshua Fulcher: (13:21)
The longterm, yeah, the longterm data also has kind of helped us change and evolve and the questions we asked, the way that the data we get out of, uh, out of the collaborative. So the database we use is, you know, customizable and we can put in our own questions in our own kind of assessments. And so as we looked at some of the data, especially around grade improvement, we, we were like, okay, well this, you know, we want to assume that this, that these students’ grades are improving because of us, but how can we prove it and how can we show a little bit more of a link of causation between what we’re doing? And, uh, and their grades improving. So we had always talked at your house and in the collaborative a lot about this accountability piece and that when these youth are held accountable for their grades, uh, there’s immediate impact and improvement.
Joshua Fulcher: (14:10)
And so we were looking for a way to kind of prove that. And so through the collaborative, we were able to build out an assessment where we, uh, when we track the quarterly grades, every student that had a d and an f had a, had an informal or formal meeting with our assistant director about why they had a d or an f and a then we talk with them about, you know, based on why, what the strategies were to improve those grades. And we track that over the quarter. And then by the end of the year, we’d be able to see whether those students improved. And we’d be able to see a little bit more causation between, uh, what we were doing and what we were just calling accountability and the actual improvement of their grades.
Traci Stanley: (14:46)
So, um, I, I got to ask you some questions here. Cause suddenly my jaw drops. Um, so Joshua,
Dolph Goldenburg: (14:52)
you said that every student that got a DRF had a one on one conversation with an assistant director?
Joshua Fulcher: (15:00)
Yes. Yeah. That’s what we decided to do because we wanted to, you know, we take great improvement very seriously, and we also pride ourselves on taking any student at any level if they’re a straight a student or a straight a student and trying to, you know, bring them up to their, their best potential. So, uh, we developed this plan and, uh, sometimes we split up the work in terms of who they’re meeting with, but basically it fell on the assistant director, uh, to have those meetings and to go through this format, which was then entered on the database as well, um, about what we were going to do to improve their grades. So maybe that was, you know, meeting with their teacher after school, maybe that was studying more for tests. Maybe that was coming to homework time more consistently. Uh, maybe that was, you know, catching up on homework on the weekends, whatever the case was. Uh, we, we wrote those down so we could hold the student accountable for their grades, um, and know that we were having a real conversation about this. We weren’t just going to brush it aside and then also give them the tools to actually improve. Wow.
Traci Stanley: (15:56)
I would just add, um, in this particular example, it, it’s a, it’s a great example of learning from your peers who are achieving higher outcome results. So in this example that Josh is sharing an Erie neighborhood house was seen, uh, you know, the greatest net gains in students, uh, increasing their GPA. And so we use the peer learning forums to understand, okay, what strategies, what practices do you think are contributing to that kind of a result so that the other agencies can take those back and implement them in their programs. And in this case, this was something that, you know, individualizing students who have ds and apps that the rest of the agency said, this makes sense. This seems, you know, it’s working for you and it’s something that they wanted to also take on and implement. And, you know, we have over the, uh, last several years, uh, seen a 10% increase in, uh, students achieving this, uh, GPA outcome that we all track. And so it’s a, you know, just a nice example of how the collaborative works together and learns from high performers.
Dolph Goldenburg: (17:11)
So, so clearly this collaborative has been beneficial for all of the educational organizations that are participating in it. But my gut tells me that this probably is true for benchmark and collaboratives across various nonprofit industries. So whether we’re talking workforce development or education or health care or homeless services. So as you all were implementing this benchmark and collaborative, what were some of your lessons learned that maybe other, other new collaboratives could take home?
Traci Stanley: (17:44)
Yeah, that is, what about
Joshua Fulcher: (17:46)
a lot of it is about the way we approach data. Um, and Tracy and I have talked about this before, but I think in the, in the example we just talked about, we approach data, um, in a way that we could, that we knew we could change the questions or, or evolve the questions to get, um, something that’s a little bit more proveable. I guess, and also, uh, to improve what we’re doing with the students. And then there are other times where we’ve used the data to answer questions that we had and we didn’t even know the data had the answers. We were talking about our retention. Um, I, one of the collaborative meetings and uh, our retention among the males was lower than our retention among the females in our and our high school program. And we didn’t know why. We had some guesses, but we figured out we’d figure out how are we figuring out why by asking the boys.
Joshua Fulcher: (18:34)
And we would’ve gotten a whole bunch of different answers. But right there in the data, it just said that the, the males, um, I’m one of the assessments we took every year scored higher or lower on thinking they had choice and autonomy in the program. And so we had asked, you know, 10 boys would have gotten 10 minutes different answers. But really what that meant is we needed to give the boys more choice and to obviously autonomy in the program, which, you know, one boy would have said, well we need to play basketball more. Another boy would’ve said we need more computer time and we wouldn’t have had any sort of answer. But by knowing they just needed more choice and autonomy. We got more boys on our youth council, we brought them into discussions about what programs we had and we watched what programs they really liked and tried to expand the time for.
Joshua Fulcher: (19:14)
Those are the opportunities for those. And that was an answer that was sitting there, right, right there in the data that we had the question for. And we just didn’t connect them and we wouldn’t have connected on the, if not for the collaborative kind of single, we’ll look at this, this, this is your answer right here. This is how you complete retention. We implemented that and we just had a group of boys that were eighth-graders when we implemented that graduate from high school and we didn’t lose a single one of them. Uh, and the program throughout their four years in high school.
Dolph Goldenburg: (19:41)
Traci Stanley: (19:42)
And then, yeah, I, I would add, you know, a clear and feasible vision, uh, and goals, uh, as well as strong a CEO sponsorship. Um, in terms of our lessons learned, I think keeping it a simple in the beginning, so when you’re identifying what metrics you want to track, uh, not trying to do too much right out of the gate. Um, as well as, uh, you know, once you kinda get systems up and running, uh, I think it’s important to be running reports early and often for staff to see otherwise, uh, you know, some feedback we’ve gotten is that they, you know, feel they’re entering this information into a black hole. Right? They do the data entry, but they’re not sort of seeing the, um, results in, in reports on the other end. Um,
Dolph Goldenburg: (20:37)
so you, you also mentioned, I think your second item was, um, strong chief executive sponsorship. Now you’ve gotta tell me what that looks like. Cause we have a lot of executive directors who listened to the podcast. And so they need to know what that looks like.
Traci Stanley: (20:53)
Yup. A good question. So, CEO sponsorship is, you know, I’m really referring to a leadership that can champion, uh, using data throughout an organization, uh, who at right. Leaders who prioritize, uh, looking at data in leadership team meetings at manager level meetings, sharing data with the board, um, and who are also going to allocate resources in the budget to support the work. Uh, so, you know, prioritizing system administrators, uh, prioritizing, working with, uh, you know, consultants who can really train staff so they have the skills and the knowledge to be effective in collecting data, using a new software, uh, analyze results, uh, and then make actionable decisions based on the data that they’re analyzing. Uh, so I think, you know, those are some of the, the key factors. And also, uh, you know, messaging with staff. When you know.
Dolph Goldenburg: (22:30)
We were talking earlier about experiencing resistance, uh, to, you know, change or resistance to, um, new evaluation systems, uh, being able to, uh, explain the why to staff why it’s important, um, and crucial for an organization to adopt, uh, you know, a new evaluation measures or participate in a collaborative similar to the CBC?
Joshua Fulcher: (22:32)
Yeah, the messaging that came down at the time when the CBC started was really important. The why and reminding the folks that are entering the data and doing the work that all of this is to make the programs better because if they’re in this kind of work and that’s not their motivation, then, um, they, you know, probably need to look for another line of work. And I think what, uh, what we found is that all of the people in the work, that was why they’re here to do as best as they could, um, by the youth. So when that messaging comes through, that’s why we’re doing this. That’s really important. And I think, um, for CEOs are thinking about starting one of those, one of these groups, uh, Tracy is really underselling her role. I think her being consistently there and leading the group in the way that she did, uh, was vital to it being sustained because, you know, ultimately I want at the beginning because I was told to, um, but the reason I enjoyed going and kept going and really put thought and effort into it was cause Tracy did a really good job running those groups if I felt that it was worthwhile.
Traci Stanley: (23:31)
So Joshua, one of the things I think I hear you saying is you’ve got to have a kind of a project manager who’s task oriented like Tracy to keep everything moving forward, even when some folks kind of get lost in the weeds and daily operations [inaudible]
Joshua Fulcher: (23:48)
yeah. And organized and committed
Dolph Goldenburg: (23:51)
a director of it. Right, right. And, and of course, I would imagine that’s probably something, a lot of funders who will let you consider funding for a couple of years to see what the results are.
Joshua Fulcher: (24:03)
Yeah. I think that that’s the, uh, that’s the ultimate goal right. To have to see a change over a long period of time and see the lessons that are learned kind of passed on and not lost when, you know, people move on to another position or, or whatever the case is.
Dolph Goldenburg: (24:18)
Right. And, and so Tracy, how did, how did the group deal with that? Cause I think it’s not at all uncommon on any collaboration for a chief executive leaves or a program director leaves and, you know, and momentum is lost with a partner or even a partners like, and we no longer see the value in it. We use to, how has, how have you dealt with those partners is as the possibility of them pulling away has, has become a risk.
Traci Stanley: (24:43)
So I think, uh, one of the greatest risks to the collaborative is when there is turnover of the CEO because a new CEO comes in and, uh, you, there’s a, a lot of work we do to, uh, educate them about the work that the benchmarking collaborative is doing, the benefits of participating, uh, in the impact that we’re having. Uh, and so, you know, I think, uh, actually Erie House, uh, uh, has a CEO who’s, um, not new. She is Josh. She’s been in her role for a couple of years now. Right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And, um, I think, you know, one of the things she did that was really smart was she met with her program directors and asked them, do you find the collaboration to be a productive use of your time? And so I think that’s part of what, um, not just right. Chris Ross is project manager, uh, you know, uh, communicating with new CEOs about the work we do.
Traci Stanley: (25:51)
But I think, uh, you know, CEOs doing a little investigative work themselves, um, internally, uh, to find out, you know, the, if staff are finding the collaborative to be, uh, beneficial is, is, has been a, has been how the process has gone in the past. Um, I think also, you know, the other thing is there’s, there’s, um, a benefit to being a part of a collaborative when you have staff turnover, right? You have an established system where you can leverage your, your peers for, you know, getting data reports polled, um, and getting some of your evaluation needs met. Uh, so it’s, it’s, that’s one of the benefits when it comes to staff turnover. Right?
Dolph Goldenburg: (26:36)
And I think that’s especially true if benchmarking goals are included in your strategic plan. Cause then there’s staff turnover. But ideally the strategic plan is turned over to that new staff person and they’re like, oh yeah, this is an important goal. It’s in our plan. That’s right. Well I have loved talking with the two of you, but I’ve got to ask you an off the map question. Um, so it’s always a little bit awkward when it’s two people cause you know, I can’t ask, really ask you both the same question. So, Joshua, I know that you’re a sports fan, Tracy, I understand that you love humorous. And by the way, I’d love to know that there’s between a comedian and a humorous at some point. But my question for each of you is w who were some of your favorites in each of those areas?
Joshua Fulcher: (27:26)
Uh, my favorite sports player ever would be Walter Peyton, uh, running old, running back for the late great Walter Payton, uh, the running back for the Chicago bears.
Dolph Goldenburg: (27:36)
And why is Peyton one of your favorites?
Joshua Fulcher: (27:40)
Well, I was real young when he was doing his thing. Um, and I used to watch the bears games with my brother and my dad. Um, and so that was just kind of a special time growing up and watching them rotten. It was a, it was like watching a power truck and a ballerina combined, I think running around and the field and a bears uniform. It was just a different kind of movement that he was able to [inaudible] kind of movement he had that, you know, made him so, so amazing to watch
Dolph Goldenburg: (28:10)
that, that, that’s kind of awesome. I’ve always kind of felt that way of a Muhammad Ali, by the way. It’s kind of like, you know, if you combine s, you know, you combine a power truck and a ballerina, it’s like, okay, kind of looks like that.
Joshua Fulcher: (28:21)
Dolph Goldenburg: (28:22)
So Tracy, how about you talk to us about humorous?
Traci Stanley: (28:26)
Oh, uh, so I think for this, I gotta say, uh, who am I going to go away? I think right now I’ve, uh, been reading a lot of David Sedaris and, uh, he just cracks me up. Um, and yeah, I, uh, the, the Book me Talk Pretty, uh, I is one of my favorites.
Dolph Goldenburg: (28:51)
I love that. [inaudible] I have to share that you, for years, one of our holiday traditions was to go to, um, um, the holiday on ice performance, um, at our local theater. So I don’t know if you know that there’s like a whole play that’s been done around holidays on ice, uh, which was one of David’s Harris’s more, more popular books. Um, tell really loved David Sedaris. I’ll have to admit I had written down and I would sh I, you know, I’d written down, I thought you were going to say, Mark Twain, cause I think humorous and I’m like, okay, Mark Twain, he’s kind of a humorist. [inaudible]
Dolph Goldenburg: (29:24)
well, let me thank you both for joining us today. So grateful that you have given some incredible information that our listeners can use as they think about how they’re going to benchmark their own data and how they’re going to use it and how they’re going to use it to really get better and better. Every. Now listeners who want more information can actually download a copy of your toolkit and it’s officially called increasing mission impact through collaboration, Chicago benchmarking, collaborative process and toolkit, and they can do that. Add Christopher for house.org we will I, it’s a little bit of a longer URL. We will link that URL into our short show notes. Now if you want to do more than download it, if you’re old fashioned like me and you want a hard copy, I think they’ve also got those available for 15 bucks and if you’re really interested in doing a collaborative, it’s probably worth buying five or six so that everyone you’re thinking about including in this, you can make sure that they’ve got a copy of this tool kit as well.
Dolph Goldenburg: (30:26)
Now Joshua has asked that we let all of our Chicago land listeners know that eerie houses looking for members for, for members is looking for mentors for its constituents. Now you can get information about mentorship opportunities by contacting Joshua firstname.lastname@example.org. We will also put his email address in our show notes and that is what a bold, bold person Joshua is. He has asked us to literally put his email address online and Joshua, I’m sure in addition to getting some great potential mentors, you might, you might have the opportunity to share a fortune and a Nigerian estate or something like that as well. So congratulations, please, please split the fortune with us. So again, Joshua, Tracy, thank you so much for being on the podcast today. Thank you dog. We so appreciate the opportunity to be able to share our work. Um, so thank you. So the pleasure of being here.
Dolph Goldenburg: (31:33)
So if you’re at this very moment, reaching out to another nonprofit in your community to see how you might form a greater than the sum of its parts alliance. Keep on figuring that out because you don’t have to write down the information we just shared. It’s available at our show notes. It’s successful nonprofits.com now, today we talked about changing for the better and sometimes change just happens and one of the things Tracy talked about is when you have got change in your chief executive or executive director position, you might lose some traction on some of those core projects and collaboratives that are really important. So I just want us to also suggest that when you’re at successful nonprofits.com you check out our blog. We have got some great articles on transitions for your executive leadership. It’s really important that you handle those transitions well. It will keep your collaboratives and all of your programs running smoothly. If you do now, I would be remiss if I did not ask you, dear listener, if you’ve not already subscribed to the podcast, then subscribe and if you have subscribed for crying out loud, isn’t it about time that you rated and reviewed us on your podcast? Dream of choice. So that’s my plea for you today. Come on. If you’ve already subscribed, go online and do that. That’s our show for this week. I hope you listeners have gained some insight to help your nonprofit thrive in a competitive environment.
I am not an accountant or attorney and either I’d have to go to a group provide tax, legal, or accounting advice. This material has been provided for informational purposes only, is not intended to provide and should not be relied on for tax, legal, or accounting advice. Always consult a qualified licensed profession