Difference between revisions of "GPCA Budget FY2011-2012 Income Narrative"

From CA Greens wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(revise Green Focus)
(revise introduction)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
'''0. INTRODUCTION'''
 
'''0. INTRODUCTION'''
  
The GPCA's FY2011-2012 Budget occurs amidst during a deep national and international economic crisis that became manifest in October of 2008. That crisis has made it challenging for non-profit organizations and other not-for-profit entities like the GPCA that survive primarily or exclusively on grassroots donations and fundraising. The economic crisis also came on the heels of the politically difficult period for the Green Party when it suffered the blowback of being blamed for the 2000 Bush presidency. Combined its own internal self-inflicted wounds over 2004 presidential strategy and other internal divisions, the cumulative effect of those trends led to a significant downturn in GPCA fundraising compared to the growth period the party experienced at the beginning of the last decade.
+
The GPCA's FY2011-2012 Budget occurs amidst during a deep national and international economic crisis that became manifest in October of 2008. That crisis made it challenging for non-profit organizations and not-for-profit ones like the GPCA that survive primarily or exclusively on grassroots donations and fundraising. The crisis also came on the heels of the blowback the Green Party faced after being blamed for the 2000 Bush presidency. Along with self-inflicted wounds over 2004 presidential strategy and other internal divisions, the cumulative effect had led to a significant downturn in GPCA fundraising compared to the beginning of the last decade.
  
In FY2011-2012, prospects are looking up for the GPCA. The political climate is favorable in light of a disappointing Obama administration combined with a far right fringe Tea Party movement on the federal level, combined with the lack of real answers by either Democrats or Republicans to the structural problems of our state. At the same time internally within the Green Party, there has been a growth in new activists interested in becoming involved, along with a return by many long time party activists.  
+
By contrast, FY2011-2012 appears as a time of opportunity for the Green Party of California (GPCA). The political climate is favorable on the federal level in light of a disappointing Obama administration combined with a far right fringe Tea Party movement. On the state level, the failure of the Democrats and Republicans to address the structural problems of our state and the increasing hardship in brings to working Californians is leaving a large political space for a positive alternative. At the same time internally within the Green Party, there has been a growth in new activists interested in becoming involved, along with a return by many long time party activists.
  
 
With this potential, the GPCA FY2011-2012 Budget seeks to establish a baseline of core expenses to ensure the maintenance of the party's basic, ongoing operations, based upon the same minimal level of fundraising experienced in the last few years, along with a plan to invest in growth opportunities that would bring in more money to fund more organizing.  This Budget also seeks to establish a manner in which increased revenue will be dedicated to additional organizing in a predictable, transparent manner that will minimize the need for mid-year discretionary choices by either the General Assembly or the Coordinating Committee, yet correspond realistically to expected cash flow and political deadlines, along with provide enough flexibility to adapt to unpredictable circumstances.
 
With this potential, the GPCA FY2011-2012 Budget seeks to establish a baseline of core expenses to ensure the maintenance of the party's basic, ongoing operations, based upon the same minimal level of fundraising experienced in the last few years, along with a plan to invest in growth opportunities that would bring in more money to fund more organizing.  This Budget also seeks to establish a manner in which increased revenue will be dedicated to additional organizing in a predictable, transparent manner that will minimize the need for mid-year discretionary choices by either the General Assembly or the Coordinating Committee, yet correspond realistically to expected cash flow and political deadlines, along with provide enough flexibility to adapt to unpredictable circumstances.
  
On the income side, the FY2011-20122 Budget contains a plan to raise up to $163,750 -- with $60,500 projected between May and September 2011 and $103,250 between October 2011 and April 2012. The plan would expand the GPCA's fundraising capability by hiring a fundraiser to manage a fundraising campaign, along with creating a new GPCA contact relationship management (CRM) database to ensure high quality management functions such as donation tracking and GPCA supporter communications.  
+
On the income side, the FY2011-20122 Budget contains a plan to raise up to $156,677 -- with $60,500 projected between May and September 2011 and $96,177 between October 2011 and April 2012, along with 4,500 generated from General Assembly registration fees. The plan would expand the GPCA's fundraising capability by hiring an Executive Director to design and manage a fundraising campaign, along with creating a new GPCA contact relationship management (CRM) database to ensure high quality management functions such as donation tracking, volunteer coordination and GPCA supporter communications. Until an Executive Director is hired, the GPCA will contract with a consultant to continue fundraising in the interim. 
  
 
----
 
----

Revision as of 20:10, 20 April 2011

0. INTRODUCTION

The GPCA's FY2011-2012 Budget occurs amidst during a deep national and international economic crisis that became manifest in October of 2008. That crisis made it challenging for non-profit organizations and not-for-profit ones like the GPCA that survive primarily or exclusively on grassroots donations and fundraising. The crisis also came on the heels of the blowback the Green Party faced after being blamed for the 2000 Bush presidency. Along with self-inflicted wounds over 2004 presidential strategy and other internal divisions, the cumulative effect had led to a significant downturn in GPCA fundraising compared to the beginning of the last decade.

By contrast, FY2011-2012 appears as a time of opportunity for the Green Party of California (GPCA). The political climate is favorable on the federal level in light of a disappointing Obama administration combined with a far right fringe Tea Party movement. On the state level, the failure of the Democrats and Republicans to address the structural problems of our state and the increasing hardship in brings to working Californians is leaving a large political space for a positive alternative. At the same time internally within the Green Party, there has been a growth in new activists interested in becoming involved, along with a return by many long time party activists.

With this potential, the GPCA FY2011-2012 Budget seeks to establish a baseline of core expenses to ensure the maintenance of the party's basic, ongoing operations, based upon the same minimal level of fundraising experienced in the last few years, along with a plan to invest in growth opportunities that would bring in more money to fund more organizing. This Budget also seeks to establish a manner in which increased revenue will be dedicated to additional organizing in a predictable, transparent manner that will minimize the need for mid-year discretionary choices by either the General Assembly or the Coordinating Committee, yet correspond realistically to expected cash flow and political deadlines, along with provide enough flexibility to adapt to unpredictable circumstances.

On the income side, the FY2011-20122 Budget contains a plan to raise up to $156,677 -- with $60,500 projected between May and September 2011 and $96,177 between October 2011 and April 2012, along with 4,500 generated from General Assembly registration fees. The plan would expand the GPCA's fundraising capability by hiring an Executive Director to design and manage a fundraising campaign, along with creating a new GPCA contact relationship management (CRM) database to ensure high quality management functions such as donation tracking, volunteer coordination and GPCA supporter communications. Until an Executive Director is hired, the GPCA will contract with a consultant to continue fundraising in the interim.


1. CLEARINGHOUSE COMMITTEE (T-1 $100, T-II $500, T-III $2,000)

1-1 Merchandise (T-1 $100, T-II $500, T-III $2,000)

Merchandise sales via the GPCA's virtual office in Sacramento have been minimal in recent years. Tier I income projections of only $100 reflects this. Tier II reflects increased efforts to design and sell GPCA buttons, stickers and t-shirts. Currently the Clearinghouse Committee has no active members (http://www.cagreens.org/clearinghouse/committee.shtml). With more involvement, exploration into bi-lingual materials, shopping bags and other party-related paraphernalia could occur.


2. FINANCE COMMITTEE (Tier I - 54,570, Tier II - 133,750, Tier III - 151,750)

2-1 Direct mail: Prospect Letters (Tier I - 15,000, Tier II - 33,000)

The plan is to write and send timely, persuasive prospect letters every eight weeks as long as the prospecting remains break even or profitable, with a goal of acquiring 1,100 new donors in FY2011-2012. If prospecting breaks even or better, then funds invested in Tier I are simply reinvested to fund Tier 2 without any additional funding required. The timeline and projections for these prospect mailings are as follows. Note that the associated expenses will be reflected in the FY2011-2012 Expense Narrative

2-1.1 June-2011 Prospect (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 5,000; List: CA donors to GPUS; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $3,000; Total income: $3,000; Number new donors acquired: 100

2-1.2 July-2011 Prospect (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 10,000; List: GPCA registered voters; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $6,000; Total income: $6,000; Number new donors acquired: 200

2-1.3 Sep-2011 Prospect (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 10,000; List: GPCA registered voters.; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $6,000; Total income: $6,000; Number new donors acquired: 200

2-1.4 Nov-2011 Prospect (Tier II)

Number of prospect pieces: 10,000; List: GPCA registered voters.; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $6,000; Total income: $6,000; Number new donors acquired: 200

2-1.5 January-2012 Prospect (Tier II)

Number of prospect pieces: 10,000; List: GPCA registered voters.; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $6,000; Total income: $6,000; Number new donors acquired:200

2-1.6 March-2012 Prospect (Tier II)

Number of prospect pieces: 10,000; List: GPCA registered voters.; Avg. response rate: 2%; Avg. gift: $30; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Total cost: $6,000; Total income: $6,000; Number new donors acquired:2 00

2-2 Direct mail: Resolicitation Letters (Tier I - 11,250, Tier II - 27,750)

The plan is to write and send timely, persuasive prospect resolicitation letters every eight weeks, targetting amounts based on prior giving history using a new CRM (contact relationship management) database, the funds for which are included in Tier 1 expenses in the Expense Narrative.

2-2.1 May-2011 Resolicitation (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 1,200; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $2,280

2-2.2 July-2011 Resolicitation (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 1,500; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $2,850

2-2.3 September-2011 Resolicitation (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 1,800; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $3,420

2-2.4 November-2011 Resolicitation (Tier I)

Number of prospect pieces: 2,000; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $3,800

2-2.5 January-2012 Resolicitation

Number of prospect pieces: 2,200; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $4,180

2-2.6 March-2012 Resolicitation

Number of prospect pieces: 2,400; Avg. response rate: 5%; Avg. gift: $50; Avg. printing and postage cost per letter: $0.60; Net income: $4,560

2-3 Personal solicitations (Tier I - $20,000, Tier II - $50,000)

An executive director will conduct phone and in-person meetings with all major donors and re-solicit all major donors by phone or in-person. Major donors will be asked identify new major donor prospects. “Why donate?” materials will be developed for major donors. Phone and in-person meetings will be conducted with GPCA Greens who can help identify new major donor prospects.

2-4 Online fundraising campaigns (Tier I - 1,500, Tier II - $3,000, Tier III - $5,000)

This campaign is based upon quarterly email solicitations and visually enticing, persuasive online fundraising web pages, which is premised upon on a redesign of the GPCA website and migration to a content management system with team publishing.

2-5 Telemarketing (Tier I - 5,000, Tier II - $15,000, Tier III - $$31,000)

This would involve researching, interviewing, hiring, training and managing a telemarketing firm that uses predictive dialing and agrees to a no money-down no-loss contract, and would call GPCA registered members.

2-6 Events (Tier I - $2,500, Tier II - $5,000)

Tactics - Create annual Bay Area and Los Angeles fundraising event, create annual events program for county councils, develop event invitation template.


3. COORDINATING COMMITTEE (Tier I - $4,500)

3-1 Income from General Assemblies (Tier I - $4,500)

Income received from General Assemblies is primarily in the form of registration fees, which are set with the goal of balancing expected expenses. As a result, the income and expense totals associated with General Assemblies are budgeted to balance each other


4. GRASSROOTS ORGANIZING WORKING GROUP ($0)

4-1 Green Focus sales (Tier I - $100)

If and what to charge for Green Focus is a topic that the Budget Committee believes merits further review by the GPCA, possibly leading to a mid-year income budget amendment based upon that review.

The GPCA's practice in recent years has been to charge for bundles of Green Focus, either via shipping or at General Assemblies for people to take home with them. But the practice at General Assemblies has not necessarily even been to collect the money there. Instead pledges are made and then not always collected later, leading to an unpredictable income stream. For that reason at present only $100 has been projected for the one issue of Green Focus budgeted for in Tier I.

Looking forward, should the GPCA charge for Green Focus? One approach is to charge a for bundles of Green Focus to cover part or all of the production and shipping costs. Another perspective is that Green Focus is a GPCA outreach tool and that the party should treat it as a straight expense like other forms of advertising and promotion, and that charging locals slows the overall process of getting copies of into peoples' hands.

The Budget Committee recommends that the General Assembly direct the Coordinating Committee o seek input from GROW, the Finance Committee and the Media Committee about if and what to charge for Green Focus and how that fits into GPCA outreach, organizing, promotion and finances, and return to the Fall General Assembly with options.


5. GPUS DELEGATION (Tier III - $2,427)

5-1 GPUS Revenue Sharing, past funds owed (Tier III - $2,427)

The GPUS recently received a large donation from which it is possible, but not certain that the amount owed to the GPCA from 2008 will be paid within the GPCA's FY2011-2012. For this reason it is placed within Tier III.

5-2 GPUS Revenue Sharing, 2011-2012

If and until the GPCA receives projections to the contrary from the GPUS Finance Committee, no GPUS revenue sharing for FY2011-2012 will be projected.