Determinants of the recovery of financially distressed nonprofits

Financial ratios are traditionally used to predict and diagnose financial vulnerability; this is helpful, but leaves unanswered how the vulnerable nonprofit should prioritize this information in order to survive. Using panel data, this empirical study observes the financial behaviors of distressed nonprofits for 4‐year periods where the first 2 years are financially vulnerable. Two definitions of vulnerability are tested: when liabilities exceed assets (insolvency) and when net assets shrink by more than 25% annually (financial disruption). In determining which nonprofits recover during the final 2 years, we find that the type of vulnerability impacts which financial indicators a nonprofit should target, and that common tactics such as improving profitability may be counterproductive. Finally, we do not find evidence for liabilities of newness or smallness in the statistical analysis.     

Exploring the link between government funding and efficiency in nonprofit colleges

Previous literature has suggested that federal funding can hinder the efficiency of nonprofit organizations, but this has yet not been empirically tested. This study used a two‐stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) model to measure the efficiency of a set of private nonprofit teaching‐oriented colleges, then estimate the impact of federal and state funding on organizational efficiency. The findings indicate that, on average, increases in neither state nor federal funding effect efficiency of nonprofit colleges. Increasing state funding negatively impacted the efficiency of public colleges (N = 799). This study suggests that the challenges for nonprofits that accompany government funding may not rise to a quantifiable negative effect on efficiency.     

How well is debt managed by nonprofits?

Little is known about why nonprofits accrue debt, how much they owe, and whether the funds they borrow are used productively. This article distinguishes between productive, problematic, and deferred debt. Employing a data base representative of 114,726 tax-filing charitable nonprofits in the United States in 1986, it examines the pervasiveness of nonprofit debt and the relation between this debt and nonprofit financial health. The analysis finds that over 70 percent of the nonprofits hold debt, the distribution of this debt is highly concentrated, and the level of debt and leverage varies with asset size and type of activity. Nonprofits with higher leverage and absolute debt levels are financially healthier than those with lower levels. While the analysis does not determine whether financially stronger nonprofits are better able to borrow, the results support the view that borrowing in the nonprofit sector is economically efficient.     

Retaining the Benefits of Government–Nonprofit Contracting Relationship: Opposites Attract or Clash?

The benefits and negative consequences of government–nonprofit contracting are well documented. From the literature, we know that government and nonprofits can demonstrate contradictory organization-level characteristics. Some argue that these contradictions make government and nonprofits complementary partners, but empirical evidence reveals the potential loss of nonprofit voluntariness. How does one harvest the alleged benefits of the government–nonprofit relationship while minimizing the potential loss of nonprofit voluntariness? Through the qualitative investigation of one nonprofit, this study identifies seven types of organizational-level differences between the government and the nonprofit. These conflicts are manifested by three forms of power struggle. This illuminates that power struggles are the root cause of the potential loss of nonprofits’ voluntariness. The author argues that as long as nonprofits depend on the government for resources, power struggles will persist and voluntariness will be at risk; hence, addressing resource dependence is the key to answering our research question.     

Back to Basics

Nonprofits are under increased accountability pressures to demonstrate their effectiveness. Output measurement (how much is produced) is disregarded as simplistic. Emphasis is made instead on measuring outcomes (changes in the lives of beneficiaries) or impacts (effects developed relative to the mission of the nonprofit, or the overall public good), and a growing portion of organizations state that they measure these effects. However, we question the assumption that outputs such as the number of beneficiaries served are being adequately measured. We first review existing research gaps on results measurement practices and discuss the main types of obstacles to the quality and utility of evaluation data. In this context, we argue for the need to reground nonprofit evaluation in the profound knowledge available about beneficiary populations. We discuss the potential and limitations of reach, a basic output indicator that is defined as the number of individuals directly affected by a nonprofit, and explore the organizational drivers of reach measurement. Evidence from 2,229 nonprofits shows they still lack adequate data on the beneficiaries they serve, face relevant conceptual and practical hurdles when trying to identify them, and are significantly influenced by organizational factors in their capacity to track them. Our research not only shows that nonprofits fail to adequately measure outputs, but also that measuring the number of beneficiaries served and how they are served is not as straightforward as outcome and impact advocates suggest. Practitioners and funders are reminded of the need to place beneficiaries at the core of their evaluation efforts.     

The Investment Returns of Nonprofit Organizations,Part II

We continue our examination of the investment performance of nonprofit charities and foundations. This analysis tests hypotheses about what types of organizations do better. Our motivating intuition is that nonprofits with greater focus on investment performance will secure higher returns. Our hypotheses are tested by regressing the rate of return for each organization on various characteristics. As expected, nonprofits whose primary business is predominantly financial, such as insurance providers and pension or retirement funds, consistently earn higher returns. The data also support our hypotheses that larger nonprofits, older nonprofits, and private foundations will tend to outperform. The evidence is mixed as to whether nonprofits that pay higher executive salaries or spend more on management earn higher returns.     

What Affects the Strategic Priority of Fundraising? A Longitudinal Study of Art,Culture and Humanity Organizations’ Fundraising Expenses in the USA

Fundraising is a crucial activity for many nonprofit organizations. However, scant research has examined how the strategic priority of fundraising activities may vary across organizations and over time. This study addresses this gap in knowledge by examining how economic and organization-specific financial conditions predict the priority of fundraising in a nonprofit organization. In particular, this study examines the changes in the ratio of art, culture and humanities organizations’ fundraising expenses to their total expenditure during the period of 2005–2012, which includes the great recession of 2007–2009. The findings reveal that, when facing an economic crisis, the ratio of fundraising expense to total expenditure increases, suggesting that fundraising becomes a higher priority under a hostile economic condition. The analysis also reveals differences in nonprofits’ reaction to recession depending on their revenue mix, with donative nonprofits reacting more sensitively than commercial nonprofits.     

Accounting for Social Value in Nonprofits and For‐Profits

The authors argue that social value can serve as a bridge between the nonprofit and for‐profit sectors. They further propose that social value is not simply an abstract concept but can be measured by applying social accounting methods. The authors argue that nonprofits are founded on a social mission but that traditional accounting approaches do not properly assess their social products. They illustrate the centrality of social value, both to nonprofits and for‐profits, in two ways: (1) a discussion of for‐profit firms that behave much like nonprofits and (2) an application of the social accounting model. The authors discuss two types of firms: (1) for‐profits whose shares are held in a trust and therefore operate much like corporations without shareholdersor like nonprofits and (2) for‐profits whose owners do not exercise the rights associated with their property. They then apply a social accounting model to nonprofit employment training programs to illustrate how the inclusion of social variables changes the assessment of an organization's value. They conclude with a discussion of a social accountability framework that embraces both nonprofits and for‐profits.     

Crisis on the Border: Specialized Capacity Building in Nonprofit Immigration Organizations

Traditional views of the nonprofit–government relationships suggest that while government may depend on nonprofit organizations to provide human services, nonprofits must also conform to government standards, monitoring, and regulation. In this paper, we argue that through specialized investments in capacity building, nonprofit providers can become irreplaceable to government funders. By developing a comparison case study of two organizations serving unaccompanied minor children who cross the U.S.–Mexico Border, we provide evidence of specialized capacity investments in a complex policy environment and discuss the implications of capacity building for both government and nonprofits.     

Net impact of government funding on nonprofit fiscal health: burden or benefit?

This study examines the impact of federal grant awards on the financial health of recipient nonprofits. Although a modest body of research finds that government grants are beneficial to nonprofit fiscal health, a large Urban Institute study (2010, 2013, 2015) found that nonprofit managers receiving government grants consistently report fiscal harm due to awards that do not cover all program costs, late payments, and significant administrative burden. Those findings raise the question of whether government funding leads to net benefits or net harm for organizations given the administrative and fiscal burdens identified. This study tests that question using a large panel of federal grants to estimate the impact of government awards on three measures of nonprofit financial health. We find that government grants promote an increase in nonprofit size, improve operating margins, and increase financial reserves for recipient organizations. These benefits endure after the receipt of the award.     

Exploring the Nexus of Nonprofit Financial Stability and Financial Growth

Taking a unified approach to studying nonprofit financial health, this research tackles a key question that has remained unexplored in the literature: “What lies at the intersection of the two key dimensions of financial health–financial stability and financial growth?” Specifically, we identify and compare nonprofits that exhibit high levels of financial stability and growth (high financially performing) to those that exhibit low levels (low financially performing)? Overall, we find that high financial performers (HFPs) tend to be older and larger organizations (in terms of unrestricted net assets and total revenue). HFPs are also more likely to report capital assets, and report high levels of compensation. Finally, HFPs tend to contain their overhead spending by exercising efficiency by investing in talented officers (paying more than the rest), but limiting the share of officer compensation, administrative, and fundraising expenses, as a percentage of total expenses. The results of the study should be informative to stakeholders attempting to understand the profile of an organization that is successfully able to achieve both capacity growth and financial stability.     

How Pervasive Are Abuses in Fundraising Among Nonprofits?

This article explores selected fundraising information for charitable nonprofits, asking whether widespread abuses might exist in this sector. After examining the pervasiveness of fundraising and its relation to mission, we show that a few nonprofits raise a majority of sector charitable revenues, and we present the ratio of funds raised to funds spent on fundraising by mission categories. We find that 72 percent of charitable nonprofits do not report direct fundraising expenditures, 5 percent of the active fundraising nonprofits obtain 90 percent of total funds raised, mission is related to a nonprofit's ability to raise funds, the median nonprofit spends about 9.6 percent of total raised funds for fundraising, and only one in five nonprofits hires a professional fundraiser. At least in terms of the measures used in this report, widespread abuses are not obvious.     

Understanding the Compensation of Nonprofit Executive Directors: Examining the Influence of Performance and Organizational Characteristics

In this study we aimed to provide a better understanding of executive compensation in nonprofit organizations. We examined factors including organizational size, market, subsector, organizational type, staffing level, and organizational performance as potential influences driving variation across the nonprofit sector. The models utilize data on the population of nonprofit organizations required to file Form 990 returns with the Internal Revenue Service in order to broadly examine compensation. The results indicate associations between various measures of performance and compensation in nonprofit orga‐nizations and also suggest that different types of nonprofits may be sensitive to different measures of performance.     

Are nonprofit density and nonprofit expenditures related to youth deviance?

This study explores whether neighborhoods with greater nonprofit density (nonprofits per mile) and/or larger nonprofit expenditures (nonprofit expenditures per 10,000 people) interact with social control to experience lower levels of adolescent deviancy. Data include cross-sectional surveys of 1541 youth. The data are analyzed using Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM). The dependent variable is a measure of deviance that is the sum of ten items, which assess deviant behaviors. For analysis the square root of this measure is used to adjust for negatively skewed data. The sample was drawn through a two stage-geostatistical sampling procedure, with the final sample including 50 zip codes throughout California. The study finds that adolescents' deviance is not associated with an interaction between social control and either nonprofit density or nonprofit expenditures. However, the analysis found strong positive associations between being male, being older, having higher levels of mean social control and the square root of deviance.     

Interorganizational network portfolios of nonprofit organizations: Implications for collaboration management

Increasingly, nonprofit organizations engage in interorganizational collaboration to address large‐scale social problems. Scholarship typically focuses on the characteristics of both within‐sector and cross‐sector partnerships of two collaborating organizations or all partnering organizations involved in a collaboration, but we know little about the patterns of interorganizational relationships that single nonprofit organizations maintain. This research draws upon surveys from 452 nonprofits and introduces nonprofit network portfolios, which we define as the number, integration, intensity, and duration of relationships that nonprofits purposefully develop with other organizations. Using 12 network measures, Ward cluster analysis revealed three distinct network portfolios: restricted within‐sector (n = 319, 70.58%), which included limited collaboration and prioritized within‐sector partnerships; robust within‐sector (n = 80, 17.70%), which included more nonprofit partnerships than restricted within‐sector portfolios; and cross‐sector (n = 53, 11.72%), which had a rich assemblage of integrative partnerships with nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Further, nonprofits that maintained each type of portfolio differed in their revenue and social mission, suggesting these factors are related to the types of collaboration that nonprofits maintain. This study makes contributions to existing research on interorganizational networks and cross‐sector collaboration and suggests practical and policy implications for nonprofit network management.     

Using Social Network Analysis to Enhance Nonprofit Organizational Research Capacity: A Case Study

As donor agencies become more specific in funding requirements, research that can demonstrate the collaborative efforts of a nonprofit agency with its organizational neighbors and how those efforts pay off in terms of capacity and provision of services is highly useful. Recognizing these benefits, a local funding agency in Virginia commissioned a study to look at the ways in which social network analysis (SNA) can enhance the data resources available to nonprofits for funding and grant requests. In this article, we present a case study of a network of 52 nonprofit organizations to illustrate the viability of SNA in terms of funding and research needs specific to nonprofit organizations. We discuss the outcomes of the case study in terms of how the visual and metric outputs of SNA can be used by nonprofits to enhance the accomplishment of their organizational missions and strengthen their grant requests.     

Nonprofit social services in Moscow: Leadership and administrative issues

This article presents the findings of a study of nonprofit human services organizations in Moscow, Russia, in the early stages of development of the nonprofit sector. It addresses the following issues of relevance to social welfare in particular and nonprofits in general. First, what is the legal status of nonprofits? Second, what leadership and governance mechanisms have evolved? Third, how are resources, both financial and human, obtained? And, finally, how can Western consultants be useful in addressing the unique and specific needs of nonprofits in Russia as they bring their expertise into this setting?     

Co‐located Nonprofit Centers

Nonprofit centers are organized to house individual nonprofits “under one roof” to enhance their efficiency and effectiveness and to offer shared services to diminish administrative load. This post‐occupancy tenant satisfaction survey of three such US centers represents the first empirical analysis of such organizations. We find that nonprofit tenants (N = 118) initially co‐located due to the leasing price and the new physical environment (free parking and safety). Nearly all nonprofit tenants wished to remain at their nonprofit centers, largely for the same reasons that brought them there. The article then discusses strategies to achieve the high response rates attained in this study. It concludes with some implications for nonprofit centers, communities, and nonprofit staff—now and in the future, including lower occupancy costs and enhanced quality of nonprofits’ workspace.