Finally a 28-year-old murder suspect accidentally released from the Broward County jail has been arrested in Georgia.Eric Vail was released from the Broward County Jail May 30, where he was being held on a a second-degree murder charge. The jail was told Vail’s charges were dismissed and he was released but he had also been charged with first degree murder.Members of the Broward Sheriff’s Office SWAT/Fugitive Unit, who are also part of the U.S. Marshals Florida/Caribbean Regional Fugitive Task Force, have been investigating Vail’s whereabouts since then, according to the sheriff’s office. Their investigation led them to a mobile home in Jesup, Georgia.Vail initially resisted and barricaded himself inside the home, the sheriff’s office said. After about three hours, he was taken into custody.He is expected to be extradited to Broward County to face one count of first-degree murder.
After ending Ivory Coast’s involvement at the 2017 edition and qualifying for last year’s World Cup at their expense, Morocco again got the better of their west African opponents in a meeting of the top two sides in Group D.Morocco need a point in their final game against South Africa to be assured of top spot, although Ivory Coast will likely still join them in the knockout rounds as runners-up with a match to come against underdogs Namibia.“Our first goal is go further than we did in 2017,” said Renard, whose Morocco lost to Egypt in the quarter-finals two years ago. “We are potentially stronger now but we need to keep the same state of mind. If we reach our goal we’ll see what we can do. There’s still a long way to go and it’s going to be a difficult competition for everyone.”Jonathan Kodjia struck the winner in Ivory Coast’s opening 1-0 win over South Africa and the rangy Aston Villa forward nearly struck inside the first minute, connecting with Serge Aurier’s flighted cross only for Romain Saiss to brilliantly head over from under his own bar.Morocco had toiled in the sweltering afternoon heat in their 1-0 victory over Namibia in their first game and they too went close in front of a mostly full Al Salam Stadium when En-Nesyri flashed a shot just the wrong side of the post from Nabil Dirar’s smart cross.– Amrabat impresses –Leganes forward En-Nesyri put Morocco ahead on 23 minutes but it was the work from Nordin Amrabat that deserved much of the credit, the former Watford winger slaloming past three Ivorian defenders before slipping a cute ball through for En-Nesyri to slot beyond Sylvain Gbohouo.Nicolas Pepe almost brought the Ivorians level moments later as the ball fell to him on the edge of the box after Morocco goalkeeper Yassine Bounou knocked the ball away from Max Gradel, but the in-demand Lille star failed to hit the target with a pair of covering defenders.Amrabat and En-Nesyri promptly combined once more to great effect, the former dummying intelligently to allow the forward a low strike at goal that Gbohouo saved well before falling on the rebound.Ismael Traore went close late on for Ivory Coast with an overhead kick © AFP / JAVIER SORIANOMidfielder Geoffrey Serey Die thumped just over from distance after a poor Bounou clearance as Ivory Coast struggled to carve out genuine openings while Younes Belhanda, back in the Morocco side after injury, forced Gbohouo to push over his curling effort.Ivory Coast substitute Wilfried Bony, without a club following his release by Swansea, planted a header wide with Ismael Traore’s spectacular overhead attempt smothered comfortably by Bounou. Noussair Mazraoui, on as a late replacement for Hakim Ziyech, volleyed against the bar in stoppage time after a clinical break as Morocco secured a win that should leave them on course to face a third-place finisher for a spot in the quarter-finals. 0Shares0000(Visited 3 times, 1 visits today) 0Shares0000Youssef En-Nesyri (R) scored his first goal for Morocco since November © AFP / Khaled DESOUKICairo, Egypt, Jun 28 – Morocco coach Herve Renard masterminded another victory over his former team Ivory Coast on Friday as a 1-0 win sent the north Africans through to the last 16 in Egypt.Youssef En-Nesyri’s superb first-half goal in Cairo earned Renard and Morocco a third win in a row over an Ivorian side he coached to the Africa Cup of Nations title in 2015.
Network for Good has two amazing webinars coming up – and (as usual) they are free with registration.*Nonprofit 911: How to Get More Followers on Social Media w/ Guy KawasakiThursday, March 21 at 1 p.m. EasternWhy isn’t your hashtag everywhere? When’s the best time for a Facebook status update? What does it mean when someone +1’s you on Google +? How come no one liked your picture, story, update, tweet, share, friendship, etc? You might be caught a social media slump!Tune in Thursday, March 21 at 1 p.m. Eastern to hear tech and social media expert Guy Kawasaki lead a free presentation giving nonprofits the insider scoop on garnering support via the most popular social media platforms.Register here.Nonprofit 911: The Decisive Organization: Building a Culture of Better Decision-MakingMonday, March 25 at 1 p.m. EasternBest-selling Switch author Dan Heath’s done it again! Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work hits shelves next week. He’s going to stop by and pre-release the most helpful decision-making practices to the Network for Good audience via a Nonprofit 911 webinar on Monday, the 25th at 1 p.m. Eastern. Join Dan Heath as he makes it easier for your organization to make that sound decision. Bonus: Dan will be giving away a free copy of his new book to 10 lucky nonprofits on the call.Register here.*If you can’t make the date for Guy Kawasaki, sign up anyway. You will get a recording of the webinar afterward! Dan Heath’s session is live only, so we won’t be sending recordings.
Donor communications that connect—that appreciate, energize, and activate your prospects and donors—are the key to fundraising success. But you already know that.What you may not know, however, is that few organizations do donor communications well. Most have lots of room to improve, as evidenced by the focus on donor communications in conference agendas, e-newsletters, blog content in the field, Facebook chats, Twitter discussions, and more. If that’s your organization, you’re not alone!Now, with the release of Integrated Fundraising: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, by Mal Warwick/DonorDigital, we have proof of the ways most donor communications fail and the impact of those failures. If you’ve asked for resources to strengthen donor communications and have been turned down or just haven’t found the time to tackle them, this is the kick in the pants you need. These striking findings come from a six-month study of donor communications—both online and offline—from 16 large nonprofits, following online contributions to each organization. Since “multichannel donors are more loyal than single-channel donors,” researchers focused on how much and how well outreach is coordinated across channels for a consistent, recognizable, and satisfying donor experience.What I love about this report is that the researchers share what’s good, bad, and ugly in multiple dimensions so we get an idea of what’s working well (that is, what to strive for and what’s happening in organizations you’re competing with for donor dollars), as well as what’s not. Take a look at these findings:Thank you letters—a reliable cultivation tactic—arrive way too late or not at all. The quickest thank you letter, sent via USPS, arrived in 12 days. The slowest took 28 days. Eight organizations didn’t mail a thank you at all.Most donor communications content is inconsistent—in tone, message, and or/graphics—across channels, so it’s more likely to confuse and annoy recipients than to strengthen loyalty or motivate them to give. Most organizations do reach out to donors via multiple channels.Follow-up appeals via direct mail are frequently implemented, but that second ask can come months after the initial online gift, diminishing its success rate.Sustainer programs (aka monthly giving) provide a strong base of revenue, especially during economic dips, and “new online donors are highly responsive to monthly giving recruitment.” But only one organization integrated its monthly giving ask into mail and email, whereas four didn’t make monthly giving asks at all. There’s much more to learn in the full report, and I recommend that you download it now. Wherever your organization currently sits on the good, bad, and ugly continuum, there’s always room to do donor communications better.With refreshing practicality, Nancy Schwartz rolls up her sleeves to help nonprofits develop and implement strategies to build the strong relationships that inspire key supporters to action. She shares her deep nonprofit marketing insights—and passion—through consulting, speaking, and her popular blog and e-news at GettingAttention.org.
In our latest Network for Good video clip, I share some key points about the state of online giving. Online donations continue to grow at a faster clip than overall giving as more of our communication and actions go online. As digital natives come into their own and as we see peer fundraising, mobile giving, and events like giving days become nonprofit staples, we expect online giving rates to climb more quickly. To make the most of digitally-minded donors, your online fundraising strategy needs to adhere to these core tenets:Online giving can’t be siloed. Your online fundraising efforts should be tied to your overall fundraising strategy, and integrated with your offline marketing outreach. Make sure your website, email, and social media messages match your direct mail appeals. Your donors’ conversation with you will span more than one channel. Many offline donors will still go online to learn more about you and read about the impact a gift could have. Online giving must be easy. The beauty of technology is that it can make things easier, faster, and more fun. Your donation experience should work to remove any barriers that might prevent someone from giving. Remember: the fewer steps and clicks it takes someone to complete a donation, the more likely they are to give.Online giving should encourage more gifts. In addition to making it easy to give, your donation experience should inspire donors to give more. By offering a compelling story, suggested donation amounts, and recurring giving options, you can increase your overall fundraising totals as well as your average online gift. Need to boost your fundraising results? These resources will help you think through your online strategy:Understand online fundraising patterns by reviewing the Digital Giving Index.Check to see how your online donation experience stacks up with the Donation Page Grader.Learn how to attract more donors with your website, through email, and via mobile and social in our Online Fundraising Survival Guide.Sign up for a free demo of Network for Good’s fundraising software. Our team will give you a full tour and answer your questions about which tools are right for your campaigns.How are you integrating online fundraising at your organization? Chime in below to share your tips and challenges with your fellow readers.
When it comes to updating nonprofit branding, there can seem be more questions than answers. Questions like:Will rebranding increase donations?Will rebranding make it easier for us to convey our organization’s impact and value?Is now the time for us to rebrand?We finally get answers to these million-dollar questions in The Rebrand Effect: How Significant Communications Changes Help Nonprofits Raise More Money (free download here).This eBook from nonprofit communications agency Big Duck is based on the results of a national survey of 350 nonprofit organizations that rebranded within the last 10 years.For the study, Big Duck defines a comprehensive rebrand as developing or changing four or more of these elements:Brand strategyOrganizational nameTaglineLogoKey messagesElevator pitch.A limited rebrand includes three or fewer of these elements.Here are the highlights of this study and what they may mean for your organization:The Good News: Nonprofits that Rebrand Raise More Money.According to the study, most organizations invest in rebranding in hopes of connecting more quickly and firmly with individual donors and prospects. Statistics show those hopes are the reality for many organizations.Fifty percent of organizations surveyed reported revenue growth, with the greatest increase seen in individual giving. This success rate is particularly striking since many participating organizations were in the process or rebranding, or had done so within the last one to two years, so felt it was too early to assess the impact of those changes.Organizations that Comprehensively Rebrand See Greatest ROI.More than half (56%) of the organizations that completed a comprehensive rebrand saw revenue increase, compared to 41% of organizations that implemented limited rebranding.And the impact of comprehensive rebranding exceed revenue gains. The survey found that organizations making more comprehensive changes are likely to see these additional wins:Greater audience participation, from program registration to activism.Improved staff ability and confidence to communicate effectively about the organization, its impact, and value.More media coverage.Several Factors Influence Rebrand Results.The data shows that results stem from more than the rebrand itself. Organizations that rebrand with any or all of these elements already in place are far more likely to get to goal:New, clear organizational focus or strategic plan (within last 12 months)New leadershipStaff and leadership committed to advancing branding and communications changes.In other words, these factors lead to relevant and robust rebrands. If your organization has any or all of these success factors in place, rebranding may well deliver significant value! Dig into the full report from Big Duck to learn more about if, and how, rebranding done right is likely to move the needle for your fundraising efforts.Bonus: Nonprofit branding is important so don’t ignore it. Are you reflecting your brand in all aspects of your giving experience: Events, donation pages, emails, and peer-to-peer campaigns? If not, we can help. Talk to a rep to learn more.
Posted on January 4, 2013March 21, 2017By: Kate Mitchell, Manager of the MHTF Knowledge Management System, Women and Health InitiativeClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth recently published an article, Quality of antenatal care in Zambia: A national assessment, that classified and assessed the level of ANC services in health facilities in Zambia.Take a look at the abstract:BackgroundAntenatal care (ANC) is one of the recommended interventions to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality. Yet in most Sub-Saharan African countries, high rates of ANC coverage coexist with high maternal and neonatal mortality. This disconnect has fueled calls to focus on the quality of ANC services. However, little conceptual or empirical work exists on the measurement of ANC quality at health facilities in low-income countries. We developed a classification tool and assessed the level of ANC service provision at health facilities in Zambia on a national scale and compared this to the quality of ANC received by expectant mothers.MethodsWe analysed two national datasets with detailed antenatal provider and user information, the 2005 Zambia Health Facility Census and the 2007 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), to describe the level of ANC service provision at 1,299 antenatal facilities in 2005 and the quality of ANC received by 4,148 mothers between 2002 and 2007.ResultsWe found that only 45 antenatal facilities (3%) fulfilled our developed criteria for optimum ANC service, while 47% of facilities provided adequate service, and the remaining 50% offered inadequate service. Although 94% of mothers reported at least one ANC visit with a skilled health worker and 60% attended at least four visits, only 29% of mothers received good quality ANC, and only 8% of mothers received good quality ANC and attended in the first trimester.ConclusionsDHS data can be used to monitor “effective ANC coverage” which can be far below ANC coverage as estimated by current indicators. This “quality gap” indicates missed opportunities at ANC for delivering effective interventions. Evaluating the level of ANC provision at health facilities is an efficient way to detect where deficiencies are located in the system and could serve as a monitoring tool to evaluate country progress.Access the PDF of the article here.Share this: ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read:
ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on January 28, 2013March 21, 2017By: Girija Sankar, Director of Haiti Programs, Senior Program Manager, Global Health ActionClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Over 2000 abstracts were submitted to the Global Maternal Health Conference 2013. Eventually, around 800 delegates from all around the world presented papers and posters on maternal health topics under the theme of “Quality of Care”.While all the sessions and plenaries were thought-provoking, some of the sessions that I found especially interesting dealt with home birth attendance and the role of traditional birth attendants (TBAs).Speakers from Nigeria, Pakistan, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia and Uganda all highlighted the role that TBAs continue to play in home deliveries. Just because a country’s Ministry of Health dictates that women should deliver at facilities does not mean that women will indeed deliver at facilities. The reality in many of these countries, quite like Haiti, where I work, is that as long as there are significant barriers to safe, affordable and accessible obstetric care, women will continue to turn to other older women whom they know and trust: traditional birth attendants.Presenters from Bangladesh and Nigeria presented findings from promoting the use of clean delivery kits (CDKs) and the consequent impact on improving safe deliveries. The CDKs were promoted through social marketing to families who would then either take the kit to the facility or give it to the TBA for use in home births.We heard from a practitioner in Ethiopia whose organization works with pastoralists in the remote Afar region to improve health outcomes by training TBAs and encouraging women to visit the maternity waiting rooms built close to the referral centers. The group had identified 6 harmful practices that TBAs practiced, often leading to maternal and neonatal deaths. When trained on safe practices, the TBAs realized that what they had been doing in the past may have led to deaths.In Bangladesh, women, after child birth, are often allowed to bleed for a long time owing to the traditional belief that any blood that leaves the woman’s body after child birth is bad blood. The TBAs have since been trained on why that is dangerous for women.Discussions on task-shifting in HRH must acknowledge the role that TBAs continue to play in communities where women do not seek facility-based care for various reasons. If working with the community and women is important, then so is understanding and respecting decisions that women make in why and how they seek services from traditional birth attendants.Prof. Mahmoud Fathalla perhaps said it best when he said “more women have died from child birth than men have died fighting each other in battles.”Learn more about the conference and access the conference presentations at www.gmhc2013.com. Join the conference conversation on Twitter: #GMHC2013Share this:
ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on January 22, 2013June 12, 2017By: Ann Starrs, President and Co-Founder, Family Care InternationalClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)This post is cross-posted from the FCI Blog and the PMNCH website.Last week’s Global Maternal Health Conference (GMHC), held in Arusha, Tanzania, was both inspiring and sobering. Twenty-five years after the Safe Motherhood Initiative was launched at an international conference held in neighboring Kenya, maternal mortality has finally begun to decline, and there are many and diverse examples of how countries are addressing the challenge of preventing deaths of women and newborns from complications of pregnancy, childbirth, and the postnatal period. But as the conference highlighted, huge challenges remain — in improving the quality of care, the conference’s core theme; in strengthening the functionality and capacity of health systems; in addressing major inequities in access to care, within and across countries; and in ensuring that maternal and newborn health receives the political support, increased funding, and public attention that it needs.The majority of the conference’s breakout sessions featured informative and often fascinating presentations on research findings and promising programmatic and technical innovations. One session, however, took a different tack — a debate on “Has the ascendance of the RMNCH continuum of care framework helped or hindered the cause of maternal health?” I proposed this session to the Maternal Health Task Force, which organized the GMHC, because for me and the organization I head, Family Care International, maternal health has been at the core of our institutional mission since we planned the first Safe Motherhood conference in 1987. For much of the past decade, however, I have been closely involved with the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH) and Countdown to 2015, two coalitions that are dedicated to promoting an integrated, comprehensive approach to the reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) continuum of care. Have our efforts to define and advance the continuum of care framework contributed to progress in improving maternal health? If so, how much? If not, what can be done about it?These questions were debated by a stellar panel I moderated, which included Wendy Graham, Professor of Obstetric Epidemiology at the University of Aberdeen; Marleen Temmerman, the new head of the Department of Reproductive Health and Research at WHO; Friday Okonofua, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Benin, Nigeria; and Richard Horton, Editor in Chief of The Lancet, as well as a fantastic and diverse audience. To start the discussion I shared the definition of the continuum of care that PMNCH has articulated, based in part on the World Health Report 2005: a constellation of services and interventions for mothers and children from pre-pregnancy/adolescence, through pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal/postpartum period, until children reach the age of five years. This continuum promotes the integration of services across two dimensions: across the lifespan, and across levels of the health system, from households to health facilities. Key packages of interventions within the continuum include sexuality education, family planning, antenatal care, delivery care, postnatal/postpartum care, and the prevention and management of newborn and childhood illnesses.It is, of course, impossible to conduct a randomized control trial on the impact of the RMNCH continuum of care on maternal health, so the discussion was based more on perceptions than on hard evidence. Nevertheless, there are a few data points to consider in debating the question. From an advocacy perspective, panelists generally agreed, the adoption of the continuum of care framework has helped the cause by appealing to multiple constituencies related to women’s and children’s health. Attribution is always a challenge; there are many other developments over the past 5-7 years that have also had an impact, such as the two Women Deliver conferences held in 2007 and 2010 (with the third one taking place in May of this year). But participants generally agreed that linking women’s and children’s health, and defining their needs as an integrated whole, has appealed to policy-makers and politicians on an intuitive and practical level, as demonstrated by the engagement of heads of state, celebrities, private corporations, and other influential figures.Let’s look at the money: during the period 2003-2010 overseas development assistance (ODA) has doubled for MNCH as a whole, according to Countdown to 2015 (Countdown’s analysis did not look at funding for reproductive health, but a new report later in 2013 will incorporate this important element). Maternal and newborn health, which are examined jointly in the analysis, have consistently accounted for one-third of total ODA, with two-thirds going to child health. Given the significant funding that GAVI has mobilized and allocated for immunization over this time period, the fact that maternal and newborn health has maintained its share of total MNCH ODA is noteworthy.And let’s look at how maternal health has fared within the UN Secretary General’s Every Woman Every Child initiative, launched in September 2010: a recent report summarizes each of the commitments made to Every Woman Every Child in the two years since it was launched. Of the 275 commitments included, 147, or 53%, had specific maternal health content. If we look at the commitments according to constituency group, developing country governments had by far the largest percentage of commitments that had specific maternal health content — 84% — compared to 39% for non-governmental organizations, 24% for donors, and 52% for multilateral agencies and coalitions. Clearly, maternal health has not been marginalized within the continuum from a broad policy, program and funding perspective, despite the fear some had expressed that it would be pushed aside in favor of child health interventions that are perceived as easier and less costly to implement.Another benefit of the continuum of care framework, as noted by Dr. Okonofua, has been increased collaboration among the communities that represent its different elements. While there were tensions and rivalries when PMNCH and Countdown were first established, especially between the maternal and child health communities, today groups working on advocacy, policy, program implementation, service delivery, and research within the continuum generally work together more frequently, cordially and effectively than they did before, especially at the global level. PMNCH and Countdown, as well as Every Woman Every Child, have brought together key players to define unified messages and strategies that have achieved widespread acceptance.That was the good news; but panelists and participants at the session also saw a number of problems with the continuum of care concept. The concern articulated by Richard Horton, and echoed by many of the session participants, was that the continuum views women and adolescents primarily as mothers or future mothers. This narrow view contributes to a range of gaps and challenges; it means crucial cultural, social and economic determinants of health and survival, including female education and empowerment, are not given adequate weight. Gender-based violence deserves much more attention, both for its own sake and for its impact on maternal, newborn and child health. Politically sensitive or controversial elements of the continuum, especially abortion but also, in some cases, family planning and services for adolescents, may be neglected in policy, programming, and resource allocation.The fragmentation inherent in the continuum of care also contributes to what Wendy Graham called the compartmentalization of women. As Countdown’s analysis of coverage has demonstrated, the continuum of care doesn’t guarantee continuity of care; coverage rates are much higher for interventions like antenatal care and child immunization than for delivery or postnatal/postpartum care. Women’s needs for a range of interventions and services, available in a single health facility on any day of the week, are not being met in many countries.Other concerns that emerged during the discussion were that the RMNCH continuum of care framework does not explicitly or adequately reflect the importance of quality of care, which in turn depends on a range of factors: skilled, compassionate health care workers, functional facilities, adequate supplies and equipment, and an effective health information system that tracks not just whether interventions are being provided, but also whether individual women and their families are receiving the care they need throughout their lives.Dr. Okonofua, in his comments, focused on how the continuum of care concept has been implemented, or hasn’t, in countries. The implications of the continuum of care for on-the-ground program implementation have not been fully articulated and communicated; more effort, he noted, needs to be invested in making the concept relevant and useful for policy-makers, program managers, and service providers.Despite these gaps, however, participants in the session – and the panelists themselves – agreed that the continuum of care is a valid and valuable concept, and that the inadequacies identified should be addressed. “Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater,” said one member of the audience. The continuum of care, as a concept, has already evolved; initially, for example, it did not fully integrate reproductive health elements. As Marleen Temmerman commented, the continuum of care concept is a tool; what is important is what is done with it.As 2015 approaches, the global health community is struggling to articulate a health goal for the post-2015 development framework that will resonate widely and guide accelerated, strategic action to prevent avoidable deaths and improve health of people around the world. The RMNCH community — or communities — needs a framework that more fully reflects the realities and complexities of the lives of women and children, and that enables us to reach out to other health and non-health communities, including HIV/AIDS, NCDs, and women’s rights and empowerment, for a common cause. To do this, we need to revise the continuum of care framework to maximize its relevance and utility for countries, and to incorporate the following missing elements:Recognition of the importance of quality of careResponsiveness to the needs of girls and women throughout the life cycle, not just in relation to pregnancy and childbirthLinks to the cultural, social and economic determinants of women’s and children’s healthRichard Horton’s call for a manifesto to emerge from the GMHC included 10 key points; redefining the RMNCH continuum of care was one of them, inspired by the panel. The challenge has been issued; it is now up to us to meet that challenge.Share this:
Once Upon a Time…Everyone loves a good story. In celebration of National Tell a Story Day, we’re opening up early registration to our May Masterclass Webinar, “How to Tell Stories That Take Supporters from Passive to Passionate.” Discover the four steps to successful storytelling with Julia Campbell, author of Storytelling in the Digital Age: A Guide for Nonprofits.Whether you prefer to curl up with a good book or get lost in a film, the story is what captures our imagination. A good narrative brings people together and forms a common ground; it evokes emotion, sparks passion, and creates empathy.For a nonprofit, a good story can:intrigue journalistsinspire donorsmotivate staff and boardrally supportersignite advocacysecure corporate sponsorshipStories are the basic building blocks for reaching our goals.As fundraisers, you’re responsible for arousing sympathetic emotions and inspiring action. The most powerful way to do that is to tell a great story. But what makes your story great? What do you need to include?The essential elements of any good story are the character, desire, and conflict.CharacterYour protagonist is who your audience relates to. Personalize your organization and mission. Look at your data and find those case studies that can serve as representational stories for the work you do. People are twice as likely to give a charitable gift when presented with an emotion-inducing personal story that focuses exclusively on one character’s plight.DesireWe all want something. What is the desire within your character’s story? Is it a need to change their world, to obtain something, get rid of something, restore order, or escape a threat? Make sure their need is powerful and immediate.ConflictConflict refers to the obstacles that arise and prevent the character from getting whatever she or he wants. Powerful stories about relatable people overcoming challenges inspire the reader (or listener) to help. Tap into those universal human emotions and your audience will engage with you.Particularly when it comes to telling your nonprofit’s origin story—whether you’re discovering how to tell it for the first time, or simply want to refresh your approach—a powerful narrative is the foundation of successful fundraising.Join us for our May webinar “How to Tell Stories That Take Supporters from Passive to Passionate” to explore more tips to create the ideal story for your fundraising.Early registration now open. Sign up today!