Thursday, March 23, 2017

Highlights of the Trump Budget Proposal


HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
  • Proposed funding change: -17.9%
  • Up for elimination: $4.2 billion for things including the Low Income Home Energy Assistance and the Community Service Block Grant programs
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
  • Proposed funding change: -13.2%
  • Up for elimination: $3 billion in spending on the Community Development Block Grant program; $1.1 billion for the HOME Investment Partnerships, Choice Neighborhoods, and Self-help Homeownership Opportunity programs
DEPT. OF STATE AND USAID
  • Proposed funding change: -28%
  • Spending cuts: $650 million over three years from development banks including the World Bank. Also, reduction in support for the United Nations, including peacekeeping efforts
  • Up for elimination: Global Climate Change Initiative; the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance account

Trump Budget Cuts Billions of Dollars From Antipoverty Programs

The Chronicle of Philanthropy
By Alex Daniels, Megan O’Neil, and Timothy Sandoval
The Trump administration’s preliminary budget proposal would zero out many nonprofit-administered antipoverty programs in areas including heating assistance, affordable housing, and economic development, while also eliminating federal agencies such as the National Endowment for the Arts.
Also on the chopping block is the Corporation for Community and National Service, which provides charities with tens of thousands of low-cost AmeriCorps workers each year, and the agency’s Social Innovation Fund, which steers public and private dollars to nonprofit programs that prove positive results.
The White House called for foreign-assistance spending by the State Department and USAID to be cut by nearly one third, or more than $10 billion.
The spending cuts outlined in the summary "skinny budget" released Wednesday would require the approval of Congress. Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said the White House will release in May a full budget for fiscal year 2018.
"Skinny budgets are tricky because they give you top line, but they don’t give you a lot of details," said Alicia Phillips Mandaville, vice president for Global Development Policy and Learning at InterAction, a membership group of international charities. "This one calls out some specific things but not always in ways we can tell what will come out in the subsequent, more detailed version."
Presidents never get everything they request, but the White House budget proposal is always an important and influential starting point for the months of tough negotiations that follow on Capitol Hill.
The stakes for nonprofits are high. Public charities get about one-third of all their revenue from government grants and fees for services, including Medicare and Medicaid payments, according to the Urban Institute’s National Center for Charitable Statistics. Nonprofit revenue totaled $1.7 trillion in 2013, according to the center.

Rallying Cry

Nonprofit leaders across the country reacted with dismay to the cuts proposed in the budget, which they characterized as deep and damaging. They say that if Congress enacts even a portion the cuts outlined by the Trump administration — which were proposed to help pay for a $54 billion increase in military spending — it will have far-reaching consequences for charitable programs and their beneficiaries.
"This is an opportunity for a rallying cry," said Tim Delaney, president of the National Council of Nonprofits.
He called on nonprofit leaders to examine how the potential cuts might affect their organizations and the people they serve. Then they can start reaching out to partner groups and state nonprofit associations to coordinate on advocacy with local representatives.
Nonprofits should emphasize how the cuts will affect the people they serve — not their organizations, Mr. Delaney said. "Nobody cares about whether nonprofits are getting hurt — or this corporation or that entity. The real concern is how this will affect the lives of individual Americans."

Economic Development

President Trump’s budget proposal would shutter multiple programs that serve low-income communities. It would eliminate the Legal Services Corporation, which provides legal representation for low-income people. It would also close the doors at several regional commissions that provide education, clean water, economic development, and health grants in low-income areas: the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Delta Regional Authority, the Denali Commission, and the Northern Border Commission.
Other programs that would be slated for closure include several U.S. Housing and Urban Development efforts to provide low-income housing, including the HOME Investment Partnerships, Choice Neighborhoods, and Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity programs.
The proposal also calls for a 17.9 percent, or $15.1 billion, cut in the Department of Health and Human Services. It doesn’t specify whether the Senior Nutrition Program, which supports Meals on Wheels groups across the country, would be cut.
"We don’t know how that will be spread out, but it is pretty frightening," said Ellie Hollander, president of Meals on Wheels America.

Community Block Grants

Donna Butts, executive director of Generations United, which supports social services for children and the elderly, is especially concerned about the proposed elimination of the Community Development Block Grant program. It provided $3 billion in grants in the current fiscal year to states, cities, and counties to provide job training, develop housing for low-income residents, build community centers, make loans to small businesses, and redevelop homes.
The block grants allow states and localities flexibility to design programs as they see fit. But because each recipient uses the grants differently, it can be hard to come together to fight the proposed cuts, according to Ms. Butts.
"It’s a blessing and a curse," she said. "When it’s block granted, it’s harder to rally a constituency. It makes it easier to cut."
Ms. Butts is bracing for more. She thinks the $1.5 billion Social Services Block Grant program, an entitlement program that supports foster care and adoption services and adult day care for the elderly, could be vulnerable. It was not included on the proposal, which only outlined cuts in discretionary programs. (Discretionary spending is implemented through appropriations bills, while spending on entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare is mandatory.)
Generations United and social-service organizations from all 50 states sent members of Congress a letter defending the program last week. But Ms. Butts fears that the deep cuts the administration has proposed throughout domestic programs will pit social-service groups against one another.
“Nobody cares about whether nonprofits are getting hurt -- or this corporation or that entity. The real concern is how this will affect the lives of individual Americans.”
"We are stronger together, but some groups are starting to express a willingness to elevate their particular age group," she said. "Some of the groups are starting to splinter."

Foreclosures and Evictions

South Jersey Legal Services, which receives the majority of its funding from the Legal Services Corporation, last year handled more than 9,200 cases. Douglas Gershuny, the group’s executive director, said the proposed elimination of the Legal Services Corporation would reduce that number by a third.
"That means more unjust foreclosures and evictions resulting in homelessness," he said in a statement. Mr. Gershuny also worried that more domestic-violence victims would be unable to escape abuse, and more homeless veterans and hungry children would be denied government benefits.
Closing the Appalachian Regional Commission would be a "cruel disinvestment" from an area hit hard by the collapse of the coal economy, said Jake Lynch, spokesman for the West Virginia Community Development Hub.
Over the past two years, the commission has made $73 million in grants to improve life in coal production areas. Mr. Lynch’s group received $94,000 to mentor local community teams in ways to diversify their economies.
"The specter of ARC vanishing is really sad," Mr. Lynch said. "West Virginia could use some hope and could use some help, and ARC has been providing that."

Advocacy for the Arts

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities are among 19 independent agencies identified for elimination in President Trump’s budget.
The elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts would be a significant blow to the roughly 100,000 nonprofit arts organizations across the nation, said Robert Lynch, president of Americans for the Arts, a network of cultural groups.
Although the amount of money the endowment provides is small, cutting the NEA would disrupt other streams of funding for cultural organizations, he said. Almost all NEA grants are matched by state and local money, and campaigns for private donations are often built around NEA-funded projects, he added.
Ending the NEA would not put many arts organizations "out of business directly," he said. "But that’s really not the point — services will be reduced and survival will be a little bit harder."
The NEA has been a catalyst for growth in the arts since it was formed in the mid-1960s, he said. There were only four state arts councils before the NEA was formed, he said. Now all 50 states have them.
Mr. Lynch noted that on Tuesday about 700 arts leaders will be on Capitol Hill protesting cuts to the NEA and other arts funding during "Arts Advocacy Day."

Ripple Effect

John Gomperts, director of AmeriCorps from 2010 to 2012, said nonprofits with staff members who come to them through programs run by the Corporation for National and Community Service should be talking to their congressional representatives about why they are important.
"We have been, for the last 20-plus years, asking young people to step up and be leaders in their own communities in the county," said Mr. Gomperts, now chief executive of America’s Promise, which works to improve graduation rates, among other things. "It is such a red, white, and blue kind of idea."
Many AmeriCorps volunteers are young people trying to serve children growing up in difficult circumstances, he said.
"I understand the president is trying to give expression to a different set of priorities, but the notion of uninvesting, disinvesting, in young people on both sides of this equation just seems to me unfortunate and shortsighted."
The current appropriation for the Corporation of National and Community Service is $1.1 billion, up from $1 billion in 2016. The agency has sustained attacks from lawmakers and others before, some of whom questioned whether paid service is really service. Nonprofit leaders and champions of national service said they find it striking that President Trump has not said much about volunteering and civic engagement, breaking with decades of presidential tradition.
AnnMaura Connolly, president of the advocacy group Voices for National Service, said that eliminating the Corporation for National and Community Service would cost taxpayers money. She cited a Columbia University study that found that for every $10 spent by the federal government on national service, $15 was raised from private sources to pay for such work.
"By matching or exceeding federal support with private-sector dollars, national service programs lessen the strain on the federal government through partnerships with more than 1,100 community and faith-based nonprofits," Ms. Connolly said in a statement. Among those charities that rely heavily on national service programs are Habitat for Humanity, Catholic Charities USA, and the American Red Cross, she said.

Foreign Aid

Ms. Phillips Mandaville of InterAction said the proposed one-third cut to foreign assistance includes a reduction in U.S. support for and work with the United Nations and the World Bank.
"At a macro level, those things, added up, really potentially undermine our ability as a country to be engaged in the world," she said.
While many big U.S.-based aid organizations get more than half their revenues from government, others are mostly supported by private philanthropy. Those donors want to see the country continue to play a leading role in global health and development efforts.
"Part of what they are concerned about is not just how much money the United States is putting into something but the net effect on development and humanitarian outcomes if the U.S. withdraws like this," she said.
Spending on foreign aid accounts for less than 1 percent of the federal budget, Ms. Phillips Mandaville said, a good value considering it saves lives and protects U.S. interests. And she questions the choice to slash an already tight foreign-aid budget to pour more into defense spending.
"The same way that Thanksgiving dinner isn’t just about turkey, our global leadership isn’t just about the military," Ms. Phillips Mandaville said. "In dinner terms, what this budget does is propose to eliminate mashed potatoes and pumpkin pie in order just to get more turkey."
She and others in the development community said that U.S. foreign-aid spending has long enjoyed strong bipartisan support in Congress and that they hope lawmakers will reject proposed cuts to that piece of the budget.
David Miliband, chief executive of the International Rescue Committee, said that slashing the U.S. foreign-aid budget endangers the country’s work to prevent and respond to global crises like ISIS and Ebola.
“The notion of uninvesting, disinvesting, in young people on both sides of this equation just seems to me unfortunate and shortsighted.”
"Working to counteract these with a forward-leaning foreign-aid policy doesn’t just mean saving lives today but sparing the U.S. and its allies around the world the much more difficult, expensive work of combating them tomorrow," Mr. Miliband said in a statement.

Taxes May Be Next

The White House’s proposal did not include details on the administration’s plans for tax policy — so its views on the charitable tax-deduction were not included. Speaking at a rally in Tennessee on Tuesday night, President Trump said that a tax-overhaul bill would follow on the heals of health-care legislation.
Steve Taylor, counsel for public policy for United Way Worldwide, said he’s heard support for the charitable tax deduction in conversations he’s had with White House staff and members of Congress. Still, neither the administration nor legislators on Capitol Hill have ruled out that limits could be placed on the deduction as part of a tax-overhaul bill — which Republicans are hoping to pass this year.
Mr. Taylor said it’s hard to know where the GOP-controlled Congress will come down on the charitable deduction. "At the end of the day, Congress is looking for revenue that they can use for their big-picture plan, which is to lower taxes," he said. "And they’re looking under every stone for that revenue, so we are as vulnerable as any" group.

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Nonprofit Knowledge Matters | Hot Button Issues


This month, we take a look at a few of the “hot button” issues in the news to explore how they affect nonprofits. The first topic, cybersecurity breaches, is all over the news, but the second, while still “hot,” is a bit of a sleeper: This month marks International Women's Day, which reminds us that women leaders are critical to any progress, whether economic or social. So now seems a good time to take a hard look at protecting our data and make sure each of our nonprofits offers women a welcoming and supportive launch pad for leadership. The common threads? Trust and accountability. Which brings us to perhaps the MOST common hot button issue we see in the news: the polarizing and divisive partisanship that makes us question whom to trust. Imagine if nonprofits were no longer nonpartisan. If nonprofits become seen as merely extensions of political campaigns they will no longer be safe spaces where people of all backgrounds and political persuasions can come together to solve community problems. That’s why the National Council of Nonprofits strongly opposes parallel efforts in Congress right now to repeal and weaken the mandate that charitable nonprofits be nonpartisan. This issue is so important, and so urgent, that we are asking you to take immediate action: Show your support for nonpartisanship by signing this Community Letter. Background about this issue is below. Together we must each send a strong signal to Congress that nonprofits insist upon remaining trusted and accountable organizations. Let’s focus on preserving that trust: by protecting personal confidential information, ensuring that women have equal opportunities for leadership, and that donors’ gifts advance our missions and benefit the community – not partisan political campaigns 
Hot Button Issue: Cybersecurity
At first glance, it may seem easy to shrug off cybersecurity as something that is only a concern for “big” nonprofits. But it's not. That’s why we encourage you to take a closer look at how your nonprofit collects and maintains data. Keeping your data house in order is just like producing accurate and timely financial reports for your board to review: it’s a matter of trust and accountability. No matter the size of your nonprofit, we are sure you will agree that protecting people from physical risks and protecting financial assets from theft are important. Protecting the data your nonprofit collects is based on the same principles of trust and accountability and is equally important. And, like putting “safety first,” cybersecurity is not only about ethics and accountability; it’s also about protecting your nonprofit’s reputation and avoiding lawsuits and/or penalties that can result from a data breach. 
Is your nonprofit at risk and if so, what’s the next step?
The Gender Pay Gap: a sleeper threat to nonprofit effectiveness and sustainability
This month individuals in countries all over the world observed International Women’s Day; in some places through strikes and protests, and in others with festive celebrations. The day brings attention to the social, economic, cultural, and political achievement of women, plus the goal of “gender parity.” Research shows that in the US women are still not paid “on parity” with men performing the same jobs. The National Partnership for Women & Families reports that on average white women earned 80 cents for every $1 earned by a man, and at least one study (a year earlier) concluded that in the nonprofit sector the gap widens to only 75 cents on the dollar. The gap is even wider for women of color in the American workforce, with African-American women working full-time paid just 63 cents and Latinas typically paid only 54 cents for every dollar paid to a white, non-Hispanic male working the same job. “Women’s median earnings are lower than men’s in nearly all occupations, whether they work in occupations predominantly done by women, occupations predominantly done by men, or occupations with a more even mix of men and women,” reports the Institute for Women’s Policy Research. While the average gender pay gap is 20%, depending on the job category it ranges from 52% to 111% and spans all types of jobs: “There is only one occupation —‘bookkeeping, accounting, and auditing clerks’–where women have the same median weekly earnings as men.”

The Simple Truth, a Spring 2017 report by the American Association of University Women (AAUW), concludes: “The pay gap is real … and it doesn’t seem likely to go away on its own.” AAUW predicts that unless there is a dramatic change, women will not reach pay equity with men until 2152. Women’s pay affects more than only women, of course. AAUW points out that 40% of mothers with children under the age of 18 are their families’ primary or sole breadwinners; eliminating the gender pay gap would have the additional benefit of raising the standard of living for those they support, namely children.
What does the gender pay gap have to do with nonprofits? 

Let’s keep nonprofits nonpartisan!
We hope every one of our readers will join the almost two thousand (so far) nonprofits, foundations and for-profit entities across the country that care about the effectiveness of charitable nonprofits, by signing this Community Letter in Support of Nonpartisanship to keep nonprofits out of the political fray. Proposals in Congress right now seek to repeal or weaken the current law that protects charitable nonprofits and foundations from partisan, election-related activities providing that - in exchange for tax-exempt status and the ability to receive tax-deductible donations - 501(c)(3) organizations may not endorse or oppose candidates or spend money on campaign contributions or other partisan activities. This law, which is sometimes called the “Johnson Amendment,” has been a bedrock principle protecting public trust in our sector since 1954 when President Eisenhower signed the tax reform bill of that year.

The many local and national organizations that have signed the Community Letter all feel strongly that the current law protects our sector and the people we serve from aggressive demands for political endorsements by candidates and from efforts to divert mission-dedicated assets to campaign contributions. In short, by signing the Community Letter, our readers’ organizations can join thousands of others in resisting efforts to turn charitable nonprofits – that are currently trusted community problem-solvers - into politicized pawns of politicians.

Thank you if your nonprofit, foundation, or business (that supports or serves nonprofits) has already signed the Community Letter.
When your nonprofit signs, it will be in good company with initiative leaders: BoardSourceCouncil on Foundations, Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers, Habitat for Humanity International, Independent Sector, Jewish Federations of North America, National Human Services Assembly, Volunteers of America, and the National Council of Nonprofits. Signers also include the Ford Foundation, United Way Worldwide, Goodwill Industries International, Inc., and many other local and national groups, religious and otherwise.

BUT just because these well-known organizations have already signed does not mean that your nonprofit doesn’t need to!

Your elected officials in Congress need to see a very long list of nonprofits in their state that demand protection of nonpartisanship so they will know that the charitable nonprofit community is united and mobilized in opposition to changing a law that has worked well for the past 60+ years!

Special National Webinar with Beth Kanter
Just in time to chase away the winter blues and welcome spring, we’re excited to announce a special webinar on April 25, 2017 with Beth Kanter, master trainer and influential author/blogger, on the subject of her newest book, The Happy, Healthy Nonprofit: Strategies for Impact Without Burnout. As a member of your state association of nonprofits you can attend this webinar for free! (Non-members pay $25.)

2017 is shaping up to be a challenging year. The National Council of Nonprofits and its network of state associations of nonprofits strive to help your nonprofit be resilient and ready for whatever lies in store. Curious about what practices your nonprofit can use to be happy, healthy and sustainable? Beth will share her personal and professional journey toward a happy, healthy culture of well-being, and pass along lots of tips that you won’t want to miss. This program offers a terrific way to share the wisdom of a happy, healthy nonprofit with your team and board members. 

Copyright 2017 National Council of Nonprofits. All rights reserved.
1001 G Street NW, Suite 700 East
WashingtonDC 20001

Monday, March 13, 2017

What's New at NRMC?












About Us                         Services                         Contact Us            

What's New at NRMC?
If you missed our updates in recent RISK eNews articles, you'll be happy to hear what our team has accomplished since January 1st!
  • Our newest team member, Project Manager Eric Henkel, led the launch of our new Risk Benchmarking App to allow nonprofit leaders to compare their risk management functions to those of other organizations.
  • We announced Jeremy Sutton as keynote speaker for the Risk Summit, our annual conference, which takes place in Philadelphia this September 17-19.
  • Kay Nakamura, our Director of Client Solutions, welcomed five new Affiliate Members into our Affiliate Member community.

March 1, 2017
Succession Planning for [NOT] the CEO

CEO succession planning arises as a strategic risk and key concern of nonprofit boards in many NRMC-led Risk Assessments. If you're looking for an article about CEO succession planning, this is not it. Instead, review our popular article, Avoid Transition Trauma with a Succession Plan.

This article explores succession planning for nonprofit leaders other than the CEO. Eureka moments often occur during our consulting engagements when nonprofit teams realize the CEO is one of many individuals whose departure could cause 'transition trauma.' Read on for inspiration for establishing a non-CEO succession planning process.
Why Succession Planning is NOT Defining a Successor
While many organizations practice the literal form of succession planning--defining a successor or #2 person waiting in the wings--the NRMC team does not support this approach. This approach is problematic as many nonprofits are too small to have an internal pool of potential C-suite leaders or backups for any key positions. Plus, any nonprofit leader would be woefully naïve to believe that a talented, C-suite material staffer would wait around for her chance to take up the mantle as a key player on the team. And if your designated #2 departs for any reason, then the succession plan is suddenly kaput.

Instead of defining actual successors for any key leadership roles, we believe that succession planning should be about the planning process and having an actual plan in place to help your organization effectively manage inevitable staff transitions. Using CEO succession planning as an example, the board is charged with establishing a succession plan that it will implement when the existing CEO is suddenly unavailable or announces her plan to leave. The succession plan should provide instructions--originally developed and approved by the board itself--that the board will now follow to conduct activities including: determining any shifting needs the nonprofit has for its incoming CEO, revamping and advertising the CEO job, filling the role temporarily with an internal or external candidate, vetting CEO candidates, hiring the selected candidate, and managing the transition and onboarding of the incoming CEO when the time is right.

Now that we've cleared up what succession planning is and isn't, how can we apply this critical process to non-CEO roles?
All Aboard the Succession Planning Train
The aforementioned article, Avoid Transition Trauma with a Succession Plan,describes three preliminary steps to complete before beginning the succession planning process for any role. Conducting these three activities regularly will create a climate for effective succession planning at your nonprofit.

Adopt and follow a performance review process for key leadership roles to empower your nonprofit team to continually assess and reshape leadership roles as the needs and priorities of the organization change over time.

Keep position descriptions up-to-date for all key positions to ensure that day-to-day duties and overarching goals are fully understood, and are kept in an accurate, written record.

Offer cross training and clarify back-up personnel for key activities completed by your team members to prepare your team for temporary succession solutions (e.g., in the event of an unplanned departure in which department staff must take on a department head's duties).
If you're confident that the activities above are occurring at your organization, then you've laid the groundwork for managing leadership transitions. Now it's time to adopt an approach to succession planning.

Depending on the size, complexity, and culture of your organization, your approach to non-CEO succession planning could be either formal or informal for certain roles. Generally speaking, succession planning for non-CEO roles will be far less formal than CEO succession planning, since there is no need to engage the board in planning for leadership transitions of other key staff.

The NRMC team often recommends a collaborative succession planning approach, allowing the relevant departmental or functional teams to participate in the search and hiring process for their own staff colleagues and even department heads. Team-based hiring enables you to seek and select new hires based on the perspectives of your diverse team members, and team-based hiring also encourages the recruitment of new staff leaders who are truly welcomed and approved by many of their soon-to-be peers and direct reports. These benefits can cultivate feelings of positivity and ownership among staff while reducing stress associated with leadership transitions.

If your HR team typically takes the lead on employee recruitment, then consider involving both HR and the department with open roles. Breaking down these silos will produce myriad benefits including gratification for HR staff whose employment practices expertise might be overshadowed by the work of programmatic staff, and an appropriate division of labor between HR and the initiating department, which promises to ease common recruitment pains that occur when these functions are out of sync (e.g., unrealistic expectations for personnel budgets and hiring/screening timelines, inaccurate position descriptions, ineffective onboarding that is either too general or is too role-specific, etc.).

If an executive staff member is leaving your organization--whether planned or unplanned departure--we recommend that one or more leadership team members (e.g., other department heads, other C-suite leaders, etc.) collaborate with the departmental team of the departing executive (with the exiting executive participating if possible). A similar approach could be used when planning the transition of any staff member within a specific department. A leadership representative and the department team can collaborate to facilitate informal, candid team discussions about the nonprofit's near future and shifting personnel priorities, using questions like:
·         Is the staff member's position description up-to-date? Are there other critical responsibilities or personal qualities that the individual brought to our team, that are NOT listed in the position description? (If the answer is 'yes,' be sure to update the position description.)
·         What elements of the role should remain the same in the distant future? What elements need to change based on our internal and external environments and any opportunities or challenges that lie on our organization's horizon?
·         Are there any special considerations for the role based on other personnel gaps that exist within our department? Are there any other personnel gaps in our department that could potentially be filled or be partly filled by a single new hire? How might this type of role be structured or developed?
·         As we begin the search process, how will we support the departing staff member's role in the interim? What are the critical responsibilities that should be delegated to other members of our team for the time being?
·         Will the departing staff member personally be available to help onboard the new hire? If not, how will we capture and share the institutional knowledge needed to provide the new hire with a solid foundation during onboarding? If so, how can we ensure a positive and productive experience for both the exiting and incoming individuals?
·         As we identify candidates for the role, how do we foresee this transition occurring? What can we do now to ensure that a smooth, positive transition occurs? Are there any gaps we need to address in our screening/hiring processes or our onboarding/training programs?
Whether it's your first foray into non-CEO succession planning, or you're a succession planning veteran just looking to revitalize your approach, your best bet is to rely on the intimate knowledge your own peers have of your organization. Leverage your team to cross-train each other and volunteer as backups, to manage staff transitions, and to seek out new colleagues who truly embody the spirit of your mission.

Erin Gloeckner is the director of consulting services at the Nonprofit Risk Management Center. Erin invites you to say hello or share your thoughts about succession planning at Erin@nonprofitrisk.org or 703.777.3504.

Nonprofit Risk Management Center, 703.777.3504, 204 South King Street, Leesburg, VA 20175