If an organization wants money from foundations, the organization’s grant writer must specifically state in the proposals what funding will be used for. If a program director (who, by the way probably reads dozens of proposals during each funding cycle) doesn’t know if an organization needs money for a specific program or for capacity building, he will be wasting his time if he continues reading the proposal, let alone consider it for funding.

As an English major, I know the importance of avoiding vagueness in writing as if it was the plague. I know in the past I’ve recieved papers critqued by some of my professors with certain sections with their writing in blue ink: “Not sure what you’re talking about here.” Or, ”Elaborate.”

It’s so important to be specific when you write because “vague claims” can be misleading. Take a look at the example Seth Godin uses on his blog post, The danger of vague claims. The claim is pretty humorous, but very misleading.

A post on Sharpe Tips lists a few reasons why an organization’s letters to its donors aren’t personal. The first one on the list is quite intriguing, but true: “Is your letter addressed to ‘Dear Friend’ or to ‘Dear Fred’?” Under this point, the blogger, Alan Sharpe, says that letters addressed to “Dear Friend” don’t even acknowledge the donor as a person. Have you ever passed a person while walking down the sidewalk who didn’t even look at you? Yeah, it’s happened to me too–quite a bit, actually. Then you’ve got the people who look at you, but the expression on their face might not be the kind of expression you were hoping to see.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about if I would rather encounter a person who might give me a dirty look or a person who wouldn’t even look at me. It can be difficult to decide, but I think I would prefer coming across a person with a scowl on his or her face instead of a person who doesn’t even look at me. The scowling person at least acknowledges my presence.

It’s similar in the case of the relationship between nonprofits and their donors. Donors want to be acknowledged as people, because that’s exactly who they are–people.

Not so, actually. A post on Neuromarketing Blog reveals quite the opposite. As the blog mentions, a research group based in the UK performed a study on this subject.  The outcome was quite alarming. According to the results, the ads that strictly employed emotional appeal were twice as effective as those that only employed rational appeal. Even the ads that used both emotional and rational content didn’t even do as well as those that only used emotional content.

It’s amazing what emotion can do isn’t it? See the blog for details.

It is for this reason that the Obama administration implemented “Cash for Clunkers.” You know how it works. People trade in their gas-slurping cars for up to $4,500 in rebates. While the program has stimulated the economy somewhat since these rebates are responsible for crowds of people flocking to car retailers, the case is different for some charities who provide vehicles to those without.

An article in USA Today explains some of the struggles charities are facing as a result of the implementation of “Cash for Clunkers.” A spokesman from one charity claims that his organization is experiencing approximately a 15% loss in vehicle donations. At that charity, donations dropped to about 45% from about 60%.  Another charity reports it has lost an estimated $75,000 because of the program.

Where should we draw the line? An increase in funding is enabling people to give car dealers more business, but on the other hand, charities who provide vehicles for people who need them are suffering.  How can we tell if this program is really helping the economy? Something to think about.

The organizations belonging to the first group use “children” because they feel that this word is more formal, dignified, and proper. The organizations belonging to the second group claim that “kids” is a whole lot more personal than the cold, distant “children.”

Here’s my take on this little dilemma, which is slightly different than Jeff’s: It depends upon your donors. Most nonprofts are funded by both foundations and individual donors. Since foundations are more likely to lack a personal relationship with an organization, the word “children” would be an appropriate term to use in a grant proposal. Individual donors, on the other hand, are quite different. Individual donors usually have an established relationship with an organization, which is one reason they fund it in the first place. For example, many of Alive’s individual donors are members of the board of directors. Therefore, “kids” would be the appropriate term to use when writing to this group.

Individual donors want to feel like they are part of the organization to which they donate. Reading a letter that is impersonal in tone may allow them to feel otherwise. As a result, they might be discouraged from giving, and you know what that means….

One question: Why do women who live in a country with free speech fail to express their opinions as much as men? Do they feel restrained from doing so? I’m not asking you to answer this question; it’s just something to think about.

Alive Arts Media, the organization where I work as a development intern, encourages young women to find their voices and express them to the surrounding world. As a matter of fact, this is what Alive is all about. The primary program at Alive is Alive Magazine, a publication that is entirely contributor-based. Contributors are from all over the U.S. and from several countries around the world. Through this publication, Alive empowers young women (between the ages of 13 and 25) to change the world with their voices.

Words have power. Better yet, they are power. They can either be used to heal or destroy. Alive confronts the destructive messages of the mainstream media by urging strong, intelligent women to speak up for themselves. It is our goal that these young women will find healing through learning of each other’s stories and sharing their own stories with others. What a creative way to change the world!

Check out this revolutionary magazine and find out how these young women are impacting their world.