The Indiana University Center on Philanthropy

conducted the Hispanic Stewardship Development

Partnership project over a three-year period, focus-
ing on the development and implementation of
fundraising training and practice in seven U.S.
Hispanic church and parachurch organizations.
This chapter presents research and conclusions on
the effectiveness of fundraising training and the
results of practical application of principles and
practices by the partners in the project. These sug-
gestions are valuable for practitioners working with
the Hispanic sectors of U.S. society.

6
The effectiveness of fundraising
training in Hispanic religious
organizations

Lilya Wagner, Cheryl Hall-Russell

THE INDIANA UNIVERSITY CENTER ON PHILANTHROPY (COP) has

been engaged in the Hispanic Stewardship Development Part-

nership project, funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc. This proj-
ect, now having completed its second year, focused on the
development and implementation of fundraising training and
practice in seven U.S. Hispanic church and parachurch organi-
zations.

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR PHILANTHROPIC FUNDRAISING, NO. 24, SUMMER 1999 © JOSSEY-BASS PUBLISHERS

85
86 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

At the close of the first year of activity, sixteen major points of

information were developed through partner feedback, by measur-
able activity toward goals dictated by the grant, by training evalua-
tions, and by summary reports. Of these sixteen points, the
following were selected as deserving additional research and eval-
uation; the results are presented in this chapter.

The partners accepted the fact that many similarities exist between
the Hispanic community and mainstream U.S. populations in
terms of fundraising practices and philanthropy. There was also
a positive understanding of the differences in philanthropy and
fundraising between Hispanics and Anglos. A cross-cultural
awareness influenced the partners’ fundraising plans and pro-
grams.
The partners’ acceptance of fundraising principles and the need for
financial sustainability was universal. They viewed the informa-
tion as vital to their causes and showed no reluctance in accept-
ing the principles. All the partners put these principles into
practice to some degree.
There are no significant differences in traditions of giving and
stewardship as a result of Hispanic cultural or national origins.
Differences tend to be in generations, foreign-born as opposed
to native-born, social class, religious affiliation, and region of the
country. Religious differences in giving are the most prominent.

The purpose of this chapter is to verify select conclusions drawn

following the first year of activity and provide evidence that is
applicable to practitioners working with Hispanics in the United
States. The research results were acquired by means of question-
naires and interviews about the application of philanthropic
fundraising principles and the results of implementation of prac-
tice. Other questions addressed cross-cultural issues relative to
fundraising markets, reasons for giving, and reasons for not giving
in response to appeals. In-depth interviews were held with key lead-
ers (directors, development associates, and board members)
addressing fundraising practice in terms of cultural and religious
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 87

issues. In addition, giving statistics were requested from all part-

ners that compared 1998 gift income to previous fundraising
income. The intent was to determine if training and consultation
with the partners had had a measurable effect.
Because religion is as much a spiritual experience as a cultural
orientation among Hispanics, church-based nonprofit organiza-
tions will be increasingly significant in U.S. philanthropy. Many of
the needs of Hispanics, from social to educational to health care,
have traditionally been met through parachurch organizations serv-
ing communities with high numbers of Hispanics. Assisting church
and parachurch organizations to diversify and strengthen their
funding is a key factor in increasing the ability of these organiza-
tions to address human needs.
The specific goals of the Hispanic Stewardship Development
Partnership (HSDP) were the following:

To develop a basic understanding of giving patterns of religious

people from various denominations and cultural groups and pro-
vide a baseline measure to be used when assessing the results of
systematic training with culturally appropriate materials and
techniques.
To develop an appropriate curriculum (bilingual and bicultural) for
training lay boards and members as well as clergy in churches
and parachurch organizations.
To provide opportunities through training for Hispanic organiza-
tions to strengthen the financial sustainability of their religious
institutions. A two-year resident development associate would
be funded; this professional would organize and conduct train-
ing for the organization’s constituency.
To develop sustaining capacities in leading organizations of faith
communities.
To evaluate the impact and efficacy of the program and contribute
to the scholarly literature on the cultures of giving.

As noted, seven church and parachurch organizations—five

Catholic and two Protestant (Evangelical, as defined in Hispanic
88 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

communities)—were selected from five regions that have the

largest concentrations of Hispanics. There are two reasons why
these organizations were selected for the project. First, churches
and parachurch organizations need funding in order to fulfill their
missions. Many funders, including government, do not support
activity in religious institutions. Because the church is the most
trusted and used source of service for Hispanics, fundraising
enables these organizations to provide service to one of the needi-
est population groups in the United States—particularly, culturally
sensitive, bilingual, and accessible services. Second, there is an
increasing importance of and demand for Hispanic leadership and
community involvement. If religious institutions are strengthened,
they can serve their entire communities in addition to their imme-
diately affected population groups.
Because of these reasons, the Lilly Endowment, Inc., and the
Indiana University Center on Philanthropy established a program
for immediate development of a bilingual, bicultural curriculum to
be used by select Hispanic church and parachurch organizations to
assist their own lay trustee development, strategic planning, and
fundraising. The expected results were that the work of seven His-
panic faith communities and their human service organizations
would be more financially sustainable, a large cadre of well-trained
fundraisers would be able to tap into Hispanic and mainstream U.S.
philanthropic activity, leadership for financially sustainable orga-
nizations would continue to be developed, and the understanding
of cultures of giving would be enhanced.
Although differing in history and function, the seven partners
had several common characteristics:

• They were associated with other organizations that could assist

and be assisted by them.
• They had existing degree or certificate programs or intended to
initiate such programs.
• They sponsored conferences and workshops on a wide geo-
graphic basis.
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 89

• Their curricula for degrees, certificates, and workshops did not

include fundraising and resource development.
• They focused on leadership development.
• They needed fundraising training and capacity building them-
selves.
• They were building board relations and professionalism in board
function.

The seven partners were the following:

Alianza de Ministerios Evangelicos Nacionales (AMEN). This orga-
nization of Evangelical ministries is associated with Azusa Pacific
University and its Haggard School of Theology. National in scope,
it has seven regional affiliate offices. The goals are to develop lead-
ership in ministry and social service organizations addressing the
Pentecostal community, including education for religious and lay
leadership. It has ties to the Mexican American community in Los
Angeles.
Catholic Theological Union (CTU). Based in Chicago, this is one
of the largest Roman Catholic graduate schools of theology in the
United States. Thirty-two religious communities sponsor it, and it
offers professional preparation for the ministry, both religious and
lay, through its doctoral, master’s, and certificate work. It also main-
tains an extensive continuing education program. Because there has
been a longtime interest in cross-cultural ministry and particularly
in the Hispanic community, it offers a Hispanic ministry program.
Instituto Hispano. Begun over thirty years ago and part of the Insti-
tute for Pastoral Studies at Loyola University, the Instituto offers a
master of pastoral studies for Hispanic ministry as well as several
certificates in pastoral competence. Through its outreach programs
and branch sites, the Instituto addresses the needs of the church and
social service organizations in five midwestern states. Preparing reli-
gious and lay leaders to deal with issues of financial sustainability
has not been a focus, but there is great interest in meeting this need.
Latino Pastoral Action Center (LPAC). LPAC primarily serves His-
panics from Puerto Rico, Mexico, and Central America and
90 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

includes several denominations. It provides leadership training,

housing, technical assistance, and other programs for the commu-
nity of Hispanics in the greater New York metropolitan area. LPAC
wishes to begin a fundraising program to build its own financial
base as well as that of associated ministries and social service orga-
nizations.
Mexican American Cultural Center (MACC). MACC provides
workshops on Hispanic religious and social life, degrees in Hispanic
pastoral ministry, and language and translation services through its
National Catholic Institute for Pastoral Education and Language
Studies. Located in San Antonio, Texas, it serves Region 10 of the
Roman Catholic church, as well as religious and lay leaders from
many denominations and regions, including South American mis-
sionaries and U.S. military chaplains.
National Catholic Council for Hispanic Ministry (NCCHM). Head-
quartered in Los Angeles, this is a membership organization of
thirty regional and national organizations serving primarily Mexi-
can Americans in religious, lay leadership, and social action pro-
grams. It attracts professional Hispanic leaders who have not been
involved with the Catholic church and provides national confer-
ences and regional workshops.
Southeast Pastoral Institute (SEPI). SEPI serves twenty-eight dio-
ceses in eight states and offers a master’s in ministry as well as a cer-
tificate program for preparing religious and lay leadership,
especially for the Cuban Roman Catholic community. It has an
outreach capacity not only to diocesan representatives but also to
dispersed sites where continuing education is offered.
Because Evangelicals and Catholics have major differences in
giving and giving motivations, it was important to identify these at
the beginning of the project. The Catholic church experiences
problems in support for the church because of the view that giving
is between the individual and God. Therefore, family needs come
first; obligations outside family are kept to a minimum. Much giv-
ing is pro bono. Tithing is often not reinforced by sermons or ref-
erence to scripture. Pledges and personal checks are rare, so it’s
hard to have goals for raising money in the church. The church
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 91

doesn’t belong to the congregation, so there is no sense of owner-

ship. Catholics defer to the authority of the priest. Only recently
are Catholic laity actually involved.
In contrast, tithing in Evangelical churches is expected and rein-
forced by scripture. Giving is part of being a faithful follower of
Christ. There is more of a sense of ownership and participation.
Community of faith is as important as ties based on Hispanic heritage.
There are class and educational differences in giving. The lower
class belonging to small Pentecostal churches tends not to give.
The better educated give to a church but also to causes in the His-
panic community, many of which are faith-related, or to prominent
causes. The church and its clergy are models and influences for giv-
ing, especially as they model values of service, compassion, and
humility.
At the close of the first year of activity, information was drawn
from partner feedback, measurable activity toward goals dictated
by the grant, training evaluations, and summary reports. The fol-
lowing points were part of the formative evaluation of the progress
of the Hispanic Stewardship Development Partnership and there-
fore are not definitive conclusions.

• The partners accepted the fact that many similarities exist

between philanthropy and fundraising practice in mainstream U.S.
populations and Hispanics. The universality of attitudes regarding
donor motivations was a theme at each training session. These were
congruent with reasons for giving or not giving, as identified by
INDEPENDENT SECTOR research (Royce and Rodriguez, 1996; see

Tables 6.1 and 6.2). In addition, participants identified philan-

thropic traits that are congruent with Hispanic values and charac-
teristics identified by Royce and Rodriguez as well as in literature
on Hispanics in the United States.
• The reasons given for reluctance to engage in fundraising
also reflected those given by other U.S. population groups. The
possibility of rejection was foremost among the reasons given for
fear of asking; this was congruent with characteristic values of His-
panics, particularly those of dignity and pride.
92 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

Table 6.1. Reasons for contributing to charitable organizations

and giving and volunteer behavior
Reason All respondents

Being asked to give by someone you know well 72.1%

Because you volunteered at the organization 60.7%
Being asked by clergy to give 59.1%
Reading or hearing a news story 43.3%
Being asked at work to give 38.2%
Receiving a letter asking you to give 28.6%
Receiving a phone call asking you to give 23.4%
Reading a newspaper or magazine advertisement 17.1%
asking you to give
Seeing a television commercial 16.9 %

Source: INDEPENDENT SECTOR, 1996.

Table 6.2. Reasons for not contributing money or not con-

tributing more money

Reason All respondents

I could not afford to give money 55.7%

Because I already give as much as I can 44.9%
Because I’m making less money this year than last 39.5%
Because I’m unsure about having a job next year 28.7%
Because I lost my job 28.6%
I would rather spend my money in other ways 26.4%
Because no one I knew personally asked me to give 16.6%
Because no charitable institution contacted me 15.5%
asking for a contribution
Because I didn’t get around to it 15.1%

Source: INDEPENDENT SECTOR, 1996.

• There was a prevailing reluctance for Hispanics to be iden-

tified as one population group. The sense of cultural, geographic,
and historic roots and differences among Hispanic populations was
significant. The terms emerging minority and market segment were
viewed negatively, and attempts to place all Spanish-speaking peo-
ples into one population group met with resistance. In fact, the lan-
guage itself varied according to place of origin.
• The partners’ acceptance of fundraising principles and the
need for financial sustainability was universal. They viewed the
information as vital to their causes and showed no reluctance in
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 93

accepting the principles. All partners put these principles into prac-
tice to some degree.
• The need to identify and focus on the mission of the organi-
zation was a readily accepted principle. As a result of the training
and subsequent counsel, several had restudied their mission state-
ments. They also accepted the principle that all fundraising must
be mission-based.
• There was a positive understanding of the differences in phil-
anthropy and fundraising between Hispanics and Anglos. For exam-
ple, although networking and personal relationships are important in
all fund development processes, these traits are vitally important in
Hispanic donor-asker interactions. Although wishing to have His-
panic cultural differences respected, the partners recognized they
must also respect Anglo and other cultural preferences in funding,
philanthropic practices, and fundraising strategies. This cross-cultural
awareness was beginning to shape the partners’ fundraising plans and
programs. Their prospect lists included a variety of possible markets.
• A prevailing theme was the desire to maintain ethnic iden-
tity while being part of society in general. The partners recognized
that their efforts on behalf of social causes were greatly needed by
Hispanic population groups and that they worked with the handi-
cap of misleading and inaccurate myths and perceptions of His-
panics in the United States. Poverty, lack of education, weak
language skills, and other problems inhibit the acceptance of His-
panics into the general mainstream. There was, as a result of these
situations, an effort to strengthen the positive image of Hispanics
while addressing legitimate needs. The partners recognized their
positive potential to influence the integration of their population
groups into American society while guarding their valued cultural
and ethnic traits and characteristics.
• The partners displayed a clear understanding of and respect for
the significant role of Hispanic church and parachurch organizations.
Because of the overlap between Hispanic religious organizations with
secular needs and society, the power of the church was acknowledged
and viewed as beneficial.
• Training participants showed an awareness of cultural char-
acteristics and values that shape the practice of fundraising among
94 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

Hispanics. Very few participants in any of the training sessions

conducted by the partners held to highly parochial views that
philanthropic and fundraising were significantly different for
them; universality of traits such as generosity and caring were
accepted by a significant majority. Religious, ethnic, and cultural
parochialism were recognized as a potential problem in seeking
funds for Hispanic causes, but were not viewed as insurmount-
able problems. The partners recognized the need for ease in the
ability to move comfortably in both Hispanic and U.S. main-
stream worlds.
• The partners accepted the need to focus on stewardship and
accountability as part of their fundraising. Stewardship as a bibli-
cal principle was readily understood and therefore served as a basis
for ethical fundraising practice.
• The values that characterize Hispanic populations in the
U.S., especially in relationships, of making connections through
people and personal connections to the cause or person soliciting
funds played a significant part in the discussions during the train-
ing. Although these values are also prevalent in mainstream
fundraising, the particular definition of relationship values in His-
panic cultures were often discussed.
• There are no significant differences in traditions of giving
and stewardship as a result of Hispanic cultural or national origins.
Differences tend to be in generations, foreign-born as opposed to
native-born, social class, religious affiliation, and region of the
country. Religious differences in giving are the most prominent.
Indeed, the discussions and posttraining evaluations indicated that
there are major differences in giving and motivations for giving
between Evangelicals and Catholics.

During the second year of activity, it became evident that the fol-
lowing issues merited further attention because research results
could provide a basis for activity among all population groups of
Hispanics in the United States, secular or religious. In addition,
this information would provide a better understanding of the state
of philanthropy and fundraising among Hispanics in the United
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 95

States and applicability of this information for practitioners in the

field. The issues were these:

• Similarities that exist between philanthropy and fundraising

practice in mainstream U.S. populations and Hispanics
• Level of understanding of the differences in philanthropy and
fundraising between Hispanics and Anglos
• Influences of cross-cultural awareness on the partners’ fundrais-
ing plans and programs
• Level of the partners’ acceptance of fundraising principles and
the need for financial sustainability; readiness to espouse the
principles and put them into practice
• Value and applicability of the information they received through
the project and how vital this was to their causes
• Differences in traditions of giving and stewardship that reflect
Hispanic cultural or national origins

The partners were asked several questions in an attempt to

address these issues. The directors and development associates were
polled and interviewed. A sampling of board members from each
organization were also interviewed. Following is a summary of the
answers to the questionnaire and interview questions.

QUESTION 1: What similarities exist between philanthropy and fundrais-

ing practices in mainstream U.S. populations and Hispanics?

Respondents pointed out that regardless of race or culture,

human compassion and generosity are the basis for philanthropic
behavior. Both mainstream U.S. and Hispanic organizations have
to be able to articulate the missions of their programs and effec-
tively cultivate financial support. The point was also made that
there are few donor organizations that give exclusively to Hispanic
causes, so Hispanic organizations have to approach mainstream
funders just as everyone else does. Most agreed that there were
basic similarities in fundraising strategies and in the motivations of
the donors.
96 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

“In both communities, money is the primary expression of philan-

thropy, followed by time and talent.”
“Both Hispanic and Anglo donors like to be recognized.”
“Both can safely presume that people have a basic desire to help
other people.”
“There has to be a connection with the cause for both groups to
make a financial contribution.”
“Whoever you are, you still have to have a plan!”

QUESTION 2: What differences exist in philanthropy and fundraising

between Hispanics and Anglos?

In general, the respondents indicated that the Hispanic culture

values one-on-one contact and Hispanics need a very personalized
approach in order to donate to a cause. One respondent said that
Hispanic people come from a “high context” culture and see things
in terms of relationships. “Anglos,” she stated, “tend to be more low
context and approach things in terms of the task at hand.” Others
emphasized language differences and the fact that formal philan-
thropy was still a new and evolving practice in most Hispanic com-
munities. Finally, others felt that the differences in average annual
incomes ($26,600 for Hispanics and $38,900 for whites) made a big
difference in both the willingness and ability to become a donor.

“Hispanics are suspicious of people they don’t know. So a first

approach to cultivate a relationship is difficult. They prefer per-
sonal introductions.”
“The broader community has fewer problems approaching orga-
nizations. Hispanics have initial reluctance to go outside of their
arena. They will work inside their communities, then go out to
support larger Hispanic projects.”
“Anglos are more fact-, statistic-, or task-oriented, whereas Hispan-
ics are more oriented to a cause or personal relation motivation.”
“The Anglos articulate their tradition of giving by keeping statis-
tics and records. Hispanics are now in the learning stages of
articulating their traditions and keeping accurate records.”
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 97

QUESTION 3: What cultural aspects influence Hispanic fundraising plans

and programs?

The differences between Hispanic subgroups were cited in the

responses to this question. Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, South
Americans, and other Hispanic groups have their own cultural
influences that have to be taken into account. Many of the respon-
dents warned of the danger of lumping the responses of differing
Hispanic groups into one category. Religion, especially the tradi-
tions learned in the Roman Catholic church, are seen as a major
cultural influence on how the respondents formed their fundrais-
ing plans and programs. Using the Spanish language was also cited
as a factor in successful fundraising.

“We tend to give to our particular subgroup. Puerto Ricans to

Puerto Ricans, Cubans to Cubans.”
“There is a preference toward the personal approach to asking and
to only those who clearly have the means to give, thus avoiding
embarrassing situations that the person asked cannot give.”
“In terms of philanthropy, religious convictions play a great part.
Teachings of the Catholic church have a strong influence; the con-
cept of ‘Help the least of these thy brother’ is important, although
this does not necessarily lead to systematic philanthropy.”
“For Hispanics, the Spanish language is not solely a means of com-
munication but an identity of which they are [functional and
ontological].”

QUESTION 4: Do you agree that most fundraising principles can be uni-

versally applied? If not, why not? What different practices have you had
to implement for your own organization?

The majority of respondents agreed that most fundraising prin-

ciples could be universally applied. Because the respondents were
all based in religious organizations, they pointed out the necessity
to tailor the general fundraising terminology to fit their religious
perspectives. In terms of implementing different practices for their
98 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

organizations, some of the respondents developed plans to educate

Hispanics in formal philanthropy and fundraising. Others carefully
targeted their appeals and modified the principles by adding a more
personal touch. One respondent vigorously disagreed, stating that
many fundraising principles are presupposed on a good, clear case
statement, and a population with an economy that will support phil-
anthropy: “The Hispanic community is still developing the notion
of philanthropy as well as self-value of not accepting help of any
kind from others. Some Hispanic communities, as a result of being
colonized by Spain, feel Hispanics are still being forced to be pas-
sive by different charities and people associated with philanthropy.”

“Most fundraising principles can be applied universally, but to max-

imize results one must depend on understanding the cultural,
economic, educational, religious differences among Hispanics.
We have used the bilingual approach, promotion through rela-
tions and religion, and we always consider the limited exposure
of our donors to formal philanthropy.”
“Agree, but more time must be spent creating interpersonal rela-
tionships. Involving people personally is prior to asking for dona-
tions. It is time consuming, but ultimately very strong and
enduring.”
“Yes, but making sure their individual approach is modified accord-
ing to ethnic group. Besides this modification, there has to be a
lot of personal touch involved.”

QUESTION 5: Has fundraising been important for your organization?

What difference, if any, has fundraising made for it? What principles
in particular have you put into practice in the past two years?

The executive directors and board members polled all agreed

that fundraising and development skills were essential tools for
their organizations. Indeed, most felt that they would cease to exist
without an organized fundraising arm. They stated that their
fundraising training had been put to practical use and that princi-
ples learned in the classes were actively being applied in their orga-
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 99

nizations. Several pointed out specific accomplishments that were a

direct result of applying the fundraising principles.

“Our institution’s acceptance of the fundraising principles, as artic-

ulated by The Fund Raising School, and our need for financial
sustainability have initiated a paradigm shift in our institutional
leadership as well as in the core leadership of the Hispanic faith
communities we serve.”
“Definitely important, without it we would not exist. Prior to the
training we had no donor base, just strong connections via the
prior director. By applying the principles of donor development
we now have a donor base of five thousand.”
“Most organizations cannot afford someone solely dedicated to
fundraising, so they pay them from various budget lines. This
means that the person is doing too much of everything when
fundraising should really be a priority.”
“This concept of philanthropy has opened our eyes. Philanthropy
has become our most important endeavor. It has helped us iden-
tify our mission, audience, and our strategies.”

QUESTION 6: There are no significant differences in traditions of giving

and stewardship as a result of Hispanic cultural or national origins.
Agree or disagree? Why do you agree or disagree?

One hundred percent of the respondents disagreed with this

statement. There was a strong perception that Hispanics give in
ways different from mainline U.S. culture. Over half of the
respondents cited the influence of the Catholic church on giving.
They stated that because Catholics do not have a formal 10 per-
cent tithing tradition, Hispanic religious organizations often do
not raise the amount of money that Protestant churches do. Some
also felt that the traditions of Hispanic giving had largely been
ignored and that more affluent populations had been targeted
instead. Most felt that informal traditions in the Hispanic culture
have always been in place but that it is difficult to analyze their
effectiveness using formal parameters.
100 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

“Disagree. Each ethnic group (from twenty-three countries) has a

different way of thinking about giving. They are only similar in
terms of giving to the church.”
“I disagree. There are issues of language, culture, and life experi-
ences for Hispanics that must be considered. There are various
subgroups, educational levels, earning power, and social status
that indicate a person’s inclination to give.”
“Perhaps it is more a matter of degree, but the differences are sig-
nificant nonetheless. Philanthropy has been targeting affluent
populations and has neglected to understand developing popu-
lations with lesser means but with means nonetheless.”
“People of faith feel blessed when they give. This is definitely a part
of the Hispanic culture in that Catholicism is so predominant.”

QUESTION 7: If you disagreed with the preceding statement, what differ-

ences exist between or among Hispanic cultures or national origins?

The answers to this question varied greatly based on the Hispanic

group the respondent’s organization served. Most agreed that indi-
vidual donors tended to give to their own groups, be that based on
race or national origin. Several pointed out that Cubans had had more
financial success in the United States than other subgroups and that
the ever-increasing numbers of Central and South Americans may
eventually influence giving patterns. Another respondent, quoting low
average incomes of most Hispanic groups, stated that there is a per-
ception that “philanthropy is for rich Anglos and that we don’t have
that kind of money. We give within our family or send money home.”

“The nonexistence of nonprofits in many countries and groups

spills over into the United States. Some groups simply are not
familiar with the process.”
“Caribbeans tend to be more racially African and identify in that way.”
“Differences exist in languages, including Portuguese, Spanish,
French, and various dialects.”
“People from stronger indigenous backgrounds tend to be more
communitarian and those from urban environments more indi-
vidualistic.”
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 101

QUESTION 8: Please give fundraising income figures for the current fiscal
year and compare this income with the previous year’s income. Explain
these figures as much as necessary.

As we anticipated, these questions either elicited enormously

varying answers or were difficult for the respondents to answer at
all. Because most nascent organizations need two or more years in
order to establish a solid, ongoing philanthropic support program,
it is not surprising that most of the organizations participating in
this project would not have strong numerical support for their
answers. However, certain themes did emerge. These are summa-
rized by their individual statements.

“Our figures are quite distorted because we have conducted a major

building campaign and received one large grant. Usually our
annual income is about $400,000 but this year we raised about
$3 million.”
“We haven’t engaged in fundraising yet but are positioning our
organization toward that end. We are focusing on fundraising
now. I can say that we have seen an increase in our membership
dues and we’re gearing up for the next year in other fundraising
strategies. Many of the organizations that attended our six
regional meetings have indicated success in writing proposals,
conducting capital campaigns, and similar efforts.”
“Our semiannual mailing campaign to eight thousand prospects
yielded $5,000 in 1997. In 1998, we mailed to nine thousand
prospects and received $6,500. We had seven major donors who
gave or pledged $12,000 each in 1997 to 1998, and a contribu-
tion in stock sold for $10,000.”
“We’re developing our fundraising office and program. So far we’ve
been fortunate to have time to do this because of grants.”

QUESTION 9: How has the training and consulting you have received made
a difference in your practice of fundraising? Please explain your answer.

The training and consulting received by the directors and devel-

opment associates has been put to practical use. Those responding to
102 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

this question relayed that as a result of the training they had been able
to have a significant impact on their organizations. They explained
that they were more confident in approaching funders, more com-
mitted to their causes, and had a better awareness of the reasons
behind some of the intuitive practices they had used in fundraising.

“The training helped our board monitor the organization more

intelligently. It also helped to educate the executive director of
the program in terms of the fundraising cycle.”
“Training opened the staff’s eyes to many aspects of fundraising
from board responsibility to donor development.”
“Our organization began to develop a new construct and gather the
tools for an ongoing development program.”

QUESTION 10: What advice would you give to any consultant or

fundraiser who might work with Hispanic causes and donors?

The answers to this question were very consistent. Be sincere in

your approach to the community, do not assume anything, and take
the time to build the trust needed in order to be accepted by the
Hispanic community in which you may find yourself working.
There was also agreement that this population has been historically
ignored by those seeking philanthropic support and that these peo-
ple needed to be educated about the process and have their own
established traditions respected.

“Know the community, know the issues, know the language, be in

a teacher mode, and don’t take anything for granted.”
“Consideration and patience have to be exhibited as a result of the
historical neglect by dominant institutions of the Hispanic com-
munity. A sudden rediscovery of Hispanics cannot easily undo
years of neglect. Be prepared to answer questions like, ‘Why are
we now a target when we weren’t before?’”
“Hispanics are always willing to help. You have to be sincere with
them. You have to earn their trust because too many people have
tried to use them.”
 THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNDRAISING TRAINING 103

“It takes a lot of time and personal investment to lay the ground-
work for successful fundraising. I am still trying to work out a
fundraising structure that would be effective in the Hispanic
world.”
“Listen to the reasons behind established practices before propos-
ing new ones.”

The results of the two years of experience indicate the vast

potential for research on a number of aspects of Hispanic philan-
thropic activity and achievement. Some of these follow:

• Further research on what philanthropic traditions, although

often not formally recognized or promulgated, exist in Hispanic
religious communities and a verification of the data presented in
this chapter
• The role of the church (Catholic and Protestant) in developing a
sense and practice of philanthropy; what values are transferable
and therefore provide the basis for giving
• Stereotypes and myths of giving among Hispanic population
groups, and the accuracy or inaccuracy of these
• The comparison or contrast of the research already conducted
(as cited and discussed in this chapter) with research results about
the relationship between religion and giving among other pop-
ulation groups in the United States
• The possible application of what has been learned to promote
the well-being of Hispanic culture and secular organizations as
they prepare for the next century
• Quantitative studies of the effect of philanthropic income to
church and parachurch organizations’ functions and programs
• The difference between giving in Catholic and Protestant churches
as well as the models and influences of religion on giving
• The influence of religion on promoting giving in a larger com-
munity—Hispanic, Anglo, or in general; the foundation that reli-
gion provides for reaching out to a larger community
• Additions to the scholarly literature on the cultures of giving,
focusing on Hispanic populations and organizations
104 HISPANIC PHILANTHROPY

By numbers, geographical concentration, and socioeconomic sta-

tus, Hispanics are becoming more important as both donors and
recipients. Attention has largely been on Hispanic organizations
that struggle for civil and employee rights. Now positive attention
turns to Hispanic nonprofit organizations, whether religious or sec-
ular, that promote a wider range of social causes, including educa-
tion and cultural development. Hispanic leaders want and need to
learn about and use new approaches in management, trustee devel-
opment, and fundraising.
As John Leo stated in his commentary, “A Dubious ‘Diversity’
Report,” “It’s certainly true that Hispanics will have a lot to say
about America’s future. But what they apparently intend to say does
not seem out of line with what earlier Americans of all races have
believed” (1997, p. 15). This observation could extend to the devel-
opment and recognition of philanthropy in Hispanic communities
and organizations. The Hispanic Stewardship Development Part-
nership program served to promote Hispanic causes and citizens as
an asset to U.S. society where common purposes honor different
ways of achieving common goals.

References
INDEPENDENT SECTOR. Giving and Volunteering in the United States. Washing-
ton, D.C.: INDEPENDENT SECTOR, 1996.
Leo, J. “A Dubious ‘Diversity’ Report.” U.S. News and World Report, June 23,
1997, p. 15.
Royce, A., and Rodriguez, R. From Personal Charity to Organized Giving: His-
panic Institutions and Values of Stewardship and Philanthropy. Unpublished
paper, Indiana University Center on Philanthropy, 1996.

LILYA WAGNER is associate director, public service, at the Indiana Uni-

versity Center on Philanthropy.

CHERYL HALL-RUSSELL works in the research and academic programs

division at the Indiana University Center on Philanthropy.
Copyright of New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.