For nearly ten years Calvin Edwards & Company served only donors, never nonprofit organizations. This helped to ensure our independence as generally there was no conflict of interest. During this period, not anyone or any entity could be a client, and we refused to provide services on many occasions.

The need for independence is particularly obvious in the areas of evaluation and due diligence, be it organizational, programmatic, or grant evaluation. The firm has been built on the principle of providing reliable, independent, objective information that has been well researched. This is a value that is immovable for us.

Challenges to our Business Model
Surprisingly, over time it appeared that our “black and white” model—that potential clients are either a grantor or a grantee—is simply not true. We encountered a wide variety of hybrid approaches including:

   A nonprofit executive who went to his own foundation to hire us, so we are retained by the funder, but in name only

   A client that is both a grantmaker and grantee, because it is a consortium that consolidates others’ donations

   A charity that is at the same time a program implementer and a donor, because it has a large endowment and makes grants to other organizations to support its own core programs

   Any number of nonprofits that “found” donors to engage us, often parties who were closely related

   A ministry whose consultant wanted us engaged and used his own foundation to do so, meaning that our client is both a donor and “insider” consultant

The list could go on. The world of nonprofits and giving is constantly changing, and that is good. I admire all this innovation and complexity.

Serving Nonprofits
So, we have reconsidered the approach that guarantees objectivity by serving only donors. This was regularly challenged, not only in the complex and innovative realities of the modern giving world where lines are often blurred, but directly by donors who believed the kind of services we provided them would be valuable to their nonprofit grantees. During 2010 we were under considerable pressure to reconsider our “we serve donors only” policy. This former policy is available here.

Commencing late in 2010 and running into 2011, we are conducting a pilot test to ascertain if we believe it prudent to provide services to both donors and nonprofit organizations. Soon after this decision was made we were engaged by three charitable organizations and we anticipate that more will follow. Thus, a reasonable test should emerge.

Retaining Independence
How then do we assure objectivity if we are working “both sides of the fence”? Principally, in two ways.

One, CEC has a long history of impeccable independence. This is the result of a culture of objectivity, processes that encourage and facilitate independence, written guides and standards, and a quality control process to ensure the final product is “sterile” and free from bias and assumptions. These measures will stay in place and the standards will not alter.

Two, we have implemented a number disclosures and affirmations into our standard Engagement Letter to guarantee transparency and full disclosure. When our clients fully understand any conflicted relationships or reliance on information obtained under a different engagement, they can hold us accountable.

The Nature of Services Provided
As this website amply explains, our services are very tightly focused on analysis, research, and evaluation of nonprofit organizations, their programs, and grants to programs. Virtually everything that we have done for donors over the years fits into these categories.

With the revised business strategy, we will first of all provide these very same services to nonprofit organizations. Same product, new client. However, we anticipate that providing services to nonprofits will quickly lead to requests for other types of services. We routinely analyze and make recommendations. It is very likely that a nonprofit client may request that we assist with the implementation of our recommendations.

We will consider such requests on a case-by-case basis. We intend to be vigilant to avoid converting to a nonprofit management consulting firm—such organizations do not typically rely on analysis, research, and evaluation. Our services, if expanded, will build upon these core services that we provide.

However, we will not raise money for nonprofit clients among donor clients, or facilitate their doing so.

All our services must make giving more effective—either because it helps a donor discriminate, or it helps a nonprofit be a more worthy recipient.

Conclusion
Serving the needs of the giving community faithfully is challenging and complex. We will continue to assess this policy in an attempt to “maximize the good of giving.”