When our local radio station announced a $50,000 give-away for one lucky nonprofit, based on listener votes, the nonprofit community sprang into action. What do we have to lose, they asked?

Well, there might actually be more to lose, and less to gain, than one might think.

1. Are we being used? Perhaps the most obvious point is that charitable organizations are being used by the sponsor. If their #1 motivation was to help society, they would be making long-term investments based on merit, not staging a popularity contest. Instead, for just $50,000, they essentially employ the most trusted sector to do one-on-one phone calls and mass marketing on their behalf.

Remember: every time a nonprofit calls their donors or puts the contest in their mail-outs, they are not only helping advertise the business, they are indirectly endorsing that business, and making that business look good by association. Is promoting a for-profit business — which likely is not in line with the nonprofit’s mission or values — really a responsible way to use the trust of the community?

2. We’re using up a valuable “ask”. When developing a relationship-based donor development model with clients, we are very careful about how and when to ask donors for something. A successful long-term relationship is based on mutual give and take, not an endless stream of requests for money, for volunteering, or for voting in online contests. When you ask your database to take the time to register online and make this vote (sometimes voting every day), you’ve used up one of a limited number of times that you can request something. In this instance, asking for money or a volunteer task in your own work would likely be a smarter use of an ask than a long-shot contest.

3. It’s not free. To engage in the contest, an organization is going to have to use limited staff time, and donate valuable real estate on its website and newsletter (usually front page) to promote the business and its contest. This represents a significant financial investment for a financial windfall that may not happen. That same money could be used to deepen donor relationships that will sustain the organization in the long-term.

4. It’s a distraction. How much of the mental, physical and emotional energy of staff is being invested in this contest? What percentage of meeting time is spent on it? That energy should be channelled into your core programs, existing, well-planned long-range development plans, amazing clients, and volunteers.

5. It highlights an unhealthy competition. During the the local radio station contest described above, I was contacted by five of my nonprofit clients. All of them are great organizations, and now I was being asked to choose between them. In a healthy community, one organization doesn’t have to beat another — we send a much healthier message when we work together for the good of society.

6. The odds are against you. Unless your organization has the biggest and most responsive database in town, it’s highly unlikely it can get anything out of all this effort. The odds are much higher of landing a grant if you put that same energy from a contest into researching a grant source, nurturing a relationship with that funder, and developing a top-notch proposal for them.

7. Is the prize really that good? In the case of our local contest, the $50,000 prize was actually $25,000 of airtime and a commitment by the radio station to raise the other $25,000. Yes, the airtime could be useful, but I’m willing to bet that almost none of the nonprofits who entered the contest had prioritized airtime in their strategic plan.

The lesson here is to avoid getting caught up in chasing funds and being grateful for a low-odds chance of payback. If the objective is to enter into a partnership with business, do it in a more deliberate way. In particular, there should be a focus on a fair balance between promoting a business (after ensuring that it fits your organization’s ethics and mission), and some kind of financial return that will benefit your organization in a sustainable, meaningful way.

Next time you’re tempted by easy money, take a good look at what’s really at stake. Analyze the hidden costs, then take the same investment and put into long-term development. We’ll all be stronger for it.

Rick Juliusson has worked in nonprofit for more than 14 years in Canada, Africa, and Texas. He now operates FreeRange Consulting, helping nonprofits on Vancouver Island and in the Lower Mainland to become sustainable through long-term donor development, strategic planning, and organizational development. Rick can be reached at Rick@FreeRangeConsulting.ca.