One of the newest ways nonprofits gather prospects is through crowdsource funding. Do some of your own research beyond what is discussed in the book, discuss your understanding of the crowd funding process, and give your opinion on the ethical implications for gaining donors through this method. Also, discuss how this might affect raising grant funds for your selected program – what methods would you like to use to gain donors overall?

Crowdfunding has become an innovative way to source venture capital for businesses and to raise funds to support nonprofit programs. In order to be successful, the goal of the fundraising project must be clearly defined as well as the goals of the investors (Mollick, 2014). Once these goals are clear, the nonprofit must choose a platform through which to advertise the crowdfunding campaign. Coley and Scheinberg (2017) mentioned several sites including CauseVox, a site I have used to raise funds for Empire City Men’s Chorus. Once the campaign is set up on the platform, the link needs to be shared with stakeholders and friends of the organization. Mollick (2014) found that crowdfunding campaigns are more likely to be successful if the organizers have a deep personal network and the program being funded is of high quality.

Crowdfunding campaigns require constant diligence and work. For example, organizers need to remind members and staff to share the link with their friends. Additionally, the nonprofit’s Facebook and other social media accounts need to be posted to regularly to remind viewers to donate. These efforts usually pay off and result in a program being fully funded (Mollick, 2014).

Along with the freedom to raise money on the internet comes responsibility. There are two ethical implications of gaining donors through crowdfunding. First, it is important to make donors feel that their giving goals have been met. For example, if I give money to a nonprofit that rescues boxer dogs, I want to see that the organization has rescued more dogs, found them homes, or upgraded their facilities. The second ethical implication is the question of what to do if the organization does not raise enough money to implement the proposed program. Does it get returned to the donors or can it be used for other projects? Ethics dictate that the answer to this question must be given to donors before they make a commitment.

For my final project in this class, I will be writing a proposal to support Empire City Men’s Chorus’s 25th Anniversary Season. We have already added crowdfunding to our revenue budget for this fiscal year. We would like to see this reach the level of 10% of our budget at some point. With 40 members, our family and friends have provided much needed support for our programs. I expect crowdfunding to be a part of our fundraising mix on a permanent basis.


Coley, S. M., & Scheinberg, C. A. (2017). Proposal Writing: Effective Grantsmanship for Funding (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.











E-government Response Paper

Submitted to meet course requirements of “Introduction to Public Administration” at Rutgers School of Public Affairs and Administration

In this week’s abbreviated reading list, Holzer and Shwester (2016) laid out the different theories and styles of leadership, described the relationship between technology and administration, and discussed public service in popular culture. The supplemental article discussed the emergence and future of e-governance (Brown, 2005). Since I discussed my reaction to the leadership readings in the discussion forum for this course, I will use this space to discuss my reaction to the readings about technology and e-governance.

Technology has found its way into every facet of life for almost everyone in the West. Public administration seems to be the perfect candidate for implementation of information and communication technologies (ICTs) because public administrators seek efficiency. The advent of e-mail, word processing software, internet-based meeting software, webinars, and myriad other technologies allow administrators to do much more work in much less time than in years past. Every governmental agency in the United States has some form of computer database and interacts with the public through a website.

As Brown (2005) discussed, self-service is an “integral part of the citizen-centered model” (p. 248). I rely heavily on technology. As a New York City resident and an employee of a New York City based organization, I interact with government on a regular basis. Before the city implemented the 311 system (discussed by Holzer and Shwester in Chapter 12) I would routinely spend hours on the telephone being transferred to many different departments where no one wanted to help. Now I can call 311 where an agent will take my information, send me an e-mail with a confirmation number, and I would get an e-mail with a resolution. This is truly a great example of how e-government can be useful.

I would like to see a future where e-voting can become part of American democracy. However, it seems like we have a long way to go before people will trust such a system. Even the government has issues with security. How will public administrators and governments solve the problems related to security while trying to innovate technology? Since information and knowledge hold such great power, how will we prevent the exploitation of technology for criminal purposes? The answers to these questions seem difficult to attain.


Brown, D. (2005). Electronic government and public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(2), 241–254.

Holzer, M., & Schwester, R. W. (2016). Public Administration: An Introduction (2nd Ed.). New York: Routledge.


Q 12/13-2. How could a public administrator reconcile their traditional role of neutral administrative competence with a leadership role?

In the modern workplace, administrators are expected to be competent. We should know the details of how to perform tasks properly and in compliance with applicable regulations. If we are in a position that allows discretionary decision-making, those decisions should be made ethically and without discriminating factors involved. Further, we should have the knowledge required to perform our jobs at the highest possible level. This role of “neutral administrator” is at the core of public administration. Laws and regulations are expected to be carried out in a fair manner. Adding leadership responsibilities does not alter this core tenet.

Given this expectation of competence, those of us who are in leadership roles should be expected to be competent leaders. This means that we should have appropriate knowledge of the different theories and styles of leadership style. Holzer and Schwester (2016) discussed trait theory, skills theory, style theory, situational leadership, and contingency theory, among others. A good leader is adept at blending these styles and theories as dictated by given circumstances. For example, during an office power outage, organizational leaders would use an authoritative style to give directions to staff regarding tasks that need to be completed to implement a contingency plan. However, they would also set an example by remaining calm and reassuring to staff that the situation is under control. The staff will likely remain calm as well and be ready to do what the leader asks. Leadership is never about the leader; it is always about the characteristics of the followers and how the leader adapts to each one.

An interesting aspect of leadership theory for administrators is the concept of expert power (Holzer, 2016). The distinction between elected officials and the bureaucracy is the expertise of the bureaucrats. As experts, bureaucrats should be viewed as respected community leaders who act with citizens’ best interest at heart.


Holzer, M., & Schwester, R. W. (2016). Public Administration: An Introduction (2nd Ed.). New York: Routledge.

Performance Measurement – Government Role

  • What role has the U.S. government played in promoting performance measurement in nonprofit organizations?

Many nonprofit organizations receive funding from the federal government. Since the increase in performance measurement by the government of their programs during the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations; there has been an increased need for nonprofits to measure performance. Federal programs are held accountable by the government. In turn, these programs that fund nonprofits must hold the nonprofits accountable for their performance if they are to continue to receive funding. This can have both positive and negative consequences for nonprofit organizations that depend on federal funding.

If both nonprofit and the government program funding it are performing well (within the standards set by the federal government), it is likely that both will receive continued or increased funding in support of the programs. This can be measured by comparing inputs to outputs (efficiency measurement) and program and outcome evaluations. For example, if a nonprofit is running a tenant rights program the nonprofit may measure how many tenants sign up for the program compared to the number of housing attorneys available to serve them (efficiency). They may also measure how many cases are brought against landlords who are illegally attempting to evict tenants that come to the nonprofit for help (outputs). Moreover, they might measure how many tenants in the program win the cases against their landlords (outcomes).

On the other hand, if the programs are not successful, the nonprofit may lose funding from the government program. This could happen if the programs are not meeting expectations or if poor performance measurement systems are in place. Further, if the federal government finds that many nonprofits receiving money from the same government program are not successful, they may cut funding to or end the government program. In that case, nonprofits would have to seek other funding sources to continue their related programs.

%d bloggers like this: