A rose by any other name...

I'm moving in 2 days and woefully behind on my packing. This, plus several interviews (yeh!) is going to put a dent in this week's reporting, I'm afraid. However, I just came across something that deserves comment to the non-profit community, and my friends in fundraising in particular.

Last year, the Salvation Army took Greenpeace to court over a bequest--because the deceased donor in question had failed to update his will to reflect Greenpeace's new name. Wait, it gets better: there were 8 charities named in the will, each set to receive $33 million--and the Salvation Army was the only one to let greed cloud their vision. Greenpeace argued that the donor's intent was more important under Washington State law, and a judge appears inclined to agree. As, I imagine, are most reasonable people, some of whom do not appear to work at the Salvation Army.

This kind of behavior is what you expect of the worst of the corporate world, not of those who work to make the world a better place. Don't get me wrong--in fundraising especially you need to be more than an idealist. You need to be driven, professional, and watching the bottom line. But whoever authorized this lawsuit at the Salvation Army--and I imagine it goes all the way up to the executive director--should be hauled in the front of the board, along with the planned giving director and their legal counsel.

I've always enjoyed the collaborative and open nature of the fundraising community. We share ideas, we learn from each other, we recognize we're all out there for the greater good. Apparently some of us forgot that along the way. It's worth remembering.