Deputized fundraising (DF) has been common among religious organizations for several decades. Yet it is rarely utilized outside the religious sector so it is almost never discussed in charitable giving literature.
For religious organizations, DF is a natural part of mission outreach—many people who are convicted by the mission want to support a missionary, and it is those people who feel directly connected to the organization’s work that are often its strongest donors.
Many other benefits can be mentioned, such as increased commitment to the mission amongst staff and a broader donor base that is more resilient to economic downturns. That said, there is a real cost to running a DF system, so an organization should only introduce it if it is willing to invest in its proper maintenance.
To understand the model, it is necessary to understand its practical implications, applicable IRS tax consequences, and employment considerations.
The basics of the deputized fundraising model
The idea of DF is simple: an employee of a tax-exempt organization is responsible for meeting certain fundraising goals, in addition to fulfilling his or her other roles.
Consider a hypothetical missionary, Michelle, who lives in LA and works for the charity, Faith in Hollywood. Most of her time is spent doing outreach through local parishes for which she is paid a salary, but she also committed to bringing family and friends on mission who could financially support the work of the charity. Their donations grow the total pool of resources from which her salary is ultimately drawn, which is the goal of DF.
The DF model can be broken down into three key elements:
The IRS tests
Over many decades, tax cases and rulings have distilled the requirements of a DF model into two tests:
Implementing deputized fundraising
Some nonprofits understandably find it tricky to translate these concepts into policies and practices.
Does Michelle think that to get paid more, she just has to raise more money? Do Michelle's family and friends think they are supporting her or Faith in Hollywood? Does Michelle think that when her time with the charity comes to an end, she can take the remaining monies she helped fundraise?
It is important for Faith in Hollywood to structure its operations carefully, otherwise the gifts will lose their deductibility status. The flow-on effects could be devastating for an apostolate heavily reliant on DF.
For best practices on this, see the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability’s article on DF and ensure you consult an attorney/accountant who is familiar with DF.
January 16, 2023 | Faith-based nonprofit organizations should recognize whether they are obligated to follow the requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
December 13, 2022 | Faith-based nonprofits will likely face more lawsuits and government actions challenging religious freedom after Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) repealing the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996. The RMA impacts faith-based organizations in two specific situations. Both relate to interactions between the faith-based organizations’ work and the state and federal government. The threats to faith-based organizations remain despite language in the RMA purporting to protect religious freedom. Both supporters and skeptics of the RMA agree that the RMA’s religious freedom language has no “meaningful effect.” Below are key questions and “known unknowns” related to the RMA’s impact on faith-based nonprofits.
November 22, 2022 | At first glance, the voting requirements in a nonprofit’s bylaws may not seem an exciting topic. Most nonprofits have not seriously considered their bylaws, perhaps because they have inherited old bylaws, copied the bylaws of another company, or even originated their bylaws from a quick internet search! If any of these scenarios applies to your organization, your organizations’ bylaws may include director voting requirements not tailor-made to your preferences or the specific needs of your organization.