How can you conduct marketing and fundraising ethically?

Farra Trompeter: Welcome to the Smart Communications podcast. This is Farra Trompeter, co-director and worker-owner at Big Duck. Today we’re gonna ask the question, how can you conduct marketing and fundraising ethically? And I am delighted to have three guests with us today that all share a connection to Girl Scouts of Greater New York. Now, I am particularly excited about this because over 20 years ago I actually got to do a project when I was at another agency called Donor Digital, where we helped Girl Scouts of the USA figure out how to do online fundraising. And this was 20 years ago. So here we are, full circle moment. I’m excited to be in this conversation and I’m joined by Karen, Lindsey, and Sasha.

Farra Trompeter: Karen Lundgard, she/her, is the Interim Chief Executive Officer for Girl Scouts of Greater New York, where she oversees several key teams including finance, product (which is cookies), property, operations, programs, and marketing and communications. With over 20 years of nonprofit experience, she has built new summer camps, rigorous youth leadership experiences, STEM programming, and more. Karen makes sure that these projects not only meet their programmatic goals but attract and retain critical funding as well.

Farra Trompeter: Then we’ve got Lindsey Cosgrove, she/her. Lindsey is a versatile nonprofit leader with experience in strategic planning, fundraising, board relations, strategic communications, volunteer management, and revenue generation. Last year, Lindsey joined the team at Greenwich House as the 120-plus-year-old settlement house’s first-ever chief of staff. Before joining Greenwich House, Lindsey most recently served as Chief Strategy officer at Girl Scouts of Greater New York. Over her eight years there, Lindsey raised millions of dollars, facilitated two strategic planning processes, guided marketing, public relations, and external communications, and transitioned the Girl Scout Cookie Program in New York City, the organization’s flagship program and largest revenue source, to a primary e-commerce business model.

Farra Trompeter: And finally, we have Sasha Prado who uses she/her/ella pronouns. Sasha is the senior manager of major gifts at Robin Hood, where she partners with philanthropists to raise funds and awareness for New York City’s largest poverty-fighting organization. Before joining Robin Hood, Sasha was the senior director of advancement and major gifts at Girl Scouts of Greater New York, where she led fund development activities including major and individual giving and capital fundraising. Sasha is a certified fundraising executive or CFRE and has served in fundraising and event management roles at Transportation Alternatives, The Doe Fund, The Village Voice, and several New York City nonprofits through consultancy work. Sasha, Lindsey, Karen, welcome to the show.

Lindsey Cosgrove: Thanks, Farra.

Sasha Prado: Thanks.

Karen Lundgard: Thanks.

Farra Trompeter: So all three of you worked together in developing and supporting Girl Scout Troop 6000, which was specifically designed to serve girls and women living in the New York City shelter system. I’d love to start with each of you sharing your connection to Troop 6000 so our listeners can get a better sense of what perspective you bring to this conversation. Lindsey, let’s start with you.

Lindsey Cosgrove: Thanks, Farra. When we talk about our connection to this program, and I’ll speak for my colleagues, the word connection to me means like my first interpretation is the emotional connection to this work, which I feel like is kind of an important place to center us. So I’ll talk about my professional connection to it in a minute. But in the bigger picture, I got into the nonprofit sector to create opportunities for kids as I know my colleagues did to varying degrees. This program is a beautiful example of what a nonprofit can do to provide opportunities in a space where there just weren’t any before. Troop 6000 was an opportunity to take the cache of a hundred-plus-year-old, highly recognizable brand, create something wholly new and also not new at all. And it really kind of captured the imagination of thousands of people all over the world. And that’s kind of why we’re speaking today.

Lindsey Cosgrove: My role in that at first as a fundraiser: I helped build the first budget for the program when it had zero kids in it, but we were dreaming of days where we had thousands and did a lot of the initial fundraising and then eventually was helping to kind of shepherd and manage several moments of viral media attention, including the biggest cookie sale we ever had during the pandemic and a lot of attention that came from that. So that was my role, but we wanna kind of stay centered as well in our connection to the work and the kids that we’re gonna be referencing and talking about in this conversation.

Karen Lundgard: Yeah, Troop 6000 started off in one shelter and really, really quickly gained traction. As Lindsey spoke of the uniqueness and the magic that was around it, the staff and the volunteers across the organizations really just were recognizing the uniqueness of this and the impact and the city saw the value as well. They obviously saw the value that we were having in these shelters. And at that point we were offered a million dollars in funding to expand. And at that time I was Girl Scouts of Greater New York’s vice president of programs. We were in the midst of a CEO transition. Both the outgoing and the incoming CEO sat me down to ask me if I could lead the expansion. And I believe the ask was something like, “500 Girl Scouts in six months.” Obviously, all of us coming from nonprofits know how many projects you have on your plate at any given time and so I was reluctant. This was a huge undertaking, especially given that tight timeline, but I knew this was something unique and that we needed to seize this opportunity and so I worked to help build that first expansion in iteration and built the original team.

Farra Trompeter: Well thanks Karen, that was helpful. And what about you Sasha?

Sasha Prado: So I grew up in Manhattan and I was a girl member of the New York City Council. All three of us were Girl Scouts at some point or another. And after several years professionally at New York City-based nonprofits, I joined the fundraising team at Girl Scouts of Greater New York. One really unique aspect of this program is that the council subsidizes a hundred percent of a Troop 6000 members’s participation. So that includes your dues, uniforms, and badges, costs for trips and activities. And I was part of the original fundraising team when Troop 6000 initially launched, and I worked on raising restricted funds from individual donors and I managed a portfolio of major donors to support the program.

Farra Trompeter: Well thank you. That’s helpful. And just to zoom back out for a moment, I have enjoyed for the past few years being on the planning committee for the Association of Fundraising Professionals Fundraising Day in New York. And I was delighted last year we had a big call for session ideas and the three of you submitted a session idea, which is the topic we’re having today. And I got to see you actually present this content in June 2024. And in the presentation around this whole thing about being ethical with marketing and fundraising and telling the story of Troop 6000, you started off with two video clips: one from news coverage in 2017, close to when things first got started, and then one more recent from 2023. And there was quite a journey you went on through navigating press coverage and marketing of Troop 6000, moving from exploitation to celebration. Now unfortunately, we haven’t figured out how to bring those video clips in in a way that would make sense for people, but we will link to those if they are available. And I would love it if you could talk about what challenges you had and issues you saw that inspired you to take a more proactive stance with media and donors. Lindsey, you wanna start us off on this one?

Lindsey Cosgrove: Sure. And for anyone listening, if you wanna baseline your kind of instincts around this kind of work, pause the podcast here and go watch those videos back-to-back and see what you see. Because one of the things about Troop 6000 and programs like it that engage young people in really emotional, motivating ways is that you have to look hard to see what’s wrong. And what we’re talking about today is to develop those instincts to listen and to watch and make sure you’re always being conscious of how the kids and the program at the center of the story are being represented and involved. It really took us over a year of running this program to finally recognize we weren’t comfortable with the way the program and the families at the center of it were being covered and that we had the agency and the ability to do something about that. So we developed a guide to responsible reporting and some other kinds of practices and tools to guide media and donors as well on how to think and talk about this work. And for the purpose of Fundraising Day, we distilled some of those best practices into a couple of points for folks to remember and to think about this in the context of their own fundraising, writing, and practice.

Lindsey Cosgrove: So the first one is to always use person-first language to put someone’s humanity in front of the situation that they’re in. So in this case, there were a lot of headlines at the beginning of the work of Troop 6000 saying “Homeless Girl Scouts, homeless Girl Scouts.” And that’s not putting the Girl Scouts’ humanity first. So we wanna be seeing “A Girl Scout Experiencing Homelessness.” And the same thing with “A Family in a Family Shelter.” That’s like really important to place humanity first always.

Lindsey Cosgrove: And then the second one is using empowering images. In any kind of nonprofit, you want to use images when you’re fundraising that show the kind of client or customer or people or community you’re serving, receiving that service, and the joy that it brings them, instead of showing the problem itself and depicting the problem itself. You wanna show the folks you serve in an empowered state. And that was a really variable thing in the beginning of this program as we were seeing coverage. There’s one particular example that I feel like is the best one to draw from which people can Google or if we can link to, which is Teen Vogue shoot taken by professional photographers. But if you look at the photos, the Girl Scouts in some cases look stressed. They look like they need protecting. And so while the photos might be artistically beautiful and kind of depict something about their experience, the girls didn’t always look empowered and that’s not what we wanna see. So we got better and better at advocating for the imagery being used to be empowering and powerful ’cause these kids are powerful and they are in community with their sister Girl Scouts and that’s what we wanna show the public. So I encourage people to check that out. Sasha, I think you’re gonna talk us through the next two.

Sasha Prado: Yeah. We also wanted to be really intentional with our approach to fundraising. And that included the language we used in donor communications. It was important to tell a compelling story about this program while being cautious about not exaggerating or sensationalizing the circumstances the Girl Scouts were facing. For example, we’re a hundred-year-old organization, so we have like a great rich history. And a lot of the early language we had would include lines like, “Often a trip to Girl Scout Camp is a member of Troop 6000’s first opportunity to spend time in nature”. As a native New Yorker, that line just isn’t accurate. There’s over 28,000 acres of parks across New York City’s five boroughs, not counting Central Park. So a stronger, more factual statement would be, “Often a trip to Girl Scout Camp is a member of Troop 6000’s first opportunity to see the stars at night unobstructed by streetlights.” That line is not only the truth but also sets up the vision the donor or funder can help us achieve with their support. We also recognize that there is value in being specific about some of the challenges the people we serve are facing. Potential donors and supporters that you’re speaking to, either verbally or via writing through grant proposals or donor letter appeals likely do not have direct experience with what your clients are facing and may fill in gaps with their own assumptions. Sharing and citing data in our proposals and solicitations was helpful with combating stereotypes and correcting assumptions. For example, the term “homelessness” is often associated with more visible forms of homelessness, such as the experience of single adults living on the street. Despite their lack of visibility. Families with children continue to be the largest segment of those experiencing homelessness: about 72% in New York City. There can also be a misconception that homelessness is caused by a person’s unwillingness to work, a lack of skills or education, and their laziness. The data’s out there that shows the primary causes of family homelessness in New York City include domestic violence and a lack of affordable housing in comparison to their wages.

Farra Trompeter: Thank you. And before we go to the next question, I wanna note that links to videos, photo shoots, everything that we’re hearing Sasha and Lindsey and Karen talk about. We will link to from the transcript for this conversation, at bigduck.com/insights. Now I’d love to move a little bit more into some tools and processes so that our listeners out there, if they are experiencing the same challenge, if they’re questioning the language, the approach to imagery, the overall ways that they’re communicating or fundraising about their programs, I wanna make sure there’s things they can take from this conversation. You all had so many great ideas and gems from that session and I’m wondering what are some tools or processes you’ve used to address problematic language or images in marketing and fundraising contexts? Lindsey, you mentioned a few moments ago the idea of developing a guide for responsible reporting. So maybe you can start off by explaining what that is and the impact it’s made and then we can hear some other ideas from you and from Karen.

Lindsey Cosgrove: Yeah, absolutely. So once you’ve got your kind of internal machine using person-first language and empowering images and avoiding exaggeration and being specific about challenges, you realize that you’re not the only ones talking about what you’re doing and you have to try to guide the media and prevent those issues from coming up from other voices. So the guide to responsible reporting that we created was a really important step for that. It’s an email, it sounds like a lofty thing: It’s a PDF and an email. It’s really just a set of instructions and reminders that we send to reporters anytime we were going to work with them. Importantly, we send them to reporters, we send them to any producers or camera staff. We also bring them printed on-site. You have to have the reminders with you constantly. You can’t rely on anyone to read anything in advance. So we do send it, but being really kind of preventative and proactive about that was key.

Lindsey Cosgrove: And Karen’s gonna talk about some other aspects of that kind of like prevention and guidance. I’ll just add too that one thing that was unique about Troop 6000 for us is that we had more people talking about Troop 6000 on social media than had ever been kind of present before. There were several, it seemed like every 18 months we were having these viral moments that we’re bringing unprecedented attention to our work and the program. And that means thousands of people are tweeting about the program. And there are kind of two major ways we address that in a similar vein. One was to have our Troop 6000 kind of homepage, girlscoutsnyc.org/troop6000 be a Bible for exactly the right language to use. And we would love to see when tweets would go viral and such, it would be using language stolen straight off the website and then we knew we were doing something right, that we were giving people the tools to speak about the program in the right way. And then also anytime Girl Scouts are in person and maybe confronted with folks who wanna post online about their experience, perhaps when they’re selling cookies, we would have signage up, “Know before you post” instructions about how to be respectful and how to tag us and how to kind of use the right language and all that stuff. Karen, do you wanna talk a little bit more about how that all worked?

Karen Lundgard: Yeah, absolutely. So on the programmatic end of things and dealing with our participants, we really needed to be vigilant about protecting them. So we, we’ve always set out to set clear boundaries with our participants in several ways. The first is, is it okay for them to be in public? Is it okay for them to be in the public eye? And this may seem like a simple first step is like media releases, but that’s such an important piece of this, especially for example, with us, we have a lot of participants coming from domestic violence shelters, and a lot of those cases they wouldn’t want their photos taken. They may have family members that they don’t want to see or know their location. So that first piece is so important is to set that first boundary and know if they’re okay and being public or not.

Karen Lundgard: The next is being really protective about locations themselves. We have to remember in this particular case, shelters are our participants’ homes. None of us would want our home location to be on the news. That piece seems to be one of the most difficult in dealing with the media, as Lindsey said: setting those boundaries, keeping that piece of paper, being very clear on there. And that’s such a piece of this that we seem to have to keep going back to. I think it’s just a part of reporting is the who, what, when, where, and that where part, it’s a tough habit for a reporter to break. And then we also wanna empower them. We wanna empower them to control these interviews and stick to questions that they’re comfortable with and their reality and their story and be able to tell it in a way that is empowering for them. And finally, it’s the staying vigilant. We have to keep following up even after all of that stuff, as Lindsey said, you bring the papers every time you do all the stuff, you have to always go back to when it actually does come out, read through it, and if necessary follow up over and over again. We see the locations still being published, we have to go back to that network, that paper and say we need you to remove it. But it’s that vigilance that’s so important in this.

Lindsey Cosgrove: I think that’s such an important aspect to call out as fundraisers, but also as professionals whose job it is to get media coverage for their organization. Your instinct is always to accommodate and say yes. That is always your instinct. And it took I think us all practice to get out of that habit enough to say, “No, you can’t shoot in a shelter. Are you still interested in doing the story?” Or like, “No, you can’t talk to this family but you can talk to this family. They’re really excited to talk to you.” Because they’re always members of our Troop 6000 community that are excited to tell their story. They’re super proud of where they come from. So we don’t need to challenge anyone to tell their story, we need to empower them, but there are always advocates and folks who wanna tell their story. But learning to say no over and over and over again is probably the most important lesson I think any of us have learned in trying to do this work.

Farra Trompeter: And I wanna pick up on that idea of learning to say no. And I think it’s one thing to say no to the media, to people posting on social, it’s another and also challenging to sometimes say no to donors. And I know Sasha, you’ve done a lot of great thinking and work to educate donors who particularly often ask for site visits, they want photos, they make other asks that may not be appropriate. And I’m just wondering how you navigated through that and any insights you have for our listeners.

Sasha Prado: Yeah, I really like to think of it as we’re all humans. We don’t like to be told no. So instead of a no, it’s about offering an alternative that makes sense for the donors as well as the program participants. So educating donors through the cultivation, solicitation, and stewardship cycle has been a really great opportunity for us to be creative. Generally, you wanna showcase a program to a donor by bringing them to an event. But realistically, as Karen and Lindsey said, bringing donors to a site or a shelter is not something we do. Their support is for the Girl Scout experience. So we chose to invite donors in to see that experience. We host an annual event, World Thinking Day, where Troop 6000 girls from all locations come together and share their findings, science-first style on the state of women across different cultures and nations.

Sasha Prado: That event was a great way for donors to see firsthand the impact of their investment and allowed for a chance to interact with the Girl Scouts while not exploiting the participants. And we also make sure to tell the girls we have visitors coming who are really excited to hear about what you’ve been doing in Girl Scouts. We may not phrase them as we have donors coming, but being honest with the kids about like we have some new friends here who are excited to hear all about what you’ve been learning. Additionally, we’ve also made some intentional investments in providing support to Troop 6000 volunteers, both mothers and caretakers and community-based volunteers who serve as leaders for the troop. The licensed clinical social worker on staff would often host trauma-informed care trainings for leaders. These were also valuable instances where we could invite donors to attend.

Sasha Prado: In preparation for any of these events, we also made sure to communicate with the donors on best practices for engaging with program participants by teaching them the preferred language and types of questions to ask when visiting or attending an event like World Thinking Day. We would be pretty explicit explaining why the use of the word facility or site rather than shelter was preferred. Some kids, for example, may not be aware they’re in a shelter setting. We would also share examples of questions that would not be ideal. So for example, asking a kid “Where are you from?” could cause confusion because children move around so much before coming to a shelter, on average three times in New York City. So, we instead would recommend that they ask open-ended questions such as “What’s your favorite part of Girl Scouting?” or “What activity did you do at your last troop meeting?” And to further discuss Karen’s point, we’d be pretty explicit about the rules with taking photos and posting on social media. As a baseline, we require that no one posts live from a location for safety reasons in general. And we carefully make sure participants who should not be photographed or identified as such in a non-alienating way. So for example, we give girls who may have been experiencing domestic violence, a Girl Scout-themed or colored lanyard so we’d know not to post them on social while also not alienating the girls or making them stick out in the way that’s uncomfortable.

Farra Trompeter: I appreciate that. Doing fundraising and communications work more mindfully requires us to move at a slower pace, ask multiple people for feedback, and truly listen to what’s being shared. Lindsey, I’d love to start with you on this one and get into how doing this work has to actually start internally. We just spent a lot of time talking about external friends like our donors, the media, people who love us on social, but what about internally within our team, within our staff, within our culture: what are some things that we need to focus on there?

Lindsey Cosgrove: When we’re thinking about all this work, we’re talking about fundraising on behalf of or in service of vulnerable populations. And that can mean a lot of different things, but one thing we wanna be clear about is that in the power dynamics that are present in a fundraising and a media context, all children are vulnerable. That’s just the situation based on like hierarchy and society and that requires you to kind of think differently. A lot of the Girl Scout staff, for example, have varying degrees of familiarity with working with vulnerable populations. It’s not necessarily part of your youth development career. And so we all had different things to learn about working in service of, in this case, communities experiencing homelessness. And I know for me, I didn’t have any experience working on behalf of this population. And so it was important for me to first think about the biases and stereotypes that were in my own brain and to address what I was thinking before the way that I would speak would come out organically.

Lindsey Cosgrove: So if you wanna change the way that you speak, you have to start with noticing how you think and noticing your own biases. And that is the first step. The first step doesn’t involve what comes out of your mouth. The first step is what’s inside your brain. And then if you start to see yourself thinking in terms of breaking down those stereotypes, it really helps. It really helps with kind of bringing a habitual nature to your speech, especially with like person-first language. Sometimes that’s a really difficult habit to break. We’ve been saying like, “Oh look at that homeless guy” like our whole lives. You know though, for those of us who grew up in the eighties and nineties, there’s like cultural implications. Like there are reasons why we speak the way we do. And so breaking those habits is not only an intellectual exercise, it’s deeper than that. And so you kind of have to ask yourself to notice the way you think and then you’ll start to notice the way you speak.

Farra Trompeter: What do you think, Sasha?

Sasha Prado: I think exercising that self-awareness that Lindsey talked about is really necessary and recognizing that no one is an expert on the lived experiences of all people being served. And that’s okay. At the time of starting Troop 6000, I was one of the only staff members who had previously worked within a New York City homeless shelter. While I could bring perspective from that work, it didn’t make me an expert, since homelessness isn’t a one-size-fits-all all experience, having an open dialogue as fundraising and communications materials are developed with that in mind is key. And being willing to partner across the organization as Karen, Lindsey, and I did, along with our partners in the program team on an ongoing basis to pulse-check your decisions and your strategies as necessary.

Farra Trompeter: Let’s round it out with you. Karen, what are your thoughts on this one

Karen Lundgard: Going with this theme of coming from the programmatic background, my decision-making has always been centered around the participant safety and well-being. For example, you know when we’re leading things in Girl Scouts like swimming, archery, any other types of high-risk activities, we never think twice about taking the time and precautions necessary to keep them safe. But when we’re taking the time to educate media and donors about protecting those same participants, it can almost feel like we’re overstepping. Especially when you’re dealing with really highly trained professionals in the media or donors who are gonna ensure the sustainability of your program. And I think each time we think we’re pushing too much or asking too many questions, taking too much time, we just really have to remember and go back to that vigilance of the responsibility we have to these participants and who we’re serving.

Farra Trompeter: Well thank you, that’s helpful. Now Sasha, when we were preparing for this call, you said something that stuck in my mind, which was: “It’s never too late to do this, just because it hasn’t been done.” You all are seven or eight years into this program, maybe nine and you still have reflections and lessons and insights and I know there were changes you made right out the gate as well as changes you made, you know, year in year out. And for folks who are out there listening, what advice would you give to them? What steps can they take to start fundraising and communicating more ethically right away?

Sasha Prado: If you notice something in your materials that could benefit from a refresh, take the swing, edit the direct mail piece to make it include more person-first language. Add data points to support the need for your organization’s programming in a grant proposal. Model the behavior of using person-first language when speaking with donors you meet with. If you find successes with these changes, think of ways to adapt them and get buy-in by encouraging your colleagues to do the same. It’s easier to “tell” others about implementing a formal plan after you’ve taken a few opportunities to “show” how you’ve done that on a few occasions to great results.

Farra Trompeter: And another idea I had on as you were talking is I think again, we’ll show the two different videos you use. We’ll link to that in the notes, but I can even imagine taking an example from within your organization or from other organizations that are in your space and showing like Where’s Waldo or Highlights or all these things like find the wrong things in this image or this photo or this article and really encouraging people to be more critical and see what comes up. And that could even just be a simple exercise on a team just to get things to think more critically and then maybe even sometimes starting with other organizations can be helpful as a way in and then come back to your own, like “Let’s look at the the year-end of appeal we sent out last year. Is there anything we do differently now?” in an attempt to be more ethical and see what comes up in that conversation?

Lindsey Cosgrove: Some of the most valuable conversations we’ve had in finding the lines that we’re all comfortable with in some of this work is around watching your gala video independently first and then discussing it as a group from lots of different people in your organization with lots of different kind of identities and backgrounds so that you can have a fresh take and have independent thinking around those videos. Sasha and I dream of starting a consulting firm that’s just about giving a final edit on event videos so that we can just like meet a baseline of ethics in some of these videos, not redo the whole thing. It’s such an easy thing to skip. And one of the key things that it’s easy to skip in that context is remembering that if you’re doing your fundraising event correctly, your clients, your customers, the people you serve are in the room. And so if you have a script and you have a video for that event that doesn’t acknowledge that they’re in the room, that can’t possibly be comporting with your values and it’s also just really awkward and not good. You can have a script and you can have videos in your events that include your community that you serve as part of the audience. It is totally possible and it makes it so much more of a kind of community experience for the donors, the staff, the volunteers, the folks presenting in the room. It just puts everybody in the same category and it’s so often done that the community you serve is othered in that environment and there’s no need for it.

Farra Trompeter: I appreciate that. It’s very specific and I’m gonna see if you’ve got any other insights or advice you wanna share with our listeners. So that was just Lindsey who shared that hot tip. And what about you, Karen? Anything coming up for you as something that folks might work on?

Karen Lundgard: Throughout this entire experience, we received an outpouring of support. And while all really well-intentioned, we really had to double down on the mantra, “Is this mutually beneficial??” For example, we were offered in-kind goods from everything from sneakers to stuffed animals, even jars of honey. There was some really, really interesting offers. I have to say at first we said yes to everything because, of course, we wanted our Girl Scouts to have everything and to get everything they needed. But we really started quickly recognizing the challenges with some of this stuff. Some of our families wouldn’t even be able to store these items. We may not even have the infrastructure for distributing them. We’ve also had to have the same approach with funding and programmatic partners. Larger corporations offered things like financial literacy workshops or workplace visits. And while those are valuable, we know that our brand is valuable too. Corporations are receiving the benefit of aligning themselves with this impactful work and that needs to be compensated accordingly. So it’s really, really important that you recognize your worth and that every situation you’re getting yourself into it, there is some kind of benefit to your organization, to your participants. And just continuously going back to remembering the worth that you’re bringing to this,

Farra Trompeter: I love that. Throughout this, it’s a “yes and.” Like “Thanks, that’s lovely that you wanna give us these jars of honey. However, what would be even better is X, Y, and Z. Because let me tell you, these jars of honey are not gonna be opened up. This is not for Winnie the Pooh and all his friends, here’s what we need. Let me tell you what’s really needed and what would be helpful.” And I think, you know, sometimes having these conversations and saying, “No, I don’t need your printer that doesn’t work anymore. Please instead, can you give us…” This is something that we have to do. And I think there has been more awareness in the nonprofit sector, I think, of this tendency, and I don’t think it’s as big of a problem as it was let’s say 20 years ago, but it still is a thing. Where donors or corporate partners or media partners or whomever come to you with this idea and they think it’s great and you have to sort of educate them and say, “Actually know that’s not what we need. I really appreciate that you’re thinking of us. Here’s what we need instead.” And sometimes be willing for that donor to walk away or that partner. And that is better than doing something that is going to give you something you can’t use that’s gonna cause more problems for you, or even worse be offensive and alienating and stigmatizing. So I appreciate you speaking to that, Karen.

Karen Lundgard: Absolutely.

Lindsey Cosgrove: And the sector may be getting better at that largely, but individuals are the ones. We are turning around and saying, we’ve learned these lessons because we were navigating that all for the first time in the last like seven years. I think that’s right that we are getting out of a scarcity mindset a bit. But it’s like the 30-year-old director of major gifts who’s having to like have those conversations and you may be doing it for the first time. So if we can empower those fundraisers and marketers and program folks who are navigating this, that’s what we wanna do.

Farra Trompeter: A hundred percent and that’s why we’re having this conversation. So if you’re out there and you wanna donate, buy cookies, volunteer, or get involved with Troop 6000, you can visit their page on the Girl Scouts of Greater New York website. We will also link to that. You can also learn more all about Troop 6000 in a book written by Nikita Stewart called Troop 6000, the Girl Scout troop that began in a shelter and inspired the world. And of course, you can connect with Karen, Lindsey, and Sasha on LinkedIn. Again, we will connect to all of their profiles and you’ll be able to see all the links we’ve been talking about on the transcript at bigduck.com/insights. Well, Karen, Lindsey, Sasha, thanks again so much for being here with us today and sharing your insights.