For a number of years, the greatest effort by the government to cut costs has involved reducing the number of local CFC zones. Each year, the government urges PCFOs to merge. Currently, OPM states on their website that there are 184 CFC zones – down from 355 a decade earlier. The immediate question, of course, is whether these mergers actually reduce costs.
The data invites doubt. According to the government, budgeted costs for the operation of PCFOs across the country were about $21 million in 2002. By 2011, the total had risen to $29.2 million, a rise of more than a third. As a percent of money pledged, costs rose from 8.9% in 2002 to 10.7% in 2011. It is reasonable to wonder, of course, if these costs would have been even higher if the number of PCFOs had not dropped.
However we sort out the budgetary impact of mergers, the reduction of zones may be affecting CFC operations in a second important way. Campaign statistics suggest a correlation between the number of zones and the participation rate of federal employees. The numbers are disturbing.
Here are two charts using government data:
However we sort out the budgetary impact of mergers, the reduction of zones may be affecting CFC operations in a second important way. Campaign statistics suggest a correlation between the number of zones and the participation rate of federal employees. The numbers are disturbing.
Here are two charts using government data:
 |  |
The question that leaps off the page is whether the effort to reduce the number of zones is actually undermining participation.
As with other forms of charity fundraising, giving in the workplace is tied to person-to-person contact. When we consolidate zones, we may be undercutting the efforts of paid staff and volunteers to engage federal employees. We have heard that donors drop off when the CFC office down the street disappears and a new team, possibly many miles away, takes over. The data certainly suggests as much.
So, we’re interested: Are those of you who are actually running the program across the country seeing the same thing? If you have been involved in a merger of zones, have you seen the costs drop? Have you seen a loss of donors?
Is anyone else worried that the law of unintended consequences may be in control? Or, put another way, if the CFC were a business, would we really be closing our sales offices?
As with other forms of charity fundraising, giving in the workplace is tied to person-to-person contact. When we consolidate zones, we may be undercutting the efforts of paid staff and volunteers to engage federal employees. We have heard that donors drop off when the CFC office down the street disappears and a new team, possibly many miles away, takes over. The data certainly suggests as much.
So, we’re interested: Are those of you who are actually running the program across the country seeing the same thing? If you have been involved in a merger of zones, have you seen the costs drop? Have you seen a loss of donors?
Is anyone else worried that the law of unintended consequences may be in control? Or, put another way, if the CFC were a business, would we really be closing our sales offices?
RSS Feed