Because, all those time-sucking “vote for my cause” competitions should be in one big place, right?
Awww yeah!
Reasons we love them:
1. Popularity contests are fun.
2. Crowd-sourcing philanthropy is innovative.
3. Particularly clever orgs can game the system.
4. Celebrity spokespeople influence votes.
5. Corporations can align their brands with charitable causes.
6. The nonprofit sector is too collaborative and should be more competitive.
7. Makes your “communications coordinator” running social media accounts so happy to post about it all day long for weeks.
Reasons we hate them:
1. Popularity contests are unseemly.
2. Crowd-sourcing philanthropy is wrong.
3. Particularly unscrupulous orgs can game the system.
4. Celebrity spokespeople skew votes.
5. Corporations can cause-wash their brands with charitable causes.
6. The nonprofit sector should be more collaborative, and less competitive.
7. Makes your “communications coordinator” running social media so happy to waste hours posting about it instead of highlighting your organization’s non-contest-related objectives.
It’s your vote…historical & upcoming!
Squidoo Charity Giveaway
Ended: December 2008
Stakes: $80,000 in total
Squidoo for Charity
Target Bullseye Gives
Ended: May 2009
Stakes: $3 million
Target launches Bullseye Contest
Chase Giving Challenge
Date: Ended Jan 2010
Stakes: $5 million
Chase Community Facebook
eBay Community’s Favourite Nonprofits
Ended: July 2010
Stakes: $5000 to $15000
http://mynonprofit.ebay.com
CharityNetUSA: Pay It Forward
Ends: October 2010
Stakes: $5,000 in “nonprofit services”
http://www.charitynetusa.com
Joey’s Community Revival
Ends: October 2010
Stakes: $25,000
http://www.joeys.ca
Yahoo!Canada Thanksgiving Challenge
Ends: October 2010
Stakes: $10,000
Yahoo!Canada Facebook
AVIVA Community Fund Competition Canada
Ends: October 2010
Stakes: $1,000,000
http://www.avivacommunityfund.org
@StaplesTweets Follow For A Cause
Ends: October 2010
Stakes: $25,000
http://www.staples.com
The Stay Classy Awards
Ends: November 2010
Stakes $25,000 grand prize, $10,000 other categories
http://classyawards.stayclassy.org/awards
Pepsi Refresh
Ends: Ongoing grant cycles 2010-2011
Stakes: $5,000 to $250,000
http://www.refresheverything.com
Pepsi Refresh Canada
Ends: Ongoing grant cycles 2010-2011
Stakes: $5,000 to $100,000
http://www.refresheverything.ca
Member’s Project: Take Part
Ends: Current 3-month cycle November 2010
Stakes: 5 charities, $1 million dollars divided
Takepart.com
Connect with Sage Grant Contest
Ends: December 2010
Stakes: Grants from $500 to $5000
Sages Sponsors Fundraising Contest
The People’s Millions
Ends: 2010
Stakes: £3.6 million
http://www.peoplesmillions.org.uk
Kiani Foundation’s WinAVote.com
Ends: December 2010
Stakes: $5000 to $20,000
http://www.winavote.com
Giant Tiger 50
Ends: March 2011
Stakes: $50,000 to one of 5 national charities
http://www.gianttiger.com/50/vote/en/
Wind Mobile Best Conversation Ever: Charity Challenge
Ends: March 2011
Stakes: $500,000 in total, grants of $5,000 to $50,000.
http://bestconversationever.ca/charitychallenge
The Jubilee People’s Millions
Ends: Voting begins 2011
Stakes: 60 awards of up to £60,000
http://www.peoplesmillions.org.uk
The Keg: Thanks a Million 40th Anniversary
Ends: Winners to be announced June 2011
Stakes: 40 grants at $25,000 each
http://www.thekegthanksamillion.com/en
Kiehl’s Gives
Stakes: Unclear – Contest rules are not listed yet just $160,000 to be awarded to 24 charities depending on number of Facebook likes to three different “causes” – Children / Environment / AIDS
http://www.kiehlsgives.com/
Found new ones? Add them in the comments!
Uh, I made this blog on a PC. So it’s a bit crap. Like real people. 
Thanks for highlighting this issue.
When I first learned of this technique, I was concerned about how it pitted one charity against another. Then I became excited and interested in supporting the causes I believed in.
As the trend has continued, I have again become concerned. I do not believe that participating in these competitions is a good use of time and resources for a charity or its donors and supporters. Time that could be used to support the cause such as pursuing gifts that have better odds. I also think the contests are a shortcut for corporate donors to get publicity for being seen to be supporting the charitable sector without really doing the work required to be good corporate citizens. They should be doing some legwork to determine which causes they support and that make an impact upon the communities they serve or the broader interests of the country or the world.
For charities, it’s tough to turn down the big dollars being waved around but I think it’s best if they stop participating and that this trend comes to an end. The charitable sector could be more competitive but these contests aren’t the type of competition that helps to make our world a better place to live.
Yep, spending a lot of time in the social media sphere rallying supporters may not cost you $ in materials, but it sure is $ in time!
Great post Claire – having submitted our idea for the Aviva Fund I’ve been thinking “is this really worth it”? – oh… and will you vote for us… LOL… idea #5725
Of course I’ll vote for you!
James is right that these contests can be a cheap and somewhat lazy way for institutional donors to distribute their funds and secure publicity. But it was ever thus. Some funders, in particular corporates and some individuals, have always sought to ensure that their philanthropy was widely known. Social media simply lets them do this faster, cheaper and arguably better.
I wouldn’t discourage charities from joining in such ‘beauty parades’ (and I use that term disparagingly), but I would encourage them to:
1. focus only on those contests directly relevant to them
2. don’t invest too much staff time in them
3. pass the voting and promotional work to supporters, especially those influencers active in social media
4. accept that this approach to philanthropy has not peaked: can you imagine how many more votes we’ll be bombarded with as the mobile web takes over?
Good point about SMS & the mobile web – thanks to the opportunities in that space I agree that we’re going to see companies jumping on the bandwagon to sponsor many more of these.
And another one:
http://www.staples.com/sbd/cre/marketing/twitter-follow-for-a-cause-charity
Feel free to add it to the list.
I generally discourage participation in these efforts, for many of the reasons stated in the post and by the comment-eers before me.
I would add that the more of these I see, the less trusting I am of the companies running them. It was helpful to see the Pepsi Refresh dissected in many forums. It is foolish to think that every one of these ‘beauty parades’ (like it!) works under the same structure and principles, that they all have an intentional commitment to privacy and to security of the data collected, as has a Pepsi that has had to throw the curtains back and defend itself. As EDs or DoDs, we should never presume that one company has made a commitment to our constituencies that is as valued and treasured as our own.
My cynical me comes out now. Personal identity information has cash value. How much is each e-mail address and name worth in terms of the company’s marketing budget? $4? $6? Now they’ve got volunteers and npo staff doing their legwork, reducing the per record acquisition cost. Given the increasing difficulty organizations find in actually winning these things (there’s good info out there on how an npo has to carefully time its entry into the ‘parade’, build the sustained momentum during the phases of the competition, and use media outside of the social to win), WHY are we helping the corporations do this on our good names?! The company running this contest is going to use these collected addresses to send e-mails about their products (unless there is a very unusual opt-out opportunity up front), and they’re going to do it better than most nonprofits can — your organization’s message has just landed in a diluted pool of messaging, all fighting for attention.
I’ve unfriended Chase, Pepsi Refresh and all the other contests because they are gleaning info from Facebook profiles. There is no perfect way to keep my personal information out of all databases, but I’m sure not going to help my constituents into them.
Companies do seem to get more out of these partnerships (participant data, brand recognition, etc.) than the individual orgs get in the end. I wonder how many charities realize the true dollar value of their brand to companies looking for these kinds of opportunities.