Before and during a Planning Committee meeting, I did some thinking about
funding and financial models for NCF. These models are not necessarily
mutually exclusive, but some have policy implications. I think it would be
very useful for both the Development Committee and the Finance Committee
if the Board could make some decisions about which funding models we want
to pursue as an organization. Then the Board could do our job of passing
the required policy, and the other committees could get on with their
jobs.

Models:  

1) Altruistic model
We depend on the willing support of our members in sending donations. This
requires on-going reminders to members. The annual membership renewal
process can do this (supplemented by a few special fundraising events to
boost awareness and spirit). There is also the regular income from new
members. Based on this year's performance, we could expect about $10,000
per month from member donations. I recommend that the Finance Committee
attempt to give us a bare-bones base budget showing what kind of
organization and system we could run on $120,000 per year. 

2) Corporate Sponsorship
We solicit a small number of corporate and institutional sponsors, trying
to find organizations willing to support our goals to the extent of
ongoing sponsorships of tens of thousand of dollars. We have some such
sponsors already who have donated office space and equipment. To attract
others, we may have to adjust some of our policies to suit the sponsor.
For example, we might offer Board representation, or Web site space. Need
to establish good and continuing relationships with major sponsors. Need
Board members with good contacts and diplomatic skills. 

3) Government/Foundation Sponsorship
We have received start-up support from various levels of government.
On-going support may be possible, but will require lobbying, and grant
applications. Charitable status may help for some grant applications.
Policies reflecting government priorities may also be important in
attracting support (eg. language policy). This funding will almost
certainly be intermittent, so should only be used to fund specific
short-term projects with a fixed budget. Need volunteers/staff with
political connections and skilled at grantsmanship. 

4) Advertising model
We currently have a very small "advertising" component in the form of line
sponsorships. The Development Committee is investigating a possible
expansion of this model by allowing sponsorships of many other NCF
components. Under this model, we would have to have policies and
procedures that set a value on NCF components in terms of advertising
space. We would also have to be careful to control unpaid advertsing. To
maintain good relationships with many small sponsors, we would have to
make some changes to accomodate them such as organization memberships,
commercial use of NCF accounts etc. To maintain good relationships with
members, we would have to be careful to limit intrusive advertising.
Labour intensive. Need people who can sell ads. 

5) Membership fees 
Some other Freenets do charge a small membership fee. To date, the NCF
Board has opposed having any fees. However, given a choice between
continuing to operate with a fee or not continuing to operate, we may want
to change our minds. Such a change would require a major change to our
philosophy and mission statement. The transition would almost certainly
reduce the number of members, but the funding provided by members would be
more stable and predictable. Members would expect some improvement in
service as compensation - for example, removal of 2-hour time limits. Such
a change would offend some existing volunteers. 

6) Sell out 
Yuck. But if we can't run this thing ourselves, it might be of benefit to
our members to simply let another organization take over. If we're lucky
it might be another altruistic organization. If we're not so lucky, it
might just be an ISP looking to gain 20,000 new customers. 

Once the Board decides on which models we will follow, the Finance
Committee will have a bit better idea of how to budget the revenue. My
personal recommendation is to be very cautious in our predictions. Base
the budget on what we know we can count on in revenue. Then identify a set
of separate projects for improvements that would be explicitly tied to
extra revenue received. The Outreach Centre at St. Laurent Library is a
good example of this kind of budgeting. 


Richard Taylor
Board member and Secretary