That is a funny video.

In terms of open solutions – please don’t spread the FUD that free and open source software necessarily requires in house technical expertise in a way that other solutions (like yours) don’t. As a general rule, it is not true. There are certainly some examples where it is true. And there are many others where it is not true (I’d betcha a bunch of money that Firefox takes less technology support that IE). In the specific realm of CRM/Fundraising, there are at least two free (not completely open source because they depend on commercial frameworks) CRM/Fundraising tools that are very easy to work with – eBase and Organizer’s Database – and these could easily be used by folks who are using Excel spreadsheets.

Both commercial and free and open source software range widely in usability and need for technical support. I’m sure that your package is a good fit for some organizations. And other organizations might find that CiviCRM, for instance, a better fit. It all depends on the individual set of needs and resources available to an organization.

Here at DonorPerfect, we’re actually quite happy that Blackbaud made this move- it further positions us as the only alternative for robust fundraising software- whether installed or SaaS- that’s moderately priced and has the sophisticated features and support that non-profits require.

Also, in reference to the title of this article, “Time to find a fundraising solution that can’t be bought.” – we’re simply not going away. We are one of the only larger companies that have succeeded the old fashion way- without venture capitalist money or outside investors. We put our customers, employees and partners first- not some wealthy VC partner or Mutual fund owner.

As for open solutions, Charlie is correct- the majority of non profits do not have the dedicated resources to implement an open source solution or even something ‘low-cost’ such as Access or Excel. Instead, they will have to rely on consultants, or unfortunately volunteers. In the end, their ‘free solution’ is not only NOT free, but more expensive in terms of real dollars spent on implementation and lack of functionality that hinders their growth.

Perhaps one day we’ll get there, but in my 15+ year experience, the level of tech resources in non-profits have stayed the same, and I don’t think it’s likely to change.

In the end, I think it’s always better to focus on core competencies. This means non-profit staff should focus on mission and fundraising and outsource technology to those that live and breathe it every day.

-Jon Biedermann
Vice President
DonorPerfect Fundraising Software
blog: http://www.donorperfect.com/dpoblog

Charlie brings up an interesting point – the number of customers that Blackbaud has pales in comparison to the leagues of nonprofits who use other solutions. Charlie is from Mission Research, which also provides a CRM/Fundraising product, and his question is a good one – what do I want CRM vendors to be? I’m an advocate of free and open source software, but I’m not overly dogmatic – I do think that at least for a while (and maybe a long while) there is a place for commercial software in the ecosystem. In fact, I think it’s good that there is – it provides the bar that FOSS needs to be able to jump. The more good, and reasonably priced (which Mission Research’s offering is) packages that are out there, the better. And, he is right – lots of nonprofits don’t have in-house tech staff – so there will need to be good, easy to implement commercial options until FOSS CRM options are as easy to implement as Firefox or Open Office (there are a couple of those, by the way – eBase, which is no longer in development, unfortunately, and Organizer’s Database – both however, dependent upon commercial, proprietary platforms)

And also in terms of what kind of vendor – it’s not free as in “beer” that matters the most (although it’s helpful), it’s free as in “libre” – all aspects of “libre” – open standards, open APIs, and, ultimately, open source.

But in terms of the overall issue, my point remains. If nonprofits want to be able to implement CRM/Fundraising solutions (or any software solutions, for that matter) that cannot be taken away from them, or have the terms under which they use them change without their control or consent, there have to be open source alternatives. And the way to get FOSS alternatives is for organizations, foundations and others to invest time and energy into those options.

I don’t know anything about Click & Pledge, and what their “custom open source CRM” is, but if it is SaaS (that is, Software as a Service) then it doesn’t quite fit as a truly open source solution. Terms of use can change without notice or control. However, SaaS (like Salesforce or eTapestry) is truly a great option for many organizations, and I’m glad they exist.

Jim

I understand that in the past they bought GiftMaker and it is no longer in the market place but it is much more likely that they will lose eTapestry’s client base if they get rid of that product rather than them migrating to an existing Blackbaud product such as The Raiser’s Edge. Blackbaud have said that eTapestry will remain a wholly owned subsidiary and continue to operate as such.

There are definitely instances where companies buy up competitors to simply shut them down but I am not convinced that this is such a case.

David Zeidman

So what are all the others doing? Access, Excel, custom stuff, and a smattering of other vendor applications. There’s definitely room for an open source effort, but it needs to match the realities of the nonprofit world: most nonprofits don’t have the benefit of in-house techies, most don’t like their data out on the web, and most can’t afford thousands of dollars or hours.

So my question to you and your colleagues, from our perspective, is what do you want us to do? What kind of vendor would you like us to be? APIs? Free software? Web APIs?