The less you charge the more difficult the client. I'd charge double and make a donation to the cause. Not sure if that's tax deductible though.

Double?

Maybe browse this?

http://www.frivillighetnorge.no/

Or ask in a local library to find very small local groups?

I have done pro bono stuff to promote art and artists such as screen posters, make banners, layout logos and flyers etc. I do free graphics for the local rock and mineral society. But, they are very free with their assistance and advice to my son who now enjoys lapidary work as much as video games. I have charged only nominal fees from the Illinois River conservation organizations here in Oklahoma. I believe in what they are trying to do.

Nothing earth shattering or of lasting importance...

Good on you.. here's some things to think about:

Identify your cause. Are you into politics, aid work, the local arts scene?

Start networking, especially if it's local causes you're into. You mind find someone from your existing client base is also involved in charity work, can you do anything through them? Or if you're viewpoint is more global, get online, there's loads of volunteer networks out there, here's a couple:

http://www.volunteermatch.com.au/
http://idealist.org/

People may be posting their design needs on there.

Secondly, think about what you want to get out of it for yourself:
Are you looking for an opportunity to flex your creative muscles away from commercial pressures? Think hard about that because you're still offering a design solution to someone else's problem, regardless of whether there is a fee involved.
If you have an idea that's waiting for the right client to come along, why not get on and develop it anyway? If you open it up to collaboration (make it open source in other words) then probably the right recipient will come along through the glorious interconnectedness of the interweb.

Finally; fees...
If you're serious about offering specialist design services to the non-profit and charitable sector as a commercial venture (for want of a better word) or as a second revenue stream, then you should treat it like any other target customer base.. build a portfolio, make a name for yourself, look for ways to get on their rosters. research who commissions design regularly, and which agencies do the work; that will give you a taste of what might be involved. But even then, be prepared for marked differences in corporate culture from what you may be used to in a wholly commercial context – not least decisions by committee, politically correct considerations and stakeholder interest.

Alternatively, you mentioned fundraising. It's possible that you could approach your chosen cause with your great idea, and offer to raise your fee yourself – through normal activity like marathons or stunts or whatever, but be careful this doesn't just look like self interest. For most of Joe Public, justifying design fees would be a tall order, even heavily discounted ones. Better to look at where your chosen cause gets their funding from and make an approach to collaborate with one of their existing supporters (but make sure you have your cause's approval first). You could also think about match funding: both you and your cause agree to meet half of the fee each – they go to their supporters for the extra, you donate your time.

As for fundraising itself, look at the work that the people behind building letters (http://www.buildingletters.org/) have done. You could do something similar, that is to say, work out a way that your design skills could generate donations and build a system to involve the type community, in other words, get entrepreneurial. Forget taking a cut for yourself though.

Last but not least, to cover your costs if that is really important, work out what proportion of your working month you will spend on Pro Bono work, and hike up your normal fees to compensate.

It's extremely difficult to run an "ethical" business, because that's not the purpose of business.
It's the purpose of business to make a profit, and of government to regulate that process so that it's not too damaging.
Jane Jacobs discussed the mutual exclusivity of this relationship in Systems of Survival.

Self-regulation is corrupted by vested interests.

People ("consumers") part with their money for price, quality, or service; virtue (e.g. fair-trade organic) is a harder sell.
Given the difficulty, you need exceptional business skills to make a "good" business work, and you will always be putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage to those who play by the existing rules, or cut corners.

Therefore it is better for idealists to make a healthy income within the system, and use that wealth (and/or their professional skills) as 100% gift to idealistic organizations run completely by volunteers.

I would be wary of supporting "establishment" do-good organizations with salaried staff, because these organizations generally rely for their funding on sponsorship (from various corporate sources and government bodies), as well as having an infrastructure to maintain, both of which compromise their integrity. Having to meet a "quota" of sales or income is, as Jacobs argues, fundamentally non-ethical. IMO, grassroots shit-disturbers make the most difference.

"They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
For trying to change the system from within"
--Leonard Cohen

> you're still offering a design solution to someone
> else's problem, regardless of whether there is a fee involved.

Yeah, sometimes designers doing pro bono work assume that their client will give them complete creative freedom. But clients -- even pro bono ones -- expect you to come up with a design solution that they like and which effectively communicates their message. They don't care if it'll look nice in your portfolio or not, and they won't hesitate to say "I don't like that design."

So it's important to pick your clients carefully and to discuss expectations before you start work. Show them examples of your work to make sure they're comfortable with your style. Explain your working method. Find out if you'll be working with an individual or a committee. Ask them about their budget for things like photography, and ask who the printer is going to be and what the printer's expectations are (they may be printing the job for free or at a low cost).

And if you're expecting a lot of creative freedom, make sure they agree to that from the start of the project.

Creative freedom should be the last thing on your mind.
There's nothing that looks less convincing, for an altruistic cause, than a self-indulgent "creative" design.
Unless, of course, the work is targeted at one's peers, eg for an environmentally-friendly paper stock.
But those are the most sought-after clients, and unless you are an award-winner, hard to get.

> would be wary of supporting "establishment"
> do-good organizations with salaried staff...

I see your point, but don't most non-profits have some salaried staff?

If it's a just a yearly charity event, then it might be just volunteers, but if it's an organization that works year-round, they'll probably have some full-time staff and those people need paychecks to support their families.

...don't most non-profits have some salaried staff?

That's why I favor supporting volunteer activists directly addressing specific issues, rather than the institutionalized bureaucracy of fund-raising by non-profits.

Guys, I really apprechiate all this input. If I’ll take on pro bono projects, the last reason would be to get nice portfolio pieces. I do have some specific causes in mind and networking sounds like a good first step. I have to take some time to read carefully through all your answers.

It would be great to hear about or see examples of idealistic design projects you’ve been involved in, btw.

One thing you need to do before you get into this is research the seedy side of the non-profit world. There are just as many incompetents, scumbags, sleazeballs and sociopaths in the non-profit world as there are in businesses. Politicians set up charities run by their spouses as a way of taking bribes. Rich people start them to keep spouses busy and away from the pool boy. Technology corporations fund them as a way of bringing their products to the poor—they’re really just lobbying the government to help establish and expand monopolies. And when you have to deal with the legit non-profits they’re often staffed with crazy do-gooders who refuse to lose any argument because they’re convinced that they’re saving the world. So if you think focusing on non-profits is going to distance you from the disappointment of meaningless work, think again.

I stopped working with non-for-profits entirely after the last one I worked with would set up meetings between myself and the guy who ran it for which he rarely showed. The unpaid interns were supposed to deliver his instructions or files or whatever but never actually knew where any of it was.

A CIA operative, no doubt.
You're on file.

"I stopped working with non-for-profits entirely"

Good for you to generalize a bad experience into an overall policy....you don't seem cut out to work with crazy do-gooders....

And on all-volunteer groups vs. organizations with some or all paid staff (apart from board members, who must be volunteers in most western countries): apart from small or ephemeral groups, effective nonprofits have to pay their staff. Otherwise they can't achieve good scale of impact and sustain their efforts. The volunteers burn out, cash isn't available for things like office space, etc. Energy is spent but long-term impact is low.

The thing is is to look around at the nonprofits and see how much they spend on the mission and how much they spend on fundraising and everything else. ROUGHLY 20% on non-mission expenses is entirely normal. In some areas of work it's more, in some less. It's the same in the for-profit world - would we invest in a company whose CEO brags about never spending anything on sales, marketing or HR, and only on direct production? Such a company couldn't even get product to market.

...apart from small or ephemeral groups, effective nonprofits have to pay their staff.

You don't have to go large or long-lived, or corporatize, to be an effective activist.
You don't have to be "non-profit" -- what is that anyway? Not making money isn't the goal, it's no way to define what you're doing.

I'm fortunate to have spent many years working full-time for a not-for-profit educational and development organization whose overall purpose is to serve minority language communities (SIL International). It is very rewarding to invest my daily work in projects that help people. I feel like my work is leaving a lasting legacy - not for me, as fonts can often be unnoticed and taken for granted - but for the millions of people trying to hold on to their language and culture while becoming citizens of the information world.

The cost of this decision was not small, for me or my family. Because most of the funds given directly to SIL go to supporting development projects, most of the staff serve as unsalaried volunteers. We can do this because of a faithful group of friends and organizations who share our goals and provide financial support for our family. It takes significant effort to maintain this body of supporters, which obviously reduces my technical productivity - but also keeps me in touch with a lot of dear friends.

It is also possible, though, to have an equal (or greater) impact while working for normal for-profit companies. I think of a couple of former SIL colleagues who now work for large corporations but have, through those jobs, made life better for minority groups. They've helped their companies understand the benefits of broadening their character set support and provided technical know-how to do it.

We're also getting ready to unveil a new web site (ScriptSource) that will help link volunteers (designers and programmers) with font and software development needs. It would be a great way to find a project to contribute to. It's not public yet, but you can see where we're at by going to the ScriptSource web site. I'll be at ATypI in Dublin in case you wanted to chat about getting involved as a part-time volunteer with some project.

It's humbling and satisfying to be able to create beautiful things that also meet people's real needs.

Nick, "corporate" needn't be pejorative. It can mean well-organized, paying for experience, being willing to hire professional services as needed (IT staff, accounting, even designers), etc.

If we think that, say, human rights groups fighting discrimination should be exclusively done for free, there will be a big imbalance in our society with government and business being well-funded and having tools the nonprofits don't have. A few highly motivated activists with weak institutions will have a hard time achieving results. And what about helping homeless people or providing low-cost health services to poor communities (less of an issue in Canada but a big one in the U.S.). Only volunteers? It's hard to have sufficient scale and impact with all volunteers. They burn out (unless they are wealthy already w/o need for a "day job") and the organizations will tend to not have organizational structures in place to make best use of resources of donations (even donations of time from volunteers) due to burnout and turnover.

If there is an emergency or short-term crisis, yeah, volunteers can make a huge difference. But if we're talking about dealing with a long-term problems, we need long-term action. And if we're talking about advocacy against, say, well-funded corporations on an environmental or health issue, you usually have to pay some people to succeed. I think in Canada about 7% of the economy is from nonprofit activities and in the US a little more.

BTW, in most places "non profit" means that any money raised above costs must go back into programs that help people, rather than into the pockets of owners or investors. So if a nonprofit runs a surplus one year, they have to do something useful with it that fits their mission.

Good point that the phrase is lame - defining something by what it's not. Some other phrases that avoid that problem, but are not great either are "civil society organizations," "private public-serving organizations," and (for local groups) "community-based organizations." Also "private voluntary organizations," but that term is very misleading since a lot of PVOs have paid staff and only the board is voluntary.

A few highly motivated activists with weak institutions will have a hard time achieving results.

"Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have." -- Margaret Mead.

You should move to the UK so you can join David Cameron's Big Society! (Only kidding, everyone should be trying to get the hell out.)

Seriously though, I commend Frode. I too would like to do something that I felt made a difference somehow, though lately I question how much power there is to do this with design. I'm not really a business man, though I think lot's of people here are and I don't mean to be dismissive of that. Perhaps it's a lack of realism on my part, idealism. I could have gone and made money after school, I had the right grades, support etc., but I chose this profession and when it just resembles money making I wonder what the big difference is and why I became involved.

I understand why people here though are saying juice the affluent clients and make donations elsewhere, but IMHO that sounds a bit like trickle down wealth and I'm not convinced that works, the richest societies being the most polarised.

Redesigning charities etc. just doesn't seem that impacting to me, but then I guess I like to see quantifiable results and don't have much faith in value adding marketing in a media swollen world. Occasionally charities have strange successes though, such as the popularity of the much copied Livestrong wristband (Wieden Kennedy I think were responsible), though this was probably a huge deal in the first place. I guess you can be charitable with your skills to do things like tutoring (nominal fee or for free) and so on, perhaps not generating huge results either but it is still a noble thing to do.

Anyway, it all starts with good intention and working out how to pursue it, which I guess is why you are here and why I am responding. I too am interested to have some involvement.

Good for you to generalize a bad experience into an overall policy....you don't seem cut out to work with crazy do-gooders....

I did do a very bad job of painting with an overly wide brush there. What I meant to say what that I stopped volunteering for not-for-profits. And I wasn't attacking all of them as evil and corrupt, just pointing out that not-for-profit corporations can have the problems that for profit ones do, and that working for them is not necessarily any more satisfying.

I agree Dunwich Type.

Also, re 1985 mentioned, there's some movement toward "design thinking" in more non-profit groups.

Take a look at this:
http://www.ideo.com/work/item/human-centered-design-toolkit/

Not sure if this is the sort of design area in which Frode's expertise lies.

To clarify what I said previously, it was typography/graphic design as a realistic catalyst or factor in change that I was questioning, as opposed to perhaps product or industrial design which more obviously makes huge changes. For example the roundabout pump.

Of course good graphic design will aid anyone who invests in it, but exactly how much, I'm no longer sure.

As stated I'm not interested in nice portfolio pieces, neither am I interested in creative freedom. I don't view commercial design as less meaningful, in fact large parts of my religious and philosophical understanding of life is founded on creativity as something meaningful in itself.
That said, I hope whatever I'll take on will feel meaningful.

I'm not afraid of corruption, but vary of those meaning well but not necessarily doing good.

@Victor Gaultney: That sounds very interesting! I'd love to get in touch with you, but I'm not sure if I'll make it to Dublin this year. Could I contact you offline?

@ Andrew (1985): Thanks! I do believe there are many possibilities. Design (and art) can aid political influence, it can help spread crucial information about things like HIV/Aids, make products more effective, help develope written language for minorities ... and so on. I also understand your thoughts.

Thank you, guys! I'm still following the thread if someone wants to share experiences or advice.

Bravo, Frode! Much of the pro bono work I have done has been working with volunteers as clients. They have a day job, a family, and a charity to help. This means they have little time and may come and go. This can be tough on them and on you. Be patient and understanding of indecision and tardiness.

Feel free to contact me - there's a contact form on this site, or you can write to me at myfirstname_mylastname@sil.org

>It's the purpose of business to make a profit,

Uh, no. The purpose of a business is to create a customer. Profit may come or it may not.
And as customers, the not-for-profit sector is little different than anybody else. But it's a huge sector of the US economy, at least - and probably any developed nation, I would imagine.

Good luck with your efforts, Frode.

Rich

The purpose of a business is to create a customer.

Richard, you'll be telling us next that the purpose of sex is to make babies :-)

Frode, as some commercial said, "Just do it."

For what it it's worth, I have two prices: full, and free. Whatever a project, once you agree to do it, the satisfaction usually comes from your work, not the cause. Bad work for a good cause is still disappointing, and in my case, I found discounts lead to less than my best work. Your personality may differ.

I'll allow that with advancing yeas, I find work that supports a good cause -- however you select "good" -- something I'm not only willing to do, but interested in. It would be easier if we dealt with food, shelter, medicine. But we don't. There are still things, people, who can benefit from our talents, such as they may be.

@nick shinn

Actually, I should have attributed my statement to the guy who said it first (unless he ripped it from someone else): management and economics guru Peter Drucker.

How you look at a thing - especially the angle of view - makes all the diff. As true in business as it is in design!

@Charles: The reason I'm reluctant to free work is clients tend to have little appreciation for something they don't view as valueable, leaving them with no reason to honour your agreement.

Frode,

I'm a bit lost. If this happened, since the work was free, what agreements needed honoring? (& I must confess I haven't read the entire thread.)

In any case, this hasn't been my experience. I have had clients for whom I did some pro bone work, and the next project was full price. Admittedly, my experiences are a small sample size. Still, at some point you just have to choose when to donate your skills, or not.

It differs from project to project I guess, but I’ve had clients neglect their part of the deal: not delivering materiel on time, not honoring credit agreements, reusing material without permission, asking for a lot more than agreed upon ++

If it’s free they assume it doesn’t cost anything to give it away.