CORPORATE CONTRIBUTORS
CAPITOL CONNECTION
If you expect them to please you, know how to say “thanks. ”
Corporate America makes billions of dollars in charitable contributions annually. Very little—almost an unmeasurable sum —goes to America’s fire service in spite of shrinking public funding and this nation’s persistently high fire death rates. (See box.)
Why? Is it the growing number of fire service groups seeking private funding? No, there’s plenty of money to go around. Some foundations must —by federal law—contribute hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Is it that foundations, industries, and large corporations don’t see life safety as a priority? Some don’t. But those that do and try to help risk criticism from the fire service. It’s no wonder more industries are not willing to take that risk. Another reason for the lack of funding is that many fire officials don’t know how to ask; in some cases, they won’t ask; and in other cases, they do not know how to say “thank you.”
Above all else, the fire service has a fundamental problem with fund-raising—attitude. Some observers label the problem “ethics.” They ask.
“Should the fire service accept money from companies whose processes, products, and services are associated with fire losses?” Often they fail to raise the more realistic ethical question, “Can a fire official ethically refuse private resources that might lead to saving lives and property from entities engaged in entirely lawful businesses?”
This question is presented with a particular urgency, since fire service budgets at all levels of government are being cut heavily. Training, public education, sophisticated new services, and even basic fire suppression are all on the block.
In the public mind, crime is a far higher priority than fire; and although I have not seen surveys to support the notion, environmental protection— clean air and water—also is likely to be more important to a tapped-out public than firefighting. And so not only are there fewer public dollars to go around, but according to my sources the fire service in many communities isn’t competing for them as effectively as they did before.
In some jobs, if the boss doesn’t give you the resources, then you can sit back and relax. Fire officials don’t have that choice. Federal labor law makes a fire chief personally responsible for sending only trained personnel into danger. If a city council cuts training funds, the chief still is tin the hook. Hut even if federal law were silent on the matter, I can’t imagine any chief in this nation allowing someone to die because of a budget cut. Even the poorest urban departments, which are faced with incredible fire and fiscal problems, somehow manage to respond.
Most fire departments depend on taxation. Some still operate strictly on contributions, although it takes a lot of spaghetti dinners and bingo games to buy even the smallest pumper. A very few departments charge membership fees —providing protection only to property owners who join up for the services.
ATTITUDE A PROBLEM
T he fire service’s reluctance to seek help from nontraditional, private sources, however, seems to be based on attitude. The professional fundraisers at universities, hospitals, churches, and other institutions know how to say, “Thank you, we will do our best to put your gift to good use.”
How does the fire service say “thank you”?
“I’d take money from the devil himself if it meant I could save a life. ” What is that supposed to be, the moral high ground? You hear it all the time from fire officials who have accepted grants from the tobacco, chemical, insurance, and alcoholic beverage industries. To the corporate ear, it sounds like, “We think you are terrible, but we’ll take your money, since no one else will give us any.” Sometimes, you even hear, “I’ll accept the money, but let’s not talk about it too publicly.”
That’s like the handsome young man saying to your daughter, “You have a great personality and I like being with you, but would you mind walking on the other side of the street so no one will know we are together?” It’s no surprise that corporations aren’t lining up at the door to help out the fire service, either.
Truthfully, a few savvy fire officials know how to be gracious and how to say “thank you.” As a result, they enjoy multiyear support from corporate and foundation sources.
THE DEFINITION OF “THANK YOU”
How much thanks does a private corporation or foundation deserve? That’s up to you. Remember, however, a fire official is not and should not feel compelled to support or oppose legislation or endorse any product because of a grant. No private sponsor should ask for such things, and a “deal” should not in any way be implied. But some limited quid pro quos do seem appropriate. Fire service organizations accepting private grants should:
- Do the work they promise. Some fire service organizations, particularly at the national level, have terrible reputations for performance under grants and contracts.
- Be willing to listen to—not necessarily agree with—their benefactors. Some fire officials have learned a lot about hazardous-materials transportation from chemical companies and transportation industry officials.
Be willing to say “thank you” publicly. Some contributors don’t want much public recognition, but if you are strong enough to ask, be strong enough to say “thanks.”
The bottom line—and believe me, we are talking about the bottom line here — is that the fire service needs private resources, should be able to attract them, and needs to be gracious about receiving help when it is forthcoming.
