The Institute for Nonprofit Organization Management at the University of San Francisco released a new report this week, "Successful Technology Use in Small Grassroots Nonprofits." (PDF Download)

One quote from a nonprofit ED really struck me. When asked how the organization paid for technology, the response was:

By hook or by crook. We haven't budgeted for it. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. But it is so important. A lot of people come to our website and it could be so strong...[Laughs] We will lay someone off. There's a lot to unpack in that statement.

On the one hand, I see this quote, and a lot of the report, as a call to the foundation community to help nonprofits invest in their infrastructure. We can't do our work without the appropriate tools, but no one -- individual donors included -- wants to pay for it.

On the other hand, I can't believe that anyone wouldn't budget for technology. If you know me at all, you know that I love to hate Dr. Phil. So to borrow one of his phrases, "You have to name it to claim it!" How does an organization expect to raise funds for technology when it's not even a part of the budget?

I'm also really struck by the statement "A lot of people come to our website and it could be so strong..." I have to wonder if that ED really knows how many people are actually visiting the site. If there is no technology budget, are they really using an analytics package? I have to assume that they are not. Which brings up another very interesting point: How are these ED's making tech decisions? Gut and intuition?

That is the crux of the report to me: that nonprofit leaders need more support and training to make good technology decisions, and it doesn't have to come solely from traditional training. In fact, the report claims that two of the main factors that help foster successful technology use are:

• Consistent access to people who provide technological resources and knowledge

• Ability to use the internet to access others who can provide assistance

They also say that:

The nonprofits that did best were those that possessed "bridging networks," connections to other organizations or individuals outside their immediate circles from whom they were able to garner valuable information about software, hardware and implementation."

This, of course, is exactly what NTEN is all about! I always say that we are facilitators of serendipity. But we're clearly reaching only a small number of nonprofits.

In fact, the report states that the organizations they surveyed were more likely to access networks like NTEN only if they had a technologically savvy person in their personal networks, someone to point them to our resources. This just says that organizations with a leg up were more likely to get a leg up.

We've seen this in how NTEN's membership has grown: more people are referred to us than anything else. I've discussed this dilemma with many of my colleagues. Bringing nonprofits into your network is extremely high-touch, more so than other markets, I think.

So, growing your programs to reach an exponential number of people and help an exponential number of organizations is a pretty daunting concept.

I'm very interested in what you make of it all.