Competencies Map

Naturally, certain projects are in greater demand by the nonprofit sector depending on relevant economic conditions and trends in the sector. The Demand rating provided in this Map provides a general sense of the relative demand based on our nonprofit survey. This rating should help organizations delivering pro bono service to focus their efforts on delivering projects that are truly needed by the nonprofit. Projects with a medium demand rating should not be overlooked as it depends on the specific nonprofit partner's needs; a donor segmentation project, for example, would be in high demand at a newer organization beginning to track donors but less effectual for a larger, well funded nonprofit.

Each project has been assigned a relative pro bono Viability rating. These designations were informed by experts in their respective fields and take into account the three most common reasons for suboptimal outcomes in pro bono service projects: time sensitivity, project scope creep and required sector knowledge (see risk descriptions below). Each project is assigned a general viability rating as well as specific risk assessments for these three areas of concern. These ratings should be used to determine the likely success of a project and to inform the team's work in designing a proper project scope to minimize that potential risk(s). A medium viability rating requires a close look at the associated risks. An event planning project, for example, does not require sector knowledge and is not likely to grow in project scope but is extremely time sensitive.

A low viability rating does not mean this is not a viable pro bono project, it indicates that the risks should be very carefully considered when scoping the work for that project. Depending on the associated risks, that project may require a high level of sector knowledge; it; and/or very reliable, quick turnaround time; and/or it may tend towards a higher probability of scope creep. These are all attributes that tend to make projects riskier when delivered on a pro bono basis.

Some projects are tied to specific concrete deadlines. Given the nature of pro bono service, delivering on a specific and tight deadline can be challenging. Pro bono service is best used for projects where a potential slip of 25-50% on the timeline will not put the nonprofit client in jeopardy. For example, event planning and financial audits tend to be riskier than creating a board reporting dashboard.

Please note: time sensitivity does not indicate the amount of time required by the pro bono team. Each project should be scoped as appropriate to the need of the nonprofit and the ability of the pro bono team to address that need.

For many business professionals engaged in pro bono service, it is their first time working in the nonprofit sector. Certain projects are almost identical to the corporate counterparts like designing a logo or conducting a lease review. Others, such as nonprofit financial audits and program evaluation use standard business skills but require significant nonprofit sector knowledge. In general, projects that require a lot of sector knowledge should be avoided or the client will need to invest significant time in providing the knowledge transfer to the pro bono team.

One of the greatest challenges in any project (paid or pro bono) is the potential for the project to shift in goals and expansion in the scope of work. In paid engagements, this is addressed by charging the client for any extra time required.

Additionally, the original scope of work is better defined by both parties as there is an understanding of the economic consequences of not having it well defined. In pro bono service projects there is less incentive to accurately nail down the project scope and once it is defined, there is a tendency for it to change as the service team wants to help and the nonprofit has a large appetite for their support. This is well intentioned but often leads to resentment by both parties and for projects to never reach completion due to burn out. Certain projects tend to suffer from this problem more than others. Projects like web sites can have such a wide range of options as to lead to significant scope creep. On the other hand, the filing for legal incorporation is petty well defined and is not likely to grow in scope.