Notice those checks, stars and caution signs?

Clearly these are meant to serve as rating systems for viewers. Missing a check or star? The system implies that your organization may not be 100% up to snuff –or else it might be hiding something.

While I’ve done my ranting about rating systems (see my posts  below), I’m afraid that your organization is stuck  with this new configuration.

By now I’m sure you know that Guidestar is a go-to site for the media, funders, bloggers, benchmarkers like me or others individuals who are curious about your nonprofit. Online donation sites like Network for Good, Facebook Causes or Change.org link up and pull their data from Guidestar.

So, get thee to Guidestar.

Login (you’ll need to register if you haven’t, the basic edition is free), search for your organization’s name and pull up your Guidestar profile. You may be surprised at how many checks you are have or are missing. Try printing out a report and you’ll quickly see what is incomplete in your Guidestar profile.

Follow the button that says Update Nonprofit Report to review the instructions for updating your information.  Read about the options for earning the Guidestar Exchange seal, for posting reviews on GreatNonprofits and developing a self-assessment impact profile through the new Charting Impact (please share your experience with our readers if you have completed an impact profile. I noticed that only 104 organizations have).

You’ll need to decide just how much you want to commit to updating. The new check view system is clearly designed to get you deep into the world of Guidestar and its partner organizations.

And please come back and share your experiences. Happy 2012.

Related posts

Fundraisers, do you know what your 990 isn’t telling donors about your nonprofit?

My worst nightmare is now true, sloppy ratings of nonprofit effectiveness in Haiti

Thank you, Guidestar, for hearing our concerns

My post on Tuesday, “My worst nightmare is now true, sloppy ratings ratings of nonprofit effectiveness in Hatii,” and a storm of Tweets generated quite a bit of attention.

As Tuesday’s post explains, after my first critique, Guidestar changed their hastily constructed home page listing  Top Ten Relief Organizations Working in Haiti, which I strongly debated the evidence for, to a somewhat more accurate Most Reviewed Relief Organizations in Haiti.

After a long conversation this afternoon with Debra Snider, Guidestar’s VP of Communications and Administration, and Shari Ilsen, Director of Marketing and Outreach at GreatNonprofits, Guidestar made the laudable decision to drop the listing altogether.

Now when you land on Guidestar’s homepage and scroll down, you’ll see Disaster Action Center and encouragement to post a review if you have firsthand experience with an organization working in Haiti. A link takes you to the site of GreatNonprofits.

Why is this so much better?

• Guidestar is no longer implying that simply because 10 organizations received more reviews than 25 others that the reviewed organizations are somehow more worthy of your giving. (My point: Once they call out a top list, even if they don’t say it directly, the donor infers that somehow this list is more special than the rest).

• Dropping   “received the most reviews” eliminated the task of keeping that list revolving and accurate. (It wasn’t.)

• As Guidestar’s intent was to help increase the number of reviews received by GreatNonprofits, this new configuration achieves the same goal without the baggage of implied ratings. I’d also suggest that it is clearer and probably will be more effective at accomplishing that goal.

• Guidestar can still offer the longer informational list they compiled of organizations that are working on relief and recovery (or longer term development) in Haiti, without trying to assess their effectiveness. This doesn’t compromise Guidestar’s valued credibility and keeps up what Guidestar is best known for — providing us with credible information on organizations and educating us about how we can make our own informed giving decisions.

Do I still have concerns about Amazon style rating systems? Absolutely. But we can talk about that at another time.

Thank you, Guidestar (and Debra), for hearing my concerns — which aren’t just my concerns, but include a rising tide of very concerned individuals with deep reservations about intermediary rating systems of nonprofit effectiveness.

P.S. You can also read a quick summary of the controversy in today’s Give and Take, the Chronicle of Philanthropy’s roundup of blogs about the nonprofit world.