RCAC Home Page > Work With Us > Rural Advocacy > White Papers >

Nonprofit Advocacy: Toward a healthy, sustainable rural America

By Chris Marko, RCAC rural development specialist

For more than 30 years, Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC) has championed rural issues in a variety of ways. RCAC engages in rural housing campaigns, educates legislators about the importance of safe drinking water for rural communities and garners support for community development finance programs. While acknowledging apprehensions around engaging in these types of activities, this article stresses the importance of participating. It identifies differences between nonprofit advocacy and lobbying and provides advocacy tips. Additionally, it highlights a few of RCAC’s advocacy successes.

Competition for resources is immense, in these difficult economic times. Advocacy is one way nonprofit organizations can ensure community and program needs are recognized as legislative and funding decisions are made. Yet, many nonprofit organizations are hesitant to advocate for their needs because they are leery of being accused of lobbying and do not fully understand the differences between the two activities. Actually, both are allowable activities for nonprofit agencies. Advocacy and lobbying are vital to improving rural communities and supporting organizations that provide services for rural communities.

Nonprofit advocacy vs. lobbying

Advocacy efforts focus on education about an issue and its impact on individuals and communities. Examples of advocacy activities include:

• Posting an analysis of a piece of legislation on your website with details on how it will affect your clients
• Testifying before the legislature to share technical expertise on an issue
• Publishing results of a nonpartisan analysis, study or research
• Meeting with your elected official to describe the impact that a policy has on your community

Lobbying, on the other hand, consists of communications that seek to influence policymakers to take a certain position on a specific piece of legislation. Lobbying includes attempts to influence the decisions of state and local legislative bodies, such as county commissions and city councils. Examples of lobbying include meeting with members of Congress to ask them to cosponsor a specific bill or writing a letter requesting that they vote for or against legislation. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), at www.irs.gov, states that an organization is lobbying:

• When it attempts to influence legislation
• If it contacts or urges the public to contact members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting or opposing specific legislation
• Or if the organization requests the adoption or rejection of legislation.

One important exception is technical expertise lobbying as discussed on the Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest (CLPI) website here.  

According to CLPI, “Under the 1976 Law Governing Nonprofit Lobbying, a nonprofit organization’s response to written requests from a legislative body (not just a single legislator) for technical advice on pending legislation is not considered lobbying. So, if requested in writing, a group could provide testimony on legislation, take a position in the testimony on that legislation, and it would not be considered lobbying.”

CLPI is a comprehensive resource for information about the differences between advocacy and lobbying. CLPI assists and encourages charitable organizations to use the full range of their advocacy and lobbying rights.

Organizations conduct direct lobbying when they target legislators or a legislative body to influence legislation, and they conduct grass roots lobbying when they ask the general public to take action on legislation. 

The difference between the two is specificity. It is advocacy when you educate your elected officials about issues that affect your clients, but lobbying if you ask them to take action (for or against) specific legislation, acts, bills, resolutions, referendums, initiatives or constitutional amendments. Administrative advocacy (advocacy directed at appointed officials or civil servants, for example, in response to proposed regulations) is not lobbying. Additionally, supporting or opposing a candidate for elective office is not an allowable nonprofit lobbying activity.

Whether lobbying or advocating through other means, charitable nonprofit organizations must be nonpartisan.

Overcoming nonprofit lobbying uncertainty

It is important to keep in mind that organizations are allowed to engage in some lobbying. Yet, if they engage in too much lobbying, they risk loss of tax-exempt status. The IRS considers a variety of factors, including  how much time is devoted (by both compensated and volunteer workers) to lobbying and by how much money the organization spends on it, when determining whether the lobbying activity is substantial or excessive.  

Based on the IRS Code, Section 4911, lobbying expenditures refer to expenditures for the purpose of influencing legislation (as defined above). Nonprofit organizations have two options for how their lobbying efforts will be examined. The default method, sometimes called the substantial part test, is more restrictive and requires more burdensome reporting, according to the CLPI website here. The other option is to elect to be covered by the 501 (h) expenditure test. CLPI recommends this option for the vast majority of small to mid-size charities. To implement the expenditure test option, the organization’s governing body must vote to come under the provisions of the 1976 law and file the one-page IRS Form 5768 with the IRS. CLPI provides the form on its website here. All sources consulted confirm that choosing the expenditure test option does not subject the organization to increased likelihood of an IRS audit.

Advocacy and lobbying tips

Set goals – Develop goals before embarking on an advocacy or lobbying effort, whether it is an event, campaign or a visit with a legislator. Identify what you wish to accomplish and your desired outcomes.

Define your key messages – Draft basic, brief and easy to read key messages about your issue(s). One-page handouts are useful for legislators and staff who are bombarded with information.

Refer to the community – Legislators want to hear how a program and/or policy impacts people in communities. Identifying with local constituents also strengthens community relationships.

Don’t be afraid of the meeting – People can be uncomfortable meeting an elected official or staff member. Legislators are relationship oriented, so don’t be intimidated. Be personable and professional.

Remember that time is short – Provide a brief background of your organization with materials, your key issues and what the legislator can do. Make the utmost of the visit; do not leave without asking for something. The number one reason people give something is because they were asked.

Don’t forget to say thank you – Remember to always thank legislators for their time. Verbally thank them in face-to-face meetings and on the phone. Make sure to send a follow-up thank you and brief summary of what was covered. Legislators and staff members are very busy and appreciate being thanked.

Follow up – Be open to follow up with more information, community referrals and additional contacts.

Attend events – Legislators value public recognition, so invite them to events, such as groundbreaking ceremonies for projects, forums and open houses. They appreciate hearing that their decisions are benefiting the public. Take pictures!

Developing and distributing a one-page fact sheet stating the goals and message and identifying local constituents to leave with legislators after a meeting will remind them about your organization’s key issues. The fact sheet also should contain contact information so that legislative staff can follow up with your organization in the future.

RCAC’s advocacy approach

RCAC participates in a number of state and national advocacy efforts that have been quite successful in keeping rural issues at the forefront and have protected existing resources in the face of significant competing needs.

In 2004, RCAC intensified its advocacy role for rural communities by forming the Government Affairs and Rural Policy (GARP) team. GARP focuses on four key areas including networking and partnerships, Congressional outreach, rural policy initiatives and advocacy information. While advocacy is often challenging, it is essential for ensuring a healthy, sustainable rural America.

Networking and partnerships
Networking and partnerships help RCAC address a range of community development issues such as health, education, renewable energy, telecommunications, entrepreneurship and workforce development. RCAC continues to network and develop partnerships with numerous colleagues including the national Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP), National Rural Housing Coalition and Opportunity Finance Network to coordinate advocacy efforts. RCAC also is represented on the Board of Directors for national rural and community development organizations including Partners for Rural America, an umbrella organization for State Rural Development Councils, and the Community Development Society, which connects educational research with community development practice internationally. We cannot be effective at rural advocacy without engaging other organizations and most importantly rural communities. RCAC facilitates communication between communities and decision-makers through forums, calls to action and letter writing campaigns. By collaborating with others involved with similar issues that impact rural communities, our collective voice is strengthened for rural America. 

Earlier this year, RCAC held a rural symposium, which attracted nearly 100 rural community development practitioners from across the West to discuss the state of housing, infrastructure, economic development, health care and leadership in rural communities today. The participants sought to identify the most pressing needs rural communities face and brainstormed possible solutions to meet those needs so rural communities will survive and thrive. “Identifying legislative strategies that are needed to support rural development was one of the key objectives of the symposium,” said Stan Keasling, RCAC chief executive officer.

Congressional outreach
As part of its advocacy activities, RCAC conducts outreach and education with legislators to keep them informed about rural issues and needs for resources. We share case studies, impacts of our programs on communities and discuss rural issues with Congressional members. As part of our lobbying efforts, RCAC also spends a limited amount of time gaining support for specific rural programs and policy. In conjunction with RCAP, its national affiliate, in February 2009, RCAC sent a legislative team to conduct Congressional visits in Washington D.C. Our messages highlighted the unique challenges rural communities face, including lack of understanding of requirements and programs, limited staff capacity to carry out projects and limited local revenue to support necessary improvements. We also shared information about legislative priorities for water and wastewater programs to support RCAC and RCAP.

At the local level, RCAC staff members conduct ongoing outreach and education with Congressional offices regarding rural issues. 

RCAC endorses letters of support for rural housing programs including letters sent to U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development and U.S. Housing and Urban Development programs. We have supported measures against predatory lending (unethical, unfair, damaging, fraudulent lending practices) and advocated the increase of resources for homeownership counseling. RCAC advocates for support of Community Development Financial Institutions (institutions that provide credit and other financial services to underserved populations), which gained increased attention under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (a government economic stimulus tool). 

Rural Oregon Day and Rural Policy Forums
RCAC has helped organize Rural Oregon Day in partnership with the Oregon Rural Development Council for the past five years. The Oregon Rural Policy Forum 2006 in Pendleton brought hundreds of people together representing communities, organizations and agencies to meet with Legislators from around the state. They developed recommendations for key rural policy issues including water, health, housing, small business entrepreneurship and workforce education. Sessions for each track were facilitated to develop policy recommendations for all the areas that moved forward in the legislature in following years. For example, the focus track on water recommended the state of Oregon develop a long-term strategy for managing water supply, which was carried through the Governor’s Office of Rural Policy to the governor, who recommended this proposal in the budget. Sen. David Nelson also included the recommendation in a legislative proposal.

RCAC also conducted Rural Oregon Day 2007, which included promoting Sen. Nelson’s Oregon Water Supply and Conservation Initiative. As a result, the Oregon Water Supply and Conservation Initiative was created. It included $800,000 in funding for the Oregon Water Resources Department to conduct a statewide assessment of water supply, emergency preparedness and grants for communities to produce source water and water conservation projects.

Positive outcomes of RCAC advocacy efforts

In Alaska, RCAC helped Valley Community for Recycling Solutions obtain $1 million for its recycling facility by facilitating community-based advocacy through the state Legislature. RCAC Alaska staff held meetings with community representatives to develop an advocacy plan which involved targeting key Legislators and the governor’s office. RCAC staff member Roland Shanks worked closely with Molly Boyer, Valley Community for Recycling Solutions executive director, to conduct visits with Sen. Lyda Green, local state senator for Wasilla as well as the Senate president, to educate her on the project. He also “coached” Boyer to conduct outreach to the governor’s office resulting in support for a $1 million Legislative Appropriation for the $6.5 million recycling facility, which is now under construction.

In California, the state Legislature created the Agricultural Worker Health and Housing Commission in 2006 as a result of a series of Food System Symposia that RCAC convened. The commission prepared options for fiscal policies that generate food system funding for agricultural workers; compiled and compared alternative policy models for providing increased primary health care access for California agricultural workers and seasonal and migrant worker housing; and assessed and summarized key stakeholder views on worker health and housing plan options.

RCAC encourages nonprofit agencies across the country to become more engaged in rural advocacy. Agencies need to be creative, do more within the scope of their mission and work together as collective advocates and with the communities we all serve. 

In New Mexico, RCAC helped attract attention to the need for regionalization of New Mexico water systems by educating the state Legislature and governor about financial challenges small systems in the state face. (See the article on pages 14 to 16.) After years of advocacy efforts, New Mexico House Bill 185 was passed in April 2009, which enabled five systems to merge and form a single Water Authority. Forming the regional structure permits them to share water rights, declare a service area, float revenue bonds and retain their community autonomy. Prior to the new legislation, this type of merger would not have been possible.

For more information about RCAC’s rural advocacy activities, contact Chris Marko at 503/228-1780 or cmarko@rcac.org.