But do you want to share your culture?

Doug and I have wrapped up our trip to B.C.

We are exploring the possibility of fundraising for the QCCC (left). I took some photos on my phone. They're not great quality but they show the potential of the site, which sits on the banks of the Cowichan River. The QCCC has an excellent business plan in hand, developed by Rod Smith and his colleagues at Festival management inc. (Fmi), for restoring the facilities and redeveloping their cultural programming. There are a number of great, new Aboriginal Cultural Centres in and around B.C. and the 2010 Vancouver Olympics have brought significant funding to B.C attractions. On the other hand it was still a stretch to find something to do in the off-season in and around Nanaimo as I had forgotten my hiking boots and we could not find a sea kayaking place still renting in November. Luckily, it was a beautiful day when we made the initial site visit.

We wanted to answer three key questions before taking a case for support to potential funders.

1) Why will the future of a funded QCCC be different from the past? (A past composed as far as we can tell of scandal, alleged theft and alleged embezzlement, questionable tourist appeal and little use or support from the Cowichan community itself).

2) What is the cultural centre for? The Khowutzun Development Corporation, the "economic development arm fo the Cowichan Tribes" seems to be primarily interested in job creation. But, as we suggested to the GM of the QCCC, if job creation and revenue generation is the most important thing, then why not create the hotel and conference centre and expand the banquet business currently in place? Inter-cultural learning and sharing is superfluous.

3) Whose project is this? (Who generated it? Who will provide oversight throughout? And, who will lead it through to completion?)

We arrived at the last question by way of a conversation with the Aboriginal Studies Department head of the newly formed Vancouver Island University, and through reflection on previous Aboriginal tourism projects. Doug was involved in creating a marketing plan for Six Nations' disparate tourist attractions in Ontario as well as a revitalization of Wanuskewin Heritage Park, out in the Prairies.

The issue of "Aboriginal tourism" is divisive. Even where tribe leaders or band councils decide to move forth with tourism planning and consulting, there has been dissent within the community, members who don't want tourists on the Reservation and certainly don't want to invest in bringing them there or making them feel welcome. Is the community interested in sharing its culture and history with non-Aboriginals? How much of it? What is sacred and cannot or should not be shared? Who will have the right to disseminate this information and in what way? These are questions that can only be answered by the communities themselves. And the answer has to be, yes, we do want to share because...in the case of Wanuskewin, "to increas[e] public awareness, understanding and appreciation of the cultural legacy of the Northern Plains First Nations people."

Do the Cowichan tribes want to share? And if so, why? These questions have to be answered before we can move their project forward.

(Photos: Julia Dow)

New project takes NetGain to Vancouver Island

Photo: Cowichan Feather Headdress, courtesy of First People

NetGain is off to Duncan, B.C. next week to contribute fundraising expertise to the redevelopment of the Quw'utsun' (Cowichan) Cultural and Conference Centre, located in the Cowichan Valley. It is a matter of public record that the Centre has been plagued by mismanagement, dwindling popularity amongst both the native community and tourists, and, as NetGain can say with confidence at the launch of most projects, "the status quo is intolerable."

B.C. interests have risen on a crest of excitement and goodwill around the 2010 Olympics, but business is general, as we are all aware, has not been great.

More to come and I promise to send photos when on site as well.

Digital not-for-profits can make more money...if they know how.

I was reading this article in the Globe and Mail. It recounts the history of a small canadian firm, TakingITGlobal which...does something involving youth and connecting them to changing the world. In the words of the founder "social networking for social change." Hmmm. Formally, "Our mission is to provide opportunities for learning, capacity-building, cross-cultural awareness and self-development through the use of Information and Communication Technologies."

I know very little about TakingITGlobal. The article is part of the G and M's "business incubator" series which examines and solicits solutions from consultants to problems faced by small businesses.

TIG, like almost all not-for-profits, would like to secure and increase their revenue streams and membership, as the majority of their funding is from government or foundation sources. I discussed the demands made on not-for-profits to secure grants this week in connection to the Wellesley Institute's report, We Can't Afford to do Business this Way.

The solutions offered to diversify revenue:

Typical not-for profit solutions:

• seek sponsorship (that hopefully won't conflict with your mandate and values). Sponsorship is often suggested as a way of underwriting not-for-profit enterprises but has great potential with TIG because of their global reach and sizeable membership. (this was mentioned)


• more government/foundation funding


• earned revenue (institutions: ancillary revenues i.e. gift shops and restaurants; cultural groups: merchandise; corporate fees; service providers: membership fees, product sales, other ancillary revenues)

Uniquely digital solutions:

• on-site advertising. I am surprised they don't have advertising on the site, as hasn't this been the major revenue stream for internet businesses? And, with an estimated 200,000 members, guaranteed clicks)


• create and collect fees for "premium" membership. But will people pay? My personal experience: I blanche at paying for content. Why pay when there is so much good content for free? I really despise when I am forced to watch a video ad before reading an article, but I will put up with it if it means not having to pay! One of the more brutal responses to the G&M article summed it up like this: "only think[sic] people pay for online is gambling, porn and ebay. how many people pay to read newspapers online?" But I know Nerve and Salon have gone this way.


• rebrand in order to attract new members (which would involve redoing parts of the site, I assume). I personally find the site has no point of entry for new users. I'm 26. Am I considered youth or not? Is the site for me or not? It's hard to tell. Confused at the point of entry, I do not waste time going further.


• also to attract new members: use other social networking sites, ie. Facebook. I found out about this wonderful micro-lending organization through Facebook. Funnily enough, my friend whose page it was on wasn't even a lender, but now I am.

The wonderful thing about these (ok, run of the mill) solutions is that they are applicable to any organization that is moving towards a primarily digital offering like....the Canadian Music Centre (with whom we met today!) They are in the process of putting a whole wack of digital music online...

Last comment on the article: I was suprised at the vitriole directed at the organization in the comments section. They can't see why the organization exists at all and generally see it as a charity that sucks money away from 'real' cash-stricken charities. I have found that that is a constant and legitimate question about not-for-profits whose primary role is to direct people or information or funds to/about other not-for-profits.