Can Nonprofits Play Well Together?

A story in Tuesday's Hartford Courant is a case-in-point that demonstrates sometimes why nonprofits prefer to do their work independently vs. collaboratively.

As the story goes, two West Hartford, CT nonprofits have been sharing the cost and income from an annual "mayoral sponsored" charity event for 9 years.  This year, the larger income-sized nonprofit has announced it will no longer be a partner and will run its own event, on its own. 

Both nonprofits serve youth.  One serves about 200 people a year and is dependent on the ball which has provided 1/3rd of its annual budget.  The other annually serves 10,000 youths a year.  The larger organization says: our "organization over the years had shouldered a disproportionate share of the work and expense to organize the ball.  Having a separate event to raise its own funds became a matter of fairness.  We wanted to move ahead and have our own gala event.  It's not part of our mission to fund raise for another organization."

It's not part of our mission to fund raise for another organization!  Here lies an interesting fact being used as an excuse for non-co-operation.  I would tend to agree that it is likely not part of many nonprofits mission to fund raise for other organizations. But, is this the point?  Is this really a valid reason not to cooperate and create win:win opportunities for both the nonprofits and the community. 

Thanks to this declaration, a relatively small community must endure two events and slice a small pie smaller.  And why?  It's not part of the mission to fund raise for another organization.  If I were the community, I would think twice about supporting what will be a new and additional event in town.  After all, it's not part of the mission of the community to support every nonprofit's fundraiser.