






































CSWRFINAL_4.1.13


69        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

Technology's Role in the Nonprofit Sector: 
Increasing Organizational Effectiveness and Efficiency 
through Technology Innovations 
  
Brianna Boles 
  

Increasing technology uptake in the nonprofit sector will 
allow nonprofit organizations and social workers to provide more 
effective services through improved work processes. The follow-
ing paper will discuss how these processes (service delivery, 
fundraising, and outreach) are carried out in the nonprofit sector 
given the current technology landscape in nonprofits. I will pro-
vide background information about innovations such as cloud 
computing systems, social media, and mobile technologies that 
should be incorporated into the nonprofit sector in order to im-
prove the quality of services and work processes. An overview of 
the barriers that nonprofits face, such as lack of knowledge, lack 
of resources, and demands by funders, will explain the challenges 
accompanying increased technology uptake. The final section 
provides a method to overcome obstacles, allowing the optimal 
integration of technology into the nonprofit sector.  

 
Social workers prioritize the needs of others before their 

own, devoting time and resources to offer services that improve 
the lives of individuals, organizations, and communities. Technol-
ogy integration in the nonprofit sector provides an enhanced 
method for social workers to improve the quality of their services 
and make their jobs more effective. For example, customized mo-
bile applications for nonprofits could offer social workers the op-
portunity to conduct fieldwork and to access agency information 
confidentially and safely off-site. Database software also provides 
a method for social workers to collect and analyze data while re-
porting outcome requirements to funders. Although nonprofit or-
ganizations incorporate technology functions into their day-to-day 
work, there still remains untapped potential. Nonprofits have the 
ability to implement technology innovations progressively, in or-
der to improve service delivery, fundraising methods, and out-
reach tactics. The following article will discuss the technology 



Boles 

Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV        70 

gap in nonprofit organizations, innovations that will allow non-
profits to optimize technology uptake, and an explanation of the 
barriers preventing the incorporation of technology into organiza-
tional operations. The final section demonstrates why collabora-
tion and education initiatives are necessary to overcome chal-
lenges so that nonprofits and social workers can benefit from 
technology’s offerings.  

 
Background 

  
Nonprofits have the opportunity to benefit from emerging 

technologies such as cloud computing systems, social media, and 
mobile technology in order to increase the quantity of clients 
served and improve service quality. Cloud computing, also 
known as “the cloud,” refers to applications, services, or software 
offered over the Internet instead of requiring direct connection to 
a server (NTEN & Idealware, 2012). Nonprofits can use cloud 
technologies to improve internal communications among staff 
members (with e-mail and collaboration software) and to store 
information (with office software and data backup). Cloud tech-
nologies reduce the cost of services and the time it takes to com-
municate information.  

Social media is a unique cloud solution in that it improves 
external communications, such as stakeholder engagement, in 
nonprofit organizations. Social media is an online platform com-
munication tool that includes channels such as Facebook, Twitter, 
LinkedIn, Instagram, and Pinterest. The purpose of social media 
is to allow people to connect and interact with each other using 
the Internet. Because nonprofits connect people to services and 
provide resources to strengthen communities, social media is a 
method for nonprofits to convey their purpose and recruit stake-
holders. Stakeholders are individuals who have an interest or 
stake in the organization, and may include volunteers, donors, and 
service users. The Pew Research Center Internet & American Life 
Project found that in 2012 alone, 69% of adults across gender, 
race/ethnicity, and income groups in the U.S. used social net-
working sites (Smith, 2012). As a result of steady growth, social 
media networks are increasingly important tools for nonprofits to 



Technology’s Role in the Nonprofit Sector 

71        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

raise awareness and conduct outreach.  
Mobile technology refers to an array of cellular communi-

cation technology, such as smart phones (cellular phones with 
Internet access), mobile applications or apps (software units avail-
able for download on smart phones with specific functions), and 
tablets (mobile computers that are typically operated by touch 
screen) (Techopedia, 2012; Techterms, 2011). Nonprofit organi-
zations can use the versatile functions of mobile technology to 
fundraise and generate interest in their missions and social causes. 
Given that nearly half of cell phone users own smart phones, one 
in three American adults downloads apps to cell phones or tab-
lets, and one in ten adults makes charitable contributions using 
text messaging, there is a large market of potential stakeholders 
available to nonprofits (Smith, 2012). The offerings of mobile 
technology have the potential for nonprofits to provide services to 
clients, fundraise, and—in addition to social media—raise aware-
ness and conduct outreach. In an increasingly digital age, non-
profits and social workers use technology on a daily basis, yet 
they do not optimally benefit from the technology innovations 
available.  

 
Technology Potential in the Nonprofit Sector 

  
Technology innovations in the realm of mobile, data, and 

cloud-based solutions provide nonprofits with the opportunity to 
reduce the time and cost it takes to effectively deliver services, 
fundraise, and engage stakeholders.  

  
Service Delivery 
  

Nearly all nonprofits use information technologies to pro-
vide services to clients (Johns Hopkins, 2010). Current informa-
tion technologies that most nonprofits use for program and ser-
vice delivery include websites, e-mail systems, and databases 
(MAP & Idealware, 2012). Yet mobile technologies and software 
systems, which would allow social workers to improve communi-
cations with clients and access agency information off-site, are 
used by few nonprofits. Only 35% of nonprofits use mobile tech-



Boles 

Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV        72 

nologies such as smart phones, personal device assistants (PDAs), 
and mobile applications to track clients, and only 40% of those 
users collect data while in the field with clients (MAP & Ideal-
ware, 2012). Even fewer nonprofits, less than 20%, use tracking 
software systems that would allow them to record outcome data 
for client and volunteer management (NPower & SBC, 2009). 
Although nonprofits integrate basic technologies into program 
areas to serve clients, the degree to which updated technologies 
are incorporated should be re-evaluated for improvement.  

A combination of data and mobile solutions would allow 
social workers to provide services more quickly and reach more 
users. To overcome the challenges that social workers face when 
traveling in the field, NPower Technology Guide for Nonprofit 
Leaders (2011) suggests syncing portable devices to office data-
bases. Data could be accessed off-site through server software, 
which would save social workers time from having to go back to 
their sites and reduce translating paperwork and notes into 
agency-based computers. To meet funders’ requirements, which 
depend on results-driven service delivery to inform decision mak-
ing, a secure database with outcome tracking software would al-
low nonprofits to measure inputs (the expected goal, pre-
intervention) and outputs (the actual goal, post-intervention) 
(NPower, 2011). As a result, nonprofits would have an easier 
time reporting client outcomes to funders. Using data and infor-
mation to inform programmatic and service delivery practices is 
essential to providing scalable services to clients. From a national 
sample of nonprofits, half of the nonprofits that did not define a 
plan for measuring the success of a program also failed to track 
data about outcomes of clients and stakeholders (NTEN & Ideal-
ware, 2012). This demonstrates how the absence of a plan to 
measure program successes is a potential reason for nonprofits’ 
failure to adopt technologies. 

  
Fundraising 
  

To drive fundraising efforts, most nonprofits rely on foun-
dation proposals, special events, major gifts, direct responses via 
mail, board support, and online giving (AFP, Blackbaud, Camp-



Technology’s Role in the Nonprofit Sector 

73        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

bell Rinker, Convio, The Center on Philanthropy, Giving USA, & 
NCCS, 2012). The only type of fundraising to grow consistently 
is online giving, which increased between 51% and 88% each 
year between 2002 and 2011 (AFP, et al., 2012). Additionally, 
more nonprofits should target individual contributions, given that 
75% of the funds nonprofits received in 2011 were from individ-
ual donors (Rebecca Gordon Group, 2011). Despite a growing 
market, limited numbers of nonprofits use Facebook advertising 
for fundraising and individual giving purposes (NTEN, Common 
Knowledge, & Blackbaud, 2012). Data show that only 3% of 
nonprofits are fundraising, and receiving less than $10,000 in an-
nual donations, on Facebook (NTEN & M+R Strategic Service, 
2012). Although growing numbers of nonprofits tap into social 
media sites, they are not maximizing Facebook’s fundraising 
functions. 

Mobile technologies, specifically applications and text 
messaging functions, are a missed fundraising opportunity for 
nonprofit organizations. Text-to-give campaigns have become 
increasingly popular channels for donors to contribute to causes. 
Text-to-give campaigns require donors to text a keyword to a 
code in order to quickly make a $5 to $10 donation (Idealware, 
2012). Because not all cell phone users prefer to use the text mes-
saging feature of their cell phones, smart phone applications are 
another way for cell phone users to donate to causes. Examples 
include the “iKettle” app from Salvation Army, which allows us-
ers to set up their own fundraising campaigns (Idealware, 2012). 
When using apps to solicit donations, organizations are provided 
with immediate receipt of the donation, and users can donate any 
amount, instead of a limited donation of $5 to $10 dollars through 
text messaging (Idealware, 2012). Mobile capacities offer non-
profits an effective way to generate donations while engaging 
with stakeholders.    

  
Outreach and Engaging Stakeholders  

  
Most nonprofits use social media to generate awareness 

about their cause-driven work and its impact in the community. 
Nonprofits appear to understand the usefulness of Facebook to 



Boles 

Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV        74 

increase engagement and outreach to more constituents: 80% of 
nonprofits believed Facebook provided stakeholders with more 
information and generated more awareness (Idealware, 2011). 
Although nonprofits actively use Facebook to engage donors, 
fewer nonprofits use mobile phones for outreach and awareness 
(Branded4 Good, 2012; MAP & Idealware Survey, 2012).  

Mobile functions that allow nonprofits to reach more con-
sumers include the development of mobile websites and smart 
phone applications. Prior to implementation, however, nonprofits 
should first assess whether mobile technology fits into their or-
ganizational objectives (Idealware, 2012). If organizations find 
that their stakeholders regularly use cell phones and can be effec-
tively engaged through that method, then nonprofits may benefit 
from integrating mobile technology into practice. A potential 
strategy for a nonprofit could be to develop a website that can be 
accessed on mobile devices and incorporate techniques such as 
highlighting key messages, keeping content organized and inter-
active, and using videos, larger pictures, and text with less content 
(Branded4 Good, 2012). In addition to providing better services 
to clients and increasing fundraising efforts, integrating mobile 
technology into operations will allow nonprofits to build a 
stronger community base and foster better interactions with do-
nors. 

 
Barriers to Technology Uptake 

  
Although a large market of technology users exists, non-

profits do not experience the same high levels of technology up-
take and integration. An abundant need for technology is present 
in the nonprofit sector as a way to develop efficient and effective 
operational functioning. To integrate technological innovations 
and improve service delivery, it is critical that organizations over-
come their lack of funding and resources, as well as the barriers 
posed by funders. 

  
Knowledge and Expertise 
  

A survey of 10,500 nonprofits, charities, and NGOs found 



Technology’s Role in the Nonprofit Sector 

75        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

that 60% claimed lack of knowledge is the single greatest barrier 
to new technological advancement adoption (TechSoup Global, 
2012). Another study found that education was needed to teach 
nonprofits how to bridge social impact missions with technology 
innovation, identify the causes and effects of tech investments 
that lead to intended social impact, and train staff in mobile 
strategies (Gahran & Perlstein, 2012). Although nonprofits at-
tempted to train employees, several impediments occurred, in-
cluding resistance to change at all levels of staff, the absence of a 
training plan, and challenges to develop a training to meet an ar-
ray of staff needs (NTEN & The Nonprofit Times, 2011).  

  
Resources 
  

Resource shortages also explain nonprofits’ inability to 
integrate advanced technologies into operations. To improve tech-
nology uptake, nonprofits must, in addition to seeking education, 
collaborate across sectors to better manage and acquire new re-
sources. Three causes of reduced resources include more competi-
tion from other nonprofits to provide services, increased require-
ments from funders to provide outcome and other data reporting, 
and increased regulatory mandates (NPower, 2011). Additionally, 
the top three resource shortages nonprofits faced were lack of 
funds, time, and IT staff (Johns Hopkins, 2010). Half of nonprof-
its reported a shortage of IT staff (NPower & SBC, 2009) and 
two-thirds of respondents in a different survey reported no in-
house IT staff (Johns Hopkins, 2010). Technology spending is 
also reportedly a small proportion of nonprofits’ annual budgets, 
averaging less than 4.2% (Johns Hopkins, 2010). TechSoup 
Global and Techsoup.org’s (2012) survey supported this claim: 
respondents reported cost as the second greatest barrier to cloud 
computing technology adoption. In particular, key challenges for 
nonprofits to develop and sustain innovations are the lack of 
much-needed resources such as growing capital and the tendency 
of foundations to encourage innovations but not sustain support 
for them.  

  
 



Boles 

Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV        76 

Funders 
  
Funders are challenged in similar ways as nonprofits, be-

cause they must remain informed of the fast-paced technology 
landscape and become educated on the potential impacts of tech-
nology in nonprofits (Gahran & Perlstein, 2012). As a result, 
many funders have limited expertise and knowledge of the role of 
technology in serving clients and improving operations. After in-
terviewing 41 funders and 13 nonprofit technology service pro-
viders, Gahran and Perlstein (2012) found that funders do not 
know about the benefits of technology trends, and therefore do 
not develop technology-funding plans. Additionally, funders are 
faced with competing funding priorities and lack of clarity about 
how organizations will use technology for social impact outcomes 
(Gahran & Perlstein, 2012). Although funders struggle to under-
stand the technology landscape of nonprofits, agencies must also 
comply with complicated funder requirements that quantify the 
impact of services (NTEN & Idealware, 2012). Nonprofits faced 
roadblocks when they attempted to demonstrate assets to funders, 
including proving positive impacts on communities served by a 
program and tracking funding sources and program allocations 
for various funders and regulators (NPower & SBC, 2009). Non-
profits struggle with data collection, analysis, and strategy in or-
der to achieve funders’ measurement standards, because the proc-
ess is time-consuming, expensive, skill-based, and difficult 
(NTEN & Idealware, 2012). Overall, nonprofits face significant 
challenges, such as lack of education and resources coupled with 
limited funder awareness, in the face of technology innovation 
implementation. In response to a complex technology landscape 
that prevents organizations from optimizing technology’s offer-
ings, collaboration across sectors provides a solution.  

 
Bridging the Gap 

  
To improve the quality and quantity of service delivery to 

disadvantaged populations, nonprofit organizations should inte-
grate technological advancements into current practice. To ad-
dress the barriers previously mentioned, and to strengthen the role 



Technology’s Role in the Nonprofit Sector 

77        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

of technology in the nonprofit sector, FEGS Health and Human 
Services System, one of the largest nonprofits in the U.S. serving 
over 100,000 New Yorkers annually, proposed a new initiative. 
Center4, a method to increase technology uptake, will provide a 
collaborative space for nonprofits, technologists, social entrepre-
neurs, and funders to address technology needs in the nonprofit 
sector. Center4 will engage nonprofits to raise concerns about the 
barriers faced in the field, so that technologists, social entrepre-
neurs, and funders will collaborate with nonprofits to develop in-
novative and efficient solutions. The generation of new ideas will 
help nonprofits incorporate innovative technologies into the so-
cial service sector (A. Keefe, personal communication, December 
6, 2012).  

Center4 will accomplish its objectives with two education 
tracks, programs, and events. The first education track will target 
nonprofit executives to identify technology issues in the nonprofit 
sector and assist them to select and apply technology solutions to 
solve problems. The second track will be for IT professionals to 
address technology issues faced by nonprofits, learn about new 
and emerging technologies, and share problem-solving experi-
ences in the nonprofit sector. Center4 will host programs to ac-
complish these goals, with informational sessions, problem solv-
ing sessions, and nonprofit specialization sessions for each track. 
The expected outcome of providing education is to increase non-
profits’ technology uptake and increase expertise and understand-
ing of IT solutions for challenges. Center4 will also host commu-
nity events, such as hackathons or competitions, for technologists 
to target needs voiced by nonprofits. During hackathons, tech-
nologists will form teams and match their interests and qualifica-
tions to nonprofits’ needs. Teams will have a time frame to pro-
duce a corresponding technological solution, including a mobile 
application or software. Center4’s role will be to convene these 
various sectors so that nonprofits can understand the breadth of 
technology’s capabilities and implement solutions into opera-
tions. Center4’s function as a bridge, connecting nonprofits and 
technology, will enable nonprofits to provide better services that 
target the social issues they seek to ameliorate (A. Keefe, per-
sonal communication, December 6, 2012).  



Boles 

Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV        78 

For example, to address the social problem of homeless-
ness, Center4 could develop a mobile application for social work-
ers and service providers to become aware of empty spaces in 
shelters, transitional housing, and permanent housing locations. 
Social workers would be able to respond to openings and to en-
sure that homeless individuals are directed to open spaces. This 
same concept of match availability of services to clients in need 
could be tailored to domestic violence shelters, to match open 
beds to women and children in need. The goal of applying tech-
nology developments to social issues such as homelessness and 
domestic violence is to increase the number of individuals con-
nected to services. In this way, technology functions to strengthen 
the capacities of nonprofits.  

 
Conclusion 

  
Nonprofit organizations must leverage technology to im-

prove how clients receive services and how social workers deliver 
them. Technology integration provides a method for nonprofits to 
achieve better service delivery, fundraising, outreach, and com-
munication outcomes. Social workers benefit from technology 
uptake in the nonprofit sector with reductions in the time it takes 
to complete services and the cost of conducting them. By becom-
ing educated on technology’s potential to reach more clients, ad-
vocating for the creation of joint innovations such as Center4, and 
initiating collaboration with donors and the private sector, barriers 
can be overcome and social impact can be strengthened. Overall, 
the advocacy and social justice efforts of social workers can con-
tribute to the expansion of technology in the nonprofit sector. 

   
References 

  
AFP, Blackbaud, Campbell Rinker, Convio, The Center on Phi-

lanthropy, Giving USA, & NCCS. (2012). Nonprofit fund-
raising study: Covering charitable receipts at U.S. non-
profit organizations in 2011. Retrieved from http://
www.urban.org/publications/1001601.html/ 

Branded4 Good. (2012). How mobile-ready are the largest non-



Technology’s Role in the Nonprofit Sector 

79        Columbia Social Work Review, Volume IV 

profits in the US? Retrieved from http://
branded4good.com/blog/mobile-ready-nonprofits/ 

Gahran, A & Perlstein, J. (2012). Funding mobile strategies for 
 social impact. San Francisco,  CA: Author. 
Idealware. (2012). What every nonprofit should know about mo
 bile report. Retrieved from http://idealware.org/reports/
 mobile-global-development/ 
Johns Hopkins. (2010). The nonprofit technology gap – Myth or 
 reality? (Communiqué No. 20). Baltimore, MD: Author.  
MAP & Idealware. (2012). Unleashing innovation: Using every
 day technology to improve nonprofit services. St. Paul, 
 MN: Author. 
NPower & SBC. (2009). Community technology survey. Brook
 lyn, NY: Author 
NPower. (2011). Technology guide for nonprofit leaders: A mis
 sion support tool for community development. Brooklyn, 
 NY: Author. 
NTEN, Common Knowledge, & Blackbaud. (2012). Nonprofit 
 social network benchmark report (4th ed.). Portland, OR: 
 Author. 
NTEN & Idealware. (2012). The state of nonprofit data report. 
 Portland, OR: Author. 
NTEN & M+R Strategic Service. (2012). eNonprofit benchmarks 
 study. Retrieved from http://www.ebenchmarksstudy.com/ 
NTEN & The Nonprofit Times. (2011). Nonprofit technology 
 staffing and investments survey report. Portland, OR: Au
 thors.  
Rebecca Gordon Group. (2011). Nonprofits’ impact on the econo
 my. Retrieved from http://rebeccagordongroup.org/site/
 nonprofits-impact-on-the-economyinfographic/ 
Smith, A. (2012). Cell internet use 2012: Pew Research Center’s 
 internet & American life project. Retrieved from http://
 pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/CellInternet-Use-
 2012.aspx/ 
Techopedia. (2012). Mobile application (mobile app). Retrieved 
 from http://www.techopedia.com/definition/2953/mobile-
 application-mobile-app/ 
TechSoup Global. (2012). 2012 cloud computing survey. San 
 Francisco, CA: Author. 
Techterms. (2011). Tablet. Retrieved from http:/
 www.techterms.com/definition/tablet/ 




