Types of Nonprofit Names

Descriptive

The names of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Feed the Children, The Nature Conservancy, the Salvation Army and World Vision are prime examples of organizations whose names relate to their mission. Not surprisingly, Descriptive is the most common type of nonprofit name.

Unfortunately, there is also an abundance of descriptively named organizations that are unsuccessful. Many are bland, uninspired, and too long. In choosing a descriptive name, consider the problem you solve and the main benefits you provide, as opposed to description of  the actions you take. The name needs to inspire, so consider the emotional impact, which can make a huge difference in how people feel about your organization.

Geographic

Descriptive names are often combined with the location of the organization, such as The Boys Choir of Harlem, Louisville Zoo Foundation, and the 92nd Street Y, or the area that the organization serves (the Himalayan Cataract Project). While originating as a point of distinction between other groups with similar missions, a geographic-based name can become a limitation should the organization seek to expand outside the named area.

The New York Zoological Society changed its name to the Wildlife Conservation Society in order to enlarge its mission and appeal to people outside of New York. Unless the geographic feature is the basis for the organization, or the entity will never expand, geographic-based names are best avoided.

Person’s Name

From Hale House to the Ellington Fund, founders’ or funders’ names are often used. There are advantages and disadvantages to this approach. A person’s name provides the opportunity for the organization to tell a compelling story of its founder and to galvanize people around a magnetic personality. The limitation is that the equity or good will is built up around an individual, and it may be difficult to shift it to the organization when the founder steps down. And of course, these types of names don’t describe what the organization does. Name recognition can also take time to build up, while scandal can easily roil the accumulated amity.

Since celebrities’ names are their greatest asset, naming their foundations after themselves, such as The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, lends immediate visibility and credibility to the charity.

And as corporations increasingly step up their philanthropic endeavors, business names are becoming more commonly associated with charities (such as the Avon Walk for Breast Cancer).

And of course, large donors love to see their names on organizations. Sometimes short, such as the Getty Center, and sometimes involving the first, middle and last names of people. For the factors to consider in naming an organization or program after a donor, see the post: Sponsor Naming of Programs.

Conceptual

This type of name implies a meaning or metaphor that relates to the organization’s mission. The name Red Cross is derived from inverting the colors on Switzerland’s flag to symbolize the organization’s neutral status, which allows it to deliver aid to ravaged countries. Their immense name recognition is owed to its long and successful history (founded in 1881 by Clara Barton), simple name, and widely recognized icon, now indelibly linked to concepts of medical care.

Using a generic word as a name has both advantages and disadvantages. The name Crossroads conjures a powerful visual metaphor and is thus used by many organizations, which creates problems distinguishing between them. The organization Breakthrough, which uses popular culture and media to affect social change, also faces competition for its name, but is a bit more unique.

Combinations

One way to generate a unique name is to combine two words. KICKSTART, which builds moral character in youth through martial arts, suggests its mission in a concise, emotionally upbeat moniker that combines two generic words.

MercyCorps, a website dedicated to the spread of more open markets and the global fight against poverty, fuses common words in a new way to create a powerful name, but unfortunately, it suggests a different mission.

Coined (Made Up)

To truly achieve a unique name, you can concoct a word. George Eastman’s camera company created the word Kodak because it had hard Ks to start and finish the word,  making the name sound modern. This unusual construction creates uniqueness and consequently aids memory.

In the 1980s, the technique of combining various Latin roots became common. Auto brand Acura suggests accurate. Lexus implies excellence. The pharmaceutical industry uses this technique for naming drugs. The name manufactured name Prozac helped fluoxetine hydrochloride become the best-selling anti-depression medication.

Linguistic naming techniques can be very effective, but are not commonly used in the nonprofit sector since it is expensive to generate good names this way and requires a significant investment in order to imbue the name with meaning and reinforce it for recognition.

A simpler method would be to appropriate a highly unusual word, such as a sound. Search engine Yahoo! successfully uses the sound of a joyous discovery; however, a nonprofit called KaBOOM!, which rallies people around the cause of playgrounds, belies its mission of providing a safe haven and nurturing ground for kids by employing the sound of an explosion as its name.

Foreign Words

Sometimes foreign words provide good names, particularly when they are short and sound good. Kiva, the microlending site, is a Swahili word that means “unity” or “agreement,” which works for them even if you don’t know the meaning – perhaps because the structure and two of the four letters subtly mimic the word give.

Hazon, a Jewish environmental organization, is the Hebrew word for “vision,” a concept suggesting the group’s progressive approach in engaging its audience on environmental issues, but leaving the door open to other causes. This team is slightly less successful because it does not relate to any English word, and it is unclear how to pronounce it.

Abbreviations

In the nonprofit sector, abbreviations are usually the result of a name that is too long to say easily in conversation. In these cases, the abbreviation is a bridge to a series of meaningless letters. Large organizations that have been around for more than half a century, such as IBM, AT&T, or the UJA (formally, the UJA – Federation of New York), may be known by their initials without the need to know what the abbreviation actually stands for (UJA was the United Jewish Appeal, which merged with the Jewish Federation three decades ago).

Some organizations such as AIPAC, AJWC, and HIAS are known by their initials, at least in Jewish circles, but their full names are not lost.

Some names that are abbreviated are abbreviated even further (down to one letter), such as calling your local YMCA The Y, or the Jewish Community Center, The J, not a bad proposition for poor organizations to be known so fondly by their members.

Acronyms

Carefully crafted acronyms, such as K.I.D.S. (Kids in Distressed Situations) or M.A.D.D. (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers), actually help to reinforce the name, in the first case by specifying the population served, and in the second, conveying the emotion felt by victims of drunk driving, a strong emotional appeal, often lacking in nonprofit names.

CARE, the leading humanitarian organization and originator of the CARE package benefits from a fantastic acronym that describes its mission succinctly. The conglomeration of relief agencies has become so well known that its longhand name is no longer referred to, even on its website.