Unmuzzle the Ox

The phrase, “Do not muzzle the ox,” comes from Deuteronomy 25:4, and it means that workers should be allowed to benefit from the fruits of their labor.

For decades, donors and grantmakers (funders) have shied away from funding nonprofit labor, the salaries of the very people who keep charitable organizations running, probably believing that except for a paid bare-bones skeleton crew, volunteer labor ought to be sufficient. Employed labor has been framed as a misuse of generosity, something to minimize rather than embrace. One study found that funders give less when overhead (labor) is perceived to be high as a percentage of all expenses (1). But what if this thinking is starving the very missions donors and communities want to see succeed?

The reality is sobering. The median nonprofit’s actual overhead costs hover around 40% of its total expenses, according to Bridgespan (2), yet many funders believe overhead, which most often is largely labor, should not represent more than 15% of all expenses. This gap forces nonprofits into a “starvation cycle,” the chronic underinvestment in trained and knowledgeable staff. As one Bridgespan report (3) put it, “It costs money to deliver results. Skimping on salaries, data, and systems means skimping on impact.”

The human toll is mounting. In 2024, 95% of nonprofit leaders reported deep concern about staff burnout, and three-quarters said they struggled to fill vacancies due to uncompetitive salaries and benefits. The Center for Effective Philanthropy (4) warns that “burnout isn’t just a human cost—it’s an organizational risk that can derail the mission.”

To close the funding gap, many nonprofits turn to earned revenues, i.e., fees, to raise cash for payroll. While this is an important step toward achieving sustainability, it is also a conundrum. If staff must generate revenue in order to pay themselves, the nonprofit becomes unable to deploy its staff into the community to engage in activities that do not generate revenue for the nonprofit’s next pay cycle.  

The first philanthropic step toward embracing labor as not only necessary but desirable is for funders to realize that different types of nonprofits have different cost structures. Food pantries, thrift shops, tutoring programs, summer camps, and the like, require little in the way of higher education and special expertise among its staff and volunteers. In contrast, in highly specialized nonprofits like medical, dental, legal, and crisis ministries, labor overhead is not a side expense—it is the mission. The skill, presence, and judgment of physicians, dentists, advanced practice providers, dental hygienists, lab technicians, counselors, and lawyers, are the program. Without their labor, the nonprofit is reduced to empty offices and dormant equipment.

Unlike many nonprofits, medical and dental ministries cannot lean solely on volunteer labor without risking quality and continuity of care, patient safety, and thorough compliance with state and federal regulations. Furthermore, these professionals require licenses, annual continuing education, and malpractice insurance, all costly and essential overhead. Consistent financial resources to fund salaries and related overhead ensure that qualified professionals remain in place long enough to build trust with patients, deliver appropriate treatment, and effect lasting outcomes.

Finally, in many underserved areas, the medical ministry may be the only healthcare provider for a community. The lack of predictable and repeating funding for salaries could limit an entire region’s access to health care to only a few days per month. In this light, supporting labor overhead in a medical ministry isn’t just an investment in infrastructure, it is an act of preserving human dignity and saving lives.

The nonprofit sector is built on people. Calling their work “overhead” is a semantic sleight-of-hand that obscures its centrality to mission success. “Low overhead can be a red flag, not a badge of honor,” the National Council of Nonprofits reminds us. Underfunding the human backbone of nonprofits doesn’t make them leaner, it makes them weaker.

It’s time for funders to stop treating labor as something to be frowned upon. Labor is, in fact, the foundation of highly specialized nonprofits. Imagine judging a hospital by how little it spends on doctors and nurses, or a school by how little it spends on teachers. That’s the logic of overhead aversion, and it’s time to retire it.

Philanthropy should embrace a new question. Ask not, “How low is their overhead?” Ask instead, “Can they afford the people necessary to meet the needs of the people they serve?” Because in the end, generosity that funds programs and capital expenditures but not the people doing the work is generosity that can’t go the distance.

Unmuzzle the ox.

Gregory E. Lang has fifteen years’ experience raising funds for homeless shelters, and medical and dental ministries. His efforts have resulted in more than $50 million in charitable contributions and earned revenues. He lives in Atlanta, GA.

References

Hung, C.K. et al. “Do Donors Penalize Nonprofits With Higher Non-Program Costs?” Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly (2022/2023)Queenan, J.E. et al. “Pay-What-It-Takes Philanthropy” Bridgespan (2016)Queenan, J.E. et al. “Momentum for Change: Ending the Nonprofit Starvation Cycle” Bridgespan (2019)Im C. et al. “State of Nonprofits 2024: What Funders Need to Know” The Center for Effective Philanthropy (2024)

The post Unmuzzle the Ox appeared first on Gregoryelang.