As you strategize and think through what 2023 will look like for your nonprofit organization, I encourage you to avoid making these four common mistakes. You can think of them are New Years Resolutions or just good advice from a fundraising consultant who’s been helping nonprofits succeed for nearly 30 years. 

1. DON’T Over-solicit

We recently shared that 65% of donors who made first fit to an organization do not make a second gift. Why is that? Donors reportedly stop giving for the following reasons: 69% are over-solicited, 64% say communications are focused on asking for more money; 63% cite a lack of measurable results; 62% are no longer inspired by the mission; and 58% believe that the overhead costs are too high. In short, they are tired of feeling like an ATM without a connection to the organization.

DO Show Genuine Gratitude

Donors are tired of being treated as transactions. Instead, organizations should be giving back to their donors – giving genuine gratitude, valuable information, and stories of their impact. We always recommend organizations take a donor-centered fundraising approach where donors are cultivated in on-going relationships, valued for their unique contributions, and thanked for their specific gift. Donors want to be thanked promptly. They don’t want the thank you letter to be a listing of the latest accolades or accomplishments of the organization, and strictly forbidden is an overt or veiled request for more funding. They just want to be thanked. 

2. DON’T Put Any Warm Body on the Board of Directors

We have a saying at our firm: “No organization can rise above the level of its board.” The makeup and commitment of a nonprofit board is its lifeblood. A great board can propel an organization to unimagined heights, and, conversely, a poor board will mire it in quicksand until it finally sinks.

All too often, nonprofits, particularly newer organizations, are more concerned with filling all their board seats than with making sure the people they are recruiting are going to be good, dedicated, supportive, hard-working board members who can really lead the organization to success.

DO Go for Quality Over Quantity

It’s much better to have a small board of all the right people than a large board full of the wrong people. Nonprofits need to look for people who have a shared passion for the cause they are addressing, along with another needed characteristic. Perhaps you need a lawyer or a real estate expert or someone with a background in social services on your board — these candidates also need to really care about the issue. And it does not hurt if they have the ability and desire to make a significant financial contribution. We can help you establish and management an effective board. Learn about all of the services available to you on our website.

3. DON’T Ignore Cryptocurrency

There is a lot of misunderstanding about cryptocurrency — what it is, how to use it, and where it comes from. I think many people think of it as a “black web” currency that you need to have when someone hacks your data and wants to sell it back to you. But, the fact of the matter is that cryptocurrency has become a legitimate form of payment for legitimate goods and services, including charitable contributions.

DO Plan Well for Crypto

We all have different comfort levels with technology and how “cutting-edge” we are willing to live. Regardless, cryptocurrency is a growing form of charitable contribution. Nonprofit leaders need to proactively determine how their organization plans to handle cryptocurrency gifts to avoid making arbitrary or “emergency” decisions when dealing with donors. By taking these steps your organization will be proactively ready for the wave of future gifts.

4. DON’T Pursue Perfection

Finally, and probably most importantly, don’t get caught pursuing perfection. Many of us think of perfection as the goal. After all, each of us wants to be the best, right? Yet, the pursuit of perfection can be your worst enemy when it comes to fundraising. Perfection consumes your time, feeds procrastination, makes you forget the fundamentals, encourages philanthropy atrophy, and creates donor drift. Read my Forbes article on the topic for a full explanation.

• Perfection Consumes Time: I repeatedly see clients spending hours and hours going through a myriad of edits to their case statement. While editing and proofreading are important, at some point you must put down the red editing pen, stop talking about it and start moving forward with your campaign.
• Perfection Feeds Procrastination: This often manifests itself as the development officer who never gets around to the solicitation of donors because they are always waiting for the perfect set of circumstances. Instead, they end up stuck working on a perpetual cycle of cultivation steps.
• Perfection Forgets Fundamentals: A development officer who’s stuck in a cycle of seeking perfection isn’t soliciting the donors … so the donor probably won’t give a gift. This is a fundamental principle that development officers often lose sight of. 
• Perfection Encourages Donor Drift: When you aren’t asking for their contributions, donors assume their help is either not needed or not wanted, and they may engage with other organizations that are actively seeking and wanting their help. With so many organizations vying for attention, it’s easy for donors to be redirected and drift away.

DO Pursue Excellence

I encourage development officers to keep in mind that the more complicated something is, the less likely it is to ever be perfect. Working with donors is a complicated dance. While you should strive for excellence, perfection should not be the goal.

The good news is, it’s not the eloquence of the words on paper, the clever phrase or the perfectly timed ask that are ultimately going to sway donors to support your project. What motivates donors to give is the vision of the organization, the urgency of the needs, the validity of the proposed solution and, most of all, their relationship with your organization and leadership. Be clear, be authentic and be responsive to your donors.

Instead of pursuing perfection, set your sights on recognizing when good enough is good enough, and start making real progress on your fundraising campaign.

DO Realize You’re Not Alone

This may seem like a tall order – all these do’s and don’ts – but our expert consultants at Alexander Haas are here to help your organization succeed. Contact us today with your questions or for a consultation to learn how we can help your organization thrive in 2023.

The post Four Do’s and Don’ts for Nonprofit Success In 2023 appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

Reforecasting Reimagined

The American Alliance of Museums annual meeting is usually a time when colleagues reunite for an invigorating week of professional development and camaraderie, yet this year’s meeting was forced online like so much of our lives today. This year, Alexander Haas was honored to lead the session Reforecasting Reimagined during a full day of sessions organized to address new approaches required by current circumstances, sponsored by AAM’s Development and Membership Professional Network.

Among the major challenges that museums are facing in response to the pandemic is that of forecasting revenue projections for current and future-year budgets. This is the result of a confluence of challenges that have never come together in such a unique way, including the unexpected timing and immediacy with which museums were forced to close, the resulting loss of earned and contributed revenue, employee health issues, and speculation over whether donors and members will cut back or redirect their giving to other priorities.

Here are four recommendations to consider as you approach the exercise of reforecasting:

Don’t Make Assumptions About Your Donors
Given the recent volatility of the economy, it would be natural to assume that donors may not have the discretionary income to invest in philanthropy as they have in the past. Also, with the heavy emphasis on health and human services organizations in recent days, it might be natural to assume that donors might redirect their giving toward other priorities. In challenging times, donors tend to focus on the priorities they value most. Based on their past giving, those priorities include your museum. Don’t automatically assume that your donors are going to cut back or stop giving until you’ve communicated with them.

Take a Measured Approach
Take a deliberate approach to reforecasting based on an analysis of your potential renewals and cautiously optimistic estimates based on donors’ historical giving. The result will be much more realistic than an across-the-board cut using an arbitrary percentage or historical data from the years following the last economic downturn. It will require more work in the short term but is worth the effort.

Funding is Tied to Programs
Apart from general, upper-level and corporate memberships and special events, a significant portion of a museum’s annual giving is directly tied to institutional programming. Be sure that sentiment is represented in reforecasting discussions. Make sure that those making institutional decisions about the budget realize that if specific programming that has been historically supported by a foundation or corporate sponsor is eliminated or dramatically reduced, so is the potential for that funding being renewed.

Revise as You Go
Given the lack of credible information about the future, it is inevitable that the first rounds of revised budgets are likely to be highly speculative at best. Continue to recalibrate throughout the year as information becomes available – such as after reopening, as major donors and sponsors indicate their intentions during their renewal cycle, or after online special events that have occurred.

While the world continues to respond to the effects of COVID-19, even the most scientific approach to reforecasting could never anticipate how the events of the future will unfold. In our experience, the organizations that take the time to develop and put into place a thoughtful, rational plan with the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances have the greatest opportunity for long-term success. In the months to come, do know that we are here to help as you reforecast your budget, revise your development program accordingly, and undertake your renewed fundraising plan for the future.

The post Reforecasting Reimagined appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

Training in the Time of COVID-19

In conversations with clients and colleagues, I have heard that training is high on everyone’s list. With travel prohibited, many staff members are seeking additional training opportunities and many leaders are trying to structure appropriate learning opportunities for their staff members. That is well and good—an excellent way to utilize time.

Let me offer a suggestion for Training in the Time of COVID-19 (apologies to Gabriel Garcia Marquez) of development officers that should actually become part of our general training regimen for gift officers. This suggestion is born of several factors—my own experience, my work with many, many gift officers as both supervisor and consultant, and my review of any number of training opportunities afforded front line fundraisers.

First some background. In working with a front-line gift officer to assist in strategy development for prospects, I was reminded of a gap in his understanding. He was interested in developing an approach for an alumnus, who did not give personally, although the accounting firm for which he is the founder and managing partner made contributions. It was clear to me that he failed to recognize that gifts from the firm were, in fact, to some degree coming out of the alumnus’ pocket. While there was merit in working with that alumnus to secure an individual gift, to approach him as though he were not giving would be a mistake. In short, his lack of understanding of the differences among corporations was proving to be a problem in his work with a prospect.

That reminded me of my early days as a gift officer. I remembered dealing with a number of prospects who were involved in the world of investments. One was a hedge fund manager whose fund was a fund of funds, giving investors access to a good array of other hedge funds—sort of like a mutual fund approach to hedge-fund investing versus owning one specific fund. Let’s just say that, as he explained what he was doing, I was lost. I had no idea what a hedge fund was; to say nothing about some of the strategies those funds employed. I nodded, smiled and kept quiet. Another did technical analysis for a mutual fund company…say what?? A third ran a fund that employed a long-short strategy designed to give investors a steady return. As he described it, “This fund is for people who want to have a reasonable return on their investment. I’ll never hit a home run, but neither will I read the headlines and immediately get nauseous.” One other was employed by Bain Capital. As he described what this private equity firm did (and I had no idea what private equity even meant), I struck that “smile, nod, repeat” posture so familiar to me (and others) when being told something about which I know nothing.

So, what’s the point of this? I have come to believe that we would serve our budding (and some who may be in full-bloom) professionals well by ensuring that they have a basic—and I do mean basic—understanding of the language and structure of the business/finance world. Having a degree of fluency in those areas would be beneficial to most. Many of the prospects they will work with, will live in one or more of those worlds. Many who do not, will still have a familiarity with one or both. We take great pains to educate gift officers in the profession. We also make sure that they have a good understanding of our college and/or university. We provide them with continuing education opportunities of all sorts. Yet, I am fairly convinced that we do not serve them nor our profession well if we do not include the basic concepts and language of business and finance as part of their overall introduction to the profession. In doing that, we have resources galore, including faculty, our alumni or select board members, if we choose to use them. They could assist us in designing the training and even help with instruction…high-level, broad, but sufficient to give them some degree of fluency. In doing so, we are likely to help them become even more effective in their work with their prospects. So, as you think about the training or professional development you want to provide your staff—or some part of it—during this time of COVID-19 social distancing, give some consideration to this. Once we can return to normal (or a new normal), consider how it can be one essential component of the education of a gift officer.  

The post Training in the Time of COVID-19 appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

Human Connection in the Time of COVID-19

Some of you may remember the concept developed by John Naisbitt in 1982, High Tech High Touch, which acknowledged that with greater reliance on technology, people would crave more TLC. How prophetic. Almost forty years later, we have transitioned to a time of super high tech, where technology plays a significant role in our lives. Thanks to COVID-19 all of us, including preschoolers through octogenarians, rely on technology for education, work, entertainment, religious observances, games, information, and social contact. Even our cats are entertained by video games. With a tablet, cell phone, laptop and of course, WIFI or cell connection, we could be content. But even the introverts among us still long for greater human contact, for high touch.

My colleague, Arthur Criscilllis, above wrote of using this time of COVID 19 social distancing to provide specific training to your development team on finance, investments, and other business concepts. Technical knowledge to further hone the craft of development is essential. This is also a time to refine the softer skills for your staff, especially as the reliance on technology creates a greater need for higher touch which is more challenging to deliver remotely. These may include understanding the hierarchy of human interactions, improving communication skills, collaborating across the organization, working with challenging donors, supervising and working remotely, time-management, but also developing prospect strategies, managing a portfolio and so forth.

These types of training could be offered in “virtual group” settings, but are much more effective one-on-one, where the content is highly personalized and customized to the needs of the individual. Further, the ability to participate in role playing and to address specific issues with prospects or colleagues in a confidential setting leads to more genuine interactions and better outcomes. Given the importance of communicating successfully across the airwaves, team members at all levels (executive and senior staff, front-line development officers, and those who play supportive roles) may benefit from customized training, coaching and mentoring.

As you plan professional development during this time of COVID-19 give consideration to this. Its impact will be both immediate in today’s virtual work world, and long-term once we find the “new” normal.

The post Human Connection in the Time of COVID-19 appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

• Fundraisers will always respect the free choice of all individuals to give donations or not.
• Fundraisers will not accept donations where the acceptance of those gifts would not be in the best interests of the organization or create a conflict of interest that would be detrimental to the organization’s reputation, mission, and relationship with existing supporters and beneficiaries.

Until recently, I wouldn’t have thought about these statements representing donors’ and organizations’ rights necessarily being in conflict. However, considering recent high-profile cases of gifts being rejected, or being refused before they’ve even been offered, following these principles in certain circumstances can create quite a dilemma for the modern fundraiser.

On rare occasion, a donor’s conflict of interest, such as their own personal gain, the burden of administering a particularly complicated gift, or a donor’s desire to direct their gift for a use outside the organization’s best interest requires invoking a review of gift acceptance policies or the consideration of a formal gift acceptance committee – the channels through which fundraisers are shielded from personally deciding whether an unusual gift should be accepted.

Yet, these days, institutions are increasingly facing external pressure to reject otherwise legitimate donations from individuals and families, not on these grounds, but based on perceived immorality on the proposed donor’s part. As an example, numerous museums in the United States and England have recently been forced to respond to public pressure by rejecting current and future gifts from the Sackler family, with protesters asserting the family’s personal complicity and contribution to the opioid addiction crisis.

It is usually a straightforward decision not to accept a gift when a proposed donor has been convicted of criminal activity. But in recent cases, a donor’s political views, their position on a provocative or hotly-debated topic such as climate change, or their legal ownership of a company with controversial business interests have encouraged bystanders to take a vocal, public position on the validity of the donor’s giving and to criticize an organization’s appropriateness in receiving it.

The essence of charitable giving in America relies on an individual’s freedom to make a voluntary contribution to any organization or worthy cause they wish to support. These transactions of the soul can bring indescribable joy and fulfillment to the donor, while providing the resources necessary for an organization to maximize the delivery of its mission. Our job as fundraisers is not to question a donor’s character or motive for choosing to be philanthropic; it is to facilitate their ability to give unless some real conflict exists that would substantially impede or damage the organizations we represent.

The values-based questions in play today supersede the function of a traditional gift acceptance committee. An organization’s board of directors, with public input as it sees fit, should be the arbiter of whether a gift from a specific donor would be detrimental to its organization’s reputation or mission or would harm its relationship with its constituents to the extent that the gift should be refused. But as boards diversify and represent more divergent points of view, debate about the receipt of controversial gifts is only likely to increase, further complicating fundraisers’ ethical role in representing both donors’ and institutions’ interests.

In the end, I believe that the spirit of philanthropy and goodwill that has fueled America’s nonprofit sector and provided immeasurable benefit to society will continue to thrive, reconciling the generosity of well-intentioned individuals and families with the organizations that are meaningful to them. And as far as I am concerned, it is a privilege to assist them both in this worthy endeavor.

The post A Modern Day Fundraising Dilemma appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

Giving to charity continued to grow in 2018, but not as robustly as in the past. Overall giving increased by less than 1%, but the growth between 2016 and 2018 was a meaningful 7.1%. As has always been the case,  individuals and families contributed the lion’s share of giving at 68%, but their total giving declined 1.1% from 2017. The most significant increase in the percent given came from foundations, including gifts from family foundations and distributions through donor advised funds. Foundation giving increased to 18% of overall giving, a 7.3% increase over the previous year. Giving to the arts essentially held steady from 2017 and continued to represent some 5% of total overall giving.

Giving USA 2019 offers several important insights into the trends uniquely affecting museums and performing arts organizations. Here are a few takeaways to consider in planning for the upcoming year:

Larger gifts from high net-worth individuals should continue to be a focus.

According to the 2018 U.S. Trust Study of High Net Worth Philanthropy, 90% of high-net worth households gave to charity, with a quarter of them giving to the arts. The Quarterly Report, also referenced in Giving USA, found that the overall increase in giving in 2018 was driven by a 2.6% increase in gifts of $1,000 or more; gifts under that size declined by around 4%. While maintaining efforts to increase gifts at all levels, arts organizations should prioritize their focus on larger gifts from individuals, through upper-level membership programs, project-related major gifts, and campaigns.

Campaigns are an important tool for attracting major gifts.

Cultural organizations continue to benefit from campaigns, which crystallize institutional priorities into fundable opportunities for donors and encourage larger gifts. Theatre Communications Group recently reported that 40% of theaters were currently in a capital campaign, and another 38% completed a campaign between 2012 and 2017, leading to a 23% increase in overall giving and a 55% increase in trustee giving during this period. This year’s Giving USA also reports that organizations in every region of the country received multi-million-dollar gifts in 2018, supporting capital, endowment, and programmatic initiatives, listing a sample of 18 representative gifts of $10,000,000 or more. As fewer individuals are giving and a greater percentage of philanthropic revenue is coming through larger gifts, now is the time institutions should consider organizing and launching a campaign.

Don’t discount online giving.

Blackbaud Institute’s 2018 Charitable Giving Report showed that online gifts represented 9.5% of overall giving to arts organizations in 2018, and the 5.8% growth in online giving to the arts outpaced other non-profits by four times. While this noteworthy growth rate in overall online giving to the arts may be a function of the membership culture unique to museums, these trends illustrate the significance of making online giving a convenient option for donors and members, especially considering the decrease in smaller gifts.

Despite the complex issues that affect charitable giving in our country – from policy and tax law changes to social, economic and other factors – the voluntary, philanthropic support of arts and cultural organizations has never been stronger, with donors giving $19.5 billion to the arts in 2018. Reflecting on the numbers and trends outlined in this year’s Giving USA report, this is a time for optimism and opportunity, as we engage those donors whose generosity lights the fire of creativity, casts light on the human condition, and brings beauty and enjoyment through our nation’s arts and cultural organizations.

Takeaways From Giving USA To Help You Plan Better:

Giving to the Arts: The Numbers

Giving USA 2019: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2018, was released in June, and amid a complex climate for charitable giving, individuals, bequests, foundations and corporations gave an estimated $427.71 billion to charities in 2018.

Giving to arts, culture and humanities organizations stayed relatively flat, increasing 0.3% to $19.49 billion.

• In current dollars, giving to arts, culture, and humanities increased 13.4% between 2016 and 2017, and increased 0.3% between 2017 and 2018. Cumulatively, current-dollar giving to arts, culture, and humanities increased 13.8% between 2016 and 2018.
• Adjusted for inflation, giving to arts, culture, and humanities increased 11.1% between 2016 and 2017, and declined 2.1% between 2017 and 2018. Cumulatively, giving to arts, culture, and humanities increased 8.7% in inflation-adjusted dollars between 2016 and 2018.
• Contributions to the arts, culture, and humanities subsector comprised 5% of all charitable donations in 2018.
• Donations to the arts, culture, and humanities subsector reached the highest inflation-adjusted amount record to date in 2017, and remains the highest to date.
• Donations to the arts, culture, and humanities subsector have amounted to between 3% and 5% of total giving over the past 40 years.

More information from the Giving USA 2019 report can be found here.

The post Giving to the Arts Holds Steady appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

According to the findings of Giving USA, 2018 was an uneven year for philanthropy, with some subsectors experiencing significant increases, while others saw significant decreases.

It was also a year that saw three unprecedented things: 1) a record year for giving at $427 billion, 2) for the first time since Giving USA began in 1954 individual giving was less than 70% of all giving, and 3) giving to Religion reached its lowest point in more than 40 years, falling to 29%.

Total giving increased in 2018 in current dollars, but just barely, at a rate of 0.7%. Adjusted for inflation giving actually decreased by 1.7%.

Five subsectors saw giving decline, while four saw increases. The biggest increase came in giving to International Affairs, while the largest decrease was in giving to Foundations.

As in previous years, giving by Individuals is the number one source of gifts at 69%, but declined by 1.1% from its 2017 level. Giving from Foundations, many of which are family foundations, increased 7.3%.

While Religion continues to be the number one recipient of gifts, giving to Religion continues to lose market share, reaching an all-time low of just 29% of the pie and actually decreased by more than 1.5% in current dollars. While the trend of a declining percentage of giving to Religion has been ongoing for years, the actual decline in current-dollar giving to Religion is a unique phenomenon; one that has never happened in a non-recession year.

Below, is a quick look at the numbers. We will share more in-depth information in our upcoming sector newsletters.
Sincerely,

David H. King
President & CEO

Quick Look At The Results

The Numbers for 2018 Charitable Giving by Source:

• Giving by individuals totaled an estimated $292.09 billion, decreasing 1.1% in 2018 in current dollars. The only source that decreased between 2017 and 2018.
• Giving by foundations increased 7.3% between 2017 and 2018, to an estimated $75.86 billion in 2018. Between 2016 and 2017 giving increased 12.0%. The cumulative change in current-dollar giving by foundations between 2016 and 2018 is 20.2%. This is the greatest percent increase of any source in this period.
• Giving by bequest remained virtually unchanged in current dollars between 2017 and 2018-to $39.71 billion. Adjusted for inflation, giving by bequest decreased 2.3% in 2018.
• Giving by corporations increased by an estimated 5.4% in current dollars from 2017 to 2018, totaling $20.05 billion. In current dollars, giving by corporations decreased by 2.0% between 2016 and 2017, and increased 5.4% between 2017 and 2018. The cumulative change in current-dollar giving by corporations between 2016 and 2018 is 3.4%.

The Numbers for 2018 Charitable Giving to Recipients

• Giving to religion decreased 1.5% in current dollars from 2017, totaling $124.52 billion in 2018. Adjusted for inflation, contributions to religion decreased 3.9% in 2018. Accounting for 29% of total giving, this is the first time that giving to religion has fallen below 30% of overall giving.
• Giving to education decreased 1.3% in current dollars from 2017-to $58.72 billion in 2018. Adjusted for inflation, contributions decreased 3.7% in 2018. In 2017, giving to this subsector reached the highest inflation-adjusted value recorded to date..
• Giving to human services decreased 0.3% from 2017, totaling $51.54 billion in 2018 in current dollars. Adjusted for inflation, contributions decreased 2.7% between 2017 and 2018. In 2017, donations to this subsector totaled the highest inflation-adjusted amount recorded to date.
• Giving to [grant-making] foundations decreased 6.9% in current dollars from 2017-to $50.29 billion in 2018. Adjusted for inflation, contributions to foundations decreased 9.1% in 2018.
• Giving to health organizations grew 0.1% from 2017, totaling $40.78 billion in 2018 in current dollars. Adjusted for inflation, contributions to health decreased 2.3% between 2017 and 2018.
• Giving to public-society benefit declined 3.7% in current dollars from 2017, for a total of $31.21 billion in 2018. The cumulative change in giving to public-society benefit between 2016 and 2018 is 2.1% in current dollars. Contributions to this subsector reached the highest inflation-adjusted value recorded to date in 2017.
• Giving to arts, culture, and humanities increased 0.3% from 2017, totaling $19.49 billion in 2018 in current dollars. Cumulatively, current-dollar giving to this subsector increased 13.8% between 2016 and 2018.
• Giving to international affairs increased 9.6% in current dollars from 2017-to $22.88 billion in 2018. The cumulative change in giving to this subsector between 2016 and 2018 is 5.2% in current dollars. Giving to the international affairs recorded the highest inflation-adjusted value in 2015, at $25.09 billion.
• Giving to environment and animal organizations increased 3.6% in current dollars from 2017, totaling $12.70 billion in 2018. Donations to the environment/animals reached the highest inflation-adjusted amount recorded to date in 2018.
• Unallocated giving represents 2% of total giving at $6.53 billion in current dollars in 2018.

The post Giving USA 2019 Results – Giving Reaches Record-Breaking High, But Not Everyone Benefited appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

One institution in the Southeast, North Carolina State University announced such a transformative gift for its College of Textiles this past fall. A $28 million gift, from alumnus Frederick “Fred” Eugene Wilson Jr. and the Wilson family will fund an endowment for the College. The College is now known as the Wilson College of Textiles.

As is often the case, this gift did not arise by accident, but through active communication with the donor and a genuine willingness to connect the donor with the opportunities and needs of the institution.  Mr. Wilson’s grandson, Rede Wilson, 2016 alumnus, responded to a direct mail appeal six months after graduation with a $1000 gift.  When asked why, he said it was because the dean asked him.  The dean had been one of Rede’s professors.  The development office was quick to connect Rede with his grandfather, who had given $10 million to High Point University.  Michael Ward, Senior Director of Development, asked Rede to serve on a young alumni committee and asked his assistance in reconnecting the family.  Members of the family became more actively involved in the College and across the campus.  Opportunities for engagement included attendance at basketball games and serving as design judges for the senior design contest.  As in best practices, a host of NC State and the College of Textile administration, faculty and staff played significant roles.  More than a dozen individuals participated in reconnecting the family, writing proposals, researching opportunities and meeting with family members.  The Chancellor and Dean were notably front and center in explaining the need, and transformative impact a naming gift could impart. 

Michael Ward suggested that there were several key points that outlined the success of this journey:

1. Soliciting new grads:  The initial solicitation resulted in an unusual gift for a six-month alumnus.
2. Recognition by the research team:  Realization that this new grad was a part of a generous multi-generational family.
3. Reconnecting the family:  Assistance was sought from the graduate to engage the family and many members of the family were involved in every step of the process.
4. Progressive emphasis on relationship building: Permission was requested every step of the way before invitations were issued to meetings and events.
5. An apology for not having stayed in touch:  The College acknowledged that it could have done a better job of staying involved with its more successful alumni.
6. Involvement of many people across the campus:  But most importantly, efforted was planned and coordinated by a seasoned development officer. 
7. Asking for permission to solicit: Nothing happened by surprise; the donor’s input and desires were instrumental in developing the opportunity and ultimately the solicitation.

The post A Transformative Gift to Name the College of Textiles at NC State appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

1. Asking for money before engaging the donor.

Engage in a sincere and meaningful conversation with your top donors before asking for anything.  Remember that asking for a gift is only one step in the “development process” and it usually is not the first step.  You need to “develop” the relationship first and find the shared goals of your organization and the prospective donor.

2. Treating all donors the same.

You may not like it, but not all donors are the same.  Small donors are perfectly comfortable responding to a snail mail or email request. Major donors require major investments of time and energy and a personal relationship and request.

3. Thinking that donors to other organizations will not give to you.

People give wherever they feel they can have an impact and most donors contribute to five or more organizations. Even a donor who is supporting one of your “competitors” may have a very real interest in the area that you are serving and want to support as many organizations as they can that are having a real impact on that issue.

4. Spending too much time securing new donors while failing to steward your current donors.

Your best prospect for a gift is someone who has made a gift before.  Yes, you need to always be adding donors, but don’t make that harder by creating a churn of lost donors every year.  Continue thanking, cultivating and stewarding your existing donors and celebrate a renewed gift just as joyfully as you would a new gift.

5. Not saying “thank you” in a timely manner … and not often enough.

We used to say get the thank you letter to them before their check clears. Most transactions these days are electronic so that no longer applies. But, be quick, be sincere, and do it without asking for more money. A donor should receive a thank you within 24 hours of a gift and a major donor should get a phone call as soon as you receive the gift.

6. Failing to deliver bad news.

They say good news travels fast and bad news travels faster. The nonprofit community is small — there are no secrets. Be upfront and clear with information that deals with controversial issues or mistakes or problems you are facing. Donors invest in you and want/expect to be treated as insiders and trusted advisors. Don’t let your donors hear about your issues from someone else – take control of the messaging.

7.  Appointing Board members who aren’t donating and raising funds.

If your board members, who are legally responsible for the organization, are not your most loyal and dependable supporters you are going to struggle with fundraising.  Further, if your board members are not willing to help you raise funds – by soliciting gifts themselves or making introductions or being vocal advocates for your organization – then you probably have the wrong board members.

[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

The post 7 Sins that Kill Your Fundraising Efforts appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.

Whatever it takes.

Sweet Briar College, a women’s liberal arts college founded in 1901, was at risk of losing its legacy in the spring of 2015 when the college president and board suddenly announced they would be closing the college due to fiscal trouble.

A group of loyal alumnae stepped up and, with the help of the experts at Alexander Haas, began to do the impossible – Saving Sweet Briar. Hear in their own words, key alumnae and David King, President and CEO of Alexander Haas, recount the dramatic turn of events as the firm did “whatever it takes” to make the Saving Sweet Briar campaign a huge success.

The post Saving Sweet Briar: “Whatever it takes.” appeared first on Alexander Haas - Fundraising Counsel.