Here are two truisms: These are uncertain times. Fundraising is as important as ever.
In Europe, the economic uncertainty surrounding Britain's exit from the European Union has advancement leaders worried. With budgets already tight—in the U.S., public funding for higher education is nearly $10 billion below pre-recession levels—advancement professionals may struggle to convince institutional leaders to invest in fundraising when additional worthy causes, including academic programs or student success initiatives, need funding.
But when institutions let up on fundraising, they lose revenue. A recent analysis by Graham-Pelton Consulting found that individuals, foundations, and corporations did not stop giving during the 2008 recession—rather, nonprofits stopped asking. "Organizations that pulled back their fundraising activities … reported the biggest declines in their income," the consultancy reports in its video on fundraising during uncertain economic times, Fundraising Through Brexit: What You Need to Know. Graham-Pelton's advice: "People don't stop giving, so don't stop asking."
As with donors, successfully making the case for institutional investment involves providing a hopeful, promising vision of what the institution could achieve with additional support—and reporting the impact, or return, of the investment.
"Instead of saying, ‘Woe is us,' let's look at it from an aspirational perspective: ‘This is what we could do, but our aspirations exceed our traditional revenue sources. If we have these resources, we can do this much, and this is how we will achieve it,'" says Kathleen Guy, principal of The Eaton Cummings Group, a Michigan-based fundraising consultancy. If development has a skeleton staff not well equipped to invite philanthropic gifts, the gifts won't come.
"An organization's ability to fundraise is directly related to its philanthropic success," observes Adrian Sargeant, director of the U.K.'s University of Plymouth Hartsook Centre for Sustainable Philanthropy, which studies and develops research in philanthropic psychology. To increase the flow of private funding essential to sustainability and growth, "the entire institution needs to have a culture of giving."
That's why buy-in is so important. Successfully making the case for investment depends on whether advancement has the respect of faculty and staff and can demonstrate that it is achieving important work. "We need to cultivate our internal audiences so that they know and understand what we're doing with our time and resources," Guy says. "You're cultivating relationships internally and demonstrating success."
The institutions profiled in these pages have taken these steps and more to secure additional financing for their advancement offices. In every case, strategic changes yielded a positive return on investment. While solutions are as unique as the institutions involved, each of these five examples contains teachable moments. Here's how the featured institutions made the case for investment.
Making the Case: Leadership
Help from the Helm
By Pyeper Wilkins, chief advancement officer and executive director of the Dallas County Community College District
Institutionally related foundations exist for one reason: to support the institution's mission. Usually, that means raising money, which sounds simple. But how much time does your foundation actually spend cultivating gifts? Do your leaders know the answer to this question?
Generating resources was a key part of the Dallas County Community College District Foundation's mission when it formed in 1973. Over the years, the foundation's endowment grew to more than $45 million and distributed more than $40 million in scholarships to thousands of students. But by 2015, the seven-college district and the foundation had undergone several changes that dramatically altered our mission.
The foundation had no fundraising staff. No one was running an annual campaign, developing connections with alumni, or working with potential major gift donors. What were staff members doing all day? Several were administering scholarships. All day. Every day. On paper.
With a new chancellor who brought a new mindset about the foundation and its role in the system, it was time to get serious about fundraising. How? By aligning the foundation's priorities with the district's strategic needs and building an organizational structure that could support fundraising efforts.
An operational assessment also uncovered the need to eliminate duplicative services, reallocate resources, and reorganize staff. For example, the foundation had staff devoted to marketing and research—services that were available through the district.
By sharing marketing and research functions with the district, the foundation eliminated three positions and replaced them with a prospect researcher, an alumni coordinator, and a director of major gifts. That time spent administering scholarships by hand? We implemented a technology platform to electronically handle the application, selection, and awarding processes. Staff now focus more on donor relations and donor reporting than on scholarship paperwork.
We secured funding to add two new major gifts officers as the foundation prepares to launch a comprehensive campaign in 2017. How did we get leadership to invest in building a sustainable fundraising structure? It started with the appointment of a chancellor who fully understands fundraising. He sees himself as the chief fundraiser for our district, and he knows we're in this for the long term.
The district CEO's involvement inspired the foundation board to reclaim its fundraising mantle. We hadn't asked them to do much, and over time the board and foundation were off on their own path. Today they see the value of fundraising to support district goals and their role in it. They're hosting events at homes and other private settings, inviting influential acquaintances to meet the chancellor, who shares with them the district's goals and needs. By introducing us to their key contacts, board members are helping the foundation build a list of major gifts prospective donors.
Key lesson: There's no substitute for involving the institution's CEO. Make sure he or she understands the value your fundraising operation brings to the institution. How many scholarship students are you supporting? How is philanthropic investment helping the institution solve problems and remove barriers that hinder student success? Securing investment is an easy sell if the CEO can see the difference you're making.
Making the Case: Expert Reinforcement
The Consultants
By Kathryn Mullins, vice president for college advancement at Grand Rapids Community College in Michigan
After serving 12 years in the President's Office at Grand Rapids Community College, I was promoted to my current position as vice president for college advancement and executive director of the GRCC Foundation. My history with the college, coupled with my knowledge of the foundation's fundraising processes, helped me understand the college's development culture. However, I knew my lack of development experience might be a challenge in my transition to the new role.
My first day in the position, I began an audit of processes and much to my surprise and dismay, I realized that all of the events and donor files were managed in Excel. There was no easy way to look at our donor database in its entirety. As a result, we were not able to identify new donors, we were not properly stewarding donors, and we were not effectively leveraging the events we were hosting. Our fundraising initiatives were stagnant.
When I hosted my first foundation board meeting, it was evident that board members were not being engaged in the work. Board meetings were more like social gatherings than business meetings. My one-on-one talks with board members revealed that they wanted to do more than they had previously been asked. They understood that significant resources were needed to take the foundation to the next level, but because I was new to this role, they questioned the foundation's ability to choose the best way forward. Ultimately, though, this desire to do more led the board to support hiring a consultant for a foundation audit.
The consultancy that conducted the audit saw the same must-address issues I had identified. It recommended adding one full-time position in our office, holding strategic development sessions with foundation board members, and implementing a donor-management database system. It also provided us with a road map for moving forward. The consultants reinforced my initial findings, building my credibility with the board, staff, and college leadership as the right leader for the foundation.
The board approved an immediate investment of $50,000 to carry out the recommendations. Within the first three months of the foundation audit, we saw a 79 percent increase in annual revenue, a 53 percent increase in end-of-year solicitations, a 32 percent increase in online donations, and a 45 percent increase in our annual event profit. We realized a $1.6 million increase in overall total dollars raised/collected over the previous year. We created a planned giving website and contracted with a vendor to purchase and implement fundraising software. As a result of working with the consultants, the board is focused on fundraising, and my staff is engaged in ways that I have not seen before.
Key lesson: When you're ready to invest in structure, be sure to invest in the board's development. Our consultant held strategic planning sessions dedicated to why the foundation board is essential for fundraising success. Board members were able to see themselves as critical partners in the foundation's work. Foundation directors can only go so far; we need the support and assistance of the board.
Making the Case: Educate Internal Audiences
Instructions Must Be Included
By Sarah Porter Waterbury, vice president for advancement at Imperial College in London
In the past 18 months, Imperial College London doubled its advancement team and has set ambitious targets for philanthropy-a 25 percent increase in 2017 to approximately £25 million. How did this happen? It started with leadership and required advancement to do what our institutions do best: educate.
In the U.K., fundraising for higher education is a relatively recent phenomenon. Until 1998, a university education, like health care, was free to taxpayers, so the concept of paying tuition and donating to one's alma mater was relatively unheard-of. So was the adage "You have to spend money to make money."
Having worked at institutions with a strong fundraising legacy-Stanford University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Lehigh University-Imperial's new president, Alice Gast, understood what a world-class advancement operation looked like. She hired a seasoned vice president (aka me) to help get it going.
We created a strategic reorganization plan and presented our budget needs to the board of directors. The process involved a lot of explaining-clarifying the components of a professional advancement program, reviewing the division of labor, and setting expectations about deliverables and projected growth in revenue. Also critical was the college leadership's willingness to invest in excellence.
We also worked closely with the financial department to gain buy-in from the senior team. The nature of development work was not well understood. I knew that, but I hadn't realized how much explanation was needed, including how a fundraising program works and what can be expected. In my tutorials, I spoke in much more detail than I had anticipated about various nuts and bolts: the difficulty in maintaining an accurate and up-to-date alumni database (of 200,000), the staffing required to efficiently process gifts, the importance of thoughtfully stewarding donors, the impact of developing compelling promotional material, the value of offering stimulating alumni programming, the cost and significance of putting on high-level events, and more. To this end, we established systemic and strategic benchmarks and key performance indicators: How many alumni clicked and opened e-bulletins? How many attended spring alumni day last year versus this year? How many new alumni donors did we add?
Fortunately, Imperial is a community of engineers and scientists who are pragmatic problem-solvers. They listened to the challenge and wanted to be part of the solution, including participating in various programs such as alumni weekend and responding to a call for gifts.
In 2015-16, we had a 65 percent increase in attendance at alumni weekend over the previous year. During that same period, we also had 27 percent more donors.
Going forward, our targets for these areas are even greater. Thanks to the addition of staff in numerous advancement functions, from gift administration and phonathon to reunions and planned giving, we have created a solid foundation. Relationships, like trust, take years to establish, no matter what side of the Atlantic you are on.
Key lesson: Get the support of institutional leadership—president/provost/chief financial officer and governing board—for advancement. Articulate the value proposition and develop a clear strategy and comprehensive plan. Work with leaders to set realistic expectations and explain key performance indicators and short- and long-term goals.
—As told to Sandra Gurvis
Making the Case: Benchmarking
It's All About the ROI
By Janet Colson, executive director of the Development Office and the Foundation at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand
When I took over as executive director in March 2016, New Zealand's Victoria University of Wellington was early in the silent phase of a four-year NZ$80 million capital campaign. Although familiar with the overall strategy, I wasn't directly involved in the decision to move forward with the campaign. Now, however, it was my baby.
To succeed, the campaign required an infusion of money to bring staffing numbers up to even a basic level. We also needed to establish systems and processes to spread the word about Victoria's accomplishments and undertakings and to create formal benchmarks to measure our progress. When it came to acclimating development officers, we embraced the adage "the show must go on!" as we had challenging targets to meet.
My first steps at Victoria were to liaise with our new campaign manager, Anita McKegg, to create a case for support that we would present to the University Council, the governing body that ultimately agreed to invest additional funding. Facts and figures were key in obtaining the counsel's buy-in, and statistics from CASE were important. Council members wanted to know how campaigns are conducted elsewhere, what the startup costs would be, and how much we were projected to raise, given the investment. We showed decision-makers how, with increased woman-power, we could move from 80 major donor relationships to 300. By providing this information, we were able to get the operational and fundraising sides of the university to work hand-in-hand. The council nearly doubled our budget with the expectation that I would significantly increase the university's capacity to attract philanthropic support. In a few months, we upped our staff from 12 to 24, including four full-time and three part-time development managers.
I revisited our plan: Was the message on target? This campaign was as much about branding as it was about investments and all-important outcomes. We analyzed how to reach out to donors to pitch various ideas and how we could design a campaign that would support the university's strategic plan. We worked with a design agency on a campaign identity with the theme "Change Lives, Change Our World."
We're already seeing results. For example, by highlighting the university's research on targeted immunotherapy, we received NZ$2 million in donations, including a partnership with the New Zealand Breast Cancer Foundation to expand this research to target improved breast cancer treatments.
In 2015, we raised NZ$10.9 million, of which NZ$7 million was a single gift. Thanks to the improved budget and campaign restructuring, we raised more than NZ$11 million in 2016, with the largest single gift being NZ$2.2 million. This shows that our efforts in casting a wider net are paying dividends.
Key lesson: Your argument needs to be clear and convincing. To secure investment from decision-makers, use best practice examples from a range of other comparable institutions, show that this is an investment that will reap rewards over time through concrete examples and success stories, and demonstrate the importance of building development resources and capacity to ensure donor relationships flourish.
—As told to Sandra Gurvis
Making the Case: Faculty Advocates
When the Faculty's on Your Side
By Alejandra Peralta Borja, head of development and institutional communication at Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México (ITAM)
When I started Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México's advancement office in 2006, we had communications and alumni relations teams. Fundraising? It was just me. We wanted to strengthen our relationship with alumni before we started asking for gifts.
However, we had one donor-initiated fund that needed to grow: the Living Expenses Aid Program, which provides students with a monthly stipend of Mex$2,500 ($139 in U.S. dollars) for food, housing, and transportation. Since 1994, ITAM has been the only private institution in Mexico to offer such aid. One-in-three students receives tuition aid, and many more than the seven who received the living expenses stipend in 2006 needed additional help.
With the help of faculty and alumni, we raised gifts for the program from 220 donors. It was impossible for me to manage 220 donors. I explained to the president that we needed internal funding to support our mission of affording high-potential students the opportunity to earn a degree. Many of them are poor, and tuition scholarships were not enough. The university agreed to give more support.
I wasn't the only one making the case. Five or six faculty members had raised concerns about students not having enough nutrition that they were suffering academically. Faculty support—they gave and raised money—sent a powerful message. Our institution of just 4,500 students is small. The president personally heard students explain what the program meant to them. He didn't hesitate to support my funding request.
With the Mex$40,000 investment from the president, we opened the fundraising office two years ago with two new employees. Today, donors to the Living Expenses Aid Program number 500. In 2016, 193 students received a living expenses stipend. We have since created six funds, all of which cover housing and other nontuition costs. We're also starting to raise funds for tuition.
The office is focused on strategy and service. We know which alumni and community groups we want to cultivate and what events we should attend. In addition to holding university-sanctioned alumni events, we're meeting with alumni in different sectors of industry. We use our donors as ambassadors, asking them to identify five or six of their friends for us to visit and cultivate. It makes them feel important. They're involved and have a voice.
With their aid, the help of faculty and students, and the small professional fundraising force we have, we're confident that we will achieve our next goal: growing our participation rate, currently at 2 percent, to 17 percent.
Key lesson: Alumni want to be involved in the university, and they seek ways to have an impact on society. Inspiring programs like the Living Expenses Aid program allow alumni to meet both needs. Faculty members have powerful voices. Having them be part of the fundraising program is an endorsement of the university.
—As told to Toni Coleman
Sandra Gurvis
Sandra Gurvis is the author of 16 books and hundreds of magazine articles on topics ranging from travel to education to medicine and more. She lives in Columbus, Ohio.