Forging the link between fundraising and marketing will be the topic of my May 1 webinar with Forum for Fundraising. You can sign up now. As one who has been on both sides of the communications divide -- fundraising and marketing, I can affirm that it's a win-win to collaborate. And I'll make it simple for you. Hope to be "talking" to you on May 1!
As a development officer, you know that your job is to raise money. But are you doing your other job as a marketer for your nonprofit institution? By cultivating donors, you are also developing customers who take action and support your cause.
And nonprofit marketing communicators, listen up. Are you partnering with the development office for optimal fundraising and marketing communications that advance your organizational mission?
If not, let me introduce you! Savvy nonprofit organizations today, including universities and medical centers, have broken down the traditional walls between marketing communications and fundraising campaigns, and why not? Working one-on-one on the frontlines with donors and prospects, nonprofit fundraisers are marketers who automatically have a direct "share of customer."
Start by aligning your terminology. Behind every fundraising cultivation step (from "awareness" to "engagement") there should be a well-defined marketing communications strategy (from "inform" to "buy").
Next, apply fundraising and marketing communications strategies in every donor interaction, from answering the telephone to a chance meeting in an elevator or a scheduled visit. Don't assume that your constituents really understand everything about your organization or its activities. If fundraisers know the most current institutional positioning and use it to inform their donor conversations, it's a win-win for everyone.
For effective fundraising communications, contact info@marketingu.biz.
Fundraising materials for buildings and other facilities often are deadly. Fundraising case statements typically promise modern and spacious facilities, vastly increased square footage and even "dramatic discoveries" and "innovative learning styles." But most potential donors want to thoroughly understand what will go on inside the building and how that activity, not the building's cosmetic features, will positively impact the education of an economics student, a film director or a doctor -- or the performance of an athlete. Bottom line, facilities fundraising is about people and programs, not structures.
That's not to say that the carefully envisioned features of a contemporary library, a concert hall or biomedical science center are not important. In fact, they are the foundation of the future promise. But they must be explained in a way that paints them as a stage set or canvass from which the vital new activity will take life and change lives.
The most successful fundraising collateral for facilities describes the project's desired outcomes through visual storytelling. What will happen inside the building? How will that activity be different because of the way the facility is designed? This living portrait builds on the reader's current context and draws a picture of a changed future, as we illustrated in the case statement for Colgate University's Case Library and Center for Information Technology.
Libraries are really different today than 30 years ago! And why? Such a guided journey is designed to permit a donor to take a virtual minds-eye tour inside the completed facility and imagine how his or her generosity will create knowledge, innovation and leadership -- and truly make a difference for new generations.
The news today that educational endowments solidly increased their returns in 2007 shows how deliberately higher education has adopted a business focus to fundraising. And there's good reason -- just like the rest of the economy, the growing disparities between the institutions that "have" and those that "have not" boils down to money in the bank. The yield is threefold -- better students, better faculty and the chance to improve the quality of education, and thus earn a better reputation.
University endowments in 2007 posted average gains of 16.9 percent, up from 10.6 percent in 2006, the Commonfund reported. Such growth is vital for students, faculty, programs, technology and facilities -- especially in light of declining state investments in public universities and the extraordinary demands on higher education to prepare graduates to work and live in a global economy. The "flat world" is here and US higher education is rushing to catch up.
Much of my professional work is focused on articulating to donors why endowments are absolutely essential. It's a simple "case" -- endowment is the lifeblood of top universities today, a perpetual savings account funded by generous gifts of cash, securities and/or real property. The endowment itself grows, through wise investment, while colleges and universities take out 4-6% a year for current operating expenses. This may fund a bright new faculty star, provide a college education to a first-generation college student, send a student abroad to study for a life-changing experience or purchase a phenomenally expensive piece of technology that advances the fight against cancer.
A successful endowment must retain its value, outpace inflation and generate dividends that produce additional resources in the future. It should support programs 20, even 40, years from now, and in the short term, provide a hedge against economic uncertainties.
No wonder that 31 US colleges and universities are seeking to raise at least $1 billion in current fundraising campaigns -- with $4 billion goals at Columbia and Stanford and $3 billion at Yale and the University of Virginia. Much of this money will build their endowments. Much smaller or less prestigious schools are movingtheir fundraising into the big leagues as well, ramping up previous campaigns below $100 million efforts a decade ago to four times more fundraising income over the next five to seven years.
Some criticize all this as a vanity arms race. Call it what you want, because the returns are extraordinary. Private philanthropists and alumni are eager to invest in one of the most important causes ever -- the education that will allow each new individual to have a productive and satisfying life.
Anonymous gifts might make slam-dunk sense to fundraisers but they can be hair-pulling experiences for communicators. The upward trend toward more anonymity in big gifts,as reported in a new study by the Chronicle of Philanthropy, promises to alter the playbook for fundraising communicators.
Think about it -- a local university's largest gift ever, one that could solidly increase national visibility, gets relegated to a few inches on an inside page in the local newspaper because there is so little that can be said publicly. As smart communicators know, news media need to be fed captivating stories -- and information that's guarded and limited is no feast.
The food chain of relationships among donors, development officers and fundraising communicators gets tested in these situations. Development officers are focused on the money and the donor relationships, and that's their job. There are standards that bind their interactions morally, ethically, legally and financially. Wealthy donors, in this age of over-exposure, worry about their privacy and safety. Doing good publicly can be embarrassing among other less-well-heeled friends and colleagues, even frightening from potential security intrusions. Communicators who are not integrated into these transactions lose the opportunity to offer alternative approaches -- and often are left with the frustrating job of trying to place a spotlight on a tidbit of information.
As an advocate for greater coordination between fundraisers and communicators, I've seen instances in which adding marketing pros to the early donor discussions might have created win-wins for everyone. Otherwise, the chance for public attention can be greatly dimmed, however savvy the communications team.
Let's face it -- big gifts are also about bright lights. But it takes a compelling human story to generate public excitement about the tremendous impact major philanthropy can have for a university, hospital or community charity.
Generous spirits, guilt and tax deadlines propel motivations for last-minute year-end giving, which can amount to as much as 25 percent of some non-profits' incomes. Unfortunately you can't always count on the same people to give year after year, a new study shows. So, playing on both serendipity and opportunity, how can you be best positioned for your donors and prospects in the next two weeks?
After the annual appeal letter has gone out, here are three other useful steps you can take:
Successful planned giving cultivation starts at age 40, long before retirement age, a recent study has found. That flies in the face of traditional planned giving communications filled only with elderly and retired faces. In this survey of 2,000 households in four states, those most likely to name a charity in their will were age 40-60, had at least a bachelor's degree and were motivated primarily by "doing good" and "doing what's expected." Income wasn't a factor. The report was researched and written at The Center on Nonprofit Philanthropy at Indiana University for Campbell & Company.
The study also found that those with a charity in their will also give more during their lifetime. This is good news from fundraising professionals wisely turning their attention to the populous Baby Boomer generation.
Baby boomers volunteer at higher rates than past generations, but they are hardest to retain year after year. A report by the Corporation for National & Community Service found that one-third of Baby Boomer volunteers choose not to volunteer the following year. The research contains several lessons for non-profits seeking to leverage the sheer size of the Baby Boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964) and wisely harness their skills and interests.
To retain Baby Boomer volunteers, nonprofits must:
A recent discussion with a nonprofit board surfaced conflicting points of view on the focus of a fundraising appeal: will donors give to us because of who we are, or because of the people and issues we support? As fundraising becomes more personalized in style -- thanks to the Internet, podcasts, other new technologies and headline-grabbing events -- everyone can more easily seize the stage for the proverbial "15 minutes." In this context, however, it's even more essential to keep the focus on the reason you're fundraising -- why you exist. Simply put, you keep the stage by "making the case" for supporting your organization through compelling storytelling. In this environment where everyone is trying to upstage each other, don't assume that people will jump on the bandwagon because of your name recognition. Credibility as an organization -- and thus successful fundraising -- still result from your donor-winning aspirations clearly matched by a solid and consistent track record of delivering to your goals.
Jeff Brooks also talks about this challenge in his provocative fundraising blog.
Grantwriting experts Cheryl A. Clarke and Susan P. Fox list the top 10 flaws of grant-funding proposals in their new book, Grant Proposal Makeover
Doomed proposals:
To fix your proposals, a few tips:
