by Barbara Barron | Posted October 23rd, 2024 | Subscribe to this newsletter
How are your fundraising goals set?
Seems like a simple and fundamental question, right?
But in my experience, the answer can range from “no clue” to “they are set by the finance committee of the Board” to “I took last year’s total and added 10%”. None of these answers are strategic. None are designed for success. And all leave the person charged with meeting the goal demoralized.
I struggled with this when I served schools from the chief development seat. Since becoming a consultant eight years ago, I’ve conducted a dozen or more advancement appraisals at schools large and small, from CA to NY. I coach advancement pros and Heads of School who are new to their roles or to their schools. I train Boards in their roles in advancement.
So — this issue comes up. Frequently. When I ask the question, and then dig into their data, I see the problem. Feels like a set up for failure.
Essentially, the setting of goals for an advancement program should go well beyond setting a budget number. We need to ask how and where those dollars will come from. What’s the pathway to reach those goals? And what difference will it make when we do or don’t?
In contrast, when schools consider mounting a capital campaign they spend considerable time, energy, and resources determining a smart and realistic goal. We do feasibility studies to test “working goals” and build gift charts to map our way there. This makes sense since there’s a lot at stake.
But when it comes to our annual programs, we ought to apply that same logic and process. We need to dig deeper and ask essential questions. We need a more comprehensive plan.
Have you subscribed to this newsletter yet? It only takes a minute.
Some Prompts I’ve Used
Putting names and faces to work helps. Here are some prompts I’ve used:
· Who are the top prospects among newly enrolled families?
· How many families might we ask to increase?
· What can we expect from renewals (returning, giving families)?
· What realistic progress might we make with other constituencies (like alumni and grandparents)?
· What is the expectation of the Head and members of the Board to assist us in this work? And how will that work?
Because the bottom line is: we can only ever solicit the people in our communities. While there may be the occasional exception, the vast majority of our support (particularly for annual giving) comes from our own people: parents, former parents, some alumni, and some grandparents. That’s the fact.
Unless we have new donors, new families, identified (and qualified!) alums or others, it makes no sense to try to justify a leap up in fundraising numbers. Further, if it’s the same tiny office of one or two people – doing everything with minimal reliable help from great volunteers – we need to accept that their capacity isn’t going to increase either. More donors and/or more gift officers out there meeting and talking with prospective donors can make a difference.
Not overnight. But it will move the needle.
It stands to reason, right? With the same population of families, how can we expect a big jump in giving?
Now, the clear caveat to that is, of course, maybe we didn’t ask for enough last year. Maybe we had no intelligence about their capacity (problem #1), or we didn’t ask personally and meaningfully (problem #2) and so we just got a peremptory token gift. This happens when we promote the “gap.” Families simply default to the gap amount even when they have the capacity to give more generously. (See my article on the problems with the Gap.)
And more one problem with this lack of careful and realistic planning: the magical thinking that abounds when we merely raise the goal — believing it will result in more dollars in — has another dangerous outcome. It contributes to the ongoing trend in our profession of good development people leaving for greener pastures. I’ve written on that problem and solutions to it as well.
Back to solutions!
Problem #1: We didn’t get good capacity intel on new families
We need to resolve this by establishing better, earlier collaboration between the admission and development leaders. Development officers need to know who is coming into the community, and they need that information in the spring once matriculation is confirmed.
Why? So, they can use the summer to research families, learn more about their giving elsewhere, and their capacity. And they need more than just names and addresses. Admission offices need to collect work information, including job titles and where the parents went to college. Don’t be squeamish about this! Applying parents are never as willing to share as when they are hoping your school will accept their child. Or are grateful you just did. Ask.
Armed with this intel, the development office can segment new families, and endeavor to ask for meaningful gifts, in person, and early in the family’s time at the school. We know that the first gift can set an important baseline, and sometimes even an intractable ceiling for future gifts. Let’s get the first one right!
Problem #2: We didn’t ask for a personally meaningful gift.
Solving problem #1 makes it possible to solve problem #2. It allows us to lean in to ask more personally and meaningfully because we are basing our asks on real info. But it requires that we do not use generic appeals – electronic or printed. We do not simply focus on efforts to reach 100% (certainly not in the fall!). We seek to have real, personal conversations about the school’s mission and the giving program that supports and enlivens it. We use our time intentionally, prioritizing the few families who have the capacity to help the school realize its dreams. We ask them to join others who made the school a top philanthropic priority during their time. We share stories of gifts at work every day and the joyful impact they have. We work our way out to include everyone.
More?
· We ask for specific gift amounts, or a range if need be.
· We make sure families know they can pledge now and pay at a time that’s best for them so they can stretch to make a gift that’s as meaningful as possible.
· We let them know we accept non-cash gifts like grants from their Donor Advised Fund or transfers of appreciated securities.
· We find out how and when we can follow up to provide the kind of donor-centered care they deserve.
· We find ways to thank them in warm and meaningful ways that touch their hearts and builds out a stewardship program that distinguishes our school from all the other worthwhile places they can give
And even when we do all these good things, we still need to be at the table when the discussion and/or the decision about fundraising goals are being made. Educating those on the finance committee about how and what we do will help them make more realistic and sound decisions. Walk with them through the exercises suggested above so they see how we are getting our projections. Partner with our Heads of School and development committees to create true allies for this important work. We need them to understand the work and trust our calculations towards better, more realistic goals.
Not easy. But worth it.
Thank you for everything you’re doing!
Barbara Barron
[email protected]
Share this post:
BARBARA BARRON is one of the most respected and highly sought-after independent advancement professionals in the country, having worked with dozens of schools in every corner of the United States.
She has raised over $20 million for schools where she served as the Director of Development. Barbara is a New York Times bestselling author, speaker, and presenter who currently advises dozens of schools in various capacities. She is considered a thought leader in the world of advancement, with her writing widely shared by professionals in development offices worldwide.
More Advancement Articles
