Here’s the truth: there’s no “end” to a campaign. Sure, you reach your fundraising goals, you expand programs and construct spaces where real change can occur. But in your donors’ worlds, the campaign is another significant moment in their ongoing journey with your organization. It’s not a destination.

I recently received an email from an executive director who is planning for a special campaign. Her question wasn’t about a feasibility study, or the campaign, but rather how to plan for the notorious “post-campaign” phase.

There’s no magical formula or standard experience that will explain exactly what an organization will find on the other side of a campaign. Just like everything else in the fundraising world, the post-campaign reality is heavily dependent on the nature of the organization and the donors. However, one thing is true according to my colleagues here at Collins Group: it’s all about stewardship. Here’s what two of my colleagues had to say about it:

• “Retention rates will depend significantly on how donors are stewarded after the campaign. It’s essential to develop and implement a carefully thought-out plan for donors of all levels during the campaign and fine tune it along the way. A snapshot of retention rates before the campaign will give the organization an idea of the work it needs to do and help it develop strategies to keep retention as high as possible during and after the campaign.”

• “The key is looking at an annual fund strategy that coincides with your campaign strategy. So, if part of the donor’s campaign pledge is an annual fund gift, there is a high likelihood that they will continue the annual portion of their gift after the campaign if they receive thoughtful stewardship. It’s also helpful to use the campaign to re-engage lapsed annual givers and then steward them to keep them engaged beyond the campaign. “

So what’s the headline here? Accelerate into the end of the campaign by ramping up your stewardship efforts.

The post Stewardship: The Never-Ending Campaign appeared first on Collins Group.

The United Way outlined several guidelines for the Food Stamp Challenge:

• Eat breakfast, lunch, and dinner, spending only $7 per day
• Try to include fresh produce and lean protein every day
• Track expenses, food choices and recipes, and share your experiences

Two members of our Collins Group team decided to take the Food Stamp Challenge.

Anne

So was I able to meet the Food Stamp Challenge? Yes, but I learned a few important things about my food choices and options: I realized I had several key advantages.

Access

I live in a neighborhood that has four grocery stores within a one-mile radius, including one with a decent bulk food section. Since these are all within walking distance, it was easy for me to shop sales and purchase limited quantities of what I needed. Individuals who lack access to options because they live in food deserts do not have the luxury of choice. Click here for a Seattle Times article on food deserts in King County.

Time

The biggest challenge I faced was having enough time to plan and cook meals. If you have the ability and know-how to prepare and cook, it is easy to come up with meals that fell under the $7 benchmark. However, there were some days that ran long due to work, meetings, and other commitments where I got home feeling famished and wanting food immediately. It can be hard to make healthy food choices when you are busy and pressed for time. Convenience sometimes wins out.

Variety

There were definitely some limitations to my food options based on what I could afford. Meat was mostly off the table, and so was eating out at restaurants, alcohol, and some oils, condiments, and spices. I ate a lot of eggs, tofu, and beans for my sources of protein. Halfway through the week, I ran out of honey and was unable to replace it. Stocking up on pantry items and non-perishable food items was out of the question. I also tended to eat the same thing every day. By the end of the week, I had my fill of oatmeal for a while!

The challenge was a great experience and made me reevaluate not only the food choices I make but also the challenges many in our community face regarding food security and making healthy choices.

Matt

Spending just under $47 I too was able to meet the food stamp challenge. While I was proud of my accomplishments, I felt like I had been “helped” along the way. Looking back on the challenge I realize that I was able to meet the goal only due to my social network.

Social Events

I was lucky enough that I didn’t have to plan out all my meals. Throughout the week several of my friends had birthday parties in which food was provided. In some cases I was given leftovers to take home. While a birthday BBQ may provide a meal, it can’t always be relied upon as a guaranteed source of food. By random chance my friends chose to throw a social gathering in which they provided food to their guests. In situations where everyone is struggling, social networks are not able to throw the same kind of celebrations. Even when someone’s social network chooses to host an event, there is little chance that someone living from paycheck to paycheck would be able to join in on the festivities, as they are often taking on multiple jobs or taking an overtime shift in order to pay the weekly bills.

Household

I live with my partner, and while we have two mouths to feed in our apartment, we work separate jobs that allow us to individually care for ourselves. My partner will also buy groceries for me without asking or expecting pay in return. This is not the case for every household. I realized that there are many people who live together to help their individual finances, but even with cheaper rent are still not able to help pay for their roommate’s needs. My partner and I are also not responsible for children. Families with kids may need one adult to stay home, decreasing the income flow of the household and greatly increasing the costs of living.

Workplace

I am fortunate enough that Collins Group had tea and coffee available for employees. This enabled me to cut out my normal morning tea at home.This got me thinking about how lucky some of us are to have work environments that provide perks to employees. I have friends at companies who often get a meal through a client meeting, or have weekly staff lunches provided. Many minimum wage jobs do not include these perks. Through this challenge I also realized that I am fortunate enough to have health insurance. An unforeseen injury could mean an entire month of one’s food budget cut if health insurance is not an option at work.

Even with my social network’s help, I still found there to be challenges. I did not budget appropriately for daily snacks, and would often feel hungry between meals. I found myself counting down the minutes until lunch or dinner. I had gone hours without eating before, but knowing I could not afford to eat until a certain time psychologically increased my feelings of hunger.

This challenge put into perspective how lucky some of us are to be able to put food on our tables, and to have a social network in our lives. It also made me realize that food security is still an issue for many Americans.

For more information on King County’s Hunger Challenge, click here.

The post Eating On Just $7 a Day: Hunger Action Week at Collins appeared first on Collins Group.

When brainstorming for a Collins Group webinar last month on Getting Board Members to Fundraise, I thought that if we only got to know our board members the way we get to know our major donors, we would all have much more meaningful relations – with each other and with the organization. Why not use the donor-centered approach for the board? Why not sit down with each board member and ask them why they decided to join the board, what they would like to accomplish this year, and what tasks they are willing to take on to further the mission? Often we assume that the accountant will be the finance chair because we need a finance chair and they have the skills. But is that what the accountant wants?  Maybe they want to learn about service delivery or fundraising. You never know until you ask.

A good time to start this process is at the beginning of your fiscal year. It is a time of renewal and prioritization for the board. Here are three simple questions you can ask individual board members to have more meaningful conversations that help move your organization forward:

1) Why did you decide to join the board?

2) What do you hope to learn while on the board?

3) What are three things you would like to do this year to help us meet our mission?

I guarantee you will have more engaged board members if you listen to and act upon their answers to these questions. Of course, heartfelt thank you notes and proof that they made a difference will go a long way, too.

The post Board-Centered Fundraising 1-2-3 appeared first on Collins Group.

So what’s the relevance to you of these lines from a history book?

We are two months into the 2013 “journey.” Your annual fundraising goals are sitting next to your computer and your list of “big ideas” for the year has been generated, but what progress has been made so far?

If any of your goals involve a big change, there may be hints of hesitancy or obstacles that have cropped up by now. Maybe there has been discussion to make this the year your annual report goes fully electronic, or to finally eliminate that event that isn’t generating enough ROI. But, it’s hard to let go of the comfort of the familiar in favor of unchartered territory. And there are people who love that printed document or three decades-old event.

The advice I recently heard in one of my Seattle University Nonprofit Leadership classes? Burn the boats.

“Burning the boats” means fully committing to look ahead, not backwards. Taking the leap without the assurance that you can run back to the old way. It means “burning” the printed annual report (figuratively, not literally–unless necessary) in favor of only offering the online version. Or finally “burning” that expensive event that has been lagging along disguised as a fundraiser. Or fill in the blank with whatever the fundraising activity is that no longer serves your mission, vision, or clients.

Easier said than done, though. How do you get started?

1. Write down your vision for what successful development would look like at your organization.
2. Identify the “boats” or obstacles that are preventing you from full commitment to the changes needed to realize this vision.
3. Convene the stakeholders to discuss how to sunset the activity—staff, volunteers, donors, vendors, etc. Whose “sacred cow” is the printed newsletter or event that you want to eliminate? Make sure they have a voice early in the process.
4. Have a plan for how anyone displaced by the change will be better served under your new plan.
5. After striking the match, go confidently in the new direction of fundraising success. There’s no looking back, except to share what you learned from the experience.

The post Burning Your Boats In Search of Better Development appeared first on Collins Group.

It seems like just about everyone I talked with was somewhere along the continuum of their “big” campaign, which is/was “bigger” than the last one, and, as a matter of fact, is the “biggest” in the history of the school. There seemed to be little in the way of self-examination around all of this bigness, and at some point the pendulum might swing back to the place of ongoing, serial, mini-campaigns to fund discrete needs one or two at a time. But, for now, the pendulum is clearly in the big zone, and it appears not to be moving anytime soon.

The way most of these campaigns achieve their impressive girth is by assembling a montage of smaller sub-unit campaigns (i.e. separate goals for key colleges, schools or departments) that, when combined, total up to the mega-goal.

The goals assigned to many of these sub-units (especially high-profile units such as medicine, law or business) are comparable to what the entire college or university campaign would have been a decade ago.

How to manage all of these sub-unit goals within a larger campaign goal? That was the subject of a break-out session co-facilitated by myself and Cara Mathison, Senior Director of Advancement for the University of Washington College of the Environment (and a Collins Group client). Cara and some of her UW colleagues (no strangers to mega-campaigns) have brought in Collins to help plan their smaller, project-based sub-unit campaigns that will be part of the overall planning effort for UW Advancement.

Some highlights of our talk:

• Successful campaigns are still about vision. Don’t get swept up in buildings getting built or endowments getting larger. You still need to articulate in a compelling and convincing fashion how the world will be better off after you’ve raised your millions than it was before.
• When setting your unit goal, data is your friend. Mine it for giving history, trend lines, how much has been raised in the past from outright/deferred/corporate and foundation giving in order to make a reasonable stab at a campaign dollar goal.
• Test your goal AND your reputation. Because these sub-unit goals are so large, they often merit their own feasibility studies (which Collins has conducted recently for units of both UW and WSU). These studies provide valuable information on confirming or modifying dollar goals and unveiling reputational concerns before you are in official campaign mode.
• Reassess you volunteer structure. Time for a re-tooling of your “advisory” board that is more hopped up about receiving monthly updates and driving you batty than helping your raise money? Launching a campaign can be just the “tipping point” to bring in a new guard while tactfully thanking the old guard. (Credit for this strategy goes to Aaron Escobar of Oregon State University, who gave an excellent presentation on creating volunteer boards that work).

Mega-campaigns are clearly here to stay. If you are the person in charge of managing a chunk of it to a successful completion, it is better to be equipped and involved in the goal-setting conversations early than to be saddled with a goal with no clearly visible path to success.

The post Higher Ed Fundraising Forecast: Bigness Looms appeared first on Collins Group.

In 2003, several critical aspects of the original 1996 HIPAA law went into effect to protect patient privacy and apply limitations on what information would be available to fundraisers. Some of the rules were vague and led to great deal of interpretation about what was permissible. The new guidelines offer clearer definitions about what information fundraisers can gather from hospital records and offer expansive opt-out options for patients.

In a nutshell, the new guidelines will allow development professionals to receive and use the following information in fundraising communications, donor segmentation, and interactions with patients and patient families:

• Department of service (new)
• Treating physician (new)
• General outcome (i.e successful, deceased, etc.) (new)
• Name
• Address
• Guarantor contact information
• Date of birth
• Insurance status
• Date(s) of service (previously limited to one date of service)
• Location/site of service

As always, organizations must be able to demonstrate a specific need to use this information, protect the data as confidential health information, and limit access to staff members who don’t need to the information for their job function.

The second most important update is to clarify opt-out language in fundraising information.

• Patients and patient families must receive clear language indicating they may opt-out of fundraising communications through any combination of low-cost, low-burden methods such as email, a toll-free phone number, and/or through the organization’s website.
  • The low-burden clause is critical. Requiring patients to write a letter is not acceptable as it imposes too much burden on the patient.
• The opt-out rule applies to verbal as well as written communications.

The bottom line for anyone in healthcare fundraising is to know the new rules and make a plan about what to do next. These modifications go into effect on March 26, 2013 and enforcement begins September 23, 2013. The link to the full guidelines is here.

The post Understanding the New 2013 HIPAA Healthcare Privacy Rules appeared first on Collins Group.

• High Net Worth (HNW) volunteerism is on the rise—a whopping 89 percent of HNW individuals volunteer for organizations they care about (up from 77 percent in 2009)
• 71 percent of HNW families have a strategic plan for giving (discover this about your top donors, and then figure out a way to fit your nonprofit into that plan if you can)
• Planned giving vehicles (like donor advised funds) are on the rise
• 90 percent of the philanthropic decisions in HNW households involve women
• Over the next three to five years:
  • 52 percent of HNW individuals expect their giving to stay the same
  • 24 percent expect their giving to increase
• Very few HNW households reported income tax breaks as a giving motivator
• • But, if the estate tax is repealed, 9.9 percent would dramatically decrease giving
• 61 percent of HNW giving goes to general operating expenses (like annual funds and keeping the lights on)
• 74 percent of donors give because they’re moved at how their gift can make a difference
• 91 percent of HNW individuals have faith in the nonprofit sector—woohoo!

Remember, individual giving makes up 70 percent of the charitable giving pie, and the wealthiest three percent of individuals account for over 50 percent of that, so it goes without saying that integrating these trends into donor strategy is key to the nonprofit sector’s vitality in 2013.

The post Bank of America High Net Worth Household Survey Summary appeared first on Collins Group.

• 75 percent of executives think their board members are not engaged enough in fundraising
• More than 25 percent of executives self-identify as having little or no competency in fundraising
• Almost one-half of development directors do not feel they influence key decisions around fundraising – their own turf!

So here’s the real headline: as talented and committed a fundraiser may be, they are only as successful as their working partnerships with CEOs, other key staff, and board members. In other words – and this shouldn’t be a surprise – no single development director can build an effective fundraising program. It takes an organizational village. Here are six suggestions for your CEO and board members that won’t cost a dime and are guaranteed to contribute to your development leader’s satisfaction and effectiveness. Your organization can start this week!

For executives:

• If your DD is new to the field, find them a mentor outside of your organization. Successful fundraisers are passionate about their causes and about their work. Take advantage of formal mentorship programs offered by professional associations in your area. If there’s not one in your community, ask your peers to suggest a veteran who would be willing to share their experience, and serve as a sounding board, with your newcomer.
• Be honest with your DD about your own fundraising skill set and level. Then work with them to identify the tools, resources, and learnings you need so you can meaningfully supervise them.
• Sit with your DD to review your own portfolio of top prospects, and the next steps for each. You don’t have your own portfolio? Begin by identifying the three to five donors you will cultivate on a regular basis, and partner with your DD to identify specific next steps for each one.
• Make your DD a member of the leadership team. They already are? Then make sure they regularly report to other senior staff on both financial and non-financial development successes and challenges (“We met our number for the year!” isn’t enough).
• Include your development director at the table when your organization is making critical decisions. If the finance committee is creating next year’s budget, invite your DD’s expertise to shape fundraising goals based on informed projections, vs. the need for a balanced budget. If the organization is launching a strategic planning process, make sure they participate in setting top priorities. If you’re considering a major program initiative, look to them to analyze the difference philanthropy could make in launching and sustaining the program.

For board members:

• Like executives, you may not know how to leverage your passion and commitment with supporters of your organization. Dedicate time at a board meeting to identify what the board as a whole needs to successfully engage in fundraising. What are today’s barriers to success?
• Accept invitations to meet with your DD one-on-one. Yes, you’re both busy, but the relationship you build with each other will model those you’ll build with other supporters, and make your work together more fun. Be open about your strengths and interests and how much you can take on. Insist on accountability from your DD, but be specific: do you need a monthly reminder, talking points, or some training?

We’ve heard chocolate helps too.

The post The Report that Rocked – and Can Change – Our (Development) World appeared first on Collins Group.

As I’ve gone through my own personal career search, I’ve noticed applications were more competitive in the nonprofit sector. I remember applying to a few entry level positions only to be told that I was one of 200 applicants. When applying for a for-profit position, I was often one of 10.

I believe this trending shift in student career choice can be attributed to a couple of factors. It is important to note that these aren’t the only reasons, but some of those that I have identified through my own involvement as a young philanthropist:

1)      Idealist attitude inspired by the “Change” generation: When I entered college, the United States was entering a recession the likes of which many of my generation has never seen. We were used to a strong national economy and led to believe that we were all special and could change the world. So with Obama’s 2008 election platform, “Change,” many of us set out to fix what was broken by dedicating our lives to philanthropic initiatives.

2)      Increase of student involvement in philanthropy at universities: Student fundraisers have been around for decades in the form of student calling fundraisers and senior class gifts. Recently, there has been the development of student philanthropy councils that work in partnership with their respective university foundations. For example, the University of Washington runs a program called SPEP (Student Philanthropy Education Program). These programs educate students on the importance of donations to higher education with a goal that they as alumni will be more receptive to giving in the future. Because these programs have enhanced youth exposure to the field of development, more youth are looking at philanthropy as a career option.

If you’re not convinced already that youth interest in philanthropy has soared, I urge you to walk around any university and look at its campus organizations. Every cause imaginable is represented, and more often than not, each of them is fundraising in some fashion. What does this mean for the future of philanthropy? On one hand, greater youth interest means a better selection pool for open positions. On the other hand, the many rejection notices to aspiring young professionals can often dishearten and drive youth away from an organization. We are the generation of feeling “special,” and getting a rejection is hard for us to understand. When looking over applicants, take care in how you address recent graduates. They applied to your organization because they believe in your mission. While they may not have been a good fit as a paid staffer, including other opportunities for involvement in your organization may bring you some of your best volunteers.

Today I’m happy to be working in Collins Group as its new Administrative Coordinator. I set out with a goal like many of my fellow youth to impact the world through working with nonprofits. Today that dream has become a reality. Through my future blogs I will continue the discussion on youth philanthropic involvement, and I look forward to bringing all generations of philanthropists together in discussion.

The post Philanthropy: The Youth Career Choice of Today (A Narrative Account) appeared first on Collins Group.

You won’t find it in The Wall Street Journal. It resides in the nonprofit sector, and it goes by the name of Capital Campaign. It’s probably the best kept secret in the investment world.

Say a nonprofit group needs to raise $10 million toward a new facility to serve a population in need. The cost to raise that money – on the high end – will be about 15 percent, or $1.5 million. Most campaigns last three to five years. So, if investing $1.5 million over the course of, say, five years will earn you $10 million at the end of that time, what is your rate of return?

An unbelievable 567 (that’s right, five hundred and sixty-seven) percent. If that’s just too silly to get your head around, then look at the annualized rate of return. It is a mere 46 percent per year over five years.

As mind-boggling as those numbers are, equally mind-boggling is the struggle I see board members undergo in approving a campaign because of the expense involved. It’s as if the basic rule of economics – that it costs money (i.e. investment) to earn money (i.e. return) – applies everywhere but the nonprofit world. And this from board members who also are some of the most sophisticated business men and women in our community.

This problem is largely one of the nonprofit sector’s own making. It generally has done a poor job of explaining what it takes – in return-on-investment language – to raise the money it needs to feed the hungry, care for the abused, inspire us all and educate the children. Or a campaign’s community impact isn’t well defined, which leads to a squishy, less-than-compelling return on investment argument.

Nonprofits also are prone to bragging about how little of each donation goes toward fundraising expenditures. Instead, how about touting in your next campaign that each dollar invested in your fundraising operation yields a 567 percent rate of return!

So why are investments in capital campaigns so safe? Because Collins Group and other reputable firms like ours conduct in-depth studies to test the feasibility of a campaign before recommending to our clients whether to proceed. At Collins Group, we track our clients’ record of meeting or exceeding the study-recommended goal: over the past decade 82% of campaigns have been successful, and 34% exceed the fundraising goal recommended. When campaigns are not successful, it is most often because the primary project was not feasible, leadership changed, or new priorities emerged.

So what kinds of questions should board members be asking when it comes to campaign expenses?

1. Is the campaign goal supported by a feasibility study done by a reputable firm with a proven track record, and did the logic model used by that firm in justifying the goal seem reasonable?

2. Is that 15 percent in fact enough to get the job done? Spread out over the life of the campaign, the expense side of the ledger goes to pay for extra staffing, web and print design, collateral material preparation, hiring campaign counsel and the like. Each nonprofit is different, and typically the more sophisticated and mature the development operation, the lower the campaign cost.

3. Does anyone on the board know of a proven, more cost-effective way to raise the capital goal other than the one being proposed?

In a time when many are looking to the nonprofit sector to be more accountable and businesslike, nonprofit leaders and the important volunteer board members who support their efforts would be wise to reframe the cost of doing business in a way that speaks to the awesome value it really is.

The post An Investment Miracle appeared first on Collins Group.