fbpx

Posts

, , , , , ,

I have a motive, and it is a bequest.

Yes, I have a motive, and it is a bequest. As a young woman with no children, I have already created my estate plans. Yes, I have. And while those I love will be taken care of as they should. There is a time after they are gone when my assets held in trust will be given to a charity which will receive the bulk of my estate.

You may ask, why?My motive for a bequest

Well, undoubtedly motives for donors are all different.  Some decide to leave money in their estate to avoid taxes, some choose to leave money to obtain recognition.   There is a whole host of other important motivations. For me, it is because I want to give to a charity which has given so very much to me. And, this gift that I make on my death will be impossible for me to make during my life.

We all tend to live on a set amount of disposable income.  While I have had saved and invested, surely I am not willing to take a chance and spend down a considerable amount of my assets while I may still need them.  I still have a long life yet to live.  However, after my death, who cares!  At that point, I will be able to make the single largest gift that I will ever make.  For me, that is enough.  More than I could do while alive.

I should add that at one point, I had a significant number of charities in my estate to benefit from my death.  And, that is where stewardship comes into play.  For you see, some charities are so intent on “chasing” the big donors that they forget about those little folks making small gifts out of their disposable income.  What they fail to think about is that for some, this giving may just be the tip of the iceberg. Since estate gifts are surely revocable, all donors whether large or small should be stewarded in some way appropriate to each.

I can’t tell you how many times during my career that an organization  I was working with received a bequest from a donor who may have made one $10 or $25 gift during their lifetime.

I have thought long and hard about those local charities and have narrowed it down to one – one that is extremely near and dear to my heart and one that treats me like a person when I visit, call, or make a gift.

I have a motive, and it is a bequest.

 

/3 Comments/by
, , , ,

Insanity? Creating a fundraising plan without conducting an audit.

When developing a fundraising plan, I am often asked whether or not, I can skip the development audit analysis. And, I arguably say “no!”

A fundraising audit is probably the most critical stage of the entire planning process looking at where an organization is now, where it has been, and where do they want to be? Without knowing the answers to these questions, how can anyone put together a solid plan for the future?Importance of a fundraising audit

An audit is a review of all the factors within an organization that may impact how an organization can expect to accomplish in the future both internally and externally.

A fundraising audit is the first essential component of a healthy fundraising plan, and it provides the “Where are we now?” component. It is only when the organization has a complete picture of the organization’s current strategic position and each of the donor markets served can the organization hope to make meaningful objectives for the future.

So, when an organization says to me, “We don’t have the time to bother conducting a fundraising audit. We’re too busy doing the fundraising.” I say, that if you don’t have a roadmap for the future, you are always going to do what you have done and how do you expect your fundraising to do any better than it has always done? It is absolutely essential and critical to the success of any planning efforts.

Don’t skimp on a development audit. You will only be skimping on solid results in the future.  And, that is just plain insanity!

/0 Comments/by
, , , , , ,

Hello, are you really listening to me?

We are all so very guilty of appearing to listen to someone, but yet already forming a reply in our head..

You know, you are sitting with a donor and rather than listening, you are rehearsing what your response may be.Listen intently during donor meetings

Are you missing some critical information when you don’t listen intently? Sure!

It is so critical to listen intently, without an already pre-conceived agenda in our mind.

You may miss key donor motivations in that pre-thinking. Here is an excellent case as an example.

I was once meeting with a donor who I thought may be interested in supporting a particular project – Rosary distribution. However, it was when I was meeting with that individual donor and asking deep, probing questions, that I learned that their interest was not in fact with what I thought it may be, but in fact with an overseas ministry in France. If I didn’t spend the time to ask questions, probe deeper, and listen, I may have missed the relevant cues that would direct me to share the ministry of importance to that donor. That donor later went on to make a significant gift to support this ministry in France. A gift towards Rosary distribution may have been certain, but probably would not be at the same gift level.

It is so critical to put aside personal and professional agendas and spend the time to listen to our donors and to understand their motivations for possibly making a gift.

I argue that time is the most important element when doing major gifts. One needs to take the time to listen and explore to know the donor better. Time and deep listening are the glue between the donor and the organization. Time and deep listening are what leads to long-term relationships.

We need to push our organizations to remove those expectations that keep us limited in the time we spend with our donors. Each donor is different, and we should not pen the relationship into key metrics. Rarely does a relationship fit into expectations and measurement. Relationships are organic and dynamic. And, most importantly relations are about deep probing, and intently listening.

Very rarely does a major gift fit into an official timeline.

It is all about the donor!

/1 Comment/by
, , , ,

We need money now! An ethical decision.

This week, I read a post by the very insightful Veritus Group. In the post, they asked,”When you think of your donor, do you first think of them as a source of cash – as a way to reach the goals you have set?”

This question indeed touched a cord in me. How many organization believe that donors are ATMs. We go to them; we ask them for a certain amount of money, we get the gift, and we get a receipt.Ethics of fundraising

I have worked for organizations that think donors are partners. How refreshing. And, then I have worked for organizations, that think donors are money as in the “We need money now!” donor.

I have a difficult time hearing donors referred to in this way. I can’t conceivably fathom such talk about another human being, mainly relating to them as if they were a transaction and not a living, breathing person with feelings, and beliefs, and values.

Over my career, donors have personally “cared” for me and my well-being. When I have been traveling, they have provided me with dinner. We I was in a new town, they ensured that I got home safely. When I was sick, they called. We built relationships. We were people connecting for a higher purpose. The “Show me the money attitude” just doesn’t work for me.

Do you view your donors as mere money machines? Do you love your donors just as much as they love your mission? Do you believe that donors should be treated with worth and dignity?

Ethically, I asked myself, would I as a donor want to be thought of or treated in such a transactional way? I couldn’t answer yes.

We are in a noble profession. We transform communities; ourselves, and the donor through the process of fund development. That is what I believe in about what I do.

And, ethically, I can’t operate otherwise.

Donors give to us because we have the highest ethical standards to do what is right. Trust is the basis of all we make possible.

Perhaps we need to revisit the “Donor Bill of Rights” and ensure that there is a clause in there about “to be treated as I would want to be treated by another, not as a machine, but as a person who has beliefs in and the capacity to support a mission.”

As a fundraiser, what I want remembrance for is my success on the job, both monetarily and ethically.

/1 Comment/by
, , , ,

When your donor loves you way too much.

For many donors who hold great wealth, they sometimes want to do more than just give. In fact, they want to shape directly rather than just support a charitable cause. This term is often called, “hyperagency.”

In most cases, that is fine. In fact, it is very welcomed. Paul Shervish, Director of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College, noted that hyperagency is “a distinctive characteristic of maWealth donors and mission creepjor giving because such donors are capable of establishing the institutional framework in which they and others live.” They want to produce rather than support.

Not often, but in some cases, the donor upon giving an enormous gift expects the organization to do what he or she wishes, changing the whole agenda of the organization. They want to determine what happens and when programmatically.

To me, this can become dangerous territory. For you see, just because someone has extensive wealth and wants to give it us, does not mean that we have to entertain “mission creep.” Our organizations have been founded to serve a community through a particular mission. It is the obligation of the organization and its Board of Directors to ensure the organization’s programs, and mission continues to be relevant to the community that it serves.

We often see “mission drift” in cases where organizations “chase” foundation funding just because it is available and whether or not it meets the orgazation’s mission. As a result, programs develop that are not mission consistent, and the organization begins to take on areas that they do not have a specialty.

A case in point, in 1907, a $3 million bequest left to Swarthmore College met this description: It was made conditional on the school ceasing all participation in intercollegiate sports. (Though tempted by the much-needed funds, Swarthmore turned the gift down.)

So, are you tempted to keep the gift or would you turn it down?

Well, if the gift is going to subject your organization to terms it couldn’t possibly meet or that are not consistent with the core mission, then yes, I say it needs to be turned down. Turning down a gift is a rather difficult decision. But, you must realize that you are bound to the donors’ wishes once you accept it. If you can’t abide by the terms whether impractical, unethical, or for other reasons, then you just need to say “no!”

The dilemma mentioned above points to the importance of having a Gift Acceptance Policy in place. Yes, I know these policies are so mundane, and I know you don’t have the time to create them, but, when you start seeking major gifts, you just may come across a situation like this. Even the smallest organizations have found themselves with donors wishing to make contributions that have binding strings attached. And, when you are small, it becomes especially difficult to say no to a massive infusion of cash.

This situation is more of an ethical and moral question. But surely, the ethics involved in fundraising must be a topic that your organization discusses at a strategic level (meaning Board), and Gift Acceptance Policies provide a basis for that discussion.

So, you don’t always have to say “yes” to a donor who loves you too much. In fact, sometimes, it is best to say no, if it means you won’t hold true to your core mission and the community that you are bound to serve.

What is your take on this ethical dilemma?

/0 Comments/by