When my boss at The University of Southern Mississippi Foundation asked me to develop my goal for next year’s annual fund, I leaned into my expertise with spreadsheets and data. Piece by piece, I built a realistic projection for what we could raise through direct mail, email marketing, and our phonathon. Confident in the numbers, I presented them to him, and he was skeptical because the figure was three times more than the previous decade of annual results.

He suggested revising the estimate to a modest 10% increase, but I firmly stood by my projections, stating they were my low-end projections. He challenged me by saying, “If you hit these numbers, I’ll let you put a pie in my face.” We formalized the bet with a signed contract displayed in the office, which became a motivator for the team.

As the year unfolded, the energy around this goal grew. Even as we processed triple the usual number of gifts, everyone rallied around the challenge. My projections were so accurate that our phonathon came within $100 of my estimates, proving the strategy worked.
​
At a faculty and staff event marking the year’s end, we celebrated with the promised pie-in-the-face moment. My boss, albeit wearing protective gear, took the pie as I reveled in knowing that meticulous planning and confidence in my expertise led to such a monumental achievement.

As we enter a new year, the promise of fresh opportunities is balanced by the practical need to set realistic projections. For nonprofit professionals, this is a pivotal step in crafting a fundraising strategy that not only meets but exceeds organizational goals. Even if you are on a July - June fiscal year, now is the time to planning and projecting because you will likely need to lobby for budget resources in February or March for the upcoming new fiscal/academic year.

But let’s start with some clarity: a goal is a desired end state – what you hope to achieve. A projection, however, is an educated calculation based on data and trends – a tool to guide your way.

While these terms are related, their distinctions are critical. In healthy organizations, projections should drive goal setting. Yet, many of us have faced the challenge of working under arbitrary or unrealistic goals set without a solid foundation in data.
​
So, how do you ensure your projections are both reliable and actionable? Let’s dive into how to create, use, and leverage them to empower your program and set yourself up for success.

Whether your organization has given you a set goal or you have the freedom to build it, projections are indispensable. Even if the target feels unattainable, projections are worth your time because they:

1. Pinpoint the Shortfall
   By analyzing past performance and calculating realistic returns, projections can reveal where your program may fall short. This allows you to identify gaps, explain challenges to leadership, and show with data why certain outcomes are unlikely.
2. Identify Opportunities
   Projections force you to look at each segment of your program, which might reveal untapped opportunities. Is there a new group to solicit? A fresh strategy to implement? These insights can help you stretch toward your goal, even if it initially feels out of reach.
   
3. Tell a Story to Advocate for Resources
   When your projections highlight the potential for growth with additional resources, they become a lobbying tool. Imagine presenting leadership with clear evidence: “If we invest X dollars in this program, we project an increase of Y dollars in revenue.” This positions you as a forward-thinking fundraiser who makes decisions based on data, not guesses.

Giving Tuesday 2024 is officially in the books, and I’m thrilled to share what worked for us this year! The seminary I work for has participated in Giving Tuesday on and off for almost a decade, but this year, we took bold steps that paid off in a record-breaking campaign.

​Spoiler alert: We set a $20,000 challenge match - our highest ever - and not only met it but exceeded it, raising $40,000! (We even used a strategic extension to cross the finish line - more on that later.)
​
Whether you’re looking for fresh ideas or want to refine your strategy, here’s what made our campaign a success:

Challenge matches are a must-have in your Giving Tuesday toolbox. This year, our $20,000 match created a sense of urgency and gave donors an irresistible reason to give.

Why It Worked: It answered the critical question, “Why should I give today?” A generic “it’s Giving Tuesday” doesn’t cut it anymore because every nonprofit is vying for attention. A match is specific, exciting, and makes donors feel like their gift has double the impact.

What if I told you that there was a source of annual fund dollars out there that could cost you 18 cents to raise a dollar and raise those funds very quickly in a short period of time?
 
And what if I told you that you probably were not currently utilizing this particular source of revenue for your institution? You would be interested, right?
 
Let me tell you what the secret source of revenue is . . . Facebook ads.
 
Yep, Facebook ads. Believe it or not, I recently did a test in which I ran Facebook ads for year-end fundraising and the cost to raise a dollar was as low as 18 cents.
 
In all honesty, this test grew out of the fact that I work for a very small shop and I’m the only fundraiser. I needed to come up with a calendar year-end giving campaign for our social media. Last year I spent a lot of time crafting unique messages to be used for each day in December. This year I was just running out of time and had no real creativity left in me.
 
So instead, I decided to craft three very targeted year-end promotional messages and boost them significantly with Facebook ads. I had a little bit of extra money in my budget that I re-purposed in order to do this. Not a ton. I'm talking less than $1,200 to experiment with.
 
So I divided my ad dollars up between three boosted ads. The first two were to promote general giving. One was targeted to those outside of our normal constituency on Facebook (people who don’t currently like our page). The second I boosted specifically to people within our community (who currently like our page).  
 
The third leg of this campaign was a specific boost to encourage our constituents to become “sustainers” (recurring monthly donors). All three of these campaigns were successful.
 
First, our campaign outside of our normal constituency reached over 44,000 people who may or may not have ever heard of the school before but had our affinity with the religious community that we serve. We also garnered 14 new page likes.
 
In the general year-end giving part of the campaign, over 500 people clicked on our giving website. We got 24 gifts out of this campaign, totaling almost $5,000. The results came out to only $0.18 to raise a dollar! This was revelatory to think that we could not only do public relations and communications work, developing our constituencies on social media, but at the same time raise some serious money
 
The monthly sustainer campaign was also quite successful. We did not spend very much on that campaign, only about $100 but we got 4 new sustainer donors. These new donors represent $65 monthly (or $780 more per year). That doesn’t even fully represent the lifetime value of those monthly donors. If you just take the first year of value from those monthly donors then it was 34 cents to raise a dollar for this micro-campaign. I would argue it is well worth it when you consider that most of these donors will roll on from year to year as ongoing monthly donors
 
I was surprised that something like Facebook ads could actually work for fundraising. I think my bias against it is because we want these digital mediums to be a free way to reach people. We know they have power to reach people but don’t want to pay for it.
 
And yet, we know that mail and phone are worth the investment. Why are we not willing to invest real money in the digital mediums yet?
 
Facebook (at least) is here to stay. It’s a reliable way of reaching people and we should start thinking about Facebook (and other forms of social media) with the same mindset we use when we think about phone to mail.

Namely, that you have to spend money to make money.
 
We need to start being smart about spending part of our fundraising budget on social media. Run some tests. Look at them with an eye to return on investment. Track the same kind of statistics that we track for phone and mail fundraising, including cost to raise a dollar.
 
If you haven't been utilizing Facebook ads in order to grow your constituency on Facebook and raise real money, I would encourage you to undertake a test. Maybe run your fiscal year-end campaign or use it around a day of giving or some other point of urgency.

​You can gain new donors, new Facebook fans, and real money. You can do all those things to the tune of 20 cents to raise a dollar. I would argue it is worth the investment. Can you lobby for a little extra money in your budget ($500 or $1,000 or $2,000) to experiment with this medium? If it works, put it into your plan for next fiscal year.

Do you already do Facebook ads? If not, is this something you could try? Let me know how it goes.

As always, comments and questions are welcome and encouraged!

Cheers,

Jessica

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• 5 Steps to Promote Your Video
• All About Giving Days
• The 30 Minute Fundraiser
• Crisis Communication
• Getting Communications and Development Staff to Function as a Team

​
PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!​​

Building and maintaining a culture of philanthropy is hard work. It is deep work that takes years to build and moments to destroy. But having a healthy culture of philanthropy makes work more fun and makes fundraising easier. It’s worth having a periodic check-up to assess how your institution is doing.

Answer these questions for your institution:

Board Support

• Does your board of directors (or board of trustees) support the organization as current year donors at 100% participation?
• Board support is a sign of stakeholder investment. It also shows that your closest advocates are current with their support. The level of the support doesn't matter so much as the consistency and recency of that support. PS - It's easier to ask for others to give if you are a current donor.

Staff Support

• Does your fundraising staff support the organization as current year donors at 100% participation?
• Does at least 50% of your organization’s overall staff (and faculty) support the organization as current year donors?
• Again, staff support is a measurement of stakeholder investment. Does your staff (especially your fundraising staff, believe in the mission enough to back it with their personal funds? The level doesn't mean as much as the participation.

Alumni support (or Grateful Patient support)

• This category assesses whether those served by your organization’s mission give back to the organization later. This is a sign of institutional effectiveness.
• What is your alumni (or similar) participation rate? You’ll know whether this is good for your organization or not. The level at which this metric is outstanding varies widely from institution to institution.

Fun Factor

• Does your organization frequently have concrete signs that fundraising is seen as an enjoyable community endeavor? (For example, an annual gala, a stewardship picnic, a “Dancing with the Deans” competition, etc.)
• List what you currently do to put the “fun” in fundraising.
• Write down three new ideas to improve your fun factor.

Communications

• How often do your constituents hear from the organization without a fundraising pitch?
• Do these communications include stories of impact?
• Are you communicating in different media? Email, print, video, etc?

Stewardship and Donor Relations

• Do you have meaningful giving societies?
• Do you have a person designated to assist donors with any “customer service” type issues? 
• How is your data management and data integrity? Nothing kills a philanthropic feeling like your name being wrong on an invitation.
• Stewardship is not just the purview of the staff member with "donor relations" in his or her title. It is an office-wide perspective of service and connection. From your front desk associates to student workers/interns to your accountants on staff to gift officers and especially advancement services and gift processing staff, improving donor relations should be everyone's primary objective.

Other questions to think about:

• Does your organization show the impact of giving clearly and broadly?
• For major donors, do you create unique reports and experiences that connect for them their gift to the impact in the world?
• Do you see expressions of gratitude at all levels of the organization? Where could your organization do better?
• Are the needs of the institution are clearly expressed for donors of all levels using different media?
• Does the institution set expectations for giving through specific asks, giving society thresholds and endowment minimums?
• Are fundraising goals embraced by both fundraising staff and program staff/faculty?

How did you feel about the assessment? Where are you doing well? Where should you improve? 

As always, comments and questions are welcome and encouraged!

Cheers,

Jessica

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• Goals versus projections
• What should a strategic plan contain?
• Planning for the Unexpected
• Conducting a Benchmarking Study
• My Exhaustive Event Planning Checklist

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!​​

1. Select a different signatory. If your CEO or President usually signs the letters, consider having a donor, volunteer, board member, student, scholarship recipient, grateful patient, recent graduate or faculty member sign the letter this year. Write from their perspective.
2. Do an “Ugly Betty”. So named because it isn’t pretty. This kind of mailing looks like those magazine subscription renewal letters you get. Almost no copy but just a perfunctory reminder to renew giving. People do them all the time because they work.
3. Write a copy-heavy letter. Most of the direct mail pieces I’m seeing in higher education are graphics heavy and, in my opinion, over-produced. Take inspiration from small nonprofits and write a long form letter, going into greater detail about your mission and impact. Don’t be afraid of 3 or 4 or more pages of copy.
4. Break up your copy with bold font, underlines, small paragraphs and block quotes.
5. Don’t forget the PS. Everybody reads the PS. Reiterate your call-to-action here. Don’t be afraid to add a PPS.
6. Go super-short. If you normally write a longer letter, try an abbreviated copy that will force you to squeeze the mission and call-to-action in as quickly as possible. The front of one letter sized page with letterhead would be my recommendation. I've gone as short as the space between the bottom of the letterhead and the top of the bottom third (which was a tear off reply card) with success!
7. Put your “updates” on the back. All that great stuff that faculty and/or program staff want you to communicate doesn’t belong front and center in a fundraising letter. A solicitation isn’t their annual newsletter. Put pictures and “talking points” on the back of the letter.
8. Consider doing a planned giving focused letter. Select a targeted group and write with the goal of generating leads for your planned giving staff rather than dollars-in-the-door right now.
9. Test including matching gift brochures in your mailing. Include a blurb about matching gifts in the PS. (You can get brochures here.) 
10. Get inspired by looking at samples on SOFII, the Showcase of Fundraising Innovation and Inspiration.
11. Find and tell the most compelling story you can. Pull some heartstrings. Be emotional.
12. On the other hand, you might need to go to the data. Put in some graphs that show how the cost of an education has changed. Or how much state support has decreased. This might be old news for you but revelatory for your prospects.
13. Write about student debt loads at your institution by checking out your statistics at The Project on Student Debt. Here's my post about how to use student debt data. 
14. Change your focus. If you normally solicit for the college level, consider a general fund letter or a departmental letter.
15. Work with major gift officers to secure a matching donation. Write a challenge letter and have the donor sign it.
16. Research “envelope tricks” and try something new on the outside of your letter.
17. Make sure your institution is doing all that they can with data research to have correct addresses. Here’s a quick introduction to basic research. 
18. Ask your mail vendor to send you a stack of samples. Even if you don’t use a mail processing vendor now, you can inquire with one and they will send you samples.
19. Ban the phrase “make a difference”. Get a large white board and write as many phrases as you can in answer to the question, “What do I mean when I say the donor’s gift will make a difference?” Characterize the difference. What does it look like, feel like, or do in the world?
20. Construct a peer-solicitation strategy. Recruit representatives to sign the letters from each class year and segment accordingly.
21. Put your name on the mailing list of 10 different nonprofits you admire. Within a month, you’ll have a stack of samples. Read them and see which ones move you and why.
22. Write your direct mail FAR in advance. Start writing your fall mailings now. The longer lead time you give yourself, the freer you’ll be to be creative and try new things.
23. Find a story highlighted in another department and expand upon it. A story of a scholarship recipient shared on social media. The story of a bequest that was in the planned giving newsletter. The student highlighted in the admissions mailing because they won the Rhodes Scholarship. It’s okay to re-use, especially if they have different audiences.
24. Try a survey mailing. Ask your constituents about how they feel about the institution, how they like to give, and why they give. Include an ask too, of course.
25. If this is appropriate to your mission, include a petition for a lobbying issue. Ask them to give to the same issue.
26. Stay away from premiums! Giveaways should be used for stewardship not acquisition. If they send you $10 because you gave them a luggage tag or address labels, why would they give next year? You’ll be putting yourself on a hamster wheel.
27. Do a big quality check on your organization’s addressee and salutation fields. If these are wrong or wonky, it can make your organization look very silly and prevent prospects from EVER opening your letters.
28. This one is hard. Consider whether you really need a refresh. Are your donors bored? Or are YOU bored? If the results bear out that your current strategy is working, don’t mess with success. Instead, ask your supervisor whether you can expand your work into another area in order to keep yourself growing and challenged.
29. Find inspiration from the for-profit world of direct marketing. Follow Direct Marketing News on Facebook. Here’s some of their resources. 
30. Research donor-centric copy. This post was pivotal when I was teaching myself to write copy for direct mail: Future Fundraising Now, Some Donor Centered Copy Examples
31. ​Write your donor using engaging narration. You’ve probably heard it before but take your draft and write it again using the word “you” more often. Make it about how the donor is changing something for the better because they gave (or will be giving).

Did you get at least 2 good ideas to pursue from this list?

Which one was most helpful? Do you have any tips for my readers struggling to make their direct mail copy fresh?

Comments and questions are, as always, welcomed and encouraged!

Best of luck in your copywriting! Cheers,
 
Jessica Cloud
 
PS – I TOLD YOU EVERYONE READS THE PS! If you liked this post, you might also like these:

• Spoilt for Choice: Why Giving Donors Direction Works
• Is Direct Mail Really Dead?
• Five Steps to Break Through Your Direct  Mail Writer's Block
• VIDEO Tutorial: How to Set Up Formulas in Excel for Direct Mail Statistics
• An introduction to Evidence Based Fundraising

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my guide to Call Center Games for Free!​​

Tis the Season for Strategic Planning! Now is the time of year that many higher education fundraisers are doing two things:

1. Working it hard to reach our fiscal year end goals and,
2. Planning how we might do things better next year.

I totally understand you are busy. Trust me. Between travel, work, and personal responsibilities, I’m stretched too.

But, I think you should consider one more project: a benchmarking study. It's the missing piece of your strategic planning process.

A benchmarking study is a survey of peer organizations that will give you insightful information about what your program should be doing. I assure you that this process doesn’t take long. The data you obtain will be so useful to you, I guarantee you that you will not regret investing the time.

A benchmarking study can help you:
​

• Check your fundraising results versus peer institutions.
  • Are they raising more or less than you? Why?
• Assess your portfolio of programs and provide supporting evidence to start new programs or drop unproductive ones.
  • For instance, say your biggest rival school does a day-of-giving and you don't. They raise more money than you overall and have a higher alumni participation rate. This is a persuasive reason for you to try a day-of-giving. Likewise, if your leadership believes the reunion giving is the most important thing in the world, but none of your peers do this and it always takes a ton of time for not much revenue, recommend dropping it.
• Give you justification to lobby for more budgetary resources.
  • If another school has 25 calling stations and calls year round successfully, and your phonathon only has 15 calling stations and doesn’t call in the summer, perhaps you need to add more stations or calling hours.
• Inspire you with ideas but also provide important return-on-investment data of those ideas.
  • With the questions I will recommend you ask, you’ll get inspired but avoid the temptation to implement ideas that sound great but don’t pull real results.
• Open a window onto what’s possible, as well as confirming where you are doing well.

How do I get started? I have no time for this…

This doesn’t have to take a long time. If you employ an intern or student worker, have them help you with the process. The first phase of identifying your peer institutions is the hardest part. Just hang with me and you'll find you can fit this in and that the long term benefits (to your institution and your own career) are worth it.

Here’s the 5 phase process for doing a benchmarking study:

1. Research
2. Create survey
3. Solicit participation
4. Analysis
5. Follow-up

Phase 1: Research

List your “peer institutions”. You know at least some of them. They might be your in-state rivals or other nearby institutions of similar size, age and student population. Your peer institutions are the ones that your boss always asks about in meetings: “What is XYZ College doing in this area?”

Note: There is a big difference between a peer institution and an aspirant institution.

An aspirant institutions is one that your institution wants to be like but isn’t. They are a significant level-up from you. They may have 50-100 years more institutional history, a much larger endowment, a larger student body or other significant indicators that make them just a bit beyond your organization.

Sometimes leadership or volunteers believe a rival institution is a peer institution when it is actually a aspirant institution. When I was at Southern Miss, we were frequently compared with Mississippi State and Ole Miss, but Southern Miss is actually much more like Eastern Carolina University or the University of Memphis than either of those in-state rivals.

It’s a bit dangerous to confuse an aspirant institution with a peer institution. You would be comparing apples to papayas. However, you can include them in your study because they are a great source of inspiration and ideas. Just mark them clearly in your data as aspirant and understand that they will likely have bigger budgets and bigger results.

If you only can come up with a few institutions, do some internet searches to find similar organizations. You might google, “liberal arts colleges more than 100 years old” or “southern universities with endowments of less than $100 Million”. I recommend you have a list of 10-12 peer institutions and perhaps 3-5 aspirant institutions because not all the institutions will respond.

Once you have a short list of potential peer and aspirant institutions, you (or your intern) should do a bit of research. You need to identity the equivalent program director at those places. For example, if your study is for annual giving, you will want to find the Director of Annual Giving at each place on your list. Record this staffer’s name, title, phone and email address in a spreadsheet.

Phase 2: Create survey

I recommend you ask a mixture of questions in these categories:

• Institutional questions
  • Student body, Endowment size, type of institution, year founded, etc. These questions provide confirmation of their peer status to your institution and establish where you are alike and different.
• Overall Fundraising Results Questions
  • Dollars, donors, alumni participation, etc.
• Resource Questions
  • Resources at the disposal of their program, including monetary resources, space, software, equipment and staff.
• Program Questions
  • Major gifts, lead annual fund, giving societies, events, direct mail, digital promotions, student philanthropy, phonathon, etc.

You can follow this process to design your survey for any area of development but here is what I’ve used before for annual giving.

Annual Fund Questionnaire

1. Institution:
2. Alumni Base:
3. Overall Annual Fund statistics:
   1. Overall Dollars Raised in most recently completed fiscal year:
   2. Overall number of donors (or pledges):
   3. Overall participation rate:
4. Other constituencies that you solicit: (Please indicate the total amount of dollars and number of donors that each program generates towards your totals above.)
   1. Parents?
   2. Students?
   3. Friends?
   4. Faculty/Staff/Retirees?
   5. Other?
5. Methods Utilized:  Please describe how you use this, the scope, etc. (Please indicate the total amount of dollars and number of donors that each program generates towards your totals above.)
   1. Phone
   2. Direct Mail
   3. E-solicitations
   4. Other e-mails (for reminders, stewardship, etc.)
   5. Social Media
   6. Personal Visits (High End Annual)
   7. Events
   8. Other Methods
6. Do you recognize or have special solicitation plans for any of the following groups: (Please indicate the total amount of dollars and number of donors that each program generates towards your totals above.)
   1. Young Alumni
   2. High Level Annual Societies
   3. Consecutive Year donors
   4. 1st time donors
   5. Reunion giving
7. Can you describe your research/data integrity plan?
8. Can you broadly describe how you segment your data for phone and direct mail?
9. Can you describe your fulfillment and stewardship cycles?
10. Do you undertake any student philanthropy education?

Phase 3: Solicit participation

Take your own survey for your institution putting in your data and make sure each question is clear and makes sense. When you do this, time yourself, so you have an accurate range of how long this will take.

Construct an email to the staffers you recorded contact info for in Phase 1. Let them know that you would love for them to participate and the survey will only take XX minutes. (I would recommend that it take no longer than 15 minutes.)

Then, and this is important, tell them that you will share the results of the survey with them to benefit their program as a thank you for their participation. Provide a deadline and let them know that you’ll remind them closer to the deadline. Keep your window not longer than 2 weeks out, otherwise there is no urgency to participate.

Remind them 4-5 days later if they haven’t participated and again closer to the deadline. You can even through in a phone call 3 days before the deadline, especially if there is a school that you need feedback from for political reasons.

Phase 4: Analysis

Review your survey results, noting where your institution does well and where you fall short. What are the great ideas that stick out? What resources do other organizations have that you don’t? How might you get access to those resources?

Compose your results into an executive summary sheet of 1-3 pages that can be included with your strategic plan or sent to relevant stakeholders as a stand-alone report. This report will be for your institution. You'll also need to consolidate and package up the raw survey results to send to your peer participants in Phase 5.

Phase 5: Follow-Up

Be professional and prompt with your follow up. Send a copy of every survey or the consolidated results to all survey participants. Do this within 2 weeks from the survey deadline. Thank them profusely and perhaps include an invitation to establish an on-going professional support relationship.

Maybe you start a Facebook or LinkedIn group where you can compare data throughout the year on an ad-hoc basis. These relationships are of great value to your institution and to your own career.

Conclusion

This process shouldn’t be intimidating and when you are done with it, you will have some important tools in your strategic planning process.

I did this exact process at The University of Southern Mississippi to prove my point that the annual fund had historically under-performed. The benchmarking study certainly showed the under-performance but it also showed similar institutions were raising so much more money, which meant there was no reason Southern Miss couldn’t do it too with strategy, consistency and investment. I’m happy to say that’s exactly what happened. I’m pleased to report the program has now exceeded the five year goals I set for it back in 2011-2012 when I did the benchmarking study.

If you do this project, you’ll have some persuasive data to lobby for changes to your program. Plus, you’ll be seen as a self-starter not only in your office or institution but in the broader development community as well. It’s worth it.

Have you undertaken a benchmarking study? Why or why not? What conclusions came out of your study?

As always, comments and questions are welcome and encouraged!

Cheers,

Jessica

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• Goals versus projections
• What should a strategic plan contain?
• Planning for the Unexpected

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!​​

Connecting with a donor or potential donor is so vital before you ask for a gift. It's like removing many of the roadblocks between you and that "YES!" response you want.

People want to give to people they like. It's not much of a secret. Ultimately, as a fundraiser you are a conduit for the relationship between that donor and the institution (not with you personally) but they must enjoy speaking with you to want to continue a relationship with the institution.

This is an important skill for any fundraiser to develop, from phonathon callers on up to executive directors, deans and development officers.

I have been to MANY call centers where they use the same tired rapport-building questions year after year after year. We cannot let this happen. No one wants to spend their precious time telling a new person why they haven't been back to campus lately just like they did last year.

Bad rapport-building has the opposite effect on the donor than that which we wish to cultivate.

The first rule of building rapport is it must be DIALOG not MONOLOGUE. You must ask questions that will solicit meaningful conversation and back and forth. You (no matter if you are a student caller or the Vice President of Advancement) must not deliver a litany of great-stuff-happening-at-our-institution without stopping for breath.

So, following this rule, we must construct meaningful rapport building questions.

The second rule about rapport building is that these questions get stale. Every year (at least) new rapport builders should be generated and put into rotation.

Here is some guiding criteria for generating these questions. Rapport building questions should:

• Extract meaningful information (like employment and campus affinities).
• Make the prospect like the caller/staffer as quickly as possible.
• Be delivered in a genuine way.
• Not be able to be answered with “Yes” or “No”.
• Not merely deliver talking points about the college or university.
• Provide opportunities for smooth transitions to the first ask.
• Collect new demographic information about prospects and verify current info (but not in a “canned” or perfunctory way).

What are some examples of strong rapport-building questions?

• Were you close to any faculty members while you earned your degree?
• Are working in the same field in which you earned your degree?
• Did you know that the <> recently <>? Isn't that great?
• I thought you might like to know that we've had a lot of success in <>. What do think about that?
• I see that you attended our recent <>. Do you have any feedback for <> about that event that I could pass along?
• You know, I am not sure about the answer to that question. But I can get back to you if I could get your cell phone number or email. I'll research that and contact you.
• Why did you make your first gift to <>? What keeps you giving?
• What are you most passionate about here at <>?
• I see you are <> as I was/am. That's wonderful to know. Do you know <>?

Does your rapport building need a refresh? Do you have some favorite rapport-building questions that I forgot to mention on my list? Comments and questions are, as always, welcomed and encouraged!

Cheers,
​
Jessica Cloud

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these:

• 5 Ideas to Improve Mock Calling
• Annual Fund versus Annual Giving: What's the difference?
• The 30 Minute Fundraiser

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my guide to Call Center Games for Free!​​

​One of the most important alliances at a nonprofit organization is between the fundraising staff and the marketing/communications staff. Making sure that the message about the funds needed and how those funds connect to mission is a crucial element of success.

Despite the importance of cooperation, it can be frustrating for fundraisers to work with public relations officers who don't have much experience with advancement work. The communication folks may find messaging about fundraising to be crass or pushy. Consequently, they might not want to give development the appropriate amount of space in the marketing channels.

Here a few tips I've used to improve the working relationship between development and marketing/communication colleagues:

EDUCATION

Educate them on what it takes to do your job! Let them know what your goals are and let them know how many messages and how many different channels you need to be participating in order to reach those goals. Show them statistics and analytics. Help make your goals into their goals.

HELP THEM HELP YOU

Make it as easy for them as possible to assist you. That means drafting a lot of your own messaging whenever possible, selecting your own images and putting all of that together into a comprehensive plan. Whether the plan is for social media or email or even your direct mail, if they assist you in managing any processes, be very clear about dates, times, and details.  Having your plan together will help get them on board.

SET THE TONE FOR TEAMWORK

Like any important colleagues, acknowledge what it is that bring that they bring to the table that is unique. Make them understand that you're on the same team. As fundraisers, we strive to be donor-centric and therefore we are advocates for our constituents. Assure them you don't want to over-message to your constituents either. You're both playing on the same team and the goal of that team is to bring in the resources necessary for the organization to complete its important mission.

BE FIRM ABOUT THE CALL TO ACTION

Being a team player doesn't mean being a pushover. You understand the best way to motivate your prospects to give. Don't let your calls to action get buried in more general promotional materials. Insist upon clarity in this portion of your communication and you will see success. Similarly, be firm about deadlines. More general marketing materials aren't as time-bound as annual giving. It's called annual for a reason. You only have one year to get it done.

FOCUS ON STORYTELLING

Play to the strengths of your communications colleagues by asking for their assistance with storytelling. Framing a moving and emotional narrative will only make your fundraising materials stronger. This is a skill that should come very naturally to your communications allies. Tap their creativity in this area and not only will your messages improve but your colleagues will feel like an integral part of the team.

I've worked at institutions where the dynamic between these two departments was less-that-optimal and it hampered fundraising productivity. I've also worked at institutions where there was a team atmosphere and mutual understand of goals. Everything is much easier when you focus on relationships first and foster learning and communication surrounding goals.

How does the development team work with the communication staff at your institution? Do the two groups function as partners or as a client-service relationship? Comments and questions are, as always, welcomed and encouraged!

Cheers, 

Jessica Cloud  

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• People Give Because They Are Asked
• Prioritize Your Relationship with Advancement Services Staff
• Crisis Communication 

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!

We like choices, right? At any given coffee shop, you get to be king (or queen) of the world for a moment as you decide whether you want coffee or tea, what size, what type of roast, caffeinated or decaf, and more.

Malcolm Gladwell in his TED talk on “Choice, Happiness, and Spaghetti Sauce” confirms the link between customization and happiness. We are happier when the market provides us with “horizontally segmented” choices: like dozens of varieties of spaghetti sauce: spicy, chunky, thin, with cheese, etc.

Clearly, we should be providing the same buffet of options for our donors, right?

Long drop down lists of designations on our website? Eight different ask amounts on our direct mail reply cards? Won’t this make our donors happy?

I would argue that it will not make them happy. And on top of that it will hurt results for our mission.

Here’s the difference between endless varieties of spaghetti sauce and giving: The donor sees you and your fundraising materials as ambassadors to the mission of the organization. Donors are looking to staff to inform them of the needs of the institution and its priorities.

If you provide so many choices (in both ask amount options and designations) the message the donor receives (consciously or not) is that it does not matter how much I give or what I give to, therefore it does not matter THAT I give at all.

Having umpteen varieties of spaghetti sauce does not communicate a subtext that spaghetti sauce is unimportant. But, by giving an overabundance of options to donors, we unfortunately communicate that our missions are not important.

Let me restate this to make it clear: If you present a range of ask amounts options that too wide and varied, the donor will feel no urgency to act because he or she has no guidance as to how much the organization needs at this time.

If you present a list of designations that is too long, it communicates that the organization does not have a clear set of priorities.

Furthermore, if you do not do the legwork to write a customized letter with a targeted appeal for one designation with tailored ask amounts, the donor learns that you do not KNOW them and therefore you don’t value their contributions.

If you’ll take any amount for any fund, why bother giving any amount for any of your funds.

Here’s an example of the reply cards sent out the year before I arrived at one of the previous institutions I worked for:

Too many choices of ask amounts. Also, the choices were static not variable text ask levels (meaning all the donors got the same list of choices). The $1,000 starting ask was just high enough to scare away modest donors and low enough to insult those with high capacity. This mailing should have been a breakout success since it was a centennial mailer. As it was, the results were less than lackluster.

Also, all of those designation choices make it seem like the college didn’t care where you gave just that you gave something. This is true for many colleges and universities who are focused on improving alumni participation rates. (For the record, there is nothing wrong with this as a pitch. The problem is most organizations operate on that assumption without informing donors that what you need is participation. Be clear.)

However, if what you want is to guide the donor to increase their commitment to the institution, a broad swath of designations won’t work. They want to know that you know their priorities and the priorities of the institution. Match those with a clear case for giving and they will send in checks.

See, if you really listen to Gladwell's TED Talk, you would see that Howard Moskowitz (the guy who "discovered" horizontal segmentation and thereby is responsible for dozens of varieties of spaghetti sauce) didn't exactly advocate for countless choices. (In other writings, Gladwell discusses analysis paralysis, a condition where too many choices makes deciding impossible.)

​Moskowitz saw in his research that people's preferences "clustered" around 3-4 varieties of spaghetti sauce.  

There is a happy medium between no choice and too many choices. It's Goldilocks. Not too many choices, not too few. I call this the principle of limited choices.
​
Knowing this, here’s how I modified the reply cards during my first year at this institution.

Don’t you feel calmer looking at this card? As a donor, you still have choice available but you understand clearly the hierarchy of the university’s priorities and a sense of the level of gifts that the institution wants to receive.

Behind the scenes in the production of these letters, there is a segmentation strategy at work which customizes the letter content and ask amounts to the donor, but what the donor feels is clarity.

Upon implementing this more streamlined system, the average gift given through direct mail went from $118 to $149 and the response rates increased from 0.36% to 0.85%. (This was a large state school with lots of non-donors.) The mailings garnered over $41,000 more than the centennial mailer sent the previous year. The principle of limited choices, combined with smart segmentation is powerful stuff.

Confused donors don’t write checks. Give them a well-constructed ask and a little direction and you’ll do much better. Don’t spoil your donors for choice.

How many ask amounts do you offer in your solicitations? How many designations do you promote as choices?  Comments and questions are, as always, welcomed and encouraged!

Cheers, 

Jessica Cloud  

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• Breaking through your direct mail writer's block
• Is direct mail really dead?
• Evidence based fundraising

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!​

Don’t get me wrong. I am a fan and advocate of automated calling software. And I’ve been spoiled in my career, working for large state universities with the resources to either outsource the calling program or to have an in-house program with appropriate calling software.

In the past, I would cringe when a colleague would tell me they were running a manual/paper phonathon.

But there’s a reason why they say necessity is the mother of invention. I now work for a small independent seminary that is on a shoestring budget.

This summer, I did some analysis and determined that what the program really needed was a phonathon. I decided this for a few reasons:

1. The school had not had a calling program in at least 8 years and many donors had fallen off of giving in that time. We needed to reconnect with those donors in a more personal way than mail could do.
2. The school had been through some rough times, including a presidential transition and controversy. They needed the public relations aspect of phone calling.
3. The school needed some work in specifically the alumni relations area. See #2.
4. We were working on growing a recurring gift program and phone is one of the best ways to acquire new recurring monthly donors.
5. And, we had some “dirty” data and needed to clarify and correct demographic data while eliminating bad information.

These are compelling reasons. But, I knew we had not budgeted for a phonathon program. I had some extra resources (only $5,000) but I knew that would not be enough to outsource or purchase software. How could I get a phonathon program off the ground quickly, easily and cheaply?

You really only need 3 things to have a phonathon:

• Callers
• Phones
• Prospects

CALLERS
I figured out my maximize number of callers and caller hours that I could afford to pay based on a competitive hourly rate for the location (Berkeley, CA). Then I set about recruitment. Here are some of the graphics I used to recruit students callers.

I used my 3 favorite interview questions for student callers. You can read about those here. I hired 4 students and 1 graduate who wanted to volunteer her time as a service to the school.

EQUIPMENT
Now I needed equipment. At first, I was thinking through how much long distance would cost and whose offices we could use in the evenings. Then I went back to drawing board: Why was thinking landlines when I preach all the time that cell phones are the future of phonathon?

I decided to go mobile. I ordered simple, Samsung flip phones which had a headphone jack so we could utilize headsets. I bought these Voistek noise cancelling headphones that would work with the phones and free the caller to move anywhere in the room. I bought some of the headsets with only one ear pad and some with two. The callers overwhelming preferred the double headset. The headsets, while very affordable ($29) also had good sound quality. Here are the links for the phones and headsets I selected.

(Yes, these are affiliate links. I've actually used these products and I'm sure they'll help you start a pop-up phonathon. If you purchase, I get a small percentage to keep the choice content coming here on Real Deal Fundraising. Fair trade, huh?)

These phones are already configured to work with a Verizon go-phone plan, which was far cheaper than long distance fees. They are also used phones so they are super-cheap – less than $17 each. My phonathon campaign was scheduled to be one month long so we paid for one month of prepaid phone access: $50 for each phone. Bonus: when you go to the Verizon store to sign up for your multiple prepaid, burner phone plans, you feel like a bad guy from a Law and Order SVU episode!

Total for each phone “station”: $96

Total to equip my five callers: $480

OVERALL SHOESTRING BUDGET
I also spent $100 on 4, $25 gift certificates to use as weekly incentives for performance.

Overall my budget looked like this:

• Equipment: $480
• Motivation: $100
• Food for Callers: $500
• Caller Wages: $3,920 (which would provide 245 calling hour at $16 per hour)

And remember that one of my callers was committed to calling as a volunteer. And the equipment itself is a one-time expense. We plan to use the phones and headsets again soon. More savings and value!

PROSPECTS
As for data, I pulled the prospects via queries in Raiser’s Edge and then used that spreadsheet to create calling sheets via a mail merge. We went through a couple of iterations to get the information in the most intuitive place for the callers but ultimately it worked well.

Overall, the program raised over $15,000 which was a great return on investment and we added over 25 new recurring gift donors as well.

If your institution doesn’t have a huge budget but needs the personalized contact that a phonathon program provides, you can create a “pop-up” phonathon program on a shoestring budget that is efficient and effective.

Do you outsource, use automated software or have a manual phonathon? Or do you need to start a pop-up phonathon for your institution? Comments and questions are, as always, welcomed and encouraged!

Cheers, 

Jessica Cloud  

PS - If you liked this post, you might also like these: 

• Is phonathon really dead? 
• Launching a phonathon program (Interview with Markus Jones)
• How to Use Economic Impact Data to Get Incentives for Student Callers

PPS - If you found this article helpful, please comment and let me know. Also subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising so you don't miss a post! You'll get my  guide to Call Center Games for Free!