Fundraising is About the Long-Term

Fundraising is About the Long-Term

 

10 June 2024

 

By David Allen, Development for Conservation

 

A couple of moments in my fundraising career stand out for me as significant learning moments. One of them was a feasibility interview I conducted with a prospect we were looking at for one of the campaign’s lead gifts. She was also a Board member of the land trust and a member of the campaign committee. My hopes were high.

I was asking whether she would support the campaign and inviting her to give me a hint about her intentions. She was trying to let me down gently.

Look David,” she said. “This land trust is the most important charity for me here on the island. But back where I live and work, it’s not in the top twenty.”

She would support the campaign – perhaps at a level one-tenth of what we were prepared to ask.

 

For a campaign ask to be successful, three factors must come into play. The gift prospect must have the money – that’s a given. They must also see themselves as philanthropists – people who can provide help toward the campaign goal and are willing to do so. Not all wealthy people see themselves as philanthropists or even give their money away at all.

And third, the land trust must be one of the charities they feel strongly enough about to choose over others. Land conservation must out-compete dozens or even hundreds of competing causes.

On that particular day, with that particular prospect, the land trust wasn’t very high in the pecking order.

Learning this is why we do feasibility studies.

 

I’ve thought about that lesson on and off ever since. Mostly in terms of asking whether we can change the eventual verdict. Can we move land conservation up on a philanthropist’s priority list?

I believe we can.

 

We can engage prospects in other ways. This particular prospect was already on the Board and already serving on the campaign committee. But if she weren’t, asking her to volunteer, serve on one of the committees, or host an engagement event herself could bring her closer. Anything to bring her around to the inside. Instead of feeling like she was helping us with our project, we might help her see it as her project as well.

We can think of the campaign as two campaigns instead of just one. A $5 million campaign could become a $2 million campaign followed by a $3 million campaign. A single effort with two phases. That same donor might give to both and the sum of her gifts might be more than she would have given to a single campaign with a larger goal.

We can evaluate the organization’s internal branding. Do we present as a successful organization ready and prepared to meet any challenge? Or do we present as a shoestring operation worried about spending $1,000 on donor research? I’ve thought about this often related to office furniture. Mismatched is one thing, but torn and rickety is another. Would we feel comfortable meeting donors here? Hosting a cocktail party? How do we look compared to her other wooers?

And we can do a better job of communicating success. When a million-dollar prospect makes a $50,000 gift, it can feel deflating. But if the effort is successful and the $50K made a difference, tell them that. And tell them several different times in several different ways. They might be more likely to make a more significant gift next time.

 

The most important lesson in all of this is that the relationships we build are best seen as long-term. They will grow and evolve over time. We don’t need to max out our result by the end of the year. Thinking that way is a recipe for disappointment. Understanding where we are now is an important first step, but it’s just step one. But accepting the status quo as the way things will always be is self-defeating also.

The author Steven Covey (of Seven Habits fame) presented the difference between one’s sphere of interest and one’s sphere of influence. If we concentrate our effort within our sphere of influence, our sphere of influence will grow.

 

And someday, we might crack the top twenty.

 

 

Cheers, and have a great week!

 

-da

 

 

PS: Your comments on these posts are welcomed and warmly requested. If you have not posted a comment before, or if you are using a new email address, please know that there may be a delay in seeing your posted comment. That’s my SPAM defense at work. I approve all comments as soon as I am able during the day.

 

Photo by Adrien Stachowiak courtesy Pixabay

 

 

Share this!
2 Comments
  • cecid4th
    Posted at 09:26h, 10 June

    Thanks for a great column and good words of advice!

    Typo here?
    “…the difference between one’s sphere of interest and one’s sphere of influence. If we concentrate our effort within our sphere of influence, our sphere of influence will grow.”

    • David Allen
      Posted at 09:38h, 10 June

      I think Covey’s point was that we may be interested in all manner of things we actually have very little control over (our sphere of interest). But if we concentrate on the things we CAN control, that sphere (our sphere of influence) will grow larger and we will be able to accomplish more. Related to fundraising, when we understand and accept the reality of where and how our land trust fits into a donor’s philanthropic priorities and work to make that experience as positive as we can, we are more likely to find that we move up on the list. When we express disappointment or frustration that “wealthy people don’t give money away,” we are more likely to drop.

      Thanks so much for the comment!