5 Tips for Giving Donors What They Really Want

Do you know what your donors want?

Do they want a clever t-shirt? A fancy certificate? A lovely lapel pin? A practical coffee mug? A recognition lunch?

Maybe. However, while some donors will appreciate receiving trinkets or invitations to recognition events, others really don’t care and still others will view such items as a waste of money.

So, what do your donors really want?

Virtually all donors want to know that their donations will have a positive impact. In other words, donors of all sizes want to know that their contributions make a difference. The younger the donor, the more true this is. In addition, they want to feel like they are partners with the organizations they support.

Renata J. Rafferty, in her book Don’t Just Give It Away, advises philanthropists, “You truly want the charity to view you as a partner in its work, and partnerships are successful only when all parties can be candid with one another.”

The way to partner with donors and let them know they are having the desired impact is through solid stewardship. You need to be transparent. You need to candidly give them the information they want.

Stewardship is defined by the AFP Fundraising Dictionary as:

a process whereby an organization seeks to be worthy of continued philanthropic support, including the acknowledgment of gifts, donor recognition, the honoring of donor intent, prudent investment of gifts, and the effective and efficient use of funds to further the mission of the organization.”

As I mention in my book, Donor-Centered Planned Gift Marketing:

Stewardship will help the donor feel good about her commitment. It will ensure that revocable gifts (i.e., bequests) remain in force and, perhaps, increase in value over time. Good stewardship can also lead to another planned gift from the donor. For example, a donor who makes a bequest commitment may be impressed by the organization and a sufficient level of trust might have been developed through the process to allow the donor to feel comfortable making a donation to establish a charitable gift annuity (CGA). A donor who establishes a CGA may feel so comfortable having done so, he may decide to establish a second. Or, a CGA donor may make a bequest commitment.”

Great stewardship can help strengthen your organization’s relationships with donors. The additional benefit is that solid stewardship of existing donors can also build relationships with prospective donors as well.

Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia has figured this out.

Rather than generating a bland, corporate annual report that examines the fiscal condition of the organization, Federation has produced a Community Impact Report that looks at the difference the organization is having on people’s lives.

There are a number of things worth noting about the Community Impact Report:

1. It exists. Perhaps the most noteworthy thing about the report is simply that it exists. Most nonprofit organizations thank donors for their support. However, far fewer charities report on how gifts are put to use.

Federation prepares a Community Impact Report each year. Actually, it usually prepares two reports, mid-year and end-of-year documents. Now on its fifth report, Federation uses the information to keep the community updated about its work toward mission fulfillment.

2. It focuses on outcomes. Unlike a typical annual report, the Community Impact Report is not a state-of-the-organization analysis. Instead, the report examines the impact the organization is having on its service area. It’s a report about mission fulfillment.

“Our donors really appreciate seeing the level of accountability we have achieved,” says Alex Stroker, Federation’s Chief Operating Officer. “They also like to know that we are focused on program outcomes.”

Do You Know How to Navigate in the Gray Area?

I recently published a post about how City of Hope plans to host a special fundraising event at odds with the organization’s mission. Most readers who responded to a poll at the end of the post felt the event is inappropriate with many even finding the event unethical.

The unscientific poll reveals that 49 percent of respondents feel that the “Let Them Eat Cake” event is “Inappropriate but Not Unethical,” 27 percent say the event is “Unethical & Inappropriate,” 13 percent say the event is a “Great Idea All Around,” and 10 percent believe the event is “Appropriate, Whether on Mission or Not.”

I’m comforted to know that over three-quarters of the respondents feel the same way as I do about the City of Hope event. However, some of the comments I’ve received on this blog site, on LinkedIn, and via email concern me a bit.

Perhaps the comments are a result of how I worded the post or phrased the poll responses. Some people seem to be under the impression that one’s actions are either purely ethical or purely unethical. In certain cases, those folks would be correct. Some actions are clearly ethical or not. Stealing money from Girl Scouts selling cookies (this really happened) is clearly unethical.

However, not all situations are black and white, ethical or unethical.

While the legality or illegality of an action is certainly a guideline, such as the theft incident I just described, something can be unethical without being illegal. Some situations in which we find ourselves put us into a gray area. The most challenging ethical dilemmas often involve situations that are not black and white. If they didn’t, they really wouldn’t be dilemmas, would they?

When considering the possible, multiple responses to a situation, we will often find some alternatives are more ethical while some are less ethical. In the case of City of Hope, the organization could choose to continue to host its “Let Them Eat Cake” event without any changes although many readers found it at odds with the nonprofit’s mission and, therefore, unethical. Alternatively, the organization could choose not do any event.

However, the organization has other options. For example, City of Hope can run its cake event but offer healthy alternatives and educational material as well. Or, the organization could host a different event like the Healthy Chef Competition in Vancouver, Canada that Rory Green, a development professional and blogger, told me about.

Again, some alternative courses of action are more ethical or less ethical than others. The objective should be to always choose the best option, make the best decision.

The most challenging ethical dilemmas of all, however, do not have any good, ethical solution. They’re no-win situations. Think of the novel/movie Sophie’s Choice or the “Kobayashi Maru” test from the film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Even in these no-win situations, we must cope as best as we can to be the best we can.

As those who work in the nonprofit sector, we must understand that our greatest asset is the trust of the public. The more trust people have in charities, the more likely they are to donate. And, with greater trust comes larger contributions.

Special Report: Charitable Giving Deduction in the Crosshairs, Again

The US Senate Budget Committee has just released its FY 2014 Budget Resolution. On pages 65 and 66, the Democratic-controlled Committee asserts that the wealthy are unfairly benefiting from “tax expenditures.”

The Budget Committee calls on the Senate Finance Committee to reduce the deficit by limiting or reforming “unfair” tax breaks for the wealthy. The Committee specifically mentions itemized deductions with various options listed for limiting them (i.e.: a percentage cap, hard dollar cap, etc.). The charitable deduction is not exempted from these various proposals.

The Obama Administration has previously floated a similar proposal. You can read my analysis of that in my post: “Obama Plan Could Cost Nonprofit Sector $5.6 Billion a Year.” In short, limiting or eliminating the tax deduction for charitable giving is expected to have a significant, negative impact on giving.

Special Report: Do You Want to Talk with an Award-Winning Author?

Have you ever read a book and wished you could talk directly with the author? Did you ever want to pick the brain of the author to get additional helpful ideas? Have you had questions about the material that you desired to explore more deeply? Were you ever curious about the author’s view of the future? Did you ever wonder what parts of the book the author felt were most important? Did you ever want to let the author know which parts of the book you particularly liked or which parts you disagreed with? Have you ever wanted to know if the author had acquired valuable, new information since writing the book?

If you answered “Yes” to any of the above questions, I have a special opportunity that will interest you.

I (Michael J. Rosen, CFRE) will be interviewed on The Nonprofit Coach Radio Show on Tuesday, February 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM (EST).

I wrote the bestselling book Donor-Centered Planned Gift Marketing, for which I won the AFP/Skystone Prize for Research in Fundraising and Philanthropy. The book is on the official CFRE International Resource Reading List. I’ll be discussing the book with host Ted Hart, ACFRE. We’ll also look at the challenges and opportunities presented by recent changes in government policy.

During the program, listeners will have the opportunity to call in to ask questions. You can learn more about the broadcast and find the call-in number by clicking here.

I invite you to listen to the show live and to participate by calling in to the program. If you’re unable to listen to the live show, you will be able to stream it after the broadcast.

Do Not Let This Happen to Your Organization

It happened recently to a prestigious private school.

New York’s Dalton School inappropriately released private alumni information to its volunteer fundraisers. The New York Times reported the blunder that sent a shockwave through the School’s community and may have a chilling effect on fundraising.

Do not let this happen to your organization.

While volunteer and professional fundraisers must have useful information to effectively perform, organizations must protect sensitive items and keep them confidential. I’m going to provide you with eight tips that will help you keep your organization safe and your prospects and donors happy.

But first, let me tell you what went wrong at Dalton. Here’s what The New York Times reported this month:

But recently, one of the top Manhattan private schools, the Dalton School, might have been a little too open with the data it had about some graduates. The school said [February 7] that it had given out to some alumni who had volunteered to raise money for Dalton information about several other alumni whose own children had applied to the school. The information included whether those children had been admitted, information that most parents prefer not to be shared, especially in cases where the answer is no.”

It is common and acceptable practice for nonprofit organizations to share prospect and donor information with both volunteer and professional fundraisers. Such information often includes contact information, spouse or partner data, affiliation, giving history, volunteer involvement, event participation, and interests.

Dalton ran into trouble when it disseminated information about whether the children of prospects applied for admission and were rejected by the School.

The Times article quoted an upset alumna:

’It’s horrible,’ said one alumna who has been financially supportive of the school, and like nearly everyone interviewed about what happened, declined to be identified for fear of upsetting school leaders. ‘Why should anyone know how much I have given and whether my kid got in or didn’t get in or even applied?’” 

Prospects and donors care about their privacy. They do not want to feel that they are being spied on. They do not want private information about themselves or, especially, their children disseminated to friends and acquaintances. Dalton overstepped by releasing admissions information about alumni children, something acknowledged by the School:

’We apologize for and deeply regret the release of this information,’ said the letter, written by Ellen Stein, the head of school. ‘We are reviewing our protocols to ensure that information about the admissions status of all Dalton families and applicants is protected and remains confidential. We have reached out to apologize personally to those 11 alumni whose names were listed.’” 

While I applaud Dalton for reviewing its data protocols after the inappropriate release of private information, it would have been far better if it had had this review before a problem occurred. You now have that opportunity.

Before a crisis happens at your organization, take the time to review your organization’s own prospect research and information sharing protocols.

Here are some tips to guide you during your review:

Want to Know the Secret to Raising More Money in 2013?

Everyone wants to find the latest, greatest way to raise money. Everyone wants to raise more money. Fortunately, the secret way to raising more funds in 2013 is not complicated. It’s not expensive. It’s not revolutionary. It’s not even really a secret. But, it will work:

Get out from behind your desk more often.

I know you’re thinking, “That’s just common sense.” You’re right. However, at many nonprofit organizations, it’s not common practice. Consider this true story from my book, Donor-Centered Planned Gift Marketing:

During a seminar at an Association of Fundraising Professionals chapter conference, the director of development for a regional theater company asked a question: ‘Could I have some of our repertory actors cultivate our major donors?’

“The presenter initially thought this was a terrific idea. Theater donors often like to think of themselves as true patrons of the arts. The opportunity to interact with the actual performers would be meaningful to many of the theater’s major donors. The presenter mentioned this and asked, ‘How many major donor prospects do you have?’

“The answer was 50. The presenter then suggested that the director of development schedule appointments with the major donors and plan on bringing one of the actors with her. At this suggestion, the director of development exclaimed, ‘I don’t have time for that! I was hoping that the actors could go out on their own.’

“The presenter patiently responded, ‘If you visit with only two major donors per week, you will have seen them all within six months. And, not only will they have been cultivated by having the chance to interact with one of the actors, you will have developed a relationship and, in the process, learned more about the donor’s interests and philanthropic abilities. You will be well positioned to renew and upgrade their current support while being able to begin a conversation about planned giving. What could possibly be a better use of time?’

“While the development director was not pleased with the response, the reality is that the most effective fundraising happens at a coffee table not at a desk. Being proactive and actually talking with donors and prospects, understanding their needs, cultivating them, and asking for the gift is always the most effective development strategy.”

I understand that it’s not always easy to schedule another conversation with a donor or prospect. There are meetings to attend, reports to write, vendors to meet with, staff members to supervise, budgets to review, etc.

However, if you really want to raise more money, you will find a way to meet with more donors and prospective donors.

To Sue or Not to Sue Over Unpaid Pledges?

Sometimes, nonprofit organizations sue philanthropists over unpaid pledges. This was recently the case with the Kansas City Art Institute. When a charity pursues this type of legal action, it sends shockwaves throughout the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors.

I do believe there are times when a nonprofit can and should sue a donor. However, this should only be done as an absolute last resort. The three instances when a lawsuit might be acceptable are:

1. The donor dies with an outstanding pledge and an heir challenges the will. In that case, the nonprofit might need to sue the estate to establish its claim and collect.

2. The nonprofit incurs real expense based on the donor’s commitment. For example, based on a pledge agreement, the nonprofit breaks-ground on a new building. The nonprofit might need to sue simply to survive.

3. The donor is about to or has entered bankruptcy. Suing the donor would be a way for the nonprofit to establish its claim. (By the way, I suspect that this fear might be what may have triggered the Art Institute case.)

In any case, suing a donor should only be done after careful consideration and only when all other options have been exhausted.

To sue or not sue over unpaid pledges? That is the question. The answer, offered by Brian M. Sagrestano, JD, CFRE and Robert E. Wahlers, MS, CFRE, is: Avoid the problem in the first place!

Brian and Robert are friends of mine. They are both seasoned, wise development professionals who have served on the national board of the Partnership for Philanthropic Planning. I’m pleased that they have offered to share some of their wisdom below as they introduce us to the concept of “concierge stewardship.”

Brian and Robert both generously provided insights and material for my book, Donor-Centered Planned Gift Marketing, for which I won the AFP-Skystone Partners Prize for Research in Fundraising and Philanthropy.

Now, Brian and Robert have written their own book, Philanthropic Planning Companion: The Fundraisers’ and Professional Advisors’ Guide to Charitable Gift Planning, and I’m honored to have been included in their comprehensive volume. The book is part of the AFP/Wiley Fund Development Series.

The official description of the book notes, “For fundraisers and professional advisors alike, The Philanthropic Planning Companion is the one-stop resource you’ll keep by your side to help your donors/clients meet their charitable and personal planning objectives.”

So, do you want to avoid a nightmare at your organization? If so, read on:

 

The Kansas City Art Institute recently sued Larry and Kristina Dodge for failure to pay $4 million on a $5 million pledge that was to be used to pay for construction of a new building, according to The Kansas City Star.

When the Dodges attempted to defend themselves (rather than hire an attorney they indicated that they could not afford), they made procedural errors and a default judgment was entered against them for the full $4 million due on the pledge. According to The Star, the Dodges made three payments on their pledge before their financial situation was impacted by the Great Recession, limiting their ability to fulfill the commitment.

In the article, Larry Dodge is quoted, indicating that he and his wife were in negotiation with the Institute to come up with a payment plan when it unexpectedly filed suit to collect on the pledge.

Regardless of the outcome, the reputations of both the Dodges and the Institute are forever harmed. Prospective donors will think twice before making a major commitment to a charity that would sue them to collect on a pledge. Meantime, the Dodges reputation, despite their many years of generous philanthropy, will be forever tarnished.

We cannot judge the merits of the Art Institute’s action or the ability of the Dodges to pay on their pledge, as we are not privy to all of the facts of the case. However, it raises a much larger issue about charities and pledges.

Fiscal Cliff Disaster Averted, but Trouble Looms

We ended 2012 by surviving the so-called Mayan Doomsday. We began 2013 by driving off the so-called Fiscal Cliff before averting possible economic disaster. Congress passed the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 which put the nation back on safe ground, for the moment.

Previously, I looked at the Act and provided information about what key elements mean for the nonprofit sector. Now, let’s look at:

What’s next?

The Charitable Giving Coalition, chaired by the Association of Fundraising Professionals, as well as the AFP Political Action Committee, won a great victory when Congress preserved the charitable giving tax deduction and reinstated the IRA Charitable Rollover for 2012 and 2013. Everyone who was involved in visiting members of Congress, writing them, or calling them to advocate for the nonprofit sector certainly has a right to take pride in what the sector has accomplished.

However, before we get too carried away congratulating ourselves, let’s remember that the nonprofit sector continues to face danger.

The return of Pease Amendment provisions will make charitable giving a bit more expensive for wealthy donors. Higher taxes will also mean that donors will have less money with which to give. As a result, organizations may face some challenges. But, these are challenges that we have faced before. We’ll just have to work a bit more creatively.

Unfortunately, there are other looming dangers.

The Fiscal Cliff legislation, which was originally supposed to decrease the deficit, will actually increase the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. In other words, we’re still headed full-speed ahead to economic collapse which would be a disaster for the nonprofit sector and society in general.

Charitable giving has historically correlated to about two percent of Gross Domestic Product. If GDP growth continues at a slow pace, philanthropy is also likely to grow only modestly. If runaway deficit spending leads to another recession, we can expect a likely decline in overall philanthropy.

All Congress has done is buy a bit of time.

Republicans have signaled that they will address the issue of spending cuts within the next two months. In two months, Congress will have to vote on whether to increase the nation’s debt ceiling. President Obama has already said that any spending cuts will require an increase in tax revenue in order to garner Democrat support.

Having achieved a tax rate increase, The White House now seeks to raise additional revenue in other ways. For example, the Administration may want to apply the top tax rates to those earning less than the current threshold of $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples. Also, the Administration is likely to seek limitations on deductions, particularly for the “wealthy.” The Administration has previously expressed support for both revenue generating options. Now, it’s likely those proposals will resurface during spending-cut negotiations.

So, while the charitable deduction appears to be safe for the moment, that safety may only last for two months.

Think I’m being alarmist? Let me provide some perspective from the US Debt Clock:

In 2000 the deficit was $5.8 trillion, which was $56,150 per taxpayer.

In 2008 the deficit was $9.2 trillion, which was $85,893 per taxpayer.

In 2012 the deficit was $16.4 trillion, which was $145,620 for every taxpayer.

Now, the Fiscal Cliff deal will add another $4 trillion to the deficit over 10 years!

At some point, the American economy will either collapse, going the way of Greece, or the government will get its act together and control spending. I’ve heard a lot of talk during the debate over the Fiscal Cliff about the need to return to Clinton Era tax rates. Sadly, there was little talk of returning to Clinton Era spending levels, even as a percentage of GDP which would still allow for spending increases.

The situation must be dealt with for the good of the nation. Unfortunately, this may require some pain for the nonprofit sector in the form of a reduced charitable giving tax deduction and reduced direct grants to and contracts with nonprofit organizations.

On the floor of the House of Representatives, during debate over the Fiscal Cliff legislation, Democrats have already begun to argue for additional revenues, echoing statements this week from The White House. In other words, the nonprofit sector has made it out of the first round of debates. But, the second round is quickly approaching.

Challenging times remain immediately ahead.

Special Report: It’s Time to Contact Congress!

On December 5, 2012, approximately 270 nonprofit professionals will descend on Capitol Hill to meet with members of Congress to advocate against proposals to limit or eliminate the charitable giving tax deduction. You can read about this effort in my blog post: “Obama Plan Could Cost Nonprofit Sector $5.6 Billion a Year.“

While the advocacy effort on Capitol Hill is important, the nonprofit sector cannot limit its advocacy efforts to this one event. As Congress confronts the “fiscal cliff,” Democrats and Republicans continue to strongly consider the implementation of a cap on itemized deductions, including the deduction for charitable giving, as a way to avert the crisis.

So, in conjunction with the advocacy event, the Association of Fundraising Professionals has activated the Engaging Networks platform that allows you to send an electronic letter (e-letter) to your House Member and two Senators with the mere touch of a few buttons. Whether or not you are an AFP member, you can send a letter by clicking here.

The link will take you to a page with the letter form. Once there, you’ll be able to begin the short process of entering the required information, adding your own personalized message, and editing the complete message before authorizing it to be sent.

Effective Stewardship Before, During, & After the Gift

About a month ago, Hurricane Sandy ravaged the Caribbean and the East Coast of the United States. New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania were especially hard hit. Millions lost electricity and were driven from their homes. Today, thousands remain without power and without homes to return to.

Through it all, the American Red Cross has been there to help those in need.

My wife and I live in Philadelphia. While many in the area were affected by flooding, fallen trees, and loss of power, we were fortunate. We made it through unscathed.

Recognizing that others fared far worse than we did, we went online and donated to the Red Cross. At the time we made the gift, we could designate to a category or to “most needed.” We were able to print a gift receipt on the spot. As an immediate follow-up, the Red Cross emailed a thank you message with a receipt, an outline of all the services the support helps provide, and another opportunity to print out the gift receipt.

Up until that point, the Red Cross had handled the process perfectly and without any surprises.

Then, several days after our contribution, as the disaster began to subside, we received another email with another thank you with the subject line: “You are amazing.” We had to open it. When we did, we were greeted with a personalized salutation and a link to a slideshow illustrating the impact of our giving.

Here’s the text of the email we received:

Dear Lisa and Michael,

My sincere thanks for your generosity over the past ten days. The outpouring of support for the families impacted by Superstorm Sandy has been extraordinary. Whether you have given a financial gift, donated life-saving blood, or volunteered your time, I’m so grateful to so many compassionate people like you in the Red Cross community, as we provide emergency relief and help millions of families recover and get back to their lives. On behalf of the families and individuals we’ve served and will continue to serve in the days and weeks ahead, thank you.

[Slideshow image and link]

We are making a difference together. To date, you have helped us provide more than 61,000 overnight shelter stays, serve 3.2 million meals and snacks to cold and hungry families and distribute more than 121,000 relief items such as warm blankets, cold weather gear, clean-up kits and hygiene kits. We have activated our entire fleet of 323 Emergency Response Vehicles to bring meals, water, information and emotional support to impacted communities and we have deployed nearly 5,900 trained Red Cross workers to support relief efforts.

Our work is far from over, but from the bottom of my heart, thank you. We’ll continue to post updates for those affected by the storm and for our caring Red Cross community on our website.

You are at the heart of our mission to relieve suffering, wherever and whenever we’re needed, and I am so grateful for your support.

Gail McGovern

President and CEO, American Red Cross”

The slideshow contains many moving images of the Red Cross at work. On the same page as the slideshow, there are tabs to access other useful information. For example, visitors can learn how to donate additional funds, how to give blood, how to help beyond donating money, and how to find assistance. The page also contains links to other useful, disaster-related information such as tips for returning home after a disaster and how to download an app to assist with future hurricane preparedness.

The Red Cross giving and thank-you process is effective for a number of reasons: