Cost effectiveness is a fundraising tool

Until recently I haven't had many clients asking about how to incorporate efficiency and effectiveness into their fundraising strategy, but times are changing!

Efficiency is  perfectly acceptable fundraising strategy according to Mal Warwick's very useful book which identifies five types of strategy under the acronym GIVES (growth, involvement, visibility, efficiency and stability).

For us in New Zealand, efficiency is becoming more important as philanthropic funding and statutory funding becomes harder to source. Funders don't want to see duplication of resources and they are tending to place a higher priority on groups which work together, hence The Working Together More Fund which is supported by Tindall, JR McKenzie, Todd and Hugh Green Foundations.

Bearing this in mind, the time seems to be right to re-investigate the concept of shared services. Shared services is not about amalgamating databases, but more fundamentally, about choosing to make decisions based on efficiency. It might mean sharing information, sharing knowledge, sharing case studies with other groups so they don't have to reinvent the wheel. It might be about improving systems and processes to ensure that no time or resources are wasted. It might be about identifying new ways of working that take less time or raise the quality of the output. It might be about ICT or sourcing products and services for the business sector that could be  used by the charitable sector. It might mean collaboration, co-opetition, or outsourcing. Phew, there's a lot to think about.

One of the organisations I work with is exploring all the options for increasing the efficiency of charities. WICT is concerned with eliminating the digital divide and making sure that technology can help all people and organisations. We're posing the question "can the right technology deliver efficiencies, improved productivity and better systems and processes so that charities can focus on their mission (not on the admin)?

Watch this space for developments.

Gambling Harm Reduction update

I posted some months ago about the Gambling Harm Reduction Bill and the number of people wanting to make submissions. At long last I got my moment in the sun when some more time was scheduled for submissions. I had only two points to make - impact on national organisations and diversity of funding sources.

I didn't get many questions from the panel. They wanted to know what rate of success I had in making grant applications. And this was a question that was asked of a number of other submitters. I was forced to concede that grant funding was not the most efficient and sustainable fundraising tool for larger organisations.

So no clear direction yet on what the committee might be thinking.

Fundraising Issues of the day

It looks like I'm not going to get my  moment in the sun. There are so many people trying to make comment on the Gambling Harm Reduction Bill that the only slot I could get was in Christchurch, and seeing as I'm based in Wellington, that's not going to happen.

So far the jury is out on whether this Bill will last the distance. My personal feeling is that there may be some sort of middle of the road solution which pops up, and let's face it, no one will be happy. In the meantime we've all been distracted from our real work - fundraising!

I heard an interview on the radio recently about the politics of the Pink Ribbon campaign. You may remember a few years ago in New Zealand that people were complaining that too many companies were tagging along with the Pink Ribbon, for minimal effort and minimal payment. The Breast Cancer Foundation responded to the criticism by putting aside a greater amount of money into research, rather than just focusing on awareness raising. Anyway the whole issue of corporate involvement in charity campaigns will become more transparent with the passing of the Fair Trading Amendment Act recently which will introduce a range of regulations governing fundraising. The most relevant to this issue being transparency around cause related marketing. It may be that corporates will have to disclose how much they are donating to charity through marketing campaigns.

On the corporate side of things, check out the website Business and Community Shares www.bacshares.org.nz This is a new hub of on-line corporate social responsibility (CSR) in New Zealand. There should be some good tools and information useful to fundraisers and also you could get yourself profiled there. Check out the flash survey they've undertaken - "who do you call?".

Also incredible freebies - if your organisation is based in Wellington and you want some help with your website or social media presence - talk to Wellington ICT - they have a fantastic range of volunteers who can help. www.wellingtonict.org.nz

Corporate Endorsements

Met up with Jo Burrows recently. Jo is director of Rededge Fundraising Solutions, based in Victoria.

Funnily enough, a week later I was looking back on some fundraising resources and found an article by Jo written for the  Aus magazine, Fundraising and Philanthropy.

Back then Jo had introduced The Sensitive Choice endorsement for the National Asthma Council in Australia.

The subject of endorsement is a fraught one and I noted that the board of the Asthma Council had asked how they could endorse products in a safe and low risk way.

Endorsements are difficult and should not be entered into without serious consideration of the risks. Too often I find that charities/nonprofits entering into any kind of business relationships fail to do any due diligence or risk assessment.

What should we be looking for?

First I would do a company search through the Companies Office. Check up on the shareholders and directors and their past history. How long has the company been around?

Don't forget the obvious - website and google search. If there is no website, or you can't easily find it, that's a bit of a red flag for me. If you find a website, make sure you look at the history, the annual report if it's attached, and any other links.

Look out for previous media coverage. Have their been any scandals or unfortunate headlines?

If they are reasonably big you might find more information in the Top 200 company's listing which is published in Management Magazine once a year.

Having found all the public information, create a risk register which outlines all the potential risks of partnering with the organisation. Capture all the "What If.s"...Think about things like the company being sued,  managers with their hands in the till, product recalls, environmental pollution, bankruptcy etc.

The final thing is to make sure that you are happy to endorse the product or service. That's the absolute bottom line. If you can't eat or drink the product, or stay overnight, or drive the car with a smile on your face, then don't go any further with product endorsements!!!!

Fair Trading Amendment Bill

An amendment to the Fair Trading Act is not exactly exciting news unless you are a serious fundraiser who is  keeping your knowledge up to date.

The passing of this legislation is a forewarning of regulation in the charitable sector, forcing transparency of fundraising practices including cost of fundraising. In a nutshell the Bill allows the Minister of Commerce to make regulations requiring organisations and professional fundraising companies to disclose the cost of their fundraising activities.

So there is small window of opportunity to stave off any regulations by ensuring that the sector is open and accountable and fully able to report on the cost of fundraising if required.

The legislation has serious implications for marketers also.  As a specialist in corporate/charity relationships I've been frequently annoyed by cause related marketing campaigns which proudly announce that a donation is being made to a charity from a sale of a product or service. "How much?" is rarely explained. the new legislation now brings this under the realm of the Fair Trading Act, and if regulations are introduced, then marketers will need to be aware of what they say about such donations, including how much is being donated.

More information can be found about this legislation in the Fundraising Institute magazine Newz Viewz, August issue.

CFRE is it worth it?

There's a lot of talk about at the moment about the value of a qualification in fundraising such as the CFRE (certified fundraising executive). It's a hard qualification to gain, you have to be doing practical fundraising and it only lasts for a limited period. I managed to gain the CFRE myself but only because I was working with a client who actually asked to me help with their fundraising. Normally I would only advise people on how to go about fundraising rather than actually doing it for them.

The sad thing is that CFRE is hardly recognised in job adverts, and I've certainly not seen any fundraisers rewarded by their employers for gaining the qualification.

But like a lot of things in life, it's over to you to promote the value of the qualification.  I certainly highlight it at every opportunity. I mention it in media releases, in client proposals, in presentations and at workshops.

Not everyone of course will aspire to this level of commitment. There's a cost to it, and not everyone is motivated by the challenge of a four hour exam. But if you want some international recognition for your professional development, then this is it!

There is little else on the market. Of course there are no specific tertiary qualifications and no plans for any NZQA accredited courses.

FINZ is working with FIA to develop some trans Tasman courses. There is the Principles and Techniques of Fund Raising Course from the Centre on Philanthropy at Indiana University, brought to you in New Zealand by the Fundraising Institute. There are also privately run courses on various introductory and specialised topics, run by private providers like Foresee Communications.

So you can go so far with your professional development until you need a qualification, then it's over to CFRE.

Not everyone appreciates what we do!

Media Management and crisis communications are jobs usually reserved for the comms manager rather than the fundraising manager but it's certainly something we all need to be aware of. A very minimum requirement is that the organisation should have a risk management plan that includes fundraising issues.

Recently in Australia, as was reported in a recent issue of Fundraising New Zealand, a news media reporter registered and attended the annual fundraising conference.  Surely this would be  a good thing? At long last the public would hear of our good planning, our donor stewardship, our love of people, our great success at our chosen profession and all the good we are doing for the community. Oh no, from the public point of view we were presented as cold, calculating and money hungry! How could this be?

The worst headlines came from a session on bequests. A few unfortunate jokes (you can imagine what they might be!) cracked by a presenter were used to demonstrate how callous our fundraising strategies might be.

So we need to think carefully about how we present ourselves at all times. Ditch the  jokes, however internally they may be intended! Remember at all times that our donors are amongst us. Remember the higher calling of our profession and that what we do is a wonderful thing.

Our own Fundraising Institute, along with the FIA, is looking at media management. Currently there is little budget for media work. But our professional reputation is important so we should be supporting our professional body to represent us. We need to let Council know that this is an important issue and that we support budget going towards media management.

In your own organisations make sure you are prepared for media crises. Identify the potential issues, how things may be interpreted, the questions the media may ask. Prepare answers and decide who will represent you to the media. Make sure everyone knows who has the media speaking rights. Only one person should speak for all. Make sure they are trained. Yes, its expensive but it's an investment for your brand. Perhaps your corporate partners will help you with this. You may be able to attend media training courses for their staff at no additional cost. Finally ensure you have contact details for all important stakeholders so you can alert them to any upcoming headlines.

Let's hope its something you don't ever need but better to be ready, than lost!

National Charities Beware - Gaming funds will be off the table!

At the FINZ Conference Trevor Garret of the Charities Commission reminded us to have a look at the amendments to the Fair Trading Act which include the Amy Adams proposal. This one certainly bears a look. It all started the year before last when Amy Adams proposed that charities should be challenged to notify donors about the cost of fundraising.


The second Bill we need to be aware of is the Gambling Harm Reduction Bill proposed by Te Ururoa Flavell. Again this has been around for some time but it has now passed its first reading by 83 to 7. Winston Peters is the only name of note opposing it largely because it removes racing as an authorised purpose.


So what is the purpose?
The aim of this Bill is to enable “local authorities, in consultation with their communities, to reduce the number of, or even eliminate, pokies from those suburbs and towns where they are particularly concentrated or doing particular harm”. The Bill also changes the responsibility for distributing pokie funds and “proposes to give gamblers more ability to limit and control their own gambling behaviour through player tracking and pre-commit cards


From an outside point of view this Bill be supported by a large number of charities but there are some drawbacks as I shall explain. The Bill proposes that territorial authorities will replace gaming societies as the arbiter of who gets the funds. Societies will no longer exist and each local council will instead appoint a committee of local people to make local decisions. At least eighty percent of the funds raised will go to local worthy causes.


So my question one is what happens to national applications. The Bill is only 11 pages long and I cannot find any positive explanation of how national charities could apply. So national fundraisers beware. You will have to apply to about 65  local body councils to get funds for a national project and then you will have to show how it's being spent in each council area.


For local organisations I see no particular benefit. Societies will be replaced by councils but there is nothing to say that the fund distribution committee will be anymore supportive of your group than any other. In fact if someone on this committee doesn't like your work (or you personally) there will be nowhere else to turn! At least at the moment you can find differing opinions by going to different gaming machine societies. If you don't succeed with one, you can at least try your luck (Ha!Ha!) with another. Under the proposed legislation you will be stuck with only one local funder. This actually gives amazing power to a few appointed people in your community. Too much power I would advocate! And remember if these people are appointees, they will change with every local government election. If your politics don't fit - all of you will be out!


I have to declare my personal interest here. I am an elected member of a licensing trust which has a class four gaming licence. We are established to support our local community which is a more restricted area than our local council covers. Under the  proposed changes our gaming funds will be added to a pool for the entire area, thus having the opposite effect than the Flavell Bill intends. So in our case, our very local community will suffer as we're taken over by the big boys!


I'm also unsure how the local council will cope with responsibilities of owning/managing and supervising gambling in their communities. They are not going to be funded to run pokie venues. They don't have the ability to create economies of scale like the societies have done. They don't have specialist staff - they will need to recruit managers and inspectors. They will need to create mechanisms for appointing (and perhaps paying) community representatives and while this may sound like a great job, realistically would local people want to be held responsible for approving and declining funding for organisations and people that they know very well! Corruption is just as feasible in this scenario as it is with gaming societies.


So where is the good news?
This will benefit some very local charities who will have the opportunity to lobby very local representatives. Full stop! I can't really see anything else. I don't advocate that our current system is perfect but nor do I see this as a reasonable alternative.


Be aware, be very, very, very aware of all the implications and remember that it was passed on first reading 83 to 7!!!!!

FINZ conference 2012

Just come back from the FINZ Conference held at Waipuna last week. Great line up of speakers, exhibitors and attendees. Over fifty percent were new attendees which shows some activity in the profession. International guests included Sandy Rees, Stephen Pidgeon and James Greenfield. Sandy invites people to register for her enewsletter. Sean Trinor, who hasn't missed a conference in years, was also (as usual) a popular speaker.

Awards were won by such diverse organisations as Rural Women and Ronald McDonald House Canterbury through to the Cancer Society for their relationship with ANZ National Bank.

Frank Claridge won the Henry A Rosso Award for his contribution to the profession. I became a Fellow for my contribution the Institute and the sector. Wow that was a special moment! I need to change my cards!

We had some good discussions on topics such as whether it was appropriate to take government money, through to what are the attributes of high performing fundraisers and whether they are a liability or an asset. I know which one I think is right!

Keith Dignan once again shared some fantastic statistical insights into telemarketing. A morning tea with James Greenfield persuaded me that we do need to take a lot of notice of financial reporting requirements. Breakfast with our good friend Trevor Garrett from the Charities Commission warned us about the update to the Fair Trading Act which would require charities to report on cost of fundraising. We will have to up the ante on our reporting if that is passed. It's already moving through the process. Remember this was the Amy Adams proposal from a few years ago. It didn't go away.

Blackbaud Index of Charitable Giving

The latest Blackbaud survey of charitable giving shows that fundraising in the US has returned to pre-recession levels. In fact it has above the level of giving last seen in 2007.

My gut reaction, because we don't keep regular statistics in this way, is that New Zealand's donation levels will be fairly static across the board but increased for emergency causes such as the Canterbury earthquake.

Blackbaud is able to gather such significant statistics because it runs a benchmarking product with regular subscribers. The benchmarking product is available in New Zealand but there are insufficient subscribers to create a regional group.

Otherwise we are reliant on the annual statistics collected by the Charities Commission, which of course, relate to the previous financial year.

The appetite for measurement and evaluation of one' s success is poor. There are few organisations that I talk to that want to invest in benchmarking. Chief executives don't understand enough about fundraising to know that the service is available and fundraisers may not want to put their efforts to the test.

For a number of organisations that I've come across the job descriptions don't specify the actual financial targets, even when a performance bonus is part of the remuneration. So why would these organisations be interested in benchmarking?

I talked recently to a senior fundraiser in a well known organisation who was struggling to satisfy a new CEO who was setting objectives. I had a look at what the CEO had proposed. There was no simple financial target. Instead a list of wishy, washy, unmeasurable challenges. The CEO called an emergency meeting, without consulting the fundraiser and announced that the organisation was in a poor financial position. Feeling very miffed, the fundraiser resigned. Later I did some research on the organisation. Its bequest income was very successful and the organisation would be held up as a model for its active bequest strategy. The results found through the Charities Commission register showed the organisation to be doing well. This is obviously a justification for benchmarking but without any comparison to go on, the fundraiser could not prove that she was doing a good job!

Social media for fundraisers

I've just given a presentation on social media strategy for communication managers at non profits and it got me thinking about the integration of communications and fundraising. The biggest organisation attending had employees dedicated to social media communications and to fundraising. The smallest organisation had two employees. So let's presume that most organisations don't have people dedicated to social media.communications.

For the fundraiser social media could be a valuable tool in acquisition and in retention but it could also be a  huge time waster and a diversion from the real job objectives. The challenge for the fundraiser, and perhaps any communications manager is to spread the load.

Collaboration is the key. While the fundraiser might be concerned about donor relations, retention and acquisition, other members of the senior team will have their own objectives - education, lobbying, advocacy, information, brand management etc.

On this particular communications tool, the smart organisation will be working collaboratively to ensure that resources are used to the best effect. There will be new roles and responsibilities delegated to different staff members. For example the new hire who already has her own facebook site and easily sends numerous twitters to her friends every day will become the social media adviser and trainer. The IT guy who hardly ever leaves his office will be the moderator. The nurse or social worker will be content specialist and a disabled client living in rural Northland will provide the monthly reports on web users, traffic, number of followers and topics of conversation. The fundraiser may tap into all of these areas of expertise and all of this content to digest into a weekly, monthly blog for donors.

The fundraiser may decide the key area is relationship building. So instead of focusing on the internal needs, he or she focuses on donor recognition at the places where donors hang out.

Here's some ideas for donor relationship building

• Identify the face book sites of your donors and post thank you's where all their friends can see! 
• Celebrate their philanthropy with virtual certificates and endorsements - become friends through social websites
• Track the special interests of your donors through sites like Linkedin and actively communicate in the groups they are following
• Actively seek information about social media sites your supporters are following
• Set up closed groups for specific stakeholders to meet and converse with each other
• Ask influential or respected people to thank your best donors through social media such as Facebook or Linkedin
• Introduce your supporters to each other through social media sites
• Seek feedback from your supporters through social media tools

Controversial fundraising tools - do they work?

Face to face and telemarketing are probably the most controversial fundraising tools. Even the most pleasant and enthusiastic supporters will cross the road or hang up the phone to avoid the (over) enthusiasm of commission sales staff.
However much we might hate these assertive fundraising activities, the truth is that these tools work, if they are used for the right reasons, and in the right way. Both are tools for acquisition (getting new names on your database).  There's no doubt that if you ask people, they will respond. The down side is that these tools are very expensive. In year one, you may spend more money to acquire new names than you get in donations. But if you can convert these new followers to seasoned supporters, the effort will be rewarded over a three or five year period.
My top recommendations:

1.  Explore other fundraising options first. This isn't something for the fainthearted.
2. Set your objectives clearly - what is the end goal, the long term goal?
3.  It's a five year plan - always refer to the long term plan in all your reporting, avoid talking about the money and focus on the acquisitions and retention
4.  Adopt a code of conduct or something similar to show your good intentions
5. Have the evidence handy to prove your case - you will get internal and external complaints - be ready for them
6. Build relationships with your supporters - retention is the key to success!

Direct Mail - still relevant?

Direct mail is still king as far as fundraising goes. Even with the advent of email addresses, blogs, online sign ups etc, the most money is still being raised from direct mail. We also know that if you sign up people on line you will need to convert them to direct mail if you want to keep them for more than a year.

In a recent survey conducted by the magazine Fundraising New Zealand, six organisations were asked to provide details about their direct mail campaigns in 2011. For all full run down on the results contact Tony Pilalis(you can find him on Linkedin) or view the www.foresee.co.nz website.

However I wanted to draw your attention to the changes in the average donation. The survey found that over the six organisations, the average donation had increased to $60.92, up from $33 in 2003 and $52.96 in 2008. Does this size of donation surprise you? Does it fly in the face of anecdotal comments you have been hearing? This shows the importance of getting the numbers right by testing. You don't want to be asking people for $25 if they are happy to give you $65,  When preparing your direct mail campaign, make sure you don't undersell yourself by asking for too little.

The other influencing factor in a successful direct mail campaign is to segment your database to make your correspondence more personal and the size of the request more appropriate. There are a number of ways of segmenting, for example according to size of previous gifts, number of previous gifts, average of the last year's gifts, whether they have ever given before, how they signed up, when they signed up, reference to personal interests. Can your database give you this information? Are you even collecting this kind of information?

Charitable trusts and foundations, grant makers

News that Gareth Morgan, a well known New Zealand philanthropist, has sold his investment company to Kiwibank, will be good news for those who follow closely the fortunes of grant makers. The Morgan Charitable Trust has already secured significant assets from the proceeds of the Trade Me Company and the trust has been granting money across a wide range of worthy causes, including organisations with an international focus. We might expect that Mr Morgan will increase the capital base of his charitable trust from the proceeds of his sale.

Applying to charitable trusts for grants is often a process given to a relatively junior member of staff, yet it's an area that could benefit from a more strategic approach. There are a number of different types of trusts and foundations and your strategy for communicating with them will differ according to their structure or purpose.

Here's a few things you need to know when researching an appropriate grant maker

1. what is the purpose of the trust or foundation - look at their charter or trust deed
2. who do they give money to - get a grant list
3. how much money do they give away - look at their annual accounts through the Charities register
4. who are the trustees/decision makers? - do you know them?
5. what is the decision making process - who and how do they make decisions,
6. how long is the process?
7. what will they need from you in your application

Sausage sizzles

New legislation around the health and safety of food sales has been on the cards for some time - obviously effecting the small scale sale of food, sausage sizzles, bake sales etc. It would appear that the legislation will move through the system this year. The new minister, Kate Wilkinson tells us that small fundraising activities will be exempt from the same requirements that will be placed on profit making ventures.

The thought of sausage sizzles and bake sales reminds me that selling something is an option for any charity fundraising. Although the public knows that they are buying in aid of a cause, some people want something in return, even if it is a humble sausage. The activity is a public event which provides some profile and it is an opportunity for some volunteers to provide their time.

However there is a warning here. Don't forget the purpose of the sale - it's to raise money! It's not an end in itself. I heard the story of a supportive husband who happily volunteered to cook the sausages on a Saturday afternoon. After several hours leaning over the hot coals he asked how much money had been made. Two hundred dollars was the answer.  "What" he answered with horror. "Why didn't you tell me you wanted two hundred dollars. If I'd known that was the objective I would have just given you two hundred dollars!"

So my top tips for the sausage sizzle are:

1. Plan, plan and execute well. You don't want to do this every week!
2. Make sure your volunteers are appropriately allocated according to their skills
3. Maximise profitability with everything donated or sponsored
4. Choose the best location or don't bother
5. Maximise effort by including other fundraising opportunities, raffles, donations, selling donated goods, car washing, gift wrapping, hot coffee or cold drinks, candy floss
6. Beware of hygiene
7. Exploit all the public relations opportunities
8. Make it fun
9. Do it once and do it well

Sponsorship and pricing

Sponsorship is becoming just one of many options for working with corporates but for certain types of organisations it's still a worthwhile type of relationship.
Sponsorship is about mutual benefits, not philanthropy and it's more commonly seen these days in sporting relationships, brand marketing, endorsement  etc.
Arts organisations rely heavily on sponsorship and sell naming rights to events, performances, tours, venues, etc. In return for some form of branding recognition, sponsors will purchase certain rights and opportunities.

Foresee Communications, which specialises in corporate relationships has produced a lot of material about sponsorships over the last 20 years. A commonly asked question about sponsorship is how to put a price on the sponsorship.
There are two common ways of putting a price on a sponsorship. The most common way is to determine how much money you need to make your event or activity work. That becomes the price of the sponsorship. FYI - this is not terribly realistic. The alternate method is to attempt to consider what it's worth to your potential sponsor.

I once ran an exercise for a client to put a starting price on a sponsorship. The potential sponsor was known to the organisation and they had good reason to want to work together. I valued the sponsorship at about a million dollars by looking at similar activities that the sponsor was already involved in, and similar deals that had been signed recently. Coincidentally, within a week of my valuation, the potential sponsor sent an offer to the client - for exactly the same amount of money. Wow, what a result. However the client thought that was too easy and they countered with four million!  You can imagine the gasps at the sponsor's office. For quite a while the deal was halted until reality prevailed. There was no one else in the mix so time was not a factor. In the end both parties came to an agreement to settle with $.15million. The key thing in this relationship was that both parties could offer something of value to each other. They were equally placed in the negotiation. Not too many deals work out like that!

The Habits of Successful Fundraisers

If you are looking for New Year fundraising resolutions that really make a difference here are some of my top recommendations:

1. phone 5 - 10 ten donors every day. Thank them for their support and check their details against your database
2. spend half an hour reviewing the database every day to check for duplications, spelling errors, incorrect or inadequate addresses. Familiarise yourself with your supporters. Every correction saves you money
3. post a tweet, a blog or facebook entry every day to keep your supporters active
4. run a telephone campaign with volunteers to thank all new donors (it will pay off next year)
5. establish or review your systems and processes (saving money by doing it right first time)
6. review and evaluate all fundraising activities. If it doesn't work, do something else

Fundraising blog topics

Had a comment from Mike Kotlyar with a few good ideas for postings. Thanks Mike. Face to face is one that he mentions in particular, along with volunteer strategies, and of course direct mail. That reminded me that telemarketing is another hot topic. If you start to bristle at the thought of those particular fundraising tools, you have to remember that they may not be aimed at your demographic.

This brings to mind a little story that someone shared with me. She had been doing her direct mail letters and of course there were a few addressed to people that she knew. As we do, she scribbled a little message on a post it note to her friends, demonstrating the personal nature of the mailing. When the CEO, who was signing the letter saw the note, she was horrified and said that the letters should be formal and proper, not with little notes stuck on! She obviously hadn't seen a Readers Digest mailing! So we need to ensure that if we have the expertise, we remind the people we work for that our strategy is sound and based on research or evidence.

I also get lots of people who fear that their letters will end up in the rubbish bin. It's okay! You don't need to be too precious about your mailings. They will end up in someone's bin. Don't stress over it. It doesn't mean they don't love you. Just that on this occasion they aren't going to reply.

The same for telemarketing. Some people will reject the call. It's a fact of life. The  important thing is not to get communication nerves. Keep going and don't sweat the small stuff.

Easy peasy fundraising

If you have plenty of supporters with time and enthusiasm on their hands - then ask them to do what they love, in aid of your charity. For some people having fun and fundraising at the same time is more attractive than cooking sausages and baking brownies.

Anyone who is competing in some sort of personal challenge or a team event could fundraise on your behalf. It doesn't have to be a sports event. It could be some kind of marathon - singing for 24 hours, standing up for a month, travelling on a shoe string budget - anything that's relatively newsworthy and attracts an audience will do.

We used to do this sort of "athon" by knocking on doors and seeking support from neighbours. Now we do this through special fundraising websites where participants can write their own blogs, email their updates to friends around the world, and collect pledges and donations electronically via credit card.

Evidence tells us that if you ask someone to collect by door knocking during an appeal week you may get them to collect a few hundred dollars each. If you ask them to collect by what we call personal challenges then they could collect at least several thousand dollars each. And they will have more doing it, than knocking on the neighbours door.

To make this successful the charity itself needs to provide guidance and all the tools necessary to make it work. It's usually easy to subscribe to a fundraising site such as Everyday Hero. But you need to provide some communication training for your participants. They will need words to describe what you do, they will need to understand how to use the website and establish their own blog. They will need to know what works and how other people have done their challenges. They will need media support from you, at least for their local community newspaper. They will need encouragement and congratulations. They will need to be part of the team. They may need tangible stuff like t-shirts, banners, flags etc. They will need you on the finish line!

Make the most of the new supporters that your participants bring along. They are part of your acquisition strategy.  Make sure you have a communication strategy to enlist them into your supporter group (first and foremost they are supporting their friend, but you can convert them to your cause). Thank them directly and make sure they know how their support is making a difference.

Too much communication?

Direct mail is a topic so close to the heart of all fundraisers but when you are starting out on your fundraising path you might ask the question “how many times should I be sending out communications to my stakeholders?”



I think the simple answer is that you send out as many mailings as your donor’s want to receive. So this means asking them!


Some organisations set up systems that allow for once a month pledges. Others communicate only a few times a year, one of which would be around the publication of their annual report. Not all communications needs to be a fundraising ask, once or twice a year it might be a copy of the stakeholder newsletter.

Campaigns are often based on time of the year, tax time or Christmas appeal for example. This might be supplemented with a special appeal for a crisis situation or a response to an emergency.

Some organisations that have multiple mailings each year may segment their database so not everyone gets every single communication. I know of one organisation that gives donors a pass for the next appeal. If they have responded to a particular appeal, they are not mailed for the next appeal.

Writing to regular donors is another contentious area. Some organisations will not send ordinary appeals to regular or recurrent donors. Sometimes this is a deliberate strategy not to over communicate with people who have already demonstrated their loyalty. However this must be balanced with a lack of communication which leaves regular donors thinking you don’t care any more. It’s especially important to build loyalty with recently acquired donors, particularly if you secured them through face to face or telemarketing or even on line. These donors will quickly leave you if you don’t build a more personal relationship with them.

There is no easy answer to “how many times should I communicate?” But my recommendation would be to err on the side of caution. If you communicate too much, the donor will probably tell you, and that’s good because a donor who calls up is one of your most loyal supporters! Communicate too little and the donor will think you don’t care!

Back to fundraising work

Fundraising New Zealand is a
good value publication

The beginning of the working year is a good time to review your memberships, your subscriptions and your professional development plans.

The key conferences you want to consider are those associated with your memberships - the FINZ conference for example is in May. The Australasian Sponsorship Conference is in October. Don't forget that your software supplier may have a conference and your own charitable sector may have a conference. You may want to bone up on a particular knowledge area - social media for example and there may be a relevant conference associated with it. To get a freebie attendance at a privately run conference you simply have to ask. Another way of getting a freebie is to offer yourself as a speaker. Not only does this mean free attendance, it also looks great on your cv.

Memberships are also important for the cv. Always use your memberships on your card, your signature etc. If you are torn between which memberships are most relevant to you, consider which ones your employer will pay for, and which ones you should pay for yourself. Have a look at the benefits and look at value for money. Make the most of all the offerings. Some societies offer free mentoring and coaching. Take advantage of all the benefits.

Subscriptions are often undervalued. Some memberships will include a magazine or access to e-news. Make it a point each month to spend an hour or two refreshing your knowledge by reading a few magazines, subscribing to a few blogs and sharing your own knowledge by reciprocating. If you are planning to undertake the CFRE qualification you will need to show that you are well read in your area of expertise and that you actively share your knowledge with others.

For your professional development, hopefully you have negotiated a budget for this. Firstly consider what you need to achieve, and then have a look at the offerings by reputable providers. The consider the pricing - what works for your budget. Sometimes it can make more sense to get a few hours of one on one coaching rather than a full day course. In some cases you may want to have your whole team trained. Most trainers work on a daily basis. You can hire them for a whole day, and then you can set the agenda.

An hour doing your planning now can ensure you spend your budget wisely. Otherwise you may spend all your budget on one activity only to find the most important conference is being held at the end of the year.

Payroll Giving, a fundraising opportunity

A New Year resolution could be to explore payroll giving. In New Zealand payrollgiving has  been an employer opportunity for a couple of years but it hasn't reached the heights you  might expect. More information on how it works are available from the inland revenue, Philanthropy New Zealand (generosity project),Charities Commission and various other official bodies.

The Inland Revenue keeps a track of the amount donated since the scheme started. However the scheme is a little more complicated than the several lines of enabling legislation would have us believe.

Firstly the scheme is purely voluntary on the part of employers, and this is first of all an employer scheme. Not an employee choice. If the employer is not interested, then that's the end of it. The second issue is that most significant employers use some brand of payroll software. If the software is not configured for the option of payroll giving, then it isn't going to happen. And thirdly the payroll officer of the company needs to be supportive because this is a job that they have to administer, and they may not want further workload. Nearly at the end folks. If all those other factors are positive, then the staff themselves have to be interested. They are the ones having their donations taken out of their payroll. Finally a word about the charities themselves. Some are resistant to encouraging payroll giving because they fear the loss of control. Their regular donors are in their sphere of influence. They know their names, and they know what they like. Payroll donors are probably anonymous. The charity has no means for communication unless the donor lets them know who they are. If they change jobs, the charity has no means to follow them.

So where does this leave us?
The actions are:
persuade employees to talk to their employers
make it easy for employers to choose charities
ask all payroll software companies to enable payroll giving
present a united front to the key decision makers
remove complicated obstacles
mitigate the barriers and the objections

There is only one player representing the charitable sector - the Payroll Giving Foundation. Other participants represent or advocate for the employers - the early adopters group.

So if you want to make payroll giving an opportunity for your organisation, take a look at the Payroll Giving Foundation or give me a call.

Complaints, good news or bad?

Complaints, good news or bad news?
The fear of fundraising is often about the possibility of complaints. People are afraid of complaints, often because of their personal perceptions, and they  forget that they are not the target audience of their communication activities.

Let's talk about a complaint and see it as a good thing, rather than a bad thing. First of all, someone who takes the trouble to phone you is actually your number one fan. They have read your communications. They have pondered the request and then they take time from their day to respond. If they didn't care, they  wouldn't respond. The phone call proves they care about your organisation and want you to receive feedback about your activities. A complaint therefore is your number one way of having a dialogue with your most ardent supporters. Take the time to respond in a positive manner and then do something to action their complaint. Make sure you record the call on your database and that you diarise to follow up. Check their giving history following the complaint. Did they actually stop donating or did they actually donate more after your conversation?

A more positive way of looking at complaints is to see them as feedback or critique. Take them as something to celebrate. They read your communications after all! Make sure you take some action and follow it up. Respond to them in writing or by calling back a few days after the initial call. Next time you are sending out a communication, forewarn them and actively seek their feedback.

And whatever you do, use the opportunity to review their database entry. Double check their details. Make sure nothing is incorrect. Record your follow up actions and do them.

Thanking you!

The power of the thank you.
There's no doubt we need to build relationships with donors but how much effort do we put into the thanking process? In our direct mail campaigns we thank supporters for their donation along with the receipting process.But what about on line donations and regular givers? How do you thank the donor and how often?

At a conference last year I heard a very captivating presentation from Chuck Longford, Blackbaud's Chief Scientist. Chuck is the company's database wizard and so can prove anything he says.

Chuck reported on a couple of experiments undertaken by charities. The concept is simple. Get volunteers on the phone thanking first time donors for their first gift and guess what happens? In year two the donations from those who had been called increased by about 25 percent.

That's an exciting result isn't it? Wow, you'd think we would have already tried it wouldn't you? Well we probably have tried it but perhaps we haven't done so systematically. Perhaps our database isn't good enough to measure the results. Perhaps we haven't shared this knowledge with our colleagues. Perhaps we haven't been around long enough to measure a campaign from one year to the next.  Perhaps we aren't putting enough resources into relationship management! Perhaps we are more concerned with the numbers than with the people.

If you are looking to improve your fundraising results with very little financial input, try doing this experiment for yourself. And for the sake of someone coming in after you, test and measure everything!

Bequests, what to do with them

Bequests were in the news over the holidays. A well known and loved charity was concerned that over the last three years it had received less bequest income. I checked the figures to check whether this was a universal phenomena and it isn't. Bequest income has actually  increased over the last three years.

However that wasn't what I wanted to comment on. It's about what you do with bequests that I think is worthy of comment. For many organisations the thought of receiving a bequest is a pipe dream yet it's probably one of the easiest fundraising tools to get started. You simply have to change your will to include a bequest then talk to your board members and supporters about why you have taken such a step. Easy, peasy.

But while you are getting that sorted out, you need to make a decision about how you will use the bequest money. There are two options. One is that you will use it to supplement your annual income. In other words spend it today. Otherwise you might establish an endowment fund which maintains its capital to generate income. Once you get to this point you are truly a sustainable organisation! Oops, Sorry, to get diverted. Back to the endowment fund! Personally I believe that an endowment fund would be attractive to your potential donors. Better that their support for you can continue to provide assistance over many years, than to be used up in one or two years. This doesn't mean that endowment funds can't ever be used. Your policy would probably determine what constitutes an emergency situation. A bequest is a legacy gift so it makes sense to keep it as a legacy.

Another issue for your bequest policy is donor recognition. I'm in the camp that says celebrate the gift while the person is around to appreciate it. You won't know for sure that someone has left you a legacy until their death but in the meantime you can presume that if they tell you they've done it, they probably have. Once you know they are making a bequest, you must do something with the information. You really only have one shot at this because if you miss the mark, the donor will go somewhere else.

Fundraising Gimmicks and new ideas

New Ideas and Fundraising Gimmicks

For the uninitiated, fundraising seems to be about gimmicks. For many there is presumption that somewhere out there is a new idea that will raise millions, preferably without the organisation itself having to spend a penny. In general the same people looking for the gimmick will also be looking for  a freebie. Not only will they ask for the consultant to work on commission, but if the consultant is successful they will still complain about the size of the commission. Accept these types of job and you are on hiding to nothing.

A couple of years ago I was invited to meet with a CEO who wanted to raise a significant amount of money for a capital purchase. I explained the process of capital fundraising and suggested that the starting point was to grow the database of supporters and to communicate the need. The organisation had a clear target market so I suggested some face to face sign ups at an enormously well attended special event. The most significant costs would be securing a display stand at the event, some publicity material and the employment of one or two key  people to direct the activity. Volunteers were available so it wasn't a huge human resource investment. The event was to be held six weeks into the future so it meant a quick decision was needed. And seeing as quick action was a requirement of the CEO I believed the solution was simple. Face to face asking is the preferred option.
Well we went backwards and forwards with meetings until I could stand it no longer, nor could my pocket. I'm happy to present ideas and discuss solutions with the client before charging but after meeting number three and missing the deadline for booking into the event, I realised that the job was turning into the impossible.
In exasperation I asked what was the problem with the strategy. "I want something different" he said in a plaintiff voice.It suddenly dawned on me. He didn't want to pay my fees for something that seemed so simple and mundane. At that point I said "if you want the tried and tested way of fundraising, with no guarantees, but plenty of evidence of success, then I'm the right person to help you, but if you want something different, with no proven process, then find someone else to help you!"

Nowadays, before I start work with a client who has no experience or exposure to fundraising, I fully explain the process of fundraising to the board and CEO and ensure I have their commitment to that process before I sign a contract. I explain that my role is about establishing the process rather than finding the gimmick. It doesn't mean that creativity is not important. It certainly is. But it's not the starting point for developing a sustainable fundraising plan.

And by the way, commission work is a no, no. I'll write a blog on that one another day.

Volunteers - Help or hindrance?
Coporate volunteering in particular has traditionally been associated with team building and that means the charity gets an offer of a group of volunteers, often for a day or even half a day. Sometimes this is offered on one particular day of the year. Many charities don't like to turn down an offer of help, but usually there is little strategic thinking about how to use the help. Physical activities ae the norm - grab a paintbrush, hammer a  few nails. What else can you do with 20 or 30 people who don't know anything about you and what your mission really is?

My suggestion of a New Year's resolution is to be more strategic. At least be more proactive. Create a strategy around volunteering. Prepare yourself for the day when 20 people come knocking. Instead of waiting - get yourself in front of the banks, the financial companies etc who do this sort of thing and  make your requirements known. Set up a challenging activity for volunteers. Think outside the box. Can your volunteers train you with their expertise? Could they fundraise on your behalf? Could they do something that you currently pay for? Could they do something in the community rather than at your office? Could they sell something? Could they organise an event? What about speed teaching, one on one with your own staff or your clients?

The secret is to make it fun and achieveable in a short period of time. Consider carefully what the corporate partner wants to get out of it. Make a pitch, well in advance of the date. Create a special event and give it a name. Fun and exciting is more attractive than hot and heavy tasks. Make it relevant to their expertise.  Ensure that the volunteers will go away with some great memories they can share with friends.

From your perspective you want it to be a lasting relationship with mutual benefits for both parties.

Whatever you choose to do with your volunteers, make sure the thank you is sincere and that their work is appreciated by the CEO and board. Make sure you get their names for certificates of appreciation. Get them on your mailing lists. Take photos and send a picture and article to their corporate communications team. Write a media release for your local paper. Do something unexpected for them and they will come back next year.

What's in a name?

It may seem supremely obvious but getting someone's name right is the first step in building a relationship with them. Getting the name right isn't necessarily going to increase the size of  their donation but getting it wrong will certainly impact on your fundraising success.
Checking details like the spelling of the name, the address, the postcode etc will pay dividends if you do it systematically. Every time you have someone on the phone, check their details, correct them if necessary and read back the changes to your supporter to confirm.

Don't presume that a simple sounding name is a given. I've seen all sorts of strange spellings for the simplest of names. You will also want to check preferred names. People change around their first and second names and many people claim to know when a list has been shared around - their real name features in the mailing address, not the preferred name. Watch out for shortened versions of names. Rod instead of Roderick for example. Double check with your supporter that this is the preferred version. I once worked with Dr Roderick Deane and everyone in the company knew that you should call him Roderick. When I see him named Rod in the media I cringe. Perhaps he's changed his mind, but I would certainly check if I had him on my database.

A simple way of checking is to google names but a quick phone call is highly desirable. It makes a great impression with your supporters if you show you're taking the time to call up. For new donors you are always going to phone to thank them (it increases their giving in year two!) so while you are on the phone, double check details and preferences.