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

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!

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!

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.