Author: Hank Lewis, MA, CFRM

In my August 12th posting, I provided a link to a three-part piece on Planning Studies. In that series, I discussed how/why the Planning Study is the best way to determine what programs/activities donors are likely/willing to support, and for identifying which donors will support which program/activity.

In a Planning Study you are interviewing people/donors who have agreed to be interviewed. People who are amenable to being asked detailed questions, many of which will touch on the personal. Without question, the Planning Study is Research.

Keep in mind that the people who are the best interviewees are likely to be former and prospective major donors; and, it is also likely that they have participated in previous studies … for yours or other organizations. It is also likely that they know and understand the “Study Process” and its purpose.

The Study, therefore, should be designed with consideration for all of that.

Questions should be similar to the following:

“Of which programs/activities is the community most aware?”
“Which program/activity do you think should get funding priority?”
“Which programs do you think your colleagues/friends/peers would support?”
“What about this program appeals to you?”
“Would you like to name that program after you and/or your wife, or you parents?”
“What would you do to make ‘that’ happen?”

Often, the best questions are:

“What can we do to get you to want to support that program?” and,
“What can we do to get you to get your others to support that program?”

But you can’t ask those questions in a vacuum. There has to be a relationship between the organization and the potential interviewees. Those people have to “want” to be interviewed. They have to feel that granting an interview will satisfy one-or-more of their needs; and, they have to feel that the interview will produce the results they desire.

Next Week, a piece on “Funding for Donor Acquisition & for Donor Research”

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

There are a number of ways to categorize research on (prospective) donors. One of the obvious ways is by whether or not they are current constituents, another is whether they’ve yet been donors to your organization.

For the first category, your research would be focused on identifying groups of people whose interests might suggest that they’d be interested in your mission and the activities in which you are involved to pursue your mission.

There are companies that compile lists of people based on what magazines they read, what tv shows they watch, where they live, how they vote, at what stores they shop, what websites they visit, what nonprofits they support, etc. You name it, and those companies amass and collect lists of people and their interests.

So, if you’re a nonprofit and you want to identify groups of people who are more likely to want to know more about you, assuming they know that you exist, it would pay to work with, to seek the advice of, one-or-more of those companies.

Then, when you’ve identified lists that fit your criteria, the next step would be to test those lists … usually by mass mailings. You would do additional mailings to those lists that result in the greatest response rates and the greatest dollar return. Part of the process might be to send multiple mailings to the same lists – at different times, to see which people respond to which aspects of your mission and to which of your programs.

That process, donor acquisition, requires an investment … often, a significant investment. And, for any organization that wants/needs to grow, it would be an ongoing investment. (How to fund that investment, in a future posting)

Another, relatively easy way to get lists of names of people who support causes and organizations like yours is to obtain the annual reports of nonprofits whose missions/activities parallel or complement yours. The smaller the community, the more useful those annual reports would be … keeping in mind that those donor lists only include names – no contact or biographical information.

Of course, some of the names on those lists may be highly recognizable – wealthy, prominent people that you’d want to know more about … with the thought that they might become major donors to your organization.

When you get responses to your donor acquisition mailings and you compile a list of names of potential (major) donors from the annual reports, you should probably do some more research.

Those that made “significant” gifts in response to your mailings, and those who are leaders/major donors to similar organizations, should be at the top of your research list.

Your first source for information would be your leadership and current major donors. Do any of them know anyone on the list? Do they know anyone who might know people on the list?

Next is the internet. “Google” those names, see what comes up.

There are also firms that will take your list of names and run them through their databases.

And, there is always the mechanism of a Planning Study, where the prospective donors are interviewed on a face-to-face basis … asking them the questions that would indicate what you’d need to do to get them to want to become (Major) Donors to your organization.

We’ll be on vacation for the next three weeks,and our
Next Posting will be on Sept 9: The Planning Study as Research

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

Last week’s posting noted that (except for the donor acquisition process) you should not be in the business of cold-solicitation, and that your organization should have done some research on your prospective donors. And, btw, even if someone has given previously, s/he is still, for the purposes of this discussion, a prospective donor.

That posting also referenced the concept of having the right person asking for the right amount, at the right time, and under the right circumstances.

Also noted was that once you have a “relationship” with your prospective donor, the questions of who the right person is, what the right amount might be, and when-and-where to ask, will get answered !!

I must make a distinction, here, between the lower-rated and the major donors. The former are those who are asked to give via mass solicitation methods – direct mail, telephone, “fundraisers,” etc., and the latter are those who are solicited on a face-to-face basis.

It doesn’t take a lot of analysis to recognize that the larger the gift you are seeking, the more time/effort/resources you’ll have to put in to realize that gift.

For the lower-rated donors, those whom you’ve acquired via a donor-acquisition process, the relationship often boils down to thanking them for their gifts and keeping them apprised of how their gifts are making a difference….

If you want the major gifts, there has to be a one-on-one relationship with the (prospective) donor. Typically, that relationship is with a current major donor and/or a board member. (See: What is a Major Gift? & Who is a Major Gift Prospect?)

Such a relationship is not limited to discussions of the organization’s mission and activities. It may begin with an introduction by a mutual friend/acquaintance. It may be a result of a “chance” meeting – based on researching where would be a good place for that to happen. It may happen when the prospect attends an event conducted by the organization. It can happen in any number of circumstances.

As the relationship develops, and the parties get to know each other … as people, not as a donor prospect and a representative of an organization, they are learning about each others interests and needs.

Keeping in mind that donors give to satisfy their own needs, not the needs of a nonprofit organization, over time the relationship uncovers what is important to the prospective major donor.

This is not being sneaky or underhanded. Anyone who is a potential major donor is unlikely to be an innocent, s/he has likely been cultivated by other organizations, and has likely been solicited by other organizations. These major donor prospects will recognize the process, and are unlikely to be offended by it.

As the relationship develops, the person who is getting to know the prospect is also becoming the person who will come to learn what it will take to get the prospect to want to make that major gift. That person will learn what the right amount would be, and what the right timing and circumstances would be. That person becomes the “Right” person.

If you are the “Right” person to establish a relationship with a prospective donor, the process of getting to know and educating the prospect about the organization is the process of Cultivation. It is a process that takes many different forms, and is adapted to the needs of the prospective donor.

Next Week, some thoughts about donor research.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

Last week the focus was on learning about and understanding what your constituents and potential donors like about you.

Now, assuming that you’ve mastered that aspect of the development process, let’s look at what else you need to know about your potential donors; and, what you would have to do to influence those potential donors.

Once you know which aspects of your mission and which program(s) are most important to your constituents, the next question is: How do you turn those interested/concerned constituents into regular donors … even major donors ??

The easy answer goes back to the concept that donors give to satisfy their own needs, not the needs of the nonprofit organization. Another way to phrase that is that, “People give because giving makes them feel good.” If it didn’t make them feel good, they wouldn’t give.

A basic principle of fundraising, of development, is having the right person asking for the right amount, at the right time under the right circumstances.

So, who is the right person to ask for the gift ? It’s easier to answer that question if it’s personal. To whom are you most likely to say, “Yes,” when asked for a gift?

Asking for the right amount is important from two perspectives: asking for more than a potential donor is willing/able to give can only get you a refusal; and, asking for significantly less than a potential donor is willing/able to give will not allow the donor to obtain the greatest feeling of satisfaction, and may create the impression that you don’t know what you’re doing.

The right time to ask for the gift is when the donor is ready to say, “Yes.” You have to know when that is !!

The right circumstances involve location and environment. It can be at the donor’s home/office; when s/he is alone or with a significant other; while on a tour of the nonprofit; at a meal; on an airplane; in a car; or, any other appropriate place.

Sounds easy, doesn’t it ??!! Of course you’re asking, “How do I know who the right person is, what the right amount might be, and when-and-where to ask?”

If you were the prospective donor, the right person would be someone whose opinion you care about, someone who you care for, someone you respect, someone you want to get to know, someone who meets any/all qualifications you’d consider important/essential, a person to whom you would respond positively if s/he asked you to make a gift….

Since (except for the donor acquisition process) you should not be in the business of cold-solicitation, which is, most often, a waste of time, your organization should have done some research. You should have learned what you could about your prospective donor from a distance, and you should have created an actual relationship with him/her. (For more on Donor Acquisition … click here)

Once you have the “relationship,” the questions get answered … Next Week, some thoughts about the substance of the “relationship.”

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
Ask Hank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

Fundraising is all about getting your potential donors to want to give to you — if they want to, they will; if they don’t, they won’t !! Too many nonprofit board and staff members don’t understand that little bit of rocket science.

Too many board and staff members are focused on “how wonderful the organization is,” on doing good works, and on helping people, often to the exclusion of what their constituents really think/want.

To turn potential donors into actual donors, there are three things that impact that transition: (1) What your current donors like about you; (2) What you need to know about your potential donors; and, (3) What would you have to do to influence those potential donors.

This week I’ll talk about the first, and next week, the second and third.

So, how do you know, how do you find out how your constituents and (potential) donors feel about your organization, about its programs and about their effectiveness?

To answer that question, and the others that are inherent in this discussion, I must make a few assumptions: That your potential donors are aware of your existence, your programs and your effectiveness; That yours is not a brand new organization; and, That your development program is well beyond the “fundraiser” stage.

A mature development program has a number of components, including direct mail, social media, special events, major gifts, etc., and is supported by the detailed record-keeping that allow you to generate reports indicating to which specific mailings/events/programs a donor responded.

If you have a mail acquisition program, and you send a number of appeals to the same list, you would have a record of the appeal(s) to which your new donors responded. For those who are ongoing donors, if you’ve given them a choice (a checkbox) as to which programs they’d like their contributions applied, then you’ve got those records.

To which of your email messages have your constituents responded? What aspect(s) of your mission drew those responses – requests for more information?

Have you segmented your mailing list to send different groups of constituents different newsletters?

O.K., I think I made my point.

So, obviously, if you have a mature development program, you have the means to determine what it is about your organization and its programs that your donors like.

If your development program is still in its infancy or growth stage, then the above might help you establish a direction for it.

One other thing you might consider … a survey — email would be great for the purpose, and you’d get your responses back fairly quickly.

Keep it simple, ask only one-or-two questions. For example, you can list the various aspects of your mission and/or the various programs you use to further your mission, then you can ask that respondents hit and indicate their priorities on that email (i.e., Which aspect of our mission is the most important to you? The second most important? Which program(s) are most important to you … on a scale of 1-5?).

Once you know what it is that your donors like about you, you can look at a massive list of potential donors and begin to identify those with whom you’d have the best chances….

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

For this discussion, I refer you to one of my earliest postings, What Is A Major Gift? for a definition of that term, and I add one additional criterion … that it is not a one-time gift

“Stewardship,” in the context of development/fundraising, is doing what needs to be done to keep donors feeling good about having given, and doing what needs to be done to get them to want to keep giving.

“Stewardship” is, in effect, “Cultivating” the donor in anticipation of when they are ASKed for their next gift.

The two terms are essentially synonymous, with the latter taking place before the gift is solicited/obtained, and the former taking place following the contribution.

So, what needs to be done?? Let’s start with the easy stuff:

The “thank you” for the first gift is step one of the stewardship process. There can, in fact, be more than one “thank you.” There can be a “thank you” from the Board Chair, one-or-more Board Members, the CEO/ED, the staff person(s) who guide the program that will be funded (in-part or fully) by the gift, and/or someone who will benefit from the program funded by the gift. And, by no means, does that list limit who can proffer a “thank you” – which can be in person, in writing and/or electronic.

Step Two could include periodic newsletters, emails, personal (handwritten) notes and DVDs showing how the gift has made a difference. Again, that was not meant to be a complete list.

Step Three could be one-or-more invitations to see the organization serving its community.

Step Four could be recruitment to participate in providing the program services – i.e., reading to kids, visiting with oldsters, working the serving line at a soup kitchen. The possibilities are endless … well, almost.

Step Five could be the naming of a program or part of a program in honor of the donor and/or someone s/he wishes to honor – keeping in mind that you don’t want to name a program or part of a program unless you know (not believe or hope) that funding will continue for that service.

Step Six could be recruiting/training the donor to be a spokesperson for the organization.

In Step Seven you could recruit/train the donor to help you evaluate other (potential) donors.

In Step Eight, that donor could be soliciting major gifts on your behalf.

For your organization, there can be as many steps in the stewardship process as would work for you and your donors, keeping in mind that some donors like to be cultivated, some don’t, and some are somewhere in the middle.

Also, it is not my intention to suggest that all of the above numbered steps should be implemented, nor that they should be implemented in any specific order … although some of those steps logically come before others.

If you’d like to add to the list, please write to me, Hank, and, if I use your thoughts/comments in a future posting, I’ll provide attribution.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

As previously noted, if your phone program is primarily a fundraising solicitation tool, then the goal must be to raise as much money as possible.

That happens when all of the elements in a phone program support/enhance each other. We’ve talked about caller recruitment, training, scripting and pre-call mail or email. We’ve also talked about the “relationship” between the prospects, the organization/institution, and the caller.

Callers must be judged, primarily, on how they deal with and relate to the prospects. They are not evaluated just on the basis of how many calls they make in a session and/or how many dollars they raise. Of course those latter two elements are important, but emphasizing the number of calls doesn’t allow callers to use their judgment and give their attention to prospects who might (now or later) make significant commitments; and, just emphasizing the dollars would encourage callers to end seemingly unproductive calls … without a thought about the future of the “relationship.”

When two people are engaged in conversation, there is a relationship that exists between the parties, a relationship that should grow as the conversation becomes more meaningful. And, even though there is a script to be followed, it’s how the caller uses the script and his/her voice (tone/inflection) that engenders a “connection” between the caller and the prospect.

If the caller uses his/her voice properly, and creates/maintains the relationship with the prospect, then the dollar commitment becomes much more likely.

This leads us to another consideration. It’s easier for two people to establish a relationship if they feel that they have “things” in common … or, at least, don’t feel as if they don’t have anything in common.

For example, how uncomfortable do you feel when you call a company’s customer service center and wind up speaking to someone from a different country/culture? There’s often something missing in that conversation … a connection, a feeling.

Another example relates to generation. When I was growing up I was taught that, when someone says, “Thank you,” my response must be, “You’re welcome.” So, when I thank someone and their reply is “No problem,” there is a disconnect, a discomfort … a minor discomfort, but still, a discomfort. If, then, there are other such disconnects, chances of establishing a “productive” relationship are further reduced.

Speaking with someone whose culture matches or is similar to yours is a major factor in creating the comfort level that allows the creation of a “relationship.” I am not suggesting that callers are only assigned to prospects with identical cultural profiles, even considering the “difficulty” of making that happen, but I am suggesting that some emphasis be placed on that issue during caller training, and some consideration be given to caller/prospect assignments.

We’ve seen movies/tv that showed telemarketing/calling centers where every caller had his/her own carrel, separated from all the other callers. We’ve also seen public television fundraising where all the “operators” are sitting next to each other. I favor the latter arrangement for callers, where they are being reinforced in what they’re doing by others doing the same thing. Callers are working together to achieve a goal.

Callers should be working in a comfortable environment: comfortable chairs, headsets instead of handsets, the ability to take breaks when they need to, with drinks and snacks available.

And, since you want to keep the callers who are “relationship builders,” those who bring in the dollars, they should be paid enough to keep them from going elsewhere where they can be better paid.

Three final thoughts: (1) Telephone fundraising is serious business and should not be conducted in a “party” environment or with a “let’s-have-fun-mindset; (2) There is one person who is as important to the success of a phone program as the caller, that’s the person who trains the caller and provides ongoing supervision, training, and evaluation; and, (3) an effective phone program can get prospects to make multiple gifts during the year … obviating the need for the terms “annual fund,” annual giving” and “annual gift.”

Any thoughts/questions ?? Agree/disagree ??

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.

Our apologies. Circumstances precluded our posting last week … first non-holiday week we’ve missed in five years.

We continue, now, with our series on Telephone Solicitation. And, by the way, our use of that term excludes telemarketing, robocalling or whatever you call those intrusive, unwelcome calls that always seem to come at inopportune times. Telephone solicitation for nonprofit organizations is about a personal contact.

Two weeks ago we ran out of space (because we want the postings on The Fundraising Blog to be worthwhile reading, easy to read, and short enough so that you’d not give up on reading a piece that looked too-long-to-read-right-now) and didn’t get to talk about caller training.

Caller training should have, as it’s main focus, the relationship between the constituent and the caller. It is about the connection they both have with the organization; the connection that the “letter-writer” tried to establish in the pre-call letter; the experiences/attitudes they may have in common; and, most importantly, how the caller treats the constituent.

For a call to be successful, both the caller and the constituent must be comfortable. At the end of the call, both participants should be smiling. Their feeling should be that they had just had a nice/pleasant experience.

For the caller, that feeling should make him/her look forward to the next call, to want to make that call, and experience that feeling again. For the constituent, that feeling should reinforce his/her feeling of commitment … to the organization and to follow through with what s/he promised during the call.

An essential element in the training process is the formal script that the caller will use when making contact with constituents. (The reason the best callers are actors is that they can make their use of a script sound like they just thought of what they wanted to say, and not like they’re reading a script.)

The wording must be conversational, not stiff, and must focus on the reason for the call. The script should not get into a “Hi, how are you” format. It should begin with the caller identifying him-/herself as the person that (the first section of) the pre-call letter/email said would be calling. If the prospect has received the letter, the rest of the call is easy … because the caller will then address sections two-and-three of the letter. (In case you missed it, the sections of the pre-call letter were discussed in the posting on June 11th.

Once the caller has identified him-/herself, the next step is to emphasize what was said in the letter about the need for a particular program, and that Mr. Kramden had asked that “you consider a commitment of….” Note, so far, the assumption is that the pre-call letter was received, that the prospect has read it, and has thought about the “support” that had been requested.

The assumptions continue, with the caller asking how the prospect would like to structure his/her commitment – “Will you be sending your check for that amount sometime this month, or would early next month be better for you?” There should be no discussion as to “IF” the prospect will make the commitment. The only question is “WHEN?”

Once the desired result (the commitment) has been obtained, then (appropriate) thanks will be in order, and mention that you will tell Mr. Kramden of the donor’s commitment. Following that, there can/should be chit-chat … conversation that will engender those “good feelings.”

OK, maybe you’re saying to yourself that the above sounds pretty impersonal, but it’s up to the callers, by their tone of voice, inflections, attitude, to show that they care … about the organization, about the program that needs support, and about the person with whom they are speaking.

The first line, the first thought, in our last posting noted that, “The key ingredient of an in-house telephone solicitation program is the person making the phone call.”

Next week we’ll wrap up this series with some varied thoughts about
the process – the callers, the training, and the calling environment.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating
or expanding your fundraising program?
AskHank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks?
They’re easy to read, to the point, and inexpensive ($1.99-$4.99)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line, and would like to comment/expand on the above piece, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply.” If you’re reading this as an email, and you want to comment on the above piece, email Comments to offer your thoughts. Your comments, with appropriate attribution, could be the basis of a new posting.