Category: Financing & Loans

Posted on

In Government Grant Proposals … You Should Address The Needs of The Reviewers

Grant reviewer going through a government grant proposal

In the process of applying for government grants, we often talk about the need to address the specific agency’s hot buttons and issues in our proposals. But how many of us address the way in which reviewers of our proposals make decisions?

Over the past twenty years, there has been a great deal of research in the fields of psychology, cognitive science, economics, learning, decision-making, and others that should inform the way we design and write proposals. This field is called Heuristics, or the study of how people make decisions.

Daniel Kahneman, a psychologist, has been one of the more influential people writing about decision making. His many articles address the ways in which we think, and discuss the typical biases and errors that are part of that process.

He was the first psychologist to be awarded (in 2002) the Nobel Prize in Economics … for his pioneering work in that field, and his findings have important implications for proposal development.

Thinking, Fast and Slow
For a clear and enjoyable summary of Kahneman’s work, read his best-selling Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011). To summarize his themes, this is what he says about our decision-making processes:
• Most people use fast and frugal mental processes to make everyday decisions and
solve problems because their cognitive resources are limited.
• Most people make decisions and solve problems with the least amount of effort
and information possible. Good decisions do not always require amassing large
amounts of information.
• We use straightforward mental processes to make decisions because of time
pressure, incomplete information, and the inability to calculate consequences.
• These mental processes usually lead to accurate decisions.

Design Proposals from the Reviewers’ Perspective
Based on the research of Kahneman and his colleagues, you should design your government grant proposals with the following characteristics to help reviewers evaluate them:
• Make it easy for reviewers to read and understand.
• Make it easy for reviewers to gather and process information.
• Make it easy for reviewers to move through your proposal quickly and with
as little effort as possible.
• Make it easy for reviewers to quickly find and understand the information
that interests them.
• Make sure that all your major themes have solutions, benefits, and proof.
• Write your grant proposal for non-technical reviewers.
• Use good visuals to emphasize your features, benefits, and major themes.

In grant proposals, as in life, “cues and clarity foster recognition and recall.” A good grant proposal that is easy to evaluate is more likely to be scored higher than a great proposal that is difficult to evaluate.

Read Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow and learn how to design grant proposals that take into account the decision-making processes of the people who will be reviewing those proposals.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dr. Jayme Sokolow, founder and president of The Development Source, Inc.,
helps nonprofit organizations develop successful proposals to government agencies. Contact Jayme Sokolow.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Look for Jayme’s ebook on Finding & Getting Federal Government Grants. It’s part of The Fundraising Series of ebooks

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Donor Retention and Donor Databases

Group of donors interlinked together

A Guest Posting by Mari Lane Gewecke (The second of two guest postings on this subject)

A client contacted me after being approached by a donor database sales representative with a proposal to solve their donor retention challenges by replacing their current database.

The feature in the new software that most interested my client was an automatic pop-up alert when they have lapsed donors. They felt that this feature was much simpler than making the effort to run a query in their current software and, thus, would help them retain donors.

I am intrigued by the notion that actual human contact with our donors could be replaced by software. But then, I am old-fashioned enough to think that donor stewardship is the way to retain donors.

Knowing the specific needs of the client organization, my suggestion was to review the new software for the following:
• How many options can you use to code a constituent?
• How are grants, campaign pledges and pledge payments recorded?
• How does campaign pledge payment invoicing work?
• How does the software handle importing of new records and/or data elements,
such as phone numbers or zip+4 codes?
• How and in what formats does it export data?
• How is annual development income tracked and reported? By program?
• How does it manage annual appeals?
• How are grants tracked and reported?
• How does report generation work, and what types of reports can be generated?
• How does the mail merge work?
• How do you search the database using multiple criteria?
• How do you segment a group of constituents?
• How are special events managed and reported?

A good software database can satisfactorily address all of the above questions, and can track donor retention through reports. All you have to do is run the appropriate query.

Of course, if a database is too complicated for staff to use it effectively, then perhaps it is a good idea to switch to something easier to understand.

It is better to have something that is limited in scope but usable than something that can do everything, if only you knew how.

In the end, donor retention cannot be accomplished by software. Retaining donors comes from effective donor relations, which involves recognition and communication, not automated pop-ups on a computer monitor.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mari Lane Gewecke, of Lane Gewecke Consulting, has been advising client organizations on their strategic and fund development planning for more than 20 years. Read more about Mari at http://www.incolor.com/mlg/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Choosing a Nonprofit Database

A nonprofit database

A Guest Posting by Ken Ristine
(The first of two perspectives on this subject, by two guest writers. The second piece will post this Thursday.)

Ever since desktop computers became common, nonprofits have found it a challenge to evaluate and adopt new technology. During the early years my major questions of organizations requesting grants for computers were: What software do you plan to use, and how is it applicable to your operations?

That was important because few software products really worked well for nonprofits and, more critical in those days, not all software worked on all computers.

All too often the answer revealed that not a lot thought had been given to those questions, and that many nonprofits got caught up acquiring technology before they really understood how they were going to use it.

Today hardware is much more flexible, so the major concern is software. And with the “new normal” that’s emerged in the last several years, the key software for nonprofits tends to be fundraising-related.

But, when choosing fund raising software (a database), many organizations fail to consider what information they have, what information they can gather, and what they will do with that information.

I’m in the final stage of helping a small organization, where I’m a board member, to adopt a fund raising database. I say final stages because there have been several key steps.

First, this organization’s key volunteers, such as the board, had to understand the basic changes facing the organization. In our case it is the decline of foundation and corporate grants and the need to grow individual giving.

Second, it was critical make key changes to the board’s monthly financial reports to clearly reflect those revenue sources and trends. The new reporting made the trend clear and has allowed the board to see the changes over time.

This understanding was critical to the third step, a commitment to our future.

The organization has chosen a path for where it needs to be in 3 to 5 years. That plan, and the organization’s commitment to it, tells us what kind of information we are going to need in 3 to 5 years. Knowing that, we know what information we need to be capturing and putting into a database today.

That commitment is critical; information doesn’t fall into a database by itself. It takes work; it requires mundane things like forms to capture information, and data entry. It means a commitment to taking the time and effort to collect and enter that information into the database.

It also takes a commitment for an organization to keeping that information stored and to retrieving it in meaningful ways. That commitment means paying attention to computer backups, report designing/writing, report running, and security issues—as in what information are you going to collect and who is allowed to see any-or-all of it.

Do you want to host your own database? Should it be on a network server? Should you look at a cloud-based system? You can only provide the best answers to those questions for your organization if you have looked at your past and your present, and made a commitment to the future.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ken Ristine is a senior program officer with a private family foundation in the Pacific Northwest. He has worked in nonprofits for over 35 years with experience in program development, fundraising, organizational development, and technology. He writes Ken’s Corner, a blog for the Puget Sound Grantwriters Association and can be reached at kenristine@hotmail.com

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Developing Financial Information for Grants: A Team Effort – Thank Goodness! (Part I)

A team developing financial information for grants

I admit it: program budgets, operating budgets, budget narratives, budget justifications, and audited financial statements are not some of my favorite things. Fortunately for me, and possibly many grant managers, developing program budgets and other financial information needed for grant proposals is a team effort.

Previously, I outlined the financial information to include in your grant proposals: your line-item program budget; sometimes a budget narrative and a budget justification; and always a statement of program sustainability; and, as attachments: your operating budget for the current fiscal year; your audited financial statement for the most recently completed fiscal year; your IRS Form 990; and, a list of your foundation and corporate grantors, including grant award amounts.

This posting focuses on how you – and the other members of your team – can prepare this information for grant proposals.

• Program staff: your NPO’s program staffers are the experts on the programs you are describing in grant proposals. They know the staff, volunteers and other resources necessary to carry out their programs, and you must work closely with them to develop the program budgets you include in grant proposals.
• Finance manager/staff accountant: The individual responsible for financials at your NPO may or may not be a CPA; they may be a paid staff member, a contract position, or a consultant. When it comes to developing financials for grant proposals, it doesn’t matter. They are on your team and critical to developing accurate financials you will need when submitting grant proposals and reports.
• Database manager: This staff member has their finger on the button, OK buttons. They can provide a list of foundation, corporate, government, and individual donors (and donation amounts) that you will need to submit with some grant proposals.
• Audit firm: You will need to submit your audited financial statement for the most recently completed fiscal year, and these folks can provide you with this document, along with your NPO’s IRS Form 990 (if your organization asked them to prepare this along with your audit).
• Development director: Depending on the culture at your NPO – and the personality of your DD – they may want to be integrally involved in the preparation of financials needed for grant proposals, or they may delegate this responsibility. Better to ask permission than beg forgiveness ☺

As I wrote in my December 6th post, a growing trend among grantmakers is the adoption of a common grant application. I have used the Missouri Common Grant Application and the budget templates they provide – these are available for download on the website of the Gateway Center for Giving.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Lynn deLearie Consulting, LLC, helps nonprofit organizations develop, enhance and expand grants programs, and helps them secure funding from foundations and corporations. Contact Lynn deLearie.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Look for Lynn’s ebook on Grants & Grantsmanship. It’s part of The Fundraising Series of ebooks

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Who Dreams Up This Stuff?

A dream cloud

An e-mail sent to me recently….
“I have read that when setting a donation goal for each major donor prospect you should project 10x their largest single gift. Is this a good rule of thumb?”

This is yet another of the several similar hard-to-believe instances over the years when someone cited such an unfounded and useless “rule.”

I strive to be respectful of my colleagues, but there are times when I cannot abide by what some of them sometimes say is “Gospel” – what they suggest as a “standard,” or a “rule-of-thumb.” Anyone promoting such a “formula,” clearly has no idea how the process works – prospect identification, assessment, rating for giving potential, and the subsequent asking process.

No such (10x) arbitrary extrapolation could/should be presented to any donor, be it a granting foundation, a corporation, or an individual. If you apply that, or any other formula, to any donor source’s largest single donation, and you come up with an ask not based on reality – it can only cause distress and dismay from your prospects. They will know that the organization making such an ask did not do its homework.

When talking about granting foundations or corporations, you simply start by understanding their range of giving, to look, possibly, at their median gift when considering an ask amount. Factor in which types of organizations were favored for their bigger donations, and determine if those organizations have missions and/or constituencies similar to yours?

What kind of reactions and suggestions do you get from your board members as they look over the list of the foundations and corporations – complete with the names of those entities’ officers and top staff? Can you find any friendship and/or business links they might have with foundation and corporate leaders? Can your board members use those connections to help you to determine the appropriate ask amounts?

For an individual who has a history of giving to your organization, you’ll know what their largest gift was. Even then, if I was a donor to your NPO and my biggest donation to you in recent years was $1,000, it would make no sense to arbitrarily peg my next ask at $10,000.

Using the 10x factor, and asking me for that dollar figure would greatly damage your credibility. People in your organization would/should know enough about me to suggest a number based on their perception of my giving capability.

Suppose I could give much more than $10k? You would miss out. Or, suppose my $1,000 gift was a real and hard stretch for me in the first place? I would be uneasy, maybe even embarrassed, to be asked for such a large donation well out of my range of giving, and then having to refuse.

It would be better if people from within the organization did do their homework, so they can ask for a more sensible and defensible gift.

You must do your best to “know” each and every prospect. A made-up multiplying factor, simply will not work, and can be damaging to your relationship with your donors and to your fundraising program.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a question or comment for Tony? He can be reached at Tony@raise-funds.com. There is also a lot of good fundraising information on his website: Raise-Funds.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

MASSIVE CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE COMBINED FEDERAL CAMPAIGN (CFC)

If Implemented As Proposed, Changes Could Cut CFC Revenues to Nonprofits by at least 50%

HELP SAVE THE CFC !!

POST YOUR COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CFC REGULATIONS

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has proposed massive changes to how the Combined Federal Campaign works. There are more than 40 pages of proposed regulations, and my analysis of the changes can be found at the SAVETHECFC Linked-In Group and on my blog at http://www.cfctreasures.wordpress.com.

There is a public comment period for all proposed government regulations, and the comment period concerning the Combined Federal Campaign proposed regulations closes June 7, 2013.

There are two ways to comment: Send a written letter to Keith Willingham, the OPM’s Director of the Combined Federal Campaign, or submit your comments via the electronic comment function of the Federal Register. I recommend, strongly, that you use the Federal Register method so that other members of the nonprofit community will be able to see your comments.

Subject/Reference Number: RIN 3206-AM68, Solicitation of Federal Civilian and Uniformed Service Personnel for Contributions to Private Voluntary Organizations

HERE IS THE SPECIFIC PAGE TO COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED CFC REGULATIONS: http://www.regulations.gov/…

Here’s one example of a proposed change that will have dire consequences for the Federal CFC donor, for CFC charities, and most importantly the people that receive the services from those nonprofit organizations.

Example of a Proposed Regulation Missing the Mark and having wide negative consequences:

In the CFC-50 Commission meetings there were many people and organizations that spoke to the benefit of extending the campaign to January 15th from the current December 15th end. The reasons for this include, both, year-end charitable giving and federal personnel schedules.

In watching all eight hours of video testimony, reading all the recommendations and appendices in the CFC-50 report, not a single person said “Shift the Campaign” from September-to-December to October-to-January.

“Shifting” is not the same as “extending…”
and there are many negative consequences to shifting, but since there was no mention of this at all in four public meetings over many months, the idea was not addressed.

Hidden Regulations – Federal Retirees Section
Some of the proposed regulations are poorly organized, with no logic behind them, and they have the effect of hiding significant and important changes. For example, the section dealing with Federal retirees, instead of being in a “Donors” section, is hidden in the “establishing Regional Committees” section, ignores the CFC-50 Commission recommendations, and makes a multi-million dollar error in judgment … all in less than a paragraph.

Here’s the link to the section that deals with retirees, hidden in the phrase “and also eliminates restriction on soliciting non-Federal personnel.” 950.103 Establishing Regional Coordinating Committees.

Will Cut CFC Revenues in Half:
If implemented as proposed, these untested changes will have the effect of cutting in half the CFC revenues for thousands of CFC charities, which is what has already happened when such massive changes were tried in workplace giving campaigns at the city and state level.

To see how much revenue was raised in your state through the CFC, please see my worksheet showing the state-by-state totals: http://cfctreasures.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/combined-federal-campaign-2012-results-by-state.

If you have questions or concerns about how you can help save the CFC as one of the most useful programs for millions of Americans who benefit from the $260 million dollars generated annually by this workplace giving campaign, please don’t hesitate to contact me at Bill Huddleston or by phone at 703-434-9780.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
During his 25-year career in the Federal sector, Bill Huddleston, The CFC Coach,
served in many CFC roles. If you want to participate in the Combined Federal
Campaign, maximize your nonprofit’s CFC revenues, or just ask a few questions,
contact Bill Huddleston
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Click this link to find descriptions of all the titles in
The Fundraising Series of ebooks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

What is a Fundraising/Development Consultant?

This is a companion piece to my posting, Who/What is a Fundraising Consultant, from last year at this time.

First, simply, a fundraising consultant is not someone who does “it” for you, and s/he is not an insider (i.e., staff, board, etc.). A fundraising/development consultant is (must be) “an objective outsider.”

You can, for example, engage someone to teach you how to write grant proposals, and have that person work with you to critique/edit what you write. That’s a consultant.

If the person you engage will do the research and write the proposal for you, that’s not consulting … that’s doing.

You can, as another example, engage a capital campaign director who will be “resident” at your location and will provide all the direction, planning, training, oversight and trouble shooting needed for the campaign. That’s doing, not consulting.

A capital campaign consultant can train you to do what needs to be done, can sit with you and provide direction while you do what needs doing, can provide occasional analysis of progress, and can suggest ways to improve/enhance the process. That’s consulting.

Taking the definition to the next step, for a consultant to provide the best possible advice/counsel/direction/training, s/he must (to a significant degree) buy into your mission and make a commitment (to him-/her-self) to help you succeed in its pursuit.

The consultant you want to engage is the one who will care about your success, and will work with you to help you achieve it. A consultant will often lose sleep … thinking about how s/he could help you do “it” better.

A good consultant will help you develop the perspective, the direction of vision, to understand how development/fundraising relates to everything an organization does, and how everything your organization does can impact/enhance/hurt your fundraising/development efforts.

A consultant will help you Identify The Problem, identify the solution to the problem, and work with you to implement that solution, but won’t solve it for you.

One important element in the definition of a fundraising/development consultant is how that person is compensated: A fee, based on the number of hours or days s/he will commit to working with you, or a pre-defined fee to include any/all effort s/he will expend on your behalf. Said fees are usually payable at $xxx per month … at the beginning of each month of the relationship. Fundraising/development consultants are never compensated by a percentage or commission of the monies raised.

Some “consultants” offer various combinations of consulting and doing. Before you engage counsel, talk with him/her, get a feel for what it is you might want him/her to do, and discuss the wording of a contract. Don’t just hire someone because you don’t want to do it yourself or because you don’t have a clue as to what needs to be done or how to do it.

And, a final thought: Consultants are also people, with the usual character plusses and minuses, but the one characteristic a consultant must have to be most effective is an ability to read, understand, motivate and get along with the people with whom s/he will be working.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? Ask Hank
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

If You’d Rather Read a Book Alone Than Join the Party, You Can Still be a Fantastic Nonprofit Fundraiser

…a guest posting by Andrea Kihlstedt

Introverts have been in the news for the past year or so. Thanks to Susan Cain’s book about introversion, Quiet, we’re now more aware that those of us who shun the limelight have unique strengths that ought to be honored.

What you might still not be aware of, though, is that introverts – yes, introverts – can make fantastic nonprofit fundraisers, either as volunteers or professionals.

This idea may seem completely counter-intuitive, but I assure you it’s true.

According to my experience and research, introverts bring the following specific gifts to the fundraising table:

• Introverts are great listeners – and aren’t we always saying that listening to donors
is one of the most important aspects of the fundraising process?

• Introverts are sensitive to the people around them–often more sensitive to their
needs than their extroverted counterparts.

• Introverts are willing to cede the limelight to others without feeling dismissed.

• Introverts are great observers and take in the all-important details of a
conversation.

If you are an introvert – or you are managing staff members and/or volunteers who are eager to help but are most definitely not the life of the party – how can you build on the inherent strengths of introversion to enhance self-confidence and build fundraising success?

Here are three suggestions:

Find the courage to be your authentic self. That’s essential.    Introverts who try to put on an extroverted face can come across as
phony, and they exhaust themselves in the process. Rather than
trying to be something you’re not – or encouraging your staff or
volunteers to be something they’re not – it’s far better to
play to your natural strengths.

Find out whether your friends and colleagues see themselves as
introverts or extroverts. In discussing this with them, you’ll
come to understand one another more fully and be able to rely on
each other’s strengths rather than being frustrated by them.

Be sure to give yourself plenty of quiet time to recuperate from
heavy interaction with others. Remember that while extroverts are
energized through interaction with other people, for introverts
contact can be exhausting. So plan on plenty of time alone between
your meetings.

The final thing to remember is that, while introverts bring natural strong skills to fundraising, the best organizations recruit introverts and extroverts and encourage each type of person to build on the inherent strengths that come from being their authentic selves. Not only that, but each of the two personality types also have other dominant traits to take into account – but that’s the topic of a different post.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Want to find your asking style, use Andrea’s Asking Style Assessment; and, if you want to read more about Asking Styles, take a look at Andrea’s book, Asking Styles: Harness Your Personal Fundraising Power. You can contact Andrea at Andrea@askingmatters.com.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a comment or a question about starting, evaluating or expanding your fundraising program? AskHank@Major-Capital-Giving.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about
The Fundraising Series of ebooks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Getting That Derailed Fund-Raising Campaign Back On Track

You can’t fix a problem in a campaign unless you know there is a problem !!

We track progress in a fund-raising campaign to be able to identify problems in time to take corrective action. If at any point in the campaign it begins to look as if the ability to achieve the goal is slipping away, then those managing the campaign must give immediate and focused attention to identifying/analyzing and formulating a solution to the problem.

The most common problem encountered during a campaign is the failure of solicitors to ask for and/or obtain commitments from their assigned donors at the levels that the rating-and-evaluating process ascribed to them.

Beginning on Day One, tracking of progress is crucial. It is better to find out that results are 15 percent below estimate after 10 percent of the (major donor) prospects have made their commitments, than after half of your prospects have responded.

Once a campaign is under way, the steps you can take to make up a projected shortfall are limited, but the earlier you take them, the greater the chance they will resolve the problem.

What to do to cover a projected shortfall and get a campaign back on track:

• Solicit a matching/challenge contribution to inspire and compel the gifts of others.
(A matching/challenge gift would greatly assist in carrying out all of the following
steps, but even without a matching/challenge gift, the following steps must be
considered.)

• Ask trustees and campaign leadership to increase their gifts.
They have a special interest in the campaign’s success, and have been making
their gifts. And even if they were substantial gifts, ask them to up the ante anyway.

• Increase the “Ask” amounts for prospects yet to be solicited.
Rework your evaluations and “Ask” amounts for prospects yet to be solicited.
Go back and reassess them individually … to a higher level.

• Identify additional prospects to be solicited.
An organization rarely contacts all of the persons capable of giving to it.
New prospects must be identified and contacted/solicited. That will, of course,
also add to your donor base for future campaigns.

• Go back to selected donors who have already given and ask them to increase
their gifts. This must be done with great care – with selectivity and sensitivity.
You go only to those whom you are certain as can be that they will not be
offended, thinking that what they did give was not satisfactory in the first place.
Have a good case ready to explain that such a request is not based on a panic
situation, but that they are special, and it’s always the special ones to whom
we look in time of need.

Any thoughts you’d like to add?? We’d really like to hear from you.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have a question or comment for Tony? He can be reached at Tony@raise-funds.com. There is also a lot of good fundraising information on his website: Raise-Funds.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Have you heard about The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.

Posted on

Write The Letter: Bequests II

Last month I introduced promotion of planned gifts with bequests.

This month, I’m helping you write your direct mail letter. If you can’t afford direct mail, don’t worry. There are lots of other channels to promote charitable bequests and I’ll get to those.

If you don’t plan a letter campaign, my tips will help you understand the audience so you’ll gain confidence in your other promotion channels—including face-to-face meetings.

If you will use direct mail, here you go:

§ Write the letter from your heart. Be warm, factual, sincere, and straightforward. Share how a bequest in a will can help support your important work long into the future, because today’s bequest may not mean cash to you for many years. This is long-term fundraising.
§ Acknowledge that family always comes first in one’s long-term planning.
§ Include an invitation to “consider including ABC Charity in your will or other long-term plan.”I like to see this ask in its own paragraph.
§ Don’t be ashamed or ask humbly. Ask with confidence and sincerity.
§ Devote your letter exclusively to promoting a gift by will. No other subjects to distract from your heart-whole purpose.
§ Your prospects are in their 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Bear that in mind as you write.
§ Limit your letter to one page. Take the advice I’ve given and write concisely.

Testimonial letters carry great power.

So if you have donors who have already included you in their wills, ask if they’ll tell the story of why they did it and how it makes them feel to have your nonprofit alongside the bequests for their spouses, children, and grandchildren.

You’ll find it easier to interview them, write the letter for them and let them edit it.

Your donors who love you will accept a simple, authentic and heartfelt explanation of how their wills can help you. Remember from last month, you’re writing to your most consistent and loyal donors.

Take note of the adjectives I’ve used. They’ll guide you as you write: warm; factual; sincere; straightforward; confident; simple; authentic; and heartfelt.

Come back in June for advice on what to do with your letter in “More Direct Mail: Bequests III.”

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Tony Martignetti, Esq. is the host of Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. He’s a Planned Giving consultant, speaker, author, blogger and stand-up comic. You’ll find him at tonymartignetti.com.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have you seen The Fundraising Series of ebooks ??

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

If you’re reading this on-line and you would like to comment/expand on the above, or would just like to offer your thoughts on the subject of this posting, we encourage you to “Leave a Reply” at the bottom of this page, click on the feedback link at the top of the page, or send an email to the author of this posting. If you’ve received this posting as an email, click on the email link (above) to communicate with the author.