In fundraising when we are trying to measure how close a prospective donor feels to our organization or cause we call it their inclination to give (or to be involved as a volunteer). Sometimes it’s also described as a prospective donor’s affinity or interest.
What you need to know about ratings
Capacity Ratings – get informed for better results
In my early days as a prospect researcher, I used to be a “Just the facts, ma’am” kind of researcher and report writer. A “here’s what I can see. I have no idea what the rest looks like so I can’t even guess for you” kind of gal. I was so afraid to be wrong.
Except I already was wrong.
Ratings – The Myth of 5% Over Five
We’ve been dead wrong in our calculations of gift potential for major donors.
We don’t have the right information. And we’re using what we do have the wrong way.
Let me set the stage: normally when we’re calculating a major donor’s capacity to give we look at their total visible assets and calculate that they will give 5% of that over five years to charity. Where does that ratio come from? The IRS, the Chronicle of Philanthropy and Giving USA are the three big resources for philanthropic giving information in the US.
The 5% figure we’ve been using isn’t real
Five percent over five
Over the weekend, a friend and fundraising consultant emailed me to ask: “Do you typically see prospects rated for a campaign at 5% of visible assets per year or 5% over 5 years?” I shot back, “Over 5.” He sent back a speedy “thanks!”
I had a quick image of him looking at the still snow-topped mountains over the screen of his laptop, working on a campaign plan for a client. I pulled on my oven mitts and eased a steaming pork pie out of the oven and started setting the table.
6 Reasons Why Real Estate Matters to the Savvy Prospect Researcher
Every so often, the topic of “Should we or shouldn’t we include real estate as one of the factors we use to determine a prospective donor’s gift capacity” comes up in the prospect research community.
Some folks have this logic: “Well, our prospective major donor is never going to give us their house (or sell their house and give us the money), therefore we shouldn’t include it.”
Which is absolutely true. (<stage whisper>: I won’t mention “planned gift” at this point, okay?)
You really should get out more
You need to spring clean your brain – really air it out and get new, fresh ideas in. At least, I know I do. This time of year, I start itching to get out and meet people and learn lots of new things. It’s always worth it when I make the effort.
3 Ways to Build a Great “Gold Guide”
Prospect researchers tend to grab great information sources with the zeal of kids let loose onto the lawn of the White House for the annual Easter Egg Roll.
And for good reason: well-curated information sources are really interesting and offer valuable time-savings. Especially because (for most of us, anyway) the pile of pending research requests is always a foot high.
Why wealth screenings are a waste of money
“Yes, we did a wealth screening a couple of years ago. We didn’t really find it very helpful.” <pause>
“Well, to be honest, we didn’t really do anything with the information when it came back. It just kind of sat there.”
If I had a twenty for every time someone said that to me I’d be making major gifts already.
It absolutely kills me, too, because wealth screenings
a) are not cheap, and
b) can be worth every single penny.
What your capital campaign plan is missing
There’s a critical piece of information missing from most capital campaign feasibility studies:
The amount of money an organization’s constituency can actually give.
We need the answer to that before we can set the goal, right?
And yet… most of the time nonprofit organizations launch their campaigns without knowing the full answer to that question. They wait until after they’ve launched to finally get all the pieces in place. Which seems kind of crazy to me.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- …
- 51
- Next Page »