“If 10% of our donor database gives over 90% of our total dollars raised, why fuss with annual giving at all? Why not just engage with the 10% who have both the wealth and a spirit of generosity?”
I once had a university president who was looking to cut costs ask me this question.
I gave him both a practical as well as a philosophical response.
First, the practical:
Without knowing all of the wealthy people who make up the 10% of donors who give 90% of the dollars, I can still safely assume that the average age of this group is 65 years old plus. Generally speaking, people above this age are the ones with significant wealth. These people also – again, generally speaking – will have a long-term relationship and giving history with your institution.
Given their average age and the fact that their current generosity emerges from a longer-term giving relationship, who will be there to take their place when they die in a few years? In other words, if you are not investing in the same type of long-term giving relationships through a robust annual giving program today, how do you plan to replace that 90% of donor dollars once your current donors die?
Second, the philosophical:
What makes your university something different – and more meaningful – from a Walmart or a Target, for example – is that its not merely a place to transact business. Unlike the customers of Walmart or Target, your students feel like they are part of a community. Your alumni feel like they are part of a community. Even your geographic community roots for your athletics team as their own.
And when people feel like they are members of a community, they want easy ways to show care for other members and for the community as a whole.
Your annual giving program is the entry point – the giving “on ramp” – for many donors to make modest-sized gifts that show they care, and helps them feel even more deeply a part of this community. It’s your annul giving program that encourages the development of a consistent giving habit to your university and it invites everyone to participate in showing they care. When you annual giving suffers, morale suffers, esprit de corps suffers, and your university’s sense of community suffers.
If you are in advancement, the above “practical and philosophical” responses to this president’s questions may not be new or novel.
But, most advancement leaders would also say that alumni, friends, current parents, former patients, program participants, business leaders, or even the general public are the primary audiences for their engagement, outreach, and educational efforts.
Meanwhile, there are educational, healthcare, and nonprofit leaders who struggle to grasp the basics of the advancement and development programs that need their support and investment.
Instead of assuming their understanding and appreciation of our programs, today might be a good day to reassess how we can help our colleagues and leadership better understand why healthy advancement programs matter.
Because if we don’t consistently educate them well, it won’t just be our programs that suffer, it will be our communities.
