|
On-Site Charitable Giving
Feasibility Studies:
The nation’s colleges, universities,
medical centers, and national nonprofit organizations have been
securing charitable gifts from their various constituencies for
nearly 200 years. Having long recognized that traditional revenue
sources
alone are not sufficient to underwrite the cost of their operations,
these institutions have established aggressive development programs
charged with raising millions of dollars annually from alumni, staff
and faculty, vendors, and the general community.
The aim of the
Onsite Charitable Giving
Feasibility Study
is to assess an organization’s current
and projected capacity to launch an aggressive charitable giving
program.
The study process examines the 22 key elements
that comprise a comprehensive charitable giving program within any
given institution. Each of these elements are summarized below:
1. Inventory of Existing Efforts:
This
portion of the study examines the history, staff, organization,
and resource allocation of the institution’s past and present
charitable giving efforts.
2. Annual Giving Potential:
Annual giving
forms the foundation of all charitable giving efforts. Here, RJMA
looks at the institution’s data processing capability, e.g.,
hardware and software, the size and status of its various prospect
lists, and the strategies currently in place to access these
lists.
3. Special Events Options:
Special events
are those activities that produce charitable revenues through the
sale of tickets. Examples include golf tournaments, 5-K races, and
banquets. The study looks at the institution’s past, present,
and planned events in terms of their potential to generate
charitable gifts.
4. Major Gifts Analysis:
Major gifts are
derived from individuals and other non-grantmaking organizations,
generally in excess of $5,000. The study examines the sources and
potential for major gift giving within an institution’s primary
community. It also looks at current and planned solicitation
strategies.
5. Endowment Building Potential:
Endowments are simply an accumulation of invested dollars that
generate interest revenues to be used for charitable purposes. The
study protocol looks at the endowment building methods and
investment options currently in place.
6. Grantseeking Potential:
Grants provide
an opportunity to infuse modest sums of money quickly into an
organization. The study examines the grantseeking methods,
options, and strategies currently in use within the organization.
7. Development Office Organization:
The
presence or absence of a specially designed development office,
having adequate staff, facilities, and resources is central to the
entire charitable giving effort. The study takes a close look at
this important component of the program.
8. Campaign Leadership Issues:
Charitable
giving programs go nowhere without strong board and staff
leadership. The study assesses this capability within the
organization and renders recommendations on ways to enhance the
necessary leadership qualities.
9. Local Community Attitudes:
What the
local community has to say about an organization’s charitable
giving goals is of major importance. The study takes a close look
at this aspect of the program. It also addresses campaign strategy
issues and potential.
The
Onsite Charitable Giving Feasibility
Study is conducted over a two-day period. The first day is
devoted to information gathering. The second day, which takes place
approximately three weeks following the first day, is spent
reporting the findings and recommendations to the organization.
The study report, generally 20 to 25 pages in
length, provides both quantitative and qualitative measures of the
organization’s overall charitable giving strength, along with
extensive recommendations on how to enhance this strength.
The ultimate value of the
Onsite Charitable
Giving Feasibility Study Report
is derived from the fact that it provides the organization with a thorough understanding of its fundraising
strengths and weaknesses. This, in turn, enables it to capitalize on
its strengths while minimizing its weaknesses in its overall
charitable giving effort
|
