Development for Academic Leaders

A Practical Guide for Fundraising Success

Penelepe C. Hunt

• Publisher: Jossey-Bass
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN: 9781118270172
• eBook ISBN: 9781118283509
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education Administration

DEVELOPMENT FOR ACADEMIC LEADERS

In addition to their other duties, academic leaders are expected to network with potential donors and to be productive and enthusiastic fundraisers. More often than not, however, academic leaders are given little or no training on how to be savvy fundraisers for their institutions.

Development for Academic Leaders is a much-needed resource that offers a concise yet comprehensive guide to fundraising for those who are new to the process. The book clarifies roles, responsibilities, programs, activities, politics, and funding sources as well as offering a review of the overall process.

Written by Penelepe C. Hunt, a successful practitioner of and noted expert in academic fundraising, the book includes information on attracting and retaining effective development officers and contains suggestions for deans (and other campus leaders) for working effectively with these valued members of their institutions. Hunt introduces novice fundraisers to the cycle of giving (identification, qualification, cultivation, solicitation, and stewardship) and provides information on how and when to take part in the fundraising process. She defines the various types of funding including annual gifts, major gifts, planned gifts, and principal gifts and reveals why ascertaining which type of gift will be most appealing to a donor is an important part of planning for a successful solicitation. Development for Academic Leaders also contains suggestions for overcoming reluctance on the part of leaders to ask potential donors for a gift. Hunt explains that donors do not give merely because our programs need and deserve support. They give because of their own desires, passions, and aspirations.

Development for Academic Leaders also reveals the importance of participating in your institution's overall development communications efforts and offers a general overview of campaign and event principles and how you can use these funding strategies to the advantage of your college.

For any academic leader who participates in their program's fundraising efforts, this important resource offers a wealth of information for becoming a creative, skilled, and successful part of the fundraising team.

Part One
Development and Academic Leaders

1

The Role of Academic Leaders in Development

Development has become a part of every academic leader’s job. Scan the ads in the Chronicle of Higher Education, and you will find that nearly every one for a dean, president, or provost includes a reference to fundraising as part of the position.

Rare is the university that can give its colleges everything they need, or want, in order to be the best they can be. Academics and program heads who passively rely on traditional sources of funding will be left behind by other programs in their own university and by peer colleges in other universities. To excel in garnering new resources, academic leaders must be creative, entrepreneurial, and proactive.

Securing private support is primarily the responsibility of the development office, whether the central campus program or a development staff within your program. Many of the gifts your college receives will result from the direct work of these staff. Academic heads who rely solely on the development staff can count on receiving small current use gifts and the occasional larger outright gift or bequest.

Those who become personally involved in development can expect much more. A donor who is considering making a major investment in your program will almost always want to know you, understand your vision, assess your leadership, and feel confident that you can steward the gift wisely. Development officers can explain your college or program and the work you do. But no one can say it in quite the same way as you can. It is your field, your leadership, your vision, and your faculty, and donors want to hear all of that personally from you.

Some academics love development and are highly effective at it. It comes naturally to them, and they happily make it a high priority. Others tolerate it, engaging somewhat hesitantly and reluctantly. Still others avoid it at all costs. Not surprisingly, those in the first category are the most successful and raise the most money. Donors can tell when an academic is genuinely enjoying development work, and they respond accordingly.

If you are in the second category, do not despair. Many academics begin their engagement with development expecting not to like it. Over time, many find it to be one of the most enjoyable parts of their job.

The most common concern new academic leaders express about development is that it will be like sales. They imagine they will be trying to extract money from people who do not want to give it up. Nothing could be further from the truth. When donors talk about giving, they usually mention feeling joyful, happy, and fulfilled. As you will see in subsequent chapters, giving comes from a partnership that forms between you and the donor, where you both share the ultimate goal of advancing your program. Once you experience that process, you will begin to see why some academics love it. And in fact, you might become one of those enthusiastic fundraisers.

Academics who love fundraising and excel at it are fondly called development deans, development presidents, or the equivalent title by their development colleagues. What makes those academics so good at development is not the ability to “sell.” It is the commitment in spirit and in time they make to the work. They are available for development purposes and are genuinely committed to development work. They do not just go through the motions. Development academics have a vision and a plan for their programs and can articulate it in person and in writing. They love their programs, and their vision for what their programs can become is contagious. They enjoy their internal and external constituencies. This is more than a job for a development academic; it is a passion.

Universities appoint academics to leadership positions based on their academic and administrative achievements and then expect them to be seasoned major gift officers their first day on the job. The majority of academics who are not successful at development simply lack a solid knowledge base for how to be effective in an area that is new to them. This book introduces you to the concepts and practices you need in order to be a successful fundraising leader.

Public Universities and Private Philanthropy

Public universities entered the world of fundraising decades later than private universities. And many academics who are entering the world of development have spent their careers in public universities. Therefore, academics who have advanced their careers in public universities may not have had significant exposure to fundraising programs as they have advanced through the faculty ranks.

Traditionally public universities had a reliable source of income from their state legislatures; private philanthropy was not part of the picture. By the early 1980s, the major public universities began to recognize that basic funding from their states would provide them only with the resources necessary to be good universities. To be great, they needed more, and so they began to pursue private philanthropy for that margin of excellence beyond the baseline state funding and the federal research dollars their faculty were securing. Through the 1990s and the early 2000s, more and more state universities began exploring private philanthropy. As state resources allocated to universities began to decline, the universities’ reasons for pursuing private philanthropy expanded from merely seeking the icing on the cake to realizing they needed private support to provide the basic ingredients for the cake itself.

Public universities newly entering the development world are at a disadvantage for several reasons:

• Their alumni were not trained from their first years in college to think of the university as needing their philanthropic support. Many private colleges and universities start this training from the moment the students are admitted.
• The public, including alumni, often do not realize that the university is no longer fully supported by the state.
• Some state legislatures view funds raised from private sources as a replacement for public allocations.

Academics in these universities can especially benefit from engaging in development. It is a buffer against growing budget cuts as state support declines.

Development Versus Advancement

As you enter the world of fundraising, you will commonly hear the terms development and advancement. They are frequently used interchangeably, but are fundamentally different.

Development refers to fundraising and all the steps involved in the process of raising money.

Advancement is a broader term that encompasses all of the functions related to advancing the cause of a program or university externally. The traditional advancement model is a partnership among development, alumni relations, and communications. Many programs now expand on that model to include admissions, government relations, community relations, public relations, and other functions responsible for relationships with external constituencies.

This book is primarily a guide for your work in development, though I occasionally expand the focus to encompass other areas of advancement.

An Academic’s Role

Your development staff, explored in depth in the next chapter, will do the vast majority of the work of the development program. Given the many demands on your time, you should use what time you have available for strategic development, engaging in activities that only you can do.

Your primary roles in the development process are to inspire potential donors, assist donors in investing in your program, and ensure that donors’ gifts are properly managed and implemented. These roles involve a variety of activities, ranging from interacting with high-end prospective donors to lending your voice to the themes and messages of the annual fund. In all of your development work, you are the face of your program, the person to whom donors entrust their contributions.

We begin by looking at your relationship with the development staff.

2

Staffing

As the head of your unit’s program, you cannot balance all of your other responsibilities and run the development office too. A strong development staff will ensure that the portion of your time devoted to development is well spent. They will also ensure that the many components of a successful development program are implemented properly without the need for your direct involvement.

University-Level Staffing Models

The staffing structure of development programs at large universities ranges across a spectrum from highly centralized to highly decentralized. The nature of your own development staffing will be determined by your university’s overall development staffing structure.

Highly Centralized

The chief development officer for the campus is both budgetarily and managerially responsible for all development staff. The officer’s salary is paid from a central budget, and the reporting lines are solid to central development managers. While it is common in this structure to have development officers assigned to colleges and major programs, the heads of these units generally do not have any managerial authority over the officers. Program heads may or may not be involved in the hiring and assignment process for their assigned development officer. Fundraising priorities are determined centrally, and prospect management is tightly controlled by the central office. (For more on prospect management, see Chapter Four.)

Highly Decentralized

The fundraising strength in this model is heavily weighted toward colleges and major programs. Unit heads pay for and hire their own development staff, and the officers have a solid-line managerial report within the program. The central development office is small. There may be some major gift officers in the central office, but the central managers have no authority over program-based officers. The majority of the central office staffing is in development programs that are most efficiently implemented across the campus. These may include gift processing and accounting, special events, annual giving implementation (primarily direct mail and phonathons), and database management. Prospect management assignments may be documented centrally, but there is little or no central coordination of prospect assignments.

Central-Decentral Blend

Responsibility for and management of development programs and staff are shared between the central development office managers and heads of colleges and programs. The central office provides staffing for shared programs, as in the highly decentralized model. Funding for salaries and programs flows from both the central budget and unit budgets. Unit-based staff have a shared reporting line to their assigned program and to central development, though the nature of that line varies. It can be solid to both, solid to central and dotted to the unit, or solid to the unit and dotted to central. Whatever the nature of the reporting lines, unit heads and central managers collaborate on hiring decisions, performance expectations and evaluations, and compensation decisions.

---

Before You Begin Staffing

When determining your own staffing setup, begin by identifying and understanding the model your university uses. An in-depth conversation with the university’s chief development officer can clarify the parameters within which you will be staffing your development efforts.

---

Your Team

Your development staff size and structure should be calibrated to your program’s performance and capacity. Baseline staffing for a new program should be a single development officer, full or half time, and at least half of a support position. In a highly centralized model, you may be assigned this first officer, and you may have to begin by sharing an officer with another unit.

This initial officer should focus on building capacity wherever your program can find it. Generally this begins with an annual giving program, from which the development officer will begin to cultivate major gift prospects (more on this process in Chapters Seven and Fourteen). The development officer will also try to identify major gift prospects through a variety of other means. It takes time for donor relationships to evolve to a major gift level. You may need as long as two years to begin to see financial benefits from this initial staffing investment.

While it would be ideal to have this initial officer working solely on generating philanthropic income, this may not be possible in the early days of a development program. The officer will need to spend time building basic program infrastructure to properly implement annual giving vehicles and manage the flow of data and gifts. If you do not have staffing in other advancement areas, primarily alumni relations and communications, your development officer may have to spend time on these programs as well. Fundraising does not succeed in a vacuum, and your constituency will be more forthcoming with gifts if they are also engaged through alumni programs and regular communication.

As the program grows, you will come to a time when your single officer is working at or above full capacity. He or she will have a very full load of program responsibilities and active donor relationships. This is a time to evaluate whether the program has also reached full capacity in terms of fundraising potential. If you and your development team, including your colleagues in the central development office, can identify reasonable growth targets that could be met with additional effort and additional potential donors with whom relationships could be developed, investing in additional staff resources is reasonable. This may entail increasing your main development officer assignment from part time to full time or, if you already have a full-time officer, expanding your staff.

Your next investment should facilitate your main development officer’s having more time to spend on your highest-return program, typically work with individual donors. Hiring a second officer to specialize in annual giving or in other advancement areas such as alumni relations and communications removes those time-consuming programmatic responsibilities. This frees your main development officer to spend additional time building donor relationships and moving those relationships toward solicitation of large gifts.

As your program continues to mature, you will once again reach a point where your staff are working at capacity. This is another occasion to assess the program’s performance and potential to determine whether additional investment would produce additional results. A common next step in staff expansion is to have an additional major gift officer working with individual donors or ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Series page
• Dedication
• Foreword
• Part One: Development and Academic Leaders
• Part Two: Development Basics from an Academic Leader’s Perspective
• Part Three: Development Program Components
• Part Four: Special Topics
• Recommended Resources
• Acknowledgments
• The Author
• Index