Funding Change Logo
Keep the Change...  a monthly shot in the arm for your fundraising June 2012
Hello! 

 

Doesn't it feel like we just did this? Time is flying!

As you may remember (or may not), last month's issue was the first of a 2-part series on an innovative fundraising model that involves your entire staff. Don't worry if you missed it -- it's online for you anytime you like.

My belief in this kind of model comes from the seven years I spent building and running a full-staff fundraising program at Neighbor to Neighbor in Massachusetts -- one of the case studies we'll be looking at below.

Neighbor to Neighbor reaped huge benefits from involving the whole staff in fundraising -- stronger relationships with donors, more collaboration among staff, group ownership of income and expenses, and definitely more money!

Sounds great, right? Well you can do it too. Keep reading for more about how it actually works. And if you know of other groups doing something like this, let me know!

 

Thanks for spending a bit of your time with me today!

 

Have a great week, 

   Tina  




Tina Cincotti
Owner & Boss of Everything
Funding Change

P.S. I'd like to give a special welcome to all my new readers. I'm very happy you're here. If you're curious what you've been missing, check out my online archive. There are more than 30 past issues just waiting for you. Enjoy!

 

All-Staff Fundraising Models: Two Case Studies 

   

It's easy to talk about things in the abstract. Making them happen is far more difficult.

So, to give you some inspiration, here are two case studies of organizations that implemented a full-staff model of fundraising. Both in very different ways.

Would either serve as a good model for your organization? How about a combination of the two?

There's no one-size-fits-all way to do this. So think about what pieces might work for you as you read about each program.


Case Study #1: Neighbor to Neighbor Massachusetts

Neighbor to Neighbor Massachusetts is a statewide, grassroots organization of low-income people fighting for economic justice.

When I left Neighbor to Neighbor in 2007, they had:
  • A $1 million budget
  • Two-thirds of their income coming from individuals
  • A staff of 12, including a full-time Development Director 
Every staff member had a list of donors that they maintained a year-round relationship with. Some had fewer donors than others, and contributed to fundraising in other ways like writing grants or organizing events.

Each person was expected to spend 5-10% of their time on fundraising.

Everyone was fully trained. The staff had clear expectations and goals, sample materials, and time to practice. They also received ongoing support, supervision, and accountability from the full team.

At staff meetings, there was always time for reviewing the budget and money raised to date, reporting on each person's individual progress, troubleshooting challenges, and role playing the latest call script or brainstorming talking points for a new campaign.

I'll circle back to the pros and cons of this model but first, let's talk about...


Case Study #2: Toxics Action Center

Toxics Action Center is a New England-wide community organization committed to addressing the health impacts of pollution and other toxins in our environment.

When I first heard about this case study in 2010, Toxics Action Center had:
  • An annual budget of $400,000
  • Half their income coming from individuals
  • An 8-person staff including 1 full-time fundraiser 
All staff participate in an intensive 2-week fundraising blitz twice a year. They have 250-300 donor visits during this time. To make it happen, staff put aside their other work for two weeks for a "bootcamp" style campaign, working 12-hour days.

The first week focuses on training, prep, and calling donors to set up meetings. The Development Director conducts role plays, provides clear lists, and they set goals and expectations together.

In the second week, each staff person has 3-5 visits a day with an average gift of $250 per visit. This raises $70,000 in just one week!

And, since most people are out on the road that second week, three conference calls are held to check-in, share stories, troubleshoot challenges, and cheer each other on for the remaining visits.

So what do you think?

Here's my take on each one...


Pros and Cons


Each of these models has strengths and weaknesses.

They both involve the full staff in fundraising and that means the organizations can build real relationships with many more donors. It also means more commitment, more engagement, and, yes, more money from these supporters.

Both models provide lots of training and support. They have clear goals and expectations for each person. And there is built-in structure and accountability to help everyone do their best work.

The Neighbor to Neighbor model has the benefit of being integrated with the year-round work of the organization. But this also means that the staff is never done with fundraising. And it can be a struggle to fit it in when program work is really busy.

The Toxics Action Center model has a clear beginning and end. But their program work virtually stops for two weeks at a time, twice a year. And the schedule is intense!


In the end...

Maybe one of these models will work for your organization. Maybe bits and pieces of each. Maybe you've got a totally different idea for how to do it.

Regardless, the important take-away is this -- Fundraising can't be off in its own little corner while everyone else does the "real work." It has to be part of your whole organization. And that's easiest and yields the best results when everyone is part of it.


Thank you to the Grassroots Fundraising Journal and Andy Robinson for allowing the use of the Toxics Action Center case study. If you're not familiar with the Journal, check it out. It's one of the best fundraising resources around. Worth the subscription at twice the price!

Tina's pic
Yup, that's me!
Social Justice Conf logo
A Social Justice Fundraising Conference:
Aug 10-11 in Oakland, CA 
 On August 10-11, the Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training will host their 4th social justice fundraising conference in Oakland, California.

Join social justice fundraisers and organizers from across the country to build and strengthen your  grassroots fundraising skills.


Did you know...?

 There are more than  thirty past issues of this newsletter online.

Read all about -- improving your annual report, optimizing your website for donors, getting your message across to supporters, planned giving for small shops... and more!

It's all available for you in my online archive.  


 

My favorite fundraising gurus  

 

 

Free Weekly Webinars 

 

 Wednesday Webinars aren't just for Wednesdays anymore!

 Sponsored by NonprofitWebinars.com, 
these free sessions cover an ever-expanding list of nonprofit topics.

Now on Tuesdays and Wednesdays!

Check it out



Did you receive this as a forward? 
Do you want your very own copy delivered to you?


Join Our Mailing List


Enough about you, let's talk about me...

That's me! 

A fund development expert with a passion for social change, Funding Change founder Tina Cincotti gives grassroots groups the skills, tools, training, and confidence they need to raise more money from their supporters.

 

She specializes in building individual donor programs; improving donor relations and donor communications; writing newsletters, annual reports, and solicitations; coaching staff new to development; and motivating boards to be more engaged in fundraising.   

 

Are you looking for consulting, coaching, or training help? Let's talk!   

 

Follow me on Twitter 

 

View my profile on LinkedIn 

  
Logo