1 / 25

The Organization of Development

The Organization of Development. Department Heads & Chairs November 29, 2007 Judy Kirk. Vision. University Development. Mission. To engage the resources of the private sector to build and sustain excellence at the University of Minnesota. Why We Were Formed.

andrew
Télécharger la présentation

The Organization of Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Organization of Development Department Heads & Chairs November 29, 2007 Judy Kirk

  2. Vision University Development Mission To engage the resources of the private sector to build and sustain excellence at the University of Minnesota.

  3. Why We Were Formed The University of Minnesota Foundation was formed to accept and manage gifts on behalf of the University and its colleges, campuses and programs. Specifically, it: • Exists to support the University’s interests. • Secures, manages and invests private support for the benefit of the University. • Provides private support for a portion of the operations or programs of the University. • Uses sound fiscal and auditing procedures. • Obtains and maintains status as a tax exempt organization.

  4. Fundraising at the U of M UMF relationship with the University includes development oversight and services: • Strategic U-wide development leadership • Campaign planning and implementation • Delivery of comprehensive development services for U-wide Development (i.e. technology, legal, donor relations, gift administration, annual giving, communications) • Financial subsidies to collegiate development programs • Endowment investment management • Assessments across colleges/programs for continued program support or new investment

  5. Historical: Campaign Summary 1985-88, Minnesota CampaignFocus: 100 endowed faculty positions Result: 111 added 1989-96, Mini-CampaignsFocus: New & renovated facilities Weisman, Ted Mann Concert Hall, Mariucci Arena, Williams Arena & Sports Pavilion 1997-03, Campaign MinnesotaFocus: Support for faculty, students, facilities & research Result: All goals exceeded 2004-Now, Mini-CampaignsFocus: Scholarships, fellowships, new facilities On-campus stadium, translational research, Carlson School addition, Bell Museum, Equine Center, Weisman addition

  6. Campaign Minnesota Highlights Campaign Minnesota: A Historic Achievement • $1,655,703,867 raised, or 127% of goal • 220,000 donors • Major impact on faculty and students What this means for future of fund raising at the U • A 30% increase in number of donors • 113,000 first-time donors • 11,000 faculty and staff donors

  7. Historical: Gift Production 2-year Average: 26 51 76 216

  8. Impact of Giving Who donates? (FY07) 87,167 total donors Corporations, foundations, organizations– 5,123 donors $70M 28% Individuals (non-alum) – 29,369 donors $70M Alumni – 51,073 donors $97M Faculty/Staff – 1,602 donors $14M Donors of 2007 Gifts

  9. National Rankings Growth in Voluntary Support (in millions) $ National ranking among: Public & private universities 14 15 15 14 14 Public universities only 4 7 5 5 4

  10. National Rankings Voluntary Support of Education - 2006 (In Millions) • Private and Public • Stanford $911 • Harvard 595 • Yale 433 • Pennsylvania 409 • Cornell 406 • Southern California 406 • Johns Hopkins377 • Columbia 377 • Duke 332 • Wisconsin 326 • UCLA $320 • Washington 316 • New York U 280 • Minnesota 267 • Northwestern 253 • Michigan 251 • Indiana 248 • UC - Berkeley 246 • U of Chicago 237 • UNC – Chapel Hill 237

  11. Impact of Giving Combined University Endowments (in millions) As of June 30 $ $2,819 $2,255 $1,965 $1,728 $1,515 National ranking among: Public & private universities 25 25 25 25 na Public universities only 6 6 6 6 na

  12. Impact of Giving - Highlights • 404 endowed chairs* from 17 in 1985 • $191.3 raised for Scholarship Campaign. Growth in scholarships and fellowships*: • 378 fellowships, 463 scholarships • Endowment exceeds $407M. • 46% increase in # of students receiving support. • $128M raised, Campaign Minnesota. • Built, renovated 25+ facilities, including -Architecture addition -McNamara Alumni Center -Microbial & Plant Genomics -Murphy Hall -Amundson Hall -Barbara Baker Dance Center -Weber Music Hall, UMD -Showboat -Studio Arts -Fitness Center, Morris -Andersen Library -Arboretum Visitor & -Mechanical Engineering -Learning Centers -Science Building, UMD -Densford Nursing Center -Law School addition -Translational Research • . *As of October 31, 2007

  13. National Giving Trends Multimillion-dollar gifts from donors seeking to change the world—a huge opportunity! • Donors not motivated by needs as much as by opportunities • Interdisciplinary programs attract leadership gifts • Growing interest in seeing immediate impact Donors want to see results, accountability • Increasingly, donors want to know the measurable outcomes before making a sizeable gift Sources of support are changing • Alumni support critical to successful campaigns • Corporate funding growing at much slower rate than in recent past Demand increasing for good, experienced fundraisers

  14. Critical Success Factors A Compelling Case Aligns U’s vision, strengths, priorities with donors’ dreams, passions & goals.

  15. Critical Success Factors Transformational Gifts: Possess unique capacity to alter the programs, perception and future of an organization; Traditionally defined by the impact on an organization, and size relative to the overall budget. “People no longer give to charity, they buy into results.” –Peter F. Drucker, renown business writer, management consultant & university professor UMN transformational gift level  $25 million+

  16. Critical Success Factors Transformational Gifts Nationally, largest 10 gifts to universities • Totaled $757M or average of $76M each. • 7 went to private schools; 3 to publics. • 8 from alumni of those institutions. U’s Experience • Twelve $10 Million + gifts in last decade • 11 business founders or executives • 10 were alumni • 9 were volunteers prior to the gift • Age range 56-85; median, 66 Why did these alumni give? • Passion for, connection to the institution • Desire to have an impact on the world

  17. Critical Success Factors Leadership Commitment & Focus • Integration of private support into U’s long-range planning. • U leaders committed to building strong relationships with alumni, donors. • Volunteer leaders meaningfully engaged in life of U & fund-raising.

  18. Critical Success Factors Volunteer Commitment & Engagement • Energetic force that drives momentum of campaign success • U’s front-line advocates • Expand networks and access to additional prospects • Share indispensable expertise • Give of their own time and financial resources

  19. Critical Success Factors A Top-Quality Development Operation • Ability to attract, retain top professional talent. • Effective coordination in decentralized culture. • Strong central services. • Budget appropriate for the potential. • Cost to raise $1 at the UofM has averaged only 9.4 cents annually for past decade. • ROI: $7-$15 raised for each $1 invested in development

  20. Relationship with College/Unit UMF Strategic Partnerships Collegiate Development Colleagues Chancellors/Deans/Directors • Search process consultation (descriptions, search committee resources, networking) • Financial subsidy • Compensation consultation and market analysis • Performance management consultation • Development strategy consultation • New employee orientation • Monthly development meetings • Training opportunities • Donor consultation • Central development services • Rewards and recognition

  21. Relationship with College/Unit Your Chief Development Officer: • Is a trained professional in major gift fund raising • Understands your unit’s mission of work • Has great “people” skills • Has passion and commitment • Has high ethical standards • Is donor-centered

  22. Relationship with College/Unit How you can help your CDO: • Have trust in their expertise and experience • Be patient: building long-term relationships takes time • Get involved: help your development officers understand your goals and be available to help donors learn more about you • Adopt a long-term vision

  23. Giving Trends Motivations for giving • To leave a legacy • To support things they care about • To support a passion for a cause or vision • To give back in gratitude for what his/her University did for them

  24. Why People Give Larry and Nancy Bentson • Following family tradition of giving. • Established endowment for undergraduate scholarships with $10 million gift in 2005. • In the first year, 66 students were Bentson Scholars. This school year The Bentson Family Scholarship will provide 185 students with about $5,000 annually for four years or more. • The Bentsons have led lives rich with loving family, friends and financial prosperity. Now they want to help students experience the same.

More Related