1 / 39

Prospect Research in a Campaign

Prospect Research in a Campaign. David Lamb Consultant Target Analytics. Agenda. Why do a campaign Feasibility study Campaign pyramid Risk analysis/prospect identification Prospect management. Why Do A Campaign?. Raises funds for featured objectives

ivo
Télécharger la présentation

Prospect Research in a Campaign

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. Prospect Research in a Campaign David Lamb Consultant Target Analytics

  2. Agenda • Why do a campaign • Feasibility study • Campaign pyramid • Risk analysis/prospect identification • Prospect management

  3. Why Do A Campaign? • Raises funds for featured objectives • Motivates existing donors to increase their giving and involvement • Acquires new donors • Generates visibility and excitement about the organization’s mission • If well run, post campaign giving may remain above pre-campaign giving Peak Campaign Giving Post Campaign Giving Gift $ Pre Campaign Giving Campaign premium Years

  4. Internal Readiness • Are the featured objectives for your campaign realistic? • Do you have the staff to research, solicit, process gifts, and steward donors? • Do you have (or can you get) the funding for a campaign? • Is your database up to snuff? • Do you have an effective prospect management system? • Is your leadership (staff and board) committed to seeing a campaign through?

  5. External Readiness • Do you have the donors to support a campaign? • Capacity • Motivation • Numbers • Is the case for the campaign compelling to your constituency and the community? • Are the environmental factors favorable? • Economy • Competition for gifts • Public attitudes

  6. Feasibility (or Planning) Study • Tests the case for support • Is conducted by a credible, objective, outside consultant • Consists of series of interviews • Board and staff • Key supporters • Prospective major donors • Integrates all findings into an assessment • Strengths and weaknesses • Recommended goal • Prognosis for success

  7. Phases Of A Campaign Typical total time frame for a comprehensive campaign is 7-10 years

  8. Campaign Pyramid • You can get to your goal faster if you get a few very large gifts and many smaller gifts • Pyramid forces you to see the gift size reality • Time tested rule: 4 prospects for every 1 donor at the top levels of the pyramid • 90/10 rule – some predict this is changing • The pyramid you start with might not be the pyramid you end with

  9. Campaign Pyramid Pivotal / Transformational Principal Leadership Major / Special Annual

  10. Inverted Pyramid Constituent Base Loyal Donors Planned Major Major /Planned

  11. Post-Recession Pyramid • http://philanthropy.com/news/updates/8853/colleges-will-see-a-decline-in-megagifts-experts-predict • Recovery from the recession likely to be weak • Fewer mega-gifts ($5MM+) than before the recession • Pre-recession – 70% of campaign total came from $1MM+ donors • Post-recession probability – 50% of campaign total will come from $1MM+ donors • Places increased pressure to find more mid-level major gift prospects • Pyramids of the future may be flatter • Implications for prospect research: we need more of those who are more difficult to research

  12. Campaign Pyramid: $500MM Source: http://www.blackbaud.com/resources/giftrange/giftcalc.aspx

  13. Setting The Goals • Top down: • Set the goal based on need and find the prospects to support it • Tends to be most aggressive and riskiest • The easy road: • Set the goal based on projected base-level giving • Tends to be the easiest to achieve • Bottom up: • Research the ability and interest of the prospect pool • Tends to balance risk vs. reward

  14. Top Down – High Risk Prospect research must identify 203 additional prospects who can give over $25K

  15. Easy Road – Low Risk • Average increase in giving since 2001 is about 4% per year • Project that into the future for a seven year campaign of $110 million over 7 years

  16. Risk Adjusted Pyramid • Risk adjusted pyramid takes into account the likelihood to give at particular levels • Typical 4:1 prospect : donor ratio has a flaw • Not all prospects have the same likelihood to give • Your best prospects may be closely tied to your org already • For your best prospects, the proper ratio may be more like 2:1 or 3:1 (low risk) • For other prospects, the proper ratio may be in the 4:1 or 5:1 range (medium risk) • Even some prospects with little current contact (but who are on your database) may make major gifts – 10:1 (high risk) • It is not possible to precisely assign probability of a gift, but you can put people into groups of similar propensity

  17. Hypothetical Example • 8 prospects identified at the $25MM level • 2 sit on the board, are personally committed to the org’s mission, and have made major gifts in the past • 1 has been a volunteer and a past major gift donor • 3 are an alumni with modest but regular giving to the annual fund • 2 are friends who have never made a gift • Do they all have an equivalent likelihood to give?

  18. High Likelihood - Low Risk Group • High likelihood prospect:donor ratio = 2:1 • Example: • 2 prospects identified at $25 MM level • As a group, their potential is $100 MM • 2:1 ratio suggests that only half of their group potential will be realized

  19. Moderate Likelihood – Medium Risk Group Moderate Likelihood prospect:donor ratio = 4:1

  20. Low Likelihood – High Risk Group Low likelihood prospect:donor ratio = 10:1

  21. Combined Risk-Adjusted Tables

  22. Combined Risk-Adjusted Tables

  23. The Middle Challenge • People capable of giving $25K-$100K may have very few discoverable indicators of wealth • A filter or screening of the database may help surface these people • Look for: • High incomes • Titles • Gifts to other orgs • Expensive or income-producing property Major, special and leadership gifts

  24. Assessing Risk/Prospect ID • RFM Analysis • Age • Constituent characteristics • Statistical models • Generic • Custom • List matching (aka wealth screening)

  25. RFM Analysis • Recency – when was the most recent gift? • Score 0 if more than 3 years ago • Score 1 if 3 years ago • Score 2 if 2 years ago • Score 3 if 1 year ago or less • Frequency – how consistently has the donor given? • Score 0 if none of the last three years • Score 1 if only one of the last three years • Score 2 if only two of the last three years • Score 3 if each of the last three years • Monetary Value (must be customized) • Score 0 of largest gift is $0 • Score 1 if largest gift is $1-$999 • Score 2 if largest gift is $1,000 – $4,999 • Score 3 if largest gift is >= $5,0000

  26. RFM Analysis • If a prospect scores >= 8 • Top priority for additional research to estimate capacity • Consider the person a high likelihood prospect • If a prospect scores 4 – 7 • Second priority for research to estimate capacity • Consider the person a moderate likelihood prospect • If a prospect scores 0-3 • Do not do additional research unless specific indicators come to light • Consider the person a low likelihood prospect

  27. Filtering On Age • Life Stage Theory: constituents have different propensities to give depending on age • Peak earning years for many professionals begins in the 40s • Increases through the 60s • Retirement age and older may be a threshold for even greater giving for the very wealthy • Focusing on age risks excluding some successful younger people

  28. Filtering On Constituent Characteristics • Alumni/program participants may be have a built-in propensity • On the other hand… • Some alumni may have minimal affiliation • Some of your best donors may be community partners or friends

  29. Other Constituent Characteristics • Degree • Major • Current/former parent • Grateful patient • Board member • Volunteer • Subscriber • Age • Ticket buyer • Event participation • Requests for information • Number or quality of communications • Number of affiliations • RFM

  30. Statistical Models • What size gift is “major” • Must have at least 200 examples of gifts in the last year at a particular level for valid statistics • Don’t include gifts from corps or founds One year gift table

  31. Constructing the models • Do-it-yourself • Must invest in software like SPSS or SAS • Must invest in statistical education • Must invest in data sources if you plan to use info beyond your database • Suggested technique: regression analysis • Variables with strong correlation become included in the model • Watch out for false or misleading correlations! • Hire a consultant/vendor • Must depend on the expertise and experience of another • Consultant/vendor may have ready access to marketing and geo-demographic data

  32. Wealth screening • An automated process that matches the names on your database to those on other databases • Simple minded, but fast • Information returned requires verification

  33. Prospect Identification • Ideal approach is to pre-screen with a model, then go deeper with a list matching process on top scoring prospects • On a pre-screened database, 1 in 10 may end up looking like major gift prospects. • If you need 4,000 prospects, screen 40,000 constituents

  34. Campaign Staffing • Staff needs are based on campaign goal • Goal controls number of prospects and donors needed • If each major gift prospect must be contacted at least 2x/year, and there are about 240 working days in a year, an MGO must contact two prospects/day to carry a portfolio of 120 prospects • Ideal portfolio will be between 75 and 150 prospects per MGO • Portfolio size is influenced by • Ask amount • Geography • Job responsibilities

  35. Campaign Staffing • To estimate number of MGOs needed for the campaign • Calculate the number of prospects who must be contacted • Divide that number by 200 • Only 100 of these will be assigned at any one time • The first prospects to be assigned will be the low-risk prospects • As prospects make gifts or are disqualified, portfolio will be re-supplied from verified prospects in the medium and high risk groups • Ratio of MGOs to researchers should be 1:4 or 1:5 in a campaign context

  36. Campaign Staffing • Goal = $500 million • Prospects above $25,000 to be contacted: 4,000 (rounded up) • Major gift officers needed: 4,000/200 = 20 • Researchers needed: ~20 MGOs/5 ≈ 4 researchers – more if many prospects must be qualified • This does not include staff time for prospect management

  37. Research In A Campaign • Filter the database to surface top prospects for research and contact • Assess capacity and inclination of top prospects • Brief profiles at identification • Full profiles as solicitation nears • Rationally place prospects on the pyramid by risk and capacity • Supply verified prospects to MGOs

  38. Research In A Campaign • Refine understanding of risk and capacity through contact and further research • Re-evaluate pyramid position of each prospect • Match institutional needs to the prospect’s interests • Manage prospects through the pipeline

  39. References • Fundraising Feasibility Studies, http://www.nps.gov/partnerships/fundraising_feas_study.htm • The Strategic Role of Quantitative Research in Campaign Planning, http://www.martsandlundy.com/dl.php?filename=pdf/special_reports/Quant_Research.pdf • A Kaleidoscope Of Prospect Development, Bobbie J. Strand, CASE Books, 2008

More Related