A Push for Big Gifts Helps Lift a Civil-Liberties Organization

Despite backing some controversial positions during an era of heightened political bickering, the American Civil Liberties Union saw donations grow by 31 percent in the 2010 fiscal year, earning it a spot on the Philanthropy 400, The Chronicle’s ranking of the U.S. charities that raise the most from private sources.

Although the ACLU (No. 159 on the list) has long courted donors who give small sums, both through a successful direct-mail campaign and through telephone appeals, it attributes this year’s increase to multiple large planned gifts and one especially bountiful matching gift.

“We used to rely on our membership program to be our star, but now it’s planned gifts and major gifts,” says Donna McKay, the organization’s director of institutional advancement and special projects.

The New York organization, a well-known nonpartisan defender of free-speech rights, concluded a five-year campaign in September that wildly surpassed its expectations because of the large gifts it received, Ms. McKay adds. The group garnered $407-million, well above its goal of $250-million—a major factor in its positive figures for 2010.

The charity raised nearly $122-million in the fiscal year ended in March, a nearly 32-percent increase over 2009’s haul.

Key among those gifts was a challenge grant made by Robert W. Wilson, the New York financier. Mr. Wilson challenged would-be donors to make a planned gift or bequest and offered to match up to $10,000 per pledge. The ACLU credits his efforts (and the $6-million in matches he delivered) with raising $217-million in gift pledges.

Mr. Wilson’s commitment, originally planned for two years, lasted four, and ended in September. “His challenge was a work of genius that drew a lot of people in,” says Ms. McKay. “We’re trying to find other ways to do that. Challenge grants are fantastic.”

Politics vs. the Economy

The success of the five-year drive, which was timed to end during the organization’s 90th anniversary, temporarily quieted worries within the ACLU that some of its stances on issues, such as its controversial backing of a January Supreme Court decision to nix restrictions on dollar amounts that corporations and labor unions can give to political campaigns, might scare off some of its most loyal supporters and act as a drag on donations.

“We were wondering whether we’d be affected more by politics or the economy when it comes to fund raising,” says Ms. McKay. “We’ve found that our donors are motivated by civil liberties and by the fact that we’re not partisan.”

Observers say the ACLU made a strong pitch to its members by tying the funds raised during the campaign to expanding the organization. Money from the drive will be used to expand its mission from coastal power centers inward toward the nation’s midsection and South, where many free-speech and civil-liberties issues, such as legalizing gay marriage and protecting immigrants’ rights, are being debated locally.

“The goal of increasing its presence in underserved areas spoke directly to the ACLU’s mission to achieve equality and justice for every American,” says Ruthellen S. Rubin, a consultant who also teaches fund raising and philanthropy at New York University. “Donors today are investing in success, and the ones I’ve talked with during the past two years are giving with more thought and pooling their resources for more meaningful donations to the organizations they see getting the job done. Hence, the success of the ACLU campaign.”

Mixed Results

The organization’s members have applauded the move to expand its work, both in person and via their pocketbooks, adds Ms. McKay. While making its pitch in mailings, in ads, and in person, the organization focused on legal battles where it had already made a difference but shied away from pointing to an unmet need for more protection of rights in areas other than coastal centers.

“We highlighted things like winning cases involving the right of gay people to adopt children” in two counties in Florida’s panhandle, Ms. McKay says, as well as an ACLU investigation that led to the closing of an immigration detention center in Taylor, Tex., last year. “There are parts of Florida where there are more members of the Ku Klux Klan than the ACLU,” she says. “That need resonates with people. But we felt we had to show strong examples of what we’d done.”

Those examples were used to lure supporters who would make planned gifts that would help ACLU bankroll increases in manpower and outreach well into the future, Ms. McKay says.

Unfortunately, the group has had trouble maintaining donations with which to run its headquarters. Twice—in 2008 and again in January—it laid off staff members during restructuring efforts made necessary by cutbacks in donations that could be used immediately, unlike many planned gifts.

Also, several major donors lost investments they had entrusted to Bernard Madoff, the now-jailed securities trader. Another donor, the hedge-fund manager David Gelbaum, blamed a stock-market downturn for his decision to suspend a gift of more than $20-million last year. And donations in the 2011 fiscal year haven’t kept pace with 2010.

“We worried about both politics and the economy, and it was the economic downturn that has hurt us,” Ms. McKay says.

Young Supporters

But the five-year campaign showed some promising signs. Even though the organization’s typical donor of $10,000 or more is 63 years old, nearly 40 percent of all donations that big were made by people under 50. Ever since the 2001 terrorist attacks and the civil-liberties challenges that erupted in their wake, Ms. McKay says, the group has worked to get younger people involved in the ACLU. It has put more money into reaching young people through door-to-door campaigns and street canvassing.

“We’re finding that we’re retaining these folks, often by getting them into our monthly giving program,” Ms. McKay says. Those donors could ensure ACLU’s long-term outlook, she adds.

But others say that while the ACLU tries to stay above the political fray and repeatedly points out its nonpartisan status, it ultimately will be the politics of the times that determine how well it fares.

“Advocacy groups, as much as they hate to say it, raise money whenever there’s bad news,” says Mark Rovner, principal of Sea Change Strategies, a fund-raising consulting group in Washington. “And in the realm of civil liberties, it looks like we’re headed for a dark period, I expect the ACLU and groups like them to do quite well.”