March 23, 2000 | Read Time: 6 minutes
The excitement among British fund raisers is almost palpable. Recent reports of huge donations — at least by British standards — by American philanthropists and foundations have encouraged an increasing number of U.K.-based fund raisers to consider adding American “prospects” to their portfolios.
Over the years, a number of British charities have been extremely successful in attracting U.S. dollars, not only from wealthy donors but also from foundations. In the mid-1990’s, for example, Oxford and Cambridge Universities raised tens of millions of dollars toward their capital-campaign goals from Americans, many of them graduates of programs there.
Most of the British charities that crossed the big pond for funds helped their cause either by opening permanent fund-raising offices in the States or by establishing U.S.-based charitable organizations — commonly referred to as “Friends of” groups — that enabled American donors to deduct their contributions on their tax returns. But now, it seems, there are signs that a second wave of trans-Atlantic solicitation is occurring.
The gifts that have created such a stir include multimillion-dollar donations by American philanthropists to the Royal Opera House ($17-million, by Alberto Vilar), the Tate Gallery ($42-million, by Donald and Richard Fisher), Cambridge University ($20-million, by the William H. Gates Foundation), and the British Museum ($6-million, by the Annenberg Foundation).
And, a growing number of top-100 British charities also seem to be stepping up their American fund-raising efforts. For example, Shelter, a highly respected national charity that works for homeless people, reports that it has received nearly $50,000 over the past two years from one American family foundation, prompting other groups to flock to bookstores in search of The Complete Guide to Top U.S. International Foundation Grantmakers.
In the past, Americans and their foundations may have seemed too far away, their criteria for disbursement of funds too narrow, and the interests of trustees too parochial. Why, for example, would a philanthropist want to tackle homelessness in another industrialized country when homelessness in America was still a problem?
But in this era of economic globalization, instant Internet communication, and cheap trans-Atlantic flights, more and more British charities seem to be looking to expand their fund-raising reach.
The English National Opera, for example, appointed fund raiser Liz Pilley about two years ago at a time when the opera company did not solicit grants from U.S. foundations — and had no strategy for doing so. Since then, Ms. Pilley has completed a professional training course to learn how to make successful applications to U.S. foundations, and the opera company has established a U.S.-based “Friends of” committee.
Similarly, Britain’s National Theatre is gearing up its American fund-raising campaign, which has now raised more than $400,000. Simultaneously the theater is running a fund-raising campaign aimed at Americans based in the United Kingdom, particularly those in London. Clare O’Brien, the National Theatre’s deputy director of development, says, “At long last, we’re beginning to deal with the American market. We have already secured two Life Benefactors, giving $30,000 each, and over 30 American Patrons.”
Part of the stepping up of U.S. overtures can be attributed to the hiring of more and more American fund raisers by British charities. After all, American fund raisers know from experience where the money is. At the London School of Economics, the director of development designate, Mary Blair, is an American and currently heads up all fund raising at the Johns Hopkins University. She will be joined in London by Lisa Boudreau, formerly of Harvard University, and Paula Marshall, formerly director of development at the Wharton Center for Performing Arts at Michigan State University. The London School of Economics firmly believes that in due time, more money will be raised in the United States than in the United Kingdom. On that basis, the school recently established a permanent fund-raising office in Manhattan, headed up by Fiona Hodgson, formerly of Harvard Medical School and Boston College.
Not all British charities, of course, are looking to the States for funds. Many are so caught up with their existing pool of prospective donors, made up entirely of British-based trusts and foundations, that they don’t have the time or resources to experiment with new sources of income. To some observers, the failure to make time for research into American foundations and potential individual donors is short-sighted. Proportionally, there is far more wealth, philanthropy, and opportunity in the States than there is in Britain — and with a pile of books on making grant applications, a bit of organization, and some good counsel, the money seems to be there for the taking.
A concerted U.S. effort, however, does not guarantee success. One Irish university, for example, established a fund-raising office in Boston and closed it 18 months later. Other charities have received nothing but rejection letters from U.S. foundations.
Consultant Nancy Bikson of Chapel and York isn’t surprised by the lack of success that some British charities have had. Ms. Bikson says that despite the arrival of many U.S. fund raisers on the British scene, many fund raisers still don’t contact the foundations to acquire a copy of their guidelines. What’s more, many don’t follow the guidelines even when they know them, and most British charities have not organized a charitable organization in the States to receive donations.
Most consultants warn British fund raisers who do make U.S. overtures to be realistic. It may be fair to assume that many Americans are rich and generous, but it is crucial that there is a clear case for Americans to support a British project. Most consultants advise British fund raisers to include in their proposals an evaluation plan for measuring results.
Henry Drucker, a consultant at the executive-search firm Oxford Philanthropic, suggests that British-based charities also should consider extending invitations to American foundation trustees and senior administrative staff members for personal visits; personal relationships, he notes, are often key to winning support. He also advises charities to sound out their British supporters to see what contacts they might have in the States.
These are exciting times. It is now cheaper for Brits to fly to New York than to take a train to Paris. Trans-Atlantic travel is no longer a luxury — indeed, it makes good business sense. E-mail and information on the Internet is available to all, and representatives — professional or volunteer — of the 180,000 registered U.K. charities now have an easier and cheaper opportunity to get busy and pitch for the American dollar.
Ultimately, this will lead to a huge growth in British-American partnerships and programs. Advisory boards will become increasingly international in their composition, consultants will rush to exploit the market, competition will raise standards, and, perhaps most important, donors will have greater choice and opportunity to maximize the impact of their gifts.
Paul J. Summerfield is acting director of development and alumni relations at the London School of Economics.
