Why Fund Raisers Fail: They Forget the Basics

After exceptionally kind treatment in the emergency room of a local hospital, I sent a gift of $250 in appreciation. After about two weeks I received a letter from the president of the hospital that said: “It is with great pleasure that I acknowledge your most generous gift to xxx hospital. The hospital greatly appreciates your donation.”

Was that a personal letter or a form letter the president just signs? Since the amount of the gift was not mentioned, I suspect it was a form. The missing information meant I couldn’t prove to the Internal Revenue Service that I deserved a charitable deduction for the gift. But more important, it was a sign that the hospital does not understand what donors expect and how important it is to thank them.

A quick check of local sources would have revealed that my wife and I are generous and are easy marks. And the best source of new donations are people who have given at least once. Cultivating a second gift certainly requires a personal “thank you.”

Not only did the hospital fail that test, it never managed to ask me again for support — even though it is in a precarious financial position.

The hospital is not alone. I have encountered numerous examples of solicitation efforts that fail in the basic fundamentals, especially in showing donors that a charitable cause is truly appreciative of their support. Among my experiences in the past six months:

• Soon after I left the board of a well-known regional historic site, I received a letter, purportedly from a still-active trustee with whom I had served, in which we were greeted as Mr. and Mrs. Longsworth and asked for a contribution. The letter was “signed” with a “signature” printed faintly.

  Instead of a check I wrote a letter to the head of the institution (even signed it myself), suggesting that it was an insult to someone who was a relatively important supporter — I had been a longtime trustee and my wife and I had over the years donated a five-figure sum — to receive an impersonal and inept solicitation. It was also a waste of the organization’s money since it failed to persuade my wife and me to give. But if it had been personally addressed, actually signed, and, perhaps, had included a personal note like “We miss seeing you,” even if not true, we may have sent another gift.

• The local branch of a national and very successful charitable organization has received my modest hundreds of dollars annually for several years. Yet it plagues me with requests for more. I am not offended in that the appeals are heartfelt and the cause is good. However, the frequent appeals are a waste in that I believe in annual — not monthly — gifts, and have told the charity that. Yet the appeals continue. The frequent appeal is popular among charities and may be effective and advised by the experts, but in this household, at least, it dampens enthusiasm and moderates the level of giving.
• Having served for several years as a trustee of a major national nonprofit organization, I continue my annual support, and I contributed generously, within my means and interests, to a capital campaign. A very nice thank-you letter came from the president noting the amount of the gift. The only problem was that I was addressed as Charles L. Longsworth, not Charles R. A minor detail? I don’t think so. A sign of poor record keeping, carelessness, indifference? I was not a major donor but was mildly offended, rather than successfully cultivated with an accurate acknowledgment.
• A large successful charity in Massachusetts has my attention and receives an annual gift, considerably larger than the average gift it receives. Having made my gift early in December, I waited for a couple of weeks for an acknowledgment. Finally, mail arrived from the charity asking if I would consider a gift of $1,000 — which was less than the amount I had already given.

One has to wonder whether whoever is in charge understands the risk the institution runs by careless donor relations. Further, in this instance, the problem is compounded because the appeals came addressed to Longworth, not my correct name, Longsworth. I have twice written to suggest a correction but, so far, s’s appear to be scarce. Donors like to believe you know their correct names.

Those last two examples occurred in such quick succession that I wondered if the flu was our only epidemic. It seemed to me that a lot of good and useful institutions are not optimizing their fund-raising opportunities. They are impersonal, careless, and seemingly uncaring about those on whom they so depend.

Any donor likes to believe, naïve as it is, that there are people in the organization to whom one’s charitable gifts are directed, who know your name and think of you as a person, not a source. Perhaps even the head of the charity thinks kindly of you and occasionally lets you know that.

When I was president of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, we expanded the number of donors to our annual fund from about 1,000 donors in 1976 to more than 100,000 in 2002. There are even more today. I signed all thank-you notes for gifts of $25 or more and included a personal note if I knew the person. I signed hundreds of letters several times a week during the giving season. It took 20 or 30 minutes at the end of the day and was well worth it.

Assuming you have a real need and a sound case, fund raising requires a good institutional memory, personalized cultivation efforts, and plenty of patience.

Nobody can predict what may transpire over the years that might spark the interest of donors, so thank them a lot, treat them like real people, address them correctly, and listen to their interests and requests. Plenty of modest donors over time become major donors. I personally saw a donor start by giving $250 to a cause and then eventually donate $14-million to the deserving institution. Another, initially a $3,000 donor, made a final gift of $25-million.

Those things don’t come out of the blue; they come from good institutions doing good work and raising money with accurate records, thoughtful donor relations, and lots of thanks. You can’t thank people enough.

Charles Longsworth is the former president of Hampshire College and the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. He served as director of development at Amherst College in the 1960s.