I sometimes struggle to define my role with clients. There are days that I would tell you that I am a researcher. Other days, I would tell you that I am a fundraiser. And yet on other days, I would tell you that I am a strategist. In reality, I am all three.
To illustrate how my multiple roles conjoin and how research provides a basis for a winning strategy, a recent client success provides a great example to show the impact that research can have on the strategic fundraising process.
About a year ago, I began working on a project for a client. The goal was to help them raise several million dollars for a capital project. As part of the process, we began to look at various sources of funding - individual, foundation and corporate. In this article, I will only focus on how research was used to identify private US-based foundations to support the client's project.
The process was multi-phased and here's how I did it.
Research Phase 1: Secondary research
My first task was to identify potential funders and match their funding preferences to the client's project. After interviewing the client, I developed a list of key words and phrases that enabled me to develop a search strategy.
The next step was to develop a list of information sources/providers for foundation information. After reviewing multiple sources, I settled on three providers for the secondary research: Foundation Center's Foundation Directory (through Dialog), NozaSearch and Guidestar. Using these three databases, I was able to develop a preliminary list of private foundations.
While the Foundation Directory and Guidestar have much of the same data, the indexing is different in each, as is the data presentation. By accessing the Foundation Directory through Dialog using DialogLink 5.0's report function, I was able to quickly output search results to an Excel spreadsheet - a key timesaving feature. The spreadsheet formed the basis of the potential funder list.
For the list, I gathered the obvious bits of information such as mailing address and other contact information. Of particular interest were recent gifts made by the foundation, the recipient of those recent gifts, foundation board members, foundation assets and any restrictions that the foundation may place on gifts.
For the recent gifts, I used NozaSearch, which is a relatively new information provider. It mines its data from the Internet and, because not all funding information is available on the Internet, the data is not comprehensive. Even so, the NozaSearch website states that it has more than 39 million records, which includes both individual and foundation data (that's a lot of records!). NozaSearch allows users to output search results in a tabular form and, because the charitable foundation search is free, it makes it a very handy tool.
The preliminary list of potential funders contained about 72 private US-based foundations.
Research Phase 2: Primary Research
Having a limited budget for writing grant proposals, and to increase the success rate of the written proposals, the client and I moved on to Phase 2 of the research-website, relationship and telephone research. The objectives of this phase were to:
Use the preliminary list of 72 potential funders to develop a highly-targeted list
Identify existing relationships between the client and the potential funder
Gather up-to-date information about the foundation
Assess the match between the funder preferences and the project and
Begin to develop a relationship (or further cultivate an existing relationship) with the funder.
It is important to note that relationships are key to successful fundraising, so Phase 2 was critical to the success of the project.
I began by exploring each foundation's website and by providing the client's staff and directors with the list of potential funders, including the foundation key staff and directors/trustees. The first goal was to identify whether or not there were existing relationships. The second goal was to gather a deeper understanding of each foundation's preference, including jargon/key phrases specific to that foundation. For example, one foundation used the term "inter-generational" repeatedly on its website.
When relationships were identified, foundation client staff/directors were interviewed to gather information about the relationship and to develop an "ask" strategy. Unless a special relationship already existed, we telephoned each foundation and asked key questions about its preferences and presented information about the client's project to gauge interest. We deliberately made an effort to use the jargon/key phases we found during the website research, as well as any identified in the course of these conversations. Using their "language" helped us to further build the relationship with potential funders. When we completed this phase, there were approximately ten foundations remaining on the list.
Developing strategies
We settled on the top four funders to approach. These funders were selected based on existing relationships, the average size of gifts made to other organizations and other information gathered from the research. We used information such as recent recipients of gifts and the depth of existing relationships to help assess the likelihood of a gift and the appropriate strategy. Because the goal was to raise several million dollars through a variety of sources, we focused on funders who could make gifts of $250,000 or more.
Armed with information and each foundation's guidelines, we developed strategies for each funder. The first step was to make another round of telephone calls to discuss the client's eventual grant proposal submission. A specific, detailed strategy was developed for each funder, but there were some common elements among the strategies, including:
Whenever possible use the foundation's jargon/key phrases in conversations and written grant proposals.
Work within the relationships that already exist
Build upon the existing relationships using the knowledge gained by the research
Bring funders on-site as often as possible
Write sound proposals that fit within the foundation's giving preferences and guidelines.
Application of research
Research - both and secondary - was crucial to help identify relationships (many of which my client didn't know existed) and to develop strategies to further cultivate both old and new funding sources.
Looking back through the process, it is clear that it is not enough to do research, you must also be willing and able to apply it. We were able to develop realistic strategies to approach the targeted list of funders because of the systematic methods we used to gather information.
The research enabled me to help my client think strategically about fundraising. Through research, I was able to:
Generate a highly-targeted list of potential funders. This helped to contain costs for my client because proposals were only submitted to funders on the targeted list
Identify existing relationships and utilize them to increase the success of the written grant proposals
Understand foundation giving preferences so that proposals matched the foundation's goals with the client's project
Identify jargon/key phases to use in grant proposals.
Results to date
Of the four funders that we approached for a gift, three private US-based foundations provided funding. By October 2008, the project received grants totalling nearly $1 million. This meant we had a 75 percent success rate with the proposals that we eventually submitted.
Without applying and strategically using the foundation research, the success rate would have been much lower and the cost to the client much higher. I think you'll agree with me that research was a key strategy for success.
Margaret King is President of InfoRich Group, Inc., which provides fundraising support specializing in board development, prospect research, capital campaign and general fundraising. In addition to raising millions of dollars for her clients, she has broad experience developing and organizing nonprofit boards and advisory councils. She speaks and writes about contemporary fundraising and board development issues.
A member of the adjunct faculty at Delaware County Community College and Eastern University, she teaches nonprofit management courses at graduate and undergraduate levels and is an instructor for the Association of Fundraising Professionals, Philadelphia Chapter. She has served on several nonprofit boards and has evaluated grant proposals for the National Science Foundation.
The FreePint Family is a family of resources to help information workers be more effective, raise the value of information in their organisations and contribute to success.
'FreePint... provides most of my professional development because it won't come through work and [other resources] just don't cut it.'
FUMSI Forum: Do you have a research question? Post it to the FUMSI Forum, where professionals share Q&A and useful tips on how to Find, Use, Manage and Share Information. It's free.
![[Reuse options]](http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.png){kind=small}
I sometimes struggle to define my role with clients. There are days that I would tell you that I am a researcher. Other days, I would tell you that I am a fundraiser. And yet on other days, I would tell you that I am a strategist. In reality, I am all three.
FreePint Shop:
VIP LiveWire:
