How can you choose between a fundraising consultant and an in-house fundraiser?

When the required skills do not exist in-house, it's time to contract those skills. The fresh perspective is great, but it's only one aspect of what makes a good consultant. You need an experienced, honest evaluation from someone who can quickly learn the mission, understand the culture, and bring something new to the table that translates into new dollars.

Fundraising consultants offer not only fresh perspectives and specialized skills, but more often than not, they also bring with them a broad network of donors and partners, and perhaps even a team of experts that can help to lighten your staff's and board's load. By handling tasks you or your staff might not have the bandwidth or expertise for, fundraising consultants can save time and money, allowing your team to focus on day-to-day responsibilities. Whether strategic planning, board engagement, major donor research, grant writing, or campaign management, a consultant can significantly enhance your short-term and long-term fundraising initiatives.

The issue is fundraising is a creative process so that a fresh outside view can be more than interesting. On the other hand, one needs to know the intricacies of your own business you want to raise funds for, not to use the word "sell". A good balance of an in-house person with a consultant is ideal. Budgets and ROI need to allow for this, as individual private fundraising is not cheap anyway.

Fundraising consultants can infuse your organization with insights, objectivity, and experience that small and mid-sized nonprofits may not be able to afford in a full-time staff member.

Small to medium-sized nonprofits don't always have the resources to hire or effectively manage full-time, expert-level fundraising staff. Contracting a fundraising consultant can be a cost-effective way of accessing high-level expertise without committing to permanent hires. Also, fundraising consultants often add value by helping organizations identify and overcome blind spots that might impede their fundraising success.

Temporary solution? Some of my clients have been with my firm for over 30 years. Many are averaging over 10 plus years. Trust, experience and good fundraising results has a lot to do with keeping and nurturing a long-term relationship.

I threw my eggs in one basket and hired consultants for a large membership drive prior to the reopening of a museum in New York City. One was based in New Mexico and the other, Missouri. Distance from the everyday of NYC was not a liability but my kryptonite for direct marking. Great objective perspective and ability to connect with the right audience far exceeded goals. At the time I had 10 years of fundraising experience behind me, but knew I needed that insight they brought.

While certain services, like bookkeeping and accounting, can be outsourced, working with a fundraising consultant requires active involvement and partnership. Because fundraising consultants aren't privy to daily operations, their understanding of organizational culture and programs might not be as in-depth as a full-time staff member. Additionally, consultants are brought on to make recommendations, not decisions, and they usually don't represent an organization. This means that the onus of cultivating and stewarding relationships with foundation program officers, donors, etc. still falls on the nonprofit.

When considering a fundraising consultant, be aware of potential drawbacks. Consultants require active involvement and clear direction from your organization. They may not fully align with your culture or provide long-term solutions.

The biggest challenge with consultants and partners is the time required for them to understand the unique nuances of your organization and mission. Also, how to navigate and work within the internal framework of your organization. However, if you find a partner that truly understands nonprofits, cares about your mission and is able to work and effectively communicate with several departments, they can be highly effective in a short turnaround. The more you can integrate your partners into your work as a whole, they more effective they can be at finding solutions across departments. Don't pigeon hole them or hide from other leaders if you want to scale long term solutions and sustainable programs.

There has been an uptick in attrition for in-house fundraisers in recent years. Many experts assert that this is related to factors like compensation, culture, and management. Kenneth makes a good point about many nonprofits refusing to pay appropriately for highly experienced and accomplished fundraisers. If an in-house fundraiser is also not experiencing a supportive environment that encourages growth and provides them with the tools and resources they need to succeed, they will not last long in the role.

The biggest benefit to an in-house fundraiser is their responsibility to manage and augment your organization's donor relationships. They are an organization's point of contact for donors to maintain engagement on the donors' terms. Success manifests by engagement metrics such as gifts given, events attended, time volunteered, and age of the relationship. The in-house fundraiser works for the organization which prevents any conflict of interest when they are operating in their work capacity on these relationships. Whereas a consultant works with an organization and their relationships are not beholden to their client (the organization).

I have led fundraising teams and current work as a major gifts person and a nonprofit fundraising consultant. I believe it all comes down to capacity. You want your spring campaign to go out but there is no capacity from your current team to begin so you bring in a fundraising consultant to help, even if it’s just to get the campaign off the ground. A consultant can also help with uncommon campaigns like those to increase monthly donors or introducing your donors to planned giving. If you decide on hiring a consultant, be sure to find the right one by matching their recent experience with your needs.

I agree with Dan, and I think as a fundraising consultant, I will have less overall credibility with an organizations donors as they know I'm on a limited contract. I typically find I'm the most effective when partnering with a in-house development person or team to build the organizations capacity.

This article uses the phrase "You may still need to invest in training, coaching..." but I would assert that you WILL still need to invest in these things. Not providing your team members with opportunities for growth is a surefire way to lose them.

For me it sounds almost like a luxury to be able to contemplate the choice between in-house and consulting support. The content of the work itself, our mission and vision, absorbs all my attention and time, which is why, like many other small NGOs, you get into the vicious circle of overworked and underfunded very quickly. Your passion is to improve a given injustice in a way that makes a difference. It needs constant fine tuning. You think you will raise the funds when you can provide abundant proof that it works. But then you hit the wall: how scale it up now for true impact? The forerunners, your pioneers, absorb all your resources - no time to develop a funding strategy including the choice of in-house versus consultant.

When choosing between a fundraising consultant and an in-house fundraiser, consider the drawbacks of an in-house fundraiser. They may lack certain skills, face burnout, and require ongoing support and training, which could add to your costs and challenges.

We use consultants surgically - when you don’t have time, expertise or you need validation from industry experts - especially to convince the powers that be of trends. I’m a big believer in an in agency model for fundraising but a trusted fundraising consultancy that works alongside brings with them the wisdom and knowledge of assisting other clients which can lead to new perspectives and efficiencies.

Most approach this comparison by reviewing only ROI (money out, money in) or leaning in on a narrow metric to measure a consultant or partner's success. To truly compare you must first determine the all-in cost of staff lead efforts - staff time, resources, technology and other departmental support required to accomplish goals. Then review the cost of your consultant as well as the value they deliver beyond just revenue - innovation, tapping into a new audience, leads, brand awareness, long term engagement, etc. It is often more than revenue. There is a cost whether you go in-house or external, that needs to be reviewed objectively, but what is the true value?

I work in a small, rural town and work with a lot of nonprofit orgs in communities with a similar makeup. I think it's important that the organization and hiring manager also takes time to consider what their hiring pool looks like in their local market. If you want to hire an in-house fundraiser, but there doesn't seem to be much talent locally, you may need to bump up the compensation/incentive to attract a strong candidate to relocate from another market area.

Having a strategic blend of in-house and external resources is important. The single, most beneficial outcome is to build in hands-on learning that is passed from the external consultant to the internal team. The NGO gets a 'twofer' with professional development for the individuals on their team and the expertise of a seasoned consultant who can often jump-start results. Any consultant worth their weight will understand this as a desired outcome.

I agree that an in-house development professional is more effective if they are with an organization for several years. I think hiring a consultant for strategic planning is really valuable- and something that can make a huge difference in the success of a campaign.

Bring consultants in to add unique value that you can't access in-house, either due to specialized skills or tools (or both). But in-house talent is critical to long-term success. That's why I prefer models where consultants are actually scoped to help build capacity and develop in-house talent as they deliver specific value to the organization. This allows scalability and increased organizational profitability to deliver more mission impact.

Traditional consultant vs in house thinking leaves out a lot of new models for organizations, especially small ones, to benefit from external help. There is a growing movement of Fractional Fundraisers that offer strategic guidance as well as day to day implementation to help organizations grow their fundraising over the long term.

The right consultant will work themselves out of necessity. Their scope of work should always, in all ways, build in-house capacity — whether that is part- or full-time staff, fractional support, or something else. In smaller organizations, they can help understand the structures necessary to build a fundraising program that has the resources to sustain itself. In larger shops, it can be building knowledge around large ideas like capital campaigns or planned giving. In early conversations, ask consultants about their off-boarding process once a contract is complete; that will tell you a lot about whether they see themselves as temporal partners or an entity that expects to be around for a long time.

My experience is that many organizations are looking to grow fundraising, but don't know where to start. In addition, as others have pointed out, finding a strong fundraiser that you can afford and will stay with you is very challenging! A model we have found helpful is to engage consultants to help you understand where you are and what you need to go forward. Look for talent that you already have in your charity that is interested in fundraising and has the competencies, then coach and support them with consulting experts as you grow a culture of philanthropy in your organization. Consultant role will then shift to more expertise and coaching, and as your internal capacity and revenue grows, your need for consultants will decrease.

There is a role and value to outside counsel - however - do not surrender the commitment to growing competencies within the organization because 'it is difficult to do' - remember - with outside counsel - the odds are good but the goods can be odd.