Whitepaper revisited: Expanding prospect discovery in the era of political polarization

The year was 2015. There were no face masks, Travis/Taylor, or TikTok. There was Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars lighting up the Billboard 100 with “Uptown Funk” and in theaters, there was a hello/goodbye of movie trilogies as we welcomed Star Wars: The Force Awakens, while also flocking to the final Hunger Games film (or so we thought.) Less heralded that year was the release of a white paper I composed (via my friends at EverTrue) entitled: Dollars over Donors - Is Higher Ed’s Reliance on the Wealthy Minority a Sustainable Strategy? Yes, this publication labored to find the same buzz that accompanied the return of Han Solo and Chewbacca. Some said it was the marketing, others felt the title “didn’t pop,” and there were many who felt let down by the lack of pie charts.

Nine years later I find myself reflecting on this paper. Not because it inspired any kind of a renaissance within the industry, but because we’re witnessing consequences that never occurred to me at the time of writing the paper. I haven’t read it in many years so I don’t know how well it holds up. In many ways I’m sure the naivete of an alumni affairs digital media person writing about fundraising was on full display. Ironically, I’m now a major gift officer focused on working with alumni on large, transformative gifts. Needless to say my experience working on the 6-7 figure gifts has grown dramatically since I penned that “prestigious” document in 2015.?

The purpose of the 2015 paper, and this piece, is not to disparage the pursuit of mega gifts or the donors themselves. I know first hand the impact they have and the work that goes into securing these historic acts of philanthropy. One of the more unfortunate narratives of our time is that if someone is wealthy they are, by default, “part of the problem.” In my experience, the alumni and friends who make these gifts have a genuine passion to provide opportunity for the young minds that will eventually be counted on to lead our country/world or advance faculty research that can deliver significant impact on the wellbeing of people and the planet. However, we can applaud these philanthropists while also expressing concern over the continued reliance on an extreme minority of the donor population to fund the work of the institution.?

As fate would have it, my journey into major gifts would commence just as I kicked-off my career as a local politician and never have the two overlapped more than they do now. The concerns over a single, dominant, political ideology on college campuses have intensified greatly over the last eight years. We can debate the merits of those arguments some other time, but what’s NOT up for debate is that we’ve continued to drift from the “80/20 rule” (80% of the money coming from 20% of donors) discussed in my white paper. While exact numbers are hard to find, some think much of higher ed is more likely around 99/5…and that might be conservative.?

Mega donations are at an all-time high. According to Forbes, over a dozen colleges/universities received gifts of a $100M or more in 2023. Leading the way with the largest gifts were Stony Brook University (NY) and McPherson College (KS) which both received $500M gifts. For McPherson, it was the second $500M gift from the same anonymous donor in consecutive years. These gifts moved McPherson’s endowment from $590M to $1.95B. Stony Brook’s gift came from Jim and Marilyn Simons/The Simons Foundation and follows a $150M gift made in 2012. The $500M gift in 2023 was more than the listed value of the University’s endowment in 2022 ($471M). By all accounts, this gift will have a significant impact on the student/faculty experience at Stony Brook, a state university serving over 25,000 students. These gifts are generous, transformative, and will undoubtedly be life-changing for thousands of students who will take the experiences these gifts make possible, and springboard into careers that will change the trajectory of their family tree.?

The argument in the white paper was that reliance on so few donors creates a potentially unstable future. There are several circumstances that could lead a donor or family from discontinuing support. In 2015, I was more concerned with neglecting pipeline development and generational changes with regards to philanthropic inclination. However today, in 2024, we find ourselves in a time of great political polarization and donors are more than willing to put their philanthropy on pause as a means of protest against their alma mater. In just the past few months, we have seen the influence mega donors can have on the leadership of major universities. As the tip of the donor pyramid shrinks in size but grows in weight, there is more opportunity for a select few to apply pressure on university leadership.?

Many schools have enough prestige and dollars in their endowment to deflect these pressures, but as we see more college closures, we’re reminded just how many institutions are operating on slim margins. For these schools, mega donors can offer a much needed lifeline, but it’s also crucial that they follow that up with investments in building authentic relationships across their alumni base in an effort to increase their number of future leadership and major gift donors.

I am in the second of two MGO roles and both have been within a specific college/unit. I enjoy this because you work closely with an annual fund officer. So while I manage a portfolio, myself and the other MGOs are also soliciting annual gifts from major gift prospects. We also have internal discovery goals that help build out our pipeline. We don’t rely solely on leads from prospect research, we connect with untracked, alumni/prospects in our coverage regions and meet with them when we’re on the road and/or via zoom. I believe the recent increased focus on discovery is crucial to overcoming the issues I wrote about in 2015, while also helping to broaden the base of support that can help institutions weather the politically inspired frustrations that have bubbled to the surface in recent years.

So what now? Well, we’re not getting back to 80/20 anytime soon. We’re also in a presidential election year, so political tension is only going to heat up…and regardless of who wins the presidency, you can bet there will be fallout. With regards to advancement, here are my thoughts on continuing to build a wider base of support:

1. Maintain a healthy “farm system”

There are two approaches to winning a championship in modern day professional baseball. You can max out your payroll (and pay a luxury tax) and try to “buy” your way to a title quickly, or you can invest in drafting young players and coach them up within your minor league teams. The latter can take many years to see the payoff, but it also is more likely to lead to a dynasty where you have the opportunity to win multiple championships over a long period of time. The go-for-broke on one season can put a ring on your finger, but it usually crumbles quickly and can lead to a longer rebuild. While higher ed should absolutely maintain pursuit of mega gifts, it’s also crucial to maintain a healthy “farm system” that, through engagement and stewardship, develops relationships that inspire more big league donors to step to the plate.?

1. Make prospect discovery by major gift officers a requirement…and set goals.
2. Invest in discovery gift officers who devote 100% of their time to using creative approaches to building relationships with less engaged, high capacity prospects.
3. Have cultivation/stewardship strategies for younger prospects, especially those who have shown a strong inclination to give consistently.
4. Adapt fundraising strategies to generational characteristics to ensure a more authentic approach.?
5. Equip frontline fundraisers with the skills and knowledge to navigate political conversations. They don’t need to “talk politics” but they should learn how to maintain a genuine dialog and convey empathy to a donor's concerns without the discussion becoming/feeling personal. (not an easy task)
6. Provide a platform for alumni to hear from other alumni/faculty who offer a diversity of viewpoints on polarizing issues via a professional/academic discussion.
7. Don’t forget about parents: I have 3 kids and I know we’re as invested in our kids as any generation to this point. There are many parents who, despite also paying tuition, would embrace the opportunity to have an impact on their child’s (and their classmates) college experience and/or give back to the area that provided invaluable development for their child. This is a significant population that is often willing to help, but the relationship needs to be established as soon as the student steps on to campus.??

Between the upcoming presidential election and the future generations of major gift donors, I feel our work on the frontlines will only become more challenging. The key will be to develop relationships early to help demonstrate impact and broaden the number of donors making 5-7 figure gifts, while also using those early connections to build trust that will minimize the likelihood they break off contact during a time of controversy. Colleges and Universities won’t always get it right, but we need to remain a place where experimentation in the pursuit of knowledge, research, and human development isn’t derailed over the fear of alienating certain donors.?