AHP Performance Benchmarking Service

Published Reports FY 2006...available only to participants of the AHP Performance Benchmarking Service.

...

....

As part of the AHP Performance Benchmarking Service, AHP will publish reports to assist with analysis and interpretation of data. For FY 2006 data collection and analysis, AHP published four reports.

“A Study of Fundraising Performance – Fiscal Year 2006” delves into key factors that contribute to a program’s outcome. It focuses on the management of human, financial and planning resources as they relate to the philanthropic environment.

Learn about the range of factors that are controllable versus those fundraisers cannot change such as geography, demographics and your institutional operating environment.

Here is a sneak peek at some of the valuable information you will find in Report II:
A Study of Fundraising Performance – Fiscal Year 2006:

Performance Findings

The following cross-tabulations below help illustrate the actual changes in variables significantly associated with fundraising returns and efficiency.

Total Fundraising Expenses

Net FR Revenue

ROI

CTRD

$104,342-$623,976
(n=8)
Median

Range

$923k

$312k-$11.4 M

$4.10

$1.74-$23.79

$0.25

$0.04-$0.58

$623,977-$926,607
(n=8)
Median

Range

$3.9 M

$1.3 M-$15.0 M

$5.95

$2.71-$17.21

$0.17

$0.06-$0.37

$926,608-$1,206,716
(n=8)
Median

Range

$6.2 M

$1.7 M-$10.0 M

$6.52

$2.68-$11.37

$0.16

$0.09-$0.37

$1,206,717-$5,392,422
(n=7)
Median

Range

$6.1 M

$858k-$20.6 M

$3.75

$1.68-$10.87

$0.27

$0.09-$0.59

Note: Fundraising expenses include costs related to direct fundraising activity. These expenses include human resources and operations expense but exclude any expense defined as non-fundraising administration. Non-fundraising administration includes activities such as hospital or system related tasks or meetings, and non-fundraising related speaking engagements.

Data above show significant median increases in net returns ($2.3 million) with the addition of $280,000 in resources between the second and third categories. The chart reflects consistent growth in investment returns with increased expenditures along with decreasing costs associated with raising funds. While the sample mirrors foundations at various stages of development, this association supports the old adage that it takes money to raise money.

At the same time, stagnating median returns beyond the $1.2 million expenditure mark may be indicative of diminishing returns. This is also supported by a declining ROI (and accompanying cost of raising funds) in the final, $1.2 to $5.4 million expense category. These preliminary trends speak to the delicate balance in adequately financing the profit center for maximum effectiveness without diminishing efficiency.

Conclusions drawn from data analysis (numbers 1 through 3 of 7 that are discussed in the report):

Wise fundraising investments do pay off. Adequate investment paired with well-rounded fundraising programs and sound management hold the keys to success. This study underscores the foundation as a profit center worthy of appropriate resources that yield high net returns and balanced efficiency. (discussion on pages 7-11)
Total resources directly dedicated to the fundraising operation (measured by direct fundraising expenditures, direct staff size, and compensation levels) show the strongest associations with bottom line returns and fundraising effectiveness. It stands to reason that adequate resources, and their effective management, would help bolster fundraising performance. One cannot forget, however, that the word effective is operative here – expenses that are too high in the form of overhead or staffing can lead to diminished returns on investment. (discussion on pages 7-10)

Foundation focus and sound management also play key roles in determining fundraising success. The depth and length of focus on major gift activity (from individuals, corporations/foundations, and public sources) are positively associated with overall returns and fundraising effectiveness. Creating giving vehicles that facilitate major gifts also play a key role evidenced by significantly higher performance among foundations in campaign versus those that are not. (discussion on pages 9-12)

To purchase this and/or other reports drawn from FY 2006 benchmarking data, go to the order form, located in the Downloads menu of the AHP Performance Benchmarking database, or download the PDF here. To become a participant in the service, fill out the AHP Benchmarking Service order form. Data collection for fiscal year 2007 begins in May, 2008.