1 / 65

About

Alumni Development in California Community Colleges Hearsay, Heresy and Evidence Based Alumni Development May 24, 2011. About. Richard H. Morley, CFRE, CSPG Executive Director, Mt. San Antonio College Foundation 8 years public education

devika
Download Presentation

About

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Alumni Development inCalifornia Community CollegesHearsay, Heresy and Evidence Based Alumni DevelopmentMay 24, 2011

  2. About Richard H. Morley, CFRE, CSPG Executive Director, Mt. San Antonio College Foundation 8 years public education 16 years in corporate training/marketing with my own business 10 years in philanthropy MBTI = ENTJ :The field marshall

  3. About Annette Ramos-Barrantes Mt. SAC Development Associate Strong data management skills Ability to track multiple projects Excellent in working with vendors as partners Quick learner of software

  4. About Mt. San Antonio College 26 miles east of Los Angeles, CA 1 hour to skiing; 1 hour to the beach Largest community college campus in CA with 65,000 student lives we touch 35,000 full time degree seeking students 424 acre campus Top tier producer of degrees Top tier honors/transfer college National top awards in most disciplines

  5. x

  6. Campus View

  7. Where we were in 2008 • Bottom 5% fund raising state wide • Lack of strong foundation presence in the community • Under-utilization of technology • No comprehensive database; no history • No online giving, no mass email capability • New Board of Directors • No comprehensive board development plan • Need to strengthen ties to community and businesses

  8. Where does Mt. SAC money come from?

  9. Mile High View Today Details at Symposium? Any interest in a hands-on pre-conference on alumni development only?

  10. Heresay, Heresy and Evidence Heresay = We change lives, we save lives, we prepare for success in life and for transfer to 4 year Heresy = Only 22% of our students graduate = 88% “failure rate” (CAE) Evidence based = define success with massive numbers of alumni success stories..it’s not just about degrees

  11. Four Year Alumni Giving     Princeton University 60% University of Southern California 43% Yale University 38% Duke University 38% Harvard University 37% Brown University 37% University of Pennsylvania 37% Massachusetts Institute of Technology 36% Emory University 36% California Institute of Technology 35% Stanford University 34% Columbia University In The City of New York 34% Rice University 33% Johns Hopkins University 33% University of Chicago 32% Cornell University 31% Washington University In St Louis 31% Northwestern University 31% Brandeis University 30% Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus 28% Vanderbilt University 24% University of Virginia-Main Campus 22%

  12. Pathetic indifference or lack of asking? • 22% average of 4 year institutional revenue comes from alumni • 2% of 2 year institutional revenue comes from alumni

  13. Objectives • Overcome FERPA myths and objections and legally contact college alumni • Organize data for ease of import/export  (from raw files, to data clean up, and back into your donor database) • Organize, analyze and make sense of your alumni data

  14. Objectives • Set priorities for using data;  define criteria for decision making • Select a vendor for data cleansing/updating old records • Segment the database by donor history, age, and other significant data: create a marketing plan based on alumni data characteristics • Use email marketing for alumni data sets

  15. Objectives • Use telefund (Virtual Call Center) to generate alumni contact and donations • Understand the dollar investment and how to measure return on money spent • Connect, engage and get alumni to support your Foundation

  16. FERPA • Family Educational Rights & Privacy Act • Enacted 1974 • Applies to ALL schools that receive applicable Federal funds • Pre-FERPA (before 1974) alumni records law does not apply • FERPA defines current and past students as the same with regards to privacy

  17. FERPA • Defines access to student records for school officials with a “legitimate educational interests” • Defines a “student directory” for records in which student information may be placed • Directory is “passive” opt in (notice in catalog) • Must provide notice to opt out

  18. Chancellor’s Ruling Provided by Foundation for CA CCs Includes only references to “directory information” memo of May 5, 2011 If your directory information is incomplete, seek legal definition from District legal counsel to pursue the same FERPA process for all student records…proven legal in case law

  19. Challenges • Most directories have limited information • Trend is to limit info in directory so as to give outside 3rd parties little to no information on our students • Creates a Catch 22 situation for contacting alumni

  20. Two Choices 1. If you have good, complete data in your Directory, use it If you are a District employee with “legitimate educational interest…” 2. If you do not have a complete directory, you may use the same FERPA defined opt in / opt out process to obtain your District’s “raw data” from records

  21. Mt. SAC Counsel Opinion Letter Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Counsel: Mary Dowell As a District employee, Exec Director has the right to the data Contacting alumni for fundraising is a “legitimate educational interest…”

  22. Legal continued… Exec Director may contract with 3rd party entity to update records All first communication must include “College has designated Mt. SAC Foundation as alumni relations…you may opt out within 30 days…”

  23. What does it take? • Support of Foundation Board, President/CEO and College Trustees • A talented technology / online marketing Development Associate • Cash: over 3- 5 years invested to grow the Foundation

  24. Integrate Parts into System eTap

  25. Vendors and Partners Look for a partner, not the best price Know what you need; engage an expert if you don’t know what you need Develop a clear technology plan (3-4 pages) that includes objectives, messaging, marketing, budget, timeframes and ROI measures Most vendors will negotiate

  26. What technology does it take? 1. True donor database (not a spreadsheet!) 2. Online giving (more than PayPal) 3. Mass email (more than constant comment) Both integrated with database 4. Social networking - Open sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Flckr - Closed alumni site (?) 5. Geocoding and donor wealth scoring

  27. Baby steps…to sprinter • Create an overall plan with goals and measurable objectives • Secure alumni data • Data mapping: create consistent data file HEADERS (in Excel for use in all data transfers) • Data updates, data cleansing Statewide NCCCF contract with Harris Connect Define what information you want in the master database (donor database)

  28. Baby steps….to sprinter 5. Create integrated eNewsletter, email, US mail, phone call and in person visits based on segmenting the donor database into highest wealth, highest propensity to give 6. Measure everything

  29. Decide what you can manage… October 2010: 1.2 million alumni records 147,000 AA, AS or certificate Harris data services $19,560 to find 95,381 good addresses 42,350 phone numbers 16,279 email opt in 411 opt out

  30. Decide what you can manage.. Next: transfer students (no degree) with 24 credit hours or more Same process starting July 1, 2011 for FY 2011-2012 Expect to bring in another 120,000 updated records: geocode and segment Total database perhaps 250,000

  31. Geocode Chosen Records Focused on only greater Southern California records Purchased wealth score data Target Analytics or Wealth Engine 7,000 alumni with “high net worth and high propensity to give” That’s where we started

  32. Donor Wealth Our 2009-10 database of 25,226 included: Mega rich over $25 Million 1 Super rich $10 mil -$25 mil 10 Rich $5 mil - $10 mil 89 Wealthy $1 mil - $5 mil 735 Well off $500k - $1 mil 1019 Comfortable $100k – $500k 5257

  33. Donor Wealth Geocoding Using census block wealth data 43,000 alumni 55+ Geocode to limit list to purchase wealth scoring (Target Analytics/Blackbaud) Wealth score /propensity to give on only the wealthiest

  34. Donor Wealth Geocoding

  35. Alumni Residence Geocoding

  36. And linked to database

  37. Wealth Scoring Purchased wealth scores on 5,000 top alumni/ donors from map 411 “mega rich” alumni All 5,000 showed A or B wealth score

  38. Alumni in USA

  39. Alumni/Donor Call Center Outreach April 18, 2011 through today – slow start for training purposes Total pledges $9,800 in 16 call shifts of approx. 3-4 hours 4-6 callers per shift Already reached break even point Four more weeks of calling

  40. What we are doing • Segmenting donor database • Based on giving history • Roughly 209 consistent donors >$500 over the years • Added 324 new donors 2008 - 2010 • Loyal donors give ultimate gifts • Event attendees rarely give ultimate gifts • Giving is just starting to occur but we have not yet nearly reached scale in contacting donors (based on donor behavior research)

  41. What are we doing? Email tailored messages to 22,000+ By age, by wealth, by interest (degree) or other information gleaned from database or social networking Birthday cards to those wealthiest over 40 who do not have email addresses In person visits Tele-fund (by paid students) spring 2010

  42. What we’ve done • Established a stronger Board…still need to engage more with affluent donors • Board development • Attended NCCCF Symposium 3 years • Strong participation and commitment • Links to new businesses and individuals • Increased visibility in the community • Put in place state-of-the-art systems and processes

  43. July 8, 2008 Prediction Financial investments in technology, staff and resources to grow the Mt. SAC Foundation will not yield results for 3-5 years. I apologized to my Board…. I was wrong.

  44. 2 Year Technology Investment Costs eTapestry donor database $ 12,000 Harris Connect Member Connections $ 30,000 Data clean up $ 20,000 Personnel $104,000 $ 154,600

  45. Guess the ROI % Return 10% 20% 30% 40%

  46. What is Return on Investment? The return on investment formula: Gain from investment – cost of investment ROI = Cost of investment

  47. ROI Total $ gain just from technology related donors over 2.5 years = $230,669 Technology costs + personnel = $154,000 ROI = 49%

  48. Technology ROI • 28,853 Verified records in donor database • Personal / Individual = 97% • ALUMNI = 7,960 Records • RETIREES = 524 Records • Business / Organization = 3%

  49. Technology ROI • Brand New Donors = 560 • FY 2008 – 2009 = 108 (E-newsletters) • 84% Individuals; 16% Business • FY 2009 – 2010 = 218 (E-newsletters+ selected direct mail • 90% Individuals; 10% Business • FY 2010 – 2011 (as of Dec. 31, 2010) = 129 New Donors • 105 new alumni donors from TeleFund in 4 weeks April 18-today = $

  50. Other Return on Investment • From January 1, 2008 to March 4, 2011 • 93,670 Emails sent vs US mail @ $0.44 rate = $41, 243.84 saved on US Mail • US Mail (Direct mail) .5-1% • Mt. SAC E-mail Open Rate = 12.19 % • Retiree Open Rate = 30 % Average

More Related