Charity
Channel
Screening Sessions for Major Donors
by Linda Lysakowski, ACFRE
President/CEO CAPITALVENTURE SM
Many times in smaller organizations,
executive directors and development directors will
bemoan the fact that they do not have the “movers
and shakers” on their board and therefore,
cannot consider a major gift program or a capital
campaign that relies heavily on leadership level
gifts. Before writing off your board members, consider
doing some brainstorming on major donor prospects.
You may be surprised at the connections your board
has in this regard.
Brainstorming is best done in the form of screening
and rating session. There are basically three ways
in which to conduct screening for major donor prospects.
For all three methods the screening committee could
include:
Board Members
Staff
Development Committee Members
Members of Leadership Gifts Committee
Organization volunteers with broad
community
Select
your committee members very carefully and make them aware
that the information shared in these meetings is VERY
CONFIDENTIAL. If your board or committee volunteers have
never done screening before, explain to them that this
method is used routinely in most organizations and is
the best way to determine the key ingredients of a major
gift—Linkage, Ability and Interest (the LAI Principle).
If you are working with a consultant, they will generally
lead the screening meeting. If you do not have a consultant,
be sure that the meeting is led by an experienced group
facilitator. It will be very important to keep the group
on task and explain the methodology and reasons behind
the screening meeting to those who are not familiar with
the process.
It is also crucial to start with a preliminary list. It
is often hard to get a brainstorming session started with
a blank slate. Prepare a list of the top 10% of donors
to your organization or other prospects that you feel
may have the potential to make a major gift. List the
giving history of these people, with their largest gift
and most recent gift. Provide a column for each of the
key ingredients—Linkages, Ability and Interest.
Be sure to mark the sheets “Highly Confidential.”
And of course, if gifts have been made anonymously, do
not list them.
Now to the three methods:
1—The Open Screening Session: Invite the group to
assemble in a quiet room and open the discussion with
brief explanation of the process, its importance to your
organization and why they were selected to help with this
task. Then distribute the lists and discuss each name
on the list, attempting to determine the best linkage—who
knows this person best or would be the best person to
make the "ask." Often there will be several
linkages and the task of this group is to determine the
best solicitation team. Next, try to determine ability—what
COULD this person give to the organization if so motivated.
Without revealing confidential information, the screening
committee members often can geuss-timate the person’s
net worth and/or income. Then try to determine Interest—does
this person have knowledge of your organization, is this
a cause they are known to support? Is there a specific
program of your organization or part of your project that
you think would interest them? As each name is discussed,
complete the form with the linkages, ability and interest
named. The advantage of this method is that there is discussion
and consensus; the disadvantage is that some people feel
uncomfortable discussing prospects.
2—The Closed Session—this method is very similar
to the first, except that instead of discussing each prospect
among the group, participants in the session are asked
to complete the answers to the Linkage, Ability and Interest
sections to the best of their own knowledge. Each person
works independently without discussion among the group.
Lists are then collected and the person in charge reviews
the lists and determines the consensus of opinion. The
advantage of this method is that people may feel freer
to comment on prospects if they are doing it confidentially;
the disadvantage is that once the lists are collected
(each screener should mark their name on their list before
turning it in) there is a lot of guesswork and perhaps
follow up to clarify what a screener has written. Without
the open discussion it is sometimes difficult to figure
out why one person thought this prospect had the ability
to give $1,000,000 and another suggested $10,000.
3—The Private Screening Session—this method
is similar to the first except that it is held one on
one with a staff member and a screening committee member.
The list is reviewed with screening committee members
one at a time in the privacy of heir office or home. The
advantages of this method are that it is easier to schedule
people at their convenience than getting them all together
in one room and the open discussion takes place at least
between he staff and the screening committee member; the
disadvantages are that it take a lot more staff time to
meet with screening committee members individually and
again the lack of open discussion may mean follow up to
clarify major differences of opinion.
In all three methods, you will want to make sure to encourage
screeners to add their own names to the list. Often seeing
the list will jog people to think of other potential donors
for your organization.
Whichever method you use, you will most likely uncover
some hidden “stars” among your current donors
and uncover new prospects along the way. Good luck and
happy prospecting!
