charles r. wood theater capital campaign plan

Running Head: CAPITAL CAMPAIGN FUNDRAISING PLAN 1

Capital Campaign Fundraising Plan

Charles R. Wood Theater

Erin L. Coon

207 Glen Street

Glens Falls, NY 12801

518 798 9663

[email protected]

CAPITAL CAMPAIGN FUNDRAISING PLAN 2

Table of Contents

Abstract 4

Introduction 5

Problem Statement 5-6

Capital Campaign Assumptions and Objectives 6-7

Capital Campaign Plan 7-22

Case Statement 8-9

Gifts Table 9-10

Staffing the Capital Campaign 10-17

Campaign Chair 11

Charles R. Wood Theater Board 11-12

Executive Director 12

Chief Development Officer 12-13

Campaign Committees 13-16

Volunteers 16-17

Campaign Timeline 17-19

Planning Phase 18


Silent Phase 18-19

Final Phase 19-20

Policies and Procedures of Capital Campaign 20-22

Prospect Rating 20-21

Gift Levels and Naming Opportunities 21

Major Gift Solicitation 21

General Gift Solicitation 21-22

Receipt and Recognition of Gifts 22

Conclusion 22

References 23-24


Abstract

Following is an academically based capital campaign plan for the Charles R. Wood Theater. The plan

is meant to run from the present through January 2015. This document includes all the fundamental

elements of a capital campaign plan including a problem statement, case statement, goals and

objectives, a division of labor including committee structures, a timeline, gifts chart and some

guidelines to be used when setting policies and procedures. The reader should keep in mind that this

is only a preliminary example of the capital campaign plan and is meant to serve as guide and quick

reference for the Charles R. Wood Theater. Its best use will be in providing a list of tasks that need to

be completed and in helping to guide the board and staff as they plan the campaign.


Introduction

The Charles R. Wood Theater is a small nonprofit organization that operates with three full

time staff members, eighteen board members, and a budget totaling less than $300,000 per year. Its

mission reads: “The Charles R. Wood Theater’s mission is to promote cultural and artistic endeavors,

thereby fostering the economic development of and improving the quality of life within the greater

Glens Falls area (Charles R. Wood Theater, 2011).”

Founded in 1995 by a group of local community leaders, the theater provides rehearsal,

performance, set-building and office space for local theatrical, concert, orchestral, and dance

performances as well as professional touring productions, special events, meetings and weddings.

The Wood Theater is an intimate space that seats approximately 300 people and provides

professional box office services to those that rent the theater. Located in a renovated Woolworth’s

store, the theater officially opened to the public in 2004 and is now used by various professional,

local, national and international nonprofit and for-profit organizations more than 200 days per year.

This paper provides a capital campaign plan to be launched in conjunction with the Charles R.

Wood Theaters tenth anniversary. It relies on research and best practices from both the academic

and practical branches of the arts management field. Commonly held best practices from the

fundraising field are used throughout this document to support and provide reference material for all

suggestions made. Each of the following sections will incorporate a literature review of successful

practices before making recommendations for the Charles R. Wood Theaters capital campaign.

Problem Statement

After nearly ten years in operation, the Charles R. Wood Theater board and staff have

identified several capital needs the organization must fulfill to remain current in the performing arts

world and viable for organizations that use the theater. This fundraising plan is meant to provide a

working guideline to the Charles R. Wood Theater for a combined or comprehensive fundraising

campaign. This type of capital campaign raises funds to help an organization meet several goals

which often include building renovations and upgrades, endowment growth and equipment needs


(Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Dove, 2001). In the case of the Charles R. Wood Theater, funds will be raised

to pay for building improvements and renovations to help make the building more energy efficient, to

update equipment and facilities to meet the standards set forth by the Actors Equity Association and

to build an endowment.

Capital Campaign Assumptions and Objectives

Before a campaign plan can be created, the premises of the organization’s position must be

understood (Dove, 2001; Heetland, 1990; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009;

Sargeant & Jay, 2004). Following is a list of assumptions and objectives, adapted from Dove (2001),

that form the foundation of this document.

Assumptions

1. The campaign will be approved by the board of directors at the Charles R. Wood Theater and will be carried out under the board’s supervision according to the principles set forth in the by-laws of the Charles R. Wood Theater.

2. A matching grant from the Charles R. Wood Foundation for $250,000 will be secured. This will require the Charles R. Wood Theater to set the goal of the capital campaign at $250,000.

3. Active fundraising for the campaign will last for two years and nine months, beginning in January of 2012 and ending in January of 2015 (six months after the ten-year anniversary of the theater).

4. Personal solicitation of top prospects will be limited to those who are believed to be capable of giving $5,000 or more.

5. Solicitation of smaller gifts will happen through mail, newsletters, internet, media solicitation and in house face-to-face solicitations made at other events or events held as a part of the campaign.

6. The campaign will not disrupt regular fundraising activities of the Charles R. Wood Theater. It will be clearly marketed as distinct from the theaters ongoing Planned Giving Campaign, Friends Drive and Annual Appeal.

7. Gifts will be sought in the form of cash, securities, real and personal property, and pledges payable over five years.

8. The condition of the economy may change during the years of the campaign and could affect the ability of many donors to commit to the Charles R. Wood Theaters campaign.


9. Tax laws relating to charitable giving could change, requiring adjustments to the campaign literature and policies concerning receipt of gifts during the campaign.

10. Inflation during the course of the capital campaign may change the quotes received from local businesses for capital improvements. Distribution of funds received from the campaign and adjustment of campaign goals may be necessary during the campaign.

11. Capital campaigns are complicated and involve the coming together of many different people and plans. If all of these elements of the campaign are not adequately prepared by the preset date for the public phase of the campaign, it may need to be postponed.

Objectives of the Campaign

Overall goal of campaign is $500,000 (including $250,000 in matching grant funds)

Raise $250,000 to meet the matching requirement from the Charles R. Wood Foundation

$350,000 will be used for building improvements

$150,000 will be put toward an endowment for the Charles R. Wood Theater

Lead gifts totaling 40% -50% ($100,000 - $125,000) of the active campaign goal should be

brought in during the silent phase of the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy

at Indiana University, 2009).

The remaining 50% - 60% ($125,000 - $150,000) should be sought out during the public

phase of the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

The campaign is an opportunity to further develop relationships with the community and

all marketing materials related to the campaign will be used to help advance the brand of

the Charles R. Wood Theater.

Capital Campaign Plan

Following is a plan of action for the capital campaign to be launched by the Charles R. Wood

Theater. The purpose of this plan is to provide a structural foundation for growth, revision and

implementation of the campaign. This plan is a first suggestion to the organizations staff, board and


volunteers. Modifications are expected and will be necessary as new factors come to light and as the

campaign planning and launch progress.

Case Statement for Support

Interests of donors are changing as the baby boomers age and younger generations find

themselves gaining more wealth (Ries & Clohesy, 2001; Briscoe, 2001; Wagner, 2002). It’s important

that nonprofit organizations develop their fundraising strategies to encompass the interests of these

new younger donors as well as the interests of the more traditional donors (Ries & Clohesy, 2001;

Briscoe, 2001; Squires, 1998; Wagner, 2002). Finding a balance in fundraising communications is

essential for development of younger donors into major donors, lead volunteers and lifetime

supporters of the Charles R. Wood Theater (Ries & Clohesy, 2001; Briscoe, 2001; Wagner, 2002).

Many of these new donors are well educated and technologically savvy (Ries & Clohesy, 2001;

Briscoe, 2001; Wagner, 2002). They expect certain rewards and recognition for their gifts (Ries &

Clohesy, 2001; Briscoe, 2001; Wagner, 2002).

The case statement for the Charles R. Wood Theaters capital campaign must serve as a quick

reference point for donors (Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Squires, 1998). Many new donors are busy (Ries &

Clohesy, 2001; Briscoe, 2001). They don’t want to read long case statements or supporting materials

(Ries & Clohesy, 2001; Briscoe, 2001). Instead, they would rather gather as much information as

possible as quickly as possible (Briscoe, 2001; Squires, 1998). For that reason the case statement

should be donor focused, informative, motivating and inspiring (Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Squires, 1998).

It should convey the major goals of the campaign in an easy to understand way (Sargeant & Jay, 2004;

Squires, 1998). It is also a good idea to tailor the case statement to fit different target donor groups

such as businesses, foundations, major donors, new donors, young donors, and regular donors (Ries

& Clohesy, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004). The case statement, along with all other fundraising

communication and literature, should be made available in the theater lobby and on its website.

Following is a suggested case statement for the Charles R. Wood Theaters capital campaign.

Keep in mind that this is only an example and can be edited to fit different purposes during the

campaign.


For the past ten years the Charles R. Wood Theater has been delivering high quality

performances from some of the best local nonprofit organizations to the Glens Falls community. You

have enjoyed top notch musicians, political discussions, new and classic performances and local

productions at consistently affordable rates. As the Wood Theater has worked with the various

artists and technicians who have visited our community, several fundamental concerns have come to

light. Technical equipment needs and building improvements simply cannot be put off if those who

use and visit the theater hope to continue to see the same caliber of art in the future. This is why the

board and staff of the theater are turning to you to help provide the funds necessary for the

expansion of the theaters capabilities. Building renovations, equipment upgrades and the

development of an endowment will help the theater to better serve the community as well as the

organizations and individuals who rent the theater. This is your big chance to make your mark on the

future of the performing arts in downtown Glens Falls. Contact the Charles R. Wood Theater to find

out how your gift can make a difference.

Gifts Table

Gift charts serve many purposes including providing a visual interpretation of the ideal gift

spread for board, staff and volunteers, providing a reality check to campaign organizers, helping to

gauge the reality of the campaign goals, deciding on the number of prospects needed at each giving

level, establishing monetary and timeline goals for various phases of the campaign, providing a

foundation for policies on gift solicitation and guidelines for volunteer fundraisers, a tool for

evaluating the progress of the campaign and for evaluating the outcome (Pierpont, 2003; Dove, 2001;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Heetland, 1990).

There are many different ways of creating a gift table; each must be unique to the specific

organization, community and campaign (Pierpont, 2003; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009). However, there are several principles that are recognized as essential to

creating a realistic and usable chart. The most important include the 80/20 rule which states that

80% of the funds raised will come from 20% of the donors, recognition that 50% - 60% of the money

will come from less than 20 of the largest gifts, 35% - 40% will come from the net 100 – 150 largest

gifts and only 15% - 20% will come from the rest of the gifts (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009; Heetland, 1990). It is generally suggested in the literature that a single gift


should be included that accounts for 10% of the overall campaign goal and from there each giving

level should be cut in half while the number of donors giving at the level doubles (Pierpont, 2003;

Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Heetland,1990). It is also generally accepted that for every one

donation needed, four times as many prospects should be identified (Pierpont, 2003; Sargeant & Jay,

2004). This ratio can decrease with giving level since it is expected that prospects who decline at

higher levels will give at lower ones (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009;

Pierpont, 2003; Sargeant & Jay, 2004). This method should be used as a basis for constructing a gift

table and should then be modified to fit the realistic capabilities of the community the organization is

relying upon for donations (Pierpont, 2003; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004).

Gift RangeNumber of

Gifts Required

Number of Prospects Needed Total

Percentage of Goal

$25,000 1 4 $25,000 10$12,500 2 8 $25,000 10$6,000 4 16 $24,000 9.6$3,000 8 24 $24,000 9.6$1,500 16 48 $24,000 9.6$1,000 32 48 $32,000 12.8$500 64 130 $32,000 12.8$250 64 130 $16,000 6.4

under $250 many many $48,000 19.2$250,000 100

Following the commonly accepted best practices, a gift table was constructed for the Charles

R. Wood Theater’s capital campaign and appears below.

Staffing the Capital Campaign

One of the most important factors for a successful capital campaign is how the responsibilities

are divided up among staff, board members and volunteers (Goettler, 2000; Dove, 2001; Sargeant &

Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). People give to other people when

they are asked, not to organizations (Kirsch & Shell, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

Universtiy, 2009; Dove, 2001). Therefore, the people who work on the campaign are the most

important element of the plan. Best practices from literature generally suggest that division of labor


be structured so that duties are primarily split up among volunteer committees headed by board

members and staff (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,

2009). One campaign chair should be recruited to oversee all the staff and committees (Dove, 2004).

The following sections detail the duties and types of people who should be sought to fill the various

roles of the Charles R. Wood Theater’s capital campaign.

Campaign Chair.

The person in this position will be in charge of the campaign and will have a great deal of

responsibility for its success (Dove, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009;

Lysakowski, 2002; Kirsch & Shell, 1998). He or she will be expected to contribute financially to the

campaign, adhere to the campaign timeline and policies, enforce rules and policies, oversee the

campaigns day-to-day operations, enlist volunteers to work on different aspects of the campaign,

assist in soliciting lead gifts, serve as a spokesman for the campaign and serve on the advance gifts

committee and the steering committee (Lysakowski, 2002; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University; 2009; Kirsch & Shell, 1998).

Qualities of a Campaign Chair.

This individual must have adequate time to complete these duties (Dove, 2004; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Lysakowski, 2002). This person is usually a volunteer

selected by the board of directors and staff (Dove, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009; Lysakowski, 2002). It is essential that the Campaign Chair have knowledge of the

theater, believe in its mission, be affluent and influential in the community and have knowledge of

fundraising and a willingness to serve (Dove, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,

2009; Lysakowski, 2002; Kirsch & Shell, 1998). Useful skills include an endearing personality that

appeals to and motivates others to give, comfort speaking publicly, an ability to gain support and

trust from staff, committees and volunteers, troubleshooting capabilities, influence among the more

affluent in the community and resourcefulness (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski, 2002).

Charles R. Wood Theater Board of Directors.

Board members must help to set goals for a campaign, plan for the campaign, work as

fundraisers soliciting gifts and support others working on the campaign (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski,


2002; Steen, 1992). Board members will be expected to participate in campaign committees and help

to attain leadership gifts (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy, 2009;

Lysakowski, 2002). Asking others to donate to an organization that doesn’t receive support from its

board undermines the strength of the ask, so each board member must donate to the campaign

(Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Lysakowski,

2002). Some literature recommends that a certain percentage of the campaign goal come from

board giving or a base gift amount be set for board members (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University 2009). Board members should participate in identifying prospects for lead gifts

and volunteers, soliciting gifts and each should take a leadership position within the campaign (Dove,

2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Lysakowski, 2002).

Executive Director.

The Executive Director is the face of an institution. This person is most commonly associated

with the organization as a whole. It is up to this person to communicate the overall goals of the

Charles R. Wood Theater to the community, staff, committees and volunteers (Kirsch & Shell, 1998;

Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,

2009). This person must place the campaign goals within the broader organizational context

(Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). The

Executive Director must take on a leadership role in the capital campaign (Dove, 2001; Sargeant &

Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). He or she must be

present for every stage of the campaign from planning through follow-up. He or she must assist the

Campaign Chair in overseeing the campaign, solicit major donors, delegate responsibility among staff

and volunteers, coordinate the goals of the campaign with the image of the organization and

exemplify that image (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009). The Executive Director must be able to tell employees and volunteers what

to do in one breath, plan with key staff and board members in the next and recruit volunteers and

donors in the next (Dove, 2011). The most important responsibility the Executive Director has is to

develop personal relationships with all volunteers, staff, committee members and lead donors

(Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). These

relationships will serve to motivate individuals and build excitement around the campaign (Kirsch &

Shell, 1998; Goettler, 1998; Dove, 2001).


Chief Development Officer.

During a capital campaign the chief development officer must help to build an environment

where people feel that what they are working for is important (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). This person must give people freedom to

accomplish goals in their own way and help them to do so (Dove, 2001). The chief development

officer must lead each person toward the same goal and coordinate everyone so that they are

working together to meet not only their own goals but those of the overall campaign (Dove, 2001).

Specific responsibilities include recruiting, educating and motivating volunteers and key campaign

staff, troubleshooting day-to-day problems, researching giving opportunities, supporting those

directly asking for gifts, assisting in processing gifts, managing solicitation strategies by ensuring that

policies are being upheld, ensuring that the campaign is sticking to the timeline and plans are being

carried out (Lysakowski, 2002; Dove, 2001). The Chief Development Officer is not in charge of the

campaign and does not take a leadership or public role (Dove, 2001). Instead, this person assists

those who are in the public eye (Dove, 2001).

Campaign committees.

Committees must be formed to handle the various tasks involved with the Charles R. Wood

Theater’s capital campaign (Reckseen & Poole, 1996; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Goettler, 1998). These committees must be led by individuals

with appropriate experience and community connections to make choices that prove successful for

the overall campaign (Dove, 2001; Goettler, 1998). Committee chairs should be selected by the

Campaign Chair since they will all report back to that individual (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy

at Indiana University, 2009). Each committee chair will be responsible for recruiting other board

members and volunteers to serve on the committees (Dove, 2001). Committees should meet

regularly to discuss progress and troubleshoot (Steen, 1992; Goettler, 1998; Dove, 2001; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Advisory Committee.

This group will be responsible for guiding the pre-campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). All planning, tactical decisions related to donor solicitation


throughout the campaign, selection of key staff and volunteer positions and drafts of budgets for the

campaign will be produced and approved by this committee (Reckseen & Poole, 1996; Dove, 2001;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Who should be on this committee?.

The Advisory Committee should be composed of members from the Charles R. Wood

Theater’s governing board and development committee as well as staff, leaders from industry,

business, civic and partner organizations (Dove, 2001).

Prospects Review Committee.

Accurately identifying prospects for major gifts is a large responsibility that will become a

cornerstone of the campaigns success (Goodale, 1992). This committee is responsible for

identification, evaluation and selection of major gift prospects (Reckseen & Poole, 1996; Dove, 2001;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). They should use the gift chart as a guide and

make decisions about prospects based on confirmed and personal information about prospect’s

financial situations (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). It is essential

that all prospect identification be realistic (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,

2009; Goettler, 1998).


Members of this group should be chosen from the campaign advisory committee and the

governing board of the Charles R. Wood Theater (Dove, 2001). They should have knowledge of the

affluent population in the community as well as the interests of those individuals in the theater

(Dove, 2001; Goettler, 1998).

Advance Gifts Committee.

This committee is responsible for approaching the selected major gifts prospects during the

silent phase of the campaign (Reckseen & Poole, 1996; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009). The prospects selected by the prospects review committee should each be

approached by two of the committee members during face-to-face solicitations (Kirsch & Shell, 1998;

Reckseen & Poole, 1996; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). This


committee will also be responsible for working with the steering committee to develop donor

benefits for all lead gifts that are received during the silent phase of the campaign (Reckseen & Poole,

1996; Dove, 2001).


Members of this committee should include the Charles R. Wood Theaters Executive Director,

members of the governing board and the campaign advisory committee (Dove, 2001; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Individuals on this committee should be respected in the

community and passionate about the mission of the theater and the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on


General Gifts Committee.

During the public phase of the campaign, a committee will be needed to oversee and process

general gifts that are received by the organization (Reckseen & Poole, 1996). This committee should

work with the steering committee to help develop promotional materials for distribution and to set

and modify policies regarding general gifts (Reckseen & Poole, 1996).


Members of the board, steering committee, community volunteers and the chief

development officer should be on this committee. Individuals selected should be detail oriented and

able to multi-task.

Major Gifts Committee.

During the public phase of the campaign, major gifts should still be solicited. A committee of

volunteers should be selected to develop prospects and solicit major gifts from business and

individual donors (Reckseen & Poole, 1996). This committee should work with the steering

committee and the advance gifts committee to develop appropriate incentives for major donors

during the public phase of the campaign.



The Charles R. Wood Theaters Executive Director, members of the steering committee and the

theaters board of directors should be on this committee (Reckseen & Poole, 1996). All members

should be respected within the local affluent and business community and passionate about the

theaters mission and goals (Reckseen & Poole, 1996).

Steering Committee.

This group will be primarily responsible for overseeing the public phase of the capital

campaign (Goodale, 1992; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). The

steering committee takes over for the advisory committee and brings all the policies and guidelines

set by that committee into the public phase of the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009). The duties of this committee include reviewing plans, policies, timelines

and benchmarks to make sure the campaign is on course, creating materials for distribution,

troubleshooting any unexpected problems faced during the campaign, and coming up with solutions

or fresh ideas to use in soliciting gifts (Goodale, 1992; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009).


The steering committee should be composed of members of the theater’s executive

committee and advisory committee, the campaign chair as well as community volunteers (Dove,

2001).

Volunteers.

Volunteers will form the backbone of the Charles R. Wood Theaters capital campaign. They

will serve on committees, solicit gifts, review promotional materials, process gifts, review policies,

adhere to rules, answer questions, donate to the campaign and spread the word to other potential

donors (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski, 2002; Lysakowski, 2003; Goettler, 1998). These individuals must be

recruited, educated, motivated and rewarded (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski, 2003). It is up to the

campaign chairs, board and staff of the Charles R. Wood Theater to meet the expectations of the

campaign volunteers (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski, 2002; Lysakowski, 2003). Specific policies concerning

volunteer selection, training, and motivation must be developed by the board and staff (Dove, 2001;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Volunteers participate to become insiders at an


organization they care about (Lysakowski, 2003; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009). The Charles R. Wood Theater must develop a volunteer program for the capital

campaign that allows each volunteer to feel important, supported and appreciated.

The program should start with materials that are developed with the purpose of orienting

volunteers into the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009;

Lysakowski, 2002). The case statement, goals, policies and timeline should be communicated to the

volunteer (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Lysakowski, 2003;

Goettler, 1998). Policies should be carefully reviewed and volunteers should be appropriately

assigned to duties based on their individual strengths, skills, community connections and interests

(Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Goettler, 1998). Volunteers should

be kept informed about major highs and lows of the campaign just as committees and staff are. This

will help them to remain motivated and passionate about the campaign throughout its course

(Lysakowski, 2003; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Clear lines of

communication should be established and information about the progress of the campaign should be

easily accessible by volunteers (Dove, 2001; Lysakowski, 2002; Lysakowski, 2003; Goettler, 1998).

Regular volunteer meetings should be conducted to make sure everyone is still happy in their

positions and working cohesively (Lysakowski, 2003; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009; Goettler, 1998).

Campaign Timeline

Timelines serve to orient all the staff, board members and volunteers working on the

campaign toward the same goals (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). It also provides a managerial benefit to the

campaign chair, committee chairs and executive director who must coordinate all volunteers and staff

(Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Heetland,

1990). Having a timeline allows for built-in milestones and short term as well as long term goals that

every individual working on the campaign can easily understand and access (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland,

1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

However, it is very important that all planning and preparatory tasks are accomplished before

advancing among the phases (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). This


may mean that launch of new phases have to be delayed. Therefore, timelines are never set in stone

and may need to be modified with campaign progression (Cluff, 2009; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay,

2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

The suggested timeline for the Charles R. Wood Theaters capital campaign follows. It runs

from the present through January 2015.

Planning phase (Present through December 2011).

During this phase, committees will be formed, and this initial plan will be expanded upon to

create a more personalized and detailed plan for the campaign using the combined knowledge of the

board of directors, various committees and Charles R. Wood Theater staff (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland,

1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Printed

materials will be designed and produced in preparation for the next phase of the campaign (Lindahl,

2008). Specific plans listed below will be drafted during this phase and this timeline will be flushed

out (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009).

Budget Marketing Plan Donor Recognition Plan Prospect Identification Tactical Plan (how donors will be approached at various levels of giving) Evaluation Plan (development of benchmarks and progress evaluation measures)

Silent phase (January 2012 through March 2013).

This phase should bring in 40 – 50% of the overall campaign goal (Lindahl, 2008; Cluff, 2009; Dove,

2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Major gift prospects and foundations identified by the Prospect Review Committee and staff

will be approached for support by the Advance Gifts Committee members during this phase (Lindahl,

2008; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). The Advance

Gifts Committee will work to reach a predetermined goal using the gift chart developed during the

planning phase of the campaign as a guide (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,

2009). Specific scripts, giving levels and incentives will be used to solicit major gifts. These items


should already have been developed by the Advisory Committee, Steering Committee and Advanced

Gifts Committee during the planning phase of the campaign.

Preparations for the next phase of the campaign will be underway by the Advisory Committee

and the Campaign Chair will help with those preparations (Dove, 2001). Volunteers will be selected

and trained in anticipation of the following phase (Lindahl, 2008; Dove, 2001). Printed materials will

be designed and produced in preparation for the next phase of the campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on


Public phase (April 2013 through September 2014).

This phase should bring in 50 – 60% of the overall campaign goal (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004;

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Lindahl, 2008; Cluff, 2009; Heetland, 1990).

Volunteers under the guidance of the campaign chair and steering committee will be put to

work as the campaign is publicly launched and aggressively marketed using the plans set forth by the

advisory committee (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009). Donors will be approached in the variety of ways predefined during the planning

phase (Cluff, 2009; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009). Major gift prospects will continue to be solicited by members of the major

gifts committee (Lindahl, 2008; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on


Volunteers will be continually motivated through recognition programs (Dove, 2001; Center

on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). The steering committee and campaign chair will

regularly evaluate progress and troubleshoot to ensure that the campaign remains in line with

predetermined goals (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Final Phase (October 2014 through January 2015).

Solicitations of both individual and major donors will be concluded and all pledges will be

collected (Hartstook, 1995; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Overall campaign results will be evaluated (Hartstook,

1995; Heetland, 1990; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana


University, 2009). Key volunteers, committee members and staff will be recognized for their

contributions to the campaign (Hartstook, 1995; Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). A media release announcing the success of the campaign

will be drafted and delivered to media outlets in the community (Hartstook, 1995; Dove, 2001;

Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Policies and Procedures of the Campaign

In order to run an efficient campaign, policies and procedures for identifying, soliciting,

receiving gifts from and thanking donors must be in place (Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Center

on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Newman, 2000; Goodale, 1992). Some of these policies

should be developed by the individual committees responsible for carrying them out and others

should be developed by the advisory and steering committees (Dove, 2001). Policies and procedures

should be clearly articulated to all volunteers, staff, board and committee members involved in the

campaign (Dove, 2001; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Newman, 2000). The

campaign chair, executive director, chief development officer and committee chairs will be

responsible for seeing that all policies and procedures are strictly adhered to (Dove, 2001; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Any deviation from policy and/or procedure could easily

upset donors, discourage volunteers and tarnish the Charles R. Wood Theaters reputation and brand

(Dove, 2001; Sargeant & Jay, 2004).

Prospect rating.

The Prospects Review Committee will be responsible for developing specific policies for

identifying and ranking potential donors. Procedures should separate prospects into three different

categories; expect, prospect and suspect (Dove, 2001). Expects are those donors who have given

large gifts in the past (Dove, 2001). Prospects are regular donors to the organization who are likely to

give at a larger level (Dove, 2001). Suspects are individuals who are involved in the theater and may

have given before (Dove, 2001). These individuals should have access to wealth and are probably

large donors to other local arts organizations (Dove, 2001).

Policies should center around ranking each of the prospects in a fair and calculated way based

on verifiable evidence or personal knowledge (Dove, 2001). Prospects should not be randomly


selected based on instinct alone. Rather, specific policies developed by the Prospects Review

Committee should guide the selection. It is important that policies dictate the number of prospects

to be selected in each category and that they indicate the giving level(s) associated with prospects.

The gifts chart should be used as a guide.

Gift levels and naming opportunities.

While some donors may elect to remain anonymous, many donors, particularly from younger

generations, want to see some benefit or recognition as a result of their gift (Dove, 2001; Sergeant &

Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009; Newman, 2000; Ries & Clohesy, 2001;

Briscoe, 2001; Squires, 1998; Wagner, 2002). There are numerous ways the Charles R. Wood Theater

can create donor rewards. These include giving levels, naming opportunities, special access to the

theater or events held there, control over aspects or decisions made within the organization, or

admittance onto the board or various theater committees (Ries & Clohesy, 2001; Dove, 2001;

Sargeant & Jay, 2004; Wagner, 2002). It is up to the advisory committee to set up these different

levels and perks as well as the policies and procedures that dictate them. It is likely that for the

largest donors, special perks will need to be developed based on their interests. This makes it

incredibly important that any policies and procedures the advisory committee sets allow for flexibility

so that these biggest donors interests’ are heard. Listening will become a crucial part of all donor

recognition procedures (Ries & Clohesy, 2001; Dove, 2001; Wagner, 2002).

Major gifts solicitation.

The advisory committee in conjunction with the advance gifts committee will need to develop

specific procedures and policies for soliciting gifts from prospects. The policies and procedures will

apply to how donors are approached, the types of gifts they can give, the time period they have to

deliver on pledges, specified giving levels suggested to prospects and the in person reactions to both

favorable and unfavorable results (Dove, 2001; Sergeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at

Indiana University, 2009; Newman, 2000). Policies should also be drafted to guide which committee

members are selected to approach the major gift prospects (Dove, 2001; Goodale, 1992). These

policies will be used by the members of the Advance Gifts Committee throughout the silent phase of

the campaign and then will be upheld by the Major Gifts Committee for the remainder of the

campaign.


General gift solicitation.

The steering committee will work out policies and procedures defining how general gifts will

be solicited during the public phase of the campaign. These policies and procedures will include the

types of promotional materials used to get the word out about the campaign and the types of gifts

that will be accepted (Dove, 2001; Sergeant & Jay, 2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana

University, 2009). The policies will also govern the creation of all promotional materials and the

branding of the Wood Theater that is inherent to those materials. All duties of volunteers,

committees and staff involved in general gift solicitation will be clearly outlined by policies and

procedures to ensure the most efficient and effective campaign possible (Dove, 2001; Sergeant & Jay,

2004; Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009).

Receipt and recognition of gifts.

The steering committee will be responsible for setting all policies and procedures guiding how

gifts are collected and acknowledged. This will include defining who is responsible for collecting gifts,

drafting letters recognizing and thanking donors for gifts, developing procedures for recording gifts

and tracking how gifts are used by the organization (Dove, 2001; Sergeant & Jay, 2004; Center on

Philanthropy at Indiana University, 2009). Policies and procedures for collecting major gifts and

general gifts and adhering to all promised benefits will be carefully dictated and timed out.

Conclusion

This document is meant to serve as a starting point for the board and staff of the Charles R.

Wood Theater as the organization moves forward in its planning of a capital campaign. It provides a

general overview of the many tasks that need to be completed by the organization and timeline

within which these tasks should be completed. It is expected that as the organization begins to plan

the campaign more fully, many of the suggestions in this paper will be expanded. The greatest

messages this paper should provide to the Charles R. Wood Theater is that it will take significant

commitment from the board, staff and volunteers to make the capital campaign a success, the

campaign is a branding opportunity and though strict policies and procedures should be developed,

some flexibility should be built into the campaign to allow the voices and desires of the many

different types of donors to be heard.


References

Briscoe, M. G., Marion, B. H. (2001). Capital campaigns and the new charitable investors.

New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 32, 25-46. Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. (2009). Principles and Techniques of Fundraising.

Indianapolis, IN: The Fund Raising School.

Charles R. Wood Theater. (2011). Retrieved from: www.woodtheater.org

Cluff, A. (2009). Dispelling the myths about major donor fundraising. International Journal of

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector marketing, 14, 371-377. doi: 10.1002/nvsm.372

Dove, K. E. (2001). Conducting a successful fundraising program: A comprehensive Guide and

Resource. John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, CA.

Goetler, J. G., (2000). Anatomy of a capital campaign. Fund Raising Management, 31(4), 16-19.

Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global.

Goodale, T. (1992). How to start a campaign from scratch. Fund Raising Management, 23(7) 59-60.


Hartsook, R. F. (1995). What to do when the campaign is over. Fund Raising Management, 36(9), 32

33. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global.

Heetland, D. (1990). The six essential steps of a capital campaign. Fund Raising Management, 21(7),

32-38. Retrieved from ABI/INFROM Global.

Kirsch, R.P., Shell, M.W. (1998). Achieving leadership gifts: the investment returns of lasting

relationships. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 21, 35-50. Retrieved from

EBSCOHost.

Lindahl, W. E. (2008). Three-phase capital campaigns. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 18(3),

261-273. doi: 10.1002/nml.185.


Lysakowski, L. (2002). The importance of volunteers in a capital campaign. International Journal of

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector marketing, 7(4), 325-333. Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Lysakowski, L. (2003). What’s in it for me? New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 39, 53-64.

Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Newman, R. H. (2000). Eleven must dos for a successful endowment or capital campaign. Fund

Raising Management, 30(12), 30-32. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global.

Pierpont, R. (2003). Capital campaigns. (Reprinted from Rosso, H., Achieving Excellence in

Fundraising. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. by The Fund Raising School, 2002,

Indianapolis, IN: The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University). Retrieved from

http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/TheFundRaisingSchool/PrecourseReadings/

precourse_capitalcampaignspierpont.aspx

Reckseen, D.M., Poole, T.R. (1996). The anatomy of an endowment/capital campaign. Fund Raising

Management, 27(6), 14-18. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global.

Ries, T. K., Clohesy, S.J. (2001). Unleashing new resources and entrepreneurship for the common

good: a philanthropic renaissance. New Directions for Philanthropic Fundraising, 32, 109-143.

Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Sargeant, A., & Jay, E. (2004). Fundraising Management: Analysis, Planning and Practice. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Steen, J.W. (1992). Fourteen fallacies of capital campaigns. Fund Raising Management, 23(7), 20-22.


Squires, C. (1998). Speaking of capital campaigns. Fund Raising Management, 29(1), 32-33. Retrieved

from ABI/INFORM Global.

Wagner, L. (2002). The ‘new’ donor: creation or evolution. International Journal of Nonprofit and

Voluntary Sector marketing, 7(4), 343-352. Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

charles r. wood theater capital campaign plan

Documents