1. Summer Seminar 2012
Development 2012: Myths, Realities, and
Best Practices
Application of Development “Best Practices” Model

2. National Statistics
 1,205 Catholic high schools in the country.
 Average Catholic High School Enrollment:
 2009-10: 607 (fairly steady in the decade)
 2010-11: 535 (down 12%)
 Tuition and Costs:
 Mean tuition: $8,800 Per Pupil Cost: $10,800
(27% incr. since ‘07) (24% incr. since ‘07)
 Mean “Gap”:
 $2,000 per student (increase of 11% since ‘07)

3. National Statistics
Enrollment/Size:
<50: 3%
50-149: 21%
150-299: 40%
300-499: 21%
500-749: 10%
750+: 5%

4. National Statistics
 42% of schools were conducting capital campaigns.
 Average endow: $3.7 mil. – half reported < $1.3 mil. in
endowment.
 Average % of students requiring financial aid = 40% and rising.
 Average tuition increase = 4%.
 55% have President/Principal operating model.
 Average enrollment 535.

5. Conclusions
 Enrollment trend is down
 Demographics
 Competition
 Cost
 “Gap” is widening
 Upward pressure on costs
 Downward pressure on tuition
 Results?
 Increased pressure on recruiting/admissions
 Increased pressure on advancement

6. Trends
Scope, sophistication and expectation of
development has increased dramatically.
Less emphasis on ‘periodic capital campaigns’.
More emphasis on perpetual funding initiative –
fund the strategic plan.
The need is to increase all annual funding form
all components – AG, MG,PG.

7. Advancement Trends
Comprehensive funding initiatives – some schools aren’t calling
it a ‘capital campaign’.
Emerging from the institutional strategic plan.
Emphasis on perpetual funding initiative – fund the strategic
plan.
Transition from ‘periodic capital campaign’ and periodic
focus on major gifts to:
‘Maximize philanthropic potential on a yearly basis’ from
each fundamental source: AG, MG, PG.

8. Where Investments Come From
 84% of all financial donations (nation wide) come from individuals (5%
from corps., 11% foundations).
 In a capital campaign/major gift initiative, 70% of the goal will come from
the top 10-20 commitments (or top 8-10% of the giving
pyramid).
 In education, alumni and parents are the primary prospects.
 Foundations are secondary prospects; corporations are seldom
prospects.

9. Fundraising & Advancement
Fundraising:
–Is ‘mass communication’ oriented.
–Makes few distinctions, considers all constituents equally.
–Same approach to all.
–Is activity oriented – events, premiums (raffle tickets, bake sales, etc.)
–Has a low marginal cost effectiveness rate.
–Is an effective method of raising some money.
Advancement:
–Is personal and relationship oriented.
–Distinguishes higher potential.
–Is strategic in nature: mission-centered.
–Requires a customized approach to all.
–Is more results oriented.
–Is the most cost effective method; will raise exponentially more money.

10. Our Model Maximize
R
Philanthropic
VE
RE
FO
RO
W Potential
OR
M
TO
Y
DA
TO
RELATIONSHIPS AND PARTICIPATION

11. Catholic H.S. Advancement –
‘Best Practices’
 Annual Fund:
 supports the operating budget, funds the “gap”
 focuses on current & past parents, alumni
 national averages: 14% alumni support, 27% parent support
 average amount raised $400,000
 Major Gifts:
 Supports institutional capital priorities (facilities, endowment, programs,
technology)
 Focuses on top of the pyramid prospects - those that have the wealth and the
interest in making philanthropic investments in the school’s mission
 <5% of the constituency base has major gift potential

12. Catholic H.S Advancement –
‘Best Practices’
 Planned Gifts:
 legacy commitments – wills, insurance policies, etc.
 usually earmarked for endowment
 focus on the securing the future of the institution
 ‘Strategic’ Events:
 typically two per year – one in the fall, one in the spring
 traditionally include an auction and one other ‘major’ event
 focus primarily on current parents, secondarily on alumni and past parents
 usually earmarked for financial aid, current operations, or current special project

13. Institutional Leadership
“A herd of deer led by a lion will defeat a herd of lions led by a
deer.”
Must GET IT!!
Shared vision of the future – Consensus and PRIORITY of FUNDING
COMPONENTS
Committed President/Principal
Committed Director of Development
Real Leadership/Board Commitment To Advancement
Allocation of Financial Resources – spend $ to make $
Realistic Expectations
Total Commitment to the plan and to success – don’t give up!!

14. Guiding Principle #1:
Reality

15. Guiding Principle #2
Step by Step
A successful advancement initiative is the result of a series
of steps taken one at a time, in the proper sequence,
according to a plan and timeline.
At any particular time, leaders should be concerned with
only one step.
If that step is not executed properly, the next will be
more difficult.
 If that step is executed properly, the next will be easier
and more effective.

16. Guiding Principle #3
Implementation, Not Ideas, is
the Key to Success
 Changes that are structural and transformational are
the keys to ensuring high quality outcomes.
 Substantial increases rather than incremental (‘fundraising’) and
‘muddling through’
 Achieve key strategic objectives (‘advancement’)
 Implementation: After all the strategizing and meeting,
someone has to go out and do it! That’s YOU!!

17. Catholic H.S. Advancement –
‘Best Practices’
 Purpose:
 What is the singular objective of the Development operation?
 Focus:
 Laser-like focus on the ‘right’ things!
 Implementation:
 Execution, getting it done!!
Don’t let this year go by without doing this!