Study says increased private giving can boost excellence at Rutgers
Archived article from Dec 12, 2005
By Ashanti M. Alvarez
With a broad institutional vision and secure resources devoted to development, Rutgers University has the potential to boost its fund-raising efforts significantly while looking toward the next major capital campaign, according to a study by a philanthropy consulting firm.
President Richard L. McCormick and the Rutgers University Foundation requested the study in January 2005 to determine how Rutgers should reach its full philanthropic potential following the success of the Rutgers Campaign. That six-year campaign raised more than $600 million.
The study and its findings mark the importance of private giving to Rutgers and other public research universities in a time of reduced funding from state governments and higher education budget cuts at the federal level. Gifts from individuals, corporations and foundations routinely go toward academic programming, facilities and equipment, faculty support and student financial aid.
Marts & Lundy, a Lyndhurst-based philanthropy and nonprofit consulting firm, began working with Rutgers in 2004, when the Foundation requested a benchmarking study comparing Rutgers’ fund-raising efforts with those of other major public research universities, including Michigan State, Texas A&M, and the universities of Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Texas and Washington.
That study determined that while Rutgers has a wide donor base and high level of retention and donor loyalty, the university had not invested in development to the level of its peer institutions and was not receiving the same level of out-of-state contributions from alumni and nonalumni as those other schools. The benchmark institutions also had “significantly larger” fund-raising operations than Rutgers and several had received multiyear commitments in excess of $100 million.
“The Marts & Lundy study is an excellent assessment of our current situation,” says Carol Herring, president of the Rutgers University Foundation and vice president of development and alumni relations. “But to reach the levels of giving that some of our peer institutions have attained, we need to look at our operation strategically and make necessary adjustments before setting our next goals.”
Following the benchmarking study, the consulting firm set out to analyze the fund-raising apparatus across Rutgers, including development staff and organization, and volunteer networks. Beginning in February 2005, the consultants visited all three Rutgers campuses several times to conduct interviews and analyze planning documents and other materials. They met with academic and nonacademic leaders, development and alumni association staff, volunteer leaders, major donors and foundation volunteers.
Among the study’s recommendations:
• the foundation president should maintain regular communication with academic leadership by attending meetings of the dean’s council and by calling on individual deans on a regular basis
• the university should consider establishing a Faculty Advancement Council to advocate for development, assist in campaign and fund-raising events, and represent the foundation to the larger academic community
• the foundation should build up some of its centralized services to provide more effective support to the institution
• President McCormick should appoint a campaign task force chaired by the executive vice president for academic affairs.
For Rutgers to surpass previous campaign records, it must devote more funds and resources to the foundation, the study found, specifically making significant investments in major gifts staff. Donations of $100,000 and above are deemed major gifts. Rutgers can rely on a stable of loyal donors who contribute money on a regular basis, the study says.
“Rutgers is in an excellent position to build its major gifts program because of the high level of donor retention,” the study says. “Donor retention at Rutgers is among the highest at public universities.”
The study cited a “disconnect” between fund-raising targets and academic programs, particularly on the New Brunswick/ Piscataway campus. The organizing of development initiatives around units and programs is confusing to donors and hinders the university’s ability to maximize support.
continued...
Page 1 of 2
Next >
Return to the Dec 12, 2005 issue
|
