A thematic analysis of fundraiser characteristics in high-quality major donor fundraising relationships in US higher education

As nonprofits increasingly rely on large contributions, skillful major gift fundraisers are more important than ever. In contrast to the vast research on donor motivations, there are few examinations of fundraisers or fundraising relationships. This study responds to nonprofits' interest in understanding beneficial fundraising strategies and to the lack of empirical literature with the question: From the donor perspective, what characteristics do fundraisers demonstrate within high-quality major giving relationships? This exploratory, interview-based project used a codebook thematic analysis approach based on HEXACO personality theory to review participants' reflections about fundraisers. The 20 participating donors had given between USD$10,000 and USD$40 million to select colleges and universities in the US Midwest region. This study confirms much of what fundraisers believe to be important to major gift donors, with added nuance about the complex form of professionalism donors appreciate. The fundraiser characteristics show several dual emphases, including on field expertise and interpersonal acumen, attention to donor concerns and institutional interests, patience with the gift-making process and ability to facilitate its progression, and attention to ethical practice and empathetic interactions. The study shows the inner workings of the major giving relationship fundraising paradigm, reveals how societal perceptions of fundraisers are relevant for understanding donor preferences, and provides a framework for fundraisers to assess and enhance their interactions with major donors.     

On the marginal cost of public funds: the implications of charitable giving and warm glow

This paper highlights the important impact of charitable giving and warm glow on the identification of the marginal cost of public funds (MCF). We employ the warm glow model of charitable giving to describe taxpayer behaviour, whereas we employ the standard model to evaluate social welfare. We first identify the impact theoretically. Then we conduct simulations to quantify its size numerically. The results of our numerical simulations show that the standard model underestimates the magnitude of MCF by at least 10 per cent. Our work suggests that adopting a non-welfarist social welfare function can make a significant difference to the identification of MCF.