FM Blog

Welcome to our Fundraising Management Blog! Be sure to visit us often for the latest information on fundraising news, trends, and best practices.

Friday Update: Giving day tips

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

The Friday Fundraising Update collects fundraising industry insights and success stories and delivers them to you each Friday from Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

This week’s articles cover giving day tips and trends:

From around the web:

  -
-
-

Spotlight: ScaleFunder Giving Day Success

Ready for a great Giving Day? See the platform institutions like these have used to power their success:

Continue Reading »

March (Alumni Giving) Madness – Final Results

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

We have the winners of the 2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness tournament!

This tournament is our fun way to determine the top alumni giving institutions for higher education fundraising. We took the institutions in the Men’s and Women’s NCAA Basketball Tournaments, analyzed their alumni giving statistics, and determined the two top institutions for alumni giving.

2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness final bracket

2017 top alumni giving institutions

Click to expand

You can read about the methodology we’re using to answer the question this year in our first post.  You can also check the early round action as we got down to the final eight teams:

And the winners are…

Men’s Bracket: Northwestern University. Knocking out competitors with a combination of strong donor growth and very generous alumni, NU was a powerhouse in this year’s tournament. Our refs also rated Northwestern’s giving portals very highly. You can check out some of the best student campaigns in the nation at Catalyzer, NU’s crowdfunding portal: catalyzer.northwestern.edu.

Women’s Bracket: University of Pennsylvania. With one of the highest alumni participation stats in the tournament, Penn boosted wins with great donor growth and incredibly high giving per living alumnus. Donor growth and consistency in young alumni giving have been real strengths at Penn. A quick review of their alumni web portal shows that Penn is offering an incredible array of engaging opportunities for alumni to stay involved and give easily, and it showed in this year’s tournament.

All this year’s tournament participants are winners. As we approached the final bracket stages we were just amazed at some of the accomplishments of these institutions in alumni engagement and donor growth. All participants in this year’s tournaments should be congratulated. The generosity of their alumni is simply mind-blowing, with over $50 million given by alumni to these institutions in 2016.

Get the E-Book

Check out all the results, with expanded commentary on the stats, in our March (Alumni Giving) Madness e-book. Download your copy here.

2017 (Alumni Giving) Madness commentary:

Alumni participation continues to decline: In most of this year’s match ups, it was more about who had declined the least. We’re on a 20-year downhill spiral for the percent of living alumni who give. While we know that part of the issue is the sheer increase in the number of alumni institutions are trying to engage (increasing the denominator in the alumni participation equation), 68% of institutions saw reduced alumni donor counts during the recession. Colleges and universities that bucked this trend were the top alumni giving institutions, with some schools with great alumni engagement programs posting recent gains.

Higher education fundraising doesn’t run on averages: With less than 1 percent of institutions raising about 28 percent of the funds in higher education, the stats are skewed toward the top. There were real blowouts, especially in early rounds. However, there are a number of institutions with modest endowments and resources that have had success with alumni giving in the past few years, and I know from working with some of them that they’ve accomplished this with careful strategy and use of their budgets.

Many institutions need a training camp for online giving. We saw a wide range of online giving presence at institutions. It was not uncommon for it to be hard to find the giving portal from the main university web page. Crowdfunding continues to grow, but is often hard to find in connection to the giving portal. Social media engagement was minimal at best, a real problem and lost opportunity. We encourage everyone to think about how easy and fun it is to give online—because that’s where your donors will be giving as we move forward.

Potential tournament changes for next year: As you’ll hear in our podcast covering the results,our tournament is weighted about 70 percent toward donor count and alumni participation. From our recent conversations with advancement leaders, we’re hearing that dollars are dominating as a concern at most institutions. We’ll be looking at this over the course of the next year, and our methodology may evolve for next year’s tournament as we determine the top alumni giving institutions.

Listen to the podcast

I break down the results with RNL Vice President Josh Robertson, one of this year’s referees, on the latest episode of podcast Fundraising Voices, available on iTunes and Stitcher.

 

Can we compare our results even if our institution wasn’t in the NCAA Tournament?

2017 March Alumni Giving Madness tournament top alumni giving institutionsYou can find out how your alumni giving compares to your peers by requesting a Donor Comparison Report. Using data from the VSE survey, this report allows you to benchmark your alumni giving statistics and identify alumni giving trends. Request your free report here.

2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness – The Final Eight

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

UPDATE: The winners have been announced, click here to see who won

People are talking after our first two rounds of the 2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness tournament. This week, we’ll get down to eight teams—four from the men’s bracket and four from the women’s.

In case you didn’t know, this alumni giving tournament is our fun way to look at higher education fundraising and dive into the data of alumni giving statistics. It started last year when one member of our team asked the question:

What if the NCAA brackets were decided based on alumni giving statistics?

You can read about the methodology we’re using to answer the question this year in our first post. The data comes from public sources, the Voluntary Support of Education Survey and the U.S. News and World Report college ranking data.

Here is an updated bracket with the results of rounds 3 and 4, which take us to the final eight institutions. UPDATE: Final winners are announced!

Check out the final results here.

2017 alumni giving statistics tournament

Click to expand

Round 3 and 4 insights:

Trends from the first two rounds continued, but a few insights this round:

  • The battles were intense: As you would expect as you do anything with progressively narrowing alumni giving statistics, the scores are very close. There were wins of within .0025 points (out of a max 64), representing the best buzzer-beater final scores you’d see in basketball.
  • The final shot can make a difference: We saw a very wide range of giving portals and online giving presence from this year’s tournament institutions. While our refs rating of online giving presence (the only subjective score in this year’s tournament) was worth only 10%, it made a difference for a number of wins.

The Referees speak: online giving portal ratings

Our referee team is made up of online giving experts, marketing experts, and fundraising geeks at RNL. Below are a few things the refs said with their ratings.

“The giving site was not mobile responsive, and it was hard to even find the giving page from the University web site. They’re also asking for too much information. I am sure this means many people don’t complete a gift.” (below average score)

“A great, responsive design on this giving portal with an easy search function. They could have pre-populated some fields, but overall, very strong.” (above average score)

“It wasn’t really clear where I needed to click to give. Their giving page is a really rough and it took at least 3 clicks to give. Not very mobile friendly. They do have a crowdfunding site but you can’t find it with google search and they don’t link to it from giving pages.” (below average score)

“It only took 2 clicks to give and the site was mobile-enabled. Lots of giving options with a great site design. They have crowdfunding but the only link from the giving page was tiny bottom left corner of page.” (above average score)

“What a stellar website. I can easily make a donation of my choice from one landing page. I loved that that they are offering a match for every dollar you donate to the scholarship fund.”  (perfect score)

“The alumni option is a whole screen down, and the major call to action is to get a membership to the alumni society. The option to make a gift gets lost on the alumni page. Couldn’t find it at all on mobile.” (below average score)

“The web site was just overwhelming and difficult to navigate” (below average score)

“Scrolling donor wall, social media sharing, a crowdfunding platform—all really great. But still, over 6 clicks just to get to a donation page!” (average score)

“Clicking on ‘Give’ from the University home page took me to a mobile-optimized page where I was immediately prompted to enter my information and gift purpose. It’s surprising how many places don’t take you immediately to this page. Why make donors hunt?” (above average score)

 

My school isn’t in the NCAA baseketball tournament—can I still participate?

2017 March Alumni Giving Madness tournamentYou can find out how your alumni giving compares to your peers by requesting a Donor Comparison Report. Using data from the VSE survey, this report allows you to benchmark your alumni giving statistics and identify alumni giving trends. Request your free report here.

2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness – The Sweet (Alumni) 16

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

UPDATE: The final winners have been chosen—see which institutions won

We’ve had a great response to our first round of the 2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness tournament. It’s time for Round 2, which names the top 16 of our alumni giving tournament winners.

This alumni giving tournament is our fun way to look at higher education fundraising and dive into the stats. It started last year when one member of our team asked the question:

What if the NCAA brackets were decided based on alumni giving statistics?

You can read about the methodology we’re using to answer the question this year in our first post. The data comes from public sources, the Voluntary Support of Education Survey and the U.S. News and World Report college ranking data.

After narrowing to a field of 32 in our last round, there ware some great match ups for this round. Here are the round 2 results: (UPDATE: Final Winners Released!)

Click to expand

Second round insights:

I saw some similar things with the wins I commented on for the first round, but a few insights this round, focusing on alumni giving dollars:

  • Big gifts made a difference. While a significant portion of our methodology is on donor participation, several institutions just blew opponents out of the water with generous alumni major gifts or recently realized planned gifts. This “strong bench” factor, the total alumni giving over the past three years divided by the alumni of record, was weighted at 20 percent of the game. But there are extreme differences on the stat across higher education.This year’s teams ranged from $6 per living alumnus to $2,230 per alumnus annually. I’d call that a bit of a range. There was one match up where this stat was within $1, but that was a rarity.
  • Big giving is concentrated. Fewer than 1 percent of institutions raise 28 percent of higher education contributions, and that showed in this year’s alumni giving tournament. We covered this phenomenon in a webinar with Ann Kaplan, VSE director, a few weeks back.
  • Recent alumni wins swayed the results: For a few institutions, a relatively recent campaign or a few very large alumni gifts boosted this giving stat. One institution had a year that was 6x their average year, making a big difference in their overall score.

When we talked to hundreds of giving professionals last year, boosting major and planned giving was a top concern. Every institution wants the right strategy in place to help gift officers quickly identify, qualify and engage the most likely big donors.

As a coach, you wouldn’t go into a recruiting season without a plan. You also wouldn’t just do the same thing every year without making adjustments based on the prospect pool. Unfortunately, a lot of programs are just flying blind on major gift identification strategy. We’re in the midst of a historic wealth transfer, and the time is now to engage your biggest givers. Or another team (charity) is going to recruit them.

How do you win with major and planed giving productivity?

Does your team have what you need for a major and planned giving program with high productivity? You can’t engage big donors at scale without the right tools. Request our free calculator to see how you could improve your program immediately.

Stay tuned, next week we’ll release the results of round 3 which will take us to the Elite (Alumni) 8 of this year’s alumni giving winners.

2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness – Round 1 Results

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

UPDATE: See who won the 2017 Alumni Giving tournament

While many of you were watching the start of the NCAA basketball tournament, I was deep in fundraising statistics computing our March (Alumni Giving) Madness competition. This alumni giving tournament is a fun way to look at fundraising trends. It started last year when one member of our team asked the question:

What if the NCAA brackets were decided based on alumni giving statistics?

You can read about the methodology we’re using to answer the question this year in our first post. This alumni giving tournament looks at alumni participation, two different looks at alumni donor counts, total giving per alumnus and the institution’s online giving portals. The data comes from the Voluntary Support of Education Survey and the U.S. News and World Report college ranking data. There is also a small random factor to keep it interesting. (UPDATE: Final Results Released!)

Click to expand

First round insights

  • There were some VERY close games. Our simulator assigned a score of up to 64 points to each institution, and one first round Men’s bracket match up was within 25 thousandths (.025) of a point. One Women’s bracket matchup was within .03 of a point.
  • Some great teams have missed shots with online giving vs. peers since our last tournament. One major player fared pretty poorly vs. opponents after being a star in our 2016 tournament. They declined significantly in ease of online giving and their overall online donor portal. Because they were very close in score to their opponents, it cost them a win. Mobile optimization is absolutely crucial given that a majority of online donors will now be using a device to make a gift. Your online giving portal is a solicitation. Think critically about how easy and how engaging it is for donors to complete a gift.

How do you score with digital engagement?

One of the most important ways you can grow your donor base is through optimized online giving experiences. Soon, over half our alumni databases will be Millennials, who have grown up interacting online and in social-media rich environments.

If you’d like to see how you can improve your digital engagement, ask us for a Digital Engagement scorecard. Click here to request your free scorecard and one of our Fundraising Strategists will contact you.

And stay tuned, next week we’ll release the results of round 2 which will take us to the “Sweet 16” of this year’s alumni giving winners.

2017 March (Alumni Giving) Madness

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me
March Madness is here, and we’re excited to kick off the second March (Alumni Giving) Madness bracket—the tournament where teams fight for the championship title based on their annual giving performance! As we wait for the final results: you might have a few questions.

How does it work?

Using the 2017 Men’s and Women’s NCAA brackets, we’ll apply a six-part methodology to determine the winner in each match up:
  • (25%) Overall team strength: the 2016 alumni participation figure reported to the VSE Survey.
  • (20%) Upward momentum going into the tournament: the increase or decline in alumni donor count from 2015 to 2016.
  • (20%) Recruiting strength and past tournament performance: The total increase or decline in alumni donors between 2007 and 2016.
  • (20%) A strong bench of dedicated team members: The total alumni giving in dollars divided by the alumni of record over the last three fiscal years (2014-16).
  • (10%) Getting a shot (gift) off: Our team of expert referees weigh in on a comparison between the two institutions’ online giving presence, including ease of online giving, giving day portal (if any), and crowdfunding. They grade how easy it was for an alumnus to “get a shot off” and make a gift.
  • (5%) Pure luck: Our simulator assigns a small portion of each team’s score to a random factor.
Statistics are publicly available data, and the 2016 VSE Survey will be primarily utilized along with annual donor reports from school websites and alumni participation numbers submitted for the U.S. News & World Report rankings. These numbers and ratings go into our simulator, and a winner is determined for each match up.

Where can I find the results?

All bracket updates will be posted here on our blog, with this tentative schedule:

My school isn’t in the NCAA baseketball tournament—can I still participate?

2017 March Alumni Giving Madness tournamentYou can find out how your alumni giving compares to your peers by requesting a Donor Comparison Report. Using data from the VSE survey, this report allows you to benchmark your fundraising results and identify alumni giving trends. Request your free report here.

What happened in the last March (Alumni Giving) Madness tournament?

Check out the results of last year’s tournament here.

Hear the Podcast

Friday Update: The best fundraising boss

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

The Friday Fundraising Update collects fundraising industry insights and success stories and delivers them to you each Friday from Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

This week’s articles feature advice on how to be the best fundraising boss, and how to work with your leader more effectively.

From around the web:

Continue Reading »

Friday Update: Opportunities and fundraising myths

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

The Friday Fundraising Update collects fundraising industry insights and success stories and delivers them to you each Friday from Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

This week we have some links to posts by a few provocative contributors who ask questions about our assumptions and challenge us to take advantage of fundraising opportunities before it’s too late.

From around the web:

Continue Reading »

Maximize your phonathon ROI with cell append research

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

Your phonathon campaign is at risk of not reaching your potential donors. Increasingly, donors have cut the cord on their land lines and only use mobile phones, so many of the numbers in your database may be bad. The good news is that RNL has a cost-effective way to seek quality cell phone numbers for your donors and prospects.

RNL Cell Phone Append Research allows you to:

  • Grow your phone solicitations and raise more money by calling people for whom you don’t currently have a phone number associated.
  • Have a second number available for people whose number is confirmed to be disconnected or wrong.

Try our free RNL Cell Phone Append ROI Calculator to estimate the additional pledge dollars you will raise this year with an investment in cell phone append research. We’ve populated the calculator with our average statistics from hundreds of thousands of numbers researched during 2015-2016..

Contact RNL to learn how we can help you reach your donors and increase phonathon ROI.

“Over the past two fiscal years, [Ruffalo Noel Levitz] cell append research has allowed us to reengage with 22,695 alumni resulting in over $363,690 from 4,637 pledges. Cell append is now a key component of our annual giving strategy!”

Elizabeth Ullian
Senior Associate Director of the Florida Fund
University of Florida

Friday Update: Fundraising sages share advice

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

The Friday Fundraising Update collects fundraising industry insights and success stories and delivers them to you each Friday from Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

This week we have some links to posts by a few of the best fundraising sages out there on how to build relationships, retain donors, and consider volunteer opportunities.

From around the web:

      -
What is the Special Ingredient that Leads to #Fundraising Success?
Michael Rosen Says… (Feb 24 2017)

Do you know the special ingredient for creating fundraising success? You’ll notice I didn’t say “secret ingredient.” That’s because it’s not a secret. It’s actually common sense….

-
The 5 Immutable Laws of Great Non-Profit Fundraising
thefundraisingauthority.com (Feb 23 2017)

Much of fundraising is an art, not a science. Knowing when a prospect is ripe for an ask, or how to craft a case for support that really tugs on the heartstrings, takes experience and practice. There are, however, several immutable, undeniable laws of great fundraising that are so very essential to the process that they can’t be overstated…

-
5 Steps to Build Steadfast Donor Loyalty & Retention in 2017
Gail Perry (Feb 23 2017)

We’re having some fun with donor retention today. We do know that donor retention = donor loyalty, right? So donor retention is the name of the game for 2017 and beyond. And your ultimate goal as a fundraiser is to build up a cadre of high value, high commitment donors, right? To help you, here are 5 simple, doable, practical, and wildly important tips that can help you increase YOUR donor loyalty…

-
So, You Are Thinking of Becoming a Volunteer? Here Are Some Things to Consider
NonProfit PRO (Feb 24 2017)

Duke offers some great advice as you consider becoming a volunteer and as we work with volunteers…

Spotlight: Consult our fundraising sages

Recent posts

Friday Update: Fundraising infographics

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

The Friday Fundraising Update collects fundraising industry insights and success stories and delivers them to you each Friday from Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

This week we have some links to fundraising infographics and reports with great visual representation of fundraising trends and tactics.

From around the web:

-
AFP Fundraising Effectiveness Project Reports
Fundraising Effectiveness Project

The groundbreaking annual Fundraising Effectiveness Survey, piloted in November 2006, offers great statistics you can use to benchmark your program. Check out the 2016 report for the latest trends.

-
How Nonprofit Communicators Spend Their Time (Infographic) #NPCOMM2017
Nonprofit Marketing Guide

Do you wonder if other nonprofit communicators are spending as much time on certain tasks as you? Check out the results from the 2017 Nonprofit Communications Trends Report and see for yourself.

-
Measuring Gift Impact
Annual Giving Network

Today’s donors seem to care less about hearing stories that describe why other donors give or seeing their own name listed on a roster. Instead, they want to know what, in measurable terms, their past support has helped to achieve.

-
The most important words of your email?
FundraisingCoach.com

Is your inbox filled with holiday sales, year end reminders, and charity appeals? It can be challenging to make your own nonprofit’s emails standout!

Spotlight: Major and planned giving productivity

You can’t book big gifts if your team isn’t productive. We’ve heard from hundreds of major and planned giving professionals over the past year about key hurdles to reaching the best and most ready donors.

Fundraising infographics: what major and planned giving officers told us

RNL consultants recently sounded off on our plan to help institutions double their results, and you can check out these features on major giving team productivity:

Recent posts

$41 Billion in higher education giving recorded by VSE survey for 2016

Follow Me

Brian Gawor

Vice President for Research at Ruffalo Noel Levitz
Brian Gawor, CFRE, is a former annual fund and major gift professional who now focuses on research and benchmarking to drive fundraising strategy. He is also a doctoral student studying higher education giving.
Follow Me

I’m a big fan of the Voluntary Support of Education (VSE) survey. For 50 years, it’s been the survey of record for higher education giving, both from individuals and grant makers. We just received the 2016 results from the Council for Aid to Education.

Here are a few highlights from this year’s VSE results and what I think they mean for us as fundraisers:

  • Donors once again set a record for higher education support at $41 billion. But since this is only a bit higher than the $40.3 billion raised in 2015, the increase is almost completely erased when you consider inflation.
  • One of the big factors here is a soft 2016 stock market, and the fact that we’re coming off successive years of big increases as well as some big art and property gifts that blew up the totals. The election and delays by donors as they watched what would happen could have also contributed. With the stock surges we’ve seen early this year, we could see some big movement in 2017 results. Two big contributors—tax policy and our fundraising strategies, will matter.
  • Less than 1% of institutions continue to raise more than 27% of the funds. This “Matthew Effect” is a continuing trend in higher education giving. That doesn’t mean that the other 99% of schools aren’t raising money, we just see mega-giving really concentrated in this elite group.
  • Individual giving, at first glance, seems down. But there has been a massive increase in the impact of family foundations and donor-advised funds that we’ve all been hearing about. These really are gifts driven by individuals. When we look at institutions that itemized these sources, we find that personal giving would actually be up substantially for yet another year. Be sure that you are correctly accounting these gifts and tying stewardship to the individuals who drove them.

Higher education giving by source, 2016

  • Alumni participation is down once again. This is definitely impacted by larger donor rolls and our ability to stay in touch with alumni, but donor counts are also down at many institutions.
  • Giving to current operations has really pulled away from capital support over the past 20 years. This is good news for fundraisers looking to address current needs.

Higher education giving as a percentage of total support

  • The survey data show a real diversification of donor sources at top institutions. Parents and non-alumni friends of institutions are an increasing part of higher education giving.

It’s important to recognize that the VSE survey primarily tracks actual receipts by institutions, not overall commitments. We’re in the middle of a giant wealth transfer right now, and many institutions are also booking significant legacy commitments which are not covered in this survey and will be shown decades from now as those gifts come to bear.

With the VSE’s annual publication (and even better, a VSE Data Miner account), you can benchmark your institution and see how you compare to peers. I’ve also found that the standardized data collected by the VSE can be a great way to look at your own institution’s trends. Giving staff rosters and database systems change, but the VSE’s reporting definitions remain steady—so if someone at your institution is consistently reporting your results, the data they store on your institution can be very helpful to track trends.

Read the full VSE press release at the Council for Aid to Education.

Join us for a webinar on higher education giving

We’ll be going in depth with Ann Kaplan, director of the VSE survey and data miner, in our webinar on March 1 at 2:00 ET. Join us as we explore the results and what they mean for your fundraising strategy. Ann will also take your questions. We’ll see you there.

Webinar on higher education giving

 

Follow us