View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
ANN E. KAPLANDIRECTOR
VSE SURVEY & DATA MINER
CAE, CASE, and the VSE Survey
Founded in 1952 as the Council for Financial Aid to Education (CFAE)
Took over the VSE Survey from the American Alumni Council in 1957
Founded in 1974 when the American Alumni Council merged with the American College Public Relations Association
Is a sponsor of the VSE survey
Classifying Institutions
Institution Classification
First study included 10 types of
institutions sorted by the American
Alumni Association
The 1957 study used government data
to create 8 categories, including
categories we no longer use, such as
Private Men’s and Private Women’s
Colleges.
Institution Classification
In 1973, the Carnegie Classification was
first published.
It is derived from empirical data on
colleges and universities.
It has been updated in 1976, 1987,
1994, 2000, 2005, and 2010 to reflect
changes among colleges and
universities.
Level 4-year or above
Control Public
Student Population 50,995
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
Why does the Carnegie
Classification matter?
Alumni Giving to
Liberal Arts Colleges
is high.
Nonalumni
Individuals Giving to
Specialized Arts
Colleges is high.
Reporting Standards
In 1981, CASE and NACUBO published a booklet of standards for counting gifts.
CASE eventually led the effort to combine standards for various surveys into one unified set of standards. The 4th Edition was published in 2009.
CAE has served on the recent committees that modify these original standards. Also serving on the committees are advancement staff at colleges and precollegiate institutions, fundraising counsel, and other researchers.
Why Reporting Standards?
Comparability among institutions.
Perception of need.
Increased transparency, particularly regarding gifts received and gifts promised or deferred.
Separating gift valuation and donor recognition.
Distinguishing between useful support and charitable giving.
Why use IRS standards for deferred
gifts?
The IRS establishes a uniform
financial effect on donors.
The effect on each institution is
highly variable.
The Donor
The Institution
Why can’t software be counted?
IRS Publication 526:
Right to use property. A contribution of the
right to use property is a contribution of less
than your entire interest in that property and
is not deductible.
Voluntary Support of Education
Vital Statistics
Enrollment: Snapshot of opening
enrollment in fall of reporting year.
FTE Enrollment: Snapshot of opening
enrollment in fall of reporting year.
Endowment: Value at last day of
fiscal year.
Expenditures: Combined
expenditures of foundation and
college.
Sources of Gifts
FoundationsAlumniCorporationsNonalumni IndividualsOther OrganizationsFundraising Consortia
Purposes of Gifts
Current Operations (Restricted)Endowment (Income Restricted)Property, Buildings, EquipmentCurrent Operations (Unrestricted)Endowment (Income Unrestricted)Deferred Gifts and Loan Funds
• Charitable Gift Annuities
• Charitable Remainder Trusts
• Pooled Income Funds
These Are Not Deferred Gifts
Bequests. Bequests are outright gifts received in the year you report them.
Bequest Intentions. These are pledges.
Gifts of Life Insurance. Counted as outright gifts at the cash-surrender value. Future premium payments made by donors are also outright gifts. You must be the owner and beneficiary to count these at all.
IRAs. These are outright gifts.
Alumni ofRecord
AlumniSolicited
Alumni Donors
Alumni Giving Statistics
• Number
• Dollar Amount
Three Largest Gifts, 2012
Public
Master’s
Public
Research/Doctoral
Optional Questions
Pledges
Pledges: Pledges made THIS fiscal year
and not paid yet.
Do not include entire pledge balance.
Do not include pledges with
contingencies, such as matching-gift
pledges.
Optional Questions
Testamentary Commitments
These are bequest intentions that have
been formally documented in a will or
trust instrument.
Do not include bequest intentions unless
there is a specific monetary amount.
(i.e.: Do not include percentages of
estates or contingencies.)
Optional Questions
Other Individual Participation
You have the option of counting the number of record, number solicited, and number of donors for these constituents:
Parents (who are not alumni)
Faculty and Staff (who are not alumni or parents)
Students (who are not alumni, parents, faculty, or staff)
All Others/Friends (who were not included elsewhere.)
Optional Questions
Governing Board Giving
These are individuals you counted
above, who serve on your foundation’s
board or other board that is expected to
make annual contributions.
Separate hard credit from soft credit,
and include both.
Optional Questions
Property
Number of Gifts and Dollar Value of Gifts
Securities
Real Estate (Do not count conservation
easements.)
Other Property (Art, etc.)
Optional Questions
Indirect Giving
Donor-Advised Funds
Personal Businesses
Family Foundations
Optional Questions
Forms of Corporate Giving Cash and Securities (exclusive of matching
gifts)
Company Products (e.g.: A pharmaceutical company donates pharmaceuticals.)
Other Company Property (e.g.: A pharmaceutical company donates office furniture.)
Matching Gifts (corporate match only) There is a separate question about matches that are paid out by another entity such as a DAF or community foundation. In this question only include hard credit.
Do Not Include!
Software Gifts/Corporate
Partnerships or Sponsorships
These are not philanthropic transfers.
The IRS does not recognize them as
charitable gifts.
The VSE only includes charitable gifts.
Optional Question
Purposes of Gifts to Endowment
Income Restricted
6.5% 0.3% 0.0% 2.5% 0.0%
5.7%
79.3%
0.1% 11.0%
Optional Question
Gifts to Extramural Athletics
Contributions for the purpose of
supporting intercollegiate teams
Two VPs for Advancement
colleges decide where to invest
staff.
Percentage of Total Giving From
Major Gifts and By Purpose
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
AllInstitutions
AllAssociate's
College A College B
12 Large Gifts
Current Operations
Capital Purposes
Staffing
College A decided to hire a major gifts officer.
It did not have a staff position devoted to this.
Two years later, its major gifts profile more
closely resembled its peer and aspirant
comparison group.
College B was too dependent on “low hanging
fruit.” Its giving rose and fell erratically. It
needed to devote more staff to its annual fund
to fill out the base of its funding pyramid. It has
made some progress after two years but has
more ground to cover.
Are donors being asked to, and are
they agreeing to, earmark more
contributions to scholarships?
13.2% 13.2%
14.0%
13.1% 13.1% 13.2%
12.7%
13.5%
13.1% 13.1%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Percentage of Gifts Earmarked for Scholarships
10.7%
11.8% 11.6% 11.4% 11.0%
11.8% 11.8% 11.8%
9.4% 9.2%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Percentage of Current Operations Gifts Restricted to Scholarships
34.4%
35.9%
34.0%
35.8% 35.5%
38.8%
38.2%
36.9%
36.3%
38.5%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Percentage of Gifts to Endowment with Income Restricted to Scholarships
QUESTIONS?
Recommended