Stephen Tall - 'Oxford Thinking': The Campaign for the University of Oxford


Published on

Presentation by Stephen Tall, Associate Director of Development for the University of Oxford, on the 'Oxford Thinking' fundraising campaign. Delivered to Russian Donors Forum, Moscow, 21st October, 2011.

Published in: Business, Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Equivalent to £82 million per annum – also equivalent
  • Taken from note of Council decision dated 15 March 2011:In summary, Council has approved a sliding scale of tuition charges, from £3,500 to £9,000 a year, depending on household income, and payable only after graduation. The discounts would be applied through a system of targeted waivers, which would mean first-year students from the lowest-income backgrounds needing to borrow only about the same amount as at present. In subsequent years of their course, the level of deferred payment would rise to £6,000 a year.Students from other low-income groups would also receive waivers, reducing their deferred annual charge to either £7,000 or £8,000, depending on household income. Overall, waivers would be available to about one in six undergraduates, based on Oxford’s current student intake.As at present no UK student at Oxford would have to pay any tuition charges upfront. Loan repayments only begin after graduation and when earning over £21,000.In addition, Council has agreed to expand our bursary provision, with more support offered to the lowest-income students. The scheme, which assists students with living costs, is designed to safeguard the principle that no student should need to take a job during term-time. The total value of the package of waivers and bursaries is more than £12 million a year, nearly double what we spend at present.In addition, we propose to increase our outreach spend to approximately £3.4m a year, while up to £750,000 in extra investment will go towards student services, such as counselling, careers advice and disability support. Details of this spending are still to be finalised and will be subject to the usual budgetary approvals process.Further illustrative material about the new funding arrangements is appended to this letter. Additional information will be published in the Gazette on Thursday.In terms of the University’s overall funding, Oxford would receive about £10 million a year in real extra income. Approximately £7 million of this additional income would be spent on new student financial support and additional outreach and access activity.
  • Tight control of costs The central University employs 9,246 staff, accounting for 53% of its total expenditure, and so has introduced robust controls to ensure there is no rise in university-funded headcount. However, the University has been forced to go beyond simple efficiency measures. Many academic departments have frozen vacancies in tutorial posts in order to save money, with the Humanities division currently forced by budget constraints not to fill vacant posts, even though 10 of its departments were ranked the best in the UK in the most recent Research Assessment Exercise.Generating new incomeThe University also looks proactively for ways to boost income. The University – especially through Isis Innovation Ltd, its wholly-owned technology transfer company – supports the exploitation of intellectual property created by Oxford’s researchers for the benefit of society and the economy, both in the UK and internationally, creating innovative products, new skills, jobs and wealth. In the year to 31 March 2010, distributions to the University and its researchers totalled £4.5m on a turnover of £7.5m, with 93 new technology deals concluded, and 157 consultancy and services agreements negotiated. Over the last 10 years, Isis revenues have shown an impressive compound annual growth rate of 25% per year.Role of Oxford University Press In 2009-10, OUP’s annual transfers to the central University comprised some £26m for the general purposes of the University. Thanks to such annual contributions, the central University has remained in surplus for the past five years. In addition, OUP provides annually £10m for the John Fell fund as seed-corn for many vital academic initiatives, and a further £7.5m for the Clarendon fund to support graduate scholarships. Investment income Over the centuries, Oxford has – thanks to the enormous generosity of alumni and friends around the world – built up an endowment from which it is able to draw annual income. In the current ‘Oxford Thinking’ Campaign, £172.8m new endowment has been gifted to the central University by its benefactors, with more also gifted to colleges. The Oxford Endowment Fund was established in January 2009, and is tasked with achieving a target 5% real rate of return over the long-term, monitored by a committee including externals with considerable investment expertise. A spending rate of 4% is designed to provide for as much spending as possible while preserving the fund’s real value. At 31 July 2010, the Oxford Endowment Fund – open to the University, colleges and funds and societies connected to the University – stood at £665m, increasing 14.5% over the previous 12 months. In addition, the University operates the Oxford Capital Fund, an investment vehicle for the Collegiate University’s medium-term funds which can be accessed on a quarterly basis. As at 31 July 2010, its market value was £431.5m, having returned 11.4% over the previous year. In addition to the Oxford Endowment Fund, the colleges manage endowments which collectively totalled £2.69bn as at 31 July 2010, just £13m below the value reported before the financial crisis three years previously. This total represents a growth in value of 11.5% on the previous year, and a total return on opening endowment balances in excess of 13%. College endowments generated £94m of income in 2009-10.
  • Students The Collegiate University recognises that any increase in fees requires expanded student support. It is intended this will both extend the provision for undergraduates of existing maintenance bursary support, and provide fee waivers to address increased tuition fees. These measures would benefit an estimated 3,500 students at a cost of £8m-£19m per annum (the equivalent of £200m-£475m endowment),To also provide adequate international scholarship support would require a further £20m per annum. For graduate students:Currently, only 50 per cent of Oxford research students are fully funded, and a recent survey of graduates offered a place to study at Oxford showed nearly half declined their offer owing to a lack of funding. The University intends to offer full scholarships (covering fees and maintenance) in Arts or Basic Science at £29,000 per annum, with full scholarships for ‘Professional’ students (eg, Med Sci, SBS, Blavatnik) at £43,000 per annum. This requires funding of up to £50m per annum (the equivalent of £1.25bn endowment). Faculty and StaffCurrently environment, the Collegiate University is primarily focused on gifts to secure existing teaching/research posts. A £60m matching fund (to be known as ‘The Teaching Fund’) has been made available to assist the University in partnership with the colleges to fund-raise to endow 75 heartland teaching posts as prioritised jointly by the academic divisions & colleges. The agreed cost of endowing each post is £2m, with matched funding of £800k. Funding all 75 posts, and drawing down the full matching fund, would support an endowment of £150m for teaching posts across the Collegiate University. The University’s need to fund existing teaching and research posts extends beyond this, however. In the Humanities division alone, just 13 of the division’s 325 posts are fully endowed; moreover 32 of the Division’s 68 statutory professorships have no endowment at all. Colleges are, therefore, endeavouring to fund some of these posts themselves to assure continued teaching of their students.InfrastructureThe central University has prioritised a long-list of capital projects across the academic divisions, as well as libraries, museums, collections and sport: collectively they total over £1.1bn. Currently, the University is progressing only two of these projects owing to financial constraints: the new Mathematics Institute (£72m), and the New Bodleian Library refurbishment (£79m) – major donations have been pledged in support of both projects, but further philanthropic support is still sought for their completion. Without significant philanthropic investment in the coming years, it is highly unlikely the University will be able to advance any of the transformational capital priorities identified as important to Oxford’s future development. In addition, the colleges and halls will have their own capital priorities. For instance, a recent internal study suggested that colleges should be providing about £40m annually to ensure the maintenance of buildings, many of which are listed and ancient. At the moment, colleges are unable to afford this level of investment in the upkeep of the estate. Great financial freedom‘Self-reliance’ should be our motto. The Collegiate University welcomes funding from many sources in pursuit of its academic mission, and views all our funders as partners in this endeavour. At the same time, Oxford – the University, and the colleges and halls – wants to build up endowment funds that enable it to determine its own destinyIncreased participationAny pound given to any one part of the University is a pound given to Oxford as a whole: a pound which will achieve impact. We aim to increase the participation rate across the Collegiate University from 14% a year to 25% a year by the end of the ‘Oxford Thinking’ Campaign. We also wish to engage fully with our supporters, involving our alumni and friends ever more closely, both as volunteers and as ambassadors, in the future success of Oxford.
  • A ‘qualified prospect” – someone met by a representative of the University (not necessarily a fundraisers). Therefore the list of qualified prospects does not include “cold” or speculative prospective donors.But note that prior donors can give again (and we have lots of very major examples: Jim Martin; Said Phase 2; and Univ experience, which I will elaborate).
  • University figures ONLY:Academic Posts £66,515,000.00 10% Academic Programmes £395,794,000.00 59% Buildings £135,082,000.00 20%Student Support £28,381,000.00 4% Other £46,873,000.00 7% Total £672,645,000.00   Figures rounded to nearest £000 Based on Campaign global income report to end of July 2011
  • Health warning: figures cover different dates as the slide points out.
  • Stephen Tall - 'Oxford Thinking': The Campaign for the University of Oxford

    1. 1. Stephen TallAssociate DirectorUniversity of Oxford Development Office
    2. 2. Starting a Fundraising Campaign• What is a Campaign• Why put yourself through it• Preparing a campaign: what do you need to do before you start?• Launching a campaign: what should happen, when, and who should lead it?• And finally … How do you know if it’s succeeded?
    3. 3. About me– Involved in campaigns in 3 Oxford colleges, 1998- 2007.– Member of University of Oxford at public launch of £1.25 billion ‘Oxford Thinking’ Campaign, May 2008.– Helping plan ‘recalibration’ of Campaign ready for 2012.
    4. 4. ‘is music the act of sounding mathematics?Annual meeting of the Vice-Chancellor’s Circle, May 2011
    5. 5. Duke Humfrey’s Night, Bodleian Library, Oxford, October 2011
    6. 6. Telephone Campaign for Oriel College, Oxford, April 2011
    7. 7. Professor AndrewHamilton, Vice-Chancellor of theUniversity of Oxford,talking to studentscalling alumni.
    8. 8. What is a Campaign• Focuses on major priorities• Defined timeframe• Specific target (minimum)• Dependent on major gifts
    9. 9. Phasing the Campaign Planning Quiet Phase Public CloseYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
    10. 10. Phasing the Campaign• Quiet Phase – Solicitation of key prospects – 30% + secured – Board commitment – Refine case for support and communications plan
    11. 11. Phasing the Campaign• Public Phase – Campaign Launch • Events • PR • Announcements – Broad based solicitation – Campaign “fatigue” • New volunteers • Renewed focus • Success stories
    12. 12. Phasing the Campaign• Closing the Campaign• Resolicit donors• Announce and celebrate• Thank
    13. 13. Why put yourself through it?• Institutional aspirations and strategic need• Articulation of a Vision• Raises sights of internal (staff) and external (alumni / donors) constituencies• Creates an enhanced infrastructure• Builds a sustainable and enhanced programme for the future
    14. 14. Phasing the Campaign Planning Quiet Phase Public CloseYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
    15. 15. Hardest question to answer:WHY?Why do you need thatspecific amount of money?What difference will it make?
    16. 16. How ready are you?• Your academic vision• A Case for Support should: o Unite your academic leadership; o Clarify your priorities o Inform about your current situation o Set out why you need what you’re asking for o Inspire both internals and externals to get stuck in! o Be a living, breathing document.
    17. 17. The power of a vision• Institutional vision is vital:• How will philanthropy make a difference?• Does your leadership believe in this vision?• Can you communicate it effectively to your donors? Will they buy into it?• Does the vision clarify direction and aims/objectives?• Is it exciting?
    18. 18. Financial case for support (March 2011).Sent to major donors and key prospects for their comment.
    19. 19. Financial case presented to various meetings of major donors and key prospects, March – June 2011.
    20. 20. The cost of maintaining Oxford‟s excellenceAverage annual cost to educate an Oxford undergraduate: approx. £16,000Funds received for every student (student fees and public funding) £8,800 Earmarked for maintenance bursaries £700• Shortfall per student per annum £7,900• Equivalent to £82 million per annum (to c.£2.1bn in endowment)
    21. 21. The cost of maintaining Oxford‟s excellenceCouncil decision on student funding announced on 15 March 2011• Council approves a sliding scale of tuition charges, from £3,500 to £9,000 ayear, depending on household income. Discounts applied through targetedwaivers• As at present, no UK student at Oxford would have to pay any tuition chargesupfront. Loan repayments only begin after graduation and when earning over£21,000• The total value of the package of waivers and bursaries is more than £12million a year, nearly double what we spend at present.• Proposed increase in outreach spend to approximately £3.4m a year, and upto £750,000 of extra investment in student services
    22. 22. How Oxford funds excellence• Tight control of costs• Generating new income• The Role of Oxford University Press• Investment income
    23. 23. The vital role of philanthropic incomeCampaign total at 28 February 2011 was £x m University £x College £xAlmost half the gifts (£247.3m)to the central University are funding currentprogrammesA further £143.5m designated in support of priority capital projects
    24. 24. Our ambitions for the future• Students – Oxford must remain open to all based solely on academic merit• Faculty and staff – Oxford must be able to recruit and retain the bestresearchers and teachers• Infrastructure – Oxford must have world-class facilities• Great financial freedom• Increasing alumni participation in giving to 25%
    25. 25. Students Posts Buildings
    26. 26. Financial Case forSupport accompaniedby ‘vision document’setting out what Oxfordwould achieve if theUniversity had themoney.
    27. 27. How ready are you?• Your development office:• Ready with the right number of people with the right experience in the right jobs?• Ready with an adequate budget? (Staffing, communications, events, travel, stewardship, database, consultants, etc.)• Ready to donate yourself?
    28. 28. Who will lead your campaign?• Role of Development Office• Strategic planning to support VC/HoH• Written campaign plan, measurable objectives• Honest and organised reporting• Management of staff and process• Stewardship of donors• Initiative to spot new opportunities, exploit to the full existing ones• Prospect ID and prospect management
    29. 29. Funding your Campaign• How to fund it – Institutional investment – “Taxing” of gifts – Donor/benefactor contributes• Don’t forget: – Systems – Research – Major Gifts – Travel – Events and Communications
    30. 30. How ready are you?• Your leadership (VC, Head of House, senior academics)• Ready to give their time?• Ready to commit their resources?• Ready to offer a compelling vision?• Ready to ask?
    31. 31. Who will lead your campaign?• Role of Vice-Chancellor / Head of House• Clear vision?• Strategic planner?• Good and effective communicator?• Happy to collaborate with staff and volunteers?
    32. 32. UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD Chancellor Lord Patten of Barnes Vice Chancellor Professor Andrew Hamilton Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Development and External Relations) Professor Nick Rawlins Development Director of Development, Liesl Elder Public Affairs Director of Public Affairs, Jeremy Harris Alumni Relations Director of Alumni Relations, Christine Fairchild
    33. 33. What makes University of Oxford fundraising different? 44 colleges and halls, 80+ departments, Saïd Business School, Ashmolean, Bodleian, collections, research institutes, etc….
    34. 34. COLLEGE DEVELOPMENT OFFICE –A “TYPICAL” TEAM STRUCTURE? Director of Development (Fundraising strategy and Major Gifts) Development Officer Alumni Officer Communications Officer (Annual Fund) (Events) Support Staff (incl. Development Assistant, Information or Database Offier) • Integrated Alumni Relations and Development programmes • Some have Campaign Officers, Deputy Directors etc • Support staff – various but more limited, if at all
    35. 35. PRINCIPLES OF INTERACTION• Principles and Protocols of Fundraising in the Collegiate University (And the Best Practice Guidelines – produced in November 2009)• Clearance: the principles• Clearance: the process • UODO requesting clearance from Colleges – DARS • Colleges to Colleges – direct contact. • Colleges requesting clearance from UODO – “Reverse clearances”
    36. 36. CLEARANCESample scenarios:1. Humanities (UODO) wish to contact an Exeter alumnus2. Exeter wish to contact a Balliol alumnus3. Balliol wish to contact a non-alumnus4. The Bodleian is fundraising for its music collection• In each case, who are the critical partners/stakeholders to talk to?
    37. 37. How ready are you?• Your donors and prospects• Already giving?• Ready to be asked?• Ready to volunteer?• Ready to ask/involve others?• Ready to back you up within your institution & with other alumni?• Do you even know if they’re ready yet?
    38. 38. How ready are your donors?• How many donors do you have? How committed are they?• Do you have a ‘pipeline’ of donors?• Is there untapped potential?• Do they understand different types of giving?• Have you communicated with them?
    39. 39. 27,000 gifts worth up to £25,000 = £20 million
    40. 40. 1,000 gifts worth over £25,000 = £560 million
    41. 41. 3% of major gifts97% of Campaign total
    42. 42.
    43. 43. Generating major gifts – looking forwardNUMBER OF GIFTSREQUIRED ToBand To University Colleges£5m & over 25£1m to £4,999k 109£500k to £999k 98 45£250k to £499k 92 63£100k to £249k 213£25k to £99k 685 2,292Projected numbers of new gifts needed to reach a £2.5bn total goal, were the samepattern of gifts to occur:
    44. 44. Generating major gifts – prospects required ToBand To University Colleges£5m & over 100£1m to £4,999k 436£500k to £999k 392 180£250k to £499k 368 252£100k to £249k 852£25k to £99k 2740 9168Projected numbers of prospectsNumbers required needed from June 2011 to realise the projected number of giftsUses a standard assumption of 25% of qualified prospects going on to make a gift
    45. 45. More prospects required – what is the gap?University only CurrentBand Prospects Gap£5m + 42 58£1m+ 84 352£500k+ 37 355£250k+ 50 318£100k+ 90 762£25k+ 184 2,556Total 487 4,401Covers „qualified‟ prospectsData on the numbers of additional College prospects is not yet available“Current” excludes existing donorsExperience says they should not all be excluded
    46. 46. Is it feasible?• Role of feasibility study:• Assessment of your database• Measure how ready to give your donors are – qualitative and quantitative• Wealth assessment (wealth-screening plus focus groups / individual interviews)• Internal audit of staff and processes• What do you do with the answers?
    47. 47. University of Oxford feasibilitystudy, October 2010 – June 2011:1. Meetings between external consultants and senior University leadership to identify key aims of next Campaign phase (Oct – Nov);2. Production of Case for Support, financial and vision documents (Dec – Mar);3. Identification of list of top 100 donors and prospects to be personally interviewed (Jan – Feb);4. Interviews conducted to ask about first Campaign phase and assess views of what needed to be done to extend Campaign to £2.5 billion total (April – June).
    48. 48. Not managed Responses to Meeting Invitation to arrange, 5 In process ofarrangement, 4 Declines, 10 Completed , 50 Profile of Meeting Respondents Rest of world Rest of world non alumni, 5 alumni, 3 US non alumni, 1 US alumni, 8 UK alumni, 25 Non-donor Giving History of Interviewees UK non (or very alumni, 8 small donor), 6 Given up to Given £1m+, 27 £1m, 17
    49. 49. Volunteers• Is the existing board the right one?• Campaign Board• Do they support campaign goals?• Can they open doors?• Are they motivated to raise money?• Will they donate to the Campaign?• Do you have the time/resources to manage/support them?
    50. 50. Charter for members of the Bodleian Libraries Development Board
    51. 51. Charter for members of the Bodleian Libraries Development BoardTERMS OF REFERENCETo lead the fundraising campaign for the Bodleian & University Libraries, an integralpart of Oxford Thinking: The Campaign for the University of Oxford, by advising onprospective individual, trust and corporate donors who can help the Libraries achievetheir initial campaign goal of £100 million.RoleA Board member’s role is an active one, not simply a name on paper. Board membersare expected to:Provide individual and collective leadership for the philanthropic aims of the Bodleian& University Libraries.Review and advise on the viability in fundraising terms of the proposed academicpriorities identified by the Bodleian & University Libraries and to provide comment onrelated development and marketing plans.Advise on the strategy of approach to particular prospects.Contribute financially to the Campaign for the benefit of the Bodleian & UniversityLibraries with a gift or a series of gifts to the best of their personal capacity. ETC ETC
    52. 52. The Oxford Thinking Campaign SummitDitchley Park3-5 June 2011
    53. 53. ParticipantsDonors/friends 23Hosts 2Senior Oxford leaders 9Other attendees/speakers 13Summit Facilitators 2Oxford Summit team 11
    54. 54. ProgrammeFriday 3 June: Oxford and the worldOxford as a global university and its world impactOxfords role in solving the worlds problemsEvening programmeExhibition of Bodleian “treasures”Dinner Q&A – Vice-Chancellor
    55. 55. ProgrammeSaturday 4 June:“Investing in Oxford”How can philanthropy support and preserve Oxfords critical tutorial system?How do we further enhance and develop support for Oxfords colleges?How do we further enhance and develop support for academic departments andother university institutions?How can philanthropy further support students?How do we inspire and encourage alumni to engage and give?How do we inspire and encourage non-alumni to engage and give?How do we increase support from international donors & where should we focus?Presentation on Feasibility Study findings by Iain More Associates
    56. 56. ProgrammeSaturday 4 June:“Next Steps”How does Oxford achieve greater financial freedom?What should the priority topics be for the next phase of our philanthropicinitiative?Review of the plans and principles we have discussedWhat are the practical next steps?Evening programme:Schola CantorumDinner in the Grand HallRecital by Jennifer PikeCollege ports and stiltonFireworks!
    57. 57. Documentation and materialsCampaign Summit website“Essential” documentsWider background readingmaterialBiographies provided byparticipants Programme and travelinformationInformation about DitchleyRegular weekly update emails
    58. 58. Big themesUniversity and College collaborationUndergraduate and PostgraduateTeaching v researchTutorial teaching – “the intimacy of learning”British/European v globalEndowments and managing our moneyPrinciples and ProtocolsCase for SupportStewardship – donors want to feel needed
    59. 59. Reaching conclusionsEndorsement for a next phaseFurther refinements to Case for SupportMenu of prioritiesDeeper engagement is essentialImproving communicationsMultipliers – volunteers, matched fundingCreating a truly global campaignTop ProspectsScholarship and BursariesDriving ParticipationRole of Development Office – best practise &support
    60. 60. Key successesMaking space to listen not broadcastTangible sense of goodwillBalancing internal and external attendanceEmergence of a body of potential new high-level volunteersGreater awareness of some of the complex issuesClose engagement between University leadership and donors/friendsHigh quality of presentation and materialsHighly bespoke programme information – more than 40 personal packsSummit websiteGreat team effort on the day – especially UODO and PAD Events TeamClarity v flexibilitySummit Facilitator
    61. 61. Is your Communications strategy ready?• Are you ready to be transparent?• Content is king• Focus on offering bespoke information in different ways to segmented audiences• Integrate messages with Campaign priorities and direct mail/telethons.• Make use of email / social media
    62. 62. University of Oxford ‘annual fund’ direct mail letter, September 2011
    63. 63. CAMPAIGN MATERIALS1. Campaign Key Facts booklet (May 2008)2. Campaign High-value donors materials • Campaign brochure, • Humanities, • Medical Sciences, • Graduate Funding, • Bodleian Libraries, • Maths, Physical & Life Sciences and • Mathematical Institute
    64. 64. Bespoke proposal to major prospective donor for gift to endow Music Curator post at the Bodleian Library.
    65. 65. CAMPAIGN MATERIALS1. Campaign Key Facts booklet (May 2008)2. Campaign High-value donors materials • Campaign brochure, • Humanities, • Medical Sciences, • Graduate Funding, • Bodleian Libraries, • MPLS and • Mathematical Institute3. Annual Campaign Report • Summers 2010, 2011
    66. 66. University of Oxford financial statementof accounts, 2009/10
    67. 67. Is your Alumni Relations / Events strategy ready?• Do you offer events which people want to come back to?• Are your events purely social, or do they integrate with academic vision?• Are you making the most of events already happening?• Have you planned events to reach out to those who don’t come back?• Have you worked out your follow-up strategy?
    68. 68. Is your stewardship ready?• How do you say thank you to your major donors?• Have you worked out how to thank people appropriately? Have you budgeted for it?• Have you worked out how to thank everyone in an affordable, sustainable way?• Have you worked out how to make it personal?• Have you worked out who will manage your stewardship programme?
    69. 69. Donor Report on specific fundraising project
    70. 70. Saying ‘Thank You’ of sounding ‘is music the actto our donors mathematics?Annual meeting of the Vice-Chancellor’s Circle, May 2011
    71. 71. Campaign to date: Headline FiguresFigures to end of July 2011 £ 1,200 M Campaign progress against target £ 1,000 M Launch Date May 28th Colleges 2008 £ 800 M University Launch total Outstanding £575m £ 600 M Legacy Pledges £ 400 M Trendline £ 200 M £0M Jul-04 Jul-05 Jul-06 Jul-07 Jul-08 Jul-09 Jul-10 Jul-11 Jul-12 Jul-13August 1st 2004 to May 27th 2008; private Year May 28th 2008 onwards; public phasephaseCampaign Total: £1,152,520,964(92.2% of minimum target)
    72. 72. Campaign to date: Headline Figures University/College income split University £ 670,879,879 (58.2%) Colleges £ 481,641,085 (41.8%) University CollegesFigures incorporate University figures to end of July 2011 andlatest available figures from Colleges to end of January 2011
    73. 73. Campaign to date: Headline FiguresSplit by key strategic themes – University only Campaign Priorities Other 7% Student Academic Support Posts 4% 10% Buildings 20% Academic Programmes 59%
    74. 74. Campaign to date: Headline FiguresIncome by Campaign priority area – comparing University andColleges University* Colleges** Buildings 20% 27% Student Support 4% 11% Academic Posts 10% 22% Academic Programmes 59% 6% Other 7% 34% * figures to end of July 2011 ** figures from 2009/2010 benchmarking figures
    75. 75. Has your campaign succeeded?• Amount of money raised against target• Time it took against expectations• Contribution to institution’s bottom line• Increased level of alumni participation• Increased level of legacy pledges• Increased awareness of institution’s needs and ambitions• Better alumni engagement (eg, student placements, event attendance)• Improved communications with alumni• Lasting culture & infrastructure for future campaign successes
    76. 76. Any Questions?