Anatomy of the Campaign for SDSU.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
QPSC Overall KDA Based on Q38 – Intention to Leave.
Advertisements

Missouri Brand Awareness & Destination Audit Study Fall 2003 Presented to: Missouri Association of Convention & Visitors Bureaus June 8, 2004.
Summary of Results from Spring 2014 Presented: 11/5/14.
Illinois Brand Study 2014 LINDA OWENS & SOWMYA ANAND SURVEY RESEARCH LABORATORY University of Illinois at Chicago
UHCL Support Staff Association (SSA) and Professional and Administrative Staff Association (PASA) In consultation with Dr. Lisa M. Penney RAs: Lisa Sublett,
Research Findings & Brand Recommendations June 13, 2012 | SocialDirect LLC |
SENSE 2013 Findings for College of Southern Idaho.
AGA 2009 Tracking Survey Perceptions of Governmental Financial Management Prepared for the Association of Government Accountants December 29, 2009 © Harris.
Student Engagement Survey Results and Analysis June 2011.
NAU ALUMNI What Do We Know About Them & What Are They Telling Us?
An Online Survey Among Michigan Adults Survey Results Prepared by: September 27,
University of Montana Foundation Faculty and Staff Giving Campaign Tara Vinson Associate Director, Annual Giving University of Montana Foundation.
Prepared For: definition, IFSA Conference 2005 By: Linda McAvenna Dissecting the investor psyche: what motivates our clients.
Peak Season Market Research Onsite Guest Intercept Surveys August 11, 2015 prepared by:
Finding Your Major Donor. Major Gifts Cycle Research Pull reports Segment Identify Capacity Motivation Relationship Qualify Interests Bring closer Involve.
© FSAI FSAI Advice-Line Evaluation Survey of Advice-line and Query Users and Mystery Shopper Measurement Evaluation carried out by by Insight Statistical.
2016 Duck River EMC Employee Survey
Summary of VCU Student Satisfaction Fall 2012
Community Survey Report
AAMC Faculty Forward Engagement Survey Results
ESTABLISHING AN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION 101
The High Cost of Low Morale
Kate Cossa, Matthew Drilling, Abby Hahn, Katy Leichsenring
Findings from Waves 1-4 of the Rapid Cycle Polling Project
Items in red require your input
Advancement Fundamentals Track Sponsored by:
Ford Volunteer Corps Employee Survey Summary
Module 10: Customer Satisfaction
Community Survey Report
Transfer Students as an Integral Part of SEM Planning
Winnipeg Regional Health Authority Tissue Bank – April 2016
Evaluating performance management
Referee Satisfaction at Nationals
Attitudes and Job Satisfaction
The Business Case for Investing in Employee Engagement
Director, Institutional Research
Higher Education and Latinos in California March 2018
Earnings Comparison: Workers with a Terminal Bachelor’s Degree
2017 UC Staff Engagement Survey
Law Society of Scotland Survey of members 2017
Items in red require your input
Items in red require your input
2016 Communications Survey
The Comprehensive Campaign for Saint Mary’s College
District 1 Membership FLC 2017 Stayner’s HEE HAW!.
2017 UC Staff Engagement Survey
Ontario`s Mandated High School Community Service Program: Assessing Civic Engagement After Four Years S. D. Brown, S.M. Pancer, P. Padanyi, M. Baetz, J.
The Business Case for Investing in Employee Engagement
Imagine Success Engaging Entering Students Innovations 2009
JENNIFER RAMSEY, RESEARCH PROJECT MANAGER Indianapolis, IN
JAPI 2016 Foreign Student in Japan Survey – post-graduation careers
Natalie Baker and Stephanie McKenzie December 2007 – January 2008
Toward a New Paradigm for Student Success
Maryland Statewide Study to Assess Perceptions of Higher Education
HFFA Membership Study Results Wave 2
The Heart of Student Success
Participant Perspectives on Community and How to Effect Change
2017 UC Staff Engagement Survey
Financial Goals Consumer Survey Results
Select Findings from the Fall 2018 Enrolled Student Survey
McPherson College, Fall 2017
Departure View Glossary
Business leaders in the age of AI
Law Society of Scotland, Annual Members Survey 2018 Report by Mark Diffley Consultancy and Research Ltd.
IIASA stakeholder engagement
Attitudes and Job Satisfaction
2017 UC Staff Engagement Survey
The NJIT Student Experience
Enter Your Work Unit Here Enter Date Here
“Our goal - to promote and enhance a strong culture of recognition within the University Community or UMatter - is about working collaboratively to create.
Presentation transcript:

Anatomy of the Campaign for SDSU

• •

San Diego State University DONOR Survey key findings REV January 29, 2018 © 2018 HURON CONSULTING GROUP INC. AND AFFILIATES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Key learning SDSU is Serving donors well, particularly highest-level contributors Overall, SDSU’s donor population feels positively about the University and their experiences as donors. SDSU earns a Net Promoter Score of 70, suggesting strong positive regard for the University. Two-thirds of donors indicate that they are very satisfied with their giving experiences and intend to continue supporting SDSU. 71 percent of donors feel they are receiving “best-in-class” service from SDSU most or all of the time. SDSU’s ratings are equivalent to or higher than those in similar studies Huron has conducted. Donors giving $100,000 or more are the most satisfied, assigning top ratings to almost all aspects of the donor experience. These donors rate SDSU at 80 percent or higher on: experience giving to SDSU, likelihood to give in the future, obtaining best-in-class service, the quality and timeliness of gift acknowledgments, and feeling that SDSU values their gift.

Key learning donors are motivated by affinity for SDSU and its people While donors at all levels indicate that they give to SDSU out of affection for the University and a desire to ensure its excellence, they are particularly focused on personal points of connection. The higher the giving level, the more likely donors are to indicate that they want to support programs or initiatives with personal meaning to them. When given a list of fundraising objectives, donors at all levels often select student scholarships and attracting top faculty―suggesting that SDSU people bring institutional support needs to life. Highest-level donors have the widest range of motivations and strongest sense of civic obligation, including the desire to support public higher education and help build endowments. At the same time, they are most likely among donor cohorts to value opportunities to connect personally with student and faculty beneficiaries.

Key learning athletics Affiliation is a positive source of connection at lower tiers of giving About half of donors who give below the $10,000 level are strongly motivated by a desire to support athletics, compared to 25% or less at the next rungs of giving. Athletics donors are in general highly satisfied with the giving experience, and are strong promoters of SDSU. Virtually all donors who are strongly motivated by athletics (95% of this segment) are also motivated by other reasons for giving, including a general affinity for SDSU, a desire to ensure its excellence, and a sense of responsibility to support future generations of students. Support for athletics is also a driver of likelihood to give in the future, though this motivation is a weaker driver than is a sense of responsibility to support future generations of students.

Q2. Overall, how would you rate your experience(s) giving to SDSU? Overall satisfaction donors are generally satisfied with their giving experiences Q2. Overall, how would you rate your experience(s) giving to SDSU? Top 2 Box (6 or 7 rating) (1) Poor 2 3 4 5 6 (7) Excellent $11 to $999 3% 2% 9% 19% 24% 42% $1,000 to $2,499 1% 7% 16% 29% 43% $2,500 to $9,999 10% 22% 21% 40% $10,000 to $49,999 0% 14% 44% $50,000 to $99,999 65% $100,000 or more 8% 23% 60% 66% 73% 62% 68% 79% 83% Donors at the highest giving levels ($50,000 or more) express high levels of satisfaction Across giving levels, donors with an assigned relationship manager are more satisfied than those without one (75% vs. 65%, respectively) Total N=2,187; Subgroup Ns: $11-$999 N=1,739; $1,000-$2,499 N=205; $2,500-$9,999 N= 118; $10,000-$49,999 N=54; $50,000-$99,999 N=25; $100,000+ N=46

Overall satisfaction most donors say they will continue giving Q4. Based on your experiences, how likely are you to continue giving to SDSU? (1) Not at all likely 2 3 4 Top 2 Box (6 or 7 rating) 5 6 (7) Very likely $11 to $999 5% 3% 9% 15% 20% 43% $1,000 to $2,499 14% 19% 53% $2,500 to $9,999 4% 2% 10% 11% 57% $10,000 to $49,999 13% 17% $50,000 to $99,999 0% 6% $100,000 or more 1% 21% 60% 64% 72% 70% 58% 77% 82% Only about one in nine donors say they are not likely to continue giving to SDSU (rating their likelihood a 3 or lower) Donors giving between $10,000 and $49,999 are less likely than other donors to say they’ll continue financially supporting SDSU Total N=2,060; Subgroup Ns: $11-$999 N=1,635; $1,000-$2,499 N=196; $2,500-$9,999 N=108; $10,000-$49,999 N=51; $50,000-$99,999 N=25; $100,000+ N=45

Relationship management SDSU often provides “Best-In-Class” Service Q11. The University’s goal is to provide “best-in-class” service to its supporters. In your experience, how often is SDSU meeting this goal? Most or all of the time Some of the time None of the time $11 to $999 5% 24% 70% $1,000 to $2,499 4% 25% $2,500 to $9,999 2% 29% 69% $10,000 to $49,999 13% 22% 65% $50,000 to $99,999 0% 11% 89% $100,000 or more 12% 88% Nearly three-quarters (71%) of donors overall believe that SDSU meets its best-in-class service goal most or all of the time Notably, donors giving between $10,000 and $49,999 are less likely than other high-level donors to feel they are receiving best-in-class service Total N=1,900; Subgroup Ns: $11-$999 N=1,499; $1,000-$2,499 N=186; $2,500-$9,999 N=102; $10,000-$49,999 N=49; $50,000-$99,999 N=23; $100,000+ N=41

(Percent selecting 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale*) Motivations for giving top drivers include affection for sdsu and a desire to ensure its excellence Q6. To what degree do the following statements describe your motivation to give to SDSU? (Percent selecting 6 or 7 on a 7-point scale*) Alumni Non-Alumni 75% 59% 66% 54% 60% 52% 72% 22% 55% 45% 37% 43% 42% 34% While alumni donors are more likely than non-alums to cite a variety of motivations for their giving, an affinity for SDSU and a desire to give back to the University are strongest While 41% of donors are strongly motivated by a desire to support athletics, virtually all of these donors (95% of the segment) cite at least one other motivation for their giving. Total N=1,956-1,971; ; Subgroup Ns: $11-$999 N=1,549-1,560; $1,000-$2,499 N=186-189; $2,500-$9,999 N=103-106; $10,000-$49,999 N=50-51; $50,000-$99,999 N=22-23; $100,000+ N=41-42 *Scale: 1(“This does not affect my motivation to give”) to 7(“This highly affects my motivation to give”)

Furthering DONOR ENGAGEMENT interest in connecting with beneficiaries Q16A. If SDSU were to connect you with the beneficiaries of your giving, in which ways would you like to connect? Please select all that apply. Among those interested in connecting with beneficiaries (19% of donors overall), large scale events that feature opportunities to interact with beneficiaries and/or their works are most appealing, followed by emails and letters Total N=332