CAPITAL CAMPAIGNS AT LARGE INSTITUTIONS

A Tale of Two Campaigns

Arthur J. Ochoa, Esq.Senior Vice President and Chief Development OfficerCommunity Relations and DevelopmentCedars-Sinai Medical CenterLos Angeles, CAArthur.Ochoa@cshs.org

Road Map for Discussion

Campaign Overview – Then and Now

Drilling Down on Campaign Structure

Examining Support Processes

Measures of Success

Question and Answer Session

2

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center by the Numbers

2 3

•Licensed Beds (as of November 2013)909

•Patient Days (approx. 690 per day)251,803

•Outpatient Visits (approx. 1,730 per day)630,269

•Admissions49,268

•Emergency Department Visits (approx. 235 per day)85,305•Patients Cared for by Cedars-Sinai Medical Delivery

Network144,357

•Research Projects1,184

•Research Funding from NIH and other federal sources$43.4 million

•Medical Residents and Fellows Trained500

•Volunteer Hours218,000

•Total quantifiable community benefits, including the unreimbursed cost of caring for Medicare patients$652.6 million

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Campaigns

Case in Brief

Discovering for Life Campaign (Feb 1, 2005– June 30, 2010)

• Campaign Goal: $350M

• In 2010, successfully completed five-year, $357M Discovering for Life campaign

• Campaign average was $68M

• 79-FTE development office

• Initiatives based on medical pillars: Heart, Cancer, Neurosciences, Women’s and Children’s Health, Surgery and Transplantation, Metabolic Diseases, and Community Benefit

• Created comprehensive suite of case materials, campaign brand and case statement

2 3

The Campaign for Cedars-Sinai: Innovate, Impact, Inspire (July 1, 2010 – June 30, 2018)

• Campaign Goal: $600M

• $327M raised to date

• 4-year fundraising average is $78M

• 70-FTE development office

• Campaign is based on 5 strategic initiatives: Aging and Longevity, Innovation and Technology, Disease Prevention & Control, Personalized Medicine and Targeted Therapies, and Education and Training

• Created limited suite of communications materials, focus on personalization and customization aligned with institutional brand architecture

PAST CURRENT

Campaign Timelines

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

FY 2011: The Transition Year (Quiet Phase)

FY 2012: Feasibility & Readiness Study

FY 2013: Late Quiet Phase

FY 2014 - 2015 Major Gift Phase

FY 2016 –2017: Public Phase

FY 2018: Campaign Closing

Discovering for Life Campaign

FY 2005: Feasibility Study & Quiet Phase

FY 2006 – 2008 Major Gift Phase

FY 2009 – 2010 Public Phase

PAST CURRENT

Post-Discovering for Life

Campaign Assessment & Readiness

• Post-campaign, engaged in division-wide assessment designed to:

Boost inter-team collaboration

Uncover opportunities for structural and process improvements

Promote donor-centric behavior

In preparation for a future comprehensive campaign.

• All elements of post-campaign recalibration contribute to elevate and consistently support the major gifts function.

2 3

• Key Takeaways from assessment:

All development operations functions need to be aligned with overall development and major gifts team

Brand alignment important to constituents (donors and community)

Stewardship of mid-level donors are paramount to future success

Integration of post-campaign assessment recommendations began October 2011 and is continuing

PAST CURRENT

Campaign Counsel

Discovering for Life Campaign Consultants

Utilized campaign consultants to help develop case and campaign plan;

Met regularly with campaign counsel who presented at Board committee meetings;

Campaign consultants helped legitimize relatively “new” development shop and validate our efforts

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

In-house Campaign Director is primary campaign planner and manager;

Campaign counsel used strategically with new volunteer leadership and formal studies like feasibility and post-campaign assessment;

Campaign counsel on retainer for special circumstances

PAST CURRENT

Feasibility Studies – Obsolete?

Discovering for Life Campaign

• Conducted first formal feasibility study ever

• Study tested readiness of community and key donors and leadership/stakeholders for first comprehensive campaign in Cedars-Sinai history

• Pool of donors/interviewees were within a 5-mile radius of the medical center

• Limited diversity of interviewees and candidates

• Study formalized campaign

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

• Feasibility study tested case for strategic initiatives, not donor readiness

• Formally executed but utilized informally

• Used internally to adjust themes and priorities

• Pool of donors /interviewees were geographically, ethnically, economically diverse

PAST CURRENT

Pillars vs. Initiatives

Discovering for Life Campaign

• Campaign focused on “pillars” which were medical specialty service lines

• Some specialties felt underrepresented

• Development staff organized by pillars

• Hard to piece out fundraising targets for specialties (ie OB/Gyn) when lumped into macro nomenclature of “Women’s and Children’s Health”

• Unclear where money was going;

• Didn’t inspire donor constituency because too broad

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

• Strategic Initiatives are more thematic not specific specialties

• Specialties can be represented in multiple themes/initiatives

• Development organized by medical specialty beats for academic priorities; every service line has an assigned DO

• More versatility in how you talk about themes (ie Aging and Longevity)

• Fundraising goals are based on specific institutes, departments and divisions

• Campaign initiatives are meant to inspire diverse constituency

PAST CURRENT

Campaign Case, Communications & Collateral

Discovering for Life Campaign Case book

• Created printed casebook that included all case for each pillar and select giving opportunities for the area;

• Barely used by frontline development staff;

• Created separate brand for campaign

• Caused confusion for all constituents;

• Didn’t leverage CS brand/name recognition

• All pillars appear to be weighted equally; not all specialties felt represented

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai: Innovate. Impact. Inspire.

• Case statement was distributed for feasibility study purposes to test themes only;

• Collateral design is based on campaign version of CS brand architecture and style guide;

• All communications leverage CS brand and name recognition;

• Every service line/medical specialty represented within the campaign themes (no one left out or overstated)

PAST CURRENT

Frontline Staffing Structure – Discovering for Life

Principal Gifts Officer• Gifts $250K +• Team Management

MA II

PGO• Gifts $250K +

Chief Development Officer, Academic Institutes

and Programs

CancerHeart

Development Associate

SDO

• Gifts $50K +

Development Coordinator

MA III

SDO

• Gifts $50K +

SDO (Surgery)

Discovering for Life Campaign Structure

• Associate Director, Campaign Management (not pictured) staffed Regenerative Medicine• Associate Director, Gift Planning, staffed

metabolic disease• No development staff specifically dedicated to

qualification

Sr. PGO (Neuro)

Director of Development 1

MA II

SDO(Women’s

Health, Pediatrics)

MA II

1 Other direct reports included campaign management, C+F, gift planning, prospect management, donor relations

Senior Vice President, Community Relations & Development

Overall Development Org ChartSenior Vice

President/Chief Development

Officer

VP of Development

Chief Development Officer, Academic

Institutes

Major Gifts

Foundations

Planned Giving

Prospect Research

Director, Donor Relations/Campaign

Management

Development Operations

Donor Relations

Donor Analytics & Reporting Services

Associate Director, Pipeline

Development

Direct Mail Events

Cultivation, Fundraising,

Recognition, 3P events

Support Group Relations

Independent(WG, HVG, FIG)

Dependent (BOG, HH, Sports)

Frontline Staffing Structure –

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai (current campaign)

Women’s Health

Surgery and Transplantation

Discovery and Unassigned

Regenerative Medicine

Principal Gifts Officer• Gifts $250K +• Team Management

MA II

PGO 2

• Gifts $250K +

Shared MA II

SDO

• Also staffs Foundations• Reports to VP

MA III• MA Duties• Prospect and Ops Meetings

CancerHeart

Development Associate

SDO

• Gifts $50K +

SDO

• Gifts $50K +• Also staffs pediatrics,

genetics, diabetes

Development Associate

MA II

SDO

• Gifts $50K +

PGO 1

• Gifts $250K +

SDO

• Gifts $50K +

Chief Development Officer, Academic Institutes and Programs

• Gifts $1M+• Team Management

Vice President, Development 1

Senior Vice President, Community Relations & Development

1 Other direct reports included campaign management/donor relations, C+F, gift planning, prospect management, and annual giving

2 Currently, one principal gifts officer staffs heart, women’s health

Neuro

Sr. Principal Gifts Officer• Gifts $250K +

Pipeline Development – Events & Support Groups

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

• Focus on creating value and support of major academic priorities

• Reduced Quantity of Support Groups

• Created guidelines to limit third party events to increase ROI on staff time

• Created alignment of fundraising support group staff and major gifts team

• Creating alignment of special events with database and major gifts pipeline

Discovering for Life Campaign

• Focused on event production

• Numerous Fundraising Support Groups:

• Independent

• Dependent

• Third Party Events

Stewardship, Stewardship, Stewardship

Campaign for Cedars-Sinai

• Proactive reporting and multiple touches for all donor levels

• Donors segmented based on cumulative giving level and stewarded strategically with automated “baseline” touches with corresponding “pick list” items DOs can elect;

• Each professional team member manages a core program area or a programmatic enhancement;

• Donor relations team is part of assembly line process to connect all stewardship activity.

Discovering for Life Campaign

• Focused primarily on donors $1m+

• Limited structure

• Reports provided as requested

• High-cost activities for low-yield

PAST CURRENT

Cedars-Sinai and Discovering for Life Campaign

FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010

Campaign Results: Discovering for Life

4

FY 2006-2011

$72M

$81M

$93M $66M$69M

Fund

s Ra

ised

(in

$)

Campaign completed above goal and two years ahead of schedule

Over 13,000 new donors brought on board, with 9,000+ repeat donors

Featured 72 donors of $1M+

Campaign average: $68M

Raised endowment giving to 40% of annual total vis-à-vis preceding five years

Closed 20 endowed chairs and 11 endowed funds

Professional development team grown during campaign, with DOs aligned by institutional pillar (service line)

Campaign Inspire Progress to Date

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

$59M $56M

$95M

$103M

Fund

s Ra

ised

(in

$)

$327M raised to date

Current endowment giving at 61%

Back-to-back record-breaking fundraising years

Professional development team assigned to beats and academic priorities;

Campaign average to date: $78M