4 Survey Results: Executive Summary Respondents were asked to estimate the percent of time that the chief LDO spends on various development activities. The majority of time is spent on major gifts. The threshold for a major gift is as little as $10,000, but is most often $25,000 or higher. Donor relations, special events, and annual giving also represent noticeable time commitments. Corporation and foundation relations and friends/board management were notable for representing relatively smaller percentages of the chief LDO’s time. Respondents were also asked to indicate by whom the library development goals are determined. There is great variation among these responses, but common responses include the central development or advancement office, the university librarian, or the chief LDO. The Library Director’s Role in Development The majority of respondents (40 or 75%) reported that the library director is not required by the greater institution to spend a specified amount of time engaged in fundraising activities. This frequency is essentially unchanged from the data collected in 2006. Where there is a time requirement, it ranges from 20% to 100% and is most often under 50%, but clearly represents a significant investment of leadership effort. Notably, several 2018 respondents indicated that despite a lack of a specific requirement, other types of goals or an unofficially stated amount of time investment is expected for the director. The amount of time actually spent on development by library directors also varies considerably, from 2% to 100% of their time. Sixty-eight percent of directors spend less than one-third of their work time on development, 30% spend more than one-third of their work time on development. The average percentage of time spent by library directors is 36%. Library directors typically become engaged in signing letters of correspondence, presenting proposals, closing gifts, meeting with prospects, and strategizing on prospects only after a specific financial threshold is met. While the average financial threshold, when one exists, for a signed letter of correspondence is somewhat modest, the average level of the required threshold for all of the other activities is well above $50,000. In contrast, directors will commonly initiate telephone calls to prospects, regardless of financial level. A comparison of the data collected in this survey to that collected in 2006 suggests some interesting shifts in the frequency of required financial thresholds for library director involvement. In 2018, these thresholds are much more commonly reported for director engagement in presenting proposals, gift closing, prospect strategy sessions, and, particularly, in meeting with prospects. The frequency of reporting a financial threshold for the latter has shown a 42% increase. A sizeable majority of library directors (39 or 72%) participate in fundraising calls without the presence of development and fundraising personnel. This frequency is essentially unchanged from the data collected in 2006. The solo director engagement is often the result of established personal relationships with specific donors. The University’s Role in Library Development There are substantial but uneven levels of active engagement by university leadership in fundraising for academic libraries. Fewer than half of chief academic officers (20 or 38%) or presidents (25 or 47%) are active in library fundraising. Unsurprisingly, their engagement is oriented to major or high-level donor prospects and commonly prompted by a request from the library. Similarly, the majority of college deans (29 or 55%) are not actively engaged in supporting fundraising for the libraries. However, the majority of college or unit-level development officers (36 or 68%) are actively supportive. In some instances where active college dean support occurs, the libraries and colleges seem to have collaborative relationships for fundraising, and in other instances the college dean may simply make referrals of prospects when they determine they have an interest aligned with the library. The engagement with college development officers, based on comments from respondents,
Previous Page Next Page