New Legacy Training Video Launched Today

Today sees the launch of NCVO's new StudyZone course entitled "How to raise Legacies from Scratch".

See http://knowhownonprofit.org/studyzone/how-to-raise-legacies-from-scratch

The course consists of a 30 minute, practical video covering the essentials of legacy fundraising, written and presented by Simon George of Wootton George Consulting. It is the latest in a series of NCVO offerings, covering a wide range of fundraising and other voluntary sector topics.

The training is available as a one-off purchase for £8.99, or subscribers can pay £9.99 per month to access all of the StudyZone courses. With each course, there is a freely available introduction to give a flavour of its content.

I'll be interested people's comments on the legacy training!

A Legacy inTime

At the board meeting of a charity of which I am a trustee, we signed off the accounts this week for the last financial year. Our Finance Director had been expecting a deficit and had been resigned to having to dip into reserves by a small amount, when we had been hoping to break even.

Just before the financial year closed, however, we were notified of a residuary legacy from a generous supporter, which saved the day. At £36,500 it was a very welcome donation and made all the difference to the accounts – proof again (as if we needed it) of the value of legacies and legacy marketing. In essence, we can’t plan the timing of legacies but if we put in the effort, the legacies will certainly come through.

As a Christian organisation, the charity concerned sees divine timing in this but I am also reminded of the Arab saying “Trust God and tether your camel” – in other words, providence may influence the legacies we receive, but we also need to do our bit, by reminding our supporters regularly that legacies are vital to our work.

So don't put off your next legacy actions. One day you (or your successor) will be glad that you "remembered to tether your camel".

Size and age of charity need not be a barrier

Fundraisers often equate success with legacies in part to the age, size and profile of the charity. In other words larger, older and well known charities tend to be well placed to raise legacy gifts.

However, I have recently been advising a small charity that is less than five years old, is certainly not a household name and has no supporter database, but which has already received a dozen legacies, including several large residuaries. So how have they achieved this?

The glib answer is more by luck than planning. In fact, until recently, they did not ask for legacies at all. They do not even have a legacy pack and have never run adverts or done legacy mailings - but the gifts still come in.

One thing the charity does have on its side is publicity. It is a benevolent fund and when support is given to someone in need, the local media often pick this up around the country and gifts seem to follow in part from these locations.

The secret I suspect is that the charity makes a very direct and visible difference to the lives of its beneficiaries and people respond well to this. Donors no doubt like the direct link between donated funds and individuals in need. They can imagine the difference the support will make. Maybe they also like the fact that the charity is small and uses volunteers and is therefore not "wasting" money on overblown administration. All these factors seem to combine to make a powerful case for legacies.

The really exciting thing is to imagine the potential when the charity starts to promote legacies effectively. My belief is they have the scope to increase legacy income significantly, just by putting in place some basic soft sell promotion and drip feed. Certainly the strategy we are developing will be aiming to do this, based on their strong case for support.

The key learning point for me is that even small and new charities can soon start to see legacies if they get their case right (even by accident!) and communicate it effectively.

Donor Recognition Pays

On holiday in Devon recently, I visited the Donkey Sanctuary, famous for its legacy income. Two things struck me. Firstly, entry was free – a great way to attract new donors from around the country. Secondly, on the walls around the site were huge boards naming their legacy donors, year by year.  They were unmissable and listed the many hundreds of people who have remembered this charity in their wills. So what can we learn from this?

The Donkey Sanctuary calls these boards its Memory Wall and, although it does not make a big play of it in its legacy promotion, it must be having an effect, as legacies account for over £18 million of its £27 million income.

This got me thinking again about how we thank and recognise our legacy donors. Charities do this in many different ways, from the traditional books of remembrance, to plaques on the wall, tree planting, lists in annual reports and, more recently, on their web pages.

What struck me at the Donkey Sanctuary was this very public form of recognition and how it no doubt also functions as a prompt to visitors to leave a legacy. So a combination of free entry, a good visitor experience and public recognition has been very effective in securing donations, including legacies, for this charity. No doubt there are other factors (strong case for support, effective communications programme etc), but this high profile recognition must be significant.

The question then is whether your charity is making the most of its opportunities to thank and recognise its special donors. You may not have any fluffy donkeys or even space for a memory wall, but maybe you have some other opportunities you to be developed? Maybe it is time to review this aspect of your legacy campaign and consider some imaginative ways of thanking and recognising donors?

Developing a Legacy Culture

Legacy marketing can be a bit "us" and "them" can't it? We the charity asking them the supporters for a donation. We use marketing techniques to overlay and crunch the data. We segment and target prospects that match the best profiles and have the greatest propensity to give. It can all seem a bit one way, impersonal and data driven. But there is a different way.

Some of the most effective legacy fundraising I have seen is based not so much on these techniques (although we cannot abandon them entirely), but on developing a strong legacy culture, in other words where leaving a legacy to a given cause is the normal, natural thing for supporters to do.

200 years agao, it was a very normal thing to leave a legacy to your local parish church. Look in many older church buildings and you will still see the plaques remembering these donors. They did it because it was expected and just "what you did". But we have got out of the habit, which is why charities invest so much in persuading people it is a good idea and why Remember a Charity has been seeking to normalise legacy giving again.

There are examples though of charities in recent years that have successfully established legacy giving as the norm, from trustees and major givers downwards. Take a look at the Acorns Childrens' Hospice campaign as a good example. This charity has massively increased its legacy income and also created a deep culture of legacies. The two are clearly connected. So what are the secrets to achieving this?

Firstly, leadership. From the top of the organisation it needs to be made clear that serious supporters are expected to leave a legacy. Trustees can take the lead here.

Secondly, openness. Successful legacy fundraising charities talk about legacies at every opportunity, in a natural and unforced way, whether this is in conversation, in literature, at events or on websites.

Thirdly, consistency. Legacies are not just promoted occasionally when the latest appeal is out of the way or fitted into a mailing schedule. Rather they are given priority and mentioned regularly, so that everyone in the community associated with the charity gets the message.

Fourthly, internal marketing supports the external. By making sure all your staff, trustees and volunteers "get" the importance of legacies, you are creating a large sales force of ambassadors that can extend its influence far beyond the reach of the fundraising team.

Creating a legacy culture is not a quick fix. It takes time and persistance, but for those charities that achieve it, the results are the holy grail of fundraising.

New Guide to Legacy Fundraising

A new guide is published this week in a series of e-books about managing and fundraising for charities.

The Charity First Series, published by the Social Marketing Partnership, is a new range of practical guides to help charities - especially smaller organisations - to improve their game. The series tackles some important issues, such as legacy fundraising, prospect research and major gift fundraising. Further titles are planned for 2012.

Published at just £7.99 each, they are an affordable way for smaller organisations to access expertise in these areas.

The guides can be puchased as downloadable pdf's here:
http://www.spmfundessentials.org/titles/

No Will - No Legacy

A good friend of mine is currently enduring the nightmare of trying to sort out the affairs of an aged relative who has died intestate. It is the last thing she needs and is very frustrating, as the relative in question had been told by all around her to make a will but never did. Now she has left a mess to be unravelled and the corresponding expense of paying a solicitor to sort it out. To cap it all, my friend has got all the responsibility of registering the death and arranging a funeral, while distant relatives who cared little for the aunt, and were essentially estranged from her, are now showing great interest in their former relative's affairs.

So what do such situations tell us? Obviously it reinforces the need to make a will, not least for the sake of those left behind and to protect the value of the estate from legal fees. Secondly, making a will can reduce a lot of stress in families by determining who gets what and avoiding arguments (my friend has had to keep a detailed account of her expenses, which will certainly be strutinised by the aunt's beneficiaries). Finally of course, without a will there will be no charitable legacy. The irony is that the aunt was estranged from her sister and had not seen those who will inherit her estate for many years. A legacy to charity would arguably have been a much better choice for her, a charity and my friend.

Legacy fundraising practice used to involve reminding people to make a will and warning them of the consequences of not doing so, with a legacy request bolted on. Things have moved on a lot in the last 20 years and we know that most targets of legacy messages already have a will, even if it may need updating. However, I wonder if we have thrown the baby out with the bath water? Could there still be a place for warning people of the nightmares they are creating for relatives by not making a will (and of course in the process remind them that they can also remember their favourite charities)?

We should obviously not overdo the doom and gloom - legacy fundraising needs to be a positive business after all - but I do wonder if the odd salutory reminder can still focus the minds of recalcitrant prospects who do no one any favour by omitting to make a will?

Will Writers in Question

The Legal Services Ombudsman Adam Sampson has warned consumers against using unregulated providers of legal services such as will writers, because they are often not insured and provide no compensation if they get things wrong.

In contrast, solicitors are regulated by the Law Society and must also carry insurance to cover any claims made against them. Ultimately, they can be struck off if found guilty of malpractice, but of course they charge more.

The reasons people use will-writers are largely because they are cheaper than qualified solicitors and because they will make home visits to take instructions from clients (although of course many solicitors now do this too).

My gut feeling is that will-writers are used mainly by people who buy on price not quality (although admittedly this is something of a generalisation). Those with larger estates, including many of those in the market for a residuary legacy, are more likely to be people who use a family solicitor and not a will-writer.

So what is the implication of all this for legacy fundraising? The danger with the Ombudsman's report is that for some people it may create another barrier to leaving a legacy, which is not what any charity needs. If will-writers really are the subject of so many complaints, then perhaps campaigns should point people very firmly to using a solicitor?

The ideal scenario is probably where a solicitor is prepared to offer some discount or even a free will for your supporters. Then they get regulated advice, backed up by compensation if things go wrong, and hopefully will be grateful to your charity for helping them sort out their affairs. Certainly, there is less chance in these circumstances that the will is poorly drafted or invalid - probably a price worth paying to keep supporters happy and maintin the integrity of your campaign?

New Incentive for Legacy Donors

In this week's budget, the Chancellor has handed legacy fundraisers a gift by incentivising legacies as a form of donation.

Although he left the inheritance tax nil rate band frozen until April 2015 (which might be seen as mean spirited), he did announce that a reduced rate of inheritance tax (IHT) will apply where 10% or more of a deceased’s net estate (after deducting IHT exemptions, reliefs and the nil rate band) is left to charity. In those cases the current 40% rate will be reduced to 36%. The new rate will apply where death occurs on or after 6 April 2012.

What this means is that we as legacy fundraisers now have a new "donor motivator" to use in our campaigns.

The proposition is that "if you leave this charity a legacy of 10% of your estate, you will benefit from a 10% reduction in your inheritance tax rate".

Although this sounds better than it really is in financial terms (as 10% of the net estate after deductions will of course be more in cash terms than the reduction in IHT) it should still be a valuable incentive for those people motivated by a desire to pay less tax.

On its own, this move is unlikely to result in a huge growth in legacy giving, but it is nevertheless a useful addition to the legacy tool box and, for some people, should be enough to persuade them that a legacy is worth considering.

At a tactical level, it also gives legacy fundraisers another reason to talk to donors about legacies and to update them on the latest rules. We need to make the most of this opportunity!

Barriers to Legacy Fundraising Revealed

So here we have it - the reasons why so many small and medium sized charities miss out on legacies.

Our survey of 52 charities looked at what was stopping them from maximising legacies and found the two main reasons were a) lack of knowledge and understanding of what to do and b) lack of staff capacity to do it. In third place came a lack of strategic focus.

This was slightly surprising, given all the opportunities for training on legacies and the fact that there is so much information available these days. I had also expected the lack of strategic focus to play more of a role.

The lack of capacity is a harder problem to fix, especially when so many charities are struggling to stand still at the moment. Perhaps there is a link here to the third reason (lack of strategic focus)? If legacies were seen as a strategic priority, then maybe the staff capacity would be found, in lieu of other less profitable activities?

The learning from the survey is clear. The sector needs to make legacy education more of a priority and charities themselves need to address the capacity issue, either by reconfiguring their fundraising activities to include legacies or by seeking external support. The legacy opportunity is just too great to do nothing!

The full report on our survey can be read at:

www.wgconsulting.co.uk/news

Exposing the Barriers to Legacy Fundraising

In carrying out fundraising reviews over the years, I have come across numerous charities which have really not grasped the legacy opportunity. Yes, they may know that legacies can be good money and maybe receive the odd one, but somehow they never quite get round to planning and running a proper campaign. What is it with these people?

OK, I know that a lot of organisations are focussed on the short term at the moment, but they are probably the ones which focussed on the short term ten years ago. If they had made the investment in legacies then, they would now be enjoying great returns. The recession is just the latest excuse.

I am not talking here about those charities which have effective campaigns in place. They are clued up ones who already recognise the potential of legacies and are reaping the rewards. I am talking about those procrastinators who never get round to it or come up with a myriad of excuses why they should not do legacy fundraising.

Previously, I have come across a wide range of excuses, such as “our trustees don’t understand legacy fundraising” (so whose job is it to tell them then?) or “we don’t have the budget for legacies” (even though they have the budget for things that raise far less money pound for pound).

Other excuses include “we’ll get on to legacies once we have sorted X, Y and Z (usually a list of pet projects which) or “we don’t like the idea of asking people to leave us money in their will – it’s too sensitive an issue” (yet some hospices manage to do it very successfully). Some even won’t do legacy fundraising because they think it is high risk, just because it is a long term opportunity and they cannot measure success in hard cash in year one.

It’s time we nailed this once and for all. Let’s get these excuses out in the open where they can be properly debated. I have set up a survey in Survey Monkey and am inviting fundraisers to contribute their views and experiences. So come on folks, tell me how it is at your charity by visiting:

Click here to take survey

I will share the results of the survey and hope that, in the process, we can open up a proper debate and persuade a few more charities that investing in legacies really is worth the candle

Legacy pledges - friend or foe?

In recent years, asking donors to pledge a legacy to a charity has been going out of fashion and for good reasons. How is it then that some charities are still basing their campaigns on pledge seeking and being very successful?

At this week’s Legacy Fundraising conference, run by the Institute of Fundraising’s new West Midlands group, we had an interesting debate. I was presenting on legacy strategy and raised the issue of pledge seeking, explaining why it is increasingly frowned upon (a lot of people see it as intrusive and will not tell the charity of their intentions; using pledges received to monitor campaigns misses all those who will not disclose their intentions and therefore under-reports the impact of a campaign; typically half of legacies received are from people not even known by the recipient charity; some people see it as rather coercive and out of kilter with the current trend for drip fed, soft sell legacy work).

To my embarrassment then, my talk was followed by two other speakers, both from hospices, which make successful use of pledges to secure legacies, to monitor results and to predict future income. This was not lost on the audience who wanted to explore this issue further and rightly so.

Most interestingly for me was the case study from Acorns Children’s Hospice, which bases its legacy work fairly and squarely on pledge seeking and very successfully too. Its legacy income has grown spectacularly in recent years, so its approach has not put people off, nor has it caused problems in monitoring results. Far from it. So how do we explain this?

What struck me about the two case studies (the other was from Douggie Mac in Stoke) was that they were both from local hospices, with a high profile in their areas and considerable good will in their communities. The Douggie Mac approach was largely based on a will writing scheme, through which pledges were also sought.

The Acorns campaign, however, had sought to create a culture where it was normal and expected to leave a legacy and where supporters were asked directly to pledge putting a gift in their wills yet – the implication being that this was the done thing. Its trustees take a lead in this and Acorns has succeeded in creating a climate where legacy giving is a natural way of supporting the charity. In this context, it is easy to see that pledge seeking can work well as part of the fundraising process.

So in future, I will be careful not to write off pledge seeking as an outdated, “sales push” approach. In some circumstances, it can clearly work. I am still not convinced that it is right for all charities (and especially the small and medium start up campaigns that I get involved in). But maybe I’ll be a bit more careful about saying “never” again!

Legacies and Direct Mail Appeals

So a DM agency has identified that adding a legacy info tick box to direct mail appeals reduces the cash response rate (3rd Sector magazine 16th March). Big deal!

Of course anything you do to water down an appeal will reduce the response rate. The best results are always achieved by making a clear and direct ask for one thing at a time, not by confusing the donor with a range of options. But then we knew that didn’t we?

As a result of their findings, US based Pareto Fundraising claims that “Separate communications about legacies are much more effective than peripheral efforts such as tick boxes on appeal response forms.” Again, this should be no surprise to anyone. But I’m still not convinced.

Firstly, a small reduction in response rates to cash appeals may well be a price worth paying to achieve more legacies, given that the average cash gifts quoted by Pareto were just £29.11 (with no legacy box) or £27.64 (with legacy option). When compared to the current UK average legacies (around £4,000 for cash gifts and £30,000 for shares of estates) the difference is paltry and in my book well worth a punt.

More importantly of course, we know that for most people, leaving a legacy is a big decision which they do not come to quickly. They often need to be gently reminded over time that keeping their will up to date and remembering a charity in it are good things to do. Few people will rush out to do so at the first mention. So as well as asking for legacies directly, drip feeding low key messages also makes a lot of sense, whether it is on response coupons, email footers, web banners, stationery etc. It all helps.

So as for me, I will keep advising my clients to give donors the legacy option, even if it may reduce their short term cash results slightly. It has to be a good investment for the future.

For more on legacies, see http://www.wgconsulting.co.uk/fundraising-services/legacy-fundraising

Time - our best friend?

We all know that legacy fundraising is not about jam today - in fact this is the key reason why so many charities under-invest in it and let it slip down their priority list. After all, they have work to fund this year and next and fundraisers have targets to meet!

However, some feedback I have just had on a campaign I designed in 2002 has underlined for me again the real value of legacies and the importance of taking a long term perspective.

The campaign I am writing about was planned in 2001 for a small national charity. We ran focus groups to develop the proposition, recruited and interviewed some legacy champions, developed the campaign literature and planned the launch. In March 2002 it all kicked off and the charity then took it over to run things itself. The head of fundraising eventually moved on and - as can easily happen - we lost touch with the charity.

By chance I was recently back in touch and learned that the campaign, which is essentially still the same, has so far raised £3 million for the charity. While I no longer have the budget details, I reckon this means an ROI of up to 100:1 - a pretty good return by any reckoning.

So what has made the difference here? Well the campaign has clearly been effective but there was nothing revolutionary about it. Fairly standard stuff in fact. What has made the difference of course is time - 8 years down the line, it has had time to work (and is still working).

We hear a lot these days about the many things we need to get right in legacy fundraising (the vision, the strategy, the copy etc), but in fact the most important thing is probably to give things enough time. The best campaign will not work if not given time, whereas even a standard, competent campaign can have fantastic results if maintained consistently over a longer period.

This is an important message for fundraisers and trustees to understand. Invest in legacies now and, if you take the long view, you WILL get the return you are seeking, provided you get the basics right.

For more details about our legacy planning work, please visit:

http://www.wgconsulting.co.uk/fundraising-services/legacy-fundraising

Lawyers and Legacies

At yesterday’s IoF Legacy Conference at Earl’s Court, lawyer Alison Talbot of Blake Talbot gave some interesting insights into a lawyer’s perspective on legacy fundraising.

To start with, she gently berated charities for chasing discretionary legacies, suggesting that professional executors found them a nuisance and that they upset donors’ families. Fundraisers familiar with Smee and Ford’s “pink forms” will know that these are legacies left by donors to the discretion of their executors and that charities which fit the criteria and receive a notification respond by writing to the executors to be considered for a share. As a result, executors can receive a lot of appeals - sometimes 60 or more.

My reaction was that, if lawyers find the charities’ letters so troubling and are concerned for family executors, why then do they not discourage will makers from leaving this type of legacy in the first place? After all, there are other sorts of legacy they can leave, most of which are easier to administer.

Talbot also went on to say that unbeknown to fundraising charities, many discretionary legators also leave a list of preferred charities, not included in their will. In other words, while discretionary legacies can appear to be a good opportunity (if still a long shot), in practice the money is already allocated and the chances of success therefore very slim.

Interestingly, she also nailed a common question from charities about advertising in legal gazettes, by confirming that she checks charity details for will making clients not in these publications, but on the Charity Commission website. So here it is from the horse’s mouth folks – don’t waste money advertising in legal gazettes, invest it in better donor care, where it will make a real difference.

So often I find people have false ideas about how lawyers can help to raise legacies. Talbot confirmed yet again that, in practice, solicitors rarely influence the choice of charity (in fact I have only ever met one lawyer who did claim to influence people in favour of his chosen charity). She also confirmed that her firm will not allow charity literature in its reception area, so the opportunities for promotion were also limited.

I know there are ways we can work with lawyers, but we need to be clued up about what they can and cannot do for us. For most charities, efforts should be focussed on prospective donors (as well as stewarding enquirers and pledgers) rather than trying to court professionals who have limited opportunities or little inclination to help bring in legacies.

Contested Legacies

So the RSPCA will appeal against a court decision in favour of an irate relative cut out of her mother’s will. And for £2 million, who can blame them?

Rare as it is for relatives to contest charitable legacies, there is an issue here, which relates to the value and integrity of the brand. And more importantly what can we all do to avoid getting into this situation in the first place?

For a legacy of this size, the RSPCA trustees clearly had to defend it. Charity law demands that trustees protect the assets of the charity and, after all, £2 million would help a lot of furry friends. Jo public may see if differently, however, and I wonder what will be the damage to the RSPCA’s reputation among its donors? We will most probably never know and nor will the charity. However, I just sense that – rightly or wrongly - some people may see the charity’s action as grasping or unseemly.

So in taking this risk to brand integrity, we need to ask “how low do you go?” £2 million is well worth contesting, but £20,000 or £2,000? It’s an interesting question, with no easy answers.

More importantly though is the question about how to avoid getting into this situation in the first place.

While we obviously cannot decide what goes into donors’ wills or prevent people from cutting out their relatives, perhaps we should be more upfront about the need to provide for relatives (and especially dependents) in the first place? I know many charities do this already to some degree (or sometimes pay lip service to it), but some don’t and even among those that do, it could be stressed more prominently in legacy materials.

The risk in doing this of course is that charities may lose out on some funding, but they need to balance this carefully against the need to defend legacies from outraged relatives, with all the legal costs and bad publicity involved, which itself may deter other donors from giving (and not just in the form of legacies – it may impact on other forms of giving too).

It’s a difficult circle to square, but the current situation seems to indicate that we have not yet got the balance quite right.

Innovation with Discretionary Legacies

Recent discussion on the Yahoo Legacy Marketing Group has raised some interesting thoughts about how best to approach discretionary legacy opportunities (this is where notice is received, usually via the Smee and Ford "pink forms" service, that money has been left in a will for the executors to distribute to charity, sometimes in named areas of work, such as medial research, homelessness etc).

While it is true that most approaches are ignored, occasionally a well crafted response can lead to a good result (I've certainly seen this with some clients of ours). However, there are several challenges to be considered here.

Firstly, executors receive a lot of charity appeals, so there is the issue of competition. There is little you can do about this, apart perhaps from only responding to opportunities which fit closely to what your charity does. If everyone did this, volumes would be reduced and serious approaches would have a better chance. So maybe it's time to ignore the long shots, for the benefit of all?

Secondly, executors are often grieving relatives, who do not always appreciate being targeted in this way. While some are solicitors or other advisors (where a professional to professional approach can be taken), for family executors a highly sensitive approach is required, which recognises their situation and makes a very gentle, even apologetic approach. This can be achieved, as far as possible, in a covering letter.

Thirdly, there is the issue of what to send - which information and how much of it? Traditionally, most charities have sent an annual report and short covering letter, with a very general ask. However, the risk here is that your appeal ends up looking very much like everyone else's. So what to do?

The approach I am testing now is to effectively treat discretionary appeals the same way as trusts. In other words, to send not only tailored letters (i.e. for family or professional executors), but also to provide a costed project for consideration. This way, the donor can see exactly how the legacy would be used, rather than being asked for a general gift. OK, this may reduce your chances of general funds - but let's face it, discretionaries are someting of a long shot anyway, so if it increases your chances of success, why not give it a go?

Legacies Bucking the Trend

The striking feature for me of the Charity Market Monitor report, published this month, was that legacy income for the top 300 fundraising charities grew by 8%, which was well above the 0.9% overall income growth reported for these charities.

While these figures are based on analysis of the top 300 charities' accounts for 2007 and 2008 by the Cass Business School (i.e. pre-recession), they still have a relevant massage in today's changed world - that legacies are different and do not directly follow the path of other fundraising techniques.

OK, so this year's legacy values may be affected by lower house prices and a fallen stock market, but even here we read today that house prices are growing again nationally (up 1.7% in July alone) and the FTSE is now nudging the psychologically important 5,000 threshold again - in other words, clear signs that legacy values will be soon back on the way up again.

Ultimately, of course, your legacy results are less reliant on fluctuations in the wider economy than are other forms of fundraising, because they do not depend on donors' current incomes. In fact, today's legacy results are driven far more by your marketing activity during the past 5 or 10 years than by how the high street or banking sectors are performing today.

The key learning point here then is that while you cannot control the economy (and therefore the values of donors' estates), you can control your own marketing efforts, which influence the volumes of legacies you receive. on the basis that results = volumes x average values.

So while the economy may fluctuate and legacy values go up and down in the short term, in the medium to longer term your legacy results depend far more on the way you market legacy giving. In other words, don't worry too much about the economy - just focus on what you can control and make sure you are getting your marketing right. Then your results will come.

Legacy Fundraising - Making it work for you

It's amazing how many UK charities could be raising significant funding from legacies but do not. Why is this? For some it may be not wanting to spend the time or money for others it may be just not knowing where to start.


To help charities like these, there is a very simple formula, which I call the 3 P's, consisting of:

• People


• Proposition


• Promotional channels

You can start by identifying the audiences or people that you will be targetting with your legacy message. List all the different groups (e.g. donors, members, beneficiaries, volunteers, trustees etc), then put numbers next to them. You'll probably be surprised just how many people you can reach!

Secondly, think carefully about the message or proposition you will use. Why should anyone leave a legacy to your cause? What is different or special about what you do? Try to come up with a compelling message which sums up the difference you could make with somebody's legacy. Then test this in a group which is representative of your target audiences.

Finally, you need to identify the ways you will get your message across. Chances are you already communicate with people in various ways (such as newsletter, website, displays, events etc). You don't need to reinvent the wheel and by integrating legacy messages into existing activities, you can save time and money on your campaign, although it will probably pay to develop some legacy specific materials.

So by following these three simple steps, most charities can make a start in legacy fundraising, without spending a fortune. It really can be a straightforward thing to do, so put it on your priority list today. It will be one of the best investments of time and money you will ever make for your organisation!