This story begins with a situation common to many nonprofit organisations:

• A Board convinced that fundraising is an exquisitely “technical” task to be left to the fundraising team once general guidelines have been established.
• A fundraising team aware of a project’s potential and the target that needs to be reached, but also aware that relationships linked to a major donor programme often require an institutional door opener.

What happens when this cycle is broken?

The story of this campaign — now close to reaching the ambitious milestone of 5 million euros for the major renovation of a building to be used for university services — illustrates how the right spark can change the culture across an entire Board.

The organisation we advised works in education and had never carried out a major donor campaign. The fundraising team, with recent experience just in mass marketing fundraising campaigns, had nevertheless drawn up a feasibility plan for a typical capital campaign project, based on realistic figures, a reasonable timeline, and engaging, emotional communication.

The presentation of the plan to the Board generated approval and enthusiasm, but no offers of support followed. This was not unusual — traditionally, the Board was reluctant to share contacts, leverage relationships, or provide real support, despite showing great respect for the fundraising team’s work.

Tip No. 1: Identifying the problem is already a step toward its resolution. In this case, it was clear that the Board was confusing its approval of the fundraising plan with working alongside the team to help achieve it.

To unblock the situation, the focus needed to shift. We suggested to the Head of Development that they stop focusing on requests to the entire Board for the possible names of major donors. Instead, together, we should work to find a “hook” — that is, a Board member (or ideally more than one) with an interest and willingness to go deeper, to feel part of a project, and literally lend a hand.

In this case, the ideal “hook” was a Board member with significative experience at a university where fundraising was considered a responsibility shared by the faculty. He therefore understood the role they wanted him to play: not necessarily making the “ask,” but supporting the fundraising team in opening up relationships.

Tip No. 2: To identify who, within the Board, might have a proactive attitude toward fundraising, you need to get to know the Board members. This can only happen through meeting them outside of formal meetings or official occasions. The time dedicated to getting to know, cultivating, and involving Board members is undoubtedly among the best investments that a fundraising team can make.

Together with the head of development, we met with this Board member to discuss the restoration project and the associated fundraising in more detail, sharing some ideas for moving forward. This prompted him to recall that among his contacts was a network of international managers and entrepreneurs, many of whom felt a strong desire to put down roots in the area and be useful to the local community.

A simple, informal conversation with one of these contacts at an event gave the Board member an opportunity to talk about and raise awareness of the organisation’s project, and the idea to invite him to visit the renovation site, along with four other contacts. There, he guided them through a tour focused on the future: “imagine the researchers who will be sitting here, the students who will meet there,” and so on. In other words, he shared an experience and an almost tangible vision of the future.

Then, he passed the ball to the fundraising team so they could proceed independently with the “ask”. He did not replace the fundraisers, nor did he feel the pressure of having to ask: he facilitated the relationship, prepared it, and then let the fundraising experts handle the request, the approach, and the communication.

This is what Board members are called upon to do: to be facilitators and relationship builders, and not (necessarily, always) to ask for donations.

The result was a first major donation. This was followed by two further contacts shared by the same Board member, and two additional donations.

At the next Board meeting, he shared what had happened with the rest of the Board — not as a lesson in fundraising, but about the wonderful encounters he had experienced and, almost to his own surprise, how those encounters had generated support.

Needless to say, this created a snowball effect that enabled the organisation to raise nearly 3 million euros thanks to the Board’s support.

At that stage, it became no longer simply a matter of presenting an idea by those who had embraced it — the Board, the fundraising team — but, much more effectively, by real testimonials from the first three donors.

The campaign is now in its final stages and the 5-million-euro goal is just around the corner. It required around two years of work, meetings, creativity, proposals drafted and refined, many “no’s,” but also the “yes’s” that ultimately made all the difference. Above all, it brought the realisation that fundraising is not just a hot potato that can only be handled by specialists in the field, and that an engaged Board brings a quantum leap in quality, particularly when it comes to the most ambitious targets.

Key Takeaways

• When faced with a ‘passive’ Board, rather than asking for contacts it is far more effective to ask yourself how you can bypass that passivity and turn it into a catalyst.  Identifying the right ‘player’ — the Board member with the strongest affinity for the project, the one whose expertise is most aligned, or simply the one most open to organising discussions and building a network of contacts — has the power to take fundraising to the next level. Work directly with that person to exchange ideas and develop concrete actions. It usually works. And, above all, it then inspires other Board members to follow suit.
• The ‘hot potato’ issue of fundraising must be defused by fundraisers: the Board needs to be gradually guided towards a genuine understanding of what this tool entails and what is expected of them. Not necessarily requests, but relationships and contacts: in short, opening doors to share a vision. The fundraising team can then handle the technical proposal and the negotiations.
• Basing the relationship with the Board solely on plans and budgets is not that effective. Instead, it is better to incorporate suggestions, ideas and proposals: a visit to the construction site seemed an obvious idea to the fundraisers, yet it was welcomed by the Board as an extremely useful suggestion they hadn’t considered in terms of engaging prospective donors. Enthusiasm is generated through direct experience, not through PDF reports.

To conclude: involving the Board of Directors does not require miracles, but a shift in perspective.

When fundraisers stop asking the Board merely ‘Who can we contact?’, and start looking at Board involvement from this ‘sideways’ perspective, things begin to change. In this case, the ‘hook’ was a single Board member who took the initiative, providing the catalyst needed. In other cases, identifying and stimulating the ‘hook’ will be the fundraiser’s responsibility. In all cases, we need to find a trigger point from which to generate engagement.

Fundraising is not a cold transaction: it is building a relationship of support. And once the Board discovers its value, there is no going back.

About Simona Biancu

Founder of ENGAGEDin and an international consultant with over 15 years of expertise in strategic fundraising, philanthropy, and board development, Simona Biancu has driven growth for global nonprofit institutions, notably leading development, marketing, and fundraising departments for prestigious organizations such as the European Union Youth Orchestra and Fondazione Accademia Teatro alla Scala. A seasoned board member and international lecturer, she is a pioneer in board governance literature as co-author of “Board in prima fila” (2020) and the blog “Welcome on Board”, backed by a Master’s degree in Fundraising from the University of Bologna and an Executive Certificate in Strategic Philanthropy.

A year on from the 2025 EFA European Fundraising4Democracy Tour, democracy and civic space remain under extreme pressure, with continuing attacks on organisations and individuals, and new legal and funding barriers. Platform reactions to EU regulation of political advertising, particularly Meta’s, have also made it harder for NGOs to communicate, build communities and raise funds online. In an EFA survey of 170 organisations across 21 EU countries, a majority said the regulation was harming their freedom of expression and ability to act.

“So what can fundraising do about this?” asked EFA executive director Eduard Marček as he opened this year’s European Fundraising4Democracy Tour — a dynamic online event showcasing the best of European fundraising for democracy and civic space. “It probably cannot save democracy as such, but it can help and support organisations which are defending rights and democratic values. It can build broad bases of supporters and it can give people a practical way to express their voice and to make themselves heard.”

Speakers shared practical examples of how fundraising, crowdfunding, and civic engagement can help defend democratic values with attendees from 15 countries.

Here are the eight examples presented, and their key lessons.

1. Be ready to capitalise on media attention

Ali Walker Davis of Forward Action in the UK explained how to turn media attention into action quickly. “The news economy is speeding up and attention has a rapidly decreasing half-life, so if it’s difficult to move quickly, you’re going to miss those opportunities to engage,” she said. 

After a far-right rally in the UK, Forward Action helped Hope Not Hate launch a simple handraiser within days. It asked people to add their name to the ‘biggest record of hope against hate’, then to leaflet their area with a message of unity, and later, to donate. 45,000 people took the first action, and the campaign gained 33,000 new email subscribers, 4,000 volunteers (who distributed 1m leaflets in one weekend) and £30,000 in donations.

The secret, Ali said, is readiness: knowing which moments you’ll respond to and what roles supporters can play; having templates for emails, action pages, sign-up forms, donation journeys and tracking; and being clear about who signs off. “Being ready with a simple action is better than something that’s very robust on the policy front, but takes too long to get out. Actions like sign, donate, share, or send a message of solidarity are really effective, particularly when there are people on the frontline coming under attack.”

2. Use Meta’s targeting limits as opportunities

Ján Plišnák of PS:Digital in Slovakia spoke about reaching new audiences despite Meta’s restrictions. Custom audiences can be especially useful: ask similar NGOs, or organisations whose followers share an affinity with your cause, to share their audience for your campaign, he said. “It’s GDPR-friendly because you don’t share any personal information – just an anonymised audience.”

Ján described a campaign for the Milan Simecka Foundation. Simecka’s grandson leads the country’s biggest (pro-democracy) opposition movement but has no connection with the foundation. Even so, the government exploited the shared name to paint the foundation as political, and grants and partnerships dried up.

“We turned the targeting limitation into an opportunity: if we couldn’t target civil society or democracy directly, we’d hack the algorithm indirectly. We teamed up with friendly, like-minded pages and invited them to share their audiences. We also used a wide mix of creative formats to give the algorithm as many chances as possible to learn, adapt, and deliver results.”

3. Turn young people’s willingness to engage into lasting participation

In France, 8 in 10 young people say they’re ready to get involved in a cause they care about: the challenge is turning that into lasting participation, said Oriane Penny-Lepastier, from France’s Institut de L’Engagement.

Since 2012 the Institut has supported more than 11,000 young people who have shown their potential through volunteering, civic service or community action, selecting them for what they’ve done rather than education or background. “We see young people that have organised projects, helped vulnerable people, protected the environment or supported children in community actions. Through this, they discover something very powerful: that they can be useful, that they can change something in the society they live in – a feeling that’s very important for democracy.”

The key, she said, is for universities, employers and institutions to recognise and value the skills that engagement creates: recognition builds confidence, and confidence makes further engagement possible. Democratic education must also keep pace with AI, so the Institut is building algorithmic literacy into its work. “We need to give them the knowledge to understand the world, and the power to believe that they can change it.”

4. Look beyond traditional funding models to build democracy from the ground up

Martina Turola from The Good Lobby in Italy shared a voting rights campaign that shows what funding democracy from the ground up takes: a mixed funding base, and campaigning and fundraising treated as one activity. The campaign addressed a gap that leaves around 5 million Italians away from home for study, work or healthcare unable to vote where they live. Beginning as a grassroots effort, The Good Lobby joined in 2018 to provide support.

Because Italian philanthropy tends not to engage with civil rights work, the team looked beyond traditional funders, starting with Guerilla Foundation which backs grassroots activists, then building on existing relationships, including with Open Society and Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo. Family office support and a base of individual donors followed, enabling a move from awareness-raising to more sophisticated advocacy: a petition, a report showing Italy was the only big European country without remote voting, and strategic litigation. A test of offsite voting was secured for the 2025 referendums, letting around 67,000 people apply to register.

To build a stable donor base, the team reached new audiences through university and city tours, sports champions as ambassadors, symbolic ballot boxes and crowdfunding. “If a campaign creates a strong sense of ownership among citizens, mobilisation can become a way of building a constituency of supporters,” Martina said. A popular initiative bill has since helped put offsite voting into the electoral law reform now under discussion, and she expects a route to securing it for the next general election even if that reform fails.

5. Think bigger with crowdfunding

Gvantsa Kakauridze of Georgia’s Orbeliani Foundation explained how crowdfunding has become a tool for solidarity and resistance as democracy backslides, where it was once mostly used for individual causes. The turning point came two years ago, when the governing party suspended the country’s EU integration until 2028: people took to the streets, and the government responded with violence and repressive laws.

Giving changed in response. People began raising money for the families of prisoners of conscience. Independent media outlets, cut off from foreign funding by new laws, ran campaigns to survive. Protesters, who have gathered every evening for almost 600 days and been fined for it, are also supported through crowdfunding. And because donations can be anonymous, it offers a safe way to participate for those who cannot protest openly, such as public-sector workers.

Monthly campaigns now support prisoners’ families, and donors see themselves as part of a collective effort. “It’s become the way to be an active citizen,” Gvantsa said. “Fundraising can build trust and civic networks, it can protect independent voices, support people facing repression, sustain civic participation, and turn individual donations into collective actions.”

6. Understand your audience to remove barriers and build support

Almost half of Ireland’s LGBTQ+ community are suffering economic hardship, and LGBTQ+ charities face a funding shortfall that threatens their services. National datasets often overlook sexuality, so TU Dublin and the Outhouse LGBTQ+ Centre surveyed LGBTQ+ and straight people to find out who supports LGBTQ+ charities, how the community’s giving differs from the general population’s, and what barriers prevent participation in the workforce and society.

Sharing early results, Antonio Vega, a PhD researcher in behavioural economics at TU Dublin, said LGBTQ+ respondents were more likely to be left-wing, younger, on lower household incomes and non-religious. They were less likely to give money but more likely to volunteer, fundraise and campaign. Donors to LGBTQ+ charities also differ from the traditional Irish donor, being younger, and driven by fairness and social justice rather than religious obligation or tax incentives. “We also discovered something really amazing, that 81% of financial donors to Irish LGBTQ+ causes identify as non-LGBTQ+,” he said. About 66% are also women, many of them young, and 100% felt motivated by altruism.

Antonio drew three lessons for LGBTQ+ causes. First, move away from tax-incentive appeals and frame campaigns around systemic change, justice and fairness. Second, “value your non-monetary assets and recognise volunteering, campaigning and advocacy as core pillars for donor retention, because these activists are your long-time organisational allies”. Third, keep pushing for sexual orientation and gender identity questions in the census.

7. Use cultural participation to launch and sustain a movement

Sara Tokina of the Belarus Outside Sound System charity music movement shared how a community in exile uses music to build solidarity and awareness, and to raise funds. The movement grew out of repression and exile: the violent suppression of the 2020 protests forced much of Belarus’s cultural community to flee. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, those in political exile needed to show that Belarusians who opposed dictatorship also opposed war and stood with Ukraine. “In March 2022, we brought Belarusian artists together and organised our first event – a rave with donation-based entry. We raised €4,000 for a Ukrainian foundation, which helped children affected by the war.”

That event established a two-level fundraising model: institutional donors and cultural partners, plus audience giving, music sales and visibility generated by events. The movement has since organised a four-city international tour, a digital compilation (plus vinyl edition) of 13 Belarusian producers, a charity festival, and four simultaneous events across Poland on the day of Belarus’s 2025 presidential election. Together, these have reached more than 80,000 streams and over 10,000 event visitors, raised more than €30,000, and brought international attention to the situation in Belarus.

Sara drew four lessons: participation can lead to giving; people need to understand where their money goes; partnerships connect cultural participation with direct support; and formats must stay flexible. “Our community is spread across different countries, and we can’t stay together in one physical space,” she said. “But we still can gather around music. From that shared experience, trust, visibility and support can grow.”

8. Fight disinformation by playing to your strengths

Larissa Probst of the German Fundraising Association (DFRV) described how civil society organisations in Germany responded within 48 hours when far-right party AfD launched an “exposé platform”. It aimed to expose alleged NGO mismanagement, mixing real information with misleading claims and AI-generated videos, and published personal data about volunteer leaders. Recognising that every click would feed the platform traffic and amplify it, the DFRV and an alliance of partners launched a coordinated response.

They emailed organisations advising them not to click on or share the AfD’s content, with recommendations for reframing the narrative, and ready-to-use materials, and ran an online exchange to align messaging and coordinate next steps. Each organisation contributed what it already did best: one offered legal templates for requesting removal of false information, another took a secure copy of the platform’s content so groups could check it for errors about themselves, and others offered communications mentoring for smaller groups. “None of us did anything we’d never done before, but instead really used our expertise,” said Larissa.

The platform quickly lost momentum as a result and was not used at the party’s national conference as planned. Larissa’s takeaway was that specialisation, shared tools and collective capacity matter more than size. “We don’t always need a lot of resources, but just to share what we already know and the strengths which are available.”

The EFA European Fundraising4Democracy Tour will return in September 2027. Catch up with the presentations from 2025 and 2026 here, read the 2025 summary, and for more useful support, check out our resources page here.

Fundraisers dedicate their professional lives to helping others. They work every day to generate the resources that allow charities, foundations, universities, hospitals and social organisations to fulfil their missions. They help causes grow, communities thrive and social challenges receive the attention and support they deserve.

Yet one question is rarely asked: who takes care of the people whose work is to take care of causes?

This year, the French Association of Fundraisers (AFF) conducted the first national study on the mental health of fundraisers in France. Nearly 500 professionals participated. While the survey is not statistically representative of the entire profession, the results provide an important snapshot of how fundraisers are living and working today and highlight issues that deserve greater attention across Europe. The findings are both concerning and revealing.

More than half of respondents reported high or very high levels of stress. Nearly two thirds said they had experienced burnout or come close to burnout during their career. More than half had seriously considered leaving their job within the previous twelve months. Managers appeared particularly exposed, reporting even higher levels of stress and burnout.

These figures should not be interpreted simply as individual vulnerabilities. They point to broader structural realities affecting the fundraising profession.

Fundraising has always involved a degree of pressure. Professionals work in environments where resources are limited and needs are growing. They are expected to secure income, build relationships, demonstrate impact and contribute to organisational sustainability. In recent years, however, this pressure has intensified.

Economic uncertainty, inflation, changing donor expectations and increasing competition for funding have created more demanding conditions. In our survey, respondents frequently cited declining resources, higher fundraising targets and concerns about their organisations’ long-term viability as significant sources of stress. For many fundraisers, the challenge is no longer simply to grow income. It is to compensate for shrinking resources elsewhere in the organisation while facing growing expectations from leadership and boards.

At the same time, the issue is not only about funding.

The way fundraising work is organised also matters. Respondents reported that last-minute requests, short-term priorities overriding strategic thinking, and growing administrative requirements contribute significantly to workplace pressure. Many fundraisers find themselves caught between ambitious expectations and limited capacity. They know what should be done strategically but struggle to find the time, resources or organisational support to do it.

One particularly striking result concerns the relationship fundraisers have with their work.

The survey suggests that fundraisers care deeply about what they do. Many remain highly committed to the missions they serve and find meaning in their work. This commitment is undoubtedly one of the profession’s greatest strengths. However, it can also become a source of vulnerability.

People who care strongly about their work often find it difficult to disconnect. They frequently absorb the responsibility of organisational challenges as personal responsibility. They may continue working despite exhaustion because they believe their cause cannot afford for them to stop.

The survey reflects this reality. Large numbers of respondents reported thinking about work outside working hours and struggling to switch off mentally. Many reported working despite being significantly affected by stress. Yet relatively few had taken sick leave related to their mental health.

This raises an important question. If people continue delivering despite high stress levels, how visible does the problem become to leaders?

A profession can appear resilient while simultaneously becoming exhausted. Perhaps the most encouraging finding from the study is that solutions exist. Respondents whose organisations offered a greater number of support measures generally reported lower levels of stress. Flexible working arrangements, remote working opportunities and respect for the right to disconnect appear to make a positive difference. At the same time, significant gaps remain. Many fundraisers reported that wellbeing is rarely discussed directly with managers, and a substantial proportion do not feel comfortable discussing their difficulties.

This suggests that improving mental health in fundraising is not simply about introducing wellbeing programmes. It is about culture.

Creating healthier fundraising environments requires organisations to recognise that wellbeing is a strategic issue rather than a personal one. It affects retention, performance, creativity, decision-making and ultimately fundraising effectiveness itself.

Leaders can play an important role by setting realistic expectations, clarifying priorities, encouraging strategic focus and creating spaces where challenges can be discussed without stigma. Boards also have a responsibility to ensure that fundraising targets are aligned with available resources and organisational capacity.

The fundraising profession itself has an equally important role to play.

For many years, conversations about fundraising have focused primarily on techniques, channels, innovation and performance. These topics remain essential. But we must also create space to discuss the people behind the results.

• How do we make fundraising careers sustainable?
• How do we support professionals through increasingly complex environments?
• How do we ensure that commitment does not become self-sacrifice?
• How do we help managers lead teams while protecting their own wellbeing?

These are questions that deserve wider discussion across our sector.

The findings from France are unlikely to be unique. Similar pressures can be observed throughout Europe and beyond. While organisational contexts differ, many of the challenges faced by fundraisers are shared: rising expectations, limited resources, increasing complexity and a deep commitment to mission.

The good news is that mental health is no longer a taboo subject. More organisations are beginning to recognise its importance, and more professionals are willing to speak openly about their experiences.

This study should be seen not as a diagnosis of a problem specific to France but as an invitation to a broader conversation. Fundraisers help organisations change the world. To do that effectively over the long term, they need environments that allow them not only to perform but also to thrive.

Taking care of fundraisers is not separate from achieving impact. It is one of the conditions that makes impact possible.

Read the AFF’s summary of the study here, and the key findings in EFA’s news story here. 

Yaële Aferiat

When the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine at Ghent University (Belgium) decided to renovate its Small Animal Clinic, fundraising was explored to help finance part of the refurbishment. New housing for dogs and cats was urgently needed, and other medical equipment also required upgrading.

A peer-to-peer fundraising campaign was launched to support the purchase of new animal enclosures. Target audiences included staff and clients of the clinic, as well as researchers, students and alumni of the faculty. To ensure visibility, the campaign relied heavily on online communication, with articles and a video promoted through paid social media. Users who engaged with this content were subsequently targeted with remarketing and conversion ads directing them to the campaign website. There, they could choose to either start their own fundraising action, donate to an existing one, or give directly to the campaign.

Examples of paid social media posts

The campaign not only generated €85,000 in donations, but also led to valuable new relationships, both with individuals and companies, that could be further developed for future support. Shortly after the campaign, the clinic also received three legacy gifts, and several individuals made enquiries about including the faculty or clinic in their wills. For the faculty, this was also a first meaningful experience with fundraising, firmly placing it on their radar as a potential income stream.

Thank you sign above the clinic’s entrance

Peer-to-peer fundraising proved to be the right choice for this campaign. It is now also part of our “always-on” fundraising offer: anyone can start a fundraising initiative to support research or education at our university.

This approach offers many advantages. Below are six reasons why you, as a fundraising professional, should consider peer-to-peer fundraising.

1. Avoid costly donor acquisition investments

Acquiring new donors can demand significant investment, particularly through traditional channels such as face-to-face fundraising, telemarketing or direct mail. Peer-to-peer fundraising is a relatively cost-effective and efficient way to acquire new supporters. In our veterinary clinic campaign, every euro invested generated €4.28, a return on investment that is often difficult to achieve through traditional channels.

2. Reach audiences you would not otherwise access

The network of people who organise a fundraising action is incredibly valuable. Many of these individuals would not support your organisation without a prompt, and you typically do not have their contact details to reach out to them directly. Peer-to-peer fundraising unlocks these networks. We observed this in our campaign as well. When a client of the veterinary clinic organised a fundraising initiative, most donations came from their personal network — friends, family and acquaintances.

3. Build your community

Online donations generated through peer-to-peer campaigns provide valuable donor data. This allows you to keep supporters informed about the impact of their contributions and your organisation’s work. Some may go on to organise their own fundraising initiatives in the future, helping your community grow organically. Thanks to the campaign, the clinic continues to maintain strong relationships with many of the contacts established at the time. Donations are still being made today. A peer-to-peer campaign can also serve as a way to nurture existing relationships or re-engage supporters. In our case, several well-known clients of the clinic (including a TV personality and a professional footballer) were willing to support the campaign.

4. A powerful engagement filter and fundraising catalyst

Someone who organises a fundraising initiative is often more engaged than a one-time donor. It reflects a deeper connection with your cause. These are valuable relationships to nurture. Some may become long-term supporters or even include your organisation in their will. Peer-to-peer fundraising therefore generates high-quality leads for the future. For instance, one company made a very substantial donation during the campaign. Such a company could become a valuable long-term partner by establishing a research chair funded by major gifts and linked to the clinic’s research.

5. Leverage user-generated content

Fundraisers are often willing to share their personal stories. These can be powerful assets for your communications. Engage with them early so their stories can support both their own fundraising efforts and your broader campaign. Many of these stories are deeply personal, authentic and inspiring: exactly the kind of content that resonates with audiences. Throughout the campaign, the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine regularly shared new fundraising initiatives on its own social media channels. This helped to inspire others to get involved.

6. Put the “fun” back into fundraising

Peer-to-peer fundraising invites creativity. Supporters can come up with original and engaging initiatives, while fundraisers can design creative campaign concepts. Donors are often more inclined to give to a personal, creative initiative organised by someone they know. We allowed people the freedom to decide how they wanted to raise funds. Some organised fundraisers in memory of a deceased pet or to celebrate their own birthday, while others set up physical events (such as bake sales or raffles).

Where to focus your time as a fundraiser

• Engaging key stakeholders, such as early adopters willing to launch a fundraising action, or contacts who can amplify visibility (e.g. through content sharing). Involve colleagues responsible for major donors and legacy giving early on.
• Aligning and coordinating campaign communications and content: from storytelling and inspiring messages to donor stewardship and impact reporting.
• Monitoring data and reporting: tracking donations, identifying key supporters and fundraisers, and adjusting communication efforts where needed.

What you need to get started

• A strong online peer-to-peer fundraising platform. There are many solutions available, so there is no need to build from scratch. Tip: pay close attention to the level of (technical) support when selecting a partner. Responsiveness matters.
• Access to content support (e.g. a content agency or copywriter) who can quickly turn user-generated stories into compelling content. Timing is often critical.
• A compelling case for support that can be translated into a creative campaign concept. A strong, original or even playful campaign angle can significantly increase engagement. Think carefully about what you are fundraising for and how to present it creatively. Tip: consider incorporating “matched giving”: for example, a donor who matches each contribution or unlocks funding when a milestone is reached.

Hopefully this article has convinced you of the value of peer-to-peer fundraising within your fundraising portfolio. If you are considering this approach, I wish you every success and fun in implementing it.

About Wim Van der Planken

Wim Van der Planken has been working in fundraising for two decades. He learnt the tricks of the trade through face-to-face fundraising. He subsequently had the opportunity to share that experience globally through face-to-face programmes run by one of the largest INGOs. He then coordinated the different fundraising streams for a Belgian NGO. Since 2019, he has been working for Ghent University, where he is responsible for fundraising communications, donations and fundraising campaigns.

Trust-based philanthropy explained

Trust-based philanthropy is a giving model designed to reduce the power imbalance between grantmakers and grantees. It’s founded on the belief that no one understands an organisation’s work better than the organisation itself, making it best placed to decide the most effective use of resources.

In practice, this means:

• Flexible, often multi-year, grants that organisations can use where needed most, including as investments in fundraising or other infrastructure
• Lighter administrative burdens through simplified applications and reporting
• A shift in power towards the people on the ground, in recognition of their expertise
• Long-term relationships between grantmakers and grantee organisations, with open and transparent dialogue

The underlying goal is to strengthen organisations’ capacity and self-determination, enhancing their potential for achieving real and sustainable impact and societal benefit.

As European philanthropy network Philea has argued, what matters most is not simply what foundations fund, but how they fund it: flexible financing gives organisations room to adapt, take risks, and innovate as circumstances change.

Why flexible funding remains the exception

Yet so far, flexible funding is still the exception rather than the norm with many foundations remaining bound by requirements for detailed reporting and oversight of how funds are spent. Concerns over potential reputational risk and loss of control also play a role. Yet in today’s volatile world, nonprofits’ ability to adapt quickly is essential. Trust-based, flexible funding can strengthen organisations by giving them the capability to prioritise and to pivot when circumstances change, as well as to plan strategically for the long term.

The question that has hovered over this debate is whether that flexibility translates into measurable results. Giva Sverige’s analysis of the Swedish Postcode Lottery’s flexible support scheme shows that it does.

The Swedish Postcode Lottery has taken a trust-based approach to funding with members of the Swedish Postcode Lottery Association for many years. Its support is non-earmarked, meaning organisations can use where it is needed most, including as investment capital to enhance fundraising and monitoring capacities, rather than being restricted to a specific project.

To assess the difference this support has made, Giva Sverige conducted an analysis of the financial development of 100 of its member organisations between 2014 and 2024. Of these, 35 had access to basic, flexible support from the Swedish Postcode Lottery throughout the full ten-year period, while 65 did not.

Giva Sverige tracked and compared each organisation’s income from donations and grants over time, and controlled for other explanatory factors, such as size and purpose, and how income trends were affected in conjunction with major societal events, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The results

The analysis found that nonprofits receiving long-term, non-earmarked flexible support saw their income from donations and grants grow significantly faster than that of organisations without such support. The differences remained, even after adjustments for organisational size and purpose, suggesting that trust-based funding helps augment organisations’ basic capacity and generates greater societal benefits over time.

• Organisations that received flexible support recorded, on average, a 52% greater increase in income from donations and grants than organisations without it
• Across the full ten-year period, donations and grants for the Lottery’s beneficiaries increased by 82%, compared with 54% for organisations without flexible support
• Restricting the comparison to smaller organisations – those raising less than SEK 50 million — flexible support was still associated with 23% higher growth
• Even after excluding organisations that received large, one-off donations linked to the Ukraine invasion, flexible support was associated with 47% higher growth in funds raised

Taken together, the results suggest that flexible funding strengthens an organisation’s underlying capacity to raise money – its infrastructure, its resilience, its ability to plan – in a way that compounds over time.

Giva Sverige head of insights & analysis Mårten Palmefors comments:

“The analysis indicates that when organisations are given the opportunity to take a long-term approach through non-earmarked resources, their ability to bolster their own viability and to generate greater societal benefit over time is enhanced, strengthening the case for trust-based, flexible philanthropy.”

What this means for funders

For foundations weighing the trade-off between oversight and trust, the Swedish Postcode Lottery data offers a real-world test of trust-based philanthropy’s core premise – showing that unrestricted, long-term support appears to build organisations that are structurally better equipped to sustain and grow their own income, year after year.

On 7 July 2026, the French Senate’s inquiry commission on the private financing of public policy adopted its report after six months of work, 66 sessions, and 102 hearings, among them a joint hearing with Philea, EFA and ERNOP on 12 May. The commission was launched in response to concern over coordinated, ideologically driven funding strategies operating under the guise of philanthropy, most notably a network of foundations linked to a French businessman openly promoting a right-wing and far-right political agenda. The commission’s 32 recommendations aim to tighten transparency around private funding while explicitly preserving philanthropy’s role in democratic life.

A clear recognition of philanthropy

The inquiry commission explicitly recognises philanthropy’s contribution to funding the public interest, social innovation, and democracy. The commission does not question philanthropy’s legitimacy. The senators conclude that the existing legal framework for associations, foundations, and endowment funds is broadly sound. Their recommendations follow one consistent line: apply existing law better, rather than overburden it with new procedures. The commission pointed to the necessity of investing in human resources and tools for oversight bodies, training for public administrations and auditors, better information-sharing between government departments, improved sector statistics, and a sanctions regime that scales with the severity of the breach. It also proposes consolidating France’s foundation categories into four broad types and easing access to public-benefit foundation status. Endowment funds (fonds de dotation) draw the sharpest attention, with specific recommendations on governance and on dissolving inactive structures.

A neutrality injunction that reflects a broader European trend

The commission devotes an entire section to what it calls the “encroachment of influence strategies” on public policy, which it attributes to the opacity of certain private structures, and asks whether such funding is compatible with the impartiality expected of public action, with democratic oversight, and with the objectives of public policy itself. While this line of questioning stems from a legitimate concern for transparency, it echoes a broader, already documented trend: the growing pressure on civil society organisations to demonstrate political neutrality.

This ambiguity is not unique to France. Across Europe, civil society organisations seeking public or private funding are increasingly required to prove either that they have no political agenda, or that the one they have is compatible with public policy. This tension is visible even within the European Commission itself, where NGOs have faced pressure to soften how they describe their own advocacy work.[1] The same underlying issue shows up in different forms depending on the institution, but the direction is the same.

Institutional dialogue

While the report affirms philanthropy’s democratic role, keeps the current legal framework mostly intact, and prioritises enforcement over new rules, the commission has not taken up the sector’s recommendation of better structuring dialogue between national representative bodies and public authorities. It cites foreign models, Italy’s and the UK’s in particular, but fails to propose a permanent body for consultation between the state and philanthropy’s representatives. Better dialogue would help both sides understand each other, anticipate risks, and build regulation that holds up over time, something French actors have been advocating for some time.

Taken together, the report is good news for philanthropy’s legitimacy, yet challenging associations’ and foundations’ capacity to shape public policy is particularly worrying when civic space is already closing in across Europe.

Laurence Lepetit

[1] Louise Guillot, Florence Autret, “ONG: cachez ce lobbying que Bruxelles ne saurait voir,” Contexte, July 2026.

Full analysis: https://www.francegenerosites.org/actualites/transparence-influence-et-controle-democratique-des-financements-prives-de-laction-publique-synthese/

Over the next two decades, the transfer of wealth from Baby Boomers to their heirs and to charitable causes will be unlike anything the sector has seen before. Across Europe and beyond, organisations of every size are waking up to that opportunity, and many are investing in legacy content for the first time. The problem is that some of that content is built around the wrong thing entirely: the organisation, rather than the donor.

Beautifully produced films that open with mission statements, impact statistics, and carefully crafted brand messaging are everywhere. But what if we started to create content that did something much simpler and let legacy pledgers tell their stories?

What the neuroscience tells us

Professor Russell James at Texas Tech University has done some of the most compelling research in this area, using brain scanners to understand what happens when people consider leaving a legacy gift, and what he found is fascinating.

Legacy decisions activate what James calls the “visualised autobiography” regions of the brain, the parts we use when thinking about our own life stories and memories, and the stronger that activation, the more interested someone is in making a gift. This is why legacy giving is fundamentally different from other forms of donation: it is a deeply personal act of self-expression rooted in a donor’s sense of their own life and values.

Dr Claire Routley’s research (with Marina Jones) reaches the same conclusion through a different method. When she interviewed people who had left legacy gifts, they all had clear, identifiable life-story connections with their chosen charities, and the decision was never abstract or transactional but always rooted in lived experience and a sense of personal continuity.

One size does not fit all

Recent research by James and Routley adds a further layer of nuance that is particularly valuable for the sector. It found that people’s attitudes towards money fall into four broad mindsets: those who see money as a marker of status, those who experience financial anxiety, those who are planners, and those who are bargain-seekers. Each group is motivated differently, and the things that encourage someone to include a charitable gift in their will are quite different from the things that influence how much they ultimately leave.

This has direct implications for how you think about your content mix.

• For your planners, a pledger who talks through the practical decision behind their gift, how it fits into retirement planning or how the conversation with a solicitor went, can be more persuasive than any amount of emotional storytelling.
• For donors motivated by status and recognition, social proof content works well, including films that show the tangible, lasting impact a gift has made, or stories about named funds and what they have built over time.
• For those who are more anxious about money, the most powerful content is probably the warmest, featuring a pledger who had similar concerns and found a way through.
• For bargain-seekers, a short explainer film or an interview that touches on the tax efficiency of a gift in a will can open doors that purely emotional content might not.

The question worth asking is whether your legacy content is speaking to one type of donor and quietly overlooking everyone else.

What this looks like in practice

CoppaFeel is a breast cancer awareness charity with a young, contemporary brand, not what most people picture when they think of legacy fundraising, and their pledger film featured a supporter speaking directly about their connection to the cause. Why she had decided to make a gift, what it meant to her and her family, and how it sat alongside the rest of their lives. The film avoided production gloss, voiceover, and institutional messaging in favour of real people talking honestly, and it has secured 14 new pledgers with a 50% acquisition rate on launch.

The MS Society project took a different approach, featuring multiple pledgers each with different motivations including personal experience of MS, commitment to research, and a sense of community belonging. The deliberate diversity of perspectives reflected the reality that there is no single profile of a legacy pledger, and that showing multiple pathways into a gift is more inclusive and more effective than building content around a single archetype.

Five Talents took a different angle again, featuring Richard, a supporter with a development background, who talked through his gift in terms of due diligence and long-term investment thinking. That framing resonated deeply with Five Talents’ donor base precisely because it reflected how their supporters actually think and talk about money: it was their language, not the charity’s, and that distinction matters enormously.

Trusting the process

There is a practical question underneath all of this, which is how you actually find the right people to feature. Research from Remember A Charity found that 64% of legacy pledgers haven’t told the charities they’ve included a gift. Legacy pledgers are also far more likely to be among your existing supporters than you might expect — they could be your volunteers, regular donors or staff members.

The most effective process starts not with a camera but with a conversation. Talking to supporters, both pledgers and non-pledgers, about what would motivate someone to leave a gift reveals the authentic language and concerns that actually resonate in your community, and those conversations also open doors, because many supporters will say yes to sharing their story when approached with genuine interest and respect.

Good legacy content then needs to balance emotional connection alongside rational explanation, and clear personal values alongside motivations that other viewers can recognise in themselves. The collaborative approach matters too, including sharing drafts, gathering feedback, and making sure participants feel comfortable with how their story is told, not only because it is ethically right but because it consistently produces better content.

Authenticity over polish

In our experience, and that of many legacy fundraisers we have worked alongside, over-produced content tends to underperform compared to more authentically produced videos.

The Five Talents project demonstrated that supporters respond to straightforward, evidence-based storytelling that reflects their own language rather than the charity’s marketing register.

The wealth transfer currently underway is unprecedented, and organisations that invest now in building trust, creating authentic pledger stories, and reaching supporters across different motivational profiles will be better positioned for what is coming. It does not need to be complicated or expensive to begin, and your supporters deserve the opportunity to create impact that extends far beyond their lifetimes.

About Emma Bracegirdle

Emma Bracegirdle is founder of The Saltways, an ethical video production company and consultancy working exclusively with charities and nonprofits. The Saltways works with organisations of all sizes and causes on legacy video content, training, and storytelling strategy. You can reach Emma at emma@thesaltways.com. The Saltways is celebrating the power of ethical storytelling in the charity sector with a Charity Film Festival on 24 September, bringing together charity and nonprofit professionals for a full day of film screenings, workshops, panel discussions, live music and live streamed awards ceremony.

The loi de 1901 turns 125 this year. When it was passed, it did something simple and radical: it gave citizens the right to organise collectively without asking the state for permission. That founding principle has held. Today, France counts around 1.5 million active associations and over 6,000 foundations and endowment funds working across every field of the public interest — healthcare, education, environmental protection, social inclusion, human rights. France accounts for nearly two in five of all associations in the European Union, an associative density 2.5 times higher than the EU average, with nearly 1.8 million employees and 13 million volunteers.

Yet in December 2025, the CIVICUS Monitor downgraded France from “Narrowed” to “Obstructed” — placing it alongside Germany and Italy, and more than 50 other countries, in the third tier of civic space. For a self-declared mature democracy, this is a signal that cannot be ignored. Since the dissolution of the National Assembly in June 2024, those of us working in and alongside civil society have felt an unmistakable acceleration: restrictions coming faster, the political climate hardening, and with a presidential election on the horizon, a shared unease about what comes next.

The funding squeeze: public and private under pressure

The most immediate pressure is financial. Several regions have engaged in systematic defunding of the associative sector. In Pays de la Loire and Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, associations working in culture, social justice, feminism and environmental protection have seen their subsidies drastically reduced — sometimes with openly hostile rhetoric from elected officials. Across France, nearly 50% of regional and local authorities cut their budgets for civil society between 2024 and 2025.

The threat reached the national level too. In July 2025, a joint report by two public inspectorates proposed a sweeping reform of the tax incentives underpinning private giving. If adopted, the proposals would have reduced donations by an estimated €1.1 to €1.5 billion annually. The sector pushed back hard. The Prime Minister’s office eventually confirmed that no such measures would feature in the 2026 Finance Law. But the episode left its mark — not just as a threat averted, but as a sign that fiscal stability for civil society can no longer be taken for granted.

Legislation as a tool of control

The regulatory environment tells a similar story. The 2021 “Séparatisme law” introduced expanded powers to dissolve associations by administrative decision, creating for the first time the possibility for the state to withdraw tax-deductibility from donor-supported organisations without a court ruling. The sector opposed it formally and publicly. It passed anyway. Since then, year after year — in the 2024, 2025 and 2026 Finance Bills — amendments have targeted organisations working on environmental protection, animal welfare and migration rights, proposing to automatically suspend their tax-deductibility. In April 2026, a new Interior Ministry bill went further still, extending dissolution powers to situations where there is no direct evidence of incitement to violence.

A Senate inquiry commission launched in February 2026 added another layer of pressure. Nominally focused on the financing of public policies by private foundations, its framing conflated legitimate philanthropy with political influence — casting a shadow over the sector well beyond its stated target. France générosités appeared before the commission to defend the sector’s track record. EFA, PHILEA and ERNOP were invited to contribute a European comparative perspective on philanthropic transparency standards — a reminder that these debates extend well beyond France’s borders.

Stigmatisation and the erosion of trust

What is harder to legislate against — but no less damaging — is the language being used about civil society. Environmental organisations have been publicly called “eco-terrorists” by government figures. Associations supporting migrants have been cast as facilitators of illegal activity. In June 2025, the Planning Familial (one of France’s oldest and most respected health organisations) saw its public funding threatened, triggering a collective response in Le Monde from dozens of organisations. The Observatoire des Libertés Associatives has been documenting this pattern for years: not isolated incidents, but a sustained effort to discredit organisations that challenge the political mainstream.

For fundraisers, the consequences are practical. Donor confidence does not survive indefinitely in a climate of deliberate stigmatisation. However, in 2025, individual donations grew by 3.6%, the strongest increase since 2021. A small signal, but an encouraging one in those difficult times.

Fighting back: collective pride as strategy

In the face of dismissive rhetoric, the sector has chosen to respond with a joyful and unifying campaign that expresses our pride in a country where the voluntary sector is thriving. Associations and foundations have joined forces around a simple message: civil society is not a problem to be managed. It is democracy in action.

This convergence has produced a unified public campaign. La France qui (se) bat — “France that fights (for itself)” — launched on 4 June 2026 to mark the 125th anniversary of the loi de 1901. Our aim: to mobilise the French public, demonstrate their commitment to the voluntary sector, and remind our elected representatives and presidential candidates of the importance of protecting this sector for a vibrant democracy.

Laurence Lepetit, chief executive, France générosités

This theme was particularly evident in the discussions that took place during the afternoon’s parallel workshops, and in the Symposium’s closing session, where the conversation continued with a presentation of findings from each workshop and questions from the audience.

The workshops were:

Challenges And Potentials Of Education In Fundraising — moderated by Nele Theuer from BIBB, and discussing questions including how educational requirements will change in the future and which developments are needed to meet them; how to ensure that the educational needs of aspiring fundraisers from different backgrounds and with varying priorities are adequately addressed; and how structural characteristics of the German fundraising landscape helps or hinders these developments.

Should I Forget What I Know? Rethinking How Fundraisers Learn — moderated by Heike Kraack-Tichy from the German fundraising association DRFV, which explored the evolving demands on fundraisers and the skills, mindsets, and formats needed to stay effective in a rapidly changing world. The session challenged traditional approaches to professional development, asking what still works and what doesn’t, and how learning in fundraising can become more connected, practical, and bold.

Fun(d)raising 2050: Let’s Rock! Imagining the Future of the Profession: What Will Fundraising Look Like in 2050? — moderated by Pia Tornikoski from VaLa, the Finnish fundraising association. This workshop invited attendees to help shape the agenda and explore the future of fundraising. They discussed emerging trends, potential disruptions and key challenges, both within and beyond the nonprofit sector, reflecting also on long-term developments and who will lead the next generation of fundraisers.

Rounding up their conclusions, the final discussion of the day focused on the evolution of professional development in fundraising, examining the structural barriers to education, the transformative impact of AI, and the shifting organisational cultures required for the next generation of leadership.

Participants agreed that continuous learning should be viewed as a strategic investment that strengthens both individuals and organisations, rather than as an optional add-on. However, it was evident that for many fundraisers, accessing education and training remains difficult, with heavy workloads, limited budgets, and lack of long-term planning often prevent organisations from investing in professional development.

It was also clear that there has been a shift in how people learn, with traditional, authority-led training models increasingly giving way to peer-to-peer learning approaches that encourage collaboration, knowledge sharing, and practical experience. This change, participants noted, also reflects broader workforce trends, particularly among younger generations who value interactive and community-based learning environments.

Artificial intelligence, it was noted, can provide valuable support by providing real-time guidance and coaching, as well as automating routine tasks and supporting more sophisticated donor engagement strategies. At the same time however, there was strong agreement that technology will complement — not replace — human skills and qualities.

The discussion also extended beyond individual learning to organisational transformation, exploring more collaborative models of leadership, and ecosystem-based structures where fundraising is a shared responsibility across the organisation. Innovative practices such as dedicated “Innovation Labs” were highlighted as ways to encourage experimentation, reflection, and learning from failure.

Looking ahead, attendees imagined future fundraising roles such as Chief Empathy Officer, Chief Visionary Officer, and Giving Architect — positions blending technological capability with human-centred leadership. These future-focused roles reinforce the idea that the most valuable skills will be those that combine strategic thinking, emotional intelligence, and the effective use of technology.

Ultimately, the symposium concluded, the future of fundraising leadership depends on creating learning cultures that are accessible, relevant, and continuous. Organisations that invest in professional development, embrace innovation, and foster collaboration will be best positioned to thrive in an increasingly complex environment.

Key learnings

• Professional development is a strategic necessity, not an optional activity.
• Workload, funding constraints, and limited planning cultures remain major barriers to learning.
• Peer-to-peer and collaborative learning models are becoming more effective than traditional top-down approaches.
• AI will increasingly support fundraisers through automation, coaching, and data-driven insights. Human skills, however, remain irreplaceable.
• Innovation requires dedicated space and time, such as ‘Innovation Labs’ and structured reflection on failures.
• Organisations should foster a “fail-forward” culture that encourages experimentation and learning.
• Knowledge sharing and internal shadowing help spread learning across entire teams.
• Future fundraising professionals will need both technical and human skills, combining AI literacy with resilience and emotional intelligence.
• A common framework for fundraising competencies would help organisations assess, develop, and invest in talent more effectively.

Photo credit: DFRV/Karolina Granja

The EFA Learning Symposium 2026 took place in Berlin on 31 May-1 June. A big thank you to Deutscher Fundraising Verband (DFRV) and their events agency Kaiserwetter for hosting us.

Why fundraising needs a competency mindset

There is a persistent myth about what makes a good fundraiser. Many people believe successful fundraisers are simply empathetic, compassionate and good with people. It helps if they are outgoing, persuasive and passionate about their cause. Some even believe fundraising success depends on a natural gift that cannot really be taught.

Of course, these personal qualities matter. Empathy helps build relationships. Confidence helps start conversations. Passion helps inspire others. But on their own, they do not make someone a competent fundraiser.

Fundraising requires knowledge, skills and behaviours that can be learned and developed: understanding donor motivation, creating fundraising strategies, analysing data, managing partnerships, stewarding donors and much more. The moment we stop treating fundraising as a talent and start treating it as a set of professional competencies, we move from intuition to intentional development.

As fundraising continues to mature across Europe, I believe this distinction becomes increasingly important. Fundraising is increasingly recognised as a profession, yet professions are not built around personality traits. They are built around competencies. If fundraising is to continue evolving, we need a common language to describe what fundraisers should know and what they should be able to do.

Photo credit: DFRV/Karolina Granja

Measuring what matters: Lessons from Lithuania

This challenge became particularly visible to me in 2020, when I was developing Lithuania’s first national fundraising competency development programme, Fundraising@LT PRO. At the time, we brought together 30 fundraisers from different nonprofit organisations. They represented different causes, different levels of experience and different fundraising responsibilities. Some focused on grants, others on individual giving, corporate partnerships or communications.

One question quickly emerged: how could we design a meaningful learning programme without understanding participants’ existing competencies?

Too often, training programmes are built around assumptions. We assume we know where the gaps are. We assume what participants need to learn. We assume which skills require strengthening. But assumptions are a risky foundation for capacity building.

Inspired by Peter Drucker, the renowned management consultant often referred to as the father of modern management, and his famous observation that “you can’t manage what you can’t measure”, we decided to begin by assessing competencies. We developed a fundraising competency assessment test designed to evaluate knowledge and skills across several key fundraising domains. The objective was not to label people or rank them against each other. Instead, we wanted to understand existing strengths, identify gaps and build a programme based on evidence rather than intuition.

The results were illuminating. Most participants assessed themselves at Junior Fundraiser level, while only a small number reached Senior Fundraiser or Expert level. Some competencies proved stronger than expected, particularly understanding of fundraising ethics and the broader fundraising environment. Other areas revealed substantial gaps, especially individual fundraising, donor relationship management and fundraising strategy.

Most importantly, the assessment allowed us to replace assumptions with evidence. Rather than designing a programme around what we thought participants needed, we could focus on the competencies that genuinely required development.

Together with our international partners, we created a learning programme specifically targeted at those areas. Fifteen months later, participants completed the same assessment again.

The results were encouraging. Overall fundraising competencies improved by 22%. The strongest growth occurred in areas that received the greatest attention during the programme, including donor stewardship, fundraising strategy and community fundraising. Perhaps even more significantly, most participants progressed from Junior Fundraiser to Senior Fundraiser level, while the number of Expert-level fundraisers tripled.

Click images to enlarge

For me, the most important lesson was not the percentage increase itself. It was the confirmation that when competencies are clearly defined, assessed and intentionally developed, professional growth becomes visible and measurable. And once development becomes measurable, it can be managed strategically.

Beyond training: Building stronger fundraising teams

At the same time, the project revealed an important limitation. The competency assessment helped us understand where people were. It did not fully answer the question of where they should be.

We could identify competency gaps, but we lacked a framework that clearly described what fundraising excellence looked like at different stages of professional development. We needed something that could help organisations not only assess competencies, but also define expectations and create a roadmap for growth.

This led me to the concept of the Fundraising Competency Matrix*.

A competency matrix is a practical framework that defines the knowledge, skills and behaviours required for effective performance in a particular role or profession. It helps organisations understand what competencies people need, what level they currently demonstrate and what they need to develop in order to progress further.

Click images to enlarge

The value of such a framework goes far beyond training. It helps identify competency gaps and learning needs, supports workforce planning and talent management, improves recruitment processes and creates clearer career pathways. Most importantly, it turns competency development from guesswork into a structured management process.

One of the biggest shifts in thinking comes when organisations stop viewing every competency gap as a training problem. Training is important, but it is only one of many development tools. Competencies can also be strengthened through mentoring, coaching, peer learning, stretch assignments, job shadowing and practical experience.

When we focus only on training, we tend to ask: “What course should we send this person to?” When we focus on competencies, we start asking a much more useful question: “What experience, support or learning opportunity would help this person develop?”

The competency matrix helps organisations make these decisions intentionally rather than reactively.

It also encourages us to think beyond individual development and look at fundraising teams as a whole. Not every fundraiser needs every competency. A corporate fundraiser requires different expertise than a digital fundraising specialist. A fundraising manager needs different capabilities than someone at the start of their career. The goal is not for everyone to be equally good at everything. The goal is to ensure that all critical competencies are covered somewhere within the team.

This creates a different conversation inside organisations. Instead of asking, “Why are we not reaching our fundraising targets?”, leaders can ask, “Do we have the competencies required to achieve them?” In many cases, that question leads to far more useful insights.

For too long, fundraising capacity building has been driven by intuition, assumptions and individual experience. As our profession continues to evolve, competencies need to become the foundation of how we recruit, develop and manage fundraising talent. Strong fundraising teams are not built by chance. They are built through intentional investment in competencies.

Fundraising is not a talent. It is a profession. And professions become stronger when competencies are visible, measurable and continuously developed.

*The Fundraising Competency Matrix is available here and can be downloaded and adapted for use.

About Giedrė Šopaitė

Giedrė Šopaitė is a strategic philanthropy consultant, speaker and trainer with over 20 years of experience in the Lithuanian NGO sector. She is the founder and CEO of Baltic Fundraising Hub, supporting nonprofits in fundraising strategy and competency development, and advising companies on strategic philanthropy. Giedrė created Fundraising@LT PRO, Lithuania’s first fundraising competency development programme, and serves as an EFA board member. Her work focuses on strengthening fundraising professionalism, leadership and ethical, impact-driven philanthropy.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/giedresopaite/