Grateful Patients and Faculty Fundraising

Report
Faculty Engagement
& Grateful Patient
Fundraising
Ellen K. Stifler
Sr. Director of Development
Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center
Matrix Cancer Center located in Baltimore, Maryland
Recognized globally for translational research mission
A team approach to care - coordinated multidisciplinary care of specific tumors
Leading investigators drawing young talent
Fundamental discoveries in cancer biology
Novel clinical treatment options
Grateful Patient Fundraising Study
Background
 Grateful patient philanthropy is a $1 billion/year industry in US
 Hopkins has traditionally excelled at grateful patient philanthropy
 No empirical data existed to demonstrate the best way to teach doctors
grateful patient fundraising
Goals of Study
 Measured qualified referrals per faculty member that result from differing
training methods
 Measured the gift solicitations and eventual gift closures by development
officers in partnership with trained faculty
Grateful Patient Fundraising Study
A randomized trial was used to determine which of the three educational
interventions would best engage faculty
Cohorts
Participants were divided into three cohorts:
 E-Mail Arm: Participants received 11 articles and one book highlighting
philanthropy in the U.S.
 Lecture Arm: Participants attended one of three sessions taught by either
Walter Stark, M.D., Patrick Walsh, M.D. or Morton Goldberg, M.D., which
reviewed general principles and specific practice each physician has adopted
for success in grateful patient fundraising
 Coaching Arm: Curriculum taught in a one-on-one setting between each
physician and a seasoned development professional
Understanding What Motivates a Gift
• Wanting to affect change as a result of their personal experience and
passion
• Connection to an individual (physician) or cause within an organization
• Think of your own personal giving and why you give
• Honorific – one time thank you
• Personal recognition – minimal
• Because it makes them feel good
• Immediate access to our doctors
• Tax reasons
The 4 A’s of a Donor
• Affluence – has the resources to give
• Affinity – loves you, your colleagues and
Hopkins
• Apt – to be philanthropic
• Access – is willing to meet to understand ways
in which they may want to participate
Recognizing the Potential
• Listen for questions about your work
• Listen for appreciative compliments
• Listen for clues about their personal lifestyle
• Frame the conversation for a specific next step
• Do not be fooled by their attire
The Time Commitment Question
• HOW INVOLVED DO YOU WANT TO BE?
• The more you’re involved, the greater the return
• It is a numbers game
• Compelling ideas that resonate with a donor!
Overcoming Obstacles/Concerns
• Ethical
 Understanding the nature of giving in America
 Philanthropy should not interfere with your relationship as
a doctor. However, you may be asked to develop a
personal relationship once philanthropy is involved.
• Legal
 HIPAA and JHM legal interpretation
 We can have a conversation with you about the patient
but not about their care/illness
 We can obtain HIPAA authorization during our initial
meeting with the individual
The Role of the Development Officer
(Protocol)
• Think of us as your personal trainer
• Understanding best practices
• Work out the “in-between” communication strategy
• How to introduce the development officer into the
relationship
• When it comes to the “ask” let the development
officer receive the “no” and you receive the “yes”
The Value of Stewardship
• A proven fact… the more you engage and inform
the more they will give
• You have to make a commitment and sometimes
its personal!
• The first gift in many instances is just a test
• Value the person, not just their wealth!
Action Plan
• Meet with development officer to go over SELECT
patients you have seen
• Agree to be engaged and dedicate time to meet on
a regular basis (6x minimum over one year) with the
development officer and possibly your potential
prospects
• Be able to successfully articulate your programs
that require funding – Why? What’s the return on
investment? How will I know my gift has an impact?
It All Boils Down To --- What Are
You Comfortable Doing?
• Screen names and sign a letter of introduction?
• Bring up the subject of your work and ask for an
appointment.
• Meet with the family and your development officer
to describe your program and their potential
interest?
• Ask for a specific dollar gift in person?
Grateful Patient Fundraising Study Sample
Physician Characteristics
Male, n (%)
Female, n (%)
Age, Mean
Race, n (%)
White, non-Hispanic
Hispanic
African-American
Asian
Other
Division, n (%)
Cardiology
Internal Medicine
Neurology
Oncology
Academic rank, n (%)
Instructor / Assistant Prof.
Associate Prof. / Professor
Years at Hopkins, n (%)
<5 years
5+ years
Email Arm
Lecture Arm
Coaching Arm
Combined
N= 14
N= 18
N= 19
N= 51
8 (57%)
6 (43%)
14 (78%)
4 (22%)
16 (84%)
3 (16%)
75%
25%
47
49
48
48
9 (64%)
2 (14%)
-3 (21%)
--
15 (83%)
--1 (6%)
2 (11%)
16 (84%)
1 (5%)
1 (5%)
-1 (5%)
78%
6%
2%
8%
6%
-- (--)
3 (21%)
6 (43%)
5 (36%)
3 (17%)
-- (--)
10 (56%)
5 (28%)
3 (16%)
2 (11%)
10 (53%)
4 (21%)
12%
10%
51%
27%
5 (36%)
9 (64%)
6 (33%)
12 (66%)
7 (37%)
12 (43%)
35%
65%
5 (36%)
9 (64%)
2 (11%)
16 (89%)
4 (21%)
15 (79%)
22%
78%
Grateful Patient Fundraising at Johns Hopkins
Referrals of Patients from Faculty by Cohort
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
E-Mail Arm
Lecture Arm
Coaching Arm
Grateful Patient Fundraising at Johns Hopkins
Conclusions
• A total of 63 grateful patient referrals were generated
• Of the 63 referrals, 19 were not qualified*
• Only the coaching and lecture arm generated referrals
• The coaching arm generated 41 qualified referrals v. 3 from the lecture arm
• 4 gifts totaling $219k were generated from the coaching referrals
* Referrals are qualified as prospects during discovery
research by Development
Grateful Patient Fundraising at Kimmel
Looking Forward
•
Future of HIPAA for philanthropy as an Opt-Out process at JHH rather than
Opt-In we have used
• Current and future economic climate for academic healthcare demands
even greater philanthropic investment
• Importance of faculty referrals and engagement with development
• Working to define how to measure and evaluate faculty involvement
•
•
Integration of participation in development and making grateful patient
referrals a component of annual faculty evaluations
Evaluating number referrals from faculty to development
Why Now?
Why Now?
Cancer incidence rate per age group (both sexes), rate per 100,000 population.
NCI SEER Program Data

similar documents