Cultivation/Solicitation/Stewardship plan for Nathan E.

Cycle of Understanding If we look at the cycle of understanding (Hart, Greenfield, Gignac, & Carnie, 2006), Nathan is somewhere in between the understanding and the commitment. As stated in his briefing last week, one of Nathans primary environmental concerns is estuary health as it relates to salmon populations and mercury. Nathan is aware of how the recycling challenges with compact florescent lights (CLFs) effects this issue, he and he understands what Zero Waste Washington is doing about this. Historically, Nathan has supported organizations that directly worked on estuary restoration, the goal for this cultivation plan is to get him to commit to supporting one of the sources of mercury pollution: the lack a comprehensive CFL recycling program. The Readiness Formula The readiness formula is a way of determining whether or not it is the right time to ask a prospect for a contribution (Fredricks, 2010). For the purpose of this cultivation plan, I will address each of the variables in this formula separately, and then assess what further action, if any, needs to be taken before making the ask. Education- Through it girlfriend Cloe, Zero Wastes board treasurer, Nathan is well educated on the general issues the organization is working on. He understands the concepts of producer responsibility, as well as the mission and values statement of Zero Waste Washington. At this point, he is familiar, but not well versed, in the CFL recycling program and legislation the Zero Waste Washington is working on.

Involvement- Nathan has attended every Zero Waste Washington event in recent history with Cloe. He helps by volunteering at the sign in table, and knows a large number of the organizations major donors. He has signed a few online petitions for the organization. Cultivation- It is important to note that Nathan has never been asked to attend an event by anyone other than Cloe, and whereas they make their donation as a family, he has always been handled as her plus one. After the organizations last major donor cultivation event, Nathan received a handwritten thank you card that was signed by the board treasurer and the program director, thanking him for his help at the event and for his continued financial support. It was the first time Nathan had received mail from Zero Waste that was addressed exclusively to him. Inclination- It is well known that Nathan is an advocate for healthy waterways and healthy fish, but whether or not he has made the connection to these issues and Zero Wastes CFL program is foggy. He knows about the effects of CFLs on mercury pollution, but it is unknown just how familiar he is with the organizations program specifics. Assets- Nathan and Cloe would never describe themselves as wealthy, but they are certainly comfortable. Their home was recently appraised at almost $500,000, they travel, have minimal debt outside of their mortgage (with the exception of Cloes student loan debt), and his salary is in the low six figures. Recently before a board meeting, Cloe had mentioned they were going to speak to a real estate agent about purchasing a small vacation home or condo in either the Washington wine country, or in the San Juan Islands. Is this the right time to ask?- No. Nathan requires more cultivation before being asked to make a large gift (independent of Cloe) to support the organizations CLF work. Currently, his relationship with the organization is week; if not for his relationship with Cloe, he would not be a

donor. If Nathan is going to be considered as a serious prospect for a $5,000 gift, it is important for the organization to not only to develop a relationship with him independent of Cloe, but also for someone other than Cloe to be his primary solicitor. Given that he is already close will the board members and the staff, the board president and the program director should be his primary solicitors. Having the leaders of the organization cultivating him will illustrate to Nathan that he is a valued part of the organization (Kihlstedt, 2010). Cultivation Plan A few of the key things we know about Nathan are 1. He prefers email communication to telephone. He is always busy at work, so he likes to read and respond to things in his own time. 2. He likes to go to public hearings and meetings. When there was a change to city bus systems, Nathan was at almost every meeting on the issue. 3. He is more logical than emotional. Cloe has commented on this several times. Even in their personal relationship, Nathan will often respond more to logical appeals (facts, figures, outcomes) than he will to emotional appeals. He is more concerned with the what and the how than the why. With these three points in mind, the first logical step in cultivating Nathan as an individual donor would be for the board president and they program director to find a local hearing on an issue related to CFL recycling to invite Nathan to attend with them. Given that Nathan is a busy man, and communicates via email, it is important to give him at least a two week notice about the hearing so he has time to add it to his calendar, and shuffle other items around if need be. Given the time of the meeting, it would be recommended that the group go to coffee or lunch after the

hearing to discuss what role Zero Waste Washington has been playing in implementing a CFL recycling program, and the legislation they are working on. In addition to inviting him to public hearings around the issue, the program director should send Nathan an email anytime there is a program update for the legislative work on this issue, and possibly give him an action item of calling a representative to support or oppose a bill the organization is working on in this issue. By connecting him with the work on the CFL campaign, the solicitors will be highlighting the pragmatic work of the organization on the topic, and Nathan will be able to see the progress they are making on this issue on a daily or weekly basis. The goal of this cultivation strategy is to have Nathan form a relationship with Zero Waste Washington outside of Cloe. Given that they are looking into buying another property, it is important to not postpone the ask (Fredricks, 2010). If the ask is postponed, then the solicitors run the risk of Nathans money being tied up in a real estate venture instead of being able to go toward the organization. With this timeline in mind, it is important for the board president and the program manager to start talking money with Nathan as soon as a relationship starts to become established. It would be easy to start with, You and Cloe have been making a wonderful annual family contribution. Have you ever considered making an individual gift to support our CFL program?. When it comes time to make the ask, the solicitors should have a proposal lined out that would show Nathan how his gift of $5,000 would help to elevate the organizations work on CFLs to the next level. Given the initial connection to the estuaries, their plan should highlighted how many CFLs they expect to keep out of landfills, and how much mercury that will keep from

going into the environment. Again, the solicitors should not rely on an emotional appeal here, but rather should stick to facts, projected outcomes, and deliverables. Once the gift is received from Nathan, it is important to continue to treat him as an individual donor, and make sure anything regarding the CFL campaigns are addressed directly to him. By continuing correspondence with him exclusively when addressing this issue, the solicitors will be solidifying their relationship with Nathan, and working their way to an additional gift to support the CFL program next legislative session. Additionally, but addressing things this way, it is stating that this $5,000 CFL gift is viewed as a separate membership than the annual gift he is making with Cloe, so both contributions will continue to come in.

References
Fredricks, L. (2010). The Ask: How to Ask for Support for Your Nonprofit Cause, Creative Project, or Business Venture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hart, T., Greenfield, J., Gignac, P., & Carnie, C. (2006). Major Donors: FInding Big Gifts in Your Database and Online. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kihlstedt, A. (2010). Capital Campaigns Strategies That Work. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett.