FundSvcs Community

 View Only

  • 1.  Gift Agreement and Fund Purpose Review Model

    Posted 22 hours ago
    Good afternoon,

    Over the past year, I have been developing a gift agreement and fund purpose review model that outlines the key components to consider when evaluating a gift agreement or fund purpose. I would welcome the opportunity to share this model with you and gather your input, feedback, and perspectives on how it might be strengthened or refined.

    My approach is grounded in the idea that reviewing a gift agreement or fund purpose requires evaluating several interconnected factors, including legal considerations, policy alignment, administrative feasibility, ethical implications, and operational efficiency. At the center of this framework is risk, as it is essential to assess the institution's risk tolerance when making these determinations. For example, if a proposed fund purpose includes subjective criteria, such as preferences that require interpretation, it is important to evaluate the level of risk the institution is willing to assume. This includes considering whether the criteria can be administered consistently, whether the fund will remain sustainable over time, and whether potential misinterpretation or inconsistent awarding could create donor relations concerns.

    At the same time, I view sustainability as an overarching principle that informs and connects each of these components throughout the review process, helping ensure that gift agreements and fund purposes remain viable and effective over time. I have also been considering whether donor relations should be incorporated as an additional element within this framework.

    I would greatly value your thoughts and perspectives on this approach.
    image


    ------------------------------
    Sarah Thomas
    NC State University
    srthoma3@ncsu.edu
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Gift Agreement and Fund Purpose Review Model

    Posted 21 hours ago
    I fully agree with the approach. You have correctly identified the "what." I believe the challenge will be figuring out the "who" and the "how."

    What you've described can be somewhat standardized using templates. I know you have those, and when I was there, we were very strict about the endowment and BTE requirements. I remember we had an exception form that CDOs needed to complete if they couldn't accept certain restrictions. You may recall that those forms had to come to me so I could determine whether they met several of the criteria you outlined in this model. When I was unsure, I would contact Counsel or Foundation Accounting & Investments, especially for administrative questions. I do not think this process requires a committee review. Just someone who knows who to contact.

    Anyway, your model should codify the process next. You don't want to make it overly burdensome with multiple reviews that could delay finalizing the agreement. Perhaps this is where Donor Relations is involved - in guiding the agreement through the review and approval process. Again, it is imperative that exceptions remain rare! But when an agreement tries to depart from your established templates, DR is in a great position to communicate between the donor and officials to finalize the agreement.

    John

    John H. Taylor, Principal
    John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC
    2604 Sevier Street
    Durham, NC     27705

    919.816.5903 (cell/text)

    Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987




    Original Message


Related Content