Great Fundraising Organizations, by Alan Clayton. Book cover.

Institute of Fundraising

I find it a little embarrassing sometimes, sitting in Researchers in Fundraising (RiF) conferences when someone from the Institute of Fundraising asks how many people are members. Very few hands are raised. Many people who attend RiF conferences are prospect researchers, and many are fundraisers.

Why do so few seem to be members? How relevant is the Institute of Fundraising to us?

The Institute produces lots of useful codes of conduct, publicises events and provides great networking opportunities for fundraisers and researchers. However, while they organise various sorts of training events, I have heard a few people at RiF events say that there is little for prospect researchers other than what we organise ourselves.

Advertisement

Great Fundraising Organizations, by Alan Clayton. Buy now.

The certificate in fundraising doesn’t seem all that relevant to prospect researchers, so we are looking into organising certificated training that is more relevant.

The Institute’s guidelines on the Data Protection ACT (DPA) are not as relevant to prospect research as they could be, and the guidelines that RiF produced have been stuck in limbo for a couple of years now.

They are featured on the RiF section of the Institute’s website, but they were not included in the last update of the Institute’s codes of practice. I am not sure of the status of the RiF guidelines.

Up until a few years ago, RiF was entirely separate from the Institute. Was becoming an Institute of Fundraising Special Interest Group the right move? Does the Institute of Fundraising have much to offer prospect researchers? If so, why aren’t more of us joining?

I help to organise the RiF conferences, and I have been a member of the Institute of Fundraising for a number of years.
 

Loading

Mastodon