CASE-Ross Support of Education:
United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Generating Philanthropic Support
for Higher Education
Findings from data collected for 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020
© 2021 Council for Advancement and Support of Education
Original publication date: April 2021
All rights reserved. No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or used in any
form, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and
retrieval system, without written permission from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer: While the publisher has used its best efforts in preparing this document, it
makes no representations or warranties in respect to the accuracy or completeness of its contents. No
liability or responsibility of any kind (to extent permitted by law), including responsibility for negligence is
accepted by the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, its servants or agents. All information
gathered is believed correct at publication date. Neither the publisher nor the author is engaged in
rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is
required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.
CASE-ROSS EDITORIAL BOARD
The Editorial Board members helped manage the project by contributing their time and
expertise at each stage of developing this report. They were involved with survey review, script
creation, survey promotion, data collection, data verification, analysis, report writing and
dissemination.
The 2019–2020 Editorial Board consisted of:
l Sandra Jackson, Deputy Director and Head of Development Services, University of Bristol
l Tania Jane Rawlinson, Director of Development and Alumni Relations, Cardiff University
l Frances Shepherd, Director of Development and Alumni, University of Glasgow
l Tom Smith, Prospect Research and Database Officer, Loughborough University
l Martin Wedlake, Deputy Director of Strategy and Operations, University College London
AUTHOR
Divya Krishnaswamy, Senior Research Analyst (Project Lead), CASE
CASE STAFF
Bruce Bernstein, Executive Director, Global Engagement (Europe and Africa)
Leigh Cleghorn, Deputy Director (Europe)
David Bass, Senior Director – Research
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we would like to thank the institutional staff who gave their time to provide
information about the philanthropic income of their institutions and those who submitted case
studies to support the publication of this report. A special thanks to all the new institutions
participating in the study for the first time. We are grateful to the CASE-Ross Editorial Board for
their continued guidance and support.
COVER ART CREDIT
© yuoak, Getty Images
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Divya Krishnaswamy
Senior Research Analyst
CASE
dkrishnaswamy@case.org or europe@case.org
+44 (20) 3752 9726
COUNCIL FOR ADVANCEMENT
AND SUPPORT OF EDUCATION
case.org
London
Mexico City
Singapore
Washington, D.C.
CONTENTS
PRESIDENT’S NOTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Key Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Cluster analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Interpreting the charts and tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
KEY INDICATORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
New funds secured. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash income received. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alumni and donors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fundraising and alumni relations investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fundraising and alumni relations staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
14
18
22
25
28
TRENDS IN KEY INDICATORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Philanthropic income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alumni and donors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fundraising and alumni relations investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fundraising and alumni relations staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Trends by cluster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
29
30
31
32
33
FINDINGS BY MISSION GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
FINDINGS BY OTHER GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
FINDINGS BY PEARCE REVIEW GROUPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
APPENDIX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Response rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Participating institutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
PRESIDENT'S NOTE
For almost 20 years the CASE-Ross Survey has documented the growth and evolution of higher education
advancement in the United Kingdom and Ireland. As the Editorial Board’s Foreword demonstrates, CASERoss data is a valuable tool providing insights into the impact of external factors, like the ongoing pandemic,
institutional practice, notably sustained investment in advancement functions, and program level strategy on
fundraising outcomes.
Throughout the past year educational leaders and advancement professionals have proven themselves
innovative and nimble. They have rapidly adapted primarily in-person alumni engagement and fundraising
programs to online activities that have proven successful in sustaining relationships. They have also been
successful in newly engaging previously uninvolved alumni and stakeholders who are motivated by institutional missions and vision. Fundraisers have adapted their appeals in many contexts to raise support for
students impacted by the crisis and the scientific research that has helped to pave a pathway beyond.
Institutional strategy has also played a critical role in sustaining and growing fundraising capacity.
Findings from this survey, as well as AMAtlas surveys of higher education fundraising in the US and Canada,
demonstrate that even in years when overall giving declines as a result of economic and other external factors,
many institutions sustain or grow fundraising. This reflects the importance of unstinting institutional support
of advancement programs. While the pandemic has posed many challenges, the CASE-Ross survey demonstrates the resilience of philanthropic relationships sustained through consistent engagement and stewardship.
The CASE-Ross survey has long been a critical resource for UK educational leaders and advancement
professionals and has become an important model for the global advancement profession. In March of 2021,
CASE published the first CASE Global Reporting Standards, an internationally applicable set of reporting
standards informed by fundamental ethical and professional principles. Members of the CASE-Ross Editorial
Board as well as other dedicated volunteers from the UK and Europe provided invaluable guidance and
support in the development of the new Standards. They include the CASE-Ross methodology of counting
new funds secured along with cash income as a central element.
Over the next two years, CASE will be engaging with volunteers and industry partners to align our established regional fundraising surveys with the new Standards and define a set of core metrics, across advancement roles, while preserving valuable longitudinal and regional data. This work will enable benchmarking
across national borders while ensuring that all CASE members have access to transparent, industry standard
data and can benefit from the metrics, analytics, and reporting resources provided by CASE’s AMAtlas team.
With sincere thanks to the members of the CASE-Ross Editorial Board and the dedicated advancement
professionals who contributed to this year’s survey and who do so much to advance education to transform
lives and society.
With much gratitude,
Sue Cunningham
President and CEO
CASE
•4•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
FOREWORD
2020’s global Coronavirus pandemic turned 2019–2020 into an unprecedented and difficult year for everyone, including universities, and their development and alumni relations programmes and teams. The fortitude,
commitment, flexibility and care shown by advancement professionals across the UK and Europe, in the face
of the pandemic, was wholly admirable. Many professionals helped support key aspects of university “pivots”
to address issues which the pandemic exacerbated.
The pandemic meant that 2019–2020 was a year of two (unequal) halves – one pre-COVID, and one
which tracked the pandemic’s early months. The CASE-Ross report for the 2019-2020 year does not distinguish between those two distinct timeframes, though the pandemic’s impact is evident across many of the data
points we track.
The overall story of the year, including those challenging early months of the pandemic, is strongly
positive. The sector delivered more than £1 billion of New Funds Secured from philanthropic sources for the
third year running. Strong momentum would seem to have been maintained, even as other sectors saw their
income from giving [or fundraising income/voluntary income] decimated.
That said, the story seems to be bifurcated in some areas of higher education advancement. Maturity, and
institutional commitment to development and alumni relations, mattered more than ever.
Mindful of this split, we reviewed our cluster analysis closely this year. Notably, initial cluster analysis left
us with a large emerging cluster, where we saw widely varied performances. Further analysis showed that this
cluster divided naturally into a group of 22 Emerging, and 11 Fragile institutions. (Last year’s Emerging cluster
might have benefitted from a similar approach, so we recommend that this year’s charts are read on their own;
they are perhaps more finely tuned and accurate, rather than representing a significant sector shift to more
“fragile” institutions.)
The more mature five of the six “clusters”: Elite, Established, Moderate, Developing and even Emerging
reported relatively consistent results and appear to have weathered the start of the pandemic. The Elite,
Moderate and Emerging clusters have all posted fundraising results that are slightly down on last year, but
this is in the context of a particularly strong 2018-19 and is not necessarily a cause for concern. Because these
institutions are responsible for more than 95% of gifts, this strong performance means that an overall New
Funds Secured remained above the £1 bn mark for the THIRD year in a row. The fall of £236 million from
last year is a return to 2017–18 performance levels, and it is worth remembering that the 2018–19 all-time
high included a single new pledge of £150m for one elite institution.
The sector’s focus on the long-term relationship based major gift model appears to have paid strong
dividends. Unlike transactional or product-based fundraising, UK higher education’s approach seems to
have nurtured and maintained long-term donor affinity and momentum. Universities’ willingness to invest
in asking, and donors’ ongoing willingness to give, does not seem to have been affected materially by the
pandemic in the last quarter of the 2019–2020 financial year.
News and analysis of the broader charity sector has frequently included reports of dramatic losses in
fundraising success, with attendant reductions in expenditure on fundraising. Our figures show that whilst
many universities reduced overall expenditure in 2019–2020, staffing numbers did not decline much. We
deduce – and anecdotal evidence also tells us – that reduced spend was the result of pausing on visits and
events (including overseas travel), rather than significant staffing cuts.
But at the very Fragile end of the spectrum (which now includes a number of institutions classed as
Emerging in previous years), there have been advancement team closures and reductions. Notably, fewer
institutions since the mid-2000s participated in the CASE-Ross survey. (Even some relatively mature offices
•5•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
were unable to complete the survey, or provide all its data points, due to staff pressures. We hope to welcome
them back to the full survey next year.) In 2019–2020, it seems, institutional commitments to fundraising
suffered for some institutions with the least mature programmes.
Stop-start investment in fundraising is a dangerous game. It can lead to damaged relationships and in
turn to philanthropic income languishing and failing to recover when it is felt investment can again be made.
Consistent investment, appropriately tailored to institutional needs and opportunities, has proven time and
again to lead to success – as the continued growth in all the other clusters demonstrates.
Where there was success, what was it that counted? Institutions that showed impressive results have told
us their success relied on strong donor relationships, on institutional agility, and/or being well aligned with
strategic planning in their institutions. When some or all of those factors were in play, advancement teams
could respond to the crisis even as institutional needs evolved rapidly. They could demonstrate authenticity
of need to donors who knew them well already and could showcase real impact to donors. Some universities found success through fundraising for research efforts associated with the pandemic and vaccine. Others
moved rapidly, and successfully, to appeals which focused on new and urgent student needs during the crisis.
Of course, we will also be watching carefully for the pandemic’s impact on the 2020–2021 year. At this
stage it is very difficult to predict. Some institutions seem to be faring well. We know that non-salary spend
may be far lower than in previous years, with no travel and few events possible. Telethons were more complex to
run. But we have heard that online engagement with alumni is opening up new territories and opportunities –
fertile ground for global engagement of a mobile, agile alumni community. Case studies of successes, and
failures, will be important for the sector to share in the coming months.
The CASE-Ross Survey continues to highlight sector trends and patterns we have observed over time.
Some longer-term trends have continued during 2019–2020:
• Investment in alumni magazines declined for the third year in a row;
• Contactable alumni numbers continue the long-term trend of inexorable rise;
• Very large gifts continue to contribute significantly to the sector’s success.
Some trends we are watching were more difficult to chart in a tumultuous year:
• Telethons seem to have slowed for the second year running for the subset of institutions who report
on this data, though it is unclear whether this was due to strategic choices, or to lockdown pauses.
• Crowdfunding continues to grow donor numbers, but again the pandemic may be a factor. Did
emergency appeals open doors to new audiences?
• While total staff numbers dipped very slightly (both in fundraising and alumni relations), a few
significant institutions did not report staff – and median staff numbers held largely constant. The
2020–2021 numbers may offer a better picture of pandemic impact.
We also observe fluctuations in “contactable” alumni with interest; we aim to consult with the sector
about the causes here, and significance of this fluctuation.
More generally, both our Editorial Board and CASE remain committed to keeping colleagues in Europe
informed and consulted, whilst CASE globally updates its surveys and programmes. (See Sue Cunningham’s
notes above about the wider landscape). We feel real pride that the CASE-Ross Survey, now passing its 20th
year, has helped provide much of the context for the recently revised Global Standards, and for data collection
in the forthcoming CASE “core metrics” programme.
Our goal as an Editorial Board together with CASE is to ensure that European colleagues have the data
and tools they need to enable benchmarking, inform their programmes, and identify communities of best
practice. We will do our best to provide early information about, and consultation on, updates and changes in
the CASE-Ross Survey. We will stay in touch, and continue the discussion at CASE events and programmes,
in the months and year to come.
•6•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Most of all, we are full of appreciation for the outstanding commitment which advancement colleagues
have shown to their universities, to their students and colleagues, and to their donors and alumni over the past
year. Our work is valuable, is valued, and truly changes lives. This survey gives an idea of the financial impact
which our work has – and all of us can be proud of the positive impact we have on people, on places, and
on learning and discovery at our institutions. Thank you to all of the institutions who participated in the
CASE-Ross Survey 2019–20!
With thanks,
CASE-Ross Editorial Board
•7•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TOTAL NEW FUNDS SECURED IN
2019–2020 WAS £1.09 BILLION
The CASE-Ross Survey Supporting Document
prescribes definitions for recording philanthropic
income, guidance on eligible funding and provides
general guidance on completing the survey. Philanthropic income includes gifts/donations or grants
that are eligible and fall within the boundaries
of philanthropic intent. Philanthropic support is
reported in two ways:
• New funds secured in a year includes the value
of new gifts/donations received and new pledges
confirmed in the year at their value for up to five
years; it excludes legacy payments and cash payments made against pledges secured in previous
years. New funds secured reflect the success of
current fundraising activity.
• Cash income received includes all cash income
received during the year and includes new single
cash gifts, cash payments received against pledges
secured in the current or previous years and cash
from legacies; it excludes new pledges where
payment has not been received. Cash income
reflects the success of the current and past years’
fundraising activity.
• The total new funds secured in 2019–2020 was
£1.09 billion.
• The mean philanthropic funds secured in
2019–2020 decreased by 17% since 2018-19.
• On average, institutions sourced 66% of their new
funds from organisations (including companies,
trusts and foundations and lottery) while the
remaining 34% was contributed by individuals.
• Amongst 79 institutions that provided the data,
219 donors made gifts or pledges of £500k or
more during 2019–2020 (excludes elite and fragile
institutions).
TOTAL CASH INCOME RECEIVED IN
2019–2020 WAS £1.03 BILLION
• The total cash income received in 2019–2020
was £1.03 billion.
• The mean cash income received in 2019–2020
decreased by 0.1% since 2018–19.
• On average, institutions received 63% of cash
income from organisations (including companies
and trusts and foundations), while individuals
contributed 37%.
• Total cash income from legacies was £85m in
2019–2020 from 986 legacy donations.
Key Findings1
For 2019–2020, overall average new funds secured
decreased by 17% over those received during
2018–19. Average cash income also decreased
slightly, by 0.1% over 2018–19 figures.
The average value of the largest new gifts/
pledges and average value of the largest cash gifts
received by institutions decreased by 24% and 4%
respectively. Average donor numbers have increased
by 3.6% while the average number of alumni
donors has increased by 5% since 2018–19.
Average figures for investments in both
fundraising and alumni relations have decreased
by 9% and 16% over 2018–19 levels.
AVERAGE NUMBER OF DONORS GREW
BY 3.6%
• 94 participating institutions reported a total of
214,115 donors.
• Average donors increased by 3.6% since 2018–19
and average alumni donors increased by 5% since
2018–19.
• Among institutions that provided breakdowns of
donor types2, 97% were individuals and 3% were
trusts and foundations, companies, lotteries or
other organisations.
• 1% or 149,715 of the reported 10.8m contactable
alumni made contributions during the year.
All average trend figures are for institutions that participated in the survey for all four years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020.
Not all participating institutions provided a break down of total donors into sub-categories.
1
2
•8•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
AVERAGE INVESTMENTS IN FUNDRAISING
AND ALUMNI RELATIONS DECREASED BY
9% AND 16% RESPECTIVELY
• In 2019–2020 the total expenditure on alumni
relations was £46m and the total expenditure on
fundraising was £107.5m.
• Average fundraising investment decreased by 9%
and average alumni relations investment decreased
by 16% over the previous year.
• Staff costs accounted for 79% of average fund­
raising expenditures and 73% of average alumni
relations expenditures.
•9•
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
INTRODUCTION
Cluster Analysis
The first CASE-Ross Support of Education Survey
(as it is now known) was carried out in 2002 and
built on previous surveys undertaken within the
Ross Group; the survey has been conducted
annually since then.
The survey methodology has been adapted for
use in other CASE surveys on philanthropic support for education in Australia and New Zealand,
continental Europe, South Africa and Canada.
During 2012–13, the CASE-Ross survey was
offered online for the first time. Its methodology
also changed substantially (differentiating it from its
predecessors) and was enhanced following a review
that included scoping interviews with key stakeholders and development directors.
The CASE-Ross Support of Education Survey,
UK and Ireland, 2019–2020 was open to participants from 16 September 2020 to 24 November
2020. Invitations to participate were sent to 161
higher education and specialist institutions in the
UK alone that are involved in some form of fundraising or alumni relations activity. Ninety-three
institutions across the UK participated yielding a
response rate of 58% (see Appendix for details).
Two higher education institutions from Ireland
and the Institute of Cancer Research in the UK
also took part in the survey. A total of 96 institutions across the UK and Ireland participated during
2019–2020.
Participating institutions provided data for the
12-month period from 1 August 2019 to 31 July
2020. Data has not been reweighted to estimate
funds raised and other data for non-participating
institutions so reported totals only account for a
portion of philanthropic support for higher education in the UK and Ireland.
CASE Research staff, with the support of the
Editorial Board, queried data submitted by institutions against an exhaustive set of logic, ratio, arithmetic and substantive tests and survey participants
were asked to confirm or correct their responses.
Benchmarking data was made available to participating institutions at the time of report release.
• 10 •
Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was first conducted
in 2013 on data from the CASE-Ross surveys in
2011–12 to explore the possibility of uncovering
groups of institutions that had similar fundraising
profiles and has been repeated every year. LCA was
used to group institutions, into different clusters
based on certain defining variables that provided
the most information about key characteristics
of fundraising activities and for which there was
sufficient variation between institutions to offer
distinct patterns and differentiating factors. These
variables are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Average cash income received over three years
Average largest cash gift received over three years
Average number of donors over three years
Average proportion of contactable alumni
making a gift over three years
5. Average fundraising costs per pound received
over three years
6. Average number of fundraising staff (full-time
equivalent) over three years
Average figures for these variables across a threeyear period were used to ensure that comparisons
were based on performance over time rather than
any single year. In earlier years, a five-cluster solution offered a good statistical fit for the data and
made substantive sense; however, since 2015–16,
additional analysis on the Emerging cluster was
conducted and it was found that the institutions in
this cluster could be further divided into two subclusters producing a total of six clusters in recent
years. The same process was first applied to the
2019–2020 dataset of 96 institutions using Latent
GOLD® v5.0 software. However, this left us with
a large, emerging cluster, where we saw widely
varied performances. Further analysis showed that
this cluster divided naturally into a group of 22
Emerging, and 11 Fragile institutions. Through
most of this report, data has been presented broken
down for the following six clusters of institutions:
1. Fragile (11 institutions)
2. Emerging (22 institutions)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
3.
4.
5.
6.
Developing (26 institutions)
Moderate (28 institutions)
Established (7 institutions)
Elite (2 institutions)
•
Interpreting the charts
and tables
• Through most of this report (other than trends by
key indicators) data has been presented broken
down by the six clusters.
• Descriptive statistics, mainly using the measures
of central tendencies – arithmetic mean/average
and median – were used to analyse the data and
report on key variables on a confidential and
aggregated basis.
• Mean figures provide a snapshot of the overall
group’s performance including outliers, while
median figures highlight the exact midpoint
in fundraising figures across participating
institutions.
• A normally distributed cluster has mean and
median figures that are quite similar. Differences
•
•
•
• 11 •
in mean and median figures may reflect the
outliers in the data reported by a cluster. Or it
could reflect the varied nature of fundraising
operations and/or maturity of fundraising
operations across participating institutions.
The number of institutions given as the base (n)
for a chart or table indicates the number of institutions that provided data for a response to a
question or for the given variable or variables.
For variables that were calculated from the
responses to more than one question in the survey,
first, the variable was calculated for each institution and then the mean was calculated at a cluster
level and at an ‘all institutions’ level.
Aggregates reported for ‘all institutions’ are
calculated for all participating institutions that
provided a response.
All income figures in this report are reported in
Pound Sterling. Data reported in Euros were
converted to Pound Sterling using an average
of the conversion rate for the survey period
(€1 = £0.87872 or £0.88).
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
KEY INDICATORS
The following section reports on new funds secured,
cash income received, contactable alumni, donors
and investment in fundraising and alumni relations
staff and activities. These key indicators provide a
broad overview of the return on investment and
economic impact of fundraising across institutions
in the UK and Ireland.
Key indicators 2019–2020
n
Total
Mean
Median
Philanthropic Income
New Funds Secured
95
£1,095,544,345
£11,532,046
Cash Income Received
95
£1,029,708,309
£10,839,035
£2,074,440
£1,821,564
Alumni
Total Alumni
94
14,946,539
159,006
142,941
Contactable Alumni
94
10,863,823
115,573
104,110
Alumni Donors
90
149,715
1,664
496
Donors
Total Donors*
94
214,115
2,278
941
†
Individual Donors
94
207,991
2,213
870
Organisations Donors‡
92
6,087
66
39
Costs
Fundraising Costs
91
£107,536,718
£1,181,722
£550,182
Alumni Relations Costs
92
£46,121,465
£501,320
£268,839
Alumni Magazine Costs
52
£4,231,505
£81,375
£43,269
Staff
Fundraising Staff (FTE)
Alumni Relations Staff (FTE)
91
94
1,499
757
16
8
8
4
All figures reported in this table are for all institutions that provided the data; this table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions
and hence the sample size varies.
*Total donor figures include individual and organisational donors.
†
Individual donor figures include alumni donors and non-alumni donors; not all institutions provided a breakdown of total donors into these
sub-categories.
‡
Organisation donors include trusts and foundations, companies, lottery and other organisations; not all institutions provided a breakdown of
total donors into these sub-categories.
• 12 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
A clear progression of fundraising capacity and
performance is apparent, ranging from the nascent
programmes in the Fragile cluster to the longestablished, well-resourced and highly productive
programmes in the Elite group.
It should be noted that the fundraising performance of institutions with less mature programmes
and fewer staff may fluctuate more from year to
year as a result of discontinuities in staffing and
investment and may be disproportionately impacted
by changes in operations, programmes, or donor
interests. It should also be noted that even in mature
institutions, fundraising can vary widely from one
year to the next.
Age of development and alumni relations programme by cluster 2019–2020
(n=96; % number of institutions)
14%
14%
13%
23%
9%
1989 or earlier
1990 to 1999
23%
36%
100%
Programme Founded:
45%
19%
2000 to 2004
2005 to 2009
2010 or later
72%
32%
27%
32%
14%
Elite
Established
46%
27%
32%
4%
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
5%
9%
14%
4%
Moderate
Mission groups3 by cluster 2019–2020
(n=96; % number of institutions)
11%
43%
4%
4%
Russell Group
27%
36%
100%
81%
68%
57%
55%
14%
Established
University Alliance
MillionPlus
Not in a Mission Group
86%
Elite
Mission Group:
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
This includes the Russell Group, University Alliance and MillionPlus.
3
• 13 •
Fragile
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
New funds secured
New funds secured in a year are new gifts/donations
received and new confirmed pledges4 (counting
multi-year value for up to five years) from donors
that are made during the year. The funds pledged
may not have been received during the year. New
funds secured include all legacy gifts where the
funds have been received during the year; and
exclude cash payments made against all other gift
pledges secured in previous years. Thus, new funds
secured reflect the success of current fundraising
activity and demonstrate the true impact of development efforts inclusive of new gift funds received
in a year and the value of future commitments.
Gifts given by individuals via charitable vehicles
such as a personal trust or foundation or from a
privately held company are also recorded as gifts
from an individual.
The total value of new funds secured for all
institutions was £1.09 billion.5
Mean new funds secured 2019–2020
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
New funds secured*
(n=95)
Largest pledge†
(n=94)
£226,409,024
£43,441,593
£8,576,448
£3,293,637
£549,247
£77,660
£11,532,046
£6,000,000
£14,687,840
£2,780,372
£1,419,028
£218,367
£35,725
£2,433,206
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
*Note that one institution from the Fragile cluster, did not provide data for this question.
†
Note that one institution each from the Fragile and Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
Total number of institutions that secured new funds at different income levels 2019–2020
(n=95; number of institutions)
25
17
10
Less than
£100,000
14
8
£100,000 to
£499,999
£500,000 to
£999,999
£1m to
£4,999,999
£5m to
£9,999,999
Note that one institution from the Fragile cluster, did not provide data for this question.
Legacies are donations received from a donor's estate.
See the table on page 12 for more information on key indicators.
4
5
• 14 •
11
10
£10m to
£20m and over
£19,999,999
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Participating institutions (excluding Elite institutions) secured 219 confirmed pledges of more
than £500k each. Of these, 81% were secured by
Established and Moderate institutions, while the
remaining 19% were secured by Developing and
Emerging institutions; there were no confirmed
pledges of more than £500k received by Fragile
institutions.
Number of donors that gave or pledged new funds at various contribution levels 2019–2020
(n=79)
20
Gift range:
£5,000,000+
226
£500,000–£4,999,999
1,039
£50,000–£499,999
£5,000–£49,999
2,929
£1–£4,999
86,222
Note that many institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
This chart represents less than half of the total donors who gave to the sector.
Individuals contributed 34% of the total new funds
secured while organisations6 contributed 66%.
Mean sources of new funds secured 2019–2020
(n = 87 to 96; % of income)
Elite
Established
Moderate
15%
17%
Developing
9%
Emerging
9%
Fragile
9%
All
8%
25%
22%
10%
10%
50%
11%
13%
Companies
6%
12%
20%
62%
12%
39%
12%
Alumni
8%
6%
32%
31%
25%
3%
49%
12%
37%
4%
18%
16%
21%
43%
Non-alumni individuals
Lottery
Trusts and foundations
Other organisations
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Organisations include trusts, foundations, companies, lotteries and other organisations.
6
• 15 •
8%
7%
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
On average, the largest single new gift/pledge
accounted for 29% of average funds secured by
institutions.
Three largest gifts/pledges as a percentage of new funds secured 2019–2020
(% of income; chart shows mean figures)
4%
32%
34%
40%
43%
6%
7%
90%
Largest
Second largest
8%
6%
11%
14%
7%
10%
Third largest
Other new funds secured
12%
9%
57%
53%
50%
New gift/pledge size:
46%
9%
9%
Elite
(n=1)
29%
39%
36%
33%
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=28)
(n=26)
(n=22)
Fragile
(n=10)
All
(n=94)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Note that one institution each from the Fragile and Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
Individuals contributed 24% of the largest gifts/
pledges received by all institutions. Just under half
the number of participating institutions (48%)
secured their largest new gift/pledge from a trust
or foundation.
As noted earlier, gifts given by individuals via other
vehicles (such as their personal trust/foundation
or own company) are recorded as gifts from an
individual.
Sources of largest gifts/pledges 2019–2020
(% number of institutions)
Elite
(n=1)
Established
(n=7)
Moderate
(n=28)
Developing
(n=26)
Emerging
(n=22)
13%
28%
9%
18%
Alumni
Non-alumni individuals
Lottery
Other organisations
Trusts and foundations
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Note that one institution each from the Fragile and Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
• 16 •
9%
19%
48%
11%
4% 4%
9%
32%
41%
18%
27%
8%
58%
15%
11%
7%
18%
54%
7%
14%
14%
57%
29%
Fragile
(n=10)
All
(n=94)
50%
50%
Companies
9%
7%
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Cash income received
from legacies7; it excludes new pledges where
payment has not been received. Cash income
reflects the success of the current and past years’
fundraising activity.
The total cash income received by all institutions
in 2019–2020 was £1.03 billion8.
Cash income received includes all donations
received during the year. This includes new single
cash gifts, cash payments received against pledges
secured in the current or previous years and cash
Mean cash income received 2019–2020
Cash income received
(n=95)
Largest cash gift
(n=94)
£232,304,488
£36,740,029
£8,225,599
£2,457,348
£560,411
£138,226*
£10,839,035
£5,300,000*
£11,118,806
£1,677,423
£500,263
£156,883
£68,086*
£1,563,177
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
*Note that some institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
Individual donors contributed 37% of all mean cash
income received.
Sources of cash income received in 2019–2020
(n = 90 to 96; % of mean cash income)
Elite
Established
22%
14%
Moderate
23%
13%
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
10%
13%
8%
25%
32%
14%
Alumni
Companies
Non-alumni individuals
Lottery
4%
Trusts and foundations
Other organisations
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Legacies are donations received from a donor's estate.
See the table on page 12 for more information on key indicators.
7
8
• 17 •
5%
17%
43%
12%
25%
14%
38%
28%
4%
12%
46%
35%
6%
8%
46%
12%
15%
11%
39%
9%
41%
15%
17%
11%
5%
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Total number of institutions that received cash income at different income levels 2019–2020
(n=95; number of institutions)
26
19
15
12
9
5
Less than
£100,000
£100,000 to
£499,999
£500,000 to
£999,999
£1m to
£4,999,999
£5m to
£9,999,999
9
£10m to £20m and over
£19,999,999
Note that one institution from the Fragile cluster, did not provide data for this question.
On average, an institution’s largest cash gift
accounted for 19% of the average cash income
received by the institution.
Three largest gifts as a percentage of mean cash income 2019–2020
(% of income; chart shows mean figures)
30%
8%
6%
20%
20%
10%
10%
6%
7%
19%
28%
49%
7%
5%
14%
17%
56%
64%
63%
50%
6%
69%
28%
Elite
(n=1)
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=28)
(n=26)
(n=22)
Fragile
(n=10)
All
(n=94)
Note that some institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
• 18 •
Largest
Second largest
Third largest
Other cash income received
8%
93%
Cash gift size:
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Individuals contributed 31% of the largest cash
gifts received by all institutions.
Sources of largest cash gifts 2019-2020
(% number of institutions)
Elite
(n=1)
50%
Established
(n=7)
29%
Moderate
(n=28)
Developing
(n=26)
21%
11%
Emerging
4%
(n=22)
14%
43%
11%
14%
54%
8%
32%
7%
8%
32%
36%
18%
14%
47%
15%
23%
Fragile
(n=10)
All
(n=94)
50%
37%
13%
Alumni
Non-alumni individuals
Lottery
Other organisations
9%
18%
43%
17%
Trusts and foundations
4%
9%
7%
Companies
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Note that one institution each from the Fragile and Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
Mean cash income received from legacies was
£1.3m across 64 institutions that received legacy
gifts (and provided the number of legacy gifts). On
average, the value of a legacy gift received was £76k.
Mean cash income received from legacies 2019–2020
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
Cash income from legacies
(n=64)
Cash income per legacy*
(n=63)
£20,456,640
£1,996,626
£911,213
£348,044
£62,694
£10,000
£1,335,671
£78,908
£115,202
£88,125
£64,303
£47,717
£10,000
£76,527
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions.
*Note that some institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
• 19 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Overall, 9% of cash income received came from
legacies.
Cash from legacies as a percentage of total cash income 2019–2020
(n=64; % of income)
Other cash income
received
Cash income
from legacies
91%
95%
9%
5%
Elite
89%
88%
86%
11%
12%
14%
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
97%
91%
9%
Fragile
All
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions.
Only institutions that provided figures for cash income from legacies have been included.
Sixty eight percent of cash income from individuals
was received as a result of face-to-face meetings or
tailored proposals.
Cash income received from individuals by communication trigger 2019–2020
(% of income)
Elite
(n=1)
Established
3%
(n=7)
Moderate
(n=27)
Developing
(n=25)
Emerging
(n=21)
11%
12%
Mass solicitation
4%
27%
48%
14%
63%
18%
68%
Face-to-face or tailored proposal
Legacy
*Other includes Unknown and Other types of communication triggers.
Note that some institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
• 20 •
8%
6%
3% 6% 5%
69%
17%
8%
3%
25%
59%
15%
8%
11%
82%
Fragile
(n=8)
All
(n=89)
4%
19%
61%
9%
Unsolicited
5%
Other*
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Telethon campaigns accounted for 42% of all
total cash income secured from individuals via
mass solicitations, followed by direct mail which
accounted for 24%.
Cash income received from individuals by mass solicitation 2019–2020
(% of income)
Established
(n=6)
Moderate
(n=24)
34%
43%
Developing
(n=21)
Emerging
(n=16)
Fragile
(n=4)
All
(n=71)
38%
13%
21%
54%
40%
5%
38%
3%
10%
Email
22%
Piggy Back
*Other includes Text and Other types of mass solicitation.
Note that some institutions did not provide data for this question including both members of the Elite cluster.
• 21 •
6%
52%
24%
Direct mail
10%
25%
39%
42%
Telethon
24%
14%
7%
8%
14%
8%
Other*
3%
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Alumni and donors
in the world and who have not opted out of
communications.
The average number of donors across all
participating institutions (that provided both total
donor and alumni donor figures) was 2,213.
Contactable alumni refer to addressable alumni
(former students of the institution) – those who
have reliable postal or email addresses anywhere
Mean number of alumni and donors 2019–2020
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
No. of
alumni
(n=94)*
Contactable
alumni
(n=94)*
Total
donors
(n=90)†
Alumni
donors
(n=90)†
Number
of legacies
(n=63)
325,952
286,521
193,247
119,232
141,625
88,617
159,006
282,324
220,864
143,389
84,607
98,462
54,571
115,573
44,175
4,523
3,098
1,054
420
78
2,213
34,434
3,746
2,518
657
200
50
1,664
246
22
18
6
1
1
16
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
*This includes institutions that provided both alumni figures and contactable alumni figures
†
This includes institutions that provided both total donor figures and alumni donor figures.
Number of alumni donors making cash contributions by gift range 2019–2020
(n=78)
17
Gift range:
£1,000,000+
169
£100,000–£999,999
716
£10,000–£99,999
£1,000–£9,999
3,309
£1–£999
103,278
Number of legacies received by gift range 2019–2020
(n=58)
205
195
207
Gift range:
£1,000,000+
£100,000–£999,999
£10,000–£99,999
£1,000–£9,999
77
5
• 22 •
£1–£999
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Individuals accounted for 97% of total donors.
Composition of donor population 2019–2020
(n=68 to 96; % number of donors)
Elite
22%
77%
Established
14%
82%
Moderate
27%
70%
Developing
29%
66%
Emerging
50%
46%
Fragile
34%
58%
All
25%
72%
Alumni
Trusts and foundations
Non-alumni individuals
Companies
4%
Other organisations*
*Other organisations include Lottery and Other types of organisations.
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
Institutions reported that they could contact 73%
of their alumni via at least one of two contact
mediums – email or post.
Percentage of contactable alumni 2019–2020
(contactable alumni as a percentage of total alumni)
Total alumni
Contactable alumni
87%
Elite
(n=2)
77%
74%
71%
70%
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=27)
(n=25)
(n=22)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions.
• 23 •
62%
Fragile
(n=11)
73%
All
(n=94)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
On average, across all participating institutions, 1%
of contactable alumni made a gift.
Percentage of alumni donating 2019–2020
(alumni donors as a percentage of the contactable alumni)
5.3%
1.3%
1.3%
1%
0.6%
Elite
(n=1)
Established
(n=7)
Moderate
(n=27)
Developing
(n=25)
0.1%
0.05%
Emerging
(n=21)
Fragile
(n=9)
Only institutions that provided both alumni donor and contactable alumni figures are included.
• 24 •
All
(n=90)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Fundraising and alumni
relations investments
based on total advancement costs and total funds
secured. Numerous factors, however, influence
charitable giving decisions and impact an institution's ability to secure philanthropic support. For
example, the value of institutional leadership and
other academic time invested in fundraising can
be substantial and the cost of this time is outside
the scope of this report. Similarly, advancement
activities benefit institutions in multiple ways and
advancement activities yield returns in the form of
alumni engagement, annual and major giving and
legacies over the course of years or decades.
Overall, £154m was invested in fundraising
and alumni relations in total across all institutions.
70% of the total investment was for fundraising
and 30% was for alumni relations. Institutions
spent about £4.2m on alumni magazines annually.
Fundraising costs are costs associated with the
efforts to gather and process new funds secured and
cash income received. It includes the cost of the
staff undertaking fundraising activity and advancement services (staff expenditure) and the other
costs of running and maintaining the fundraising
operations (non-staff expenditure). When the cost
of both staff expenditure and non-staff expenditure is combined this equals the total fundraising
expenditure.
Alumni relations costs are costs associated with
engagement activity with an institution’s alumni
and community, including staff and non-staff
expenditure.
The return on investment in fundraising and
alumni relations could, in theory, be calculated
Mean fundraising and alumni relations investments 2019–2020
Fundraising
investments
(n=91)
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
Alumni
relations
investments
(n=92)
Fundraising and
alumni relations
investments
(n=95)
Alumni
magazine
investments
(n=52)
Institutional
expenditure
(n=94)
£18,951,357
£2,752,340
£1,204,674*
£460,135
£260,673*
£50,474*
£6,434,404
£1,185,276
£510,520*
£240,101*
£220,300*
£71,176
£25,385,761
£3,937,616
£1,653,937
£681,767
£459,111*
£107,884
£572,698*
£207,614*
£104,061*
£40,428*
£27,106*
£8,019*
£1,903,384,500
£855,926,418
£348,025,832*
£178,844,743
£296,765,709
£124,709,773*
£1,181,722
£501,320
£1,600,606
£81,375*
£336,392,107
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
*Note that some institutions, including a member of the Elite cluster, did not provide data for this question.
• 25 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Mean fundraising and alumni relations investments by cluster 2019–2020
(% of fundraising and alumni relations investments)
25%
30%
30%
30%
34%
Investments:
46%
59%
75%
70%
70%
Alumni relations
Fundraising
70%
66%
54%
41%
Elite
(n=2)
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=28)
(n=26)
(n=21)
Fragile
(n=11)
All
(n=95)
Total number of institutions that made fundraising and alumni relations investments
at different levels 2019–2020
(n=95; number of institutions)
36
24
23
9
2
Less than
£100,000
£100,000 to
£499,999
£500,000 to
£999,999
£1m to
£4,999,999
£5m to
£9,999,999
This includes investments on fundraising, alumni relations and alumni magazines.
• 26 •
0
2
£10m to
£20m and over
£19,999,999
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
On average, staff costs accounted for 79% of total
fundraising expenditures.
Mean staff and non-staff fundraising investments 2019–2020
(% of fundraising investments)
23%
77%
Elite
(n=2)
16%
84%
23%
19%
19%
77%
81%
81%
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=27)
(n=26)
(n=21)
27%
73%
Fragile
(n=8)
21%
Investments:
Fundraising non-staff
Fundraising staff
79%
All
(n=91)
Of the average alumni relations costs, 27% was
spent on non-staff costs and 73% on staff costs.
Mean staff and non-staff alumni relations investments 2019–2020
(% of alumni relations investments)
33%
67%
Elite
(n=2)
22%
78%
27%
24%
23%
23%
27%
73%
76%
77%
77%
73%
Fragile
(n=11)
All
(n=92)
Established Moderate Developing Emerging
(n=7)
(n=27)
(n=24)
(n=21)
• 27 •
Investments:
Alumni relations non-staff
Alumni relations staff
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Fundraising and alumni
relations staff
48% of these staff members were employed in
Elite and Established institutions.
The ratio of average FTE fundraising staff to
average FTE alumni relations staff was 2:1 across all
participating institutions. This figure was highest for
Elite institutions where the average ratio was 2.4:1.
A total of 2,256 staff (full-time equivalent or FTE)
were employed in fundraising and alumni relations
roles across the sector9.
Mean fundraising and alumni relations staff 2019–2020
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
All
Fundraising staff
(n=91)
Alumni relations staff
(n=94)
FR/AR staff ratio*
(n=89)
252.4
34.5
16.8
7.4
4.1
1.0
16.5
104.4
17.4
8.5
4.1
3.6
1.4
8.1
2.4
2.0
2.5
2.4
1.5
0.8
2.1
This table has been compiled using responses to multiple questions.
*Only institutions that provided both fundraising and alumni relations staff figures were included.
See the table on page 12 for more information on key indicators.
9
• 28 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
TRENDS IN KEY INDICATORS
Trends are calculated using data from a base of 81
institutions that provided information for a key set
of variables for all four years – 2016–17, 2017–18,
2018–19 and 2019–2020. Trends are based on
consistent year-over-year samples. Since institutions
did not provide data for all key indicators for all
three years, samples sizes vary.
Philanthropic income
• Mean cash income received decreased by 0.1%
since 2018–19.
• Mean cash income from legacies decreased for the
second year, by 3% since 2018–19.
• In the case of the largest cash gift received, the
mean percentage decrease was 4% since 2018–19.
• Mean new funds secured decreased by 17% since
2018–19.
• In the case of the largest new gift/pledge received,
the mean percentage decrease was 24% since
2018–19.
Mean percentage change in philanthropic income 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020
% change 2017–18 to 2018–19
% change 2016–17 to 2017–18
% change 2018–19 to 2019–2020
43%
30%
22%
21%
18%
13%
12%
7%
5%
-0.1%
-17%
-3%
-4%
-18%
-24%
New funds
secured
(n=81)
Largest new
gift/pledge
(n=80)
Cash income
received
(n=81)
Cash income
received from
legacies
(n=42)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
• 29 •
Largest cash
gift
(n=79)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Alumni and donors
continued growing by 3% and donors by 3.6%
since 2018–19.
• Mean number of alumni donors increased for
the second year, by 5% since 2018–19.
• The mean alumni and mean donors both increased
again for the third year; contactable alumni
Mean percentage change in alumni and donors 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020
% change 2016–17 to 2017–18
% change 2017–18 to 2018–19
% change 2018–19 to 2019–2020
5%
4.4%
3.6%
3%
3%
2%
1.0%
1.4%
-4%
Contactable alumni
(n=79)
Total donors
(n=79)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
• 30 •
Alumni donors
(n=77)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Fundraising and alumni
relations investments
• Mean alumni relations staff and mean alumni
relations non-staff investments decreased by 8%
and 33% respectively since 2018–19.
• Mean alumni magazine investment decreased for
the third time, by 10% since 2018–19.
• The mean fundraising and alumni relations investments have decreased since 2018–19, by 9% and
16% respectively.
• Mean fundraising staff and mean fundraising
non-staff investments decreased by 0.5% and 31%
respectively since 2018–19.
Mean percentage change in fundraising and alumni relations investments 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19
and 2019–2020
% change 2017–18 to 2018–19
% change 2016–17 to 2017–18
4%
1%
-0.5%
-0.5%
15%
11%
8%
6.3%
% change 2018–19 to 2019–2020
6.4%
7%
5% 5.3%
-3%
-4% -6%
-8%
-9%
-10%
-16%
-31%
Total
fundraising
(n=75)
Fundraising
staff
investment
(n=72)
Fundraising
non-staff
investment
(n=73)
-33%
Total
alumni
relations
investment
(n=75)
Alumni
relations
staff
investment
(n=74)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
• 31 •
Alumni
relations
non-staff
investment
(n=74)
Alumni
magazine
investment
(n=34)
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Fundraising and alumni
relations staff
• The mean number of alumni relations staff
decreased by 4% since 2018–19.
• The mean number of fundraising staff increased
by 0.1% since 2018–19.
Mean percentage change in fundraising and alumni relations staff 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19
and 2019–2020
% change 2016–17 to 2017–18
% change 2017–18 to 2018–19
% change 2018–19 to 2019–2020
5%
3.9%
3.6%
0.1%
-1%
-4%
Fundraising staff
(n=81)
Alumni relations staff
(n=80)
This chart has been compiled using responses to multiple questions and hence the sample size varies.
• 32 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Trends by cluster
The composition of clusters, as determined by the
cluster analysis described on page 10, varies from
year to year. To provide accurate year-over-year
comparisons, the following trends have, however,
been calculated using clusters consisting of the same
81 institutions for each year. For example, an insti-
tution identified as moderate in 2019–2020 would
be included in the moderate cluster for the three
years prior even if they were identified as “developing” in prior-year cluster analyses. Since institutions did not provide data for all key indicators for
all three years, samples sizes vary.
Mean percentage change in philanthropic income by cluster for 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020
Variable
New funds
secured
(n=81)
Cash income
received
(n=81)
Year
Elite
Established
Moderate
2016-17 to
2017-18
25%
9%
6%
2017–18 to
2018-19
30%
2%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
-35%
2016–17 to
2017-18
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
8%
-10%
70%
26%
-7%
87%
-44%
19%
-15%
63%
-58%
-56%
3%
10%
3%
12%
-26%
20%
2017–18 to
2018-19
14%
8%
15%
-3%
26%
29%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
-5%
7%
-2%
24%
-4%
-38%
Mean percentage change in donor numbers by cluster for 2016–17, 2017–18, 2018–19 and 2019–2020
Variable
Total
donors
(n=79)
Alumni
donors
(n=77)
Year
Elite
Established
Moderate
2016-17 to
2017-18
10%
6%
-4%
2017–18 to
2018-19
-2%
-10%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
2%
2016–17 to
2017-18
Emerging
Fragile
2%
-27%
-26%
-1%
-1%
-18%
16%
11%
1%
1%
22%
-14%
0%
-9%
-5%
5%
-17%
-32%
2017–18 to
2018-19
-8%
-16%
14%
18%
41%
23%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
8%
15%
6%
-16%
-20%
-8%
• 33 •
Developing
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Mean percentage change in fundraising and alumni relations costs by cluster for 2016–17, 2017–18,
2018–19 and 2019–2020
Variable
Fundraising
costs
(n=75)
Alumni
relations costs
(n=75)
Year
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
2016-17 to
2017-18
1%
-5%
4%
0%
-14%
15%
2017–18 to
2018-19
4%
12%
8%
-2%
6%
-3%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
-3%
-24%
-7%
-4%
6%
1%
2016–17 to
2017-18
2%
24%
14%
7%
11%
26%
2017–18 to
2018-19
22%
2%
-2%
6%
-2%
-15%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
-18%
-25%
-13%
-14%
9%
-10%
Mean percentage change in fundraising and alumni relations staff by cluster for 2016–17, 2017–18,
2018–19 and 2019–2020
Variable
Fundraising
staff
(n=81)
Alumni
relations staff
(n=80)
Year
Elite
Established
Moderate
Developing
Emerging
Fragile
2016-17 to
2017-18
4%
-1%
4%
10%
-6%
3%
2017–18 to
2018-19
2%
-6%
3%
3%
6%
-35%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
8%
-12%
-5%
-3%
-5%
17%
2016–17 to
2017-18
1%
1%
6%
24%
-4%
8%
2017–18 to
2018-19
9%
2%
-1%
2%
15%
4%
2018–19 to
2019-2020
7%
-8%
-6%
-9%
-10%
-11%
• 34 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
FINDINGS BY MISSION GROUPS
The Russell Group is an Association of 24 researchintensive institutions in the UK.
The University Alliance represents institutions
in the UK that are leaders in technical education,
professional training, research and development,
enterprise and innovation.
The MillionPlus is the Association for Modern
Universities in the UK and the voice of 21st century
higher education.
Key indicators for Mission Groups 2019–2020
(mean figures)
Russell
Group
(n=23)
Russell Group
excluding Oxbridge
(n=21)
University
Alliance
(n=3)
MillionPlus
(n=11)
Philanthropic income
New funds secured
£38,786,586
£20,917,782
£362,356
£318,075
New funds secured
from individuals
£10,781,856*
£6,572,499
£159,181
£160,863#
New funds secured
from organisations
£16,278,748*
£14,345,282
£193,842
£171,836
Largest new gift/pledge
£6,957,535*
£7,003,132
£51,833
£192,145
Cash income received
£35,881,554
£17,174,608
£514,806
£329,169
Cash income received
from individuals
£10,797,790*
£6,425,049
£167,370
£103,153
Cash income received
from organisations
£14,923,782*
£10,749,558
£347,436
£223,581
Cash income received
from legacies
£2,995,169
£1,332,171
£8,641‡
£118,398#
Largest cash gift
£4,694,012*
£4,665,156
£88,750
£116,006
Number of legacy gifts
25*
15
1‡
1#
Alumni
Total alumni
269,813
264,466
232,405
96,800
Contactable alumni
206,806
199,613
128,584
67,780
Donors
Total donors
5,595*
3,723
1,079
133#
Individual donors
5,452*
3,608
1,055
118#
Alumni donors
4,295*
2,860
734
64#
Organisation donors
148*
119
24
14#
Costs
Fundraising costs
£3,223,485
£1,725,592
£348,240
£126,252
Alumni relations costs
£1,298,290
£809,137
£207,566
£93,915
Non-staff production
and distribution costs of
alumni magazine
£181,862*
£155,806†
£39,948‡
£23,181#
Staff
Fundraising staff
44
24
6
2#
Alumni relations staff
21
13
4
1
*n<23, †n<21, ‡n<3, #n<11
• 35 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
FINDINGS BY OTHER GROUPS
GuildHE is an officially recognised representative
body for UK Higher Education. Member institutions include some major providers in professional
subject areas including art, design and media, music
and the performing arts, agriculture and food,
education, maritime, health and sports.
Key indicators for other groups 2019–2020
(mean figures)
Arts
(n=7)
Medical
(n=6)
Specialist††
(n=17)
Philanthropic income
New funds secured
£4,185,044
£5,630,858
£7,052,463
New funds secured
from individuals
£1,785,080
£1,202,502
£3,162,989
New funds secured
from organisations
£2,702,889*
£5,314,027†
£4,369,238‡
Largest new gift/pledge
£1,939,403
£2,133,753
£3,490,741
Cash income received
£4,588,319
£3,598,717
£8,137,813
Cash income received
from individuals
£1,451,974
£1,331,789
£2,292,937
Cash income received
from organisations
£3,053,042
£2,720,313†
£6,173,736‡
Cash income received
from legacies
£466,607
£1,032,407†
£652,703‡
Largest cash gift
£1,448,055
£757,837
£3,784,436
†
Number of legacy gifts
7
64
24‡
Alumni
Total alumni
49,534
17,000†
46,182‡
Contactable alumni
29,406
14,154†
31,495‡
Donors
Total donors
819
2,790
1,507
Individual donors
765
2,756
1,463
†
Alumni donors
115
290
337‡
†
Organisation donors
52
61
52‡
Costs
Fundraising costs
£707,998
£761,846
£819,498
Alumni relations costs
£98,290
£158,058
£230,802
Non-staff production
and distribution costs of
alumni magazine
£10,369*
£38,194†
£23,981‡
Staff
Fundraising staff
9
7
9
†
Alumni relations staff
2
2
3‡
*n<7, †n<6, ‡n<17, #n<7
††Includes
institutions grouped under the categories of arts and medical.
• 36 •
GuildHE
(n=7)
£136,142
£18,559
£117,583
£45,190
£315,277
£72,445
£242,464
£172,879#
£107,502
2#
45,374
36,221
120#
110#
66#
9#
£98,846
£53,607
£16,616#
1
1
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
FINDINGS BY PEARCE REVIEW GROUPS
The 2012 HEFCE Pearce Review of Philanthropy
in UK higher education looked at how fundraising
changed over the previous 10 years and how the
sector responded to the Thomas Report on
Voluntary Giving to UK Universities 2004.
Key indicators for Pearce Review groups†† 2019–2020
(mean figures)
Pre-1960s
(n=29)
1960s
(n=20)
1990s
(n=17)
2000s
(n=7)
Philanthropic income
New funds secured
£16,358,332
£3,941,609
£507,800
£199,968
New funds secured
from individuals
£5,365,346
£819,946
£235,242
£10,676#
New funds secured
from organisations
£11,364,786*
£3,211,497†
£270,911
£189,532
Largest new gift/pledge
£5,448,228
£1,252,790
£202,159
£115,749
Cash income received
£13,828,680
£3,992,133
£496,713
£309,398
Cash income received
from individuals
£5,513,447
£877,468
£170,667
£10,580
Cash income received
from organisations
£8,295,140
£3,128,177
£324,470
£298,450
Cash income received
from legacies
£1,264,942*
£283,067†
£33,118‡
£3,000#
Largest cash gift
£3,620,859*
£634,625†
£132,872‡
£141,810#
Number of legacy gifts
14
5
1
1
Alumni
Total alumni
218,928
178,510
180,857
54,800
Contactable alumni
160,653
134,884
120,126
41,854
Donors
Total donors
2,992
2,462
548
78
Individual donors
2,894
2,395
529
71
‡
Alumni donors
2,384
1,880
281
53
Organisation donors
100
67
19
6
Costs
Fundraising costs
£1,409,456
£657,737
£275,119
£49,650
Alumni relations costs
£715,243
£318,983
£209,457
£58,984
Non-staff production
and distribution costs of
alumni magazine
£121,203*
£70,018†
£27,824‡
£5,687#
Staff
Fundraising staff
20
11†
4‡
1#
Alumni relations staff
11
5
4
1
*n<29, †n<20, ‡n<17, #n<7
††Review of Philanthropy in
UK Higher Education, 2012.
• 37 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
APPENDIX
Response rate
Response rates for UK higher education institutions 2013 to 2020*
2013– 2014– 2015– 2016– 2017– 2018– 2019–
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
English higher education institutions
Invited to participate
131
128
144
133
133
133
133
Number participating
101
91
90
87
80
77
76
71%
63%
65%
60%
58%
57%
Response rate
77%
Welsh higher education institutions
Invited to participate
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
Number participating
5
6
6
4
3
4
3
63%
67%
67%
44%
33%
44%
33%
Response rate
Scottish and Northern Irish higher
education institutions
Invited to participate
21
18
19
22
19
19
19
Number participating
18
16
14
14
14
16
14
Response rate
86%
89%
74%
64%
74%
84%
74%
UK higher education institutions
Invited to participate
160
155
172
164
161
161
161
Number participating
124
113
110
105
97
97
93
60%
60%
58%
Response rate
78%
73%
64%
64%
*Two higher education institutions from Ireland and the Institute of Cancer Research in the UK also participated in the survey.
The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) reports that there were 169 higher education providers in the UK during 2018–19
which reported student data to HESA (2020).
10
• 38 •
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
Participating institutions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
Abertay University
Aberystwyth University
Aston University
Bath Spa University
Bournemouth University
Brunel University London
Cardiff University
City, University of London
Cranfield University
Edinburgh Napier University
Glasgow Caledonian University
Goldsmiths, University of London
Guildhall School of Music & Drama
Heriot-Watt University
Imperial College London
Keele University
King's College London and King's Health Partners
Kingston University
Lancaster University
Liverpool Hope University
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
London Business School
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Loughborough University
Manchester Metropolitan University
New Model Institute for Technology & Engineering
Newcastle University
Northumbria University
Nottingham Trent University
Plymouth University
Queen Margaret University
Queen Mary University of London
Queen's University Belfast
Royal Academy of Music
Royal Agricultural University
Royal College of Art
Royal College of Music
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland
Royal Holloway, University of London
Royal Northern College of Music
Sheffield Hallam University
SOAS University of London
Solent University
SRUC
St. George's, University of London
St. Mary's University, Twickenham
Swansea University
The Institute of Cancer Research
The London School of Economics and Political Science
The Open University
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
• 39 •
The Royal Veterinary College
The University of Edinburgh
The University of Manchester
The University of Nottingham
The University of Sheffield
The University of Warwick
The University of West London
Trinity College Dublin
Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance
University College London
University of Bath
University of Bedfordshire
University of Birmingham
University of Bradford
University of Brighton
University of Bristol
University of Cambridge
University of Cumbria
University of Dundee
University of East Anglia
University of Exeter
University of Glasgow
University of Huddersfield
University of Hull
University of Kent
University of Leeds
University of Lincoln
University of Liverpool
University of Oxford
University of Reading
University of Roehampton
University of Salford
University of Southampton
University of St Andrews
University of Stirling
University of Strathclyde
University of Suffolk
University of Surrey
University of Sussex
University of the Arts London
University of the West of England
University of the West of Scotland
University of Westminster
University of Wolverhampton
University of York
York St John University
CASE-Ross Support of Education: United Kingdom and Ireland 2021
For further information about this report contact europe@case.org.
w
The Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) is the professional organization
for advancement professionals at all levels who work in alumni relations, communications, and
marketing, development, and advancement services.
CASE’s membership includes nearly 3,600 colleges, universities, and independent elementary and
secondary schools in more than 82 countries. This makes CASE one of the largest nonprofit education
associations in the world in terms of institutional membership. CASE serves more than 90,000
advancement professionals on the staffs of member institutions.
CASE has offices in Washington, D.C., London, Singapore, and Mexico City. The
association produces high-quality and timely content, publications, conferences,
institutes, and workshops that assist advancement professionals in performing
more effectively and serving their institutions.
AMAtlassm is a global resource for educational advancement-related metrics,
benchmarks, and analytics, providing a data-rich resource for schools,
universities, and colleges.
case.org/amAtlas