2000 Advancement Services Staffing & Salary Survey Results|
2000 Advancement Services Staffing & Salary Survey Results |
This page contains the summary of the Advancement Services Staff & Salary Survey performed in September-October 2000. Where the survey that I did in 1998 really concentrated on Salaries, this survey was attempting to get both Staffing and Salary information. Most of the input came from institutions on either the Fund Services or Fund List listservs.
For this survey, I offered the opportunity for institutions to share their salary information. Of the 34 respondents, all but three requested that their salary data remain confidential. As most institutions requested confidentiality, no detail salary information is being made available, but the staffing information has been put into a spreadsheet which may be downloaded as explained at the bottom of this page.
Please recognize this as a "survey" and not a "statistical analysis". Our colleagues have provided some useful information to put your institutions information into a helpful context. But there were not enough respondents to say, for instance, "nationwide, the salaries for Directors of Advancement Services is..." Even so, thanks so much to the institutions that did respond. Both the salary and staffing information is quite useful.
To put the responses in context, following is some general information about the respondents:
 | All institutions responding were Educational institutions (or their related foundations.) Ten were either public or private research or doctoral institutions with institutional budgets ranging from $130M to $1.3B. Ten were public or private masters degree granting institutions with institutional budgets ranging from $18 to $132M. Ten were private special or liberal arts (baccalaureate degrees) institutions with budgets from $17 to $74M. |
| Unfortunately Advancement Services budgets were reported fairly inconsistently. Some didn't report the number and several did not include salaries within the A/S budget. I therefore made no analyses of the overall A/S budgets. |
| Because of the differences between the respondents, I have tried to provide more analysis by type of institution (i.e., Carnegie Classification) in this survey. |
| The reported salary range for the top Advancement Services position ranged from a low of
$28,500 to a high of over $120,000, with an average salary of $55,000. (Note
that all of these number represent an increase over the number in my 1998
survey.)
To make that more meaningful and useful, consider the following information: | ||||||||||||||||||
| All of the institutions which detailed the responsibilities of the top positions reported that the position included Gift processing. 84% noted the position was over Bio records maintenance and Files; 60-80% reported the position being responsible for Research, Reporting, and/or Training. Slightly over 50% reported responsibilities for Stewardship/Donor Relations and/or Technical Support. Only 28% reported having administrative responsibilities. | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other responsibilities included:
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Ten of the Top A/S positions reported having Fund-Raising responsibilities. Three reported doing outside consulting. There was no overlap among these thirteen. |
The remaining data and analysis are provided by "Carnegie Category" as it seems to have more relevance in that framework.
Ten responses came from either public or private research or doctoral institutions with institutional budgets ranging from $130M to $1.3B. Their reported A/S budgets ranged from $300K to $10M (some did not report their budgets & I did not include those which excluded salaries). Giving to these schools ranged from $7M to $407M.
| At two of these schools the head of A/S had the title of Vice President or Asst. VP and had salaries over $120K. Seven others reported salaries in the $57-78K range with an average of $65K. Two, including one of the highest paid, have fund-raising responsibilities; three do some outside consulting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The four largest of these schools have 150 to 460 users; the other six reported about 50-80 users. Ratios of users to Advancement Services staff ranged from about 4 or 5 (must be nice) to about 13. The institution's IT department provides additional support for six of the responding schools. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BSR Advance, JSI Millennium, and SCT Banner were the systems reported as being used by these schools. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The A/S group in these schools all support Advancement and Schools/Deans. All but one reported as supporting Alumni and Membership operations. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Advancement Services managers and staff ranged from 6 to 70 in these schools with an average of 22 staff. Virtually all also reported using part-time and student workers. The table below provides some information about those A/S positions and their salaries: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| These schools reported that last years increases were generally greater than or equal to 3% while this years will be less than or equal to 3%. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Among these schools, salary satisfaction (on average) was reported slightly below the mid-point of 3; user satisfaction was reported slightly higher than the mid-point of 3. |
Ten responses came from either public or private masters degree granting institutions with institutional budgets ranging from $18M to $132M. Giving to the Privates among these schools ranged from $2.4M to $7.6M; to the Publics ranged from $3.3M to 4.1M.
| At one of these schools the head of A/S had the title of Executive Vice President and had salaries over $100K. Seven others reported salaries in the $31-53K range with an average of $42K. Four, including the EVP, have fund-raising responsibilities; none do outside consulting. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| These schools reported 13 to 145 users. Ratios of users to Advancement Services staff ranged from about 4 to about 20. The institution's IT department provides additional support for half of these responding schools. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Blackbaud Raiser's Edge, JSI Millennium, SCT Banner, Quodata, CARS, and Viking were the systems reported as being used by these schools. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| The A/S group in these schools all support Advancement; all but one reported as supporting Alumni and Membership operations. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Advancement Services managers and staff ranged from 1 to 7 in these schools with an average of 3.5 staff. Virtually all also reported using part-time and student workers. The table below provides some information about those A/S positions and their salaries: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| These schools on average reported that last years increases were generally greater than or equal to 3.4% while this years will be slightly less | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Among these schools, salary satisfaction (on average) was reported below the average at 2.5; user satisfaction was reported on average at 4. |
Ten responses came from private special or liberal arts institutions with institutional budgets ranging from $17M to $74M. All of the respondents were private schools; their gift receipts in the last year ranged from $3M to $42M.
| Salaries were reported in the $28.5 to 60K range with an average of $43K. | |||||||||||||||
| These schools reported 7 to 45 users. Ratios of users to Advancement Services staff ranged from about 2 to about 11. The institution's IT department provides additional support for nine of these ten responding schools. | |||||||||||||||
| Blackbaud Raiser's Edge, SCT Banner, Datatel Benefactor, AIMS, SRN, and one "home-grown" were the systems reported as being used by these schools. | |||||||||||||||
| Advancement Services managers and staff ranged from 2 to 8 in these schools with an average of 4.7 staff (note that these numbers are slightly higher than the Masters Degree schools). Virtually all also reported using part-time and student workers. The table below provides some information about those A/S positions and their salaries. In virtually all case, personnel with a "manager" title were managing the area and had no staff under them: | |||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| These schools on average reported that last years increases were generally about 3% and that the current years increases will be about the same. | |||||||||||||||
| Among these schools, salary satisfaction (on average) was reported below the average at 2.6; user satisfaction was reported on average at 4. | |||||||||||||||
| It should be noted that there were four other responses - three from independent schools and one from a two-year technical and community college. One of the independent schools, Northfield Mount Hermon School, would probably more appropriate compare itself with the liberal arts colleges. The remaining three schools had one or two person A/S shops and can see their data in the detailed spreadsheet below. |
| No organization include a webmaster position, although University of South Florida commented, "we desperately need to add a webmaster position." I would expect that with Alumni Communities and portals, with on-line fund-raising, and the like, the USF comment will be repeated elsewhere. |
| Many people commented on the difficulty of filling technical positions. As University of Washington observed, "technical staff in our region (e.g., Microsoft, Boeing and others) put an upward pressure on salaries for retention." Many colleges and universities are competing with other technical organizations and just general businesses for technical staff. |
| Binghamton and others note the difficulty in keeping A/S support staff at an acceptable ratio with Fund-Raising and other user staff to provide good service. |
| George Washington notes that with current low unemployment, it is even difficult to attract and retain clerical employees. |
| I'll again offer my thanks to those who responded to this survey and my salute to all of you who are trying to do an important job to support your institution's advancement efforts. |
An Excel spreadsheet of the submissions can be downloaded from my web site. You may "right-click" on this link and then select Save Link as... (Netscape) or Save Target as... (MS Internet Explorer) from the pop-up window. The spreadsheet does not include any salary information as virtually all of the respondents ask that their date be kept confidential. It does contain the actual staffing, by area, as reported by respondents to the survey.
Return to R I Arlington Survey Page
Page updated October 2000; links updated May 2003
