Campaign vs. Program
The labels stand in the way of getting started,
and getting started is the whole point.
Language shapes how we think about our work and the possibilities within it.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in fundraising, where terms like “campaign” and “program” permeate our planning, reporting, and donor communications.
These words are often applied to all types of fundraising efforts, including planned giving. But, in the context of planned giving, the use of such language can be inadvertently limiting, shaping perceptions and strategies in ways that do not truly fit this unique area of philanthropy.
‘Campaign’ and ‘program’ imply boundaries.
A campaign conjures images of a defined initiative, with clear start and end dates, tangible goals, and a sense of urgency that galvanizes donors and staff alike. A ‘program’ suggests a packaged effort or suite of offerings, systematically related and typically measured for short- or medium-term results. For major gifts, annual gifts, and even capital drives, this language is entirely appropriate. These fundraising activities are, by design, bound to certain timeframes and objectives.
Planned giving, however, operates on a fundamentally different plane.
Unlike most fundraising initiatives, planned giving is concerned less with immediate outcomes and more with fostering long-term relationships that may take years (or decades) to bear fruit. Donors might express their intentions, complete their legal documents, and notify your organization, all without fanfare or attention. The actual benefit to your mission may not materialize until well into the future.
When we refer to “planned giving campaigns” or “planned giving programs,” we unintentionally convey to donors, colleagues, and even ourselves that this is just another compartmentalized effort—something to be promoted for a while, counted, and then closed out. In reality, planned giving is best understood as a continuum: a persistent, evolving presence within an organization that weaves through generations of donors and sustains your organization’s mission over time.
Moreover, the donor’s journey in planned giving is deeply personal and cannot be predicted by artificial deadlines or targets.
The act of including an organization in one’s estate plan is often prompted by major life events such as retirement, the birth of a grandchild, or the loss of a loved one. These moments do not conform to the cyclical logic of a campaign calendar or the rigid structure of a program.
By embracing language and strategies that honor the enduring, long-haul nature of planned giving, we invite our donors into relationships built on trust, patience, and vision. Instead of a “campaign,” consider describing your planned giving effort in collaborative terms such as an “ongoing invitation” or a “legacy partnership.” Shift the conversation from “closing gifts” to “documenting intent.”
In summary:
While ‘campaign’ and ‘program’ have their place in the broader fundraising lexicon, applying them to planned giving can confine our thinking and our practice. By consciously choosing language that reflects the need to meet donors where they are and planned giving’s unique, timeless nature, we can foster deeper relationships and ensure the legacy of our mission for generations to come.