# data[].attributes.headline
currently no specific benchmarks; so difficult b/c hard goals feel at odds w/ decolonizing fundraising principles .... but we also want to have a sense of whether we're on track, setting up new employees to development up for success / clear expectations, etc.

# data[].attributes.subject
currently no specific benchmarks; so difficult b/c hard goals feel at odds w/ decolonizing fundraising principles .... but we also want to have a sense of whether we're on track, setting up new employees to development up for success / clear expectations, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
small staff and need to reorganize a system like CT has in place!

# data[].attributes.body
This is the first time we've had a separate MGO position. So, we're still figuring out how to structure things.

# data[].attributes.headline
balancing more meetings with less time to do the work

# data[].attributes.subject
balancing more meetings with less time to do the work

# data[].attributes.headline
yes more benchmarks would be helpful and we are using a few of the current ones.  but i'd love to try and be better about customizing the benchmarks for what works with our affiliate too.

# data[].attributes.subject
yes more benchmarks would be helpful and we are using a few of the current ones.  but i'd love to try and be better about customizing the benchmarks for what works with our affiliate too.

# data[].attributes.headline
We try. Or should I say we've tried. Does not always work...  More would be helpful!

# data[].attributes.subject
We try. Or should I say we've tried. Does not always work...  More would be helpful!

# data[].attributes.headline
The pandemic pushed us to look more at truly meaningful contacts and solicitations rather than # of donor meetings.

# data[].attributes.subject
The pandemic pushed us to look more at truly meaningful contacts and solicitations rather than # of donor meetings.

# data[].attributes.headline
staff capacity but we are adding a MGO soon so hope that this will be less of a concern.

# data[].attributes.subject
staff capacity but we are adding a MGO soon so hope that this will be less of a concern.

# data[].attributes.body
It would be great if there was a way to adjust the benchmarks in Looker, particularly when the reporting is showing donors who do or don't meet a benchmark. For example, adjusting from 6 to 4 outreach attempts in 90 days.

# data[].attributes.headline
Interesting that we aren't throwing things up on the padlet for this one. Should we have a call on how to set KPI's?

# data[].attributes.subject
Interesting that we aren't throwing things up on the padlet for this one. Should we have a call on how to set KPI's?

# data[].attributes.body
we're thinking more expansively about what substantive engagement with donors looks like, so "meetings" include phone calls, zoom, in-person, and potentially even a intensive email exchange -- anything that is pivotal step in advancing strategy the way an in-person meeting is often assumed to be. From there, we tend to set goals for a % of the portfolio rather than a hard number

# data[].attributes.body
and the meetings are between the individual gift officer and their manager, rather than looking at KPIs as a full team. There are quarterly looks at the program-level goals (rather than individual portfolio metrics)

# data[].attributes.body
goal is ~6 meetings/month for a portfolio of 125 donors. This includes all formats (phone / zoom/ in-person), ideally with solicitation and a PG conversation, but sometimes not depending on where the donor is in moves management cycle.

# data[].attributes.body
weekly metrics meeting 1-1 with DDP for each gift officer. purpose is to review benchmarks for a different stage each week. week 1 = qual, week 2 = cultivation / stewardship, week 3 = solicitation, etc..

# data[].attributes.body
our main (controllable) benchmarks are personalized outreach attempts per donor. we are also tracking # meeting requests, # meetings, # solicitations.