From Handoff to Head Start: Rethinking Nonprofit CEO Transitions Through Fundraising
James Abruzzo – Abruzzo Associates
Peter H. Hansen – Principal, Arts, Culture, and Media Philanthropic Advisors
In our first blog, we described the dismal record of nonprofit boards—and their CEOs—in creating healthy succession plans. It would seem that organizations that plan well in advance of a leadership transition are miles ahead. And, in some ways, they are.
This work begins long before the transition itself, with a process commonly known as onboarding. But onboarding is more than showing a new CEO where the restroom is or helping them complete their 403(b) forms. It is a strategic process that sets the foundation for long-term success.
In a future issue, we will explore the many steps toward effective onboarding and the benefits it brings. However, this blog focuses on one element that is likely the most financially influential: the transition plan, with fundraising at its core.
In most cases, the outgoing CEO holds a wealth of institutional knowledge and has cultivated deep, often decades-long relationships with key donors. Transferring that knowledge—and those relationships—cannot happen in a single meeting or even a series of introductions between the new CEO and the Chief Development Officer. Trust must be built over time.
Complicating this handoff is the quality of donor intelligence within the organization’s CRM. Even the most diligent contact reports rarely capture the nuance of relationships. For this reason, the outgoing CEO remains an essential partner and resource for the new administration—not just in the short term, but well beyond the transition period.
The former CEO can be a powerful ally in maintaining and advancing donor relationships. Joint meetings between the incoming and outgoing CEOs with top donors signal the institution’s commitment to those relationships and provide an effective forum for a thoughtful and credible handoff.
Importantly, the partnership between the current and former CEO should not have a fixed expiration date. While the new CEO must establish their own leadership identity, maintaining access to a trusted source of institutional knowledge is a strategic advantage. The cadence of collaboration may evolve, but open lines of communication should remain.
It is one reason why, in a planned transition (rather than an emergency or forced departure), the board may offer the outgoing CEO financial incentives to remain involved. While having the outgoing CEO involved may prove problematic, we firmly believe that the benefits outweigh the risks.
Case Study – Major Arts Institution
Years after a leadership transition, an incumbent CEO invited his predecessor to assist with a major donor solicitation. The former CEO had a longstanding and highly respected relationship with one of the institution’s most significant philanthropists. Rather than sidelining that relationship, the incumbent leveraged it—asking his predecessor to join him in soliciting a substantial estate commitment.
This collaborative approach signaled both institutional continuity and mutual respect. The donor initially agreed to a $10M estate commitment. Upon the donor’s passing, however, the institution learned it was the beneficiary of a $20M gift—double the original pledge.
While the incumbent CEO could have pursued the solicitation independently, he recognized that a joint approach would materially strengthen the outcome. The result underscores the power of collaboration—and the risk of prematurely severing ties with former leadership.
What to Do
- Manage the transfer of knowledge and relationships strategically
- Engage the outgoing CEO in the knowledge transfer process, particularly when CRM data is incomplete or institutional memory resides primarily with them
- Utilize the former CEO post-transition, especially for joint donor engagement and planned giving efforts, and offer financial incentives
- Maintain ongoing access to the former CEO as a valued institutional resource
What to Avoid
- Treating the transition as a clean break and disengaging the former CEO too quickly
- Assuming CRM data alone is sufficient to transfer complex donor relationships
- Failing to prioritize donor communication and stewardship during the transition period
- Overlooking the emotional and relational dynamics donors may have with departing leadership
- Allowing ego or territorial concerns to prevent collaboration between past and current CEOs
- Limiting the former CEO’s role to ceremonial involvement rather than strategic engagement
For further questions about this topic and others related to capital campaigns, fundraising, CEO succession, and the health of your organization, contact James at www.jamesabruzzo.net and Peter at peter@acmphilanthropy.com.