Fundraising After the NCAA’s Name, Image, and Likeness Agreement

For many decades I was privileged to work with a generous donor to align his philanthropic goals to support both academic and athletic programs at Wichita State University (WSU), where I served as the chief executive of the WSU Foundation and Alumni Engagement.

This past January, I reached out to set up a meeting with this donor and university leaders regarding plans to elevate a program to which he had given his time and resources in the past. The donor responded to my request with an email which, in summary, said he had recently made a substantial commitment to WSU’s name, image, and likeness (NIL) collective for student athletes and could not provide additional support to the university at this time. He said he felt it to be a critical time for WSU’s athletics, and he was concerned that WSU athletic success and recruiting would fall behind if capable donors like himself did not directly support the NIL collective.

No doubt this is a scenario many development professionals in higher education have now faced. I have worked in development for over 40 years, so one might think I have seen everything, but we are now in completely uncharted territory. The world of college athletics has seen unprecedented and tumultuous changes, first with the implementation of the student-athlete transfer portal with no restrictions, and then the 2021 agreement by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) to allow student athletes to use their name, image, and likeness for commercial or promotional purposes.

As numerous NIL collectives have emerged across the country, college athletic directors have scrambled to determine how to both ethically and strategically maintain competitive programs. Furthermore, the recent NCAA settlement agreement to pay former college athletes who played from 2016 to 2021 nearly $2.8 billion in back damages over 10 years could add significantly to the burden of already-stressed athletic budgets. Jim Trotter, a columnist for the Athletic, maintains that this recent decision could have potentially dire consequences for mid-majors or smaller Division I schools.

All these changes to athletic funding will inevitably impact broader college or university development initiatives. A significant question then is: How do leaders in higher-education development and institutionally related foundations navigate the mandate to continue to raise funds for academic priorities while also supporting our colleagues in athletics?

And more importantly, how do we educate donors about these issues, allowing them to align their philanthropic dollars with their passions? Here are a few ideas:

• Understand NIL and be ready to educate donors. For you to be effective with all donors, particularly those who support other areas within your institution, you must have a good working knowledge of NIL and the collectives with which your athletic department has chosen to affiliate. Although your highest-level athletic donors probably have worked to become knowledgeable, do not assume most donors understand NIL. Educating donors on key issues differentiating donations to the institution from NIL contributions can be very helpful. For example, tax treatments can differ between the two. While a donation to a college or university to support institutional priorities is tax deductible, a contribution to an NIL collective may not be. Do not dissuade a donor who is choosing to help fund NIL but do be able to speak to how the process works to ultimately help the student athlete. In addition, be prepared to share ideas for the donor’s consideration that match with their giving interests. In other words, do not predetermine whether your donor feels “tapped out.”
• Recognize that, in the short term, some major donors may choose to shift their finite philanthropic dollars to an NIL collective. In doing so, they may choose to delay decisions on supporting academic priorities. Even so, development professionals should stay connected to such donors. Continue to highlight the benefits of mainstream gifting, such as tax deductions and the joy of helping advance other institutional priorities. Note that the drastic changes resulting from the portal system and the rise of NIL collectives might have an adverse impact on some donors, who may choose to abandon support to the college or university entirely. Such donors may require extra assurance of the integrity of the athletic department’s leadership and clarification of how a strong athletic program helps the institution connect to various constituents. Of course, the best possible scenario is strong market conditions and superb donor relations that will result in donors being willing to support multiple priorities, now or in the future. Either way, remember that development work done well is a marathon and not a sprint, so stay close to your donors.
• Cast your development nets wider. The NIL collectives may identify individuals who have not previously been donors to your school. These individuals may represent new potential donors for development professionals, so engage with them whenever possible.
• Partner with your college’s or university’s athletic director and staff. This is arguably the most challenging time in history to be an athletic administrator, so being supportive is more critical than ever for development leaders. Prior to my retirement from the WSU Foundation and Alumni Engagement a few months ago, I was fortunate to work with an exceptional athletic director, Kevin Saal. Kevin always seeks to make every decision based on what is best for the university first and foremost. The foundation chief executive and the director of athletics must be united in following the university president’s direction as to how best to seek private support when balancing numerous priorities for capital and non-capital projects, both academic and athletic.
• Athletic directors need to be prepared to answer the question asked by trusting donors: “Where do you need financial support the most within athletics?” With so many pathways for athletic donations, such as scholarships, annual operating budgets, donor accounts for specific sports, capital projects, etc., the traditional guidance generally has been to encourage donors to focus on one of these accounts. Athletic departments can pay their bills and have full arenas and stadiums, but doing so requires good fiscal management and top student talent. So perhaps a better answer these days is to encourage donors to commit to an NIL collective. Should this be what your director of athletics decides, then you need to understand and support this direction.

I venture to say that most of us preferred the days before the transfer portal and the NIL rulings. But for now, this is the reality of college athletics and institutional development. So, this is a critical time for development professionals to align strategically with our athletic department colleagues and partner to achieve successful outcomes.

Elizabeth King is president emerita of the Wichita State University Foundation and Alumni Engagement.