Feasibility Case ≠ Leadership Case

We’ve been working on a few cases for support for different clients this fall. One is preparing for a feasibility study, the other is right in the middle of their leadership phase.

Although our process of developing each of these cases is largely the same — interviews, testing, writing — the substance is fundamentally different.

So we put together this FAQ on how we think about and approach feasibility study cases vs. leadership phase cases

What is the purpose of a feasibility study case for support vs. a leadership phase case for support?

A feasibility case assesses donor alignment with proposed campaign priorities and case language. 

A leadership case assesses donor interest in funding a specific campaign priority.

Who are the primary users of and audiences for feasibility and leadership cases for support?

Campaign counsel uses the feasibility case with a subset of lead donor prospects. 

Advancement staff, board members, and campaign volunteers use a leadership case with a broader group of leadership gift prospects.

Should the process of writing a feasibility case differ from that of a leadership case?

Yes. Typically, for a feasibility case for support, you would perform an in-depth review of the organization’s strategic plan, speak with senior leadership, and test language after the final draft is approved. 

With a leadership case, you would review a wider range of communications related to each campaign priority, speak with additional stakeholders, and test the case with your campaign executive committee before the final draft is approved.

What content should I include in a feasibility or leadership case for support?

Your feasibility study case for support should rely more on the organization’s vision and high-level goals as presented in the strategic plan. Those goals should be “translated” into campaign priorities, described broadly in the case. 

You’ll also need to present a working dollar goal (or range) for the campaign and each priority. At this stage, other than the most senior leader, first-person voices and stories are not necessary; naming opportunities aren’t either. 

On the other hand, for your leadership phase case for support, campaign priorities should be fleshed out enough by now to describe them in detail, along with refined working dollar goals. 

You’ll rely more on implementation strategies for the goals of your strategic plan, but don’t forget to answer these 10 questions. The case will benefit from a range of voices through quotes and stories; naming opportunities may be included if known. 

Both cases should always include a clear call to action with specific instructions. “Join us” is never enough.

Should a feasibility or leadership case be designed?

Don’t design your feasibility case, but do format it nicely within brand standards. It should look professional but not finished so donors know their input will matter as the case evolves. Keep the case to a single document and mark it as a draft. 

Your leadership case is a different matter. Depending on the maturity of the content, the audience, and the timing, a designed case may be necessary. This may even be where your campaign brand begins to take shape.

Either way, that case will ideally be a set of separate documents—one for each priority. If you’re not ready for professional design, however, don’t forget to keep the draft wordmark. It can go a long way to making donors feel like insiders.

One final note: 

The benefits of early-stage case writing go beyond donor engagement and lead gifts. Developing a case for support strengthens internal alignment around campaign priorities and language. It’s a resource for talking points, one-sheets, proposal templates, web copy, philanthropy stories, and social media.