Fund Raising Project Selection Summary

fund Raising Project Selection Summarykristie Nixoncpmgt3058212017

When presented with options to get involved with or take on a company, a systematic process must be followed to determine the best choice. Making an informed decision involves evaluating each option using an approved process, which helps establish priorities and guides the ultimate selection. This process entails comparing multiple projects based on their ability to meet essential requirements and organizational goals, considering both must-have and nice-to-have criteria.

Prior to evaluation, assumptions are made to facilitate an objective comparison. The must-haves are non-negotiable attributes that a project must satisfy to be considered viable. By screening projects through these criteria first, one can quickly eliminate options that fail to meet critical needs. The wants, on the other hand, are desirable features that can enhance the project’s value but are not crucial for success. Evaluating wants can help prioritize projects once the must-haves are satisfied, emphasizing the additional benefits each project offers.

The evaluation process involves ranking the projects based on their fulfillment of must-have requirements and wants. Projects that meet all must-haves and score high on wants are prioritized higher. This systematic approach ensures that the selected project aligns with organizational priorities, maximizes resource utilization, and advances the organization’s mission effectively. The process also addresses the importance of transparency and consistency in decision-making, which is critical for stakeholder confidence.

In the specific case of fundraising projects, the evaluation considers factors such as income potential, community engagement, media coverage, fun factor, and alignment with organizational goals. For example, the "Hoops for Hope" project was ranked highest due to its ability to generate awareness and community interest, despite marginal income potential. Conversely, projects like "Halo for Heroes" received low rankings because of limited revenue and media appeal, even though they meet certain guidelines. These rankings demonstrate a balanced approach that values both financial outcomes and mission impact.

Ultimately, choosing the right project involves weighing various criteria to optimize benefits and minimize risks. This structured evaluation ensures that organizations select initiatives that best support their strategic objectives while also considering stakeholder interests and resource constraints. The process underscores the importance of thorough analysis, clear criteria, and disciplined decision-making in project selection.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Effective project selection is foundational to organizational success, especially in resource-constrained environments like charitable fundraising. When organizations aim to maximize their impact, selecting the right project requires a careful, structured approach that evaluates potential initiatives against established criteria. This paper explores the process of project evaluation, emphasizing how organizations can systematically prioritize projects to align with their mission and strategic goals.

At the heart of project evaluation lies the distinction between must-have attributes and wants. Must-haves represent non-negotiable requirements, such as compliance with legal guidelines, achievable timelines, or budget constraints. For instance, a fundraising project must ensure compliance with college policies and ethical standards. Wants, meanwhile, encompass desirable but non-essential features, like entertainment value or media appeal. These criteria can influence the project’s overall attractiveness and potential success but are secondary to must-haves.

The evaluation process begins by screening all proposed projects to verify if they meet the must-haves. Projects failing these essential criteria are eliminated early, streamlining the decision-making process. The remaining projects are then assessed based on how well they fulfill the wants. The projects are ranked accordingly, with higher scores assigned to those that provide additional benefits or align more closely with organizational priorities.

Applying this framework to fundraising projects involves analyzing various factors such as potential revenue, community engagement, media coverage, ethical considerations, and fun factor. For example, the “Singing for Smiles” project, which involves surgical procedures for cleft lip correction, ranks highly because of its direct impact on beneficiaries and alignment with the charity’s mission. Conversely, projects like “Halo for Heroes” receive lower scores due to limited revenue potential and media appeal, despite meeting some organizational criteria.

The ranking of projects not only guides resource allocation but also ensures transparency in decision-making. It allows stakeholders to understand the rationale behind project choices, fostering trust and accountability. Moreover, the ranking process helps identify opportunities where additional benefits might be gained, such as community awareness or media exposure, which can amplify the organization’s overall impact.

In conclusion, systematic evaluation and ranking are indispensable for effective project selection. By clearly defining and assessing must-haves and wants, organizations can make informed choices that optimize their resources and maximize mission effectiveness. This disciplined approach aligns projects with strategic objectives, supports stakeholder confidence, and ultimately enhances organizational success in achieving its philanthropic goals.

References

• Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2014). Project Management: The Managerial Process (6th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
• Gray, C., & Larson, E. (2018). Project Management: The Managerial Process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
• Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). PMI.
• Meredith, J. R., & Mantel, S. J. (2017). Project Management: A Managerial Approach (9th ed.). Wiley.
• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Wiley.
• Heldman, K. (2018). PMP: Project Management Professional Exam Study Guide. Sybex.
• Heagney, J. (2016). Fundamentals of Project Management. AMACOM.
• PMI Talent Triangle. (2020). Building Competencies for Effective Project Management. PMI.
• Zwikael, O., & Smyrk, J. (2019). Project Management for the Unofficial Project Manager. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
• Schwalbe, K. (2018). Information Technology Project Management. CENGAGE Learning.