When Capacity Lies (and What It’s Costing You)

Why wealth ratings are a tool, not a truth — and how fundraisers can stop letting data dull their instincts.

Wealth ratings are like weather forecasts: sometimes helpful, often misleading, and never the whole story. I’ve worked with incredible prospect researchers who know this and use ratings as one tool among many. But when ratings dominate our decisions, or when fundraisers confuse “capacity” with “intention,” things go sideways fast.

When Ratings are Wrong

Let’s start with the obvious: really wealthy people know how to shield their assets from visibility. Some of the most generous donors I’ve experienced were rated low or even at “no capacity.” I’ve seen fundraisers surprised by discovering capacity the old-fashioned way – by talking to people (gasp!).

One fundraiser visited a donor in Indiana whose file showed zero capacity. She stopped for coffee anyway. In that conversation, she learned that the donor owned several thoroughbred racehorses, had leased a large cattle farm in Wyoming and had just returned from presenting to the Supreme Court. When she called the office to have the research re-run, the results came back the same: zero. Turns out, livestock doesn’t show up in wealth screenings.

Another time, that same fundraiser stopped for lunch at a donor’s “small” restaurant. Again, no wealth rating to speak of. But a quick chat revealed the owner’s yacht was docked nearby, and a local friend later shared that the restaurant buys $25 million in meat every year. Guess what? Beef sales and yachts don’t show up in wealth ratings either.

Then there’s the human factor. What else doesn’t appear on screenings? Intentions. Capacity doesn’t equal generosity or passion. Some donors have the means but no interest in giving more than they do presently. I know a multi-millionaire who gives $14-20 per month to his two favorite charities. He’s (rightfully) proud of supporting these organizations and will tell you all about their work. But he is not going to give a major gift. That’s just not his style and that’s okay. Intention will never show up in a spreadsheet.

Capacity also doesn’t measure passion. A donor can have all the means in the world and still direct their biggest gifts elsewhere. Maybe she gives six figures to health research because her nephew died from a rare cancer, and a smaller gift to your animal nonprofit because she served on the board and loves pets. That’s great - she’s generous, and you’re part of her giving story. But let’s be real: the pet charity isn’t going to outrank the cause tied to her family’s heartache. Keep building the relationship, keep stewarding her well, but maybe don’t pencil her in as the lead gift for your next campaign.

The biggest indicator of capacity is a donor’s giving history. I once watched an organization remove active donors from their major gift portfolios because “the data said” they lacked capacity. These donors were giving at major gift levels! Thankfully, some were moved to midlevel and continued to be cultivated. Conversely, I’ve also worked with teams who put high-capacity donors in major gift portfolios, without any history of large gifts. Do you know what usually happens to those donors? They get moved back to midlevel, or direct marketing.

When Fundraisers Go Awry

This is where things really fall apart. Some fundraisers confuse capacity, giving, and intention, and it’s a costly mistake.

A few years ago, I was working with a fundraiser and suggested some new donors to him. He flat out told me, “I don’t see the value of trying to work with these new prospects you suggested. None of them are worth my time. I need to focus on the big fish – that’s what the bosses want, too.” (Another blog will focus on the language we use; I hated so much about that sentiment and the words used to describe donors – ahem, not prospects - but I digress).

In the moment, I took several deep breaths and practiced all my coaching skills. This was a cop-out, and I knew it. His caseload was filled with donors giving under $2,000. The prospects I suggested were giving $5,000 or more and had capacity north of $25,000. I even threw in two $3,000 donors with half a million in capacity. If he had reflected, he would have seen it: capacity is not everything.

But this wasn’t about data. It was about comfort. It was easier for him to cling to his current caseload than to stretch toward new relationships. His leadership didn’t help; they sent monthly capacity lists and told the team to “work the $500 donors with high ratings.” No wonder he was confused. When leadership overvalues research and undervalues relationships, the whole system loses sight of what fundraising actually is - human connection and bringing joy.

The Bottom Line

Wealth ratings are a tool, not a truth. They can guide your thinking, but they should never replace your instincts, your conversations, or your curiosity.

If you want to build a portfolio that performs, spend less time chasing scores and more time chasing stories. Ask questions. Listen well. See the person, not the profile.

Because here’s the thing: capacity is what’s in their wallet (maybe). Connection is what’s in their heart. And only one of those writes the check.