Executive Summary
In today’s increasingly complex fundraising environment, global social impact organizations, higher education advancement teams, and healthcare foundations face growing pressure to strengthen donor relationships, increase funds raised, and operate more efficiently across broad-based and high-touch fundraising models. The broader nonprofit, healthcare, and higher education sectors are also under increasing pressure to modernize the technology foundations that support fundraising and constituent engagement. Rising demand, constrained funding, staffing challenges, and continued reliance on manual, resource-intensive processes are limiting many organizations’ ability to operate in a data-driven way. At the same time, advancement teams face growing expectations to increase fundraising performance while legacy platforms that often present reporting limitations, siloed data, and integration challenges.
Blackbaud Enterprise Fundraising CRM™ (Blackbaud CRM) is an enterprise platform that centralizes donor and prospect data, supports modern advancement and development workflows while providing visibility across fundraising, operations, analytics, stewardship, engagement, and adjacent institutional teams. The platform supports fundraising modernization by giving advancement and development teams a more unified way to manage donor relationships, prospect activity, gift processing, stewardship, business intelligence, reporting, and cross-functional access to fundraising data.
Blackbaud commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) enterprises may realize by deploying Blackbaud CRM.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact of Blackbaud CRM on their organizations.
Key Statistics
219%
Return on investment (ROI)
$9.0M
Benefits PV
$6.2M
Net present value (NPV)
Key Benefit Metrics
5.6%
Gift-giving growth uplift by Year 3
20%
Operational productivity improvement for advancement operations by Year 3
$438,000
Annual cost savings from legacy environment modernization and simplification (nominal dollars)
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed seven decision-makers at five organizations with experience using Blackbaud CRM. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewees and combined the results into a single composite organization, which is a global, enterprise-scale social impact institution with a large and diversified fundraising operation supporting both broad-based donor engagement (annual giving) and high-touch strategic giving (major gifts). Before deploying Blackbaud CRM, the organization raised approximately $200 million annually from a donor base of roughly 400,000 annual donors, supported by an advancement/development team of about 120 employees.
Prior to deploying Blackbaud CRM, the interviewees’ organizations consistently struggled with legacy fundraising CRM environments that had become fragmented, manual, and difficult to scale as donor volumes, fundraising goals, and program complexity increased. Interviewees said these environments often relied on manual workarounds, disconnected systems, slow reporting, limited automation, and inconsistent access to donor and prospect data, resulting in incomplete donor views and operational inefficiencies. These challenges constrained teams’ ability to maintain a centralized view of supporters, identify and prioritize high-potential donors, manage moves and portfolios effectively, and provide frontline fundraisers with timely, actionable insights. As fundraising operations have become more sophisticated — spanning annual giving, major gifts, campaigns, events, sustainers, planned giving, and other engagement channels — legacy systems increasingly created bottlenecks, increased administrative burden, and limited the organizations’ ability to support modern, data-driven fundraising at scale.
After deploying Blackbaud CRM, the interviewees’ organizations gained a more unified and fundraising-specific platform that improved how advancement and development teams managed donor relationships, operational workflows, and fundraising activity. Rather than requiring staff to work across fragmented legacy systems and manual handoffs, the platform supports configurable user views, connects with adjacent systems through API and data integrations, and enables automated reporting and business intelligence capabilities. The platform also helped centralize constituent, giving, engagement, and prospect data while supporting more disciplined moves management, portfolio oversight, stewardship tracking, planned giving management, and enhanced reporting and analytics. These capabilities helped create a more consistent fundraising operating model, allowing frontline fundraisers to work from better donor and portfolio intelligence, operations teams to reduce manual data movement and CRM administration, and institutional stakeholders to access more reliable information for stewardship, planning, and decision-making. Capabilities such as configurable user views, automated data processes, integrated reporting access, API-enabled connectivity, and vendor-managed updates helped reduce manual work, improve data visibility, and support broader use of Blackbaud CRM information across fundraising, operations, finance, leadership, and other stakeholder groups. As a result, interviewees’ organizations were better able to scale fundraising operations, equip teams with more timely and actionable donor insights, reduce dependence on legacy workarounds and point tools, support growth without proportionally increasing administrative burden, strengthen data confidence, and create a more adaptable foundation for future programs, channels, and growth.
Key Findings
Quantified benefits. Quantified benefits for the composite organization include:
-
Incremental growth uplift of 5.6% for funds raised. Blackbaud CRM supports the composite organization’s fundraising growth through stronger donor and prospect data management, integrated portfolio and moves management, improved donor history and engagement visibility, and opportunity tracking from discovery through stewardship. Previously, the composite raised $2 million annually with a baseline fundraising growth rate of 2.9%. With Blackbaud CRM, the growth rate increases 5.6% above this baseline by Year 3. Forrester attributes 40% of that uplift to Blackbaud CRM and applies the composite’s 80% operating margin, resulting in $6.9 million in total risk-adjusted benefits in present value over three years.
-
Productivity improvement of 20% for advancement operations team. Blackbaud CRM improves the composite organization’s advancement operations team productivity through scheduled processes, automated reporting refreshes, more reliable data imports and exports, stronger integration capabilities, centralized data access, and reduced manual CRM administration work. These capabilities allow the composite to avoid 3.5 operations hires in Year 1, increasing to 4.8 avoided hires in Year 3. Over three years, this produces total risk-adjusted savings of $1.1 million in present value.
-
Cost savings from legacy tool consolidation worth nearly $1 million. Blackbaud CRM’s hosted SaaS architecture, vendor-managed infrastructure and updates, integrated fundraising workflows, and built-in integration and reporting options allow the composite organization to replace legacy software, self-hosted infrastructure, ancillary integration tools, and manual support processes. As a result, it realizes annual savings of $170,000 from reduced software and hardware maintenance and $25,000 from ancillary tool consolidation, while avoiding two IT FTEs previously supporting legacy tools and infrastructure. Over three years, this produces $980,000 in total risk-adjusted savings in present value.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
-
Improved data confidence and decision-making discipline. The composite organization gains a more trusted foundation for reporting, planning, and fundraising decision-making as constituent, donor, giving, engagement, and operational data becomes more complete, usable, and accessible. Blackbaud CRM helps provide centralized constituent data, reporting capabilities, and more consistent access to donor and prospect information. This reduces the organization’s reliance on incomplete or manually assembled data and helps teams make decisions and plan with greater confidence.
-
Enhanced donor and supporter experience. The composite organization improves donor-facing interactions by giving staff access to more timely and complete information and by supporting capabilities such as donor portals and self-service access. These capabilities help the composite deliver more relevant engagement, enable faster follow-up, and provide more convenient ways for supporters to interact with the institution.
-
Improved ease of use driving user adoption. The composite organization benefits from greater and more consistent CRM usage across advancement, development, operations, and adjacent teams. Blackbaud CRM provides role-relevant access, modern fundraising workflows, and pipeline forecasting that support user adoption. Higher adoption improves the likelihood that users enter better data, follow consistent processes, and rely on the CRM as part of daily work.
-
Broader organizational visibility enabling cross-functional usage. Blackbaud CRM expands value beyond frontline fundraising by enabling leadership, finance, marketing, stewardship, academic or program teams, and other stakeholders to access constituent, donor, and giving information. This expands the role of the CRM beyond back-office fundraising operations and enables more proactive stewardship, planning, relationship management, and fundraising strategy across the organization.
-
Access to implementation and migration expertise. The composite organization benefits from Blackbaud CRM’s mature fundraising-sector implementation model and support ecosystem when replacing a deeply embedded legacy CRM environment. Blackbaud CRM provides implementation practices, fundraising-specific data and process models, and access to professional services and implementation resources. These capabilities help the composite navigate complex CRM transitions and implementation projects.
Quantified costs. Quantified costs for the composite organization include:
-
Blackbaud CRM platform subscription costs of $828,000. The composite organization uses Blackbaud CRM as its enterprise fundraising CRM platform to support a broad set of advancement, development, operations, and institutional users across the organization. It pays an annual platform subscription cost of $300,000 in Year 1, with an annual 6% increase (incorporating a nominal discount). This cost provides access to the platform for advancement and development users, fundraising operations, CRM administration, donor services, IT, and adjacent institutional users. After a 5% upward risk adjustment, the composite’s three-year cost totals $828,000 in present value.
-
Initial platform deployment costs of $1.9 million. The composite organization’s deployment of Blackbaud CRM requires a meaningful up-front cost that includes data migration, process redesign, configuration, integrations, testing, training, and cross-functional participation. The organization allocates six internal FTEs at partial allocation to support implementation activities, using a fully burdened annual salary of $121,500, and it engages Blackbaud for $1 million in professional services to assist with configuration, data migration, and implementation execution (mostly during the initial period). The deployment also includes the configuration of Blackbaud CRM’s donor, gift, reporting, prospect, and integration capabilities to support the organization’s fundraising requirements. After a 10% upward risk adjustment, the composite’s initial deployment cost totals $1.9 million in present value.
-
Ongoing platform support and training costs of $121,000. The composite organization incurs recurring costs for platform support, update testing, configuration changes, user support, and annual training. Two CRM administrator FTEs spend 10% of their time on ongoing maintenance, while all CRM users receive 2 hours of annual training. Blackbaud CRM’s structured fundraising functionality, configurable user views, role-relevant access, scheduled processes, and Azure-hosted SaaS delivery model support ongoing platform administration, user support, and training activities. After a 5% upward risk adjustment, these costs total $121,000 in present value.
The financial analysis that is based on the interviews found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $9.0 million over three years versus costs of $2.8 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $6.2 million and an ROI of 219%.
Benefits (Three-Year)
The Blackbaud Enterprise Fundraising CRM Customer Journey
Drivers leading to the Blackbaud CRM investment
Interviews
| Role | Industry | Region | Annual funds raised | Donor base | Prior state and Blackbaud CRM deployment date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIO of university foundation | Public higher education | Global (HQ: Southeast US) | >$300 million | >500,000 |
• Competing on-premises solution • ~April 2019 |
|
IT director Fundraising operations director |
Specialized healthcare | Global (HQ: Canada) | >$250 million | >600,000 |
• Blackbaud Raiser’s Edge on-premises • ~June 2021 |
| Senior director of advancement systems | Private higher education | Global (HQ: Southeast US) | >$200 million | >300,000 |
• Competing on-premises solution • ~June 2020 |
| Advancement systems director | Pediatric healthcare | Northwest US | >$150 million | >200,000 |
• Blackbaud Raiser’s Edge on-premises • ~October 2023 |
|
CRM director Senior fundraising analyst |
Global health nonprofit | Global (HQ: Northeast US) |
>$70 million |
>300,000 |
• Blackbaud Raiser’s Edge on-premises • ~May 2021 |
Key Challenges
Forrester interviewed seven senior decision-makers at five organizations spanning a range of hands-on leaders responsible for CRM systems, data, and fundraising operations — typically spanning advancement systems, IT, analytics, or fundraising operations functions. Positioned at the intersection of technology and fundraising, they have deep operational perspective shaped by direct ownership of legacy systems and active involvement in CRM selection and implementation. Collectively, they provided clear insight into both the challenges of the prior state and the drivers behind modernization.
Before adopting Blackbaud CRM, the interviewees’ organizations struggled primarily with CRM systems that were generally constraining, though this manifested differently across institutional types. Higher education institutions and healthcare foundations primarily faced strategic limitations stemming from long-standing legacy platforms that had reached end of life. Interviewees said these systems were difficult to use, lacked extensibility, and constrained the ability to scale fundraising efforts, generate meaningful analytics, and develop a unified, data-driven view of donors.
In contrast, the interviewees from the nonprofit and healthcare foundations said their organizations were burdened by heavy manual processes, poor system performance, and fragmented technology ecosystems that required extensive workarounds and limited the ability to integrate data, automate workflows, and respond to donors in a timely manner. They explained that this was largely due to high volumes of smaller, transactional donors, leading to acute operational pain and significant inefficiencies with the day-to-day execution of legacy systems.
Across both segments, a common thread emerged: Legacy CRM environments had become fundamental barriers to growth, preventing interviewees’ organizations from effectively leveraging data, scaling fundraising operations, and supporting increasingly sophisticated engagement models.
Interviewees noted how their organizations struggled with common challenges prior to investing in Blackbaud CRM, including:
-
Limited scalability for growth. Interviewees consistently stated that legacy CRM environments had reached a point where they could no longer scale with the growing complexity, volume, and requirements of modern fundraising efforts, effectively placing them at, or near, end of life. These systems, many in place for decades, were not designed to handle expanding donor bases, increasing data volumes, or more sophisticated engagement models. As fundraising targets rose and programs diversified, the institutions encountered hard limits in system performance, configurability, and data handling capacity, making it difficult to support growth without fundamentally rethinking the underlying platform. The senior director of advancement systems for the private higher education institution stated, “We had basically gotten to the point that we either needed to build our own CRM or buy a modern platform.” This underscores that scalability constraints were no longer merely an operational inconvenience.
-
Inefficient and manual processes. Across the interviewees’ organizations, legacy CRM environments were characterized as inefficient, with highly manual processes that placed significant operational burden on staff and constrained day-to-day fundraising execution. Core activities such as data extraction, list generation, and integration with downstream systems often required multistep, manual workflows, including running complex queries, exporting files, and reprocessing jobs when failures occurred. These processes were not only time-consuming but also fragile; large data pulls could take many hours to run and frequently failed mid-process, forcing teams to restart jobs and repeat work. As a result, routine operational tasks became prolonged and resource-intensive, limiting responsiveness and productivity. The senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit organization referred to repeated failures in large data export jobs that had to be rerun from the beginning: “A lot of times it would take three days to export large data sets because we had to restart over. The exports would crash overnight.”
-
Usability and performance issues. Legacy CRM usability and performance issues created challenges for users, who often had to work around system limitations. Interviewees described the prior environments as dated, difficult to navigate, and in some cases dependent on aging, self-hosted infrastructure that introduced reliability concerns and slowed routine work. Users faced clunky interfaces, limited configurability, weak search and reporting experiences, and processing delays that made day-to-day fundraising operations more cumbersome for staff. These issues were especially problematic as teams attempted to broaden CRM access across fundraising, operations, and institutional stakeholders. The advancement systems director for the specialized healthcare foundation explained, “We were on [a legacy tool], which was self-hosted and running on aging servers.” This highlights how usability constraints and technical fragility had become intertwined in the legacy CRM environment.
-
Limited analytics and reporting capabilities. In the prior CRM environments, analytics and reporting were often constrained by delayed, incomplete, or manually assembled data, making it difficult for the organizations to operate with timely insight into donor behavior, campaign activity, and fundraising, which affected decision making. Reporting frequently depended on exports to spreadsheets or CSV files, manual refreshes, overnight processes, and reconciliation across disconnected systems, which slowed analysis and increased the likelihood that teams were working from stale or fragmented information. These limitations were particularly problematic for organizations trying to become more data-driven, because even when the underlying data existed, it was often difficult to access, slow to process, or unavailable in near real time. The CRM director for the global health nonprofit organization explained: “There were system issues and slowness in the system, preventing us from getting data in real time or as close to real time as we could get. All of that impacted fundraising [and] our ability to be nimble and react to changing conditions, whether it’s a donor situation or external economic data.”
-
Lack of centralized donor and prospect management. Prior to deployment, interviewees’ organizations often lacked a centralized donor and prospect management environment because critical constituent, giving, engagement, campaign, online fundraising, and operational data resided across disconnected legacy systems. This fragmentation made it difficult for teams to maintain a consistent view of donor history, understand cross-channel engagement, coordinate prospect assignment, or reliably identify when a donor should move into a high-touch portfolio. In many cases, staff had to bridge systems manually through exports, imports, spreadsheets, or third-party tools, which created delays, data quality risks, and uneven visibility across fundraising, operations, analytics, and stewardship teams. Interviewees said the result was that donor and prospect management was less coordinated than their organizations needed it to be, particularly as fundraising programs grew more complex and donor interactions spanned more channels. The senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit organization explained: “At that time, our [online fundraising] and [legacy CRM] didn’t talk to each other. So, we had to manually import the files every day.” This illustrates that disconnected systems prevented teams from operating from a unified, timely view of donor activity.
-
Inability to support modern fundraising efforts. Interviewees pointed out that prior CRM environments also limited their organizations’ ability to support modern fundraising models that require effective prospecting, portfolio management, campaign planning, and major or planned gift cultivation. Fundraising teams needed to identify high-potential donors, understand where constituents sat in the cultivation cycle, coordinate outreach across teams, and track complex relationships and opportunities over time, but older systems often relied on rigid data structures, attributes, manual workarounds, or disconnected prospecting processes that made this difficult. These limitations became more pronounced as organizations prepared for larger campaigns, pursued higher-value giving, or sought to move donors from broad-based engagement into more personalized stewardship and solicitation strategies.
Investment Objectives
The interviewees’ organizations searched for a solution that could:
-
Support enterprise-scale fundraising growth. The organizations sought a CRM that could handle larger donor populations, increasing fundraising targets, more complex campaigns, and expanding data volumes without requiring constant workarounds or major redevelopment.
-
Meet fundraising and advancement management requirements. The organizations wanted a solution that supports gifts, stewardship, donor pipelines, and development officer workflows without requiring extensive customization or add-ons.
-
Create a centralized view of donors and supporters. Interviewees emphasized the need to consolidate giving history, engagement data, online activity, campaign participation, event or third-party marketing data, and prospect information into a unified environment to improve donor understanding and coordination.
-
Enable stronger prospect, portfolio, and major gift management. A key requirement was better support for moves management, prospect assignment, planned giving, opportunity tracking, and development officer portfolio visibility.
-
Improve analytics, reporting, and data accessibility. Interviewees looked for a solution that could make fundraising and donor data easier to access, analyze, refresh, and report on, supporting more timely insights and a stronger foundation for data-driven decision-making.
-
Integrate with the broader fundraising technology ecosystem. The organizations prioritized extensibility and connectivity with online fundraising tools, payment processors, finance systems, data warehouses, reporting platforms, donor portals, and other third-party applications to reduce manual data movement and improve operational reliability.
Composite Organization
Based on the interviews, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite organization, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the interviewees’ organizations, and it is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:
-
Description of composite. The composite organization is a global, enterprise-scale social impact institution with a large and diversified fundraising operation supporting both broad-based donor engagement (annual giving) and high-touch strategic giving (major gifts). Before deploying Blackbaud CRM, the organization raised approximately $200 million annually from a base of roughly 400,000 donors, supported by an advancement/development team of about 120 employees, including frontline fundraisers, fundraising operations, marketing, events, donor services, CRM, and IT staff. The organization relied on legacy fundraising systems to support donor management, fundraising operations, analytics, and reporting across the advancement function.
-
Deployment characteristics. The organization deploys Blackbaud CRM to approximately 200 users spanning advancement, operations, IT, donor services, and adjacent institutional functions. The deployment includes the centralization of donor and prospect information, support for fundraising operations and reporting, and integration with related fundraising systems.
-
Key modeling assumptions. Forrester used the following assumptions in the financial model:
- Prior to deploying Blackbaud CRM, the composite organization raised $200 million annually.
- Prior to deploying Blackbaud CRM, the composite organization’s fundraising growth rate was 2.9%.
- The composite organization’s fundraising cost is 20% of funds raised.
- The composite organization’s fundraising activity consists of a combination of major gifts and annual giving.
- The composite organization has 120 FTEs advancement/development FTEs and 22 fundraising operations FTEs at the beginning of the analysis period.
- The fully burdened annual salary for an advancement/development FTE is $113,400.
- The fully burdened annual salary for a fundraising operations FTE is $108,000.
- The composite organization's fundraising cost is 20% of funds raised. The composite realizes 80% of modeled benefits in Year 1, 90% in Year 2, and 100% in Year 3.
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
-
Previously raised $200 million in annual funds
-
22 FTEs on the fundraising operations team in Year 1
-
195 Blackbaud CRM users in Year 1
-
80% operating margin
Composite Organization Assumptions
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organizational assumptions | ||||||||||
| R1 | Funds raised (baseline) | Composite | $200,000,000 | $205,000,000 | $211,000,000 | |||||
| R2 | Operating margin | Composite | 80% | 80% | 80% | |||||
| R3 | Donors | Composite | 400,000 | 410,000 | 420,000 | |||||
| R4 | Fully burdened annual salary for a fundraising operations/development FTE | Composite | $108,000 | $108,000 | $108,000 | |||||
| R5 | Fully burdened annual salary for a CRM administrator FTE | Composite | $121,500 | $121,500 | $121,500 | |||||
| R6 | Fully burdened annual salary for an IT FTE | Composite | $121,500 | $121,500 | $121,500 | |||||
| R7 | Fully burdened annual salary for a donor services manager | Composite | $162,000 | $162,000 | $162,000 | |||||
| R8 | Blended fully burdened annual salary for an advancement team FTE | Composite | $113,400 | $113,400 | $113,400 | |||||
| R9 | Effective value derived from Blackbaud CRM | Composite | 80% | 90% | 100% | |||||
| Blackbaud CRM use assumptions | ||||||||||
| R10 | Frontline fundraisers | Composite | 35 | 36 | 37 | |||||
| R11 | Total fundraising staff members (including events, marketing, etc.) | Composite | 98 | 99 | 101 | |||||
| R12 | Fundraising operations FTEs (including CRM, IT, donor services) | Composite | 22 | 23 | 24 | |||||
| R13 | Advancement/development team members | R11+R12 | 120 | 122 | 125 | |||||
| R14 | Users outside of the advancement/development team | Composite | 75 | 78 | 82 | |||||
| R15 | Total CRM users | R13+R14 | 195 | 200 | 207 | |||||
Analysis Of Benefits
Quantified benefit data as applied to the composite
Total Benefits
| Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atr | Increase in funds raised | $2,448,000 | $2,788,000 | $3,213,952 | $8,449,952 | $6,944,276 |
| Btr | Advancement operations team productivity-driven savings | $377,055 | $441,693 | $517,104 | $1,335,852 | $1,096,321 |
| Ctr | Cost savings from legacy tool consolidation | $394,200 | $394,200 | $394,200 | $1,182,600 | $980,317 |
| Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $3,219,255 | $3,623,893 | $4,125,256 | $10,968,404 | $9,020,914 |
Increase In Funds Raised
Evidence and data. A recurring theme across the interviews was that Blackbaud CRM helped increase the productivity of frontline fundraisers by strengthening the capabilities of the broader advancement and development organization. Before adopting Blackbaud CRM, their organizations’ ability to increase funds raised was constrained by legacy CRM environments that made it difficult to consistently identify, prioritize, cultivate, and engage the right donors at the right time. Donor and prospect data was often incomplete, difficult to access, or spread across systems, limiting teams’ ability to identify high-potential opportunities, manage donor movement through the fundraising lifecycle, and provide frontline fundraisers with timely, actionable insights.
Interviewees said that Blackbaud CRM helped address these constraints by providing a fundraising-specific platform with stronger donor and prospect data management, more integrated portfolio and moves management capabilities, improved visibility into donor history and engagement, and better tools for tracking opportunities from discovery through solicitation and stewardship. These capabilities enabled the interviewees’ organizations to operate more systematically and productively across both broad-based and higher-touch fundraising activities, helping frontline fundraisers focus on better-qualified prospects, accelerate engagement cycles, and ultimately increase funds raised. Interviewees also highlighted incremental improvements in planned giving programs, driven by enhanced capabilities for identifying planned giving prospects, coordinating solicitation efforts, and consistently tracking donor engagement and stewardship activities. Improved visibility into the planned giving pipeline and more accurate forecasting of long-term commitments further contributed to increased fundraising effectiveness over time.
-
The fundraising operations director for the specialized healthcare foundation explained: “We saw a 10% increase in major giving revenue. That was tied to the ability to have a 360-degree view of our constituents, which allowed us to target our marketing efforts [and improve] stewardship tracking, prospect planning, and moves management.” The IT director from the same organization observed: “The [third-party marketing] data is now in our system, whereas before it wasn’t. So we can now market to them differently. Having this data integrated was helpful in creating new programs and new revenue streams.”
-
The advancement systems director for the pediatric healthcare foundation noted: “I think there are more sophisticated tools in the CRM now. It has a more centralized management system for prospect development and managing those kinds of major gift functions.”
-
The senior director of advancement systems for the private higher education institution said: “Blackbaud CRM has made us more educated in our work because we are using more data in our decision-making and solicitations. We are also much more efficient in our work because the system is all integrated rather than various pieces we need to keep in sync.”
-
The CIO of the public higher education foundation shared: “By moving into [Blackbaud CRM], we were better able to stress the utilization of tracking our stages of prospects — basically moves management. We started using plans and opportunities with more dedicated effort from our frontline fundraisers.”
-
The CRM director for the global health nonprofit organization stated: “Our growth suggests that [Blackbaud CRM] been successful for us. Our ability to manage our donors and manage our sustainer audience has been very robust.”
Modeling and assumptions. This benefit focuses on the increase in funds associated with changes in major gift cycle time, moves management, data mining capabilities, and frontline fundraiser productivity. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The composite organization raises $200 million of funds in Year 1 under the baseline scenario without Blackbaud CRM, growing by 2.9% CAGR over the analysis period.
-
The composite organization realizes an incremental uplift in growth rate percentages of 3.0% to 6.3% above the baseline after deploying Blackbaud CRM.
-
The gross growth uplift for the composite after deploying Blackbaud CRM is 5.6%. The net gift-giving growth uplift enabled by Blackbaud CRM is 4.5% in Year 1, 5.0% in Year 2, and 5.6% by Year 3 reflecting the solution’s implementation ramp.
-
The net increase in funds raised by the composite organization enabled by Blackbaud CRM is $9.0 million in Year 1, $10.3 million in Year 2, and just over $11.8 million by Year 3.
-
Forrester attributes 40% of the full fundraising uplift to Blackbaud CRM to reflect the role of people, process, and broader fundraising strategy.
-
The composite organization has an operating margin of 80%.
-
In its prior state, the composite raised an average of $5.7 million per frontline fundraiser. With Blackbaud CRM, this average is $6 million.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences and that results may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
Differences in advancement and development operations across higher education institutions, healthcare foundations, and enterprise-scale nonprofit organizations.
-
The relative emphasis placed on major, planned, principal, and annual giving programs.
-
The frequency and magnitude of one-time gifts of out-sized proportion, which may be driven by factors beyond the CRM platform.
-
The cost of fundraising.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 15%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of more than $6.9 million.
5.6%
Gift-giving growth uplift enabled with Blackbaud by Year 3
Increase In Funds Raised
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Baseline funds raised without Blackbaud CRM | Composite | $200,000,000 | $205,000,000 | $211,000,000 | |
| A2 | Structural growth uplift enabled with Blackbaud CRM (net of ramp) | Interviews | 4.5% | 5.0% | 5.6% | |
| A3 | Increase in funds raised enabled with Blackbaud CRM | A1+(A1*A2) | $209,000,000 | $215,250,000 | $222,816,000 | |
| A4 | Fundraising uplift attributed to Blackbaud CRM | Composite | 40% | 40% | 40% | |
| A5 | Increase in funds raised attributed to Blackbaud CRM | (A3-A1)*A4 | $3,600,000 | $4,100,000 | $4,726,400 | |
| A6 | Operating margin | Composite | 80% | 80% | 80% | |
| At | Increase in funds raised | A5*A6 | $2,880,000 | $3,280,000 | $3,781,120 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓15% | |||||
| Atr | Increase in funds raised (risk-adjusted) | $2,448,000 | $2,788,000 | $3,213,952 | ||
| Three-year total: $8,449,952 | Three-year present value: $6,944,276 | |||||
Sector Spotlight
Major Gifts Impact For Higher Education Institutions And Healthcare Foundations
Interviewees from higher education institutions and healthcare organizations said Blackbaud CRM’s impact on raising funds was especially meaningful in the context of major and principal giving, where the fundraising motion depends on identifying high-potential donors, managing long cultivation cycles, tracking moves, and equipping development officers with timely donor intelligence. While the composite financial model reflected a blended fundraising organization that included both broad-based annual giving and higher-touch strategic giving, the higher education interviewees described environments where major gifts represented a much larger share of total funds raised and where even modest improvements in prospect identification, portfolio management, and cycle time could materially affect fundraising outcomes. In these settings, Blackbaud CRM helped advancement teams use donor data more effectively, improve visibility into portfolios, and manage the progression from discovery through cultivation, solicitation, and stewardship.
Interviewees said these improvements translated into measurable fundraising outcomes. The senior director of advancement systems at a private higher education institution explained: We have actually been getting larger major gifts. We have been able to speed up the close rate because we’re tracking it in a much better way, and our development officers can see their portfolio much better than they used to.”
An alternative analysis considers how the same overall outcome of increasing funds raised could be viewed through a higher education and healthcare major-gifts lens. In this illustrative scenario, which does not reflect a separate modeled organization, major giving represents approximately 70% of funds raised, and the same Benefit A fundraising uplift is attributed to a 7.0% uplift in major giving through improved prospect intelligence, moves management, portfolio visibility, and development officer productivity. This does not create a separate financial model or change the overall Benefit A result, ROI, or study economics. Rather, it illustrates how the same fundraising uplift could be concentrated differently for higher education institutions whose fundraising mix is more heavily weighted toward major and principal gifts. This framing was also directionally supported by one of the interviewees from specialized healthcare, who reported a 10% increase in major giving revenue that they attributed to a more complete constituent view, better stewardship tracking, prospect planning, and moves management.
The higher education interviewees also emphasized that the value of Blackbaud CRM was not limited to reporting on fundraising activity after the fact. It also informed how advancement teams managed the donor pipeline itself. By providing a central system of record for alumni, donors, constituents, plans, opportunities, and prospect stages, Blackbaud CRM helped these interviewees’ institutions improve visibility into the full pipeline, strengthen forecasting accuracy, and create greater accountability around moves management and more consistently manage the work of frontline fundraisers. One CIO at a public higher education institution described this shift: “By moving onto [Blackbaud CRM], we were better able to stress the utilization of tracking our stages of prospects, basically moves management. We started to strategically use plans and opportunities with more dedicated effort from our frontline fundraisers.”
Interviewees also noted that enhanced pipeline tracking and standardized data supported more reliable short- and long-term forecasting of both major and planned gifts, supporting more coordinated solicitation strategies across distributed teams. This was particularly important for institutions with complex stakeholder networks, multiple schools or colleges, and large alumni and donor populations, where consistent pipeline management and shared visibility into future giving were critical to align fundraising efforts across the enterprise.
Ultimately, the higher education major gifts lens illustrates how Blackbaud CRM may be particularly relevant in environments where fundraising success depends on fewer, larger gifts and more disciplined relationship management over time. For these institutions, the platform’s fundraising-specific data model, prospect and portfolio management capabilities, and improved donor visibility helped advancement teams better identify, prioritize, cultivate, and steward high-value donors. While this study’s financial model uses one composite organization, the interview evidence suggests that higher education institutions with a larger major-giving mix might experience the same overall fundraising benefit through a more concentrated improvement in major and principal gift performance.
Advancement Operations Team Productivity-Driven Savings
Evidence and data. Interviewees said Blackbaud CRM not only improved the productivity of frontline fundraising teams, but that it also enhanced the productivity of the core advancement and development operations teams that supported fundraising execution. Prior to Blackbaud CRM, the interviewees’ organizations’ advancement and/or development operations teams were burdened by manual, repetitive, and fragile processes required to keep fundraising systems running and data usable. Staff spent significant time extracting and importing data, reconciling information across disconnected systems, maintaining lists and reports, managing data quality issues, supporting integrations, and responding to routine CRM administration needs. This is work that would have required additional operations FTEs as fundraising volumes, donor counts, and organizational complexity grew.
Blackbaud CRM helped reduce the need for incremental hiring by automating and streamlining many of these operational activities. Interviewees described improvements related to data imports and exports, integration capabilities, workflows, data access, reporting refreshes, and infrastructure maintenance. As a result, interviewees reported being able to support larger and more complex fundraising operations without proportionally expanding advancement operations teams, making this benefit one of cost avoidance through productivity and scale rather than headcount reduction.
-
The senior director of advancement systems for the private higher education institution estimated: “We would have probably had to add at least 10 more people just because of the volume of transactions if we were working at today’s levels with the old system.”
-
In the context of integration between systems, the senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit organization recalled: “When we were [using our legacy CRM tool], we had one person [whose sole responsibility was working with a separate online giving tool]. Now we don’t have that because one person can do multiple things.” They summarized: “We have seven to eight people now [in development operations]. I would say we probably would have needed 10 to 12 [without Blackbaud CRM].”
-
The advancement systems director for the pediatric healthcare foundation noted: “From an operation standpoint, I would say Blackbaud CRM has increased productivity because of the abilities to automate tasks. If we didn’t have Blackbaud CRM, we would need to add a couple more positions.”
-
The IT director for the specialized healthcare foundation shared: “Less time [is] spent after hours now. Before Blackbaud CRM, imports were just a disaster. Even with data entry, we were never on time. I believe you can equate it to one FTE savings in terms of the efficiency on the dataset alone.”
-
The CIO of the public higher education foundation observed: “Overall for all aspects of the system, we have probably experienced a 10% to 15% gain in productivity, not just fundraising, but the way that we enter records and run the operations.”
Modeling and assumptions. This benefit focuses on productivity benefits for the advancement operations team. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
Without Blackbaud CRM, the composite’s advancement operations team would consist of 22 FTEs in Year 1, 23 in Year 2, and 24 in Year 3.
-
The gross improvement in advancement operations team productivity for the composite is 20%. The net improvement in team productivity is 16% in Year 1, 18% in Year 2, and 20% in Year 3.
-
Productivity improvements enable advancement operations team FTEs to be assigned to higher-value tactical and strategic tasks.
-
The blended fully burdened annual salary for an advancement team FTE is $113,400.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences and that holistic productivity improvements for advancement operations teams will vary among institutions depending on:
-
Differences in advancement operations team structures across higher education institutions, healthcare foundations, and enterprise-scale nonprofit organizations.
-
The scale of the organization.
-
The capabilities of the legacy CRM tool stack.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of nearly $1.1 million.
20%
Operational productivity improvement for advancement operations by Year 3
Advancement Operations Team Productivity-Driven Savings
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Advancement operations team FTEs without Blackbaud CRM | Composite | 22.0 | 23.0 | 24.0 | |
| B2 | Effective operations team productivity improvement with Blackbaud CRM | Interviews | 16.0% | 18.0% | 20.0% | |
| B3 | Avoided hires for advancement operations team | B1*B2 | 3.5 | 4.1 | 4.8 | |
| B4 | Blended fully burdened annual salary for an advancement team professional | Composite | $113,400 | $113,400 | $113,400 | |
| Bt | Advancement operations team productivity-driven savings | B3*B4 | $396,900 | $464,940 | $544,320 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓5% | |||||
| Btr | Advancement operations team productivity-driven savings (risk-adjusted) | $377,055 | $441,693 | $517,104 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,335,852 | Three-year present value: $1,096,321 | |||||
Cost Savings From Legacy Environment Modernization And Simplification
Evidence and data. Interviewees said Blackbaud CRM helped their organizations reduce CRM-related operating overhead by replacing fragmented legacy environments that required ongoing software maintenance, hardware support, manual administration, and ancillary tools for analytics, data movement, enrichment, and integration. In the prior state, several organizations relied on self-hosted or aging CRM environments that placed recurring demands on IT and operations teams, including server upkeep, upgrade coordination, database administration, troubleshooting, and support for point solutions used to fill gaps in reporting, imports, or donor data management.
While many interviewees said their organization had migrated from self-hosted environments, they described this benefit primarily as a reduction in CRM-related operating overhead rather than purely as infrastructure elimination. Interviewees reported reducing dependence on some legacy tools and administrative activities. Blackbaud CRM provided platform maintenance, integration and data access capabilities, and fundraising-specific functionality that supported these changes.
-
The senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit organization explained the challenge of previously having multiple point tools: “At that time, [our online giving tool] and our legacy CRM tool didn’t talk to each other. We had to manually import the files every day. We even had to use a third-party vendor to use its import product to get the two tools to communicate. With Blackbaud CRM, we were able to eliminate these tools.”
-
The CIO of the public higher education foundation said: “We wanted to move from on-premises to something that was cloud-based. Previously, I had a server room that had 106 physical and virtual servers that we were able to eliminate.”
Modeling and assumptions. This benefit focuses on reductions in CRM-related operating overhead and elimination of legacy infrastructure. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The composite realizes annual savings of $170,000 from reduced CRM-related software maintenance, hardware upgrades, and related servicing expenses.
-
The composite realizes annual savings of $25,000 from the elimination of ancillary tools for online giving, data integration, and related functions.
-
The composite eliminates two IT FTEs dedicated to supporting on-premises hardware and the legacy tools.
-
The average fully burdened annual salary for an IT FTE professional is $121,500.
Risks. Forrester recognizes that these results may not be representative of all experiences and that cost savings from legacy environment modernization and simplification may vary from organization to organization based on:
-
The size of the organization.
-
The organization’s ability to secure favorable pricing terms.
-
The number of legacy hardware and software tools previously supported.
-
The number and costs of FTEs dedicated to supporting legacy hardware and software tools.
-
Legacy environment licensing contract terms.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $980,000.
$438,000
Annual cost savings from legacy environment modernization and simplification (nominal dollars)
Cost Savings From Legacy Environment Modernization And Simplification
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | CRM-related software and hardware maintenance cost reduction | Composite | $170,000 | $170,000 | $170,000 | |
| C2 | Savings from ancillary tool elimination | Composite | $25,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 | |
| C3 | FTEs dedicated to supporting the legacy environment | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| C4 | Fully burdened annual salary for an IT professional | Composite | $121,500 | $121,500 | $121,500 | |
| Ct | Cost savings from legacy environment modernization and simplification | C1+C2+(C3*C4) | $438,000 | $438,000 | $438,000 | |
| Risk adjustment | ↓10% | |||||
| Ctr | Cost savings from legacy environment modernization and simplification (risk-adjusted) | $394,200 | $394,200 | $394,200 | ||
| Three-year total: $1,182,600 | Three-year present value: $980,317 | |||||
Unquantified Benefits
Benefits that provide value for the composite organization but are not quantified for this study include:
-
Improved data confidence and decision-making discipline. Interviewees described Blackbaud CRM as helping their organizations operate with more complete, accessible, and reliable data, which improved confidence in reporting, planning, and day-to-day fundraising decisions. This was less about analytics productivity and more about the organization’s ability to rely on CRM data for strategy and execution, providing a single source of truth. The IT director for the specialized healthcare foundation said, “Teams have now started to depend on data to make their decisions with more confidence, and even to strategize.” The composite organization may experience similar benefits through improved reporting, planning, and fundraising decision-making. This benefit could be quantified through improvements in data quality metrics, reporting accuracy, or fundraising outcomes associated with data-driven decision-making.
-
Enhanced donor and supporter experience. Interviewees noted that Blackbaud CRM helped their organizations support donor-facing interactions through more complete data, more timely information, and capabilities such as donor portals and self-service access. For the composite organization, this enables more responsive stewardship activities and gives donors more convenient ways to interact with the institution. The IT director for the specialized healthcare foundation explained: “We’ve designed a supporter portal where you can go in, download your tax receipt, and change your monthly giving without needing the APIs on the back end of CRM. There would be no way of doing that [without Blackbaud CRM].” This benefit could be quantified through donor satisfaction, donor retention, digital engagement, giving participation metrics, and associated fundraising outcomes.
-
Improved ease of use driving user adoption. Interviewees noted that Blackbaud CRM provided a more usable environment than the legacy systems it replaced, which helped increase willingness to use the CRM across advancement, development, operations, and adjacent teams. They said this benefit was especially important because better usability supported more complete data entry, broader adoption, and more consistent use of fundraising processes. The senior director of advancement systems for the private higher education institution noted, “Because the system is so much easier to use compared to the other one, we have more people that are willing to use it.” This benefit could be quantified through user adoption rates, CRM utilization metrics, data completeness measures, or productivity improvements.
-
Broader organization visibility enabling cross-functional usage. Interviewees observed that Blackbaud CRM became a centralized source of donor, alumni, constituent, and giving information for stakeholders beyond the core fundraising team, including leadership, finance, academic units, marketing, and stewardship teams. The composite organization may similarly benefit from broader access to constituent and fundraising information across departments, enabling more informed planning, reporting, stewardship, and decision-making activities. This benefit could be quantified through user adoption rates, the number of departments actively using the platform, or reductions in duplicate reporting and data-management activities.
-
Access to implementation and migration expertise. Several interviewees said they valued Blackbaud’s experience supporting fundraising operations through CRM implementations and migrations, which helped reduce uncertainty during complex CRM transitions. This was particularly important for organizations moving from deeply embedded legacy systems where conversion, training, and continuity were major concerns. The senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit relayed how this experience factored into the organization’s selection of the platform: “Blackbaud was more established. They had a game plan for nonprofits. Obviously, they do conversions all the time. It was a key factor in our decision.” The composite organization may similarly benefit from access to implementation guidance, migration resources, and fundraising-sector expertise during platform transitions. This benefit could be quantified through reductions in implementation time, project delays, or external consulting requirements during deployment.
Flexibility
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Blackbaud CRM and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
-
Adaptability to support future growth. Several interviewees described Blackbaud CRM as a platform that helped prepare their organizations for continued growth, more sophisticated fundraising activities, and evolving operational needs. As the composite organization’s fundraising programs, donor engagement strategies, and operational requirements evolve over time, it may be able to leverage Blackbaud CRM to support future growth initiatives without requiring a significant platform change.
-
Configurability across different operating models. Interviewees said they valued that Blackbaud CRM gave their organizations the ability to configure views, fields, workflows, data lists, and user experiences around their specific fundraising processes rather than forcing teams into a rigid operating model. The CRM director for the global health nonprofit organization observed: “Blackbaud has done well by making their systems more extensible. For example, their SKY API product allows us to integrate more easily with different products and different systems.” As the composite organization’s fundraising strategies, reporting requirements, or stakeholder needs evolve, it may be able to adapt the platform to support new operating models, business requirements, and integration needs.
-
Support for new programs, channels, and constituent engagement. Some interviewees noted that Blackbaud CRM helped their organizations incorporate data and workflows that legacy systems could not easily support, such as third-party marketing data, supporter portals, planned giving needs, and more targeted stewardship or marketing approaches. The advancement systems director for the pediatric healthcare foundation explained: “Increased automations, the customization, the ability to configure, and the connectivity between systems — these capabilities have opened up new avenues for us.” As the composite organization’s fundraising strategies evolve, it may be able to extend its use of Blackbaud CRM to support new fundraising programs, constituent engagement channels, supporter experiences, and fundraising initiatives in the future.
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Total Economic Impact Approach).
Analysis Of Costs
Quantified cost data as applied to the composite
Total Costs
| Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dtr | Blackbaud CRM platform subscription costs | $0 | $315,000 | $333,900 | $353,850 | $1,002,750 | $828,167 |
| Etr | Initial platform deployment costs | $1,626,900 | $275,000 | $0 | $0 | $1,901,900 | $1,876,900 |
| Ftr | Ongoing platform support and training costs | $0 | $48,038 | $48,615 | $49,424 | $146,076 | $120,981 |
| Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $1,626,900 | $638,038 | $382,515 | $403,274 | $3,050,726 | $2,826,048 |
Blackbaud CRM Platform Subscription Costs
Evidence and data. Interviewees reported that their organizations’ Blackbaud CRM costs were structured as a platform subscription, with pricing influenced by factors such as institution size, scope of deployment across advancement and related functions, overall system complexity, and associated services rather than a strictly per-user licensing model.
-
Interviewees described Blackbaud CRM as a subscription-based platform that supported broad access across development, advancement, finance, operations, and other adjacent functions. Several noted that user access was not a limiting factor in their deployment. One interviewee referred to Blackbaud CRM pricing as “subscription-based with no user limits.”
-
Other interviewees reported that pricing was tied to factors such as institutional size and deployment scope, with some enterprise deployments involving hundreds of users across advancement, development, leadership, and other stakeholders.
-
Pricing may vary. Contact Blackbaud for additional details.
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
The composite organization supports nearly 200 Blackbaud CRM users in Year 1 and expands access by approximately 5% annually across advancement/development, fundraising operations, IT, donor services, and adjacent institutional users.
-
The modeled user population includes both core advancement/development users and users outside the development team who access donor, giving, stewardship, or reporting information.
-
Based on the organization’s size and usage, the composite pays $300,000 in Blackbaud CRM subscription costs in Year 1, increasing by 6% annually thereafter.
-
The composite organization receives a nominal discount based on its organizational scale.
Risks. The impact of this cost may vary by organization depending on the following:
-
The scope of Blackbaud CRM add-ons and additional modules deployed.
-
The size and scale of the organization’s Blackbaud CRM deployment.
-
Customization, integration, and configuration requirements.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $828,000.
Blackbaud CRM Platform Subscription Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Blackbaud CRM platform subscription costs | Composite | $0 | $300,000 | $318,000 | $337,000 |
| Dt | Blackbaud CRM platform subscription costs | D1 | $0 | $300,000 | $318,000 | $337,000 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | |||||
| Dtr | Blackbaud CRM platform subscription costs (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $315,000 | $333,900 | $353,850 | |
| Three-year total: $1,002,750 | Three-year present value: $828,167 | |||||
Initial Platform Deployment Costs
Evidence and data. Interviewees said deployment and initial setup represented a meaningful upfront cost for their organizations because the Blackbaud CRM implementations required data migration, process redesign, configuration, integrations, testing, training, and dedicated participation from cross-functional advancement, operations, IT, and fundraising stakeholders. However, interviewees generally described the implementation as more structured and manageable than a fully custom CRM build because Blackbaud CRM provided a fundraising-specific data model, configurable workflows, and built-in capabilities for donor management, gift processing, reporting, prospect tracking, and integration.
Several interviewees also said their organization benefited from Blackbaud professional services or implementation partners that helped guide requirements gathering, data conversion, business process mapping, and user training. As a result, deployment still required significant time and internal effort as the organizations moved from legacy environments to Blackbaud CRM.
-
The senior director of advancement systems for the private higher education institution said: “The actual implementation and integration was about 15 months. We had a team of 10 on what we called the core group. We probably spent half to three-quarters of their time over those 15 months making this transition happen.”
-
The senior fundraising analyst for the global health nonprofit organization said: “We officially started the conversion in February 2020. We went live in May of 2021, so it was about 15 months. [Three of us] spent 50% of our time on this effort. The other team members [spent] maybe 15% of their time. There was a team of three from Blackbaud for implementation. It was part of our initial contract.”
-
The CIO for the public higher education foundation reported: “We had one person dedicated to [implementation]. Collectively, [there were] probably 20 people doing their everyday [jobs] and meeting twice a week for 18 months.”
-
The advancement systems director for the pediatric healthcare foundation said: “It was about an 18-month project. We brought on a full-time project manager who was a consultant. Within [my organization], I was probably 80% dedicated to the project, while three other people were probably [dedicated to it] about half their time.” Regarding the add-on consulting services, they said: “It was paid for as part of the implementation work. It was a milestone contract for the implementation, so it wasn’t time and materials.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
A CRM administrator and a project manager each spend 100% of their time for 18 months on the deployment of Blackbaud CRM.
-
An additional 10 SMEs each allocate about 20% of their time over the same period, representing a total of 6.0 FTE years of internal deployment effort.
-
The average fully burdened annual salary for a CRM administrator FTE is $121,500.
-
The composite incurs a one-time implementation cost of $1 million, with $750,000 incurred during the initial period and $250,000 incurred in Year 1.
Risks. The impact of this cost may vary by organization depending on the following:
-
The size of the organization.
-
The organization’s configuration of Blackbaud CRM, including add-on options.
-
The relative expertise of the organization’s advancement operations team.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of nearly $1.9 million.
Initial Platform Deployment Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Total internal deployment effort (FTE years) | Interviews | 6.0 | |||
| E2 | Fully burdened annual salary for a CRM administrator FTE | Composite | $121,500 | |||
| E3 | Cost of Blackbaud professional services | Composite | $750,000 | $250,000 | ||
| Et | Initial platform deployment costs | (E1*E2)+E3 | $1,479,000 | $250,000 | $0 | $0 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑10% | |||||
| Etr | Initial platform deployment costs (risk-adjusted) | $1,626,900 | $275,000 | $0 | $0 | |
| Three-year total: $1,901,900 | Three-year present value: $1,876,900 | |||||
Ongoing Platform Support And Training Costs
Evidence and data. Interviewees said ongoing platform support and user training represented recurring costs for their organizations, but they generally indicated that ongoing support requirements remained manageable after deployment. Unlike the initial implementation, ongoing support was focused on helping users adopt and sustain effective CRM behaviors, testing periodic updates, supporting configuration changes, resolving day-to-day questions, and training fundraisers, operations staff, and adjacent users on relevant workflows. Interviewees reported that ongoing support activities included system maintenance, update testing, configuration changes, and user support. As a result, ongoing costs were associated with supporting users and maintaining the platform as organizational needs evolved.
-
The CIO of the public higher education foundation shared: “Platform maintenance is minimal. Blackbaud provides quarterly service release packs. It’s maybe 10% to 15% of an FTE’s time per service pack update.”
-
The IT director for the specialized healthcare foundation observed: “For upgrades, we have one person leading it, but for the testing we would include the operations team. On an ongoing basis, [it requires] less than 10% of one person’s time.”
-
The CRM director for the global health nonprofit organization stated: “Once you have it established, it’s very robust. I think it can handle a lot of the maintenance once you figure out your business rules. I would say [it requires] 10% of an FTE’s time.”
Modeling and assumptions. Based on the interviews, Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
-
Two CRM administrator FTEs spend 10% of their time on ongoing maintenance.
-
Each Blackbaud CRM user requires 2 hours of annual training related to platform updates and new features.
-
The fully burdened annual salary for a CRM administrator FTE is $121,500.
-
The fully burdened hourly rate for an advancement team professional is $55.
Risks. The impact of this cost may vary by organization depending on the level of support needed for upgrades.
Results. To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of about $121,000.
Ongoing Platform Support And Training Costs
| Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | CRM administrator FTEs dedicated to ongoing maintenance | Interviews | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | |
| F2 | Fully burdened annual salary for a CRM administrator FTE | Composite | $121,500 | $121,500 | $121,500 | |
| F3 | Training time per Blackbaud CRM user (hours) | Interviews | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | |
| F4 | CRM users who require training | Composite | 195 | 200 | 207 | |
| F5 | Blended fully burdened hourly rate for an advancement team professional (rounded) | Composite | $55 | $55 | $55 | |
| Ft | Ongoing platform support and training costs | (F1*F2)+(F3*F4*F5) | $0 | $45,750 | $46,300 | $47,070 |
| Risk adjustment | ↑5% | |||||
| Ftr | Ongoing platform support and training costs (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $48,038 | $48,615 | $49,424 | |
| Three-year total: $146,076 | Three-year present value: $120,981 | |||||
Financial Summary
Consolidated Three-Year, Risk-Adjusted Metrics
Cash Flow Chart (Risk-Adjusted)
Cash Flow Analysis (Risk-Adjusted)
| Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total costs | ($1,626,900) | ($638,038) | ($382,515) | ($403,274) | ($3,050,726) | ($2,826,048) |
| Total benefits | $0 | $3,219,255 | $3,623,893 | $4,125,256 | $10,968,404 | $9,020,914 |
| Net benefits | ($1,626,900) | $2,581,218 | $3,241,378 | $3,721,983 | $7,917,678 | $6,207,922 |
| ROI | 219% | |||||
| Payback | 8 months |
Please Note
The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.
These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.
The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.
From the information provided in the interviews, Forrester constructed a Total Economic Impact™ framework for those organizations considering an investment in Blackbaud CRM.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Blackbaud CRM can have on an organization.
Due Diligence
Interviewed Blackbaud stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to Blackbaud CRM.
Interviews
Interviewed seven decision-makers at five organizations using Blackbaud CRM to obtain data about costs, benefits, and risks.
Composite Organization
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewees’ organizations.
Financial Model Framework
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the interviewees.
Case Study
Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.
Total Economic Impact Approach
Benefits
Benefits represent the value the solution delivers to the business. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and costs, allowing for a full examination of the solution’s effect on the entire organization.
Costs
Costs comprise all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the solution. The methodology captures implementation and ongoing costs associated with the solution.
Flexibility
Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. The ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.
Risks
Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”
Financial Terminology
Present value (PV)
The present or current value of (discounted) cost and benefit estimates given at an interest rate (the discount rate). The PVs of costs and benefits feed into the total NPV of cash flows.
Net present value (NPV)
The present or current value of (discounted) future net cash flows given an interest rate (the discount rate). A positive project NPV normally indicates that the investment should be made unless other projects have higher NPVs.
Return on investment (ROI)
A project’s expected return in percentage terms. ROI is calculated by dividing net benefits (benefits less costs) by costs.
Discount rate
The interest rate used in cash flow analysis to take into account the time value of money. Organizations typically use discount rates between 8% and 16%.
Payback
The breakeven point for an investment. This is the point in time at which net benefits (benefits minus costs) equal initial investment or cost.
Appendix A
Total Economic Impact
Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
Appendix B
Supplemental Material
Related Forrester Research
How CRM Evolves To Support Industry Requirements, Forrester Research, Inc., May 19, 2026.
The Industry-Specific CRM Landscape, Q4 2022, Forrester Research, Inc., Dec 1, 2022.
Online Resources
State of Nonprofits 2026, The Center for Effective Philanthropy, 2026.
Appendix C
Endnotes
1 Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists solution providers in communicating their value proposition to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of business and technology initiatives to both senior management and other key stakeholders.
Disclosures
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by Blackbaud and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.
Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in Blackbaud CRM. For any interactive functionality, the intent is for the questions to solicit inputs specific to a prospect's business. Forrester believes that this analysis is representative of what companies may achieve with Blackbaud CRM based on the inputs provided and any assumptions made. Forrester does not endorse Blackbaud or its offerings. Although great care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of this model, Blackbaud and Forrester Research are unable to accept any legal responsibility for any actions taken on the basis of the information contained herein. The interactive tool is provided ‘AS IS,’ and Forrester and Blackbaud make no warranties of any kind.
Blackbaud reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.
Blackbaud provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Consulting Team:
Erach Desai
Published
August 2026