Legacy fundraising: why growing pipelines are not converting into value

Charities have worked hard to make Gifts in Wills easier.

Free will offers, online will-writing and better signposting have helped more people take a first step. That is a positive shift. More supporters are engaging. More people are asking questions. More people are starting the process.

But there is a risk in how we read that growth.

In many organisations, more legacy enquiries are being taken as a sign of stronger legacy performance. Sometimes that is true. But often it tells us only that we have become better at getting people to the starting line.

That is not the same as knowing whether they went on to write a will, include a gift, or tell us about it.

This is where many legacy strategies start to wobble. We have improved the front end of the journey, but our understanding of what happens next is often weak.

More legacy enquiries do not automatically mean more value

One of the challenges in legacy fundraising is that much of the real decision-making happens out of sight.

Many people who leave a gift in their will never tell the charity in advance. That means charities are often trying to interpret supporter intent based on partial information. We can see an enquiry. We may be able to see that someone requested a guide or used a will-writing service. But we usually cannot see the full decision.

So we create categories to help us manage that uncertainty.

Prospect. Enquirer. Intender. Pledger.

These labels may be useful for internal reporting, but they are often more subjective than we like to admit.

What is the real difference between an enquirer and an intender? Is it based on behaviour, confidence, language, timing, fundraiser judgement, or just the limitations of the CRM?

In practice, it is often a mix of all of these.

That matters because the categories we use can easily start to look more concrete than they really are.

Legacy pipeline measurement is often designed for internal reporting

This is part of a wider issue in legacy fundraising.

Many pipeline frameworks are built to make legacy activity easier to report internally. They help show progress, volume and return on investment to boards, senior leaders and finance colleagues.

That is understandable. Legacy teams are under pressure to demonstrate value. If a charity invests in free wills, direct mail, digital lead generation or stewardship, senior stakeholders want to know what it is producing.

The problem is that measures built for internal reassurance are not always the same as measures that help us understand supporter behaviour.

In other words, some legacy pipeline measurement is designed to ease reporting up the line rather than explain how supporters move towards making a gift in their will.

That creates distortion.

It encourages us to prioritise what is visible and countable. It can make neat internal categories feel more meaningful than they really are. And it can lead charities to overstate the strength of their pipeline because the reporting looks positive.

A bigger pipeline may show increased awareness or easier access. It does not necessarily show stronger supporter commitment.

The supporter journey is not the same as the charity pipeline

This is the point that often gets missed.

Supporters do not think in pipeline stages. They are not asking themselves whether they are now an enquirer, an intender or a warm prospect. They are asking different questions.

Do I need to write a will or update one?
Can I afford to leave a gift?
Should I speak to a solicitor?
What comes first, family or charity?
Am I ready to make this decision now?
Do I need more time?

These are practical and emotional questions. Sometimes they are also legal or financial.

If our measurement is built around what the organisation wants to classify, rather than what the supporter needs to move forward, we are likely to misunderstand where people really are.

That is why some legacy pipelines look stronger on paper than they feel in reality.

Easier will-writing has changed the meaning of an enquiry

As charities have made will-writing easier to access, the number of early-stage signals has grown.

That is good. But it also means an enquiry today may not mean what it meant ten years ago.

A supporter may request information because they are curious. They may respond to a free wills campaign because it removes a barrier. They may start an online journey because it feels easy to do now, even if they are not yet ready to make a final decision.

That does not make the enquiry unimportant. It simply means we should be careful about what we assume it tells us.

Starting a will is not the same as completing one. Completing a will is not the same as including a gift. Including a gift is not the same as telling the charity.

Charities are part of the will-writing journey, not the owners of it

There is another point here which matters.

Charities operate in the will-writing market, but writing wills is not our core business. Nor should it be.

Our role is not to act like legal advisers. It is not to push supporters towards a decision. And it is not to overstep into territory where there is a risk of undue influence.

Our role is simpler and more important than that.

We should inspire people with a reason to leave a gift.
We should reassure them that this is a normal and meaningful choice.
We should signpost them to the right expert help when they are ready.

That is where charities add value.

The mistake is to assume that because we can generate an enquiry, we should also be able to manage every step that follows. In most cases, we cannot. Nor should we try to.

A better question for legacy fundraising strategy

For many charities, the question is no longer how to get more people into the top of the pipeline.

Direct marketing, free will offers and digital activity can all play an important role here. They can raise awareness, reduce friction and encourage supporters to take a first step.

But top-of-funnel activity is only part of the picture.

If charities want to understand whether supporters are genuinely moving closer to making a gift in their will, they need more than reporting categories and campaign metrics. They need a better understanding of the people behind the data.

That comes from talking to supporters. Listening to what is motivating them. Understanding what is holding them back. Learning how they think about family, values, financial security, memory and impact.

It also comes from building trust. Not just trust in the charity as a safe pair of hands, but trust in the organisation’s long-term vision, mission and relevance. People do not leave gifts in wills because they moved neatly through a pipeline. They do it because they believe in what the charity stands for, and want their values to live on through it.

That is why relationship fundraising still matters so much in Gifts in Wills.

The organisations that will do this best will not be the ones with the most impressive looking pipeline reports. They will be the ones that combine strong marketing at the top of the funnel with genuine supporter understanding further down it. They will listen well, communicate clearly, build confidence over time and inspire supporters to see a gift in their will as a way of helping future generations.

If your legacy enquiries are growing, that may be a good sign. But the bigger question is whether your organisation is building the kind of trust, understanding and connection that helps supporters take the next step.

In legacy fundraising, value is not created by pipeline growth alone. It is created by understanding supporters, earning trust and inspiring them to shape the future through a gift in their will.

About the author

Sam Devlin is a fundraising consultant working with charities across the UK and Australia, helping organisations grow and convert their Gifts in Wills programmes.