Donor Recognition Programs for Architecture: Lessons Learned

In institutional architectural projects, where funding is often heavily reliant on private benefactors, it is important that Architects offer/initiate/advise as matter of course, early on - say around Design Development phase or early CD phase, say- that the Donor Recognition Program be coordinated into the design. Case in point: a major and significant academic building having gone through at least five years of planning gets constructed without this planning, the Owner's Development team (having since turned over) had promised the Donors pretty well almost anything to secure their pledges without coordinating with the architectural design; a wing, a floor, the auditorium, the atrium, whatever.

Consider the building constructed now, and the Design and (new) Development Team now is scrambling to find a design strategy to place these names on the various promised architectural elements, in a very prominent way (as mandated by the Donor Agreement) without making the building Las Vegas-esque, and keeping in mind the extreme politics between and egos of Donors (not to mention the Architect; see below). For example, whatever you do to for one, you have to replicate for the other. What if the architectural conditions at the other location(s) for the other major Donors do not accommodate it? It's not just a design problem, it's a political problem. What if the Donor does not accept the Architect's Donor Recognition design(s)? What if the Donor presents an image of a grand space, practically designed around the Donor Recognition? One might simply say that there is a design solution for it somehow, but I promise that this will often be at hands of some architectural compromise.

What if most major Donors have been promised a building 'Wing', but another one has been promised a whole Level (of the whole building), while still another has been promised a major space on that very Level, and each are expecting equal billing and simultaneously expecting the hierarchy of the gift amount to be recognized, as well as the Patronage over the promised space or element (i.e. political conflict between the Wing Benefactor and the Floor Benefactor and Space Benefactor). This all may make one's eyes role, but don't forget these Donors each represent several millions of dollars (each) of critical funding that make these buildings happen, and their continued generosity is counted on by the Institution (for future projects and programs); so great effort and care is required in keeping the Donors happy.

In some other case I know about (who I will not name), the Architect simply refused (at the late stage of the project) to accept the need to recognize the Gift Giver as prominently as the Owner required ($100M+ gift). The Owner was forced to go over the Architects head and hire a separate Design Team to work without the Architect to install the elaborate installation. Not a good situation. Thank goodness they actual hired fairly competent and respectful designers.

It's just one of those things in the program of the architecture that needs to be considered along with the very functional parts of the program so as to maintain the integrity of the architectural design and even the the respectful recognition of the Major Donors.