Why Hiring Fundraising Leaders Feels Harder Than the Headlines Suggest

written by Jonathan McIntosh, Nonprofit Practice Recruiter

If you only followed the news, you might assume this is an employer’s market. Economic uncertainty, layoffs, and questions about nonprofit funding would seem to suggest there should be an abundance of available talent.

From where we sit, however, the executive nonprofit talent market tells a different story.

Across our work, particularly in fundraising leadership, CEO, and Executive Director searches, we’re seeing a highly competitive market for experienced leaders who can drive philanthropic revenue.

Several forces are converging:

Demand for fundraising talent has increased.

The reduction or uncertainty around federal funding hasn’t simply hurt organizations that depended on government grants. It has increased pressure on nearly everyone to diversify revenue.

Organizations are asking questions like:

We need someone who can build a major gifts program.
We need stronger institutional giving.
We need campaign leadership.
We need someone who can cultivate transformational donors.
We need a CEO who can personally raise money.

Fundraising isn’t more important than it was five years ago, but it is happening in a more pressurized environment. Organizations are competing more aggressively for philanthropic dollars, raising the premium on experienced fundraising leaders.

That creates demand.

Supply hasn’t kept up.

The nonprofit sector has had succession problems brewing for years.

Many senior development officers came into the profession in the 1980s and 1990s and are now retiring.

At the same time:

burnout accelerated after COVID,
many people plateaued,
fewer organizations invested in developing second-tier leaders,
many talented fundraisers have become consultants or fractional executives instead of taking another institutional job.

The result is a surprisingly shallow bench.

The roles themselves have become more complex.

Boards don’t just want someone who can manage annual giving. They want someone who can:

lead teams,
build strategy,
understand data,
cultivate seven-figure donors,
partner with CEOs,
navigate difficult boards,
retain staff,
communicate during uncertainty. That combination is rare.

So even when there are “lots of applicants,” very few are truly competitive. Hiring authorities often mistake applicant volume for candidate quality.

The strongest candidates don’t need to move.

This is one of the classic signs of a candidate-driven market. The people every organization wants are:

employed,
generally compensated well,
often emotionally invested in their missions,
and cautious about changing organizations during uncertainty.

They can afford to wait.

That shifts negotiating leverage.

The result is a market where the strongest candidates are typically already employed, selective about making a move, and often considering multiple opportunities at once.

For hiring organizations, this doesn’t mean lowering expectations. It does mean recognizing that speed, clarity, and a compelling opportunity matter more than ever. Organizations that articulate a clear vision, move decisively through the search process, and present an inspiring leadership opportunity consistently outperform those that assume the broader economy will make recruiting easier.

The headlines may describe an uncertain economy. In the nonprofit talent market, we’re experiencing something more nuanced: a sustained shortage of exceptional leaders at precisely the moment organizations need them most.