A charity should compare Salesforce proposals by examining the outcomes, scope, assumptions, delivery approach, nonprofit experience and long-term costs behind each price. The lowest quotation is not necessarily the best value, particularly if it excludes discovery, migration, integrations, training, testing or post-launch support.
When several partners submit proposals, it can be tempting to put the prices into a spreadsheet and begin there.
Cost matters, particularly when charitable funds are involved. But a Salesforce proposal is not useful simply because it is the cheapest or contains the longest list of features. The more important question is whether the proposal gives the charity a credible route from its current problems to the outcomes it needs.
Before reaching this stage, it is worth reviewing what a UK nonprofit should look for in a Salesforce partner. That wider partner-selection framework helps establish the experience, behaviours and capabilities the charity should expect before it begins scoring individual submissions.
Are the proposals solving the same problem?
Before comparing prices, check whether each partner has interpreted the project in the same way.
One proposal may assume that the charity has already cleaned and mapped its data. Another may include substantial migration preparation. One may include integrations with the website, payment platform and finance system. Another may treat them as future work.
Differences may also appear around:
- Discovery
- Configuration
- Custom development
- Data migration
- Integrations
- Testing
- Training
- Change management
- Reporting
- Project management
- Support after launch
Two prices cannot be compared fairly if they cover different work. Ask each partner to clarify what is included, excluded and assumed.
How well does each proposal understand the charity?
A strong proposal should reflect the organisation described in the brief and discovery conversations.
Look for references to the charity’s actual:
- Supporters
- Volunteers
- Beneficiaries
- Members
- Fundraising model
- Services
- Reporting obligations
- Teams
- Current systems
- Operational pressures
Be cautious if a proposal could be sent to almost any organisation with only the name changed.
Technical Salesforce knowledge is essential, but nonprofit projects also require an understanding of the relationships, constraints and responsibilities found within charities. SPT’s nonprofit and charity Salesforce work starts with the organisation’s mission, people, processes and desired outcomes rather than a predetermined package of technology.
Does the proposal connect features to outcomes?
Every major element should have a clear reason for being included.
For example:
- Automation should reduce a defined administrative burden
- Integration should improve a specific flow of information
- Dashboards should answer agreed management questions
- Migration should create reliable records for future operations
- Volunteer functionality should support the real volunteer journey
- Fundraising configuration should reflect how the charity raises and processes income
A proposal containing an impressive list of Salesforce products and capabilities may still be weak if it does not explain how they improve the charity’s work. Ask what will be different for employees, supporters and leaders when the project is complete.
How should nonprofit experience be assessed?
Ask for evidence of comparable work rather than relying on general statements about sector expertise.
Relevant evidence could include experience involving:
- Donor and supporter management
- Volunteers and foster networks
- Membership
- Gift Aid
- Fundraising platforms
- Service delivery
- Impact reporting
- Website and payment integrations
- Legacy data
- Limited internal technical capacity
The project does not need to be identical. The partner should, however, be able to explain what it learned and how that experience applies.
Published work provides more meaningful evidence than a page filled solely with technology logos. For example, SPT’s work with the Charity Retail Association connected Salesforce with the organisation’s website and Eventbrite, automated membership processes and reduced reliance on manual reporting. Its work with a UK animal-welfare charity demonstrates the impact of standardising, validating and matching high volumes of supporter data before it reaches Salesforce.
Has the partner challenged the proposed scope?
The most valuable partner may not be the one that agrees with every request.
A charity’s initial specification may contain unnecessary functionality, conflicting requirements or too much work for a single phase. Constructive challenge can indicate that the partner is thinking about long-term value.
Examples might include:
- Recommending a phased implementation
- Questioning whether a custom feature is necessary
- Suggesting that data should be cleaned before migration
- Identifying a process problem that technology will not solve
- Prioritising adoption before advanced automation
- Advising against an integration whose cost exceeds its likely benefit
The objective is not to implement the greatest possible amount of Salesforce. It is to implement what the charity can use, maintain and benefit from.
How does each partner approach data and integrations?
Data migration and integration are often among the most underestimated parts of a CRM project.
The proposal should explain:
- Which data sources are included
- Who is responsible for cleansing the data
- How records will be mapped
- How duplicates will be managed
- How migration will be tested
- Which systems will integrate with Salesforce
- Whether integrations are direct or use middleware
- How errors will be monitored
- Who will own integrations after launch
A low implementation price can become much less attractive if major data or integration work appears later as an additional cost.
SPT’s guides to preparing for a Salesforce data migration and integrating a charity website and donation platform with Salesforce provide useful context for evaluating these areas.
Does the proposal address adoption and change?
A technically successful implementation can still fail if people do not use it consistently.
Look for evidence that the partner has considered:
- Stakeholder involvement
- User research
- Internal communication
- Process design
- Role-specific training
- Testing with real users
- Internal champions
- Post-launch feedback
- Ongoing optimisation
Training should not be limited to a generic demonstration immediately before launch. The proposal should explain how employees will be prepared for changes to their responsibilities and daily work.
The guide to improving Salesforce user adoption explains why adoption needs to be designed into discovery, implementation, training and ongoing support rather than treated as a last-minute activity.
What does the price include?
Request a clear breakdown of the fees and any circumstances in which costs could change.
Check whether the proposal includes:
- Discovery
- Design and configuration
- Data migration
- Integration
- Testing
- Training
- Documentation
- Project management
- Expenses
- Post-launch support
- Licences for Salesforce or connected products
- Third-party applications
Also consider the internal cost of the project. Employees will need time to attend workshops, review requirements, prepare data, test the system and complete training. A proposal that depends heavily on client activity may still be appropriate, but those responsibilities need to be understood.
If donated licences form part of the business case, the charity should distinguish clearly between licence costs and the wider investment required. SPT’s explanation of Salesforce’s free nonprofit licences covers implementation, data, integrations, change and ongoing ownership.
How should ongoing support be evaluated?
The charity needs to know what happens after launch.
Questions should include:
- Is a support period included?
- How are faults and questions handled?
- Who owns the Salesforce roadmap?
- How are platform releases managed?
- Can the partner provide ongoing administration?
- How will new requirements be prioritised?
- Is knowledge transferred to the internal team?
- What are the ongoing costs?
Salesforce will continue evolving after implementation. The organisation’s needs will change as well. A proposal should therefore consider how the system will remain accurate, usable and aligned with the charity’s priorities.
Where the charity lacks all the necessary capability internally, Salesforce Managed Services can provide ongoing administration, reporting, integration support, user guidance and strategic improvement after go-live.
Should charities use a scoring framework?
A scoring framework can help make the assessment more consistent, provided it does not replace judgement.
| Evaluation area | Suggested weighting |
| Understanding of the charity and desired outcomes | 20% |
| Proposed solution and delivery approach | 20% |
| Relevant nonprofit experience | 15% |
| Data, integrations and technical quality | 15% |
| Adoption, training and change management | 10% |
| Support and long-term partnership | 10% |
| Cost and overall value | 10% |
The weighting should reflect the charity’s priorities. A complex migration might justify giving data greater importance. An organisation with limited internal Salesforce expertise may place more emphasis on ongoing support.
What warning signs should charities look for?
Potential warning signs include:
- A proposal produced without meaningful discovery
- Little reference to the charity’s actual work
- Unclear exclusions
- Vague migration assumptions
- Integrations described without explaining how they will be delivered
- No adoption or change-management plan
- Excessive custom development without a clear reason
- Unrealistically short timescales
- A low initial price with substantial undefined future costs
- No explanation of post-launch ownership
- Claims of nonprofit expertise without supporting evidence
No proposal will remove every uncertainty. A good one should make those uncertainties visible and explain how they will be managed.
FAQs
Should a charity always obtain three Salesforce proposals?
Not necessarily, although comparing more than one suitable supplier can provide useful perspective. The appropriate procurement process will depend on the charity’s governance, policies, project value and funder requirements.
Is the cheapest Salesforce proposal usually the riskiest?
Not automatically. A lower-cost proposal may reflect a simpler and more appropriate solution. The risk arises when the price is low because important work has been excluded or underestimated.
Should partners be given the same brief?
Yes. A shared brief makes comparisons more meaningful, although partners should still be encouraged to challenge assumptions and recommend alternatives.
How can a charity verify Salesforce experience?
Ask for case studies, references, project examples and an explanation of who will actually deliver the work. General company credentials do not always reflect the experience of the proposed team.
Should charities ask for a fixed price?
Fixed pricing can provide certainty where scope is sufficiently understood. More complex or uncertain projects may need a paid discovery phase before a reliable implementation price can be agreed.
Look beyond the proposal total
Choosing a Salesforce partner is not simply a purchasing exercise. It is a decision about who will help the charity reshape important information, processes and working practices.
Compare the proposals carefully, test the assumptions behind them and look for the partner that understands both the technology and the organisation it needs to serve.
Sweet Potato Tec works with charities to understand the required outcomes first, then design an achievable route through discovery, Salesforce implementation, integration and ongoing improvement.