Boomers’ Charity Spending
Good news and insight from Matt Thornhill of the Boomer Project, my favorite Boomer expert.
Writing in Engage: Boomers, Matt compares the spending habits of today’s age 55-64 Boomer segment to today’s 65-74 year-olds (he calls them”Silents”) ten years earlier. In other words, how were the Silents spending their money (and how much) ten years ago when they were at the same lifestage as today’s Boomers. So Boomers spending in 2008 to Silents spending in 1998, when they were age 55-64. [All figures inflation adjusted, in 2008 dollars.]
The first observation reflects simple demographics. Because there are so many more of them, Boomers spent $500 billion more annually on consumer goods and services in 2008 than did Silents in 1998. But in category after category, Boomers also spent more on a per capita basis.
What does this mean for fundraisers?
Matt reports that Boomers gave more money per capita to charities, $2,163 to only $1,624 for Silents at the same lifestage. That’s about 33% more. Overall, Boomers gave close to $43 billion compared to the $21 billion donated by Silents at the same lifestage. [Again, all figures adjusted for inflation to 2008 dollars.]
Wouldn’t that be a nice habit to see Boomers carry forward?!
Tom
4 responses to “Boomers’ Charity Spending”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting. But how will this affect legacy income? I suspect the trend will reverse when it comes to the value of legacies.
Its good to see folks give back to society. I hope the trend continues.
Best to focus on current gifts and acquisition. The oldest baby boomers are 65 and a couple that age has a joint life expectancy of 26 years. One life is 21 years. We have a long way to go before bequests from baby boomers matter. For the next twenty years at least the income from that source will depend on the tail end of the G.I. Generation and the Silents.
I wonder if in general we can say that people who spend more give more?