Donor acquisition

Agitator Cliff Notes: “Data Driven Nonprofits”

I have a confession to make. I still dog-ear pages. Yes, this goes against my former-library-employee training. No, I don’t leave books open so it breaks their poor spine; I’m not a total monster. Yes, I know I can take pictures of the pages and put them on Evernote or Pocket now. Yes, I can […]

Learn More May 22, 2018

Can Your Monthly Donors Be Held Hostage?

If you care about the future of your monthly giving program I urge you to take 2 minutes and complete this confidential Agitator Survey. Here’s why. As technology changes and competition increases, many organizations are switching CRM database vendors and credit card payment processors. SURPRISE! Many organizations making this switch are discovering to their shock […]

Learn More May 21, 2018

Cause Connection: A Simple, Underused Donor Identity

The last two days have covered two examples of health charities that have increased their revenues by differentiating based on cause connection. That is, they looked differently at those who either had the disease they are working to abate or had been treated by their facility and those who didn’t have this type of cause […]

Learn More May 18, 2018

Generating Leads By Combining Identity and Programmatic Outreach

The natural assumption is that most donors to the American Hangnail Society either have hangnails or care about someone who does. Yes, as you can tell, we are anonymizing a disease-focused charity. There is not, to my knowledge, an American Hangnail Society (AHS). (Yet; I’m eagerly awaiting the DRTV spots with dreadful looking cuticle beds.) […]

Learn More May 17, 2018

Monthly Giving Part 4: Stewarding Monthly Donors

For reasons attributable only to sloth or ignorance far too many organizations sign up monthly donors then walk away. No thank you. No phone call. No newsletter. Nothing. And they wonder why these precious donors lapse. Really? In a moment I’ll share the top three tips on stewarding (treating donors like human beings) monthly donors […]

Learn More May 10, 2018

When Have You Acquired a Donor?

When you received their donation, right? Once you have their sweet sweet cheddar in your bank account, the person has made a donation. Thus they are a donor. They have been acquired. Q.E.D. On to the next blog post. But let’s consider this in reverse. You go to a new restaurant. It’s so horrid you […]

Learn More May 4, 2018

Breaking Down Your Acquisition Silos

You can spend money on anything. That’s why it’s called money. Economists call this fungibility, which has nothing to do with mushrooms. It has everything to do with how a dollar can be used for rent or food or entertainment or whatever. In our minds, though, we hate fungibility. People have sophisticated mental jars of […]

Learn More May 3, 2018

What to Do When Cost-to-Acquire Lies to You

I’ve argued cost-to-acquire (CTA) and lifetime value were the two metrics that mattered most. The idea is that if lifetime value is going to be higher than the cost of acquiring, acquire that donor. If not, you need lower acquisition costs or higher lifetime value. That makes great sense as far as it goes. The […]

Learn More May 2, 2018

What Your Board Should Learn from Starbucks

There’s no question in my mind that a great deal of the furor over the ‘high cost of fundraising’ on the part boards, CEOs, watchdog groups, the press, regulators and many fundraisers themselves stems mostly from ignorance. Ignorance about what “acquisition” is, how it should be measured, and when or whether its costs should be […]

Learn More May 1, 2018

It’s Donor Acquisition Week

Many fundraisers –regardless of the size of their organization—tell us that donor acquisition is one of their biggest problems. The numbers support this. In the UK eight of the largest charities are losing donors faster than they acquire themby a rate of 5 to 3. In the U.S., for the fourth quarter of 2017 the […]

Learn More April 30, 2018

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

Q: As a designer who works with non-profits on fundraising strategy, I see the language like the following: “Our supporters help empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs.” I do not think the word “help” is useful–I think “Our supporters empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs. ” is much more engaging. Thoughts?

Whether “help” is more engaging or not really depends on the framing and context. The word help can sometimes weaken the perceived agency of the supporter, making their role feel secondary rather than central (your point). On the other hand, help can also signal collaboration rather than implying full ownership of the outcome, which might […]

Read Full Answer

Q: We started offering a donor cover option last april 1. The data to date suggests this may be dampening giving.eg. those who say yes to donor cover have a lower average gift (based on analysis of 6000+ gifts). I’m wondering if those who give lower gifts feel more guilt and therefore say yes to donor cover or if the presence of donor cover is making people adjust (lower) their gift size to accommodate the extra 3%. Would love any insights you have.

Great question! Here’s how behavioral science can help unpack what might be happening: Pain of Paying: Even a small extra charge can make giving feel more transactional than emotional, potentially reducing generosity. Fairness Concerns: Some donors might perceive donor cover as a surcharge rather than a contribution to the cause. If they feel the charity […]

Read Full Answer

Q: When writing an appeal, I waffle back and forth between writing “Your gift CAN…” or “Your gift WILL…” Any studies of which of these two words is best for an appeal?

The choice between “Your gift CAN…” and “Your gift WILL…” taps into the psychological framing of certainty vs. possibility. Currently, there is no academic research directly comparing these two framings in charitable appeals. However, I suspect no framing is universally better—the outcome likely depends on your target audience and the campaign’s goal. Here are some thoughts: Certainty Framing – […]

Read Full Answer

Q: Do you have any insight on whether integrating an individual giving appeal with other comms from the charity in both appearance and messaging can uplift results? Or does the actual appeal become ‘lost’ for lack of stand-out?

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

Q: Is there any research on response rate impact in direct mail when referring to a sustainer gift as ongoing or recurring (catching all frequencies) v. monthly or annual?

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

Q: A major conservation nonprofit sends me lots of mail, many of which have on the envelope “time to renew” or “2nd notice.” I find this practice deceptive, especially as I haven’t given to said organization since 1997. It must be effective or they wouldn’t do it. But is it ethical?

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