Fundraising analytics / data

Bumper Crop for #GivingTuesday. Crop. Picture of the Larger Harvest Mixed.

First, a quick summary of 2018 #GivingTuesday results (as of 11/29/18): Biggest #GivingTuesday ever raised $380 million in the U.S. 6 million donations were made with mean gift size of $105.55 Facebook users, some using livestream Facebook video gaming, raised over $125 million; that’s $45 million more than last year. Blackbaud reported that its systems […]

Learn More November 30, 2018

Institutionalizing Myopia

Amazon recently scrapped a machine-learning based recruiting tool. Its sin? It was discriminating against women. Why would a machine pick up this very human bias? The machine learned by looking at resumes submitted to Amazon over the previous decade. Since the tech sector skews male, especially for technical roles (see chart from Reuters at right), […]

Learn More October 19, 2018

A Sober Reflection on Latest Retention Data

EVERYBODY PANIC! It may not be necessary to run into the streets wailing uncontrollably and rending our garments. But there’s probably a need for more panic about retention than is evident out there. Back in April, we looked at the 2017 Fundraising Effectiveness Project Report. The good news was that retention was up. The bad […]

Learn More October 8, 2018

Learning from Politics: Chip In Change for Change

You’ve seen the headlines: “Americans more divided than ever”, “Gridlock reaching threat level crimson, which is worse than red somehow”, and “Pelosi-McConnell West-Side-Story-style dancing knife fight leaves two dead; four injured.” The two major parties here in the United States seemingly can’t agree on anything. But here’s a ray of hope. They can agree on […]

Learn More October 3, 2018

How Can the DonorVoice Nudge Unit Help You?

Ok, so what can decision science do for you and your cause? The possibilities are limitless. In fact, there is a whole sub-field within the Decision-Making field dedicated to philanthropic behavior. From the widely known (but not widely practiced!) “identifiable victim effect” to the less known “unit asking”, Behavioral Science could make people feel […]

Learn More September 26, 2018

The Curious Case of Kimberly Ellinger

We have a phantom member of our family. When we moved into our first house, one of the people who sold us the house was Kimberly something-or-other. We immediately started getting mail for Kimberly Ellinger – her first name, our last. Our best guess is that a mailer assumed she got either married or divorced, […]

Learn More September 17, 2018

Fundraisers I Fear: Part 2– Insufficient Knowledge of Basic Information

In Part 1 I urged all of us to become “expert novices” –fundraisers who have knowledge and confidence but are capable of maintaining a seed of doubt that they may be wrong. Of course, the building blocks of knowledge, skepticism and curiosity must be stacked on top of the rock-solid granite foundation of fundamental fact. You […]

Learn More September 14, 2018

Year End: Ideal Asking Amounts

Do you really know the best “ask amount” for each donor? Many fundraisers really don’t know. They guess, or resort to traditional, tribal wisdom ask strings like 1X Highest Previous Gift (HPC), 1.5 X HPC, 2 X HPC and Other $_______ The result? They’re often leaving massive amounts of money on the table. The ask […]

Learn More August 30, 2018

TEST RESULTS: External Validators Are Vitally Important–Except When They Aren’t

We’re looking at external validators – seals and such – in our week-long series on how to frame overhead and impact. These validators were the second most important factors to get right, lagging only how overhead is presented (which we covered yesterday) In the DonorVoice study with the DMA Nonprofit Federation, we looked at five […]

Learn More August 22, 2018

TEST RESULTS: Donors Don’t Care How You Spend Your Money. They Care How You Spend Theirs.

It sounds like a semantic difference – after all, if donors are donors, then their money becomes your money. But it makes all the difference in the world. We know that (unfortunately) donors have an aversion to overhead. Take a study from Gneezy et al. They allowed participants to give $100 to either charity: water […]

Learn More August 21, 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