Uncategorized - Agitator

Direct mail

More Donors Vs. Better Donors: Long-term and External Benefits

To review, in our Monday post Betty (arguing in favor of better donors over more donors) won a slight victory over Mo (arguing in favor of more donors over better donors) in talking about costs of fundraising. Today, they will debate again: this time on the topic of external benefits of donors. Mo: The case here […]

Learn More January 14, 2020

More Donors Vs. Better Donors: Cost of Fundraising

In our Science of Ask Strings white paper, we talk about the importance of knowing whether you want more donors or higher-value donors. After all, the decision about how much to ask for should be predicated on how much risk you are willing to undertake to get a higher average gift. But this is a […]

Learn More January 13, 2020

Smile! It’ll Raise More Money (But Only If You Do It The Right Way)

It probably intuitively rings true that facial expressions provide visual cues about what a person is feeling. In fact, a lot of work has been done to codify this across cultures. But what about facial expressions – the smile in this case – and what they signal about your motivation? We innately try to discern […]

Learn More January 10, 2020

Learning from Politics: Texting

In the last US election year, we talked about what we can learn from political campaigns in hypertargeting, nudge language, and building the tools you need. Now, we have a lesson we can take from the 2018 cycle about the use of texting. A bit of background – for political campaigns, robocalls are the incumbent […]

Learn More January 8, 2020

The Year In Review – Part 2

Here are three additional concerns/opportunities that we raised in 2019 –topics that also happened to be among the most popular with Agitator readers. If acted upon, each one holds substantial promise for a brighter 2020 provided they’re acted upon. Donor Identity. It won’t surprise frequent Agitator readers that in a study by Donor Graphics for One & […]

Learn More January 6, 2020

We Pause The Year In Review for This Serious Rant

I was moving along to finish Part 2 of my Year in Review post when a Tweet storm caught my eye. Usually, I ignore ‘em while writing, but this series struck a nerve. In fact, it reveals how we so ignore and frustrate basic donor needs that I wonder how we even survive. Consequently, I’m […]

Learn More January 3, 2020

The Year in Review: Part 1

Happy New Year! This is the perfect time to invoke the spirit of Janus, the Roman god who looked both forward and backward. Looking at the state of fundraising back in 2019 and forward into 2020 I think three things ae true at the same time. Fundraising is much worse. Fundraising is terrible. Fundraising will […]

Learn More January 1, 2020

Fundraisers Abandon Ship

This post first appeared on August 19, 2019 Not only is the nonprofit sector doing a lousy job holding on to donors, we’re apparently equally awful when it comes to retaining nonprofit fundraisers. In a recent survey conducted by The Harris Poll for The Chronicle of Philanthropyand AFP, using a self-selected sample of American and […]

Learn More December 30, 2019

REPEAT: Thanks, But No Thanks-Part 2

Thanks to everyone involved in the robust discussion here and on social media about the study of thank you calling on subsequent giving Kiki and Roger discussed Monday. In particular, discussion from Penelope Burk and other minds in fundraising have centered on who calls, when they call, and what is said. I’ll have a brief […]

Learn More December 28, 2019

Thank You: 2019’s Most Popular Post

For the next two weeks –until everyone’s back from the holidays or recovered from year-end exhaustion– we’ll re-run some of 2019’s most popular Agitator posts. This year’s most popular and comment-provoking entry was titled (or mis-titled) Thanks, But No Thanks. The post reported on a study of thank you calls to 500,000 public broadcasting donors […]

Learn More December 26, 2019

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

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

Q: I find it irritating when some nonprofits accept my “gift” and then ask me to cover their credit card fees separately. It feels like a practice that does nothing to help win donors and runs the risk of turning others off. Is there any data on this either way?

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

Q: What are the three most important things to consider when designing a brilliant supporter journey?

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

Q: Is there any evidence that changes to the tax laws in the USA changed end of year giving behaviors? Previously, ~30% of US taxpayers filed itemized tax returns allowing them to receive a deduction for charitable giving. Tax law changed in 2017 so that now only ~10% itemize. This should mean tax year-end giving should not matter to millions of people for whom it used to matter. Is there any data evidence to support this?

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

Direct mail

More Donors Vs. Better Donors: Long-term and External Benefits

More Donors Vs. Better Donors: Cost of Fundraising

Smile! It’ll Raise More Money (But Only If You Do It The Right Way)

Learning from Politics: Texting

The Year In Review – Part 2

We Pause The Year In Review for This Serious Rant

The Year in Review: Part 1

Fundraisers Abandon Ship

REPEAT: Thanks, But No Thanks-Part 2

Thank You: 2019’s Most Popular Post

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

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?

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?

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?

Q: I find it irritating when some nonprofits accept my “gift” and then ask me to cover their credit card fees separately. It feels like a practice that does nothing to help win donors and runs the risk of turning others off. Is there any data on this either way?

Q: What are the three most important things to consider when designing a brilliant supporter journey?

DonorVoice products

Commitment System

Donor Feedback Platform™

PreTest Tool

TouchPoint Mapping