Uncategorized - Agitator

Advocacy Fundraising

Revolutionary Fundraising

On July 4th we Americans will celebrate our Independence Day, called such because Amxit is a mouthful. I wanted to focus on the fundraisers – as ever, the real unsung heroes of the revolution. The techniques and the situation may sound very modern… Urgent need. In 1780, the Continental Army surrendered Charleston to the British […]

Learn More July 3, 2019

F-2-F Part 4: What Data Makes a Difference and How to Get It

It’s more than ironic that a large nonprofit employing both a $5 million direct response acquisition program and a F-2-F program costing the same $5 million will cumulatively spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars on the preparation of their direct mail package, but totally neglect any significant investment in the training and monitoring […]

Learn More July 1, 2019

F-2-F Part 3: Missed Opportunity and the F-2-F Paradox

Given the unique opportunity to capture information directly from the donor that is essential for assuring higher retention and donor value, it is ironic that most F2F operations simply ignore this bonanza. In fact, it’s more than ironic. It’s downright wasteful and irresponsible. I call it the “The F2F Paradox”. … On the one hand, the […]

Learn More June 28, 2019

F-2-F Part 2: Avoiding the Sins of the Past

A common and dangerous misperception of F2F is that it’s seen as a powerful acquisition channel for securing monthly donors. As a result, most current F2F programs—just like their direct mail forebears– focus on acquisition volume while ignoring any serious attention to retention. And, just as in the case of direct mail, F2F will face […]

Learn More June 26, 2019

Is F-2-F Acquisition a Sustainer Oasis or a Mirage?

Face-to-Face fundraising in the United States holds great promise if for no other reason than it isn’t a grossly oversaturated channel and we’re a big, populous country. This likely explains the Paul Revere feeling some have as the Brits (and Canadians and Australians) “invade” to setup shop on U.S. shores. Why? Because in those countries […]

Learn More June 24, 2019

Your 7 Updates for June

It’s time for our monthly updates! The sky is still falling. OK, probably not the most cheerful opening… The newest Fundraising Effectiveness Project data is out on the sector. Previous reports have shown a serious decline in the number of donors to nonprofits, potentially threatening the health of the sector. This report shows this downward […]

Learn More June 21, 2019

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 June 19, 2019

Thanks, But No Thanks

A new study strongly questions the near-universal assumption that saying “thank you” and showing “impact” is the silver bullet for improving supporter value or increasing second gift conversion. Take a deep breath. Now, read on. Titled Do Thank-You Calls Increase Charitable Giving? Expert Forecasts and Field Experimental Evidence, the study has spawned lots of debate […]

Learn More June 17, 2019

What If We’re Wrong?

One of the central theses of Agitator | DonorVoice is that the future of fundraising lies in attracting and retaining more and more deeply committed donors. We’ve talked about how the areas of fundraising that are increasing – mid/major giving, planned giving, and recurring donations –are driven by the most committed donors to your organization. […]

Learn More June 14, 2019

The Power and Prison of Defaults

Your mind is lazy. I don’t mean that as an insult – mine is too. All ours are. We humans want to do the minimal amount of thinking and deciding. So unless there’s a good reason, we go for the default value, whether that’s taking the same route to work, eating tacos for Taco Tuesday, […]

Learn More June 12, 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

Advocacy Fundraising

Revolutionary Fundraising

F-2-F Part 4: What Data Makes a Difference and How to Get It

F-2-F Part 3: Missed Opportunity and the F-2-F Paradox

F-2-F Part 2: Avoiding the Sins of the Past

Is F-2-F Acquisition a Sustainer Oasis or a Mirage?

Your 7 Updates for June

Thanks But No Thanks: Part 2

Thanks, But No Thanks

What If We’re Wrong?

The Power and Prison of Defaults

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