Profoundly Simple: A Plan For Every Donor
This past week, fundraising creative maven Jeff Brooks, who The Agitator greatly admires, has been rubbing it in … reminding us each day that he’s on vacation!
OK, we’ll give Jeff the benefit of the doubt and assume he deserves his week off (or is it a month, Jeff?), while you, Roger and I slave away.
To keep us tuned in, Jeff posted some of his oldies but goodies, and one that caught my eye was titled: 6 signs of a well-run nonprofit organization.
His entire article is well worth a re-read, but, from a fundraising perspective, one ‘sign’ in particular sounds so simple, yet is so important in terms of how successful fundraising should proceed. Here it is:
A well-run nonprofit has a plan for every donor
And here’s how Jeff explains it:
“That’s right: a plan for every donor at every giving level and every stage of their life cycle. The plan needs to have an appropriate treatment for every donor group:
When and how they’ll be contacted.
How much you can spend on them.
What the messages and offers will be.
What to do with donors who upgrade or downgrade.
How to handle lapsed donors.
How to handle new donors.
Your donor plan should be in writing, so when someone with institutional memory leaves, the knowledge stays intact, and no group is lost in the transition. And it must be followed religiously. It can’t be changed on a whim—only by new information that shows you a better way to treat a specific group.”
A plan for every donor. It forces you to make and test explicit assumptions, parse and analyze your donor base in some detail, track and measure carefully, understand ROIs of various tactics and channels, prioritize spending … in other words, get your act together, based upon solid empirical grounding.
Very simple — but very important — advice. On the strength of it, take another week off, Jeff. Roger says he’ll shout you a pina colada.
Tom
P.S. This isn’t a suggestion that you simply dial up a plan and then follow it by rote. There’s a big difference between rote and discipline. The plan represents the best scheme your present response experience suggests. But the planning process should have identified which links in the chain are weakest and most in need of further testing, and where the greatest yield from further improvement might lie. As Jeff says, you shouldn’t change things on a whim, but only when new information shows you a better way.
6 responses to “Profoundly Simple: A Plan For Every Donor”
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
Ah yes. The relationship-building program / plan. Focused on developing loyalty, the Holy Grail of any business. (Remember Tom and Roger when you said loyalty is the Holy Grail. Back in 2009, I think.)
So when I’m thinking about relationship building plans and programs…. I think about the donor segment, the particular donor, and what’s done for everyone and what’s done for a particular segment or individual or…
And my criteria are NEVER just gift size.
— The excessive focus on “big donors” is professionally unwise: the largest gift anyone ever gives is often that bequest. And bequests come from loyal donors…even the $50/year donor who has been giving for 10 years.
— The excessive focus on “big donors” is part of what I call philanthropy’s moral dilemma. That’s the final chapter of KEEP YOUR DONORS. And posted in the Free Download Library on my website.
Anyway… Off to client work.
Jeff deserves a vacation. So do you two.
As a relatively new, self-taught, one-woman development shop, I am often overwhelmed. I love this profoundly simple and sensible advice and would like to work towards a much better, more thorough, more disciplined plan for the coming year. I also have full responsibility for events, communications, and marketing, so this donor plan gets short shrift.
I know (and I think I am starting to get the board and leadership team here to understand) that while an event might have a certain kind of impact and modest fundraising success, the real ROI is in donor cultivation/retention process. I don’t want to wing it this year. Do you have recommendations for guidance/examples for the kind of plan referenced above? Thanks for this blog – a great resource!
Dr. Eddie Thompson is a personal friend and has raised +$3 BILLION dollars. His Ed.D is from Vanderbilt, and his dissertation was “The differences between great fundraising organizations and average fundraising organizations”.
In his first development job, he was given a paper stack of 94 lapsed donors, who no one wanted to work. Eddie went to the local grocery store and purchased a 12 ft. sheet of butcher paper. He wrapped his closet-office in the butcher paper, made a 12 month calendar and developed a strategic plan of communication with the stack of donors.
Over the course of five years, Eddie acquired a few more donors but mostly focused on the group no one wanted. He raised +$50 million!
He had a plan for every donor!
Message for commenter Molly: go to Pam Grow’s website if you haven’t already. You want materials that sing to the heart of the one-person development shop? Pam’s got ’em. Plus, Roger and Tom love her too. (Full disclaimer: I get nothing. Just the joy of sharing.)
The organization I work for has always looked at groups of donors and planned for each segment but never tried individual donor plans. I’d love to try this. Do any of you have one you can share? rayramj@yahoo.com
Thanks!
The title caught my eye, and I would agree that we need a plan for every donor. But what is described is a plan for every donor group or segment. If fundraising really is about building relationships, then a plan for each and every individual donor is what is needed and so often lacking. As a donor, I’d like to think that the organization actually thought about me and what the next cultivation step should be, not just what donor segment I’m in, with a personalized but group message. Check out http://www.giftmappingstrategies.com for just such a tool and strategy.