The World Cup Of Fundraising
Having just watched The Netherlands eliminate Uruguay (justice being served IMHO), I moved on to reading fundraiser Mal Warwick’s latest newsletter.
In particular, an article by Tom Ahern titled We don’t care what our donors think of us caught my eye. Tom talks about a recent fundraising conference where 150 attendees were asked if they conducted donor satisfaction surveys. Tom says not a hand went up. He goes on to discuss how lousy nonprofits are at holding on to donors.
All of which inspired me to wonder … If there were a World Cup of Fundraising, what should it be awarded for?
I suggest it should go the the charity or cause with the highest retention rate for first year donors. Isn’t that the most important single stat in fundraising performance? The entire economics of your direct response fundraising program derives from that one number … from viability of prospecting to lifetime value of your file.
Do you have a better candidate?
Tom
One response to “The World Cup Of Fundraising”
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
I agree with both Toms — Belford and Ahern!
In my own education, “rearing,” apprenticeship and many years of practice in nonprofit organizational advancement, I keep in mind that I was raised and mentored to see fund raising as the “cart behind the horse” — the final phase of a process or continuum that begins with building constituencies, continues through cultivation and management of relationships (with those constituencies), and culminates with the formation of a loyal donor who invests in the mission way beyond the first year.
If one agrees that this is really how it all properly works, then one also assumes that this process or continuum absolutely demands the habit of regular and sustained initiatives in donor (i.e., “consumer”)-behavior research. In other words, it’s critical to routinely survey one’s donors to gain intelligence about their perspectives on the organization and their attitudes and concerns about what is done with their investments.
Without such research, whether through surveys or other similar methodologies, there is no way to know how to measure the organization’s societal impact as well as the effectiveness of its advancement/philanthropy program, including but certainly not limited to direct-response fund-raising initiatives.
I can’t say that I would suggest a better candidate for the winner of the fund-raising World Cup. I might view it more broadly and call it something else, relating it to overall strength and quality of constituent relationship as well as financial contributions.
In the end, it’s all cut from the same piece of fabric! Great posting, gentlemen!