What’s a Trillion or So $$ Among Friends?
For the past decade or so planned giving folks — hell, fundraisers in general — have been citing several economic forecasts that indicate as much as $41 trillion (yes, “T”) will be inherited by Baby Boomers over the next two decades. Of course, the follow-on assumption is that if the Boomers' parents don't leave part of it to charities, the Boomers will.
One of the most cited study for this stat comes from the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College. Good folks, who do interesting research.
Now, as it comes to pass, when all this money has failed to materialize on the predicted schedule — because of anti-biotics, better health care, and the gods only know what else — the naysayers step in. Fundraiser blog “Don't Tell the Donor” had a fascinating post last week (actually, almost all of his/her/their posts are fascinating and worth reading) citing a piece in Kiplinger's Personal Finance which argues that the 'mythological' $41 trillion transfer may have been overrated.
So, I guess there are now dozens or even hundreds of directors of planned giving who are clipping that post and neatly tucking it into their 'projections' files, ready to explain to their bosses or the development committee why they missed this year's numbers.
Not so fast. When in doubt I always turn to the reporting of Holly Hall of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, who, rare among the reporters I know, actually spends time thinking and interviewing folks about this sort of thing. True to form, Holly calmly reports (you may have to be a 'premium' subsciber to get the full story — it's worth it!) that it's unlikely that charities will receive the bequests they were expecting by 2017, “unless the death rate in the United States suddenly and unxepectedly soars….”
Continue reading “What's a Trillion or So $$ Among Friends?”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