In-person ‘asks’ boost fundraising

The Philanthropy Journal had this report last week, well worth a read:

Echoing conventional wisdom in the fundraising profession, nonprofits can raise more money if donors are asked for gifts in person by people they know, says a study that examines where and why donors make their largest gifts. Donors to secular charities who were approached for a gift face-to-face by an acquaintance gave an average of $987, or 19 percent more than those contacted by an acquaintance through mail, email or phone, says the study, commissioned by Campbell & Company and conducted by the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.

Donors to religious organizations gave an average of $2,904, or 42 percent more when they were asked in person by someone they know. Among all donors, the average size of their largest gift was $1,098, and 43 percent of people directed those gifts to secular nonprofits, while 57 percent gave to religious groups. Among households with income of $150,000 or more, the average largest gift was $2,486, more than double the average gift size for all households.

 And while recognition for donations may boost gift amounts slightly, providing token gifts resulted in the second-lowest average gift value, the report says. “With token recognition, donors may see their contributions as transactions, but donors who receive more personal recognition better understand how their gift impacts an organization’s work,” Peter Fissinger, president of Campbell & Company, says in a statement.

Great Impact

I tweeted this the other day, Charity Water every day post a picture of what their work is doing. It is phenomenal Impact, they really get the importance of Impact. Here is the picture that really caaught my attention

 

Public Perception and Charity Reality – Gap

You may have seen the new poll released by the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations (ACEVO). It shows a scary gap between the public’s understanding of charities and the reality. ACEVO believes this could lead to an erosion of trust and confidence in ‘the special relationship’ the public has with charities.

ACEVO believes that charities need to have a much more honest relationship with the public and it is calling on the sector to become more accountable and transparent to prevent an erosion of public confidence.

ACEVO is, as a result, leading a coalition of 240 charities and trade bodies to draw up a ‘transparency manifesto’ which it will urge all charities to sign-up to. It will also seek the backing of the Charity Commission.

ACEVO’s key public survey findings are:

• Nearly 50% think there are less than 70,000 registered charities in England and Wales. Only 16% identified the right ballpark figure of over 170,000

• 77% of respondents were unable to correctly identify the right bracket of the number of people working in the charity sector as between 500,000 and 750,000

• On average charities spend 12.5% on their overheads. Only 20% of the public got this figure in the right ballpark. 61% of the public thought they spent more than 20% on overheads

• 52% estimated that the total annual income for charities was less than £20 billion – it is in fact more than £30 billion

• Only 16% were in the right ballpark on the average income charities receive from government as government grants, income and loans. Charities receive £11.5 billion from government

I agree with ACEVO’s viewpoint that charities need to be more transparent. We can’t blame the public for their perceptions  if we dont commuicate with them properly.

There was a post on the Bluefrog Creative Blog this week with a similar theme, called Why do people think charities waste money? Because we don’t prove them wrong? They made the point that:

Whenever we work with charities on recruitment pieces, we encourage them to use the basic statistic of how many pence in the pound go on ‘real work’.

You’d be surprised how many are reluctant to do so. When asked why, some point out that another charity has a better statistic. But by that, they may mean only one or two pence more are spent in the ways that are easiest to justify to a supporter.

It’s a great shame if a charity doesn’t share their figures on the basis of just one or two per cent.

We kind of only have ourselves to blame

Take the Donor-Centered Pledge (or die)

This is from the fantastic Ahern Communications email.

23 rules to live by

We, [fill in the name of your nonprofit organization here], believe…

 1. That donors are essential to the success of our mission.

2. That gifts are not “cash transactions.” And that donors are not merely a bunch of interchangeable, easily replaceable credit cards, checkbooks and wallets.

3. That no one “owes” us a gift just because our mission is worthy.

4. That any person who chooses to become our donor has enormous potential to assist the mission.

5. That having a program for developing a relationship with that donor is how organizations tap that enormous potential.

6. That we waste that potential when donors are not promptly thanked.

7. That “lifetime value of a donor” is the best (though often overlooked) way to evaluate “return on investment” in fundraising.

8. That donors are more important than donations. Those who currently make small gifts are just as interesting to us as those who currently make large gifts.

9. That acquiring first-time donors is easy but keeping those donors is hard.

10. That many first-time gifts are no more than “impulse purchases” or “first dates.”

11. That we’ll have to work harder for the second gift than we did for the first.

12. That a prerequisite for above-average donor retention is a well-planned donor-centric communications program that begins with a welcome.

13. That donors want to have faith in us, and that it’s our fault if they don’t.

14. That donors want to make a difference in the world — and that every gift is an attempt to achieve that goal.

15. That donors are investors. They invest in doing good. They expect their investment to prosper, or they’ll invest somewhere else.

16. That we earn the donor’s trust by reporting on our accomplishments and efficiency.

17. That individual donors respond to our appeals for personal reasons we can only guess at.

18. That asking a donor why she or he gave a first gift to us will likely lead to an amazingly revealing conversation.

19. That fundraising serves the donor’s emotional needs as much as it serves the organization’s financial needs.

20. That we are in the “feel good” business. Donors feel good when they help make the world a better place. We sell joy, the joy of “feeling like you [the donor] have made a difference.”

21. That a prime goal of fundraising communications is to satisfy basic human needs such as the donor’s need to feel important and worthwhile.

22. That the donor’s perspective defines what is a “major” gift. Is $250 a major gift? Many organizations would say no. Most donors would say yes. The donor’s always right.

23. That, for the donor, every first gift to a new cause can open a door to a strange and exciting world, and you’re the guide to that world, through your communications.

UK Card Association reports increase in donations

This is a really interesting piece from the BBC website showing that donations to charities on debit and credit cards have increased year on year. The piece is nicelt balanced highlighting that areas charities have struggled with is legacies as well as an increase in demand for services, no mention of corporate donations. But I think its certainly worth reading.

Source BBC News

The latest figures from the UK Cards Association suggests the public’s appetite for giving to charities has not diminished during the downturn.

The trade association for the cards industry said that in the first four months of 2009, the value of donations on debit cards was up 24% on the same period the previous year. Credit card donations were up 11% over the same timescale.

This followed an 18% rise in donations on plastic cards in 2008 – up from £1.01bn in 2007 to £1.19bn in 2008.

“These card figures tell us an interesting story. Despite the economic downturn, it seems there was no let-up last year in people’s commitment to charity,” says Sandra Quinn, of the UK Cards Association.

The Charity Commission figures show the annual income of the 166,807 main charities reached £51.16bn by the end of June 2009. This was up from £48.4bn at the end of 2008 when there were more charities – 168,354.

With the figures having risen steadily over the previous years, the position still looks rosy for charities.

But these statistics do not tell the full story.

Various aspects of charitable giving have been hit in recent months. With the value of homes and shares having fallen sharply, the amount received in wills has been cut.

A recent report by a think tank, the Smith Institute, concluded that there might be a loss in the value of legacies of between £150m and £200m in 2009.

Low interest rates have also meant that charities’ own savings and investments had not performed as well as they might have expected. Some were caught up in the saga with the Icelandic banks.

An economic survey of 1,000 charities in England and Wales in February discovered that 52% of those asked said they had been affected by the financial downturn. Some 58% suggested that they suffered a drop in income.

“Clearly the impact of the financial downturn on charities is widening and deepening. Some charities still face that double whammy of a drop in income as well as an increased demand for services,” says Dame Suzi Leather, who chairs the Charity Commission.

Understanding Donors Motivations for Online Giving.

Todays post is by Guest Author Scott Neilson. Scott is the CEO/Founder of FundBunch, which provides tools and services to allow individuals and organizations to be more effective in their online fundraising efforts and he shares his insights into what motivates donors to give online

There are lots of motivations for why donors choose give online, but essentially they can be summarized as a combination of three reasons:

• Convenience (63.4%).  It’s fast, convenient, and allows quick action on an urgent need.
• Direction (20.3%).  They were asked to give online
• Incentives (15,4%).  Credit Card rewards program, managing personal cash flow.

Source:  American Express Charitable Gift Survey, November 2007

Nearly two thirds of online contributors stated that convenience was the primary reason for giving online.  Nothing else is close.  And that is what you should expect.  Giving is an emotional transaction.  Once you’ve reached your audience with a compelling message about your cause, you need to make it easy and convenient for them to contribute.  If your donors have to work, you’ll miss out on a lot of opportunity.  And few things are worse than missed opportunity.

The other main reason that contributors chose to give online is you took the initiative to ask for the contribution.  Just having an online presence itself does not lead to contributions.  You must still be active in asking for contributions and directing your supporters to a convenient way for them to contribute.

As an online fundraiser, you need to make sure that it’s easy for your donors to complete their transaction.  Eliminate multiple pages in the contribution process where they can drop out.  And be considerate of their time.  Don’t require them to complete unnecessary information about themselves they isn’t required to process a payment.  This is not the forum for building profile data. 

Most importantly, ask people to contribute online.  Just having a website and expecting contributions makes you a ‘fund-accepter’, not a ‘fundraiser’.  And that is not where you want to be.

You can reach him at scottn@fundbunch.com or visit his site at www.fundbunch.com

Get others to make your case

Im sure lots of you are reading Seth Godin so this may not be new, but I thought it was worth sharing and certainly something we could try out.

Seth was asking “How do you get your boss to approve something, the customer service people to understand the pain a system is causing or the folks in engineering to see things your way?”

His solution was simple in its genius

“Here’s a new way that’s extraordinarily effective: Make a video….. interview your customers. Ask them questions and show the answers to your team. “

And here is an example from Ji Lee at Google masterminded this man on the street interview:

Replace the Word Customer with Donor

And this video makes real sense. I read this great little Simple Truths book and here is a video summary of it. Its actually worth getting some copies of the book and circulating them in your organisation. Its great thinking.

you can buy the book here

This is the way to say thanks

This is great work by Action Aid UK again, they really get it. This is similar to something I saw during the US election (check that post out here).

This may be a bit expensive for your organisation, but adapt it, how about some of your supporters or people who benefit from your service recording a Thanks video, like this Send a Singer post from Crisis.  Simple but effective.

Thanks to Eugene Flynn from 54 degrees for showing us this at Fundraising Ireland

Sustained Giving seems to be doing ok

I still hear from organisations that their monthly donors continue to drop off and cancel. Two recent articles from Professional Fundraising and Philanthropy UK seem to suggest across the sector that is the trend but people are still signing up to help non profits:

The Association of Payroll Giving Organisations reports that the number of employees signing up to payroll giving schemes has fallen only slightly.

Figures from APGO’s five member professional fundraising organisations show that 60,366 employees signed up to a payroll giving scheme in the 2008/09 financial year, compared with 60,942 in 2007/08.

Source: Philanthropy UK

The number of direct debit donors has increased significantly, but so too has the number of donors defaulting on their commitments, according to new figures.

Direct debit donor levels are 600,000 higher than 2007, according to figures from automated payment processor Bacs Payment Schemes, which has labelled reports which claim direct debit cancellations are on the rise as “misleading”.

Source: Professional Fundraising Magazine

Some great advice from Michael Chambers, Bacs managing director,  who suggests charities should offer their donors more flexible payment dates.

Running out of Charity

That was the headline in the Irish Times today where the author goes on to quote numerous heads of fundraising about how bad things are. I think Tim O’Dea came across as being most balanced.

What frustrates me about this is overall its not balanced its all about doom and gloom and I genuinely dont think it helps us to be fueling this fire. As for the title! Give me a break.

Read it here, if you like.

What Donors Want?

After a successful weekend of fundraising and then reading Damian’s post here about his recent successes (donor mailing up 42%) I am even more convinced now that if you give donors what they want you will be successful.

I am not saying I have a new magical piece of information here. I think thats the thing, there is no magical solution. The reality is everyone doesnt want to give to your cause. Your target market isnt everyone. 

So know who you are targeting. Then do the small things well.  Give people a really good reason to give and a really good reason why they should give now, you will be successful.

Knowing your client

 

I was fortunate enough to get to stay at the Malmaison Hotel in Newcastle yesterday. These guys know their clients. I was really impressed by this sign in reception. Clearly hotels are places where people come and have business meetings in the reception. Most hotels, or a lot of hotels, make people a little uncomfortable about this. Not Malmaison, they seem to embrace it and encourage it.

Just made me think that we need to try understand the people that come to our organisations and challenge ourselves into thinking…why are they here? If we can answer that question then we can start delivering a better donor experience for them.

Great Donor Care

I have had an AMAZING donor experience with Nothing But Nets.

I came across them about a year ago and really liked the concept and some of the stuff they were doing. Recently when thinking about getting married myself and Gemma decided that instead of doing favours we were going to buy a net for every guest who attends (we were really taken by the impact a net has when we saw it on Comic Relief). Liking what Nothing But Nets does I decided to contact them and just ask if we could get something small to put on each table to let people know.

They have been fantastic.

Firstly they replied to my initial email within a couple of hours and straight away made me feel like I was important to them. I emailed an info@ address (which I tend not to like) but the reply to it made up for it, I was speaking to a person, Julie, and she gave me her email address and direct line so I could call her if I wanted to.

I went back with a few questions or thoughts that I had and Julie came back to me and really over delivered on my expectations. Lots of suggestions and she emailed me a whole load of stuff.

What I really liked was that Julie was taking a personal interest in the donation and she was so appreciative, not in a gushing way, but in a genuine way.

So well done Nothing But Nets. A great donor experience (oh and we still have to complete the donation as we still dont know the numbers attending our wedding).

The Big Switch

 

 

One of the most successful campaigns of recent times in Ireland has been The Big Switch. It was a campaign by a natural gas company trying to get people to switch to them for their electricity supply. They had hoped to get 100,000 people to switch by the end of the year and managed it in just a few months.

What struck me was the reaction of the market leader, the semi-state ESB, to the switch.

I switched (it was a great offer, 14% cheaper electricity). The ESB, who has had a monopoly for years, did nothing. They never once asked if we would like to stay with them, they never asked was there anything they could do to keep our business. Nothing. Not even a thank you for all the business.

There is a lot (an awful lot) of talk about attrition recently. PFRA are doing a survey about it.  What I am reading and hearing about it mostly blames the recession. But I have to wonder are we taking an ESB approach to donor attrition?

Are we just letting the donor go without communicating with them (phone call). Maybe they have come across another charity similar to ours that they feel is doing a better job, maybe they werent getting enough communication from us, maybe too much. If you talk to the donors who are cancelling regular gifts you may get a wealth of information that will make you better at what you do and you may also be able to encourage some to stay.

I can’t help feeling that there is opportunity in attrition.