*Originally posted on PhilanTopic blog. 

In this short video series Amy Sample Ward explain’s how to interpret and understand the results from the 2013 eNONPROFIT BENCHMARKS STUDY by M+R and NTEN.

Online Giving Trends Part 1

Online Giving Trends Part 2

Online Giving Trends Part 3

Peer Fundraising, also known as social fundraising, can be a powerful tool for your nonprofit. In our recent webinar Scot Chishom of peer fundraising platform StayClassy shared with Achieve CEO Derrick Feldmann strategies for nonprofits to start getting supporters to raise money for your cause.

Peer-to-Peer Fundraising Part 1

Peer-to-Peer Fundraising Part 2

Peer-to-Peer Fundraising Part 3

by Derrick Feldmann

Originally posted on Philanthropy News Digest Blog. 

When I started in fundraising, I had almost no experience asking for money. To compensate, I read lots of articles and books about the different approaches and techniques used by successful fundraisers. As I immersed myself in their ways, I started to pay particular attention to an approach that emphasized the importance of communicating to donors the impact their gifts were helping to create.

Many years later, as the head of national fundraising for a K-12 education program, I spent a good deal of my time seeking support from some of the biggest foundations and corporations in the country. My “ask” in these situations invariably included what I thought was a powerful and persuasive presentation that demonstrated to grantmakers how a grant would transform the lives of a certain number of students and ultimately improve a community. Every time I gave my presentation, I would see heads nodding and would sigh with relief, knowing that those present “got it.” Of course, not every presentation resulted in financial support, but even when they didn’t, I usually made new friends who understood and liked what we were doing and were willing to help us build our network of supporters.

I used this method, with its focus on impact, in every fundraising solicitation I made. And I taught my staff to do the same.

One day, a member of the board who planned to ask a friend to donate to our organization before the end of the year called me to review our solicitation script. But as I walked him through it, I could tell something was wrong. He didn’t say anything after I finished, but he clearly was uncomfortable. A week or so later, he called me to report on the meeting and let slip that he hadn’t said any of the things to his friend I’d told him to say. When I asked why, he said, “I’ve known my friend a long time. And I know the only thing that really matters to him is my trust in this organization and the people who run it. I could’ve talked about all that impact stuff, but it wouldn’t have made a difference. So I just told him why I support you and asked him to consider making a gift.”

I told him I appreciated his honesty and filed it away as one person — albeit an important one! — who made a spur-of-the-moment decision.

A couple of months later, I attended a gala event for an organization that a friend served as a board member. Now, I have to admit that attending a fundraising event for another organization is not high on my list of things to do. But I wanted to help my friend.

So I watched as individuals schmoozed, bid on auction items, and generally enjoyed themselves. Then it was time for the “fund the need” portion of the evening, during which everyone in attendance was asked to support the cause by donating whatever they could. As I sat there, my wife (a fundraiser in a former life) turned to me and told me to get out our credit card. I hesitated, then asked, “Why?” Because, she said, it was important to our friend. “How do you know our gift will make a difference?” I replied. “Stop being cheap,” she said.

Then it hit me. Not everyone is a “sophisticated” donor. Not everyone is a professional fundraiser or works for a foundation or corporate giving program. In fact, very few people do. And people who don’t seldom give to a charitable cause or organization because they’re looking to achieve impact or based on a chart of performance metrics; they give because it makes them feel good, or because it’s a worthy cause, or because, like me, they want to help a friend.

As professional fundraisers, we tend to align our methods and appeals with the needs of sophisticated donors. Why? Because they have money to give and it’s what they expect. But in doing so, we sometimes forget about the people who give because it makes them feel good or because they like our mission, our leadership, or the story we have to tell.

What’s a fundraiser to do? Start by thinking about your sophisticated donors and how they may be influencing, subtly or otherwise, your overall fundraising approach:

Board Members
Board members, especially good ones, are by definition sophisticated. They tend to be accomplished individuals who are interested in your work and are more than happy to sit through presentations and engage in serious discussions about all aspects of that work. Since most are expected to dig into their own pockets to support your organization, they also tend to have a keen and very personal interest in your fundraising results. As such, they can exert a disproportionate and even damaging influence on those results. As I like to say to the board members with whom I work, you are not the target audience of an organization’s fundraising appeals; the general public is.

Foundations
Given the number of organizations seeking their support, foundations really do have limited resources. Which is why many of them, especially larger ones, evaluate their grant investments on a regular basis to identify high-performing nonprofits with a proven ability to execute. They also are staffed (again, the larger ones) with program officers who have particular agendas of their own. Many nonprofits seeking foundation support get into trouble when, against their better judgment, they agree to alter, expand, or create programs to serve a foundation’s goals rather than their own.

Major Donors
Some fundraisers will try to replicate the conversations they have with major donors when “pitching” a member of the general public. That almost never works, for obvious reasons: Jane Doe doesn’t have the resources, philanthropic experience, or big-picture mindset that a major donor typically has. Even more problematic is trying to approach a potential $1,000 donor in the same way you might approach a $100,000 donor. Don’t assume the former (or even the latter) cares about organizational effectiveness or is familiar with any of the well-known charity rating systems out there. Indeed, studies show that fewer than 22 percent of all donors will check a charity’s ratings before making a gift.

Don’t get me wrong: Sophisticated donors and the fundraising approaches that resonate with them are important and should be reviewed and revised on a regular basis. But development professionals also need to realize that not every donor is willing to invest as much time and thought in their giving as are wealthy individuals and big grantmaking organizations. If you remain mindful of that fact and allocate your resources accordingly, I’m pretty confident you’ll soon realize improved returns on your investment in fundraising.

My response to Dan Pallotta’s TED Talk: The way we think about charity is dead wrong.

A new TED Talk is making the rounds and stirring up conversation on a much dreaded nonprofit topic: fundraising for overhead. Dan Pallotta, author of Charity Case and president of Advertising for Humanity, makes the case that until the philanthropy community stops fearing investing in fundraising and talent we will never truly bring charities to scale and create the change we work towards.

The Issue

Pallotta argues that investing in the human capital and strategies like advertising that prove successful in forprofits would bring radical change to the sector, but there is a stigma about investing in nonprofits that stops this from happening. The result he claims is despite decades of research into cancer or programs to lower the homeless, no actual declines in these issues are occurring.

Consider these stats: 

Facing the Dilemma

As any fundraiser knows, talking to a donor about investing in staff or marketing isn’t an easy sell. They want to know their dollars are making a difference. We as fundraisers need to challenge ourselves to prove that investing in those areas will make a substantially larger difference.

Even Pallotta’s own nonprofits struggled with this dilemma. Following a new model of event fundraising, his events for aids and breast cancer research capitalized on peer fundraising by investing in traditional advertising channels to raise awareness. He started his breast cancer walk with an investment of $350,000. Overhead adverse donors would argue that they would want the $350,000 to go to the services. But Pallotta believed that rather than hiring one top researcher for $350,000 the startup capital should be invested in fundraising. The result was that in five years the $350,000 investment turned into $194 million.

That would be a pretty major success in the business world. However, in the nonprofit would it was frowned upon. The media put the races under fire for spending so much money on overhead costs and sponsors pulled out of the race. Ultimately, a cultural shift needs to happen where corporations, foundations and philanthropists start allowing nonprofits to operate more like businesses and invest in talent and fundraising.  

What we can do about it

Like me, you probably are thinking this issue is too big to change on your own. And it totally is. But each individual nonprofit can play a role in creating this shift by building their own case for investing in overhead and proving that it will make a difference, instead of running away from the topic in fear.

A quick way to start would be to take 19 minutes out of your next board meeting and show this video. It’s not enough for us as fundraisers to know the issue exists; we need to work together to open our stakeholder’s eyes.

Watch The Ted Talk Video Now

Check out the top sound bites from the Live Stream broadcast of the Cause For Change book release with co-authors Derrick Feldmann and Kari Dunn Saratovsky.

Don’t Dismiss the Slactivist

Moving Millennials up the Ladder of Engagement

Millennials and the Workplace

In January Achieve CEO Derrick Feldmann presented on how to increase fundraising for a “small shop” nonprofit. Check out a sample of this webinar below for a quick tip on small shop fundraising.

Achieve offers complete monthly webinars focused on donor engagement, fundraising techniques, and online/offline tactics to raise support. Follow this link to learn more: http://www.achieveguidance.com/webinars

Since, 2010 we have been researching Millennial behavior to challenge assumptions and discover ways to involve this new generation of leaders. Over three years we have found this generation willing and excited to give of their time, talents and treasure when they are inspired and provided with meaningful opportunities.

Organizations big and small are taking note and starting to plan to be more inclusive of this generation. They understand the return for the future is worth it. In 2013, Achieve has big plans to continue this research and engage nonprofit leaders in new ways to further expand their knowledge and ideas of how to reach Millennials.

But first we need your help!

Please share our 2013 Millennial Impact Survey to your nonprofits networks (and if you are of the Millennial generation take it yourself!). The more people we reach, the better the data we will have to share with you. Include it in your newsletter, tweet it out, post it on Facebook – anything you can do helps.

Survey link: https://www.research.net/s/misurvey13

Sample message to get you started: 

• Were you born between 1979-1984? Then congrats you are a Millennial. We want to know how you are making an impact.
• Are you a millennial? Share what you love about nonprofits and your biggest pet peeves in our survey.
• What change do you want to see in the nonprofit sector? Tell us how you connect, involve and give. Become a part of the impact – take our survey now:

The survey closes March 8. 

Guest Blog Post By Allison Carter, Roundpeg Director of Communications

If you ever take a glance at the Insights tab on your Facebook Fan Page, you might have had a nasty shock recently: The number of fans who see your posts has cratered in recent months. Today, only about 15% of your Facebook fans see any given post.

Want to reach a larger audience? Facebook can help—for a price. Depending on the size of your audience, promoting a post might range from a few dollars to hundreds.  Even if your nonprofit posts only a couple times a week, that cost can add up in a hurry.

Sure, we could sit around and cry about how it’s not fair (and it isn’t), or we could refocus on what matters on our Facebook pages. As a nonprofit, it’s up to you to make tough choices about where your marketing dollar is going to go the furthest.

As Facebook continues to shift its strategy, it’s time to recalibrate your own. Ask yourself the following questions:

• Why is my organization on Facebook? Why did you get into this crazy medium in the first place? “Because everyone else is doing it” is not an adequate answer. What concrete benefit were you hoping to gain from it: increased awareness, better communication with your most loyal donors and volunteers, a driver for donations?
• Have we seen results so far? Do volunteers come up to you and say “oh yeah, I saw you were doing that from your Facebook page”? If so, you’ve seen a result. Have you seen more people clicking those links you’re sharing on Facebook and take the next step by donating, volunteering or otherwise doing what you want them to? Whatever a “result” looks like for your organization, has it worked so far?
• How much are those results worth to me? So let’s say you’ve met your goals. People are donating from the fan page, RSVPing for events and volunteering. If so, would you see an increase if more people saw your posts? Or, by appealing to your most loyal fan base, are you already doing the most good?

Setting up clear goals and metrics for your fan page has never been more critical. As costs increase, you need to hold your marketing accountable. Ask yourself these questions, experiment with sponsoring a few of your best posts that offer clear call-to-action and see if it’s worth it to you. But be on your toes– after all, Facebook could change at any time.

Allison Carter is director of communications for Roundpeg, an Indianapolis marketing firm that specializes in helping small businesses become big businesses. She spends most of her days up to her elbows in words, working with small businesses to tell their unique stories through strategic social media use and rousing copywriting. Follow her on Twitter @AllisonLCarter or read more at roundpeg.biz.

By Derrick Feldmann (Originally posted on Philantopic – a blog of opinion and commentary from PHILANTHROPY News Digest.)

My mother isn’t a techie. And because I’m a so-called “digital native,” I tend to serve as her tech support, troubleshooting problems with her iPhone and laptop. Let me put this as politely as possible: serving as Mom’s tech support requires a certain level of patience.

Recently, over the Thanksgiving holiday, she asked me to go online with her to look at some Christmas gifts she was thinking about buying for my wife. After watching her inch the cursor across the screen and type a Web address into the browser that led us to a “page not found” message, I jumped in and suggested it might be faster if we used Google. So we went to the Google home page, typed “cute personalized Mac travel case” into the search box, clicked on the “I’m Feeling Lucky” button, and voila! — link after link to sites offering cute personalized Mac travel cases.

Good comparison shoppers that we are, we decided to click on a link accompanied by a great short description and the promise of a steep discount. When we clicked on the link, however, it took us to a site that looked about ten years old. As I scanned the page, Mom said, “Derrick, we aren’t going to buy it from here, are we?” I had already decided we weren’t, but I wanted to hear her reasoning. When I asked her, she said, “Well, it looks like it’s a scam. I mean, we should buy from a site that looks like the people behind it have been in business a while, right?”

Then I asked her to explain something that led me to write this article: “Tell me specifically what you don’t like about this site.” To which Mom replied, “Other sites just look nicer. They have easy-to-click buttons, and I feel like I can trust them with my credit card.”

My mom is like millions of other ordinary consumers who have been exposed to a variety of e-commerce experiences. She has been trained to expect simple user interfaces and straightforward navigation schemes that allow her to easily find and purchase the item(s) she’s looking for. What my mom doesn’t realize is that someone, a developer or programmer, designed the Web page or site that enables her to do just that: to easily find what she’s looking for, learn more about the item, and, should she choose, purchase it with a minimal amount of fuss and bother.

In the Web development/design business, this is known as usability, and it typically comprises five components:

Learnability: How easy is it for users to accomplish basic tasks the first time they visit a site?

Efficiency: Once users have become familiar with a site, how quickly can they find what they need?

Memorability: When users return to a site after having not visited it for a while, how easily are they able to reestablish their proficiency in navigating the site?

Errors: How many “wrong turns” do visitors to the site make? How deflating are these mistakes and dead ends and how easily are visitors able to recover from them and find what they were looking for?

Satisfaction: How pleasant is the user experience?

Companies and organizations that have mastered usability with respect to their Web sites are able to get customers like Mom coming back to purchase more of their products or services. Straightforward navigation and simple transaction mechanisms help to establish a level of trust with the individual customer/visitor and make it easier for her to learn about additional products and services. In short, sites that offer a good usability experience make it easy for folks like my mom to move quickly from being a potential consumer to becoming an informed buyer.

And that’s exactly the kind of experience that every nonprofit should provide to prospective online donors. Organizations need to think about the online donation experience in terms of usability. This includes taking the five critical components of usability noted above and applying them to your online donor cultivation, solicitation, and stewardship pages.

Learnability: How easy is it for a prospective donor to understand the mission and purpose of your organization? Is it clear why your organization is asking for money and the ways in which donated funds are used to assist your organization’s constituents? Are donors able to actively engage with your organization the first time they visit the site?

Efficiency: Once a prospective donor understands the reasons your organization requires additional funding, how easy is it for him or her to make a donation? Is the process quick and painless, allowing the donor to act on impulse? Is the experience one that instills trust? And, most importantly, does it build on the knowledge the donor gained during the cultivation process?

Memorability: When a donor returns to your site after a period of time, is it easy for her to reestablish the connection she made with your organization the last time she visited? Was her previous experience on the site memorable enough to inspire her to return, learn more, and perhaps make another gift for a larger amount?

Errors: How many “wrong turns” do potential donors make during the donation process and do they affect their willingness to donate? Could donors’ navigation mistakes and dead ends be avoided if your organization provided better tools, easier options, and/or additional support during the donation process?

Satisfaction: Do donors leave the site feeling satisfied? Are they satisfied with the additional knowledge they gained, the efficient donation process, and the overall user experience?

As I hope the above makes clear, usability is not just a “techie” term. It’s a way of thinking and a way to ensure that current and future donors’ experience with your organization online is educational, efficient, and satisfying. Indeed, nonprofits that are busy acquiring new donors tend to be ones that have solved the usability puzzle. And their donors tend to return year after year — and sometimes more frequently — to support the important work the organization is doing.

So ask yourself: Does your organization’s Web site pass “the Mom test”? Or is it more like the ten-year-old site that no one really trusts and wants to spend time on?