Other mistakes that undermine your web fundraising

Last time I wrote about the "beginner" mistakes that undermine your web fundraising. This time I will cover the more intermediate mistakes that cost you online donations.

1. No Benefit for the Donor

If your website is all about what a wonderful non-profit you are, all your achievements, all your programs, you sound just like most other mediocre websites, whether charitable or commercial. If, on the other hand, you communicate what your organization can do for the donor, you immediately separate yourself from the pack. As with successful direct mail text, use the words “you” and “your” often. Your website should not appear to be a snare to catch a gift, but a tool for the donor to achieve his or her philanthropic goals.

2. No Urgency

Make it clear why the donor must do something now. What are the implications if they delay? Perhaps even set a deadline. “We need to raise $xxxxx by xx date in order to ensure children are fed.”

3. Colors Blend In

Does your call to action stand out or are you enslaved by corporate brand guidelines? Fundraising is often about creating action out complacency. It is hard to do that if everything is subject to the tyranny of a non-intrusive color palette. Your “donate” button should be big, bold and assertive. Your call to action statements should stand out. Tell the snarky designers to apply their sacrosanct brand guidelines on a nondescript brochure. You need to make sure your case for giving literally vibrates on your web page.

4. No Credibility

Donors are not only concerned about ensuring that their gifts are well used but also that they appear to be savvy philanthropists.  They don’t want to look like fools to their peers. They want to give to organizations that are winners. Nothing cuts through the “Who are these people?” question better than donor profiles, complimentary quotes by supporters, or the logos of recognizable corporate sponsors. Use them.

5. Loaded with Jargon

Sometimes it’s fun to use big words that make you look smart, right? Maybe, but it is a terrible fundraising tactic. Few but your own employees will understand highly technical industry jargon. Simple words work best when trying to persuade someone to take action.

Apply these elements and see your website giving soar.

I Resolve to...

A year ago January, the Advancement Best Practices LinkedIn Group asked their members to list their fundraising resolutions or goals for 2012. Here is what they answered:

42% Build a philanthropic culture
20% Link metrics to ROI
17% Engage trustees/ CEO
16% Identify new potential donors
5% Not one of the above

I think it is interesting that the top goal was to build a philanthropic culture. You would think that was a given for anyone working for a nonprofit. The fact that it was yet to be built, (not even simply improved), says something about the state of our business. If a nonprofit or charity doesn't have philanthropy at the core of what they do, how are they surviving? How are they connecting with and motivating their donors? By coercion? Yikes!

According to Guidestar, up to 60,000 nonprofits fail each year and in 2010 8% claimed they were in imminent danger of going under. Why?

I think the lack of a philanthropic culture is part of the problem. But more importantly, there is a fundamental misunderstanding as to how and why donors give. Here is what nonprofit leadership must understand:

• The heart is more important than the head. Executive Directors and Boards are often embarrassed to present the emotional side of their story. They want to "convince" the donor that they are a good "investment". Leave the investment up to the bank. Your charity or nonprofit most likely grew our of a compelling need. Don't forget that. 
• You must ask to receive. The classic "If we build it they will come" is hooey. If you don't ask, someone else will -- and they will get the donation.
• Everyone in your organization must be comfortable with the fundraising process. I have heard some fundraisers say, "Everyone in our organization is a fundraiser". I don't buy that. Fundraising is a skill forged from experience and an art born of personality. Not everyone is good at it nor do they have to be. If this wasn't so, why would we hire fundraisers? But the entire staff should understand how it works, if only to support the efforts of the fundraising team. The one thing that can kill an organization is an employee who is constantly denigrating the fundraising process.
• Take advantage of every avenue to raise funds. There are 1.5 million nonprofits in the US. That's a lot of competition. Make it easy for the donor to give to you through the channels they prefer. You must have an annual fund program, solicit major gifts, make use of social media and e-philanthropy, create profitable events, accept planned gifts, and keep abreast of whatever is working for other organizations.
• Test, test, test. Be fiscally prudent but don't be afraid to take risks. Risk can often be reduced by testing. I am constantly astounded to find experienced nonprofits that fail to test fundraising approaches. 

There are certainly other elements of successful fundraising. As the survey identifies, link your metrics to return on investment. (This is especially true of events. I am sure many organizations would be shocked if they included direct and all indirect costs in their event profitability assessment.) Engaging trustees and all leadership in the mission as well as the fundraising process is helpful. And yes, finding new donors is important. But, I would have ranked "steward current donors exceptionally well" ahead of prospecting and that isn't even listed! Your most valuable donors are the ones who have already provided you with a gift.

What are your resolutions for 2013? I will list mine in my next post.

Quote of the Week: YOU are awesome!

I saw this great cartoon from the Marketoonist site authored by Tom Fishburne with the title 5 types of social media strategies - (by way of Jeff Brooks' Future Fundraising Now blog). 

Some of the most cutting and insightful commentary on modern marketing comes by way of the artistic wit of Mr. Fishburne. Fundraiser Jeff Brooks notes in his own blog's commentary on this 'toon that the self-absorbed, self-focused approach so often promoted on social media platforms must be avoided by fundraisers -- and all marketers, really.

Repeat after me- It's all about the donor. It's about how we can help them feel awesome. It is how awesome they ARE. 

Post Direct Mail Fundraising

Direct mail is still the king of fundraising. Despite the incessant drumbeat of speculation that direct mail  is on the wane, dying, or already dead, it is still responsible for 75% of all fundraising revenue for a typical nonprofit (source: Blackbaud 2011 donorCentrics Benchmarking Report). 

By the way, bad direct mail should be dead. With a stake in its heart!

Personally, I believe that the most successful fundraising strategies include a multifaceted approach. Coordinated campaigns that include complimentary direct mail, online, social media, telefundraising and personal solicitations are proving to be extremely effective.

But what would post-direct mail fundraising look like? Are alternatives to direct mail dependent campaigns really working for certain charities?

Is post-direct mail fundraising already here and does it looks like Charity:Water?

Tom Belford of the Agitator blog recently asked regarding Charity:Water's September campaign Is this any way to launch your annual appeal? He answered with a definitive "You bet it is!" And Beth Kanter recently posted about Charity:Water's brilliant use of Instagram. 

The following video hints at why Charity:Water is so successful, why it connects so strongly with donors on an emotional level, and how it utilizes electronic media so well.

September Campaign 2012 Trailer: Rwanda from charity: water on Vimeo.

The video tells a great story and illustrates how Charity:Water is a key part of the story. But it has the astuteness of understanding that Charity:Water, the nonprofit, is not the story. It is all about the people of Rwanda. It is their story. The story is told clearly and simply. It promises that if you - the donor - partner with Charity:Water you can help ensure the story ends well.

Paull Young, Charity:Water's Director of Digital Engagement, recently summed up their approach this way:

• ask supporters to give up their birthdays, offering a great experience in return
• focus on sharing great content, not asking for money
• make the campaigner the hero, not the organization
• strive to have a ten year relationship with constituents
• rely 100% on social media and online platforms with no direct mail

This approach seems to be working extremely well for them. Charity:Water raised over $8.6 million in 2009 and over $16 million in 2010. All without utilizing direct mail.

Let's take a look at how they do it online. Click on this link for their September Campaign 2012. 

Charity:Water leverages the web beautifully. An arresting first frame of an embedded video takes up nearly half of the page. Towards the top of the page is a progress bar showing how much has been raised so far and what the ultimate goal is. Under this first video titled "The Trailer" you see there will be four other videos that can be viewed on August 28, September 4th, 7th and 11th. These are tempting teases encouraging the visitor to return to the site. Naming the lead video The Trailer makes it seems like a movie premier and I think you will agree the clip has the impact and production values of a Hollywood blockbuster.

As you scroll down you see that you can donate now or start your own campaign. You also see that they promise to "prove" they have completed their goals with photos of each completed well site. They will even supply GPS coordinates for each project just in case you want to check them out yourself.

Lastly, as you continue to scroll down on the landing page you see project cost information, links to individuals who have started campaigns, profiles of the people they are helping, more outcome data, and information on what different levels of contributions will accomplish. Scattered throughout the page are multiple links providing ways to give, start a campaign, or receive additional information and project updates.

The entire site is beautifully designed. The data is simple and compelling. The visuals are eye-catching.

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that does this better than Charity:Water.

Is Charity:Water unique? Could this same "no direct mail" approach work for all charities? I am not sure it could. Many nonprofits have a more complex and nuanced story to tell that may require more traditional communication media. Additionally, many prospects may be less comfortable with online giving. Perhaps more telling, many charities may not have the superb "new media" talent to pull something like this off.

What do you think? Is this the future of fundraising? Or, is this simply a superbly executed exception?

Quote of the Week: Generosity Day Follow-up

A month ago I posted a story about an initiative to "re-boot" Valentine's Day as Generosity Day proposed by Sasha Dichter of the Acumen Fund and Katya Andresen of Network for Good.  (See my February 14th post here.) 


Their concept was to elevate the day beyond the rather benign commercialism of cards and candy and encourage more compassion and caring. In Sasha's words, "We wanted to reconnect (the day) to the core ideas of love and human connection."


The idea had its genesis in Sasha's Generosity Experiment -- a month in which he said "yes" to absolutely every request for help.


Last week he blogged about the results of this year's Generosity Day. 


Here is some of the feedback he received. 

One person shared that she approached an elderly woman on the street and gave her a rose, only to be told that this was the first Valentine's Day flower she'd ever received. Another woman finally had coffee with someone she'd long thought could be a new friend -- and she was right. A third person told an 80-year-old woman how beautiful she was and the woman shed a tear, saying that no one had told her that in years.

Much more than any statistics about the word spreading far and wide, it is these actions that made Generosity Day real, these actions that created innumerable moments of joy. We heard stories of anonymous acts of kindness, outrageous over-tipping and heartfelt thank you notes. We heard about people paying strangers' tolls on the parkway, folks passing out croissants to the morning-rush crowd, and loads of people who spent the day or night volunteering. We heard from people who were donating money, and those who were donating blood. We heard from so many people who made the day better for others and experienced the joy of generosity themselves.

Oh, the bliss of giving and the blessings of generosity!


To further quote Sasha Dichter, You too can be part of this movement, today or any day. All it takes is the decision to say "yes".

Generosity Day: A Valentine Reboot

Last year, a couple of days before Valentine's Day, Sasha Dichter, Chief Innovation Officer for Acumen Fund launched an effort to completely change the nature the 14th of February. He and his friend Katya Andresen, of Network for Good, came up with the idea of turning Valentine's Day into Generosity Day. As Dichter stated, "We wanted to reconnect (the day) to the core ideas of love and human connection."

Sasha says it started as an idea with him when he decided to spend the month of December saying "yes" to everyone who asked him for money -- a homeless person, a street musician, a nonprofit. Soon he posted on his blog that "I want all my readers to hear first. This Monday (Valentine's Day in 2011), is going to be rebooted as Generosity Day: one day of sharing love with everyone, of being generous to everyone, to see how it feels and to practice saying "Yes." Let's make the day about love, action and human connection -- because we can do better than smarmy greeting cards, overpriced roses, and stressed-out couples trying to create romantic meals on the fly."

The results were heartening. "We reached a few million people last year through blogs, Facebook, Twitter. Our hunch was spot on: People are hungering for something more in their lives -- more connection and more meaning", said Dichter.

What are you doing for Generosity Day? Have you thanked your donors, staff, friends?  Have you thought about the transformative nature of gratitude? Are you so focused on need -- your need,  that you have overlooked the power of reciprocity? 

I have included two videos below. One describes the concept behind Generosity Day, the other was created by the Jubilee Project and poses the question "What is love?" to a variety of people met on the street. (The Jubilee Project was born out of the Haiti earthquake in 2010 and creates videos for good causes.)

Give it  a try. Let's reclaim Valentine's Day. 

Mega-Donors Gave More Last Year.

According to an article in today's Chronicle of Philanthropy, America's top 50 donors gave over $7-billion dollars more in 2011 than they did in 2010 ($10.4-billion vs. $3.3-billion). 29 individuals gave $50-million or more to their foundations or causes, up from 22 in 2010. The list was topped by the estate of agribusiness heiress Margaret Cargill, followed by deceased steel executive William Dietrich II,  co-founder of Microsoft Paul Allen, financier George Soros, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

It also appears that larger, more well-known charities are receiving the bulk of the larger charitable gifts. 36% of the dollars went to higher education, 35% to private foundations, 15% to hospitals, medical centers, and medical research, and 7% to museums, libraries, and historic preservation. Additionally, the concentration by larger donors on higher profile, well established institutions may be in part because donors are worried that some of the newer and smaller charities may not be around in 25 or more years.

Should smaller nonprofits consider soliciting large or even "mega-donors"? Some consultants and charity heads believe they can. But big donors certainly won't consider an organization they don't even know exists. It is therefore critical that each charity consider the following:

• Consistently get they word out on the work of your organization. Court the media, create compelling print and electronic communications, utilize social media, involve community leadership, share successful outcomes.
• Provide an informative, inspiring website. Many donors research institutions on their website prior to making a gift.
• Connect donors directly to your programs and beneficiaries. Have them visit a classroom, take them to a project site, invite them to join your board. Don't just tell them about your good work show them.
• Be realistic. The number one ranked billionaire may have loved cats but she is likely already connected to a favorite charity. Don't allocate all your resources for that one big donation "hit". Like anything else diversify your cultivation. 

Although 2011 experienced a significant increase in large donations in comparison to 2010, giving was still well below pre-recession contributions. Moreover, many believe corporate support has been permanently changed by the bad economy.

Those charities that fared better in 2011 such as the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), invested heavily in often overlooked but lucrative revenue sources such as monthly credit card or direct debit donors. They have also concentrated on building connections with donors through social media where they have obtained a million Facebook supporters.

Be creative. Toot your own horn.
Be persistent. Your cause is worth it.
Be aspirational. Shoot for the stars.
The only thing that ensures failure is not trying!

Check out this info-graphic from the Chronicle of Philanthropy article: Link to info-graphic

Can we get rid of that "old" direct mail?

Here is another great infographic from Kivi Leroux Miller's Nonprofit Marketing Guide.com site. It is compiled from their 2012 Nonprofit Communications Trends Report. 

It is interesting how the "new media" -- website, email marketing, e-newletters and Facebook -- are deemed either very important or somewhat important to a higher degree than the "tried-and-true" print newsletters and direct mail. 

This is particularly intriguing in light of fundraising expert Jeff Brooks' recent post on his Future Fundraising Now blog entitled What's wrong with the Next Big Thing? To quote:

One of the most pointless and uninteresting things you can hear is that something is the Next Big Thing in Fundraising.

Anything that's being bandied around as a "big thing" is not a big thing. Not yet, and probably not ever.

You'll know a thing is big when nobody's calling it a big thing any more -- but they're just using it successfully to meet their goals. 

Another way you can tell a thing is big is when people start claiming it's "dead".
The two Biggest Things in Fundraising today are direct mail and the house of worship collection plate.

Now, it is important to distinguish considering these newish channels from the standpoint of communication versus solicitation.  Electronic channels will serve an ever more prominent role in getting the word out. Truly, email, websites, social media, et al are important components in any nonprofits communication arsenal.


The problem lies in the belief that any of these will supplant direct mail or in-person solicitations as a significant source of gift revenue any time soon. And oh, how we yearn to replace costly direct mail with something inexpensive such as email! Do not succumb to this spurious temptation! 

Use email to support direct mail. Employ social media to provide broader opportunities for education and engagement. Spruce up your website and make sure that it tells your story in a clear and compelling manner. But realize your gifts will come mostly through old-fashioned but lucrative channels.