• Save
PFRA DARS 2009 Maximising Income From Face To Face Regular Giving 2009 Pfra Attrition Survey Distribution Copy
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

PFRA DARS 2009 Maximising Income From Face To Face Regular Giving 2009 Pfra Attrition Survey Distribution Copy

on

  • 378 views

The 2nd annual PFRA Donor Attrition & Retention Survey (DARS)

The 2nd annual PFRA Donor Attrition & Retention Survey (DARS)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
378
Views on SlideShare
375
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 3

http://www.linkedin.com 3

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert. Question – what is your opinion – no effect, positive effect, negative effect? What horizon are you measuring over? – time period critical.
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Morag
  • Morag - Question what they think the most relevant frequency would be
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert. Potential question before next slide re – what do you think has the most positive effect on donor retention
  • Rupert
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert. If time, potentially explore what we did with the months to avoid having donors that hadn’t yet made their payments – based on date of last 1 st payment. This info will now be featured in our report, due September 2009. Being careful of assumptive attrition modelling
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Morag. 2006 – blue 2007 - red
  • Morag. 2006 blue, 2007 red, 2008 green
  • Morag – state we are unsure if the data contained in the 3 charities with much lower Yr 1 attrition is being reported in the same way as all other campaigns (to be focussed on in report due Sept 09).
  • Morag
  • Morag. 2006 blue, 2007 red, 2008 green
  • Morag
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Rupert
  • Morag
  • Morag. Underlying message here is that in spite of increase in attrition across both street and door from 06 to 08, street income per 1,000 donors recruited is largely unchanged to that in 2006, thanks to increase in average gift. Door has seen a very slight overall decrease in income per 1,000 donors recruited, as the increase in average gift has not quite offset the increase in attrition from 06 to 08. However, there has been a shift of volumes between street and door, with 1.5 times as many donors reported for door campaigns (48,000) than for street campaigns (35,000) in 2006, increasing to three times as many door reported donors (67,000) compared with street reported donors in 2008 (19,000).
  • Rupert
  • Morag
  • Rupert / Morag. Report due in Sept 09 will include insights into how we carried out our analysis, complete with advice and feedback for participants on the data they submitted.
  • Rupert / Morag

PFRA DARS 2009 Maximising Income From Face To Face Regular Giving 2009 Pfra Attrition Survey Distribution Copy Presentation Transcript

  • 1.
    • PFRA
    • Unit 11 Europoint
    • 5-11 Lavington Street
    • London
    • SE1 0NZ
    • July 2009
    • Dear PFRA member,
    • Thank you for your interest in the PFRA Attrition Survey 2009, the second year we have conducted this analysis. We are happy to supply you with a copy of the presentation made at the Institute of Fundraising Convention in London on 6th July. However, we would like to make it clear that this presentation includes only the initial analysis of the data and needs to be read bearing the following points in mind:
      • The presentation analysed the responses of 20 PFRA member charities (out of a total membership of 93) who responded to the survey sent to the whole membership.
      • 2. The particular questions asked in the survey required charities to report the number of donors who had made 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc payments.
  • 2.
      • 3. In the interests of consistency, donors who did not make their 1st payment (often known as “no-shows”) have not been included in the calculations, since not every charity knows this information
      • Percentages in all graphs other than ‘Attrition by Charity’ have been calculated by taking the total number of payments reported by all charities and who fell into that particular criterion and calculating the percentage attrition against the total number of payers at 1st month.
        • Cumulative attrition figures for the first year, therefore, should be read at Month 11, since this point represents all donors that cancelled after having made eleven payments; therefore all remaining donors at this point DID go on to make a full 12 payments.
    • This preliminary analysis will be followed up by a full written report at the end of September.
    • In the meantime, while looking at the findings within our presentation, care must be taken not to draw specific conclusions. This is because there are many variables that are at work within the campaigns that have been reported by charities to us.
  • 3. The findings that we have reported are indicative of general trends that we have deduced from the survey results, but can only be proven by an individual charity when running a head-to-head Test internally within their organisation, ideally where only one variable is changed at any one time. We very much hope that this survey marks just the beginning of a process of qualitative research, and testing of factors that beneficially impact retention for charities. The information contained in the presentation and subsequent report are copyright to the PFRA and the authors of the presentation and report (Morag Fleming, Head of Fundraising, Quarriers and Rupert Tappin, Managing Director, Future Fundraising) and we would ask that you do not reproduce or disseminate any of this material (apart from for internal use within your own organisation) without prior permission from the PFRA. If you would like to receive a copy of the full report when published, then please contact Ian MacQuillin of the PFRA, on [email_address] , or call 020 7401 8452. Yours faithfully Mick Aldridge CEO, PFRA
  • 4. Maximising Income from Face-to-face Fundraising (Findings from PFRA Attrition Survey 2008 & 2009) Monday 6 th July 2009 (@ IoF Convention) Rupert Tappin – Future Fundraising Morag Fleming – Quarriers
  • 5. Agenda for the Session
    • Introduction
    • Recap on last year’s survey
    • Communications and Attrition
    • 2009 Survey results
    • Questions and Answers
  • 6. Why did we do the survey?
    • To provide a benchmark for charities to measure their performance against
    • To demonstrate the efficacy of the medium
    • To dispel some of the myths around Face-to-face fundraising
  • 7. Why measure attrition?
    • Measure of success of the campaign
    • Trends and information to guide future campaigns
    • Return on investment
    • Future strategic planning – short and long term
    • Understanding why attrition occurs
  • 8. How did we measure attrition?
    • No show rate – non payers excluded from figs.
      • Street = ’06: 17%; ’07: 15%; ’08: 20%
      • Door = ’06: 18%; ’07: 21%; ’08: 23%
    • Attrition rate – measuring donors who have failed after making 1 st , 2 nd , 3 rd etc payments
    • % measurement against number of donors who made 1 st payment
  • 9. 2008 Survey Key Findings
    • 2004 vs. 2006 (weighted averages):
      • attrition slightly improved on street:
      • 50% Yr 1 to 49.6% Yr 1
      • significantly improved on door:
      • 50% Yr 1 to 41% Yr1
    • Brand awareness does not significantly impact on attrition
    • Region, level of ask and cause all do have an impact on attrition
  • 10. Communications and attrition
    • Additional research conducted by Professor Adrian Sargeant
    • Analysing the interaction between the communication methods and the level of attrition
    • Modelling the effect of each communication variable to determine the relative significance on attrition
  • 11. Communication Myth No 1
    • “ Welcome calls can cause a donor to cancel their direct debit”
  • 12. Question Time Round 1!
    • Show of hands: do welcome calls
      • (a) make attrition worse
      • (b) have no effect on attrition
      • (c) improve attrition ?
  • 13. Our survey found . . .
    • Welcome calls reduce attrition in the first three months of a donor relationship
  • 14. Communication Myth No 2
    • “ If we communicate with our donors they will cancel their direct debit”
  • 15. Our survey found . . .
    • Donors who receive more communications in a given year tend to be more loyal than those that are communicated with less frequently
  • 16. Communication Frequency
    • Average number of communications was 3 per year
    • Maximum number was 8
    • Increasing communications may increase loyalty but at a higher cost
  • 17. Communication myth No 3
    • “ If we include these donors in our appeals and ask them for more money they will cancel their direct debit”
  • 18. Our survey found . . .
    • There was no evidence that including appeals increased attrition..
    • . . . . however
  • 19. Customising Communications
    • Donors receiving customised newsletters with appeals showed a higher level of loyalty than those who did not
    • It is clear from the results that customising at least one aspect of communications will impact positively on attrition
  • 20. Communication myth No 4
    • “ Calling donors to upgrade them reminds them of their direct debit and they cancel”
  • 21. Question Time Round 2!
    • Show of hands: when should you attempt to upgrade your donors?
      • (a) never, it’ll prompt donors to cancel
      • (b) between 1-2 years
      • (c) after 2 years
      • (d) other
  • 22. Our survey found . . .
    • An upgrade significantly reduces donor attrition
    • Upgrading 7- 12 months after recruitment is optimal strategy
  • 23. Upgrade Calls
    • Effects of upgrade calls are small but highly significant
    • No benefit in waiting beyond 7 – 12 months
    • There are more donors at this point therefore more benefit to upgrading
  • 24. 2009 PFRA Attrition Survey
    • How valid are the results?
        • 20 responses
        • 22% of PFRA active membership
        • 60 campaigns reported (26 Street & 34 Door)
    • Data reported on over 258,000 donors:
        • 78,000 Street donors
        • 180,000 Door donors
    • £27 million ‘pledged’ income in Year 1 alone
    • 100% of all campaigns reported usable
  • 25. 2009 PFRA Attrition Survey
    • How was data actually measured?
      • Campaign lifetime, grouped by actual number of payments made per month
      • Length of individual campaigns vary:
        • 2006: charities supplied typically 30 months data
        • 2007: charities supplied typically 18 months data
        • 2008: charities supplied typically 6 months data
  • 26. 2009 Survey
    • All charities anonomised & allocated a number
    • Figures used up to the month that the majority of donors would have made payment using date that last 1st payment made was made
    • Weighted averages used – only charities that have donors in that particular payment included in the result
  • 27. Average Attrition
    • What do you think has happened to attrition over the past 12 months?
  • 28.  
  • 29.  
  • 30.  
  • 31.  
  • 32. Key Findings
    • Street
    • Average attrition at year 1 for 2007 – 49.4% compared to 49.6% for 2006
    • 2008 attrition at 4 months 32.2% compared to 27.4% in 2007 and 26.7% in 2006
      • Estimating Yr 1 attrition to be 55-57% for 2008
  • 33.  
  • 34.  
  • 35.  
  • 36. Key Findings
    • Door
    • Average attrition at Year 1 for 2007 – 47.2% compared to 41% for 2006
    • 2008 attrition at 4 months 27.3% compared to 27% in 2007 and 19.5% in 2006
      • Estimating year 1 attrition to be 47% for 2008
  • 37.  
  • 38.  
  • 39. Street Trends
    • All charities attrition follows similar curve with 2006 lower than 2007 and 2008
    • Majority of charities have attrition between 53 – 66% at Yr 1
    • 3 charities have much lower Yr 1 attrition between 22 – 35%
  • 40.  
  • 41.  
  • 42. Door trends
    • Again all charities have a similar curve with 2007 clearly higher than 2006. 2008 mainly higher again.
    • Majority of charities have Yr 1 attrition of between 40 and 60%
    • 3 charities again maintain attrition between 15 and 22%
  • 43. Average Gift – significant effect on campaigns in 2008 survey, albeit inconsistent What is its impact in the 2009 attrition survey?
  • 44. Actual Average Gifts (Weighted)
    • Actual weighted averages (incl. GA):
      • Street: ‘06 = £9.28; ’ 07 = £10.30; ‘08 = £10.09
      • Door: ‘06 = £8.15; ’ 07 = £8.37; ‘08 = £8.18
    • Av. gifts rose ‘06-’07, reduced ‘07-’08, but trend still up
      • ? +ve reflection on making DDs affordable in recession
    • Street improvement in av. gift of 9% (‘06-’08)
    • Door improvement in av. gift of 0.5% (‘06-’08)
  • 45.  
  • 46. Attrition by Av. Gift - Street Trends
    • Best attrition shown by lowest (under £6.48) and highest (above £10.50) average gift
    • Worst attrition shown by 2 nd highest av. Gift range (£8.50 - £10.49)
    • Increasingly pronounced difference in av. gift bands from 2006 – 2007 – 2008
  • 47.  
  • 48. Attrition by Av. Gift - Door Trends
    • Best attrition again shown by lowest (under £6.48) average gift band [no highest (above £10.50) band]
    • Unlike street, worst attrition shown by 2 nd lowest av. Gift band (£6.49 - £8.49)
    • Highest two av. gift bands absent from any 2008 campaign reported (?recession)
  • 49. What Can We Read Into This?
    • Cannot say simply that lower average gift yields better attrition (look at highest band!) – too many other variables
    • Ask instead: what is it that these lower attrition campaigns might have in common?
    • Perhaps: membership or sponsorship campaigns, linked by frequent, totally customised & personalised communication
  • 50. Putting the Survey Findings Into Context
    • In 2004, to raise £75,000 from 1,000 donors:
      • it would have taken 3 years (av. Street & Door)
    • Street performance, time taken reduced to:
      • ’ 06: 11.5 months
      • ’ 07: 10 months
      • ’ 08: 11.5 months (est.)
    • Door performance, time taken reduced to:
      • ’ 06: 12 months
      • ’ 07: 13 months
      • ’ 08: 13.5 months (est.)
  • 51.  
  • 52. Attrition Survey Conclusions
    • Attrition has increased from ‘06 to ‘08, but ‘only’ by around 12%, and still better than ’04 (door only)
      • Recession large part to play, we must respond & adapt
    • Increase can be more than offset by implementing combination of donor comms best practice, which have a cumulative positive effect:
      • Communicate with donors frequently
      • Ensure personalised & customised communication
      • Welcome call quickly, soon after sign up
      • Upgrade call within 7-12 monthly payments
  • 53. Attrition Survey Conclusions
    • Effective, meaningful partnership approach between charities and agencies essential way forward
      • Relative attrition levels yielded in first three months tend to follow through for remaining three years
    • Acquisition and retention go hand in hand – both must be planned into a campaign during set-up
      • the latter must not be an afterthought of the former
    • Still raising money 2 times faster in ’08 than in ’04
      • 2-3 yrs to raise £75k in ’04, 1-1.5yrs (est.) in ‘08
  • 54.
    • Thank you to all survey participants & PFRA
      • UK at forefront of attrition management
    • Academic paper being published in International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing (2009)
    • Report of this year’s survey will be distributed to all PFRA members in September
      • – (others can e-mail Mick, ceo@pfra.org.uk)
    • If you’d like this presentation emailed to you...
      • … please post your business card in box at front
    Wrap-up & Questions
  • 55. Morag Fleming, Head of Fundraising, Quarriers, morag.fleming@quarriers.org.uk, 01505 616032 Rupert Tappin, MD, Future Fundraising, rupertt@futurefundraising.co.uk, 0845 644 8026 Wrap-up & Questions