• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Jump Online Fundraising - Seminar
 

Jump Online Fundraising - Seminar

on

  • 387 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
387
Views on SlideShare
387
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

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
  • (64% of US adults qualifiedAbout 148 million donors)Pie Chart size represents size of ADULT population for that Generation(Animated- Matures First) Matures have the highest percentage of donors. Highest yearly average donation, and, the highest aggregate projected donation. But, they are our smallest population and have one of the smallest actual number of donors by Generation . Plus, by virtue of their age, their lifetime potential is dwindling. Boomers average yearly donation is smaller than matures, but have a high percentage of donors, and given their population size, actually generate more in dollars than any other generation. Our Gen Xers, the next largest population actually generate more than Matures, due to donor population size. Their average annual contribution is lower vs. older groups, but still impressive. Plus, their lifetime potential is much greater. Gen Y is more about future potential, with over half currently donating, posting annual contributions averaging about $340, generating over $28 B a year. Another trend we see is that younger generations give give to fewer charities, but when they give, they give similar amounts as older donorsSpend a lot of time focused and soliciting these groups (point to Matures), But the vast majority of the donor universe are Boomers, Gen Y and X – represent huge opportunity in terms of sheer numbers, and will only get more valuable (from a dollar perspective) over timeHence as a fundraiser, if you have the ability to attract them, they can be economic in current terms, and of course constitute higher potential life time value, plus contribute to outreach due to their social networks/ peer influence.Hence as a fundraiser, if you have the ability to attract them, they can be economic in current terms, and of course constitute higher potential life time value, plus contribute to outreach due to their social networks/ peer influence.Question wording:Q4. Approximately how many nonprofit organizations and charitable causes have you donated to in the past 12 months? Q6. Approximately how much do you give in total each year to all charitable or cause-oriented organizations, excluding your school and place of worship? Blue numbering in the table on the right indicates significance at the 95% confidence level
  • While pluralities to majorities of each age cohort plan to maintain their current level of giving to their top charity A higher proportion of younger donors plan to increase their donations to their top charity next year Older you get, more likely to maintain the status quoQ21: Are you likely to: Increase your donation next year, decrease your donation next year, continue giving the same amount next year.
  • Time to Give BackJust starting out, don’t have a lot time or money to giveAt point in life where would like to increase my $/time commitment to charityWhat’s In It For Me?Like promotional give-awaysLike to support through social events. (i.e. parties, runs, etc)Online ConnectionPromote through social networks Visit a website prior to supporting
  • Random, Peer Motivated SupportMost of the charitable giving is random (who asks, emotions)More likely to support a charity when friends/family ask vs. the charity Time vs. MoneyVolunteering is a priority for me Can make more of a difference volunteering my time What’s In It For Me?Like promotional give-awaysLike to support through social events. (i.e. parties, runs, etc)Online ConnectionPromote through social networks Visit a website prior to supporting
  • Random, Peer Motivated SupportMost of the charitable giving is random (who asks, emotions)More likely to support a charity when friends/family ask vs. the charity Time vs. MoneyVolunteering is a priority for me Can make more of a difference volunteering my time What’s In It For Me?Like promotional give-awaysLike to support through social events. (i.e. parties, runs, etc)Online ConnectionPromote through social networks Visit a website prior to supporting
  • Random, Peer Motivated SupportMost of the charitable giving is random (who asks, emotions)More likely to support a charity when friends/family ask vs. the charity Time vs. MoneyVolunteering is a priority for me Can make more of a difference volunteering my time What’s In It For Me?Like promotional give-awaysLike to support through social events. (i.e. parties, runs, etc)Online ConnectionPromote through social networks Visit a website prior to supporting
  • Lot of information on this chart. Two most common ways to “give back” are what I know some of you refer to as “tipping” – leaving a buck for charity here or there at the supermarket, etc; and of course check by mail. But what I really want to focus on is some of the generational differences. Gen Y most likely to give in small ways -- $1 at checkout type of gift. No one prevalent channel beyond that -- as likely to give via website as check, same numbers at gift shop, event, etc. More than 1-in-10 say they have participated in mobile philanthropy. Giving thru SM more prevalent than other generations, but still small. Gen X true multi-channel givers -- more likely to give through many of these channels than other generations. Most likely to make online donations (though still a little less than good old check). Both X and Y more likely to participate in something like Gap Red campaign where part of the proceeds fr third party vendor purchase goes to charity. In focus groups we heard that this is a way that they can easily and affordably be charitable. Win-win (i.e. Gap – “I shop there anyway, and it’s a way to feel good”). X using monthly debit more than other cohorts. –NOT REALLY -- THE DIFFERENCE IS WITHIN THE MOE Matures (and Boomers) most likely to mail in a check. A third of Matures have made tribute gifts. More have given via phone solicitation than other generations (though still just a quarter).Q7: Which of the following giving methods have you used in the past 2 years (select all that apply).Bold numbering in the table on the right indicates significance at the 95% confidence level
  • Direct donation most prevalent, but more likely to be first form of support as age Y (followed by X) more likely to check out the charity’s website as a way to get involved. Also more likely to attend an event and volunteer. Finally, Y most likely to promote charity to others through email, FB, etc. Suggests that younger groups need to go through one or more cultivation steps to build a relationship that can lead to a financial transactionQ12: When you first learned of [Top Charity], in what ways did you become involved with the charity/group? Blue numbering indicates significance at the 95% confidence level
  • Fundraising is profoundly multichannel
  • Message/channel integration is a more urgent priority than ever.
  • Social media can seem overwhelming. Don’t worry, focus on 1 or 2 key sites to start. Most orgs that would be more than sufficient.
  • Source: Next generation of Canadian givingHeavy internet users, eager to stay connectedTrendsetters and early adoptersWillingness to try new networks but have preferencesMost willing to connect, promote, and donate to your charity via social mediaMost active group on Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, Flickr, Delicious, Google Buzz, YouTube, MySpace, Digg
  • 18.5 Million Canadians on Facebook. (source: socialbakers.com) 70% of online population
  • On average sharing your site with a comment is typically worth over 100 likes on an organization’s own Facebook page. This is because an organization is only talking to the people who like them and relying on comments or shares to reach new audiences, where as an individual is sharing directly with their audience, which averages 130 people.
  • Tools also available to schedule all your posts in advance. Removes some of the work, but must remember to actively monitor!
  • None of this is as important as the content you produce

Jump Online Fundraising - Seminar Jump Online Fundraising - Seminar Presentation Transcript

  • ONLINE FUNDRAISING…AND AN INTRO TO THE JUMP PROGRAM
  • Why Jump?11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 2
  • Why hjc? • 20 Years Experience in Online Fundraising and Integration • President, Michael Johnston one of the first online fundraisers • Working with some of the world‟s biggest and most demanding org’s • Constantly pushing the nonprofit sector online – new innovation, tools, concepts, techniques • Created the first ever multi- lingual/multi-currency social network fundraising campaign11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 3
  • BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONLINEThe basics, improving stewardship
  • Dressing for success  Make your organization easy to find  Make your website and all forms user-friendly  Go to where your constituents are on the web  Make your communications engaging and relevant  Vary the call to action  Integrate across all organizational activities and channels  Target your ask – segmentation and tracking are key  Custom landing pages and donation forms  Engage new supporters immediately  Make it viral – give supporters the space to have their own conversations and tap into their own networks  Continuous, dedicated investment to the channel11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 5
  • The Basics: Homepage Prominent, strong ask buttonEmail captureopportunity Offer different opportunities to give from the The homepage homepage – tribute belongs to the entire / monthly, etc. organization yet everything is clean, clear and visible 11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 6
  • The Basics: Giving Forms uses images affirmative statement different forms for different types of givingmonthly givingask is prominent 11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 7
  • Donate options clear from the home page11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 8
  • What makes a good homepage? • Donate button • Focused call to action • Clean, visually appealing, on brand • Easy to navigate, user friendly • Contact info • Readable font, ability to increase font • Up to date info • Mission statement, org history • Explaining updates to site • Photo/copy balance • “search” option/site map • No Flash on main page11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 9
  • The Basics: Email Signature11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 10
  • Start at the beginning - Email collection • Consistent collection through the website, online registrations, awareness & education outreach, donations, etc. should continue • organizational consensus on accepted practices/business rules will drive how people opt-in – Some organizations will use a separate opt-in for various channels – phone, email, mail – Best practice would be to set the rules for general contact – If there is a phone support option for events then offer a separate opt-in for this11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 11
  • E-newsletter sign-up on the website Welcome User Visits Email / First Website e-news Confirmation Email / Enters email Additional address fields Thank You / Notification page11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 12
  • Why an eNewsletter? • Helps grow the email list • Key and inexpensive means to communicate with your supporters • Provides a degree of interactivity for the user • Gives up to date and constant information to supporters who want to learn more about the organization • Share success stories and allow people to learn how fundraising dollars are spent • Stewards supporters in preparation of a fundraising ask – makes supporters feel comfortable with emails from your organization11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 13
  • Email acquisition from the homepageSubscribe to our newsletter Stay informed Participate Act 1. “Like 3 million internet users worldwide, you‟ll receive free news and calls to action from Greenpeace several times a month.” 2. “Click here to close this window and visit the Greenpeace France website without subscribing. You can subscribe anytime by clicking the „Subscribe‟ heading in the navigation.” 11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 14
  • • Inclusive across the entire organization • Interactive elements • Clearly defined areas for information, events, news stories11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 15
  • “If you want to have high performing web pages make sure that: 1. You have a clear understanding of what the purpose of that page is. 2. You have a clear understanding of what drove visitors to the page and what they wanted to accomplish.” - Source: Avinash Kaushik, 4Q creator and analytics evangelist for Google11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 16
  • A few more of hjc’s content tips • Create a seamless giving experience for a visitor to the website – Use inspirational and explicit outcome statements throughout the website • Connect stories with a call to action – Integrate within website stories – patients, donors, recipients, etc. – Include a call to action near the beginning of a story – Explain the problem and the solution within the 1st couple of paragraphs – By integrating call to actions within a story, the reason for donating will sound more authentic and seamless throughout the website11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 17
  • What does this mean for you? • Users will not read your content thoroughly – Sure, some will read more than others, most will scan • The 1st two paragraphs need to state the most important information • Use standout words as subheadings and within paragraphs to catch the user scanning down the left had side11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 18
  • • If it is too complicated, cumbersome, intimidating or ugly no one will use it. • If it is too bubbly, cute, fun, flashy or impractical no one will trust it. • Think about your experiences buying, registering and donating online. – What do you like ? – What do you dislike?11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 19
  • Mike Johnston • Present – President, Founder, Senior Consultant at hjc • Past – 25 years in fundraising – Written 4 books in AFP Fund Development Series – Fundraised in over 40 countries – Chair of only global charitable online lottery – Founding board member and Education Chair of the E-philanthropy Foundation – Written over 60 industry articles and research papers11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 20
  • E-PHILANTHROPY: SOME CONTEXT
  • Online Fundraising – The Numbers  Online Giving in the US alone surpasses $15 Billion in 2009 and globally surpasses $30 Billion!  Source: Ted Hart / Harvard University Initiative on Social Enterprise  Up from $10 Million in the US in 1999  Online giving accounted for just over 5% of total giving to charities in the US during 2008 steadily growing year after year  16% of new donors and 27% of new revenue came from online sources in 200811/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 22
  • Why Online Matters Which channel do you think will be most important to your annual/regular giving program in 10 years? 4% 7% 14% Online Events Face-to-face Direct Mail Phone 14% 61%11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 23
  • Who is the Online Donor? • Online donors are younger and have higher incomes than traditional direct mail donors. • recent donorCentrics study found that 11% of online donors were under 35 compared to only 3% of offline donors in that that age group.11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 24
  • The Online Donor • 34% of online donors earned over $100,000 annually versus only 24% of offline donors in the same income range. • Target Analytics found that 37% of the donors acquired online in 2006 who gave in both 2007 and 2008 never gave online again in either of their subsequent years of giving after their acquisition year • Acquire Online, but renew with Phone or Mail. INTEGRATE!!11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 25
  • Charities Today Must … • • • •11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 26
  • E-PHILANTHROPY: WHERE DOES ONLINE FIT IN?11/12/2012
  • • • • • •11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 28
  • How online integrates FUND DEVELOPMENT11/12/2012 Online Fundraising - Jump Seminar 29
  • Generational Giving 79% Give 30.8M donors $1066 yr/avg 6.3 charities 67% Give $32.7 B/yr 52.2M donorsTotal annual giving $901 yr/avg 5.2 charities $47.1 B/yr 58% Give 35.9M donors $796 yr/avg 4.2 charities $35.9 B/yr 56% Give 28.5M donors $341 yr/avg 3.6 charities $9.7B/yr % Giving © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Future GivingDonations plans to top charity next year © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • More on Gen Y Defining Values Social Media Habits (% doing regularly) Time to give back What’s in it for me? Online connection Value 70% 49% 25% 16% • Size • Lifetime value Mobile Habits • Lower cost appeals 49% Mobile ONLY phone • Active supporters/promoters 32% Mobile primary BUT 42% Facebook Mobile app • Require multichannel appeals • Tracking difficult 53% Texters © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • More on Gen X Defining Values Peer-motivated Social Media Habits (% doing regularly) Support random, emotional Time vs. money Online connection Value 56% 30% 13% 11% 11% • Size of gifts to top charities • Lifetime value Mobile Habits • Lower-cost appeals 28% Mobile ONLY phone • More than dollars 37% Mobile is primary • Viral promoters 27% Facebook mobile app • Most Educated, Higher Income 40% Texters BUT • Harder to secure © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • More on Boomers Defining Values Giving more planned Tech/Media Profile Efficiency/overhead concerns 29% Facebook (reg) 2-in-10 retired (60% Total) Value 17% Texters • Largest cohort 47% E-newsletters • Size and dollars 55% Bank online • Income 33% Shop online © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • More on Matures Defining Values Pre-meditated giving Loyal But guarded Tech/Media Profile Scrutiny 17% Facebook (reg) Value (50% Total) • Largest annual contributions 5% Texters • Greater # of groups 48% E-newsletters • Tracking/Direct mail responsive 57% Bank online BUT 34% Shop online • Smallest cohort and shrinking • Less open to new appeals © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Giving Channels% donated this way in last 2 years (total) GEN Y GEN X BOOMERS MATURES 48% 57% 52% 48% 26% 43% 54% 77% 28% 35% 32% 30% 29% 35% 31% 25% 22% 28% 28% 31% 22% 22% 27% 35% 25% 27% 17% 12% 8% 10% 16% 25% 11% 17% 14% 11% Emerging Channel 14% 13% 4% 2% 9% 6% 4% 2% © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • First Engagement Direct donation 42% Attended event 19% Visited website 27% Promoted to others 15% Gen Y Donated goods 23% Volunteered 15% Direct donation 51% Attended event 18% Donated good 28% Volunteered 16% Gen X Visited website 19% Direct donation 61% Donated goods 25% Boomers Attended an event 13% Direct donation 71% Donated goods 26% Matures Attended an event 13% © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Fundraising is profoundlymultichannel © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Remove the silos within your organization© 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Direct mail andtelemarketingneed to evolve © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Cross Channel Acquisition: New York Public Library• One segment of advocates we’re mailed before the end of the year to ask for a gift supporting essential services at the Library. – 3.24% direct mail response rate – $59 direct mail average gift – Average response on prospecting packages 0.30% © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Channel integration makes money...An email was sent alongwith some of the directmail packagesAverage gift• DM only = $49• DM and email = $105 © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Social media is #1 onlineactivity Source: comScore Media Metrix, March 2007 - October 2011
  • Popular across generations… GEN Y BOOMERS •Trendsetters •Frequent •Early Adopters internet users •Willingness to try •Less likely to upload new social networks Videos or listen to podcasts GEN X CIVICS •Similar to Gen Y but •More passive on not as quick to adopt social media •More ‘regular’ users •50% using Facebook of LinkedIn and YouTube 45
  • WALK FOR KIDS HELP PHONE10 Quick Wins to Implement
  • 4 steps for social media success1. Make sharing easy2. Empower your supporters3. Communicate regularly4. Measure, refine, repeat 47
  • 1. Make sharing easy• Add sharing buttons to your website, emails, all collateral so people know where you are 48
  • 2. Empower your supporters• Give them clear direction on how they can help• Give them tools to help raise awareness/money/goodwill/loyalty through social channels 49
  • 3. Communicate regularly• Social media has got to be “all in” • Keep the “social” in social media, can’t just push your organization’s content, need to engage in a dialogue • Reserve time to monitor your social media channels on a regular basis • Respond to comments or questions made by your followers on your posts • Ask logical, relevant questions of your followers in posts • Repost/retweet interesting relevant posts from others engaging with you on social media • Keep your social media activities going year-round 50
  • 3. Communicate regularlyA schedule can really help with your communications strategy
  • 4. Measure, refine, repeat• Shocking how many orgs go through the trouble of a social media strategy with no plans to track its success• Track everything you can to the best of your ability – Messaging: polls, photos, positive/negative sentiment – Social cues: likes, shares, retweets – Fundraising: donations, registrations – Website: pages/visit, time on site, bounce rate 52
  • Social media summary• Your constituents are on (multiple) social media networks, are you?• 4 steps to social media success 1. Make sharing easy 2. Empower your supporters 3. Communicate regularly 4. Measure, refine, repeat 53
  • Use the wholedonor pyramid © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Online will be increasingly important for major gifts and legacy giving © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • Case Study: SickKids• The cultivation survey: – Sent to 57,400 donors – 3 key segments: Monthly, Active & Lapsed – 5,530 responses (response rate of 11%) – Raised $17,574 – a bonus! – Reactivated 30 donors – Found 85 expectances and 292 legacy leads – 143 middle and major donor leads! – Key: shared budgeting! © 2010 Convio, Inc.
  • In the end, is it all worth it? Value/Donor $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 Offline w/ No Offline w/ Online Only Online/Offline Email Email Value/Donor $43 $54 $57 $156Multichannel donors are nearly 3x more valuable than single channel donors. Source: Defenders of Wildlife Jul08-Jun09 © 2010 Convio, Inc.