NONPROFIT CAPSTONE FINAL

Millennial Engagement With
Human Rights & Services
Nonprofits
What These Nonprofits Can Do to Connect With This
Pivotal Population into the Future
By: Arthur Rothenberg

April 23, 2014

2

Issue Definition
American Millennials are the largest generation in United States history consisting of
over 85 million people born between 1981 and 2000.1
Similar to previous generations,
Millennials advocate and give back to the causes and nonprofits that they hold close to their
hearts, but sometimes utilize different avenues for philanthropy and need to be attracted utilizing
somewhat different tactics from their parents and grandparents. While Millennial donor and
volunteer engagement is well researched today on a general level including all types of
nonprofits, it is largely unknown if Millennials prefer to be engaged similarly with human rights
and human services nonprofits in comparison to all nonprofits in general.
The purpose of this white paper is to explore specifically how human rights and human
services nonprofits in the state of Ohio, and nationally, can effectively engage current and
potential Millennial donors and volunteers. This paper analyzes survey data of Millennial donor
and volunteer behavior with AIDS Resource Center Ohio (from the 2013 Dr. Robert J. Fass
Memorial AIDS Walk Central Ohio Event Survey) and interview data from three fundraising
expert interviews. The fundraising experts currently work at the human rights and services
organizations: AIDS Resource Center Ohio (ARC Ohio), Human Rights Campaign (HRC), and
Human Rights First (HRF). Overall, this white paper strives to exhibit what motivates
Millennials to volunteer and donate for human rights and services causes.
According to the 2013 Millennial Impact Report, over 82% of Millennials made a
financial gift to a nonprofit in 2012 and stated that passion and inspiration about the cause was
the most important reason for nonprofit participation.2
This data signifies that Millennials are
valuable to the current and future success of nonprofits. This white paper will aid human rights
and services nonprofits to be able to analyze their current and future success– learning more
about Millennial donors and volunteers and how to keep them for the long haul as they
increasingly gain money, power, and influence in the future. However, the target population for
this paper is not just for people associated with human rights and services nonprofits. This paper
also targets Millennials themselves. These target populations are the focus of this paper because
Millennials will be increasing their impact on nonprofits and many of them deeply care about
progressing human rights according to the Pew Research Center.3
Ultimately, after assessing the data, it is recommended that human rights and services
nonprofits engage Millennials by utilizing both social and traditional media effectively, using
many options for charitable giving, providing for special events catering to Millennial interests,
and by gathering data on Millennial behavior and interests.
Issue Context
How human rights and human services nonprofits in the state of Ohio and nationally can
effectively engage current and potential Millennial donors and volunteers is an issue that has
previously not been explored. However, by breaking down this issue into four related topics, it
becomes clear that there is plenty of helpful research on this issue. The four areas of this issue to
be reviewed include defining human rights and human services nonprofits (and defining
Millennials themselves), exploring nonprofit donor and volunteer engagement with technology
(and showing the controversies and disagreements with current trends), discussing how
nonprofits can best engage Millennials according to up to date research, and reviewing a relevant

3

nonprofit social media engagement example.
DEFINING HUMAN RIGHTS AND SERVICES NONPROFITS AND DEFINING
MILLENNIALS
Human rights and human services nonprofits are defined throughout this paper as 501(c)3
and 501(c)4 nongovernmental organizations striving to protect human rights, expand civil
liberties, end human rights abuses, improve human mental and physical well-being, and provide
essential individual, group, and community human services.4
These nonprofits generally follow
bottom-up (grassroots) or top-down approach to progressing human rights and services.
Examples of organizations that use a bottom-up approach include Amnesty International,
Planned Parenthood, The Daughter Project, and Freedom to Marry Ohio. Organizations that take
a top-down approach include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Southern Poverty
Law Center, National Immigration Project, and Naral Pro-Choice Ohio.
The Millennial generation is now the largest generation in the United States currently
consisting of over 85 million Americans. Currently, there is significant public debate on the start
and end birth dates of this generation’s age range. Some claim that the first Millennials were
born as early as 1977, while others claim that the youngest Millennials were born as late as 2004.
However, that age range is too large for this white paper. Most generations tend to be about 15-
20 years each according to Catalyst. Therefore for the purposes of this white paper, Millennials
are defined as people who were born between 1981 and 2000 (roughly between the ages of 14
and 33 today).
Additionally, it is important to describe some defining characteristics of Millennials to
provide for a more complete perspective to understanding how human rights and services
nonprofits can and do engage Millennials. Older Millennials are in their earlier years working in
the labor force, while younger Millennials are still completing their formal education in high
school. Collectively, Millennials are less wealthy currently in comparison to older generations
such as Generation X and Baby Boomers. According to previous research, Millennials are
known for being optimistic and goal oriented, enjoying collaboration and multitasking in and out
of the workplace, embracing current and new technology, and highly valuing meaningful work.5
Because Millennials strongly appreciate valuable work, they readily seek to participate with
nonprofits that align with their values.6
EXPLORING NONPROFIT DONOR AND VOLUNTEER ENGAGEMENT WITH
TECHNOLOGY
Existing studies show that there are many ways for nonprofits to retain current donors
and volunteers and to recruit new donors and volunteers. However, much of this is not without
controversy and disagreement from marketing and fundraising experts.
Alex Semien, a fundraising and volunteer outreach expert from The Nonprofit
Fundraising Journal, provided expert opinion by highlighting three different strategies that all
nonprofits should utilize when trying to engage new donors and volunteers. First, marketing
experts have stated that “word of mouth” is the most cited answer when people were quizzed
(from focus groups) when they hear about a new product, service, special event, website, or
organization. Essentially, gaining followers for your organization can come from the friends,
family, coworkers, and other ties of those new followers. The second strategy is to create an
engaging website highlighting the primary importance of promoting public engagement and
soliciting donors and volunteers. This is done by properly showing the character and personality

4

of the nonprofit, highlighting specific results of the nonprofit, and promoting accomplishments
of the nonprofit using plenty of photos. The third strategy is that nonprofits should hold a joint
event with another organization comparable their own organization. This allows for new donors
and volunteers to enter the fold because there will be people at the event who like the values of
your nonprofit but might not have been exposed to your nonprofit before the event occurs.7
In addition, there was an academic article written by David Suarez, an associate professor
from the University of Washington and prominent nonprofit researcher, that focused on civic
engagement on the internet, which expanded upon the technology information previously
discussed from the Nonprofit Fundraising Journal. It had two notable findings. The first was that
human rights groups, environmental organizations, and policy entrepreneurs all consistently
mentioned advocacy and promote civic engagement on their websites. However, the second
finding of this study was that organization funding structures and resource dependence
differences had no visible effects on the nonprofits use of their own websites for engagement.
Nevertheless, this study is important because it showed that it does not matter how much funding
an organization has in order for their website and social media to engage donors and volunteers
effectively.8
HOW NONPROFITS CAN ENGAGE MILLENNIALS
It is important to remember that while Millennials currently do not have strong spending
power, nonprofits cannot financially afford to ignore them. Although Millennials have less
spending power because they are new arrivals to the workforce, they will obtain more money as
they advance their careers and obtain their inheritances. More specifically, Millennials currently
boast $62 million in discretionary spending power and are expected to inherit $42 trillion in
wealth from their parents and grandparents.9
The book on nonprofit Millennial engagement, Cause for Change, highlights not only
why engaging Millennials must be a priority for nonprofits but also how they can engage
Millennials effectively. The nonprofit strategists who have ample experience studying Millennial
engagement, Kari Saratovsky, Derrick Feldmann, and Jean Case propose a "Millennial
Engagement Platform" that consists of four "operational and cultural components." Those four
components include leadership inviting (for example: engaging and empowering Millennials to
connect with the nonprofit's decision makers), transparency, social connectivity, and a solution-
inspired environment. Overall, the authors found that these components were the most effective
ways to engage Millennials over the long term after years of researching and consulting with
many types nonprofits of various sizes.10
Case has ample experience working on other nonprofit studies as well. She worked on
The 2013 Millennial Impact Report, which was taken from survey responses from 2,665
Millennials throughout the United States. The report emphasizes how nonprofits can best engage
Millennial donors and volunteers. The report discussed five important trends stemming directly
from the survey responses that nonprofits must facilitate to effectively create optimal Millennial
engagement: Millennials prefer to connect via technology (donating online and using email and
social media to communicate), Millennials share in micro ways (they like nonprofits that allow
them to make immediate and impulsive decisions such as a small donation to run a 5K benefit
race), Millennials facilitate and rely on peer influence, Millennials volunteer along a continuum
of support, Millennials give in order to have an impact.11

5

After examining the comprehensive
data from both the 2013 Millennial Impact
Report and Cause for Change, it becomes
clear that nonprofits should focus on a handful
different aspects to engage Millennials.
Nonprofits should spend time and resources
maximizing effective Millennial engagement
by focusing on improving technological
communications, allowing for open
interactions with the public, and permitting
convenient charitable giving.
In addition, nonprofits must focus on long-term volunteer support: having supportive
activism, establishing and supporting a young nonprofit professional group, and prioritizing
ongoing leadership. Ultimately, Millennials gravitate towards organized, successful leaders that
allow them to develop strong professional and personal relationships. Also, the comprehensive
data indicates that Millennials greatly prefer nonprofit transparency and when nonprofits foster
significant peer-to-peer engagement. Millennials like to have someone that they can relate to
who is associated to the nonprofit. In
particular, they prefer to have the ability to
interact with someone who is around their age.
Furthermore, Millennials express
defined charitable giving behaviors. They
have been shown to give more money (and
donate more often) when they feel inspired by
the organization and when they have an easily
accessible monthly charitable giving option.
52% of Millennial respondents from the 2013
Millennial Impact Report stated they would be
interested in a monthly giving option even if
they cannot currently do it within their current budget level or with their favorite nonprofit.
Finally, as emphasized multiple times throughout the 2013 Millennial Impact Report and
Cause for Change, Millennials support causes that they are passionate about over institutions or
organizations themselves. The research shows that while Millennials do care about the nonprofits
themselves, they care even more about the work they do and the causes that they stand for.12
NONPROFIT SOCIAL MEDIA ENGAGEMENT EXAMPLE
One particular campaign that inspired Millennials across the United States was the
Human Rights Campaign’s social media viral blitz in support of LGBT marriage equality in the
United States. On March 25, 2013 to mark the beginning of the Supreme Court oral arguments
on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, in which both laws barred gay marriage, the
Human Rights Campaign (HRC) launched a campaign through social media that ignited a
grassroots movement through Facebook for weeks. HRC encouraged all same-sex marriage
supporters to change their profile picture to a modified version of their logo, which was a pink
equal sign with a red background. This logo especially took off with the Millennial generation,
with Facebook confirming that the majority of users who changed their profile pictures were
between the ages of 20 and 40. Overall, HRC inspired a 120% increase in Facebook profile
2013 Millennial Impact Report Highlights:
Social Media & Charitable Giving
• 60% of Millennials like when nonprofits
shared personal stories about their
projects
• 75% of Millennials “like,” “retweet,” or
share nonprofit content on social media.
• 51% of Millennials connect with a nonprofit
using social media
• 46% of Millennials donated online
•
2013 Millennial Impact Report Highlights:
Why Get Involved With a Nonprofit?
• 79% of Millennials view their passion for
the nonprofit, its mission, and its work as a
motivator for involvement
• 56% of Millennials like meeting people with
similar interests fostered by nonprofit
involvement
• 46% of Millennials like acquiring expertise
from being involved with the nonprofit

6

changes to the red equal sign logo in March and April. Additionally, the HRC social media
campaign also was a part of the most “retweeted” tweet on Twitter as of March 2013.13
Experts
declared that the social media campaign was very successful because it was unbranded.
Essentially because the movement (or passion for the cause) and the people affected by it came
before the organization, it led to individuals strongly identifying with the cause.14
While HRC did greatly increase its visibility during this social media campaign (and had
a 600% increase of web traffic overnight the first day) it was not without controversy. Some
critics of the viral social media campaign viewed this campaign as “slacktivism” because the
campaign was online and not an event, rally, or fundraiser. It simply raised awareness rather than
being rooted in a fundraising campaign. Additionally, it is impossible to determine exactly how
the 2.7 million people changing their profile picture to support marriage equality made a tangible
difference. Regardless, these countless profile pictures will remain with the public forever as the
core of a campaign that reached the hearts and minds of millions across the United States.15
SOURCE: Madison Andrews, aNewDomain16
DEFICIENCIES IN EXISTING LITERATURE AND GAPS IN UNDERSTANDING
One deficiency of existing literature is that it is largely unknown why people care about
human rights and services in particular. For example, it is not known why people will donate for
a human rights nonprofit but not for an environmental advocacy nonprofit even if they are very
passionate about both causes. The remainder of this white paper will address this gap, providing
more information about why people (and Millennials specifically) engage with human rights
organizations and their causes.
Specifically, this white paper will explore how Millennials express their passion for
human rights through volunteering and donating to human rights nonprofits. Analysis of survey
data and interviews will be used to inform the source of Millennial motivation to contribute to

7

human rights nonprofits and how human rights nonprofits can effectively harness this
motivation.
Data Analysis
ANALYSIS APPROACH
This white paper uses an analysis approach that has roots in both survey and interview
data that will inform the reader of how human rights and services nonprofit organizations engage
Millennial volunteers and donors. The analysis will show why Millennials give to human rights
and services nonprofits, how the attention of Millennials is captured, how human rights and
services nonprofits communicate with Millennials, how Millennials are engaged with special
events, and how Millennials prefer to donate.
Three different human rights and services organizations were utilized for both the survey
and interview data: AIDS Resource Center Ohio (ARC Ohio), Human Rights Campaign (HRC),
and Human Rights First (HRF). ARC Ohio was used as the sole survey data source. The survey
data consists of the results from ARC Ohio’s 2013 Dr. Robert J. Fass Memorial AIDS Walk
Central Ohio Event Survey. This post-event survey was completed online using SurveyMonkey
by donors and participants in ARC Ohio’s largest annual fundraiser, AIDS Walk Central Ohio.
AIDS Walk Central Ohio has over 1,000 participants each year and had over 1,500 participants
in the 2013 AIDS Walk. The 2013 Dr. Robert J. Fass Memorial AIDS Walk Central Ohio Event
Survey, completed in April 2013, consisted of a total sample size of 52 total survey respondents,
but only 49 of the respondents answered every survey question. The results of those 49
respondents are synthesized into the survey data analysis.
The post-event survey asked feedback questions about the 2013 AIDS Walk Central
Ohio. Five of those feedback questions pertained to engaging donors and volunteers. Those five
questions ask why participants partook in the event, how participants heard about the event, how
much the participants personally fundraised, what fundraising methods were most effective, and
how to recruit event participants most effectively.
The interview data consists of the results from three interviews from fundraising experts
from ARC Ohio, HRC, and HRF. One interviewee currently works at ARC Ohio, one currently
works at HRC, and one currently works at HRF. All three interviewees all have at least one year
of experience doing development, fundraising, and volunteer engagement with their current
organizations on a full-time basis. This expertise allowed them to make informed answers about
key constructs.
A convenience sample was used to target ARC Ohio, HRC, and HRF. Those three
nonprofits were chosen not only because they operate on the state and/or national level but also
because all they focus on different aspects of human rights and services.
The interview data is presented by highlighting common themes, similarities and
differences in expert opinion, and other notable findings. Ultimately, after the interview data is
fully analyzed, it will be determined if the survey and interview data from human rights and
services nonprofits exhibits similar results to the issue context research.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND SERVICES NONPROFITS
ANALYZED

8

Figure 1
SOURCE: AIDS Resource Center Ohio, Human Rights Campaign, and Human Rights First
SURVEY DATA
AIDS WALK SURVEY DATA: Age Range of Participants
In order to analyze the survey data from the AIDS Walk, it is important to examine the
age range of participants. In Figure 1, the age range is exhibited in order to demonstrate the
characteristics of the population. Since a convenience sample of participants was used, each age
group has an uneven number of respondents. The survey was optional for 2013 AIDS Walk
participants, and was taken from the results of the 49 survey respondents who completed the
survey (out the roughly 1,500 emailed potential survey respondents) For the purposes of this
white paper, the survey data was used to compare the results of the Millennial respondents with
all other respondents (which were labeled as “Non-Millennials”). 20 out of 49 survey
respondents labeled themselves as between the ages of 14 and 30 (in April 2013), which would
make those 20 respondents Millennials.
AIDS Resource
Center Ohio
•  Mission: ARC Ohio is a community-based organization that leads the fight against HIV/AIDS
through awareness, advocacy, and care
•  Person Interviewed: Emily Toney, Central Ohio Special Events Manager
•  2013 Revenue: $9.84 million
•  2013 Expenditures: $9.77 million
Human Rights
Campaign
•  Mission: HRC is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end
discriminiation against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and
equality for all.
•  Person Interviewed: Matt Aycock, Development Operations Assistant
Human Rights
First
•  Mission: HRF is an independent advocacy and action organization that challenges America to
live up to its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle for human rights
so we press the US government and private companies to respect human rights and the rule of
law. Around the world, we work where we can best harness American influence to secure core
freedoms.
•  Person Interviewed: Molly Galvin, Director of Individual Giving

9

Figure 2
SOURCE: 2013 Dr. Robert J. Fass Memorial AIDS Walk Central Ohio Event Survey, N= 49
AIDS WALK SURVEY DATA: Capturing the Attention of Millennials
Figure 3 shows that both Millennials and Non-Millennials participated in the AIDS Walk
due to personal connections to HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, over 60% of respondents participated in
the AIDS Walk because a friend or family member currently is living with HIV/AIDS. However,
while the graph indicates that Millennials are much less likely than Non-Millennials to
participate in the AIDS Walk because they currently are living with HIV/AIDS or in
remembrance of a loved one killed by AIDS, this does not mean that their personal connections
to HIV/AIDS are inconsequential. In fact, the opposite is true.
In addition, 50% of Millennials participated in the AIDS Walk to combat stigma and for
social justice and 85% of Millennials participated in the AIDS Walk in order to raise awareness.
This indicates that a sizable portion of Millennials are eager activist volunteers, which was
supported by the interview data as well.
Figure 3
0

5

10

15

20

14-‐18
19-‐20
21-‐25
26-‐30
31-‐40
41-‐50
51-‐60
61+

Amount

of

Participants

Age
(In
Years)

Age
of
AIDS
Walk
Survey
Participants

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%

Corporate
Work
Team

Combat
Stigma
&
For
Social
Justice

For
the
Exercise

To
Raise
Awareness

Remembrance
of
Loved
One
Killed
by
AIDS

I'm
Living
With
HIV/AIDS

Friend(s)
or
Family
Member(s)
Living
With
HIV/AIDS

I
Was
Asked
by
Someone
I
Know

Why
Participate
in
the
2013
AIDS
Walk?

Millennials
Non-‐Millennials

10

AIDS WALK SURVEY DATA: Communicating With Millennials
Communicating with Millennials effectively is a goal for ARC Ohio. By examining
Figure 4 below, it can be determined how certain types of communication were more effective
than others for reaching out to potential AIDS Walk participants. Millennials were significantly
less likely to hear about the AIDS Walk through email correspondence or postcards in
comparison to Non-Millennials. Nonetheless, Millennials were much more likely to hear about
the AIDS Walk from a participating AIDS organization, coworkers, or at a bar event. While the
sample size of this survey is small, it can be determined that those avenues of connecting with
Millennials need to be prioritized into the future for ARC Ohio and for other similar
organizations. Additionally, over 35% of both Millennials and Non-Millennials heard about the
event from a friend or ARC Ohio staff. This means that ARC Ohio (and similar human rights and
services organizations) would be best served to discover and enable easier ways for friends to
share information with each other and for nonprofit staff to be able to directly communicate with
individual participants more frequently.
Figure 4
AIDS WALK SURVEY DATA: Special Events Engagement
It is important to examine how Millennials are recruited for special events with ARC
Ohio. By examining how they were recruited for the 2013 AIDS Walk in Figure 5, it becomes
clear that some tactics were more effective than others. For both Millennials and Non-
Millennials, emails and social media had almost universal support for effectiveness among the
survey participants. Posters, brochures, magazine ads, bar outreach signups, and pre-walk parties
were also believed to be effective for both Millennials and Non-Millennials. However, the most
notable (and telling) result that is largely exclusive for Millennials is that they believe that bar
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%

AIDS
Walk
Postcard
Received
at
Home

Email
From
AIDS
Resource
Center
Ohio

Email
From
Friend/Family/Colleague

At
a
Bar
Event

AIDS
Resource
Center
Ohio
Staff

Coworkers/Employment

Facebook
(Or
Similar
Site)

Friend

Participating
AIDS
Service
Organization

How
Did
You
Hear
About
the
AIDS
Walk?

Millennials
Non-‐Millennials

11

events are much more effective for recruiting AIDS Walk participants in comparison with Non-
Millennials.
Figure 5
AIDS WALK SURVEY DATA: Charitable Giving of Millennials
Millennials tend to donate less than non-Millennials because they are currently less
wealthy. The results from Figure 6 from the AIDS Walk survey reflect that information. The
majority of Millennials (53%) only fundraised between $1 and $100 for the AIDS Walk.
However, there was a sizable Millennial minority (16%) that fundraised between $751-$1000.
While this is only an educated guess, it is likely that those Millennials were well connected and
able to recruit a lot of friends, family, and coworkers to donate to their team. Also, those
Millennials were probably passionate about mission of ARC Ohio. Human rights and services
nonprofits would be in optimal shape if they are able to go out of their way to directly
communicate with, thank, and reward those fundraisers. By taking extra efforts to open
communication, nonprofits could learn more about how Millennials fundraise.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

TV
Advertising

Radio
Advertising

Magazine
Ads

Posters
and
Brochures

Social
Media

Billboards

Emails

Pre-‐Walk
Parties

Bar
Outreach
Signups

Bar
Events

What
Are
Effective
Ways
for
ARC
Ohio
to

Recruit
Participants
for
the
AIDS
Walk?

Millennials
Non-‐Millennials

12

Figure 6
Unlike the varying answers exhibited in many of the previous figures, Figure 7 helps to
confirm that multiple methods are effective for producing donations for the AIDS Walk. In this
question, survey responders were limited to picking only one answer choice, keeping answers
more streamlined. While it certainly was expected that social media and email would be highly
effective for producing donations for both Millennials and Non-Millennials, there were two
findings that were somewhat unexpected. Non-Millennials were more dependent on social media
than Millennials for producing donations, and a sizable amount of Millennials and Non-
Millennials found in-person conversations to be the most effective way of producing donations.
This signifies that while social media is important for fundraising, it cannot be the be-all
end-all tactic. Traditional fundraising and relationship development in person are still extremely
important for fundraising effectively!
Figure 7
2%

12%

18%

53%

30%

17%

22%

1%

11%

1%
2%

16%
15%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Non-‐Millennials
Millennials

Percentage
of
AIDS
Walk

Participants

How
Much
Did
You
Personally

Fundraise
for
AIDS
Walk
2013?

I
Didn't
Raise
Money

$1-‐$100

$101-‐$250

$251-‐$500

$501-‐$750

$751-‐$1000

More
Than
$1000

0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%

Emails

Phone
Calls

In-‐Person
Conversations

Social
Media

I
Did
Not
Raise
Money

Which
Method
Produced
the
Most

Donations
for
Your
AIDS
Walk
Team?

Millennials

Non-‐Millennials

13

INTERVIEW DATA FROM FUNDRAISING EXPERTS
INTERVIEW DATA: Why Do Millennials Choose to Give and Participate with Human
Rights and Services Nonprofits Instead of Other Types of Nonprofits?
Millennials care about many different types of nonprofits (such as health, science,
poverty, religion, and education), but will choose to give and volunteer with human rights and
services nonprofits for a handful of particular reasons. The human rights and services fundraising
experts all agreed that people are personally invested in human rights and services in part
because they generally can connect their own experiences (or those of friends or family) with the
mission of most human rights and services organizations. Human rights and services affect all of
us since we are all human. That personal investment goes a long way with long-term engagement
and fosters passion and inspiration with the nonprofit. However, the value of personal
connections to human rights causes and organizations is not exclusive to the Millennial
population. Older generations are affected by it as well.
Nevertheless, all of the fundraising experts believe that Millennials have a stronger need
to give back and volunteer than previous generations, because giving back to those in need has
been ingrained into Millennials from a young age. The experts stressed that the need to give back
for human rights is especially valued by Millennials because multiple contentious human rights
issues (such as immigrant rights, LGBT rights, and reproductive rights) are at the forefront of the
minds of Americans today. These issues are plainly visible to Millennials thanks to increased
media exposure from the internet and social media, two ways of receiving information that
Millennials heavily utilize. All in all, Millennials use online mobilization and strong virtual
communities of like-minded people to move human rights policy forward.
INTERVIEW DATA: Capturing the Attention of Millennials
The fundraising experts all agreed that utilizing social media and online communication
effectively was vital with catching and maintaining the attention of Millennials. In addition, they
agreed that their own volunteers and interns are an excellent source of Millennials actively
engaged with their organization. They stated that those volunteers and interns not only were
astutely capable of being good volunteers, but also were capable of being dependable
ambassadors of the organization.
Matt Aycock, the fundraising expert interviewed from HRC, discussed the importance of
using social media to engage Millennials. He stressed that social media (particularly Facebook
and Twitter) is the main source of the news for many Millennials and successful nonprofits
generally capitalize on social media outreach well. He said that HRC is particularly proficient
with using social media because they use targeted messages and advertisements to Millennials
based on their online behaviors with HRC.
Similar to the 2013 Millennial Impact Report’s results, the fundraising experts believed
that “peer-to-peer involvement” is particularly effective in engaging Millennials. Emily Toney,
from ARC Ohio, stated that it is most effective to reach out to Millennials during events by
having a Millennial representing ARC Ohio in some capacity. This allows for Millennials who
might be interested in ARC Ohio to better relate to an ARC Ohio representative because they are
both from the same generation. 17
All of the experts concurred that human rights and services nonprofits must harness
Millennials’ passion for human rights and services by fostering their introspective thinking about
who they are and how they relate with the nonprofit. Also, many Millennials are targeted by

14

human rights and services nonprofits because their generation is most highly affected by the
work of the particular human rights organization. For example, ARC Ohio captures the attention
of Millennials because Millennials have the highest number of new HIV infections annually and
are at the highest risk for being infected with HIV.
Additionally, all of the fundraising experts agreed that Millennials like to feel appreciated
and connect personally with human rights and services nonprofits. The experts asserted that
Millennials highly value their passion and inspiration for the mission to be more visibly
recognized by nonprofits in comparison to previous generations. For example one of the AIDS
Walk survey participants enthusiastically exhibited exactly how important passion for the cause
can be. He exclaimed, “I participate in the AIDS Walk because the mission of ARC Ohio is
so damn real and vital to life for everyone!”
INTERVIEW DATA: Communicating with Millennials
According to the fundraising experts, Millennials largely become connected with
particular human rights and services organizations because those organizations communicate
with them effectively. The experts agreed that utilizing social media efficiently, marketing
appropriately, and providing for engaging activities and special events are important.
Nonetheless, they disagreed with the value of traditional media to connect with Millennials.
All of the fundraising experts agreed that using social media suitably is essential in order
to connect with current and potential Millennial volunteers. They stated that social media must
be integrated effectively to reflect the work of the nonprofit and grab the attention of Millennials,
especially since they use social media more than previous generations. Also, they asserted that
human rights and services nonprofits must utilize social media data to better understand the
preferences of Millennials.
Traditional media usage to communicate with Millennials was debated among the
fundraising experts. Emily Toney of ARC Ohio believes that traditional media is not an effective
way to reach Millennials and claimed that it was not cost effective, but Molly Galvin from HRF
disagrees. Galvin stressed that traditional media greatly helps Millennials search through the
“ocean of information,” essentially working to simplify an overload of news and data. However,
all of the fundraising experts believe that it is harder to target traditional media specifically to
Millennials because it tends to be much more costly than social media.
The fundraising experts also discussed the importance of marketing and special events as
a way to communicate more effectively with Millennials. With regards to marketing, Galvin
said that a human rights and services nonprofit needs to “tell more stories on what the work
really does for individual people and groups. For example, videos can help to bring your work to
life.” She also said that marketing can be a critical tool used to figure out what Millennials are
looking for, allowing their voices to be properly heard. Utilizing a similar, mission focused
approach, Toney highlighted how special events and activities can be a way of communicating
with Millennials. She said that events are a terrific way for an organization to personally
communicate with Millennials and personal communications allow for effective longer-term
feedback as well. For example, staff from ARC Ohio was able to talk with Millennials during the
AIDS Walk and obtain survey results afterwards.
INTERVIEW DATA: Special Events Engagement
As previously discussed, special events are a vital way of communicating and engaging
with Millennials. Overall, the nonprofit fundraising experts highlighted that special events are

15

more successful with increased Millennial engagement and participation when their needs and
wants are adequately addressed. Through the experts’ previous experiences working with special
events, they found that Millennials tend to prefer participating with events in which they are
clear of the purpose of the special event. Also, Millennials prefer special events in which they
can have engaging peer-to-peer social opportunities. This is extremely similar to what clarified in
the 2013 Millennial Impact Report, signifying that Millennials highly value social opportunities
for causes that they believe in.18
In addition, Aycock highlighted a specific tactic that is particularly pertinent for human
rights and services to use in order to retain Millennials after special events occur. He found that
Millennial retention and long term engagement is strongest when personalized thank you emails
and letters are sent after the event happens so Millennials are thanked for their participation and
are properly informed of the nonprofit’s current work and future events.
Finally, Emily Toney stated that the bar crawl pre-AIDS Walk event has been particularly
effective in recruiting Millennials for the AIDS Walk. Coming full circle, these results highlight
once again how Millennials prefer engaging with human rights and services nonprofits in which
there is peer-to-peer engagement and where passion for the cause is clearly visible. Toney
also noted that Millennials tend to prefer more casual social events in contrast with formal galas.
Therefore, the fact that bar events are casual social events is simply icing on the cake catering to
the preferences of most Millennials.
INTERVIEW DATA: Charitable Giving of Millennials
Surprisingly, a bar crawl can be a great way to get Millennials to not only be volunteers
but also donors for human rights and services nonprofits. However, besides special events, it is
worthwhile to examine the giving preferences and characteristics of Millennials.
First, all of the fundraising experts concurred that Millennials prefer to donate in an easy,
streamlined fashion. Millennials prefer when human rights and services nonprofits allow for
more opportunities to give, allow for direct donations during events, provide for a monthly
giving option to be more budget friendly, and provide for direct giving through social media and
email capital campaigns. In addition, just like with volunteer engagement, Millennials respond
much more strongly when engaged on their level with a personalized pitch. Also, according to
the nonprofit experts, Millennials (and Non-Millennials) respond well to urgent and competitive
giving that encourages “down to the wire” fundraising in which people compete with friends,
coworkers, family, and strangers in a fixed amount of time for a cause they deeply care about.
Furthermore, while Millennials do give monetary donations to human rights and services
nonprofits, Toney was insistent that Millennials prefer to donate their time before donating their
money. This is because they are in a life stage generally fostering more free time, but less
spending money.
Aycock provided some other helpful insight on Millennial charitable giving preferences.
He discussed that while many Millennials are part of the “trophy generation” in which they
oftentimes expect a reward for effort and participation, he stressed that it is not a negative
stereotype that nonprofits should ignore. He insisted that all it means is that Millennials prefer to
have something tangible to take home (such as a T-shirt or water bottle) that connects them
directly with the organization. If the physical product relates directly to the mission, then it
benefits the Millennial relationship with the human rights and services nonprofit even more. To
provide a contrast perspective, the nonprofit experts agreed that older generations donate to
human rights and services nonprofits primarily because it empowers them to feel like they are

16

“doing their part” to progress human rights. Millennials highly value “doing their part” as well,
but they prefer volunteering and participating on an even more personal level that emphasizes
personal relationship building.
Conclusion: Should Human Rights and Services Nonprofits Engage Millennials Differently
in Comparison to Older Generations?
The answer to the question above is both “yes” and “no” for a multitude of reasons.
People from all generations care about the mission of progressing human rights and improving
human services, but Millennials are more comfortable with utilizing technology and social media
to be engaged. Also, Millennials value when human rights and services nonprofits provide for
peer-to-peer engagement with activities and special events. Furthermore, Millennials and older
generations differ on special events preferences. Millennials like more informal and social events
in comparison with older generations. While Millennials do not have much to donate now, it is
important that human rights and services nonprofits keep them engaged with volunteering and
fostering their activist enthusiasm for the mission. This will lead to increased donations from
them in the future. Millennials also love to be able to give quickly and easily, favoring donating
online and through social media. Finally, while the Millennials have unfairly suffered from the
“trophy generation” label, that exaggerated stereotype is something that can be harnessed
effectively by human rights and services nonprofits. Millennials can be given something tangible
in reward for their charitable gifts to effectively connect them directly with the human rights
organization for years to come.
Recommendations: How Can Human Rights and Services Nonprofits Reach Out
Effectively to Millennials?

1) Utilize both traditional and social media.
Share inspired personal stories showing how your
nonprofit helps the people it serves.
2) Give Millennials as many options to give as
possible. They like affordable monthly charitable
giving!
3) Spend time cultivating relationships with
Millennials by providing social events for them.
Millennials like a strong community of people
coming together for a cause they value.
4) Pay close attention to the wants, needs, and
priorities of Millennials. Gather data on their
behavior and communicate directy with them!
Recommendations

17

References
1
"Generations in the Workplace in the United States and Canada." Catalyst, May 01, 2012.
http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/generations-workplace-united-states-canada.
2
"The 2013 Millennial Impact Report." Achieve: The Millennial Impact Research, July 2013.
http://cdn.trustedpartner.com/docs/library/AchieveMCON2013/Research Report/Millennial
Impact Research.pdf.

3
Hais, Mike. "Millennials Have Already Won on Gay Rights, Abortion, and Immigration–
What's Next?."PolicyMic, sec. Identities, May 14, 2013.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/41427/millennials-have-already-won-on-gay-rights-abortion-
and-immigration-what-s-next.
4
United for Human Rights: Making Human Rights a Fact, "Human Rights Organizations." Last
modified 2014.

5
"Generations in the Workplace in the United States and Canada." Catalyst.

6
“The 2013 Millennial Impact Report." Achieve: The Millennial Impact Research.

7
Semien, Alex. "3 Proven Strategies to Get New Donors and Volunteers for Your
Nonprofit." Nonprofit Fundraising Journal, Fundraising Tips and Volunteer Engagement,
February 02, 2014. http://causera.org/nonprofit-journal/3-proven-strategies-to-get-new-donors-
and-volunteers-for-your-nonprofit/.

8
Suarez, David. "Nonprofit Advocacy and Civic Engagement on the Internet." Administration &
Society. no. 3 (2009): 267-289. http://aas.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.ohio-
state.edu/content/41/3/267.full.pdf html.

9
Saratovsky, Kari D., Derrick Feldmann, and Jean Case. Cause for Change: The Why and How
of Nonprofit Millennial Engagement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2013.

10
Saratovsky, Kari D., Derrick Feldmann, and Jean Case. Cause for Change: The Why and How
of Nonprofit Millennial Engagement.

11

12

13
Thomas, Jon. Social Media Today, "Breaking Down the Viral HRC Marriage Equality
Campaign." Last modified April 26, 2013.
http://socialmediatoday.com/jonthomas/1350096/breaking-down-viral-hrc-marriage-equality-
campaign.

18

14
Wagner, Meg. Mashable, "How HRC's Marriage Equality Campaign Put People First." Last
modified September 24, 2013. http://mashable.com/2013/09/24/hrc-marriage-equality/.

15
Thomas, Jon. Social Media Today.
16
Andrews, Madison. "Social Media Goes Red in Support of Marriage Equality." aNewDomain.
http://anewdomain.net/2013/03/27/social-media-goes-red-in-support-of-marriage-equality/

17

18

NONPROFIT CAPSTONE FINAL

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to NONPROFIT CAPSTONE FINAL

Similar to NONPROFIT CAPSTONE FINAL (20)

NONPROFIT CAPSTONE FINAL