This document discusses using demographic data to improve segmentation and targeting in direct marketing. It provides examples showing that males and certain age groups tend to be more valuable donors. Specifically, males on average give 46% higher gifts and are 50% more valuable donors. Donors ages 45-54 generate the highest revenue per donor of all age groups. The document recommends testing gender and age-based segmentation, list selection, and messaging to acquire and upgrade more valuable male and certain age range donors.

1. Five Data Points
that Really Matter!
Diane Clifford
Mary Beth McIntyre
Lisa M. Smith

2. Five Accessible Data Points that
Really Matter
First Gift Amount
Offer/Product Responsiveness
Mission Affinity & Relationships
Multi-Channel, Multi-Action
Demographics

3. Checklist of Segmentation Methodologies
& Readiness Level
Big Data
• Unstructured v.
fixed fields
• Expensive
technology
• Largely limited to
commercial sector
at this time
Models
• Regression, with
Coop data
• Requires critical
mass of names
(100K+) for cost
benefit
• 1MM+ volumes;
targeted audiences
Lapsed, Mid/Major,
Warm Prospects;
specific tactics like
optimized asks
Five Accessible Data
Points
• Stored at transaction
or summary levels
• Relevance to files
5,000+ names;
analyst v. statistician
• Virtually infinite
applications,
opportunities
including paring with
models
• Be data creative!

4. First Gift Amount

5. Regional Social Services – Donor
Distribution & Value by Channel Acquired
5
$192
$75
$166
$102
$512
$549
$-
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
51%
3%
23%
4%
19%
Direct Mail
FSI
Zip Walk
Web
All Other

6. Regional Social Services – 2009-13
Combined New Donor Value, All Channels
$8 $19 $35 $64 $119 $182 $407 $857 $882
$3,398 $3,703
$10,285
$27,750
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
6

7. Key Action Items
 Diversify acquisition. A ll channels exceed or are competitive with
direct mail. Need to keep an eye on costs of course.
 Optimize first gift amounts through: List Mix, Demographics, Modeling
targeting higher entry asks where they work.
 Make sure your contact cadence for new donors takes into account
first gift/LTV learnings.
 Make sure the customer service number is easy to find and printed on
everything. From this example, customer service is great at
converting callers to high value sustainers.
 Find ways to promote memorial and honor gifts. While these are often
one-time donors, the average first gift is high and exceeds the LTV of
a direct mail donor.

8. Offer/Product Responsiveness

9. National Social Services – Targeting Prior
Responders to Increase Net Income
9
$-
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
Control Calendar Test
August 2012
Net/Donor % Resp
• Calendar to Calendar Responders, Label to non responders. Test less expensive Label to
Calendar responders.
• Both products produced net income but, Calendar responsive donors produced 2x more
net income to Calendars than to Labels driven largely by response rate.

10. Enviro/Conservation –
Calendar Non Responders
Panel/Package Qty Mailed Gifts % Resp Revenue Avg Gift CPM Net Income
Calendar NON-
Responsive
Donors / #10 Non-
Freemium 12,500 234 1.87% $6,366 $27.21 $309.00 $2,504
Calendar NON-
Responsive
Donors/Calendar
Control 12,500 432 3.46% $10,411 $24.10 $701.46 $1,603
#10/Calendar
Variance 0% -46% -46% -39% 13% -56% -56%
• Optimized net by sending proven Calendar Non Responders a non-
premium, mission-based piece.
• Though Calendar generated higher response rate, impact negated largely
by cost variance

11. Enviro/Conservation – Chronic Product
Non Responders
Panel/Package Qty Mailed Gifts % Resp Revenue Avg Gift CPM Net Income
Chronic
Freemium Non-
Responders #10
Non-Freemium 12,500 286 2.29% $8,905 $31.14 $309.00 $5,043
Chronic
Freemium Non-
Responders
Calendar
Control 12,500 370 2.96% $10,097 $27.29 $701.46 $1,328
#10/Calendar
Variance 0% -23% -23% -12% 14% -56% 280%
• Using same concept, but broadening to Product Non Responders (v. an individual
product like the calendar), generated 280% more net income targeting traditional,
mission-based package
• Calendar generated higher response rate, but not nearly as high as the product
specific non responders and not high enough to offset package cost.

12. Key Action Items
 Use approach to drive net income and/or reduce marketing
spend, touches per donor
 Offer/Product responsive-based segmentation works best with:
• larger campaigns (50,000+ names)
• clear cut, specific offers and/or expensive packaging
• reliable coding and/or well defined audiences
 Don’t leave net income on the table if you don’t have to! If
financially viable consider alternate offer to non responders!

13. Mission Affinity & Relationships

15. Remember What Your Constituents Tell You!
 There is value in self reported information
 Especially if it is about their affinity or relationship with your
mission.
 It is hard work to convince organizations to remember this
information, and to agree it is not violating privacy.
 Don’t forget to explore inferred mission relationships that may be
collected in other areas of the organization or database.
 Any work you do in this area will be important to your donor
relationships and fundraising future! This is YOUR legacy.

16. National Health - Donor Value and Performance
Comparison with “Reported Affinity”
Organization Affinity Annual
Rev/Donor
Annual Ret.
Rate
% Retention
Lift
Health Org. A Affinity $53 68% 42%
No affinity $40 48%
Health Org B Affinity $60 58% 81%
No affinity $37 32%
Health Org C Affinity $45 72% 44%
No affinity $34 50%
Health Org D Affinity $41 53% 33%
No affinity $31 40%
Health Org E Affinity $44 50% 32%
No affinity $39 38%
Note: For organizations with 20%+ donors with affinity
16

17. Affinity Gifts/Donor Retention Rate % Lift in
Retention
Pet Ownership 3.65 55% 45%
No Reported Pet
Ownership
2.57 38%
International Animal Welfare –
Value of Donor Affinity
Source: 2009 Cape Cod Philanthropy Day
17

18. Mission
Action vs
None
Retention
Rate
% lift
Retention
Rev/Donor
(DM Only)
% lift
Rev/Donor
Member
and
Mission
Activity
47% 46% $325 91%
Member
Only
32% $170
Donors who participate in Mission Event/Activity
have additional value in direct marketing!
18
Museum example – Importance of understanding all
donor/member activity to enhance relationship

19. Regional Health - Value by Inferred Affinity
$304
$319
$148
$745
$280
$177
Newsletter
Patient
1-800 Info
-12%
+145%
Note: Value includes revenue from all channels
• Donors who have an existing relationship and become a donor
will have a higher value than those who don’t have a relationship
• Donors who give to content-rich mission-based offers like
Newsletters, even if same RFM level those that don’t, will have a
higher overall value
+27%

20. Volunteers - Value of Volunteer/Donors
Donors Life Gifts Life Revenue
Life Gifts
/Donor
Life
Avg Gift
Life
Val/Donor
Donors no
Volunteer 69,321 176,036 $ 11,370,733 2.5 $64.59 $164.03
Donors w/
Volunteer 459 1,256 $ 163,912 2.7 $130.50 $357.11
FY09-FY13
Active
Donors
69,780 177,292 $ 11,534,645 2.5 $65.06 $165.30
Note: Gifts, Revenue include all channels
• Less than 1% of active donor file are Donor/Volunteers as migration is organic
• Donor/Volunteers 2X more valuable than Donors Only
• Unclear if Donor or Volunteer relationship occurred first, but opportunity minimally to
cross-sell programs, giving or engagement opportunities

22. Key Action Items
 Consider how this can be used in segmentation
 Share with partners for modeling, major gift and
planned giving profiling
 Break out reporting by key attributes to guide:
• Package/offers
• Copy Versioning
• Signers and multi-relationship schedules
• Share highlights across the organization… create
momentum!
 Brainstorm on opportunities to collect donor
preference or overlay and encourage engagement

23. Multi Channels, Multi Actions

24. Making it work…
• The strategies vary by organization depending on the channels
• Your approach to managing multi-channels will vary depending
on the organization infra-structure
• Start with data and analysis to support discussions
• Coordinate and integrate what you can manage and share
proving points and benefits
• Work to collaborate on more opportunities with the donor and
mission in mind

25. Advocacy
Activity
Retention
Rate
% lift
Retention
Rev/Donor % lift
Rev/Donor
Donor
AND
Advocacy
55% 10% $160 135%
Donor Only 50% $68
Donors who engage in multiple ways are telling
you they are more interested in your mission!
25
Animal Welfare example – Importance of Mission opportunities to enhance value

26. # of
Sources
Retention
Rate
% lift
Retention
Rev/Donor % lift
Rev/Donor
2+
Sources or
Channels
88% 53% $65 58%
1 Source
only
69% $41
Donors who engage in multiple sources have
enhanced commitment and value!
26
Animal Welfare example – Importance of cross-sell, UK example

27. National Health Multi-Channel Revenue per
Constituent is at Least 3X Greater Among Multis
Origin Type
Single
Constituent MA
Multiple
Constituent
Advocate $0 $120
Benchwarmer $0 $95
Donor $163 $588
Event Donor $233 $269
Fundraiser $106 $333
Service $25 $141
• Constituents who are engaged in multiple ways – across ALZ
programs – are worth significantly more to the organization
• DM program will support testing and collaboration to manage the
optimum cross-channel communication to enhance donor
engagement and value.

28. National Health - Lapsed Walker Conversion
• Segment tested for three years.
• Audience is stronger than
traditional lapsed, cold prospects
• Testing indicated that both Direct
Marketing and Event revenue
increased with the presence of
these efforts—a win-win situation.
• The large universe available
means there is additional potential
to drive more revenue for the
Association, while re-engaging
thousands of former event
constituents.

29. International Health – Multi Channel
Landscape with DRTV in the Mix
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Mail
DRTV
Web
Telemarketing
Publications/Ads
Events
Revenue
Donors
• 50% of donors are sourced through Direct Mail
• 23% to DRTV
• A portion of the16% Web donations are driven by, attributed to DRTV
SOURCE: Donors acquired 2009-2013.. Excludes sustainers, gifts of $10,000+.

30. International Health – Multi Channel
Landscape with DRTV in the Mix
Class 2009-13 Total Donors % of File Life Val/Don Variance
1 Channel 265,552 83.21% $ 122.00 N/A
2 Channels 47,707 14.95% $ 345.00 183%
3 Channels 5,616 1.76% $ 818.00 570%
4 Channels 265 0.08% $ 1,182.00 869%
• 17% of donors are active in two or more channels, 2X+ more
valuable than single channel donors
• Largely strategic channel migration, some organic particularly with
DRTV in the mix

31. International Health – Multi Channel
Landscape with DRTV in the Mix
$159
$559
$527
$373
$643
$303
Donor Life Value
47%
24%
10%
11%
5%
3%
Mail/Phone
Mail/DRTV
Mail/Online
DRTV/Phone
DRTV/Online
Phone/Online
• Of the 18% of donors giving in more than one channel, 47% are Mail/Phone
• 24% are Mail/DRTV, with migration both mail to DRTV, DRTV to mail
• As shown, some channels drive volume like Mail and Phone, some drive
value like DRTV, Web

32. Key Action Items
 Multi-engagements = enhanced LTV… set your priorities and tactics to move
donors and prospects across channels
 Prove what works in your area of control. Show benefits to donors and the
bottom line.
 Share analysis, results with other teams in your organization to create
momentum around these strategies
 Create pilots and tests to show how this can be managed and improve
retention, better coordinate contact schedules for donors.
 Be strategic, lead your donors to giving/action opportunities across multiple
parts of the organization!

33. Demographics

34. Demographics
• Used sparingly in direct marketing programs
– Ethnicity, largely Hispanic
– Age as it relates to ‘how do we engage younger donors’
– Gender, ‘my file is all female!’
– Income regarding upgrading to Mid and Major
• Can demographics play a role in our segmentation and
treatment in direct?
– Yes, though we may need to resist the temptation of
totaling focusing on messaging

35. Regional Social Service –
Fewer but More Valuable Males
Gender Donors % of File
Life
Revenue
Life
Gifts/Donor
Life
Avg Gift
Life
Val/Donor
Female 23,258 57% $1,379,581 1.8 $33.46 $59.32
Male 15,551 38% $1,415,892 1.9 $46.83 $91.05
Unknown 1,799 5% $579,535 2.0 $161.25 $322.14
Total 40,608 75,055 $3,375,008 1.8 $44.97 $83.11
Note: Gifts/Revenue from all channels
• Males 50% more valuable largely as result of 46% higher average gift
• Males across organization’s niche have a higher representation than the average,
data can be used minimally in prospecting/list selects

36. Enviro/Conservation –
Three-Year Value by Age Range
$217.50
$94.11
$107.49
$124.66
$230.34
$183.90
$120.42
$95.31
$63.35 $57.06
0-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 56-64 65-74 75-84 85-94 95-104
Data Source: Gifts/Revenue does not include Digital
• 50% of file over 65
• 45-54 highest value per donor of all age groups
• 12% of file, 22% of revenue generated

37. Age – Participation by Channel
Age 45-54 - Top Channels
Channel Donors Gifts Revenue Value/Member
Direct
Marketing 58,390 98,054 $7,021,583 $ 120.25
Field Trips 77 99 $320,577 $ 4,163.34
Planned Gifts 14 14 $1,442,472 $ 103,033.72
Special Events 316 575 $383,560 $ 1,213.80
Major Donors 129 171 $6,127,802 $ 47,502.34
Gatherings 46 63 $14,647 $ 318.41
37
• 45-54 most valuable on per constituent basis and most involved across
varying giving and engagement opportunities
Data Source: Gifts/Revenue does not include Digital. Age is overlaid..

38. Key Action Items
Gender
 Currently in market with gender ‘ask array’ testing, more aggressive
upgrades for males
 Will be testing gender list selects in acquisition, particularly for niches
that tend to naturally attract males
Age
 Engagement opportunities vary by age, potential to use age as a filter
for channels other than Planned Gifts
 Reminder to use direct mail, email as vehicle to broadcast other
engagement or giving opportunities

39. Thank you!
Diane Clifford
mbmcintyre@win-wingiving.com
Lisa M. Smith
Lsmith@russreid.com
Dclifford@audubon.org
Mary Beth McIntyre
5 Accessible Data Points that Really Matter!