Download to read offline
More Related Content
IACO Presentation
- 1. DONOR MANAGEMENT Why it isneeded and what are the options for IACO
- 2. DIVERSE COMMUNITY NEEDS GOOD COMMUNICATION The Interfaith Associationof Central Ohio (IACO), established in 1992 has grown in: • Prestige • Number of Donors • Membership • Volunteers. 02
- 3. OUR CONSTIUENT • MoreNumerous • Younger • Online using social media • Small donor card size • Prefers to volunteer • Wants to be informed about IACO’s efforts 03
- 4. DONOR MANAGEMENT KEEPS ALLTHE INFORMATION IN ONE PLACE • Phone • USPS mail • Email • Social Media (for some solutions) • Tracking communication • Event attendance 04
- 5. WHY DONOR MANAGMENT Whydo we need to invest in a new piece of software Reduced Workload • Removes duplicate entry of same information in different software • Permits volunteers to enter data of leads and donor metadata directly • Online donations can flow directly into the system Scalability • Can grow as we get more donors • IACO can track non-donors • Users can enter data simultaneously Data Collection • Import existing data • Segment groups • Track preferences and tendencies, • Track if interest is growing or weaning 05
- 6. DONOR MANAGEMENT SOFTWAREOPTIONS Most important unique options Giftworks • Works similar to QuickBooks • Sensitive data is local NationBuilder • Integration with Social Media • Website included DonorPerfect • Good support • Used by many similar sized nonprofits Salesforce • Most robust data collection • Training easily available • Least expensive 06
- 7. IACO’S PRIMARY NEEDS EaseOf Use Since, due to IACO’s size, the software needs to be used by many lay leaders it needs to be easy for anyone to pickup and use. Access From AnywhereSince there are few in- office hours by our staff and the board members may need to use it from their home, the ability to access it not on site seems to be priority. 07
- 8. NEEDS FUFILLED Most Features FewestFeatures More Expensive Less Expensive 8
- 9. COMPARISON Most desired featuresavailability in each product 9 GiftWorks DonorPerfect NationBuilder SalesForce Accessible Everywhere NO YES YES YES Understandable interface (Ease of use) SOME YES SOME YES Data stays in-house YES NO NO NO Record email interactions NO 3rd Party YES YES Record social media interactions NO NO YES SOME Automate communications NO 3rd Party YES YES Website integrations NO NO YES/Proprietary YES QuickBooks integration NO YES SOME YES
- 10. DONOR MANAGEMENT TEAM 10 Paidposition at the IACO office. Kerry works 10 hours a week mostly on QuickBooks and donor management on spreadsheets. Kerry Taylor Office Manager Works mostly offsite. August is not a paid intern so he is not always dependable if things are needed in a timely manner. College Intern Technically savvy president of the lay board. Willing to chip in as needed. President August Bergqvist Philip Washburn
- 11. CONCLUSION • Giftwork featureswere far too few, and the interface was arcane compared to its competitors. • NationBuilder’s feature agile, especially when attempting to crowdsource volunteers and donors in the social media environment. • DonorPerfect is a well-established brand an is used by most nonprofits our size we communicated with. • Salesforce is an incredibly robust databasewith integration with email. Social media is tracked but not as robust as Nationbuilder does. There is a user base of 3.8 million with excellent peer-to-peer support. 11
- 12.
Editor's Notes
- #2 Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about donor management software. Hey wait a minute, don’t fall asleep yet. Lets get through some of this first. My name is Daniel Newman and I was the treasurer of IACO a number of years ago. I have been asked to speak with you today so you might approve some investment into helping grow the organization with a solution that will bring more coordination of communicating with IACO’s constituents and fundraising.
- #3 The Interfaith Association of Central Ohio (IACO) is a small nonprofit established in 1992. It is made up of diverse faiths that have come together: “To create an interfaith community based on understanding, friendship, and trust.” The organization has grown for 50 donors a year to 350. IACO is now tracking 75 volunteers. The organization is supported by a part-time office manager for 10 hours a week. The board is very active in the day-to-day operations but an executive director is something that the organization will be investing in by the end of 2019.
- #4 Typically, older Americans have accumulated the most wealth, driving the bulk of the overall giving. Charles Schwab put out an annual giving report. It says that the “greatest generation” (born before 1946) gave mostly to one cause and large gifts. Younger givers are giving to more progressive causes, such as IACO, since the last presidential election but give to many causes and smaller amounts. IACO has never been a benefactor of large gifts. Our average gift is less than $50. If this is our sweet spot, we should be targeting more the younger constituent for the small gifts since they align well with our cause. Their desire to be solicited online should be considered when looking at the donor management solutions.
- #5 Currently IACO keeps some information on its donors. We have their name, mailing address, possibly their email. We keep this information in our accounting software, QB. We may have people’s phone, event attendance, spouses’s name. That we keep in this spreadsheet…. You see how many pages this is? This is a 120 page printout of our spreadsheet. That is close to 6000 rows of data (50 rows a page). Now , we all know that we don’t have 6000 people in our rolls. There are duplicates in here, there are desist people, there are people who left Ohio. Why are we carrying all this stuff? Because we have no easy system to track it. Not only is there the 6000 names here, but remember all the data that is in QB? Some of the spreadsheet names are in there and some are not. Information that is in neither place, becaue we don’t track it are social media accounts of these people, who opened our last email, and who attended our events. Oh, that who attended our events. That is this spreadsheet: 350 pages since we started tracking it.
- #6 So why do we need a Donor Managements system. Mostly to get rid of that mess. 500 pages of spreadsheets. We want to work smarter and reduce our workload, We want something that will grow with us and scale up as we get larger. We want something that can help us wrestle that bunch of data that I printed out. Since not all members are created equal, or respond to the same interaction, we also want to be able to segment groups of members based on their level of involvement, preferences or tendencies, and potential for investment. This helps us communicate with them strategically so that you can reach out to your most dedicated donors during critical fundraising campaigns, and also seek engagement with individuals who have recently lapsed in participation.
- #7 The four we are looking at are Giftworks, NationBuilder, DonorPerfect and Salsforce. Giftworks was looked at initially because it was the least expensive of the solutions surveyed. It costs merely $90/year. Since putting this report together, another contender, Salesforce, has come in as the cheapest solution which I will detail later. The biggest benfit of Giftworks is that the data we put into it will stay in our office and will not be kept on the internet. The other solutions requires our data to live on their servers. Having sensitive data outside IACO’s complete control was of concern of some on the board. DonorPerfect is very well adopted by many nonprofits IACO’s size. It has integration with Quckbooks and mass email software, constant contact. Nationbuilder is unique in that it can also track our interactions with social media. Salesforce was a latecomming and was almost left off this presentation. Salesforce which is best known for managing sales department’s data has recently come out with a NP version to manage donors with high reviews.
- #8 Of the board surveyed the two most interesting features that IACOs board was most interested in was ease of use and access from anywhere. Three of the solutions was able to accommodate the Access from anywhere and even though ease of use is subjective, it appeared that two products, DP and SF, came out on top in this category as well.
- #9 In terms of features to expense ratios, if you look at this 4-quadrant you will see that three pieces of software with the most features. While the Lest expensive with most features appears to be Salesforce, Nationbuilder at $59/mo has many features and is not completely out of our range.
- #10 This chart will show which of the four Donor Management systems has most of the features that IACO seems to care about: Accessibility everywhere, easy interface, ability to track email and social media interactions, the ability to automate communications and integration with our other two mission critical pieces of software: Website and QB. Nationbuilder and SalesForce seem to come out on top with salesforce really clinching it with understandable interface.
- #11 It is good to recognize who on our team will be most in the system. Kerry is probably our primary data entry person and will maintain the software. August who we may only have for a year, can grasp all technology and feels very comfortable in NationBuilder since he used it for political campaigns. Phil used DP at his work, Habitat for Humanity, but says he would feel comfortable in any of the choices and thinks Salesforce has some features he knows he can’t replicate in DP.
- #12 Based on assessing the pros and cons of each of the mentioned solutions, Salesforce comes out on top for the size and needs of IACO. Since IACO is starting from scratch with a new system, there is no data compatibility issues as we upload our limited data to their system. Since IACO will need fewer than 10 users, the product will be free outside of credit card processing fees and plugins to integrate with Quickbooks and mass email solutions. Salesforce keeps our financial exposure down with the most features available.
- #13 Please take a moment to look over the report I left you for more detail on the work that has been done about assessing the donor management systems. If you have any questions, my name, once again, is Daniel Newman. You can reach me through the email and phone number displayed on this slide. Thank you for listening you have been a wonderful audience. I am happy to take any questions at this time.