The Next Gen. of Canadian Giving with emphasis on Gen. X and Gen Y

1. THE NEXT GENERATION OF
CANADIAN GIVING
AFP Presentation 2014

2. About hjc
• hjc is a leader in non-profit technology
and online fundraising strategy with over
20 years of experience.
• Some of our services:
– Copywriting, design execution, strategic
planning, integrated fundraising, software
implementation, email strategy and
communications calendars, google analytics
& adwords, social media strategy and
management.

3. About hjc
Proprietary & Confidential 3

4. Current Fundraising Reality
Aging Donor Base
Donor files and acquisition
list sources are shrinking –
the environment is
competitive.

5. The Next Generation of Canadian Giving
• Joint study published in September 2013
based on an online survey of Canadian
donors, excluding Quebec, conducted
May 16-26, 2013.
• Conducted in conjunction with a similar
study in the US.
• The fundraising landscape is becoming
more and more complicated. What do we
do? Listen to our donors.

6. What key questions did we ask?
• Does age influence who you give to?
• What are the basic dos and don’ts for
fundraisers?
• What are the preferred giving channels of
each generation?
• What are the preferred communications
and engagement channels?

7. Generational Giving
An overview of annual giving by generation confirms the importance of
Boomers in the charitable giving space.
Matures
79% Give
5.8 M donors
$831 yr/avg
4.5 charities
$4.8 B/yr
78% Give
6.9 M donors
$942 yr/avg
4.9 charities
$6.5 B/yr
Boomers
Gen X
Bubble size is ‘Estimated Annual Contributions’
% Of Generation Giving
Total annual giving
$1,800
$1,600
$1,400
$1,200
$1,000
$800
$600
$400
$200
$0
62% Give
4.5M donors
$639 yr/avg
4.0 charities
$2.9 B/yr
87% Give
3.1 M donors
$1507 yr/avg
7.0 charities
$4.7 B/yr
Gen Y
55% 65% 75% 85% 95%
7
Born: 81-91
Born: before 1946
Born: 46-64
Born: 65-80

8. Draw your bubbles.

9. Causes – Top Tier
GEN Y GEN X BOOMERS MATURES
PRIORITY CAUSE
45% 50% 50% 55%
↓
21% 31% 31% 36%
↓ ↓
↓ ↓
32% 40% 38% 28%
18% 25% 23% 40%
15% 17% 17% 14%
12% 14% 11% 14%
% donating overall to causes
50%
30%
↓
35%
26%
16%
↓
13%
71%
48%
46%
33%
23%
22%
Health charities
Local social service
Children’s charities
Place of worship
Animal
rescue/protection
Emergency relief
↓
Priority Cause Overall Giving
• Health charities have the
largest % of donors
across generations
• Emergency giving
dropped as a priority
cause across
generations
↓
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
*Bolding indicates statistical significance among audiences. Arrows indicate statistical significance between 2010 and 2013.

10. GEN Y GEN X BOOMERS MATURES
55% 54% 58% 55%
45% 55% 35% 31%
21% 35% 47% 56%
36% 39% 38% 30%
29% 33% 40% 37%
11% 23% 36% 58%
22% 29% 37% 34%
22% 24% 29% 29%
24% 20% 25% 20%
25% 19% 11% 9%
15% 14% 12% 14%
5% 9% 15% 18%
7% 5% 4% 9%
4% 9% 4% 4%
5% 8% 4% 3%
12% 4% 2% -
6% 4% 3% 2%
1% 2% 3% 2%
Giving Channels
Donated this way in last 2 years
56%
*New or changed attribute, no tracking data
41%
41%
36%
35%
32%
32%
26%
22%
15%
13%
12%
6%
5%
5%
4%
4%
2%
Checkout Donation
Online Donation
Honor/Tribute
Purchase for Proceeds
Pledge at Event
Mailed Check/Credit Card
Door to Door*
Monthly Debit
Street Canvassing*
Third Party Vendor
Email*
Phone
Radio/TV*
Online Ad*
Will/Planned Gift
Mobile/Text
Social Networking Site
Stocks, Bonds, Property
↑
↑
↓
↑
↑
↓
↑
↑
↓
↑
↑
↓

11. Acceptable Solicitation Channel
Channels with a personal connection are most acceptable, followed by letters or TV/radio.
Acceptable Solicitation Channel
(from organizations with an established relationship)
Very Unacceptable Very Acceptable
1%
1%
5%
6%
12%
18%
25%
33%
34%
34%
35%
43%
3%
6%
9%
9%
12%
14%
25%
16%
21%
23%
25%
24%
34%
36%
36%
30%
34%
29%
22%
15%
17%
16%
12%
9%
47%
41%
23%
18%
15%
11%
4%
8%
3%
6%
2%
1%
NET GEN Y GEN X BOOMERS MATURES
+77 +78 +87 +77 +63
+69 +70 +76 +68 +62
+46 +53 +40 +46 +47
+34 +51 +43 +30 +13
+25 +50 +41 +11 +5
+8 +45 +26 -2 -33
-24 -4 -21 -37 -24
-26 +24 -5 -46 -65
-35 -6 -29 -49 -46
-35 -26 -38 -41 -30
-46 -17 -38 -54 -67
-57 -29 -48 -76 -63
Friend
Friend's
child/grandchild
Letter/message
Radio or TV program
Email
Opt-in for extra charge
on ticket/recording
Phone call
Message via social
media
Voice message
Door-to-door
canvassing
Street canvassing
Text message
Net (Acceptable – Unacceptable)
Smwt Smwt
*Bolding indicates statistical significance among audiences. Arrows indicate statistical significance between 2010 and 2013.

12. Acceptable Solicitation Channel
• Engagement channels may or may not be
transaction channels.
• The cost of direct mail means that you
need to be more strategic in how it is
used and it must be integrated.
• Looking at your income channel-by-channel
does not reflect the importance
of each channel to fundraising.

13. 24%
Engagement: Directed Giving
Directed Giving Preferences
22%
49%
26%
18%
53%
23% 25%
46%
10%
40%
43%
Directed donation Unrestricted
donation
Either is fine
27%
Would Motivate Me a Great Deal
to Make a Larger Donation to
55%
Gen Y Gen X Boomers Matures
7% 5%
22%
44%
6%
1%
22%
34%
5%
0
14%
28%
7%
2%
Decide where
funds go
See the impact
of my donation
Thank you gift Public
recognition
Charity
*Bolding indicates statistical significance among audiences. Arrows indicate statistical significance between 2010 and 2013.

14. Quick audit of your organization:
1. Have I underinvested in fundraising to Gen. X donors, who are a
quickly rising force in philanthropic giving in Canada?
2. Have I completely ignored the up and coming younger
generation, or relegated them to an un-strategic social media
effort?
3. Does my fundraising channel mix include direct mail for younger
donors and digital communications for older ones? (Hint: it
should)
4. Am I preparing for the future by addressing the cultural demands
Gens X and Y are placing on institutions (such as transparency).
5. Am I empowering my most enthusiastic supporters to fundraise
and evangelize on my behalf?

15. Appealing to Generation Y
15

16. APPEALING TO GEN Y
CASE STUDY: THE REDWOOD

17. Background
• The Redwood is a Toronto based shelter
for women and children who have fled
abusive situations
• Provides a safe haven for families to live
free from domestic violence, fear, and
threat
• Strong support from local community

18. Challenge
• Every holiday season, donors would buy
and deliver physical gifts to The Redwood
• The shelter was running out of space and
gifts were taking up important program
areas, like the children’s library
• Often, gifts didn’t meet the needs of
women and children staying in the shelter
• Limited budget and technology
constraints

19. Opportunity
• Shift traditional holiday gift program to
online
• Meet immediate needs of women and
children at the shelter
• Gain back physical space in the shelter to
run programs over the holiday period
• Lessen the labour intensive work for staff
who had to sort and wrap gifts

20. Opportunity
• Reach new donors in the online space
• Increase giving levels of current donors
• Create a symbolic gift program that runs
year round
• Create a feeling of designated giving
without restricting the gifts.

21. Solution
• Create a new online symbolic giving
catalogue
• Use existing online tools to host e-commerce
part of site
• Develop unique microsite design and
create custom CMS to make it easy for
staff to update in the future

22. Safe Haven Store
• hjc worked with The Redwood on creative
development, copy, design and building
out the site
• Design and copy evoked a shopping and
“Santa” feeling – store sign, corkboard
background, coin like buttons
• Gift categories and items were created
based on the most needed items at the
shelter and reflected holiday theme

23. Holiday Campaign
• Online marketing campaign to promote the
launch of the Safe Haven Store
– Four email appeals
– Banners for website and social media
– Google advertising
– Integrated into direct mail campaign
• Marketing assets kept the same look and
feel of store
• Consistent CTA throughout e-appeals –
focused on mom’s story

25. Results
• Email campaign - $139 average gift, 1.14%
conversion rate, $10,725 revenue with a list
size of 1,700
• Direct mail – total revenue of $39,159, total
list size of 9,463
• General donations made on main website –
total revenue of $16,663, 70 online
transactions
• Total revenue (online & offline) - $66,622,
growth rate of 64% over previous year

26. Appealing to Gen. X

27. Giving with Gen. X is growing.
Test solicitation approaches to Generation X they have lots of years to give!

28. Case Study: Sick Kids Foundation

29. Case Study:
Sick Kids Foundation
Supporter survey sent out to:
• Collect demographic
information
• Collect information on
giving interests
• Find legacy bequests
• Identify comms
preferences.
• Much More!

30. Case Study: Sick Kids Foundation
• Survey:
– Sent to 57,400 donors
– 3 key segments:
Monthly, Active &
Lapsed
– Shared budgeting!
– Surveymonkey and RE

31. Case Study: Sick Kids Foundation
The Results:
1. Generation X is thinking of legacy gifts!
2. They are open to Gifts of Stock and
300% over represented on LinkedIn
3. Raised $7,574
4. Reactivated 30 donors
5. Found 85 expectances and 292 legacy
leads.
6. We learned how to solicit to Gen. X.

32. Step 1: Analyze & Identify
a. Start with your database
b. Look at your analytics
c. Solicit feedback through surveys
d. Build profiles / personas

33. Why a database audit?
• Benchmark
• Identify Trends
• Identify Pain Points
• Identify Opportunities

34. Analytics Review
• Google Analytics
– Top Referrals
– Audience Demographics
– Keyword Performance
• Facebook Insights
– Audience Demographics
– Popular Posts
• Email Analytics
– Popular Content & Clicks
• Alexa.com
– Competitor Web Analysis

36. Other Valuable Reports:

37. Supporter Surveys
Here’s where I go on my rant against
anonymous surveys!

38. A Good Supporter Survey Should:
 Collect demographic information
 Collect information on giving potential and
interests
 Collect information on first interest and
interaction with your charity
 Find legacy bequests
 Collect information on communication
preferences
 Integrate back into your CRM for future
marketing opportunities & segmentation
 Help you build profiles / personas

39. Online Sample
• Sent to 57,400 donors
• 3 key segments:
• Monthly, Active &
Lapsed
– 5,530 responses
(response rate of 11%)
– Raised $7,574
• Reactivated 30 donors
• Found 85 expectances
and 292 legacy leads

40. And the mail will pay for itself…

41. Build Profiles / Personas
Buyer personas are fictional, generalized
representations of your ideal donors. They
help you understand your donors (and
prospective donors) better, and make it
easier for you to tailor content to the
specific needs, behaviors, and concerns of
different groups.

43. Step 2: Map & Improve
a. Map Current Journeys
b. Improve & Innovate
c. Build Infrastructure & Processes to
Succeed

44. Team Facilitation
• Good to have outside party / consultant
facilitate
• Invite anyone who ‘touches’ the donor –
events, service, direct marketing, donor
services, advocacy
• Set-up your journey mapping canvas…

45. Sample Journey Plan

46. Thank you!
Hilary Grunewald
Hilary.Grunewald@hjcnewmedia.com
Heather Mclean
Heather.mclean@hjcnewmedia.com