63 Percent of Charities Predict an Increase in Giving in 2011, says Report
Giving to most charity fundraisers stayed the same or increased last year, according to a new survey released by the Nonprofit Research Collaborative, a coalition of six organizations that study or represent non-profits and fundraisers on Tuesday. However non-profit officials and charities said that gifts did not increase as much as they had hoped, given the economic recovery.
The study asked about two key measures of fundraising—the percentage of organizations reaching their fundraising goals and the percentage of charities raising more funds in one year compared to the previous year. In the NRC survey about 2010, just 52 percent of organizations reported reaching their fundraising goals that year. In a survey conducted by the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP, a member of the NRC) about 2009, 53 percent of charities reported meeting their yearly fundraising goals that year.
63 percent of the more than 1,800 organizations studied said they expect private donations to rise in 2011.
Nearly two-thirds said they do not plan any increases in the number of fundraising staff members this year.
The study pointed out that the fundraising situation for these causes was more stable in 2010 than in 2009, when many of the charities were reeling in the wake of the 2008 recession. While only 11 percent reported that they had raised about the same amount of money in 2009 as they did back in 2008, 24 percent said they had raised as much money in 2010 as in the previous year.
The percentage of charities that said their donations declined fell from 46 percent at the end of 2009 to 33 percent at the end of 2010.
“While many organizations stopped the bleeding, giving simply didn’t rebound like we thought it might, especially given the economic growth we saw in the last quarter of the year,” said Paulette Maehara, president of the Association of Fundraising Professionals, one of six organizations that make up the research collaborative.
“Despite the unexpectedly flat fundraising results that charities reported, the survey showed that success was more likely when organizations invested resources in fundraising staff and infrastructure, including volunteer management.”
Spending More Pays Off?
According to the survey, three-quarters of the organizations that increased their spending on fundraising activities saw collections rise. Almost half of the organizations that increased their spending on fundraising by 15 percent or more saw contributions increase by 15 percent or more.
This does not point out if there was even a return on their investment. So, you increased the spending on advertising (those dollars donated to your organization for ‘projects’ most likely) and you saw an equal increase in contributions?
Let’s say organization X spent $ 15,000 on advertisements and increased their contributions 15%, which was up from $ 10,000, that is only $ 1,500 and a loss of $ 13,500 that could be used to feed multiple families in poverty, rescue animals, provide clean water to villages in Africa, etc. This type of scenario would not be productive and an utter waste of resources.
The survey also showed that online giving produced the most growth out of all types of solicitations charities use. Of course, it should. Fundraising online is much more easier, requires less time, and is overall much more productive for organizations. It’s easier to track the results of fundraising campaigns and see what works, what doesn’t, and allows you to measure very accurate results.
Online giving rose for 58 percent of organizations that use the Internet to seek donations by running online fundraising campaigns.
Net proceeds from special events rose for half the organizations that use that approach; efforts to seek big gifts also rose for half of the groups.
Less than half the groups that sought foundation grants, sent direct-response appeals such as mail and e-mail messages, or solicited gifts from board members or corporate contributions saw increases in those categories.
The study did not point out how much of an increase those organizations realized, nor is it completely accurate in its findings. While only aggregating data from several resources, which accounted for ONLY 1800 organizations, there are still more than 1.5 million other registered 501 c3 non-profit organizations that data was not gathered from.
The large organizations that are all most likely surveyed account for incredibly high amounts of overhead and are notorious for being inefficient with their fundraising and giving. Many of which are not effectively fundraising online to be more productive with time, capital, and return on fundraising efforts.
The way people give to causes is changing. More and more people would like to see transparency with the non-profits and charities they give to. Instead of giving $ 100 and having no idea where it goes, yet most likely 99% to salaries and other expenses, while 1% gets distributed to actual causes, donors would like to see that if I give $ 100, there will be tangible evidence that my contribution was used for this project, and this was the result, etc.
There is a shift in the way people give and will continue to gain momentum over the coming years, as online fundraising campaigns by causes, big and small continues to grow. More donors will donate to smaller, flexible, and more efficient causes, opposed to the very big ones that have proven to be not as effective, when measured pound for pound to the smaller ones.
For example, if a smaller non-profit is fundraising to raise money online for a project to build a school and fresh water system that will allow a community of 1,000 people in Kenya to be self-sufficient for $ 40,000, and will take 90 days to complete, would you donate to them, if they have proven results with other projects, good donor feedback, and pictures and videos to back it up?
Or, would you donate your $ 100 to the American Red Cross for example, as they do not point out where and how exactly the money will be spent for a cause such as the Japan Earthquake Relief Efforts? Most likely it will go to salaries, events, and other expenses, as maybe $ 1 or so gets passed on those in need.
The times and way people are giving is changing, while the Internet and cause transparency will be major fuel for this momentum in the coming years. For donors that are debating on what cause to give to, it is highly suggested to do some research on the organization and understand the percentage of donations that go to what part of the organization. This will help you decipher what cause is more effective in helping those that need it.
Whether you need to raise money for a non-profit fundraising campaign, a charity fundraising campaign, or for another cause, you can quickly create, manage, and scale an unlimited amount of online fundraising campaigns with ease by using the free fundraising tools provided by Piryx, the social giving platform.
Categories: End Of America 63 Prediction Tags: 2011, Amount Of Money, Association Of Fundraising Professionals, Association Of Fundraising Professionals Afp, Charities, Charity Fundraisers, Economic Growth, Economic Recovery, Fundraising Goals, Giving, Increase, Last Quarter, New Survey, Non Profits, Nonprofit Research, Nrc Survey, percent, Predict, Previous Year, Private Donations, Rebound, Recession, Report, Says, Staff Members, Two Thirds, Year 63
63 Percent of Charities Predict an Increase in Giving in 2011, says Report
Giving to most charity fundraisers stayed the same or increased last year, according to a new survey released by the Nonprofit Research Collaborative, a coalition of six organizations that study or represent non-profits and fundraisers on Tuesday. However non-profit officials and charities said that gifts did not increase as much as they had hoped, given the economic recovery.
The study asked about two key measures of fundraising—the percentage of organizations reaching their fundraising goals and the percentage of charities raising more funds in one year compared to the previous year. In the NRC survey about 2010, just 52 percent of organizations reported reaching their fundraising goals that year. In a survey conducted by the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP, a member of the NRC) about 2009, 53 percent of charities reported meeting their yearly fundraising goals that year.
63 percent of the more than 1,800 organizations studied said they expect private donations to rise in 2011.
Nearly two-thirds said they do not plan any increases in the number of fundraising staff members this year.
The study pointed out that the fundraising situation for these causes was more stable in 2010 than in 2009, when many of the charities were reeling in the wake of the 2008 recession. While only 11 percent reported that they had raised about the same amount of money in 2009 as they did back in 2008, 24 percent said they had raised as much money in 2010 as in the previous year.
The percentage of charities that said their donations declined fell from 46 percent at the end of 2009 to 33 percent at the end of 2010.
“While many organizations stopped the bleeding, giving simply didn’t rebound like we thought it might, especially given the economic growth we saw in the last quarter of the year,” said Paulette Maehara, president of the Association of Fundraising Professionals, one of six organizations that make up the research collaborative.
“Despite the unexpectedly flat fundraising results that charities reported, the survey showed that success was more likely when organizations invested resources in fundraising staff and infrastructure, including volunteer management.”
Spending More Pays Off?
According to the survey, three-quarters of the organizations that increased their spending on fundraising activities saw collections rise. Almost half of the organizations that increased their spending on fundraising by 15 percent or more saw contributions increase by 15 percent or more.
This does not point out if there was even a return on their investment. So, you increased the spending on advertising (those dollars donated to your organization for ‘projects’ most likely) and you saw an equal increase in contributions?
Let’s say organization X spent $ 15,000 on advertisements and increased their contributions 15%, which was up from $ 10,000, that is only $ 1,500 and a loss of $ 13,500 that could be used to feed multiple families in poverty, rescue animals, provide clean water to villages in Africa, etc. This type of scenario would not be productive and an utter waste of resources.
The survey also showed that online giving produced the most growth out of all types of solicitations charities use. Of course, it should. Fundraising online is much more easier, requires less time, and is overall much more productive for organizations. It’s easier to track the results of fundraising campaigns and see what works, what doesn’t, and allows you to measure very accurate results.
Online giving rose for 58 percent of organizations that use the Internet to seek donations by running online fundraising campaigns.
Net proceeds from special events rose for half the organizations that use that approach; efforts to seek big gifts also rose for half of the groups.
Less than half the groups that sought foundation grants, sent direct-response appeals such as mail and e-mail messages, or solicited gifts from board members or corporate contributions saw increases in those categories.
The study did not point out how much of an increase those organizations realized, nor is it completely accurate in its findings. While only aggregating data from several resources, which accounted for ONLY 1800 organizations, there are still more than 1.5 million other registered 501 c3 non-profit organizations that data was not gathered from.
The large organizations that are all most likely surveyed account for incredibly high amounts of overhead and are notorious for being inefficient with their fundraising and giving. Many of which are not effectively fundraising online to be more productive with time, capital, and return on fundraising efforts.
The way people give to causes is changing. More and more people would like to see transparency with the non-profits and charities they give to. Instead of giving $ 100 and having no idea where it goes, yet most likely 99% to salaries and other expenses, while 1% gets distributed to actual causes, donors would like to see that if I give $ 100, there will be tangible evidence that my contribution was used for this project, and this was the result, etc.
There is a shift in the way people give and will continue to gain momentum over the coming years, as online fundraising campaigns by causes, big and small continues to grow. More donors will donate to smaller, flexible, and more efficient causes, opposed to the very big ones that have proven to be not as effective, when measured pound for pound to the smaller ones.
For example, if a smaller non-profit is fundraising to raise money online for a project to build a school and fresh water system that will allow a community of 1,000 people in Kenya to be self-sufficient for $ 40,000, and will take 90 days to complete, would you donate to them, if they have proven results with other projects, good donor feedback, and pictures and videos to back it up?
Or, would you donate your $ 100 to the American Red Cross for example, as they do not point out where and how exactly the money will be spent for a cause such as the Japan Earthquake Relief Efforts? Most likely it will go to salaries, events, and other expenses, as maybe $ 1 or so gets passed on those in need.
The times and way people are giving is changing, while the Internet and cause transparency will be major fuel for this momentum in the coming years. For donors that are debating on what cause to give to, it is highly suggested to do some research on the organization and understand the percentage of donations that go to what part of the organization. This will help you decipher what cause is more effective in helping those that need it.
Whether you need to raise money for a non-profit fundraising campaign, a charity fundraising campaign, or for another cause, you can quickly create, manage, and scale an unlimited amount of online fundraising campaigns with ease by using the free fundraising tools provided by Piryx, the social giving platform.
Question by Ujyathica: Can somebody please explain how taxing the rich is a good idea?
Obama is trying to raise the taxes on the rich.
Now, mind you (these are facts that were derived from IRS reports
the top 1% of tax paying Americans earned 1.79 Trillion Dollars (22.06% of total) yet they paid as a whole (the entire 1%) 408.4 Billion Dollars
The Bottom 95% of tax paying Americans earned 5.14 Trillion Dollars (63.34% of total) yet they paid as a whole (the entire 95%) 408.1 Billion Dollars
That means. 95% of Americans (the poor that Obama is not going to tax) supplied less than the 1% of Americans Obama is going to try and tax.
I have some questions
How can a group that earns 2.87 times less money than the other group, yet still pay more in taxes?
Seems to me, like the 95% need to have their taxes increased by 287% so that it is even across the board, right?
Also, mind you. That 95%, if their taxes increase and worst comes to it, they leave the country. Lets do some math
95% of the US Population = 288633408 people
1% of the US Population = 3038246.4 people
Now, if obama taxes the 1% and they leave, and avoid paying taxes the government loses ~408 billion dollars
Based on the # of americans in the 95% range, and the amount paid by that entire group you get $ 1413.9 per person
If obama increased the taxes on them instead, and the same # of americans left the country (1% of total = 3038246.4 people) the government loses 4.3 billion dollars
4.3 billion dollars >> 408.4 billion dollars
and mind you the 1% already pays 2.87 times more in taxes than the 95% as a whole.
I know the what 95% of the population voting for a man is going to overwhelm the 1% voting for the other, so obviously the 95% wont care, because they aren’t getting the short end of the stick
but what if them voting for obama, causes the percentage of Americans that actually mean something to the country leaves, or lays of workers to cover the taxes..
Somebody make this make sense to me please.
Is it really just the poor overwhelming the rich in votes, so now the rich have to pay even more? Since when did it become ok to pick on the minority? Give the minority scholarships yet take away from another minority so long as its accepted by the majority?
What if the minority says screw it, and leaves for a prospering country? We all know they have hte money and power to do it?
Will America remain free, if it watched the only group of Americans that could actually affect the country leave? Or will the military force them to stay, just like Germany did to Fritz Haber. Who mind you, became a war criminal because he was forced by Germany to make poisonous gas.
How can increasing the taxes on the group that already pays more in taxes fair?
I say increase the taxes on the other 95% by 287% and then go from there. Enough with the “I am poor its not fair i didn’t go to Harvard and I’m not smart”
Best answer:
Answer by cmdrbnd007
It has nothing to do with equity but “fairness.” It’s not fair that they are that rich and therefore they need to lose some more of that money. That’s how the liberal thinks.
Add your own answer in the comments!
Five Elements of Year-End Giving
Article by The Compass Group
Philanthropy and economic conditions go hand-in-hand. If the economy is suffering, philanthropy suffers, too. According to the Giving USA Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2010, estimated charitable giving in the United States rose 3.8% – which reflects the modest economic recovery achieved in 2010. Based on the annual report, charitable giving was $ 290.89 billion for 2010. The increase in giving is good news to nonprofits that continue to be assertive with their messaging and fundraising goals, and proves that an organization that focuses on giving can and will thrive. Year-end giving is a key element in achieving fundraising goals.
This article outlines the five elements of year-end giving and how to be successful when the economy is still recovering.
1. Case for Giving
There is always a case or reason for donors to give. Regardless of the economy, a case for giving should continue to be presented in the marketplace. Since donors tend to give more in the last three months of the year, tapping into year-end giving is critical.
Nonprofits should take the following into consideration when presenting its case for giving:
Do not ignore the economy. Donors will understand that there are financial challenges, but the organization also must illustrate measures taken to ensure donors’ money is being spent wisely. Be worthy — not needy. If a nonprofit is “tightening its belt” in preparation for a year that may be more austere than planned, donors should know. This will show that the organization is being prudent but staying the course due to the importance of its mission. Do not panic. Crisis fundraising does not work well and will not lead to fundraising success. Many other nonprofits are facing similar challenges. Appeal to emotion. Gifts are “generated from the heart and justified by the head.” There is a societal need for what nonprofits do, and the results of fundraising benefit the entire community. Nonprofit organizations are worthy and have value — they should not be shy in asking for support.
2. Annual Fund
The annual fund is not about big plans for expansion or acquisition – it’s about today. It tends to represent a substantial percentage of a nonprofit’s operating income. A nonprofit should keep focused on its basic mission and how donors can help.
When asking for donations to the annual fund, remember to:
Stay within the philanthropic culture. Solicitors should be themselves — not too fancy or too austere. They should focus on the basics of solicitation and stay personal and respectful. Make the needs known from the start. Adhering to organizational integrity, staff and volunteers should put forward the needs of the organization in order to reach fundraising goals and initiatives. Do not eliminate end-of-the-year mailings. Donors are accustomed to end-of-year mailings and will expect them. However, the organization should plan for slower returns and possibly smaller gifts, but they should stay the course with direct-mail appeals. Develop and conduct “the perfect ask.” It is better for a nonprofit to be active in the philanthropic marketplace, than to sit on the sideline. Solicitors should be prepared with a strategy for conducting “the ask.” Create an end-of-the-year challenge. Nonprofits should consider leveraging loyal, major donors to create an end-of the-year challenge that inspires others to give. For instance, the organization can ask a major donor to match any new or upgraded gifts. Promote participation. Even if an organization is confident about meeting its annual fund goals, continuing to acquire new donors at any level and promoting participation is beneficial.
3. Capital Campaign Planning
While the economy is affecting the psychological state of donors, organizations still have needs, plans and goals; therefore, planning for and implementation of campaigns should continue. Stagnation is damaging and very hard to overcome. Still, nonprofits should be prudent and cautious, while continuing to move forward. Take year-end giving into consideration when planning your capital campaign.
To plan a successful capital campaign, a nonprofit organization must:
Build an urgent and compelling case for giving. Solicitation teams should be trained and prepared to handle major-gift asks. If an organization spends time building volunteers’ confidence, they can spread the nonprofit’s message in a positive, proactive manner. The more personal the message is, the more effective it will be. Spend time reviewing the prospect pool. Members of the organization must identify potential prospects, conduct prospect research and determine which have influential relationships that can “win the campaign on paper.” Cultivate current and prospective donors The nonprofit must involve their prospective and current donors and let them know how important they are. These individuals will be your most likely prospects to support the organization during the campaign.
4. Capital Campaign Solicitations
Solicitation is never an easy task. To make soliciting donors more successful and less stressful, those asking should acknowledge that the campaign may take longer than expected, that gifts may be smaller than hoped for and that, in general, the fundraising will be harder.
To be successful with capital campaign solicitations:
Prepare for a longer campaign timeline. Campaign leadership should make adjustments to the plan and timeline. This will account for solicitations that take longer and for donors who will be conservative and cautious about their philanthropy. Increase the prospect pool. The organization must continue to build relationships with potential donors in an effort to increase the prospect pool. Acquiring new donors is the basis of all fundraising activity. Ask your current donors and volunteers to suggest others who could be asked. Continue to ask. If the organization is not making progress with the current “ask,” campaign leadership and solicitors should reevaluate the ask amounts, examine the solicitation training and ensure that the right solicitation teams are in place. In current economic environment, nonprofits must be active in the marketplace. Utilize letters of intent. If prospects are uneasy about making a multi-year pledge, the solicitor should offer a letter of intent as an alternative and consider other creative options for pledges. One solution, for example, might be to suggest the donor give 20 percent of the proposed ask amount now (this fiscal year) with the understanding that the solicitor will return the next year to discuss a four-year pledge. Ensure the team stays committed and motivated. While the original plan may change, the solicitation team needs to be assured that there is a reasonable strategy being implemented. Knowing that there is a path to success – regardless of the economy — will keep your team motivated and committed to the initiative.
5. Stewardship
Stewardship is the vital connection between the nonprofit and its constituents. It allows the organization to develop relationships with donors by thanking them in a manner that will cultivate future giving to the organization.
To create a successful and on-going stewardship program:
Maintain strong relationships. Donors with whom an organization has a strong, confident relationship will continue to support the organization. Show results. Donors will continue to invest when they can see that their dollars are making a difference. They will know and understand their value to the nonprofit. Add value. Donors who have experienced the organization’s productivity and understand the “value added” to the community will not only continue to donate but will also help attract other supporters.
While philanthropy and the economy have a symbiotic relationship, it is important for nonprofits to stay focused on their fundraising goals and remain active in the marketplace. Organizations should continue to maintain strong relationships with current donors, while always working to identify new potential donors.
Year-end giving is critical to the overall success of your fundraising goals, annual fund, stewardship and campaign. By following these five elements of year-end giving and remaining calm during dips in the economy, an organization will find fundraising success.
About The Compass Group
The Compass Group (www.therightdirection.com), headquartered in Washington, DC, provides strategy, education and coaching to organizations that must be successful in fundraising. In a working partnership with your staff, volunteers and board, Compass collaborates with you to enhance and develop the philanthropic culture of your nonprofit organization in order to achieve fundraising success. Our specialty areas include Arts & Culture, Environmental, Health Care, Higher Education, Human Services and Independent Schools.
About Frank Pisch
Frank S. Pisch is a senior fundraising executive and nonprofit leader with more than 30 years of successful experience. His strengths include campaign design and management, board and staff development, effective utilization of volunteers and all other aspects of fundraising, including creation of effective fundraising teams. Pisch has consulted on capital campaigns and major gift fundraising and strategic planning for a wide spectrum of nonprofit organizations, private and four-year colleges, public universities, community colleges, university foundation boards, independent schools, hospitals and medical centers, human service and environmental agencies, youth groups, arts organizations, and trade associations. Pisch has raised more than billion for his clients, and as a major gifts specialist, he has been involved in the successful solicitation of more than 150 gifts of million or more.
ContactFrank S. Pisch, CFREChairman and Chief Executive Officerfpisch@therightdirection.com800.401.0731
© 2011 The Compass Group, Inc.
Categories: Crisis Five.com Tags: Elements, Five, Giving, YearEnd
