Join us Friday, Mar. 6 at 1:30 pm Toward a Predictive Model for Fundraising  We’ll review the preliminary results from a recently- completed survey of fundraising practices in advocacy organizations.  We’ll develop scenarios to test our theories and discuss next steps for this project.  Come to the workshop and help write the rest of the story... we’d love to see you there!

TOWARD A PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR FUNDRAISING #15NTCPREDICTIVE Mary Dillon Kerwin President, Blue Strike NTen Nonprofit Technology Conference Austin #15NTC March 6, 2015

Introduction Collaboration Notes:

This session ❖ Launch the next phase of research into a fundraising tool that will help development directors set goals, manage time, and deploy resources. ❖ Look at preliminary findings and ask for your recommendations for phase II.

Agenda  How we got started  What we found (so far)  A look at the study’s limitations  Real life scenarios  Where we go next

BACKGROUND Project Development

It started with a question from the audience “Can you tell me which strategy will yield the best results?” Why is this question so hard to answer?

Tools that help us predict We have retirement calculators, we have mortgage calculators, we even have workout calculators...

How about one for development? Your organization’s revenue mix, number of donors Your staff size and level of experience Your volunteer profiles, willingness to help

Hypothetical #1 If your organization is less than 10 years old, and you have fewer than 500 donors, and you have a part-time development director, then you are likely to find success Starting a sustainer program 2. Relying on board participation 3. Focusing on a combination of web-based giving strategies

Hypothetical #2 If your organization is going through an executive director transition, and you have approximately 2,500 donors, and you raised $2 million last year, you are likely to find success Starting a giving club for major donors 2. Hiring additional fundraising staff 3. Focusing on cultivation of high net worth individuals

Enlisting help for the project ❖ Conference calls with nonprofits, discussions with businesses and consultants ❖ Faculty advisor for independent study ❖ Data collection ❖ Analysis -- here we are at NTC!

Questions to think about  As we go through the research, here are a few questions to consider:  Have you seen similar, supporting or contradictory research?  How might you use the findings?  What other correlations or causes should we look for?

RESEARCH Descriptives and Group Differences

Research design ❖ Focused on organizations engaged in advocacy, public policy, civic engagement, and public interest law ❖ 900 organizations selected at random received an online survey from Jan. 20 to Feb. 17, 2015 ❖ Questionnaire asked about 2013 fundraising practices ❖ Responses were matched with IRS administrative records (FY2013) to create the datafile.

About the sample  175 responses  162 completed surveys  44 states and 14 different categories

Figure 2.1 Nonprofit Category

Individual giving and revenue ❖ Most organizations (77%) have fewer than 1,000 donors ❖ Most (60%) have fewer than 5,000 names on their files ❖ Only 17% count on individual donors to make up 50% or more of their revenue ❖ Average revenue is $2 million

Staff and volunteers ❖ Two-thirds of the organizations have staff dedicated to development ❖ 38% have executive directors with less than five years tenure; while one-third have tenure of 10 years or more ❖ Board participation is present, but modest

Figure 3.1 Fundraising Practices

Figure 3.2 Giving Clubs

Figure 3.3 Matching Campaigns

Figure 3.4 Conditional Ask String

Figure 3.5 Sustainer Program

Figure 3.6 Second Gift Ask

Figure 3.1 Fundraising Practices

Figure 4.1 Development Directors

Figure 4.2 Board Participation

Figure 4.3 Executive Director Tenure

Figure 4.4 Comparison

Other variables  Age of organization*  Category  Number of donors/ file*  Assets to revenue ratio  Revenue mix * Indication of possible statistical significance

LIMITATIONS Considerations in using the research

Limitations ❖ Not generalizable to all nonprofits ❖ Does not measure all practices ❖ Revenue is an imperfect dependent variable ❖ Survey focused on risk of memory decay ❖ Ranges are difficult to use in regression ❖ Low response rate may result in non-response bias

DISCUSSION Real Life Scenarios

Hypothetical #1 If your organization is less than 10 years old, and you have fewer than 500 donors, and you have a part-time development director, then you are likely to find success... Starting a sustainer program Relying on board participation Focusing on a combination of web-based giving strategies

Hypothetical #2 If your organization is going through an executive director transition, and you have approximately 2,500 donors, and you raised $2 million last year, you are likely to find success... Starting a giving club for major donors Hiring additional fundraising staff Focusing on cultivation of high net worth individuals

Hypothetical #3 If your organization is..

Discussion questions

NEXT STEPS Phase II of research, sharing findings through webinars

Additional testing  Looking for correlations  Segmenting by age, category, income  Controlling for media and unusual gifts

Sharing research findings  to all survey respondents  Webinars with state nonprofit associations  Brown bag lunch with Association of Fundraising Professionals

Wrap up Evaluation Survey: Collaboration notes: