The Agitator

Some days I wish I could call an emergency meeting of all Agitator readers, if for no other reason than to get your immediate reaction to one or another of our insane ideas — or at least Tom’s insane ideas. Until last week I figured that the time, cost and logistics of reaching 5,000 Agitatees would be prohibitive or impossible. Now I know better. Turns out that for little more than $1,500 we could hold an Agitator Telephone Town Meeting. All we need are readers’ phone numbers, and

Thursday’s mid-year release of the Blackbaud Index shows overall charitable giving up 2.2% and online giving up 14% for the first six months of 2013. More importantly, it should remind us all that now — today, or tomorrow at the latest — is the perfect time to get started planning for online year-end fundraising, tuning up your donation pages and learning more about best practices so you’re ready to act when December rolls around. More on year-end preparation in a moment. First, a look at overall fundraising trends for the first half of 2013 compared to last

That’s not a typo. Hispanic women are the growing powerhouse of consumer spending in the US. Not only are their numbers and buying power increasing dramatically, Hispanic women seem to call the shots when money decisions are made within the typical Hispanic household. [Of course, my wife says that's just a continuation of a long-established tradition that most men of any stripe haven't yet realized. "Ignorance is bliss" she says.] According to this new report from Nielsen, Latina Power Shift, with 52 million in the US population, Hispanics have an impressive buying power of $1.2 trillion. Says Nielsen, “Within

Peter Buffett, musician and philanthropist, wrote this piece — The Charitable-Industrial Complex — last week in the NY Times. Much of what he says relates to the programmatic side of what major donors attempt to do and their motivations. For example, he describes “conscience laundering” …

“As more lives and communities are destroyed by the system that creates vast amounts of wealth for the few, the more heroic it sounds to “give back.” It’s what I would call “conscience laundering” — feeling better about accumulating more than any one person could possibly need to live

Nice short item from Seth Godin the other day. He says there are only six ‘buttons’ to press — or, “keys on the keyboard” — if you’re trying to spread an idea or sell something … Anger, disgust, fear, sadness, happiness and surprise. Four negatives, one positive, and one that could go either way (probably triggering one of the other five!). Godin says: “…all of these words are merely costumes for the six emotions built deep in our primordial soup.” You’ve probably seen other lists like this. Here’s one I’ve kept on hand for years, from direct marketing

It’s not bad enough that every nonprofit you compete with for funds is badgering your donors with email appeals. Their appeals are just the tip of the iceberg. This remarkable infographic from ExactTarget shows you just how crowded those in-boxes will get over the balance of the year. According to ExactTarget, the average online retailer will send 17 promotional emails in July, 18 in August and September, 20 in October, 25 in November, 27 in December and 18 in January. That’s 125 before the year end’s. And that’s just one retailer! Here’s the environment you’re fishing in. The advice given

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), one of my alma maters, flubbed it last week, sending a message that graded its many online activists. One who contacted The Agitator received a ‘D’ … and wasn’t happy about it. I’m not sure what interpretation of human nature would have led EDF to think that chastising its activists — “You’ve earned a D” — for not responding sufficiently to alerts would be an effective cultivation strategy. On the other hand, awarding bad grades did get a response! So many

Now I’ve heard everything. Donors on Nantucket Island have given enough. They’re all tapped out. There’s hardly a free evening any more … what with all the celebrity cocktail parties to attend. So reports the Cape Cod Times, as cited by Nonprofit Quarterly. Said one beseeched, but well-heeled resident: ““We’re full of angels, but you shouldn’t try to overdo it, be­cause a person can get turned off very easily if they think everyone is coming to the same well.” For our geographically-challenged readers, Nantucket ranks highest in the US in housing prices. The typical house on Nantucket Island

When it comes to the recipe for lasting, committed relationships, there’s no ingredient as important as consistency. Whether it’s your best friend, your spouse, partner, favorite restaurant, toothpaste or razor blade, I’ll bet that consistency is a main thread that runs through all these relationships. Your best friend or partner didn’t get to be ‘best’ by being undependable; showing up sometimes late, sometimes early, sometimes on time. And when you first discovered what is now your favorite restaurant, I’m certain that the second and third time you returned, the food,

Like it or not, far too many folks judge a charity by its cost of fundraising and ‘overhead’. From regulators to the media, from charity watchdogs to far too many nonprofit boards — and even some fundraisers themselves — the false metric of ‘cost of fundraising’ has created a big mess of misunderstanding. Fortunately, the industry is waking up and finally seems motivated to deal with the issue. Nowhere was the awakening clearer than at last week’s New York conference of the Direct Marketing Association’s Nonprofit Federation (DMNAF). First, a heavily-attended plenary session — moderated by Tom

How many lists have you seen giving rules you should follow to retain a donor? I hope you collect them all, because retaining a donor is the most important task in fundraising. Even more important than acquiring the donor in the first place (I hope a few readers go head-to-head with me on that proposition). So I was pleased to read Willis Turner’s list with a twist — 30 Ways to Lose Your Donor — in Fundraising Success. Lists like this tend to repeat the same things, so I’m always looking to find something new, or if not new,

Would you associate AARP, the voice of America’s 50+ population, with adroit use of social media? If not, think again. AARP has some 80 Facebook pages with over a million fans, an active presence on YouTube and Twitter, and a “toehold” in about 15 other online platforms. Of course, if you have a nine-person team solely devoted to social media — and working in a sandbox with 37 million members — you had better get it right! Judging from this article on AARP’s social media strategy, I’d say they’re on the right track. Here are some observations by Tammy

The Chronicle of Philanthropy just published this great article, 75% of Young Donors Turned Off by Out-of-Date Web Sites, describing what motivates people in their 20s and 30s to donate, and what their giving preferences are. A heap of stats, in the report — the 2013 Millenial Impact Report — sponsored by the Case Foundation and conducted by Achieve, about likes, dislikes, size of donations, channels used, etc. But what I found most interesting was that the research included videotaping 100 young donors as they browsed a selection of nonprofit websites. Take a look here for a

Direct mail fundraisers who use ‘donor fatigue’ as an excuse for frequently changing acquisition packages are in the charlatan business. Same for fundraisers who attempt to hook or trick the donor — with silly teaser copy, oversized outer envelopes, omitting the organization’s logo. They’re charlatans too. So says Kevin Schulman, our provocative pal over at DonorVoice, who has little tolerance for some of the practices in the nonprofit direct mail world, as you’ll see from this remarkable post, Stop trying to beat the control.  Just build a better one to start with. With 15+

To complement the guerilla war we’ve declared against sleazebag ‘charities’ and solicitors (we refuse to call them fundraisers) in our Part 1 post, we need to mobilize both association and public official action. These are some of the associations in our sector that are in position to act and should:

• Association of Direct Response Fundraising Counsel (ADRFCO)
• Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP)
• Direct Marketing Association Nonprofit Federation
• Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability
• National Catholic Development Conference
• National Council of Nonprofits
• Independent Sector

In the regulatory sector:

• National Association of State Charity Officials
• National Association
  

Do donors actually use watchdog groups like the BBB Wise Giving Alliance and Charity Navigator to decide which nonprofits to support? The answer may surprise you. It’s an important question, because as the debate over questionable or downright corrupt practices heats up, the roles and importance of regulators, the trade associations and the charity watchdogs will also be debated. In an earlier post, What Is The Watchdog Watching?, we took issue with the much-too-heavy reliance on ‘cost of fundraising’ and ‘cost of overhead’ metrics used by some watchdogs like Charity Navigator. Since then,

Finally, another voice stepping up to the plate regarding regaining some public trust in fundraising. The Direct Marketing Association Nonprofit Federation (DMANF) has just issued its new Principles and Best Practices for Accountability in Fundraising. Hats off to DMANF. In the media release, DMANF General Counsel Senny Boone comments: “Donors expect nonprofits to be accountable and transparent. The new principles serve as key reminders to organizations that they hold a public trust.” The guidelines offer a defense of fundraising as a necessary investment in any nonprofit’s mission, but with this bottom line: “Taken in total, in accordance with