• No results found

The Role of Direct Mail in Philanthropy Marketing

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "The Role of Direct Mail in Philanthropy Marketing"

Copied!
35
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

The Role of Direct Mail in

Philanthropy Marketing

Wayne Gurley

President & Creative Director Allegiant Direct, Inc.

Brentwood, TN

(2)

The Allegiant Direct Philosophy:

Developing a Successful Contact Strategy • Direct marketing serves as a “lead generation”

program for major and planned gifts.

• A cultivation process – moving a person from first-time gift to a major or planned gift.

(3)

The Allegiant Direct Philosophy:

Developing a Successful Contact Strategy • Not “annual” giving (once a year), but current,

regular, repeat giving

• Getting donors to their “long-term value” as quickly as possible

(4)

Direct Marketing

A “Numbers” Game

Major Donors & Planned Giving Donors

(20% give 80%)

Mid-Range Donors

Entry Level Donors (80% give 20%)

(5)

Years of Giving Between 1

st

Gift

and 1

st

Five-Figure Gift ($10,000+)

(Source: Target Analysis Group/Blackbaud)

1 - 2 Years 10%

3 - 5 Years 12%

6 - 8 Years 13%

9 - 12 Years 20%

(6)

What Was the Size of a

Five-Figure Donor’s First Gift?

$1 - $24 18% (second largest %)

$25 - $49 14%

$50 - $99 15%

(7)

What Was the Size of a

Five-Figure Donor’s First Gift?

$100 - $249 23% (largest %)

$250 - $499 8%

$500 - $999 4%

(8)

What Was the Size of a

Five-Figure Donor’s First Gift?

$1,000 - $2,499 7% $2,500 - $4,999 3% $5,000 - $9,999 2% $10,000 - $24,999 5% $25,000 + 1% $1,000 + 18% (total of above)

(9)

Your goal should be to maximize

Donor Long Term Value (DLTV)

Move donors from Point “A” (first-time gift) to

(10)

A few DLTV givens:

• Average worth per donor is $1,000 - $2,000. This figure includes all lifetime income from individuals, including planned giving. (Does not include

foundation grants or corporate support.)

• Best age demographic for fundraising is 65+.

• Average “life” of a direct mail donor is 7 years, so you don’t have a lot of time to move them from “A” to

(11)

Case Study:

Donor Long Term Value Analysis

Martin Memorial Foundation/Stuart, FL

Years of

Giving Total Lifetime Income From Individuals # of Individuals Responsible for Total $$$ Average Worth Per Donor 30 $141,000,000 27,840 $5,065

(12)

Case Study:

Martin Memorial Foundation/Stuart, FL • 13-year history of direct mail

• Historically did 2 appeals, fall & spring • Lacked accurate data and analysis

• No focus on pipeline/attrition rate • Excellent donor relationships

(13)

Case Study:

Martin Memorial Foundation/Stuart, FL

Starting in FY 2008:

– Increased mail to patients – Began systematic testing

– Added a Fall follow-up appeal to donors; added Doctors’ Day mailing in February

– Launched Foundation “Hot Sheet” – Added LYBUNT mailings

(14)

Direct Mail Results

Martin Memorial Foundation/Stuart, FL

$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000

FY2008 FY09 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 YTD

$190,855 $196,675

$216,956 $222,484

$196,080

$156,437

* fiscal year ends 9/30 1,897 donors 1,592 Donors 1,116 donors 1,917 donors 1,254 donors 1,273 donors

(15)

Focus on LYBUNTS

• Wanted to address high attrition rate

(16)

LYBUNT Results

Fiscal Year # mailed # gifts % response $ raised Avg. gift Cost/donor

2009 (Aug) 691 73 10.6 % $13,115 $180 $4.16 2010 (Aug) 1,250 126 10.0% $12,235 $ 97 $4.76 2011 (Jan) 311 70 22.5% $ 6,455 $ 92 $2.14 2011 (Aug) 1,195 122 10.21% $ 7,708 $ 63 $4.90 2012 (Jan) 694 59 8.50% $ 3,245 $ 55 $5.88 2012 (Aug) 1,057 126 8.40% $ 5,420 $ 42 $4.19 •Cost/donor = cost to recapture each donor

(17)

Lapsed Donor vs.

Variable Paragraph Copy Test

Audience Pieces

Mailed # gifts % response $ raised Avg. gift CP$R

Lapsed 2-3 Year Donors (IVUS Letter) 1,246 16 1.26% $723 $45.19 $1.08 Lapsed 2-3 Year Donors (LYBUNT Letter) 1,246 17 1.36% $1,130 $66.47 $0.69

(18)

The UN-solicitation

• Foundation “Hot Sheet”

• 1 piece of paper, done in-house, “down & dirty”

• Mailed 10+ times/year to $100+ donors, all coded MG prospects, other lists as necessary

• Current, quick, can be

customized for different uses (i.e. “all-doctor” edition, event edition, impact reports)

• Drives donors to website – no BRE included (we tested)

(19)

Annual Giving:

A Flawed Concept

• Concept of “annual” giving comes from college & university fundraising.

• Perpetuates the mindset that you will only ask for support once a year

• Assumes you will only get one gift per year from donors

• Does not promote an environment in which “multi-donors” can be cultivated

(20)

Problems with

“Annual” Giving

• Creates extremely high attrition rates

• Puts enormous pressure on organization’s donor acquisition efforts to replace donors who lapse and grow the donor base at a reasonable annual rate

(21)

Donor Attrition Chart:

20% rate over 5 years

Donors 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 1,000 800 640 512 410 328 2,500 2,000 1,600 1,280 1,024 819 5,000 4,000 3,200 2,560 2,048 1,638 10,000 8,000 6,400 5,120 4,096 3,277

(22)

Donor Attrition Chart:

40% rate over 5 years

Donors 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years

1,000 600 360 216 130 78

2,500 1,500 900 540 324 194

5,000 3,000 1,800 1,080 648 389

(23)

Donor Attrition Chart:

60% rate over 5 years

Donors 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years

1,000 400 160 64 26 10

2,500 1,000 400 160 64 26

5,000 2,000 800 320 128 51

(24)

Annual Goals

Annual Donor Renewal Rate of 60% - 80%

(25)

Direct Mail Results

What Can You Expect? (Industry Standards) • New Donor Acquisition response: 1% - 2%

• New donor acquisition average gift: Low: $15 - $25; High: $50 - $60 (depending on the “ask”)

• New Donor Acquisition CP$R: $1.00 (break-even) to $3.00 or possibly more

(26)

Direct Mail Results

What Can You Expect? (Industry Standards)

• Active Donor Renewal response: 5% - 15%

• Active Donor Renewal average gift: Can vary from low of

$25 to $100+

• Active Donor Renewal CP$R: $.01 - $.50

• Lapsed Donor Renewal response: 2% - 3%

• Lapsed Renewal average gift: (Same as above.)

(27)

Getting the First Gift

• Entry-level “audition” gift

• Was the donor thanked?

• Was gift properly acknowledged?

• Was it acknowledged quickly? (within 24-48 hrs.)

• Was the donor told that his/her gift was put to good use

(28)

Getting the Second Gift

• Extremely important!

• 50% of first-time donors never give again

(29)

Suggested remedies

for high donor attrition rates

• Thank donors promptly with a letter, and preferably, with a phone call.

• Mail a “Welcome on Board Package.”

• Within a few weeks, make another phone call

thanking them again, and put the idea of making a second gift into their head by mentioning a matching gift and asking them if they mind receiving info.

(30)

Suggested remedies

for high donor attrition rates

• Send a postcard inviting donors to participate in a webinar or telephone conference with a senior member of your organization who would agree to discuss issues you are facing or needs (such as new technology or treatment procedures for a hospital). • Should be roughly 30 minutes with time for

(31)

“Renewal at Birth”

Membership/Giving Clubs

• Comes from subscription fulfillment industry

• Designed to reduce number of 1-year lapsed donors and generate higher renewal rates and average gifts • Ask comes soon after first gift, when donors are most

(32)

Goals of

Membership/Giving Club

• Get donors to give a second gift

• Get donors to give multiple gifts over course of the year

• Get donors to give cumulatively larger gifts than they would without the structure of membership

• Get donors to their “long term value” as quickly as possible

(33)

Don’t worry about asking too often.

• Your job is to ask. Your donor’s job is to give.

• Resist the temptation to make this decision for your donors by limiting the number of times you solicit them.

• Your donors will tell you by the number of gifts they give how often they wish to give.

(34)

Word have meaning

• Consider changing the name of your program to something that is more conducive to encouraging

multiple annual gifts, such as “Current” or “Sustained Giving.”

• Project a different reality in your own mind and also in the mind of your donor.

(35)

Remember…

• If you think you are protecting your donors by not mailing to them so they will be more inclined to give to you, you are sadly mistaken.

• If you aren’t mailing to your donors, some other organization is.

• Your Lapsed Donors are Active Donors for some other charity.

References

Related documents

2. Implement appropriate access controls... Implement appropriate vulnerability testing. Implement realtime intrusion detection and logging. Institute periodic incident

“Deferred tax assets” ( e ,8.9 million at 0 September 006) include e 1,88.6 million for the remaining balance of deferred tax assets recognised on the reversal of the intragroup

The first two research questions investigated pausing at the grapho-motor level of the handwriting process to examine whether children with DCD spent a greater amount of time than

Thus, the research question for the second aim is whether higher subjective and objective career success in officers of the Swiss Armed Forces go along with higher expressions

We pro- pose a two-stage shared representation learning framework with intra-modal optimization and subsequent cross-modal transfer learning of semantic structure that produces a

Realizations of this process can be gener- ated with the stochastic simulation algorithm, but simulating highly reactive sys- tems is computationally costly because the

En logique propositionnelle classique, un même processus d’inférence peut faire intervenir un nombre quelconque (fini) de fois la même formule afin de dériver une conclusion, ce qui

String diagrams of the protein–protein interactions in (a) pulmonary microvascular endothelial cells using the 20 most down-regulated DEGs and (b) pulmonary artery smooth muscle