The Little Words Mean the Most

What are we rooting for the Saturday before Superbowl Sunday? From a donor-communications standpoint....

We are this close to destroying the old-school (and maybe financially not the best-school) case by bringing full on stage the character rarely named in the past: that abstraction called a donor person. Written fully into the story, in every chapter. Like a novel. Open-ended, though. Donors write the ending.

In the midst of this blizzard I stood

The household snow shovel stands nearby,

like a Continental soldier in 1776, uncertain but sure

in case my next bright idea doesn't work just the way I'd hoped

 

dedicated to so many

In case my next bright idea doesn't work.

"Money is washed spotless once given away," I thought. "Sins of the father."

Off the rack (what every audit must know) [rough]

What makes a donor newsletter "great"?

            The only objective measure is revenue.

            Revenue tells you whether your publication is working.

            High-performance donor newsletters — i.e., those that bring in eye-popping amounts of charity — have certain characteristics.

When a donor newsletter gives readers what they crave (basically, a feeling that they've made a difference), charitable income rises, in two ways.

 

1. It rises immediately, as more gifts arrive in response to a particular issue.
2. And it rises indirectly, long-term ... because a great donor newsletter nurtures the organization's so-called "culture of philanthropy."

           

            A great donor newsletter constantly reminds your "supporter family" how important they are. Hence, the newsletter provides donors with a regular source of rich emotional gratification. Result? As your donors become aware of just how vital they are to the success of your mission, your charity will see improvements in those donors' Lifetime Value (LTV).

 

Retention is the bottom-line goal

 

Top researchers like Prof. Adrian Sargeant and psychologist Jen Shang consider Lifetime Value fundraising's most important metric.

            LTV is the amount a donor will give totally, from first gift to last, from acquisition to bequest. The problem (or opportunity) is: most charities realize only a tiny fraction of their potential LTV, because most new donors don't stay with them long.

            Retention is the "new black" in fundraising. For decades, acquisition ruled. But the data is now clear: organizations lose their new "charity customers" (i.e., new donors) remarkably fast. Blackbaud's chief scientist, Chuck Longfield, reported in 2013 that 70 percent of first-time donors are gone within a year. And his sample is vast.

            US charities have a serious, undiagnosed disease: they're hemorrhaging donors. What's the cure: do a better job of holding your donors close. It's easy enough.

Talk down to me. I'll like it. The "great debate" is a blast of swamp gas.

Fundraiser: "We need to write our direct mail at the 6th-grade level, professionals tell me." CEO: "Over my dead body. All our donors are university graduates. We will not demean their intelligence by dumbing things down." Who's right? The fundraiser. Who's ignorant as a pancake griddle? The CEO. Grade level has zero to do with vocabulary or content. It has to do with how fast I can absorb your deathless prose. A low grade level is a fast read. A high grade level is a slow sinking death into the La Brea tar pits, the charming poisonous stink of asphalt bullying into your lungs. To kill you, sweets. Find out the truth here.

US Republican History 101: Revolutions against the greedy never happen

in fact they're quite common I'm happy to report. Nobody likes greedy people

The Rich Are Getting Richer: News at 11

It's what progress looks like: inequities. There's a dynamic at work, like erosion. Extreme wealth is just another sight to stare at, with a hate&envy factor of 99%

How one client's audit begins

Summary

 

 

 

Rarely do you see nonprofit communications work as powerful and mistake-free as yours. And I can say this because I see landfills’ worth of nonprofit attempts at donor communications every year.

            Your printed materials are operating at the extreme edge of excellence.

            That said, as Professor Dumbledore might say to Harry, in that old wizard’s squeaky high voice: “Mr. Potter, you are still missing one magical ingredient.” Dumbledore waited. Harry said nothing. Dumbledore thumped his staff. “Donor-centricity, Harry! You must have donor-centricity … if you want to maximize charitable income.”

            There are three degrees of donor-centricity: (1) compulsory because convention demands it (lists of donor names); (2) calculated — you start using “you” and other rudiments; you’re greedy enough to know your self-absorbed NPO needs to change its ‘tude toward donors, so you fake it until you make it; and (3) full body hug. It’s not hard to guess which degree raises FAR more money.

© 2015 Tom Ahern

Checklist for donor newsletters

• Does it bring me, the donor, joy on the front page?
• Does it give me a big, fat, giggle-inducing hug?
• Is it corny enough? (Corny’s a good thing.)
• Did it surprise me; i.e., is there any intrinsic news value?
• Does it follow the Domain Formula (including content)? (You need training for that.)
• Does it pass the “you” test?
• Is it easily skimmed, extracting all the key messages in a few seconds?
• Is there clear “need” as well as “joy”?
• Are there “big check” turnoffs?
• Are the headlines competent?
• Are the headlines donor-centric?
• “Are those headline verbs I hear sizzling?”
• Am I taking the donor on a journey?
• Are my offers (calls to action) bold and many?
• Are you sending people to your website over and over, where they can have a different sort of experience?

From the new case show