Which is Better: More Donors or More $$$?
Posted by Allison Fine on November 23, 2010
The Minnesota Community Foundation has their second annual “Give to the Max Day” last week and once again it was a spectacular success.
The first giving day was last year. I had a chance to talk to the chief architect at the Minnesota Community Foundation, Jennifer Ford Reedy, a few months ago for my Social Good podcast for the Chronicle of Philanthropy.
It was a terrific example of a foundation forming partnerships with dozens of local nonprofits and a dozen other funders, creating an open source platform for giving (it was open source to enable and encourage other foundations to replicate the effort.) And at the end of the day, that first go round, the day generated 38,000 donors giving $14,000. I remember seeing those numbers on Beth’s blog and thinking that there had to be a typo. In the depths of the recession it was astounding to see that Minnesotans had given that much money to charitable causes. But, then, again, it’s Minnesotans, the most generous people in the world.
Jennifer posted a summary of this year’s event on the Council of Foundation’s blog last week. Jennifer outlined a key difference between this year’s event and last year’s. They decided this year to focus on increasing the number of donations not the size of the donations. They were successful in doing this, their bottom line this year was 42,000 donors pledging a total of $10 million.
As Jennifer writes, “we created an incentive system that rewards organizations for turnout.” The incentive were grand prizes of $20,000 and $10,000 to the nonprofits that raised the largest number of donors during the day.
This all raises a very interesting question: should nonprofits be aiming for more donors or more money?
Smart people like Kim Klein have been arguing for years that building a broad base of supporters is critical to long term sustainability for nonprofits.
But what if the needs are so great, winters in Minnesota are brutal after all, that losing $4 million hurts local people and communities in the most need right now?
I think part of the answer has to be what happens to these donors after they give on the big day? Blackbaud reports that donors who give online give more over time than their traditional counterparts. However, we reported that after the first America’s Giving Challenge sponsored by the Case Foundation that the winners didn’t know what to do with their online donors once they had them. That was three years ago, maybe we’re collectively getting better at learning how to build relationships with our online friends and turn them into long term donors now.
Maybe. At least I hope so! Katya, Kivi and Rebecca provide hopeful insights here on how to retain online donors.
This is, I suppose, the heart of our biggest challenge for the next few years; creating online friends, building stronger ties with a portion of them, asking them to give in real, authentic ways — and getting them to give again.
Share this:
This entry was posted on November 23, 2010 at 6:40 am and is filed under Social Media. Tagged: america's giving challenge, Blackbaud, Give to the Max Day, Jennifer Ford Reedy, kim klein, Minnesota Community Foundation, network for good, Social Good. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
9 Responses to “Which is Better: More Donors or More $$$?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Sylvester Renner said
Great question: Initially, I would lean towards more donors – assuming that they would become repeat / recurring donors. A big donor list offers potential – though conversion may be uncertain. The key as you stated is how to “turn them into long term donors”. Think future…
On the other hand, more $$$ is also great as you can take that to the bank today and use to impact lives immediately. Think present…
What would be “best” (not just better) is: both
Jane McGillem said
This is a very interesting question. Colorado is weeks away from its inaugural giving day–Colorado Gives Day. On Dec. 8 Community First Foundation set the goal to raise $1 million in 24 hours. $1 million seems so small compared to $14 million, but what is impressive is the number of donors and nonprofits that have joined this effort to increase philanthropy in Colorado. GivingFirst.org is the Foundation’s online giving protal where all of the donations will be collected. The website has been around since 2007 and over that time period, they have seen more donors give small gifts. Because of this, now there is momentum to be able to pull of Colorado Gives Day. For this reason, I think it’s important to increase the number of donors first. With more donors, you then have great potential to raise more money for the organizations that are so vital to every community. I guess we’ll have to see after Dec. 8th how Colorado’s numbers come back.
Hayley S said
I agree with Jane – the more donors you get, the more people you’re likely to reach in the long run. I think the key is how to turn donors into *fundraisers*. That’s what we’re trying to do at Gameraise.com – converting donors into fundraisers so that not only are they donating money themselves, but they’re also encouraging their friends and family to donate.
Great article – I only recently found your blog and I’m glad I did! Will be following you on twitter, too. I’m @GameRaiseHayley
Shevonne said
Definitely more donors. Word-of-mouth is always the best way to reach people. The more donors; the more reach.
Jeff Achen said
In fundraising, it seems to me that there are three main types of intended outcomes: 1) an increase in the frequency of donations, 2) an increase in the number of donors, and 3) an increase in the amount donated from existing donors.
It makes sense for nonprofits to focus marketing/communication efforts on increasing the number of donors as a pathway to the other two goals. Here in Minnesota, we’re proud to be helping nonprofits expand their donor base, particularly in the new online world. There have been so many wonderful stories of nonprofits connecting with new donors on Give to the Max Day. Though the dollar amount is down from last year, there have been so many beneficial outcomes of this day of giving that go well beyond the statistics.
Thanks Allison for helping us dig deeper and reflect on what Give to the Max Day means for the nonprofit world.
Allison Fine said
My pleasure, Jeff. From these comments, I do wonder if it’s possible not to create a dichotomy between more donors OR more $. Somethign to think about. Also, something to think about is how to help the groups that did just gain these new donors turn at least some of them into long term givers. Thanks again for everything you’re doing!
Allison
Beth Kanter said
And here’s the coverage from this year! A guest post from Jeff
http://www.bethkanter.org/gtmd2010/
Geri Stengel said
Interesting question. I’d vote for more donors, with the caveat that any fundraising project, whether traditional or new school, has to include a follow-up plan. As the links you give point out, the plan must be personal, show people how much impact they had, and make it easy for them to give again. A well-thought out plan that includes response to giving will create a longer-term income stream that will equal more money overall.
mmfritz said
Thank you for this information.