Canadians have historically risen to charitable funding challenges by donating their money and time to help alleviate suffering both at home and abroad. According to the 2004 Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (CSGVP), more than 22 million Canadians made a financial donation to charitable or nonprofit organizations. Donations for that year approached $8.9 billion.
But for all the goodwill and munificence mustered up by individuals, corporations and governments, there is an ever-expanding list of disasters, diseases and causes that need your help. Natural disasters, terrorist attacks, famine, cancer, homelessness, the environment…the catalogue of charities in need of funding is seemingly endless.
Charities and nonprofits are getting better at reaching out to the public via TV ads, radio spots, lotteries, newsletters and the like. But is it all getting too overwhelming for John Q. Canuck, and is there a limit to his generosity?
Defining the issue
Sarah J. Howard, CFRE and president of Compton Fundraising Consultants Ltd. in Vancouver, says there may be something to donor fatigue, but it’s not as big a problem as some might think.
But first it bears description.
“Donor fatigue is what occurs when the relationship with an organization’s donors is poorly managed,” she explains. “Symptoms include: declining response rates and reducing gift levels. An organization that balances its contact with its donors so the relationship is one of partnering (informing, surveying, thanking, etc.), rather than one of always asking, will find their supporters will view the relationship as a partnership that works both ways, and donor fatigue is less likely to occur.”
In Toronto, Susan J. Egles, CFRE and senior vice president with DVA Navion International Fundraising Consultants, views it slightly differently.
“I find that many potential donors are using this term to describe their community,” she said. “The pattern I see is that the volume of capital campaigns has increased in the last five to seven years, and the same group of key community donors is being asked to make major gifts over and over. In fact, we are hearing about IOU fundraising – donors giving not because they have passion for the charitable organization, but because they have an IOU to the solicitor.”
Still, the propagation of charities and their campaigns isn’t necessarily all bad news for the sector.
Small dips, big returns
Though it may seem only natural for people to tire of giving to one intense fundraising campaign after another, the studies don’t necessarily reflect that conclusion.
According to Howard, generosity is often compounded during times of need.
“Our experience during times of disaster, much like the US data has confirmed, is that gifts to a disaster are generally given in addition to [people’s] current giving,” she says. “It appears that tsunami and hurricane giving has had a positive effect on non-disaster giving, suggesting that disaster giving did not ‘crowd out’ giving to other causes.” Indeed, in the U.S. numerous studies have been conducted to address this question.
An Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) survey of giving trends in the wake of 9/11 found that a dip in gift receipts did occur in the first six weeks after the attacks, but that by November 2001 donations began pouring in once again.
The Center of Philanthropy (COP) at Indiana University studied giving patterns for the same event and compiled the following results:
- 75% of households reported 9/11 giving was in addition to other giving in ’01
- 84% of foundations reported their 9/11 giving was in addition to other giving in ’01 and ’02
- 72% of corporations reported their giving was in addition to other giving in ’01 and ’02
However, when looking at disaster relief fundraising numbers for the years following 9/11, the COP discovered a downturn in giving. While 66% of households donated to 9/11 relief funds, by the time of the 2004 Indonesia Tsunami, just 25% of Americans were inclined to give to that disaster. That number improved to 47% for Hurricane Katrina, but was still well below the giving rates for 9/11.
At DVA Navion, Egles is also concerned that donor fatigue is causing diminishing returns to her clients’ charitable campaigns.
“We are seeing, on the campaign side, a smaller pool of larger gifts, more donors saying no and fewer gifts in the $25,000 to $50,000 range,” she comments. “It is getting harder [to fund] projects that do not have broad based impact, as hospitals do, [and] to attract [campaign] leaders and volunteers from beyond their core base of friends.” That said, the COP and others hypothesize these regressions in giving are generally short-lived.
Giving begets giving
Howard cites another example from her organization’s activities that illustrates donor fatigue may be less of an issue than many believe.
“During 2004-05, our firm was managing a capital campaign for the Canadian Red Cross, BC, Lower Mainland region. We were focused on raising $3.5 million for a Disaster Response Centre when the Asian Tsunami occurred,” Howard recalls. “The number of calls that were received from corporations to give money…corporations that the Red Cross didn’t (at that time) have relationships with, resulted in a ‘disaster major gift’. The Red Cross was well positioned to nurture those newly formed relationships, thus resulting in ongoing giving from those corporations in 2005 and 2006.”
Still, Howard admits that the proliferation of charities in Canada, and their related campaigning, has resulted in a much more competitive environment, one that can sometimes “overwhelm” the public consciousness.
Egles is of the same opinion.
“I think there is a greater awareness of the role of charities,” she said. “I don’t think that the typical person is aware of the growth in the number of charities, but they may feel that charities are asking more often, so they feel bombarded. [It’s] causing individuals to think through their giving decisions more carefully…to be sure they do their due diligence on the charity, to look at the project timelines and to say ‘no’ more often if there isn’t a perfect fit.”
Coping with the fatigue
Howard advises clients to do the following to preempt donor fatigue.
“Simply put, get up close and personal,” Howard counsels. “Ensure donors are properly and, if possible, personally thanked, asked for input and kept informed without every contact always being an ‘ask’. Update newsletters on how their dollars were spent; this is always helpful and an act of good stewardship.”
As for Egles, her advice is aimed at the future of fundraising.
“[Our clients] must take the time to build relationships with donors, to ask for campaign pledge amounts that fit with their giving history and commitment to their charity, and take time to engage the next generation of leaders, not the old guard,” she insists. “For example, many family-owned businesses are transitioning to the next generation of leaders. What are we doing to engage these people?”
It’s an important question and one that will need careful consideration to ensure that the future of fundraising is not compromised by today’s donor fatigue scenarios.
Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf is president of WordLaunch professional writing services in Toronto. He can be reached at andy@wordlaunch.com.
