Category: Ask

Bandwagon or Bus?

Steven Screen  |  Ask

Here’s a question for your individual donor fundraising: is your nonprofit a bandwagon or a bus? 

A bandwagon nonprofit thinks people will join because it looks impressive.  The pitch is the organization itself: when it was founded, its effective programs, all the great work it’s already done.

“Look at all the good work we’ve done,” a bandwagon says, “will you give a gift to help us continue to do this good work?”

A bus nonprofit knows that people get on because the bus is going where they want to go.  There’s a big sign that says the destination or route.  A potential rider glances at it and in a second or two knows if this is her bus or not.

“You care about this,” a bus might say, “will you give a gift to help?”

I’ve seen this play out in a real appeal letter.  An organization serving moms and kids experiencing homelessness had been asking, “Will you help us continue this important work with families?”  That’s bandwagon.  But Better Fundraising wrote their next appeal and said, “You can give moms like Julianne their own apartment, and counsellors to help them recover.” 

The second appeal – the “bus” appeal – was sent a month later to the exact same mailing list and raised eight times as much money.

A bus is easier to get on.  It’s open to more people.  It’s easy to understand at a glance, and helps riders do something they already wanted to do.  So, more people board, and that means more donors. 

And here’s the thing: when people ride the bus and have a good experience, they come back.  They tell a friend.  And you know what they call a bus that a lot of people are on, having a great time, and attracting onlookers to want to get on? 

A bandwagon.

But you make the bandwagon by running a bus that people wanted to get on and are glad they took.

Don’t Fear Typos in Your Fundraising

Steven Screen  |  Ask

It happens to all of us sooner or later: an email or letter goes to your donors with a typo in an important word.

A longtime client of ours just shared that a letter went out years ago with a prominent typo.  They meant to say that donors could give a gift to provide a specific service “for the deaf.”  Instead they told donors that they could provide that service “for the dead.”

The same two things happened that always happen in situations like this:

  1. People panicked, and the fear caused some people to imagine all sorts of catastrophic scenarios.
  2. The letter raised just as much as it normally did.  The fundraising performance of the letter was not affected at all by the typo.  No donors left the organization because of the error.

The catastrophizing was a tempest in a teacup.

But oh man do I understand it.  I’ve had deeply embarrassing typos myself.  I’ve feared for my job.  More than twenty years ago, I had a client find a typo, fire me that day because of it, then tell me that they weren’t going to pay any of the invoices I’d sent them.  I had an uncashed check from them that I hadn’t deposited yet, and their reaction was so forceful that I was worried they were going to stop payment on it.  This was an international organization, and the closest branch of their bank was about three hours away from me in Canada.  So I immediately got in the car, drove the three hours, crossed the border, and cashed the check before the end of the day. 

That typo left a mark.

But in my experience, and the experience of other fundraising lifers like me, the only kind of typo that reduces how much money you raise is a typo in/around how the donor makes their gift.

Typo in a url or in the programming of a QR code?  You’re in trouble.  Typo in the return address of your reply envelope?  Get ready for a long couple of weeks.

But that’s it.  The vast, vast majority of donors get it when they find a typo.  They know that no one is perfect.  They probably know you’re a small nonprofit, and that these things happen.  A few people will let you know about it, and everyone who was going to make a gift will still make a gift.

And if my experience is any indication, a few more people than normal will make a gift.  This experience is so common (a typo causing a slight increase in gifts) that the general understanding is that when people notice a typo, they “click” into an increased level of engagement; they stop skimming and start reading.  This increases the number of people who read the fundraising message, which increases the number of people who give.

(And if this makes you think about inserting a typo in your fundraising on porpoise to increase how much money you raise, I’ve had the same thought.  But I’ve never inserted a typo on purpose, except for the one in the previous sentence.)

I share all this so that, the next time a typo happens to your organization, you can be the voice of reassurance and reason in the room.  Don’t panic; respond warmly to the people who let you know about the typo, and keep on doing your important work.

Break Through the Noise at Year-End

Steven Screen  |  Ask

The new Executive Director of one of our clients, when looking over the fundraising results from the previous year, said:

“There was an astronomical spike in giving last November and December – what did we do?” 

“Last year was the first time we convinced you guys to run our full recommended year-end plan,” we replied.  “We helped you send out two appeal letters, both with chaser emails.  We did 4 or 5 emails for Giving Tuesday.  Then 4 emails on the last three days of the year.  We also helped you make phone calls to major donors who hadn’t given yet that year.  Oh, and we changed the hero banner on the website for the month of December to promote year-end giving.” 

“That’s a lot,” he said.  “But it obviously worked.  Will it work again?”

“Based on what happens for our other clients,” we replied, “it will absolutely work again.”

We know this because the following has always been true: year-end is the busiest time of year for your donors, but if you can manage to break through all the noise and get your message in front of them a couple of times, they’ll give generously!

Take a look at your plan for year-end.  Will it break through all the noise and get your message in front of donors a couple of times?

Hate the Need, But Don’t Hate Sharing the Need

Steven Screen  |  Ask

I’m always on the lookout for quick ways to say powerful things.  So when someone in the webinar chat wrote the following sentence, I noticed immediately.

”I think the existence of hungry children is more offensive than learning about them.”

The context was a conversation about “sharing the need” in a piece of fundraising, and some readers being offended.

My two cents: don’t protect donors from reality; trust them with it.

Sharing the need doesn’t feel good for the person sharing it, or for the reader.  But was the situation getting any better before your nonprofit got involved and started talking about it?  No.

This is why we have so much respect for effective Fundraisers: they have the foresight to know that the occasional person is going to be offended by their fundraising, and the strength to continue.  Because when more people know about the need, more people will help.

Hate the need.  But don’t hate sharing the need.

Subject Lines, Teasers, and Headlines

Steven Screen  |  Ask

You can’t save souls… in an empty church.

Your fundraising can’t inspire anyone to give… if nobody reads it.

These ideas point towards the importance of email subject lines, teasers on direct mail letters, and story headlines on newsletters.  Because those parts of your fundraising play a major role in whether your fundraising gets read… or not.

Always remember:

  • You spent money and time to send a donor a letter, but it doesn’t matter if they don’t open it
  • You sent an email to your whole list, but it doesn’t matter if they don’t open it
  • You wrote an amazing story for your newsletter, but it doesn’t matter if people see the headline and just move along

I know many professionals who spend more time on subject lines, teasers and headlines than they spend on the letter, email, or story itself.  It’s that important.  I reviewed a direct mail letter today – of the 30 minutes I spent with it, about 15 minutes were spent on the headline for the reply card.

If you’re interested in getting better, here are some simple teaser tips, and here’s a podcast I did about teasers with Jeff Brooks.  And here’s some help with newsletter headlines.

But the first and biggest thing you can do is ask yourself: is your organization spending the appropriate amount of time on your subject lines, teasers, and headlines?  If not, what reminder can you set for yourself to spend a few more minutes next time?

Quick ‘AI & Fundraising’ Thought

Steven Screen  |  Ask

Quick reminder: vanilla ChatGPT (or any AI platform) is not good at writing direct response fundraising.  Here’s why…

ChatGPT learned from a massive amount of publicly- and digitally-available fundraising content, but does not know how well each piece of fundraising performed.

AI sees zero difference between the e-appeal that raised 3x what you expected and the e-appeal that generated 3 gifts and $57.  It will draw from both appeals equally as it works on your appeal.

But sooner or later, someone in your organization or on your Board will say, “Hey, I ran your proposed appeal through AI and here are some improvements it suggests” or “Hey, can we have AI write our fundraising?”

Here’s what I want to say, but probably never would:  “Thank you.  We know that AI was trained on fundraising, but doesn’t know which pieces worked and which pieces didn’t.  So, roughly half of the advice it’s giving is going to make our fundraising worse.  Would you please figure out which half of the advice you’re passing along is going to cause us to raise less than we’re raising now, and let me know?  Thank you!”

All kidding aside, here’s the other true thing: AI is really helpful.  AI will have a good suggestion or two.  AI will complete a first draft for you, so you don’t have to face the empty document and blinking cursor. 

AI, when expertly trained and well-prompted, can write a pretty great appeal.

But if you’re using vanilla, untrained AI to create or evaluate fundraising, half of what it’s telling you will make your fundraising worse.  And it doesn’t know which half.

Hollow Highlights and Pronoun Problems: Never Emphasize a Word That Can’t Stand Alone

Steven Screen  |  Ask

As a sort of “companion piece” to my recent post on highlighting too many things, here’s more hard-won advice about underlining and bolding in your fundraising:

The words you highlight should be understandable without reading the whole piece.

Here’s what I mean.  The following is a screenshot of a story I recently reviewed for a print newsletter.  Focus on the bolded copy:

If you only reading the headline, subhead and emphasized copy (which is all than an estimated 80% of people read), you will receive the following message:

  • You have given her a better future
  • Because of you, Sovanna is learning, growing and becoming more confident
  • But that all changed with your gift

What does the last sentence mean?  What all changed?  I thought Sovanna was doing great, but I guess she’s not doing great any longer?  And I caused that? 

The reader doesn’t know what the sentence means, and it possibly changes the meaning of the whole story.  That is a big problem if the emphasized copy is the only thing a donor reads – which is true for most donors!

Now, contrast that to my edited version:

Now look at the three things a “scanner” would take away:

  • You have given her a better future
  • Sovanna’s Mom is going to tell you how much you improved her daughter’s life
  • You provided a backpack, notebooks and other school supplies that Sovanna needed.

I made a handful of changes, but the change I want to focus your attention on is the bolded sentence in the middle of the story.  We went from a sentence the donor doesn’t understand (she doesn’t know what the word “that” refers to), and the donor doesn’t know if the change was good or bad – to a sentence that clearly tells the donor the concrete things that happened because she gave.

When you’re choosing what to bold or underline, always check for two things:

  1. The words or sentence must be understandable even if the donor hasn’t read the rest of the piece.  Watch out for pronouns that reference sentences that the donor likely hasn’t seen!  The word “that” in the original is a perfect example of this.
  2. The bolded or underlined copy, taken together, should tell a coherent story.

Always always always remember that most donors will scan before they read.  And many donors will only scan and never read. 

Learn to write and emphasize your fundraising to make sense to scanners.  When you do, you dramatically increase the number of people who will receive the message you’re trying to send.

Overuse of Emphasis

Steven Screen  |  Ask

Here’s a portion of an email I received from a nonprofit last year.  I’ve changed the name of the organization and its location.

What I want you to notice Is how many things are visually emphasized using bolding:

There’s an old adage that says, “when you emphasize everything, you’ve emphasized nothing.”  I think that’s true here.  So many things are important that I don’t know what’s important!

Here’s the thing: when you choose what to emphasize, choose carefully.  Here are the rules I live by.

And remember that, when you choose what to highlight for readers, you are giving your beneficiaries a gift.  By generously curating the two or three most important ideas for your readers, you make your fundraising more accessible and easy to understand quickly.

And by making your fundraising more accessible and easy to understand quickly, you increase how many people donate – which means you can do more of your mission work to help your beneficiaries.

‘It’s Like YouTube’

Steven Screen  |  Ask

My wife and I got our kids to watch an episode of Seinfeld last night, something we’d never done before. 

Less than five seconds into the episode, our 15-year-old with a rocket for a brain began to doubt that this was going to be worth his very important time.  “So… what IS this,” he asked.

My wife said, “It’s a SitCom.”

Blank stares from the kids.

She continued, “’SitCom’ is short for ‘situation comedy.’  It’s a type of show.”

Just complete nothing on my kids’ faces.

So I said, “It’s like a 22-minute YouTube show with recurring characters.”

“Oh!” my two older kids said.  They understood.  “Sounds great, let’s watch!”

“Oh!” my youngest kid said.  “Like YouTube!”  He understood enough to be interested.

Once they had a frame of reference they understood, they were willing to give some time to this.

Let this be a lesson to all us nonprofit people and our jargon.

If you ask donors to “provide housing for a person who is justice involved” … you’re going to get a lot of blank stares.  The only donations you’ll receive are from people who already know the jargon, so you’ll have a very hard time growing. 

On the other hand, say you give donors a frame of reference that they understand and ask them to “provide housing to a person who has turned their life around after an early arrest.”  Then you’re going to get a lot of, “Oh, sounds great.”

It’s a generous act by a nonprofit to use language and concepts that are easier for a donor to understand.  (And of course there are boundaries: I’m not suggesting using hurtful terms or language, and in my contra-example I purposefully used people-first, supportive, respectful language.) 

When we make the generous choice, we’re sacrificing a tiny bit of accuracy for increased engagement, donations, and impact.

To bring it back to my kids; I could have been the pedantic parent, made them look up “situation comedy” and given them a brief history of the TV landscape in the 90’s. 

How do you think that would have gone?

That’s not the type of parent I want to be, and it’s not the type of nonprofit our beneficiaries need us to be.