Category: Ask

The Gap and The Gift

Steven  |  Ask
The Gap

There’s a gap between your organization and your donors.

Savvy fundraising organizations know that donors don’t know as much about your beneficiaries or cause as your organization does.

That donors often don’t care quite as much as you care.

That donors often use different words and phrases than you would. 

Savvy fundraising organizations know that the people on the other side of the gap are not likely to close the gap themselves.  Donors are quite happy as they are, thank you very much.  They don’t have a felt need to be educated, learn new jargon, or grow to an expert’s level of understanding.

So savvy fundraisers make the generous act of crossing the gap and meeting donors where the donors are. 

That means writing to donors at donors’ level of understanding.  It means no jargon.  It means being specific, not conceptual.

It means figuring out what motivates donors to give and crafting your fundraising around those motivators – even if those motivators are not what motivates the organization’s staff. 

And when you’ve done the generous thing – crossed the gap to meet the donor where they are – then you can ask them to take a first step towards involvement and greater understanding. 

That first step?  It’s usually a financial gift.  A check in the mail or a donation online.

And that gift happens because you gave them a gift, first.  You crossed the gap.  You went to them.

This post was originally published on November 17, 2020.

The Six Types of Asks

Steven  |  Ask
Six types.

There are 6 main types of “asks” that I see in fundraising.  Let me tell you what they are, then make a couple of observations. 

As I go through these, look for the type that your organization tends to use…

More General Asks

The ask is Organizational

The donor is asked to support the organization.

  • “Will you please support our work?”
  • “Please join us as we…”
  • “Will you partner with us?”

The ask is Conceptual

The donor is asked to do or provide something that’s a concept.

  • “Will you please provide hope to a person”
  • “You’ll help provide refuge…”
  • “Will you walk alongside someone as they…”

The ask is About a Topic

The donor is asked to support one area or part of the organization’s work, but it’s still conceptual.

  • “Your gift today will provide education!”
  • “Will you help provide habitat restoration for wild birds?”
  • “For Moms experiencing homelessness, will you provide housing?”

More Concrete Asks

The ask is Specific

The donor is asked to do something more specific.

  • “Will you provide a year of school?”
  • “You can provide 1 square meter of sanctuary for wild birds.”
  • “Your gift will provide a night of housing for a Mom experiencing homelessness.”

Note: if you’re wondering how to highlight a specific part of your organization’s work while still raising undesignated funds, download our free whitepaper here.

The ask is Specific with a Price

The donor is asked to fund something specific, and given the price to fund it.

  • “You can provide a year of school for $78!”
  • “1 square meter of sanctuary for wild birds costs just $150.”
  • “Your gift of $48 will provide a night of housing for a Mom experiencing homelessness.”

The ask is Specific with a Price, and is Timely

The donor is asked to fund something specific, with a price point, and what they’re being asked to fund is needed/about to be needed.

  • “Your gift before August 26th will provide a year of school for $78!”
  • “Before the migratory birds arrive next month, will you please give $150 to provide 1 square meter of sanctuary for wild birds?”
  • “Your gift of $48 will provide a night of housing for a Mom experiencing homelessness.  No one should have to sleep in a car during this heatwave.”

As I thought about the different types of Asks, I noticed something that I hope will be helpful to you: there are times and places for both “more general” asks and for “more concrete” asks.   

Here’s what I’ve observed:

  • “More general” asks tend to be successful with people who have a lot of context about your organization and what you do.
    • These people already know the importance of your work, and they already know some of the specifics. Think “major donors that you’re in relationship with,” grant-making organizations, and at events when you have time to give people the whole picture.
  • More specific asks tend to be successful to people who do not have a lot of context about your organization and what you do.
    • Asks that are more specific tend to work better in direct response fundraising: email, the mail, on TV, etc. In those mediums, most of the audience does not have much context about your organization and what you do. They simply don’t know. So being specific and concrete is really helpful for them.

    The lesson, as always, is to know the audience for any given piece of fundraising, and meet that audience where they are.

    Why ‘Having Access’ Isn’t a Compelling Reason to Give

    Sarah Lundberg  |  Ask
    Access.

    There’s a phrase I see used in direct response fundraising that always has me scratching my head.

    Having access.

    For example: Your gift will make sure a child has access to healthy meals.

    Or your gift will help a cancer patient have access to treatment. Or your donation will make sure a student has access to education.

    I’m not sure why this language is so enticing to organizations, but “having access” doesn’t provide a compelling reason for a donor to give. And it’s just not language that regular people use in their everyday life.

    If you put on your donor hat, here’s something to puzzle over:

    Would you rather give $30 so a child has healthy meals to eat, or give $30 so a child has ACCESS to healthy meals?

    Would you rather give $100 to help a cancer patient get treatment, or give $100 to help a cancer patient have ACCESS to treatment?

    Would you rather give $75 to help a student get a great education, or give $75 to help a student have ACCESS to a great education?

    When we start to think like a donor, giving to provide access to something… just doesn’t measure up to providing the thing itself.

    So when you’re writing your next appeal or e-appeal, try writing without using the idea of “having access” to something. Your writing will be stronger, your appeal will be easier to understand, and your donors will have a more compelling reason to give.

    One Test, Three Lessons

    Steven  |  Ask
    Three lessons.

    A long time ago, at an Agency far, far away, I was part of a team that tested two phrases against each other to see which one worked better in an organization’s fundraising.

    Here are the two phrases:

    Your gift will provide clean water to a person

    Your gift will provide clean, disease-free water to a person

    The phrase that included “disease-free” was the clear winner – more people gave money and more clean water was provided. 

    (Apologies to my fellow nerds out there, this was 20-something years ago and I don’t remember the exact results of the test.  But I do remember it was statistically significant and we used the “disease-free” variant of the phrase moving forward.)

    I took three lessons from this little test; they’ve been helpful to me and to others, and I hope they will be helpful to you.

    Words Matter

    Just a couple words here and there can make a material difference in how much money a piece of fundraising raises.

    The Words that Matter Most are the Words that Describe What the Donor’s Gift Will Do

    In my experience, the words you use to describe what a donor’s gift will do are the most important words in any piece of fundraising. 

    Put differently, changes to the words that describe what the donor’s gift will do are going to have the largest impact of any changes you make.  Focus on these words first.

    ‘Embed the problem in the solution’

    Adding the words “disease-free” to the original phrase reminds donors of the original negative situation that their gift will help solve. 

    When I saw this happen again and again, I created the phrase “embed the problem in the solution” as shorthand to remind myself to do this.  It’s not always possible, but it results in phrases like:

    “You can provide no-strings-attached financial aid to a student”

    “Your gift will provide a Bible in a person’s own language for just $4”

    “You can provide healthy, non-fast food meals to a person living in a food desert”

    I think you can feel how that phrasing is more powerful.  It’s more powerful because when donors are reminded of the current situation, they more clearly see and feel the whole impact of your programs and their giving.

    To close, I encourage you to apply these lessons to your own fundraising.  And when you make your writing decisions based on evidence-based lessons from head-to-head testing at scale, you’ll start to get a reputation as a donor whisperer.

    How ‘Tactic Stacking’ Helps You Raise More Money

    Steven  |  Ask
    Tactics.

    My last post was an introduction to the idea that donors often make decisions to give (or not to give) based on information that has nothing to do with the organization or its programs. 

    When an organization first makes this realization, a whole new world is opened up.

    They see that, instead of just looking for new inspirational ways to describe their work, they start using the tactics and approaches that the “Fundraisers who came before us” discovered were effective.

    Examples include:

    • Matching funds – “matching funds will double your impact!”
    • A deadline – “Please send your gift by June 30th”
    • Highlighting a need that’s happening soon – “The kids start arriving at camp in just a couple weeks!”
    • A limited time opportunity – “If we don’t buy this piece of property for our new building, it’ll go up for public sale.”

    The magic really starts to happen (and the money really starts to roll in) when you do what’s called “tactic stacking” – using multiple tactics at the same time.

    Take a look at this paragraph, which “stacks” all four of the tactics mentioned above:

    The kids will be arriving at our summer camp at the end of the month!  [NEED THAT’S HAPPENING SOON] And I’m thrilled to tell you that matching funds will double your gift – you can help send two children to camp instead of one!  [MATCHING FUNDS]  This is the only chance to send a kid to camp this year.  [LIMITED TIME OPPORTUNITY]  So please send your gift before June 30th! [DEADLINE].

    See how all those tactics work together to create a compelling argument for a donor to send in a gift today?

    And that’s just the copy.  Here are some of the Design tactics we could “stack on” to make this appeal even more compelling:

    • Use illustrations of kids doing fun camp activities
    • Have the reply device be designed to look like a “certificate” that’s “good for a day at camp for a child”
    • An insert that lists the daily schedule at camp, where a child has written in all the activities they are excited to do

    Once you start to learn all the tactics, creating fundraising becomes an endlessly fun, creative endeavor.  You’re no longer constrained to just talking about the programs and outcomes of your organization; you’re unleashed to use human psychology and behavior science to build compelling cases for your organization.

    Today, your organization is somewhere on the continuum between “we just describe our work and ask for support” and “using all the tactics all the time.”

    So I’ll just ask you a simple question: what tactic or tactics could you apply to your next piece of fundraising?

    A Sentence that had Nothing to Do with the Organization

    Steven  |  Ask
    Birthday gift.

    I was once part of a large-scale test where two versions of an appeal letter were sent to equal groups of donors:

    • One group was asked to sponsor a child
    • The other group was asked to sponsor a child whose birthday was the next month

    The letters were exactly the same, apart from a sentence in the “birthday version” that said, “[Child Name]’s birthday is next month, and your sponsorship will be a life-changing gift.”

    The “birthday version” was the clear winner of the test – significantly more donors responded to that version; it raised more money and resulted in more children being sponsored.

    In fundraising, this type of thing happens all the time: donors are moved to action by content that has nothing to do with the organization, its programs, or the quality of its work.

    Maybe better said, donors don’t give only because of what the organization does or the quality of their programs.

    For instance, savvy fundraisers know that a donor is more likely to give if:

    • The beneficiary’s birthday is coming up (people like birthdays)
    • If matching funds will double their gift (people like to have more of an impact)
    • If donors know their gift is urgently needed (people feel great when they solve urgent problems)
    • If the donor knows a lot of people in their neighborhood are donating (people are more likely to donate if there’s “social proof” that people like them are donating)

    I think of the bullet points above as things that a donor already likes to do.  Donors like getting their money doubled, they like knowing that other people are giving, etc.  They liked doing those things before they ever heard of your organization.  And when a piece of fundraising gives them the chance to do those things, they are more likely to donate.

    So, organizations that want to raise more and increase their impact will intentionally fill their letters / emails / events / in-person asks with reasons to give a gift that tap in to what donors already like to do. 

    As the “birthday version” showed, just one sentence that gives donors a reason to do what they already like to do can meaningfully increase how much money you raise.

    The One Exception

    Steven  |  Ask
    Be the exception.

    Last week I wrote about “Ask Culture versus Guess Culture” in major gifts fundraising, and how Ask Culture results in raising more money and keeping more of your donors.

    But after hitting publish I remembered something…

    I know of one major gifts program that never asks donors to give but raises tons of money and has a high major donor retention rate.

    Here’s how that program does it:

    • Every single conversation and communication contains a clear reminder of “the need” that the organization exists to serve.
      • The only exception is when a donor is being Thanked for a gift they just made.  Those calls / handwritten notes / receipt letters are full of thankfulness. 
    • The organization absolutely “reports back” to donors on successes…
    • And they always mention what they think is needed next: from “serve the people who will need help next month” to “serve the people they haven’t reached yet” or “expand the successful program” or “start a new program.”

    In a nutshell, the organization is so focused on “the situation” they exist to serve that they can’t help but mention that situation and the people they haven’t been able to help yet.

    The consequence is the following three things are always being reinforced:

    1. The need exists right now, today
    2. What the organization would like to do about it next
    3. That funding for “what’s next” is needed

    (By the way, notice the contrast between that approach and the standard approach that focuses almost entirely on people they’ve already helped / things they’ve already done, and how they are helping today.) 

    To me, there’s something very pure about this organization’s approach to major donors.  They do the “relational” parts of fundraising very well: they thank donors with real gratitude, they report back on progress made.  They are personal and build strong relationships with donors…   

    But the organization always makes sure their donors are aware of the need for their work.  They don’t make the foundational mistake of believing that making donors aware of their work will inspire significant giving.

    This approach isn’t for everybody – in my experience it takes incredible emotional strength to be thinking about & sharing the need so constantly.

    But this case shows that donors can handle it.  And that you can succeed in major gifts fundraising without asking often or directly.  But only if you have made the need abundantly clear and that funding is needed to meet it.

    Ask Culture vs Guess Culture

    Steven  |  Ask
    Ask culture and guess culture.

    Sometimes an idea or perspective from outside the world of Fundraising can help you see the work of Fundraising more clearly. 

    That’s what happened when I heard about “Ask Culture vs Guess Culture.”

    Here’s a quote from when this idea first appeared online: 

    In some families, you grow up with the expectation that it’s OK to ask for anything at all, but you gotta realize you might get no for an answer. This is Ask Culture.



    In Guess Culture, you avoid putting a request into words unless you’re pretty sure the answer will be yes. Guess Culture depends on a tight net of shared expectations. A key skill is putting out delicate feelers. If you do this with enough subtlety, you won’t even have to make the request directly; you’ll get an offer.

    When an organization is operating in Guess Culture, here are three of the behaviors you see:

    • Over-stewarding of donors
    • Never asking, or Asks that aren’t direct or clear
      • Perfect example: I did a “creative review” for an organization where I looked at twelve pieces of their fundraising.  In all those pieces they never actually asked the donor to give a gift. 
    • Under-communicating out of a fear of “donor fatigue”

    You’re also seeing Guess Culture at work any time you hear a Major Gifts Officer say something like, “If you do a great job of stewarding a donor, you won’t even have to ask.”

    Guess Culture and Fundraising

    I think the unique demands of nonprofit fundraising cause people and organizations to operate in Guess Culture more than they normally would. 

    Asking for money is a vulnerable experience, and it’s hard to be vulnerable.  Many times, for many reasons, it’s emotionally easier to shower donors with stewardship and give them the occasional “opportunity” to give… instead of boldly preparing a specific offer and asking the donor to make a gift.

    And of course the Guess Culture approach works sometimes.  Because donors are generous, any approach will work sometimes.

    But looking at the performance of the nonprofits we’ve worked with over the years, an Ask Culture approach to major gifts fundraising (and to direct response fundraising) works better.  It results in raising more money and keeping more donors year-over-year.

    Ask Culture major gifts fundraising looks like:

    • When setting up a conversation or meeting, telling the donor in advance whether you’re going to ask for money or not
    • Being willing to ask major donors for more than one gift a year
    • Asking for a specific amount
    • Asking directly with phrases like, “…so I’m asking if you’ll give a gift of $10,000”
    • After the ask is made, being silent and letting the donor speak next

    Of course there will be a few “no”s.  Of course there will occasionally be an uncomfortable silence.

    But you’ll get a lot more “yes”es and you’ll raise more money for your cause.

    Do you know Sofii?

    Steven  |  Ask
    Sofii

    If you don’t know sofii.org, you should.

    It’s a website for Fundraisers, by Fundraisers.

    Here’s a GREAT post to start with:

    https://sofii.org/article/how-i-wrote-it-the-make-a-wish-foundations-prospect-letter

    The post is about a successful donor acquisition letter written by Harvey McKinnon, a pro who I’ve had the pleasure of meeting a couple of times.

    There’s a lifetime’s worth of fundraising wisdom in this post – seriously, get a cup of coffee and read it.  You’ll get so many ideas.  If your next piece of fundraising isn’t better, I’ll eat my hat. 

    Sofii and Harvey – you can’t go wrong!