Tag: nonprofit

Nonprofit mailings need more quality, less quantity

~ penningink ~ 1 Comment

The United States Post Office has a nice service called “informed delivery.” People who sign up for it get an email each morning that shows them an image of each mail piece or package set to be delivered that day. It’s a nice heads-up feature for anyone looking for some important mail. As one who uses the service, I find myself often looking at the email and saying “again?!”

A stack of various envelopes, including a white envelope labeled 'BILL ENCLOSED' and several colored envelopes in the background.

It makes sense that an organization will send a thank-you and acknowledgment of a recent gift. It also is to be expected they would ask past donors to consider another contribution. But the frequency of these mailings from individual organizations often exceeds what is reasonable. As a result, the mailings defeat their purpose to generate another response. The likely response to being flooded is to toss or shred the mailing unread in an inevitable “cry wolf” effect.

The frequency of mailings from each organization is made worse by the number of mailings from multiple organizations. I contribute to a number of nonprofit organizations. Of course this places me on their mailing list. But because organizations sell or share mailing lists, or addresses appear in the database of professional mailing houses that serve nonprofit organizations, my name gets added to the mailing lists of organizations I have never given to or even heard of.

This all adds up to a pile of mail, and my conclusion that nonprofit mailings need less quantity and more quality.. Part of my past career doing public relations work for nonprofit organizations included direct mail fundraising letters. So I offer some suggestions as a consumer as well as a professional in this arena.

  • Segment by recency, frequency, and quantity. It is conventional advice that organizations should segment their publics and avoid the folly of thinking there is a “general public”. In nonprofit fundraising, this means having a database and using it strategically. Sending mail, and writing corresponding content, that considers how recently someone gave, how often they historically give, and how much they typically give is just common sense. Asking someone to give when their last contribution has not even appeared on their bank statement or credit card bill is annoying. Taking them off the list for a period is respectful and likely will have more response. A targeted letter to lapsed donors, those who have missed a pattern of regular giving, can also be effective if written well to acknowledge the appreciation of past giving and asking if there is a reason the contributions have stopped. Related to recency is frequency. Some people give monthly, while others prefer to give quarterly or annually. Once organization I support smartly recognizes that I give each July and they send me a reminder appeal shortly before then. Finally, appeals should be written differently to groups of donors according to they amount they have given or have potential to give. A letter to a wealthy individual with check boxes for $10 or $100 is a missed opportunity. Asking for a large gift from someone of modest means will cause offense or distress.
  • Match donor intent and cause. When I worked for an NGO, we allowed donors to support specific staff, projects or a country where we worked. This gave donors more agency and the opportunity to feel more engaged with the organization. It also matched their preferences and considered why the donor gives and not just what the organization needs. If a donor gave to a project that was fully funded, we let them know and offered to return the gift or redirect it to something else of the donor’s choosing.
  • Be a relational vs transactional nonprofit. Corporations that make and sell products or services talk about what type of brand they are. Transactional brands merely offer a product or service in exchange for payment. That’s fine in some product categories and industries. Others seek to be a relational brand, where there are repeat customers who engage with the company in ways beyond a purchase and actually have relationship with company representatives. Some of the nonprofits I support achieve this relational status well. I receive correspondence not from some nameless organization, or even a development director, but directly from a person in the field doing what the nonprofit mission is. Often it was that person and my association with them that encouraged me to give in the first place. But the ongoing relationship also keeps me on the list of engaged supporters.
  • Manage the report to request ratio. I wrote above about the instinct to shred or trash mail from nonprofits who flood my mailbox too frequently. One way to encourage me–and others–to open mail is to ensure that some mailings do not request more contributions at all, or do so subtly. Instead, they report on what the organization has done with the support, in what specific ways have they been accomplishing their mission. There may be some people who give to nonprofits to feel good about themselves and say they support an organization. However, most want to know that their contribution housed the homeless, fed the hungry, established a church, rescued animals or in any other way demonstrate impact. The best way to do this is with storytelling–personal stories where the beneficiaries of the organization’s mission are front and center demonstrating positive change in their lives as a result of the organization doing what it says it does. Direct mail letters can include these stories in a letter, or in a newsletter or annual report. A giving envelope can be included without fanfare so donors can choose to give. But the purpose of such communications on a regular basis should be accountability.

In addition to this advice for organizations, I have advice for people like me who want to support nonprofits but get annoyed by the flood of direct mail funding appeals. People can go to DirectMail.com and fill out a form to be taken off mailing lists. But I would rather have people become strategic donors and reward organizations who do the above.

Essentially, I would encourage people to select a set number of organizations they want to support. Even do what I do and develop a spread sheet. Then indicate the annual amount (or monthly or what makes sense for you) to give to each organization. The total would be your annual charitable giving, which may equal the “tithe” percentage of income that Christians are encouraged to consider when giving. This helps to plan, stay committed to giving, report on taxes if you itemize, and mostly allows you to sort mail and discard organizations you have not pre-determined to support.

Criteria for giving are up to individuals but I suggest the following:

  • Obviously, select thoughtfully the types of causes you want to support. Religious, arts, environmental, political or anything else that means the most to you.
  • Investigate if the organization is responsible. One metric is the percentage of funding that goes to mission vs operations. A good standard is 80-20. Sometimes a donor can feel like they are merely paying for the next package to come in the mail to ask them for more. Guidestar is a good online resource of third-party data to vet nonprofits before committing to giving to them.
  • Do you actually know someone who works for the organization? This is not necessary, but it can help ensure you are entering into more of a relationship than a transaction.
  • Does the organization match what is recommended above in terms of the frequency and contents of direct mail communications?

If all of the above are practiced, I suggest it would lead to less frustrated donors and more effective nonprofits.

Could AI assist nonprofit news models?

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

I had mixed emotions when I first heard about AI news releases. On the one hand, I had the typical professor’s worry about plagiarism and enabling laziness in students. On the other hand, I teach according to what is happening in the industry. So I had to balance educating students about this tool but also working to ensure they learned how to write news style as opposed just typing in some keywords and waiting for a result.   

It reminds me of going from banning laptops in class to requiring them for use in an active learning pedagogy. 

My rule on AI news release tools became a compromise—students can use the MuckRack AI news release generator (we use MuckRack for contact lists and other things in class so they can learn a media relations software for internships and jobs), but they must edit and show me the changes they made in their submitted assignment, using track changes of comments in a PDF.

One student so far took me up on this. She did not do the edit part. AI got a poor grade. It may be hard to do particular assignments as well, such as audio news releases, video news releases, feature release style or a pitch to a particular journalist.

I also discussed AI and the quality of its output in class. Here is an example of AI output for an actual client in class. I entered the organization’s name and what they do. I shared the output—which came in 10 seconds—with students and had students them critique it based on AP style and standards for a good news release they had learned in class. 

Here is the AI news release that resulted:

The Flourish Society Launches Intergenerational Women Mentoring Program

The Flourish Society, a leading organization dedicated to empowering women, is thrilled to announce the launch of their new Intergenerational Women Mentoring Program. This program aims to bridge the gap between different generations of women by fostering mentorship relationships and providing valuable support and guidance for personal and professional development.

In today’s fast-paced world, it is essential for women to support each other and learn from the experiences of those who came before them. The Intergenerational Women Mentoring Program by The Flourish Society is designed to create a platform for women of all ages to connect, share knowledge, and build meaningful relationships that will contribute to their growth and success.

The program offers a unique opportunity for mentees to be paired with experienced mentors who can provide guidance and advice based on their own professional journeys. Mentees will have the chance to learn from the wisdom and expertise of their mentors, gaining insights on various aspects of their careers and personal lives. By connecting women from different generations, this program aims to foster a sense of community and create a supportive network that will inspire and empower women to flourish in their chosen paths.

The Flourish Society’s Intergenerational Women Mentoring Program caters to women from diverse backgrounds, professions, and age groups. It recognizes the value of intergenerational cooperation and the positive impact it can have on personal and professional growth. By encouraging women to learn from one another, the program aims to break down barriers and stereotypes, and create a more inclusive and supportive environment for women in all walks of life.

Through this mentoring program, The Flourish Society hopes to inspire women to reach their full potential and develop the confidence necessary to overcome challenges and achieve their goals. By connecting women from different generations, the program aims to foster a sense of collaboration and empowerment among women, creating a ripple effect that will benefit not only the mentees but also the mentors.

To learn more about The Flourish Society’s Intergenerational Women Mentoring Program and to get involved, visit their website and follow them on social media. Let’s celebrate the power of mentorship and support women in their journey towards personal and professional success.

Students critiqued the output pretty well. Here is a summary of their comments:

  • No format, such as a dateline, boilerplate, etc.
  • Missing key info
  • Saying “thrilled to announce”
  • No quotes
  • Not AP style
  • Repetitive, redundant
  • Cliches and platitudes
  • No news value stressed

The bottom line I told students is what I’m hearing from professionals: AI for news releases, as well as other applications, can be a first draft and get you past a blank page. But humans with news judgment and public relations skills will still be needed to make a usable final version that journalists will find acceptable and may also draw visits to an online newsroom. 

AI illustrates an old problem with technology—efficiency for the user does not necessarily mean quality for the recipient. Journalists already complain of the overwhelming quantity and poor quality of news releases and pitches they receive. They have had their own tools to write, edit, and assess the quality of news. For example, the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) maintains a list of tools for journalists, as does the Poynter Institute. Journalists also can simply delete or block news releases that continue to come from bad actors.

Speaking of journalists, the advent of AI for news comes as media companies continue to consider the best business model. Ad support has declined. Readership has been divided with so much available online content. People read individual articles, not complete packages in the form of newspapers or magazines or broadcast outlets. There is also increasing concern by news organizations of AI deepfakes, literal fake news and images, as discussed in a recent Axios article. 

A philanthropy center at the university where I work recently had an article about three non-profit news models. Whether it’s nonprofit status, nonprofit ownership, or some form of foundation support, the media industry may be turning from seeing news as a loss leader for advertising revenue to seeing news as a public good supported as a charity. 

One can only wonder if AI will contribute more news to make a donor-funded model for news more sustainable. In other words, would a non-profit model for news employ the efficiencies of AI to generate news? But then, would people pay for news generated by a machine if they can use the same machine themselves to generate and aggregate news of their interest? 

I am hopeful that the future will be news written by people, for people, and supported by people. AI may have a place, but as of now I doubt it will be primary. 

I also hope that PR professionals who know how to write, understand news, and have a desire and obligation to inform people will be assisting their journalistic counterparts in the news ecosystem. As with all professions, a benefit to society should be the primary driver for practice as opposed to efficiency for an organization. 

Advice on Nonprofit Annual Reports

~ penningink ~ 2 Comments

A few months ago, I spoke to a group of nonprofit executives about the types of information nonprofit donors prefer. You can read more about that in a previous blog post.

I received an email following that presentation asking for some advice about whether or not to do an annual report. I thought I’d share my response here.

First of all, why should a non-profit organization do an annual report? They are not required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as they are for public companies. This could be seen as a good thing if you’ve ever read the SEC’s instructions for an annual report, called a 10K in government parlance.

But many nonprofit organizations do annual reports anyway, and with good reason. One reason is simple accountability. Donors who contribute money in various amounts all want and deserve to know how well it was spent, and what was the return in terms of organizational mission. Staff, recipients of services, government agencies, and other publics may also expect to know what the organization did in the past year.

The annual report also serves as a fine promotional tactic and should be seen as a strategic aspect of the organization’s ongoing communication plan. Donors feel compelled to give again–or for the first time–when reading about accomplishments and seeing who else gave. Community members have a deeper understanding of the organization as opposed to just name recognition. This can lead to referrals for services and partnership opportunities as well as support.

The woman who emailed me also asked if an annual report could replace their newsletter. That’s a possibility, but you lose some frequency since annual reports only come out once a year. Another option is to make the annual report the fourth issue of a quarterly newsletter. It saves the money of an additional publication but maintains top-of-mind communication with key audiences and fulfills the purpose of an annual report. It could be an insert in the newsletter or a special issue format.

So then the question becomes, what sorts of content should you put in a nonprofit annual report? Here’s a suggested list:

  • First, have a theme each year that is told both in words and graphically. The theme should tie in to the organization’s mission generally but also be specific to unique success in the past year or a vision for the year(s) to come next.
  • Include a letter  from the president and/or board chair that reflects on the past year, looks ahead, and incorporates the theme. Go for personality and creativity as opposed to perfunctory, pedestrian language.
  • Include a list of board members and their affiliations as well as staff with titles. This is a form of transparency, but also personalizes the organization and provides implicit endorsement.
  • Donor profiles. Telling the stories of donors, including who they are and why they give, serve as both grateful recognition and powerful testimonials to motivate repeat and new giving.
  • Success stories. Nonprofits don’t exist to just gather funding, they have a mission. Telling personal stories about real people who benefited from that mission puts a face on the cause, treats the recipients of services with dignity, and provides all readers a deeper and more  accurate understanding of the organization’s work.
  • Finally, include the financials. This would include both sides of the ledger. For donations received, name donors (with permission) and possibly put them in tiers or categories of giving to show that all sizes of gifts are  welcome. If gifts were earmarked for specific projects or programs, show that also. Then, show how money was spent by category of mission, including administrative costs. This is again both a form of transparency and good promotion to show the need, responsibility, and diversity of organizational assets.

A good idea is to include an envelope or web address for additional giving. Track the responses that come from it, as well as comments from key publics for future reference.

Understanding Nonprofit Donors’ Preferred Types, Qualities and Sources of Information

~ penningink ~ 1 Comment

I was happy to speak to a sold-out crowd of 60 nonprofit professionals last week about how to reach out to potential donors based on the information they are interested in, not just what nonprofit organizations want to send them.

Discussing nonprofit donor information preferences at
the GVSU Johnson Center for Philanthropy.

The presentation was at the GVSU Johnson Center for Philanthropy, as part of its “Brown Bag Lunch and Learn” series.

I was sharing data and information from my chapter “Nonprofit Financial Communication: Donors’ Preferred Information Types, Qualities and Sources.” The chapter is included in the recently published Handbook of Financial Communications and Investor Relations. The study of the information nonprofit donors seek is an extension of my research on individual investors when they are considering purchasing a stock: “The Value of Public Relations in Investor Relations: Individual Investors’ Preferred Information Types, Qualities and Sources”.

Attendees were interested in the results of my survey of a sample of 173 donors to a large community foundation. The book chapter includes a lot of statistical analysis of results (which can be read if you acquire the book via the link above). In the presentation I hit the high notes of practical take-aways about the types of information (i.e. content), qualities of information (ranging from length to tone and more) and the sources of information (meaning the people or communication tactics). The brief results are as follows:

Top preferred types of information:

  1. Mission of the organization
  2. Impact of the organization and the donations received
  3. Where money is spent by category
  4. Location of organization (local, regional or national)
Top preferred qualities of information:
  1. Personalized appeal
  2. Focused on organizational need
  3. Stressing a specific giving opportunity versus general gift to organization
  4. Focused more on results of organizational work vs its need for support
Top preferred sources of information:
  1. The organization’s web site
  2. The organization’s newsletter
  3. Other donors (i.e. word of mouth)
  4. The organization’s annual report
  5. Conversations with staff of the organization (ie interpersonal)
It is interesting to note that the news media does not rank highly in the responses of donors as a source of information for donors to nonprofits. Media relations and publicity are helpful, but it turns out not the most persuasive form of communication strategy when trying to gain attention and raise funds. The news media was valued, but came in after other sources of information when donors were asked what was the “most useful” source of information and presented with people and organizations, not tactics. Their response in order of preference was:
  1. The nonprofit organization itself
  2. Other donors
  3. A charity expert (such as a financial planner)
  4. The news media
When so many people confuse “PR” for publicity, it is important to note that the strategic communications and relationship building aspects of public relations–the real root of the profession–are most effective in the minds of donors.
In my study, and to a degree in my Johnson Center presentation, I went over the association of variables. In other words, when donors are looking for specific types of organizations, they look to specific sources. I also explained that when they want certain qualities of information they favor specific sources. These are illustrated in the latter slides in my presentation, which is available on my Slideshare page.
The room full of nonprofit pros had a good variety of questions and observations. In the end, the discussion showed that public relations, and nonprofit public relations and fundraising, is far more sophisticated and strategic than “getting the word out” or “just raising awareness.” Nearly everyone said they left with something specific they could apply back at the office, which made me more motivated when I got back to my office.

Community Relations Important Even for Well-intended Nonprofit Programs

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

This article in MiBiz about the Grand Rapids based nonprofit AmplifyGR needing to address community mistrust caught my eye. It’s another example of a news story that does not use the words “public relations” or “PR” even though it is the essence of the issue at hand.

The organization was working to develop 35 acres in southeast Grand Rapids as part of an effort to increase jobs, housing, education and health care in the area. But it recently cancelled community engagement meetings and took a cue to slow down and “develop community relationships” before moving ahead.

This is a typical mistake of even the most well-intended nonprofit efforts–swooping in with solutions before fully understanding the problem, delivering programs without listening to those intended to be served.

Corporations engage in what is known as community relations (or they should) as a way to be less aloof and perceived as merely motivated by profit in the geographic areas where they have a plant, office or store. This helps build mutual relationships with publics beyond merely customers, employees and government officials.

It is always good for nonprofits to do the same, and not assume that their good programs are welcomed and understood by the communities they serve. There is a large operational risk of looking arrogant and insulting if the community members are treated as targets rather than partners.

Good community relations practice involves doing more thorough research of the community culture and not just the broad issue or problems to address. This could include:

  • getting a sense of the community perception about what their most pressing needs are;
  • finding out what has been tried before, by whom, with what result;
  • what are the preferred methods of communication;
  • what ideas do community members have to solve the problems they themselves have identified;
  • to what degree do community members want to partner, lead, or simply benefit from any resulting programs;
  • what community partners would be approved and appreciated partners in the community;
  • what should be the longevity of the program, is it permanent or is their a defined exit timeline and method.
As a general rule, nonprofits  should start by listening and not announcing. It’s fundamental community relations, a vital form of public relations. And it is critical to reputation and operational success.
It seems from the MiBiz article that AmplifyGR has taken a step back and is approaching the planning more humbly. It will be a good case study to see the results.