imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks Key findings from the 2020 MAJOR GIFT BENCHMARK STUDY

Presented by

Ryan Woroniecki Greg Warner Vice President of Strategic Partnerships CEO & Founder

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks Key findings from the 2020 MAJOR GIFT BENCHMARK STUDY TODAY’S AGENDA

1. Who was involved 2. 2017 Benchmark Study findings 3. 2020 Benchmark Study findings (highlights) 4. Takeaways 5. Questions imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks Key findings from the 2020 MAJOR GIFT BENCHMARK STUDY

Who was involved? 2017 Major Gift Benchmark Study findings

What’s considered a major gift?

Challenges major gift fundraisers face? Not having enough time or staff & lack of board member involvement

Prospect identification and qualification tools and methods?

What led to achievement of major gift goals? Consistent processes

Capital campaign? 59% planning, conducting a study or in a campaign

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

80% of nonprofits want to raise major gifts

but only 43% met their major gift fundraising goals

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

What can you do to meet your major gift fundraising goals?

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

First… What is a major gift? What is the amount that qualifies as a major gift? MEDIAN: Middle value among list of options MODE: Most common selection

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

First… What is a major gift? What is the amount that qualifies as a major gift?

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Larger = higher amounts are major gifts = wider range

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Next… How long does it take to secure a major gift?

6 months - 2 years

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Smaller orgs = More likely to meet goals with 50 or less prospects Next… How many prospects in a portfolio or caseload?

Over 200 = Drop-off in meeting goals

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

What can you do to meet your major gift fundraising goals?

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Include more people in major gift solicitations Colleagues The CEO/Executive Director Board members Volunteers Etc.

More ‘askers’ increases the likelihood of meeting major gift fundraising goals

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Improve pipeline satisfaction The study found that pipeline satisfaction is related to meeting major gift goals

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Improve pipeline satisfaction 49% of major gift The study found that fundraising staff pipeline satisfaction are disappointed is related to with their current meeting major gift goals pipeline of major gift prospects

Only 34 % were satisfied

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

What’s used to build a pipeline?

Systems and processes

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

What’s used to build a pipeline?

Systems and processes include a mixture of: Dedicated staff members who research donors, cultivate donors and solicit major gifts

Technology solutions Human-based knowledge sources

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

What’s used to Consistently using a process is build a pipeline? linked to success = meeting major gift goals

Systems and processes include a mixture of: Dedicated staff members who research donors, cultivate donors and solicit major gifts

Technology solutions Human-based knowledge sources

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

What’s used to build a pipeline?

Dedicated staff members who research donors, cultivate donors and solicit major gifts

Technology solutions Human-based knowledge sources

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

How fundraisers use technology for prospect identification and qualification to increase their chances for success matters

Technology solutions

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

How fundraisers use technology for prospect identification and qualification to increase their chances for success

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more likely to meet or get close to meeting their goals 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more satisfied with their prospect pipelines 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more satisfied with their prospect pipelines 1.2

1

0.8

0.6 0.4 48% 0.2 30% 0 13.5%

48% were satisfied with their 31% were satisfied with their 13.5% were satisfied with their prospect pipelines prospect pipelines prospect pipelines 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more likely to complete more major gift solicitations 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more likely to complete more major gift solicitations

82% completed 11 or more 60% completed 11 or more 35% completed 11 or more major gift solicitations major gift solicitations major gift solicitations 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success

Use 3 or more! 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success

Use 3 or more! 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success

Use 3 or more! 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success

Use 3 or more! 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success

Use 3 or more! Types of Analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did?

2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do?

3. Diagnostic analytics Why they did it?

4. Behavioral analytics What they do when you aren’t there? + Readiness for outreach? Types of Analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did/look like?

2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do?

3. Diagnostic analytics Why they did it?

4. Behavioral analytics What they do when you aren’t there? + Readiness for outreach? Technology tools capture these types of analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did/look like? ‘Affinity, philanthropy, & wealth screening’ 2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do? ‘Segmentation and profiling’ 2020 findings

Using more technology solutions for prospect identification and qualification increases your chances for success Technology tools capture these types of analytics

Donor Name Last Gift $ Total gift $ # of Gifts $50 $200 5 $250 $3,000 7 $100 $150 2 Honeybadger $250 $250 1 $15 $45 2 LeSean McCoy $18 $18 1 Frank Clark $16 $45 3 $10 $100 10 Chris Jones $25 $39 2 $10 $100 4 $500 $730 2 $1,000 $2,500 3 $30 $30 1 What data is predictive?

Donor Name Last Gift $ Total gift $ # of Gifts Real Estate Patrick Mahomes $50 $200 5 $3,106,428 Tyreek Hill $250 $3,000 7 $642,726 Travis Kelce $100 $150 2 $294,620 Honeybadger $250 $250 1 $0 Sammy Watkins $15 $45 2 $500,000 LeSean McCoy $18 $18 1 $1,056,937 Frank Clark $16 $45 3 $178,306 Mecole Hardman $10 $100 10 $358,732 Chris Jones $25 $39 2 $1,000,430 Derrick Nnadi $10 $100 4 $185,370 Daniel Sorensen $500 $730 2 $938,489 Martinas Rankin $1,000 $2,500 3 $0 Dustin Colquitt $30 $30 1 $526,000 Technology tools capture these types of analytics

Modeling

• RFM of 240 240 • $100,000 gift elsewhere 34.4 • Not on FND Board 0 • $800,000 house +2.3______MG Prospects 276.7 Score

Real Estate Value % of Donors % of Giving Predictive Strength

$750,000 - $999,999 2.5% 5.7% 2.3

Largest Gift % of Donors % of Giving Predictive Strength $100,000+ 0.7% 24.1% 34.4 donorsearch.net | 410-670-7880 39 What data is predictive?

Donor Name Last Gift $ Total gift $ # of Gifts Real Estate FND Trustee Largest Gift Patrick Mahomes $50 $200 5 $3,106,428 N $250 Tyreek Hill $250 $3,000 7 $642,726 N $10,000 Travis Kelce $100 $150 2 $294,620 N $100,000 Honeybadger $250 $250 1 $0 N $500 Sammy Watkins $15 $45 2 $500,000 N $50,000 LeSean McCoy $18 $18 1 $1,056,937 Y $1,000,000 Frank Clark $16 $45 3 $178,306 N $100 Mecole Hardman $10 $100 10 $358,732 Y $50 Chris Jones $25 $39 2 $1,000,430 N $50 Derrick Nnadi $10 $100 4 $185,370 N $50 Daniel Sorensen $500 $730 2 $938,489 N $1,000 Martinas Rankin $1,000 $2,500 3 $0 N $1,000 Dustin Colquitt $30 $30 1 $526,000 N $100 Technology tools capture these types of analytics

RFM = Relationship or Affinity Score. o It’s calculated using the following 3 data sets: - Recency of giving (0-100) - Frequency of giving (0-100) - Monetary total contribution (0-100) o Total RFM score ranges from 0-300

RECENCY FREQUENCY MONETARY Last Gift Number of Gifts Total Giving Technology tools capture these types of analytics

Charitable Giving Elsewhere

Largest Gift % of Donors % of Giving Predictive Strength Benchmark 100% 100% 1.00 $100,000+ 0.7% 24.1% 34.4 $50,000 - $100,000 0.5% 13.5% 27 $25,000 - $50,000 0.6% 6.5% 10.8 $10,000 - $25,000 0.7% 7.0% 10 $5,000 - $10,000 1.1% 5.4% 4.9 $5,000 + 3.6% 56.5% 15.7 Technology tools capture these types of analytics

Foundation Trustees

All User Reported Donors Data element All User Reported Donors Matching to Foundation Trustee Nonprofit Users Reporting 227 192 User Reported Donors 684,351 14,225 (48:1 or 2%) Average Lifetime Giving $315 $1,306 Cumulative Lifetime Giving $149,798,873 $13,791,182 (9%) Total Gift Count 2,403,282 83,290 (3.5%) Average Individual Gift Size $87 $257 Average Gift Size Comparison $1.00 $2.95

Per Person Average Lifetime $1.00 $4.15 Giving Comparison Technology tools capture these types of analytics Value of Real Estate

Real Estate Value % of Donors % of Giving Predictive Strength

$2,000,000+ 1.4% 25.0% 17.6

$1,000,000 - 3.2% 13.2% 4.2 $1,999,999 $750,000 - $999,999 2.5% 5.7% 2.3 $500,000 – $749,999 5.4% 6.8% 1.3 $250,000 - $499,999 12.8% 8.6% 0.7 $125,000 - $249,999 10.9% 4.8% 0.4 $1 - $124,999 8.4% 3.5% 0.4

donorsearch.net | 410-670-7880 44 Technology tools capture these types of analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did?

2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do?

3. Diagnostic analytics Why they did it?

4. Behavioral analytics What they do when you aren’t there? + Readiness for outreach? Types of analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did?

2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do?

3. Diagnostic analytics Why they did it? ‘Verbatims’ 4. Behavioral analytics What they do when you aren’t there? ‘Digital body language’ + Readiness for outreach? imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

Human-based sources

Technology solutions Human-based knowledge sources imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

human-based sources

donors l board members l volunteers l staff ‘DONOR DISCOVERY’ imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

human-based sources

donors ‘DONOR DISCOVERY’ 2020 findings imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

Using more human-based sources for prospect identification and qualification makes fundraisers more likely to meet or get close to meeting their goals

73% 45%

human-based sources human-based sources human-based sources 73% met or got close to 45% met or got close to 25% were satisfied with their meeting their goals meeting their goals prospect pipelines Top human-based donor discovery/qualification methods

1. Face-to-face 2. Telephone 3. Survey Top human-based donor discovery/qualification methods COST QUALITY SCALABILITY 1. Face-to-face $$$$$ 2. Telephone $$$ 3. Survey $ ? 2020 findings imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

Only 1 out of 5 survey their donors to learn more about their interest in making a major gift 2020 findings imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks

Only 1 out of 5 survey their donors to learn more about their interest in making a major gift Types of analytics

1. Descriptive analytics What your donors did?

2. Predictive analytics What your donors could do?

3. Diagnostic analytics Why they did it? ‘Verbatims’ 4. Behavioral analytics What they do when you aren’t there? ‘Digital body language’ ‘Verbatims’ ‘Digital body language’ ‘Verbatims’ ‘Digital body language’

Why they care Interests (programs) Passions Life stories Who inspired them to care The name/relationship of that person Ranking of your cause compared to others How important your mission is to them How they want to give (cash/assets/legacy) Consideration stage for giving/meeting Ready now Definitely later Maybe later What information they want/need ‘Verbatims’ ‘Digital body language’

Have any children or not Married or have life partner Widow or widower Age Education level Career (entrepreneur, nearing retirement) Interest in giving their home or property Have a donor advised fund, family foundation or IRA and their interest in giving from them Interested in charitable gift annuity Want to support capital campaign or not Want to volunteer Willing to refer or introduce friends ‘Verbatims’ ‘Digital body language’

Want to arrange a meeting Update contact information (email, phone number and/or mailing address) ‘Verbatims’ ‘Digital body language’

What emails they open or click on What pages they visit online How long they stay on your web pages Frequency of their engagement online What videos they view What they download What they share/forward to others Tracking cookie Explicit opt-in CASE STUDY

Build and strengthen relationships Close gifts

CONSIDERATION CONTINUUM $ Desire Interest Action Reconsider Gift received Gift Awareness

Fundraiser CASE STUDY Fundraisers want meetings – not lists

HOW TO UNCOVER READINESS

Make surveys ubiquitous and survey regularly

Use tracking cookies with explicit opt-in

Monitor engagement and consideration migration Tying technology and human-based resources together BUILD PIPELINES THAT RESULT IN MEETINGS 100,000 total donors

DESCRIPTIVE & PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS

20,000 identified prospects DIAGNOSTIC & BEHAVIORAL ANALYTICS SELF-QUALIFICATION READY

1,500 assigned

OPTIMIZE OVER TIME 2020 findings

Lastly… When survey respondents were asked what “would most benefit major gift fundraising”…

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com USING MORE TECHNOLOGY SOURCES & Use 3 or MORE HUMAN BASED SOURCES more!

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com imarketsmart.com/major-gift-benchmarks Key findings from the 2020 MAJOR GIFT BENCHMARK STUDY Questions??

donorsearch.net imarketsmart.com