Using Data Analysis to Improve Results Lisa Spivak, Laura Christian, Fast Facts

 Founded in 1852

 Oakland,

 997 undergrads (women only); 611 grad students (women & men)

 UG solicitable base: 12,500

 2014 Goals: 25% participation and $4.5M raised

 2014 Results: 26% participation and $4.8M raised

 Annual fund totals highly variable based on institutional gifts & other restricted fund outliers Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Challenges/opportunities

 Young annual fund (2005)—”acquisition mode”

 Nontraditional student population since 1990s

 Decentralized annual fund staffing structure

 Consecutive giving society launched 2013

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Data management & analysis

 Reports

◦ Dashboard

◦ Tableau reporting tool

◦ “Actionable”

 Partnering with Advancement Services

 Enhancing data quality

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Dashboard report

 Weekly snapshot

 Breakdown by channel

 Retention rate of various segments

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results OIA Dashboard Report

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Tableau

 $900 for one 3-year license

 Self service

 Renewal profile

 Longitudinal appeal info

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Tableau Reporting Tool

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Tableau Reporting Tool

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Partnering with Advancement Services

 Educate

 Communicate

 Come up with solutions together

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Partnering with Advancement Services

 Be able to answer the questions…

 Why does this data matter?

 How do we make this data “actionable”?

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Enhancing data quality

 Data appends

 Surveys

 Phonathon calls

Mills College

Using Data to Improve Results Fast Facts

 Founded in 1870  2,347 undergrads  30,000+ donors in solicitable base  2014 Goals: 50% participation  & $10.5M raised  2014 Results: 53.4% participation & $11.4M raised

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results The Wellesley Fund (TWF) Task Force

 AVP of Resources  Director of Wellesley Fund  Marketing Consultant  Marketing Director  Associate Director, Dev. Services (AKA Data Guru)

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results TWF Task Force

 2-hr. weekly meetings  Short-term/long-term projects (mailings, emails, phonathon, challenges, etc.)  Data analysis  Creative briefs

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results First Mail Appeal Results Previous 4 Years and Relevant Time Period

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results FY13 Sept Mail Appeal Results – by decade

Wellesley College 1.1% Spent $1.54 to raise $1!

Using Data to Improve Results

September Appeal Brief  Notes from meetings incorporated  Briefs must contain the following: ◦ Overview and author ◦ Target audience ◦ Action we want taken ◦ Potential barriers ◦ Main messages ◦ Mandatories

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results

The September Appeal – mailed version  Monarch paper  Warm  Heart-felt  Giving Thanks  Date of last gift

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results End of September FY14 Results!

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results FY14 The Wellesley Fund (TWF) Q1: Results as of September 30, 2013 Goal YTD 2014 YTD 2014 % of Goal Projectio Results n Wellesley $10,500,000 $420,000 Cash: $875,410 8.3% Fund (Commitments: (9.4%) $992,201) Alumnae 15,299 1,025 1,437 9.4% Donors (Participatio n stands at 4.7%) Alumnae 128 Durants All 146 Durants FY14 The WellesleyFund (TWF)Table of Gifts TWF $$ comparison over 5 years TWF donor comparison over 5 years FY14 YTD Alumnae Participation by Donor Behavior and Channel

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results FY14 TWF Q1 Cash Results by Channel

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results Durants (All Sources) Comparison to Previous 5 Years

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results FY14 September appeal mail results

 Response Rates ◦ Overall 6.8% (680 Donors of 10,025 Overall Base)  Durant Renewal 5.0% (36 Donors of 725 Base)  Do 9.2% (610 Donors of 6,625 Base)  Will 1.3% (34 Donors of 2,675 Base)  Cash ◦ Overall $209,133  Durant Renewal $85,900  Do $117,793  Will $5,440

Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results FY14 September appeal mail results compared to previous 4

Number of Appeal FY Appeal Gifts Base Total Smallest Largest Average Median

2014 A0114 683 10,025 $209,233 $ 5 $ 5,000 $ 699 $ 200

2013 A0113 744 20,571 $259,469 $ 1 $ 20,000 $ 684 $ 200

2012 A0112 717 24,525 $284,910 $ 1 $ 15,000 $ 738 $ 200

2011 A0111 363 23,940 $134,833 $ 2 $ 5,000 $ 800 $ 200

2010 A110 239 24,128 $ 83,536 $ 10 $ 10,000 $ 1,614 $ 1,375 Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results

Rest of FY14/Planning for FY15  Hiccups – specifically October  Persona work  Segmentation strategy for FY15 ◦ Reunion cohort ◦ Non-Reunion Durant cohort ◦ Non-Reunion 1st time donor cohort ◦ Non-Reunion Not Yets cohort ◦ Non-Reunion sporadic donors cohort ◦ Non-Reunion “Those who’ve made a gift for the last 2-5yrs and 6-10yrs Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results

Questions?

Mills College & Wellesley College

Using Data to Improve Results