Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FEP
Gai n Net
Loss
Project Sponsors
Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP)* Association of Donor Relations Professionals (ADRP) Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) National Committee on Planned Giving (NCPG) * Founding partners, providing resources for the project. Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute* Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University Council for Resource Development (CRD)
Dimensions
FEP measures and publishes statistics on gains, losses and net growth for both number of donors and amount of gifts (dollars). See Figure 8, page 11 for an illustrative FEP growth-ingiving (GiG) report. Definitions for the gain/loss categories are in Appendix A, page 13. FEP retention statistics are referred to in this supplement as donor retention and gift$ retention. This supplement focuses primarily on donor retention. Donor retention categories are: New donor retention Repeat donor retention Overall donor retention Database donor retention
* See Appendix A for definitions and formulas for the four categories of donor retention using the FEP database (page 13). 1
2010 Result
57% Did not give in 2010 15% Gave less in 2010 12% Gave the same in 2010 16% Gave more in 2010 43% Gave in 2010 100% Gave in 2009
41%
* 43% is the average or mean donor retention rate, 41% is the medain ** Total 2009 repeat donors for 2,377 repondents to the FEP 2009-2010 survey.
While overall donor retention (combined new and repeat donor retention) for 2009-10 was 41 percent, new donor retention was only 27 percent and repeat donor retention was 70 percent. Repeat donor retention was 75 percent if previously lapsed donors that renewed their 2010 gifts are included in the calculation.
New donors Attrition * 76% 77% 77% 76% 75% Retention 24% 23% 23% 24% 25% * Some lapsed previous-year new donors may be renewed in future years Repeat donors Attrition Retention ** Retention - II *** 33% 67% 73% 34% 66% 72% 33% 67% 73% 33% 67% 73% 32% 68% 74%
74% 26%
73% 27%
** Repeat retention rate excludes previously lapsed donors renewed in 2010 *** Repeat retention rate - II includes previously lapsed donors renewed in 2010 45% Overall (new and repeat combined) Attrition 57%
Average 55%
50% 54%
50%
46% 54%
54%
47% 55%
53%
45% 58%
55%
41% 59%
59%
43% 59%
57%
Retention
Average
43%
45%
46%
50%
46%
46%
45%
47%
42%
45%
41%
41%
41%
43%
Retention: Repeat Donors Versus New Donors for 2005 to 2010 Surveys
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Repeat New donors
Retention Attrition
The average donor retention rate varied slightly over the six year period from 2005 to 2010, tracking economic conditions during the period -- ranging from 50 percent in 2005 to a low of 41 percent in 2009 and averaging 45 percent. Donor attrition exceeded donor retention all six years.
2004-05 50%
54%
2005-06 54%
54%
2006-07 53%
55%
2007-08 55%
58%
2008-09 59%
59%
2009-10 57%
59%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Only 65 of the 2,377 FEP 2009-10 survey respondents (3%) had donor retention rates over 70 percent while two-thirds had retention rates ranging from 50 percent to under 10 percent. There is enormous room for improvement in donor retention!
Figure 5 - Donor Retention and Attrition by Donor Retention Rate for 2009-10
Attrition/Retention Category Responses --> Percentage --> Attrition (lapsed)
Median
Total --------------------------------------------- Donor Retention Rate --------------------------------------------------2009-10 100% -70% 70% -60% 60% -50% 50% -40% | 40% -30% 30% -20% 20% -10% 10% -0% 2,377 65 205 403 531 | 502 330 220 121 100% 3% 9% 17% 22% | 21% 14% 9% 5% | 57% 25% 36% 45% 54% | 65% 75% 84% 94% 59% 26% 35% 45% 54% | 65% 75% 84% 94% | 15% 21% 21% 18% 16% | 13% 9% 6% 3% 12% 21% 18% 16% 13% | 10% 7% 4% 1% 16% 43%
41%
100%
17% | 13% 9% 6% 46% | 35% 25% 16% 74% 65% 55% 46% | 35% 25% 16% | 100% 100% 100% 100% | 100% 100% 100% | <------ Over 40% retention ------- Median ------ Under 40% retention ----->
32% 75%
25% 64%
21% 55%
2% 6%
6%
100%
Statistics:
Factor Donor retention for group
Median
Total ---------------------------------------------------- Donor Retention Rate -----------------------------------------------------2009-10 100%-70% 70%-60% 60%-50% 50%-40% 40%-30% 30%-20% 20%-10% 10%-0% 43%
41%
75%
74%
64%
65%
55%
55%
46%
46%
35%
35%
25%
25%
16%
16%
6%
6%
45%
44%
63%
63%
57%
59%
50%
54%
50%
48%
42%
41%
34%
31%
29%
21%
17%
6%
Responses Number of 2009 donors Donors per respondent Average gift size Avg respondent size
65 24,301 374
$ 923 $ 1,196 $ 824 $ 781 $ 931 $ 966 $ 1,181 $ 1,009 $ 871 $ 692,247 $ 526,759 $ 808,182 $ 804,305 $ 916,479 $ 620,320 $ 632,013 $ 448,995 $ 132,434
Growth in giving:
Net growth in donors 2% 18% 10% 4% 9% 4% -10% -18% -53% Net growth in gift$ -2% 12% 10% 3% 5% -1% -9% -33% -43% There is enormous potential for increased growth with increased donor retention. Overall net growth in donors from 2009 to 2010 ranged from 18 percent down to minus 53 percent, and net growth in gift$ ranged from plus 12 percent down to minus 43 percent.
2010 results by type of donor (new, previously lapsed and renewed 2009 donors):
Number of donors as a % of 2010 total: New in 2010 44% Previously-lapsed renewed 14% 2009 renewed in 2010 42% Total 2010 donors 100% Amount of gift$ as a % of 2010 total: New in 2010 22% Previously-lapsed renewed 13% 2009 renewed in 2010 65% Total 2010 gift$ 100% 26% 10% 64% 100% 27% 15% 59% 100% 30% 17% 53% 100% 43% 15% 42% 100% 54% 12% 34% 100% 61% 11% 28% 100% 71% 9% 20% 100% 78% 9% 13% 100%
Respondents with higher donor retention rates relied substantially less on new donor acquisition almost 1:3.
Investing more in donor relations may be one solution to the poor donor retention problem
The Association of Donor Relations Professionals defines donor relations as follows: Donor relations is the comprehensive effort of any nonprofit that seeks philanthropic support to ensure that donors experience high-quality interactions with the organization that foster long-term engagement and investment. This effort is commonly thought to have four elementsgift acceptance and management, acknowledgment, donor recognition, including events, and reporting (*) that together support the acquisition and retention of donors. http://www.adrp.net/assets/documents/adrpdefinitionsexpanded.pdf (*) The fourth element is reporting to donors on the impact of their gifts on the mission of the organization (from ADRP definition). Communicating with donors about their gifts at work is essential. According to research on donor attrition by Penelope Burk, 46 percent of donors who were asked why do you stop giving? responded that they would stop giving to a charity they once supported for reasons that are tied to insufficient or poor quality information concerning their gifts at work (page 15, Donor Centered Fundraising, 2003). These same reasons are likely to apply to stagnant and declining giving where repeat donors give the same or downgrade instead of upgrading the size of their gifts. Donor relations resources The Association of Donor Relations Professionals http://www.adrp.net/experts-bureau Strategies for reducing attrition are provided in the following books on donor relations and retention. Tom Ahem and Simone Joyaux, Keep Your Donors: The Guide to Better Communications and Stronger Relationships, AFP Fund Development Series, John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Penelope Burk, Donor Centered Fundraising, Burk & Associates, Ltd./Cygnus Applied Research, 2003 Ken Burnett, Relationship Fundraising: A Donor-Based Approach to the Business of Raising Money, 2nd Addition, Jossey-Bass, 2002. Adrian Sargeant, Elaine Jay, Building Donor Loyalty: The Fundraisers Guide to Increasing Lifetime Value, Jossey-Bass, 2004
Quotes from Penelope Burks book found on pages 86-87 of Ken Burnetts book Relationship Fundraising: It takes more time to keep donors informed of what their money is achieving than it does to ask them for it which means devoting over 50 percent of staff time reporting to donors on their gifts at work. Sixty-nine percent of individual donors say none of the nonprofits they support call them without asking for another gift.
Sixty-one percent of donors say theyve received a request for a second gift with their thank you. Eighty-one percent have been offended by this. A donors prime needs are to know the gift was received, to know the gift was set to work as intended, and to know the project or program is having the desired effect.
--- Growth in giving would have been --3% 9% 7% 8% 14% 12% 13% 19% 17% 18% 24% 22% 23% 29% 27%
The differences between growth-in-giving results FEP minus 2 percent, Chronicle 400 plus 4 percent and Giving USA plus 2 percent are consistent with FEP 2011 survey data, which indicates that growth in giving performance varies significantly according to size (based on total amount raised) with larger organizations performing much better than smaller ones.
10
AFPs Growth in Giving GiG Reports www.afpnet.org/FEP The core Growth-in-Giving (GiG) Report provides a concise, yet informative picture of fundraising gains and losses-growth in giving and attrition-in a simple, reader-friendly format that the executive staff and board members can understand. The Excel-based GiG Report template downloadable from www.afpnet.org/FEP -- has instructions for retrieving gain(loss) data from donor databases and automatically produces the "Core GiG Report" - the centerpiece of the FEP gain(loss) reporting package along with 7 other useful GiG Reports.
Gains New Recaptured Upgraded $ Subtotal gains Same Losses Downgraded Lapsed new Lapsed repeat Subtotal losses Total - gifts $
Amount of Gifts
n/a n/a 122,173 122,173 62,505 273,241 99,468 148,337 521,046 705,724 $ $ 152,797 87,809 259,017 499,624 62,505 130,118 n/a n/a 130,118 692,247 $ $ 152,797 87,809 136,844 377,451 (143,123) (99,468) (148,337) (390,928) (13,477)
11
Figure 9 - Donor Attrition and Retention Case Study By Range of Gift Size
Attrition/Retention Category Overall donor retention Overall donor attrition New donor retention New donor attrition Repeat donor retention Repeat donor attrition Database donor retention Database donor attrition Number of donors year 2 Percent of donors by range Amount of gift$ year 2 Percent of gift$ by range Average gift size year 2 ----------------------------- Gift Size Range ------------------------$250 & $250 to $1,000 to Down $1,000 $5,000 $5,000 & Up 33% 67% 11% 89% 51% 50% 14% 86% 2,618 84% 145,000 $ 8% 55 $ 71% 29% 24% 76% 78% 23% 28% 72% 280 9% 108,000 $ 6% 386 $ 83% 17% 42% 58% 86% 14% 36% 64% 169 5% 75% 25% 40% 60% 78% 22% 25% 75% 61 2%
All Donors 40% 60% 12% 89% 58% 42% 16% 84% 3,128 100%
Retention Attrition
12
Appendix A - Definitions and formulas for donor retention rates Using the FEP survey database at the Urban Institute
FEP measures and publishes statistics on gains, losses and net growth for both number of donors and amount of gifts (dollars). Definitions for gain/loss categories are provided on the next page. FEP retention statistics are referred to in this supplement as donor retention and gift$ retention. The supplement focuses on donor retention. Donor retention rates: New donor retention rate last years new donors who gave again this year as a percentage of all of last years new donors Repeat donor retention rate last years donors excluding last years new donors who gave again this year as a percentage of last years donors excluding last years new donors Overall donor retention rate all of last years donors who gave again this year [also equals new and repeat donors combined] as a percentage of all of last years donors [new and repeat] Repeat donor retention II rate - last years donors excluding last years new donors who gave this year plus previously lapsed donors recaptured this year as a percentage of all of last years donors plus previously lapsed donors recaptured this year Database donor retention rate this years donors excluding this years new donors as a percentage of total donors of record in database who have ever given excluding this years new donors Related FEP gain/loss categories: New donor retention involves New and Lapsed new gain/loss categories. Repeat donor retention involves Upgraded, Same, Downgraded and Lapsed repeat gain/loss categories. Repeat donor retention involves recaptured donors as well as Upgraded, Same, Downgraded and Lapsed repeat gain/loss categories.
Definitions for Gain/Loss categories in GiG Reports: New donors who never gave prior to year 2 (current year) Recaptured previously lapsed donors who gave again in year 2. Upgraded donors who gave more in year 2 than in year 1 (previous year). Same donors who gave the same amount in both years. Downgraded donors who gave less in year 2 than in year 1. Lapsed new new, first-time donors in year 1 who did not give in year 2 Lapsed repeat other lapsed donors who gave in year 1 and prior years but not in year 2
---------------------- Donations made ---------------------Before During During Year 1 Year 1 Year 2 no no yes yes no yes n/a yes yes n/a yes yes n/a yes yes no yes no yes yes no
13