« The difference between "stewardship" and "generosity" | Main | When will giving recover? »

October 27, 2009

4 observations from Blackbaud's Q3 2009 online giving trends

I have my eye on online giving trends for two reasons:
1. It's the fastest growing giving platform of choice for many who donate to charitable causes.
2. The means by which we exchange cash in general commerce singificantly impacts the way we exchange cash (or donate to) charitable organizations (i.e. churches).

Here are a few interesting observations from BlackBaud's release 2009 online giving trends (current through Q3):

1. Significant growth in money given via online channels means every church should implement an online giving option for its membership.

Blackbaud: "Online revenue in the third quarter of 2009 was up 41% compared to the same time period in 2008."

Analysis: Stop ignoring online giving as a viable means for people to support your church. AND stop thinking that just because you introduce online giving then you're giving will automatically increase. The same "cultivation" principles still apply. Nevertheless, this medium or platform for giving is here to stay.

2. Just because online giving is not as established as traditional methods of giving doesn't mean it should be discounted as a viable platform for contribution to your cause or organization.

Blackbaud: "Our research suggests that the majority of nonprofit organizations are still in a growth phase for online giving, compared to well established offline channels, and the impact of the recession is largely masked."

Analysis: Don't expect online giving to be the "magic bullet" that solves all your church funding issues. Many people in your church will continue to give via offering envelopes and other more established giving platforms for at least the near future. Expect more of the same while anticipating what's coming. I'm sure people used this objection to cars when the "majority" still used a horse and buggy.

3. Sustainability means we must uncover multiple avenues that provide a foundation for growth in transactional giving to hedge against an unanticipated change in any one type of giving transaction or platform.

Blackbaud: "Online transactions are still growing at 56% year-over-year and this volume growth overcomes any declines in gift amounts. The emerging trend in the data is that a nonprofit's online fundraising mix might influence their year-over-year results."

Analysis: Two things are important in any giving transaction analysis: total amount given and frequency of gift. If online donors give less per transaction but at a higher frequency than offline donors, the organization is still better off to spend the time (and money) it will take to cultivate this group of donors.

4. Year-over-year growth matters. (A LOT!) The performance of online giving on a whole should provide enough evidence that online giving must be a part of your church's funding strategy.

Blackbaud: "The analysis looked at a sub-group of 1,274 nonprofits to compare their online fundraising results for the first six months of 2008 to the same period of 2009. These nonprofits had a 22.13% year-over-year growth in online revenue."

Analysis: In a time when most churches are satisfied to break-even between operational expenses and funding, any giving mechanism that yields growth in consecutive years should indicate opportunity to cultivate a currently non-supporting segment of your church's membership and perhaps increase the overall giving capacity of other, established donors who aren't contributing at maximum capacity. (Hint: Growth is good.)

I hope you take the time to read the entire analysis from Blackbaud (that means clicking through the ancillary links too). Online giving is here to stay. The conversation in your next staff meeting should NOT be "are we going to implement online giving?" but "when will we?"

Posted by bstroup at October 27, 2009 8:50 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.lifeway.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4890

Comments

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)