Fundraising Copywriter George Crankovic

Category: nonprofit

  • New Year’s Fundraising Resolution: Reconnect with lapsed donors

    One way to start 2020 off right is to reactivate lapsed donors. They’re not a lost cause. But you have to be strategic about winning them back.

    First, realize that they’re not sitting around thinking, “Wow, I haven’t given to Save the Gooney Bird League in a while. I should do that.” You have to keep in touch.

    But don’t just keep them in your regular mail stream, and don’t mail them your newsletters. That’s too expensive.

    Second, not all lapsed donors are worth reactivating. Not much point in going after a donor who gave $5 a year and a half ago. The lifetime value isn’t there. Sometimes you just have to let them go and focus on the higher-dollar supporters with a higher lifetime value.

    Once you’ve determined which lapsed donors to contact, one approach is simply to version a successful appeal with wording like “We miss you” and “We need you back.”

    If that seems to work, another approach is to go even further with the lapsed language. Make a big deal about how much their last gift did, and make an even bigger deal about what their returning gift will do. Go overboard talking about how much you want them back.

    Yet another way to go is to try a different format altogether. Maybe a handwritten card with a personal-sounding note about losing touch and how much their support is needed. Including the amount of their last gift can help, too.

    Problem is, though, that many donors who haven’t given in the past 12 months might not think of themselves as lapsed. And all your “we miss you” talk might rub them the wrong way. Maybe they just haven’t gotten around to giving but still thinking of themselves as supporters. Imagine their surprise when you accuse them of cutting things off.

    The reality is that you can’t know why donors have lapsed. Maybe they’ve moved on to other causes. Maybe they didn’t feel their gift did any good. Maybe their situation changed and they’re not donating anymore. Maybe they were acquired with a freeium or a premium and are waiting for another free gift to give again.

    So, yes, it’s a bit of a guessing game. But considering the cost of acquisition, it’s almost always  a good idea to try to reclaim lapsed donors. The subsequent support will likely make it worthwhile. They’ve given before, so they’re more likely to give again. If they’re asked the right way.

  • Your year-end appeal: last-minute help, free

    It’s time to get your year-end appeal (online and offline) set up, nailed down, and ready to go. If you’ve been putting it off … or if you already have an appeal prepared and want a gut-check before you launch, here’s help.

    This free guide covers everything from offers to formats to messaging, and more to ensure that your year-end appeal this year is one of your strongest. Get your copy of this free guide here: https://lnkd.in/ehxTgdV

  • Year-end fundraising – what you should be doing now

    To raise more money with your year-end appeal, one of the first things to do is to make sure you have a solid offer.

    The fundraising offer is a statement of what the donor receives in return for giving. It’s the deal, the transaction, the quid pro quo. It’s how the donor and nonprofit connect.

    The offer for your year-end appeal needs to convey:

    • Why you’re writing to the donor.
    • What you want your donor to do.
    • Why the donation is a good deal.
    • Why the donor should give now.
    • What the donor gets out of it (benefits of giving).
    • Why your donor’s support matters.

    Getting these basics nailed down is the first step in building a strong year-end appeal. For help thinking through your offer and the other elements of your year-end appeal, check out this free informational guide: https://lnkd.in/ehxTgdV

     

  • This can torpedo a fundraising appeal

    There’s a structure that’s often used for fundraising appeals even though it’s not really all that good for getting donors to give. This post at the Better Fundraising Company blog shows us what this structure is, and it goes something like this:

    1. Thank you, Mrs. Donor, for your support in the past.
    2. Martha and her daughter, Vicki, have a safe place to live now because of your gifts.
    3. Please give so we can help someone else like them.

    You see this structure again and again in appeals, even though results say it’s often not the best way to go.

    The problem is that this structure fails to present a specific problem and a specific solution that the donor can latch onto. Because of that, it removes one of the most important reasons that donors give – the ability to make a real difference. In the case of Martha and Vicki, the problem has been solved. They’re not homeless anymore. So instead of telling the donor about a person who does need help, this appeal talks about the two people who don’t need help anymore.

    What causes fundraisers to take this approach? It’s most likely the fear of asking. It can be hard to ask people for money. And because some fundraisers are uncomfortable about asking for money, they think that donors are uncomfortable being asked.

    Even experienced fundraisers fall into this trap. As a result, they try to cushion the blow of asking for money by reinforcing the donor’s past gifts and telling a story that’s all good news.

    Usually in these kinds of appeals, the copy goes on and on about how Martha and Vicki are doing so well at the homeless shelter because of the donor’s past support. And often there’s no mention of the struggles that brought Martha and Vicki to the homeless shelter in the first place – only the fact that mother and daughter are living transformed lives. And often in these kinds of appeals, there are few asks. In fact, it’s not unusual to see only one ask, often at the very end of the appeal. As if the charity were hesitant to ask at all.

    Why do this?

    The fact is, donors expect to be asked to give. They want to give. That’s why they opened the letter or email in the first place. They knew they were getting into a fundraising appeal, not a letter from their long-lost sister Matilda.

    What they want and what they will respond to in an appeal is a problem to solve and a compelling way to solve it. Because then they can feel like they’re doing a good deed, instead of simply reinforcing a good deed that’s already been accomplished.

  • Another reason to send thank you letters to your donors

    When it comes to thanking donors, this is a horror story: A donor writes a check for $50,000, sends it in to the charity, and waits and waits for days and then finally calls the charity to make sure it received the donation.

    Obviously, something like that should never happen. It’s wildly irresponsible. But it points up a very practical reason for sending a thank you. In addition to thanking your donor for giving, naturally, one very important purpose of the thank you letter is simply to confirm for your donor that you did actually receive her gift.

    Donors will wonder about this after they give. Think about it: In your personal or business life, how many times have you sent something to somebody and never received an acknowledgement that the other person received it? Drives you crazy, right? You just wanted a simple, “got it, thanks,” to put your concerns to rest.

    It’s an often-overlooked reason why the thank you letter is so crucial. Of course, in your thank you letters, you’ll go beyond a simple confirmation, and that’s where fundraising expert Jerry Huntsinger comes in.

    In his Eighty-six tutorials on creating fundraising letters and packages, he points out four reasons to send thank yous:

    1. Create a warm glow around your donor.
    2. Say thank you in a genuine and personal way.
    3. Educate your donors.
    4. Prompt another gift.

    Wait – what’s that third one? Educate your donors? Isn’t it true in fundraising that if you’re trying to educate donors you’re losing them? Yes, but Jerry makes a valid point here.

    When your donor gets a thank you letter, you pretty much have a captive audience. Chances are, your donor is going to read it top to bottom – which is certainly not true of most donor communications. So, “don’t hesitate,” as Jerry says, “to explain your organizational purpose and goals.”

    This is the chance to reinforce for your donor why your charity’s work is important and why it matters. It’s surely a good idea to do this in the thank you letter for new donors, and even for long-term donors, it’s not a bad idea to reinforce why your charity’s work is needed.

    What’s the takeaway here? It’s important to slather on the praise in your thank you letters. Even go overboard. No donor is going to say, “No, stop. You’re thanking me too much!” But recognize that it’s also important to underline and reinforce your charity’s core reason for being. Praise combined with relevance – that’s the kind of thing that makes a donor want to give again.

     

  • When to use a plain envelope in fundraising

    In Gulliver’s Travels, our intrepid explorer finds himself in Lilliput, where two factions of Lilliputians are in dispute. On one side are the Big-Endians, who break their boiled eggs at the big end, while on the other side are the Little-Endians, who break their eggs at the little end.

    This is kind of like that. There’s a group of people in direct mail and fundraising who maintain that the best carrier, bar none, is the humble plain envelope. After all, they insist, getting the carrier open is half the battle, and who can resist the siren song of the plain envelope? Don’t prospects just have to know what’s inside?

    And then there’s another group of people who maintain that teaser copy and images on the outside envelope are the way to entice donors and lure them in.

    So who’s right? Luckily, we have some help, by way of a post on SOFII, from the esteemed Professor Siegfried Vogele, dean of direct mail and one of the field’s most original thinkers.

    The good doctor explains envelope effectiveness in terms of filters and amplifiers. A filter impedes response, and an amplifier, well, amplifies it.

    He further explains that the plain envelope is what we normally associate with personal correspondence (rare these days, thanks to email) or with business mail, like a letter from your insurance company. When you get that letter, open it, and find your expectations confirmed – yes, it IS a letter from Aunt Margie! – then that’s an amplifier for the recipient. In this case, the envelope has done its job by successfully setting the stage.

    But if that plain envelope happens to contain an advertising circular, a sales letter, or a Dear-Friend fundraising appeal that you weren’t anticipating, then that can be a filter, depressing response – probably because, in this case, the envelope did not set the stage for the prospect. You got something completely different from what you’re conditioned to expect from a plain envelope.

    So does this mean we should never use a plain envelope? Or that we should ways use teaser copy and images? As with all things direct mail, it depends.

    If the contents are highly personal and highly targeted to the recipient, then a plain envelope could be the right way to go. That will set the stage for the recipient about what’s to come, and your donor will likely move smoothly from the outside envelope to the appeal inside to have their expectations confirmed.

    But, if the contents are obviously a more mass-market kind of fundraising appeal, then it might be good to think about how to set the stage with teaser copy and images. No easy task. That could mean everything from a simple “R.S.V.P” on the outer envelope to an expression about the cause to the beginning of a story. There’s an infinite number of ways to do this, so picking the so-called right one is going to depend a lot on your list and your offer. Not to mention your ability to read your donors’ minds.

    So, there we have it: the Big-Endians versus the Little-Endians. Which side is right? Well, both are, of course.

     

  • The best reason to ask your donors more often to give

    Lots of charities are shy about asking for donations. They don’t want to mail or email too often out of fear of seeming too pushy. And even in their appeals themselves, it seems like they’re trying to work up the courage to ask, with all the hemming and hawing and beating around the bush before coming out and asking for a donation.

    Why is that?

    There’s no reason to feel that fundraising is manipulating or shaking down donors. The fact is that giving is good. It’s good for the person receiving the generosity, naturally, and it’s just as good for the giver. Both benefit.

    Christianity says so. The Bible says “whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully” (2 Corinthians 9:6). (link)

    Judaism says so. Helping the poor is an obligation in Judaism known as “tzedakah” in Hebrew. In tzedakah, the gifts that are given to others eventually return to the giver. (link)

    Islam says so. Believers are entreated to be generous. The Koran says “And whatever you spend in good, it will be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged.” (link)

    Buddhism says so. Generosity is one of the three tenants of Buddhism, stressing that the giver should feel a sense of joy before, during, and after the act of giving. (link)

    Atheism says so. In fact, as this report explains, even without the heavenly reward for charitable acts that most religions promise, atheists are still generous givers. They say, “We don’t need God to do good,” pointing out that, even without belief, giving is personally rewarding. (link)

    With apologies to any faith or group unintentionally omitted here, it looks like there’s one thing that people of every stripe can agree on, and it’s the foundational idea, as old as humanity, that’s it’s good to give. And if it’s good to give, then it has to be at least as good to ask.

    So there’s no reason to shy away from the ask, whether it’s in a direct mail letter, an email appeal, or face to face.

    Ask freely, ask enthusiastically, ask honestly, ask boldly, ask early, and ask often. Will you get a “too much mail” donor complaint here and there? Maybe. But you can’t let that dictate what you do for the far greater number of donors who welcome the opportunity to help. The larger issue is that giving is good for donors, good for your nonprofit, and good for your nonprofit’s beneficiaries. It’s so good, in fact, that it’s just plain good. And how many things can you say that about?

  • What’s your fundraising war story?

    When things go wrong with a fundraising appeal, it can seem like the end when it’s happening to you. But really, sometimes the lessons you learn in the school of hard knocks are the best ones – the ones you need to learn.

    In this guest post at GuideStar blog, here are three lessons I learned the hard way:

    • Why cleverness is never a good substitute for genuine creativity in fundraising appeals.
    • What happens to an appeal when group-think takes over.
    • How the messaging in an appeal can get overshadowed and what that does to response.

    Take a look at the full post here for the details. Hey, we’ve all been there. But that doesn’t mean we have to stay there. With every appeal, we learn more, and that’s part of what makes fundraising so fascinating. So, what’s your fundraising war story? Let me know.

  • Fundraising: the 2 key “abilities”

    Donor retention keeps falling, while donor skepticism keeps rising. So, it’s more important now than ever to connect with donors in a personal way if you expect to engage and keep them. But how?

    There are two key “abilities” that are vital for effective fundraising. They’re credibility and likeability. It’s essential to convey both to donors if you expect them to join with you in your mission. See more in my article in Nonprofit Pro.

    • Building credibility takes financial transparency, testimonials, and the like. But it’s more than that. There are specific things you can do to gain donors’ trust or win it back if you’ve lost it. See more here.
    • Establishing likeability is a lot about tone and presentation, including a conversational copy voice. But again, it goes deeper than this. Likeability is more than the way an appeal is written. It’s a strategy that embraces donors on a personal level of shared values. More about that here.

    It’s all but guaranteed that failing to convey credibility and likeability in appeals and content marketing will hurt your fundraising efforts – which will drain revenue. For some nonprofits, the result is some belt-tightening, but for others, it could be a question of survival.

     

  • How too much collaboration ruins fundraising appeals

    There’s this idea that people seem to accept without even thinking about it. It’s the idea that all work is teamwork … that nothing can happen without the involvement of anyone and everyone … that any kind of collaboration is always inherently good.

    You see this all the time in environments where people do creative work like marketing and fundraising. Everyone from the proofreader to the receptionist to the account staff to a board member’s brother-in-law has a hand in the creative, making changes that are often based on little more than personal opinion.

    There are comments like, “I don’t like this” or “Can we change this to something else?” or “Why is this in here?” And invariably, there’s this one: “Change that – the client won’t approve it.” Then someone goes ahead and incorporates the changes, often without regard to the tone, presentation, or strategy goals of the appeal. Hey, we’re a collaborative team, right? So, all input is implemented without question.

    This might seem like collaboration since we’re involving everyone and being very egalitarian, but it isn’t collaboration. It’s creative by committee. It’s group think. It’s too many cooks in the kitchen.

    This isn’t to say that collaboration is bad. Not at all. Collaboration is vital. But ideally it’s limited to those individuals familiar with the strategy of the appeal, the target audience, the concept, the offer, and so on. This group discusses the appeal and the strategy, and reviews it based on strategy — not personal opinion, ego, or office politics. That’s collaboration.

    Creative by committee is something else entirely, and it’s deadly for fundraising. Because if we’re creating fundraising that a committee can approve, that doesn’t ruffle any feathers, that everyone can okay, then there’s a good chance it’s bland and boring. And that’s not going to excite donors.