In September, I had the opportunity to present at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy Science of Philanthropy Initiative Conference alongside our partner, Mailchimp. While one of our key takeaways from the conference was the realization that we did not take enough data analytics courses in school, others had some valuable takeaways for application in more practical fundraising efforts. As a note, it’s also important to remember that researchers and not practitioners primarily gave the presentations we watched. My takeaways are envisioning the real-world application of the data shared in presentations.

Donors don’t trust the communities they are funding to make appropriate decisions about how dollars are spent. Several presentations looked at test data regarding how donors directed funds, and despite knowing that recipients would prefer simple cash to be able to direct resources toward their needs, donors still preferred the paternalistic approach to giving. As organizations, donors, and foundations it is our responsibility to take a more intentional and community-led approach to our fundraising and giving, allowing those we serve to take a more active role in guiding the programs and campaigns we lead.

Crypto donations need to be available as an opportunity to smaller organizations. While I still tend to glaze over when I hear conversations about crypto, even I must admit that it is too large of an opportunity for nonprofits to ignore. Both at this conference, as well as The Giving Institute Symposium in July, there are countless studies and actual data on the growing opportunities here. However, what also is notable is that this often is administered and only available to organizations that are large enough to afford the platforms that can manage and process these donations, or the staff capability to add another type of donation to their portfolios. If this is to become a true opportunity for the nonprofit sector, it’s worth exploring how it can be further democratized to be accessible to all sizes of nonprofits, and not just those at an institutional scale.
The way we talk about and present the needs of the communities we serve is critical in how we fundraise. UC Berkeley professor Julianna Schroeder gave a great presentation on donor psychology and the ways in which donors tend to dehumanize the communities they contribute to which leads to donors prioritizing funding to services that lean towards more physiological benefits as opposed to supporting the psychological-based needs of communities. As fundraisers, it is of course easier to gauge the power of a donation in pounds of food, the number of people housed, or any countless other ways that communities can be served. However, it is imperative that we also not overuse the things that are easier to gauge in place of discussing the needs that may be less quantifiable, such as mental health services.

Do you have thoughts or experiences related to these topics? I’d love to hear about hear about them! sdarrow@purposepossible.com