2010 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey

7/31/2019 2010 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey

1/47

TheFund

March

The

2010Raise

011

onpro

Nonp

in201

itRes

ofitF0Comp

archC

undr

aredwi

llabor

isingth200

ative

Surv

y


2/47

Withspecialthankstotherepresentativesof1,845charitableorganizationswhotookthesurveyinFebruary2011, andingratitudeforthetimeandcarefulworkofthemanyindividualswhoworkedonthisproject.

2011NonprofitResearchCollaborativeForpermissiontoreprint,[email protected].


3/47

1 NonprofitResearchCollaborative March2011

KeyFindings

Overallcontributionsreceivedin2010comparedwith2009Moreorganizationssawgrowth(43percent)thandeclines(33percent).Combined,twothirdsof

respondentssaid

they

saw

contributions

increase

or

stay

about

the

same

as

in

2009.

This

is

an

improvementoverayearagoatthesametime,when46percentreportedadeclineandonly54percent

sawgrowthorstablecontributionslevels.

Afarlargersharein2010sawstableamountsofcontributionsreceived(24percentversus11percent

lastyearatthistime).Theshiftbetween2009and2010isfromdecreasedtoaboutthesame.

TheresultsinthiswaveareanimprovementovertheNovember2010surveyconductedbythe

NonprofitResearchCollaborative.Atthattime,36percentofrespondingcharitiesreportedanincrease

and37percentreportedadecreaseinthefirstninemonthsof2010.Thissuggeststhattheuptickin

givinganticipatedinthelastweeksof2010mighthaveoccurred,butnonetheless,thegrowthin

contributionsreceived

did

not

match

expectations

for

the

year.

Byregionofthecountry

Therewerefewmeaningfuldifferencesinthechangesinamountsreceivedwhenorganizations

weregroupedbyregionoftheUnitedStates.

Bysize(expenditureamount)

Largerorganizationsweremorelikelytoseegrowththanwereverysmallorganizations.Thisis

consistentwithNovember2010results,aswell.

Bytypeofrecipient

Changesacrosstypesofrecipientsarefairlyconsistentwiththegeneraltrend.

Shareoffundsraisedbydonortype(sourceofcontribution)Just45percentoforganizationsreceivedmorethan50percentoftheircontributionsfromindividual

donors.Mostorganizationsreceived1to10percentoftheirrevenuefromotherfundraisingsources.

Thesurveyincludedassourcesindividuals,bequests,foundations,corporations,andothercharities.

ChangesincontributionsreceivedbyfundraisingvehicleInternet/onlinegivingroseat58percentoftheorganizationsthatreportedusingitandmorethan

threequartersreportedonlineorInternetfundraising.Majorgiftsandeventsproceedsroseathalfof

theorganizationsusingthem,butformostotherfundraisingvehicles,thepicturewasmixed.

Organizations,onaverage,usedsixofthe10vehiclesstudied.Organizationsthatraisedmoreuseda

highernumber

of

techniques,

on

average.

FundraisinginvestmentlinkedtofundraisingresultsMostorganizationsheldtheirinvestmentinfundraisingsteadyin2010.However,thosethatincreased

expenditures,staffing,orvolunteerengagementweremorelikelytoseeincreasesinfundsraised.

Thereisalsoarelationshipbetweenfailingtoinvestinfundraisingandfailingtomeetgoals.Thatis,

investmentdoesntguaranteeincreases,butdecreasedinvestmentisassociatedwithnotmeetinggoals.


4/47


FundingreceivedwasmostlyforgeneraloperatingexpensesAbouthalfoftheorganizations(51percent)reportedthat75percentormoreofthefundsraisedin

2010supportedoperations(ratherthancapital,investment,orendowment).

LastquarterfundraisingisimportantbutnotdominantatmanycharitiesManycharitiesdoreceiveasignificantshareoftheirfundinginthelastquarter,butthissurveyfinds

thatitisnotoverwhelminglythemostimportantpartoftheyearforfundraising.About50percentsay

theyreceivemorethanonequarteroftheyearscontributionsinthelastquarteroftheyear.Forthe

other50percent,givingisspacedoutovertheentireyear.

Expectationsfor2011Charitiesexpectgivingin2011toincreaseandarelikelytoholdstaffingandexpendituresfor

fundraisingat2010levels.


5/47


Contents

KeyFindings.................................................................................................................................................. 1

Summaryofthestudy................................................................................................................................... 5

Changesin

total

contributions

received

.......................................................................................................

6

2010isslightchangefrom2009,withmoreseeingsameresultsthandeclines.................................. 7

Regionalvariationinchangesingivingmodest........................................................................................ 8

Largerorganizationsmorelikelytoseeincreasedcontributionsamounts.............................................. 9

Changeswereconsistentacrossalltypesofcharities............................................................................ 10

Fundraisingsuccesslinkedwitheffectivecommunications....................................................................... 11

Changesin2010didnotmeetexpectationsstatedinlate2009............................................................... 11

Evenwhileanticipatingincreases,organizationsbudgetedconservativelyfor2010fundraisinggoals....12

Half

of

organizations

met

fundraising

goal

for

2010

..............................................................................

13

Percentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortype................................................................................... 14

Percentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortype,bysize...................................................................... 15

Onaverage,charitiesusesixfundraisingvehicles...................................................................................... 17

Resultsbytypeoffundraisingvehicleshowstrengthinonline,majorgifts,events................................. 19

Onlinegivingtopslistofvehiclesshowinggrowth;resultsmixedformostfundraisingtechniques.....19

Somesubsectorsmorelikelytoreportsuccesswithsomevehicles..................................................... .21

Comparisonof2010resultstopriorStateofFundraisingSurveyresults.................................................. 22

Conditionsthataffectedfundraising......................................................................................................... .25

Explorationofrelationshipbetweenfundraisinginvestmentandchangesinfundraising........................ 26

Fundingforgeneraloperatingsupport....................................................................................................... 27

Givinginthelastquarteroftheyear.......................................................................................................... 29

Largecharitiesmostlikelytoraise25%ormoreofdollarsinlastmonths............................................ 30

Anticipatedchangesfor2011..................................................................................................................... 31

Challengesahead........................................................................................................................................ 32

Changesinrevenuefromgovernmentgrants........................................................................................... .33

TheNonprofitResearchCollaborative........................................................................................................ 34

Methodology...............................................................................................................................................

35

AppendixA:TablesofChangesbyFundraisingVehiclebySubsector

AppendixB:Survey


6/47


Figure1: Percentageoforganizationsbysizeanddirectionofchangeinphilanthropiccontributions,

FY2010comparedwithFY2009................................................................................................. 6

Figure2: Adecadeofchangesinphilanthropicgifts................................................................................. 7

Figure3: Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionofchangeincontributionsreceived,2010compared

with2009,byregion................................................................................................................... 8

Figure4:

Percentage

of

organizations

reporting

direction

and

magnitude

of

change

in

philanthropic

contributions,2010comparedwith2009,bysizeoforganization(expenditures).................... 9

Figure5: Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionofchangeincontributionsreceived,...................... 10

Figure6: Comparisonofpredictedchangeandactualchange............................................................... 11

Figure7: Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionandmagnitudeofchangeinfundraisinggoal,.......12

Figure8: PercentageoforganizationsthatmetordidnotmeetfundraisinggoalforFY2010..............13

Figure9: Rangesfortheppercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortype,2010............................. 14Figure10:Rangesforthepercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortypeforverysmallorganizations

(expendituresin2009


7/47


Summaryofthestudy

Morethan1,840peopletookthisonlinesurveyinFebruary2011.Most(93percent)wereCEOs,

directorsofdevelopment,financeofficersorothermembersofamanagementteam.

Questionsfocusedonseveralareas.Theseincluded:

Magnitudeanddirectionofchangeincontributionsreceivedin2010,comparedwith2009(fiscalyearwaspermitted)andmagnitudeanddirectionofchangeinfundsreceivedfor10

fundraisingvehicles.

Whetherornottheorganizationmetitsfundraisinggoalsfor2010. Directionandmagnitudeofchangeinresourcesavailablein2010forfundraising,includingstaff,

financialsupport,

and

volunteers.

Theshareoffundsraisedthatwere:o Receivedfromdifferenttypesofdonorso Availableforcurrentexpenditures(operations)o ReceivedfromOctoberthroughDecember

Changesingovernmentgrantdollarsreceivedin2010comparedwith2009. Anticipatedchangesinfundsraisedandexpendituresforfundraisingin2011.

SurveyrespondentscouldentereithertheirEmployerIdentificationNumberortheorganizationsname

andzipcode.TheseresponsesallowedtheresearchteamtousedatafromIRSForms990toclassify

organizationsbysize,location(regionofthecountry),andsubsector(majorcategoryoftheNational

TaxonomyofExemptEntities).

AppendixAcontainsdatatablesprovidingmoredetailforsomeofthecrosstabulations.

AppendixBcontainsthequestionsandresponsecountsforcharitiesthatreceivedgifts,beforedata

cleaning.


8/47


ChangesintotalcontributionsreceivedJustoverfourintencharities(43percent)reportedthatphilanthropiccontributionsin2010roseabove

their2009level.Almostonequarter(24percent)foundthatcontributionswereaboutthesameasin

fiscalyear2009.Onethird(33percent)sawsomelevelofdecline.SeeFigure1.

TheFebruary2011resultsforallof2010showanimprovementovertheNovember2010survey

conductedbytheNonprofitResearchCollaborative.InthatNovemberstudy,coveringthefirstnine

monthsof2010,36percentofrespondingcharitiesreportedanincreaseand37percentreporteda

decrease.Thisearly2011surveyaskedforresultsthroughDecember,and43percentreportedan

increase.Thissuggeststhattheuptickanticipatedinthelastweeksof2010mighthaveoccurred.

Figure1:Percentageoforganizationsbysizeanddirectionofchangeinphilanthropiccontributions,FY

2010comparedwithFY2009

Ayearago,theAssociationofFundraisingProfessionalsfoundthat43percentofresponding

organizationssawanincreasein2009,11percenthadcontributionsataboutthesameleveland46saw

anincrease.AFPsurveyeditsmembers;thisstudyreachedalargergroupofcharities,includingAFP

members.

Thisstudyfindsthattheshiftin2010isfromdeclinesingivingtonochange.Thereisnodifference

between2009and2010resultsinthepercentageofcharitiesthatsawgivingincrease.

However,inthisstudy,alargershare(19percent)ofcharitiessawgivingincreasebymorethan15

percentthanwasthecaseayearearlier,whenjustunder14percentsaidgivinggrewby20percentor

more.Thatis,whilethesameoverallpercentageoforganizationssawsomeincreaseinthetwoyears,

morecharitiessurveyedthisspringsawahigherrateofgrowththanayearago.

15

18

24

24

19

Declined b more than 15%

Declinedb lessthan15%

Increased b more than 15%

Increased b less than 15%

Stayedthesame


9/47


2010isslightchangefrom2009,withmoreseeingsameresultsthan

declinesMorecharitiesreportedincreasedphilanthropiccontributionsin2010thandeclines.Thisisashiftfrom

2009,whenmorecharitiessurveyedinFebruary2010bytheAssociationofFundraisingProfessionals

sawdeclinescomparedwith2008.Responsesin2010aredistinct,inpart,becauseaboutonequarter

(24percent)

of

organizations

saw

giving

remain

approximately

the

same

as

in

the

year

before.

This

is

morethantwicethepercentagethatsawgivingremainaboutthesamein2009.Thustheshiftin2010is

fromdecreasedasin2009toaboutthesame.SeeFigure2.

Figure2:Adecadeofchangesinphilanthropicgifts

Percentageofrespondingcharitiesreportingchangeincontributionsreceived

3039

27 25 24 24 24

4046

33

10

11

20

10 137

11

1411

24

6049 54

65 6369

65

46

43 43

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Morethanprevious year

Approximatelythesame

Lessthanpreviousyear

Note:2001and2010havedifferentmethodsfrom20022009.Resultsarenotdirectlycomparable.

Theresultsfor2010arenotasstrongasintheeconomicboomyearsofthemid2000swhen60

percentormoreofcharitiesrespondingtoasimilarsurveyreportedincreasedgiving.

2010ismarked,inpart,bytheunusuallylargepercentageofrespondingcharitiesthatnotedthat

contributionswereapproximatelythesameastheprioryear. Innootheryeardoestheshareof

charitieswith

giving

about

the

same

approach

one

quarter,

as

it

did

for

2010.


10/47


RegionalvariationinchangesingivingmodestThevariationinchangesingivingbyregionwasslight.TheMidwestshowedasomewhathigher

percentageoforganizationsreportinggrowth(47percentcomparedwith43percentnationally)anda

lowerpercentagewithdeclines(28percentcomparedwith33percentnationally). SeeFigure3.

Figure3:Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionofchangeincontributionsreceived,2010compared

with2009,byregion

33 3328

34 37

24 2225

26 23

43 44 4740 40

Total North Midwest South West

Morethanpreviousyear

Aboutthesame

Lessthanpreviousyear

Regional

definition

in

Methodology

section.

IntheWest,aslightlyhigherpercentagereporteddrops(37percentcomparedwith33percent

nationally)andalowerpercentagereportedincreases(40percentcomparedwith43percent

nationally).

Theseresultsarebasedonresponsesreceivedandmightnotreflectallcharitiesineachregion.


11/47


LargerorganizationsmorelikelytoseeincreasedcontributionsamountsIngeneral,organizationswithhigherexpendituresin2009weremorelikelytoseeincreasesin

philanthropiccontributionsreceivedin2010,comparedwith2009.SeeFigure4.

Figure4:Percentageoforganizationsreportingdirectionandmagnitudeofchangeinphilanthropic

contributions,

2010

compared

with

2009,

by

size

of

organization

(expenditures)

2113 10 11

1321

21 18

2824

20 22

1922 31 29

20 21 18 20

Very

small

Small Medium Large

Increasedbymorethan15%

Increasedbylessthan15%

Aboutthesame

Declinedbylessthan15%

Declinedbymorethan15%

Verysmall=Expenditures


12/47


ChangeswereconsistentacrossalltypesofcharitiesEverysubsectorsawmorerespondentsreportinggrowthingivingin2010thanadecline.Most

subsectorssawbetween20and30percentoforganizationsreportingthatgivingstayedaboutthesame

in2010asithadbeenin2009.SeeFigure5.

Figure5:Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionofchangeincontributionsreceived,

2010comparedwith2009,bytypeofrecipient(subsector)

3831 30 30

36

1929 30

21

2229

24

26

18

2719

4147

4146

38

63

4452

Increased

Aboutthesame

Declined

*100orfewerrespondents.Usecautionwheninterpretingresults.

Humanservicesorganizationsshowedthelowestpercentageoforganizationsgainingin2010compared

with2009,withjust38percent.Nearlyasmany,36percent,reportedadrop,and26percentsaidgiving

wasaboutthesame.Humanservicesorganizationstendtobesmall,andsmallorganizationsingeneral

werelikelytoseegivingfallin2010.

Just41percentofartsorganizationsand41percentofenvironment/animalsorganizationsreported

growth,although38percentofartsorganizationssawadrop,comparedwith30percentof

environment/animalsorganizations.

Internationalorganizationswerehighlylikelytoreportgrowth,with63percentsayinggivingincreased

in2010.Note,however,thattherewereonly43organizationsrespondingfromtheinternational

subsector,soitisverydifficulttousethisresulttogeneralizeforallinternationalorganizationsinthe

UnitedStates.


13/47


FundraisingsuccesslinkedwitheffectivecommunicationsInopenendedresponsesaboutwhatmostaffectedfundraisingresultsin2010,surveyparticipants

notedtheimportanceofeffectivecommunications.Whenclusteredbytheme,thesefivewereoften

cited:

1. Communicatingtheorganizationsmission,impact,andneeds.

2. Increasedeffortsbystaffandboardmembers.

3. Donoroptimismabouttheeconomy.4. Donorsrecognitionofothersneedsdueto

therecession.

5. Increasedfocusongrantsandgrantwriting.

Whatsingleissuemostpositivelyaffectedyourfundraisingin2010?Awarenessofourcausebroughtonby

increasedmediacoverage

Wewereabletodescribetheimpactinspecific

andaccountablewaystothedonors.

TheBoard'scommitmenttoincreasingtheir

fundraisingeffortsandaddingadministrative

andfundraisingstafftoaccommodatethenew

erathatisuponus.

Changesin2010didnotmeetexpectationsstatedinlate2009Ayearago,61percentoforganizationssurveyedbytheAssociationofFundraisingProfessionals(AFP)

anticipatedincreasesincharitablegivingin2010.Amongcharitiesthatparticipatedinthisyearssurvey,

43percentreportedanincreaseinFY2010comparedwith2009.SeeFigure6.

Figure6:Comparisonofpredictedchangeandactualchange

Percentageofrespondingorganizationsindicatingpredictedoractualchange

61

26

13

43

24

33

Increase Approximatelynochange Decrease

Light shade=2009prediction

Darkershade=2010reportedresults


14/47


Evenwhileanticipatingincreases,organizationsbudgeted

conservativelyfor2010fundraisinggoalsEventhoughmanyfundraisingprofessionalsearlyin2010anticipatedgrowthingivingduringtheyear,

charities

prepared

budgets

reflecting

slow

growth

in

giving

for

the

year.

About

one

third

set

goals

at

2009levels(31percent).Another23percentprojectedadeclineingiving.Lessthanhalf(46percent)set

abudgetthatreflectedanincreaseinfundsraised.SeeFigure7forabreakdownofthedirectionand

magnitudeofchangeinbudgetedfundraisinggoalsin2010,comparedwith2009.

Figure7:Percentageoforganizationsbydirectionandmagnitudeofchangeinfundraisinggoal,

2010comparedwith2009

Whenanorganizationsetahighergoalthan2009,itwasmostlikely(29percentofallresponding

charities)tosetagoalreflectinglessthan15percentincrease.

9

14

31

18

Goaldeclinedby more

than15%Goalincreased by

morethan15%

Goaldeclined by

less than 15%

Goaldeclinedby less

than15%

Goalstayed the

sameas2009

28


15/47


Halfoforganizationsmetfundraisinggoalfor2010Justoverhalf(52percent)ofrespondingorganizationssaidtheymettheir2010fundraisinggoal.Thisis

essentiallynochangefromthe53percentwhoreportedmeetingtheirgoalin2009inAFPsstudyfrom

ayearago.Differentcharitiesparticipatedinthesurveyinthetwoyears:AFPmembersinearly2010

andalargergroupcontactedbytheNonprofitResearchCollaborativemembersinearly2011.

Figure8:PercentageoforganizationsthatmetordidnotmeetfundraisinggoalforFY2010

Yes

52No48

WhileahigherpercentageofcharitiesintheMidwest(55percent)mettheirgoalsthanthe52percent

resultnationallyandalowershareofthoseintheSouth(48percent)mettheirgoalthereisno

statisticallymeaningfuldifferenceinthesepercentages.

Verysmallorganizations(expendituresoflessthan$250,000in2009)weretheleastlikelytomeettheir

fundraisinggoals.Just38percentsaidtheydidsoin2010,comparedwith52percentforall

respondents.Themajority(62percent)saidtheydidnotmeettheirgoal.

Amongmediumsizedorganizations(expendituresof$1millionto$3million)andlargeorganizations

(expendituresof$3millionormore),roughly64percentmettheirgoaland37percentdidnot.These

samepercentageswerereportedbyorganizationsinbothsizecategories.

Aswithregion,thereweredifferencesbysubsector,butthedifferencesarenotmeaningfulgiventhe

lownumberofrespondents.Forexample,59percentofhealthcharitiessaidtheymettheirgoal,and46

percentof

religion

charities.

Across

all

subsectors,

roughly

half

of

the

participating

organizations

met

theirgoalandroughlyhalfdidnot.


16/47


PercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortypeGivingUSAhasreportedsinceitsfirstpublicationin1956thatindividualdonorscontributethelargestshareofthetotalintheUnitedStates.Totestthisnationalresultattheorganizationallevel,thisstudy

askedabouttheshareoffundingfromindividuals,foundations,corporations,andthroughbequests.

Whilenot

amajority

of

all

giving

except

at

very

small

organizations,

individual

giving

is

the

largest

single

sourceofcontributionsinthemajorityoforganizationsparticipatinginthissurvey.

Figure9showshowparticipantsinthissurveyrespondedwhenaskedaboutthepercentageoffunding

thatcomesfromvariousdonortypes.Aboutonequarter(22percent)oforganizationsreported

receiving75to100percentoftheirtotalcontributionsrevenuefromindividuals.Anotherquarter(23

percent)saidtheyreceived50to75percentfromindividualdonors.Institutionaldonorssuchas

foundationsandcorporationsmostoftenaccountedforlessthan10percentofcontributions,and

bequestsoverwhelmingly(for44percentofrespondents)werelessthan10percentofthetotalraised

in2010.

Figure9:Rangesforthepercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortype,2010

(Thesize

of

the

circle

and

the

number

indicate

the

percentage

of

organizations

that

responded.

Thus,

15

percent

ofparticipantssaidIndividualsgave1to9%oftheirorganizationstotalphilanthropiccontributionsin2010.Not

shownarethepercentagesoforganizationsthatleftthequestionblank.)

Notshownonthegrapharecharitiesthatreportednofundingfromthedonortype.Just3percent

receivednodonationsatallfromindividuals,and18percentofsurveyparticipantssaidtheyhadno

foundationgrants.About20percentofthecharitiesreportednogiftsfrombequestsin2010.Morethan

60percentofcharitieshadnocorporatefunding.Abouthalfoftherespondingorganizations(49

percent)donotreceivefundingfromothercharities.

Individual

Foundation

Bequest

Corporations

Othercharities

2223211715

36

26

44

31

10

4

4 1

11

4

8 4

2

2

19

7

9

22 17

19% 1024% 2449% 5074% 75%100%

Percentageofallcontributionsfromsource


17/47


Percentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortype,bysizeThereisnotmuchdifferencebysize,exceptalargershareofverysmallorganizationsinthisstudy

received 75percentormoreoftheircontributionsfromindividualsdonorsthanwasthecasein

organizationswithhigherexpenditurelevels.

Figure10:Rangesforthepercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortypeforverysmallorganizations

(expendituresin2009


18/47


Figure12:Rangesforthepercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortypeformediumsized

organizations(expendituresof$1millionto$2.99millionin2009)

Figure13:Rangesforthepercentageofcontributionsfromeachdonortypeforlargeorganizations

(expendituresof$3millionormorein2009)

Individual

Foundation

Bequest

Corporations

Othercharities

242417

47

35

8

5

5 0

02

4 1

2

23

7

12

1420

53

34 26 22 8 5

Individual

Foundation

Bequest

Corporations

Othercharities

322311

51

39

10

7

3 1

01

3 2

3

25

18

10

1714

48

40 29 15 8 3

19% 1024% 2449% 5074% 75%100%


19% 1024% 2449% 5074% 75%100%



19/47


Onaverage,charitiesusesixfundraisingvehiclesMostcharitiesrespondingtothissurveyusedmultiplefundraisingvehicles.Theaverage,mode(most

frequentanswer)andmedian(midpoint)areallsix.Thatis,respondentstothisstudyarehighlylikelyto

reportuseofsixdifferentfundraisingvehicles.

Themostfrequentsourceofdonationswasboardmembers,reportedby87percent.Majorgiftswere

reportedby77percentofrespondents.Methodsofengagingdonorsfromonlinethroughspecialevents

anddirectmailwerereportedbyapproximatelythreequartersofrespondents.Telephoneappealswere

infrequent,usedbyjust18percent.Notethatdirectmailandemailappealsareconsideredtogetheras

directresponseappeals.SeeFigure14.

Figure14:Frequencyofuse*ofdifferentfundraisingvehicles

18

41 42

74 77 77 7879 80

87

*SurveyparticipantscouldselectNAorskipthequestion.Bothwereconsideredevidenceofnotusingthefundraisingvehicle.

Somesurveyparticipantsreportedthattheirorganizationsincreasedfocusongrantsandproposal

writingin2010.

Onewrote,Wereceivedgrantsreceivedfromfoundationsthatwerenotavailablein2009.

Anothersaid: Wearestartingtowriteourowngrantsinternally lessexpensive,moreeffectiveand

timely.


20/47


Thenumberoffundraisingvehiclesusedriseswiththeamounttheorganizationraises(notorganization

sizebyexpenditurebutamountraised).Organizationsthatraiselessthan$250,000aremostlikelyto

usebetweenfiveandsevenfundraisingvehicles,ofthe10includedinthestudy.Incontrast,

organizationsthatraised$3millionormorewerehighlylikelytousemorethan7ofthevehicles

included.SeeFigure15.

Figure15: Numberoffundraisingvehiclesusedbyrangeofamountraisedincontributions

24%

8%

3%

4%

8%

44%

22%

16%

14%

12%

22%

47%

56%

62%

73%

7

5,6,or7


21/47


Resultsbytypeoffundraisingvehicleshowstrengthinonline,major

gifts,events

Online

giving

tops

list

of

vehicles

showing

growth;

results

mixed

for

most

fundraisingtechniquesFigure16comparesincreases,decreases,andstableamountsraisedbytypeofvehicleused.Forthreeofthemorecommonlyusedfundraisingvehicles,atleasthalfoftheorganizationsthatusedthevehicle

sawgivingincrease.Theseinclude:

Online/Internetgiving,whichrosefor58percentoftheorganizationsusingit,and Majorgiftsandspecialeventnetproceeds,whichbothrosefor50percentoftheorganizations

usingthem.

Although

online

giving

rose

at

more

organizations

using

it

than

other

types

of

fundraising

vehicles

did,

onlinehasbeenreportedelsewhereasaccountingfor10percentorlessthantotalcontributions

receivedatmostcharitiesthatuseit.(GivingUSA2009,GivingUSA2008,BlackbaudinNovember2010)

Lessthanhalfoforganizationssawgrowthinfourothercommonlyusedfundraisingvehicles.

Directresponseappealsyieldedincreaseddonationsat43percentoftheorganizationsusingthem.Athirdoforganizationsusingdirectresponsesawstablerevenue,andnearlyonequarter

(24percent)sawadecline.

Fortypercentoforganizationsusingfoundationproposalsforfundraisingreportedincreasedcontributionsfromthismethodin2010,comparedwith2009.Athirdsawfoundationgrants

remainstableandnearlyonequarter(24percent)sawadeclineinrevenuefromthisvehicle.

Just39percentoforganizationsreceivinggiftsfromboardmemberssawanincreaseincontributedrevenuefromthissource.Almosthalf(49percent)usingboardgivingsawitstay

almostthesameasin2009.

Justoveronethird(34percent)oforganizationsreceivingcorporatecontributions(grantsorgifts)sawanincreasefromthisfundraisingvehicle. Almost4inten(44percent)sawrevenue

fromthis

vehicle

remain

stable,

but

nearly

one

quarter

(22

percent)

saw

adecline.

Thethreeleastusedmethodstelephoneappeals,payrollgiving,andplannedgivingwereamongthemostlikelytostayatthesamelevelsasin2009.Forcharitiesusingthem,halfto60

percentsaidthesevehiclesgeneratedthesameamountasintheprioryear.


22/47


Figure16:Fundraisingvehiclesusedin2010andchangesintheamountsraisedthrougheach

74

9

1310

8

5460 52

16 20

18

9 6 13

T ele phone Payr oll Planne d

Gifts

Percentageoforganizations

using

vehiclethatreportedchange

Increasedbymore

than15%

Increasedbyless

than15%

Stayedthesame

Decreasedbyless

than15%

Decreasedby

more

than15%

3 68 8 10 9

45

16 1016 15 13

8

34

44

33

3335

27 49

38

22

27

26 21

29

24

20

12

2317 18 21

15

Online Corporate

gifts

Major

gifts

Directmail

oremail

Foundation

grants

Special

events

Board

Giving

Percentageoforganizationsusingvehiclethat

reportedchange


23/47


SomesubsectorsmorelikelytoreportsuccesswithsomevehiclesSometypesofcharitiesshowedresultsdifferentfromtheoverallfindingsbytypeoffundraisingvehicle.

TablesfortheresultsbysubsectorareinAppendixA.Ofparticularnotearethefollowing:

Artscharities: 59percentofparticipatingartsorganizationsthatusedplannedgivingreported

thatrevenue

from

this

vehicle

remained

the

same

in

2010

as

in

2009.

This

is

higherthanthe52percentofcharitiesusingplannedgivingthatreportedstable

revenuefromthissource.Notethatthedifferencereflectsonlytherespondents

tothissurveysoisnotgeneralizabletoallartscharities.

Educationcharities: 55percentusingmajorgiftssaidthatgiftsfromthisvehiclerosein2010,

comparedwith50percentforallcharities.

Environment/animals: Thesecharitiesweremorelikelytoseeboardgivingremainthesameandnot

increasethanallcharitieswere.About69percentofenvironment/animals

charitiessaidboardgivingwasstablein2010,comparedwith49percentofall

charities.

However,environment/animalscharitiesweremorelikelytoreportgrowthin

receiptoffoundationgrantsthanwereothertypesofcharities.Nearlyhalf(47

percent)oftheenvironment/animalscharitiessaidfoundationgrantsrosein

2010comparedwith2009.Thisishigherthanthe40percentofallcharitiesthat

saidfoundationgivingwasup.Again,thisfindingrepresentsthecharitiesthat

respondedtothissurveyandmightnotbegeneralizabletoall

environmental/animalsorganizations.

Healthcharities: Morehealthcharitiesreportedgrowthinrevenuefromeventsthandidcharities

overall.

Of

the

responding

health

charities,

56

percent

said

special

events

proceedsincreasedin2010comparedwith2009.Thisishigherthanthe50

percentofallcharitiesthatfoundgrowthineventfundraising.Thisresultis

basedonresponsesreceivedandmightnotbegeneralizabletoallhealth

organizations.

Publicsocietalbenefit: ThiscategoryincludescollectivefundraisingorganizationssuchasUnitedWay

andJewishfederationsaswellasthinktanks,policycenters,andmore.Alarger

percentageofrespondentsinthiscategorythanamongallcharitiesreported

increasesforthreefundraisingvehicles:events,corporategiving,andplanned

gifts.Forevents,55percentoforganizationsinthisgroupsawanincrease

(comparedwith50percentoverall).Forcorporategiftsandgrants,44percent

oforganizations

in

this

group

saw

an

increase

(compared

with

34

percent

overall),andforplannedgiving,39percentsawanincrease(comparedwith31

percentoverall).Thesedifferencesreflectresponsesreceivedandarenot

necessarilygeneralizable.


24/47


Comparisonof2010resultstopriorStateofFundraisingSurveyresultsTheAssociationofFundraisingProfessionals(AFP)begantheStateofFundraisingSurveyinearly2002,

inordertogaugetheresponseofdonorsinthewakeoftheattacksofSeptember11,2001.AFP

continuedtosurveyitsmembersearlyeachyearthrough2010andnowjoinstheNonprofitResearch

Collaborative(NRC).ManyofthequestionsusedinthisreportaredrawnfromAFPsmostrecentState

ofFundraisingSurvey.However,thisyear,theinvitationtothesurveywasdistributedwidely,reaching

nonprofitorganizationswithoutpersonnelwhoareAFPmembers.Thus,whileshownherefor

informationalpurposes,resultsshouldnotbeusedtodrawconclusionsbasedonthisyearcompared

withprioryears.

Thissectionincludes10yearcomparisonsofsurveyresultsforfundraisingvehiclesthatwereincludedin

theAFPStateofFundraisingSurveysandintheNRENonprofitFundraisingSurvey.Methodsnotshown

werenotincludedinboth.

Directresponseappealsmostoftenincreasedat50percentorlessofcharities

Directresponse

appeals,

including

mail

and

email

messages,

were

used

by

78

percent

of

charitable

organizationsthatparticipatedinthe2011survey.Ofthoseusingdirectresponseappeals,43percent

sawanincreaseinfundsraisedin2010comparedwith2009.SeeFigure17.

Figure17:Tenyearsofsurveyresultsaboutamountsreceivedthroughdirectresponsefundraising

2429

2417

26 2430

39 35

24

3030

33

27

25

10

19

2325

33

4641 43

5649

66

51

38 40 43

2001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Higher

than

pastyear

Stayedthesame

Lowerthanpast

year

Percentagereporting

givingbyvehicle:

Note:Thereweremethodologicaldifferencesinthecompositionofthesamplein2001and2010.Thereisno

statisticalvalidityincomparisonsthatincludeeitherofthoseyears.


25/47


Onlinegivingshowsmoreorganizationshadincreasesthandecreasesinallyearsstudied

Amajorityofrespondentsreportedincreasesinonlinegivingineveryyear.SeeFigure18.

Figure18:Tenyearsofsurveyresultsaboutamountsreceivedfromonlinegiving

8 7 4 612

7 1114

9 8

3542

34 30

33

5

2833

31 34

5751

61 6455

88

6153

60 58

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Higherthanpastyear

Stayedthesame

Lowerthanpastyear

Percentagereporting

givingby

vehicle

:



Specialeventsresultsamongthemostvariable

Figure19:Tenyearsofsurveyresultsaboutspecialeventsnetproceeds

20 23 1611

2317

2433

40

22

3433

31

24

22

9

19

24

27

27

46 4453

6555

74

57

4333

50

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Higherthanpastyear

Stayedthesame

Lowerthanpastyear



Percentage

reportinggivingby

vehicle:


26/47


Plannedgiving

Figure20:Tenyearsofsurveyresultsaboutamountsreceivedfromplannedgiving

24

29

24 1726

24

30

3935

24

30

30

3327

25 10 19

2325

33

46

41

43 56 49 66 51

38 40 43

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Higherthanpast

year

Stayedthesame

Lowerthanpast

year

Percentagereporting

givingbyvehicle:



Telephonefundraisingshowslowestpercentageofresponsewithincrease,2009and2010

Figure21:Tenyearsofsurveyresultsaboutamountsreceivedfromtelephonefundraising

2535

18

23 23 24 26 20 20 21

31

30

2925 27

11

2849

6454

4435

53 52 50

65

46

31

16

25

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Higherthanpastyear

Stayedthesame

Lowerthanpastyear

Percentagereporting

givingbyvehicle:




27/47


ConditionsthataffectedfundraisingNonprofitmanagersdeterminetheinvestmentofresourcespossibleforfundraisingeffortsinthe

contextoftheorganizationsprogramactivitiesandotherfinancialneeds.In2010,mostorganizations

maintainedstablelevelsoffunding,staffing,andvolunteerengagementinfundraising.SeeFigure22.

Figure22:Changesinfinancialresources,staffing,andvolunteersforfundraising,2010comparedwith

2009

10 114

13 8

7

5659

53

14 13

24

7 9 12

Financialresources

availableforthe

developmentfunction

Staffingforthe

developmentfunction

Volunteersassisting

withfundraising

Increasedbymore

than15%

Increasedbylessthan

15%

Stayedthesame

Decreasedbylessthan

15%

Decreasedbymore

than15%

Thebiggestincreaseininvestmentcamefromanincreaseduseofvolunteertimeforfundraising.That

rosebymorethan15percentin12percentoftherespondingorganizationsandby1to15percentat

another24percentofsurveyparticipants.

Anadagesaysthatittakesmoneytomakemoney,andthisstudyconfirmedthat.

Increasedinvestmentinfundraisinganddevelopmentcorrelatedwithmeetingafundraisinggoal.The

strongestcorrelationisforfinancialinvestment(.0226,p


28/47


Explorationofrelationshipbetweenfundraisinginvestmentand

changesinfundraisingThissurveyanalysisincludes1,616participants,moreorlessequallydistributedacrossthenationsfour

regions.Respondents,likecharitiesinthecountry,wereoverwhelminglyfromorganizationswith

relativelylowbudgets(under$1million).Theparticipatingorganizationsarenotarandomsampleof

charities,so

statistical

analysis

will

not

generate

results

that

can

be

applied

to

all

charities.

Nonetheless,

byexamininginmoredetailspecificresults,thisreportexploresfurthersomeideasabouthow

fundraisingisconductedandhowchangesinfundraisingaffecttotalcontributions.

Investinginfundraisingcorrelatedpositivelywithincreasedfundraising

proceeds

Almosthalf(48percent)oftheorganizationsthatincreasedfinancialsupportforfundraisingby15percentormoresawcontributionsincreaseby15percentormore.Aboutaquarter(27

percent)sawgivingrise,althoughbylessthan15percent.Combined,threequarters(75

percent)oforganizationsthatincreasedtheirfinancialsupportforfundraisingin2010sawan

increasein

funds

raised.

Less

than

aquarter

(24

percent)

saw

giving

remain

flat

or

fall.

Organizationsthatkeptfinancialinvestmentinfundraisingthesameweremorelikelytoseecontributionsdeclineorstaythesame(56percent)thantheyweretoseecontributionsincrease

(44percent).

Aboutfourin10(43percent)organizationsthatallowedfundraisingexpenditurestodeclineby15percentormoresawcontributionsdeclineby15percentormore.Justoverathirdofthese

organizations(36percent)sawgivingstaythesameorincrease.

Investing

in

fundraising

associated

with

greater

likelihood

of

meeting

fundraisinggoalsFindingswereconsistentforallfourorganizationalsizes.Forverysmall,small,medium,andlarge

organizations:

Declinesofanyamountinfinancialinvestmentanddeclinesinstaffingwerebothassociatedwithalowerprobabilityofmeetingthefundraisinggoal.

Forverysmallandsmallorganizations,areductioninvolunteerengagementinfundraisingwasalsoassociatedwithalowerprobabilityofmeetingtheorganizationsfundraisinggoal.

TheNonprofitOverheadandAdministrativeCostStudy(www.coststudy.org)foundthatraisingfundsfor

administrativeexpenses,

including

fundraising,

was

difficult

in

all

sizes

of

organizations.

This

repeatedly

compromisedorganizationaleffectivenessinmeetingthecharitablemission,asthecharitiesmadedo

withlessinnumerousways.

Verysmall:Expendituresof$250,000orlessin2009;Small:Expendituresof$250,000to$999,999in2009;

Mediumsized:Expendituresof$1millionto$2.99millionin2009;Large:Expendituresof$3millionormorein

2009.


29/47


FundingforgeneraloperatingsupportTotalcharitablecontributionswere$304billionin2009,accordingtoGivingUSA2010.Ofthat,approximately$31billionwenttograntmakingandoperatingfoundations.TheCouncilforAidto

Educationreportsthat$11billionofthe$28billioningivingforhighereducationwasforendowmentor

capitalpurposes.Fewotherstudieshavepreviouslyaskedaboutthepurposesofcharitable

contributions

received

at

most

types

of

charities.

Thissurveyfindsthatmorethanhalfoftheorganizationsparticipating(51percent)received75percent

ormoreoftheircontributeddollarsforoperatingsupport.Another13percentsaidbetween50percent

and74percentofcontributionswereforoperatingexpenses.Combined,64percentsaidthathalfor

moreofthecontributionsreceivedwereforgeneraloperations.SeeFigure23.

Figure23:Shareoforganizationsbypercentageoffundsraisedthatwereforoperations

NOTE:Differentshadesareusedtodemonstratetheshareoffundingforoperations,withthelightestshadeindicatingthatno

fundsraisedwereforoperations.Astheshadegetsdarker,theshareforoperationsincreases.

Just7percentreportedthatnoneofthefundsreceivedin2010wereforoperatingexpenses.

Thereisnomeaningfuldifferencebyregion,eventhoughdifferentpercentagesoforganizationsinthe

SouthandtheWestreportedreceiving75percentormoreoftheircontributionsforoperations.Inthe

South,thepercentagewaslower,at48percent,thanthe51percentfoundgenerally.IntheWest,the

percentagewashigher,at55percent.

7

20

8

13

51

None

1 24%

25 49%

50 74%

75 100%Percentageoffundsraisedthatwere

foroperations

Percentageofrespondingorganizations


30/47


Operatingexpenseslowershareoftotalateducationandpublicsocietal

benefitorganizationsBytypeofcharity,thissurveyfindsthatamongallorganizationtypes,amajoritysaidthat50percentor

moreoftheircontributionsreceivedwereforfundingoperatingexpenses.Artsorganizationsand

religionrelatedorganizationsweremostlikelytoreportthis,72percentand76percent,respectively.

(Notethattofacilitateunderstandingacrosseighttypesofcharities.Figure24combinescategoriesthat

arereportedseparatelyabove.)Theleastlikelytoreportthat50percentormorewasforoperating

expenseswereeducationorganizations(at54percent)andpublicsocietalbenefitorganizations(at53

percent).

Figure24: Percentageoforganizationsbyshareoffundingforoperatingexpenses,bytypeofcharity

20

31

25

27

24

41

41

16

8

15

6

11

8

3

6

8

72

54

68

62

68

56

53

76

Arts

Education

Environment/Animals

Health

Humanservices

International*

Publicsocietalbenefit

Religion*

0to

24%

2549%

50%ormore

Bysubsector,theseresultscannotbedirectlycomparedtootherstudies,inpartbecausethequestionis

different.TheCouncilforAidtoEducation,initsstudyofhighereducationalinstitutions,foundthat

approximately60percentofanestimated$28billioningivingforthe20092010fiscalyearwasfor

currentoperations.Thisisnotthesameasaskingwhetherthepercentageofcontributionsforoperating

supportfallsinrangea,b,orc,asthisstudydoes.


31/47


GivinginthelastquarteroftheyearNonprofitmanagersandmembersofthemediaoftenwanttoknowhowmuchoftheyearsgiving

occursinthelastfewmonthsoftheyear,thesocalledgivingseason. Thissurveyisoneofthefirstto

askthatquestionofalargenumberofcharitiesinallsubsectors.

Figure25:PercentageoforganizationsbywhatshareofcontributionsrevenuearrivedfromOctober

throughDecember

Figure25showsfivelevelsofcontributionsrevenue,fromnoneto50%ormore.Thesizeofthecircle

representsthepercentageoforganizationsthatsaidtheyreceivedthatpercentageofcontributions

revenueinthelastthreemonthsofthecalendaryear.

Thelargestshareofcharitiesinthisstudy(36percent)saidtheyreceive25percentto49percentof

theirtotalcontributionsinthelastthreemonthsoftheyear.Onlyaboutoneinsix(16percent)reported

receiving50percentormoreoftheirtotalcontributionsinthelastthreemonths.However,abouthalf

ofthe

charities

receive

more

than

one

quarter

of

their

contributions

in

the

last

quarter

of

the

year.

If

contributionswereevenlyspaced,wewouldexpecteachcalendarquartertoaccountforroughly25

percentofphilanthropicdollarsreceived.

163631144

0% 19% 1024% 2549% 50%ormore

PercentageofcontributionsarrivingOct. Dec.


32/47


Largecharitiesmostlikelytoraise25%ormoreofdollarsinlastmonthsResultsarevirtuallythesameinthegeographicregions(North,Midwest,South,andWest)asforall

respondingcharities.However,thereisvariationbysizeofcharity.Smallerorganizationsaremorelikely

toseetheircontributionsarrivethroughouttheyear,but59percentofthelargestcharitiessaidthat

theyreceive25percentormoreoftheirgiftdollarsinthelastfewmonthsoftheyear.SeeFigure26.

Figure26:Percentageofcharitiesreportingthattheyreceiveupto25percentor25percentormoreof

theircontributionsfromOctoberthroughDecember,bycharitybudgetsize

Thereissomevariationbytypeofrecipientorganization.SeeFigure27:Percentageofcharities

reportingtheshareofcontributionsthatarrivefromOctobertoDecember,bytypeofcharity.

Figure27:PercentageofcharitiesreportingtheshareofcontributionsthatarrivefromOctoberto

December,

by

type

of

charity

49

57

47

42

47

51

38

50

38

51

43

53

58

53

49

62

50

62

All

Arts

Education

Environment

Health

HumanservicesInternational

PublicssocietalbenefitReligion

0to24%25%ormore

55

47

45

41

45

53

55

59

Verysmall

Small

Medium

Large


33/47


Anticipatedchangesfor2011Budgetsandplansforfundraisingforthisyearweredraftedinmid tolate2010.Organizations

participatinginthissurveyweregenerallyoptimisticaboutincreasedcontributionsthisyearbutthe

largestportionanticipatedthatstaffingandexpendituresforfundraisingwillremainthesameasfor

2010.Acombinedtotalof63percentprojectthatcontributionswillincreasein2011.Thirtynine

percentanticipateincreasesinexpendituresforfundraising,comparedwith49percentthatsay

expenditureswillremainthesame.Nearlytwothirds(65percent)saythatdevelopmentandfundraising

staffinglevelswillremainthesameasin2010.SeeFigure28.

Figure28:Predictionsforchangesinfundsraised,expendituresforfundraising,andstaffinglevelsin

2011

4 3 3

8 94

25

4965

42

29

18

21

10 10

Charitable

contributions

Totalexpenditures

forfundraising

Developmentor

fundraising

staffinglevel

Increasebymore

than15%

Increasebylessthan

15%

Staythesame

Decreasebymore

than15%

Decreasebyless

than15%


34/47


ChallengesaheadRespondentstothesurveycouldwriteinresponsestothequestion:Whatisthesinglebiggest

challenge,orissue,ortrendthatwillaffectfundraisingforyourorganizationin2011?

Whilesome

responding

staff

at

nonprofit

organizations

saw

optimism

for

the

economy

in

2010,

it

was

stillthemostcommonlynamedchallengefor2011.Afewcommentsfromtherespondents:

- Becauseoftheeconomy,donorsdonotwanttocommittomultiyearpledges.- People'sconfidenceintheeconomyandtheirwillingnesstogive.

Respondentsfeelthattheirorganizationsareunderstaffedfor2011.Onesurveyrespondentnoted: I

amaonepersonoperationtoomanyprojects/challengesforoneperson.

Respondentswouldlikeboardmembertobemoreinvolvedin2011.

- Lackofboardinvolvement/boardnotsufficientlypoisedtodomajorgiftfundraising.- Gettingourboardtogetinvolvedingive/getfundraising.Hasneverbeendonebefore

andIamtryingtogetthisimplementedfor2011.

Communicatingtheorganizationsmissionandimpactisalsoseenasanareaneededforsuccessin

2011.

- OurbiggestchallengewillbePR,gettingthewordoutaboutourproject.- Successofanewmarketing/communicationsplanwhichincludesincreasingfinancial

stability.

Theeconomylimitedtheamountsomedonorswerecomfortablecontributingin2010,butitalso

helpeddonorsfeelaconnectiontononprofitorganizationswork.Perhapstheconnectionsmadeduring

therecessionwillturnintocontributionsasconfidenceintheeconomygrows.


35/47


ChangesinrevenuefromgovernmentgrantsWhilenottaxdeductiblephilanthropiccontributions,governmentgrantsareamajorsourceoffunding

formanycharitiesandarereportedasaformofpublicsupportonIRSForms990.Manydevelopment

officeshaveresponsibilityforpreparingproposalsforfederalandstatefundingandareheld

accountablefor

their

results

in

this

area

as

they

are

for

gifts

received

from

individuals,

estates,

foundations,corporations,andothercharities.

Thissurveyaskedaboutchangesinamountsreceivedingrantsfromgovernmentsourcesin2010,

followingontheNovember2010surveythatalsoaskedaboutgrantrevenue.

About45percentoforganizationsreportedreceivinggovernmentgrants,andofthose,moresawa

decline(38percent)thansawstablegovernmentfunding(32percent)orincreases(31percent).Thisis

consistentwithearlierassessmentsandwithmediareportsaboutgovernmentbudgetcutbacks.Tothe

extentthat2011stateandfederalgovernmentbudgetsarefurthercuttingexpenses,nonprofit

organizationsarebracingforfurtherdeclinesfromthisrevenuesource.SeeFigure29.

Figure29:

Percentage

of

organizations

by

direction

and

magnitude

of

change

in

government

grant

revenue,2010

(Onlyorganizationsreportinggovernmentgrantrevenuechangesareincluded.)

22

16

32

14

17

Decreased bymore

than15percent

Decreased byless

than15percent

Increased bymorethan

15percent

Increased by

lessthan

15percent

Stayed the

same


36/47


TheNonprofitResearchCollaborativeSixorganizationshaveformedtheNonprofitResearchCollaborative.Eachoftheseentitieshas,ata

minimum,adecadeofdirectexperiencecollectinginformationfromnonprofitsconcerningcharitable

receipts,fundraisingpractices,and/orgrantmakingactivities.

Thecollaborativeeffortreducestheburdenoncharities,whichwillreceivefewerrequestsforsurvey

participation.Surveyrespondentswillformapanelovertime,allowingfortrendcomparisonsamong

thesameorganizations.Thisapproachprovidesmoreusefulbenchmarkinginformationthanrepeated

crosssectionalstudies.

Thecollaboratingpartnerstodateare:

AssociationofFundraisingProfessionals,whichsurveyedmembersforanannualstateoffundraisingstudy;

Blackbaud,Inc.,whichpublishesTheBlackbaudIndexandpreparesareportabouttheStateoftheNonprofitIndustry;

TheCenteronPhilanthropyatIndianaUniversity,whichconductsawiderangeofstudiesonphilanthropyandgiving;

TheFoundationCenter,whichprovidesservicestononprofitorganizationsanddocumentstrendsinfoundationgivingworldwide;

GuideStarUSA,Inc.,whichhasissuedannualreportsabouttheimpactoftheeconomyonthenonprofitsectorsince2002;and

TheNationalCenterforCharitableStatisticsattheUrbanInstitute,whichtracksthefinancesandactivitiesofnonprofitorganizationsandpreparestheNonprofitAlmanacandotherpublications

and

resources.

Additionalorganizationsmayjointhecollaborative.Formoreinformation,pleasecontactReema

Bhakta,[email protected].


37/47


MethodologyTheonlineonlysurveywasfieldedfromFebruary10toFebruary28,2011.Invitationstoparticipate

weresentbyeachofthecollaboratingpartnerorganizationstoitsownhouselist,and

communicationsfromthepartnerorganizationswentoutthroughsocialmedia(Twitter,Facebook,

LinkedIn)messagingtoreachaswide agroupofcharitiesaspossible.Noestimateofthenumberof

recipientsoftheinvitationtoparticipateispossiblegiventhisviraldistributionmethod.

Atotalof1,845responsesweresubmitted.Notallwereeligibletocompletetheentiresurvey,as173

didnotacceptcontributions.Ofthe1,673whodidreportacceptingcontributions,notallcompleted

enoughquestionstobeanalyzed.Resultsarebasedon1,616responses.

Reportedvaluesarealwayspercentagesofrespondents,andthedenominatorexcludesnon

respondentsforeachquestion.

Becausethesampleisnotrandom,resultsarenotgeneralizabletoallnonprofitorganizationsinthe

UnitedStates.

Some

types

of

organizations

might

have

been

systematically

excluded

from

participating.

Thesecouldincludeverylargeorganizationswhereresponsibilityfortakingonlinesurveysisnot

assigned,organizationsthatfoldedduringtheyearbecausetheydidnothavesufficientfundraising

revenue,organizationsfacingsevereweatherinFebruary2010astheMidwestandEastexperience

numerousstorms,ororganizationsthatdonotuseemailorInternetconnections.

Withaconveniencesample,nomeasuresoferrorcanbecalculated.Whileuseofstatisticalprocedures

doesassumearandomsample,analysisdidincludeChisquaretestsfordifferencesforthissetof

respondents.Whenadifferenceisreportedamongtheserespondents,thepvalueisalways0.05or

lower.


38/47

36

RegionTheregioStatisticssurveys(Codingfo

Image:httpDistributi

naldefinitionprovidedstarwithorgan

rregionswa

://nces.ed.gov/

onofrespon

401

Northeast

sarethoseoeinformatioizationalnadoneatthe

nationsreportca

dentsbyreg

458

Midwest

NonprofitR

ftheU.S.CenbasedontesandzipcCenteronP

rd/NDEHelp/W

ion526

South

searchColla

susBureau.eEmployerdes,forthoilanthropya

bHelp/Welcom

459

West

borative

TheNationaIdentificatio

erespondenIndianaUni

e_to_the_NAE

lCenterforCNumberssutswhodidnversity.

_Data_Explore

March

haritablebmittedwittincludean

.htm

2011

theEIN).


39/47


SizeSizeisbasedonexpendituresreportedonIRSForms990for2009.TheNationalCenterforCharitable

Statisticsmatched990datawithEmployerIdentificationNumberssubmittedwiththesurveys(orwith

organizationalnamesandzipcodes,forthoserespondentswhodidnotincludeanEIN).Thesizesused

areasfollows:

VerySmall:expenditureslessthan$250,000 Small:expendituresof$250,000to$999,999 Mediumsize:expendituresof$1millionto$2.99million Large:expendituresof$3millionormore

Thesecategorieswereselectedinpartonthedistributionofthesizesoftheparticipatingcharities,so

thatthefourcategorieshaveroughlysimilarnumbersofrespondents.

Distributionofrespondentsbysizecategory,basedon2009totalexpenditures566

368400

282

Verysmall Small Mediumsized Large


40/47


OrganizationsbyamountraisedInadditiontolookingattotalexpenditures,organizationswerealsoorganizedbyamountraised.Some

largeorganizationsreceivesignificantportionsoftheirrevenuefromfeesforserviceorgovernment

contracts,sodonotraiseamajorityoftheirfundingthroughphilanthropicgifts.Thus,anorganizationin

thelargeexpenditurecategorymightraiselessthan$250,000.However,whenanalyzingthenumberof

fundraisingvehicles

used

based

on

organizational

characteristics,

we

used

the

amount

raised

rather

thantheoverallexpenditurelevel.

Mostorganizationsthatparticipatedinthissurveyraisedlessthan$250,000in2010.

Distributionofrespondentsby2010amountsraised

925

264 236 242178


41/47


SubsectorcodesBecauseorganizationscouldprovidetheirEmployerIdentificationNumbers(EIN),subsectorassignment

wasbasedonclassificationdoneattheNationalCenterforCharitableStatisticsfollowingtheNational

TaxonomyofExemptEntities.SomeorganizationsdidnotprovideanEINandaspartofthesurvey,they

couldidentifytheirorganizationaltypebyselectingfromalistof26categories,whichareusedbythe

IRSfor

classification.

Related

categories

were

then

aggregated

into

subsectors

(or

major

groups)

to

provideabroaderviewofthenonprofitworld.

ThemajorgroupsusedbytheNationalTaxonomyofExemptEntitiescorrespondtosubsectorstracked

byotherpublications,includingGivingUSA.Theyare

I. Arts,Culture,andHumanities

II. Education

III. Environment/Animals

IV. Health

V. HumanServices

VI.

International,Foreign

Affairs

VII. PublicSocietalBenefit

VIII. ReligionRelated

IX. Mutual/MembershipBenefit

X. Unknown,Unclassified

DistributionofparticipantsbyNTEEmajorcategory/subsector

*Lownumberofresponses.Oflimiteduseininterpretingresults.

265197 167

250

585

43

238

100


42/47

AppendixA:1 NonprofitResearchCollaborative March2011

AppendixADatatablesshowingresultsbysubsectorbyfundraisingvehicle

Notshownaretwofundraisingvehicles:Payrolldeductionsandtelephone.AlsonotshownareorganizationsintheInternationalandReligionsubsectors,duetoalownumbersofrespondentsineach.ARTS

Percentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010comparedwith2009Percentage

Using 57 69 80 68 75 28 77 75Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events PlannedGifts Foundations Corporations

Increased 44 51 45 48 49 30 38 34Stayedthesame 34 41 40 36 29 59 34 39Decreased 22 9 15 16 23 11 29 27EDUCATIONPercentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010comparedwith2009Percentage

Using 68 65 76 66 69 37 65 66Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events Plannedgifts Foundations Corporations

Increased 41 57 39 55 48 32 32 30Stayedthesame 34 35 47 23 32 45 40 42Decreased 25 8 14 22 21 23 28 27ENVIRONMENT/ANIMALSPercentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010comparedwith2009Percentage

Using 71 74 71 68 76 37 71 62Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events Plannedgifts Foundations Corporations

Increased 42 61 27 46 43 27 47 32Stayedthesame 37 28 61 37 37 53 30 43Decreased 21 11 12 17 20 20 23 25


43/47

AppendixA:2 NonprofitResearchCollaborative March2011

HEALTHPercentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010comparedwith2009PercentageUsing 74 70 81 70 74 42 73 75

Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events Plannedgifts Foundations CorporationsIncreased 41 60 40 50 56 32 43 33Stayedthesame 35 34 48 33 18 58 32 48Decreased 24 6 12 17 25 10 25 19HUMANSERVICESPercentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010compared

with

2009

Percentage

Using 68 64 79 69 76 40 75 72Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events PlannedGifts Foundations Corporations

Increased 43 57 38 45 49 29 41 32Stayedthesame 31 33 52 35 27 51 36 47Decreased 27 10 10 20 24 19 23 22PUBLICSOCIETALBENEFITPercentageusingvehicleandpercentagesreportingdirectionofchangeincontributionsin2010comparedwith2009Percentage

Using 66 61 80 67 67 34 63 66Mail Internet Board Majorgifts Events Plannedgifts Foundation Corporations

Increased 44 57 42 53 55 39 38 44Stayedthesame 37 40 47 32 25 50 38 37Decreased 19 3 11 15 20 11 24 19


44/47

AppendixB

AppendixB:p.1

Preliminary Results of the 2011 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey

These figures are based on the respondents who answered the questions to date. The final results will be released in March.What were your organization's cumulative gross dollars raised in FY 2010 from all private philanthropic sources?

Count Percen

Less than $250,000 925 50.1

$250,001 - $500,000 265 14.3

$500,001 - $1 million 236 12.8

$1,000,001 - $3 million 242 13.1

$3,000,001 - $5 million 59 3.2

$5,000,001 - $10 million 48 2.6

$10,000,001 - $50 million 50 2.7

$50,000,001 - $75 million 6 0.3

More than $75 million 16 0.9

Total: 1,847 100.0

How have your organization's gross dollars raised from all philanthropic sources changed from FY2009 to

FY2010?

Count Percen

declined by more than 15% 278 15.1

declined by less than 15% 329 17.8

stayed the same 449 24.3

increased by less than 15% 448 24.3

increased by more than 15% 343 18.6

Total: 1,847 100.0

Did you reach your fundraising dollar goal in 2010?

Count Percen

Yes 870 47.1

No 811 43.9

Not applicable 166 9.0

Total: 1,847 100.0How did your fundraising dollar goal in 2010 change from your goal in 2009?

Count Percen

declined by more than 15% 154 9.2


Sstayed the same 515 30.6



45/47

AppendixB

AppendixB:p.2


Total: 1,681 100.0

Approximately what percentage of your organizations total contributions in FY 2010 arrived from October

through December?

Count Percen

None 66 3.61-9% 263 14.4

10-24% 562 30.8

25-49% 647 35.5

50% or more 285 15.6

Total: 1,823 100.0

Approximately what percentage of your organizations contributions received in FY 2010 came from the following

sources?

0% 1-10% 10-24% 25-49% 50-74% 75-100% N/A

Individuals 43 (2.48%) 250 (14.41%)

288 (16.60%) 353 (20.35%) 403 (23.23%) 385 (22.19%)

12 (0.69%)

Foundations 300 (17.29%) 512 (29.51%)

377 (21.73%) 279 (16.08%) 142 (8.18%) 62 (3.57%)

46 (2.65%)

Corporations 344 (19.83%) 740 (42.65%)

327 (18.85%) 164 (9.45%) 73 (4.21%) 27 (1.56%)

43 (2.48%)

Bequests or from trustdistributions from estates

978 (56.37%) 400 (23.05%)

109 (6.28%)

55 (3.17%)

19 (1.10%) 8 (0.46%)

136 (7.84%)

Other charities (such as UnitedWay, congregations or CombinedFederal Campaign)

767 (44.21%) 562 (32.39%)

146 (8.41%)

65 (3.75%)

28 (1.61%) 13 (0.75%)

122 (7.03%)

Please indicate how amounts received in FY 2010 changed from those received in FY2009 from the following

sources:

Decreased by morethan 15%

Decreased by lessthan 15%

Stayed thesame

Increased by lessthan 15%

Increased by morethan 15%

N/A

Direct mail/e-mail 103 (6.21%) 204 (12.30%)

434 (26.18%) 335 (20.21%) 217 (13.09%)

365 (22.01%)

Telephone fundraising 22 (1.33%) 40 (2.41%)

161 (9.71%) 48 (2.90%) 25 (1.51%)

1357 (81.85%)

Online/Internet giving 38 (2.29%) 58 (3.50%)

418 (25.21%) 464 (27.99%) 250 (15.08%)

422 (25.45%)

Board giving 55 (3.32%) 116 (7.00%)

708 (42.70%) 341 (20.57%) 219 (13.21%)

211 (12.73%)

Major gifts* 98 (5.91%) 123 (7.42%)

418 (25.21%) 342 (20.63%) 287 (17.31%)

385 (23.22%)

Special events/net-eventproceeds

119 (7.18%) 180 (10.86%)

364 (21.95%)

387 (23.34%) 284 (17.13%)

320 (19.30%)

Planned gifts: estates, trustdistributions, annuitydistribution

59 (3.56%) 56 (3.38%)

356 (21.47%)

127 (7.66%) 90 (5.43%)

965 (58.20%)

Foundation grants 123 (7.42%) 202 (12.18%)

460 (27.74%) 281 (16.95%) 242 (14.60%)

345 (20.81%)


46/47

AppendixB

AppendixB:p.3

Corporate gifts or grants 77 (4.64%) 206 (12.42%)

555 (33.47%) 286 (17.25%) 149 (8.99%)

378 (22.80%)

Payroll giving 28 (1.69%) 66 (3.98%)

411 (24.79%) 138 (8.32%) 4 3 (2.59%)

967 (58.32%)

*MAJOR GIFT: An order of magnitude higher than the organizations usual range of gift amount (e.g., $1,000 if typical is $100) andhas the potential to have a significant impact on the organization.

Approximately, what percentage of the total amount raised in contributions was for annual operations (as distinctfrom endowment gifts, capital expenditures)?

Count Percen

None 122 7.

1-24% 327 19.

25-49% 137 8.

50-74% 216 13.

75 -100% 847 51.

Total: 1,649 100.

How did the following conditions affect your fundraising efforts in FY2010, compared to 2009?

Decreased by morethan 15%

Decreased by lessthan 15%

Stayed thesame

Increased by lessthan 15%

Increased by morethan 15%

N/A

Financial resources available forthe development function

142 (8.66%) 187 (11.41%)

790 (48.20%)

193 (11.78%) 97 (5.92%)

225 (13.73%)

Staffing for developmentfunction

142 (8.66%) 110 (6.71%)

781 (47.65%)

176 (10.74%) 116 (7.08%)

303 (18.49%)

Volunteers assisting with

fundraising

54 (3.29%) 101 (6.16%)

724 (44.17%)

327 (19.95%) 169 (10.31%)

250 (15.25%)

Other (please specify): 10 (0.61%) 7 (0.43%)

27 (1.65%) 12 (0.73%) 22 (1.34%)

521 (31.79%)

How do you anticipate the following conditions will change in FY2011 compared to FY2010?

Decrease by morethan 15%

Decrease by lessthan 15%

Stay the sameIncrease by less

than 15%Increase by more

than 15%N/A

Income from charitablecontributions

67 (4.10%) 134 (8.19%)

392 (23.96%)

662 (40.46%) 338 (20.66%)

43 (2.63%)

Total expenditures for

fundraising

48 (2.93%) 149 (9.11%)

780 (47.68%)

449 (27.44%) 163 (9.96%)

47 (2.87%)

Development/fundraisingstaffing level

52 (3.18%) 55 (3.36%)

965 (58.99%)

263 (16.08%) 142 (8.68%)

158 (9.66%)

How have your organizations gross dollars raised from government grants changed from FY2009 to FY2010?

Count Percen


47/47

AppendixBdeclined by more than 15% 179 11.0


stayed the same 260 16.0



N/A, do not receive government grants 797 49.2

Total: 1,621 100.0

For classification purposes, what is your primary responsibility with the organization?

Count Percen

CEO/Executive Director/President 625 38.6

Chief Financial Officer/Organization Treasurer 114 7.0

Executive Officer (other than CEO/Executive Director or CFO/Treasurer 121 7.5

Fiscal/Finance (Other than Chief Financial Officer or Organization Treasurer) 26 1.6

Board Member/Board Director/Trustee 73 4.5

Development/Fundraising 547 33.8

Programs and Services 25 1.5

Communications 7 0.4

Marketing 12 0.7

Technology 2 0.1

Volunteer 12 0.7

Other (please specify): 56 3.5

Total: 1,620 100.0

What was your organization's annual operating budget in FY2010?

Count Percen

Less than $25,000 170 10.5

$25,000 - $99,000 195 12.1

$100,000 - $249,999 202 12.5

$250,000 - $499,999 179 11.1

$500,000 - $999,999 188 11.6

$1,000,000 - $2.99 million 296 18.3

$3,000,000 - $4.99 million 104 6.4

$5,000,000 - $9.99 million 101 6.2

$10,000,000 - $49.99 million 142 8.8

$50,000,000 - $75 million 18 1.1

More than $75 million 22 1.4

Total: 1,617 100.0

2010 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey

Documents

Transcript of 2010 Nonprofit Fundraising Survey