Tag: online advocacy

The battleground

Early in 2017, the Trump administration proposed the removal of LGBT elders from the National Survey of Older Americans Act Participants, a survey that measures how well federally-funded aging programs like Meals on Wheels are reaching older adults.

This effort would effectively erase LGBT elders from critical data collection and decision-making, and there was a limited window of time to comment before the changes were final.

For SAGE—the country’s largest and oldest organization dedicated to improving the lives of LGBT older adults—the threat demanded an urgent response.

Joining the resistance

SAGE had always focused on both advocacy and services, but their advocacy occurred largely behind the scenes; in describing their work, SAGE talked mainly about the services they offer.

Enter Siegelvision—the iconic branding firm, and SAGE’s partner in a new rebranding effort. To Siegelvision, this moment was the perfect opportunity to showcase SAGE’s new look and messaging: the threatened erasure created the perfect storm of circumstances for SAGE to both lead a resistance movement, and redefine the organization in the process.

“We Refuse to Be Invisible,” a statement that resonated early on, became both the rallying cry for this effort and the activist voice SAGE had been looking for.

Creating a movement

SAGE’s task was to fill the commenting period with as many voices as possible demanding that the question on sexual orientation be added back to the survey. Siegelvision dove into thinking about how best to galvanize and activate allies. A high-profile Midtown billboard was floated. But would the right people see it? Would it lead to action? This limited window of opportunity was too critical to leave those questions to chance.

A call with the team at Craft & Commerce—an outcomes-focused digital agency specializing in cause campaigns—yielded a different option: Bring “We Refuse To Be Invisible” to life in the form of short, inspiring social media content, and use paid social to rapidly test, optimize, and scale an online petition call-to-action.

The #WeRefuseToBeInvisible campaign was born.

The effects were immediate. Within days the goal for petition signatures had been reached and then surpassed. By the end of the commenting period, 10,000 allies had signed the petition, and, for greater impact, these digital petitions were printed and delivered to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Printed signatures ready for delivery to HHS

The social media campaign dovetailed with SAGE’s offline advocacy—including op-eds, lobbying, letter-writing parties, partner mobilization, and an impactful presence at Pride marches across the country. This widespread awareness and a critical mass of action was achieved within a relatively scrappy budget, and orchestrated by an organization whose advocacy had heretofore flown under the radar.

Outcome: An unlikely victory

The public outcry of the #WeRefuseToBeInvisible campaign was swift and fervent, and pushed the Trump administration to reverse course. The question on sexual orientation would remain.

For SAGE, the fight isn’t remotely over. LGBT elders are still fighting to be seen and better understood in the context of aging, and new threats to LGBT rights continue to arise. But thanks to a clarified brand voice and a well-run resistance campaign, there now exists a broader, more aware coalition to activate when the next challenge comes along, and a road-tested set of tactics to deploy for success.

Resistance checklist:

  1. Define and streamline the message.
  2. Run a simple campaign (KISS).
  3. Marry great creative with paid digital media for big impact.
  4. Find your most engaged supporters through persona building and testing.
  5. Optimize for results (ads and landing pages).
  6. Rally support of leadership and board.
  7. Be nimble to capitalize on the moment (right time, right place = perfect storm).
  8. Integrate digital with offline (lobbying and in real life).

Online and mobile chat or text options are being offered by more nonprofit organizations everyday, including loveisrespect, Planned Parenthood, RAINN as well as other intimate and domestic partner violence counseling services. For people in situations where making a phone call isn’t possible, online chat services can provide a desperately needed lifeline that traditional telephone hotlines can’t.

Additionally, an increasing number of younger people don’t use the telephone in the way other generations do, often preferring chat or text for communication. Chat can feel more anonymous, helping people be more open and honest. And if English is a second language for someone, they may feel more comfortable typing than speaking.

I worked with four domestic violence service agencies over the last few years on a collaborative project to create just such a service for domestic violence survivors in the San Jose, California area, launched last year as SafeChat Silicon Valley. Based on what we learned in that project, here are some facts as well as questions to help you assess the feasibility, organizational readiness, and capacity of starting a similar service in your nonprofit.  

What you need to know

Chat vs. text

Nonprofits who provide these services report  that online and mobile chat is far more popular than text or SMS. If your organization is considering both types of services, chat is the one to consider implementing first. Some organizations provide chat only, since it works on any internet-connected device and doesn’t create the charges clients may have to pay for each text. However, if you operate in an area with limited internet connectivity, text or SMS may be a better solution. It’s best to ask your clients and other potential users to understand their needs.

It’s different

While people are more honest and forthcoming via chat, you do lose the tone of voice and inflection that you get when you speak to someone on the phone. Advocates or others who staff the chat service will need to adjust their tactics and communication accordingly.

Health & safety

As with many technology tools, the health and safety of the user must be a priority. It’s vital to inform users how to delete chat histories and text conversations. Your organization must understand what data is kept about the person requesting the chat, how to safeguard that data against hacks, and what process is needed to erase that data. Always keep your users’ safety and health concerns in mind when exploring these services

7 questions to assess your nonprofit’s readiness

1. Is our technology ready?

Adding a chat or text service requires your technology to meet a variety of minimum standards.

Are your computers, operating systems like Windows or MacOS, and other software up to date? Some services require the newest versions of software and won’t work on outdated hardware.

Is your internet connection up to speed? Have you tested all locations for download and upload speeds? Chat tools—and your constituents who use them—require fast speeds to allow you to respond to chats without long delays. Several of the domestic violence agencies I worked withhad to upgrade their connection speed.

One tool to test your internet speed: www.speedtest.net (requires Adobe Flash Player).

2. Are our staff and volunteers ready?

While many folks talk about capacity building, to be successful with technology, nonprofits must look at capability and skill building. Adding a chat or text service requires thoughtful planning, careful implementation, and a commitment to ongoing maintenance.

  • Has your organization developed a technology plan to help you be strategic in your tech investments?
  • Does your staff need training on managing technology projects?
  • Are staff familiar with the language used to talk about online chat services, broadband,  websites, and other related technology pieces?
  • Is there a staff person, board member, or volunteer with experience managing technology projects who can make a commitment to help with this project?

If you answered “no” to any of these, start building up those skills with resources from places like Tech Soup or NTEN, or your state’s nonprofit association.

3. What does “success” look like?

Describing exactly what you want your chat services to do, who it will serve, how it will be staffed, and what information or service(s) it will provide is essential to being successful. Some organizations start with unrealistic expectations about who will use a piece of technology and how. Clearly articulating what success looks like for the project ensures focus, provides a clear goal that everyone can work toward, and saves resources by clearing stating what the project will – and will not – accomplish.

Careful planning is required to get the positive results you desire. What pieces of data or metrics will you use to measure how successful you are? Will you merely measure the number of conversations or will you evaluate the quality of those conversations to help improve the service?

Marketing will also be vital to the success of the new service. What metrics will you measure when it comes to website visits, engagement with social media posts, clicks on emails and other similar measures?

Taking the time to have staff and management contribute to the vision of how the service(s) will operate and be supported creates a clear vision of success.

4. Is this feasible?

The first three factors above help you determine if an online chat or text project is feasible for your nonprofit.

If you find don’t currently have the capacity to improve your technology readiness, you may need to look for a funder to support you in providing this type of service and where technology needs can be woven into the funding request. You may need to adjust budgets to allocate more resources to updating technology hardware, software, and most importantly, staff technology skills. If the service is a success and you have a high demand for your services, how will you increase your capacity to cover the work staff does currently and this added responsibility?

Nonprofits are endlessly creative in finding solutions to these kinds of issues, so you may identify areas that need work before a chat project is feasible. If none of these are possible and solutions can’t be found, you may find this type of project is not currently feasible. During the initial research and discovery phase, you may realize that you are not able to handle adding an additional service or that your constituents may not be interested. You can continue to build your skills and capacity and revisit the project later.

5. What are the roles and responsibilities we need to map out?

For SafeChat Silicon Valley, we defined a set of roles that the project required: leads for the project management, for technology, for tool selection, for data, for staffing, for training, for marketing and for fiscal management. Each of these roles had detailed descriptions and work plans created during planning to map out exactly how we would arrive at success.

As an expert in nonprofit technology management, part of my consulting role was to help guide the creation and execution of these plans. Distractions and circumstances can often derail big projects, so my role also included keeping us on track, providing the outsider’s view, offering advice about technology-related pitfalls to avoid, and even being a cheerleader when enthusiasm waned or difficulties were encountered.

6. Which tool is the best for our needs?

There are many online chat tools and new ones coming to market every month. It’s important to define your needs before you begin looking at tools. This includes what data is collected, the ways in which you will communicate, creating a databank of responses, initial and ongoing costs.

Online chat tools are primarily built for commercial customer support and sales, so they are designed to gather and store as much information as possible about the person chatting. In fields like domestic violence, concerns about safety, health and privacy are most important. As you define your needs for a tool, describe what, if any, data you want to collect. For SafeChat Silicon Valley, we had to create a process for staff to purge data from the system on a regular basis to reduce the danger of the system being hacked by an abuser and used against the survivor or the organization.

For some nonprofits, the ability to communicate in multiple languages is essential. Some tools can handle translations but need to be tested to ensure the translations are accurate. Some organizations will require that the person staffing the chat is able to write in another language if the translation software is inadequate.

Many of the systems allow for a databank of responses to be created, which allows for consistency in responses and the ability to track which common questions are asked and what responses are provided, without sacrificing anonymity of the person with whom they are chatting. Does the tool have that capability? Who will craft the responses and who will maintain the response databank?

While cost is a consideration, never choose a tool based on cost alone. Only if all other attributes are equal can you choose a tool based on price. Choose the tool that best fits all of your other needs first, then look at costs. “Free” tools are rarely free—you either get them free for a short time, then pay inflated prices later, or the free version has such restricted functionality that it ends up not being a bargain at all.

7. Are we ready to commit long-term?

Even if you’re ready and your community needs a service like this, it won’t be successful without a commitment to the long term. These services are not like a chair that you buy once and just use until it wears out. They require active management, staffing, and support to maintain. Marketing, training, changes based on tool upgrades, upgrading technology as the tools are improved, and adjusting processes to incorporate new features or functions all have to be considered when thinking about your long term commitment to providing these services.

 

With the proper guidance and thoughtful planning, nonprofits of all sizes and technology capabilities can be successful in providing chat or text services.

 

Technology is helping community members have a voice in their community’s growth.

The Saint Consulting Group, a management consulting firm specializing in land use politics, and Five Corners Strategies, a grassroots public affairs firm, are humanizing community involvement in real estate development.

Since its inception in 1983, Saint has ensured that people have a voice in community development. With experience on over 1,800 projects, the firm understands that the impact that development projects have on people and communities is often big. They believe, therefore, that it’s critical that residents in an impacted area have a way to voice their opinions about the projects.

Through utilizing mobile engagement tools, they are now making it easier for community members to get involved.

One project Saint Consulting is involved with is a major development proposal in Oakland, California called Coliseum City. The city is promoting the ambitious project that will create 21,000 jobs over the next 20 years by developing three new sporting venues, an intermodal transit hub, mixed-use developments, and much more.

Saint uses the following tactics, powered by an integrated mobile and web-based software platform, to empower community advocates:

  • Advocates send a text message to learn about the program – in this case, they text “OAKLAND” to 52886
  • Saint replies with a text message that takes advocates to a mobile-friendly action center where they can take action and let their officials know how they feel about a proposal
  • Once the commission receives the message from the advocate, they can respond directly to the supporter, drawing them even further into the civic process
  • The most engaged and committed advocates attend open houses, testify at hearings, and call their officials

By allowing people to voice their opinions through their phones, the firm has seen “overwhelming response from constituents,” said Courtney Graziano, Director of Digital Strategy for Saint Consulting.

In the first few weeks since the campaign became public, thousands have engaged with the tools by sending letters about the project to city planning officials responsible for making decisions on the project.

Saint is getting the word out by passing out flyers at games and giving t-shirts to canvassers at events educating people how they can get involved simply by texting.
oryjeb.img_.2.jpg

“Oakland residents are passionate about keeping their beloved Oakland teams in Oakland,” Graziano continued. “The tools we are using now make it easy for anyone with a phone to have a say in the future of this city.”

The campaign has also started to go viral. For instance, a popular radio show host was advertising how people can get involved simply by sending a text message on his weekly show.

“One night, we saw that 300 new people joined the campaign – all from listening to a passionate supporter of the project tell people how they can make a difference – just by sending a text message,” Graziano said.

“The future of land use development is about using technology to make it easier to find new ways to reach people in their community, educate them on the projects, and empower them to get involved,” said Graziano.

Another consulting firm that specializes in community engagement to support land use projects is Five Corners Strategies. One of the projects they are working on is a development proposal for Washington, DC’s soccer team, DC United. The team is looking to relocate to a new stadium to be built within the District.

Five Corners has used innovative means to find and identify supporters of the project, including working with DC United to sponsor festivals like FiestaDC, the largest Latino festival in the Eastern United States, with more than 100,000 attendees in 2014.

One successful tactic they used was a live call-to-action at the event. Attendees were invited to text “ESTADIO” to 52886 to register their support for the initiative. Participants got to see their name appear on event’s main projection screen, creating excitement for everyone in attendance.

“Five Corners Strategies uses a combination of the latest mobile engagement tools and old school, tried and true canvassing and door knocking to engage the community on the projects we work on. People want to be involved in their communities – they just don’t always know how they can be. We help fill that gap,” Ben Kelahan, Partner at Five Corners Strategies, said.

These types of projects are leading the way in leveraging digital mobilization tools in land use projects by making it easier for community members to voice their opinions.

If you’re one of the 84% of people worldwide who claim they “couldn’t go a day” without a mobile phone in hand … You are not alone! We’ve never been more passionate users of mobile devices than we are right now.

At my company, Artez Interactive, we clearly can see the rising importance of smartphones and tablets by looking at the traffic to fundraising and donation pages on our North American platform. Of the millions of unique visitors to our system every month, over 15% are visiting on mobile devices.

As we increasingly adopt mobile devices in our professional and personal lives, we are also turning to mobile technology to help us support charitable causes.

At Artez, we wanted to know more about the impact of mobile devices on peer-to-peer, or “crowd-sourced,” fundraising campaigns. When individuals are motivated to ask their friends and social networks to donate to a cause, are those supporters using smartphones and tablets to help them fundraise? Similarly, are donors in peer-driven events giving through mobile-web enabled devices?

We examined the fundraising success of 83,566 participants in a variety of peer-to-peer fundraising campaigns to help answer that question for our Mobile Matters Whitepaper.

Some of the individuals in this study were participating in traditional run, walk, or cycle-a-thon events. Others were encouraged to host a party for a cause or raise pledges towards the completion of a challenging activity. All participants were asked to sign up on a charitable organization’s website and collect donations on a personal fundraising page towards their fundraising goal.

Registrants had the choice of any of the following digital fundraising tools to help them raise money:

  • Event Website: Participants on laptops and computers had the option to log into the campaign’s website to send solicitation emails, post on social media sites, upload photos and personal messages, and track donations through an online fundraising console.
  • Mobile Website: Participants on mobile devices automatically experienced a mobile-version of the campaign website, allowing them to log into the site and raise money through a mobile-optimized version of the fundraising console.
  • Mobile App: Participants with an Android or iOS device could download the event’s free mobile application (“app”) from Google Play or the iTunes store. The app allowed participants to log into a version of the campaign’s fundraising console, access their device’s contact list for email, post to social sites, and upload photos taken from their smartphones.

Given these options, we discovered that 23% of all participants chose to log into the mobile web site, download and log into the mobile app, or use both mobile options. (The highest percentage of “mobile fundraisers” we saw in any individual campaign was 37%.) That means that overall, almost one in four registrants used mobile tools to fundraise for their cause.

Mobile fundraisers and fundraising success

In each campaign we examined, mobile fundraisers raised more money than those who used the web only.

Participants who chose to use one mobile tool (mobile web or mobile app) raised 2.2 times more money than non-mobile participants. Individuals who used both mobile web and a mobile app were even more successful, raising 2.95 times more than non-mobile participants. These “heaviest mobile users” represented some of the most successful fundraisers in each campaign.

Do mobile fundraisers simply have wealthier friends? No!

Mobile fundraisers raised more individual pledges from friends and family than non-mobile fundraisers. The online-only group of participants averaged 5.1 individual donations. When participants used one mobile tool, either web or app, they earned an average 8.4 individual donations. Participants who used both mobile web and mobile apps earned even more, on average 11.4 individual donations.

Could mobile fundraisers be more successful at earning more pledges because they are making more asks for donations to friends and family members? When we surveyed participants to see which features of apps they were using the most, the most popular answer was: “make ‘asks’ for donations via email, Facebook and Twitter”.

Why are mobile fundraisers more successful at raising money?

It’s possible that mobile tools themselves help participants raise more money, encouraging them to check their messages and fundraising totals on-the-go, or make more individual requests for donations.

It’s also possible that a campaign’s most engaged, most enthusiastic, and best performing fundraisers are also big fans of smartphones and tablets. Most event fundraising professionals are well aware of the “80/20 Rule” proposing that, in general, 80% of donations will be generated by 20% of the most active participants.

Either scenario suggests it’s important for fundraising campaigns to provide mobile technology options for participants.

Donors and mobile devices

Participant success is only one piece of the mobile picture. Many people think of “mobile donations” as meaning gifts by text-to-donate (SMS), however, with the shift towards mobile web and responsive design, it’s now easier for donors on smartphones and tablets to give by credit card or PayPal directly through a charity’s mobile-optimized donation form.

With mobile traffic to charity and nonprofit pages hovering at 15%, we wondered about the donors in these peer-driven campaigns. Are donors giving on mobile devices?

When we dove into the pool of over 250,000 individual donations, we found that, yes, donors are making pledges on mobile web browsers. A little over 6.5% of the donations were made through a smartphone or tablet browser. To put this number in perspective, only 12 months ago the average number of mobile web donations in a campaign was 2.15%. That’s an incredible increase of 205% in the last year. (Which begs the question — what will the percentage of donations by mobile web browsers be by the end of 2013?)

What’s driving the rapid rise of mobile web donations?

The fact that almost 50% of Americans now own smartphones is just the beginning of the explanation. We also know that the majority of tweets are read on a mobile device and that users of mobile Facebook are twice as active on Facebook as those on computers.

When event participants share fundraising page links on social sites, it’s more likely than ever before that their potential sponsors may view that post or tweet through a mobile device. Our Fundraising with Facebook Whitepaper review of 645,000 individual donations in peer-driven events found that over 15% of those pledges were directly referred from Facebook.

Email is another platform driving donors to pledge by mobile web. Adobe’s 2013 Digital Publishing Report noted that 79% of smartphone owners use their device for reading email. In fact, that’s a higher percentage than those who use it for making phone calls!

We know that donors are motivated to give after reading personal emails from a friend or family member. When fundraising participants send emails to friends asking for donations, there’s a good chance their requests could be read on a smartphone or tablet.

It’s refreshing that the conversation about mobile technology in the non-profit sector has evolved beyond text-to-donate to include mobile design and apps as other important elements of an integrated fundraising campaign. Have these insights piqued your curiosity?

For more data about mobile fundraisers and mobile donations, please join our NTC session “Mobile Matters: The Impact of Mobile Technology on Peer-to-Peer Campaigns” on April 12 or download our Mobile Matters Whitepaper.

If you’re one of the 84% of people worldwide who claim they “couldn’t go a day” without a mobile phone in hand … You are not alone! We’ve never been more passionate users of mobile devices than we are right now.

At my company, Artez Interactive, we clearly can see the rising importance of smartphones and tablets by looking at the traffic to fundraising and donation pages on our North American platform. Of the millions of unique visitors to our system every month, over 15% are visiting on mobile devices.

As we increasingly adopt mobile devices in our professional and personal lives, we are also turning to mobile technology to help us support charitable causes.

At Artez, we wanted to know more about the impact of mobile devices on peer-to-peer, or “crowd-sourced,” fundraising campaigns. When individuals are motivated to ask their friends and social networks to donate to a cause, are those supporters using smartphones and tablets to help them fundraise? Similarly, are donors in peer-driven events giving through mobile-web enabled devices?

We examined the fundraising success of 83,566 participants in a variety of peer-to-peer fundraising campaigns to help answer that question for our Mobile Matters Whitepaper.

Some of the individuals in this study were participating in traditional run, walk, or cycle-a-thon events. Others were encouraged to host a party for a cause or raise pledges towards the completion of a challenging activity. All participants were asked to sign up on a charitable organization’s website and collect donations on a personal fundraising page towards their fundraising goal.

Registrants had the choice of any of the following digital fundraising tools to help them raise money:

  • Event Website: Participants on laptops and computers had the option to log into the campaign’s website to send solicitation emails, post on social media sites, upload photos and personal messages, and track donations through an online fundraising console.
  • Mobile Website: Participants on mobile devices automatically experienced a mobile-version of the campaign website, allowing them to log into the site and raise money through a mobile-optimized version of the fundraising console.
  • Mobile App: Participants with an Android or iOS device could download the event’s free mobile application (“app”) from Google Play or the iTunes store. The app allowed participants to log into a version of the campaign’s fundraising console, access their device’s contact list for email, post to social sites, and upload photos taken from their smartphones.

Given these options, we discovered that 23% of all participants chose to log into the mobile web site, download and log into the mobile app, or use both mobile options. (The highest percentage of “mobile fundraisers” we saw in any individual campaign was 37%.) That means that overall, almost one in four registrants used mobile tools to fundraise for their cause.

Mobile fundraisers and fundraising success

In each campaign we examined, mobile fundraisers raised more money than those who used the web only.

Participants who chose to use one mobile tool (mobile web or mobile app) raised 2.2 times more money than non-mobile participants. Individuals who used both mobile web and a mobile app were even more successful, raising 2.95 times more than non-mobile participants. These “heaviest mobile users” represented some of the most successful fundraisers in each campaign.

Do mobile fundraisers simply have wealthier friends? No!

Mobile fundraisers raised more individual pledges from friends and family than non-mobile fundraisers. The online-only group of participants averaged 5.1 individual donations. When participants used one mobile tool, either web or app, they earned an average 8.4 individual donations. Participants who used both mobile web and mobile apps earned even more, on average 11.4 individual donations.

Could mobile fundraisers be more successful at earning more pledges because they are making more asks for donations to friends and family members? When we surveyed participants to see which features of apps they were using the most, the most popular answer was: “make ‘asks’ for donations via email, Facebook and Twitter”.

Why are mobile fundraisers more successful at raising money?

It’s possible that mobile tools themselves help participants raise more money, encouraging them to check their messages and fundraising totals on-the-go, or make more individual requests for donations.

It’s also possible that a campaign’s most engaged, most enthusiastic, and best performing fundraisers are also big fans of smartphones and tablets. Most event fundraising professionals are well aware of the “80/20 Rule” proposing that, in general, 80% of donations will be generated by 20% of the most active participants.

Either scenario suggests it’s important for fundraising campaigns to provide mobile technology options for participants.

Donors and mobile devices

Participant success is only one piece of the mobile picture. Many people think of “mobile donations” as meaning gifts by text-to-donate (SMS), however, with the shift towards mobile web and responsive design, it’s now easier for donors on smartphones and tablets to give by credit card or PayPal directly through a charity’s mobile-optimized donation form.

With mobile traffic to charity and nonprofit pages hovering at 15%, we wondered about the donors in these peer-driven campaigns. Are donors giving on mobile devices?

When we dove into the pool of over 250,000 individual donations, we found that, yes, donors are making pledges on mobile web browsers. A little over 6.5% of the donations were made through a smartphone or tablet browser. To put this number in perspective, only 12 months ago the average number of mobile web donations in a campaign was 2.15%. That’s an incredible increase of 205% in the last year. (Which begs the question — what will the percentage of donations by mobile web browsers be by the end of 2013?)

What’s driving the rapid rise of mobile web donations?

The fact that almost 50% of Americans now own smartphones is just the beginning of the explanation. We also know that the majority of tweets are read on a mobile device and that users of mobile Facebook are twice as active on Facebook as those on computers.

When event participants share fundraising page links on social sites, it’s more likely than ever before that their potential sponsors may view that post or tweet through a mobile device. Our Fundraising with Facebook Whitepaper review of 645,000 individual donations in peer-driven events found that over 15% of those pledges were directly referred from Facebook.

Email is another platform driving donors to pledge by mobile web. Adobe’s 2013 Digital Publishing Report noted that 79% of smartphone owners use their device for reading email. In fact, that’s a higher percentage than those who use it for making phone calls!

We know that donors are motivated to give after reading personal emails from a friend or family member. When fundraising participants send emails to friends asking for donations, there’s a good chance their requests could be read on a smartphone or tablet.

It’s refreshing that the conversation about mobile technology in the non-profit sector has evolved beyond text-to-donate to include mobile design and apps as other important elements of an integrated fundraising campaign. Have these insights piqued your curiosity?

For more data about mobile fundraisers and mobile donations, please join our NTC session “Mobile Matters: The Impact of Mobile Technology on Peer-to-Peer Campaigns” on April 12 or download our Mobile Matters Whitepaper.

It’s kind of our favorite time of year: our annual dose of data about email and online advocacy and fundraising activity.  With the analytics and campaign expertise of M+R Strategic Services, we are excited to release the 2013 eNonprofit Benchmarks Study!

So: What’s going on with nonprofit email, fundraising, and social media?

In short: Online revenue is up, monthly giving is booming, and social media audiences are growing too. But there are also some bitter truths about last year that you need to know about.

We analyzed the results of:

  • 1.6 Billion email messages that were sent to
  • Over 45 Million subscribers; as well as
  • 6.5 Million online gifts totaling
  • $438 Million raised; and
  • 7.3 Million advocacy actions

You can get the complete report — including important reference information like definitions of terms and metrics — for free.

Don’t forget: you can also attend the webinar on Tuesday, April 23rd, to hear from the report authors and some of the study participants.  Reserve your webinar spot online now.

And for a quick reference, take a gander at the 2013 eBenchmarks Infographic:

2013_enonprofit_benchmarks_infographic_6