Host: Welcome, everyone, to another episode of the Go Beyond Fundraising Podcast. Today I am thrilled to sit back down with a couple of gentlemen that we always have some great discussions with. The first is Trent Ricker, the CEO of Allegiance Group + Pursuant. Trent, welcome back. 

Trent Ricker: Thanks, Leah, great to be back as always with you. And I’m excited to have Ryan with us. Let’s talk about Ryan, Leah. 

Ryan Carpenter: Hey there, guys. Glad to join. Excited to talk today with both of you. 

Host: Yeah, Ryan, it’s been too long since we had a conversation on this topic. And I think since the three of us have had good conversation. So excited to dive in. 

So, something that we were kind of chatting about before we hit record was the importance of the experience a donor has when they make a first gift with you. And so to get us a little bit of an icebreaker question to get us thinking a little bit more deeply about this, I wanted to ask both of you something. Ryan, I’ll start with you. What is a really exceptional experience that you have had with a commercial brand, like a retail brand or any kind of commercial brand that really made an impact on you, and why did it stand out? 

Ryan Carpenter: Yeah, I’m glad you asked about experience with a commercial brand because I feel like they lead the way in consumer engagement, and nonprofits can take a lot from how they’re operating to do that through the lens of nonprofit fundraising donor engagement.  

I subscribe to Stitch Fix, which, as you know, provides clothes on a monthly or quarterly basis. It just makes it easier, right? I don’t have to go out and shop. And what’s really cool about it is they assign you a stylist, right? And the stylist’s job is to serve you up clothes that you want to keep because they’ll send them to you, and you can keep nothing or you can keep everything. And so they’re constantly surveying you. They’re constantly asking you, like, what are you looking for? What’s your style? You’re always getting options for what kind of clothing apparel you actually like? And, you know, it took probably about a year, maybe even a little bit more, to get it right. 

But now, everything my stylist sends me, I love. And it didn’t happen overnight, but it continually worked, right? When I signed up for the first time, I liked two out of six things. Sent back the remaining stuff, and immediately I got an email from her like, “Hey, what was it that you did or didn’t like?” And then they have a whole app where you can actually look at different clothing styles, so it was kind of like a dual approach. It was the automated experience: here’s a carousel of clothes, give us thumbs up or thumbs down. But then it was actually that personal or personalized outreach from the stylist, where she was like, “What was it you liked?” Just plain text, let me know what it was. And I thought it was great. It made me want to respond because there’s a benefit to me, right? I’m going to get clothing that’s more in line with what I want to wear, and then obviously, for Stitch Fix, they’re happier because I’m buying more of the clothes they send me. And so, if you asked me, this nine or 10 months ago, I probably wouldn’t have said Stitch Fix. But that was just my ignorance because it does take a little time. And now I love being subscribed to them because they’re always sending me great clothes. It’s a really good experience. I really like the way they approach it. 

Trent Ricker: That’s awesome. I’d probably say I’m old school. Amazon, right? Amazon’s been around for like 30 years. And I think back to the early days when they were just a bookseller, and if you bought this book, you might like that book. Frankly, they were in the data collection business from the very beginning. And just using that data in a way that was very – to reference another one of my favorite authors, Seth Godin – in the personalized, relevant, and timely email that he had in his book called Permission Marketing, I think that’s what it was called. It would have been the late 90s or early 2000s. But I think today they’re all about lifetime value. 

So it’s personalization at scale. Ryan, I love your example of Stitch Fix in the sense that as they get to know you better, your experience is better. So you’re a happier customer, and it creates that kind of loop. And I think Bezos even talks about that as part of what he was trying to create with Amazon, and it’s very true, right? There’s that kind of flywheel that he talked about. It works because I think you move from it just being transactional, in your case with Stitch Fix, buying some clothes that you need, to kind of being a subscription or a habit where you’re a very loyal customer. And if you think about what you spend there now versus what you might have spent at various different retail outlets. And it’s the same thing for Amazon. 

I mean, I think buying a book or two here or there, for many of us that are Prime members, it’s the first place we think of as kind of our default commerce experience. It’s where we go. Anything you need. And what blows my mind is now I can think of something at eight, nine o’clock at night, and it’ll be on my doorstep when I wake up. It blows my mind, right? And so they continue to flank the competition as it relates to that because, I could probably get that at Home Depot or something, but I’d have to wait. My gosh, I might have to wait a full day for it as opposed to overnight. 

So it becomes part of what you’re doing. And I think, Leah, back to you and why we’re here today, when we think about that from a non-profit, constituent experience.  

And so, I think that’s a great question. A lot of people make a gift to an organization because they’re either asked to or they have a heart for the mission. But then what can we do? And that’s the theme for today from a donor perspective, engagement and the donor experience standpoint, expand that so that we increase lifetime value in a way that is not exploitative, in a way that is connecting mission to money and support. In a seamless way. I think in Ryan’s example of Amazon, we don’t feel like we’re exploited through those commerce platforms. We feel like we get good value, good service, and we’re building community. Ryan, you’re a good ambassador right now for that organization. And I think that Amazon’s created the community as well as it relates to the reviews. 

Ryan Carpenter: I agree. And it’s not exploitative. I feel like it’s elevated my expectations for the experience, and I’m glad to have received that. And I want us to help our nonprofit clients, not just with this podcast, but also to get others in the industry to think about it that way. Right. You want to serve up what your donors want because they’re craving that. And it’s going to be a two-way street. They’ll benefit because they feel like they’re getting what they need. They’re seeing the impact of what they care about. 

And then as an organization, you benefit because to your point, LTV, lifetime value increases, retention increases. And so it’s not exploiting these donors to understand what they care about, no. We want that, right? I’m one data point, you’re one data point, but I feel like anecdotally, we want to receive things that are important to us, right? And that’s going to make us happy, whether it’s a consumer or a donor. 

Trent Ricker: One last thing to hit on before we expand on that. We have to remember that in the nonprofit space, we give our money, and in return we are given a feeling of helping others. And so in order to receive that product, if you will, then it’s up to the organization to deliver on that product [the feeling of helping others]. It’s part of stewardship, of course, right? But Stitch Fix or Amazon, they’re exchanging currency for something tangible. And in the nonprofit space, people are giving a gift for something that they care about, an animal rights organization, or arts and culture organization, or a healthcare organization. They give that money, and they need to know that their money is making an impact and a difference, and cultivating that as that product is what we’re going to talk about, so that they become more loyal supporters. You become a philanthropic priority for those people who are supporting your organization. Let’s have some fun, Leah. 

Leah: Yeah, I was just thinking as both of you were sharing. I think there’s something actually a little bit deeper in both of the retail experiences that you described. And it aligns really well with this topic of donor loyalty because, for example, Ryan, with your Stitch Fix story, the value that Stitch Fix is delivering for you goes beyond just convenience and clothes that you can wear, but clothes are something that convey information about what we value. It conveys things about how we see ourselves. It conveys how we want others to see us.  

Even with Amazon, it’s kind of capitalizing more on the convenience factor. It’s saying, let us do the heavy lifting of going out and finding this item that you need to make your life more convenient, and you can be freed up for higher and better uses of your time. 

So kind of thinking about that deeper value of what we’re getting out of those experiences and tying that in with nonprofits, I think today’s donor has come to have a similar expectation for the nonprofit where donors in previous generations might have given to an organization because of kind of a sense of, I think today’s donors have more of an individualistic kind of focus on giving. And it’s not to say they’re selfish, but they want to give to organizations that they feel are augmenting values and aligning with values that they already have, because it contributes to an image of themselves that they want to project to the world. It’s important that as we onboard new donors after they make that first gift, we have that in mind so we can craft an experience for them that is hitting at some of those deeper, meaningful expectations that people have with brands or nonprofits that they’re giving their support to. 

Ryan Carpenter: Yeah, I think there are actually some studies, particularly about younger generations like Gen Z and millennials, that it’s actually the outcome where they wanted to align with their own values. And so one way to do that is by providing the experience that speaks to those values. Whether it’s individual or individualized, you have to cater to that desire. And it’s been shown through some studies. I don’t have it off the top of my head, but you just mentioned it, where, at least for the most part, for younger donors, that’s the expectation. But I think behaviorally, regardless of age band, we are all accustomed as consumers to get that personalized, served-up subscription model. I feel like nonprofits can do more of that without feeling like they’re exploiting or taking advantage of donors and their goodwill and desire to support your mission. 

Trent Ricker: Yep. And I think that’s why today’s topic is so timely. Lots of data out there is showing us that there are fewer donors, but giving more dollars. Now, taking that at its surface, donor engagement today is more important than ever. Acquisition is getting more difficult. Costs are rising. Returns are declining because of those lists that are being rented in the pools and the pond that we’re fishing in, which means that retention is the new acquisition, if you will. It’s harder and harder to get new donors, at least through traditional methods. But it’s more important than ever to retain, upgrade, get that second gift, move to potentially sustaining giving, mid-level giving, and up the pyramid, where in fact we have those that are aligned with our mission. And for our listeners, this is likely going to be a two-parter, right? Because today, we’re going to talk about that first gift and moving towards some semblance of loyalty. And in a future episode, we’ll continue to move them up the donor pyramid to become mid-level donors, the next generation of supporters for capital campaigns or major giving projects for those of you that might have different initiatives out there. 

So today we’re going to focus on data, creativity, stewardship, and how that all plays the role. And I’ll kind of start by saying that first gift. Really, when we work with some of our clients, We think in silos at times, right? In acquisition, we’re always measuring ROI related to our acquisition campaigns. We need to continue to do that. But we have to think about the quality of that first gift as it relates to moving from the first gift to the second gift. Let’s talk about the importance of that first gift, moving to the second gift, and what it means for potential lifetime value. 

Ryan Carpenter: Your response to the first gift the donor makes is critical, and really, that experience will inform whether they want to make a second gift to your organization. And, you know, I don’t think enough organizations are doing enough to communicate that. So, when you make a first gift, are you just getting some standard boilerplate gift receipt? If so, that may leave you wanting more. Or do you have a well-thought-out welcome series, even personally thanking as many donors as you can? That experience is going to let me, as a donor, feel valued and heard from, and also know that you don’t view us all the same. You don’t communicate to us all the same way. Now, maybe in-house we have a few different tracks, which we can get into as we talk about this. But really, having a well-thought-out welcome series to welcome these new donors to your organization, make them feel heard, and begin to get to know who they are. 

And then keeping that goal of let’s try to get a second gift, too. Because as you mentioned, there are some well-known statistics from the Fundraising Effectiveness project where typically new donors make their first gift and are going to be retained at 20%. All right. That’s very low. We can all agree on that. But if you get them to make a second gift, retention is going to triple to 63%, which is significant. On average, overall, retention across the industry is about 45-ish percent. 

So if you can get a second gift from your new donor, you’re even going beyond that, the likelihood that they’re gonna retain. Acquisition is getting more expensive. The effectiveness of it is continuing to wane. We have to hold onto these people. And you know, two-thirds of your major donors start here, so let’s not let one of those future major donors slip through and not make another gift to you because the experience wasn’t what they deserved. 

Trent Ricker: I think it’s appropriate to suggest that not every new donor is an ideal candidate to become a long-term, multi-year donor. Sometimes people give spontaneously because it’s the pet cause of their nephew that made an ask, or they’re participating in an event. Or it’s a disaster response. It’s not uncommon for the generosity of somebody to give. Many of our clients are food banks, and we saw the COVID bump. They’re basically the equivalent of disaster relief. And many of those, the generosity, it’s okay. You should still cultivate them. To Ryan’s point, cultivating and taking them through a journey so that we can try to get the second gift is wholly appropriate. But I think it’s important to note that we’re using data and personalization to drive towards that cohort that is most loyal. And we use tools here at AGP, like our GivingDNA tool, that help to identify strategic segments that will be aligned with the mission of your organization, that we need to spend more time with. 

Back to the correlation of Stitch Fix or Amazon, they’re not looking just for the one purchase or even a subsequent purchase. They’re not looking for Ryan to buy a shirt and then buy another shirt next month. They’re looking for a subscriber. Amazon’s looking to convert you to a prime member with benefits that go along with that so that, again, you make it a habit for them to be your preferred merchant of choice for that category – the same way we want to drive those that have a mission alignment with your organization, such that you become a philanthropic priority. Most people only give regularly and deeply to three to five organizations. How can you become one of those three to five organizations? And Ryan, you were hitting on that a bit earlier as it relates to just the importance of thoughtful stewardship, journey mapping and welcome series that lead to that second ask – very important as the first step. 

Ryan Carpenter: Yeah, in the current season we’re in with this economic uncertainty, they’re continuing to give, but they are giving to less organizations than they were potentially like a year ago. So making sure that you can identify who has the most potential, who has the greatest affinity and doubling down on your communication and engagement with them is more important than ever.  

So let’s just talk a little bit about what is that welcome? We always hear about the welcome series. But what does the typical cadence look like, and why is it important? Right. A gift comes in. We are going to, in a very timely fashion, steward this donor. I don’t know the capacity of every organization or everybody listening here, but you should certainly have a really nice thank you, nice stewardship, either through the mail, digital, or both. For me, I’m always dealing with these high-touch donor engagement strategies. We work with some organizations that are not very large, but they make it a real priority to pick up the phone and call as many of their donors as they can. Going down to low, low levels, it could be $50 to $100. I’m pleasantly surprised when I hear from some of our clients that say, no, we are calling every week, doesn’t matter the level. And so that’s step one. That’s going to go a long way for the donor, their first engagement with you. Feeling recognized, feeling heard, feeling valued. And then typically from there, you’re going to want to set up a couple of communications where you know, you’re surveying them. Why is it that you give to us? What was important? What do you care about? Because most organizations have a variety of programs. And whether you’re a hospital or international relief, I want to make sure I know what you care about, because then I can maybe set up some tracks for our donors in the future, where if I’m a hospital up here in Massachusetts, I can talk about childhood cancer research for this group and I can talk about brain tumor research for this group. It’s just going to provide a greater experience because, much like with consumer engagement, if you’re giving me what I want, what I care about, what I’m interested in, I’m going to stay engaged and I’m going to then continue to support you going forward. So there’s that step.  

And so then you want to survey them. You want to cultivate them. A welcome series ends with another ask. And it’s important to put that next ask out there. A lot of organizations feel a little shy about asking for a gift too soon. We’re donors. We understand the relationship. We made a gift because we want to see you continue your mission, because we care about that. So don’t be shy about putting another solicitation out there within the next 45, 60 days. If you only make one gift, you’re probably going to retain one out of five times. If you make two gifts, those donors are going to triple their likelihood of retention. 

Trent Ricker: I recently made a gift to an organization after watching a documentary, and it was on the Duke lacrosse team. And for those of you guys who might remember that storyline, there was some wrongly accused, and it’s worth the watch. But at the end, the families had talked about their support of the Innocence Project, and I was moved by this documentary enough to make a gift. And Ryan, to your point – and I’m not picking on this organization because it was only a couple of weeks back – but to that point, I made a gift. And to your point, you should always acknowledge right away. Thank you for your donation. You need a receipt, of course. But then it’s, you know, in that case, there are so many different reasons why somebody might give to an organization like that. What I see far too often is that the first-time donor is treated transactionally. Thank you for your gift. Then, if two weeks later – and this did happen to me, I’m not picking on them because I don’t know if I’m still going to get a welcome series or not – but they had a newsletter of sorts that was going out, with all the different things that they’re doing. But it was fairly lengthy and it was not in a lot of context for me because they do a lot of different really what seems to be impactful work. I went to their website and did a little bit of just learning, right? But I don’t know that everybody would necessarily do that. I can’t remember if at the end of the documentary, there was something that said, “If you’d like to support the Innocence Project, here’s a website.” I would hope that if it were made today, maybe there would be a QR code or something like that for a partnership. They may not even have known that they were part of that.  

But my point is that I did receive something else. Mother’s Day is coming up this week, as we’re recording this, and I got a Mother’s Day email from the Innocence Project, along with some other things. I leave wanting more. As a new first-time donor, I would hope that within that first 30 days, I was moved to make a first-time gift to an organization based on something that I saw, that they would move me towards that second gift. Ryan, to your point, either more directly or more relevantly asking me, Why did I give the first time gift?  

And then you get the permission to say, “Did you know that, just like those families from the Duke lacrosse team, there are X number of other people who are innocent? And did you know that we actually successfully got someone out of prison who was wrongfully charged and in jail for 30 years? Did you know about the social injustices that take place?” Hey, organizations that are out there listening to us, you have a treasure trove of information. If you assume that the person who gave the first-time gift fully understands your organization, you’re likely sadly mistaken. You need to educate them on all the great work that you do and why it’s important that they continue to give. It’s an important first step in our journey towards donor engagement, leading towards a second gift, potentially monthly donor, a sustaining giving program, and maybe something more meaningful in mid-level or above. 

Ryan Carpenter: And again, I feel like this is something that a lot of us struggle with, not wanting to be too intrusive or going over the line. We have to get that out of our heads. Early in my career after college, I was in sales, and it was always about what was in your head, preventing you from asking the right questions. Same here as marketers and fundraisers. 

Trent Ricker: It’s only noisy if it’s irrelevant, right? I mean, to that point. Right. 

Ryan Carpenter: Yeah. They want to hear this, just like our examples. I am glad to give you the answers. If that’s going to lead to a better experience, that’s going to strengthen our relationship. So really being direct about like, hey, what is it you care about? And then tailoring communications towards that, maybe not every month, but interspersing things that this group of donors or this specific donor cares about. You’re helping me as the donor, give me what I want. That makes me feel better. That makes me want to engage further. That makes me want to give again. And so you can get that first-party data. 

And then there’s the whole topic of third-party data, because surveys aren’t responded to 100%, not by a long shot. You can use external data, as we do at AGP, and other organizations have the ability to get as well that can help inform on who these donors are, what do they care about, what are they interested in, how do they want to be communicated with, and where’s the real value to move them up the pyramid. 

Trent Ricker: Yeah, touching on that data for everybody, there are three components that we think of, right? There’s primary data, the gifts that they give, and how frequently and how much an individual’s given. That’s primary data. It’s really important, and it’s proprietary to you as the organization.  

There’s third-party data. We partner with Axiom and have a zillion different data points. Every year, it seems like we can get more and more. The science and the art today is to figure out what pieces of data make the most sense from a nonprofit, philanthropic standpoint relative to a particular cause. That last part that Ryan was just talking about, a survey, is this kind of other piece of primary data that you can’t go buy from Axiom or Experian or anything else, but you have to experience an observation, behavior, interest profiles, and survey responses. How are they opening your email? Are they watching videos? If you’re a university, did you survey and ask them, were they involved in the Greek system or intramurals, or how engaged were they on the campus? Because that’s going to be a likelihood as to whether or not they’re likely to support the institution based upon the pride and the engagement that they had as a student or as a supporter thereof.  

We’ve got to put all this data into one system, which will then help us to prioritize our engagement, stewardship, and our journey mapping in order to lead towards that next gift. And then at what level? That’s really critical because we know that they support similar organizations. We know that they might be able to give at a certain level. That’s going to certainly inform when and how much we ask. 

Host: So I want to start with a basic question. For someone, or for a nonprofit that’s starting from scratch, and they’re hearing these amazing points both of you are sharing about data, but they only collect first name, last name, email, mailing address, birthday, you know, just really basic information. But they want to get at what is that first or zero party information from the donor that they should start to ask. What are some initial steps you would recommend they take to kind of start to elevate the way they engage with their donors? 

Ryan Carpenter: So I can tell you because 10 years ago, working at another agency, when I was serving Feeding America, we were relying on that transactional gift data to determine, well, what’s their channel preference? Well, I see that they’re giving mostly online, right? And so you can use basic data to determine are they trending up? Likely not new donors, but donors on file. Like, are we seeing them upgrade organically? All right, well, maybe we want to put an upgrade gift asker in front of them. Or are they giving only through digital? Or are they responding mostly through mail? That can help you determine channel preference. What are they responding to? You can use the trends from merely giving data to help you understand who they are. Now, that may not be as accurate or all-encompassing as third-party data that you can get from your experience and axioms of the world, but you can start there.  

The other piece that you want to ask about is, directly, how do you want to be communicated with, right? I’ve found that more appreciation in that simple question when managing mid-level programs. Don’t be afraid for somebody to tell you that they don’t want to have any communication. That’s very infrequent. In fact, when you ask them how they want to be communicated with and they tell you primarily through email or mail or quarterly, mailings are good for me, and then you can email them with your monthly cadence. So donors have told me directly, like, I really appreciate you asking and then honoring that. So how do they want to be communicated with? Right. 

And then also, what is it that they care about? Even if you’re a small organization, you have two or three programs, ask them which of them they care about. You don’t want to create a thousand personal communication tracks, but if you can bucket into a couple that are manageable, so when you’re sending out your monthly email and your quarterly mailing, if you’re a smaller organization – because I want to make sure we’re speaking to smaller, not just the biggest organizations with the biggest budgets in the world – that you are providing them the experience they want. How do they want to be communicated with? What do they care about? What is their attachment to your organization? That’s going to help determine what the affinity is for your organization. What is the propensity for upgrading? 

So those are like three key easy ones without getting into the weeds of what kind of organization you are that I would say are really important. But if you can just come up with a few key questions to better understand who they are, what they care about, how to best communicate with them, you are way ahead of most others out there. And that’s going to make the difference because people are giving to less organizations but they are still giving. If you’re going to provide that experience, you could be one of those key organizations that they continue to support. 

Trent Ricker: Ryan, you mentioned a couple of things that I want to pick up on related to the commerce side, too. Because you’re getting something in your response to Stitch Fix, you want a more tailored experience, both of clothes that fit your taste and fit your body, right? Amazon, back to my example, they don’t ask a lot of questions. They look at the data a lot. They look at what you’ve bought, what you’re browsing, et cetera. And they make some assumptions from that. And they’re pretty good assumptions. And obviously, algorithms have gotten better and better on that. 

To the organizations, regardless of your size, Ryan said something that’s very important. Asking with frequency, but asking at the right time. Because again, sometimes people feel like they don’t trust organizations – whether it’s for-commerce or a not-for-profit – that they’re not going to just spam them all the time. People gave to your organization because they care about your cause. Or somebody that cares about your cause asked them to give – there’s a big difference there. 

So I’ll use this as an example. Let’s say my niece asks me to make a gift to XYZ organization that I have very little affinity with. But I’m doing it because my niece is trying to raise $2,000 for her walkathon. If XYZ organization treats me as if I’m a deeply entrenched, mission-aligned system individual, I’m going to ignore it. I’m probably not going to give a second gift anyway. Maybe my niece said something that I do care about though and if asked appropriately, how frequently and what sorts of things would you like to be communicated with, it’s an honest conversation earlier on. Do not, as Ryan said, be ashamed or worried if some people say, I don’t want to hear from you anymore or I only want to hear from you once a quarter and I only want to hear from you from you on digital. They’re actually doing you a favor because if we treated everybody the same, we’d be spending an awful lot of money on that disaster relief. Did a lot of work with Red Cross back in the day. 

Somebody gives to Hurricane XYZ. If we treat them as if they are a deeply engaged Red Cross supporter as opposed to the episodic disaster relief, we might want to scratch and say, this person is generous in disaster relief. Let’s make sure we hit them appropriately when we need help in certain areas, as opposed to somebody who might give regularly to the Red Cross for some of their deeper and more important needs. 

So, asking those questions are important. I’d love for our audience to hear a little bit more about the appropriate way to engage in surveys because I think again, most of us don’t really want to take the time to fill out a survey. But we have to be reminded that there are some people that are given that first gift, a diagnosis of a certain illness, and you’re now supporting a health organization for the first time, that survey is going to make a huge difference in the relevancy that you can communicate with that constituent on a move-forward basis. And we’ll touch on that in a bit too, because AI can help us to have more relevant communication. And we’ll give some examples of that in a minute here. But Ryan or Leah, what’s the best way to engage in some of those surveys? 

Ryan Carpenter: I would just say Leah, probably as the marketing expert here, might have some thoughts. For me, though, it goes back to asking questions that the donor wants to answer because there’s a benefit to them. It can’t just be a benefit to me as the organization, but there can be a co-benefit, right? 

So asking questions that they’re going to be more likely to answer. 

Trent Ricker: Which is your Stitch Fix experience. You’re more likely to answer because you’re going to have a better buying experience by engaging in that mechanism. 

Ryan Carpenter: Right. And so I feel like you can take that same approach with a donor in your mission. 

Leah: Definitely. One organization that came to mind is MS Canada. 

That’s multiple sclerosis services in Canada. One thing they realized when they wanted to kind of redo their website and make it a more constituent-focused experience is that a large majority of folks that were visiting their site were actually caregivers, not people who actually suffer themselves from multiple sclerosis. What they discovered is that people were going to the website to discover how to better care for people in their life rather than how they could improve their own outcomes with the disease. And so in that situation, it would be appropriate early on in that person’s relationship with the organization to ask them what their relationship to that disease or that disorder is so that you can appropriately angle your marketing and your messaging to them so that they are getting what’s relevant to them and their experience with your cause. 

Trent Ricker: That’s an excellent example. And I think that’s where I kind of want to go a little bit on how I think the evolution of personalized, timely, and relevant communications is getting simpler and simpler.  

So to your example, Leah, if somebody – let’s take a health organization, mission recipient versus caregiver – and let’s then think about the person that gives to the organization. Do they care more about, let’s say, care versus cure. Because in that matrix, too, you can think about raising money, going towards taking better care of people with horrible diseases like MS or research to cure for next generation. Some people care about both. Some people though have a right brain, left brain association with that. Boy, it seems overwhelming for me to get my head around curing cancer or MS. 

So, I’m more concerned about taking better care of those that are diagnosed because my loved one just was diagnosed.  

Those are just a couple of examples that you could say, okay, if I have that, how would I talk to you differently? If I was having a conversation with Ryan about that as a new constituent, what questions might I ask and how might I follow up? As we store that in the data, it’s one of the things I want to kind of pivot to – and we would do this for our clients now. It’s gotten easier, which means it’s more efficient, more impactful, and it’s frankly cheaper too. A copywriter might look at four, five, or six different donor journeys or welcome series, depending upon the point of entry of that new first gift. If I were to scan the QR code at the end of a television program, they know exactly where I came from and they can infer that thing that I watched was what led me to give that first gift so they could infer that in the stewardship, the most likely point of relevance that they could speak to. 

So again, if I just had a generic thank you stewardship letter, I could throw it in ChatGPT and have it do an analysis. I could then say, “Hey, tweak this for a volunteer that gave their first-time gift”. “Tweak it for the caretaker”. “Tweak it for the mission recipient who gave a generous gift”. You could literally within an hour probably have six, seven or eight different stewardship letters that could be part of email or put in postal. You’d obviously put your own tone and voice to it. The best thing about chat GPT is it gives you the template for you then to be able to create your own voice in it. But we do that with our own copywriter. When we think about welcome series and we think about those that care most about, it’s a little bit different in the iteration today. 

Someone’s watching a video. And what they click on related to after the video shows what do they care about? Research? Do they care about Care? Do they care about maybe two or three different things that are intentionally there for us to ascertain the interest? It’s a different primary research way – or secondary research way, I should say, because we’re not asking the question, we’re inferring it from what they’re clicking on the links – to build a deeper profile. 

So, those are some hints, I think, that you can create stronger stewardship. And again, going back to the theme of this podcast, we’re trying to create deeper roots so that you can have deeper donor engagement. 

Ryan Carpenter: Something you just said really struck me. We can do it. It’s easier and more effective. They may not feel like they have the capacity to create multiple versions, multiple tracks, but you just laid it out. You can really create three or four different messages with the help of ChatGPT or some other AI tool pretty quickly these days. It’s not something where you have to get a copywriter to come up with six different messages. You can do it and it is effective, right? We’re talking about serving up an experience that’s important to somebody and based on what you know about them, whether they told you directly or inferred it from a video or from some other method, taking that and then delivering the communication based on it, that’s effective. It’s going to lead to greater engagement, higher levels of giving, higher levels of retention. And the days of just sending out one message to everybody, guys, we can’t do that anymore. It’s not effective anymore. It is relatively easy to upgrade into a more sophisticated, nuanced approach as to how you communicate with your donors.  

Trent Ricker: And you both said it earlier. Look, as consumers, we’re conditioned by the commerce experience. We give nonprofits a little bit of grace in that. But if you’re significantly behind the experience that we would otherwise have with our retailers or other commerce experiences, we won’t give. And by the way, nonprofits are competitive too. We all understand that. 

So, if you aren’t doing it, someone who’s competing for those dollars for your nonprofit organization is. And to Ryan’s point, it’s not very difficult to say, okay, this is my standard stewardship letter or script for a phone call. Now, if I know that it’s Leah who gave to me, it would take a very small amount of time for me to learn a little bit more about Leah. And even if you don’t have GivingDNA as a tool to do a little bit of investigation and donor profiling, you could take Leah’s LinkedIn page, overlay it with your thank you letter, create either a customized thank you letter and/or a couple of talking points for the script if you left to try to call her. And Leah probably wouldn’t even answer the call, but if she got a voicemail that was very relevant to Leah thanking her for her gift, the impact that she’s made, and a couple of tidbits that are specific to Leah, boy, how much more impactful is that? And then Leah would be more likely the next time your email comes through for the Mother’s Day two times match. She might then be more inclined to slow down, pay attention, and take action. Pretty simple stuff. 

Ryan Carpenter: And you know, it’s true, if the experience is lacking, that’s going to stand out because to your point, nonprofits are competitive. There are organizations doing great work, marketing and fundraising in really smart ways. I was just talking to our colleague Kristen Priest yesterday about the experience a donor would get by making a $5,000 gift to an animal welfare shop. You’re going to get personally stewarded. You’re going to feel great. They’re going to really appreciate you. Comparatively to maybe A large hospital, for which $5,000, it’s not really much, right? No fault of their own. They only have the capacity in most cases to personally steward donors that are giving $25,000 or above.  

We were just talking about the experience. If I’m a donor and I write $5,000 checks in a welfare shop in my city, they’re going to call me personally, invite me to meet the executive director in all likelihood. But if I write the same check to the local large hospital, it’s not going to be. And so I’m going to recognize that as a donor to say, well, What gives here, right? 

So, that’s just one kind of theoretical example of this, if you are not doing personalization in your communications, you’re going to be looked at and compared negatively to a lot of these other organizations that are starting to the best of their ability to drive personalization in the donor experience. 

Trent Ricker: If we were to take the simplistic viewpoint, I’ve thought this for a long time and I’ve coached this throughout. If you didn’t have any wealth screening – and it’s obviously very appropriate in certain practices related to the cultivation of donors – there’s just this simple rule I always thought of. When somebody gives you that first gift, they likely have the ability or capacity to give 10 times that gift without it hurting them much. Because the first gift is a spontaneous one that is not usually at the highest end. 

Sometimes it is because if you had a life-changing experience, let’s say at a hospital. To your point, Ryan, sometimes those big gifts can come. I would sometimes make the comment that very rich people would leave a million dollar tip on the pillow after having an amazing experience at a hospital because there’s David Letterman back in the day when he had a heart attack. And I think it was New York press or something. He had all those doctors come onto the show and he gave very generously because they saved his life. But if I give $50 to the Innocence Project, I probably could have given them $500, and it wouldn’t have killed me to do that. So here’s the thinking. What do you need to do in order to tap into that relationship so that you can get to that 10x gift in the shortest time possible. What would you need to do and learn? 

And then through that learning, you might learn that $50 gift was just strictly a spontaneous gift because somebody else asked them and they really aren’t connected to your mission. And that’s okay too, because then we’ll spend less time with those people and more time on learning about what it would take for that individual to give. How soon can you get there? Now, you’re not going to ask me for $500 right out of the gate. But what would you have to do for me to then slow down and maybe make another $50 gift in the next 60 to 90 days and then maybe give another one because there was an interesting match at the end of the year or Giving Tuesday or something like that. Now I’m open-minded to giving a sustaining program, and boy, next thing you know, the sustaining program of just $30 a month, I’m at $360 a year, and I’m probably giving a spontaneous gift at various times in the year. I probably am over $500. Now my compounded lifetime value with you screening somebody who’s giving that sort of consistency, that is a potential mid-level donor or cultivated for the next generation of major giving support or even a planned gift. That’s, again, for another episode, planned giving, right? Because that’s where we would lead that to as well. 

Host: We’ve got to bring this home, guys. Ryan, you shared something kind of in our prep discussion about how for most donors, you have about 90 days to make that transformative first impression. So, if you were to supply us with three to four tips, what are some things that need to occur in that first 90 days to really lock in the loyalty with those donors that are going to be transformative to you? What are some of those things that they could do? 

Ryan Carpenter: Yeah, so I touched upon it a little bit, but just to crystallize that you have to have a timely and authentic stewardship communication that goes out, right? 

So whether your shop does it digitally, mail, both, probably, I would suggest if you have the budget to do so with mail, timely. We can’t be waiting over two weeks to get this out. You have to be stewarding them digitally, you know, next day and then have the mail go out, you know, on a weekly basis. 

On top of that, Personal outreach at all giving levels is the most effective, right? So I’ve run a lot of mid-level programs at various giving levels, done sustainer and planned programs as well. Personal communication is going to be the biggest lift. It just is, and it works. So for whatever level you can then personally on a weekly basis thank your donors, do that. If it can only be 10 donors that gave over a thousand dollars or 50 donors that gave over a hundred, great. If you can do everybody, I would encourage you to do so. And whether you have, you know, maybe you have volunteers, interns, as long, you know, just. Coach them up, it’s really effective. 

So, that’s step one. But then really having an effective welcome series is really important. So from this, it’s really about four or five steps. You have that first stewardship. From there, about a week later, you send them out a survey asking some questions. The following week, you send them out an email based on those responses. 

So, you get to set up some automation here. So if you ask them, you know, what do they care about? What programs are important to them? Now all of a sudden, for all those new donors from week one, you got three or four tracks for that third communication that goes out, cultivating them, showing the impact of the work you do and the work you still want to do, sending out a solicitation maybe by week six, and then asking for a second gift.  

That’s really the approach that we’ve seen works effectively. The donor feels valued and appreciated. You learn something about them that benefits them. And then getting back to that ask sooner rather than later because we’ve just talked about the importance of getting the second gift to come in.  

Trent Ricker: I’d suggest doing an audit in just 90 days. Audit the first 90 days from the first gift. And even if you’re working with an agency, I think it’s a smart thing to do. Sit down with that agency and reevaluate it. Bring some folks together in their conference room. Map it out with some index cards along the wall. What are we doing and what could we improve upon and where can we insert, to Ryan’s point, better personalization? And are there, ways that we can introduce that personalized touch through a phone call or leaving a message. People will listen to the message. And if it’s personalized and it’s authentic, people will feel more engaged and it will slow them down to pay closer attention the next time they receive a piece of mail or an email or text if you’re doing that. They’ll slow down. 

Ryan’s got great advice there, and I’d say start with just doing an audit. What are you doing in the first 90 days right now? And how can you improve it? I’m a big believer in constant and never-ending improvement, like just iterating one or two things better. As you do that better, and we’ll wrap with the same thing that I started with here, retention of the new acquisition. If you’re retaining and you can really shrink your coverage ratio so that we don’t have to go get a bunch of new donors because we lost a bunch of donors, then we’re in a better spot. Because those donors that are with us longer are going to continue to give and give at a deeper, more meaningful level. And that’s going to raise our revenue and lower our costs. 

Ryan Carpenter: That’s great. And one thing to just kind of leave with everybody for our next conversation is there’s also the aspect of recognizing where the value is sooner, rather than later. So, understanding throughout, whether it’s through your own data, own models you’ve created, or if you have external insights, third-party data, recognizing who’s likely to become a sustainer, who has mid-level potential. Who has that potential to become a major donor?  

Understanding that sooner than later can help inform on strategies that allow you to be more proactive in moving those donors up the pyramid. That’s something that I really focus on here at AGP, and I feel like it’s really important. You have to know beforehand, earlier than later, what’s the opportunity here, and how do I want to focus on various key segments with discrete communications on a variety of different goals?  

Trent Ricker: Leah, I’d love to ask you to hold Ryan and me accountable and have us back soon, because today we focused on that first gift to the second gift, which is all about retention. And we want to expand this conversation about now we have loyalty. How can we upgrade to programs like sustaining programs, mid-level programs? Potentially major giving or planned giving. We can focus primarily on sustaining and then continue to upgrade. And I welcome our listeners out there to reach out to us as well. Donor engagement is something that we really believe deeply in. And Ryan, I’m going to offer you up as our vice president of donor engagement to take messages and phone calls because I know you love talking about this stuff to organizations of all sizes. It’s what gives you your oxygen. So I know you’ll take that on. 

Ryan Carpenter: I’d love to hear from our listeners. I’d love to talk about it. Donor engagement and creating high-touch touch personal and personalized strategies is really what’s fun for me. It makes me feel energized. This may sound sappy, but I love mid-level programs because people that are giving a thousand dollars, they’re not going to get their name on a building, but they are hugely valuable and I feel like they should be appropriately stewarded. Sometimes they don’t get the appreciation they deserve which I really feel like they do. I enjoy working with them and our clients on those programs. It’s really fun for me. 

Host: Love it. Yes, absolutely. I’ll see you both for part two of this conversation, where we can keep these thoughts flowing and bring more value to the nonprofit space. Thank you both.