About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. New look for Charity Commission AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis The Charity Commission has unveiled a new logo and branding, part of the regulator’s review of its structure and vision.The new logo, created by design company BANG signifies a more “in-touch, modern and empowering organisation”, that is “working at the heart of society.”Chair of the Charity Commission Geraldine Peacock said: “I’m inspired by the new logo which, through creative visual imagery, demonstrates our changing values and culture. The Commission is re-focusing, re-structuring and sharpening up the way it works and the bold logo illustrates our new way of working.” Advertisement Howard Lake | 5 April 2005 | News 15 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis In the new logo the crown is removed as are the words “for England and Wales”. The bold words ‘Charity Commission’ appear in capitals in white on a lime green background.Commission staff and external stakeholders suggested the need for a more contemporary image.The logo hasn’t been met with a welcome from all. Charity legal expert, author and trainer Sandy Adirondack, writing in her legal update, said: “Yuck. I’ll let you know when the Charity Commission starts selling the t-shirts… Personally I would rather have had the Charities Act than a lime green logo.”
Warner Brothers’ Blood Diamond,nominated for five Academy Awards in 2006, was filmed on location in South Africa.Mary AlexanderThe South African government is to inject millions of rands into the country’s fledgling film industry with two new schemes aimed at encouraging local filmmakers to produce big-budget movies, and foreign filmmakers to use the country’s diverse and stunning landscape for their locations.Launched by the Department of Trade and Industry in February 2008, the South African Film and Television Production and Coproduction Incentive offers a 35% rebate on the cost of films and full-length television programmes produced by South African filmmakers. The second scheme, the Location Film and Television Production Incentive, offers foreign film companies a 15% rebate on the costs of filming in the country. Both schemes, set to run for six years until 2014, cap the rebate at R10-million (US$1.25-million) per production.“South Africa has a growing and vibrant film sector, attested in the recent past by productions such as the award-winning Tsotsi and the internationally acclaimed Blood Diamond,” said Minister of Trade and Industry Mandisi Mpahlwa at the launch of the incentives. “Opportunities abound and producers continue to benefit from the cost competitiveness of the country’s beautiful locations.”Tsotsi, a wholly South African production, won the Academy Award for best foreign language film in 2006. Warners Brothers’ 2006 film Blood Diamond, filmed on location in South Africa, was nominated for five Academy Awards. The country’s other recent movie successes include Yesterday, nominated for an Oscar in 2005, and U-Carmen eKhayelitsha, awarded a Golden Bear at the prestigious Berlin International Film Festival in 2005.The local film industry is one of the priority sectors indentified by the government’s Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (Asgisa) as having excellent potential for growth. Asgisa aims to boost the country’s growth rate to 6% in order to halve unemployment and poverty by 2014.The local production incentive scheme is designed to support South Africa’s film industry and create job opportunities, while the location incentive for foreign filmmakers aims to encourage and attract big-budget films to the country, increasing both foreign direct investment and the country’s international profile.“In addition to incentives,” Mpahlwa said, “the DTI is working with other role-players on raising the profile of the sector in general an a number of strategic cooperation treaties are set to improve distribution locally and internationally.”Both schemes are for the production of feature films, telemovies, television drama series, documentaries and animation, produced to top commercial standards. Excluded are reality TV, news, sports, advertising and variety shows, as well as pornography and material that promotes religious intolerance.Qualifying for the incentivesTo qualify for the South African Film and Television Production and Coproduction Incentive, the company producing the film must be incorporated in the country, must have a majority of South African shareholders, and must comply with the black economic empowerment codes of good practice. Only one film per production company is eligible.Only films with a minimum R2.5-million total production budget will qualify, with the company committing 25% of this budget.The majority of the film’s intellectual property must be held by South Africans. The director has to be a South African, as do those with top writer and producer credits, three or more of the top five highest paid actors, and most of the film’s heads of department and key staff.The Location Film and Television Production Incentive is available only to foreign-owned films, with the producers required to incorporate a special purpose corporate vehicle in South Africa for the sole purpose of producing the movie. The South African portion of the budget must be between R12-million ($1.5-million) and just under R100-million ($12.4-million).At least 50% of the principal photography, and a minimum of four weeks’ photography, must be shot in South Africa.Related articlesTelevision in South AfricaMore Oscar glory for South AfricaUseful linksDepartment of Trade and IndustryFilm and Television IncentiveTsotsiYesterdayBlood Diamond
View comments LOOK: Venues for 2019 SEA Games LOOK: Loisa Andalio, Ronnie Alonte unwind in Amanpulo for 3rd anniversary WATCH: Streetboys show off slick dance moves in Vhong Navarro’s wedding Arellano University took down San Beda in straight sets, 25-22, 25-21, 25-18, to keep an unblemished slate in the Premier Volleyball League Collegiate Conference Wednesday at Filoil Flying V Centre.Eunika Torres dealt the final blow for the Lady Chiefs as they improve to 2-0 while the Red Spikers slipped to 1-1.ADVERTISEMENT Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC SEA Games in Calabarzon safe, secure – Solcom chief Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. UPLB exempted from SEA Games class suspension LATEST STORIES MOST READ Filipino athletes get grand send-off ahead of SEA Games PLAY LIST 01:27Filipino athletes get grand send-off ahead of SEA Games00:50Trending Articles00:59Sports venues to be ready in time for SEA Games01:37Protesters burn down Iran consulate in Najaf01:47Panelo casts doubts on Robredo’s drug war ‘discoveries’01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games E.T. returns to earth, reunites with grown-up Elliott in new ad Read Next LOOK: Retired NBA, WNBA vets confirmed as cast members for upcoming film ‘Uncle Drew’ Catriona Gray spends Thanksgiving by preparing meals for people with illnesses The Lady Chiefs, though, had to battle back in the third set after San Beda got the early lead in the final period.“That has always been our problem whenever we get two set, we start to dip in performance come the third,” said Lady Chiefs head coach Obet Javier. “So I always tell them that the third set will be crucial for us.”FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutoutArellano was down 8-6 early in the third set before Regine Arocha converted on a service ace to cap off a 7-1 run and give the Lady Chiefs a 13-9 lead.Arocha had a game-high 16 points to lead Arellano while captain Jovielyn Prado added 13 with Mary Anne Esguerra chipping in 10.
Read Next Yankees face elimination again, this time in ALCS Game 7 Oakland Raiders running back Marshawn Lynch (24) makes contact with back judge Greg Steed (12) during the first half of an NFL football game between the Raiders and the Kansas City Chiefs in Oakland, Calif., Thursday, Oct. 19, 2017. Lynch was ejected after the play. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)NEW YORK — Oakland running back Marshawn Lynch was suspended for one game without pay by the NFL on Friday for shoving a game official during the Raiders’ victory over Kansas City on Thursday night.Lynch was ejected from the game after he shoved line judge Julian Mapp.ADVERTISEMENT Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH QC cops nab robbery gang leader, cohort Kin of Misamis Oriental hero cop to get death benefits, award — PNP Stronger peso trims PH debt value to P7.9 trillion Kammuri turning to super typhoon less likely but possible — Pagasa Makabayan bloc: Duterte suspension order on rice importation only a ‘media stunt’ PLAY LIST 02:46Makabayan bloc: Duterte suspension order on rice importation only a ‘media stunt’00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles01:37Protesters burn down Iran consulate in Najaf01:47Panelo casts doubts on Robredo’s drug war ‘discoveries’01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games CPP denies ‘Ka Diego’ arrest caused ‘mass panic’ among S. Tagalog NPA Japan ex-PM Nakasone who boosted ties with US dies at 101 The scuffle started when Oakland quarterback Derek Carr was hit late on a run by Kansas City’s Marcus Peters midway through the second quarter. Raiders offensive linemen Kelechi Osemele and Donald Penn immediately confronted Peters, and Lynch sprinted onto the field from the bench to join the fray. Mapp tried to break up the fight, but Lynch pushed him and grabbed his jersey. Lynch also got a personal foul.NFL vice president of football operations Jon Runyan wrote a letter to Lynch, saying:FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutout“You made deliberate physical contact with one of our game officials as he was diffusing an active confrontation between players. You were disqualified for your inappropriate and unsportsmanlike actions. Your conduct included pushing the game official and grabbing his jersey. … You were not directly involved in the active confrontation that the game official was attempting to diffuse, nor were you a participant in the play that initiated the confrontation. You were the only player from either team who ran from the sideline to midfield to insert himself into a situation in which he was not directly involved.”Lynch will be eligible to return to Oakland’s active roster on Oct. 30, the day after the Raiders’ game against the Buffalo Bills. LATEST STORIES Lynch finished the game with two carries for 9 yards.The Raiders rallied to win 31-30 on a touchdown pass by Carr on the final play, and Lynch was in the locker room after the game congratulating his teammates.Lynch came out of retirement this season and was traded from Seattle to the Raiders. Lynch said he wanted to make a comeback so he could give something back to his hometown of Oakland before the Raiders move to Las Vegas in 2020.Lynch has rushed for 266 yards and two touchdowns in seven games.ADVERTISEMENT Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. MOST READ View comments
Kingad eyes to bounce back in ONE: Visions of Victory FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSLillard, Anthony lead Blazers over ThunderSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutout LATEST STORIES NEXT BLOCK ASIA 2.0 introduces GURUS AWARDS to recognize and reward industry influencers John Lloyd Cruz a dashing guest at Vhong Navarro’s wedding MOST READ Slow and steady hope for near-extinct Bangladesh tortoises Globe Business launches leading cloud-enabled and hardware-agnostic conferencing platform in PH View comments AFP official booed out of forum Read Next Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC 2 ‘newbie’ drug pushers fall in Lucena sting Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Sta. Lucia Realty overcame a slow start to escape with a 21-25, 25-21, 23-25, 25-15, 15-7 victory over Generika-Ayala in the Chooks to Go-Philippine Superliga (PSL) Grand Prix on Tuesday at Bacoor Sports Complex in Cavite. Bohdana Anisova, formerly of the Ukraine national team, erupted for 28 points and MJ Philips chipped in 22 to tow the Lady Realtors to their first victory. SLR coach George Pascua said his key players led by veteran setter Rubie de Leon are slowly adjusting with the rest of the team.ADVERTISEMENT Trending Articles PLAY LIST 00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice01:19Fire erupts in Barangay Tatalon in Quezon City
There is an article on TechCrunch by Dave McClure called “7 steps to Graphing Your Facebook Strategy“.Here are seven major aspects of Facebook you can use to increase the visibility of your startup, business, product or service:1. Set Up Your Graph: Profiles & Privacy2. Make Connections: Networks, Groups & Events3. The Need for Feed: Your [Shared] Social Activity Stream4. Share Your Content: Share & People-Tag Your Stories & Media5. App to the Future: The Facebook Platform, APIs, & Applications6. Pay to Play: Ad Networks, Sponsored Stories, & Paid Distribution7. Show Me The Bunny: Gifts, Points, & Virtual Currency[Editor’s note: For important Facebook demographical information that can be crucial when starting or redesigning your Facebook strategy, view this slideshow posted by Beth Kanter on her blog.]Source: http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2007/10/seven-steps-to-.html
Are you constantly testing in your fundraising program? Are you learning one or two new things every month? You should be.Here is a quick summary of recent findings from direct-mail tests conducted for a Merkle|Domain client involved in international humanitarian work.Compelling Test Results and Conclusions1. Donors read their mail. Sometimes there is a temptation to reduce the cost of a direct mail appeal package by eliminating the letter and relying on a double buckslip form: one part a short personalized message, the other a reply coupon. We conducted two separate tests to determine whether including the letter would increase response. In both cases the packages that included the letter secured a higher response rate, higher average gift, and higher net revenue than the package without the letter.2. Integration of effort using different communication channels — telephone and direct mail works! Two randomly selected audience groups of 10,000 donors each were mailed identical appeal packages. The test group also received a pre-mailing alert phone call. The response rate of the test group was 15.6% higher, and net revenue from this group was 45% higher than from the group that did not receive the call.3. Donors appreciate a good deal. Two test panels of 10,000 donors each were involved in a matching gift offer test. The direct mail packages sent to both panels were identical except that the test group’s did not contain the matching gift offer. The results were no surprise. The panel that received the matching gift offer responded at a rate 56% higher than the group without the matching gift offer. Net revenue was 53% higher from the matching gift panel.4. Package inserts or alternative response options may sometimes depress response rates. We tested giving donors the opportunity to sign up for ongoing electronic funds transfer (EFT) by including a “send me more information” checkbox on the reply coupon. We also tested whether inserting an information flier would boost EFT sign-ups.Unfortunately, when the EFT option was promoted with the check-off box, response declined by 15.8% and net revenue declined 34.3%.When the promotional flier was added in addition to the check-box, response dropped by 19.6% and net revenue dropped by 42% compared to the control panel that did not receive the EFT option. The take-away value from this test is to stay focused on a single message and response option in your direct mail appeal packages.5. A cover letter included with newsletter packages sent to frequent givers can generate higher response. We included a separate cover letter from the organization’s CEO with the newsletter package sent to frequent givers. The response rate from those receiving the cover letter increased by 16.6% compared to those who received no cover letter. When the cost of the cover letter was added to the overall cost of the package, net revenue remained unchanged; however, the cover letter may contribute to a stronger relationship and increase donor loyalty.6. Personalized copy referring to a donor’s previous gift can build donor loyalty. We often include copy in appeal packages that references the donor’s previous gift amount and the project their gift supported. We have learned over the years that this type of referencing affirms donors and helps to accomplish the Donor Loyalty Cycle™ elements of affirmation and reporting. A recent test, however, indicates that such referencing doesn’t always boost response.A direct mail appeal package focusing on an emergency situation in Africa was mailed to two randomly selected groups. The test group’s letter referenced their most recent gift amount, reported a few details about the project they had supported, and encouraged them to give again for the emergency project. The control group received the same package but no reference to their previous gift. The control group outperformed the test group with a 5.3% higher response rate, 9.4% higher average gift, and 16.7% higher net revenue.What did we learn from this test? While it’s important to affirm donors for their previous giving, and report back to them on how their gift was used, the nature of the given appeal package might not lend itself to specific previous gift referencing. In this case, for example, the emergency nature of the package was probably diluted by the previous gift reference.A Final WordYou should be regularly testing in your direct mail fundraising program. But remember, not all tests can be universally applied. Your test results may be very different from what we have reported here. The make-up of your donor file, the nature of your cause, your brand positioning, and your communication style and content are unique to your organization.Our goal at Merkle|Domain is to change fundraising to be more effective, more efficient, and more keenly focused on building donor loyalty. That’s how we can change the world!Source: Merkle Orange Papershttp://www.merkledomain.com/site/PageServer?pagename=orange_testingCopyright © 2007 Merkle Inc.All rights reserved
Here’s a pop quiz. Read the following two paragraphs and see which is more apt to tug at your heartstrings:A) Any money that you donate will go to Rokia, a seven-year-old girl who lives in Mali in Africa. Rokia is desperately poor and faces a threat of severe hunger, even starvation. Her life will be changed for the better as a result of your financial gift. With your support, and the support of other caring sponsors, Save the Children will work with Rokia’s family and other members of the community to help feed and educate her, and provide her with basic medical care.B) Food shortages in Malawi are affecting more than three million children. In Zambia, severe rainfall deficits have resulted in a 42% drop in maize production from 2000. As a result, an estimated three million Zambians face hunger. Four million Angolans — one-third of the population — have been forced to flee their homes. More than 11 million people in Ethiopia need immediate food assistance.If you answered A, you are like most people, according to a new study conducted by Deborah Small, a Wharton marketing professor, and two colleagues. The researchers found that if organizations want to raise money for a charitable cause, it is far better to appeal to the heart than to the head. Put another way, feelings, not analytical thinking, drive donations.Rokia is what academic researchers call an “identifiable victim.” As such, her personal story, which focuses exclusively on her plight and not that of other famine victims, is much more likely to generate charitable donations than more dispassionate descriptions of unnamed “statistical victims” like those in paragraph B, according to Small.That people would want to give money to identifiable victims like Rokia rather than unnamed famine victims may not seem all that surprising. But Small and her colleagues, in a series of field experiments, delved deeper into the issue of sympathy and how it relates to charitable giving. The researchers found that if people are presented with a personal case of an identifiable victim along with statistical data about similar victims caught up in a larger pattern of illness, hunger or neglect, overall donations actually decline. In addition, they found that if people are told about the inconsistent levels of sympathy evoked by identifiable and statistical victims — the “identifiable victim effect,” in the words of the researchers — people reduce their giving to identifiable victims but do not increase their giving to statistical victims.Small says the findings — which hold implications for policymakers, fundraisers for charities and even news organizations that urge donations to victims of tragic events — show that sympathy and aid-giving are often irrational.“When donating to charitable causes, people do not value lives consistently,” write Small and her co-authors, George Loewenstein of Carnegie Mellon University and Paul Slovic of Decision Research, a non-profit research firm in Eugene, Ore. “Money is often concentrated on a single victim even though more people would be helped if resources were dispersed or spent protecting future victims.”In many cases, society “would be better off if resources were spread among victims such that each additional dollar is spent where it will do the most good,” according to the paper, titled “Sympathy and Callousness: The Impact of Deliberative Thought on Donations to Identifiable and Statistical Victims.” Yet when making a decision to donate money toward a cause, “most people probably do not calculate the expected benefit of their donation. Rather, choices are made intuitively, based on spontaneous affective reactions.”The study cites several well-known examples of large sums of money being donated to help identifiable victims. In 1987, a child named Jessica McClure, dubbed “Baby Jessica” by the news media, fell into a well near her home in Texas and received nearly $700,000 in donations from the public. Ali Abbas, a boy who lost both his arms and his parents in the Iraq War in 2003, was the subject of widespread media attention in Europe and received some $550,000 in donations. Even animals generate sympathy: In 2002, more than $48,000 was contributed to save Forgea, a dog stranded on a ship adrift in the Pacific Ocean.Proportions vs. Absolute ValuesWhy do identifiable victims elicit such an outpouring of emotion — as well as piles of accompanying cash? In general, psychological research has found that “people pay greater attention and have stronger emotional reactions to vivid rather than pallid information,” says Small, a psychologist by training. Furthermore, the mind responds to proportions, not absolute values. “This is why we gasp when we see a 50%-off sale, regardless of whether the original price is $5 or $500,” she adds. “Similarly, saving 10 lives out of a group of 100 is a high proportion and thus evokes a greater emotional response than saving 10 lives out of one million. An identifiable victim is the extreme, in this sense. When a victim has been identified, she becomes her own frame of reference — there was only one Baby Jessica to save — and thus receives the greatest level of sympathy.”Small and her co-authors reached their conclusions by conducting a series of four field experiments involving ordinary citizens. The researchers gave each person $5 in one-dollar bills. They were then instructed to read a letter containing a charity request and asked to donate a sum of money, ranging from zero to $5, by placing the money anonymously in an envelope.Each experiment was designed to encourage “rational” thinking when people made decisions about how much money to donate to identifiable and statistical victims. In one experiment, for example, the subjects were told about the identifiable victim effect before being asked to make a donation. In another experiment, the researchers provided statistics about victims alongside a request for donations to an identifiable victim.The upshot of the four experiments was that people are most generous when asked to make a donation to an identifiable victim in the absence of “rational” analytic thought. The more statistical information the citizens were given about the general plight of a group of people, the less generous they became. Yet emotion-based thought failed to augment generosity to statistical victims. “It’s easy to override people’s feelings by giving them statistical information,” according to Small. “But it’s not so easy to add feelings where feelings aren’t naturally there to begin with. It’s hard for humans to generate feelings toward statistics.”One subtle positive finding was that informing ordinary citizens about the identifiable victim effect at least had the result of increasing their consistency towards the two types of victims. Yet the field experiments showed that giving people statistical information had a pernicious effect on overall caring, since people gave less to the identifiable victims but no more to the statistical victims.“Insight, in this situation, seems to breed callousness,” the researchers write. “In some ways, this conclusion seems well founded. Faced with almost any disaster of any magnitude, it is almost always possible to think of worse things that have happened or even that are currently happening in the world. The deaths of 9/11 [numbering 2,973], for example, compared with the slaughter in Rwanda [estimated at between 500,000 and one million]” seem to have less impact. But the slaughter in Rwanda, in turn, “is dwarfed by the problem of AIDS in Africa. Thinking about problems analytically can easily suppress sympathy for smaller-scale disasters without, our research suggests, producing much of an increase in caring for larger-scale disasters.”Yet the researchers acknowledge that this interpretation may have limitations. It is possible, they say, that deliberate, rational thinking in some cases may lead to more charity. “For example,” they write, “contrary to the difference between statistical and identifiable victims, we often experience little visceral sympathy for needy victims who are from other countries or of a different race or socioeconomic status, but thinking about their plight may lead us to recognize their deservingness. In such instances, we conjecture, interventions that encourage deliberate thinking like those presented in the four studies … might lead to greater generosity rather than less.”Charities Need a Compelling MessageWhat implications does Small’s paper hold for charitable organizations? “It’s all about putting together a simple, emotionally compelling message,” Small says. “The best way to do that is in the form of a picture or a story, something that purely engages the emotional system. The mistake that many charities make is trying to appeal both to emotion and to reason. They assume this would be more effective than appealing to only one or the other, but it isn’t.”Although they feel that charitable donations might be more efficiently distributed among more desperate victims if donors were not so emotional in making decisions to give money, the researchers do not criticize people who wish to help when they feel sympathetic.“Although the money spent on Baby Jessica and Ali Abbas could save more lives in theory if not concentrated as such, the absence of identifiability effects might reduce the impetus to give at all,” they write. “Thus, although victim identification may distort aid allocation somewhat, its impact generates more aid than any other pitch. Charities certainly recognize this, at least implicitly, when they employ a poster child to raise money for a general cause.”Source: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1767Copyright of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania
Why buy a toxic Bob the Builder this holiday when you give the gift that not only does no harm – it does good.The Good Card is a gift card for charity – where the recipient gets to donate to their charity of choice. That includes ANY charity with registration in the US – up to 1.7 million. Customers, clients, employees, friends and family all have their favorite charities and now you can give them the perfect gift – a donation to their favorite charity via Network for Good’s secure giving system. That includes the charity fighting a disease that’s touched their family, their alma mater — or even your organization!And yes, I work for Network for Good, so this is product placement.How it WorksÂ§ At www.networkforgood.org/goodcard, you can buy a card to be mailed or choose an electronic gift card to be sentÂ§ Your recipient receives the cards via mail or email (or you can send it to yourself if you want to give it in person!)Â§ The Good Card recipient comes to Network for Good’s website, chooses a charity and then enters the amount to donate using the code on their Good Card/email Â§ Network for Good sends the charities the donation Â§ Cost per card is $5. 100% of the card value goes direct to charity.
I received an email from a college student asking if he could interview me about ePhilanthropy and the future of online fundraising.The questions gave me an opportunity to think creatively about the application of some web 2.0 concepts, such as tagging and feeds, and how they can improve our practices.His questions and my answers follow.> * How did Internet change the way nonprofits fundraise?Maybe a better question would be, “HAS the Internet changed the way nonprofits fundraise?” Because for a lot of organizations; it still hasn’t.There are certainly plenty of new tools, but most nonprofits (outside of universities and hospitals) are traditionally very slow to adopt new technologies. This is for a few reasons, including: budget, being “people focused,” lack of staff/resources, and budget (did I mention budget?).Still, for those organizations that are on the ball, technically speaking, it has broadened their tools for appeals. The most obvious direct items are “Donate Now” buttons and email. The less direct way is using the ‘net for promotion, communications, and visibility.Email can be used for a direct appeal, or for newsletters with indirect asks. But, again, limited budget and staff to implement these has kept most smaller and medium sized organizations from fully realizing the potential benefit of these tools.I mention budget a lot. Email is cheap to use, and scales cheaply, but can be costly to implement effectively (opt-in systems to avoid spamming, software or ASP’s beyond the basic MS Outlook, and the staff to actually manage lists and write the messages).> * Is traditional fundraising still part of the fundraising mix?Most definitely so. For the reasons listed above (slow implementation, budget, etc.), but also because of human nature.While online tools are fabulous for meeting new donors, and younger donors, there is nothing that can ever compare to the personal touch of the in-person ask.Even snail mail has a place, as it’s far easier to make an emotional connection with a photo you can hold in your hand than with an email that may or may not properly display images based on the user’s software settings and operating system.In the area of Foundation grants, the worlds are merging somewhat as more and more Foundations accept online applications. It is traditional fundraising in terms of the skills required for completing the applications, but they are adapted to the online world.For that matter, you could say that all online fundraising is just an adaptation of traditional methods. It’s the medium that has changed – or expanded – not the message or the appeal.> * The future of online fundraising?More effective integration of cause and effect using tags and feeds. For example, it’s entirely feasible for a news website to automatically match stories (IE: flood in India) to donation opportunities (IE: International Red Cross).They do this now, manually, with major disasters. But with proper use of tagging, RSS, etc., it’s entirely possible that even “minor” local stories (IE: car crash kills drunk driver) can automatically linked to local causes (IE: local United Way or MADD or AA chapter).What I’m saying is really, technology gives us the opportunities to be more pro-active and less passive in our efforts. Rather than waiting for a potential supporter to come to our web site or sign up for our email newsletter, we will be able to find them based on what they’re reading and hook directly into their online experience.> * Why are many nonprofit are still waiting with their online fundraising?Money, or the perception of no money. While many of these tools are low or even no cost (use of blogspot.com as a communications platform), they are loath to give even the impression that they are wasting resources.Example: An organization I know of that was given very nice, high quality office chairs from a defunct dot-com. They were not allowed to use them because it gave the impression that they were extravagant. Many nonprofits live in this poverty mind-set.Any assets must go to the clients. Anything that doesn’t directly benefit them is seen as a waste. What they don’t see is that a small investment in online tools will create a return that can be used for mission and services.> * What will make a website a good ePhilanthropy site?See “the future” question above. It’s the integration of information and ask. Don’t make the potential donor search for the means to give.Have the opportunity linked directly into the inspiration. This is the answer.Source: http://nonprofitconsultant.blogspot.com/2006/12/future-of-online-fundraising.html