Target Analytics donorCentrics Index of National Fundraising …€¦ · January 2010 which was largely due to fundraising for relief efforts following a severe earthquake in Haiti

Target Analytics donorCentrics™ Index of National Fundraising Performance

Fourth Quarter 2010 Prepared by Helen Flannery, Rob Harris, and Carol Rhine April 2011

Q4 2010 Index of National Fundraising Performance

Copyright 2011 Target Analytics | www.blackbaud.com/targetanalytics 1

Target Analytics donorCentrics™ Index of National Fundraising Performance 2010 Fourth Calendar Quarter Results

About the Index of National Fundraising Performance..............................................2

Q4 2010 Index Participants.......................................................................................3

Q4 2010 Summary....................................................................................................4

Overall Index Performance .......................................................................................5

Industry Sector Performance ..................................................................................13

Animal Welfare ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Arts & Culture ............................................................................................................................................... 17 Environment ................................................................................................................................................. 18 Health ........................................................................................................................................................... 19 Human Services ........................................................................................................................................... 20 International Relief........................................................................................................................................ 21 Religion ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 Societal Benefit ............................................................................................................................................ 23

References..............................................................................................................24

Industry Sectors Used in the Index .........................................................................25

Looking Ahead ........................................................................................................26

Index Methodology..................................................................................................26

About Medians ........................................................................................................26

Participation ............................................................................................................26

Online Resources ...................................................................................................26

About Target Analytics ............................................................................................26



About the Index of National Fundraising Performance

The Target Analytics donorCentrics Index of National Fundraising Performance analyzes direct marketing giving for many of the largest non-profit organizations in the country. For the twelve months ending Q4 2010, Target Analytics evaluated transactions from 83 organizations, including over 39 million donors and more than 81 million gifts totaling over $2.5 billion in revenue.

The Target Index reports on direct marketing giving only; direct mail is the dominant revenue source for most organizations but web, telemarketing, canvassing, and other gifts considered to be direct marketing are also included. Individual payments greater than $5,000, soft credits, and matching gift payments are excluded.

Quarterly results are reported on a calendar year basis. This report includes results through December 2010. Index findings are based on analysis of actual donor transactions, not survey responses from fundraisers. All calculated measures have been reviewed by participants for accuracy.



Q4 2010 Index Participants Animal Welfare American Humane Association ASPCA Humane Society of the United States International Fund for Animal Welfare People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Arts & Culture Colonial Williamsburg Foundation National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial National Trust for Historic Preservation National World War II Museum The Smithsonian Institution Environment Defenders of Wildlife Earthjustice Environmental Defense Fund Greenpeace USA National Parks Conservation Association National Wildlife Federation Natural Resources Defense Council The Nature Conservancy The Ocean Conservancy Sierra Club Trout Unlimited The Wilderness Society World Wildlife Fund Health ALSAC / St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital Alzheimer’s Association American Cancer Society American Diabetes Association American Health Assistance Foundation American Heart Association American Institute for Cancer Research American Lung Association Arthritis Foundation Children's Cancer Research Fund Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Easter Seals The Foundation for AIDS Research Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Leukemia and Lymphoma Society March of Dimes Mayo Clinic Multiple Sclerosis Association of America National Multiple Sclerosis Society Special Olympics

Human Services American Indian Relief Council Cal Farley’s Boys Ranch Covenant House Feeding America Paralyzed Veterans of America St. Labre Indian School United States Olympic Committee International Relief AmeriCares CARE Catholic Relief Services ChildFund International Doctors Without Borders Habitat for Humanity International Heifer Project International International Rescue Committee Mercy Corps Operation Smile Oxfam America Plan USA Project HOPE Save the Children U.S. Fund for UNICEF Religion Association of Marian Helpers Franciscan Friars of the Atonement at Graymoor Missionary Association of Mary Immaculate National Shrine of St. Jude Sisters of St. Francis of Assisi Sisters of St. Francis - PET Society of the Divine Savior Societal Benefit American Association of University Women American Civil Liberties Union Amnesty International Anti-Defamation League Human Rights Campaign NAACP NARAL National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare Planned Parenthood Public Citizen Southern Poverty Law Center



Index Revenue Remains Flat from 2009 to 2010 Post-Recessionary Revenue per Donor Increases Compensate for Continuing Donor Declines

Q4 2010 Summary Overall Results

After significant recession-related declines in 2008 and 2009, the organizations in the Target index held revenue steady in 2010.

Revenue growth for the Target index was essentially flat in 2010, increasing by a median 1.0% from 2009. Just over half of the organizations in the index had revenue increases over the year.

Revenue performance was markedly divided by industry sector. Of the eight sectors in the index, three (animal welfare, international relief, and societal benefit) had significant revenue growth. Three (arts and culture, health, and religion) had significant revenue declines. And two (environment and human services) had essentially no change in revenue from 2009 to 2010.

The sector with the greatest revenue growth, the international relief sector, had a dramatic revenue spike in January 2010 which was largely due to fundraising for relief efforts following a severe earthquake in Haiti.

While revenue has remained flat, donor numbers have continued to drop. Donors declined a median 2.0% for the index as a whole from 2009 to 2010.

This continues a trend that predates the recession; donor populations have been shrinking consistently for the past five years, primarily due to declines in new donor acquisition. The index has not experienced positive year-to-year donor growth since the U.S. Gulf Coast hurricanes in the third quarter of 2005.

After having been in an atypical decline for all of 2009, revenue per donor amounts rose in 2010. This growth was widespread throughout the index; 73% of the organizations in the index had positive revenue per donor growth over the period. These increases have allowed index organizations to maintain last year’s revenue levels even as donor numbers continue to fall.

Overall donor retention rates remained essentially flat from 2009 to 2010, as relatively stable multi-year donor retention rates mitigated declines in first-year donor retention.



Overall Index Performance All index results are medians unless otherwise specified.

Year-to-Year Change

Revenue for the Target index remained essentially flat in 2010, growing a median 1.0% from 2009 (see Fig. 1). This is a stabilization following recession-related declines of 4.7% the previous year. Just over half of the organizations in the index had revenue increases over the period.

Revenue performance was markedly divided by industry sector. Of the eight sectors in the index, three (animal welfare, international relief, and societal benefit) had significant revenue growth. Three (arts and culture, health, and religion) had significant revenue declines. And two (environment and human services) had essentially no change in revenue from 2009 to 2010.

The sector with the greatest revenue growth, the international relief sector, had a dramatic revenue spike in January 2010 which was largely due to fundraising for relief efforts following a severe earthquake in Haiti.

In contrast to revenue, which has been leveling off throughout 2010 after significant recession-related declines in previous years, donor numbers have continued to drop. Donors declined a median -2.0% from 2009 to 2010.

This continues a trend that predates the recession; donor populations have been shrinking consistently for the past four years. The index has not experienced positive year-to-year donor growth since the U.S. Gulf Coast hurricanes in the third quarter of 2005. Only 41% of the organizations in the index had positive donor growth in 2010.

Fig. 1: Overall Index Medians

-4.7%

-2.3%

-0.5%

-7.2%

0.2%

-2.8%

0.3%

-0.2%

1.0%

-2.0%

2.8%

-3.5%

-0.8%

-2.0%

-0.6%

1.7%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

Overall Retention

1st-Year Retention

Multi-Year Retention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Year-over-Year Changein Key Measures

% of Organizations w ith Positive Change

35%

35%

45%

36%

53%

39%

52%

49%

55%

41%

73%

47%

46%

42%

47%

54%



Overall donor declines have been primarily due to declines in new donors, which have also been in decline since 2005. New donor numbers fell a median 3.5% from 2009 to 2010, on top of a decline of 7.4% the year before, and in spite of strong disaster-related acquisition in the first quarter of the year. While three sectors (animal welfare, international relief, and societal benefit) had significant new donor growth in 2010, four sectors (arts and culture, environment, health, and human services) had significant new donor declines.

Donor retention rates remained essentially flat from 2009 to 2010, declining a median -0.8% over the period. Overall retention held steady primarily because relatively stable multi-year donor retention rates compensated for falling new donor retention rates. New donor retention declined by 2.0% from 2009 to 2010, on top of a 2.8% decline the previous year.

After having been in an atypical decline for all of 2009, revenue per donor amounts rose in 2010. Revenue per donor increased by a median 2.8% from 2009 to 2010. This growth was widespread throughout the index; 73% of the organizations in the index had positive revenue per donor growth over the period.

These increases in revenue per donor have allowed index organizations to maintain last year’s revenue levels even as donor numbers continue to fall. Actual Median Values for Performance Metrics

In this analysis, we typically focus on the change in metrics over time, such as year-to-year comparisons and long-term trends. In a fourth-quarter analysis, however, we can examine actual median values of key metrics based on a full year of data.

Median revenue per donor was $59 for the index in 2010 (see Fig. 2). The international relief sector had the highest revenue per donor, with each donor giving $149. The religion sector had the lowest revenue per donor, with each donor giving $26.

Index donors gave a median 1.69 gifts each in 2010. Animal welfare organizations had the highest gift frequency of any sector, receiving a median 2.47 gifts per donor in 2010. Although sustainer or monthly giving programs are not widespread and typically account for a small fraction of giving, organizations with larger sustainer programs will drive up gifts-per-donor metrics.

The index as a whole had a median 51.2% donor retention rate in 2010. The arts and culture sector had the highest retention rate at a median 66.7%; the health sector had the lowest retention rate at a median 45.1%.

Fig. 2: 2009 Medians by Industry Sector

Revenue Donors Revenue per Donor Average Gift Gifts per Donor

Overall Index $15,499,518 246,723 $59 $33 1.69

Animal Welfare $12,581,979 213,894 $52 $27 2.47Arts & Culture $8,552,386 101,525 $74 $49 1.50Environmental $18,774,523 270,633 $61 $36 1.70Health $15,513,945 640,045 $37 $25 1.50Human Services $28,220,922 443,262 $56 $29 2.03International Relief $35,740,647 257,554 $149 $67 1.93Religion $8,711,690 252,139 $26 $14 1.93Societal Benefit $19,431,465 204,725 $70 $40 2.03

% New DonorsOverall

Retention RateFirst-Year

Retention RateMulti-Year

Retention RateReactivation Rate(1-5 Yrs Lapsed)

Overall Index 28.8% 51.2% 29.1% 59.1% 8.3%

Animal Welfare 19.5% 50.9% 27.1% 60.5% 8.1%Arts & Culture 27.3% 66.7% 31.9% 70.2% 9.5%Environmental 30.0% 51.6% 27.4% 60.1% 8.5%Health 31.0% 45.1% 26.9% 53.4% 7.1%Human Services 30.3% 50.1% 34.4% 57.0% 8.1%International Relief 27.8% 58.1% 29.5% 65.7% 9.1%Religion 24.5% 51.7% 29.9% 57.3% 9.7%Societal Benefit 29.3% 53.6% 31.3% 59.9% 10.6%



First-year retention rates were spread slightly differently across the index than were overall retention rates. The index as a whole had a median 29.1% first-year retention rate in 2010. The human services sector had the highest first-year retention rate at 34.4%; the health sector had the lowest first-year retention rate at 26.9%. Single Quarter Change

In the index, we usually report on year-to-date or rolling twelve-month periods, rather than year-to-year changes in individual quarters. This is because shifts in the timing of direct marketing campaigns can, in turn, shift significant revenue from one quarter to another. In addition, smaller donor counts and revenue totals in single quarters can magnify increases and decreases in donors and revenue.

We have done some analysis on year-to-year trends for the four quarters of 2010, however, to evaluate the recent giving in more detail (see Fig. 3).

This analysis indicates that, in general, the first and second quarters of 2010 were weaker than the equivalent quarters in 2009, while the third and fourth quarters were flat.

One notable exception to this pattern is the marked 3.4% increase in revenue in the first quarter of the year. Much of this is likely due to disaster-related giving following a severe earthquake in Haiti in January.

The third quarter of 2010 was the only quarter of the year to have growth in new donor acquisition. The other three quarters of 2010 had new donor declines of roughly 2%.

It is important to remember that the first and second quarters of 2009 were two of the deepest quarters of the recent recession. In other words, 2010 results for Q1 and Q2 are both being compared to fairly weak economic periods in the previous year. Long-Term Revenue Trends

Rolling twelve-month quarterly medians of revenue growth can provide longer-term context for year-to-year index trends. A rolling analysis compares the twelve months of revenue ending in each quarter to the twelve months of revenue ending in a specified starting quarter.

This helps to smooth out seasonal differences and allows us to see continuous movement from one quarter to the next, instead of simply comparing one full or partial year to the next full or partial year.

Historically, rolling index revenue has grown at approximately 4% per year. Revenue grew at typical rates throughout 2006, 2007, and the first part of 2008.

Revenue growth then declined substantially in the fourth quarter of 2008 and in all four quarters of 2009, paralleling the weak economy during the recession.

In 2010, revenue declines appear to have leveled off somewhat (see Fig. 4). A small spike in the first quarter of 2010 is likely at least partly due to disaster-related giving.

Fig. 3: Median Single-Quarter Year-to-Year Change

Q1 2009 to Q1 2010

Q2 2009 to Q2 2010

Q3 2009 to Q3 2010

Q4 2009 to Q4 2010

Revenue 3.4% -2.8% 1.0% -0.4%Donors -2.3% -5.4% 0.3% 0.6%New Donors -1.6% -2.4% 1.8% -2.6%

% of Orgs With Positive Revenue Change 63% 43% 54% 49%% of Orgs With Positive Donor Change 46% 39% 51% 52%% of Orgs With Positive New Donor Change 48% 48% 52% 43%



Cumulatively, over the past five years, overall index revenue has declined. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, index revenue declined a cumulative median 3.1%. This is an effective annual decline of 0.6% per year (see Fig. 5).

Over the most recent three years, which includes the worst quarters of the recent recession, overall index revenue has declined substantially. From the twelve months ending Q4 2007, when the recession began, to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, index revenue declined a median 3.2%, for an effective annual rate of decline of 1.1% per year.

Real index revenue has declined by 13.0% over the past five years and by 6.9% over the past three years when revenue dollar amounts are adjusted for inflation1.

Long-Term Donor Trends

A rolling twelve-month analysis provides additional context for donor trends as well. It shows that recent donor declines are part of a long-term pattern that grew worse during the recent recession.

Donor numbers have generally been on a slow decline ever since the U.S. Gulf Coast hurricanes of Q3 2005. Declines intensified during 2008 and 2009 but have appeared to have flattened out in 2010 (see Fig. 4).

A large spike in the first quarter of 2010 is likely largely due to disaster-related giving following a January earthquake in Haiti.

Fig. 4: Five-Year Overall Index Revenue and Donor TrendsCumulative Rolling 12-Month Median Change from Q4 2005

-3.1%

-6.3%

-12%

-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

Q4

2005

Q1

2006

Q2

2006

Q3

2006

Q4

2006

Q1

2007

Q2

2007

Q3

2007

Q4

2007

Q1

2008

Q2

2008

Q3

2008

Q4

2008

Q1

2009

Q2

2009

Q3

2009

Q4

2009

Q1

2010

Q2

2010

Q3

2010

Q4

2010

IndexRevenue

IndexDonors

Start ofRecession

HaitiEarthquake

End ofRecession

Fig. 5: Long-Term Index Revenue and Donor Trends

Five-Year Change

Four-Year Change

Three-Year Change

Two-Year Change

One-Year Change

2005 to 2010 2006 to 2010 2007 to 2010 2008 to 2010 2009 to 2010

Revenue

Median Change -3.1% 1.6% -3.2% -0.4% 1.0%

Effective Annual Change -0.6% 0.4% -1.1% -0.2% 1.0%

% Orgs with Positive Change 48% 52% 43% 49% 55%

Donors

Median Change -6.3% -6.5% -7.7% -2.8% -2.0%

Effective Annual Change -1.2% -1.6% -2.5% -1.4% -2.0%


Shows the cumulative median change from the first year to the second year in each column.

Effective Annual Change is the average yearly change over the stated time period, adjusted for compounding over that period.



The result of these combined trends is that donor numbers have declined significantly over the past five years. Donors declined a cumulative median 6.3% from the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, for an effective annual rate of decline of 1.2% (see Fig. 5).

As we have said in previous editions of the index, falling donor populations in the index may be due to a mix of factors. The recession certainly had an impact, but so also may have a changing generational profile in the United States, changing attitudes of donors about giving, and a change in focus by fundraisers toward higher-dollar donors. New Donors

Over the long term, overall donor declines have been caused mainly by declines in new donor acquisition.

Over the past five years, from the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, new donor numbers have fallen a cumulative median 19.3% (see Fig. 6).

This is an effective annual rate of decline of 3.6% per year (see Fig. 7).

New donor declines accelerated during the recent recession. Over the most recent three years, from the twelve months ending Q4 2007 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, new donor numbers fell a cumulative median 13.9%. This is an effective annual rate of decline of 4.4% per year.

These trends appear to have, at the very least, leveled off somewhat over the past year. This is encouraging, although there is still a lot of ground to make up to reach pre-recession levels of acquisition.

Retention Rates

Lack of new donor growth in the index is the primary cause of overall donor declines, but falling first-year donor retention rates are also partly responsible.

Fig. 7: Long-Term Index New Donor Trends

Five-Year Change

Four-Year Change

Three-Year Change

Two-Year Change

One-Year Change

2005 to 2010 2006 to 2010 2007 to 2010 2008 to 2010 2009 to 2010

Median Change -19.3% -9.8% -13.9% -4.5% -3.5%

Effective Annual Change -3.6% -2.4% -4.4% -2.2% -3.5%


Shows the cumulative median change from the first year to the second year in each column.

Effective Annual Change is the average yearly change over the stated time period, adjusted for compounding over that period.

Fig. 6: Five-Year Overall Index New Donor TrendsCumulative Rolling 12-Month Median Change from Q4 2005

-19.3%

-6.3%

-30%

-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

Q4

2005

Q1

2006

Q2

2006

Q3

2006

Q4

2006

Q1

2007

Q2

2007

Q3

2007

Q4

2007

Q1

2008

Q2

2008

Q3

2008

Q4

2008

Q1

2009

Q2

2009

Q3

2009

Q4

2009

Q1

2010

Q2

2010

Q3

2010

Q4

2010

New Donors

AllDonors

Start ofRecession

HaitiEarthquake

End ofRecession



Overall retention remained essentially flat in 2010. Retention rates fell a median 0.8% from 2009 to 2010, after flat 0.2% growth the previous year (see Fig. 8). Just under half (46%) of the organizations in the index had positive retention rate growth in 2010.

This stability in overall retention masks the fact that first-year donor retention has been declining for the past two years. First-year retention rates fell 2.0% from 2009 to 2010, on top of a 2.8% decline the previous year. 42% of the organizations in the index had positive first-year retention rate growth in 2010.

Multi-year retention has been less volatile. Overall, multi-year retention remained essentially flat, declining a median 0.6% from 2009 to 2010. 47% of the organizations in the index had positive multi-year retention rate growth in 2010.

The Impact of the Relief Sector on Overall Index Performance

The purpose of the index is to allow participating organizations to compare their own performance to that of other sectors. Performance metrics based on aggregate index revenue or donors would be dominated by dramatic gains or losses by a few organizations – such as recent disaster-related gains in the relief sector – and would not be useful for benchmarking purposes.

For this reason, all results are reported as medians – the middle value of the relevant group of organizations.

The index as a whole had essentially flat revenue growth, with a median increase of 1.0% from 2009 to 2010. When relief organizations are removed from the calculations, index revenue growth remains flat, declining a median 0.4% over the period (see Fig. 9).

The index as a whole had median donor declines of 2.0% from 2009 to 2010. When relief organizations are removed from the calculations, the index donor decline becomes only slightly larger, at a median 2.9% (see Fig. 10).

These results indicate that Haiti-related giving in the first quarter of 2010 neither negatively affected non-relief organizations nor skewed overall index results to any significant extent.

Fig. 8: Retention Rate Change

2008-2009 2009-2010 2008-2009 2009-2010 2008-2009 2009-2010

Overall Index 0.2% -0.8% -2.8% -2.0% 0.3% -0.6%

Animal Welfare 0.6% -1.0% 0.6% 4.3% 1.5% 1.7%

Arts & Culture 0.6% 2.6% 3.1% -6.1% 0.5% 1.5%

Environmental -2.2% -0.7% -5.1% 0.3% -2.4% -2.0%

Health 1.4% 0.7% -1.0% -2.8% 1.6% -0.1%

Human Services 0.4% -2.7% -4.2% -3.0% 1.4% -4.0%

International Relief -1.3% 6.4% -2.9% 4.3% -2.1% 7.4%

Religion 1.4% -3.2% 0.6% -7.1% 2.5% -2.6%

Societal Benefit 0.2% -2.6% -2.2% -2.1% 0.0% 0.1%

Overall retention rates may not always fall between first-year and multi-year donor retention rates for a given sector, since each

rate is a median of the rates of all organizations in that sector.

Overall Retention First-Year Donor Retention Multi-Year Donor Retention

Fig. 9: Median Revenue ChangeRelief vs. Non-Relief Organizations

-4.7%

-7.8%

-2.7%

1.0%

35.0%

-0.4%

OverallIndex

ReliefSector

Non-ReliefSectors

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 10: Median Donor ChangeRelief vs. Non-Relief Organizations

-2.3%

-5.0%

-1.9%

-2.0%

27.6%

-2.9%

OverallIndex

ReliefSector

Non-ReliefSectors

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010



Effects of the Economy on Giving

Research by the Giving USA Foundation™ tells us that charitable giving revenue growth rises during periods of strong economic growth and slows during periods of relative economic weakness.

Non-profit giving trends are not limited to simple parallels with national economic growth, however. The Foundation has reported in their publication Giving USA that during harder economic times, charitable giving falls as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product2.

This means that in a slow economy, not only does giving slow down, but it also declines as a proportion of the average American’s spending dollar. In recessionary periods, people shift their spending priorities away from charities, compounding the effects of an economic decline on fundraising.

The Target Analytics index has consistently supported both of these findings. Median index revenue growth has generally paralleled national economic performance and tends to grow more slowly than GDP during periods of relative economic hardship.

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the United States economy entered a recession in December 2007 and emerged from it in June 20093. Since then, some indicators of US economic growth have certainly improved; in particular, positive GDP growth for the past six quarters4. However, other indicators – particularly job growth – have not been as encouraging5.

Non-profit direct marketing revenue in the Target index declined in 2008 and early 2009 as the economy weakened, and donor declines intensified during that time as well. We reported overall revenue declines in seven consecutive editions of the index (Q2 2008 through Q4 2009), with some of the steepest downturns coming in the first half of 2009.

Non-profit revenue in the index leveled off after the declared end of the recession but has remained flat since then. In addition, disaster-related fundraising accounts for much of the growth for two of the sectors with the highest revenue increases in the current period. Overall, it appears that participating organizations have not yet begun to regain any significant portion of the ground lost over the past four years.

This may not, however, be unusual. Further research by the Giving USA Foundation indicates that once a recession is over, it has taken an average of three to four years for inflation-adjusted charitable giving to rise back up to pre-recession levels6.

The Growth of Internet Giving

By the time of publication of this edition of the index, we were able to identify and verify gift channels for 56 of the 83 participating organizations, and so are able to include a giving channel analysis in this report.

The organizations that participate in the index are large direct marketing organizations that rely primarily on direct mail. Revenue from other channels, such as telemarketing and the internet, makes up a relatively small portion of the overall total, and revenue from large-scale events is generally not included in the index analysis.

In 2010, a median 76% of all index revenue came in through the mail, 4% came in through telemarketing, and 3% came in over the internet (see Fig. 11).

There is a great difference in the relative sizes of mail and internet gifts; internet gifts tend to be significantly larger than gifts given through direct mail.

For index organizations in 2010, the median mail gift was $37 while the median online gift was almost twice as large, at $66 (see Fig. 12).

Fig. 11: Percent of Gifts by ChannelOverall 2010 Index Medians

76%

4%

3%

Mail

Telemarketing

Online

All other channels combined made up 17% of gifts in 2010.

Fig. 12: Average Gift by ChannelOverall 2010 Index Medians

$37

$45

$66

Mail

Telemarketing

Online



For this reason, online giving makes up a larger proportion of overall revenue than it does of overall gifts.

The percentage of gifts and revenue coming in online have both been growing steadily over the past five years. In 2006, internet giving accounted for 2.1% of all gifts and 3.5% of all revenue. By 2010, internet giving accounted for 3.3% of all gifts and 6.2% of all revenue (see Fig. 13).

As would be expected with overwhelmingly mail-based programs, most new donors are still acquired through the mail. For index organizations in 2010 a median 84% of all new donors were acquired through the mail, while just under 8% of all new donors were acquired online.

However, as with overall giving, the proportion of new donors who choose to join online is steadily growing. Over the past five years, the percentage of new donors acquired online rose from a median of 5.1% in 2006 to 7.7% in 2010 (see Fig. 14).

There is a great deal of variation in the prevalence of online giving among the different industry sectors in the index (see Fig. 15).

In general, animal welfare, environmental, international relief, and societal benefit organizations receive proportionately more gifts online than do the other sectors in the index. Relief organizations in particular have been able to take good advantage of the online giving channel, using it to enable their donors to respond immediately to emergency fundraising appeals.

Fig. 13: Online Gifts and Revenueas a Percent of Total

Overall 2006-2010 Index Medians

2.1% 2.3% 2.5%2.9%

3.3%3.5%3.9%

4.5%

5.6%

6.2%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Gifts

Revenue

Fig. 14: New Online Donorsas a Percent of All New DonorsOverall 2006-2010 Index Medians

5.1%5.9%

6.4% 6.0%

7.7%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Fig. 15: Online Gifts as a Percent of Totalby Industry Sector

Overall 2010 Index Medians

1%

1%

2%

2%

4%

5%

8%

13%

Health

Human Services

Religion

Arts & Culture

Animal Welfare

Societal Benefit

Environmental

International Relief



Industry Sector Performance All sector results are medians unless otherwise specified.

Revenue and Donors

In 2010, performance varied widely across organizations and was heavily divided by sector (see Figs. 16-17).

Three of the eight industry sectors in the index – animal welfare, international relief, and societal benefit – had significant revenue growth and relatively strong performances in other areas of fundraising as well, including new donor acquisition and retention.

Two sectors – health and religion – had flat or declining performance in most key measures.

The remaining three sectors – arts and culture, environment, and human services – had mixed results.

The international relief sector had by far the greatest growth in both revenue and donors from 2009 to 2010. This is largely due to relief-related fundraising following a severe earthquake in Haiti in January.

Animal welfare organizations have had strong revenue and donor growth for most of the past five years. This year’s results may be due in part to Haitian earthquake relief and in part to fundraising surrounding the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April.

Societal benefit organizations had revenue and donor increases and particularly strong new donor growth in 2010. Performance for this sector this year continues to be encouraging after a difficult two years during the recession.

There is evidence that the strong performances of human services organizations during the recent recession have begun to level off in 2010. Revenue remained essentially flat for the sector but donor numbers fell, driven by declines in both new donor acquisition and retention.

Arts and culture organizations had declines in revenue but donor numbers remained essentially flat.

Fig. 16: Revenue Change by Sector

-4.7%

6.4%

-4.6%

-4.7%

-5.1%

3.7%

-7.8%

-2.4%

0.4%

1.0%

9.8%

-2.5%

-0.1%

-6.2%

0.4%

35.0%

-1.9%

5.5%

Overall Index

Animal Welfare

Arts & Culture

Environmental

Health

Human Svc

Relief

Religion

Soc Benefit

2008 to 20092009 to 2010

Fig. 17: Donor Change by Sector

-2.3%

1.8%

-4.9%

-1.3%

-4.9%

-0.1%

-5.0%

-2.0%

-0.3%

-2.0%

3.5%

-0.9%

-2.5%

-7.2%

-4.7%

27.6%

-2.4%

5.3%

Overall Index

Animal Welfare

Arts & Culture

Environmental

Health

Human Svc

Relief

Religion

Soc Benefit

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010



Environmental organizations, on the other hand, had donor declines but revenue remained essentially flat. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 appears to have had no discernable effect on environmental giving.

Health and religious organizations had declines in both revenue and donors in the index in 2010. New Donor Growth

Overall donor declines in the index were driven primarily by declines in new donor acquisition. As was the case with revenue and overall donor growth, new donor growth in 2010 was sharply divided by sector. International relief, societal benefit, and animal welfare organizations all had significant new donor growth from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 18). For the international relief sector in particular, this growth is due largely to disaster-related fundraising.

Religious organizations also had moderate new donor growth in 2010.

The other four sectors – arts and culture, environment, health, and human services – all had significant declines in new donor acquisition from 2009 to 2010.

For all four of these sectors, this came on top of equally significant new donor declines in the previous year, during some of the deepest parts of the recent recession. Retention Rates

Donor retention has been an area of concern in the index throughout 2010. Now, in the fourth quarter, we can get a complete picture of full-year retention rate changes.

Fig. 18: New Donor Change by Sector

-7.2%

3.7%

-9.8%

-5.6%

-11.3%

-9.7%

-15.6%

-9.5%

3.1%

-3.5%

7.5%

-8.4%

-8.4%

-6.4%

-7.5%

78.0%

1.4%

20.5%

Overall Index

Animal Welfare

Arts & Culture

Environmental

Health

Human Svc

Relief

Religion

Soc Benefit

2008 to 20092009 to 2010

Fig. 19: First-Year Retention Rate Changeby Sector

-2.8%

0.6%

3.1%

-5.1%

-1.0%

-4.2%

-2.9%

0.6%

-2.2%

-2.0%

4.3%

-6.1%

0.3%

-2.8%

-3.0%

4.3%

-7.1%

-2.1%

Overall Index

Animal Welfare

Arts & Culture

Environmental

Health

Human Svc

Relief

Religion

Soc Benefit

2008 to 20092009 to 2010

Fig. 20: Multi-Year Retention Rate Changeby Sector

0.3%

1.5%

0.5%

-2.4%

1.6%

1.4%

-2.1%

2.5%

0.0%

-0.6%

1.7%

1.5%

-2.0%

-0.1%

-4.0%

7.4%

-2.6%

0.1%

Overall Index

Animal Welfare

Arts & Culture

Environmental

Health

Human Svc

Relief

Religion

Soc Benefit

2008 to 20092009 to 2010



While declining new donor acquisition is primarily responsible for the overall index donor declines, falling retention rates – particularly first-year retention rates – also certainly play a part.

With the exception of animal welfare organizations and relief organizations, which benefited from disaster-related fundraising, every other sector had declines in first-year retention from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 14). Several sectors have now seen first-year retention rates decline for the second year in a row.

Some first-year retention rate declines were dramatic, such as the 6.1% decrease for both the arts and culture sector and the 7.1% decrease for the religion sector (see Fig. 19).

Multi-year retention was, as always, more stable than first-year retention. Animal welfare, arts and culture, and relief organizations in the index had increases in multi-year donor retention in 2010. Environmental, human services, and religious organizations had declines. Multi-year retention remained essentially flat for the health and societal benefit sectors (see Fig. 20).

Individual sector results are explained in more detail on the following pages.



Animal Welfare 5 organizations

The animal welfare sector has been one of the strongest sectors in the index for more than five years. Most notably, these organizations have had strong donor growth during a time when most other sectors had significant donor declines. In 2010, the sector again had some of the largest growth in revenue, donors, revenue per donor, and acquisition in the index. Some of this may be due to fundraising following the Haitian earthquake in January 2010 and to relief efforts surrounding the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the U.S. Gulf Coast in April.

Animal welfare revenue increased a median 9.8% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 21), compared to overall index revenue growth of 1.0%. Animal welfare revenue growth was second only to that of relief organizations, which had a much larger response to Haitian earthquake relief appeals. Four of the five organizations in this sector had revenue increases in 2010.

Donors to animal welfare organizations increased a median 3.5% from 2009 to 2010, compared to an overall index median donor decline of 2.0%. Three of the five organizations in this sector had donor increases in 2010. Sector donor growth was primarily due to growth in new donor acquisition, which was up 7.5% from 2009 to 2010. This was one of only three sectors in the index to have positive new donor growth during the year.

Rolling twelve-month trends give us a long-term picture of animal welfare sector performance. The sector received a substantial amount of giving in late 2005 surrounding the U.S. Gulf Coast hurricanes and had an accompanying decline in revenue and donors one year later. Since then, the sector has had two significant event-related spikes in revenue and donors over the past five years; one in 2007 following the conviction of professional football player Michael Vick on dog fighting charges, and one in the first half of 2010 following the Haitian earthquake and the BP oil spill.

These spikes have enabled the animal welfare sector to outperform index revenue and donor medians significantly over the past five years. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, revenue growth for the animal welfare sector grew by a cumulative median 25.0%, while the index as a whole had revenue declines of 3.1% (see Fig. 22). Over the same period, sector donors grew by a median 10.7% while the overall index saw a median donor decline of 6.3% (see Fig. 23).

When evaluating results for this sector, it is important to be aware that it includes only five organizations.

Fig. 21: Animal Welfare Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

6.4%

1.8%

0.3%

3.7%

0.6%

0.6%

1.5%

5.9%

9.8%

3.5%

5.4%

7.5%

-1.0%

4.3%

1.7%

-6.6%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 22: Five-Year Animal Welfare Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

25.0%

-3.1%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Animal WelfareSector

Each data point is the median change in revenue fo r the 12 months ending in that quarter from the 12 months ending in Q4 2005.

Michael Vick Indictment

EntireIndex

Haiti EarthquakeGulf Oil Spill

Fig. 23: Five-Year Animal Welfare Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

10.7%

-6.3%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Animal WelfareSector

Michael Vick Indictment

Entire Index

Each data point is the median change in donors for the 12 months ending in that quarter from the 12 months ending in Q4 2005.

Haiti EarthquakeGulf Oil Spill



Arts & Culture 5 organizations

During the past three years, arts and culture organizations had flat to negative trends in most key measures that were similar to or slightly more negative than those of the index as a whole. In 2010 the sector particularly struggled with new donor acquisition and first-year donor retention but multi-year donor retention and reactivation rates have both increased for two years in a row. This could indicate that the sector is focusing more on retention and reactivation than on acquisition – or it could be a result of poor acquisition in prior years leading to a higher concentration of relatively more loyal, higher-retaining supporters in the current year.

Arts and culture sector revenue declined a median 2.5% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 24), compared to overall index revenue growth of 1.0%. Two of the five organizations in the sector had positive revenue growth in 2010.

Sector donors declined a median 0.9% from 2009 to 2010, close to the overall index median donor decline of 2.0%. None of the five organizations in the sector had positive donor growth in 2010. New arts and culture donors declined by 8.4% from 2009 to 2010. This was the largest new donor decrease of any sector in the index and came on top of a 9.8% decline the previous year. None of the five organizations in the sector had positive new donor growth in 2010.

Although overall retention for the sector increased by a median 2.6% from 2009 to 2010, first-year donor retention declined by a median 6.1% over the same period. This was the second-largest decline in first-year retention of any sector in the index.

Twelve-month rolling trends can provide longer-term context for recent arts and culture sector results. Revenue and donor growth for the sector have both been volatile; both outperformed the overall index from 2007 to 2009 but have underperformed the index in 2010.

Over the past five years, from the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, the arts and culture sector has had a cumulative median revenue decline of 3.4%, essentially the same as the overall index decline of 3.1% (see Fig. 25). Over the same period, the sector had a cumulative median donor decline of 12.2%, compared to an overall index decline of 6.3% (see Fig. 26).

When evaluating results for this sector, it is important to be aware that it includes only five organizations.

Fig. 24: Arts & Culture Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

-4.6%

-4.9%

-1.8%

-9.8%

0.6%

3.1%

0.5%

17.8%

-2.5%

-0.9%

2.8%

-8.4%

2.6%

-6.1%

1.5%

2.6%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 25: Five-Year Arts & Culture Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-3.4%

-3.1%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Arts &CultureSector


Start of Recession

EntireIndex

End ofRecession

Fig. 26: Five-Year Arts & Culture Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-12.2%

-6.3%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Arts & Culture Sector


EntireIndex

Start ofRecession

End of Recession



Environment 13 organizations

Over the past two years, the environmental sector has matched overall index results more closely than any other sector. This has generally continued into 2010: sector revenue remained flat, as did that of the index as a whole, and donor declines were similar to those of the index as a whole. Environmental organizations are, however, particularly struggling with new donor acquisition and lapsed donor reactivation.

Revenue for the environmental sector remained essentially flat, declining a median 0.1% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 27). The index as a whole also had essentially flat revenue growth of 1.0% in 2010. 46% of the environmental organizations in the index had positive revenue growth in 2010.

Donors to the environmental sector declined a median 2.5% from 2009 to 2010, which was only slightly larger than the overall index median donor decline of 2.0%. 31% of the environmental organizations in the index had positive donor growth in 2010.

The area of greatest concern for environmental organizations is new donor acquisition, which fell for the environmental sector by a median 8.4% from 2009 to 2010. This was the second-largest new donor decline in the index and came on top of a 5.6% decline in the previous year. These trends are not universal, however; 46% of the environmental organizations in the index did have positive new donor growth in 2010.

Twelve-month rolling trends can provide longer-term context for recent sector trends. This analysis shows that although environmental revenue and donor growth have both followed index medians relatively closely in recent years, both have outperformed index medians over the past five years.

From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, the environmental sector had median cumulative revenue growth of 13.8% while overall index revenue declined by a median 3.1% over the same period. (see Fig. 28). From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, the sector had cumulative median donor declines of 1.8%, while the index as a whole had donor declines of 6.3% over the same period (see Fig. 29).

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 appears to have had no significant impact on revenue or donor numbers for the environmental sector.

Fig. 27: Environmental Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

-4.7%

-1.3%

-0.4%

-5.6%

-2.2%

-5.1%

-2.4%

-2.7%

-0.1%

-2.5%

4.4%

-8.4%

-0.7%

0.3%

-2.0%

-8.0%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 28: Five-Year Environmental Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

13.8%

-3.1%

EntireIndex

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Release of An Inconvenient Truth

EnvironmentalSector


Start of Recession

Gulf OilSpill

End of Recession

Fig. 29: Five-Year Environmental Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-1.8%

-6.3%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Release of An Inconvenient Truth

EnvironmentalSector


Start ofRecession

EntireIndex

Gulf OilSpill

End of Recession



Health 20 organizations

Health organizations have had some of the greatest fundraising challenges in the index for much of the past five years. Negative health sector trends predated the recent recession but were significantly intensified by it. In 2010 the sector continued to see declines in many key measures, including some of the largest revenue, donor, and new donor declines in the index. These declines come on top of significant declines in the previous year, which included some of the deepest parts of the recent recession.

Health sector revenue declined a median 6.2% from 2009 to 2010, on top of a decline of 5.1% the previous year (see Fig. 30). This was the largest revenue decline of any sector in the index. 35% of the organizations in the health sector had positive revenue growth in 2010.

Health sector donors declined a median 7.2% from 2009 to 2010, on top of a 4.9% decline the previous year. This was the largest donor decline of any sector in the index. Only 15% of the organizations in this sector had positive donor growth in 2010.

As was true for the index as a whole, declines in health sector donors were mainly due to declines in new donor acquisition. New donors for the sector fell 6.4% from 2009 to 2010, on top of an 11.3% decline over the same period the year before. 30% of the organizations in this sector had positive new donor growth in 2010.

Health sector revenue and donor growth have both lagged overall index median trends significantly over the long term. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, health organizations had cumulative revenue declines of 13.7%, compared to 3.1% declines for the index as a whole (see Fig. 31). Over the same five-year period, health organizations had a cumulative donor decline of 25.5%, compared to a decline of 6.3% for the index as a whole (see Fig. 32).

Since the fourth quarter of 2007, when the recession began, health sector revenue is down 16.3% and donors are down 19.1%.

This study considers direct marketing revenue, not event revenue. Several health charities have large-scale fundraising events that are not included in this analysis.

Fig. 30: Health Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

-5.1%

-4.9%

0.1%

-11.3%

1.4%

-1.0%

1.6%

0.4%

-6.2%

-7.2%

2.2%

-6.4%

0.7%

-2.8%

-0.1%

-0.3%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 31: Five-Year Health Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-13.7%

EntireIndex

-3.1%

-30%-25%-20%-15%-10%-5%0%5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

HealthSector


Start of Recession

End of Recession

Fig. 32: Five-Year Health Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-25.5%

EntireIndex

-6.3%

-30%-25%-20%

-15%-10%-5%0%

5%10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

HealthSector


Start of Recession

End ofRecession



Human Services 7 organizations

The human services sector was one of the strongest in the index during the recent recession; human services organizations outperformed the index in both revenue and donor growth during both 2008 and 2009. It may be that during this time of greatest need donors consciously focused their giving on organizations in this sector, which provide direct aid to the disadvantaged. In 2010 human services organizations experienced flat revenue growth and began to struggle with both acquisition and retention, leading to overall donor declines; much of this may be a natural leveling out after strong growth in previous years.

Human services revenue remained essentially flat, growing a median 0.4% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 33). The index as a whole had similarly flat revenue growth of 1.0%. Four of the seven organizations in this sector had positive revenue growth in 2010.

Overall human services donor numbers declined a median 4.7% from 2009 to 2010, while the index as a whole had donor declines of 2.0%. This was the second-largest donor decline in the index. Three of the seven organizations in this sector had positive donor growth in 2010.

The human services sector did have difficulty with acquisition during the recession, and that continued into 2010. The sector had median new donor declines of 7.5% from 2009 to 2010, on top of 9.7% declines the previous year. Only two of the seven organizations in this sector had positive new donor growth in 2010.

During 2008 and 2009, human services organizations were able to achieve overall donor growth primarily through increased retention of their existing donor file. In 2010, the sector has seen some of the largest retention rate declines in the index; overall retention declined a median 2.7% and multi-year retention declined a median 4.0% from 2009. These may be, at least in part, reversions from high retention rates in previous years.

Rolling twelve-month trends show that sector revenue and donor growth have both outperformed the index over the past five years. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, human services revenue grew a cumulative median 15.3% while overall index revenue declined by 3.1% (see Fig. 34). Sector donor growth has been more volatile but has still outperformed the index over the long term. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, human services donors declined a cumulative median 3.4%, compared to an overall index decline of 6.3% over the same period (see Fig. 35).

Fig. 33: Human Services Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

3.7%

-0.1%

0.0%

-9.7%

0.4%

-4.2%

1.4%

8.7%

0.4%

-4.7%

0.9%

-7.5%

-2.7%

-3.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 34: Five-Year Human Services Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

15.3%

EntireIndex

-3.1%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Human ServicesSector


Start of Recession

End of Recession

Fig. 35: Five-Year Human Services Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-3.4%

-6.3%-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Human ServicesSector


Start of Recession

Entire Index

End of Recession



International Relief 15 organizations

Relief sector performance in 2010 was dominated by fundraising related to relief efforts following a devastating earthquake in Haiti on January 12. The sector saw phenomenal growth in all key areas in 2010, on a scale almost equal to the period after the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004. The sector was able to retain a substantial portion of its tsunami-related fundraising during later non-disaster years; it will be important to see if the same will be true of Haiti-related gains.

Revenue for the international relief sector rose a median 35.0% from 2009 to 2010, dwarfing the 1.0% overall index median revenue increase (see Fig. 36). This was by far the largest revenue increase in the index in 2010. 80% of the organizations in the relief sector had revenue increases over the period.

Donors to international relief organizations increased 27.6% from 2009 to 2010, compared to an overall index median donor decline of 2.0% over the same period. This was by far the largest donor increase in the index in 2010. 80% of the organizations in this sector had donor increases over the period.

The area perhaps most affected by Haiti relief was new donor acquisition. The relief sector had median 78.0% growth in new donors from 2009 to 2010, while the index as a whole had new donor declines of 3.5%. 73% of the relief organizations in the index had positive new donor growth over the period.

Rolling revenue and donor trends can give a longer-term context for recent relief sector performance. The Indian Ocean tsunami of December 2004 generated record disaster-related revenue and donor acquisition in late 2004 and early 2005, much of which was retained for several years. Cyclone and earthquake-related giving may be responsible for a smaller bump in 2008. And there was a significant Haiti-related spike in the first quarter of 2010. All of this has allowed the relief sector to significantly outperform the index over the past several years.

Relief sector revenue is up a cumulative 54.2% from the twelve months ending Q4 2004 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010 while the index as a whole had only 9.2% growth (see Fig. 37). Donor numbers grew a cumulative median 34.0% for the relief sector over the same six-year period, compared to an overall index median donor decline of 7.5% (see Fig. 38).

Fig. 36: International Relief Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

-7.8%

-5.0%

-4.2%

-15.6%

-1.3%

-2.9%

-2.1%

-14.3%

35.0%

27.6%

4.6%

78.0%

6.4%

4.3%

7.4%

36.6%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 37: Six-Year Relief Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2004

54.1%

9.2%

-10%

0%

10%20%

30%

40%

50%60%

70%

Q4

'04

Q1

'05

Q2

'05

Q3

'05

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Relief Sector


Indian Ocean Tsunami

Burma Cyclone& China Earthquake

Hurricane Katrina

Entire Index

Haiti Earthquake

Fig. 38: Six-Year Relief Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2004

34.0%

-7.5%-10%

0%

10%20%

30%

40%

50%60%

70%

Q4

'04

Q1

'05

Q2

'05

Q3

'05

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

ReliefSector


Indian Ocean Tsunami

Burma Cyclone& China Earthquake

Hurricane Katrina

Entire Index

Haiti Earthquake



Religion 7 organizations

Compared to most sectors, religious organizations performed well during the recession. They outperformed the index in both 2008 and 2009, experiencing some of the smallest revenue and donor declines of any sector during those years. In 2010, however, this pattern changed, and the religion sector saw declines in many key areas of fundraising, particularly in retention.

Religion sector revenue declined a median 1.9% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 39), while the index as a whole had essentially flat revenue growth of 1.0%. Sector donor numbers fell a median 2.4% from 2009 to 2010, similar to the overall index median decline of 2.0%. Three of the seven organizations in this sector had positive donor growth and three had positive revenue growth in 2010.

The religion sector did have moderate new donor growth in 2010. New donor numbers for sector organizations rose a median 1.4% from 2009 to 2010, while the index as a whole had new donor declines of 3.5%.

This was the only sector in the index to have declines in revenue per donor in 2010. Revenue per donor declined for religious organizations by a median 1.4% from 2009 to 2010 while the index as a whole had increases of 2.8%. The sector already has the smallest revenue per donor amounts in the index ($26 in 2010).

Perhaps the greatest area of concern for this sector is retention. Religious organizations had the largest declines in overall retention and in first-year donor retention and the second-largest declines in multi-year donor retention in the index. Overall retention fell for the sector by a median 3.2% from 2009 to 2010 while the index as a whole had declines of 0.8%. First-year donor retention fell for the sector by a median 7.1% from 2009 to 2010 while the index as a whole had declines of 2.0%.

Long-term sector revenue and donor growth have been somewhat volatile, but the sector has outperformed the overall index in both over the past five years. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, sector revenue grew a cumulative median 4.7%, compared to overall index median declines of 3.1% (see Fig. 40). Over the same period, sector donor numbers grew a median 0.6%, compared to overall index declines of 6.3% (see Fig. 41).

All seven of the organizations in this sector are Catholic faith-based organizations.

Fig. 39: ReligionSector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

-2.4%

-2.0%

0.9%

-9.5%

1.4%

0.6%

2.5%

2.9%

-1.9%

-2.4%

-1.4%

1.4%

-3.2%

-7.1%

-2.6%

1.7%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 40: Five-Year Religion Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

4.7%

-3.1%EntireIndex

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Religion Sector


Start of Recession

End of Recession

Fig. 41: Five-Year Religion Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

0.6%

-6.3%

EntireIndex

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Religion Sector


Start of Recession

End of Recession



Societal Benefit 11 organizations

From 2006 to 2009, societal benefit organizations experienced some of the greatest fundraising challenges of any sector in the index. These negative trends appeared to have largely leveled off for the sector in 2010, which had some of the largest increases in the index in several key areas – particularly in new donor acquisition but also in revenue and overall donor numbers.

Revenue increased a median 5.5% from 2009 to 2010 (see Fig. 42), compared to flat overall index median growth of 1.0%. This was one of the largest revenue increases in the index. 64% of the organizations in the societal benefit sector had positive revenue growth in 2010.

Societal benefit donor populations grew a median 5.3% from 2009 to 2010, at a time when the index as a whole experienced donor declines of 2.0%. The only sector in the index to have higher donor growth in 2010 was international relief, which had substantial disaster-related giving in the first quarter of the year. 55% of the organizations in the sector had positive donor growth in 2010.

Unlike most index sectors, societal benefit organizations had relatively strong new donor growth throughout 2009 and donor acquisition rose even more strongly in 2010. New donors for the sector grew by a median 20.5% from 2009 to 2010. This growth was relatively widespread; 64% of the organizations in this sector had positive donor growth in 2010.

A rolling twelve-month revenue and donor analysis can provide a longer-term perspective on these recent trends. It shows that the societal benefit sector generally underperformed the index in both revenue and donor growth from 2006 to 2008, but that the sector regained some ground during and after the recent recession.

Cumulatively, in spite of recent performance, cumulative revenue and donor growth for the societal benefit sector both lag overall index medians over the past five years. From the twelve months ending Q4 2005 to the twelve months ending Q4 2010, societal benefit revenue declined a cumulative median 6.6%, compared to overall index revenue declines of 3.1% (see Fig. 43).

Over the same period, societal benefit donors declined a cumulative median 13.7%, compared to an overall index decline of 6.3% (see Fig. 44).

Fig. 42: Societal Benefit Sector MediansYear-to-Date Change in Key Measures

0.4%

-0.3%

0.6%

3.1%

0.2%

-2.2%

0.0%

0.1%

5.5%

5.3%

1.7%

20.5%

-2.6%

-2.1%

0.1%

-1.5%

Revenue

Donors

Rev / Donor

New Donors

OverallRetention

1st-YearRetention

Multi-YearRetention

Reactivation

2008 to 2009

2009 to 2010

Fig. 43: Five-Year Societal Benefit Revenue Trends 12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-6.6%

EntireIndex-3.1%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Societal Benefit Sector

Each data point is the median change in revenue for the 12 months ending in that quarter from the 12 months ending in Q4 2005.

Start of Recession

End of Recession

Fig. 44: Five-Year Societal Benefit Donor Trends12-Month Quarter-End Median Change from Q4 2005

-13.7%

EntireIndex-6.3%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

Q4

'05

Q1

'06

Q2

'06

Q3

'06

Q4

'06

Q1

'07

Q2

'07

Q3

'07

Q4

'07

Q1

'08

Q2

'08

Q3

'08

Q4

'08

Q1

'09

Q2

'09

Q3

'09

Q4

'09

Q1

'10

Q2

'10

Q3

'10

Q4

'10

Societal Benefit Sector


Start of Recession

End of Recession



References 1. U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Analysis, Seasonally adjusted month-end Consumer

Price Index (U.S. city average, all items), http://www.bls.gov/. Retrieved March 22, 2010. 2. Giving USA Foundation, Giving USA 2006, pp. 22 and 29. 3. National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Business Cycle Dating Committee Announces Trough

Date, September 20, 2010, http://www.nber.org/cycles/sept2010.html. Retrieved March 22, 2010.

4. U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis, Seasonally adjusted quarter-end Gross Domestic Product (indexed to 2005 dollars), February 25, 2011, http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm. Retrieved March 22, 2010.

5. U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Analysis, Employment Situation Summary, March 4,

2011, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm. Retrieved March 22, 2010. 6. Giving USA Foundation, “Giving Recovery after Economic Depression or Recession,” Giving USA Spotlight,

Issue 2, 2009, p. 8. Article written by Melanie Miller, Sarah Schaefer, and Corinne Wagner of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.



Industry Sectors Used in the Index Animal Welfare Organizations Organizations that focus on the care, protection, or understanding of pets or specialty animals, other than livestock. Includes humane societies, veterinary services, aquariums, and zoos. Arts & Culture Organizations Organizations that promote enjoyment or understanding of the visual, performing, folk, or media arts or the humanities; communications organizations; and organizations that promote the appreciation or understanding of historical events, including historical societies and genealogical or heredity-based organizations. Environmental Organizations Programs that focus on the preservation and protection of the environment, including pollution control and abatement programs; conservation and development of natural resources (land, plant, water, energy); control or elimination of hazardous and toxic substances (including pesticides); solid waste management programs; botanical gardens and societies; urban beautification and open spaces programs; and environmental education. Also includes programs that focus primarily on the protection and preservation of wildlife or fisheries. Health Organizations Programs which help people achieve and maintain physical well-being through prevention, screening, evaluation and treatment; programs that promote mental health and treatment of mental illness; voluntary health organizations that are organized on a national, state or local basis and supported primarily by voluntary contributions from the public at large, which are engaged in a program of service, education and some research that is related to a particular disease, condition or disability, or group of diseases, conditions or disabilities; research institutes and other organizations whose primary purpose is to promote the advancement of knowledge about specific diseases, disorders, or medical disciplines. Human Services Organizations Organizations that promote or provide a broad range of social or human services to individuals or families; organizations that focus on protecting the public from antisocial elements; organizations that help individuals to find and sustain gainful employment; organizations that focus on the development and improvement of food resources; organizations that focus on promoting adequate housing for individuals, families and communities; organizations which aim to prevent, predict or control the effects of domestic disasters (e.g., floods, earthquakes, fires, tornadoes); organizations that work to build character and develop leadership and social skills among children and youth. International Relief Organizations Organizations that provide development and relief services to foreign countries and/or organizations that raise and distribute funds for the benefit of overseas institutions. Religious Organizations Programs operated for the purpose of worship, religious training or study, governance or administration of organized religions, or the promotion of religious activities. Societal Benefit Organizations Programs that focus on protecting and promoting the broad civil rights and civil liberties of individuals, improving relations between racial, ethnic, and cultural groups, and promoting voter education and registration; advocacy and citizen action groups that work to change public policy and opinion in a variety of areas; organizations that work to strengthen, unify, and build community spirit and increase the capacity of various community organizations to improve the quality of life for all. Most sector definitions based on a modification of the Foundation Center’s National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities. http://fdncenter.org/ntee/index.html



Looking Ahead

The next installment of the index, to be released in July 2011, will examine activity for the first quarter of 2011. Findings can be found at http://www.blackbaud.com/targetanalytics.

Index Methodology

Target Analytics applied the following rules to standardize data from each of the organizations participating in the Index of National Fundraising Performance:

Individual payments greater than $5,000, soft credits, and matching gift payments are excluded. Direct mail is the dominant or only revenue source for most organizations; however, web, telemarketing, event, and other sources are included. Indicators are calculated on a cash payment basis, as opposed to a pledge basis. Gifts or donors are defined as new, retained, or reactivated according to relative gift dates rather than organization-specific business rules or source codes. Retention rates for quarterly analysis are calculated by dividing the number of donors giving in the current year-to-date quarter(s) who also gave during the previous calendar year by the total number of donors who gave in the previous calendar year. Revenue per donor refers to the cumulative giving per donor per current period.

About Medians

Unless otherwise noted, index trends are measured by using the median percent change among a group of organizations. The median is the middle value in a ranked order of numbers. Using this statistic to describe historical trending minimizes distortion caused by the wide range of organizations’ file sizes or extreme changes at a few organizations.

Participation

Participation in the index is limited to organizations that meet size and geographic requirements as well as other terms and conditions. For information about index eligibility contact Sue Rock Tully at [email protected]. Please direct questions or requests to reproduce these findings to [email protected].

Online Resources

Participating organizations are granted access to an online, interactive graphical system where they can chart their own performance results against overall and sector-specific medians. Please contact your account representative for your password and for more information.

About Target Analytics

Target Analytics, a Blackbaud company, delivers data-driven, collaborative solutions designed to help non-profit organizations maximize their fundraising potential. Founded in 1989, Target Analytics was the first company to bring forward-thinking non-profit organizations together to establish industry-standard benchmarking and openly discuss successful strategies and practices.

Documents

Target Analytics donorCentrics Index of National Fundraising …€¦ · January 2010 which was largely due to fundraising for relief efforts following a severe earthquake in Haiti