Explanation in fundraising

John Whitehead

Supporter Planning Manager

WaterAid

Top level explanation

Cash

74,000

Direct debit

130,000

Standing Order

24,000

54,000 114,000

21,000

16,000

3,000

Total active donors

208,000

Segment regular donors by value and explain

where the money is coming from

40%

20%

25%

12%

3%

15%

13%

27%

25%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

£0.01 -

£35.99

£36.00 -

£59.99

£60.00 -

£119.99

£120.00 -

£239.99

£240+

% Number

% Value

Segment direct debits by source and

understand who is lapsing

Regular Gift Retention by Channel

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Start 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year

Inserts DRTV Face-to-Face

Explaining where appeal income is

coming from

A Last gift over £500 Response % Ave Gift

A1 Last gift £500+ and that gift 0-12 months 12% £620.73

A2 Last gift £500+ and that gift 13-24 months 9% £573.45

A3 Last gift £500+ and that gift 25-36 months 4% £403.87

A4 Last gift £500+ and that gift 37-48 months 3% £490.00

B Last Gift £100 - £499.99

B1 Last gift £100.00 - £449.99 and that gift 0-12 months 15% £159.76

B2 Last gift £100.00 - £449.99 and that gift 13-24 months 10% £146.73

B3 Last gift £100.00 - £449.99 and that gift 25-36 months 5% £130.97

B4 Last gift £100.00 - £449.99 and that gift 37-48 months 2% £143.34

C1 Last Gift £25 - £99.99C1 Last gift £25.00 - £99.99 and that gift 0-12 months 18% £37.81C2 Last gift £25.00 - £99.99 and that gift 13-24 months 10% £35.64C3 Last gift £25.00 - £99.99 and that gift 25-36 months 5% £36.09C4 Last gift £25.00 - £99.99 and that gift 37-48 months 3% £33.74

D Last Gift £2.00 - £24.99D1 Last gift £2.00 - £24.99 and that gift 0-12 months 25% £14.23D2 Last gift £2.00 - £24.99 and that gift 13-24 months 12% £14.57D3 Last gift £2.00 - £24.99 and that gift 25-36 months 6% £13.32

What do recency, frequency and value tell us

when selecting donors for appeals?

At WaterAid we consider most donors of

48 months recency ‘active’ in so far

traditionally we mailed them all.

In terms of value, we have learned, if

their last gift value was under £25, then

it is not worth mailing them further back

than 36 months recency.

And we mail no-one whose last gift was

less than £2.

And in terms of recency, if they’ve only

ever given one gift, it not worth going

back further than donors of 36 months

recency.

You can actually take ‘value’ to mean

many things in different contexts

Last gift value

Highest gift value ever

Highest gift value in the last two years

Average gift value

Total gift value

Explaining database dynamics – recency

by last gift value

Recency

Last Cash Gift Value 0-12 months 13-24 months 25-35 months 27-48 months TOTAL

£0.01 - £24.99 20% 13% 10% 9% 52%

£25.00 - £99.99 13% 8% 7% 8% 35%

£100.00 - £4999.99 5% 3% 2% 3% 12%

TOTAL 38% 24% 19% 19% 100%

Recency by lifetime value

Recency

Lifetime Gift Value 0-12 months 13-24 months 25-35 months 27-48 months TOTAL

£0.01 - £24.99 6% 6% 5% 5% 22%

£25.00 - £99.99 11% 8% 7% 8% 35%

£100.00 - £4999.99 21% 9% 7% 6% 43%

TOTAL 38% 24% 19% 19% 100%

Last Gift Value by Highest Gift Value?

Horiz % Highest Gift Value

Last Cash Gift Value

£0.01 -

£24.99

£25.00 -

£99.99

£100.00 -

£499.99

£500.00 -

£4999.99 TOTAL

£0.01 - £24.99 80.0% 18.0% 2.5% 0.5% 28,000

£25.00 - £99.99 90.0% 9.5% 0.5% 16,000

£100.00 - £499.99 95.0% 5.0% 5,000

MOSAIC PROFILE OF WATERAID CUSTOMER CAMPAIGN DONORS

% W

A

% U

K

Index

A1 Global Connections 1.2% 0.7% 167

A2 Cultural Leadership 1.9% 0.9% 207

A3 Corporate Chieftains 1.8% 1.1% 161

A4 Golden Empty Nesters 2.8% 1.3% 211

A5 Provincial Privilege 3.2% 1.7% 193

A6 High Technologists 2.6% 1.8% 143

A7 Semi-Rural Seclusion 3.7% 2.0% 181

B8 Just Moving in 0.2% 0.9% 22

B9 Fledgling Nurseries 1.0% 1.2% 85

B10 Upscale New Owners 1.2% 1.4% 89

B11 Families Making Good 2.1% 2.3% 91

B12 Middle Rung Families 2.2% 2.9% 77

B13 Burdened Optimists 1.4% 2.0% 71

B14 In Military Quarters 0.1% 0.2% 59

C15 Close to Retirement 4.0% 2.8% 142

C16 Conservative Values 3.4% 2.8% 120

C17 Small Time Business 4.0% 2.9% 137

C18 Sprawling Subtopia 3.4% 3.1% 110

C19 Original Suburbs 3.9% 2.4% 162

C20 Asian Enterprise 1.3% 1.0% 127

D21 Respectable Rows 3.2% 2.7% 121

D22 Affluent Blue Collar 2.3% 3.1% 74

D23 Industrial Grit 2.7% 3.8% 71

D24 Coronation Street 1.7% 2.8% 60

D25 Town Centre Refuge 1.2% 1.1% 106

D26 South Asian Industry 0.9% 0.9% 102

D27 Settled Minorities 1.6% 1.6% 99

E28 Counter Cultural Mix 1.6% 1.4% 118

E29 City Adventurers 1.8% 1.3% 142

E30 New Urban Colonists 2.6% 1.4% 191

E31 Caring Professionals 2.2% 1.1% 204

E32 Dinky Developments 0.9% 1.1% 82

E33 Town Gown Transition 0.9% 0.8% 118

E34 University Challenge 0.2% 0.3% 77

F35 Bedsit Beneficiaries 0.4% 0.7% 56

F36 Metro Multiculture 0.6% 1.7% 36

F37 Upper Floor Families 0.7% 1.7% 41

F38 Tower Block Living 0.1% 0.5% 20

F39 Dignified Dependency 0.4% 1.3% 30

F40 Sharing a Staircase 0.0% 0.5% 11

G41 Families on Benefits 0.3% 1.2% 25

G42 Low Horizons 0.6% 2.6% 23

G43 Ex-industrial Legacy 0.8% 2.9% 28

H44 Rustbelt Reliance 0.9% 3.0% 30

H45 Older Right to Buy 1.1% 2.7% 41

H46 White Van Culture 2.0% 3.2% 63

H47 New Town Materialism 0.9% 2.2% 41

I48 Old People in Flats 0.3% 0.8% 36

I49 Low Income Elderly 1.0% 1.6% 61

I50 Cared for Pensioners 0.8% 1.4% 56

J51 Sepia Memories 1.1% 0.8% 147

J52 Childfree Serenity 2.3% 1.3% 172

J53 High Spending Elders 3.4% 1.5% 222

J54 Bungalow Retirement 1.7% 1.3% 135

J55 Small Town Seniors 3.3% 2.7% 122

J56 Tourist Attendants 0.5% 0.3% 167

K57 Summer Playgrounds 0.4% 0.3% 138

K58 Greenbelt Guardians 3.0% 1.7% 172

K59 Parochial Villagers 1.7% 1.6% 104

K60 Pastoral Symphony 1.6% 1.3% 122

K61 Upland Hill Farmers 0.5% 0.4% 122

Sym

bols

of

Success

Happy F

am

ilies

Suburb

an

Com

fort

Tie

s o

f C

om

munity

Tw

ilight

Subsis

t-

ence

Gre

y P

ers

pectives

Rura

l Is

ola

tion

Urb

an I

nte

lligence

Welfare

Bord

erlin

e

Munic

ipal

Depend-

ency

Blu

e C

olla

r

Ente

rprise

0 100 200

Explanation

and targeting

by

neighbourhood

Jane and Peter Reynolds

Mid 50’s

Children 19 and 23

Ethel Brown

Late 70’s

Widowed

Daniel McGregorLate 20’s

Single with partner

Caroline and Simon TaylorEarly 40’s

Children 4, 7 and 11

Explaining segments to creatives

Jane and Peter Reynolds

Mid 50’s

Children 19 and 23

Ethel Brown

Late70’s

Widowed

Daniel McGregorLate 20’s

Single with partner

Caroline and Simon TaylorEarly 40’s

Children 4, 7 and 11

INSERTS

Segmentation is not just about

description

Segmentation is about explanation

and it is about application