2014 FS Closer Look

FrontStream | Philanthropy 2014 Edition

A CLOSER LOOK:FrontStream Philanthropy

2014 EDITION

$


We live in a time of dynamic change, in which all aspects of our lives are analyzed and redesigned. This pattern has begun to fundamentally alter how we go about everything from taking a taxi to managing relationships and finances, even ordering a hamburger. The philanthropic sector, a catchall term for a wide variety of activities in which money moves to people, organizations, and causes, is in serious need of this kind of social innovation. The challenges faced by those working in this sector are age old. Corporate CSR teams, educational institutions, nonprofits, and donors have always sought ways to help families in need of food, communities in need of opportunities, or students in need of enrichment. How they raise, distribute, and receive funding to combat these issues is how FrontStream aims to revolutionize philanthropy as we know it. This report examines FrontStream 2014 giving data to provide insight into activity across the entirety of our platform. We believe that data is the tool powering our revolution. Yet to FrontStream, data is not just a number in a glossy report. While analytics do include quantifiable figures and quantitatively measured trends, we go beyond this. We paint a picture of the stories behind the numbers, captured via character limited anecdotal fields within our systems, survey research, or the application program interfaces (APIs) we utilize to move data directly to those who use it to better serve their cause. With this philosophy in mind, we are able to add value for participants in our software ecosystem by constantly inquiring about what data can empower their efforts. By combining the resulting data with technological developments that integrate our various products, we will revolutionize philanthropy. We will create a world in which an investment in one aspect of your philanthropic activities can connect you to data and tools to enhance your other work, be it corporate-nonprofit partnerships or workplace giving. This is FrontStream.

Brandolon BarnettManager, FrontStream Philanthropic Research & Analysis

Preface


Contents2 Preface

By B. Barnett

3 Table of Contents

4 Methodology &Definitions

5 FrontStream Year in Review

6 Partners, Numbers & Activities in Philanthropy

7 Recipients of Philanthropy

8 Timeline of Philanthropy

9 Integration of Philanthropy

10 Insights Across Giving Types

11 FirstGiving Opting-In

International

13 FundraisingPro Event Quartiles

Global Participation

15 Workplace Philanthropy

By Industry & State Gender & Giving

18 Donor CRM

Return on Investment


Methodology& Definitions

Closer Look 2014 SampleFor 2014 FrontStream examined outside research, survey data, and transactional data from $712 million in giving from over 5 million donations across our numerous platforms.

International Classification of Nonprofit Organizations (ICNPO)The International Classification of NonprofitOrganizations is a classification systemdeveloped through a collaboration between researchers at Johns Hopkins University, the United Nations, and other institutions. The systemgroupsnonprofitactivitiesinto12broadactivitygroups. This simplifies thecomparisonof philanthropic activity across national boundaries.

Workplace PhilanthropyWorkplace Philanthropy is the umbrella term for FrontStream software empowering giving (namely Campaign Management) and volunteering (Volunteer Solutions) for corporate CSR teams and their employees.

Peer-to-Peer FundraisingPeer-to-peer fundraising is a method of fundraising that encourages supporters of a nonprofit’s cause to raisemoney on behalf ofthe organization. Supporters solicit donations from their network of family and friends often through social media and online donation pages. FrontStream provides multiple tools, i.e. FirstGiving and FundraisingPro, for peer-to-peer fundraising purposes.

IntegrationIntegration of data, services, and functionality is a primary differentiator for the value thatFrontStream technology brings to nonprofits,CSR, donors, and causes. At heart, integration refers to the use of Application Program Interface (API) protocols to move data between products to enhance functionality. This philosophy challenges the isolation of traditional fundraising activities, allowing the investment in one fundraising/philanthropic tool, say a CRM or Workplace Giving platform, to add value to other efforts like corporate-nonprofitpartnerships or management of events.


2

014

FrontStream Year in Review


Numbers in PhilanthropyFrontStream facilitated $712 million to charity via our powerful suite of philanthropic software & services.

Volunteer Solutions 849K volunteer hours

Workplace Philanthropy$400 million

FirstGiving Peer-To-Peer$102 million

FundraisingPro Software$210 million

Partners in Philanthropy

Nonprofits FrontStream served nearly 70,000 nonprofit organizations, including 4,000 United Way programs. About 650 nonprofits received more than $100K, while 90 nonprofits received more than $1 million through our platforms.

Corporations FrontStream worked with companies from 36 different industries to facilitate their workplace giving programs. 96 Fortune 500 corporations utilized our software to pledge money to a variety of nonprofit organizations.

Donors A rough estimate shows that about 3.5 million people used our system to donate to their favorite causes.

Activities in Philanthropy

Vetting & ComplianceThe FrontStream nonprofit database has 2 million compliant & eligible 501(c)3 organizations. In 2014, FrontStream’s CSR & NPO Services Team utilized the SCALE methodology to vet over 60,000 additional charities in the U.S., Canada, and around the world, ensuring all funds went to enhancing philanthropic impacts at legitimate charities.

201

4


Recipients of PhilanthropyFrontStream classifies charities into 12 broad categories defined by the United Nations through the International Classification of Nonprofit Organizations (ICNPO). For each country we then map local classifications (in this instance IRS NTEE codes) within these 12 broad groups. These 12 groups are seen below with the corresponding color that is used in all of the charts.

Health and Human Service organizations maintained a sizeable majority across all charity breakdowns of our platforms, demonstrating the continued prevalence & strength of these programs in the nonprofit fundraising space.

FundraisingProLarge health organizations, like hospitals, research institutes, and advocacy groups, were the primary users of FundraisingPro and used it to manage donations and event-based fundraisng. Philanthropy & Voluntarism Promotion nonprofits, such as community foundations, were also typical users of FundraisingPro.

FirstGivingThe FirstGiving tool was used by a wide variety of nonprofit organizations. This illustrates the extensive relevance of peer- to-peer fundraising for a broad variety of organizational needs. Of note are the greater number of Cultural, Recreational, and Environmental organizations with FG donation pages compared to Workplace or FundraisingPro. For these organizations, peer-to-peer giving has become an essential aspect of modern fundraising.

Workplace PhilanthropyWorkplace Philanthropy is dominated by Philanthropy & Voluntarism organizations, such as programs associated with the United Way. This is in many ways due to the role of United Ways as innovators of this giving type and the historic relationship that many corporations foster with United Ways. Nonprofits with exclusive missions, especially Religious and Law, Advocacy & Political organizations, were not often designated by corporate employees in large part due to corporate guidelines.

0.06% 16%

2%

13%

13%

14%

6%

3%4%

7%

22%

FIRSTGIVING

0.03% 1% 1% 8%2%

7%0.3%

0.4%

58%

0.5%

23%

WORKPLACE

1% 8%4%

8%

4%

36%

4%3%

10%

2%

20%

FUNDRAISINGPRO

Business & Professsional Associations Culture & Recreation Development & HousingEducation & Research Environment HealthInternational Law, Advocacy & Politics Philanthropy & Voluntarism PromotionReligion Social Services Unknown

201

4


100K

200K

300K

400K

500K

$

$20M

$40M

$60M

$80M

$100M

$120M

$140M

January February March April May June July August September October November December

2014 Donations By Month

FG Donation Amount $ WP Donation Amount $ FPro Donation Amount $FG Number of Donations WP Number of Donations FPro Number of Donations

Timeline Of PhilanthropyWhile our platforms facilitate donations throughout the year, the distinctive giving timelines of FirstGiving (FG) peer-to-peer fundraising and Workplace Philanthropy (WP) illustrate that how people give influences when they give. Nonprofits looking to maximize their fundraising efforts should take note of the peaks and valleys in giving to more effectively target donors based on the timing associated with various giving types.

Overall, the second half of the year sees the most donation dollars: 80% of all funds processed across our platforms are pledged from July through December. However, this is largely influenced by workplace donations, which predominately occur August through November. Peer to peer and event fundraising on the other hand consistently receive donations throughout the year.

While people give more often towards the end of the year, median donation amounts tend to be higher in the middle of the year, particularly in June and July, and lower towards the ends of the year. Donors are more generous perhaps because other needs (holiday spending, other charity appeals) are not competing for their financial resources.

Giving converged in September. Within the FrontStream ecosystem, it is a popular month to donate for both workplace donors and peer to peer fundraising donors. The back to school season is popular for fundraising events, and is also the start of new employee giving campaigns. Therefore, September is a very busy time for donors to pledge for the upcoming year.

In PracticeEvents can be good for “off-sea-son” fundraising, because they encourage supporters to rally for a cause even when their peers or holiday obligations are not urging

them to donate.

In PracticeConsider tailoring your fundraising communications in the fall to target workplace donors. Nonprofits seeking sustaining, year-long donations should especially address donors who give via payroll deductions, which are by far the most popular method ofworkplace giving. In 2014, 90% of all donations were made this way. However, be aware that several large companies do not allow payroll deductions and encourage donors to explore workplace donations through stock or credit card. These donations are

associated with very high average and median donations.

In PracticeMid-year, especially June, consider targeting donors who give more on average instead of blanketing your supporters in appeals. This requires less effort but can generate equal or

greater funds.

201

4


Integration of PhilanthropyFrontStream’s integrated products hold the key to adding value & streamlining philanthropic efforts. Our analysis of the market reveals the power integration holds to empower nonprofits, donors, and corporate CSR teams. That analysis can be illustrated in numerous examples.

For instance, let’s say a large nonprofit utilizes FundraisingPro. Using the software interface, the nonprofit registers attendees for a 5K Walk-Run-Ride event. They enable a “corporate team” field on their online event registration form to collect the employer of each participant. When 20 employees of one of our corporate clients register for the event, their registration data flows seamlessly to the dashboard of Workplace Philanthropy administrators. This CSR team now discovers that 20 of their employees in Boston are participating in an event—information that was previously unavailable. Using the power of integration, however, the corporate client decides to offer matching funds for their employees’ donations, maximizing the event’s fundraising potential.

In our analysis, integration of products in this manner is immensely valuable. In the example outlined above, the nonprofit’s investment in our online donation solution allowed the organization to gain visibility with corporate CSR teams by simply doing what they do best—connecting with supporters of their cause. For corporations, CSR administrators are

empowered to make more dynamic decisions to engage employees. CSR teams might promote the event in an internal newsletter,

partner with the managing nonprofit as a sponsor, or encourage those 20 participants to share

their interests with fellow employees in the form of an in-campaign fundraising page.

For employee donors they are given more avenues through which their passions can reach corporate administrators and benefit the nonprofits and causes they care about. This integrated technology systematically takes corporate-nonprofit relationships beyond the traditional sponsor-grantee dynamic. Integration allows new avenues for doing good.

Our Analysis As demonstrated in the instance above,

FrontStream data allows for endless possibilities in the way information can move

between integrated systems to better connect the work of nonprofits and corporate CSR teams.

Key to this effort is an analysis of metrics available, from market research, nonprofit 990 forms, and case studies of the early adopters of our integrative solution, as a way to uncover the data points of most value.

As a first measure, our analysis has found that 225 charities received funds from all three of the core product categories in 2014. Moving forward, these

will become the base for a longitudinal study of the impact that integration has on these organization’s revenues, expenses, and operations.

201

4

Percentage of All FS Nonprofit Clients that Benefitted from Each Product


InsightsAcross Giving Types


FirstGivingThe FirstGiving portal allows for any individual or organization to create a page and raise funds for their charitable causes. The APIs behind these portals also power nonprofits receiving funds from Indiegogo & GoFundMe crowdfunding platforms. In 2014, $102 million were facilitated to charities using this technology. Across 1.29 million individual donations, the median donation was $40, but this did not limit some charities from receiving upwards of $100,000 through FirstGiving. Nearly 150 charities received more than $100,000, and 4 charities received $1 million plus through crowdfunding, event fundraising, and online donation pages.

Events were an especially popular form of peer-to-peer fundraising. FirstGiving hosted over 8,000 events in 2014, raising, $47.7 million. However, of this total, $7 million was raised via individual, grassroots fundraisers, who were not directly affiliated with the charity or an event. The power of peer-to-peer fundraising resides in these individual supporters, who wield their network to advance nonprofit development. Every effort to alleviate charities of the endless and cumbersome task of fundraising is valuable, as time and energy are redirected to the primary charitable mission.

Opt-In To Cover FeesFirstGiving offers donors the opportunity to pay the associated transaction fees, thereby tapping into the fundraisers’ peer-to-peer network to help nonprofits cover some of the costs of managing their fundraising pages. By encouraging donors to “opt-in” and donate a little more to cover processing fees, they can ensure 100% of their donation goes directly to supporting the worthy cause or event. Across 767,000 FirstGiving donations raised through event-specific fundraising pages, opt-in was largely popular with donors. In 2014, 38% of donors exercised this option.

Peer

to P

eer

Beyond the NumbersFor years Special Olympics (SO) Hawai’i has made it their mission to offer opportunities in sports training and competition to athletes. In order to achieve this mission, SO Hawai’i relies on the success of annual fundraising events, such as the Polar Plunge. Using FirstGiving, the organization was able to raise $27,000 and draw over 200 fundraisers and registrants to their 2014 Polar Plunge event.

The donations raised through the Polar Plunge were put towards transportation, lodging, and competition expenses for athletes traveling to Oahu, Hawai’i three times a year. Moreover, SO Hawai’i believes that participation in these sport competitions promotes a healthy lifestyle for individuals with intellectual disabilities and encourages inclusion. FirstGiving allowed the organization to focus on what mattered most: ensuring their athletes are able to continue to participate in the Special Olympics for free.

In PracticeSeveral events benefitted with over 50% of supporters covering processing fees. This is likely related to effective communication strategies that remind donors of this “opt-in” opportunity. Cut down development costs and ultimately raise more money for your cause by directly asking your donors to

cover the fee.


Giving Around the WorldFirstGiving donors raised money for charity events from every corner of the globe. While there were 40 countries with over 100 transactions, only 6 countries had over 1,000. This is largely due to the popularity of FirstGiving, Indiegogo & GoFundMe with charities in the Western world, especially in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe. American donors were the most common on the FirstGiving platform, making up 97% of the total number of donations. Below is a chart of countries ranked by total amount donated.

Beyond the NumbersIn the summer of 2013, ultra-marathon runners Matt Nelson and Frank Fumich signed up with FirstGiving to attempt what some might think impossible. Departing from the 911 Memorial at the Pentagon in Washington D.C., Nelson and Fumich ran to the finish

line of the Boston Marathon. The pair crossed over 400 miles through 10 states to raise money for the families of two Boston Marathon bombing victims, Martin Richard and Jeff Bauman. Inspired by their stories and desperately wanting to help, they formulated this bold fundraising idea the day after the tragedy.

Word quickly spread through social media. As the event grew the men realized they would need a peer-to-peer fundraising page to facilitate the donations. Utilizing a FirstGiving online donation page & other services the men quickly surpassed their original goal of $26,000, reaching a total of $86,000. FrontStream, inspired by their noble mission, partnered with the duo to share their story, tweeting out to our network of nonprofit and corporate clients and working with local news outlets along their route to Boston. In total, 800 people from 20 different countries donated to

the cause and upon arriving in Boston, Nelson & Fumich hand-delivered the funds raised to families of the victims.

Country Total Donation Count of Donations

USA $98,880,802.90 1,245,569

Canada $793,936.61 10,817

Great Britain $530,472.31 8,550

Australia $315,303.51 4,792

Hong Kong $163,192.84 597

Germany $117,440.00 1,710

Singapore $113,320.73 924

Switzerland $90,417.38 577

Israel $86,325.51 1,283

United Arab Emirates $72,356.41 363

Peer

to P

eer


Event FundraisingThroughout 2014, FundraisingPro served as the enterprise level peer-to-peer fundraising solution for hundreds of nonprofit organizations. With nearly 2.4 million transactions, FundraisingPro supported thousands of events that reflect the evolving event fundraising industry. The majority of events were sports related, from the traditional Run-Walk-Ride Events, to golf, bowling & kickball tournaments. There were also creative & bold fundraisers, including polar plunges, head shaves and ugly Christmas sweater challenges. Overall, these events raised $210 million USD.

Because FundraisingPro supports fundraising initiatives of all sizes, the data was segmented by quartile to more accurately represent the aggregate picture based on total amount raised.

Across all events, the median donation amount was $31. This amount is consistent with events in the 4th quartile. However, the median donation amount drops to $27 for events in the 3rd quartile, and decreases even further for events in the 1st and 2nd quartiles. This same trend holds up when comparing average donation amounts across the quartiles. Thus, these high average & median donations suggest that fundraisers for larger events did a better job at soliciting high donation amounts than their counterparts in small events. The reason for the events in the 4th quartile’s success is due to the ability of fundraisers to solicit large donation amounts, not just a large number of donations.

FundraisingPro

Beyond the NumbersAround the world people are standing in solidarity and raising millions of dollars—by updating their hairdos. In a bold fundraising challenge participants of all ages shave their heads, dye their hair, or have a “bad hair day” to support important causes. All the while they ask family and friends sponsor their participation. The wild success of these peer-to-peer fundraising initiatives, which involve more creativity and courage than a typical fundraiser, has contributed to their rising popularity among FrontStream’s FundraisingPro clients.

BuzzOff and the World’s Greatest Shave are two such events that have been extremely successful. They have raised millions of dollars and emboldened hundreds of thousands to shave or color their hair. BuzzOff, oneMission’s challenge to raise funds for kids with cancer, uses FundraisingPro’s customizable platform to encourage participants to stand in solidarity with and lift the spirits of kids who lose their hair during cancer treatments. Meanwhile, the World’s Great Shave, organized by the Leukaemia Foundation, is one of Australia’s biggest fundraisers, sponsoring the treatment and research of blood cancer.

Event Size Events by Quartile Median Donation Avg. Donation Avg. Amount Raised Per Event

Total Count of Donations

>$276.26 1st Quartile $18 $31 $100 3,915

>$2,063.15 2nd Quartile $23 $56 $922 19,710

>$13,309.47 3rd Quartile $27 $72 $5,807 96,934

$13,309.47+ 4th Quartile $32 $89 $167,813 2,276,531Peer

to P

eer

In PracticeCompare your event against our benchmarks to see how you stack up. Based on your total donation volume, place your event into one of our four quartiles. Compare your event’s median or average donation to your quartile’s to see how you are doing compared to the average event of similar size.


Global ParticipationFundraisingPro has a global reach. Donors from all continents except Antarctica (not yet at least) donated to events. In 2014, donors from 158 countries around the world contributed to charities through the platform. The map below shows all countries from which donations originated. The highest concentration of donations came from the Anglophone world—Canada, Australia, the United States, Great Britain, & New Zealand. Yet donors from all over the globe used FundraisingPro to make an impact.

Beyond the NumbersEvery year mental illness has disastrous consequences for individuals and communities. Whether measured in the raw $190 billion in estimated economic costs, or the rare and everyday tragedies that result, the work of organizations like NAMI is critical in the fight against mental illness. In 2014, NAMI utilized the FundraisingPro platform to raise over $10 million dollars through its numerous run/walk events. This figure represented a 9% increase year over year and was in large part the result of higher median donation amounts versus 2013.

Integration provides new avenues for NAMI to strategically appeal to employee donors. An examination of 2014 transactional data revealed that employee donors within the FrontStream sample designated their pledges to Health related charities 7% of the time. Of that 7%, charities which work in the realm of Mental Health & Crisis Intervention received only 3% of designations. The integration between FrontStream’s FundraisingPro and its Workplace Philanthropy platform holds the potential to alter this dynamic for NAMI by offering new outlets to tell NAMI’s story. In this new world, the seamless connection of data between Workplace Philanthropy and FundraisingPro will allow for NAMI to tell its story to workplace donors in a new and more engaging manner.

Peer

to P

eer

Donor’s Home Country (Colored by Number of Donations)


Workplace Philanthropy

Striving for Maximum ImpactIn 2014 FrontStream’s Workplace Philanthropy platform facilitated $400 million to charities, primarily in the US & Canada, through direct clients or clients of the platform’s resellers. Research from America’s Charities and others estimate this was as much as 10-14% of the entire value of workplace giving dollars pledged to charity in 2014. Funds came from over 1,000 workplace campaigns at organizations of all sizes. From major universities to the Fortune 500, workplace giving is not only the domain of large companies. Subsequently, campaign sizes varied greatly within the sample.

90% of campaigns within the sample raised $600,000 or below. Meanwhile, a campaign which brought in above $5 million is in the top 1% of workplace campaigns. The table above illustrates the number of unique charities served within each campaign percentile. Campaigns within the 99th percentile serve 46,000 charities more than those in the 20th percentile.

Based on your campaign’s total donation volume, you can place it into our percentiles and see how your campaign ranks compared to the campaigns of FrontStream’s other workplace philanthropy clients.

In PracticeIf you are managing a smaller campaign, consider focusing on a select group of charity partners as to distribute limited funds with maximum impact. Consider encouraging departments or teams to adopt a small charity. A match distributed across teams can have a big impact, while you are able to foster close relationships with a variety of nonprofits who

appreciate your support.

Campaign Size Percentile Number of Unique Charities

< $ 11,555 20% 1,249

$34,120 40% 3,126

$86,560 60% 6,817

$275,492 80% 15,595

$604,706 90% 25,266

$5 Million 99% 47,488

Beyond the NumbersIn mid 2014 FrontStream’s CSR & NPO Services team, which handles charity compliance and vetting, received a powerful note from an employee of a corporate client, a Fortune 500 software firm:

“ My daughter has DIPG [a brain stem cancer with zero survival rate and] is currently being treated by a team in Bristol. […] I have been raising a lot of money for them and would love it if [my company] can support this charity and match with $1000. They are trying to save my daughter and all children in the world with DIPG. They need support and I hope [the company] can do that. I have been at [this company] over 13 years and have always been brilliant. I hope you are able to do matching for the Southmead Charity. ”This charity was approved as part of the FrontStream vetting process and the

note shared with the client. The donor had met his match cap for the year, but upon hearing this story, the client agreed to lift the cap for him and match any subsequent donations. This story is a reminder of why we do what we do. However, it also reiterates that data is more than numbers & charts; equally important are the anecdotal data and the systems which collect this data to move this information to clients within the FrontStream ecosystem of platforms. Because these platforms are connected via advanced APIs, workplace donors have the opportunity to enter their stories and communicate directly with their employers, as well as charities that can receive this information within our CRM.

Wor

kpla

ce


Employee Donors at the CoreIn a presentation at the Association of Fundraising Professionals 2015 International Fundraising Conference in Baltimore, Diane Solinger of Google made a statement which hints at the ongoing changes in the nature of the nonprofit-corporate relationship. In a panel entitled “Understanding CSR from the Corporate Perspective,” she stated flatly:

“ If you see a Google matching gift, that’s your donor. That’s the best way to reach us. The relationship can start with a $100 donor, with that employee. ”

A holistic corporate social responsibility movement requires a corporate team to interface with employee engagement efforts, Human Resources initiatives, supply chain concerns, as well as philanthropy. These requirements can stretch thin relatively small CSR teams who face challenges with juggling requests for partnerships, sponsorships, or other close collaboration with nonprofits.

In response, companies like Google are looking to their employees to spearhead charitable relationships which can later be evaluated for further engagement if in line with the company’s CSR objectives. In this light, organizations working in the realms of international development, the arts, or the environment have the opportunity to mobilize strategies to better engage employees within the formal structures of their company’s campaigns. Currently these organzations are not very popular in workpalce giving campaigns. Not capitalizing on this opportunity may present challenges in engaging corporate partners if these trends continue.

By Industry & StateWithin the FrontStream sample, a look at workplace giving by industry reveals that industries requiring advanced degrees or specializations, like Energy and Chemicals Manufacturing, yield the highest median donations at $200. Meanwhile industries with greater numbers of unskilled labor, such as Retail & Transportation, tend to have lower median donations, $26 and $104 respectively. Consulting & Finance are mid range at $125.

Regarding workplace giving by state, FrontStream has found no evidence of a substantive correlation between workplace giving and regional economic conditions such as unemployment rates, median household incomes, or cost of living indices. Within the FrontStream sample, states representing all corners of the U.S. rank in the Top 10 states for highest median donation amounts: New Mexico & Missouri tie for first place at $144, while New Jersey, New York, & California take last place at $52. In general, the West and the South make the strongest showing, which is much in line with the Chronicle of Philanthropy’s 2014 study of all charitable gifts by U.S.geographic region. This study found that the most generous states were the ones with the most church goers, topped with Utah which had a giving rate of 6.6%. However, in the FrontStream study of employee giving by state, Utah is 31st out of 35 states, and only two states—North and South Carolina—overlap both FrontStream and the Chronicle’s Top 10 List.

While by all measures growing quickly year over year, it is clear that workplace giving is not a primary means of charitable giving for the average American. Rather than sheer dollar amounts, employee giving’s power lies in its ability to act as the foundation for corporate nonprofit relationships in the age of CSR.

In PracticeAs a nonprofit, make it a priority to discover where your donors work & if their employer has a workplace

campaign.

In PracticeAs a member of a CSR team, there is a great opportunity to incentivize employee support for organizations working in areas related to your core CSR competencies, particularly if they lie outside the realm of Health & Human Services or Philanthropy & Volunteerism. This can increase the likelihood of discovering community partners who are both engaging your employees & operating in areas where

you can add value beyond dollars.Wor

kpla

ce


Gender and Workplace Giving FrontStream was intrigued in 2014 when our workplace giving data showed the potential for a different trend. An analysis of nearly 1.5 million workplace donations tagged by gender over a 3 year period (2012 – 2014) found that in no year did women give more than men on average. In 2012, men gave on average 26% more than women per transaction, and in 2013 they gave 24% more. In 2014, this percentage dipped to 23%; nevertheless, men’s higher on average donation amounts remained consistent during this 3 year period.

While this constituted a noteworthy aggregate insight on gender differences in charitable giving, the more striking realization was the reported gender pay gap in the US currently sits at 22%, according to both a 2013 study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research and a 2014 analysis by the Pew Research Center.

Additional research first controlled for individual 2011-2013 campaigns for which comprehensive gender data was available. Campaigns were limited to those at larger companies with a minimum of 5,000 transactions within a given campaign year. This analysis evidenced very few campaigns in which female employees provided larger donations than their male counterparts.

An examination of median numbers showed that among these 2011-2013 campaigns, male and female donors within the sample gave equal amounts ($52) in 2011 and 2012. In 2013, median donations sharply diverged: men’s median donation when controlled for campaign size outpaced women within the sample by 33% ($104 for men and $78 for women). When examining the average donation amounts, again controlled for campaigns, the emerging picture of giving amongst coworkers similarly appeared to buck established trends. In 2011 men gave 8% more on average. In 2012 this number was 19%, while in 2013 the figure exceeded 40%. These average numbers, more sensitive to variance in donation size, hint at the impact of large one time donations by men on the campaigns under observation.

Next, in an attempt to further control for a group with similar income and social conditions, research was controlled for workplace donations by company and state. This research was limited to companies with gender-tagged records for both male and female employee donations and a minimum of 1,000 transactions within a given state and corporate location. The picture of median giving by gender

remained largely unchanged. In both 2011 and 2013 the median donation amount for both genders within the sample was equal, at $52. In 2012, however, the median donation amount for women did exceed that of male employee donors by 25% at $65. Average donation amounts, more sensitive to larger donations (and by extension more likely to be sensitive to income variance within a given company), once again painted a picture of a giving environment skewed towards male participants. Average donations from men within the sample exceeded that of women in each year. Men gave more by 8%, 21%, and 20% in 2011, 2012, and 2013 respectively.

Currently there are limitations to this analysis of FrontStream transactional data. First, this is not a random sample. Companies can self-select when collecting or distributing gender data within their payroll files. The sample is also selectively limited to clients of FrontStream products. While by some estimates we facilitate over 10% of the total US workplace giving dollars, a look at a larger sample would be beneficial in painting a picture of the role gender inequality in the workplace might play in workplace donations more directly tied to incomes than other types of giving.

Still, while it’s difficult to be exact, these insights, combined with a growing body of research on both differences in giving by gender and the interplay between income and workplace giving (particularly payroll), do plant the seeds for a broader discussion of workplace giving, gender equity, and corporate social responsibility. That discussion requires further research but also can have implications for how corporate administrators of employee engagement programs go about their work and how nonprofits appeal to both employee donors and potential corporate partners.

$-

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

M W M W M W

2012 2013 2014

Average Donation Payment by Gender & Year

Average Donation Difference2012-2014

24%

U.S. Gender Pay Gap2013

22%

W

orkp

lace


Donor CRMFrontStream’s donor CRM plays an important role in the integration of our products. Not only does the CRM serve as a vital tool for charities to manage their donors, integration will allow charities to understand their donors. The thousands of charities that use our CRM currently have access to donors who gave through our workplace giving product, thus acquiring a rare connection with employee donors who are passionate about their organization. Leveraging this connection, nonprofits can target their workplace donors and finally penetrate the legendary corporate giving domain. This is only the first of many possibilities that come with integration.

Return on Investment Most recognize the necessity of donor database systems to help nonprofits manage donor information and fundraising communications. However, measuring the return on investment for these CRM products is challenging, especially with limited data available. While future developments are in progress for more robust data integration & collection, we were curious about the use of our donor CRM, and decided to conduct a correlational study on a small sample of our nonprofit clients. We found on average an 11% growth in total revenue the year following the purchase of our CRM, where data was available. This was only a quick look at ROI, but as data integration at FrontStream develops we hope to dive deeper into ROI and other data points to further understand & improve our Donor CRM.

Beyond the NumbersOur Village Project (VP) had a very productive 2014. Our Village Project was founded in 2010 and has rapidly grown, expanding beyond a grass roots project operating from the basement of a church. They are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and serve 80 families in

the greater Cleveland, Ohio area. With the understanding that food is the most basic human need, Our Village Project first provides nourishing meals to families experiencing cancer, and then, depending on the need, provides extended services, such as tutoring, grocery shopping, or laundering. VP relies on funding from grants, corporations, and generous individuals, and events naturally play a large role in their fundraising. Through FirstGiving event registration pages, this charity hosts numerous events a year, such as the Spring Fling Gala, Cancer Car Crash, Basketball Shootout, and Garage Sale. Project Pedal, their largest event, is a bike ride fundraiser that brought in nearly $13,000 for the organization in 2014.

Most notable, is VP’s use of FirstGiving with FrontStream CRM. Since 2013, this organization has maintained their donor relations with special use of acknowledgement letters and donor group emails. Tracking volunteer hours is also an integral part of their FrontStream CRM use, as they have over 400 volunteers with a variety of skills, from cooking and cleaning to writing and technology. With the integrated functionality from FirstGiving, this nonprofit is able to pull in registrants for their numerous events directly into their CRM and incorporate them into their supporter database for easy management. With the help of FrontStream software and support team, Our Village Project is free to serve their neighbors struggling with the effects of cancer in every way possible.

Don

or C

RM


To find out more about FrontStream, our products, or analytics, call +1 (202) 903-2585 or email [email protected].

Special thanks to America’s Charities, the Chronicle of Philanthropy, the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Special Olympics Hawai’i, Matt Nelson and Frank Fumich, oneMission, the Leukaemia Foundation, NAMI, Southmead Hospital Charity and Our Village Project for their research and assistance in the making of this report.

Prepared and written by:Brandolon Barnett, ManagerMeghan Ball, AnalystBeth Eller, Associate

FrontStream Philanthropic Research & Analysis Team

Boston, MA

USA

Lancaster, PA

USA

Reston, VA

USA

Toronto, ON

Canada

Melbourne, VIC

Australia

www.FrontStream.com

2014 FS Closer Look

Documents

Transcript of 2014 FS Closer Look