[Podcast] Cultivate Lasting Donor Relationships During COVID-19 and Beyond

Ryan Brown joined us on The Responsive Fundraising Podcast to share how Food for the Hungry cultivates lasting donor relationships. We discussed the power of “full heart” donor development, the need to continually pivot to stay relevant, and why waiting for “normal” will lead you to focus on the wrong tactics.

Ryan is the Chief Development Officer at Food for the Hungry (FH) and serves out of its corporate headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona. Prior to joining FH, Ryan spent time as a stockbroker, singer/songwriter, concert promoter, and for a short time, ran a small Christian music record label.

Donor Development: 4 Best Practices From A Chief Development Officer

Ryan provided invaluable insights and summaries of his most successful initiatives, but if there are only 4 things to take away from this episode, we think it’s his 4 best practices for donor development right now. Here is what he suggests.

1. Break Down Silos

Food for the Hungry was having issues with donor attrition in their child sponsorship program. As they figured out their data and messaging, they were able to retain more donors. At the same time, they started identifying new acquisition opportunities, and the child sponsorship program started to grow. Fast. 

The growth quickly outpaced their systems and processes. Ryan discovered that sponsorship was operating as a silo, disconnected from other individual giving strategies. Many donors who came into the organization through child sponsorship eventually became major donors or program sponsors, and Ryan wanted to build a process that created a more unified donor experience across the organization.  Ryan says, “Child sponsorship is no longer just a siloed part of our organization, but the entire organization is looking to support that at different levels.”

In the place of a siloed approach, Ryan and Food for the Hungry are creating overarching donor journeys that start with a donor’s first commitment and then lead them throughout their entire relationship with the organization for years to come. The result is a better, more comprehensive donor experience and increased revenue. We encourage all responsive nonprofits to examine their current systems for harmful silos and identify ways to improve operations in order to serve donors in a more relevant personalized way. 

2. Constantly Show Impact

“People love knowing that they’ve been part of a solution, that they’ve done something that’s good,” Ryan says. Your donors need to hear from you. 

Messages to your donors fulfill two purposes: showing gratitude and inviting a deeper connection to your mission. “If they’re sponsors giving regular gifts, we need to continue to show them the impact of that gift,” Ryan said. “If they’re not aware or invited to give in deeper, or wider, or more substantial ways, they won’t.” 

These invitations and communications must be personalized.”It really originates in identifying who those donors are,” Ryan says. “Whether we’ve already signed up to give a recurring gift, or we’ve just given a one-time gift, that circumstance really dictates how people need to be approached and engaged and invited.” 

3. Scale Your Processes

Do your tools and processes support your growth, or are they getting in the way? Often, Ryan points out, we’ll try to get fundraising tools to conform to an existing process, instead of using it the way it’s designed. “Typically, we’re going to be much better off if we can pivot in process,” Ryan says. 

If you’ve experienced significant growth in a short time, it’s worth taking a second look at your processes. That’s what Ryan’s doing at Food for the Hungry. “Processes were built, not because they were necessarily most strategic, or best, but just because that’s all there was time to do. So, we as an organization now are increasingly continuing that process of evaluating, constantly looking at different quality improvement processes to see, ‘Okay, are there ways that we can improve processes to better conform or better utilize different tools that we have?’”

Often, it can be a long and involved project, but a commitment to evolution and responsive philosophy will ensure that you are always growing with your donors instead of playing catch up. As you update systems, technologies and processes, make sure to add in regular check-ins to evaluate whether they are serving your donors and your team. These could be as often as every quarter, or annually. They won’t always result in changes, but regular check ins for process will ensure that you are never too far away from where you need to be as you grow.

4. Prepare for a New Normal

COVID-19 has changed predictions for the nonprofit sector, and there’s a lot we don’t know. Ryan points out that it’s not a matter of “returning to normal,” but of a new normal emerging. He cautions against treading water, waiting for old strategies to start working again. Instead, the team at Food for the Hungry is reevaluating. They’re looking at everything they’ve been doing, recognizing where things need to change and where it’s time for something new. 

While there’s a lot of speculation and opinion, the nonprofit sector is starting to get some hard data. You can look at what’s happened already this year to see where your donors may be right now. “I think we have to utilize that information and use it to inform our pivots,” Ryan said. He points to data that suggests that while some donors anticipate giving less in the COVID-19 era, 25% of surveyed donors say they anticipate giving more in the current environment.

“I’ve been a stockbroker and it’s both up and down markets. There are opportunities. They’re different, you engage them differently, you perceive them differently, but there are opportunities within any type of economic climate. And so we just have to pivot in those strategies,” Ryan says.

Instead of remaining stagnant, use this time to try and test new ideas. Give your team the resources they need to execute campaigns that you didn’t have the space to try before. Remember, you are part of creating the new normal for both your team and your donors. 

Full Transcript

Ryan Brown: Not to sound cliché, but that new normal is going to emerge. And if we are just buying time and treading water, we feel our old strategies become as effective as they were or as relevant as they were, we may continue to tread water until we can no longer and just continue to start sinking.

Noah Barnett: From Virtuous, I’m Noah Barnett and this is The Responsive Fundraising Podcast, a show where we talk with fundraising leaders and thinkers to uncover how today’s top nonprofits craft remarkable donor experiences and build lasting relationships at scale.

On this episode, I’m joined by Ryan Brown. He’s the Senior Director of Responder Operations at Food for the Hungry, and oversees all the private funding sources that Food for the Hungry receives, including their recurring giving program through child sponsorship; also their acquisition programs, their major donor development and so much more.

Food for the Hungry is leading the way in how they seek to engage donors and really reduce the distance between the donor and the good that they’re doing through Food for the Hungry’s network of international partners. I’m so thankful for Ryan as he has so much expertise in this space, and we dig into the key questions development staff are asking today in the midst of the uncertainty caused by the global pandemic COVID-19 has left behind, and so I’m grateful to dig in here because these are the questions that we’ve heard from you who wanted to run them by Ryan. Let’s dive in.

So Ryan, today you work in a development role with a large international development and relief organization. But I want to take a step back and really understand how you got into this role because I think what’s unique to fundraisers, and specifically those that work in nonprofit roles at large capacities is that we each have a unique story as to how we even got into the profession. I’d love know; how did you get here, Ryan?

RB: Yeah, thank you, Noah. I think prior to my time at Food for the Hungry where I have been now going on close to 15 years, I think my career trajectory is one that I best describe as being a little bit schizophrenic. I had been engaged in a dual career path. One had been a stock broker. 

I spent 10 years doing that during some of the most aggressive bull markets in US history, and there were some very busy and full times there. But then was also involved in the Christian music industry. I had, as a singer/songwriter, had recorded a couple of albums and they had been picked up for distribution and was touring around the United States, and also had a small, independent record label and did a lot of concert promotion.

And I think through, it was really the music side of things that really connected me to get involved with the One Campaign as an artist and promoting it at some of the events that were put together. Many of you are familiar with the One Campaign, an organization put together by Bono and others to help raise awareness for issues of debt and the staggering burden that it, the disproportionate burden that it played in many countries in Africa.

NB: I think we’ve all been to our fair share of Bono concerts if I’m not mistaken.

RB: Yes, absolutely. Yep. So we’ve got engaged there and definitely that work resonated with my faith journey. And just as I read scripture see that Christ has a heart and an affinity for those in poverty. And so as I was wrestling with aspects of career, started looking at opportunities at a good friend that was at Food for the Hungry, and he knew about the wrestling that I was dealing with and figured out ways to be more engaged in some of these issues. 

He invited me to look at a position that he was vacating in our Phoenix office as he was heading to Asia with Food for the Hungry. And so looked at that position and through a variety of circumstances, it just looked like it was the right opportunity.

I didn’t necessarily have nonprofit experience directly when I came to Food for the Hungry. Certainly had a heart for the issues that Food for the Hungry was involved in and certainly had a bit of an entrepreneurial spirit as it relates to ways to engage my art and passions. 

And so those seemed like they coalesced an opportunity to serve with Food for the Hungry. And then over the last 15 years, as organizations change and morph, had opportunities to step into different roles and just continue to grow on my journey there.

NB: Yeah. And what is your role today at Food for the Hungry, Ryan?

RB: We are an institution which works with private funding as well as public funding. Public funding being those government grants or multinational type grants, and then private being individual donors. We have a large child sponsorship program. We have major donors as well as foundations and things so I oversee the private fund development operations for our organization.

NB: Yeah, and I know you and I connected because we both worked with child sponsorship organizations, and that’s definitely a component of it but for others listening, that’s very much of a type of recurring or sustainer giving program that’s tied to supporting a child that’s a part of a children’s programs but still similar to other monthly giving or sustainer programs for those that are less familiar with it.

Cultivate Donors while Your Organization Grows

NB: I think what’s interesting… And I want to take this opportunity because I don’t get to dive into this as much with others is how your team is actually structured. Because we talk a lot about today’s donor and what today’s donor wants but we don’t necessarily get into the operational side of how things are structured so I’m curious if you could unpack, even just from an example of Food for the Hungry, how are you divided as a team? How do you serve the donor in different ways? How maybe do you do it through segmentation? What does that look like for Food for the Hungry?

RB: I meet regularly with a lot of other sponsorship organizations and inevitably, as we are meeting, I think we spend half of our time just trying to get these mental concepts of how folks are structured because everybody handles it slightly different. Not even slightly different, actually dramatically different in some cases.

For Food for the Hungry, a lot of the ways that it is structured now are actually the result of just even some of our history and where we’ve seen growth. Up until about four or five years ago, child sponsorship; we certainly had a child sponsorship program, but it’s really over the last few years that we have just really seen exponential growth within our child sponsorship programs.

In all transparency, we had issues with child sponsorship where we were losing a lot of donors. We had very, very high attrition rates, and we had to get in and part of that was just figuring out the data, part of it was figuring out some of the messaging and all of those types of things that have allowed us to increasingly close the back door on the donors that we were losing there. And then we also concurrently started seeing more and more opportunities on the acquisition side, and so our child sponsorship program really exploded.

And in many ways, there’s a gentleman I know who was with Dell Computer during their heyday. And the example that he always gave at the time that he was there is that people would see the growth that the organization was experiencing and say, “Boy, you guys are a rocket ship heading to the moon. It just must be an incredible ride.” He would say that what people didn’t recognize is that when you went and opened the door to that rocket it was being propelled by a bunch of people on bicycles pedaling really hard and really fast.

And so that’s very much where Food for the Hungry had been as an organization. We had seen a lot of that growth really quick and really fast. We had seen growth that outpaced our systems, that outpaced our processes and all of those different things. For us, during the heart of that, sponsorship actually was fairly siloed within our private resource strategy. And that was the area that I was focusing on. That our operations as well as all of our cultivation marketing strategies; all of those fell under that scope of authority.

What we have been over the last couple of years, though, as we have again seen that growth with its sponsorship; we’ve been looking to diffuse that throughout the organization. We’ve got wonderful people on our marketing team. Ideally, we would walk our best and brightest marketing thinkers to be engaged in how do we cultivate those child sponsorship relationships?

The last couple of years, as far as the ways that we have been structured… We’ve seen the growth in sponsorship, and that was very intentionally siloed at the time just because that’s what was necessary to keep pace with that growth. But now we’re in the process where we’re trying to disperse that so child sponsorship is no longer just a siloed part of our organization but the entire organization is looking to support that at different levels. We, like many organizations, continue to be in transition, we continue to figure out how to best do that, how to best steward some of those relationships. But for us, child sponsorship has really been both the engine and the fuel for a lot of our growth.

I mentioned earlier we do have major donor programs. Many of our major donors came to us initially as child sponsors. Even the direct mail programs, we have our sponsors participate in those as well. For us, the challenge has been continuing to dissipate that ownership for sponsorship throughout the organization.

Get Rid of Silos and Build Donor Journeys

NB: Yeah. And I love that you bring that up because a lot of times, we as fundraisers… I know this is how it was when I was working in the international relief nonprofit similar to Food for the Hungry, was that we isolate different functions based on how we think about them internally, not necessarily in alignment with how the donor or our supporters might experience them. We had a similar challenge where sponsorship was managed by one team, child sponsorship was managed by one team and other fundraising activities; events, trips, all the other functions that we might do, planned giving, were all managed by a completely separate team. So there wasn’t this alignment between how we cultivated that experience.

And in some ways, if you were a sponsor and a donor to our organization outside of the sponsorship, it almost felt like two separate experiences. And we had to get to a point where we needed to merge these things, and it sounds like that’s similar to what you all have done or are doing. Is that the same pain that you’re trying to overcome at Food for the Hungry?

RB: Yeah, very much so. Thankfully, for us, it’s been more so and I think everybody sees the opportunity. Many times there’s, to get people to move, there’s just getting people on the same page is difficult. 

Thankfully, our teams have been on similar pages and so it really has just been a matter of allowing people to move together through strategy to figure out how those pieces play together, to figure out that, as you mentioned, that overarching donor journey that we would have in play. From somebody who goes to a concert with Toby Mac or whatever the case may be and raises their hand to sponsor a child. What does that look like 10 years from now? What does that look like 20 years from now?

It’s a lot of work. It does require a lot of coordination, but it’s also a lot of fun. It’s great to see those different teams leading together and seeing where there’s those opportunities that emerge that would not be the case if we continue to completely operate in those functional silos.

NB: Yeah, 100%. We saw tremendous growth opportunity once we were able to overcome our own internal friction that we had handcuffed ourselves to. And once we were able to free that, we realized again that donors, to our organization, were people. They weren’t sponsors or donors, they’re people. And we were able to have a more holistic relationship from a donor and organization standpoint as we cultivated those donors.

And I know that there’s a lot of parallels here. We get a lot of feedback from arts organizations or others that have this primary annual fund. And the question that comes up, which I’d love to get your feedback on, Ryan, is, okay well we have these annual fund donors and then we have these major donors, but they’re separate. 

How does X, Y and Z strategy apply to annual donors versus major donors? And I’m like, well aren’t they all donors? How do you reconcile that? Any kind of experiences or feedback you would give to maybe a fundraiser listening and is like, “Ryan, that’s us right now. We’re so segmented based on our own internal categorization, not necessarily a donor’s journey.” What feedback might you provide to them to get them unstuck or moving forward?

RB: I would probably characterize it a little bit different, even beyond… We do have different strategies as it relates to, say, our direct mail as opposed to our sponsorships. Sponsorship, obviously those recurring gifts, direct mail is typically, whether or not they choose to respond to the next invitation to give. And so there is a distinction and difference that happens in the messaging there and then you have individuals such as major donors, which are really a hybrid of those two. 

Obviously, if you take the sponsorship or those continuity donors, they’ve already made that commitment to the organization and so it’s upon us to communicate in a stream that it shows them that that’s a good  investment. That they’re seeing a return on those types of things. That there is a satisfaction. 

People have a joy in giving. People love knowing that they’ve been part of a solution, that they’ve done something that’s good, and so those need to be the overarching themes involved in that communication stream.

For those that are part of our direct mail stream, which are needing to receive continuous invitations to give, it’s a different approach that we need to be continuing to remind people of the need to give, to outline the opportunity for them to give and then to, again, show how we’re a wise choice for their gift or towards that investment. And so whereas the one is communicating that the impact, the other is communicating the opportunity. For many of our major donors, they really perfectly straddle both of those.

There’s a part of them that they’re sponsors that are giving regular gifts and we need to continue to show them the impact of that gift. There is also then the fact that if they’re not aware or invited to give in deeper or wider or more substantial ways, they won’t.

Again, back to my faith journey; there’s in the scriptures, Jesus tells the story of a master that gives three sums of money to three different servants. And one of those goes out and makes a great return on that investment, was given five gold coins, comes back, he’s made five more. Second servant given three gold coins comes back, has made three more. And the last servant took that money and hid it. 

The idea that Jesus is talking about in that parable is he who has been faithful with little and has taken what they’ve been given and shown return on it, that they will be given much. Those who have not been faithful with little will not be given that same opportunity.

For me, that sponsorship is a wonderful illustration of that parable. That $38 a month; if we can communicate impact and show how we are truly able to change a life in a community through that regular gift, if that’s the story and the narrative that donors have seen and understood about our work, when we then approach them and then communicate an opportunity or a need, that they’re much more likely to participate at that level as well. It really originates in identifying who those donors are. Like you said; they’re people.

By and large, a lot of what the way people are wired and the things that connect them are not all that different. We like to know that we’re doing good, we like to know that we’re having impact. But the situation of our giving, whether we’ve already signed up to give a recurring gift or whether we’ve just given a one-time gift, that circumstance really dictates how people need to be approached and engaged and invited to participate.

How To Scale Nonprofit Systems

NB: Yeah, 100%. And I appreciate you showcasing how there’s that alignment between the various ways that we engage donors to their organization and how we can build better relationships with them, honestly, by being able to serve them in different ways.

One thing that you mentioned earlier is that there’s been challenges as you grow on your systems. Were you referring to the internal processes? Because one thing we see here on systems is that systems are actually made up of people, processes and platforming. Like software, like Virtuous. 

And so I’m curious if you can talk about that; how you guys approach that as you look to scale because that’s one thing we talk a lot about is are your systems actually designed to help you scale? And a lot of times they’re not, they’re actually limiting. And so I’d love for you to even briefly talk about your experience in that and where you guys are at in that journey.

RB: You’re exactly right that there are the tools then there are the processes; the means by which people are utilizing those tools. Again, we all engage with different organizations and have opportunities and have heard horror stories from different organizations as well as heard the things that have gone well. And by and large, a lot of organizations will tend to fall into a fallacy of thinking that they are remarkably unique, that therefore their processes need to be completely different than all other organizations.

And there can be elements of truth to that. No organizations are the same. We all serve different needs, we all engage different ways. But what can be a trap as it relates to that interplay between tools and between processes is many organizations will tend to try to get the tool to conform to their process, will try to utilize that the tool, in a way that naturally fits in the way that they have just organically done things over the years, and in many cases end up completely mis-using that tool or just completely under-utilizing the tool.

Whereas if, as an organization, if we are able to recognize the logic and different tool design and instead try to conform our practices to the tools that we’re utilizing, typically we’re going to be much better off. If we can have that ability to pivot in process, that allows the tools.

There are incredibly bright minds on the bleeding edge of technology and engagement and good thinking as far as the features or the structures, as far as how these tools are utilized. Why would you not want to take advantage of those? Why would you not want to have processes that can, in that sense, be on that bleeding edge as the tools continue to evolve and to refine and to improve. That’s not an easy transition.

It’s easy to state and it’s good to hold up as an ideal or a philosophy, but the reality is that there are some of these tools that are so core to our processes, and in many cases even core to our identity or our strategies that any time you try to change them, it’s not the equivalent of just a tooth extraction or things like that to change out. 

These tools become the equivalent of an organizational heart transplant. But if you do approach it as such and look to utilize the tool as designed and look to recognize that perhaps not all of our organizational processes are the sacred cows that we might think they are and willing to see where we might be able to conform, typically that short-term pain, and maybe it’s not short-term, those pains can linger. But those pains work towards a greater good.

For us, that’s where we’ve been. Again, when we saw growth so quickly. There’s that proverbial image of a ma and pa shop that exploded overnight and suddenly we’re having to do a lot of different things. And so processes were built not because they were necessarily most strategic or best, but just because that’s all there was time to do. 

We as an organization now are increasingly continuing that process of evaluating, constantly looking at different quality improvement processes to see, okay, are there ways that we can improve process to better conform or to better utilize different tools that we have available?

Pivots for Your Organization During Covid

NB: Yeah. And I think a lot of organizations, whether it’s for the sake of growth or it’s the current crisis that we’re all handling as far as a response to COVID, and that’s impacted organizations in so many different ways, we’re also having to pivot. It’s not always for the sake of growth, it’s also for the sake of just forced change. 

How have you all navigated the current moment of crisis? And specifically, what advice would you have for others that are leading the development or the individual private funding teams’ advancement? There’s CDOs. What advice do you have for them to keep top of mind as we continue to emerge from this and really begin to deal with the reality that’s a result of the crisis?

RB: Yeah, in the same way that processes can be sacred cows, at times strategies can be sacred cows. As I was talking with some of our program folks as far as folks in our field locations. We’ve got a wonderful program that is having life changing impact, but there are aspects that as they’ve begun to wrestle and recognize that many of the front line staff had initially been thinking, okay, once things return back to normal we’ll be able to resume activities as they were before. 

But not long into this they began to realize, well, there may never actually be a return to normal. Not to sound cliché, but that new normal is going to emerge. And if we are just buying time and treading water until we feel our old strategies become as effective as they were or as relevant as they were, we may continue to tread water until we can no longer and just continue to start sinking.

For us, we’ve really tried to, as it relates to fund development, look at everything. Things that we have been doing, recognizing that you know what? That may not be as effective as it once was. Things that we had looked at before and had passed on, they need to be re-evaluated. Those things may make a lot more sense in this current reality or there may be new things that have emerged that we were not aware of at all. We have really tried to focus on, first, looking to retain our donors. 

And in the current crisis, we all know that the adages, it’s easier, cheaper to retain a donor than it is to acquire a new one. And so we’ve been looking at all of those different things that are necessary to make sure that we are stewarding those donor relationships well so that we can retain that so that folks know when they give their monthly gift or substantial gift that they know that it’s going to have impact. That’s the first thing for us is to retain.

The second then is, you’re looking; okay, how do we maximize the existing channels that we have? Again, we had fundraising strategies in place. Some of those come under fire or become more challenging in the midst of the current crisis, others, perhaps with [inaudible 00:30:50] and messaging or things that like become much more effective. We have to recognize, okay, what pivots do we need to make? What do we have to accommodate to maximize opportunity within the existing channels?

And then lastly, we have to explore. We have to dedicate bandwidth to making sure that we’re looking at the horizon to see not just what’s the next step in front of us? But what does the new reality look like? Where do we need to be making intentional investments right now because of a possible horizon mark that we need to either be able to account for or just a possible horizon that we need to maximize the opportunity? 

NB: Yeah, and those are great reminders because I think those don’t go away. Those are first principles of fundraising and the challenges we have as fund developers who are looking to build sustainable growth over time. And we need to go back to those. 

That’s something that we’ve focused a lot on recently is just encouraging our customers and those prospects we interact with to remember what we’re doing and what are the first principles of that and how we engage donors and really connect them with the good that we’re doing in the world. I appreciate that reminder, Ryan.

RB: Certainly. Yeah.

NB: Well Ryan, this has been really helpful, and I know we’re running out of time so I wanted to just get your outtake. Article just came out by Chronicle Philanthropy that said giving is down $25 million or $25 billion in lost revenue in giving in the first half of 2020. I feel like we’re going to continue to see these headlines. 

What encouraging thought or point of focus would you drive people to that are seeing this and are concerned? They’re like, “How are we going to hit our goals? How are we going to make this happen from a fund development standpoint?”

RB: Yeah, you read a dozen different articles and you’ll get a dozen different experts talking two dozen different opinions as far as what’s going to happen. It is impossible to know. What we do know is some of that stuff that is in the rear view mirror; first quarter, second quarter, what has actually occurred. Again, I think we all have to utilize that information and use it to inform our pivots.

There was some great research by Fidelity not too long ago talking about the philanthropical giving that were roughly of those surveyed in relationship to COVID-19 that 25% of donors anticipated that they would end up giving more in response to the current environment, whereas about 21% said that there was a hesitancy that they felt like they could very likely end up giving less.

And so just doing that, I know that we’ve had to.

Again, we want to steward every donor relationship well, but we recognize that some may not be in the position where they are able to give now, but there are other donors that are willing to step up and to engage and to expand their level of giving. Donors tend to give to organizations they’ve given to before. Great opportunity to go into lapsed files and engage those segments of donors to see again as at least a name that they have some familiarity with. Are we that organization that they’re looking to give more in response? Are we an organization that they may consider doing so with? There are opportunities, certainly.

Even though I mentioned I had been a stock broker, and it’s both up and down markets. There are opportunities. They’re different. They’re different strategies. You engage them differently, pursue them differently. But there are opportunities within any type of economic climate, and so we just have to pivot in those strategies to make sure that, again, strategies are staying relevant to the current reality.

NB: Absolutely. And I think it just puts a stress on all of us as leaders of nonprofits to make sure that we’re presenting a compelling case for support as well. Not only reaching out, but we have to remember that there’s others that are reaching out. And if there are minimal opportunities, how do we make sure that we’re just being clear on the opportunity that individuals can have in partnership with you? And I think that’s becoming more and more important as we push through. I’ve already asked you one hard question so I won’t ask you a second hard question about what should we do with the stock market right now? Because that’s a mess. But we’ll circle up on a different podcast about the stock market right now.

RB: There we go.

NB: But Ryan, valued the time, appreciate your expertise, and look forward to continue to follow Food for the Hungry’s growth and just the impact that you all are having around the world.

RB: Great. Thank you so much, Noah. I really, really appreciate the time and appreciate all of you guys for doing this that serve so many organizations so well.

NB: Thanks for listening to this episode of The Responsive Fundraising podcast by Virtuous. Each episode we’ve designed to really give you the insights into the philosophy process and playbook of leading nonprofits so that you can grow giving and build deeper relationships with the people who matter most; your donors.

Fundraising insights you won’t delete.
Delivered to your inbox weekly.
How To Involve Your Board In Year-End Fundraising

How To Involve Your Board In Year-End Fundraising

How do you engage your board at year-end? Your board members can be important partners in your year-end fundraising campaign. But how do you inspire them to participate? What’s the…
Declutter Your Data

Declutter Your Data

Do you have messy data? When you’re a busy nonprofit, keeping up with delivering programs and communicating with donors, staying on top of your data often comes last on your…

Grow generosity with Virtuous.

Virtuous is the responsive fundraising software platform proven to help nonprofit organizations increase generosity by serving all donors personally, no matter their gift size.

“Virtuous truly understands nonprofits and the importance of our mission. And their open access to data and built-in custom reports gave us access to the data we need.”
Todd Shinabarger​
Chief Information Officer