Sustainable Fundraising Practices

I sent out my email newsletter today. And I had no idea the title “don’t erase yourself; because it affects our data and AI” will come back with so many responses in the email. Seeing that it needs to be said, slowly and lovingly, I am pasting a snippet of my email letter here – for those who are not yet (and no pressure to join) of that newsletter. ********************* In the last 3 months, I have had 4-7 DMs or post-conference questions, asking whether they should ●  hide parts of their identity when writing to donors (and accordingly store in their data)? ●  avoid including pronouns in their email signature? ●  downplay where they are from, their accent, or how they show up? The question is a growing concern and, unfortunately, a familiar hesitation—wanting to be authentic and not offend anyone. Here is what I tell them: Do not erase yourself. Your identity is not a liability, it is proof of your existence. And sharing that authentically in your data and communications is a signal - of trust, transparency, and courage. When we hide essential pieces of who we are, especially in donor communications, we send a quiet but powerful message: that there's a "right" way to be in this sector—and that it doesn't include all of us. That authenticity should be edited out. But here is the thing you and I need to understand: our identity is not a reason for our privileges, nor is it a permission to suffer/cause harm. Our choices, however, are. For example, pronouns in your signature are not a distraction. They afford clarity. They are part of your commitment to make your spaces more inclusive—so that some identities don't always have to do the heavy lifting of explaining themselves. When you include yours, you help shift that burden. And that's authentic leadership. And your story, your voice, your lived experience – all add depth to your work and the relationships you build. Of course, there's nuance. If you are in a high-stakes conversation with a donor whose values you don't know well, it's okay to be thoughtful about how much personal detail to share. But thoughtfulness is different from self-erasure. And over time, we want to cultivate donor communities that value authenticity, not just polished narratives. We can't ignore this truth - now is the moment our histories will write how our choices meant showing up authentically—where you and I own, "This is who I am, and I lead from that place." Because when we do that, we create a culture where others—staff, board members, community partners—can do the same. And that is not just good philanthropy practice. That is liberation in action. And that affects our data and AI. So, my advice? Show up. Fully. Authentically. You are not too much. You are not too different. You are exactly the human our sector needs. #nonprofits #community

Campaigns get so much attention in fundraising, rightfully so. However, many of us fail to understand that rather than a curtain call, campaigns should end with a critical handoff that provides our organizations with an incredible opportunity for follow-up that inspires donors and their giving for years beyond the campaign. As soon as a campaign is complete, the window to thank donors in meaningful ways, share the first signs of impact, and ensure the new connections sparked during the campaign carry forward into the next chapter, begins to close. Across our Innovation Partners, it’s incredible how many organizations seize this exact moment with a natural handoff to a Virtual Engagement Officer. We’ve all seen participation suffer during campaigns as we focus on larger dollar giving. That’s exactly why so many Innovation Partners are bringing in Virtual Engagement Officers (VEOs) to recapture lapsed donors. Other Innovation Partners saw major momentum from their campaigns and an influx of donors. These partners are developing new portfolios for their VEOs to focus on retention, sharing impact, and building relationships in ways that lead to the natural outcome of giving. For example, Baylor University's unexpected surge in millennial giving during its recent campaign inspired a new focus for the Virtual Engagement Officer—keeping these donors engaged and building lasting connections that will shape the future major gift pipeline. Meanwhile, as Western Carolina closes its campaign, traditional frontline fundraising staff are focused on dollars in the door. Meanwhile, the VEO is actively widening the overall circle for future growth by rebuilding participation, increasing donor counts, and keeping the new donors close with stewardship and cultivation. The University of Oklahoma Foundation’s VEO is already looking ahead, organizing the new interest the campaign unlocked and aligning prospects to the right portfolios so the next chapter starts with a ready-made pipeline. Each of these teams shows us that trusted digital labor in the form of Autonomous Fundraising represents an opportunity that wasn’t available just a year ago. With Autonomous Fundraising, campaign completion is truly the handoff, not the curtain call. Virtual Engagement Officers empower us to deepen support from these new and re-engaged donors, preparing us for the inevitable next campaign before this one even closes.

Dear funders of charities and nonprofits, If you want evaluation and reporting on the funding you are providing➡️Fund the costs of an evaluation specialist, staff time to develop and implement feedback collection, data analysis, and report generation If you want collaboration and partnerships➡️Fund the costs of time and energy required to conduct outreach, exploratory meetings, develop shared frameworks and outcomes, and ongoing learning If you want organizational sustainability➡️Provide unrestricted, multi-year funding which ensure programs and efforts can continue into the future If you want innovation➡️Provide funding to allow for mistakes and learning to happen, and for the multiple years it might take to see an idea take root, while also remembering it may not work at all If you want volunteer engagement for your team members➡️Provide funding for the labour and energy it takes to organize meaningful volunteer engagement opportunities Having expectations without providing support to make them happen is a recipe for stretching an organization beyond its capacity to deliver. Also, a good place to start is to ask is if your expectations are reasonable and necessary to begin, so you can remove any excess burden from the organizations you are funding. They have enough to do already!

Since the USAID cuts and broader donor shifts, I’ve seen an increasing number of nonprofits seriously considering launching commercial arms—essentially adapting social enterprise models to generate revenue for their impact work. Makes sense. Funders are asking about “sustainability,” and social enterprise sounds like a solution. For most of my career, I led development at an organization with a hybrid model— mostly philanthropy, with a bit of commercial revenue. Funders’ eyes 𝘭𝘪𝘵 𝘶𝘱 when we mentioned earned income. But behind the scenes? It was a 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗹𝗲 to build. At our peak, that revenue covered 15% of the budget. But most years it was much less. Spring Impact’s 2024 report on nonprofit funding kinda backs this up: just 6 of 28 orgs they studied got any funding from end users. Only 4 charged other NGOs or CBOs. Commercial revenue for nonprofits isn’t easy, and usually only makes up a small slice of the budget/revenue. So if you’re thinking about going this route, some questions to chew on:   • 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿? Do you have the time, capital, and team capacity to build this out? In my experience, this was the core tension. Everyone wants ROI clarity before investing—but you have to invest to get that clarity. 🙃   • 𝗖𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁? Design a pilot. Find someone to fund it. Measure both income and impact.   • 𝗗𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻? If your mission is to provide a public good to those most in need, charging them might contradict that—unless the price is truly affordable, or someone else (like government) is footing the bill. 𝘐 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘴. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘴, 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘢𝘺.   • 𝗜𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗶𝗻—𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘀? A revenue model needs to be baked into your strategy and impact model, not tacked on as a side hustle. I’m not saying don’t go for it. I’m saying: go in with eyes open. Building a commercial arm takes strategy, time, and deep alignment—it’s not a quick fix, and it won’t look the same for every org.  I’m sharing this not to discourage, but to offer perspective from someone who’s been in the trenches for 8+ years. You’re 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 if your org doesn’t have a business arm. And you’re definitely not failing if grants are still your mainstay. Sustainability has many paths—what matters is choosing the one that fits your mission and reality.🌱 ✨ Check the report here: https://lnkd.in/dVhkcQGC What lessons are you learning on your sustainability journey? Let’s trade notes 👇🏾 #fundingafrica #internationaldevelopment #fundraising #socialenterprise #nonprofitfunding

If I had to rebuild nonprofit impact reporting from scratch today, I wouldn’t start with glossy annual reports. I’d start with: Timing. Because most nonprofits don’t lose donors due to lack of results. They lose them due to lack of memory. Here’s exactly how I’d rebuild donor reporting so it sticks: 1. Respect the 72-hour rule Cognitive science shows memory fades after 3 days. If you wait 3 months to share impact, donors forget the emotional spark that led them to give. Don’t let the moment slip. • Send an update within 72 hours. • Even if it’s raw or imperfect. • Tie it directly to the donor’s gift. Momentum beats polish. 2. Micro-updates, not mega-reports Stop saying: “Wait for our end-of-year report.” Start saying: “Here’s what your gift did this week.” Short videos, quick photos, a 3-line story. Your donors want to feel progress, not sift through 20 pages. 3. Make impact a habit, not an event The best donor journeys are built like fitness routines. Consistent, bite-sized reps, not sporadic marathons. Do this instead: • Weekly “impact snapshots” • Monthly behind-the-scenes notes • Quarterly deep dives (not the other way around) Build rhythm. Build trust. 4. Anchor updates to emotion, not just outcomes Data fades fast. Emotion lingers. • Instead of “We planted 5,000 trees”… Say: “Meet Lucia. She’s breathing cleaner air today because of you.” Stories keep the trigger alive. 5. Create recall moments If you want donors to give again, bring them back to their first spark. • Replay the video that moved them. • Send the photo that made them act. • Use the same language that triggered their gift. Remind them why they cared in the first place. Delayed reporting doesn’t just cost attention. It costs retention. In 2025, donor communication should feel less like PR. And more like a memory anchor. Not an annual report. A living reminder. Comment “retention” and I’ll send you our playbook on how to do all of this using LinkedIn. With purpose and impact, Mario

An appeal isn't just a request for donations—it's about creating experiences that donors treasure. It's crucial to understand that we're not asking donors to support our mission; instead, we're aiding them in fulfilling their vision of a better world. Here’s how we make donating a joyful and meaningful act: 1. 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞: Shift the focus from needs to highlighting opportunities for donors to make significant changes in the world. 2. 𝐄𝐱𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭: Provide donors with intimate insights and special access to see the impact of their contributions firsthand, making them feel like integral parts of our journey. 3. 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Move beyond standard acknowledgments. Customize your gratitude to reflect the unique impact of each donor’s contribution. 4. 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐰𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬: Share powerful stories that illustrate the direct results of their generosity, portraying donors as the heroes of these narratives. We have the power to transform giving into an enriching experience, elevating our donors from mere supporters to valued partners in a shared mission. By engaging donors meaningfully, we celebrate and support their aspirations to improve the world.

As a Communications Officer in an NGO, targeting donors, funders, and partners on social media requires strategy — not just storytelling. Here’s how I would approach it: 1. Segment Before You Speak Not all audiences are the same. Donors want impact, transparency, and emotional connection. Funders want data, scalability, governance, and measurable outcomes. Partners want alignment, visibility, and shared value. A single generic post won’t convert all three. Content must be intentional. 2. Lead With Impact + Evidence Social media is crowded. Credibility wins attention. I would consistently publish: Before/after impact stories Clear outcome metrics (beneficiaries reached, % change, ROI of intervention) Visual dashboards and infographics Short case studies Numbers build trust. Stories build connection. Together, they build funding confidence. 3. Position the Organization as a Thought Leader Donors don’t just fund projects — they fund competence. I would create: LinkedIn articles on sector insights Commentary on policy trends Reflections on lessons learned from field implementation Data-driven threads on SDG alignment This attracts institutional funders looking for strategic partners — not just implementers. 4. Showcase Partnerships Publicly Tag existing partners. Celebrate collaboration. When organizations see their peers working with you, social proof increases credibility. Partnerships attract partnerships. 5. Clear Call-to-Action Every campaign should answer: Are we seeking grants? Corporate sponsorship? Strategic collaboration? Technical partners? The CTA must be visible and specific — website link, proposal deck, contact email, impact report. 6. Retarget & Nurture Social media is the first touchpoint, not the final conversion. Connect with decision-makers on LinkedIn Send tailored follow-up messages Share quarterly impact briefs via email Invite prospects to webinars or virtual field tours Campaigns convert when communication continues beyond the post. Key Takeaways Targeting donors, funders, and partners on social media is not about posting more. It’s about: Strategic messaging. Evidence-based storytelling. Consistent positioning. Relationship building. Because funding follows credibility. #NGOCommunications #FundraisingStrategy #DevelopmentSector #SocialImpact #CommunicationsOfficer #CommunicationsManager

I had coffee chats with EDs of 53 nonprofits that collectively raise $200M+/year. These are the secrets that I learned: 1. Invite funders for a site visit, always. 2. Search for funding by looking at peer organization’s funders. The highest signal that a funder is interested in your work is not that they claim to "value" a category that you belong to, but rather that they’ve funded an organization with the same programming. 3) Donor fatigue is a myth, sort of. Atypical appeals / capital campaigns don’t usually cannibalize regular giving, if the campaign is transparent. 4) Seek funding from: 1) previous funders, 2) funders of peer organizations, 3) local foundations with relevant priorities 4) national foundations with relevant priorities 5) everything else. In that order, or you're being inefficient with capacity. 5) Don’t avoid hiring, but hire carefully. EDs of small orgs can’t grow impact by doing more in the same amount of time. Quality of work inevitably drops, and the org risks over-reliance on a single individual. 6) Government agencies don’t fund organizations they believe in — they fund organizations they trust. Working with local, state, fed agencies requires long-standing relationships, much, much more than private foundations. Foundations expect some experimentation/failure when funding, agencies expect guaranteed results. 7) Send handwritten letters to funders It's the most underrated and underutilized stewardship strategy in 2025. Easiest way to implement this is have a volunteer write on a blank piece of paper and mail it out with each new outbound grant application. If there’s more capacity, thank historical funders with notes. I talked to one org that had a ~25% success rate with unsolicited requests to funders no formal application process with handwritten notes, and another org with a 60%+ win rate with normal grant applications when they did this. With individual donors, orgs can expect to see ~30% lift in average check size with handwritten notes. This is my first post, let me know if I should post more! I have the privilege of meeting with more EDs / development directors than probably almost anyone else on the planet, so I thought I'd share these insights in a space where evidence-based development strategy is so hard to find.

Many donor conversations focus on what we want from them. These 5 questions focus on what matters to them: 1. "What first connected you to our mission?" (Reveals their personal story and values alignment) 2. "Of everything we do, what resonates most with you?" (Identifies which aspects of your work they value most) 3. "What impact would you most like to see your support create?" (Uncovers their vision and aspirations) 4. "How would you prefer to stay connected with our work?" (Respects their communication preferences) 5. "Who else in your life might find meaning in this work?" (Opens doors to their network naturally) The magic happens in the follow-up: "Tell me more about that..." Then, you can mirror: "It sounds like you're saying that..." These questions transform transactional interactions into relationship-building conversations. They signal that you value the person, not just their wallet. I've seen these questions uncover major gift opportunities, reveal passionate volunteers, identify board prospects, and most importantly—build authentic relationships that last. What's your go-to question when speaking with donors?

Your major donor just called and listed out all of their frustrations. You won't like what they had to say. It wasn't about money. It wasn't about competing priorities. It wasn't about the economy. It was about you. "They never told me what my gift accomplished," they said. "I gave $25,000 and got a form letter thank you. Then nothing for eight months." "When I finally called to ask about impact, they couldn't give me specifics. Just vague statements about 'helping the community.'" "I realized they didn't see me as a partner. They saw me as an ATM." ‼️ The organizations losing major donors aren't victims of donor fatigue. They're victims of donor neglect. ‼️ Your major donors don't leave because they can't afford to give. They leave because you can't afford to care. Pull up your major donor communications from the last year. For each donor over $10,000, ask: 👉 Did they receive specific impact reports tied to their gift? 👉 Did someone call them personally within 3-5 days? 👉 Did they get invited to see their impact firsthand? 👉 Did you ask for their input on organizational direction? If you answered "no" to any of these, you've got a problem. The most successful major donor programs I work with treat donors like investors, not transactions: 👉 They provide quarterly impact reports with specific outcomes. 👉 They invite donors to strategic planning conversations. 👉 They offer behind-the-scenes access to programs and leadership. 👉 They ask for advice, not just money. Your major donors aren't leaving because they don't care about your mission. They're leaving because you don't care about them. Fix your relationship problem before you blame donor capacity. Because in fundraising, how you treat donors after they give determines whether they'll give again.