FEATURED STORY ONE

Digging Into E-newsletters
This article is excerpted from an M+R Strategic Services whitepaper of the same title. Read the paper in its entirety, along with its accompanying charts and stats here.

“Urgent vote TOMORROW!” “Your account balance is overdue.” “Hurry, final sale ends tonight!”

With so many other, potentially more urgent messages competing for your e-mail list members’ attention, what can nonprofits do to maximize the likelihood that their e-newsletters will be opened, read and clicked on?

FEATURED STORY TWO

Top 25 E-mail Marketing Terms You Should Know
Sure, you might hear some really, really forward-thinking folks saying that e-mail and the Internet are so ’90s when it comes to nonprofit fundraising. But the truth of the matter is that a good deal of small and mid-sized organizations still are feeling their way.

That in mind, e-mail marketing firm Constant Contact offers this really basic and incredibly helpful glossary of terms for companies and organizations that are just starting to make e-mail marketing and fundraising a priority.

If you have ever felt out of your depth in a discussion about e-mail marketing, rest assured you are not alone. These top 25 common e-mail marketing terms and definitions below will help you expand your e-mail marketing vocabulary and make you look and feel like an expert.

EDITORIAL DIGEST

Fundraising Around the World
In the May issue of FundRaising Success, we turn our focus to the international face of fundraising. The charismatic, highly regarded Tony Elischer is our Guest Editor and has pulled together a fantastic team of writers whose stories will give you insight into the fundraising efforts, challenges and successes of your peers around the world. Why is that important? Many reasons. Most practically, your organization might well be looking to expand its programs and fundraising outside of the U.S., and there are very real differences you need to consider. But in a greater sense, fundraisers — no matter where they’re from — most certainly can benefit from recognizing that the passion to right wrongs and change the world is universal, that we all have things to teach — and to learn — and that the tapestry of our humanity grows richer with each colorful and unique new thread we add to it.

It’s Gold Awards Time Again!
Hard to believe, but the deadline for FundRaising Success’ fourth annual Gold Awards for Fundraising Excellence already is fast approaching! Cut-off for entries is July 11. You can find the entry form here.

The categories will be pretty much the same as last year, with some minor changes. Categories are:

* Direct Mail: Acquisition (50,000 or more mailed)
* Direct Mail: Acquisition (Fewer than 50,000 mailed)
* Direct Mail: Renewal (50,000 or more mailed)
* Direct Mail: Renewal (Fewer than 50,000 mailed)
* Special Appeal
* Package of the Year: The highest overall points-getter from among the other direct-mail winners
* Grand Control of the Year: Chosen from among the controls in the Who’s Mailing What! Archive
* E-philanthropy: For campaigns centered around e-mail and Web, with no direct-mail components
* Multichannel: For campaigns that combine any number of strategies, including direct mail
* Fearless Fundraising: For innovative, push-the-envelope campaigns that employ elements of mobile, guerrilla, social-networking or other cutting-edge strategies.

Gold Awards season is a busy time for us here at FS, but it’s also a lot of fun and gives us an opportunity to spend time with some of the best fundraising efforts the sector has to offer. We’re already looking forward to an influx of entries.

FEATURED RESOURCES

QUOTE

“Our findings show that there is a wide gulf between donors’ intended and actual giving. The largest segment of respondents (47 percent) said that their primary reason for giving to charities was to assist the needy. Yet in 2006, these donors dedicated only 6 percent of their giving to organizations that aim to meet people’s basic needs in the United States, and sent just 2 percent of their donations to organizations that aid people in other countries. At the same time, they gave the bulk of their charitable contributions (60 percent) to religious causes.

Respondents whose main philanthropic goals were to make their community or the world a better place (38 percent of the sample), to provide services that government doesn’t (5 percent), or to achieve other ends also made most of their donations to religious organizations.”

— Ellen Konar, Sheryl Sandberg and Melissa Brown, writing in the Winter 2008 edition of the Stanford Social Innovation Review. The article, “Destination Unknown” speaks to the results of a survey conducted by SSIR and Google regarding the discrepancy between donor intent and actual giving.