giving

Welcome to our special guest blog post series - "Millennial Perspectives: Voices of a Giving Generation." We hope you will join us each week until the Millennial Donor Summit on June 22, 2011, as we explore Millennial engagement with a variety of leading experts and practitioners.

This week, we've invited Andrew Ho, Manager of Global Philanthropy for the Council on Foundations to share his insights on how Millennial engagement is being redefined here in the US and around the world.

Philanthropy, much as with other things today, has stepped on the accelerator in terms of becoming a global phenomenon. The amount of charitable donations going overseas and to US-based international programs has doubled since 2003, according to the Foundation Center. The rise of philanthropy among the world’s wealthiest in the most recent Forbes survey of the top philanthropists now includes individuals from India (Azim Premji), Mexico (Carlos Slim), China (Li Ka-shing), Germany (Dietmar Hopp and Klaus Tschira), and Switzerland (Steven Schmidheiny). This is yet another example of the global nature of philanthropy now.

It is no coincidence that the rise of global philanthropy mirrors the growth of the millennial generation. Millennials are more connected, cognizant, and committed to tackling society’s ongoing challenges of a global scope than any generation before them. Technology and social media certainly facilitates the increase in connectedness and knowledge – and millennials have grown up in an age where the Internet has always existed. Now there are the tools to not only know what’s going on but know who else is passionate about global issues of the environment, poverty, global health, and education at a speed and on a scale that wasn’t previously achievable. The knowledge and connections spanning the globe – through study abroad trips in college, volunteering for a short-term stint in a developing country, or backpacking the world in a gap year, have led to higher levels of knowledge about the world, but more importantly a higher commitment to solve challenges in today’s world.  Philanthropy increasingly reflects this changing worldview as well, with more and more young people volunteering and making charitable donations.

Global philanthropy is no longer only writing a check or making a grant and sitting back to wait for the results–it is becoming much more involved than that.  Global philanthropy is drawing from the best of the sectors, and collaborating to find solutions.  Social stock markets, social impact bonds, and other hybrid solutions drawing from each of the three sectors demonstrate the merging, melding, and blurring of the business, government and nonprofit sectors. It isn’t so much about which sector or industry is responsible for solutions anymore, it is recognizing that any one cannot achieve success alone, and that it requires networks of committed citizens across the sectors to work together to develop solutions.  Bridging the gaps and increasing philanthropy's impact by breaking down traditional barriers of class, race, sector, and wealth are a work in progress, as are the development of new forms of philanthropy. Each country and culture affects philanthropy, and we all have much to learn from one another as we form our respective ethos of philanthropy.  

The Council on Foundations is committed to developing the next generation of philanthropic leaders and preparing them to take on positions of increasing leadership in the philanthropic sector. Whether through the Career Pathways program, the Next Generation Task Force, or through publications like Trading Power, the Council recognizes and values the development of new leadership in the philanthropic sector. Working with the Council are groups including 21/64, Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy, Resource Generation, and others are working together with under-40 philanthropic leaders around the world to make a difference. We are also working alongside groups in Brazil, Mexico, and China as they develop the next generation of philanthropic leaders in their respective country. Global philanthropy has tremendous potential for social change in the coming years, as philanthropy raises new leaders to increase collaboration across philanthropy, across borders, and across sectors.  

The philanthropic sector, at a young 100 years old, stands to grow tremendously in the second 100 years through new ways of communication, collaboration, and cooperation. By building trust, sharing knowledge, developing relationships, and strengthening the collective vision toward shared goals for a better society tomorrow, together this generation can extend philanthropy’s impact in pursuit of a better future, for all of us.

Often characterized simply by their “me-centric,” constantly connected ways, if you can catch Millennials with enough time in between a text or tweet, you might find a great deal of encouraging news about this rising generation. Millennials not only give to causes they care about, but they give generously – and, they’ll even roll up their sleeves and volunteer too. This is according to the second annual Millennial Donors Survey conducted by Achieve and JGA, and released earlier today.

The Millennial Donor Survey finds that of the more than 3,000 people (ages 20 to 35) who responded, 93 percent gave to nonprofit organizations in 2010, with 10 percent giving $1,000 or more. What does this mean for nonprofits? Millennials are giving, they’re giving generously, and if organizations aren’t focused on how to most effectively engage with these new donors – they won’t just be falling behind, they’ll have a difficult time catching up.  

It’s All About Face to Face

While organizations are all a flutter trying to lock in their short codes for SMS and text-to-give programs, the survey showed that Millennials actually respond best when there is an authentic personal connection as opposed to a blast email or text soliciting support. Of course, given that a large majority of Millennials are known to actually sleep with their phones, there are many assumptions that can be made about how they want to be reached. Yet, just as the survey showed last year, Millennials value personal contact over high-tech approaches.

When it comes to method of payment, Millennials prefer to give online, with 58 percent citing this as their preferred method. What may be surprising however is the discrepancy in how they use social media for communicating versus how they use it to give. Only a small number of Millennials donated via text (6%), Facebook (4%), phone (10%), and mobile apps (1%) – but none of those was heavily preferred. 

Trust is a Must

When asked to describe what motivates them to give, 85 percent of Millennials pointed to a compelling mission or cause, and 56 percent cited a personal connection or trust in the leadership of an organization. Friends and peers followed just slightly behind at 52 percent. Perhaps one of the more telling statistics to come out of the report was centered around the issue of trust. In fact, when making decisions to give, Millennials put such a value on trust that 84 percent said they would be somewhat or very likely to donate to organizations they can fully trust, and 90 percent would stop giving to an organization they could not trust. Transparency is a key factor in trust, as 70 percent said they trust organizations that report how financial support makes a difference.

Givers still Google

The survey showed that givers quickly turn to the Web for information about an organization as their preferred method – so, make it easy to find your content. Not only should you make the information easily accessible, but give them what they want and reach out on their terms.  In other words, once they reach you they want basic information and tools to take action whether that be giving or volunteering.   A surprising 65 percent want to find giving guides on individual websites explaining how their support will make a difference and 52 percent want to learn about specific volunteer activities.

Millennials Who Give More Volunteer More

Sure, Millennials are busy, but they’re nothing if not multi-taskers. The study found that when searching for the greatest indicators of volunteerism, organizations should look to giving levels. While 93 percent of survey participants donated money to a nonprofit, only 79 percent gave of their time – however, the more money people gave, the more time they gave, as well.  Just as in giving, the most compelling motivator for volunteering is also a compelling mission or cause at 84 percent while 55 percent said a friend or family member motivated them to volunteer.

But Wait, There’s More…

Over the course of the next couple of months leading up to the June 22 Virtual Summit on Millennial Engagement, we will be exploring these findings, dissecting them and making sense of what they mean for the future of fundraising and the future of our nonprofit sector. We’ll be providing tools to help your organization take a few strategic steps to strengthen and maintain relationships with Millennial donors.

We hope you’ll join us as we continue to explore this important space and breakdown common generational assumptions. You can download a copy of the full report here or simply flip through this prezi presentation we’ve pulled together with a summary of the key facts and takeaways. 

It doesn’t matter if you’re a nonprofit, a hot new restaurant or a wannabe fashion trend, one thing is certain – you’re spending a lot of time and energy these days figuring out how to attract and then keep Millennials coming back to your cause, your store or your brand.

When it comes to assessing Millennials' attitudes and preferences in supporting nonprofits, much can be assumed about what it is they want to know before giving, and how they want it. But thanks to Achieve and JGA, there is research that has helped shed some light on how to best engage Millennial donors, and you might be surprised to learn how they want to be reached.

Last year, the Millennial Donor Survey found that donors not only wanted to give financially, but they wanted to affect change and create direction – they wanted access to the board’s leadership and real opportunities to get involved. Perhaps we assume that since Millennials are doing everything else online, they must be giving there as well – but last year’s survey found that 91% of Millennial donors are at least somewhat likely to respond to a face-to-face request for money from a nonprofit organization (with 27% highly likely), but only 8% are highly likely to respond to an e-mail request.

This year Achieve and JGA are at it again. They have launched a new survey for Millennials to understand their donor preferences and to hear more about why donors decide not to support a cause, perceptions on gifting trends such as text campaigns, and views on young professional groups. The results of this study will be released in April 2011 and will help guide nonprofits that work closely with Millennials.

The information gleaned from this survey is important to all of us. If you’re a Millennial (ages 20-35, for purposes of the study) please take 5 minutes of your time to fill out this survey and help organizations throughout the country understand how to involve Millennials more strategically to impact our communities. We’ll be covering the results of the study here on Social Citizens when it’s released in April.

Does “philanthropy” need a re-brand? The question is one that keeps rearing its head, and earlier this week while participating in a conversation hosted by the One Percent Foundation, it really got me thinking.  My instinctive reaction was to say “of course it does” Philanthropy is a stodgy term that needs to be rebranded kind of like civic engagement needs a good facelift – it just doesn’t seem to resonate with the rising generation of do-gooders. At the Case Foundation we often talk about how the present and the future of philanthropy is not a bunch of rich people writing checks, but it’s in the power of the five-dollar donor, just as much as it is the fifty-thousand dollar donor.

After all, the power of micro-donations is making each of us philanthropists -- and indvidual donors typically account for three fourths of charitable giving each year. Yet, still very few of us consider ourselves to be such – we don’t like that word or we don’t think it applies to what we’re doing. If you want to make philanthropy something that engages the next generation (or as Rosetta Thurman challenges, the NOW Generation) while we’re still young, then philanthropy must be relevant to the way we live our lives. When you think about it, a philanthropist is simply someone who cares about a cause, and uses what they have to help. And now there are more ways than ever for people to exercise this power – be it texting, tweeting, or even embedding it into every day acts like buying products.

I just came across an interview that Sean Stannard Stockton of Tactical Philanthropy did for McKinsey’s new Learning For Social Impact Series.  Sean suggested (and I paraphrase) that in 1982 only 6% of people in the United States owned stock.  Two decades later more than 50% of us do –and the same thing could very much hold true for philanthropy. Its becoming main stream, and if the culture of investing which has taken hold in the United States can take hold in philanthropy and become an everyday habit, then you’ll find more nonprofessionals becoming engaged in philanthropy.  Sean’s broader point is that we need to put in place greater social impact assessments, and I certainly agree – but do we also need to bring the word philanthropy into the 21st century? Something to show we're not talking about our parents style of philanthropy (more significant dollars but later in life).

Ironically, just a few short years ago the world was inundated with philanthropic advisers – people tasked with helping the rich give away their money.  When the recession hit suddenly philanthropic advisers were hit with a branding problem and according to Robert Frank in a recent Wall Street Journal post, “some philanthropy advisers started rebranding themselves as “generosity coaches,” making the whole business seem more a matter of good morals than big money.”

No matter what we call it - giving, generosity, philanthropy or something completely different -- it seems there is a gap in the communications efforts by nonprofits which causes a good portion of people who have the ability to give regularly, to give only during crisis situations.

So, what you do you think? Is philanthropy positioned in people’s minds as something that everyone can be part of, or just the elite?

The mobile giving response to the Haiti earthquake signaled a clear shift in the public's willingness to use their phones as quick donation devices. The number of campaigns, the more than $35 million raised via this method, and the number of people who participated by kicking in $5 or $10 at a time are all impressive and meaningful data points. The ease and immediacy of text donations will surely continue to make it a go-to method for crisis response. But I wonder if it was really all it could have been.

At the time, some wondered if the mobile giving campaigns were a bit of a handicap in disguise because they might give someone the psychological satisfaction of having done their part by donating a quick $5 or $10, when they might have otherwise donated much more online, by mail or in person. It can be argued that it’s simple and small ask might have drawn in many people who might not have given at all.

The work in Haiti is far from done, but with crazy Icelandic volcanoes, a historic healthcare bill and continued concern over the global economy, it’s fading from the headlines already. And the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund, for example, continues to actively raise money for long-term rebuilding efforts. But I wonder how many of the people who contributed text donations during the first few days after the earthquake have even considered giving again. It seems none of the organizations employing mobile giving campaigns have figured out how to promote continued engagement.

I’ll offer myself as an example. I made two donations in the days following the earthquake – one to the Red Cross via text and one online to Partners in Health. Partners in Health has sent me three email updates on what my money has been doing and information about opportunities to continue being a part of the recovery effort. So far, I have received nothing from the Red Cross since the day I confirmed my donation via text – even though the terms and conditions of the donation stated I could receive up to four texts from them per month. I asked around a bit and heard of only one organization, based in Canada, that has done any follow up so far via text.

While I understand the constraints of 160 characters, I’m surprised and disappointed. I hoped we would see creative ways, or at least attempts, to continue engaging this mobile audience who sent $35 million to Haiti. Especially with more than 40 percent of Americans on smart phones, it seems these organizations could have sent a photo, a sentence, a link to their website with the promise of an update for those who click through. Had they done so, they probably could have found some repeat donors and advocates for their organizations and additional help for the people of Haiti. In some cases, the nonprofits may not yet be able to obtain the phone numbers of the people who gave or they may not have decided how to walk the line between maintaining engagement and annoying these donors in the relatively uncharted territory of mobile giving. Either way, I hope nonprofits are able to continue to move this ball forward soon. 

With all the capabilities of social media and technology, donors are beginning to feel more and more like empowered consumers and shareholders, who expect follow up. If the thousands of people who donated via text to Haiti aren’t engaged or asked again, they might not send another dollar to Haiti – a country that will need support for some time to come. When another crisis happens and organizations launch mobile giving campaigns in response, I trust that they will still succeed in raising a new record-breaking amount, but I hope to see some additional innovation by these organizations to help mobilize and engage people who want to give more than $10.

This interview is part of our "Social Citizen Sightings" series, in which we highlight how people are using their creativity, idealism, and digital fluency to support their causes every day.

Name: Daniel Kaufman

Organization where you spend a lot of your time: One Percent Foundation

Describe yourself in one tweet…or at least give it your best shot:  I am building a broad-based movement around next gen philanthropy by engaging Millennials+ in collective giving. #kindofcrazybutitworks

What’s currently uploaded to your kindle or on your nightstand?

Better by Atul Gawande and Let the Great World Spin by Colum McCann. Really enjoying both of them.

What was your inspiration for creating the One Percent Foundation, and what are you hoping to achieve?

I created the One Percent Foundation with a good friend after we realized that despite being socially conscious and engaged, we had never really thought about what we wanted to achieve with our own philanthropy. We started talking to our friends and heard the same three responses over and over:

• I don't give because I can't afford it.
• I don't know which organizations to support. There are so many out there--how am I supposed to distinguish between them?
• Whatever I give will be so small that it will be meaningless for the organization I give to.

We created the One Percent Foundation to solve these problems.

First, we ask people to make a baseline commitment of giving at least 1% of their annual income to philanthropic causes each year, half of which we ask to be given through OPF. We encourage monthly recurring donations to ease any financial burden and make it easier to budget. Giving $30/month is a lot easier than writing a $360 check in December for someone making $36,000 year that is paying rent and has student and credit card debt.

All money given through OPF is placed in a grant pool that is given out to nonprofits selected through a participatory grantmaking process. Everyone that makes the 1% Commitment (joins OPF) is invited to nominate, assess, and help select grant recipients. The process is entirely bottom up so grant recipients reflect the will of the community.

Finally, because we give out a limited number of large grants, participants are able to be part of making large grants to organizations. This means that they are making a substantial impact on the grant recipients. Ultimately, OPF is trying to create the infrastructure to support and engage Millennials in meaningful giving. This is a $16 billion market, an amount that dwarfs even the largest foundations. To put that in perspective, the Gates Foundation gave $3 billion last year. We believe that by democratizing philanthropy, we can empower our generation to be a powerful funding source, supporting innovative, creative, and exciting ideas, people, and organizations.

Is the Millennial Generation responding to this new form of collective philanthropy? How can people participate?

Definitely. Millennials, more than any other generation, seem to emphasize integrating good into everything they do and are comfortable with collective action, especially through leveraging their social networks. There is always a moment when I speak to Millennials when it clicks: "Wait a second, you mean I can give that little and have that big of an impact?" Becoming part of the One Percent Community is easy. You can check out the OPF website here and you can join here. We would love to have the Social Citizens community join us.

What do you see as the role of social media in enhancing opportunities for people to give back? Is it making it easier, or are people overwhelmed with choices?

From the perspective of the One Percent Foundation, social media makes possible large scale implementation. Collective giving requires a sense of community and social media enables bridging the gap created through online organizing. It is critical that our participants realize that they are part of a larger movement and we have found social media to be an important tool in making that happen.

From a broader perspective, I do think that there is a bit of information overload created by social media, making it hard for organizations to really stand out. However, the ease of communicating and giving more than makes up for any overload. With one click, one text, one tweet, or one status update, you can spread the word to thousands of networks and leverage the power of small donors.

You just launched a new campaign in time for March Madness. Tell us a bit about it and how can our readers get involved?

OPF just launched Grant Madness, a March Madness pool with a philanthropic twist. Run just like an NCAA office pool, OPF is hosting a pool where participants can make a $10 donation (the entry fee) and enter a bracket into the tournament. Instead of playing for money, the Grant Madness winner will win the right to select a nonprofit organization to receive a grant funded by the entry fees.

Grant Madness is a fun take on March Madness and gives people an opportunity to direct their pool money to good (instead of a new flat screen TV for the IT guy who sits down the hall). We'd love for the Social Citizens community to get involved.

To learn more about the One Percent Foundation, you can follow them on Twitter, check out their blog or find them on Facebook.

This blog post is part of the Embedded Philanthropy Blog Series, sponsored by Telecom for Charity. The blog series was launched in May 2009 to highlight expert thinking and encourage discussions on the state of embedded philanthropy in today’s economy. 

Over the long weekend I had an opportunity to catch up on some blog posts and stories that caught my eye last week. It’s not often that I’m disciplined enough to actually go back through my feeds to play catch up – but I’m glad I did. I was struck by a conversation taking place on Skoll Foundation’s Social Edge moderated by Jill Finlayson and Hildy Gottlieb called, Issue Fatigue – Fighting for Attention and Funds in an Aware World. The basic premise is that perhaps we’re not suffering from donor fatigue as much as we are overwhelmed by the causes that surround us as we go about our daily lives. 

• It’s the economy.  With the disappearing grants, dwindling corporate support, and declining donations, fundraising confidence is at 10 year low with more than 93 percent of fundraisers saying the economy is having a negative impact on fundraising. There is less money and more need.
• It’s the number of nonprofits. With more than 1.5 million in the U.S. alone (up about half a million in the past four years), and new people starting nonprofits, appeals are up and competition for discretionary funds is greater. 
• It’s the awareness. With Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth and global leaders speaking out, people believe they need to change their habits to save the world.  We have reached a tipping point in public understanding of climate change and many other issues.
• It’s the internet. With so many more ways for people to help and ways for nonprofits to reach supporters, it is no longer just direct mail. People can help their favorite nonprofits by nominating, voting, joining, sharing, evangelizing, blogging, petitioning, auctioning, gifting, loaning, and making small changes, taking small actions. 

Is your organization or cause tredding a little differently in this new hyper-connected world?  Do you see your personal style of giving changing? Or, are you just plain overwhelmed?

And the results are in - AT&T is calling Valentine's Day one the hottest texting days of the year, claiming 61 percent of adult cell phone owners surveyed plan to send a text message to their significant other this February 14. More than half of those surveyed, said they believe receiving a Valentine's Day text to mean the same or more than receiving a card.

And AT&T isn't the only one on to this trend.  Last night I came across a study released by the British National Trust, a charitable organization in charge of preserving and displaying some of the most famous love letters in our history. Over 2,500 adults took part, and while the majority would prefer to receive the old fashioned love letters and poems, the survey reveals that very few actually go through the trouble of penning them, choosing instead to type a simple “I luv U” text message. 

But texting isn’t the only way social citizens are spreading the love this Valentine’s Day. After all, it’s a desperate time for so many and we all feel a level of uncertainty that was not as apparent just a year ago. I put a call out on Twitter and Facebook asking friends and colleagues to share some of the ways they are planning to spread the love for “social good” this February 14, and you can find some of them below.  I also want to give a nod to the list of Valentine's that Give Back on Britt Bravo's Have Fun Do Good Blog, and my colleague Stephanie Hackman our resident  fashionista at the Case Foundation who reminds us why she "Heart's" Valentine's Day, and you should too.

• Honor your loved one with a life-changing gift. The Grameen Foundation is encouraging individuals to make a tribute to a loved one and bring a square to life by pledging $10 to help Stop Poverty Now.

• The folks at Global Voices think Valentine's Day is a day of love, friendship and communication. So, what better way to mark the occasion than to teach someone you love to blog or micro-blog?

• It's amazing but true: $5 can provide clean water for a person for 20 years. You can really make a difference this Valentine's Day and beyond, says Angel Mission via their viral video campaign that was spreading across facebook this past week.

• At MicroPlace a $20 donation in honor of your valentine gets you a box of fair trade milk chocolate from Ghana and a good feeling that your investment will make a difference in the life of a hard-working poor person.

• Wondering how to green your valentine’s day? The Guardian newspaper in the U.K. has plenty of tips and tricks to cut down on your environmental impact this February 14 with some green gift ideas.

*And yes, all of the text talk, reminded me of the picture our photographer’s captured as my husband and I were feverishly typing away on our blackberry’s on our wedding day last March. Only further revealing the mild addiction we are “working through.” I don’t think we were actually texting each other, but I wouldn’t put it past us… Happy Valentine’s Day!