« Podcast: Fundraising as Courtship | Main | How nonprofits can join the marketing revolution »

Tiny gifts: good or bad?

Maybe you've encountered donation websites that don't take gifts below a certain amount. The purpose, I suppose, is to keep the small-gift riff-raff out.

The Firstgiving Blog looks a this issue upon encountering a site that turned away donations under $25 (!): Every little bit helps for a good cause, doesn't it?

Why would you refuse to accept donations under $25? ... we all know that there are processing fees, but they're a lot more for checks than for online transactions. And processing fees are usually a percentage of the donation -- like Firstgiving's are -- so why would it matter if somebody wanted to give even just one dollar online?

I can think of one good reason you don't want tiny gifts: The vast majority of donors who give very small gifts keep giving very small gifts. Their value to you will remain small, and if you aren't careful, you can end up spending more cultivating them than they'll give you over time.

Someone who gives $1 (or even $5) -- especially online, where the norm is up around $100 -- is likely not a serious donor.

But there's more to it. Many small gifts are "Widow's Mite" gifts -- far more meaningful than their amount indicates. I know I'm in unmeasurable, spiritual territory here, but it's true. Charitable giving is a lot more than just a monetary transaction.

And that's why you should accept tiny gifts. Nothing's forcing you to spend on a $1 donor the way you would on a $50 donor.

Giving people a chance to give is a great service. One of the best you have to offer, really. It's just not right to turn people away from the benefits of giving just because they can't give very much. That's basically a harsh form of discrimination against the poor. Not all the tiny-gift donors are poor; some are just cheap. But we can't tell the difference, can we?

Here's what I'd do: Include the line, "Suggested minimum" (say $5 or $10), but don't enforce it.


Technorati Tag:

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b8ab69e200e552e42b9b8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tiny gifts: good or bad?:

Comments

Even though the organization must get the average acquisition gift over $15 to $25 (depending upon the analysis of repeat gifts for a given organization) to upgrade donors successfully, why would anyone turn down a gift regardless of the amount? I agree with your statement.

I love your analogy of the "widows mite." Who knows. A potential large donor may be testing the charitable organization to see what they do. Do they appreciate a donor's desire or need to help regardless of amount?

When judging the character of the organization, it is important to reflect a spirit of thankfulness. It's how well we do the little things that end up reflecting who we really are.

So accept the small gifts with open arms and send a heartfelt thank you note. The donor deserves your respect.

Thank you for picking up on this important point Jeff.

Another thing about the "widow's mite", is that some of them will actually be widows. And they'll be cash poor, but potentially asset rich. They care about what you do, they want to give, and give an amount they can afford. One day, they'll potentially leave some of their estate.

I realise this may appear cold, but I suspect THEY might not see it that way. Many of the Little Old Ladies I know are fabulous, have a different way of looking at the world, and are more web savvy than you might expect.

One tiny donor's perspective...

I consider myself a tiny donor - but I only start out that way (think: $10) until I feel "comfortable" with a charity. Being fairly new to having the kind of income that allows me to donate, I'm (perhaps) overly cautious. I do try to find out the most cost-efficient way to give to a particular organization (online, check, cash if it's an option), and then - piggy-backing on your more recent post regarding customer service - increase my level of contribution based on how it's handled. I also choose tiny charities because my $10 is more meaningful to someone raising $20,000 for a project than, say, Unicef with its kazillions of donor dollars.

Well I just started earning and I frankly can't give much but I make it a point that I give only when I genuinely want to. Turning me away seems silly to me because at some point I might be earning more, then I definitely would not be giving to that charity!!

For online communites maybe transacting say a $1 contribution would cost half that amount. I dunno.

whatever the size or the amount, it's the thought that counts....

The comments to this entry are closed.


If you're serious about raising money from donors, you need to get serious about donors. More than ever before, donors are insisting that you share power with them, not treating them like passive ATMs. This blog is about the ways you can do that -- and the rewards that await you and your donors when you do.

Jeff Brooks, creative director at Merkle, has been serving the nonprofit community for nearly 20 years. He wants to be a curmudgeon when he grows up, and considers blogging great training. You can reach him at
<jbrooks [at] merkleinc [dot] com.More
  See this blog's policies.
A great partner for the nonprofit that wants to get donor-powered and grow revenue like crazy!
Subscribe by e-mail

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


AddThis Feed Button

Add to Technorati Favorites