Winning Back Lapsed Donors with Concerted Stewardship Before Asking
Handwritten Direct Mail outperforms other types of direct mail and other types of a marketing in a number of different ways, and has a wide range of use-cases for a number of industries ranging from non-profit fundraising to political campaign, from home services to real estate.
Zooming in on non-profits, such use cases include stewardship and acquisition, and at the nexus of the two sits lapsed donor win-back. Lapsed donors are past donors who haven’t given in the last year (sometimes called LYBUNT, which stands for “Last Year But Unfortunately Not This year) or even longer (sometimes called SYBUNT, which stands for “Some Year But Unfortunately Not This year”).
In fundraising parlance, a donor who has not given recently is considered cold (borrowing from sales terminology where promising leads are referred to as hot, and less promising leads are referred to as cold - hence the term “cold calling”) The more time that has elapsed since a donor has given, the “colder” that donor is considered.
We recently began a 6-month test with a customer, using handwritten direct mail to win back lapsed donors.The results speak for themselves.
The Customer
Quoting their website verbatim, Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center (AWCC) is a sanctuary dedicated to preserving Alaska’s wildlife through conservation, education, research, and quality animal care. AWCC takes in injured and orphaned animals year-round and provides them with spacious enclosures and quality animal care. Most of the animals that arrive at the AWCC become permanent residents and will always have a home here.
This outstanding organization not only does an exceptional job executing on an incredibly important mission, but also boasts a staff that is passionate, professional, and incredibly compelling when it comes to describing their many impressive organizational achievements.
In addition to serving as a hotspot for visitors and locals who enjoy Alaska’s diverse and exotic wildlife, the organization champions conservation efforts that saves orphaned animals and has even helped introduce Bison on the brink of extinction back into the wild.
This organization not only has a unique mission, however, but also has some unique challenges in raising funds for that mission, which is where Postalgia came in.
If you love animals, their instagram is seriously worth a follow!
The Challenge
When we first met with Development Director Becky Chambless, she described to us how her organization enjoys support from many one-time donors who are visiting the wildlife conservation center as part of their “bucket list” trip - retirees, families, couples, etc… who come from out-of-state to enjoy a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
They come in for a tour and feel compelled to support the excellent work that AWCC does with a gift, but then do not give again. AWCC has a list of more than 10,000 of these lapsed donors.
The challenge, then, is how to encourage repeat and ongoing donations amongst these lapsed donors who do not directly benefit from the services that the organization provides (most live out-of-state) and do not feel connected to the ongoing mission of the organization (most viewed their experience with AWCC as a one-time interaction).
The Test
When conceptualizing how best to tackle this challenge, we discussed the goal of recapturing the positive feelings towards the organization that compelled donors to give in the first place (even if it was impossible to recapture the magic of physically being there), and to make donors feel connected to the mission.
We considered what had not worked in the past, both for AWCC and for other similar organizations: namely aggressively asking cold leads for further donations with long-winded appeals, or attaching a hard ask in a thank-you note for a gift that could be several years old.
We decided that while “thasking” (a portmanteau of “thanks” and “asking”) would be inappropriate, as would an appeal letter after the donor had lapsed. The goal here was to make the donors feel like they were a part of the ongoing mission, and the first step in the process of achieving that goal was to make them feel like someone at the organization cared to keep them abreast of the goings-on of the wildlife conservation center.
We decided that rather than test one letter to the entire list, we would aim for depth rather than breadth, with a campaign of 4 separate mailings to approximately a quarter of the list of lapsed donors.
The plan was two stewardship pieces, a holiday card, and an end-of-year appeal.
For the two stewardship pieces we designed a double-sided newsletter, heavy with information and personal touches, and light on any kind of ask. Inspired by research undertaken at the Yale School of Management, we decided that while we would avoid any kind of hard ask, we would include a reply envelope to capitalize on any gifts - though we did not expect many gifts until the final mailout of the campaign.
The newsletter was mailed along with a reply envelope and pledge card in a handwritten outer envelope, and included a handwritten message from the executive director of AWCC. The first newsletter highlighted the work that AWCC does with orphaned animals, and the second focused on the stunning work that AWCC has done to bring wood bisons in Alaska back from the brink of extinction.
The third piece - which has yet to be sent - is a simple thanksgiving card, expressing gratitude and wishing the recipient a happy holiday. It will not include any reply coupon or reply device, and will have no ask of any kind.
This piece was inspired by a test that we ran with Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Boston, and we expect it to dramatically increase results on the end of year.
All three of the first pieces were designed to give the lapsed donors a sense of connection and ongoing investment with the organization and its mission. None were expected to perform well on their own, but were rather meant to “warm up” the lapsed donors for the end-of-year appeal.
While the third and fourth installments of this plan have yet to be implemented, the results that have come in already surprised us and surpassed our most optimistic expectations.
The Results
One thing that we took pains to discuss in all of our conversations with AWCC is that we did not expect many - if any - donations to come in directly from the first three of the four mailings; all three were meant to be an investment that we hoped would pay dividends on the fourth mailing.
Similarly, we discussed that lapsed donor win-back is one of the few direct mail campaigns that are sent out despite not always being cash-flow positive or even break-even in the short term; many organizations are very comfortable with undertaking lapsed donor win-back campaigns, or new donor acquisition campaigns, that cost more than they make back in immediate donations, and even consider these campaigns a success. That’s because with proper stewardship, those donors continue to give for years, hopefully in increasing amounts, and so a campaign that costs $2,000 and only nets $1,500 can easily net $20,000 over 15 years.
With that in mind, we were blown away by the results of the first mailing, which we expected to produce almost no short-term results.
With these encouraging results, we are excitedly awaiting the outcome of the second newsletter (which has already been mailed), the thanksgiving card, and especially the final end-of-year appeal.
This mailing had fewer than 2,000 recipients, with no actual ask, received 53 donations totalling $8,106. Those donations also included 3 people who signed up for monthly donations. Their pledges total a further $900 for the year (and are expected to continue after the year ends).
The mailout itself only cost $2,500. The return on investment for this campaign, which was expected to be a loss-leader, actually resulted in a 264% return on investment.
Also very gratifying is the fact that 74% of the donations came from out of state, which is an encouraging sign that AWCC is achieving their goal of winning back lapsed donors who once visited Alaska and gave what then appeared to be a one-time gift.
Of note but not surprising is that 79% of the donations were by check (mailed back using the reply devices included) and the rest were electronic.