Best Practices

While Google is disrupting a lot of businesses, it has it limits.

Any free search engine, no matter how much money it generates in ad revenue, has it limits. In effect, we get what we pay for.

CPR has mastered the most pristine search techniques, to quickly prove what's real — and what's not — from every search engine. We're vigilant about systematically avoiding "false positives" and statistical miss-hits.

During economic times that remain challenging for many, it's tempting for those responsible for budgets to misinterpret what a free search engine can do. In the hands of true experts, it can do a lot. But non-specialists risk much and create significant opportunity costs when, in effect, they spend all day Googling. Nothing is more costly than wasted time.

Try a couple of tests against the experts:

  • How quickly can you find the biggest gift Bill Gates has made? And make sure you're not mixing up Bill Gates with his father, who shares the same name! An expert can accomplish this in about ten minutes.

  • In the area of Donor Upgrades — or ensuring that lower level supporters are giving to capacity — it’s almost always more cost effective to increase the contributions from a long-standing donor, as opposed to trying to acquire a new one.

    Some donors sit in a nonprofit's database giving at a relatively low level for years. With the notable exception of universities and health care settings, which often have solid demographic data, prospect research tends not to serve planned gifts well. Planned giving is a relatively discreet business, where the best research is self-identified from the prospects.

    Still other donors may support a nonprofit at a relatively low level and give larger amounts elsewhere. Why? And which, if any, of these lower level donors should be targeted for research and solicitation? The search for appropriate donor upgrades is about patterns. Here's a quick example. Say a nonprofit offers health care services. In that nonprofit’s database there are several lower level donors who might capable of giving more. Take this challenge to if you can wisely invest an organization's limited research budget. Choose which of the following deserves additional research by clicking on an option below. See if the pros agree with you:

Prospect: Mr. and Mrs. John T. Smith III

Last five years of giving:

  • $900 in 2022
  • $500 in 2021
  • $300 in 2020
  • $200 in 2019

Total Giving: $2,250

Major gift to a competitor of your non-profit: $25,000 one time gift
Known by a member of your organization's board or staff: YES
Age: 55

The pros agree.

The pros disagree.

Prospect: Oscar Garcia

Last five years of giving:

  • $3,000 in 2022
  • $3,000 in 2021
  • $3,000 in 2020
  • $3,000 in 2019

Total Giving: $12,000

Major gift to a competitor of your non-profit: $1 million +
Known by a member of your organization's board or staff: YES
Age: 64

The pros disagree.

The pros agree. This person has already made a major gift elsewhere to another competing organization; the competition got to them before you did. People usually give close to the heart. Unless you could prove that your prospect was capable of multiple $1 million pledges, another big gift is unlikely. Of course, if your board member contradicts the hard data, then listen to your board member because the best research comes from personal relationships.

Prospect: Marie Wang

Last five years of giving:

  • $250 in 2022
  • $200 in 2021
  • $200 in 2020
  • $75 in 2019

Total Giving: $1,175

Major gift to a competitor of your non-profit: $100,000 pledged in the last five years
Known by a member of your organization's board or staff: NO
Age: 80

The pros disagree.

The pros agree. Even though this person proves she is capable of a much larger gift, and she has given in increasing amounts, the sporadic pattern feels like she had a revelation or inspiration. But, in effect, that gift looks transactional, not relationship driven, so a “one shot deal.” The facts are that she's an older, single woman with no known contact to the organization and that her prime earning years are behind her.

In the above cases, one name would probably pay off and the others would not. But if you've got 5,000 names to evaluate, CPR is equipped to systematically handle large volumes of names and evaluate which are the most likely prospects that will give more. CPR has defined the tried and true patterns that can help you develop lower level donors into major gifts prospects.