《M+R：2024年非營利組織電子郵件營銷基準報告（英文版）（44頁）.pdf》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關《M+R：2024年非營利組織電子郵件營銷基準報告（英文版）（44頁）.pdf（44頁珍藏版）》請在三個皮匠報告上搜索。

1、225 players20-25 min4Section NameTABLE OF CONTENTSThe Game is AfootOpening Moves:Key FindingsHow to Play3511STARTFundraisingAdvertisingEmail MessagingSocial MediaMobile MessagingWebsite PerformanceBenchmarks:The Game13452959396782GAME ONParticipantsGlossary7479EXPANSION PACKGUESS WHO YOUR M+R BENCHM

2、ARKS GAME MAKERSWe have more resources,advice,tools,and other fun stuff waiting for you at .Find out more about working at M+R and join our crew at ARE M+RAND WE ARE NOT PLAYING AROUNDWe believe that the nonprofits we work for are essential to advancing the cause of justice,alleviating suffering,and

3、 solving the greatest challenges we face.We bring experience,talent,and unshakeable dedication to our clients through fundraising and supporter engagement,movement building and issue advocacy,and message and brand development.2Section Name*THE GAME IS A FOOTNOTEPlay the M+R Benchmarks Mystery Game!W

4、in fabulous prizes!Impress your friends?We couldnt very well make a board-game-themed Benchmarks and not invite you to have a little fun with it.Step 1:Hidden throughout this introduction are the names of five of the suspects from the board game Clue(thats Cluedo for our UK friends).Identify the mis

5、sing suspect,and youll have your culprit.Step 2:There are a bunch of Clue weapons lying around here somewhere,too.One is missing thats your weapon.Step 3:Identify the classic Clue location where it all happened.You can solve the mystery without leaving this page but if you read the M+R Benchmarks St

6、udy carefully youll encounter a well-defined hint or two before the end.Think youve got it all figured out?Email us at with your answer(it should look something like“It was culprit with the weapon in the location.”),and if youre right well send you a prize!(If you are not right we will probably give

7、 you a hint.Well just be so excited someone wanted to play the M+R Benchmarks Mystery Game!)Offer valid while supplies last.Void where prohibited.Prohibited in the Void.“It is of the highest importance,therefore,not to have useless facts elbowing out the useful ones.”Arthur Conan Doyle,A Study in Sc

8、arlet Theres a fair bit of detective work involved in building a successful digital program.We collect evidence,we investigate clues,we question everything and everyone to get closer to the answers we seek.Its a difficult game,and most fundraisers and marketers face two problems:1.Not having enough

9、information to make solid,data-driven strategic decisions.2.Having too much data,overwhelming our ability to process and make use of it.To help solve the first problem,weve compiled as much reliable data as we possibly can on fundraising,advocacy,and marketing metrics across digital platforms.The de

10、tailed charts and data points throughout the M+R Benchmarks Study are designed to allow any nonprofit to compare the results they are seeing to what their peers are reporting,and identify which parts of their program may not be cutting the mustard.To help solve the second problem,we have run extensi

11、ve analyses to identify key trends,spot weird outliers,and put the findings into context.And we know that strategic decision-making is rarely black and white,so we have also asked our nonprofit participants to share information about their own priorities.Those participants have been generous with th

12、eir time,providing data and thoughtful responses to our questions.We are proud as a peacock to be joined by 225 nonprofit participants this year more than weve ever had at our Benchmarks table.These nonprofits do heroic,groundbreaking,world-changing work across a wide range of issue areas.They opera

13、te at the local,national,and international level,impacting people and communities around the world.They include environmental nonprofits pushing for a green energy future,relief organizations working with families affected by conflict and disaster,cultural institutions,food banks,public media,animal

14、 shelters,and so much more.If you are one of those participants,thank you so much for joining us.If youre not,we hope youll consider playing along with us next time around.Either way,we are glad youre here,and we cant wait to get started.Lets roll the dice,follow the clues where they lead,and see wh

15、at we can discover together.THE GAME IS AFOOT*34KEY FINDINGSSCORECARDAverage online revenue declined by 1%in 2023.Revenue from monthly giving increased by 6%,and accounted for 31%of all online revenue.Nonprofits raised an average of$0.94 through direct mail for every dollar raised online.Direct mail

16、 revenue fell by 6%in 2023.Total advertising investment by nonprofits increased by 13%.The biggest change was in radio spending,which increased by 67%.Yes,radio!We are super excited to get to share ad spending data beyond our usual detailed exploration of digital channels.See the full ads section on

17、 page 45 for more(including our usual detailed exploration of digital channels).About half of M+R Benchmarks participants reported working with social media influencers in 2023.Of those,17%relied only on paid partnerships,and 30%used a mix of paid and unpaid influencer work.TikTok audiences for nonp

18、rofits increased by 112%in 2023,far faster than other social media platforms.Facebook and Instagram follower counts grew by 6%and 11%.The number of Twitter/X followers declined by 1%on average.Email revenue declined by 7%on average.The share of all online revenue directly sourced to email was 16%in

19、2023.The majority of nonprofit website traffic came from users on mobile devices 52%,with 48%of traffic from users on desktop devices.However,78%of revenue came from users on desktop devices.5Key FindingsThere is analysis surveying the board,seeing where all the pieces fit,calculating percentages.Th

20、ere is experience familiar patterns to use as a guide and recurring pitfalls to avoid.There is strategy foresight,contingency plan-ning,the rare and precious ability to look several steps ahead and discern complex branching paths.And then there is something more.Intuition,creativity,an instinct for

21、timing and an appetite for risk.A sudden flash of insight.A bold gambit that changes the game.All of these play a role in how nonprofit digital programs advance and evolve.Lets take a look at some of the topline data and trends that can help you make the right moves.Digital tools arent only a key dr

22、iver of revenue;they are critical to identifying,recruiting,organizing,and mobilizing supporters.7Key FindingsIn addition to our findings on broadcast mobile messaging(which can be found on page 39),we asked M+R Benchmarks participants to share details on how they are using peer-to-peer(P2P)texting

23、for mobilization.Only a subset of nonprofits take advantage of P2P text messaging:23%of M+R Benchmarks partici-pants had an active P2P program in 2023,com-parable to the 21%that conducted phone banks for advocacy or community organizing.Several of the most common uses of P2P texting centered on mobi

24、lizing audiences to participate in real-world actions.Of nonprofits with P2P pro-grams,85%used them to promote event atten-dance,75%recruited volunteers,and 68%lever-aged P2P texting to support GOTV efforts.KEY FINDINGSOverall online revenue was relatively flat on average,online revenue was 1%lower

25、than in the previous year.Some nonprofits saw increased revenue;aver-age online revenue was 3%higher for Public Media nonprofits,and 4%higher for the Health sector.At the other extreme,Disaster/Interna-tional Aid nonprofits saw online revenue decline by 7%on average.We have a lot more to say about a

26、ll this in the Fundraising section on page 13,but the short ver-sion is that these results may say less about what happened in 2023 than they do about the different context faced by nonprofits heading into the year.Those Disaster/International Aid nonprofits,which experienced the largest drop in rev

27、enue in 2023?That result followed a 10%increase in revenue in 2022,largely connected to the escalation of con-flict in Ukraine.Looking back further,there has been little year-over-year change in online revenue over the past three years:single digits,up and down.This plateau followed a king-sized spi

28、ke in revenue in 2020,the first year of the pandemic.Since then,the experience of many nonprofits has been about finding adjustments to a new normal.Another way to put the change in online revenue into perspective is to compare to direct mail re-sults.In 2023,while online revenue declined by 1%on av

29、erage,direct mail revenue declined by 6%.On average,nonprofits raised slightly more reve-nue through online channels than through direct mail.For every$1.00 in online revenue,nonprofits raised$0.94 via direct mail.6Throughout M+R Benchmarks,we generally stick to aggregates and collectives.We talk ab

30、out nonprofits as a whole,about participants,about programs,about sectors.We refer to ourselves with a royal we.9Key FindingsBut the heart and soul of every one of these abstractions is made up of real,living,breathing,individual humans.We wanted to learn more about who those people are,and assess t

31、he progress that nonprofits have made in building diverse teams.We asked M+R Benchmarks participants to share the data they submitted to the Equal Employ-ment Opportunity Commission(EEOC).Its difficult to report specifically about fundraising,advocacy,and marketing staff,so our findings include orga

32、nization-wide staff.Before we take a look,there are a few limitations to this data set that should be acknowledged.The EEOC asks employers to identify the per-centages of staff that fall into a handful of racial categories.These include:American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African America

33、n Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White Two or more racesThis list has serious flaws,including the treatment of“Hispanic or Latino”as a racial category and the conflation or exclusion of other racial identities.As one M+R Benchmarks participant pointed out,the standard E

34、EOC forms erase Arab identities,mak-ing communities that have been heavily politicized and otherized invisible.Because of these limitations,we have chosen to group racial categories other than White under the umbrella of Black,Indigenous,and People of Color(BIPOC).We also want to acknowledge that ot

35、her important identities,including disability and gender,are not managed well by EEOC,and are not included in our analysis here.The upside of the EEOC data set is that it is collect-ed consistently among U.S.employers,which al-lows us to get a clear picture within the constraints of this data set.He

36、res what we found:the portion of nonprofit staff who identify as BIPOC rose from 25%in 2022 to 27%in 2023.KEY FINDINGSThe one-to-one nature of P2P texting also cre-ates a unique opportunity to begin and continue a deeper conversation with supporters,and then expand an organizers reach.A majority(58%

37、)of nonprofits with P2P programs used these con-tacts for relational organizing asking support-ers to activate people in their own network.Nonprofits relied on a range of senders in their P2P messaging programs.Paid employees sent P2P messages for 82%of the nonprofits with active programs.Unpaid vol

38、unteers texted on behalf of 52%of these nonprofits,and 43%used paid contractors.Every nonprofit with a P2P text program sent messages to their own opt-in subscriber list.For many,this list is relatively modest in size non-profits had an average of 158 mobile subscribers for every 1,000 email list su

39、bscribers.To supple-ment this audience,47%of nonprofits with P2P programs also targeted outside audiences beyond their existing opt-in file typically lists culled from sources like voter databases,or rented from politi-cal campaigns or other organizations.8Key Findings1.Wherever possible,we have bro

40、ken out the findings by sector.Each of our participants self-identified the appropri-ate sector(or,in some cases,fell out-side of our defined sectors and selected“Other”).If you are not sure which sector represents your peer group,review the full list of participants on page 76 to find where you bel

41、ong.2.We also sort our participants by size.For our study,“Small”refers to non-profits with annual online revenue in 2023 below$500,000;“Medium”is those nonprofits with annual on-line revenue between$500,000 and$3,000,000;and“Large”covers all those with annual online revenue greater than$3,000,000.3

42、.The averages displayed in each chart and discussed throughout Benchmarks represent the median figure for a given metric for all participants who reported data.We do this to avoid having one or two outliers with extraordinary results from having too much influence,as might happen with a mean average

43、.4.Not all participants were able to pro-vide data for every metric.If a chart does not include data for a certain sector or size,its because we were not able to collect enough results to report a reliable average.5.In addition to the median figure,some charts display a range showing the 25th percen

44、tile to the 75th percentile.Half of all reported values fell within this range,which can be considered“normal”results for participants in our study.6.Do not compare this years M+R Bench-marks findings to previous editions!Be-cause our participant pool changes each year,these comparisons will not be

45、simple and straightforward,like Apples to Apples.They will be wrong and upsetting,like Cards Against Humanity.7.Wherever we include year-over-year changes,we are including long-term data from this years participants.These com-parisons are reliable.See the Web Perfor-mance section if you want to know

46、 more about our feelings when we are prevented from reporting accurate longitudinal data.8.If you have any more questions,please reach out to mrcampaigns or email .And remember the most important rule of all:have fun!M+R Benchmarks is a fun,fast-paced,data-based game experience everyone can enjoy!Th

47、ere are just a few important features and rules to keep in mind before you begin.HOW TO PLAY11KEY FINDINGSWeve collected more data from more nonprofits for M+R Benchmarks this year than ever before.Thats for staff across levels and departments,from the executive director at a national organization t

48、o the warehouse workers at a community food bank to the people who are reading this report.At the executive and senior management level,BIPOC representation rose from 19%to 21%.BIPOC staff made up 27%of first-and mid-level management,a slight decline from the 28%in 2022.The biggest increase came fro

49、m the wide range of job categories that fall outside of man-agement,with BIPOC employees making up 29%of all staff in 2022,and 35%in 2023.In addition to the peer-to-peer mobilization and EEOC data above,we are thrilled to provide ad spending data beyond digital channels,a deeper look at nonprofit pa

50、rtnerships with social media influencers,and more.Many nonprofits have made a vocal commitment to diversity,equity,and inclusion,and to hiring,re-taining,and promoting more people of color.This EEOC data is just one measure of racial diversity,and cant capture the full extent of progress to-ward equ

51、ity and inclusion or the experiences of BI-POC staff.This kind of change takes time there are only so many new hires or jobs turning over in any given year.The reporting in 2023 makes it clear that there is more work to be done,especial-ly at more senior(and higher-paying)levels.Thanks again to our

52、nonprofit partners,and to you for reading.Go ahead.Its your move.1012FUNDRAISINGSCORECARDOnline revenue for the average nonprofit decreased by 1%in 2023.Revenue from one-time giving fell by 5%,while revenue from monthly giving rose by 6%.Monthly giving accounted for 31%of all online revenue in 2023,

53、up from 27%the previous year.Nonprofits raised an average of$0.94 through direct mail for every dollar raised online.Direct mail revenue fell by 6%in 2023.December giving made up 26%of all online revenue,and 34%of one-time online revenue.Donations made on December 31 accounted for 5%of 2023 revenue.

54、13FundraisingThere are moments when unpredictable,uncontrollable,and largely unre-peatable events drive an influx of revenue.A natural disaster might spur an outpouring of generosity,or the political conversation draws focus to your cause.Perhaps some Rich Uncle Pennybags hands over an unsolicited a

55、nd jaw-dropping donation.Maybe theres a bank error in your favor(collect$200),or you win second prize in a beauty contest(collect$10).We try to make the most of these opportunities when they arise,but this is all shaky ground on which to build a fundraising program.We can only go so far relying on c

56、hance and hap-penstance.Instead,long-term growth comes from making investments that will deliver results over time:email and mobile list acquisition,ads that are aggressively tested and optimized,a social media program that supplements organic reach with paid influencers,deeper audience research to

57、under-stand what inspires,thoughtful message testing to find the strongest case for giving,an emphasis on monthly giving and lifetime giving.These are the stable foundations for successful programs that can continue to support an organizations goals no matter what.Total online revenue for nonprofits

58、 in our study declined by 1%in 2023.So,pretty much flat.And we found a very similar trend when looking at small nonprofits raising less than$500,000 in annual online revenue,medium nonprofits in the$500k to$3MM range,and large nonprofits with annual online revenue over$3MM.Which might make it seem a

59、t a glance like things generally held fairly steady last year.But while some sectors reported a similar average year-over-year change,Disaster/International Aid nonprofits saw a 7%drop.At the high end,Health nonprofits saw 4%higher revenue on average.Notes fromPrincipal Audience&Research Manager NEH

60、AL MAHMOUDAudience and message research has quickly moved from a tool thats nice to have to a must for many nonprofits.Thats primarily because fund-raising,advocacy,and engagement is only getting harder as this years Benchmarks Study illustrates.And,lets face it,the monolithic approach to any audien

61、ce is not sufficient ethically or effectively.If were serious about developing audience-smart programs,we have to truly understand those audiences.And that means relying less on assumptions and stereotypes,and more on what those audiences are telling us through their behavior,reliable data,and their

62、 own words.This kind of research used to be out of reach for nonprofits.But exciting new tools have made it more affordable and scalable for organizations of every size,allowing us to craft campaigns that are truly audience-centric.At M+R,were using research to better understand our current and pro-

63、spective audiences through:Surveys,social listening,and media scans that give us a holistic view of who an organizations supporters are,what they know about an organization,and how theyre interested in helping Virtual focus groups that are generally more inclusive and accessible than their IRL count

64、erparts,allowing for even richer and more insight-ful conversations Pre-market testing tools that help us sharpen a creative approach be-fore we even press“send”or“launch,”allowing us to focus resources on the most effective creative possible Brand tracking studies that measure the impact of ad buys

65、 and media hits on public perception of a brand or issue Want more scoop?Reach out to me at .Even those median figures may be obscuring more than they reveal.If we expand our view to include the range from the 25th percentile to 75th percentile,we see a much more complete picture.And what a picture

66、it is!This middle range indicates that a relatively small increase in revenue in the single digits was almost as likely as a modest decline.Thats for the total pool of M+R Benchmarks participants.The range among small nonprofits was wider.While many did see a decline in online revenue,those at the 7

67、5th percentile saw 8%higher revenue in 2023!FUNDRAISING14And then there is the Disaster/International Aid sector.Here,nonprofits in the 25th percentile reported 43%less online revenue than in the previous year.Large swings in revenue from year to year are not unusual for this issue space,with high-p

68、rofile humanitarian crises driving periods of exceptional generosity.The invasion of Ukraine in 2022 led to a surge of giving to organizations involved in crisis response or supporting displaced people.Indeed,if we look at the change in revenue from 2021 to 2022,the Disaster/International Aid sector

69、 saw the fastest growth.The decline in revenue in 2023 can be seen as a reversion to pre-Ukraine-crisis levels of support for nonprofits in this space.17FundraisingTaking a longer view can help put the year-to-year changes and volatility into context.Many nonprofits,especially those in the Hunger/Po

70、verty space,experienced an unprecedented surge in giving during the first year of the Covid pandemic.The year-to-year changes in the years since have been more modest.So far,we have looked only at online revenue.And by“so far,”we mean“so far in this section”as well as“so far in the 18 years since we

71、 started publishing the M+R Benchmarks Study.”For the first time this year,we are able to include data on direct mail giving.In 2023,nonprofits saw direct mail revenue decline by an average of 6%from the previous year.This was a sharper drop than the 1%reported for online revenue,though once again t

72、he Disaster/International Aid FUNDRAISINGsector was an outlier.While this sector saw the biggest reduction in average online revenue,direct mail revenue increased by 4%.For groups in our study,online giving made up a slightly larger portion of total revenue than direct mail giving for every dollar r

73、aised online,nonprofits raised$0.94 through direct mail.On average,small nonprofits(those with annual online revenue under$500k)received more revenue from direct mail than from online sources.For medium($500k$3MM in annual online revenue)and large(annual online revenue over$3MM)nonprofits,more reven

74、ue was sourced to online channels than direct mail.1619Fundraisingone-time gifts.Breaking out results by size,small nonprofits had higher average monthly and one-time gifts than medium or large nonprofits.While the overall average gift size is instructive,successful programs dont treat their entire

75、supporter base as a monolith with a single centerpoint.Instead,audiences are segmented by engagement,demographics,geography and giving history.In 2023,donors giving at least$500 made up just 4%of all small-dollar donors(defined here as those who only gave under$1,000 in a year).Their donations made

76、up 14%of total revenue.About half(52%)of small-dollar donors fell into the$50249 giving level;their giving represented 30%of one-time gifts revenue.With online programs an increasingly important source of revenue,every donor matters especially those who provide reliable support over time.Lets turn b

77、ack again to look only at online giving,and explore a few of the ways that donors choose to make multiple gifts.First,monthly giving accounted for 31%of all online revenue in 2023,up from 27%in 2022.While revenue from monthly giving increased by 6%,one-time revenue declined by 5%.That split FUNDRAIS

78、ING increased monthly revenue,decreased one-time revenue was widespread.Every sector and size breakout we measured showed an average increase in monthly revenue.Only two sectors reported a rise in one-time revenue Health and Public Media.The average size of a monthly gift was$24,while the average on

79、e-time gift was$115.Health/Poverty nonprofits had the highest average gift size for both types of giving:$45 for monthly giving,$174 for 1821Fundraisingaverage of 0.2 one-time gifts in addition to their monthly gift,with average one-time giving of$18.The long-term value of a donor isnt only determin

80、ed by how much they give in a single gift,or in a single year.Donors who make a commitment to supporting a nonprofit year after year are essential to long-term stability and growth.One-year retention for 2023 was 44%,which means that out of all one-time donors in 2022,almost half made another one-ti

81、me gift in 2023.If we consider only new donors those who made their first online gift in 2022 the retention rate was just 23%.Of those supporters with a previous giving history who gave in 2022,61%gave again in 2023.While the specific rate varied from sector to sector,the pattern remained consistent

82、,with first-time donors substantially less likely to be retained.Larger gifts mean a bigger impact on overall budget thats no surprise.What might be more surprising is how consistent these results have been in recent years.In 2021,2022,and 2023,donors giving$5099 made up 21%,21%,and 22%of one-time d

83、onors,and gave 7%,7%,and 8%of revenue.Even as major,world-shaking events affect the work that nonprofits do and the issues that the public prioritizes,these ratios stayed essentially unchanged.Even as metrics like overall revenue,ads ROAS,and email response rates shifted up and down,these ratios hel

84、d steady.The consistency is remarkable.FUNDRAISINGOf course,someone who makes a one-time gift isnt necessarily someone who will only give one time.Donors who made only one-time gifts online gave an average of 1.2 times in 2023.To be clear,this is not a measure of lifetime value,or retention for dono

85、rs who gave in previous years(well get to that in a sec).These 1.2 gifts per donor represent repeated giving within 2023,and meant that the average donor who made only one-time gifts gave$165 over the course of the year.Monthly donors also sometimes make additional gifts over and above their recurri

86、ng donation whether inspired by breaking news or solicited as part of a campaign.Monthly donors made an 2023FundraisingWeve taken a look at how donors are giving,and how much,and how often next,we turn to when.Overall,34%of online revenue from one-time gifts came in during December,2023.November was

87、 the next-highest month,at 15%,with revenue in every other month ranging between 3%and 5%of the overall total.Among other things,November included Giving Tuesday in 2023,which may have helped increase that months share of the annual total.In 2024,FUNDRAISINGGiving Tuesday will fall in December,which

88、 has the potential to make December even more important to reaching budget goals.Including both one-time and monthly donations,December giving accounted for 26%of all online revenue.The last week of December alone accounted for 13%of the years total online revenue.And December 31,the last-chance,mat

89、ch-deadline,clock-is-ticking,nail-biting final day of the year:5%of 2023 revenue.2224Fundraising25Online revenue was 7%lower on December 31,2023,than it was on December 31,2022.For email,revenue on the final day of the year declined by 10%.Pulling back to look at the final week of December,overall r

90、evenue was 2%lower than in the previous year.Despite a drop on 12/31,email revenue held steady in the final week of 2023 compared to 2022.Because December 31 fell on a weekend,many nonprofits shifted messaging slightly earlier in the calendar,which may have had an impact here.Overall,December revenu

91、e was 4%lower overall in 2023,while email revenue declined by 2%.The largest decrease in December revenue came in the Cultural sector,which reported 15%FUNDRAISINGlower email revenue,and 12%lower revenue overall.The only sector to see an increase in December giving was Wildlife/Animal Welfare,with 3

92、%growth overall.So many factors are outside our control as fundraisers from global conflict to the day of the week that the year happens to end on.Swings in revenue will happen,sometimes quite dramatically.This is all the more reason to emphasize stable and reliable sources of revenue,from monthly d

93、onors to annual giving days to retaining and reactivating previous donors.And if you happen to pass go,dont forget to collect your$200.EVERY YEAR SINCE 2015,BENCHMARKS HAS HAD A THEME PULLING IT ALL TOGETHER.WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING WAS NEVER A THEME FOR BENCHMARKS?Answers on page 19 of the rules book

94、letSpaceTravelDinosaursFoodTRIVIA!27FUNDRAISING28Section NameEMAIL MESSAGINGSCORECARDEmail list sizes increased by 7%in 2023,after 5%and 8%growth in the previous two years.Email revenue declined by 7%on average,while the share of all online revenue directly sourced to email was 16%.For every 1,000 f

95、undraising messages sent,nonprofits raised$76.This marks a 20%decrease from 2022.Nonprofits sent an average of 59 email messages per subscriber in 2023.There was a 12%increase in volume from the previous year.The average response rate for advocacy email was 1.4%,a 10%decline from the previous year.T

96、he average response rate for fundraising email was 0.07%,a 16%decrease compared to 2022.We dont like to complain,but listen:email fundraising is hard.Growing your list is hard.Building a thriving messaging program is hard and the data suggests it is not getting any easier.(Its fun,though,too.We cant

97、 deny that either.)It takes diligent planning,consistent effort,and constant creativity to build a program.Increasing the audience subscriber by subscriber,finding what works message by message,climbing that ladder rung by rung.It takes so much less a change in corporate or government privacy regula

98、-tions,a tweak to the Gmail inbox,a shift in audi-ence priorities to slide right back down again.First,the ascent:over the course of 2023,nonprof-its added an average of 0.27 new email subscrib-ers for every subscriber they had at the start of the year.That means that a nonprofit that had a list siz

99、e of exactly 100,000 subscribers on Janu-ary 1,2023 would add 27,000 new subscribers by December 31.Those numbers(and most of what we report in M+R Benchmarks)represent the median figure.If we broaden our view,we see that some nonprofits greatly exceeded that pace.The colored bars on the chart repre

100、sent the range from the 25th percentile to the 75th percentile.At that higher end of the“normal”range,nonprofits added 0.55 new joins per start-of-year subscriber.Our hypothetical nonprofit with 100,000 subscrib-ers would add 55,000 new email listmembers over the course of 2023.29Email MessagingNote

101、s fromDirector of Data Analytics THERESA BUGEAUDYou might have noticed that the math in these churn charts looks a little odd:6.7+8.7 15.7%.I promise you our calculators are not broken,although after all this work they are very tired.Whats happening here is that we are reporting the median for each

102、component metric.First,we look at the median figure for bounces,and get 6.7%.Then,we take the median figure for unsubscribes,and get 8.7%.Rather than simply adding those two numbers together,we then look separately at the median figure for overall churn,which in this case was 15.7%.This allows us to

103、 more accurately identify the average for each metric,even if it does occasionally make some of the charts look a little weird.Now,the descent:15.7%of email subscribers were lost to churn over the course of 2023.That churn was divided between bounces(6.7%)and unsubscribes(8.7%).For Environmental non

104、profits,average churn was 20.7%,and in the Rights sector average churn was 25.4%!Thats a long way to slide down!We move forward,we fall back.We add new subscribers through advocacy actions,acquisition ads,email signup forms,and more.We lose audience through bounces and the unsubscribe button that Gm

105、ail very helpfully adds to our messages.Its the balance of those two opposing forces(plus complicating factors like removing inactive addresses)that determines the change in overall list size.In 2023,email list sizes increased by 7%on average,after growth of 5%and 8%in the previous two years.Health

106、nonprofits reported steady gains over that three year period,with 14%increases in each year.While there was more volatility in other issue areas,the median nonprofit in almost every sector reported email audience growth in 2023.31EMAIL MESSAGINGWHICH BENCHMARKS THEME RESULTED IN THE MOST COMPLAINTS?

107、3DAnswers on page 19 of the rules bookletOptical illusionsRock and rollXTRIVIA!On average,nonprofits sent 59 messages to each subscriber over the course of 2023,with 27 of those messages devoted to fundraising.Both the overall volume and the content of those messages varied widely between nonprofits

108、 in different sectors.Health nonprofits sent the fewest messages 28 overall,with about half of those fundraising messages.Subscribers to Wildlife/Animal Welfare nonprofit email programs could expect to receive a whopping 86 messages.Thats a lot!But its worth noting that there was a broad mix of advo

109、cacy,engagement,and other messages in this mix and that the volume of fundraising appeals was close to the overall average(31 for the Wildlife/Animal Welfare sector;27 overall).Public Media nonprofits also sent a relatively high volume of messages but of their 79 email messages per subscriber,55 wer

110、e newsletters.Average email volume increased by 12%from the previous year,with fundraising messaging increasing at the fastest rate.For most nonprofits,email volume ebbs and flows throughout the year.Given the importance of end-of-year fundraising(including Giving Tuesday),it should be no surprise t

111、hat the highest overall volume came in November and December,each with over 7 messages per month on average.Some nonprofits will have their own local peaks,typically driven by a combination of external events and the organizations own strategic choices.Disaster/International Aid email volume spiked

112、in February,when many nonprofits marked the anniversary of the escalation of conflict in Ukraine.For Public Media nonprofits,annual pledge drives likely contributed to especially frequent messaging in May.Weve looked at the size of email audiences.Weve looked at how many messages,and what types,nonp

113、rofits sent.That baseline audience size,and those messaging choices,are important.But the success of an email program rises and falls with supporters:how do they respond to all this messaging?Email Messaging33EMAIL MESSAGING3235One way to see the impact of declining email metrics is by looking at em

114、ail revenue per 1,000 fundraising emails sent.In 2023,nonprofits received an average of$76 in revenue for every 1,000 fundraising appeals which is to say,a single fundraising email landing in a single inbox was worth about seven and a half cents.This figure is substantially lower than what nonprofit

115、s saw in 2022.The average change in revenue per 1,000 fundraising emails was a 20%decline,with some sectors seeing even more dramatic drops.The exception was Disaster/International Aid nonprofits,which reported a 2%increase.This decline outpaced the increases in audience size and fundraising email v

116、olume.Overall email revenue was 7%lower in 2023 than the year before.However,Hunger/Poverty nonprofits saw a 3%increase in average email revenue,and Public Media nonprofits reported a 17%increase.Small nonprofits(those with annual online revenue under$500,000)saw email revenue shoot up by 34%in 2023

117、.Remember when we said this was hard?It took an average of 1,429 fundraising emails to generate 1 gift!Send 1,000 appeals,get$76 back!But nonprofits keep climbing that ladder,because it makes an impact.All those messages landing in all those inboxes matter in 2023,16%of all online revenue was direct

118、ly sourced to email a metric that includes only gifts that came from users clicking on email donation links.Moving onward and upward is rarely easy and never uncomplicated.Setbacks are inevitable,and some factors are outside our control.And yet,nonprofits keep climbing,and email programs continue to

119、 be a key part of online success.Email MessagingFor fundraising email messaging,the average click-through rate(the percentage of email recipients who clicked on a link in the message)was 0.54%.Of those who clicked through to the donation page,15%completed a gift.The average response rate for fundrai

120、sing email(the percentage of email recipients who completed a gift)was 0.07%.For advocacy email,the corresponding metrics tended to be much higher.The average click-through rate was four times higher at 2.1%,the page completion rate was 72%,and the average response rate was 1.4%.EMAIL MESSAGINGThe a

121、verage email fundraising response rate dropped by 16%,and this downward slide was even steeper for some nonprofits.In the Hunger/Poverty and Rights sectors,average fundraising email response rate dropped by 28%.For Environmental nonprofits,the decline was a more modest 6%.It wasnt just fundraising r

122、esponse rates.Just about every key email metric was lower in 2023 than it was in 2022.As nonprofits sent more messages to larger audiences,the likelihood of any individual email generating a click,action,or donation declined.343736EMAIL MESSAGING38When every character is counted,every character coun

123、ts.Sure,it takes creativity and skill to craft a compel-ling action alert or fundraising appeal in email(see the Email section on page 29 for our complaints about how hard it is).But when youre trapped in a 160-character straitjacket,when your audi-ence is smaller than in other channels,when their t

124、olerance for mass alerts is possibly strained by increasing volume making the most of every mo-bile message matters.Lets start with those audiences.For most non-profits,mobile audiences were significantly small-er than other channels.On average,nonprofits had 158 mobile subscribers for every 1,000 e

125、mail subscribers.The sector with the highest mobile-to-email subscriber ratio was Rights the average nonprofit had 485 mobile subscribers for every 1,000 email subscribers,meaning the mobile list was not quite half the size of the email list.39Mobile MessagingMOBILE MESSAGINGSCORECARDMobile messagin

126、g(a.k.a.text messaging or SMS/MMS)subscriber list size increased by 5%.Nonprofits had 158 mobile subscribers for every 1,000 email subscribers.The Rights sector was an outlier with an average of 485 mobile subscribers per 1,000 email subscribers.Mobile message volume increased by 40%in 2023,and we f

127、ound wide differences in volume among participants.Fundraising mobile messages generated$92 in revenue for every 1,000 messages sent.Revenue from mobile messages increased by 14%from the previous year,and accounted for 0.37%of all online revenue in 2023.41Email MessagingMobile message volume was hig

128、hest in December as with email,this spike was most likely connected to end-of-year fundraising efforts.Wildlife/Animal Welfare nonprofits kept up a steady stream of messaging throughout the year for this sector,volume peaked at 5.3 messages in August,with June the quietest month at 2.9 messages per

129、subscriber.As nonprofits continue to explore tactics and seek to increase the value of their mobile files,messaging volume can range significantly.Those at the 25th percentile for fundraising message volume sent just 2.1 mobile appeals in 2023.At the 75th percentile,nonprofits sent 15.5.Similar rang

130、es were reported for advocacy messaging.Its important to note that these are not truly separate audiences.In many cases,mobile lists have grown hand-in-hand with email lists,the same sign-up form enrolling a new subscriber to both channels.Some subscribers receive only email;some receive only mobile

131、 messages;many will receive both.Mobile audiences increased by 5%in 2023,a lower rate of growth than see in previous years.In 2022,mobile lists grew by 7%on average,following a 16%increase in 2021.All of these figures represent net growth,accounting for both new subscribers and those removed from th

132、e list.MOBILE MESSAGING40As audiences grew in 2023,so did mobile message volume.On average,nonprofits sent 40%more mobile messages in 2023 than in 2022 and both advocacy and fundraising message volume increased by more than 50%.This increase doesnt necessarily mean that nonprofits were overloading o

133、ur cell phones with asks and appeals.The median number of mobile fundraising appeals sent per subscriber over the course of the year was 7.7,along with 4 advocacy messages.Mobile Messaging43Of course,the number of fundraising messages sent whether its 2.1 or 7.7 or 15.5 matters a lot less than the r

134、esponse.For every 1,000 fundraising messages sent,nonprofits generated$92 in revenue.This compares favorably to the$76 per 1,000 fundraising messages reported for email,but still marks a 25%decline from the previous year.For many of our charts,the overall average provides a reasonable approximation

135、of what most nonprofits might expect.This is not one of those.The median Rights nonprofits received$15 per 1,000 mobile fundraising messages sent.Environmental nonprofits also saw a relatively low average of$29.For Health nonprofits,the return was an order of magnitude higher$308 in revenue for ever

136、y 1,000 fundraising messages sent.And for the Hunger/Poverty sector,the average return per 1,000 messages was$769!MOBILE MESSAGING42Some of the variability here may be due to our relatively small sample size:not every Benchmarks participant reported mobile messaging fundraising data.(In fact,not eve

137、ry Benchmarks participant sends mobile fundraising messages.)But we have also seen a wide range of volume,and there are profound differences in message content and tactics.In 2022,just 0.37%of online revenue was sourced to mobile messaging.After a 14%increase in mobile revenue last year,the share of

138、 online revenue from mobile messaging rose to 0.37%.Compared to organic web traffic,digital advertising,email,or other channels,mobile messaging continues to make a relatively small impact on overall revenue.There remains enormous untapped potential for many nonprofits.Continuing to expand audiences

139、,executing thoughtful strategy,and making every message matter are the keys to growth.WHAT WAS THE FIRST YEAR THAT THE BENCHMARKS STUDY FIRST INCLUDED ADVERTISING METRICS?2019Answers on page 19 of the rules booklet201720152013TRIVIA!44ADVERTISINGSCORECARDNonprofit digital ads spend increased by 13%i

140、n 2023,with nonprofits reinvesting$0.12 in digital ads for every dollar of online revenue.Across digital and non-digital advertising channels,61%of spending was dedicated to direct fundraising.Among digital channels,search and social media made up the largest share of fundraising advertising budgets

141、.Linear television made up 77%of non-digital fundraising advertising spending.Spending on connected TV for fundraising advertising increased by 50%in 2023,aligned with a 46%increase in digital audio budgets.Search advertising had the highest return on ad spend(ROAS)at$2.70.Just about anyone can cove

142、r one single spot.Maybe you start with a Google Grant,helping drive traffic to your site.Simple.Manageable.Then you stretch a little further,supplementing with paid search.You spot an opportunity to reach new audiences on Instagram,and soon enough you are straining to include several so-cial media p

143、latforms.Before you know it,you are knee-deep in display ads,youve got your hands on pre-roll video,youve elbowed your way into an experiment with digital audio,and youre pretzeling auda-ciously to cover connected TV,bending over backward to find and engage the audiences that matter to your cause.Ab

144、ove all else,it takes flexibility to manage the array of channels,platforms,creative,audiences,budgets,and response metrics that make up a modern ads program.In order to try to capture more of this complexity,we are including adver-tising investment data from non-digital channels for the first time

145、in M+R Benchmarks this year.Well put a spotlight on digital ad performance a little later,but first lets look at how nonprofits approached advertising overall.Including both digital and non-digital channels,61%of advertising spending by nonprofits was dedicated to direct fundraising efforts.Aware-ne

146、ss advertising accounted for 25%of spending,and nonprofits spent 10%of advertising dollars on lead generation.45AdvertisingAdvertising47Compared to fundraising advertising,non-digital spending investments were not as heavily skewed toward linear television.Large nonprofits spent 16%of non-digital ad

147、vertising budgets on print,and 15%on out-of-home advertising billboards,bus shelter ads,etc.Medium nonprofits split this spending between linear television(63%)and print(37%).Small nonprofits did not report meaningful spending on non-digital advocacy campaigns.For awareness advertising,nonprofits of

148、 all sizes shifted spending toward digital video(18%on average overall),out of home,and radio ad-vertising.When nonprofits were looking to raise visibility to wider audiences rather than drive direct response,these channels were more important.Total investment in advertising increased by an average

149、of 13%in 2023,with some sectors reporting a significant increase in ad spending(Environmental:up 35%;Health:up 33%)and others scaling back(Public Media:down 17%;Rights:down 9%).Small nonprofits increased ad spending by 27%,medium nonprofits by 22%,and large nonprofits by 11%.ADVERTISINGThe balance b

150、etween these three was markedly different for nonprofits of different sizes.Small nonprofits spent 89%of budgets on direct fund-raising,and only 3%on awareness advertising.For large nonprofits,the split was 58%direct fundrais-ing,27%awareness.With larger budgets comes greater flexibility to invest i

151、n branding,education,and expanded reach.Next,lets look at spending by channel for each of these three major advertising goals.Among digital channels,search and social media spending combined made up 80%of fundrais-ing advertising budgets.Large nonprofits tended to spread spending more widely into ot

152、her channels.Search and social accounted for 90%of spending by small nonprofits,80%for medium nonprofits,and 78%for large nonprofits.Larger advertising budgets create more opportunity to experiment and opti-mize within new channels.Among non-digital channels,linear television consumed the majority o

153、f fundraising adver-tising budgets 77%overall.Small nonprofits devoted 42%of non-digital fundraising advertis-ing budgets to print,compared to just 20%for medium nonprofits and 17%for large nonprofits.The balance between channels looks quite different for advocacy advertising,where the immediate goa

154、l is to drive signatures or some other action rather than donations.Among dig-ital channels,social advertising made up half of advocacy spending 50%overall,and 100%of spending by small nonprofits.49ADVERTISINGNonprofits increased fundraising ad spending across nearly every channel.The biggest spike

155、in spending was in radio advertising(as weve seen,radio made up only a small share of overall budgets,so this is a large percentage change but not necessarily a big shift in absolute dollar amount).Connected TV increased the most among digital channels,with 50%larger bud-gets on average.The only fun

156、draising channel where nonprofits pulled back on spending com-pared to 2022 was Meta.Now lets turn our attention specifically to digital channels.To put these year-over-year changes in perspective,nonprofits reinvested$0.12 in digital advertising for every dollar raised on-line.As with the change in

157、 spending levels,we see large differences by sector.In the Health sector,a nonprofit with$100,000 in online revenue would spend$23,000 on digital advertising over the course of the year.A Rights nonprofit with$100,000 in online revenue would invest just$3,000.48As we get closer to Google Chrome depr

158、ecat-ing support for third-party cookies,nonprofits have adopted more sophisticated cookieless measurement tools.This in turn may enable them to better track viewthrough conversions from Safari and Firefox,allowing more revenue to be correctly attributed to display advertising.Another(possibly small

159、er)factor:Google has strongly encouraged advertisers to use campaign formats that combine multiple channels.For ex-ample,Performance Max campaigns set audience and performance goals,with Google serving a mix of Google Display Network,YouTube,and search advertising.Because these campaigns include sea

160、rch placements,they often have a high ROAS,which can be difficult to distinguish from dis-play-only campaigns.Among non-digital channels,the highest ROAS was$0.56 for radio.Out of home had the lowest ROAS,with nonprofits seeing just$0.03 in revenue per dollar spent on out of home fundraising adverti

161、sing.Cost per donation has a major impact on ROAS the more it costs to generate a single gift,the more difficult it is to see a positive return.Search had a high ROAS,and we see a relatively low cost per donation of$55.Out of home has a low ROAS,and we see an actually very high cost per donation of$

162、2,622.51ADVERTISINGWeve examined ways nonprofits stretch,bal-ance,and redirect advertising budgets.Now we can take a look at how audiences responded,starting with return on ad spend(ROAS)for fund-raising advertising.As we mentioned earlier,and as we mention in every years M+R Benchmarks,search adver

163、tis-ing has the high ROAS of any channel.For every$1.00 nonprofits spent on search advertising for fundraising,they raised$2.70 in revenue.Occasionally as we are analyzing M+R Benchmarks data,we see results that knock us off balance.While we dont make direct comparisons from one edition of M+R Bench

164、marks to the next,we take notice when a data point is far out of step with what we typically see.Return on ad spend for dis-play advertising was one of those this year the$1.26 raised per dollar spent is much higher than what we have reported in previous years.We give these metrics extra scrutiny be

165、yond our typical QA to make sure we havent made an error in our calculations.If the numbers hold up,we look for possible explanations,even if it means getting tangled up in knots.The display ROAS numbers held up.So whats going on?We can speculate.WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WERE NOT A BENCHMARKS LA

166、UNCH PARTY TCHOTCHKE?BroccoliAnswers on page 19 of the rules booklet45 singleRubiks cubeBowtieTRIVIA!53Part of this variance is driven by different levels of investment in advertising platforms.The low-est cost per lead was found with cost-per-acqui-sition(CPA)buys these platforms often host advocac

167、y actions that reach a large audience,and allow nonprofits to negotiate a set cost per new subscriber.The average cost per lead for these platforms was$1.31,with large nonprofits spending just$1.08 per lead.Meta had an average cost per lead of$4.44,with significant variation by sector.TikTok and Goo

168、-gle/YouTube efforts had the highest cost per lead.Our data set doesnt allow us to make ROAS comparisons between nonprofit sectors or sizes for most channels,but we are able to do so for three digital channels:display,search,and Meta.Across nonprofits of every size and sector,search advertising had

169、the highest return on ad spend.Hunger/Poverty nonprofits saw the best ROAS of any sector across all three channels.The Hunger/Poverty sectors$4.52 ROAS for display advertising was by far the highest of any sector,and suggests that nonprofits in this space could increase spending significantly while

170、maintaining positive results.Cost per donation was highest in all channels for small nonprofits.Larger budgets can create more opportunities for testing and optimiza-tion,which may have allowed large nonprofits to bring down the average cost per donation.Rights nonprofits spent more than those in an

171、y other sector to generate a gift in display and search,though this did not hold true on Meta.ADVERTISINGChoosing how to balance advertising budgets de-pends on metrics like cost per donation and ROAS,along with a complex,overlapping web of consid-erations.With a low cost per donation and a high ROA

172、S,nonprofits prioritized search.Out of home advertising was inefficient for direct fundraising,but maintaining a visible presence in specific communities might be important to a nonprofits goals.Nonprofits might prioritize reaching specific audiences,or hold back on Twitter/X spending out of concern

173、s about the platform.Beyond generating an immediate return on spend-ing,nonprofits also used advertising to generate leads,grow email and mobile messaging audienc-es,and drive web traffic.The average gift to generate a lead through adver-tising was$3.33,with a wide range between non-profits in diffe

174、rent sectors.At the low end,Public Media nonprofits spent just$0.49 per advertising lead,while at the high end Hunger/Poverty non-profits spent$18.18 per lead.Advertising55For some nonprofits,these lead generation efforts were an important part of maintaining a healthy email program.The average rati

175、o of ad-acquired lead to start of year email list size was 0.06.That means that a nonprofit that started 2023 with 100,000 email subscribers would acquire 6,000 new leads via ads over the course of the year.The median figure for Disaster/International Aid nonprofits was twice as high a ratio of 0.12

176、,so that nonprofit with 100,000 subscribers on January 1 would add 12,000 new ad-acquired leads.At the 75th percentile,the ratio was 0.47 for Disaster/In-ternational Aid nonprofits,the equivalent of adding 47,000 leads to a 100,000 subscriber list over the course of the year.That many new subscriber

177、s in a relatively short time can have a dramatic impact on email and mobile messaging performance.We began this section noting that Google Grants is often the starting place for nonprofits exploring advertising,so lets end there as well.These place-ments differ from paid search advertising.First,the

178、y are run with ad credits;were presenting Google Grants data in terms of“dollars spent”to put it on similar footing to other channels,but this advertising doesnt represent actual spending.Google also imposes caps on total budget and cost per click for Grants ads,limiting the terms nonprofits can cov

179、er using Grants.Perhaps the most important difference is that Google Grants search results appear below paid results,which makes users less likely to click.The upshot of these differences is that Google Grants ads were not nearly as effective as paid search efforts.The ROAS for these Google Grants c

180、ampaigns was$0.13 overall;the average ROAS for paid search was$2.70.Even though Google Grant placements are free,the net return is still significantly lower than paid search.The“cost per donation”for Google Grants was also far higher than for paid search.Remember that this“cost”is in ad credits rath

181、er than pay-ments made by nonprofits.On average,nonprofits spent the equivalent of$1,192 in Google Grants credits to generate one donation.ADVERTISING545756While direct fundraising metrics fall short of paid search,Google Grants can make a meaningful impact on digital programs.Nonprofits received 33

182、2 site visits for every$1k in Grant spend.Small nonprofits were particularly effective at generating web traffic with Google Grants,with 488 visits per$1,000 spent.Advertising platforms,audience preferences,and nonprofit strategy are changing quickly.Building a successful program means adapting,adju

183、sting,and stretching to meet those twists and turns.ADVERTISING58SOCIAL MEDIA AND INFLUENCERSSCORECARDTikTok audiences for nonprofits increased by 112%in 2023,far faster than other social media platforms.Facebook and Instagram follower counts grew by 6%and 11%.The number of Twitter/X followers decli

184、ned by 1%on average.About half of M+R Benchmarks participants reported working with social media influencers in 2023.Of those,17%relied only on paid partnerships,and 30%used a mix of paid and unpaid influencer work.Among nonprofits with paid influencer campaigns,50%used those partnerships for fundra

185、ising,75%for advocacy or volunteer asks,and 79%for education or persuasion.For every 1,000 email addresses,nonprofits had an average of 1,041 Facebook fans,527 Twitter/X followers,251 Instagram followers,and 36 TikTok followers.Chaotic.Competitive.Frantic.Needlessly aggressive much of the time.Thats

186、 social media.Right this second,millions of users,brands,post-ers,influencers,and secret bots are competing for space and attention,producing and con-suming content at a breakneck pace.They are hungry.Hungry.In this context,its essential to have a clear sense of your priorities.Not only which platfo

187、rms youll participate in,but which metrics matter to your program total audience size,key demographics,specific audiences like lawmakers or press,overall views,daily engagement,direct response metrics like donations,and on and on.Most of these goals depend on reaching a lively,engaged audience.We wa

188、nt to find people who are excited to participate,and the quickest way to find them is to look at the places where new users are clamoring to join the conversation.In 2023,TikTok audiences for nonprofits grew much,much faster than any other major social media platform.The number of followers on Tik-T

189、ok more than doubled in 2023,with 112%growth on average.In the Disaster/International Aid sec-tor,TikTok follower count increased by 267%.59Social Media and Influencers61Social Media and InfluencersIn contrast,the number of followers increased by an average of 6%on Facebook,and 11%on Instagram.And f

190、or the first time since we started tracking social media metrics in M+R Benchmarks,the average follower count for a platform actually decreased nonprofits in our study saw the number of Twitter/X fans decline by 1%.The rate of change for audience size tells us about where people are going but does n

191、ot necessarily reflect where people already are.Despite the rapid growth in TikTok followers,overall audience size was still much larger for Meta platforms and Twitter/X.On average,nonprofits had 1,041 Facebook fans for every 1,000 email subscribers meaning the two audiences were comparable in size.

192、Twitter/X follower count was roughly half that size,at 527 followers per 1,000 email subscribers.Cut that in half again and you get Instagram followers,at SOCIAL MEDIA AND INFLUENCERS251 per 1,000 email subscribers.TikTok follower numbers were another order of magnitude smaller,36 per 1,000 email su

193、bscribers.Which is all to say that nonprofits have a long way to go to build the kind of audiences on TikTok that they have developed on more mature platforms(and theres no guarantee they will ever reach that level).Nonprofits must balance audience size,audience growth,audience engagement,and other

194、considerations(e.g.Does the CEO of this company represent an affront to human dignity?)in deciding where and what to post.In 2023,Facebook and Instagram had nearly universal adoption among M+R Benchmarks participants,and nearly 90%of nonprofits used Twitter/X.Looking at newer platforms,39%of nonprof

195、its used TikTok,and 32%had joined Threads.6063Just about half of the nonprofits in M+R Benchmarks worked with influencers in 2023.Of those,17%relied solely on paid influencers to promote campaigns or other content,and 48%worked with influencers but did not pay for promotion.In addition,30%of the non

196、profits who worked with influencers used a blended approach,working with both paid and unpaid influencers.Instagram was the most commonly used platform for influencer campaigns.Of those nonprofits with active efforts,94%worked with influencers on Instagram.As weve seen,the number of TikTok followers

197、 for most nonprofits was far smaller than equivalent audiences on other platforms but 63%of nonprofits with influencer campaigns extended their reach through partnerships on TikTok.Typically,the cost of working with paid influencers scales alongside follower count;influencers with the widest reach t

198、end to command the highest rates.In 2023,nonprofits spread their influencer work across a broad range.We surveyed M+R Benchmarks participants,and found that 13%of those with active Twitter/X accounts are planning to leave the platform or sunset the account in some way.Regardless of active plans for

199、leaving the platform,62%of nonprofits active on Twitter/X reported that they have started building a presence on other emerging platforms.With several social networks vying to be“new Twitter,”nonprofits were most likely to explore Threads.A smaller number of nonprofits explored Mastodon,Discord,and

200、Bluesky.SOCIAL MEDIA AND INFLUENCERSThroughout all these shifts,nonprofits continued to put out a steady stream of content across social media platforms.Up until now,we have focused on direct interactions between nonprofits and social media audiences.But when it comes to capturing eyeballs,often the

201、 best approach is to have a third party with a large audience do the talking.Thats where influencers come in.626564At the lower end,77%of nonprofits with active efforts worked with influencers with fewer than 10,000 followers,and 85%worked with influencers with 10k100k followers.In many cases,these

202、smaller influencers are active in issue areas relevant to a nonprofits mission or are able to reach specific audiences.At the other end of the spectrum,47%of nonprofits with influencer campaigns worked with influencers that had more than a million followers.The most common use of paid influencers wa

203、s to increase visibility for a nonprofit brand,cause,SOCIAL MEDIA AND INFLUENCERSAnswers on page 19 of the rules bookletTRIVIA!WHICH NONPROFIT HAS PARTICIPATED IN BENCHMARKS THE MOST TIMES?Planned ParenthoodOxfamSierra ClubChildrens Hospital Los Angelesor campaign 79%of nonprofits with influencer ca

204、mpaigns did narrative change or persuasion work.Promoting volunteer or advocacy actions was close behind at 75%.And among nonprofits with paid influencer partnerships,half relied on influencers to promote fundraising.The social media space continues to change quickly,with nonprofits and their suppor

205、ters shifting tactics,following trends,and looking to rise above the chaos.Setting clear priorities is crucial to driving success as is a willingness to experiment and take risks,whether that means working with influencers or joining an emerging platform.66WEBSITE PERFORMANCESCORECARDThe majority of

206、 nonprofit website traffic came from users on mobile devices(including both phones and tablets).Mobile users represented 52%of all visits,with 48%of traffic from users on desktop devices.Users on desktop devices made up the majority of donation transactions(67%)and revenue(78%).The average gift made

207、 on desktop devices was$137;for mobile users,the average gift was$83.PayPal was the most widely-used alternative payment method 67%of nonprofits made this option available on donation pages.Apple Pay(38%)and Google Pay(30%)were also in use.Googles shift from Universal Analytics to Google Analytics 4

208、 has made aggregate year-over-year data collection more difficult by actually,its a bit more complicated than what we usually try to fit in these little SCORECARD call-outs,so you should probably just read this whole section.Consciously or not,we often plan for a best-case scenario.We set a goal or

209、a destination,and we make a plan to reach it assuming that all goes well.Then,the real world intervenes.There are complications,diversions,and opposing forces popping up to knock us off track.Anticipating those complications is a helpful skill,but even the best-laid plans will run into trouble.Befor

210、e we get into website performance data,we want to talk about the problems with tracking website performance and give you some tools to make tracking your own program easier.The trouble began,as so many modern problems do,with a tech company making unilateral chang-es without first checking to see if

211、 it would incon-venience us personally.Rude!On July 1,2023 Google Analytics 4(GA4)officially replaced Univer-sal Analytics(UA).The short version is like this.UA implemented a session-based tracking model that used cookies to record all web activity during a users session on a site within a given tim

212、e frame.As enhanced privacy protections make cookies less widely available,GA4 adopted an event-based tracking model.GA4 collects data from users who have consented to Google tracking and then uses ma-chine learning models to estimate site-wide data for unconsenting users.This isnt to say all change

213、 is bad;generally GA4s event-based tracking offers a more thorough view of each users journey in-cluding cross-device and cross-platform tracking.(Sorry,we said that was the short version,not necessarily the simple version.More details can be found here( you are interested in web analytics.Or if you

214、 are not particularly interested in web analytics but suffer from insomnia.)Website Performance6769Website PerformanceThe shift from UA to GA4 has wide-ranging implications for privacy,ecommerce,the global economy,the future of tech,yadda yadda yadda.More to the point,it has a direct impact on Bench

215、marks,and on your own program.Thats the stuff we care about right now.With the transition from UA to GA4 occuring mid-year in 2023,year-over-year comparisons of traffic,user behavior,and other key metrics became much messier.Even something as seemingly simple as counting total users would not be an

216、apples-to-apples comparison between the two systems because of the changes made to the underlying logic of many key metrics.In addition,the default settings for GA4 keep only two months of data available to use in GA4s Explorations(see Principal Data Analyst Lia Mancusos advice on changing your sett

217、ings on page 73).For these reasons,we have decided to use only GA4 data collected from November and December in the website performance charts for this years M+R Benchmarks.The bad news here is that we have a more limited data set,and that we are not able to make year-over-year comparisons for these

218、 metrics.The good news is that our limited data set includes the critical end-of-year period when many nonprofits see a spike in traffic and revenue.The even better news is that we should be able to be back to full-year reporting in the next edition of Benchmarks.Got all that?Good.Now lets look at s

219、ome charts,finally!And since we all waited so patiently while we got into methodological constraints,well WEBSITE PERFORMANCEstart with one of our very favorite charts.(We are primarily concerned with the accuracy of our charts rather than the aesthetics,but this one is a favorite because it always

220、looks so nice and paints such a clear picture of whats happening out in the real world.)In the final months of 2023,desktop users accounted for 48%of nonprofit web traffic,with mobile users(including both phones and tablets)comprising the other 52%.While desktop visitors were a minority of all traff

221、ic,they generated 67%of all donation transactions,and 78%of all online revenue.We want to emphasize once again that this includes only data from the final two months of the year,and that we cant draw direct year-over-year comparisons,and that you are not allowed to go look at last years M+R Benchmar

222、ks to compare results there because our participant pool has changed.However.If you were to look at the equivalent chart from past years,you would see a very consistent pattern:desktop users accounting for roughly half of traffic,two thirds of transactions,and three quarters of revenue.While the ove

223、rall picture looks familiar,there were some striking differences within sectors.For Environmental nonprofits,desktop users represented the majority of traffic,and accounted for 83%of revenue.For the Wildlife/Animal Welfare sector,70%of website visits came from mobile users,along with 57%of transacti

224、ons and 42%of revenue.68Website Performance71Overall,44%of visits to the nonprofits in our study came from organic traffic.This category includes visitors who searched for a term and clicked on an unpaid result.It excludes other sources like direct links on other sites,social media,email,paid advert

225、ising,or users simply entering a URL.Of those desktop users who made their way to a nonprofits main donation page,16%completed a gift.For mobile users,the main donation conversion rate was just 10%.Public Media was the only sector to see a higher conversion rate for mobile users than for desktop use

226、rs.Average gift was also higher for desktop visitors than for mobile visitors$137 compared to$83.These differences may be driven by a combination of audience demographics and preferences,traffic WEBSITE PERFORMANCEsources,and nonprofit tactics including website optimization and direct response effor

227、ts.One way that many nonprofits have attempted to increase conversions among mobile users is by adopting alternative payment platforms.The most popular of these is PayPal,which was an option on donation pages for 67%of M+R Benchmarks participants.Apple Pay and Google Pay were accepted by 38%and 30%p

228、articipants,respectively.And 53%of nonprofits allowed donors to give directly from a Bank Account/EFT.7072Section NameNotes fromPrincipal Data AnalystLIA MANCUSOThere are some things about Google Analytics 4(GA4)that I absolutely love,and some that I complain about to my colleagues,my family,my dog,

229、and probably in my sleep.Maybe the biggest one is that the default setting for data retention for GA4 Explorations is two months.The first step you should take is to immediately update your GA4 data retention settings to 14 months.If youre not sure how to change these settings,weve linked to helpful

230、 instructions below.You may also need the help of a developer to ensure that any recommended events or custom events you wish to track are fully set up in GA4.This is an important step to ensure that you dont lose the ability to track certain important events(e.g.donations/purchases,refunds,donation

231、 frequency,etc.)As Google moves fully into the GA4 era(and the rest of us follow),data collected under the previous Universal Analytics(UA)platform will become unavailable.Dont let your data disappear!Make sure to archive your UA data before July 1,2024.For detailed instructions,see only will you ha

232、ve more control of your own data,youll also be one step closer to participating in next years M+R Benchmarks.A true win-win.73Combining users from devices of all types,the average main donation page conversion rate was 12%.(Each participant identified their own“main donation page”typically its the o

233、ne you land on if you click the big DONATE button that is probably in the top right corner of your homepage.)While this metric varied between sectors,we did not find significant differences between nonprofits of different sizes.We can hope for a best-case scenario,where potential supporters can easi

234、ly search for a cause that matters to them and find their way directly to the content they are looking for whether thats information,an opportunity to take meaningful WEBSITE PERFORMANCEaction,a convenient way to donate,or something else.And it happens all the time,it really does!But not every path

235、forward is smooth or uninterrupted,and the decisions being made by Google,Apple,Meta,and other corporations can create trouble in unexpected ways.We look forward to being able to report even more comprehensive data on web performance next year.In the meantime,there are some important settings in GA4

236、 that determine how complete your own data is.If you have not already done so,making these changes will help ensure that you can collect and retain the data you need to measure your website performance.Answers on page 19 of the rules bookletTHIS YEAR WE HAD 225 PARTICIPANTS IN BENCHMARKS.HOW MANY PA

237、RTICIPATED IN OUR FIRST STUDY BACK IN 2006?155531102TRIVIA!75Thanks for playing along!74MEET THIS YEARS PLAYERS77Thank you for playing along!American Museum of Natural HistoryArts Alliance IllinoisBarnes FoundationCalifornia Academy of SciencesCentral Park ConservancyHillel InternationalMonterey Bay

238、 AquariumMuseum of ScienceNational Trust for Historic PreservationAlliance for the Great LakesAppalachian Mountain ClubConservation Law FoundationConservation MinnesotaEarthjusticeEcojusticeEnvironmental Defense FundEvergreen ActionFood&Water WatchFriends of the EarthGreenpeace CanadaGreenpeace UKGr

239、eenpeace USALeague of Conservation VotersMono Lake CommitteeMystic River Watershed AssociationNational Audubon SocietyNational Parks Conservation AssociationNatural Resources Defense CouncilNature Conservancy of CanadaNorth Carolina League of Conservation VotersNRDC Action FundOceanaOverton Park Con

240、servancyRails-to-Trails ConservancyRareRiverkeeperSave the Boundary WatersSierra ClubSouthern Utah Wilderness Alliance(SUWA)Action Against Hunger USAActionAid UKAmerican Jewish World ServiceAmerican Red CrossAneraBread for the WorldBritish Red CrossCanadian Red CrossChristian AidConcern WorldwideFIN

241、CA InternationalHIASInternational Development Research Centre (IDRC)International Medical CorpsInternational Rescue Committee UKInternational Rescue Committee USIrish Red CrossIslamic Relief UKMAG(Mines Advisory Group)Oxfam AmericaOxfam GBPhilip Hayden FoundationRight To PlayRoot CapitalSave the Chi

242、ldren USASightsaversCULTURALDISASTER/INTERNATIONAL AIDENVIRONMENTALMEET THIS YEARS PLAYERS76TrcaireUK for UNHCRUNICEF UKUSA for UNHCRWaterAid UKWomen for Women International UKWorld Food Program USAAction on Smoking and HealthAlzheimer Society of CanadaAlzheimer Society Waterloo WellingtonAlzheimers

243、 AssociationAmerican Cancer SocietyAmerican Heart AssociationAmerican Kidney FundAmerican Lung AssociationAtlanta Ronald McDonald House CharitiesBlood:WaterChef Ann FoundationChildrens Hospice South WestChildrens Hospital Los AngelesColorectal Cancer AllianceCureSearch for Childrens CancerCystic Fib

244、rosis FoundationDementia UKEvelina London Childrens CharityGreat Ormond Street Hospital Childrens CharityGuys&St Thomas CharityGuys Cancer CharityHealth Equity InternationalHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital FoundationHospice UKLauraLynn,Irelands Childrens HospiceLeukemia and Lymphoma So

245、ciety of CanadaMarch of DimesMarie CurieMINDMuscular Dystrophy AssociationNational Deaf Childrens SocietyNational Kidney FoundationPietaReSurge InternationalHEALTHHUNGER/POVERTYThe Trust for Public LandThe Wilderness SocietyThe Wilderness Society Action FundUnion of Concerned ScientistsWashington Tr

246、ails AssociationWaterkeeper AllianceWorld Wildlife FundWyoming Outdoor CouncilRNLIRonald McDonald House Charities of Chicagoland&Northwest IndianaSamaritansSan Francisco AIDS FoundationSmile Train USSpecial OlympicsTerrence Higgins TrustYoung Lives vs CancerZERO Prostate CancerAkron-Canton Regional

247、FoodbankAtlanta Community Food BankBanco de Alimentos de Puerto Rico Inc.Blue Ridge Area Food BankChild Poverty Action GroupCommunity Food Bank of New JerseyFeeding AmericaFIND Food BankFood Bank for the HeartlandFood Bank of Northeast LouisianaFood Bank of Northwest IndianaFood Bank of the RockiesF

248、oodbank of Southeastern Virginia and the Eastern ShoreFreestore FoodbankGods Pantry Food Bank,Inc.Golden State Opportunity FoundationGood Shepherd Food BankGreat Plains Food BankGreater Chicago Food DepositoryGreater Cleveland Food BankGreater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank Maryland Food BankOregon

249、Food BankRhode Island Community Food BankSan Francisco-Marin Food BankSecond Harvest Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and AcadianaSecond Harvest Food Bank of Middle TennesseeSecond Harvest Foodbank of Southern WisconsinSecond Harvest HeartlandTerre Haute Catholic Charities Foodbank79GlossaryADVOCACY

250、 MESSAGEAn email or SMS message that asks recipients to sign an online petition,send an email to a decision-maker,or take a similar online action.For the purposes of this Study,advocacy response rates do not factor in higher-bar actions like making a phone call or attending an event,largely because

251、tracking offline response is inconsistent across organizations.Advocacy email rates were calculated from advocacy emails with a simple action sent to either the full file or a random sample of the full file.CAVITY SAMThis is the actual name of the person you perform surgery on in the game Operation.

252、Its a pretty gross name.CLICK-THROUGH RATECalculated as the number of people who clicked on any trackable link in an email or text message divided by the number of delivered emails or text messages.People who clicked multiple times in one email were only counted once.In other words,if a subscriber c

253、licked on every link in a message 10 times,this was counted the same as if the subscriber had clicked once on a single link.CONNECTED TV ADVERTISINGDigital television delivered to a smart television or over-the-top device like Roku or Fire stick.Does not include streaming on a PC or mobile phone.DEL

254、IVERABLE EMAILSOnly the emails that were delivered,not including the emails that are considered inactive or emails that were sent and bounced.“Delivered”email messages may land in a users inbox,spam folder,promotions tab,or custom folder.DEVICE TYPE,DESKTOPWe use the definitions provided by Google A

255、nalytics to separate traffic data by device type.The“desktop”category includes any desktop or laptop computer with a screen larger than 7”in diagonal.GLOSSARYDEVICE TYPE,MOBILEWe use the definitions provided by Google Analytics to separate traffic data by device type.Mobile devices are hand-held dev

256、ices that include a phone or a tablet.DIGITAL AUDIO ADVERTISING Streaming music or podcast service,delivered via a website or app.Not traditional or satellite radio.DIGITAL ORGANIZINGRecruiting,engaging and organizing members,activists,and/or volunteers toward advocacy outcomes.FANS,FACEBOOKPeople w

257、ho“like”a nonprofits Facebook Fan page.FOLLOWERS,INSTAGRAMPeople who subscribe to see posts from a nonprofits Instagram account.FOLLOWERS,TIKTOKPeople who follow a nonprofits TikTok account.FOLLOWERS,TWITTER/XPeople who subscribe to receive the tweets from a nonprofits Twitter account.FULL FILEAll o

258、f an organizations deliverable email addresses,not including unsubscribed email addresses or email addresses to which an organization no longer sends email messages.FUNDRAISING MESSAGEAn email or SMS message that only asks for a donation,as opposed to an email newsletter,which might ask for a donati

259、on and include other links.For the purposes of this Study,fundraising email only includes one-time donation asks;it does not include monthly gift asks.Fundraising email rates were calculated from all fundraising emails,regardless of whether the email went to the full file,a random sample of the file

260、,or a targeted portion of the file.78The Food Bank of Contra Costa and SolanoThe Salvation ArmyUnion Gospel Mission(Vancouver)KAWCKNKXLouisville Public MediaMaine PublicNebraska Public MediaWAMU 88.5WETAWHYYAfterschool for Children and Teens Now(ACT Now)CoalitionAmerican Friends Service CommitteeBar

261、nardos IrelandBoys&Girls Clubs of AmericaDave Thomas Foundation for AdoptionFriends Committee on National Legislation IndspireKenneth Rainin FoundationMake-A-Wish UKMoveOnNational Education AssociationNational Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV)Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern Califor

262、niaProject On Government OversightRailway ChildrenRoom to ReadSEIUTrue Patriot Love FoundationUJA Federation of New YorkUSOPCACLUAmnesty International UKAmnesty International USACenter for Reproductive RightsClientEarthEquality FederationFs FeministaGLBTQ Legal Advocates&Defenders(GLAD)Global Fund f

263、or WomenHuman Rights CampaignKids in Need of Defense(KIND)National Womens Law CenterPlanned Parenthood Action FundPlanned Parenthood Federation of AmericaRAICESRefugeReprieveSouthern Poverty Law CenterBC SPCABest Friends Animal SocietyCanadian Wildlife FederationCenter for Biological DiversityDogs T

264、rustDogs Trust IrelandHumane Society InternationalHumane Society International/EuropeInternational Fund for Animal WelfareInternational Fund for Animal Welfare UKJoybound People&PetsNational Wildlife FederationOperation KindnessPeople for the Ethical Treatment of AnimalsRedRoverRise for AnimalsThe B

265、rookeThe Humane Society of the United StatesThe International Wildlife Rehabilitation CouncilWoodgreen Pets CharityWorld Animal Protection CanadaPUBLIC MEDIARIGHTSWILDLIFE/ANIMAL WELFAREOTHER80GOOGLE GRANTSA distinct Google Ads account where nonprofits can buy up to$10,000/mo in search ads using fre

266、e credits.Subject to restrictions(such as caps on certain bidding strategies):think of it as a giant coupon with a lot of fine print!INFLUENCERSSocial media influencers are people who have an established presence on one or more social media platforms,with a reputation for being knowledgeable about a

267、 certain topic.Influencers regularly post content around that topic for their established,engaged follower base.These audiences,ranging from thousands to millions,follow influencers for their authentic views on their area of expertise.LINEAR TELEVISION ADVERTISING Traditional television,with content

268、 delivered via satellite or cable.Not connected tv.LIST CHURNCalculated as the number of subscribers who became unreachable in a 12-month period divided by the sum of the number of deliverable email addresses at the end of that period plus the number of subscribers who became unreachable during that

269、 period.Study participants were required to track the number of subscribers who became unreachable each month to account for subscribers both joining and leaving an email list during the 12-month period who would otherwise go uncounted.MONTHLY GIFTA donation where the donor signs up once to donate o

270、n a regular schedule,typically by pledging a regular gift amount on a credit card each month.Also known as a sustaining gift.MUZJIKSA Russian peasant,especially prior to 1917.“MUZJIKS”generated the highest-ever score for an opening word in competitive Scrabble,earning Jesse Inman 126 points in the 2

271、008 National Scrabble Championship.NEWSLETTERS,EMAILAn email with multiple links or asks,which can include fundraising or advocacy asks.Email newsletter rates were calculated from all email newsletters,regardless of whether the newsletter went to the full file,a random sample of the file,or a target

272、ed portion of the file.ONLINE RETENTION,NEW DONOROf the donors that made their first-ever online gift in the previous calendar year,the percent that made an online gift in the current calendar year.Note that we count someone as“new”in 2023 if they have no online donations reported between the start

273、of 2019 and the end of 2022.ONLINE RETENTION,PRIOR DONOROf the donors that made an online gift in the previous calendar year that wasnt their first online gift,the percent that made an online gift in the current calendar year.OUT OF HOME ADVERTISINGAds appearing outdoors,like on billboards,street fu

274、rniture,transit infrastructure.Can be traditional printed media or digital screens.PAGE COMPLETION RATECalculated as the number of people who completed a form divided by the number of people who clicked on the link to get to that form.For the purposes of this Study,it was not always possible to use

275、the number of people who clicked on a link to a specific form,so we used the number of unique clicks in the message.PERCENTILEThe percentage of observed values below the named data point.25%of the observations are below the 25th percentile;75%of the observations are below the 75th percentile.The val

276、ues between the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile are the middle 50%of the observed values and represent the normal range of values.PEER-TO-PEER TEXT MESSAGINGUnlike a single mass message to a full list,these SMS messages connect volunteers and staff to individuals,enabling one-on-one conversa

277、tions.RATIO OF AD-ACQUIRED LEADS TO START OF YEAR EMAIL LIST SIZERatio of new email leads acquired through digital advertising divided email size at the start of the year.RELATIONAL ORGANIZINGMobilizing personal contacts within a volunteers network.It could be calls,texts,or in-person conversations

278、with people in their own community.RESPONSE RATECalculated as the number of people who took the main action requested by an email or text message divided by the number of delivered messages.STUDYA published report containing careful analysis or examination of a subject(e.g.the M+R Benchmarks Study).

279、A room devoted to reading,schoolwork,or literary pursuits.Occasionally,a crime scene.UNIQUE CLICKSThe number of people who clicked on any trackable link in an email message,as opposed to the number of times the links in an email were clicked.If a subscriber clicked on every link in a message 10 time

280、s,this is counted as 1 unique click.It is also counted as 1 strange person.UNSUBSCRIBE RATECalculated as the number of individuals who unsubscribed in response to an email message divided by the number of delivered emails.VIEW-THROUGH REVENUERevenue from donors who made a donation(typically within 3

281、0 days)of seeing,but not clicking on,an ad.For example,a supporter who sees a banner ad and later goes directly to the nonprofits website to make a gift.WEBSITE DONATION PAGE CONVERSION RATECalculated from the number of donations to a participants main donation page,divided by the number of unique p

282、ageviews of that page.We included only unique pageviews for the one-time donation page,if a separate donation page existed for monthly gifts.WEBSITE PAGE LOAD TIMEThe number of seconds before a page appears to be visually complete,as measured by the WebPageTest tool at http:/webpagetest.org.WEBSITE

283、REVENUE PER VISITORCalculated as the total revenue from one-time online gifts,plus the value of initial monthly gifts,divided by the total number of website visitors for the year.Depending on retention,the long-term value of monthly gifts may be substantially higher.WEBSITE VISITORS PER MONTHThe num

284、ber of monthly unique visitors to a participants main website.81GlossaryGLOSSARYHOW TO PLAY THE GAMEContents 1 Benchmarks Study 1 Infograph Players Manual 1 custom d6(a.k.a a regular six-sided die,for you non-nerds)4 play pieces2024 M+R Benchmarks is fun for the whole family!*Get ready to enter the

285、world of nonprofit digital fundraising,advocacy,and marketing with M+R Benchmarks:The Board Game!Inside youll find everything you need to explore the ups and downs,the twists and turns,the chutes and ladders that are shaping email,advertising,mobile messaging,social media,and more.Spin the wheel,rol

286、l the dice,and get ready for Benchmarks 2024!*Assuming your whole family is super into nonprofit digital programs,and really enjoys look-ing at data,reviewing charts,and quietly reading analysis.If that sounds like the sort of thing your family is into,we are both concerned and a little jealous.STEP

287、 ONE:Open your Benchmarks Study to the back page to reveal the Official Benchmarks Game Board.STEP TWO:Choose a Hero Piece(created from participant answers to the question:who is someone who inspires you to do the world-changing work you do?Check out the list of answers starting on page 7 of the rul

288、es booklet!)Up to 4 players15 minsSTEP THREE:Roll the die,and move your custom Hero Piece that many spaces.Follow the instructions on that space.If you are instructed to move to a different spot,you dont need to follow those new directions.If you land on a slide,follow the arrows to your next space.WINNING:The first player to make it to the center of the board wins!But really you got to play a nonprofit data-themed boardgame likely during work hours,so were all winners here.82