Howard Lake | 11 March 2009 | News Fundraising response forms adapting to recession, says Tick Box Report Tagged with: Individual giving recession Research / statistics AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis Printed fundraising response materials are changing, according to the Tick Box Report 2009 from advertising and marketing consultant Andrew Papworth. The changes are likely to be reactions to the recession, he argues.The 120-page report analyses the design of 191 reply forms and coupons in loose inserts, mailshots and and newspaper and magazine adverts published in 2008-09 and designed to raise funds for 105 organisations.Papworth has found that the trend away from asking for one-off donations and towards asking for regular direct debit payments reversed during 2008/09. This could be because fundraisers assume that people are currently less willing to commit to regular giving when their own incomes could be in doubt.But Papworth suggests another reason. Whereas in the past fundraisers were happy to achieve lower response rates for regular giving appeals, given the lifetime value of such donors, now they are more keen simply to achieve a higher volume of response, so appeals for one-off gifts become more likely.The report also found that the range of asks for one-off gifts tends to be much larger than for regular direct debits. Although the typical asks are not very different – about £20 for one-off gifts and £2 or £3 per month for direct debits (equivalent to £24 to £36 per annum) – Papworth suggests it is not uncommon for the range of one-off asks to go up to over £1000, whereas the highest ask for direct debits was £24 per month (or £288 per year).“Whether £24 per month is a realistic limit for regular giving is open to testing,” said Papworth. “Clearly some people – even in these straitened times – could well afford £100 per month for a cause close to their hearts. It could be a case of if you don’t ask, you don’t get.”He points out that one charity, Centrepoint, has adopted a tactic which could be developed further. “They say that £12 per month will sponsor a room for a homeless person and £24 will sponsor two such rooms. There is an interesting idea here which could be adapted and extended by other fundraisers.”In the report Papworth questions the lack of choice typically given to donors. “Coupons and reply forms tend to force supporters down one channel – either into one-off gifts or regular giving,” he said. “This could be a big mistake. It’s hard work attracting attention and getting read. Once you’ve achieved the hard part, it makes sense to enable readers to express their support in one of a number of ways.”Papworth also suggests that some membership and sponsorship organisations could be missing a trick in not offering an opportunity to donate without, or as well as, joining or sponsoring. He counsels against newspaper and magazine adverts that rely purely on a phone number of website as a response channel. “Apart from the fact that some people prefer the post,” he said, “the addition of a coupon flags the fact that the ad is inviting a response.”Overall, the report indicates that fundraising print could be much more user-friendly. “You’d think that relationship marketing had never happened,” said Papworth. “Reply addresses are corporate and impersonal; there are very few ‘thank yous’; there’s not much promise of feedback on how donations will be spent; premium telephone numbers are used with no explanation of cost and too often a donor who cuts out and sends off a coupon is left with no means of contact.”The Tick Box Report 2009 is designed to offer a benchmark of current practice and to indicate possible improvements based on examples which depart from the norm. It includes 27 detailed data tables and 42 charts.It is available at £70 per copy from Andrew Papworth at [email protected] 66 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
SC Calls Upon Advocates & Parties-In-Person To Provide Joint Consent For Resuming Physical Hearings [Read Notice]
Top StoriesSC Calls Upon Advocates & Parties-In-Person To Provide Joint Consent For Resuming Physical Hearings [Read Notice] Sanya Talwar2 Jun 2020 5:47 AMShare This – xTaking stock of requests for re-commencing physical hearings at the Top Court, the Supreme Court has called upon Advocates and Parties-in-person to give their written consent stating that the same shall only be considered on receipt of the same.The circular signed under the hand of the additional registrar has been released today and states that,”In view of the request received from…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginTaking stock of requests for re-commencing physical hearings at the Top Court, the Supreme Court has called upon Advocates and Parties-in-person to give their written consent stating that the same shall only be considered on receipt of the same.The circular signed under the hand of the additional registrar has been released today and states that,”In view of the request received from various quarters and in order to explore the feasibility of physical appearance of advocates in the court, while adhering to social distancing norms, it is hereby notified to all the advocates and party-in-person to give their joint consent for physically appearing and arguing in court, only on receipt of consent of all parties to that effect, the matter will be considered for listing before the Hon’ble Court, subject to availability of the bench”The circular has further made it clear that the order for commencing physical court hearings shall only take place subject to the order of the competent authority and the requisite social distancing norms.The Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) today had addressed a letter to CJI SA Bobde, urging him to restore working of the Courts in a physical setting, from July, 2020. The letter highlighted that Open Court hearings are the “spine” of the Indian legal system and that Virtual Courts are not a substitute to physical Courts. Attention had also been drawn towards the “practical difficulties” in online filing and hearing of cases via video conferencing.The letter stated that almost 95% lawyers are not comfortable with the Virtual Court hearings as they are not well equipped with knowledge on the use of computers. “The common feedback seems to be that the lawyers are unable to present their cases effectively in the Virtual medium and the same is acting as a major deterrent for lawyers to consent for such virtual hearings,” stated the SCAORA.Earlier, on April 28, the Bar Council of India had requested the CJI not to continue the system of E-filings and Virtual headings, post lockdown. “There is humongous difference in the technical knowhow of persons often according to age gap, and often according to difference in mode and manner of education, and resources and technology available from place to place,” the Council had stated.Click Here To Download NoticeRead NoticeSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story