Nonprofits walk a fine line when it comes to donor communication.
On one hand, donors love giving to specific, tangible needs. Offers like “Give a child a gift at Christmas” spark generosity and inspire trust in the donor about how their money will be used.
On the other hand, restricted gifts can limit a ministry’s ability to respond where the need is greatest.
This caused us to ask: could we broaden our client’s holiday direct mail offer without losing donor engagement or revenue, thus giving them more flexibility in how funds are used?
The Test
One of Masterworks’ clients’ direct mail control offer between July and December was a restricted offer to provide a Christmas gift to a child. The goal of the test was to broaden the offer so that the funds could be used where needed most. Since the test was changing the long-standing control offer language for the fall, we split it into two phases to reduce risk. That way, if the first phase did not show promise, we could revise and retest.
- Year 1/Phase 1: Removed seasonal language while still keeping children as the focus. This broadened the use of the funds beyond the holiday timeframe but still limited them to the children’s ministry.
- Year 2/Phase 2: Fully undesignated the offer from children by making it “children and families at Christmas and all year long.” This allowed the revenue to be used where needed most.
The test ran across 13 direct mail impacts between July and December. Donors were locked into one of two tracks: either the control language for the entire season or the test. Rather than looking at each individual mailing’s results, we evaluated the performance of the test at the donor level during that time. The goal at the end of the two-year test was to move from the offer of:
“Your gift helps spread God’s love to children at Christmas.”
to an unrestricted ask of:
“Your gift helps spread God’s love to children and families at Christmas and all year long.”
The Results
The undesignated test performed comparably to the control in all key metrics, with no statistically significant shift in:
- Revenue
- Retention
- Gift frequency
- Average gift
Ultimately, the test did not impact donor retention or donor value in this critical timeframe. When testing, a “tie” can be a win, and in this case, it was exactly what we’d hoped for. It meant we could unrestrict the language without harming donor performance.
Additional Findings
While overall results showed no statistically significant change in donor value, we did see a difference when looking at donor performance segmented by time on file. Newer donors, those on file for less than two years, appeared more sensitive to the language changes. Our hypothesis is that they may read appeals more closely and that restricted offers could help build trust early in the relationship. They might also be more alert to what we call “wiggle” words (words that unrestrict the ask) in the offer language. In contrast, longer-term donors were largely unaffected, likely because they recognized the package and had already developed a strong sense of trust with the organization.
Moving Forward
The results gave our client the confidence to move toward a more flexible offer structure, with minimal risk to donor trust and engagement. However, as a safeguard for newer donors, we kept 2 of the 13 holiday-season mailings restricted, a measured approach that balances flexibility with donor trust.
This test showed that even small shifts in messaging can open the door to more flexibility, without losing donor trust or generosity. By taking a thoughtful, strategic approach, we were able to gain learnings and freedom and still keep loyal supporters engaged.
