In the mid-1970s, the first studies on the use of persuasion techniques for fundraising purposes were published in academic journals. The purpose was to understand the psychology of human generosity by adding short phrases in a donation request, that would somehow trigger us to say ‘yes’ to give money to a good cause. These techniques were named foot-in-the-door, door-in-the-face, the pique technique, etc.

For instance, with the foot-in-the-door technique the charity tried to get prospective donors to first comply to a small request (for instance: would you sign this petition?) which would increase the likelihood that they would comply with a later-larger request (for instance: will you donate money?).

Such persuasion techniques were interesting for several reasons. For one, they quantified the extent to which donation decisions could be influenced by words that had nothing to do with the merit of the charitable cause. In addition, they were very cheap and easy to use.

The value of this type of research, wasn’t to show that we were susceptible to manipulation—we already knew that—but rather to show how susceptible we were and which techniques we could all use to become better at influencing others.

Today, we have an abundance of easy-to-implement persuasion techniques at our disposal. We see them frequently and we use them to get people to say “yes” to supporting our worthy cause.

The only problem is that potential donors are growing increasingly frustrated with being the targets of manipulation attempts.

This is reflected in the following three fundraising challenges:

1. Avoidance Behaviour: Research shows that people are willing to sacrifice time and money to avoid a donation request. We take a longer route to our car to avoid being seen by a street canvasser, and we’re less likely to visit a commercial website if we expect to be met with a donation request from a charity.
2. Spam Categorization: Technological or legal measures are being implemented to protect people from unwanted solicitations. This includes spam filters on email accounts, spam-identifying apps on phones, and restrictions on street canvassers implemented by municipalities and local stores. Did you know that every time an NGO launches a telemarketing campaign, the Danish phone directory site 180.dk categorizes the calls as potential spam? This is a problem for fundraising organizations.
3. Manipulation Sensitivity: Recipients of donation requests have gradually learned to identify attempts at manipulation. What was clever in the 1970s is now obviously manipulative. For instance; research shows that images of crying children motivate recipients to donate money, but at the same time, also irritates them. So, while the image triggers a desire to stop the crying, it is also interpreted as an attempt at emotional manipulation. The result is that the effect of the image is canceled out by the sensitivity to manipulation. You could say that it ends in a fundraising zero-sum situation.

Implications for fundraising?
There are still plenty of researchers and fundraising practitioners who focus on developing new variations of old persuasion techniques. But new fundraising directions are also emerging that document and address the three challenges mentioned above.

I will conclude with four solution-oriented headlines presented by this research:

1. Have the courage to reduce manipulation and give your donors ownership of the relationship and the donation appeal.
2. Show empathy to your donors and acknowledge, in your communication, that requests can be annoying.
3. Work more with segmentation by trying to reduce the number of recipients who respond negatively, or not at all, to your requests (when 5% of recipients of an email campaign donate, do the remaining 95% become slightly annoyed? If so, can we filter some of those for whom the message is less relevant out?).
4. And my personal crusade: Get better at evaluating for long-term gain. Ask your organization: Do our KPIs help us create long-term value, or do they just make us better at persuasion for short-term gain?

Hopefully, fundraisers will increasingly be willing to experiment with approaches that recognize and overcome these challenges.

References used in text

Andreoni, J., Rao, J. M., & Trachtman, H. (2017). Avoiding the ask: A field experiment on altruism, empathy, and charitable giving. Journal of political Economy, 125(3), 625-653.

Adena, M., & Huck, S. (2020). Online fundraising, self-image, and the long-term impact of ask avoidance. Management Science, 66(2), 722-743.

Kang, I. H., Leliveld, M. C., & Ferraro, R. (2022). The impact of facial emotional expression on the effectiveness of charitable advertisements: the role of sympathy and manipulative intent. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 35(5), e2281.

Shaw, S. (2019, June 12). Consumers are becoming wise to your nudge. Behavioral Scientist.

Kamdar, A., Levitt, S. D., List, J. A., Mullaney, B., & Syverson, C. (2015). Once and done: Leveraging behavioral economics to increase charitable contributions. Science of Philanthropy Initiative Working Paper, 25.

Damgaard, M. T., & Gravert, C. (2018). The hidden costs of nudging: Experimental evidence from reminders in fundraising. Journal of Public Economics, 157, 15-26.

Thomas, S. A., Feng, S., & Krishnan, T. V. (2015). To retain? To upgrade? The effects of direct mail on regular donation behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(1), 48-63

Jacob Schjødt

About Jacob Schjødt

Jacob Schjødt is a Ph.D. Candidate in Private Donor Management at Copenhagen Business School (CBS). He teaches behavioural science and marketing at CBS and donor retention for fundraising practitioners in Denmark. In collaboration with several Danish charities, Jacob conducts research on the effect of fundraising communication on acquisition, retention, and upgrade behavior. He has a background in behavioral science, customer journeys, and started his interest in fundraising as a face to face fundraiser.

Picture by Miguel Á. Padriñán on Pexels

When democratic space shrinks, fundraising becomes a political act. Whether we fundraise for human rights, anti-corruption, independent journalism, or marginalized communities, our work is no longer neutral. It is civic resistance. And in Central and Eastern Europe, this reality is becoming impossible to ignore.

Nowhere was this more visible than in Bulgaria on 5 June 2025, where over 200 civil society leaders, fundraising professionals, and activists from at least 7 countries gathered for the country’s first-ever fundraising conference: Fundraising In Challenging Times. Organized by the Bulgarian Centre for Not-for-Profit Law and Fundraising Club Bulgaria, and supported by the European Fundraising Association (EFA), the event was not just a milestone – it was a warning and a call to action.

Across the region, populists and autocrats are eroding democratic norms. Civil society organizations find themselves underfunded, isolated, and under attack. Yet the Bulgarian event showed that there is another path: community, collaboration, and courageous fundraising. The conference sessions – on crowdfunding for democracy, engaging major donors for difficult causes, and mobilizing support for niche topics – cut to the heart of Europe’s current democratic challenges.

The message was clear: even in difficult political environments, individual fundraising is not only possible, it is necessary. What’s more, it works. From Poland to Romania, Lithuania to Czechia and Slovakia, practitioners shared real-world examples of campaigns that challenged power, mobilized citizens, and delivered results.

Photograph by Andrzej Pietrucha (FAOO – EFA member from Poland), featuring speakers from other EFA members: in the foreground, Giedrė Šopaitė-Šilinskienė (Baltic Fundraising Hub, Lithuania) and Cătălin Dinu (2doGood – prospective EFA member from Romania); in the background on the left, Eduard Marček (EFA Executive Director) and Jan Kroupa (Czech Fundraising Centre – EFA member from Czechia).

As European fundraisers, we must recognize what’s at stake. The future of civic space will not be secured by statements alone. It requires investment, infrastructure, and support for grassroots fundraisers working in high-risk contexts. Events like the one in Bulgaria must not remain isolated. They should be part of a broader strategy to build capacity where it is most urgently needed.

That means:

• Establishing regional peer networks for fundraisers in fragile democracies.
• Prioritizing fundraising for advocacy and rights-based causes within international actors.
• Providing training, mentorship, and mobility opportunities for fundraisers working under political pressure.
• Recognizing that fundraising is a tool of civic resistance, and treating it with the strategic seriousness it deserves.

The community built in Bulgaria is only the beginning. Plans are already underway for a follow-up gathering in 2026. But the real test is whether we, as a European fundraising community, respond with long-term commitment. These are not ordinary times – and fundraising is not an isolated profession. It is a vital force for civic resilience.

To succeed, we must embed support for fundraisers working on the frontlines of social change – especially in regions where civic space is under threat. Let’s make sure they are not left to stand alone.

With over a decade as a fundraising leader, and experience on a number of nonprofit boards, I’ve sat on both sides of the proverbial fence, including a lot of time immersed in the world of fundraising leaders through chairing sectoral networks. And my observation is that while the strategic challenges facing senior fundraisers remain consistent, they require new framing.

Here’s why.

Hills & waterfalls

As ‘nonprofits’, we define ourselves by what we’re not ­­– and thus from the outset undermine the opportunity of holistic organisational culture and strategy, where income fuels mission. Too often we have ambitious wishlists for services, but how to fund them comes as an afterthought. We strive for the resilience of our service users, and yet resist investing in our own. And if we do integrate income as a core strategic pillar, we seldom back it up with the necessary focus on culture.

Fundraisers therefore find themselves pushing their rock up a hill, championing income generation as a cause in itself. We try to convince upwards that being service-user led or supporter centric is not a binary choice. What other role spends more than half their time asking permission to do their job, or protecting their team from the same fate? How do we move the conversation from overhead to investment?

I dream of a world of holistic thinking, where (business-cased) business plans flow from the top down and back up again. Where they are supported by clear integrated metrics and performance management. Where bravery in delivery matches the bravery of our core mission.

How do we move to a world where instead of rolling that rock up a hill, strategy flows effortlessly from the top down, like a vibrant waterfall?

‘Everyone’s a fundraiser’

While not incorrect, this phrase keeps fundraising leaders where they are ­– championing their job as a cause and pushing that rock up the hill. It also devalues their expertise ­– is everyone an accountant? A programme manager? Quite simply, no. So this phrase continues to feed a risk already present – namely, that anyone who once organised a coffee morning, self-proclaims sufficient knowledge to run a regular giving programme.

Does that mean that board members don’t have a role when it comes to leveraging their networks, and maybe even supporting financially themselves? In short, no. But the true value of the board in empowering income generation lies far beyond being seen as an annual income stream. Rather it is about viewing the board as a strategic enabler and often symbiotically educating and equipping them to do so.

I’ve seen so many examples where the challenges being faced by the executive just simply couldn’t be resolved without board sponsorship and support. From governance structures and SLAs to fragmented strategies and risk aversion, many issues by definition need board escalation to overcome. These big-ticket items don’t move quickly ­– but without board involvement, they won’t move at all. Worst case, they may even remain unidentified.

Board perceptions, behaviours & investment

So let’s explore this from both sides of that proverbial fence…

Fundraisers, how do you perceive your board? 

Do you view your board as an inconvenience or an ally? I regularly witness two extremes.  At one end of the spectrum, the executive regards the board as ethereal all-knowing beings. Hours are spent preparing board packs and sweating over presentations. Employees face this group of oracles to hear their future and their fate. Sure, you can push back… but not too much – it’s the board! At the other extreme, board sign-off feels like a time-swallowing formality.

Much perception is of course driven by the performance and culture of boards themselves.  Often a fundraiser’s goals centre around ambition, impact, innovation and investment, while the board’s goals centre around risk management and governance. The reality is that this is a necessary and healthy tension. But it can morph into a dysfunctional relationship that impedes partnership, collaboration and progress.

We all know that active engagement and strong relationships are at the heart of all fundraising. So too we need to invest time in our board relationships. Seek sponsors and champions at board level for the projects you are most passionate about. Enter into this with explicit agreement on how involved – or not – your board members will be in delivery. After all, they are there to be a project sponsor and sounding board, not an extra pair of hands.

Your CEO is a key stakeholder in helping you navigate this. And to work with you on the case for investing in board make-up and recruitment. Make sure that this is not being neglected and that decisions are being driven by clear objectives. And avoid recruiting board-level fundraisers to do a professional’s job for free. You might see some short-term gains here but it is not sustainable and can become fraught with issues around conflicts of interest.

Some food for thought for board members.

Were you aware of the time commitment before you signed up? Have you made the time to visit your charity, to meet with the team? If you’re considering becoming a board member, be clear on how many meetings per year are involved, whether online or in person, working hours or evenings and weekends – ask these questions up front and only get involved if the requirements align with how much you can afford to give.

If you’ve come from the commercial sector, maintain care in how theory, frameworks and skills translate to a nonprofit context.  My advice is a very healthy dose of pragmatism. Take the time to understand what is and isn’t possible ­– or even advisable – in a resource-stretched context. The most powerful formula will be your wealth of experience combined with humility. Enter this board role with an appetite to learn as much as you impart.

Do you prepare for board meetings and are you prepared to stick your neck out to ask the tough questions? It’s hard to challenge the status quo. Board culture and ways of working were established long before you joined. It will be difficult to push for a longer-term investment-driven view of income in an organisation where annual budgets have reigned supreme. But this is where you balance the risk and push the executive for well thought-through pilots and business cases.

One last question though for the executive team. 

Have you ever put yourself in the shoes of a bunch of volunteers who shoulder legal responsibility for your organisation’s governance? Should boards be volunteer-led at all?  Perhaps a question for another time, but in my opinion countless issues lead back to this.

Is your funding model serving you?

Finally, what does your organisation’s income pie-chart look like now, and how do you want it to look?  But more fundamentally, is your funding model supercharging your impact or limiting it?

So how will your funding model look three, five or even ten years from now?  Will it change in size and shape and how will this enhance your impact?  Is your income mix too heavily weighted towards labour intensive funding streams? Ones that restrict capacity to invest or scale and hold back the pace of delivery?  What if you had a social enterprise arm that gave you the freedom to generate unrestricted income through new and innovative products and cultures?  How much potential lies outside of traditional ‘fundraising’ streams and might a siloed mentality be holding the organisation back?

Big questions?  Yes.  Ones to equip a board to get involved in, I’d say.

Jane Trenaman

About Jane Trenaman

In 2023, Jane Trenaman founded The HX Consultancy specialising in leadership, fundraising, insight and experience – the culmination of a 25-year career with customer experience and social impact at its heart. Her services include board level training to empower income generation.

Jane’s heart has been squarely in social impact for the past 14 years as a nonprofit leader, mentor and consultant in fundraising and public engagement. She has worked in and for nonprofits, large and small, at different stages in maturity, in diverse parts of the sector. Jane currently chairs Fundraising Director Networks in the UK and Ireland and has served on boards and advisory committees for Christian Aid Ireland, Samaritans Ireland, and the National Opera House. She is a non-executive director with Common Purpose Ireland.

Main image by Cottonbro Studio

As fundraisers, earning and maintaining trust is essential to inspiring generosity. Without trust, donor confidence erodes, and charities struggle to fulfil their mission.

How can charities and agencies maintain public confidence while ensuring sustainable revenue streams in an era of heightened scrutiny, transparency, and evolving donor expectations? The answer lies in robust self-regulation.

To build and strengthen public trust, charities must actively listen to and respond to community feedback. Self-regulation in charity fundraising isn’t just about protecting donors – it’s about supporting and empowering them too. At the F2F Congress in Vienna, I will explore how ethical self-regulation frameworks, grounded in principles-based codes of conduct, safeguard donors and provide them with new ways to meaningfully engage with the causes they care about. This proactive approach fosters deeper connections between donors and charities while reinforcing trust and transparency in the process.

Self-regulation is more than just compliance – it’s a fundamental pillar of ethical, sustainable, effective and impactful fundraising. Here’s why.

The case for self-regulation

The fundraising sector is dynamic and diverse, spanning different markets, cultures, and regulatory environments. However, the common thread across all regions is the need for ethical fundraising that upholds public trust.

The Public Fundraising Regulatory Association New Zealand has supported and empowered members since 2006 by providing a proactive framework for self-regulation that ensures charities and fundraising agencies operate with integrity beyond just legal obligations.

By developing and adhering to self-regulatory frameworks, fundraising organisations can:

• Set clear ethical expectations to ensure fundraisers operate with integrity.
• Enhance transparency and accountability to donors, regulators, and the public.
• Proactively manage risks related to reputational damage or public scepticism.
• Strengthen industry credibility by demonstrating collective responsibility.

Principles-based codes of conduct: a flexible and ethical approach

A core component of effective self-regulation is the adoption of principles-based codes of conduct. These frameworks go beyond fixed rules to establish ethical standards that guide fundraisers in diverse and evolving circumstances.

Unlike prescriptive regulations, principles-based codes emphasise intent, impact and context, and support fundraisers to make decisions based on ethical considerations rather than just ticking compliance boxes. Key principles often include:

• Honesty – Ensuring truthful and clear communication with donors.
• Respect – Upholding donor rights and dignity at every interaction.
• Accountability – Being answerable for fundraising practices and outcomes.
• Transparency – Providing clear information on how funds are raised and used.
• Sustainability – Ensuring responsible fundraising that considers long-term impact.

Building and maintaining trust

Trust is the foundation of all successful fundraising. Without it, donor engagement diminishes, and the communities and beneficiaries we serve are directly impacted. Self-regulation fosters trust by setting high ethical standards and demonstrating a commitment to responsible and transparent fundraising.

Strategies for maintaining trust include:

• Open and honest communication – Donors should know how their contributions make an impact.
• Clear complaints and compliance mechanisms – Avenues for addressing concerns must be accessible and effective.
• Third-party accreditation and oversight – Independent reviews help reinforce credibility.
• Consistent ethical behaviour across all channels – Whether in face-to-face fundraising, telemarketing, or digital marketing, integrity must remain at the core.

Future-proofing fundraising: the role of self-regulation in long-term success

As fundraising landscapes evolve ­– whether due to technological advancements, economic shifts, or regulatory changes – self-regulation provides charities and agencies with the flexibility to adapt without compromising ethical integrity. By embedding these frameworks within their operations, organisations can not only navigate challenges with confidence and ethical clarity, but innovate responsibly while maintaining donor trust, and establish long-term sustainability through consistent ethical practices.

About the International F2F Fundraising Congress

Where: Vienna

When: 28-30 April 2025

EFA discount: Thanks to the support of additional social funding for the event, the F2F Congress host Fundraising Verband Austria is pleased to be able to offer a 20% discount on tickets to EFA members and Fundraising Europe readers, accessible with the code EFA20 when booking here. 

More information: www.f2f-fundraising.com

Sessions at the F2F Congress on self-regulation include Angela Norton’s Building Trust & Sustainability: How Self-Regulation Strengthens & Future-Proofs Your Charity’s Fundraising, and Helping You Fundraise Sustainably, Ethically, and Effectively in Any Circumstance, co-presented with Matt Radford, which will delve into practical applications of the principles explored in the article, offering insights into how charities and agencies can embed ethical practices into their daily fundraising operations. View the full programme here, and read more in this month’s story.

About Angela Norton

With over a decade in charity fundraising, Angela Norton works to drive transformative self-regulation that is focused on supporter experience, ethics, transparency, and accountability. As national manager for the Public Fundraising Regulatory Association (PFRA), she collaborates with members to strengthen a self-regulatory framework that builds public trust and empowers support for valued causes.

Main picture by Vicki Hamilton on Pixabay

In June, Swissfundraising, the Swiss fundraising association, presented its first award for the ‘Best Fundraising Mailing in Switzerland’. Reputation effect on the sector and innovative strength were evaluated, as well as economic criteria such as average donation, and response or yield per item. However, the award stands out from other prizes in the fundraising community because the majority of the criteria relate to ethical principles and their implementation.

The Swissfundraising board’s decision to create such an award was based on the conviction that, on the one hand, fundraising mailings are and will remain a central instrument in the fundraising mix and greatly impact how the respective organisations are perceived, as well as the sector as a whole. On the other hand, despite the unbroken willingness to donate, there is increasing concern or even rejection of fundraising mailings among the Swiss population. These trends must be taken seriously and addressed.

Critical attitudes in the Swiss population

Six years ago, a study commissioned by Alliance Sud, an alliance of Swiss development organisations, showed that, in addition to identifying with the goals and work of aid organisations, the population also held some negative feelings towards the organisations themselves and particularly towards their fundraising.

Worryingly, this included negative stereotypes such as inefficiency or bureaucracy. Lack of transparency and authenticity due to exaggeration or oversimplification were also assumed, particularly in fundraising mailings. Rejection of the stereotype of misery and of the paternalistic narrative was also central. At the same time, the messages did not always seem to reach their audience as desired because the language was seen as often being technical, full of jargon and not very conversational. Furthermore, the study found that the credibility of fundraising mailings was in danger of dwindling if only success stories were communicated without self-criticism or discussion of challenges, problems and failures.

Ethical principles for strengthening donation mailings

The important insights gained in this study and the subsequent discussions led to the creation of the ‘Manifesto for Responsible Communication’. In 2020 Swissfundraising also took up the discussion with the aim of promoting ethical practice in fundraising mailings and thus simultaneously contributing to the long-term acceptance of this fundraising tool. The idea was to create an award for best practice examples to raise awareness in the industry. To this end, Swissfundraising has further developed the conclusions of Alliance Sud on ethical principles. The ethical principles for responsible fundraising summarise the aspects outlined above in eight points:

1. The self-image and values of the organisation are communicated.
2. The objectives of the work, its impact and how it is measured are made transparent.
3. The language is appropriate for the target group, comprehensible and dialogue oriented.
4. An authentic picture of the work and its context is conveyed.
5. Contributors speak for themselves and are respectfully portrayed at eye level.
6. Challenges, setbacks and problems are addressed self-critically.
7. A sustainable solution perspective is shown.
8. The communication is relevant for the addressees and mobilises them.

Practical outputs

Hanspeter Bigler

About Hanspeter Bigler

Hanspeter Bigler has been working in fundraising for 25 years in nonprofit organisations and also as a consultant. He is a member of the executive board of Swiss Church Aid (HEKS/EPER), heads the communication and mobilisation division and is deputy director. Since 2024, he has also been president of Swissfundraising, the Swiss fundraising association. Hanspeter Bigler studied ethics and political philosophy as well as contemporary history at the University of Fribourg/Switzerland, is a certified NPO manager VMI and holds a master’s degree in communication management.

Picture by Aron Visuals on Unsplash

Participatory grant-making (PGM), for anyone who’s new to it, is a way of funding community projects that ensures those with lived experience of the issues trying to be solved are the same people who decide how funding is spent. This means that local people affected by and understanding the issues make up the funding panel which, with support and training, is ultimately responsible for deciding how the available money is used. The underlying principle of PGM is “nothing about us, without us” which leads to more effective decision making, more inclusive practices, and stronger communities.

It is important to note that PGM is not new, but has certainly been gaining momentum in recent years. Kelley Buhles describes how “The Funding Exchange, founded in 1979, is often seen as initiating PGM within modern philanthropy. The group, founded by young progressive activists with inherited wealth, called for ‘change, not charity’.” Hundreds of activists and organisations have pushed forward this work, and today the Participatory Grant Making Community of Practice has members from 73 different countries across the world. The Red Umbrella Fund  is a fantastic example of an organisation doing revolutionary work in shifting power, in their case to those with lived experience of sex work.

More widely, there is a trend in philanthropy of wealthy individuals and trusts recognising the problematic nature not only of their own wealth, but also how traditional philanthropy systems are often perpetuating inequality, instead of reducing it. Marlene Engelhorn, David Clarke and Lankelly Chase are all giving significant sums of funding, by either putting the decision making into the hands of others, or funding work which aims to challenge these systems.

Donor-driven PGM is becoming a trend, so nonprofits can’t afford to ignore it. However, there is more than financial gain to be had here. PGM is an ethical funding model that is much more transparent and inclusive in its approach.

How does participatory grant making work at Camden Giving?

At Camden Giving, we work with roughly fifty Camden residents a year, who decide which citizens and grassroots organisations are best placed to reduce inequalities in the London borough. My role as Head of Partnerships is to work closely with our corporate partners, supporting them to be good Camden neighbours in many ways, but primarily through funding.

Here are some of the top insights I have gained regarding how to fundraise for PGM:

You’re asking funders to take a leap into the unknown 

Supporting PGM involves relinquishing control on how funding will be spent, which can feel uncomfortable for funders. Much as there are themes and structures that sit behind a PGM process, you never know which projects will speak most loudly to panellists and be awarded a grant. As a fundraiser you need to create ways to make the ask feel as tangible as possible despite this uncertainty. Bridging this gap looks different for every organisation, from sharing past successes and drawing on previous grantees to give a flavour of the kind of work that might be supported, to being as transparent as possible in terms of what a PGM decision making process looks like.

I was lucky to join Camden Giving six years into its journey, so there is already a strong track record of PGM delivery, with an incredible existing pool of grantees to involve when fundraising. To support this, funders feel close to our work because they are quite literally physically close to it, either working or living in Camden. We know there is a strong desire from corporate employees to be more connected to the communities they are working in, so we ensure that meeting this need is a thread that runs throughout our fundraising strategy.

As a participatory grantmaker, you fill a gap other funders would struggle to effectively step into 

As a participatory grantmaker you act as a facilitator, ensuring funding isn’t just parachuted to whichever organisation has the most contacts or the strongest marketing campaign. It is crucial that as a PGM organisation you have strong sector networks and can demonstrate the value of these networks when building relationships.

In Camden Giving’s case, we know that corporate organisations we’re pitching to will not have the same level of robust networks as we do in the borough. As well as strong links in the voluntary sector and with residents, over 50% of the Camden Giving staff team have lived and worked in the Camden. As corporate organisations don’t have easy access to this knowledge and expertise, they would struggle to effectively fund work in Camden without a lot of external guidance.

PGM will always double the impact of a donation

Funders have the joy of knowing that if they support PGM, they are enabling two different kinds of social impact, firstly, the social impact achieved through the hard work of grantees, but also the social impact PGM creates in and of itself, with participants consistently reporting increased confidence and wellbeing, and often going on to be involved in further civil society work. Supporting PGM means being part of a global movement.

As Georgia Gould, Leader of Camden Council describes, “Camden Council have delegated funding through Camden Giving across a number of grant programmes because we know that we can reach communities who are underfunded more effectively. We also know that, beyond participatory grant-making, our involvement with Camden Giving is influencing global businesses to shift their approaches to community consultation projects, putting Camden residents at the heart of decision-making about changes that affect them directly, empowering them to elevate their voice and access roles they otherwise might not access.”

It’s important to know when to lead with the participatory model and when to frame your work differently

For some funders, PGM is more of a ‘nice to have’; they may be drawn to working with you for other reasons, such as volunteering opportunities, the variety of work you deliver, or because recent crises, such as the cost-of living, have motivated them to give back. As with all pitches, it’s important to be alert for indicators as to what has drawn a potential funder to your work early, so you can know how best to motivate them to give to your cause.

We know PGM takes too long an amount of explanation and time to be an effective hook on social media. Much as we love to talk about PGM all day long, sometimes we have to lean into other aspects of our work, such as tangible grantee stories, to capture people’s attention, and then later down the line we can hopefully get them as excited as we are about PGM. However, for some of our corporate partners, PGM is absolutely at the heart of why they want to support us, and from the word go they fully buy into the concept.

I hope this blog has given some interesting insights into the world of PGM, and how to navigate making what can at times feel like a more complex ask to funders. One of the most fulfilling moments I have when pitching for funding and explaining PGM to someone outside of the sector, is that they look slightly confused, and ask me “isn’t that always how funding is decided?” I look forward to the day when I can answer yes, that is always how funding is decided.

Lucy White

About Lucy White

Lucy White has worked in the UK charity sector for over ten years, initially developing mentoring and consultancy programmes between the charity and corporate sectors, and more recently fundraising and building partnerships at Camden Giving, engaging with businesses to support local charities and grassroots organisations that tackle the most pressing issues in the area.

Camden Giving is an independent charity working to end local poverty and inequality in Camden, London, where 40% of children live in poverty and Black Londoners are twice as likely to regularly go without basics compared to White Londoners. The charity was set up in 2017 as a participatory funder and to promote racially just communities. 

Main picture by Monstera Production on Pexels

Turnover in fundraising staff is a huge challenge—and costly problem—for nonprofit organizations.

The average tenure for a major-gift fundraiser is generally under two years.

Couple that with the cost of losing a staff member (which the Society for Human Resource Management estimates at 90 to 200 percent of the individual’s salary), and it becomes clear that retention is a key issue that successful nonprofit organizations need to address.

While it is important for nonprofit organizations to look at increased compensation, flexibility in work conditions, and internal promotion opportunities as methods for keeping great fundraising professionals, Harvard Business Review points out there is another affordable and accessible retention tool that staff members really want: professional development.

How Professional Development Impacts the Bottom Line
Professional development isn’t simply good for your fundraising staff—it’s good for your organization’s retention rate. Studies have shown that organizations that prioritize professional development opportunities for staff enjoy retention rates that are 30 to 50 percent higher than those of their peers.

Confirming & Solidifying Knowledge: Certifications
While conferences and webinars are part of a well-rounded professional development plan, professional certifications are key for retaining high-performing fundraisers.

Professional certifications do more than impart knowledge—they enable fundraising staff to network and learn outside of their organizations, demonstrate their competence and breadth of knowledge, and raise fundraising professionalism within your organization.

Fundraising staff who have invested in themselves by completing a fundraising course accredited by EFA or earning the accredited CFRE certification credential are the kind of fundraisers organizations need.

Smart organizations support individuals in their pursuit of certification by providing funding and time off to study or take associated exams. They know they’ll reap the benefits by keeping highly engaged and motivated fundraising staff who are effective and confident in their work.

The Strongest Investment You Can Make
But it’s also a reality that sometimes an organization’s professional development budget is smaller than its aspirations. It can take time and effort to make the case for the investment of more resources into professional development.

Even with a tight budget, organizations can make sure they support a learning culture in which professional development is valued and encouraged.

Here is how to provide professional development for fundraisers at no or little cost:

• Give each staff member an hour each week for on-the-job professional development. Need ideas on where to find programs? There are over 600 free programs listed in CFRE’s My Education Finder, a searchable database of fundraising training from approved education providers.
• Start a fundraising reading group at work.
  Select a book on fundraising or on skills that fundraisers need—and provide them with some on-the-job time to complete the reading. Then have your fundraising staff meet to discuss what they’ve learned and how the knowledge can be applied to improve fundraising at your organization. No time to read an entire book? Select a recent issue of a magazine serving the fundraising profession. Choose an article or two that could provide your organization’s fundraising with some new ideas.
• Coach your staff.
  Often, on-the-job conversations are transactional and task-oriented. Create time for one-on-one discussions with your staff where you can learn their professional aspirations and co-create a plan for realizing them.

High-performers want to learn and grow in on the job.

If they can’t learn and grow at your organization, they’ll find one where they can. Investing in professional development is a smart, cost-effective way to retain the dedicated, knowledgeable professionals that your organization’s fundraising depends on.

Eva Aldrich

About Eva Aldrich
Eva E. Aldrich is President and CEO of CFRE International, the first globally recognized fundraising credential. Prior to joining CFRE International, Aldrich was Associate Director of Public Service and The Fund Raising School at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. Before that, she was a member of the consulting team at Johnson Grossnickle & Associates and was Assistant Professor of English and Director of the Writing Center at Franklin College. Aldrich has been widely published in fundraising journals and is one of the editors of Achieving Excellence in Fundraising, 3rd Edition, from Jossey-Bass. She holds a Ph.D. in Philanthropic Studies from the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy

We’ve been talking about how important it is to be donor-centred in fundraising for a long time now. I strongly believe in this and even more so when it comes to legacy fundraising, I’m absolutely convinced that we need to put supporters at the centre of our efforts to build successful legacy fundraising programmes. But what does that mean, and most importantly how can we practice what we preach?

Shifting the focus to supporter-centred legacy fundraising
Firstly, let’s clarify why we emphasize being supporter-centred in legacy fundraising rather than solely donor-centred. It’s quite simple: not all potential legators are active donors in the traditional sense. A lot of potential legacy givers are not to be identified in your donor database. Research conducted by Legacy Foresight indicates that, on average, 52% of legacy donors in the UK were not previously known to the organisation. In the Netherlands, this percentage is even higher (56%).

So, it’s crucial to broaden our perspective and not solely focus on existing donors but to recognize and engage with a more extensive group. Legacy Foresight’s UK research on “invisible legators” highlights that people who pledge to leave a gift in their will view themselves as supporters, even if they don’t donate regularly. They might include past volunteers, former employees, beneficiaries from years ago, or simply ‘silent’ supporters—people who feel a deep connection to the charity’s cause but do not outwardly demonstrate it.

Why people leave a gift in their will to our organisation?

Based on the insights research brought together in the Legacy Futures literature review, it’s evident that the decision to include a charitable gift in one’s will is often deeply personal. It’s a decision rooted in reflecting on someone’s life journey, where individuals consider how a charity aligns with significant aspects of their life or has made an impact. This decision may also be a way to honour someone, such as a deceased loved one.

Additionally, we must not overlook the impact of social norms and peer influence. Collaborative legacy campaigns, which are becoming more widespread in different European countries, play a vital role in establishing charitable bequests as a social norm. Furthermore, notaries and solicitors wield significant influence in this regard. A behavioural study revealed that merely introducing the concept of charitable giving by legal professionals can double the number of individuals opting to include a charitable gift in their wills.

Furthermore, this decision-making process extends to the future – what individuals wish to pass on and the impact they want to have on future generations. There is a strong desire to contribute something meaningful to the future and ensure its continuity. Being confronted with our own mortality can be unsettling, and research indicates that some individuals cope with this by striving for a lasting social impact ­– a form of symbolic immortality that allows them to live on through their charitable contributions.

The motivations of your supporters

So, it’s clear that in legacy fundraising, perhaps more so than in other fundraising methods, the personal narratives and motivations of our supporters play a profound role. Merely emphasizing the importance of your organization’s work and the need for support through bequests isn’t enough.

I still encounter charities promoting “leave a better world behind by leaving a gift in your will to us.” While this sentiment aligns with what a supporter ultimately desires, it falls short in providing a concrete answer. We must ask ourselves, why should a supporter choose our charity specifically? How can we align with their motivations and aspirations to create a distinct and meaningful impact?

To find answers, we need to understand what motivates our supporters. These motivations answer why people decide to leave gifts in their wills for our organization.

In my work as a consultant, I collaborate with diverse organizations to craft their unique “legacy propositions” that address this “why.” It never ceases to amaze me that, through insights from supporters, it becomes relatively straightforward to identify 3-5 core main motivations that drive people to offer long-term support and influence their decisions regarding legacy gifts. While every life story is unique, they often converge around certain motivations that connect them to an organization.

How to identify legacy motivations and put them to use?

It’s actually quite easy – you can uncover these motivations by having conversations with your supporters. If you’re aware of individuals interested in leaving a legacy gift, start by talking prospects and pledgers. If you haven’t identified them yet, engage with older volunteers, long-term donors, and former beneficiaries. Ask them why they feel a connection to your organization and what they think about leaving gifts in wills.

You can gather this information through interviews, focus groups, panels, and even surveys, which can provide valuable insights into the deep-seated motivations driving your supporters. Utilize these insights to shape your legacy messaging, develop a strong and distinctive legacy proposition, and create engaging content for your legacy communications.

Incorporate these stories by using the testimonials.

A great example is Oxfam GB’s lovely video portraits. With my favourite being this one.

Next to that you can share those stories also in newsletters, magazines, on your website, and in advertisements.

Looking back: Legavision Conference 2023 – Forging a global alliance of joint legacy campaigns

Legavision is the international network for joint campaigns creating a favourable environment for legacy giving to charities. The network now encompasses over 24 international campaigns, spanning regions across Europe, Australasia and America. In many countries, those public awareness campaigns are important drivers of making charitable gifts in wills a social norm.

This year’s Legavision conference 2023 took place in Vienna, bringing together 15 representatives from mostly European legacy campaigns. The event served as a platform to exchange insights, showcase inspiring campaigns, share best practices, and collectively address common challenges.

Lena Vizy

About Lena Vizy

Lena Vizy has over 15 years of experience in marketing and fundraising and has specialized in legacy giving for nearly a decade.  As a consultant at Legacy Futures, she supports European charities in embracing legacy giving and developing their unique voice for communicating with supporters about gifts in wills. Apart from her work with charities, she actively promotes knowledge exchange and inspires others in legacy fundraising. She is a frequent speaker at conferences, co-founded the legacygiving.eu blog, focusing on legacy fundraising in Europe, and is one of the coordinators of Legavision, the international network for joint legacy campaigns. She can be contacted here: lena.vizy@legacyfutures.com | linkedin.com/in/lenavizy.

Main picture by Keyur Poudel on Pexels

Digital technology in the charitable sector is a bit like the Loch Ness monster: it’s exciting fodder for discussion, but nearly impossible to spot in action. While most charities are aware that they need to develop their digital culture, they don’t know how to handle the “beast” due to a lack of training and skills.

Seven deadly sins are preventing organizations from achieving digital maturity:

• A short-sighted, ROI-based approach, preventing organizations from fully investing in a digital long-term transformation. Usually this is due to a lack of resources, expertise, time and talent. Interestingly, a good long-term decision often yields disappointing short-term results.
• A lack of digital expertise on boards of directors, leading to antagonism between directors and employees over digital’s place. Directors often fail to show leadership on this subject, and don’t understand the resources and skills required. Digital campaigns are often treated as one-offs, which – unless financial results are positive in the short term – renders any attempt to invest in digital superfluous.
• Major internal discord caused by a lack of understanding about the opportunities offered by digital marketing and how to use the tools.
• Digital goals that aren’t linked to any strategy. In most cases, these goals are not formally presented in a strategic plan, let alone an action plan. Without precise objectives or performance indicators, organizations often make do with “quick wins”.
• Absence of a budget dedicated entirely to digital, which means organizations work on a piecemeal basis, and digital projects are budget lines within other budget items with no way to easily manage the digital budget as a whole.
• Data analysis is lacking with topics mostly limited to viewing statistics, open or click-through rates. Generally speaking, organizations don’t know their conversion statistics, and are under-equipped with the tools and knowledge to do so.
• Too much siloing between different organizational functions, particularly between fundraising, marketing and communications activities. This is a considerable hindrance towards growth, as failure to ensure communication between all the building blocks of an organization’s ecosystem prevents the adoption of a cross-functional and iterative approach.

These major pitfalls are accompanied by challenges that cannot be met with half-truths or half-measures. It’s becoming vital for many organizations to move out of reactive mode and into proactive mode ­­– future generations of donors are 100% digital.

The other major challenge is to remain visible in a hyper-competitive and disrupted market, marked by hyper-choice and the arrival of new trusted third parties. Knowing how to communicate one’s promise and value proposition online is a minimum requirement for existence nowadays. Becoming a media brand is an undeniable asset. Successful organizations know how to continuously tell their story to stay top of their audience’s mind.

Case in point is The diary of Louise by Relief. To raise awareness of its services, the organization created an online platform featuring the fictional Louise, who lives with anxiety and shared her ups and downs every week for a year. Brand content is definitely a powerful ally for digital projects.

Grant-making foundations will have a decisive role to play in this conversion, by providing adequate funding to accelerate the sector’s digital transformation. The cost of inaction is all too often overlooked, and will likely be even higher with the advent of artificial intelligence.

The rise and pitfalls of AI

In the space of a few months, AI has become the talk of the town with the arrival of ChatGPT making its impact on our lives and businesses tangible and concrete. We’re entering a civilizational revolution that’s as exciting as it is terrifying, and the challenge will be to strike a balance between innovation and the preservation of human dignity.

The philanthropic world is no exception to this technological tsunami, and those involved must seriously consider the risks and opportunities of integrating algorithmic tools into their practice. Here are the 10 commandments to take into account:

1. Conduct an impact analysis before implementing AI.

It’s important to identify the upstream consequences of a major organizational change on teams, operational processes and even corporate culture, to ensure adoption is accepted and understood.

2. Define the place and function of AI within your organization.

We all agree automation of repetitive, low value-added tasks is desirable, but what about the generation of text and images? If you’re looking to stand out from the crowd and add heart and spirit to your content, humans will do a better job. On the other hand, ChatGPT can be a great help in developing personas and marketing strategies. Tasks based on information retrieval should also be treated with caution. Doing trend monitoring or researching potential donors can be less risky than informing customers via a chatbot equipped with AI.

3. Adopt a policy for the responsible and supervised use of AI.

Use this to guarantee the protection of donors’ privacy, stating the nature and scope of the tasks entrusted to it, and ruling on the type of data that can be submitted to AI. This must be drawn up in collaboration with the employees responsible for applying it, and made public and accessible to donors, in the same way as a confidentiality policy.

4. Gauge your relationship to the dispossession of your content.

Everything you inject into AI no longer belongs to you. If you ask it to put itself in the shoes of a donor and give its opinion on your brochure or communications, the elements submitted will certainly clarify your request, but also train the tool and feed future answers to other people’s questions. Google has said that any content made public on the internet could to be used to feed its AI assistant Bard, including websites, social networks and YouTube videos. It’s plausible that organizations will have to prioritize the content they distribute, from the most generic (and copyable) to the most differentiating, according to the degree of exclusivity they wish to have. It’s a safe bet that audio content formats, which are harder to copy than text, will become increasingly popular.

5. Learn to avoid bias and utilitarian criteria.

Using algorithmic tools that are faster and more efficient than humans in terms of execution and data cross-referencing doesn’t mean you don’t need to think critically. We need to be more practical in our approach to AI, entrusting it with workflow optimization rather than decision-making. Take the case of a community foundation seeking to analyze several hundred grant applications within a tight timeframe with an external selection committee. Going through each application individually, entering the essential information in a pre-established criteria grid, is a colossal task. To escape the manual hell of cut-and-paste, the combination of AI and automation tools is a lifeline.

6. The tool must not become an avatar of magical thinking for charities in need of everything (resources, talent, time).

Using ChatGPT as an ace up your sleeve, yes. Making it the master of your strategy, no. AI is a skill that comes on top of business expertise, and it’s essential to have that beforehand. Otherwise you’ll be undercutting AI’s full potential for your organization.

7. Playing the transparency card to preserve trust. 

The last thing a donor expects is for “love of humankind” to be embodied in artificially infused exchanges. At a time when we’re already worrying about the influence of AI on human relationships, isn’t it better to reveal the contexts in which we use it? Who knows, we may one day see the appearance of a “Not generated by AI” label.

8. Only use AI to do better than before.

The tool must provide you with a leap in growth or productivity. Otherwise, you’re wasting your time.

9. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

Over-reliance on third-party applications and services can limit your ability to function without them. AI is said to be the new electricity, but there’s no guarantee against blackouts. Once mass adoption and dependency have set in, the rules may change to our disadvantage, such as increasing subscription costs.

10. What to do with the “time dividend”?

That’s the question every organization climbing on the AI bandwagon needs to answer. Productivity gains are good. Knowing what to do with it is better. The time saved in production can be invested in creation, iteration, training or simply in maintaining human relations through a donor experience strategy.

DXD (Donor Experience Design) reinvented

DXD, also known as Donor Experience (DX), takes its inspiration from Customer Experience (CX) by focusing on the design of a positive and meaningful experience for donors to build loyalty, further engage them and encourage them to support our cause on a regular basis.

In its early 2020s version, DXD is marked by a shift from audience to community. The difference between the two is engagement. The case study that best illustrates this trend is Team for the Planet (TFTP), with the exception that donors have been replaced by the company’s own nonprofit investors. Its aim is to raise a billion euros by 2030 to finance around a hundred innovations to combat greenhouse gases. TFTP excels at communicating its value proposition and mobilizing its associates to form a highly effective taskforce. The company ticks all the community-building boxes, enabling it to raise nearly $24 million euros in just three and a half years.

Canadian entrepreneur and Internet community builder, Greg Isenberg, developed the T.R.I.B.E. test to find out whether an organization (TFTP in our case) has created a community:

Togetherness — people have a space to be together. Collective intelligence is one of TFTP’s core values. Important decisions, such as which innovations to finance, are taken at the Annual General Meeting with all shareholders, enabling everyone to contribute in addition to their financial participation.

Rituals — people can participate in routines. With TFTP, associates are regularly asked to relay TFTP posts on social media using a turnkey kit.

Identity — people feel they’re with like-minded people. Many people connect on LinkedIn because they have TFTP in common, implying they share the same values of preserving the planet.

Belonging — people feel they’re part of something bigger than themselves. TFTP shareholders display their participation in the project on social networks with an “I joined” banner. They also list it as an additional position in their LinkedIn CVs.

Engagement — people consistently adding to the conversation without need for the brand. It’s even more powerful when the content is memorable. To celebrate the 100,000-associate milestone, TFTP released the first rap video for the climate which caused quite a stir on social media.

The charitable sector has plenty of good ideas to draw on from TFTP to assist in reinventing the donor experience in light of the major generational and behavioural transformations underway.

In a nutshell, nonprofits are caught in a double race against time: the inevitable catching up of their digital transformation in an ever-shortening timeframe, and preparing to leap into the AI vortex while there’s still time to have their say on ethics and usage. The great challenge for charities in the coming years will be to navigate the complex and ever-changing environment that sits at the intersection of virtual and real worlds.

About Charlène Petit 

Charlène Petit debunks and vulgarizes philanthropy through her podcast FILantropio and her monthly newsletter Vitamine G. Based in Montreal since 2013, and after an eight-year career as a fundraising professional, she founded Facteur Digital. Her mission is to support charitable brands (nonprofits, foundations, NGOs) in their digital growth strategies and brand awareness by offering growth marketing consulting and brand content production services (podcast, storytelling, copywriting).

Picture by Ekaterina Bolovtsova on Pexels

An essential part of our daily lives, social networks also provide associations and foundations with the means to engage their communities, increase their visibility and raise awareness of their social missions.

Social media channel use among nonprofits in Europe

Data from the 2023 Nonprofit Tech for Good Report, which covers nonprofits in 116 countries worldwide, shows that 87% of nonprofits now use social media in their digital marketing and fundraising strategies, and that 47% increased their spend on social media advertising in 2021 and 2022.

This study shows that Facebook is the most popular globally, used by 96% of nonprofits, while 73% use Instagram, 59% Twitter, 49% LinkedIn Pages, and 44% YouTube. Lower down, 16% use WhatsApp, 6% TikTok, 1% Snapchat and 1% Twitch. An earlier report from the same organisation, and with European-specific findings on social media advertising, showed that 63% of European nonprofits in 2021 were spending here, with half of these increasing their spend in that year. Facebook Pages and Instagram were the most popular social media channels for posting ads, followed by LinkedIn and Twitter.

These findings are backed up by EFA’s Nonprofit Pulse 2022 study, which showed that across Europe, use of social media channels has remained fairly steady. 73% of those surveyed said they used them to engage people (slightly down on 2021’s 76%) while use of social media for advertising rose by around a third – from 30% to 42% of respondents.

To find out how associations and foundations in France are using these channels, at France générosités, we have analyzed the presence and data of 53 of our member organisations across seven of them, presenting the findings in our 2023 social media report.

Here we share some of the data, providing insights into a number of areas including community size, ranking by activity, annual growth, and NGOs’ market penetration rates.

Evolution of NGOs on social media in France

Facebook remains the leading network in France in terms of overall users with 48 million. It’s also the leading network for NGOs, with 11.2 million followers to our 53 organizations’ pages – an average of almost 81,000 each, and a market penetration rate of 23% (the percentage of all people on the channel who follow an association or foundation). However, despite this high number, growth among our member organizations is weak (just 2% in 2023) and is beginning to slow down. The question we are asking then, is whether we have reached the glass ceiling for associations and foundations on Facebook.

However, this is not the case for LinkedIn, which is taking off! This social media channel has showed the most growth among NGOs, with a 36% increase in followers in 2023. Overall, our 53 members have 2.5mn followers on LinkedIn – an average of just over 39,500 each, with this channel followed in popularity by TikTok and Instagram. Furthermore, we also have noticed strong growth in the number of international solidarity organizations on the network, with a significant gap between them and other causes, largely due to the war in Ukraine.

Over on Instagram, it’s animal and environmental causes that stand out, thanks to content related to these causes being easily “Instagrammable”. However, lagging sector investment in this channel due to the emergence of new networks dominated by video such as TikTok and Twitch means the growth of NGO communities on this channel is slowing down (+13 % in 2023). While the NGOs present on Twitch so far remain very rare in France, we have seen a slight increase in the number of organizations opening TikTok accounts, resulting in one of the highest growth rates at +36 % in 2023. We expect to see more organizations testing out TikTok, considering that it presents a real opportunity for greater visibility and reaching new audiences.

NGOs also have a long way to go on YouTube, a channel they do not invest in as much (due to HR or investment difficulties, as well as specific formats required by the platform). Here, the market penetration rate is one of the lowest at 1.4%.

Finally, Twitter has shown a certain instability over the past few years, and we can only predict more of this to come in future. We have already seen the impact on NGOs’ accounts with the overall growth of associations on this channel slowing down despite a very good market penetration rate of 23%. While our member organizations reached 4.3 million followers in 2023, this was an increase of just 1%, and the lowest since we started our study.

Two examples of how NGOs are using social media channels

A French example:

The Fondation de France released a 45-second animated film across all of their social media platforms (Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook) called “We can’t act on one cause without acting on all”. This video shows that all the causes are linked, and that we need to act on each of them to achieve a real result. Furthermore, this animation perfectly illustrates the multiple causes that the foundation is working on. Along with this strong message, the scenes illustrating the causes are very well chosen and the link created between the causes is logical and relevant. The illustrations and colours are very soft and allow us to really understand the characters’ emotions.

An international example:

“The Color of Water” was a project created by charity : water in collaboration with Unsplash, a copyright free photo sharing platform in 2022. Their goal with this project was to raise awareness about the lack of access to clean, safe drinking water in too many countries by showing the real colour of water that people have to drink today, through the colour palette of unsafe water (brown, green, red, grey and yellow) using the Unsplash community. People were invited to submit their most striking yellow, red, brown, green, or grey images (of any subject matter) with the top images from each colour featured online and across both Unsplash and charity: water’s social channels. An original and highly visual way of denouncing the global water crisis, which allowed the cause to take a step away from its usual visual universe.

Ipek Aykut

About Ipek Aykut

After multiple communication and marketing experiences in nonprofit organizations and as a Master’s degree student in strategic communication of organizations specialising in corporate, political and digital communication, Ipek Aykut currently works as a communications officer for France générosités, a professional union for fundraising organizations. She’s in charge of promoting generosity through the information platform Infodon.fr and strategic digital communication including peer-to-peer networks.

Main picture by Tracy Le Blanc on Pexels