Philanthropy in Europe: Mapping Research and Data on Donations by Households, Bequests, Foundations, Corporations and Charity Lotteries looks at contributions from households, bequests, corporations, foundations, and charity lotteries to provide a comparative overview of philanthropic giving across Europe. An executive summary can be downloaded here, and the full report accessed via this link.

The study findings are based on the best available data from 2022 on philanthropic giving in 23 European countries. Breaking the overall figure of €104.5 billion down, the study reveals that:

• Household giving is the largest and best-documented source of philanthropy, totalling €52 billion across Europe
• Corporate giving amounts to €21.5 billion, though the true figure is likely considerably higher
• Foundation giving reaches €20.6 billion, with Germany and Switzerland home to the most active foundation sectors
• Bequests contribute €8.4 billion and remain significantly under-measured across most of Europe
• Charity lotteries generate €1.9 billion, concentrated in a small number of countries including the Netherlands, Germany, and Sweden

The study is edited by Barry Hoolwerf and Johan Vamstad and draws on the expertise of nearly 50 researchers. It maps how philanthropic resources are directed toward a wide range of causes, including health, social services, education, culture, environment, international aid, and community initiatives.

It also provides a systematic assessment of data quality across Europe, stating that the €104.5 billion estimate is a lower-bound figure, with significant amounts of giving remaining invisible due to data gaps and inconsistencies. This, ERNOP says, highlights how differences between countries often reflect differences in data infrastructure as much as differences in generosity.

Barry Hoolwerf, director of ERNOP and co-editor of Philanthropy in Europe said:

“Building on our 2017 Giving in Europe study, this publication again maps the scale of philanthropic giving across Europe. What emerges is a picture of considerable variety and resilience in how philanthropy is expressed across countries. At the same time, our ability to understand it remains uneven — and in some cases appears to be weakening. The gaps in our data are not a footnote; they are a central finding. Strengthening Europe’s philanthropic data infrastructure is not a technical ambition — it is a prerequisite for informed public debate, effective policy, and the long-term development of the sector.”

ERNOP’s 2017 Giving in Europe study estimated philanthropic giving at €87.5 billion in 2013. Although ERNOP states that differences in data availability and methodology limit direct comparison, it notes that the updated figures underline both the scale of philanthropy in Europe and the importance of continued investment in data infrastructure.

Main image: Unsplash Community for Unsplash+

Companies donated 7.7 billion CZK, up from 6.7 billion CZK in 2023), while individual donors gave 3.9 billion CZK (a slight increase from 3.6 billion in 2023), and foundations and endowment funds 4.2 billion CZK (a significant increase from 3.8 billion in 2023).

The 2025 Donation Map focuses on the scope and trends of philanthropy in the Czech Republic. According to the Forum, the data confirms a long-term growing interest in supporting publicly beneficial projects across society, from foundations and endowment funds to companies and individuals.

Donor SMS

Another noticeable increase was recorded in DMS (SMS giving), due to the 2024 floods, raising 64 million CZK by sending almost 800 thousand donor SMS messages.

Overall, the Forum shares, since DMS launched in 2004, approximately 27.2 million donation SMS messages have been sent, with the total amount raised now exceeding 1 billion crowns for the first time. As well as one-off donations, it is possible to donate regularly through DMS, and to choose from six price levels, with two new price levels for one-time and regular giving introduced in September 2025: 290 and 490 crowns.

Foundations and funds

The Donation Map shows that there are currently 3,427 foundations and funds in the Czech Republic, distributing 4.2 billion crowns, of which 467 (14%) were established by companies and 2,960 (86%) by other entities. They most often support education, science and research (21%), followed by children, youth and family (15%), followed closely by culture and monuments (14%), assistance to the sick and disabled (13%), assistance to the socially disadvantaged (13%), and humanitarian and human rights (7%).

The number of foundations and endowment funds is rising – up by 191 year-on-year. The volume of distributed endowment contributions also continues to increase, shown by support from foundation entities reaching CZK 4.2 billion. This increase, the report says, is mainly due to non-corporate foundation entities. Overall, Czech foundations and endowment funds distributed CZK 400 million more than in 2023 (an increase of approximately 10.5%).

Klára Šplíchalová, executive director of the Donors Forum, said:

“The foundation sector in the Czech Republic has long shown that it is a stable and reliable partner for publicly beneficial projects. This year, support for foundations and endowment funds rose to 4.2 billion crowns, which confirms their growing role and responsibility towards society. However, for philanthropy to truly bring long-term effects, it must be sustainable – strategically planned, connected across sectors and focused on real impact.”

Motivations for giving

The biggest motivation for donating funds is how doing so makes people feel, cited by 81% of donors, while before giving, donors mainly consider who the money will help (68%) and how it will be used (61%).

Trust is also an important factor, and is growing: in 2023 60% of Czechs trusted the public benefit sector, rising to 63% in 2024. Personal experience with a collection or platform is important for approximately a third of respondents.

However, fraudulent and non-transparent collections are a significant risk: 24% of donors encountered these in the past year, the same as in 2023, according to the report.

Economic impact

More than a quarter of donors in the Czech Republic say they are donating less than before. The main reasons cited are a decrease in income or living standards and general price increases.

A fifth believe that in the current economic situation, the state should rather help those in need. A similar proportion of those surveyed are bothered by the fact that there are too many collections. For one in ten, the reason for limiting donations is a bad experience with a specific collection or collection platform.

Similar to 2023, only one in ten donors say they currently donate more than before, and this tends to be among regular donors. Almost half perceive helping others as even more necessary in the current economic situation, and for a similar proportion of donors, the main reason is an increase in income in the last year.

The data also shows that the most popular way to donate is to purchase a collectible item (73%). This is followed by online payment (70%), cash donation (58%) and donation SMS (49%).

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels

The number of people making donations of €3,000 and higher rose to 8,381 over the period, according to the first Barómetro de la filantropía privada en España. The study was prepared in collaboration with the University of Alcalá’s Institute of Economic and Social Analysis, and consultancy Diagram Consultores, using data from 16 NGOs in the country.

It notes that one in four of these donors also volunteers for an NGO, versus one in five in the rest of the population. It also shows that many philanthropists would like to collaborate with these nonprofits in other ways such as offering their professional advice and consultancy on a pro bono basis.

However, the study notes too that many nonprofits are not taking advantage of those opportunities, in particular the potential for philanthropists to help with networking or to act as campaign ambassadors.

The report suggests that NGOs could do more to include these donors in conversations about strategy and planning, without forgetting that smaller donors make up the majority of their supporter base and income.

Building a picture

Although these bigger donors only make up a very small portion (1.8%) of charities’ income, the AEFr says that this report will help the sector to understand this group better. Fernando Morón, managing director of the AEFr, says:

“We want to identify the characteristics of a donor profile that is mythologised on some occasions, questioned on others, but rarely listened to and analysed objectively. With this publication, we seek to identify mechanisms that allow us to strengthen the relationship of organisations with these donors, improve the effectiveness of collaboration, try to promote alliances with other key actors in the strategic planning of impact capital and promote a greater culture of strategic philanthropy in our society.”

One stereotype the report dispels is that philanthropists are likely to be from a rich family, noting that in most cases, their main source of income is earned.

The average donor here is a male between 50 and 70 years of age. This contrasts to donors more widely – 60% of regular donors in the country are female, although the average age is similar, at 59.

Tax incentives are not usually a decisive factor in Spanish philanthropists’ decision to donate, the study says.

Picture by geralt on Pixabay

The face of philanthropy is changing – quite literally – and both what and how newer philanthropists support is increasingly different from previous generations.

Why people give probably hasn’t changed that much over the decades. Motivation remains driven by personal experience and empathy for the cause – it’s the classic giving from the heart approach. But the causes that are becoming popular are less traditional, with newer donors seeking different ways to bring about change.

At THINK, we have noticed some interesting shifts in philanthropy when it comes to newer philanthropists – whether truly Next Gen donors or simply those donors entering the philanthropy market for the first time.

Changes in who and what

Younger major donors have a greater desire to give in a more targeted way than their older counterparts. Data from Wealth-X in The New Normal suggests that younger donors donate to a narrower range of causes. And while they may be loyal to particular causes, such as the environment, they are not charity loyal. In other words, they will support initiatives that match their passion, but are just as likely to support a social enterprise or a campaign led by an organisation they haven’t supported previously. They simply support those they feel will deliver impact and change, and rather than giving via ‘old-fashioned’ bank transfer, they may want to donate cryptocurrency, which can send shock waves through finance directors and trustees.

The Milken Institute report Stepping off the Sidelines: The Unrealized Potential of Strategic Ultra-High-Net-Worth Philanthropy (2020) suggests that younger donors, be their wealth self-made or inherited, have a greater taste for donating to advocacy and a better understanding that this is likely to lead to greater impact for their giving. Newer female philanthropists are similarly motivated, especially in traditionally less popular causal areas such as refugees and migrants, as well as increasingly supporting causes directly related to women and girls. All are becoming more engaged, and seeking to be development partners rather than faceless donors; wanting to donate their expertise as well as their money, and to see real evidence of their impact.

Changes in how

The rise of philanthropist-led giving movements and the proliferation of DIY giving circles is a step further and has the potential to see some charities side-lined altogether. While they aren’t currently dominant in the market, there’s the possibility that their growth globally may, in time, attract major donors away from charity-led initiatives to other ‘independent’ major donor programmes where donors combine funds and donate to causes directly.

Where donors used to be more reactive and tended to support the projects they were asked, this too is changing. Over time, there has been a shift from ‘ad hoc’ giving to more strategic investment in charities whose vision aligns with the donor’s own. Donors are more proactive in identifying recipients, often using third parties to help in the process. Wealth and philanthropy managers at private banks or specialist organisations are being commissioned to help donors decide where to give and it is not always the usual suspects with big advertising budgets and a high profile among the general population.

What does it mean?

Trends witnessed in the wider major donor market should be heeded, and charities should consider how they can respond. Clearly, charities operating in causal areas that have not always been popular may find it easier to attract next generation donors. But even traditional causes need to consider  how they can attract particular sub-groups of major donors and encourage them to give their time and expertise, as well as money. INGOs are leading the way here with several setting up giving groups specifically targeting younger or female philanthropists – or in some cases, both – with great success.

It is worth noting that there is a concentration of younger UHNWIs (ultra high net worth individuals) in the tech industry, which has come out of the Covid-19 crisis in good shape, but there are others. Whatever the sector, these potential philanthropists tend to hang out in different places and may not respond to classic fundraising events or asks and the same could be said of other new philanthropists. To engage them, charities will need to be clever, developing products and offers that appeal to their need for direct action and big impact.

There is a word of caution. Younger and female donors are both small minorities amongst UHNWI. The most reliable data suggests that women are perhaps between 1 in 7 and 1 in 10 of UHNWIs globally and only 12% of global UHNWIs are under 50, and it is slightly less than this in the key markets of North American and Europe. So, while they offer new opportunities, more traditional donor types should not be forgotten – for now at least.

Simon Dickson, Think Consulting Solutions

About Simon Dickson

Simon has been working for the charity sector for over 20 years. He started his career as a trust and foundation fundraiser but evolved into a major donor fundraiser through his leadership role in capital campaigns. As a Senior Consultant at THINK Consulting Solutions, he specialises in high value fundraising – trusts, major donors and corporate and their inter-relationships – and in helping charities develop their case for support. He also manages THINK’s Philanthropy and Partnerships, Compliance and Fundraising Directors’ Forums as well being a mentor for early career fundraisers.

Main photo by Christina Morillo on Pexels

The Index, developed by researchers at The Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at IUPUI, affirms that a consistent and enabling regulatory environment, state collaboration, and strong philanthropic traditions and societal values are essential to nurture philanthropy.

Of the 91 countries and economies covered by the survey, three-fifths report a favourable environment for philanthropy between 2018 and 2020 (scoring 3.50 or over), with philanthropic giving growing worldwide. However, two-fifths report a restrictive environment, with one-third citing restrictions for cross-border philanthropic flows specifically. Among the 79 nations studied in both 2018 and 2022, nearly 30 report a shrinking space for philanthropy as a result of their political environments, such as state harassment, negative campaigns, political instability and restrictions on foreign funding.

To measure philanthropy, the Index rates countries and economies on a scale of 1 (least favourable) to 5 (most favourable) across six factors: the ease of operating a philanthropic organisation, tax incentives on giving, cross-border philanthropic flows, political environment, economic environment, and sociocultural environment for philanthropy.

It found that the overall philanthropic environment was moderately supportive globally between 2018 and 2020, scoring 3.63. Of the six factors, ease of running a philanthropic organisation (3.97) scored the highest global average and economic environment (3.46) the lowest.

European countries among highest scorers

Many European nations were among the highest scores in the Index, with the Balkan region and Northern Europe seeing an overall improvement in their philanthropic environment and Western Europe remaining largely stable, while those in Southern Europe saw a slight decrease.

Globally, Liechtenstein scored the highest average score overall, at 4.91, followed by Norway (4.83), Switzerland (4.83), Germany (4.78), and the United States (4.76). Countries with scores between 4.5 and 5 were Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Netherlands, Sweden, and outside of Europe – Singapore. Austria, Ireland, Italy, Romania, and the UK also scored above 4. However, Albania and Hungary scored just 3.13 and 3.14 respectively.

Countries where the political environment for philanthropy has declined include Hungary – where attempts have been made to control the distribution of foreign funding, and where there is opposition to human rights and watchdog organisations. The latter opposition applies in Serbia too.

Barriers for philanthropy

The COVID-19 pandemic was listed as the main challenge for philanthropy in Southern Europe but was also seen as an opportunity to develop new ways of working. There was also concern that anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism legislation had introduced more reporting requirements on the Southern European philanthropy sector. Overall however, philanthropy seems to have a relatively stable legal environment here.

Few changes were reported from the nine Western European countries where the environment remained stable and favourable for philanthropy, and minor changes in tax law both for philanthropic organisations and donors even improved the situation.

Amir Pasic, Ph.D., the Eugene R. Tempel Dean of the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, said:

“The Global Philanthropy Environment Index and the Global Philanthropy Tracker provide the tools global leaders need to understand how and where the philanthropic environment is changing and evolving and – most importantly – to provide context as philanthropy works to solve pressing challenges. Whatever the challenge at hand, philanthropy operates in a context that we ignore at our peril.”

Last month, the American philanthropist and writer, MacKenzie Scott, announced her third colossal tranche of donations, taking her total giving over the past year to an astounding total of over $8.6 billion (€7.3 bn).

While the size of the most recent funding allocation is certainly significant, the selection of 286 ‘historically underfunded and overlooked’ nonprofits is remarkable too, with Scott choosing to support the nonprofit sector itself, including philanthropy infrastructure organisations among the beneficiaries. What’s more, rather than directing how those funds are to be used, she opts to give nonprofits a free rein, writing in her blog:

“Because we believe that teams with experience on the front lines of challenges will know best how to put the money to good use, we encouraged them to spend it however they choose. Many reported that this trust significantly increased the impact of the gift. There is nothing new about amplifying gifts by yielding control. People have been doing it in living rooms and classrooms and workplaces for thousands of years. It empowers receivers by making them feel valued and by unlocking their best solutions. Generosity is generative. Sharing makes more.”

We explore whether this could be indicative of a broader shift among philanthropists away from project funding to a more strategic and long-term approach.

Addressing systemic challenges through philanthropy

As the resource development director at the Association of Community Relations in Romania (ARC Romania) and an independent strategic philanthropy adviser, Madalina Marcu works to help major donors direct their giving. She explains that philanthropists in Romania have been moving towards more strategic funding decisions for a few years now, but that the movement has been accelerated because of systemic problems with the national education system.

Madalina Marcu, ARC Romania

She says: “Young people are dropping out of school and those that stay rarely get a high quality of education. Over the years, it’s become a systemic issue – a problem that impacts the whole of Romanian society and our future workforce.

“Major donors – often entrepreneurs and business leaders– are working hard to drive change, putting pressure on the government to tackle the issue and coming up with their own solutions to address the root cause. They are thinking hard about where they can invest to have most impact and they understand that this is a problem that cannot be fixed overnight – it will take time. This recognition is a major shift for philanthropy here.

Marcu adds: “We’re still in a place where philanthropists want to see a lean team – NGOs with few staff and overheads, but their business thinking is carrying through into their approach to philanthropy. They set KPIs, they want to see a process that can be monitored with measurable outcomes and outputs. And, so long as they can see signs that it’s working, they are prepared to wait.”

She gives the example of one of the country’s largest donor families, who chose not only to give, but to set up and fund an award programme through the Romanian Business Leaders Foundation to recognise good practice in teaching, aiming to reward high standards, rebuild confidence in education and attract more talent into teaching. Five years on, the programme is working well and so the family has increased its investment in the scheme and is working in partnership with other nonprofits.

Investing in core and sustainable funding

Lars Erik Svanberg, Norwegian Trekking Association

Similarly, Lars Erik Svanberg, head of financing and framework conditions at the Norwegian Trekking Association (DNT), agrees that philanthropic partners – ranging from commercial organisations to foundations and high net worth philanthropists – are increasingly looking for a longer-term strategic approach.

For 150 years, DNT has been working to promote trekking and to improve conditions for all who enjoy Norway’s broad range of outdoor attractions. The organisation has over 300,000 members, manages 550 cabins and 22,000 km of paths for public use, also running programmes and activities linked to the public health agenda, designed to entice people of all ages and backgrounds to be active and get outdoors.

He says: “We’re seeing a shift – rather than giving small sums to a plethora of different projects with short-term goals, partners increasingly choose to award larger amounts over a longer-term period, wanting to make a bigger impact. We want our supporters to recognise that we can achieve more when we’re not rushing from project to project and having to start again each year. In this respect, the longer-term perspective is a selling point – they can get more for their investment.

“These partnerships give us a better opportunity to plan ahead, build capacity and to have the flexibility to use the money where its needed most. It’s not just a case of working towards longer-term goals, but having the opportunity to spend that money more wisely; to invest in more sustainable programmes.

“Sustainability is becoming more important for all of us and that’s a key focus for our work over the next 10 years. Ultimately, we want to take care of what we have, rather than building new; and this resonates really well with our funding partners.”

Making a transformational and tangible difference

Nathalie Bousseau, Fondation CentraleSupélec

Indeed, a more entrepreneurial style of fundraising and income generation can be influential when it comes to inspiring philanthropists to give. Nathalie Bousseau, director of Fondation CentraleSupélec – a French graduate engineering school, part of the University Paris Saclay, says:

“We’re planning some big projects for the future and we’re going to need considerable investment, so we’re working to develop with new ways to generate income. That includes applying to foundations, taking out a loan to invest in housing for students near to the campus, which is generating rental income already, and even investing in start-up businesses created by our students. This kind of thinking and long-term planning can be all the more appealing to entrepreneurial donors.

“Now, because of the COVID crisis, we find that our major donors are more aware that it may be difficult to raise money in the future. They seem to be more willing to invest in the organisation, rather than just funding particular projects and they are responding well to our own strategic approach and diversification of income streams. This is particularly true for those supporters that have been with us for a long time. They want to know that we will survive and to have a voice in our future.”

According to Marta Redondo, legacy & major donor manager of Cris Cancer Foundation in Spain, major giving isn’t that well established in Spain, but it is starting to grow. She says:

“What we can see is that donors don’t simply want to give and move on. They want to know where the money goes and the real impact their gift is making. I dare say, most of them are not interested in events, presents or publicity. They want results.

“So, we work with supporters to identify what areas are most important to them and aim to offer a turnkey project; a funding opportunity that fits with their motivations and aligns with our mission. This might be a case of creating a grant for a specific type of cancer.”

While individual philanthropic drivers and needs can be wide-ranging, experts agree that, ultimately, big givers are looking for the opportunity to make a transformational and tangible difference to causes they care about.

Dr Beth Breeze, director of the Global Challenges Doctoral Centre and Centre for Philanthropy at the University of Kent (UK) says:

“Over the 15 years I’ve been studying philanthropists, I don’t think this core goal has substantially changed but perhaps the way of reaching it will change in the light of role models such as MacKenzie Scott, and also as a result of changes in grant-making during the pandemic.

“Charities have always preferred, and hoped for core funding, and have long felt frustrated about the need to ‘project-ise’ their work into fundable chunks. It is increasingly clear that core, no-strings attached funding is the best way for donors to provide the most-valued support, and to give in a way that demonstrates greater trust and partnership with those they support.”

Supporting wealthy people with their giving

There is of course no singular mould for a philanthropist, but a broad spectrum. As such, philanthropy experts emphasise the importance of taking time to develop those individual relationships and to support donors with their giving.

Cath Dovey, The Beacon Collaborative

Cath Dovey, co-founder of The Beacon Collaborative – a collective impact movement working to grow philanthropy across the UK, says: “Sometimes we forget that philanthropy can be really daunting, particularly for those who are new to it. It doesn’t matter how rich you are, there can be a great deal of fear about losing money. Philanthropists want to get it right and make sure their donations go where it’s most needed. But there’s no established pathway for that.

“It’s so important to support donors through the process, educating them around how it works and what to expect from you. And that’s what they will remember when they go into the next phase of the relationship.”

Being sensitive to the high levels of anxiety that wealthy people may feel about their wealth and spending is just one of a series of a barriers to giving identified in Beacon’s recent report, The Giving Experience – Overcoming the barriers to giving among the wealthy in the UK.

She adds: “High net worth donors can be so easily misunderstood. Often, they are highly successful business people wanting to engage as partners, but the world of philanthropy has completely different timescales and expectations. If a donor calls to ask what’s going on, they are sometimes perceived to be demanding or ego-driven, when usually it’s just that they are busy people with busy lives, wanting to be helpful. They are looking for reassurance that their support is having an impact and it takes time to establish that trust.”

“At the end of the day, rich people are just people – they have the same hopes, fears and dreams. They want to understand how they can help, the impact of their gifts and to feel a sense of security that they have done the right thing. So, it’s all about managing the relationship, sharing information about what you’re doing and helping them feel that they are part of the solution.”

Appealing to today’s philanthropists

Sharing their views on what nonprofits can do to appeal to wealthy philanthropists, experts highlight the importance of offering strategic and sustainable funding opportunities, setting goals with clear benchmarks to monitor progress along the way, communicating regularly and openly, and involving the board of trustees.

“Regular communication is really important,” says Dovey. “We always encourage charities to go beyond the brochure, inviting donors to join events and come together with other supporters, creating opportunities to really get to know them better.”

Bousseau highlights the importance of transparency, saying: “High net worth supporters expect us to be honest with them and that means ensuring that fundraising teams are comfortable answering questions not only about a charity’s mission, but about the finances and future of the organisation. I also think that involvement from the board of trustees is key, conveying how much a philanthropist really means to the organisation.”

Marcu agrees that board support is critical, concluding: “Often the best way to start those relationships is to ask for advice and listen to what they have to say long before you ask for money. Treating a philanthropist as an adviser not only enables them to give you their feedback and to help create solutions that they will want to invest in, but teaches you to speak in their language.

“It can be really hard to build major donor relationships from zero, so having board members that are willing to open doors, that have the business expertise and experience to speak as equals with the people you’re approaching, is so important.

“After all, it’s all about relationships– philanthropists will invest in those they believe and trust.”

Related features on Major giving

Photo by Riccardo Annandale on Unsplash

The 5×1000 scheme, which allows Italian taxpayers to designate a small percentage of tax monies to a nonprofit organisation of their choice, appears to be losing favour with donors. It requires them to add the fiscal code of the organisation into the relevant section of their tax return. The list is published the following year, enabling nonprofits to work out how many people have given using the scheme and how much has been raised.

Despite the drop in donors using the scheme, the amount given through the scheme has reached the state-imposed limit of €520 million, prompting Nicola Bedogni president of ASSIF – the Italian Fundraising Association, and other nonprofit representatives to urge government to raise that limit:

“There has been a decline in signatures”, Bedogni says: “we have lost 600,000 choices; perhaps due to the particular circumstances of last year, people did not have the time and desire to look for the organisation’s tax code”.

“From now on, we need to make an appeal to government to raise the ceiling on donation levels: we have constantly exceeded the cap since 2018.”

The Italian Government has been gradually increasing the donation cap from €510m in 2019 to €520m in 2020 and €525m in 2021. However, Bedogni reports that even the €525m limit is already being exceeded. To encourage supporters to keep on using the scheme, the cap needs to be raised even higher.

The data also reveals trends in people’s charitable giving choices. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the popularity of health research has risen, with sport and scientific research remaining stable. However, there was also a significant increase in the public’s support for culture and conservation, including national parks and the sea).

Related news:

https://efa-net.eu/news/pandemic-sees-income-fall-for-many-italian-ngos-as-donors-choose-covid-related-causes

The Young Givers report establishes that wealthy millennials may be frustrated about bigger issues, but they generally don’t connect their giving with systems change, and that they know less than you might expect about the complexities and workings of the charity ecosystem. Donating is often in the moment and they are not currently seeking long term engagement

Wealthy millennials often use the word “impact” to describe their own experience and professional goals. But when charities use this word, it means something different to them.

Giving is not a core part of their identity though some see it as playing a role later in life. It can be intensely personal and therefore difficult or ‘awkward’ to talk about. However, there is an intrinsic sense of pride in their giving even if they rarely articulate this publicly.

Individual fundraising however is completely different and they are very willing to talk about events and sponsorships that they have done to raise funds.

Giving by wealthy millennials is not structured and is more ad hoc. They typically connect with charities in three settings: through work, lifestyle activities and if they face a major life event

For wealthy young millennials, their time is money. They see volunteering as more valuable than a financial contribution, but that doesn’t mean they understand the financial value of their volunteering commitment.

The report intends to help fundraisers, wealth advisors and charity sector professionals better understand the needs of wealthy millennials and develop long-standing relationships with the next generation.

The research was funded by the Arts Council England, with the organisation’s director of philanthropy, Clare Titley, saying:

“We found that this group want to understand how their contribution is making a difference. They want to know where their money is going, and what causes cultural organisations are engaging with in their work. They also want to understand how giving can be meaningful for them, within the scope of their busy lives: how can they help you to do your best work, and how can they engage personally, through opportunities such as volunteering.”

See the full report here.

Photo by Ph B on Unsplash

To address the gap between the research output and knowledge available to practitioners, ERNOP is launching a monthly series of online seminars in which researchers and academics will present their findings and address related research. Participants will be invited to ask questions and contribute to the discussion.

Barry Hoolwerf, executive director at ERNOP, says:

“This age is characterised by unprecedented challenges. The global pandemic, climate change, migration, polarisation and the rise of artificial intelligence requires every societal actor, including philanthropy, to do better, more, or different.

“An important source for innovation and growth comes from research and development. Members of ERNOP produce the best of research on philanthropy within the continent, but only limited output makes it to the board rooms, decision tables and policies of philanthropic and voluntary organisations. The gap between production and usage of academic knowledge is a waste of valuable resources. With the ERNOP Science and Society Seminars, ERNOP takes the initiative to start building that bridge.”

Covering a broad range of philanthropy-related topics, this will include seminars on impact investing, to engaging with family businesses and the media perceptions of philanthropy.

The first seminar, ‘Sustaining Voluntary Energy’, will be presented by Professor Lucas Meys from the Department of Business-Society Management at the Rotterdam School of Management on 23 March 2021.

Representatives from EFA, DAFNE, EFC, and the Centre for European Volunteering will also participate in the seminar programme.

Hoolwerf adds:

“I am very pleased that EFC, Dafne, EFA and CEV are endorsing the series and hope that other philanthropy networks will hop on the boat as well.”

For more information and a complete overview of the series and links to relevant research, see ERNOP’s seminar webpage.

Image credit: Photo by J. Kelly Brito on Unsplash

In the report – The Impact of Covid-19 on Nonprofits in Europe – we present findings from a survey of 797 representatives of nonprofit organisations from 26 nations across Europe, showing that nonprofits have been hit hard by the pandemic, but that they are innovating and embracing digital to re-shape their future.

Over two thirds of respondents said they had to cancel fundraising activities and just under half struggled to reach beneficiaries or deliver services in lockdown. The most common current challenge cited by nonprofits in the survey was the ability to raise sufficient funds, identified by 62% of respondents.

More than six in ten respondents predict their revenue during 2020 will be lower than expected at the start of the year. Just over a third report that income from individual donations and services has fallen during the pandemic. Of the six national markets with the largest number of responses (enabling comparison), respondents in Italy (53%), Spain (38%) and the UK (37%) were most likely to have seen a decrease in the amount donated. Respondents in Germany (45%) and France (37%) were more likely to have seen an increase, while donations were stable for 40% of respondents in the Netherlands.

Eduard Marček, president of the European Fundraising Association (EFA) and chair of the Slovak Fundraising Centre, says:

“This has been an incredibly tough year for the sector, and this survey indicates that the majority of nonprofits have had to downscale their income projections at a time when their services are urgently needed. The ability to raise enough funds to continue their vital work remains an immense concern.

“And yet, it’s clear that nonprofits have not stood still. They are working hard to innovate, identifying new ways to fundraise, to build supporter engagement and to deliver frontline services.

“The pandemic remains a major threat and the work of the nonprofit sector will be all the more important as we work together to aid Europe’s recovery.”

Rob Acker, CEO of Salesforce.org, adds:

“This year was not something any of us planned for, but it is one where the nonprofit community redefined resilience. Demand increased while funding decreased, yet we’ve seen incredible examples of new services, creative fundraising, and agile operations stem from our nonprofit community.”

Transforming service delivery and fundraising

Since the pandemic struck, nonprofits have ramped up their use of digital to raise funds, engage with supporters and deliver services. More than half of respondents said they have found new ways to deliver services (53%). Two thirds said they are delivering more services online and over one third say they are increasing their use of the telephone for services.

Almost seven in ten respondents increased their use of digital channels for fundraising, four in ten launched emergency appeals and over one third started using fundraising channels that were new to them. Nonprofits are transforming their future fundraising strategies, with six in ten respondents saying they will increase their focus on digital channels and more than half (56%) diversifying their approach to use a broader range of channels. Only 11% say their future fundraising strategy will not change.

Insights from Italy, UK and the Netherlands

The pandemic cast a hefty shadow in Italy, with respondents in the country most likely to anticipate a fall in their total revenue for the year. More than half of those surveyed launched emergency appeals to raise funding, and while nonprofits in Italy are embracing digital channels for fundraising, there is also a notable increase of focus on supporter care.

Simona Biancu, ASSIF

Simona Biancu, vice president of the Italian Fundraising Association (ASSIF) and fundraising / philanthropic adviser at ENGAGEDin, comments:

“There has been a real shift in the way that nonprofits appeal for funds and engage with their supporters in Italy this year, particularly when it comes to medium and smaller nonprofit organisations. I’m starting to see a much stronger desire to invest in fundraising and to think from a long-term perspective.

“During the pandemic, there was no choice; nonprofits here had to try new things, whether that was launching crisis appeals or asking supporters to give online – something that wasn’t thought of as particularly common for Italians. They had to stop thinking about what they couldn’t do and the risks, reaching out in different ways. This means that we’ve seen some incredibly ambitious campaigns, often with very impressive results.

“So, ironically, while the pandemic has been devastating in so many ways, it has also brought about an opportunity to reshape the future of our organisations, how we work, our role in the community and to embed a culture of giving in Italy. 

“Nonprofits have come out of this bolder and braver. There is greater maturity around our fundraising, with accelerated learning and professionalisation. And that is filtering through to the public, raising awareness around the vital role that the sector plays in Italy. Giving to charity seems more widely recognised as a natural thing to do and that’s a huge step forward for us all.”

Meanwhile, in the UK, the impact on service delivery seemed to be particularly widespread with more than half of respondents in the nation reporting difficulty in delivering services during lockdown. At the same time, respondents indicated that demand for their services had increased during the pandemic. There was a huge amount of change, with almost three quarters of UK respondents saying they had identified new ways to deliver services, and the large majority making greater use of digital channels. Similarly, although there have been widespread cancellations of fundraising activities or events, UK respondents upped their use of digital for fundraising and around four in ten said they had started using channels that were new to them.

Respondents also indicate that staff capacity was a more prominent issue for UK nonprofits. While the number of staff available to work dropped for around one third of respondents across the full survey sample, in the UK – where government introduced a furlough scheme – more than half (56%) of respondents recorded a reduction in staff.

Daniel Fluskey, head of policy and external affairs at the Chartered Institute of Fundraising, says:

“The results in this survey echo and reinforce the fundraising picture that we hear and see from across our membership in the UK. The expected fall in income over the year resonates with the research we’ve collaborated on with Pro Bono Economics and Charity Finance Group – lots of charities are having to make tough decisions about their staffing levels and service delivery to get through winter and into 2021. The fact that UK respondents are reporting a higher impact on service delivery and a higher likelihood of having to reduce staff levels shows just how challenging the situation is for UK charities right now.

“While many organisations are trying new things and working in different ways, it’s interesting to see that in the UK the use of virtual events has been more prevalent than the average across Europe. While this could be a reflection of the severity of lockdown and social distancing measures in the UK, it may also be that some of the skills and technology necessary to deliver virtual events are more developed in some of the UK’s charity sector. What is clear is that the need and opportunity to try new things, fundraise in innovative and different ways, is not over – charities are going to have to continue to be nimble and responsive as they respond to the challenges that the coming months, and indeed years, are going to bring.”

In the Netherlands, use of social media or messaging for fundraising was particularly prevalent during the height of the pandemic, with nonprofits also making widespread use of email and online fundraising channels. The number of donations and amount given appear to have been a little more stable in the Netherlands than elsewhere, and yet the ability to raise sufficient funds remains the primary concern for those contributing to the survey.

Commenting on the findings, Margreet Plug, director of Goede Doelen Nederland, says:

“It is of course not surprising that our sector is affected by the corona crisis, but we see that there is great willingness to help each other today. Regular donors continue to support charities and the sector is showing power. Charities work together to continue their work or develop new activities that help society through the corona crisis. We also see more charities working online.”

While there is some variance around the impact of the pandemic at a national level, it’s clear that this year has been a rapid accelerant for change and digital transformation for nonprofits. Future fundraising strategies, service delivery and the way that nonprofits work internally and collaborate with others have transformed markedly, demonstrating once more the sector’s ability, determination and passion to continue their vital work.

About the Nonprofit Pulse Survey

EFA and Salesforce.org carried out this online multilingual survey from July to October 2020. 797 nonprofit representatives from 26 nations across Europe responded. Respondents most commonly identified themselves as fundraisers, communications, marketing or policy officials, but over a quarter were in senior leadership roles as CEOs or trustees / board members.The largest number of respondents were based in the UK, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and France, enabling national comparisons across those markets.