Welcome to Fundraising Update. This week, we look at new research on spontaneous givers and what they say it takes to bring them back. Plus, we dig into the best ways to measure impact so you can tell the stories your donors need to hear.

I’m Rasheeda Childress, senior editor for fundraising at the Chronicle of Philanthropy. If you have ideas, comments, or questions about this newsletter, please write me.

Thanks to our sponsor DonorPerfect for supporting Fundraising Update.

Young donors are more likely than their older peers to give spontaneously, and nonprofits can retain these donors through regular detailed updates, according to new research from the Blackbaud Institute that I reported on recently.

“First Impressions: Spontaneous Giving Insights” surveyed 1,003 spontaneous donors in June to see what led them to give and what would inspire them to give to the same cause again. The report defined spontaneous gifts as “unplanned, first-time donations to a nonprofit.”

Many nonprofits assume that spontaneous giving is largely to disaster and emergency-related charities, but the report found that a wide variety of causes benefit from such gifts.

“Smaller and more resource-constrained nonprofits might feel like spontaneous giving isn’t a path for our organization to focus on because people give spontaneously in reaction to something that they see in the news or a major disaster,” says Lori Poer, director of the Blackbaud Institute. “But that’s actually not what we saw in the data. There’s something for all organizations.”

In fact, the top three causes supported by spontaneous donors were children’s charities, animal welfare, and health. Emergency and disaster relief came in fifth on the list.

While spontaneous giving can go to any charity, a small share of donors accounts for most of the contributions, the study found. Just 12 percent of all donors give spontaneously, but the share is a little higher among Gen Z (16 percent) and millennials (15 percent).

The survey found 72 percent of spontaneous donors had previously heard of the charity before giving. A quarter of spontaneous Gen Z donors learned of the giving opportunity from social media. This suggests it’s important for nonprofits to maintain lots of touchpoints, including social media, even if they aren’t receiving direct donations via social channels, Poer adds.

“Even though the gift is often not made there, the spontaneous donors report often going from social media to an organization’s website to learn more and to make the gift,” she says.

Rebecca Sparenberg, vice president of digital marketing at the Humane Society of the United States, says that in her experience, spontaneous donors are often the “blank spots” fundraisers have in their data. “We couldn’t see and we couldn’t track them, but they’re finally showing up because they’ve been engaged.”

People who made spontaneous gifts most often gave to one charity (50 percent) or to somewhere between two and four charities (38 percent), according to the survey. The average annual amount given spontaneously was $160 — out of $684 total given during that period. When boomers and older donors gave spontaneously, the amount they contributed was higher, an average of $181 compared to $128 for Gen Z.

For more on spontaneous giving, read the complete story.

Impact has long been a buzzword in the nonprofit world, but many groups are still wrestling with how best to capture data that proves they’re making a difference — and share those results with donors in ways that are informative and interesting, reports my colleague Lisa Schohl.

More than 70 percent of nonprofit leaders think measuring impact is important, but only 20 percent say they’re very good at it, one survey finds.

The biggest hurdle many groups face is a lack of hard data, says Sheri Chaney Jones, CEO of SureImpact, an online platform that helps nonprofits with measurement and reporting. Nonprofits’ data capabilities are improving as more donors and grant makers ask for data and new technology makes this work easier, but there’s still an uphill climb ahead. “That’s who we talk to every single day are nonprofits who don’t have access to impact measurement and want to,” Chaney Jones says.

When organizations have a system in place for measurement, it’s often because their leader prioritizes data and fosters a culture that values it, she adds. To get buy-in from a leader who isn’t there yet, explain how strong data will help your fundraising.

Lisa talked to experts who offered advice to help nonprofits get started with measurement, demonstrate results in meaningful and inspiring ways, and avoid common pitfalls.

Among their tips: Define what impact means to your organization.

Nonprofits often make decisions about evaluation based on what their funders want, not what they’re trying to achieve, says Cindy Eby, founder of ResultsLab, a social enterprise that helps organizations use data well. “Often we see that measurement is disconnected from what we would call an impact strategy,” she says, which lays out the problem a nonprofit is trying to solve and how it’s working toward that goal.

Before deciding what to measure, you need to get really clear on that strategy, she says, which is commonly called a theory of change. ResultsLab and other organizations offer online resources that can help you figure this out.

You also need to understand that impact is not the same thing as activities, like the number of people you reached or the amount of money you raised. “That’s the number one mistake is that people stop there,” Chaney Jones says. Although activities are important, impact is how your nonprofit is truly changing the lives of those it serves.

For more tips, read Lisa’s full article.

• Health Scare Leads to Gift. It’s been a rough few weeks for the billionaire philanthropist Thomas Golisano and his family, reports my colleague Maria Di Mento.

  Three weeks ago, a 5-year-old great grandchild underwent a heart transplant; it was scary but successful. Then his 95-year-old sister, Marie, opted into a risky hip replacement surgery; she is also fine. Then on Thursday, Golisano was sitting on the patio of his foundation’s Victor, N.Y., offices when he fainted. Twice. His wife and a foundation official called an ambulance and Golisano was rushed to the hospital. Now, the Paychex founder has a new pacemaker and is giving away $360 million through his foundation that is likely to have a big impact on the work of charities in Upstate New York.

  At a news conference last week, Golisano surprised the assembled leaders of 82 charities in Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse, N.Y., with the news that they were getting big gifts. The charities received $250,000 to $10 million apiece, with most in the $1 million to $5 million range. All of the gifts are unrestricted. He also announced that he is giving his Golisano Foundation $52 million, nearly doubling its endowment to $120 million.

  “I know there are many organizations doing great work and understand that running a nonprofit is not easy, facing both opportunities and challenges, like raising money,” Golisano said during the announcement. For more on the gifts, see Maria’s entire story.

Herbert and Carol Reztkyleft $36 million to the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy to expand scholarships and support other programs.

Both Herbert’s father and Carol’s father were pharmacists. Once Herbert earned his degree from the pharmacy school in 1946, the couple took over the operations of Herbert’s father’s pharmacy on the South Side of Chicago. Herbert Retzky was closely involved with the pharmacy school, having served as an alumni representative on several committees there helping to evaluate courses and guide the curriculum. Herbert died in 2017, and Carol passed away in 2019.

For other notable gifts this week, read my colleague Maria Di Mento’s Gifts Roundup column. To learn about other big donations, see our database of gifts of $1 million or more, which is updated regularly and has data going back to 2000.

Relentless Fundraising Is Eroding Trust in Nonprofits. Here’s How to Fix Things. Simple strategies to build relationships with supporters and show your organization is worthy of their backing.

What the Fearless Fund Settlement Means for Philanthropic Freedom (Opinion). The case underscores the urgent need for policies that protect a nonprofit’s right to address social inequities.

Tapping into Women’s Wealth. Women are on the verge of controlling the majority of personal wealth in the United States, and many want to focus on giving, says an opinion piece in Fortune. The publication notes that while women like MacKenzie Scott and Melinda French Gates make the news, women at all income levels are making strides in giving.

“We aren’t Melinda or MacKenzie in our wealth, but we pool and give $30,000 each year to support grassroots community-based organizations, led by and serving people of color,” Sara Lomelin, author of the piece and CEO of Philanthropy Together, writes about the women in her giving circle. “We gather around my kitchen table, and with laughter, good food, and hard-but-loving conversations, we share our many different ideas and viewpoints and eventually agree on where that funding will go.” (Fortune)