Read other parts of the report:
This section of the report explores how and why Indian nonprofits raise funds from everyday givers: What motivates them to seek support from everyday givers, and what strategies they use to connect, communicate with, and keep these supporters engaged over time. We also dive into the practical side with what they've learned works best, and what doesn't.
Indian nonprofits are already generating substantial support from everyday givers, creating a strong foundation for strategic growth.
Organizations in our study report that donations from everyday givers make up approximately one-third of their funding, ranging from 30 to 33% over the past five years.
Most encouraging is how organizations view this work: Among nonprofits currently fundraising from everyday givers, the vast majority (96%) find it worthwhile, with 36% considering it highly valuable to their operations.
This positive perception isn’t just sentiment – it’s backed by results. Analysis shows a strong correlation between how worthwhile organizations find fundraising from everyday givers and the proportion of their funding that comes from them1. Organizations that raise more from everyday givers tend to view the approach more favorably, while those who see value in the work tend to achieve better fundraising outcomes. This suggests that success and satisfaction reinforce each other.
These two indicators – the actual percentage of funds raised from everyday givers and organizational perception of this being worthwhile – serve as key measures of fundraising effectiveness throughout this analysis.
In the sections that follow, we explore both the challenges that prevent nonprofits from fully leveraging this funding source and the proven practices that help organizations unlock its true potential for sustainable, community-driven support.
Everyday giving helps nonprofits build authentic relationships within their communities, creating local legitimacy, grassroots support, and genuine community ownership of their work. The majority of organizations also report that everyday giving increases their visibility and reach, as supporters naturally become grassroots ambassadors who boost awareness through social media, word-of-mouth, and community events, opening doors to new channels of support.
Founded in Mumbai in 2015, Adhyayan Quality Education Foundation works across India to strengthen education systems and improve learning outcomes, partnering with 4600+ government schools to ensure a good education for every child. Using everyday giving strategies, Adhyayan decentralizes fundraising among all its team members, where each person plays a role, right from storytelling campaigns, creation of collaterals, and making the process fun for everyone involved. Their everyday giving processes turn donations into greater participation and shared ownership, not only garnering funds, but including supporters as co-travellers who remain engaged beyond the financial gift, building local legitimacy and sustained support. The Deputy CEO reflected that, “Retail fundraising has been a route of advocacy for the cause and the efforts of each individual in the organization in making our vision a reality.”
Nonprofits value the flexible, unrestricted nature of funding that everyday giving provides.
This allows them to allocate funds according to organizational priorities and emerging needs. This autonomy addresses a research-backed and well-documented challenge in the Indian nonprofit sector: The majority (83%) of nonprofits struggle to meet their indirect costs,2 and most nonprofits receive the majority of their funding in a restricted manner, mandating it is used for financing specific costs associated with individual programmes3. Survey respondents emphasized that everyday giver contributions are largely unrestricted, enabling them to cover operational expenses, respond to emergencies, and pilot new initiatives without restrictions.
Founded in 2014, Project DEFY is a Bengaluru-based nonprofit that reimagines education by creating community-owned self-learning spaces called Nooks. Operating across India and internationally, it empowers marginalized communities to design their own education. To ensure continuity beyond delayed or restricted grants, the organization relies on diverse sources as a dependable stream of unrestricted funds. Recurring contributions from local donors, HNI and community networks cover core costs, help retain staff, and sustain momentum. Project DEFY’s Head of Fundraising feel that “By cultivating this base layer of funding, Project DEFY is building resilience and securing long-term impact.”
Everyday giving is so much more than money, and can be used to gather varied resources including volunteer time, in-kind goods, and professional expertise like design, technology, or legal support. This multidimensional approach creates richer support ecosystems where contributors can engage according to their capacity and interests, often leading to deeper, longer-term relationships with the organization’s mission.
At Udayan Care, a New Delhi based child rights organization, the lines between donors and volunteers are intentionally blurred – creating a dual pathway for deeper engagement. Recognizing that many donors are eager to contribute beyond financial support, the organization actively encourages them to volunteer their time and skills. Similarly, volunteers who become more invested in the mission often go on to support the organization financially.
This cross-pollination not only strengthens relationships but also builds a more committed and well-rounded community of supporters. As the Executive Director put it, “Some of our donors are very passionate about giving back – not just money, but also their time. And some of our volunteers also become donors. It fulfills both needs.” By creating space for supporters to engage in multiple ways, Udayan Care reinforces a culture of shared ownership and sustained commitment.
Some organizations also value everyday giving for its operational advantages. Nearly half consider it a reliable source of funding, while 41% emphasize its cost-effectiveness compared to other fundraising methods. A minority of organizations said they appreciated the reduced bureaucracy, as everyday giving requires fewer compliance processes, lighter reporting requirements, and lower administrative overheads compared to institutional funders.
A Maharashtra based NPO that raises almost 80% of their budget from everyday givers, emphasized that everyday giving reduces the administrative burden, allowing organizations to concentrate on their core mission rather than bureaucratic requirements. A staff member noted, “The most convenient thing about everyday givers [is that] they are a bit light on the compliance part. They don’t require too many papers to be filled in, and they don’t have any jargon-ish expectations from the organization.”
To understand what’s working and what’s not, we drew insights from survey responses of a wide range of nonprofits, and from in-depth conversations with nonprofit leaders and fundraising experts. This section highlights fundraising strategies that are not just commonly used, but also those that have a stronger correlation with fundraising outcomes. This was done by looking at both what organizations say has worked for them, and also by running regression analyses to explore which practices are linked to better results – in particular, raising more money from individuals or getting more recurring donors.
An analysis of the structure of fundraising efforts – whether managed internally, externally, or through a blended approach – showed that organizations relying primarily on in-house teams tend to see stronger financial results and deeper engagement from everyday givers. Half of the surveyed organizations design and execute their fundraising strategies using in-house resources – either dedicated fundraising teams or team members who are not dedicated fundraisers. These organizations had higher recurring donor rates (+9.12 percentage points), and a higher share of giving by everyday givers in their overall budget (+10.28 percentage points), as well as 1.9 times more volunteers. However, most Indian nonprofits operate everyday giving fundraising without dedicated fundraising teams.
The small minority of organizations that fully outsource their fundraising showed no strong correlation to any fundraising outcomes that were studied. Could this be a reflection of the challenges of external agencies aligning with an organization’s mission, or limitations in donor trust and personalized engagement when handled externally? That said, telecalling – a practice that is usually outsourced to external agencies – is associated with a 13.83 percentage point increase in recurring giver percentage, and 12.95 percentage points higher share of funding from everyday givers.
While having an in-house fundraising team is associated with better outcomes, the size of the fundraising team doesn’t determine fundraising effectiveness. Regression analysis controlling for overall team size, organizational age, and operational scale found no significant correlation between fundraising team size and the percentage of funds raised from everyday givers.
Data reveal two key factors that significantly improve results – budget allocation and training.
Organizations that channel larger portions of their budget to fundraising from everyday givers achieve substantially higher fundraising results (4.6 percentage point increase in share of funds from everyday giving) and organizations whose team members receive fundraising training see significant improvements in their everyday giving revenue share (19.9 percentage point boost)4. This demonstrates that strategic investment in skills and resources, rather than simply hiring more staff, creates the foundation for successful fundraising from everyday givers.
Accessing new supporters can be a time consuming and costly process for many NPOs. Respondents were asked to rate the effectiveness of different outreach methods based on their experience. Further analysis was also done to understand the relationship of these practices with specific fundraising outcomes.
A striking 60% of NPOs rated outreach through existing donor networks as the most effective method – far higher than any other strategy.
Using this approach is also associated with a 16 percentage point increase in the percentage of funds raised from everyday givers. For example, if an organization currently raises 20% of its budget from everyday givers, using existing networks to increase their donor base could help them raise 36%5. This analysis shows that the average “effect” of leveraging existing networks is the same across organizations of different sizes. Word-of-mouth and embedded trust within existing networks lead to sustained, low-effort, high return donor relationships. These relationships are often cultivated over years and are responsive to regular but light-touch engagement.
“The most effective outreach method for us has been when donors themselves initiate contact. This is especially important as we do not have a dedicated fundraising team,” stated the CEO of a Telangana based social service organization.
Only 5% of NPOs reported not using this approach, suggesting widespread adoption and perceived value in cultivating known supporters. As an expert shared, “People want to be part of something that’s already seen as good. Peer validation helps.”
Outreach through the organization’s volunteers was the second most highly rated outreach method. Despite being more people-intensive, 76% of NPOs reported using volunteers to reach new supporters, indicating a strong leaning toward leveraging community networks over impersonal channels. Qualitative insights show that volunteer-led fundraising works best when it is structured and localized.
U&I Trust has redefined crowdfunding by positioning volunteers as campaigners rather than donors. “One is through our volunteers, which is what we call crowdfunding. That is not to say that the volunteers are giving us money, but they are fundraising for us… the crowd is not the donor, the crowd is the campaigner,” explained the Senior Manager of Strategy, Development & Crowdfunding at U&I Trust. Volunteers function as ambassadors during specific campaign periods, both for fundraising and volunteer recruitment.
Friends and family networks are the most trusted and effective pathways for reaching new everyday givers. Nearly two-thirds of organizations identified this personal approach as their most effective practice, with an overwhelming 95% having used this method at some point, making it both the most popular and most successful strategy among Indian nonprofits. “Fundraising from friends and family works well because it is built on trust and personal relationships. People choose to give to the ones they feel connected to,” shared the CEO of a social service organization less than 20 years old, that has built a trusted network of supporters in that time.
However, this doesn’t mean that nonprofits are only raising funds from their immediate circles. Rather, friends and family serve as a powerful starting point and a gateway to reaching supporters who are one or two degrees removed from the organization’s staff. These are people who are still likely to have a personal or compelling reason to give. This approach is far more effective than targeting completely new individuals with no prior connection to the cause or organization. “We’ve started building a Supporter Engagement Plan, where our existing champions can further advocate for us through smaller giving circles within their own networks,” shared the Deputy CEO of Adhyayan Quality Education Foundation. By enabling trusted supporters to mobilize their networks, Adhyayan is gradually shifting from purely digital strategies to community-driven outreach to expand reach and deepen relationships.
While technology adoption varies among Indian nonprofits, marketing and outreach tools and donation platforms seem to be the most widely used forms. Regression analysis showed that organizations that use tech-based marketing or outreach tools have 1.72x higher odds of raising funds from everyday givers. For instance, using a website donation button demonstrates this impact. The majority (86%) of organizations use this feature, with 58% rating it as effective. Organizations that have integrated a donate button on their website tend to have a higher share of funds from everyday givers in their overall budget (+12.01 percentage points). This simple digital tool can significantly enhance fundraising effectiveness.
However, the use of technology for marketing and outreach suggests that many organizations are leveraging technology primarily to attract new donors rather than to build lasting relationships with them.
One of the emerging themes is the shift from using traditional communication (email, phone calls) to instant messaging platforms like WhatsApp for donor outreach. The leader of a Hyderabad-based social service organization explained, “We start reaching out to partners via WhatsApp in April or May. This informal and timely communication has proven far more effective than formal email campaigns.”
Organizations did not uniformly report that traditional methods were ineffective. However, several emphasized that WhatsApp has become a preferred tool due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of use, real-time coordination, and higher engagement rates. Regression analysis showed that the use of engagement tools like WhatsApp increases the percentage raised from everyday givers by 7.5 percentage points and increases the odds of raising from everyday givers by 103%. Similarly, other digital channels like crowdfunding and social media are widely used as outreach methods but perceived as moderately effective.
“We never used door-to-door. We reached out through social media and WhatsApp, everything personalized. Donors could directly see what they were donating for,” shared a Bengaluru-based education and research organization with operations pan India.
Outreach through in-person door-to-door campaigns, telecalling, and charity counters in shops are among the least used and also rated as the least effective methods. These patterns highlight a clear shift away from traditional face-to-face channels in favor of more digital and relational methods – what we might think of as a digital door-to-door approach. As one expert said, “There is a clear, consistent rejection of traditional offline channels due to high cost, low return on investment, and trust issues among the NPOs.” They added that offline models can work if they offer a low-threshold, emotionally resonant, entry point, but for many, the return doesn’t justify the effort.
“We feel that the conversion ratio is very less, people don’t appreciate being approached in public spaces,” explained the program director of a youth-based social service organization that works pan India.
However, interviews with NPOs affirmed that digital outreach is seen as necessary but insufficient on its own. Success hinges on personalization, storytelling, and hybrid integration with other channels. WhatsApp messages and social media become truly effective only when paired with existing networks or credible champions (e.g., founders, influencers). Automated or bulk messages alone rarely convert audiences into givers.
“Texts for sure are the best way to go about it, but even that didn’t work as well as when I personally reached out. It’s the conversation on text that really matters. Social media worked well when a couple of influencers shared. On LinkedIn, people have followed our leadership, those followers donated,” noted the Manager of Strategic Partnerships and Growth of an environment based organization from North India.
“Crowdfunding platform is just helping us logistically; the driving is what happens through social media or text,” observed the leader of an education and research based organization operating in multiple states.
Despite digital advancements and the clear advantages of using digital technology to drive more fundraising, two in five organizations are not tapping into tech-based engagement at all. NPOs see technology as costly or complicated, even when low-cost solutions exist. As one expert remarked, “Technology is not the issue anymore. Canva, ChatGPT, all these tools are available. It’s about whether NPOs know how to use them.” This underscores a critical need to build the digital capacity of nonprofits. Strengthening tech skills not only leads to better fundraising results but could also improve the return on investment from everyday donors.
For Humans of Volunteering, the perceived complexity of adopting new technologies was addressed by relying on existing, familiar platforms like WhatsApp to tailor messages, share updates and mobilize support. “We used WhatsApp extensively, curated different messages for individual donations – different groups for partners, and donors,” revealed the Co-founder. This simple yet strategic use of a widely used app not only reduced barriers to adoption but also ensured high engagement, demonstrating how familiar channels can be leveraged effectively for fundraising and community outreach.
Nonprofits overwhelmingly reported that need-based fundraising (fundraising when there is a perceived need, as opposed to a planned fundraising effort that is a part of the organization’s annual strategy) is a very effective strategy. Qualitative interviews support this finding with organizations repeatedly emphasizing the urgency and specificity of need-based fundraising (e.g., COVID relief, school kit campaigns) as major drivers for giving. A member of the business development team of an education based organization operating pan India pointed out that “Moments of urgency and clear, time-sensitive need have proven to be the most effective in activating donations.”
However, it is common knowledge that unplanned fundraising efforts often require more resources than systematic, planned approaches. While most NPOs rely on need-based fundraising, many organizations say they haven’t ever tried scheduled and planned fundraising events like marathons and galas. An expert commented that, “Fundraising is still passive for many nonprofits. It’s often limited to one-time campaigns or crowdfunding during crises. There’s little thinking around a structured, repeatable model to engage everyday givers.” Controlling for those that do not use scheduled events, analysis showed that 90% of those that did schedule events rated it as effective, pointing to an under-utilized strategy that could improve fundraising outcomes for all.
Our analysis also shows a significant relationship between the frequency with which NPOs make appeals and whether they perceive engaging in everyday giving a worthwhile effort. Each increase in appeal frequency (e.g., from seasonal to monthly) is associated with a 15% increase in the odds of an organization perceiving everyday giving as worthwhile. Could this correlation be pointing to the fact that having a planned strategy for engaging everyday givers leads to better results at lower costs, and is – in turn – seen as a more worthwhile effort?
According to the Centre for Social Impact and Philanthropy’s “How India Gives 2020-2021” report, 34% of urban Indian households that did not donate said that they didn’t do so because nobody had approached them for support. This finding suggests that nonprofits may not be making enough strategic fundraising asks, potentially explaining why the sector has not been able to leverage everyday giving to its full potential. The data point to a clear opportunity: More systematic, planned engagement approaches could unlock significantly greater participation in everyday giving.
A major opportunity for strategic and planned fundraising events is to leverage giving moments. Giving moments are occasions for which people are already primed to be generous. Festivals are widely recognized by Indian nonprofits as the most effective fundraising periods with 40% of the respondents rating them as highly effective. Many nonprofits reported that donors are more generous during times of celebration, perhaps due to the centering of community and reflection on cultural and religious practices during these moments.
“Say it’s Christmas time and many people want to give during that time. Also during Diwali people want to give, that’s why it’s a festival. Or like Karma in Jharkhand, our religious festival time.” explained the Executive Director, Winner With You
Humans of Volunteering shared that their most impactful campaigns were crowdfunding drives tied to a giving moment. “In Daan Utsav, we have a campaign called Ghar Baithe Daan Karo (give from your home). Each day will be dedicated to supporting different organizations with funds – for example, for doing a school renovation in a rural area,” claimed the Co-founder.
Other giving moments like global and national giving days are currently underutilized, with one in four nonprofits not using them at all. These include dedicated days that inspire people to come together and give – whether it’s money, time, or support. GivingTuesday, DaanUtsav, Good Deeds Day and India Giving Day are all examples of such giving moments. Many giving days align with India’s festive season from October to December, a time already associated with generosity, reflection, and community. International days of observance (such as Earth Day, International Children’s Day, International Women’s Day) also offer strategic opportunities for cause-aligned organizations to connect their fundraising with global awareness campaigns centered on specific themes or communities.
These moments allow organizations to combine fundraising, community engagement, social media and awareness efforts into a focused, multi-channel campaign that encourages generosity on a larger scale. Unlike religious festivals, these giving days are religion-agnostic and inclusive, while still benefiting from the same emotional and cultural readiness to give. This makes them powerful tools for organizations that may hesitate to explicitly tie fundraising to specific religious narratives.
End-of-financial-year is another giving moment that has been rated as effective for fundraising from everyday givers by many NPOs. As one NPO leader pointed out, “People want to save taxes, repeat donors think, ‘OK, I didn’t give this year. So let’s give to this last campaign’”. However, the “How India Gives 2021-2022” report states that tax benefits do not appear on the primary motivator list for Indian households. Moreover, under India’s new tax regime, individual salaried taxpayers can no longer claim tax deductions for donations. As a result, the common trend of increased giving by everyday donors at the end of the financial year may slow down, or even disappear entirely. This potential shift warrants further research to better understand whether policy changes could have a broader impact on everyday giving overall.
In fundraising, the concept of the “leaky bucket” refers to the common problem of losing donors and supporters at a faster rate than new donors are gained, leading to stagnant or declining revenue. It’s a metaphor that suggests that efforts and resources are being wasted on a constant cycle of accessing new donors without sufficient focus on nurturing and retaining existing relationships. The key to ensuring your bucket is not leaky is to both bring in new donors and, more importantly, plug the leaks by improving donor retention and engagement, commonly termed ‘donor stewardship’.
Another concept called the donor pyramid6 demonstrates how organizations could think about long-term growth strategies built on donor stewardship practices that move them upward from the large numbers of small one-time donors at the base of the pyramid, to recurring giving, mid level contributions, and eventually, sustained champions of the cause.
Retaining donors depends on consistent and meaningful engagement that goes beyond the gift. It is common knowledge that donors who feel valued are more likely to stay engaged, driving long-term sustainability in everyday giving.
Nearly half the study respondents lack structured approaches to donor retention, leaving significant potential untapped and many leaky buckets.
Retaining donors is significantly more cost-effective and impactful than constantly accessing new ones. External benchmarks show that on average, only 20% of new donors are retained after the first gift, while 60% of repeat donors are retained after a second gift. Bringing in a new donor is estimated to be ten times more expensive than retaining an existing one.7
“Once someone has donated, you already have their attention. The next step is to deepen that relationship, not restart the chase every time,” explained one independent expert.
The good news is that more than 65% of the respondents reported that they have repeat or recurring givers, but almost 60% of those reported that less than a quarter of their everyday givers come back to give again.
The data clearly demonstrate that acknowledging each donation promptly and sharing impact updates is foundational to donor loyalty. For instance, acknowledging each donation is associated with a 20.3 percentage point increase in percentage raised from everyday givers, and showing donors the impact of their contributions is associated with an 11.3 percentage point increase in recurring giver percentage.
“We send WhatsApp thank-you videos directly from beneficiaries. When a child says thank you with a smile, the donor feels connected. It’s quick, warm, and very real,” reflected the CEO of a social service organization.
While there is an argument here in favor of donation platforms that automate most of these practices for users, experts stress the importance of heartfelt, personalized communication – not just automated receipts – as well as regular communication with donors. “Donors want to know how their contribution changed something, not just that it was used. Case stories, visuals, and real-time updates are far more engaging than data-heavy reports,” stressed an independent expert.
Another successful practice linked with an increase in the percentage of recurring givers is creating opportunities for donors to directly engage with the nonprofit’s work. This helps donors understand how their contributions are shaping change in the community or cause area.
A two-member nonprofit with an annual budget size between INR 1 crore and 5 crores said they stopped investing in high-cost events like marathons and outsourced fundraising drives, because of low returns. Instead, they doubled down on building deep personal connections with donors.
For them, this shift has led to strong donor retention, high conversions at intimate gatherings, and a steady growth in their donor base through referrals.
“We lead with impact, not with the ask. People give when they see the change they’ve helped create.”
“When donors visit our learning centers, talk to the children, or attend a virtual session, it becomes personal,” shared the leader of a social service organization based in Western India.
“Even virtual walkthroughs or a 2-minute audio from the field can help donors feel closer to the work,” emphasizes an independent expert.
The leader of a Telangana-based nonprofit reflected, “We’ve seen that long-term engagement develops when individuals begin to invest in our organization’s vision. This deeper connection often leads to stronger commitment.”
Only 40% of the respondents with retention strategies reported providing donors with more ways to give apart from money (offering non-financial opportunities for involvement), and only 33% recognize or reward donors for each contribution. Neither of these practices showed a significant correlation with fundraising outcomes. However, data from GivingTuesday’s “State of Generosity 2024” report shows that “In every country surveyed, most people reported that they gave both money and some other form of support (e.g., voice, items, time). Fewer than 10% of givers in any country gave money exclusively in 2024.” In the same study, 70% of Indian respondents said they gave money, goods and time, and 10% gave money and goods. This data point should be a catalyst for further engagement across all dimensions of giving, as it suggests that any one type of generous participation can be a gateway to all types of generosity.8
Analysis indicates that organizations adopting technology for specific purposes achieve stronger fundraising outcomes, with higher donor retention. For instance, organizations that use automated tax receipt systems have 5.9 percentage points more recurring givers than organizations that do not. This finding suggests the importance of streamlining administrative and compliance processes to improve donor retention – and technology can aid with that
Our analysis found that NPOs using customer relationship management systems (CRMs) were 18.7% more likely to have recurring givers. This finding suggests huge potential to improve support services (like donor management systems) in the everyday giving ecosystem.
Moving to CRM systems could be intimidating for many organizations, but Adhyayan Quality Education Foundation is taking a gradual approach to learning. Instead of jumping headfirst into a new system, the team is testing a CRM before committing fully. This allows staff to understand how donor data could be managed more effectively, moving from Excel sheets to an integrated platform for segmentation and tracking.
Although technology is emerging as a key enabler of more fundraising from everyday givers, the qualitative interviews pointed to challenges such as recurring transaction failure rates being as high as 60% due to regulations by the Reserve Bank of India. “This makes it tough for NGOs to depend on tech-based recurring giving,” claimed a subject matter expert.
But organizations are finding creative ways to deal with these challenges. Instead of relying on automated recurring payments, one organization approaches donors twice a year for repeat giving, maintaining the relationship manually. They time their outreach to match donor contexts – for instance, reaching out to Indian donors around February and March during tax season, and approaching international donors around November and December, coinciding with GivingTuesday and international year-end tax periods.
Time and again both NPOs and experts have stressed the importance of strategic and personalized communication when it comes to engaging with everyday givers. An expert underlined, “If you bombard people with repeated general requests, it becomes overwhelming. Make targeted pitches.” But how can you make targeted pitches if you don’t know much about your donor groups? Of the NPO respondents in the study’s sample only about one-third reported that they segment their everyday givers to better understand and engage them.
According to one expert, this is probably because, “The mindset is still very ‘event and campaign’ driven. There’s little investment in the backend tech that helps you understand and nurture a donor over time.” Organizations that consciously segment donors are better positioned to craft relevant and timely messages. However, the fact that a majority of NPOs in India do not segment their donors, indicates a missed opportunity for deeper engagement and personalization. As experts emphasized, most NPOs are not yet strategically fundraising from individuals, which means that segmentation has not been a regular part of their strategy.
For organizations that do use segmentation as a part of their donor management and engagement systems, there is a clear correlation with positive fundraising outcomes. The basis on which they segment their donors also has an impact on the outcomes.
Even though segmenting based on size of contribution is the most commonly used, and likely the most straightforward one too, segmenting donors based on the frequency of their contributions is associated with a higher share of budget raised from everyday giving. On average, organizations who segment by frequency tend to raise 21 percentage points more from everyday givers than organizations who do not. This finding suggests the importance of identifying your most consistent contributors and tailoring your donor stewardship practices accordingly. “By distinguishing between one-time and recurring givers, MAD aims to track patterns, identify who is likely to stay engaged, and explore how to deepen their involvement. Similarly, analyzing ticket sizes allows the team to identify opportunities for growing contributions or tailoring communication,” revealed the Senior Director, Fundraising and Partnerships at Make a Difference.
Strategic segmentation based on donation frequency also allows for better predictions about which occasional givers have the potential to become regular or higher-value donors. For example, someone who gives small amounts sporadically can be encouraged to commit to an annual pledge, and annual donors can then be nurtured into multi-year or major supporters. This structured journey helps convert one-time contributions into sustained, long-term giving relationships. As the co-founder of a young organization based in North India explained, “Frequency has been helpful – those who give once a year, we make that quarterly and then eventually monthly. So that kind of helps us identify who are more likely to become monthly givers.” This highlights the real power of data-driven fundraising – not as an add-on, but as a force multiplier. When used smartly, even simple data strategies like tracking donor details can significantly amplify the effectiveness of fundraising teams and deepen relationships with everyday givers.
Other approaches NPOs have reported they use include segmentation based on location, cause area or for a specific project. Project or cause alignment enhances emotional resonance and relevance, helping convert general interest into action. “Donors are far more responsive to project-based or cause-specific campaigns. This informed our strategy to frame future campaigns around specific issues,” the leader of a social service organization pointed out. Localized segmentation improves turnout at events, relevance of appeals, and trust – increasing the likelihood of repeat donations. The co-founder of a young education-based organization operating in North India agreed, “Location segmentation helps because whenever we do this kind of gathering, we ensure that people in that location get a personal invitation.”
Experts argue that NPOs can further refine outreach by combining multiple segmentation layers (financial, emotional, project or cause) to maximize outcomes and allow for nuanced appeals and donor journeys. This however requires clear positioning, data hygiene, and consistent messaging. An expert stated that the current gap is not in donor willingness but in the NPO’s ability to use the data they already have: “I’ve been donating to this organization for 20 years, but they treat me like a new donor every time.”
Donor segmentation enables more effective outreach. When nonprofits don’t segment their donors, everyone receives the same appeals and type of engagement, regardless of their interests, giving history, or relationship with the organization. It’s often assumed that donors are simply tired of giving – but what if they’re actually just tired of receiving the same generic messages? This challenges the common narrative around “donor fatigue” and reframes it for what it often is: Fatigue from irrelevant messaging. With smarter segmentation, nonprofits can move from one-size-fits-all outreach to communications that actually connect and keep donors engaged.
Organizational characteristics like age, scale, personnel size, fundraising team size and budget allocated to everyday giving didn’t seem to have any significant correlation with the percentage of recurring donors. However, there is a negative correlation between the percentage of recurring donors and organizations whose team members attended fundraising training. Receiving fundraising training is associated with a 20.2 percentage point decrease in recurring donor percentage (equivalent to a -10 percentage point standardized effect size). In an earlier analysis we saw how attending fundraising training has a clear positive correlation with the percentage of funds raised from everyday givers. While this could indicate that organizations with fewer recurring donors are more likely to attend training programs, it most likely points to the fact that a lot of capacity building programs on fundraising for NPOs are more focussed on bringing in new donors than on sustained donor engagement – a clear gap that can be easily filled with better and more strategic training programs offered to sector leaders.
These insights underscore a critical shift that nonprofits must make: Moving away from viewing fundraising as a series of isolated asks toward building a sustained relationship-building strategy. Donor retention isn’t just a tactic; it’s a strategic imperative that directly impacts financial stability and mission impact. Many organizations acknowledge the value of recurring givers – donors who commit to giving regularly on a fixed schedule (like monthly or quarterly). They also recognize the value of repeat givers – individuals who donate multiple times but not on a set schedule. However, the lack of structured approaches means too much potential with both repeat and recurring donors is left on the table.
To truly plug the leaky bucket, nonprofit organizations need philanthropic support to invest in systems – including technology, communication, and engagement strategies – that make every giver feel seen, appreciated, and connected to the cause – transforming one-time acts of giving into long-term commitments.
Understanding the landscape of fundraising from everyday givers requires examining both sides of the equation: Why some organizations haven’t started this work, and what challenges those already engaged are working to overcome.
Organizations not currently fundraising from everyday givers face predominantly internal barriers to getting started. The most common obstacles reported are limited team capacity, insufficient knowledge about individual donor engagement, and core fundraising skill gaps. Many prioritize other funding channels they view as more straightforward, while others lack basic systems for managing small-size, high volume campaigns. A smaller number of organizations cite brand visibility issues, difficulty identifying potential donors, or discouraging past experiences. Notably, only a very small minority said they felt it wasn’t relevant, indicating that organizations can see the potential and value, and just need better support.
These nonprofits face primarily operational rather than motivational challenges, often echoing similar capacity constraints that prevent other organizations from starting this work.
Capacity and capability constraints create the foundation of most challenges. Organizations struggle across three interconnected areas: human resources (51% report staffing gaps), financial limitations (43% cite budget constraints for building fundraising infrastructure), and knowledge gaps around donor cultivation practices.
“We do not do it proactively because we are a small team. We do not have a fixed group.” – NPO respondent
These capacity and capability issues culminate in a critical strategic gap: 38% of organizations that actively fundraise from everyday givers identify the absence of a clear strategy as their top obstacle. Many operate with ad-hoc approaches that prioritize short-term funding fixes over sustainable engagement models, lacking exposure to best practices in digital outreach, donor segmentation, and relationship-building.
“Nobody wants to invest in fundraising. Fundraising is not an investment category in organizations… the likelihood of you having a fundraising team is only 20%,” claimed an independent expert.
"Not knowing how to do retail fundraising is the primary reason," stressed an independent expert
"Upskilling is not there at least from the Indian lens… fundraising courses are minimal," highlighted an independent expert
"You're not thinking through the strategy, not thinking through sustainability. It's a very short-term strategy to fill a current need," explained an independent expert
An NPO respondent acknowledged, "The most significant obstacle... is the lack of a clear, structured strategy in this area."
This strategy deficit directly impacts effectiveness and cost-efficiency. As demonstrated earlier, organizations with planned, systematic approaches see 15% higher odds of perceiving everyday giving as worthwhile, while ad-hoc efforts tend to be more resource-intensive and less sustainable. The cycle becomes self-reinforcing: Limited investment in strategy and skills yields limited returns, which justifies continued underinvestment.
The encouraging reality: Organizations already engaged in everyday giving recognize its value, despite these challenges. This suggests that addressing capacity, capability and strategic planning barriers could unlock significantly greater potential across the sector.
Read other parts of the report:
1The survey measured perceived worthwhileness on a 4-point scale (ranging from “not at all worthwhile” to “highly worthwhile”). The statistical analysis shows a 0.19 point increase in worthwhileness rating for typical increases in everyday giving revenue share. This represents a meaningful shift on the scale – for example, moving an organization’s average rating from 3.0 to 3.19 – indicating a clear positive relationship between fundraising success and organizational satisfaction with this approach. ↩︎
2Bridgespan Group. (2022). Bridging the Gap on Funding True Costs of NGOs in India. https://www.bridgespan.org/getmedia/0cef78ac-b5e3-44e6-b3b4-80d4acb0e9ed/bridging-the-gap-on-funding-true-costs-of-ngos-in-india.pdf ↩︎
3FE News Desk. (2023, February 18). Most non-profits find meeting funders’ reporting, compliance requirements burdensome: Survey. Financial Express. https://www.financialexpress.com/business/industry-most-non-profits-find-meeting-funders-reporting-compliance-requirements-burdensome-survey-2985520/ ↩︎
4Budget allocation analysis shows that for each standard deviation increase in budget allocated to everyday giving fundraising, organizations see a 4.6 percentage point increase in funds raised from everyday givers. Similarly, fundraising training is associated with a 19.9 percentage point boost in everyday giving revenue share (equivalent to a 6.7 percentage point standardized effect size). These represent meaningful improvements in fundraising outcomes relative to investment in capacity building. ↩︎
5A percentage point increase refers to the absolute difference in percentages. For example, moving from 20% to 36% represents a 16 percentage point increase. The actual monetary impact varies by organization: for a nonprofit with a ₹10 lakh annual budget, this could mean an additional ₹1.6 lakhs from everyday givers; for a ₹1 crore budget organization, it could represent ₹16 lakhs in additional revenue. ↩︎
6Jefferies, A. (n.d.). The Donor Pyramid: How to Use this Flexible Fundraising Tool. Meyer Partners. https://www.meyerpartners.com/fundraising-blog/donor-pyramid ↩︎
7Otero, D. (2025, September 8). Donor Segmentation: Comprehensive Guide + Tips for Success. Bloomerang. https://bloomerang.co/blog/donor-segmentation/ ↩︎
8GivingTuesday. (2024). State of Generosity 2024. https://stateofgenerosity.givingtuesday.org/2024#trust ↩︎
