Achieving Excellence in Fundraising

By Eugene R. Tempel, Timothy L. Seiler and Dwight F. Burlingame

Achieving Excellence in Fundraising is the go-to reference for fundraising principles, concepts, and techniques. With comprehensive guidance toward the fundraising role, this book reflects the latest advances in fundraising knowledge. Coverage includes evolving technologies, the importance of high net worth donors, global fundraising perspectives, results analysis and performance evaluation, accountability, and credentialing, with contributions from noted experts in the field. You'll gain essential insight into the practice of fundraising and the fundraising cycle, reinforced by ancillary discussion questions, case studies, and additional readings. With contributions from members of The Fund Raising School and the faculty of Indiana University's Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, this new edition includes detailed guidance on nonprofit accounting practices as defined by the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, rounding out the complete, thorough coverage of the fundraising profession.

Designed to provide both theory and practical knowledge, this book is an all-in-one resource for anyone who performs fundraising duties.

• Understand donor dynamics and craft an institutional development plan
• Explore essential marketing and solicitation techniques
• Learn effective volunteer recruitment, retention, and management strategies

Fundraising merges a variety of fields including psychology, business management, accounting, and marketing, making it a unique role that requires a uniquely well rounded yet focused skillset. Amidst economic uncertainty and a widening wealth gap the world over, it's more important than ever for fundraisers to have a firm grasp on the tools at their disposal. Achieving Excellence in Fundraising is the ultimate guide to succeeding in this critical role.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wiley
• Release date: Dec 10, 2015
• ISBN: 9781118853795

Book preview

PART ONE

A PHILANTHROPIC CONTEXT FOR FUNDRAISING

CHAPTER ONE

A PHILOSOPHY OF FUNDRAISING

By Henry A. Rosso

Introduction by Eugene R. Tempel

Twenty-five years have passed since Henry Hank Rosso undertook the development of Achieving Excellence in Fund Raising. The original edition won the prestigious Staley Robeson Prize from the National Society of Fund Raising Executives – now the Association of Fundraising Professionals. Fundraising was still two words then. Hank was a superstar among fundraisers. Many of us are privileged to call him our mentor.

Hank founded The Fund Raising School in 1974, 40 years prior to the time we began work on the fourth edition of Achieving Excellence in Fundraising. The work Hank started has grown and prospered with The Fund Raising School as an integral part of the new Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. However, we continue to feel his influence through the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy's Rosso Medal for Lifetime Achievement in Ethical Philanthropic Fundraising, through The Fund Raising School, through Achieving Excellence in Fundraising, fourth edition, and especially through this chapter.

In this chapter Hank offers his philosophy on fundraising, a philosophy developed over a lifetime of work as a fundraiser, consultant, and teacher. The principles upon which he founded The Fund Raising School in 1974 have stood the test of time and culture with adaptations and modifications rather than replacement, and so has his philosophy of fundraising. Both his principles and his philosophy have been substantiated by research on philanthropy, donor behavior, and fundraising available today. This is why we have continued to include Hank's Chapter, A Philosophy of Fundraising.

This chapter covers some of Hank's basic tenets, including:

The importance of mission in fundraising.

Why you exist is more important than what you do.

The importance of integrating fundraising into an organization.

Substituting pride for apology in fundraising.

Hank's original chapter, A Philosophy of Fund Raising, in subsequent additions, including this fourth edition, is included unaltered and in its entirety. The fourth edition is being published 25 years after Hank developed his original chapter. It is a tribute to all he contributed to the profession of fundraising and the development of philanthropy.

A central theme in Hank's philosophy and in the way he approached his work was fundraising is the servant of philanthropy. He opened and closed the first chapter of his book with that theme. Fundraising is not an end in itself. When it becomes that, both the organization and philanthropy are diminished and fundraising becomes a mere technical application of skills. Fundraising in Hank's view was only a means to an end that rested on organizational mission. We know today that donors are motivated to give primarily because they believe in the cause. The pillars that support Hank's central theme are as relevant today as they were in 1991. For example, research shows that high net worth donors depend on professional fundraisers and colleagues to help them make decisions about their giving (Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, 2014).

The most significant of these pillars is why do you exist? This question enables an organization to articulate its mission in terms of the societal values it is fulfilling. Mission is what gives us the privilege to ask for philanthropic support. Mission is particularly important in an era where nonprofit organizations are encouraged to develop new income sources, undertake market-based activities, focus on social enterprise, form collaborations and partnerships, and approach venture philanthropists with confidence.

Hank's philosophy also rested on the role of the governing board. He saw governing boards as not only being responsible for fundraising but also for stewardship of the organization's mission and resources. The governing board today must ensure the public trust of the organization if fundraising is to be successful. Heightened calls for transparency and accountability make the role of the governing board even more important today than it was in 1991. Trust is the bedrock upon which philanthropy rests.

Fundraising as the servant of philanthropy must be part of an organization's management system. This is a pillar of Hank's philosophy of fundraising that is also critical today. Fundraising cannot be a separate, isolated, activity. Ensuring trust means conducting fundraising that is based on mission by staff and volunteers who are committed to the organization and who represent the organization with integrity. Staff and volunteers of an organization who embrace a culture of philanthropy enable fundraising by accepting philanthropy as a legitimate and important source of income to support a worthy cause.

Hank believed that philanthropy must be voluntary. Today this pillar of Hank's philosophy is more important than it was in 1991. The interest in self-expression through philanthropy calls for a more open approach by organizations. Pluralism becomes an important tenant. Another of Hank's beliefs is applicable here: Fundraising is the gentle art of teaching people the joy of giving. To ensure long-term donor engagement and donor satisfaction that lead to increased philanthropy, fundraisers must remember that giving is voluntary. As we will see in Chapter 2, contemporary research demonstrates that there is a joy in giving.

Perhaps the greatest contribution Hank made was to teach the substitution of pride for apology in fundraising. As the number of people engaged in fundraising has grown, and fundraisers have sought a more professional approach, recognizing that fundraising is a noble activity based on organizational mission has been central to professional development. Another of Hank's statements about soliciting a gift is applicable here: Set yourself aside and let the case walk in. The case for support as discussed in Chapter 4 gets back to the main reason why individuals give.

The last two paragraphs of this chapter carry the same subtitle as the opening line, with a slight variation: Fundraising as Servant to Philanthropy. Hank explained the role of fundraising in terms that foreshadow the models currently needed to assist wealth holders in determining their philanthropy. He wrote of fundraising: It is justified when it is used as a responsible invitation guiding contributors to make the kind of gift that will meet their own special needs and add greater meaning to their lives.

Today more than ever fundraisers need a philosophy of fundraising. The call for accountability, the need to inspire trust, the leadership of volunteers, the involvement of donors in their philanthropy, and the new approaches to philanthropy discussed in the following chapters all call for fundraisers to be reflective practitioners who can center themselves with a philosophy of fundraising. Hank's philosophy provides an excellent beginning for us to develop our own philosophy.

A PHILOSOPHY OF FUNDRAISING

Fundraising is the servant of philanthropy and has been so since the seventeenth century, when Puritans brought the concept to the new continent. The early experience of fundraising was simple in form, obviously devoid of the multifaceted practices that characterize its nature in the contemporary United States. These practices now make fundraising more diversified and more complex than ever before.

The American spirit of giving is known and respected in other nations. American fundraising methods are equally known and admired abroad, as foreign citizens who have attended classes taught by The Fund Raising School will attest. Ironically, the practice of resource development that is so much a part of the culture, necessity, and tradition of not-for-profit organizations in the United States is not sufficiently understood, often misrepresented, and too often viewed with suspicion and apprehension by a broad section of our own population, particularly by regulatory bodies. Few still argue with the observation that fundraising has never been considered the most popular practice in this country.

Dean Schooler of Boulder, Colorado, a scholar and student of fundraising, takes the teleological view of a vitalist philosophy that phenomena are not only guided by mechanical forces but also move toward certain goals of self-realization. Indeed, fundraising is never an end in itself; it is purposive. It draws both its meaning and essence from the ends that are served: caring, helping, healing, nurturing, guiding, uplifting, teaching, creating, preventing, advancing a cause, preserving values, and so forth. Fundraising is values-based; values must guide the process. Fundraising should never be undertaken simply to raise funds; it must serve the large cause.

Organizations and Their Reasons for Existing

Organizations of the independent sector come into existence for the purpose of responding to some facet of human or societal needs. The need or opportunity for service provides the organization with a reason for being, as well as a right to design and execute programs or strategies that respond to the need. This becomes the cause that is central to the concern of the organization. The cause provides justification for more intervention, and this provides justification for fundraising.

The organization may claim a right to raise money by asking for the tax-deductible gift. It must earn the privilege to ask for gift support by its management's responsiveness to needs, by the worthiness of its programs, and by the stewardship of its governing board. An organization may assume the right to ask. The prospective donor is under no obligation to give. The prospect reserves the right to a yes or a no response to any request. Either response is valid and must be respected.

Each organization that uses the privilege of soliciting for gifts should be prepared to respond to many questions, perhaps unasked and yet implicit in the prospect's mind. These may be characterized as such: Why do you exist?, What is distinctive about you?, Why do you feel that you merit this support?, What is it that you want to accomplish and how do you intend to go about doing it?, and How will you hold yourself accountable?

The response to Who are you and why do you exist? is couched in the words of the organization's mission statement. This statement expresses more than justification for existence and more than just a definition of goals and objectives. It defines the value system that will guide program strategies. The mission is the magnet that will attract and hold the interests of trustees, volunteers, staff, and contributors.

The answer to What is distinctive about us? is apparent in the array of goals, objective, and programs that have been devised to address the needs of the value system as well as serve as symbols of fidelity to it.

How do we hold ourselves accountable? is the primary question. It is a continuing call for allegiance to the mission. It acknowledges the sacredness of the trust that is inherent in the relationship with both the constituency and the larger community. The organization is the steward of the resources entrusted to its care.

It is axiomatic that change is a constant. Shifting forces within the environment quicken the pace of change, thus posing a new constant. Not-for-profit organizations must always be prepared to function in the center of whirling pressure.

Organizations cannot afford to be oblivious to the environment that surrounds, and indeed engulfs, them. Forces within the environment such as demographics, technology, economics, political and cultural values, and changing social patterns affect daily business performance, whether this performance pertains to governance, program administration, fiscal responsibility, or fundraising.

To Govern or Not to Govern

Governance is an exercise in authority and control. Trustees, directors, or regents – the interchangeable nomenclature that identifies the actors in governance – are the primary stewards of the spirit of philanthropy. As stewards, they are the legendary keepers of the hall. They hold the not-for-profit organization in trust to ensure that it will continue to function according to the dictates of its mission.

The trustees must bear the responsibility to define and interpret the mission and ensure that the organization will remain faithful to its mission. Board members should accept the charge that trusteeship concerns itself with the proper deployment of resources and with the accompanying action, the securing of resources. Deploying resources is difficult if the required resources are not secured through effective fundraising practices. It stands to reason that trustees as advocates of and stewards to the mission must attend to the task of pressing the resources development program on to success.

Institutionalizing Fundraising

Fundraising projects the values of the total organization into the community whenever it seeks gift support. All aspects of governance – administration, program, and resources development – are part of the whole. As such, these elements must be part of the representation when gifts are sought. Fundraising cannot function apart from the organization; apart from its mission, goals, objective, and programs; apart from a willingness to be held accountable for all of its actions.

Fundraising is and must always be the lengthened shadow of the not-for-profit entity, reflecting the organization's dignity, its pride of accomplishment, and its commitment to service. Fundraising by itself and apart from the institution has no substance in the eyes and heart of the potential contributor.

Gift Making as Voluntary Exchange

Gift making is based on a voluntary exchange. Gifts secured through coercion, through any means other than persuasion, are not gifts freely given. They do not have the meaning of philanthropy. Rarely will gifts obtained under pressure or through any form of intimidation be repeated. These gifts lose their meaning.

In the process of giving, the contributor offers a value to the not-for-profit organization. This gift is made without any expectation of a material return, apart from the tax deductibility authorized by government. The reasons for making a gift are manifold.

In accepting the gift, it is incumbent upon the organization to return a value to the donor in a form other than material value. Such a value may be social recognition, the satisfaction of supporting a worthy cause, a feeling of importance, a feeling of making a difference in resolving a problem, a sense of belonging, or a sense of ownership in a program dedicated to serving the public good.

Trustees, administrators, or fundraising practitioners so often misconstrue the true meaning of this exchange relationship, and they violate the acknowledgement process by offering a return of substantive value. This alters the exchange, reduces the meaning of philanthropy, and diminishes the gift in its commitment to the mission. The transaction is one of a material exchange, a self-centered quid pro quo with none of the spirit of philanthropy in the exchange.

Substituting Pride for Apology

Giving is a privilege, not a nuisance or a burden. Stewardship nourishes the belief that people draw a creative energy, a sense of self-worth, a capacity to function productively from sources beyond themselves. This is a deep personal belief or a religious conviction. Thoughtful philanthropists see themselves as responsible stewards of life's gifts to them. What they have they hold in trust, in their belief, and they accept the responsibility to share their treasures effectively through their philanthropy. Giving is an expression of thankfulness for the blessings that they have received during their lifetime.

The person seeking the gift should never demean the asking by clothing it in apology. Solicitation gives the prospect the opportunity to respond with a yes or a no. The solicitation should be so executed as to demonstrate to the prospective contributor that there can be a joy to giving, whether the gift measures up to the asking properly and in a manner that puts the potential contributor at ease.

The first task of the solicitor is to help the potential contributor understand the organization's case, especially its statement of mission. When a person commits to contribute to a cause and does so because of an acceptance of and a belief in the mission, then that person becomes a stakeholder in the organization and that for which it stands. This emphasizes that philanthropy is moral action, and the contributor is an integral part of that action.

Fundraising as a Servant to Philanthropy

Philanthropy is voluntary action for the public good through voluntary action, voluntary association, and voluntary giving (Payton, 1988). Fundraising has been servant to philanthropy across the millennia. Through the procession of the centuries, the thesis has been established that people want and have a need to give. People want to give to causes that serve the entire gamut of human and societal needs. They will give when they can be assured that these causes can demonstrate their worthiness and accountability in using the gift funds that they receive.

Ethical fundraising is the prod, the enabler, the activator to gift making. It must also be the conscience to the process. Fundraising is at its best when it strives to match the needs of the not-for-profit organization with the contributor's need and desire to give. The practice of gift seeking is justified when it exalts the contributor, not the gift seeker. It is justified when it is used as a responsible invitation, guiding contributors to make the kind of gift that will meet their own special needs and add greater meaning to their lives.

CHAPTER TWO

THE JOY OF GIVING

By Sara Konrath

According to the Corporation for National & Community Service, 62.6 million Americans devoted nearly 7.7 billion hours to unpaid volunteer work in 2014, which was valued at an estimated US$173 billion. Moreover, Giving USA has found that over $358.38 billion was donated to charitable organizations in 2014. Eighty percent of this came from individuals and bequests. Fundraising professionals likely helped to bring a significant portion of individual donations into nonprofit organizations. Development staff are integral to the success of nonprofit organizations.

And yet, development staff have high turnover. A recent national study of development directors found that 50% of them planned on leaving their current job in the next 2 years, and 40% of them planned on leaving the field of fundraising altogether (Bell and Cornelius, 2013). While there are many organizational characteristics that likely feed into fundraisers' levels of job satisfaction, one factor that should not be ignored is fundraisers' perceptions of themselves. Therefore, this chapter covers:

Fundraisers' role in facilitating the joy of giving

The psychological benefits of giving

The social benefits of giving

The physical health benefits

Ways to maximize the benefits of giving.

Fundraisers are Givers, Not Takers

Although fundraisers participate in a number of complex day-to-day activities, most of these are focused in some way on raising money for a nonprofit organization. In other words, their job is to ask people for money. Fundraisers are often seen as salespeople. But the salesperson role is not fully accurate, because salespeople are perceived as being money-oriented and driven by profits. The fundraiser-as-salesperson analogy may make fundraisers see themselves as takers—taking hard-earned money and valuable time from those who often do not have much of either. Indeed, a 2014 Gallup Poll found that salespeople are among the least trusted professions in the United States, comparable to politicians.

But in more ways, fundraisers are actually givers. Without fundraisers, nonprofits could not follow their important missions. Donors and volunteers could not be as effective in actualizing their personal values. Fundraisers are the high priests of giving. Most donors cannot directly help people in the most effective way possible. For example, someone who feels genuinely concerned about the plight of homeless people can certainly give money directly to homeless people they encounter. But this is likely to address the problem in a limited and temporary way. Giving to a long-term shelter that also has education and job-training programs may be a better investment in terms of what the donor wants to accomplish. Fundraisers help to match people's values with opportunities to give, and in doing so, they are helping to feed the hungry, take care of the sick, share musical and cultural experiences, and educate generations of students.

Besides the obvious social good this accomplishes, there has been a lot of research recently on the potential benefits that happen to givers themselves. As Hank Rosso, founder of The Fund Raising School at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy wrote "Fundraising is the gentle art of teaching the joy of giving." This chapter summarizes the research on the health and well-being benefits of giving money (charitable donations) and time (volunteering). When fundraisers help givers to give, they may not realize that they are bringing these givers more happiness and better health. By being mindful of these health and well-being benefits of giving, I hope that fundraisers can see themselves as serving an important giving role, so that they can also personally experience the joy of giving.

Psychological Benefits of Giving

Many of us believe that if we only had more time and money, we would be happier. In fact, there is much research finding that giving away our time and money makes us happier, even though after giving we have less for ourselves.

There have been many studies examining volunteering and well-being, with the vast majority of them finding that people who regularly volunteer have higher happiness, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being than those who do not volunteer. Of course, volunteers are different than non-volunteers in a number of ways that could explain why they are happier. For example, they tend to have higher incomes and have more social and psychological resources than non-volunteers. But there has been a lot of research finding that these differences do not fully explain the happiness effects of giving time. Even when scholars statistically control for these variables, the results remain similar.

In addition, a few studies have used a method that is also used to test to see if a new drug works, a randomized control trial. Researchers start with a group of people who are pretty similar at the beginning, and then ask half of these people to volunteer for a period of time, and the other half to be on a waiting list. These studies have found that volunteering actually causes people to have higher self-esteem and feel less depressed (Li and Ferraro, 2005). Other studies find that helping others does not need to be done in the context of a nonprofit organization to increase people's well-being (Tkach, 2005; Otake, et. al., 2006). Being kind to others feels pretty good.

Does giving away money also make people happier? Before answering this question, it is important to note that there is often overlap between the people who volunteer and who donate their money. Givers tend to give generously in a variety of ways, so fundraisers should be mindful that sometimes their next big donors are literally right under their nose volunteering for their events and programs. In fact, the time-ask effect finds that if people are first asked to give their time to an organization, and then only later asked to make a financial donation, they will give more of both (Liu and Aaker, 2008). When people are first asked to make a financial donation, they give less time and money. This is because thinking about money automatically activates concepts of individualism and self-focus (Vohs, Mead, and Goode, 2006).

There are far fewer studies on the psychological effects of giving money compared to giving time, however, the results in these studies are pretty consistent. Most of these studies find that giving money to others, including charities, is associated with more happiness than spending it on oneself. For example, one study asked participants to spend a small amount of money (either $5 or $20) on themselves versus another person, and then the researchers measured participants' mood at the end of the day. People who spent their money on someone else were happier than those who spent it on themselves, regardless of the amount of money spent (Dunn, Aknin, and Norton, 2008). Other research has found that simply recalling spending on others has similar mood boosting effects. These positive emotions, in turn, inspire even more giving behavior (Aknin, Dunn, and Norton, 2012). So, giving feels good, even if we are just recalling a time when we gave, and these good feelings could pay off in terms of increased donations.

Donating money in the specific context of the workplace not only makes people happier, but it has been shown to increase job satisfaction and make people work better on teams (Norton, et. al., 2010). This implies that corporate giving programs should be channeled directly through employees in addition to being handled by corporate development directors. Giving employees a chance to choose where corporate charitable dollars should be spent may have implications for employee retention and productivity.

Fundraisers need not worry that they might erase these benefits of giving by sharing the news with potential donors. Even when people are aware of the potential happiness effects of giving, this does not diminish the psychological rewards (Anik, et. al., 2009). Indeed, one study found that donors gave more when they learned of the potential happiness-building effects of giving (Benson and Catt, 1978).

Nor should fundraisers worry that these psychological rewards will necessarily be fleeting. Several studies demonstrate that giving is associated with long-lasting good feelings. For example, people who are asked to regularly and frequently do small kind acts for others feel happier up to 2 months later (Tkach, 2005). There are similar findings when it comes to giving money to others. For example, one study found that people who chose to spend more of their employment bonus on others felt happier up to 2 months later (Dunn et. al., 2008), while another study found that participants who donated more money to charity at one time point were happier up to 9 years later (Choi and Kim, 2011).

Even more incredible is that these happiness boosts seem to be noticeable by outside observers (Aknin, Fleerackers, and Hamlin, 2014). It is not just that people think they are happier after they give, but it seems as though they are genuinely experiencing more positive emotion.

These effects are pretty strong and have been found in many studies. And yet, when people are asked to guess which one will make them happier, spending money on themselves versus spending it on others, they have no clue about the powerful effects of giving on their own happiness. Instead, they think they will be happier when spending on themselves (Dunn et. al., 2008). This, in part, could help to explain why people so desperately chase after the latest gadgets and fashion, but it also reveals an opportunity for fundraisers to fill in a knowledge gap.

Not only can giving money make people happier, but it also makes them feel richer. A recent study gave some participants the opportunity to make a donation to a needy child, while other participants were not given this opportunity (Chance and Norton, 2015). Donating money made people feel as though they were doing better financially than average. This is despite the fact that objectively they had less money because they just gave some away.

Giving time to others can lead to similar feelings of abundance (Mogilner, Chance, and Norton, 2012). A recent paper gave some participants the opportunity to give their time to help others (e.g. write a letter to a sick child) while other participants either spent time on their own or were allowed to leave the experiment early, thus buying them time. Across four studies, the authors found that giving time to others led to more feelings of time affluence, the subjective feeling of having a lot of free time available. Amazingly, people feel like their schedules are less rushed after giving away time to others, despite the fact that objectively they have less time because they just gave some away.

The psychological benefits of giving and volunteering go beyond the increased experience of positive emotions among psychologically healthy populations. Giving is also associated with fewer symptoms of depression and anxiety (Hunter and Linn, 1980; Musick and Wilson, 2003), which, if untreated, could become full blown psychological disorders. Among those who have ongoing psychological problems, such as post-traumatic stress disorder or social anxiety, giving can help to manage their symptoms (Alden and Trew, 2013).

Social Benefits of Giving

The joy of giving and volunteering can also spread to others.

First, there is research finding that giving is literally contagious. People's giving behavior spreads into their closest friendships and family members, and into their broader social networks (Tsvetkoa and Macy, 2014). This is because when people are the recipients of generosity or see someone else give, this inspires us to give as well. For example, parents can influence their children by not only giving, but by directly talking about their giving behaviors with their children (Wilhelm, Brown, Rooney and Steinberg, 2008). Parents also have an influential role in the development of giving-related traits in their children. Research has found that there are certain parenting styles that predict more empathic and giving children. Highly involved fathers and parents whose discipline focuses on others' feelings have more empathic children (Koestner, Franz and Weinberger, 1990).

On the flip side, parents also have an influence on their children's narcissistic self-focus. Narcissism is a personality trait that involves an inflated sense of self-esteem and entitlement. Just as parents can encourage their children to be more aware of others' needs, they can help to create self-centered and miserly children. All they need to do is indulge their children's every whim, reminding their children of how superior and special they are (Brummelman, et. al., 2015).

Not only is giving socially learned and spread, but it also enriches people's social relationships, both in quantity and quality. Kind people are likeable, and others want to be around them. For example, the number one trait that both men and women are looking for in a romantic partner is kindness (Sprecher and Regan, 2002). One randomized control trial asked one group of preadolescents to do 3 small kind acts for others each week for four weeks, and another group to visit 3 new places each week. The researchers found that the teens in the kindness group became more popular with their peers by the end of the study (Layous, et. al., 2012).

Volunteering and donating money to important causes can help people to meet others who share similar passions, and more deeply enmeshes people within their local communities. For example, one study found that older adults who were assigned to volunteer had more social connections over a period of 4 to 8 months, while those in the wait-list control group had a decline in their number of social connections. Volunteers also experienced a 16.7% increase that others would support them if they needed it, while people in the control group experienced a 25.3% decline in perceived social support (Fried, et. al., 2004).

Among older adults, volunteering helps people who are dealing with shifting roles, for example, as older adults retire and their children become more independent of them (Greenfield and Marks, 2004). It can help to give people a sense that they are important and needed, which can help to buffer them from the potential stresses of aging, including losing important social relationships and experiencing declining health.

Physical Benefits of Giving

There has been a lot of research examining the physical health implications of volunteering and giving. For example, interesting new work has been examining what happens in the brain while people make charitable donations. This research finds that when donating money, the pleasure / reward centers of the brain light up as much as when receiving money (Harbaugh, et. al., 2007; Moll, et. al., 2006). These physiological effects mirror the psychological effects discussed earlier in this chapter.

However, there is only limited research examining the immediate physiological consequences of giving. Our research has found that people who are highly empathic have lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol after stressful events (Reinhard, et. al., 2012; Ho, et. al., 2014). Other research confirms that shifting one's focus away from the self and toward others can buffer oneself from stressors (Ableson, et. al., 2014), and that giving money to others is directly associated with lower cortisol (Dunn, et. al., 2010). In addition, volunteering has been shown to be associated with better cardiovascular health in a number of studies.

Taken together, increased positive emotions and decreased stress hormones are likely to have implications for physical health. Indeed, volunteers self-report being healthier than non-volunteers (Kumar, et. al., 2012). And our research has found that volunteering is associated with good health especially for religious people (McDougle, et. al., 2013). Perhaps by volunteering, religious people are affirming their most cherished beliefs to help and serve others.

Giving can also make people physically stronger, at least temporarily. In one study researchers asked people who were waiting for a subway to hold a 5 pound weight with their arms stretched horizontally for as long as they could. They were then given a $1 payment and half of them were asked to donate it to UNICEF (they all did), while the other half just kept it. People who donated the money were able to hold the 5 pound weight for a longer period of time than those who did not donate the money. Two other studies confirmed that giving literally made people physically stronger (Gray, 2010). That feeling of I can make a difference is literally energizing.

The Joy of Giving Across the Lifespan

Given all of the benefits of giving described so far, it should perhaps no longer be surprising that volunteering is associated with longevity. An analysis of over a dozen studies across a 25-year period found that volunteering is associated with a 47% reduced risk of dying overall, and a 24% reduction in the risk of dying when statistically adjusting for demographic variables. There are no known studies on whether giving money is associated with a reduced mortality risk, or whether volunteering is associated with certain causes of mortality more than others (e.g. cancer, heart disease, injuries).

Most of the research so far on the effects of giving time and money been conducted on older adults, because they tend to have more time to volunteer for nonprofits and to be in studies. Studies have generally found that the health and well-being benefits of giving tend to be stronger as people age (Van Willigen, 2000). This might be because of different types of volunteer jobs across different age groups, or different motives for volunteering as people age. Yet, giving time and money is also associated with more psychological well-being and better health in middle-age adults, adolescents, and even children.

The joy of giving around the world

Similarly, most of the research on the effects of giving time and money have been conducted on people from North America and Western Europe. However, there is an emerging cross-cultural literature that suggests people from many cultures around the world experience the joy of giving and volunteering.

There are a number of large cross-national studies that take advantage of the Gallup World Poll, which conducts regular large surveys that represent approximately 95% of the world's population. These studies have examined between 136 to 142 countries worldwide, and confirmed that in most cultures, volunteering is associated with higher well-being (86% of cultures studied) and better health (88% of cultures studied), and donating to charity is associated with higher well-being (90% of cultures). These results are similar even in poor countries where resources are scarcer, and are not explained by the fact that volunteers and donors may differ in demographic factors such as gender, age, religiosity, and income.

Taken together, all of this research shows that even though of course giving away money and time means that there is less left for the self, it does not feel that way. The paradox of generosity is that people feel happier, richer, and healthier after giving their money and time to others. Having money in itself does not make people happier, but the way people spend it can affect their happiness.

The Importance of Motives

So should we give in order to experience these benefits? No, there is evidence that nobody can reap the personal rewards that generous practices tend to produce by going through the motions of generosity simply in order to reap those desired rewards (Smith and Davidson, 2014, p. 7).

There are many different reasons to volunteer. Some of these reasons are more focused on others' needs, such as wanting to help others or joining in with loved ones on causes that are important to them. Others are more focused on how one might personally benefit from helping, such as learning new things, feeling better about oneself, escaping one's troubles, and helping to promote one's career.

One study examined whether the motives of 4,085 Australian volunteers were associated with a number of well-being indicators. The researchers found that people who volunteered for other-oriented reasons had higher self-esteem, psychological well-being, and self-efficacy, which is a sense of oneself as competent (Stukas, et. al., 2014). These other-oriented volunteers also felt more socially connected. People with the more self-oriented motives of escaping their troubles or promoting their career scored lower on these well-being indicators. One potential personal benefit of volunteering is learning new things, and in this study, having this motive was associated with better well-being.

One of our studies used the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study to examine whether motives for volunteering among a sample of 3,376 older adults predicted their risk of dying four years later. We found that older adults who volunteered for reasons related to others' needs had a lower chance of dying four years later (Konrath, et. al., 2102). Those who said that they volunteered because they could personally benefit had a slightly higher chance of dying four years later. In our study we statistically controlled for a number of different potential explanations for these results, such as their previous mental and physical health and their socioeconomic status. So we know that these results are not because other-oriented volunteers were healthier or richer than more self-oriented volunteers.

When it comes to the reasons that people choose to donate money, there is much less research. So far, scholars have identified several reasons for making donations, without examining the implications for health and well-being. Similar to volunteering, many people donate money because they are aware of the need and they care about the recipients. They also donate because they trust that organizations will use their money appropriately and productively. There are also a number of less prosocial motives for giving: to avoid being embarrassed when publicly asked to donate or to fit in with others, to gain power or recognition for their gifts, to enjoy tax incentives for giving, to avoid feeling guilty, or to feel good about themselves. One additional major reason that people give is simply because they are asked. Studies find that the vast majority of charitable donations (between 85-86%) come after being directly asked to give.

Based on the findings that other-oriented motives for volunteering are better for health and well-being, it is likely that other-oriented motives for charitable donations are associated with similar benefits. However, future research will provide more insight on this question.

Maximizing the joy of giving

Besides having other-focused motives, there are a number of practices that seem to maximize the joy of giving.

First, the social aspects of giving seem to contribute to their happiness. For example, when scholars examined a set of 37 studies on the relationship between volunteering and well-being, they found that volunteering was associated with double the amount of happiness when the volunteering activities involved directly interacting with others, versus a more indirect type of helping (Wheeler, Gorey and Greenblatt, 1998). There are no known studies that examine similar questions with respect to charitable donations, but I would expect that giving in person (e.g. directly to a fundraiser or at a charity event) would make people happier than giving in other ways (e.g. mail, online, automatic payroll deductions).

Next, there are specific ways to give that can maximize the joy of giving. Framing the giving instruction as more concrete (e.g. make someone smile) instead of more abstract (e.g. make someone happy) increases the happiness of giving to others (Rudd, Aaker, and Norton, 2014). So, fundraisers should consider designing their donation appeals to elicit simple concrete behaviors, rather than higher level conceptual ones.

Giving in a variety of different ways and to different types of people also makes people happier than giving the same way and to the same people over and over again (Tkach, 2005). This suggests that, just like a healthy diet of food, a healthy giving diet should involve variety to avoid the acts becoming routine. Since some of the joy of giving comes from its novelty, fundraisers should think about how to encourage a variety of giving experiences among their constituents.

At times, it is not even necessary to actually give in order to experience the joy of giving! As in the case of motives, the psychological aspects of giving and donating are at least as important as the behaviors themselves. For example, simply counting the number of kind acts that one performs can make people happier (Otake, et. al., 2006). People who became more aware of their kind acts by counting them ended up feeling happier and more grateful compared to control participants. Altruistic attitudes also matter, such as saying that you enjoy helping others, or that you try to help even if others can't return the favor. In fact, altruistic attitudes at one time point had a larger independent effect on positive emotions than prosocial behaviors such as volunteering for a nonprofit organization or helping friends (Kahana, et. al., 2013). It is the thought that counts – being ready to serve and help matters, even if actual opportunities for helping do not present themselves.

Why is giving good for people?

Why is giving good for people's health? The ultimate why, in terms of why as a species we should find giving so rewarding, is that we are hard-wired for face-to-face contact that includes lots of mutual touch, eye contact, and smiles. Such interactions activate a complex bonding and stress regulation system that originates in parental caregiving, but generalizes beyond infants and to any distressed person (Preston, 2013). Ultimately, I believe that giving is good for us because when giving to others we are acting in accordance with our deepest nature.

But we can also analyze specific processes that happen in the moment when someone is giving, versus over time, after repeated practices of giving.

The immediate act of giving causes people to shift their focus of attention away from themselves and toward others. Focusing on the self can be quite toxic for mental health, while shifting one's focus of attention toward others can reduce anxiety and stress. Indeed, one study found that volunteering helped people to take their mind off their work during leisure time, and create new psychosocial resources to cope with stress (Mojza, et. al., 2010). Other leisure activities did not seem to have such benefits.

When giving people also tend to make comparative judgements about the situations of the recipients versus their own situations. Giving helps people to feel more gratitude for their own situations; "It could be worse." In one study that provides some initial support for this idea, people felt higher life satisfaction after giving to a charity that helped poor people than after giving to a charity that did not involve a downward comparison (Huang, 2014). However, this might be because giving to people directly is more pleasurable than more indirect giving.

As reviewed in this chapter, giving leads to more positive emotion in the moment, which helps to repair and restore one's mind and body from stressors. Positive emotion in itself predicts healthier and longer lives (Danner, Snowdon, and Friesen, 2001), so the joy of giving in itself may be a critical explanation for the physical health benefits of giving.

It is also worth underscoring the increases in physical activity that come with giving. For example, one study found that volunteers had a 31% increase in the distance walked each week, while control group participants declined 9% (Freid, et. al., 2004). Volunteering means getting off the couch and out of the house, and physical activity in itself is associated with better health and well-being and greater longevity.

Next, what happens after repeated giving interactions? Over time, giving makes people see that they have an important role to play in relieving others' suffering and making others happy. In other words, giving increases givers' sense of meaning and purpose in life (Musick and Wilson, 2003). Studies have found that people with a defined sense of purpose in life live longer and healthier lives than those with a less defined sense of purpose (Reker, Peacock and Wong, 1987).

Over repeated giving interactions, people start to meet like-minded others, feel more connected and less lonely, and increase their sense that others are there for them. In themselves, social connections predict healthier and longer lives. Repeated giving interactions are like deposits into a resilience bank account with compound interest. All of the potential explanations of why giving is associated with better health have something in common: they help people to deal with unanticipated negative life events and stressors. For example, studies have found that volunteering helps people to deal with changing roles and provides a sense of stability in unstable situations (Schwartz and Sendor, 1999; Meier and Stutzer, 2008). Giving to others functions as a social insurance policy, that if something bad happens, everything will be okay. Again, this is as long as the giving comes from a true spirit of generosity.

Is there such thing as giving too much?

Of course, it is possible for people to give beyond their means in terms of time and money, but I suspect that joyful givers know their limits.

When it comes to volunteering, studies have found that volunteering between 1 and 15 hours per week is associated with optimal health and well-being (Choi and Kim, 2011). Volunteering less than 1 hour per week is not beneficial, perhaps because this represents more intermittent volunteering, rather than regular weekly practices of giving.

As for charitable donations, one recent study found that Americans who donated 10% of their money were happier than those who donated less than 10% of their money (Smith and Davidson, 2014). The authors used 10% as a cutoff point since some religions encourage this amount of giving, however, they did not explore whether there a point at which giving was no longer associated with increased happiness. This could be because it was highly unusual for people to give this much away—only 2.7% of their participants did so. Another study found that the more money people gave, the higher their psychological well-being, and the authors did not find any cutoff point after which there were fewer benefits of giving (Choi and Kim, 2011). In fact, spending money on others is associated with increased well-being even in relatively poor countries (Aknin, et. al., 2013). However, it seems reasonable to assume that at a certain point, donating to charity might be bad for well-being, especially if people give to the point that they cannot take care of their own needs. Such over-giving is rare, and the more common problem is under-giving.

In general, it seems best for people to give from their surplus resources. For example, it might be better for lower income people to give their time than their money, since researchers have found that volunteering predicts higher happiness in low income people compared to high income people (Dulin, et. al., 2012). This might have to do with available resources of lower income people, who may have more surplus time than money.

Finally, when it comes to other acts of kindness, the more people give, and the more they make giving part of the practice of their everyday life, the more joy they experience from giving. For example, performing nine acts of kindness per week leads to more happiness than performing three acts per week (Tkach, 2005).

A daily dose of Vitamin G

Doctors regularly recommend that their patients make healthy eating choices, get lots of physical activity, and refrain from smoking. Yet at this point in time, it is hard to imagine that doctors would recommend a daily dose of Vitamin G (giving) to their patients. However, as more research on the links between altruism and health emerges, perhaps one day giving will be included in the list of healthy lifestyle behaviors (Hirschfelder and Reilly, 2007). Until then, development professionals play an important role in disseminating this information. By helping others to give by keeping up with the latest research on the health effects of givers, fundraisers are giving as much (or even more) than the donors that they cultivate.

Conclusion: A Recipe for Giving

It seems appropriate for a chapter title that refers to a famous cookbook to end with a recipe for giving. These measurements and ingredients are taken from previous research summarized in this chapter, but expert givers (like expert cooks), will make changes to suit their lifestyle and preferences. These are just guidelines, and there is still a lot left to know about how to optimize giving for our health and well-being.

When using this recipe givers must understand that there are many ways to be generous. Overall, I recommend creating practices of generosity since research finds that such regular practices are what seem to drive the psychological benefits of giving (Smith & Davidson, 2014). Whether you are a marathon runner, a concert pianist, or learning a new language, the best way to become an expert at a new skill is to break it down into smaller repeated pieces that can be practiced regularly, typically at least once per day. The recipe for Giving Goulash is as follows:

Slice and dice your schedule and budget so that you can give your time and money to nonprofit organizations. This will create regular times to practice and prioritize generosity.

Add specific concrete giving goals (e.g. make someone smile, feed a child).

Reduce your focus on the self, and increase your focus on others when giving. Let your self-focus simply evaporate as others' needs become central.

Measure your kind acts: pay attention to the ways that you give to others, whether it's opening a door for a stranger, letting a neighbor borrow a tool, listening to others, or volunteering and donating to charities.

Add a pinch of gratitude for the resources that allow you to give.

Mix with social interactions: give together with other people to maximize the benefits.

Season with a willingness to be the recipient of others' giving. Allowing others to give to you not only benefits them in all the ways described in this chapter, but helps you to avoid compassion fatigue.

Variety is the spice of giving. Give in many different ways to maximize flavor.

Simmer the different ingredients of giving in oxytocin, the bonding and stress regulation hormone.

Be ready to serve whenever needed, with a caring attitude toward others.

Savor the pleasure of making a difference in others' lives.

Repeat often, whenever you see someone hungry for kindness.

Discussion Questions

Compare and contrast the effects of giving money versus giving time on givers' health and well-being. Is there more research on one area or the other? Is giving money or time better for health and well-being?

Do you think that there some people or circumstances for which giving might be harmful, rather than helpful, for health or well-being?

If someone feels good after donating their money or time to a charitable organization, does this mean that their actions were not altruistic?

How can fundraisers apply these findings to their own professional practice?

How might this information be used to help them feel more satisfaction with their jobs?

How might this information be used to help them achieve their fundraising goals?

Key References/Further Reading

Aknin, L., Barrington-Leigh, C. P., Dunn, E. W., Helliwell, J. F., Biswas-Diener, R., Kemeza, I., Norton, M. I. (2013). Prosocial Spending and Well-Being: Cross-Cultural Evidence for a Psychological Universal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 635-652.

Anderson, N. D., Damianakis, T., Kröger, E., Wagner, L. M., Dawson, D. R., Binns, M. A., Cook, S. L. (2014). The benefits associated with volunteering among seniors: A critical review and recommendations for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1505-1533.

Bekkers, R., Konrath, S., & Smith, D. H. (2014, in press). Conducive biological influences (genetics, physiology, neurology, and health). In D. H. Smith, R. Stebbins & J. Grotz (Eds.), The Palgrave Research Handbook of Volunteering and Nonprofit Associations.

Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2010). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

Calvo, R., Zheng, Y., Kumar, S., Olgiati, A., & Berkman, L. (2012). Well-being and social capital on planet earth: cross-national evidence from 142 countries. PLoS ONE, 7(8), e42793.

Dunn, E., & Norton, M. (2013). Happy money: The science of smarter spending. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Fried, L., Carlson, M., Freedman, M., Frick, K., Glass, T., Hill, J., Zeger, S. (2004). A social model for health promotion for an aging population: Initial evidence on the experience corps model. Journal of Urban Health, 81(1), 64-78. doi: 10.1093/jurban/jth094

Harbaugh, W. T., Mayr, U., & Burghart, D. R. (2007). Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science, 316(5831), 1622-1625.

Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review. PLoS Med, 7(7), e1000316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316

House, J., Landis, K., & Umberson, D. (1988). Social relationships and health. Science, 241(4865), 540-545. doi: 10.1126/science.3399889

Kumar, S., Calvo, R., Avendano, M., Sivaramakrishnan, K., & Berkman, L. F. (2012). Social support, volunteering and health around the world: Cross-national evidence from 139 countries. Social Science & Medicine, 74(5), 696-706.

Konrath, S. (2014). The power of philanthropy and volunteering. In F. Huppert & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide. Interventions and Policies to Enhance Wellbeing (Vol. VI, pp. 387-426). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Konrath, S., & Brown, S. L. (2012). The effects of giving on givers. In N. Roberts & M. Newman (Eds.), Handbook of Health and Social Relationships: American Psychological Association.

Leary, M. R. (2004). The curse of the self: Self-awareness, egotism, and the quality of human life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Moll, J., Krueger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., de Oliveira-Souza, R., & Grafman, J. (2006). Human fronto–mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(42), 15623-15628.

Okun, M. A., Yeung, E., & Brown, S. (2013). Volunteering by Older Adults and Risk of Mortality: A Meta-Analysis. Psychology and Aging 28(2), 564-577.

Schreier, H. M., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Chen, E. (2013). Effect of Volunteering on Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease in Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA pediatrics, 167(4),