Skip to main content
    Three volunteers working together on laptops outdoors during a community editing event in Chittagong
    Digital Fundraising

    How do you get started with digital fundraising?

    November 1, 20269 min read
    Back to all articles

    Photo: Motiur Rahman Oni, Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 4.0. Cropped to 8:5 and resized. Documentary image, not an endorsement from an organisation we support.

    Jump to section (10)

    Start with three things you control: an email list people agreed to join, a donation page that works on a phone, and a reason to give monthly. Measure them against published benchmarks, then run one controlled test at a time. Paid advertising comes after these foundations, not before.

    Key Takeaways

    • 1Build measurement, the donation page and the email list before paying for traffic.
    • 2M+R reports 11% desktop and 8% mobile conversion on primary donation pages, so review the phone experience on its own.
    • 3FEP reports 18.9% of new donors gave again, so plan the second gift from the start.
    • 4Test one change at a time with random splits, a measure chosen in advance and enough gifts to judge.

    A charity with 3,000 email addresses will not fix its digital income by buying ads if its donation page loads slowly on a phone. The money leaks out at the page and in the weeks after the first gift.

    This article is the short version of our full Digital Fundraising Starter Guide, which adds a 90 day plan, a test log and the country rules for email consent. Here we cover the order of work and the first tests to run.

    Know the numbers you are measuring against

    M+R Benchmarks 2026
    Components · 4 parts

    Four reference points for online fundraising

    Select a component to focus on it

    1. $54 raised per 1,000 fundraising emails

    2. 11% desktop and 8% mobile conversion

    3. 27% of online revenue

    4. 37% of online revenue

    2025 activity at participating US nonprofits, in US dollars. Use them to find your weakest link, not as targets.

    Use this diagram with the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide (guide).

    Benchmarks tell you whether a result is unusual. They do not tell you what your charity should achieve. The M+R Benchmarks 2026 report, which covers 2025 activity at participating US nonprofits, gives a useful starting reference:

  1. Email: fundraising emails had a click-through rate of 0.59% and a response rate of 0.05%, and raised $54 for every 1,000 sent (M+R email chapter).
  2. Website: 1.6% of all website visitors made a donation. On a primary donation page, 11% of desktop visitors and 8% of mobile visitors completed a gift (M+R website chapter).
  3. Monthly giving: monthly gifts made up 27% of online revenue (M+R fundraising chapter).
  4. Timing: 37% of online revenue arrived in December (M+R fundraising chapter).
  5. These are US figures in US dollars, and your country, cause and list size will differ. A benchmark describes the organisations that took part; it is not a target you have to hit. Use them to spot the weakest link in your own numbers.

    Build the foundation before you buy traffic

    Order of work
    Layers · 4 layers

    Each layer makes the next one cheaper

    Select a layer to focus on it

    1. Gifts tracked by source, device and page

    2. Fast, clear and built for a phone

    3. The audience your charity owns

    4. Bought only once you can see what visitors do

    Our recommended sequence. Smaller teams finish the first two layers before starting the others.

    Use this diagram with the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide (guide).

    We recommend working in four layers, in this order. Each layer makes the next one cheaper.

    1. Measurement. Track donations by source, device and page. Without this, every later decision is a guess.

    2. The donation page. A page that converts well makes every visitor worth more, whichever way they arrived.

    3. The email list and welcome journey. Your list is the audience you own. Ads and social platforms can change their rules; your list stays with you.

    4. Paid and in-kind traffic. Only now does buying visitors make sense, because you can see what they do when they arrive.

    If you are a team of one or two, finish layers one and two before anything else. A $10 million organisation will run all four at once, but the order still applies to every new campaign.

    Email still does the heavy lifting

    M+R reports that email directly accounted for 11% of online revenue, and that participating nonprofits sent 31 fundraising emails per subscriber across the year (M+R email chapter). That figure counts only gifts traced straight to an email, so email's real influence is likely wider.

    Treat 31 as a description, not a sending target. What matters is revenue per subscriber across the year, measured alongside unsubscribes and complaints. A smaller charity that sends six appeals a year to an engaged list can outperform one that sends thirty to a cold one.

    Start with a welcome series for every new subscriber, a clear single ask in each appeal, and a plain-text thank-you that sounds like a person wrote it.

    Make the donation page work on a phone

    M+R website chapter
    Comparison · 2 approaches

    Where mobile visitors fall away

    Select a column to focus on it

    • 52% of website traffic
    • 43% of donation transactions
    • 28% of revenue
    • $88 average gift
    • 11% donation page conversion
    • Against 8% on mobile
    • $168 average gift
    • Review each experience separately
    Descriptive figures. They do not prove the device causes the difference.

    Use this diagram with the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide (guide).

    Mobile users made up 52% of website traffic in the M+R data, but only 43% of donation transactions and 28% of revenue. The average desktop gift was $168, against $88 on mobile (M+R website chapter).

    That gap does not prove the phone causes smaller gifts. People may browse on a phone and give later on a laptop. It does mean the mobile page deserves its own review.

    Open your donation page on your own phone, on mobile data, and time how long it takes to give $25.

    The same report found 79% of participating nonprofits accepted PayPal, 58% accepted Google Pay and 57% accepted Apple Pay (M+R website chapter). If you offer none of these, adding one is a sensible test.

    Plan the second gift and the monthly ask

    The Fundraising Effectiveness Project reports that only 18.9% of donors who were new in 2024 gave again in 2025, compared with 59.3% of repeat donors. Most new donors are lost before their second gift.

    This is why follow-up needs to be planned alongside the work of recruiting donors. A planned sequence of thank-you, impact update and second invitation gives each new donor a reason to stay. A monthly giving option, offered clearly but never forced, gives committed supporters an easy way to keep giving. Our monthly giving launch plan covers the operating details.

    What published donation tests show

    NextAfter experiments
    Components · 4 parts

    Four published tests worth repeating

    Select a component to focus on it

    1. Care Net: conversion 26.1% to 54.1%

    2. CaringBridge: conversion 3.3% to 7.4%

    3. Focus on the Family: recurring conversion up 24%

    4. NBCF: click rate 0.19% to 0.72%

    Results from single-organisation randomised tests run between 2016 and 2020. Confirm each with your own donors.

    Use this diagram with the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide (guide).

    NextAfter’s fundraising experiment library, a US fundraising research lab, publishes the results of randomised tests run with charities. Four are directly relevant to a charity starting out, and each shows how much a small piece of friction can cost. All four were run between 2016 and 2020, so treat them as ideas to retest rather than current benchmarks.

  6. Fewer fields on the form (2020). Care Net removed three optional elements from its main donation form: a comments box, an option to cover the card fee and an option to give on behalf of someone. Conversion rose from 26.1% to 54.1%, a 107% relative increase at 99.3% confidence (NextAfter experiment #32781). The test had only 83 visitors, so treat it as a strong hint, not a rule.
  7. An open amount field (2017). On CaringBridge's main donation page, replacing a set of six suggested gift buttons with an open field and a $10 minimum raised conversion from 3.3% to 7.4% across 785 visitors, with no valid change in average gift (NextAfter experiment #6700). The same six-button array had beaten a three-button array in an earlier test, which shows why results do not transfer automatically between pages.
  8. A monthly prompt at the moment of giving (2018). Focus on the Family had already tested a pop-up on its main donation page. It appeared after a donor clicked to give and offered to turn the gift into a monthly one, at 60% of the original amount (NextAfter experiment #6147). NextAfter then rolled it out across every donation page on the site. Recurring donor conversion rose from 0.50% to 0.62%, a 24% relative increase, across more than 86,000 visitors. NextAfter reports that 16% of all recurring gifts came through the pop-up, and that it did not significantly change the likelihood of giving (NextAfter experiment #6147).
  9. A first name in the email (2016). The National Breast Cancer Foundation split a post-campaign email between a personalised and an unpersonalised version. The click rate rose from 0.19% to 0.72% across 29,389 recipients. That result persuaded the charity to start collecting first and last names on its sign-up forms (NextAfter experiment #2759).
  10. Each result comes from one organisation's audience, page and season. Use them to choose what to test first, then confirm the effect with your own donors.

    Run one controlled test at a time

    Testing discipline
    Cycle · 4 stages

    One change, one measure, one decision

    Select a stage to follow the loop

    1. Name one change and why it should help.

    2. Assign people to each version at random.

    3. Choose revenue per person before you start.

    4. Keep, drop or retest once enough gifts arrive.

    Keep a log of every test, including the ones that lost.

    Use this diagram with the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide (guide).

    For a useful test, assign people to groups at random and decide what you will measure in advance. Wait for enough gifts before judging the result. With a small list, run fewer, bigger tests. Changing the button colour on a page that receives 40 gifts a month will not produce a reliable answer.

    The best known field experiment in charitable giving is a useful model. Dean Karlan and John List sent direct mail appeals to more than 50,000 prior donors. A matching offer raised revenue per letter by 19% and the likelihood of giving by 22%.

    But a 2:1 or 3:1 match did no better than 1:1 (Karlan and List, NBER working paper; American Economic Review). That was a direct mail study. Treat it as a hypothesis worth testing in your own emails, not a promise.

    Good first tests for most charities:

  11. A genuine 1:1 match against the same appeal with no match, measured as revenue per email sent (Karlan and List).
  12. A clearer single call to action in your appeal emails, measured as donations per email delivered.
  13. A mobile-first donation page against your current page, for phone visitors only.
  14. Removing optional form fields such as comments or tribute options, measured as donation page conversion (NextAfter experiment #32781).
  15. A monthly prompt after the donor clicks to give, measured as recurring donor conversion (NextAfter experiment #6147).
  16. A clear monthly option on the donation page, measured as revenue per visitor over six to twelve months.
  17. A planned welcome journey against your current one, measured as the second-gift rate within a year.
  18. Email law differs by country, and the rules for charities are not the same as for businesses.

  19. United Kingdom: a charitable purposes soft opt-in came into force on 5 February 2026. It lets registered charities email people who supported or expressed interest in their work, if they offered a simple opt-out when collecting the details and in every message. It does not cover data collected before that date or bought lists (Fundraising Regulator).
  20. Canada: the Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations exempt messages sent by or for a registered charity whose primary purpose is raising funds for the charity from CASL's consent and unsubscribe requirements (SOR/2013-221, section 3(g)). Messages that mainly sell something, such as event tickets, may not qualify.
  21. United States: CAN-SPAM covers commercial messages. Where it applies, you must use honest subject lines, include a postal address and honour opt-outs within 10 business days (FTC compliance guide).
  22. Australia: the ACMA expects senders of marketing messages to have consent, identify themselves and make it easy to unsubscribe (ACMA).
  23. Whatever the law allows, a working unsubscribe link and a record of how each person joined your list protect your reputation. Check the details for your situation with a qualified adviser in your jurisdiction.

    Your homework

    Digital fundraising grows from a few owned foundations: measurement, a page that works on a phone, an email list and a planned second gift. Compare your numbers with the benchmarks above, fix the weakest link, then test one change at a time. Give your team these assignments:

    1. This week: Pull last year's online gifts by device and source, and calculate your mobile donation page conversion rate alongside the desktop rate.

    2. Within 30 days: Write or rewrite a three-email welcome series for new donors, ending with a second invitation to give.

    3. Within 90 days: Run one randomised test from the list above, decide the measure before you start, and record the result in the test log in the Digital Fundraising Starter Guide.

    These timings are our suggested working arrangements, not research benchmarks.

    Resources

    Put this guide into practice

    Enter your name and email to get the printable article or a matching template immediately.

    Evidence

    Every statistic and study referenced above links to its primary source. Each entry has a stable anchor, so citations stay consistent over time.

    1. 1
      M+R Benchmarks 2026, email messaging chapter · mrbenchmarks.com

      Click-through, response, revenue per 1,000 emails, email share of online revenue and sending volume. Accessed November 1, 2026.

    2. 2
      M+R Benchmarks 2026, fundraising chapter · mrbenchmarks.com

      Monthly giving share of online revenue and December share.

    3. 3
      M+R Benchmarks 2026, website performance chapter · mrbenchmarks.com

      Site and donation page conversion, device mix, average gifts and payment options.

    4. 4
      Fundraising Effectiveness Project, 2025 Q4 retention by donor type · publications.fepreports.org

      New and repeat donor retention.

    5. 5
    6. 6
      Karlan and List, American Economic Review 97(5), 2007 · aeaweb.org

      Published version of the matching study.

    7. 7
    8. 8
      NextAfter, experiment #6700: an open field on a donation form · nextafter.com

      CaringBridge gift array test.

    9. 9
      NextAfter, experiment #6147: a recurring gift pop-out on all donation pages · nextafter.com

      Focus on the Family monthly prompt test.

    10. 10
      NextAfter, experiment #2759: first name personalisation and email engagement · nextafter.com

      National Breast Cancer Foundation email test.

    11. 11
      Fundraising Regulator, charitable purposes soft opt-in · fundraisingregulator.org.uk

      UK rules from 5 February 2026.

    12. 12
      Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations, SOR/2013-221 · laws-lois.justice.gc.ca

      Canadian registered charity exemption.

    13. 13
      FTC, CAN-SPAM Act compliance guide · ftc.gov

      US commercial email requirements.

    14. 14
      ACMA, avoid sending spam · acma.gov.au

      Australian consent, identification and unsubscribe expectations.

    Related questions

    About the author and our standards

    Amir Massoumian, Technologist at SA Philanthropy

    Amir Massoumian

    Technologist, SA Philanthropy

    Amir Massoumian is a technologist at SA Philanthropy. He builds the data, automation, and AI tooling that fundraising teams use day to day, and tests where those tools help and where they quietly cost trust.

    This article was reviewed by the SA Philanthropy editorial team before publication. We source every statistic, name every author, date every update, and correct errors on request. Read our editorial policy.

    Share this article

    Get the biweekly blog digest

    Practical fundraising guidance, every other Tuesday. Unsubscribe anytime.