Donor Acquisition Innovations that Produce Measurable Results Presented by: Reneé Brueckner Operations Director Association of the Miraculous Medal Kris Matthews President MEGA, Inc. Rick Witt Senior Vice President Client Services, Wiland

Introduction/Agenda What This Means To You Where We Were What We Did Internal Processes List Strategy Coop Involvement Where We Are Now What This Means To You

Where We Were About Association of the Miraculous Medal Vision, Mission, Values History Active file dropped from 230,000 in 2008 to 175,000 in 2012 Donations down from $8 million to $6.7 million Expenses increasing led to deficit spending 2011: hired consultant to determine viability, suggest changes Reorganization and changes to appeal process Measurable improvement to donor acquisition

What We Did: Creative Process Changes Enlarged Creative Team Advantages: Able to make recommendations based on prior experience Evaluate performance, reply envelope and form processing, potential member reaction

What We Did: Creative Process Changes Creative Team Focus In every creative team meeting, we made sure to ask two questions… How does this tie into our mission? Will our donors value this?

What We Did: Creative Process Changes Created Focus Group Women who are representative of membership Advantages: Able to review envelope and card samples Compare to previous appeals Helps the Creative team select best options

What We Did: Creative Process Changes Worked with Outside Vendors for Acquisition Packages Advantages: New ideas, based on experience with other organizations Encouraged us to take chances Backup in case internal equipment fails

What We Did: Creative Process Changes Logged and Analyzed Comments about Appeals Analyzed both good and bad comments from members Changed Appeals to Full Four-Color Packages Response rate increased from 2.77% to 4.67%. Net income also increased dramatically Changed reply back to 2-color without affecting response New Four-Color Package Original Two-Color Package

What We Did: Rental/Exchange Process Exchanged Active (0-12 month) Names Prior to 2012, only renting/exchanging inactive names Universe became smaller and less lucrative Not renting/exchanging active names was hurting us Participated in Cooperative Database Provide file and activity records, updated every two weeks Names from co-op available at lower cost Produce better results and higher LTV Response models had excellent performance

What We Did: Effective Data Usage Mine Inactive Donors Based on Co-op models Determine most likely to respond Participate in Multiple Coops Increased data Use our current file more effectively Hired Data Analyst Analyze LTV for various rental lists Help make better decisions for mail plan

List Interaction Strategy Introduction to MEGA, Inc. List Interaction Strategy Challenge: Improve Direct Mail Acquisition Results Find a mix of rental, exchange and coop files that would once again provide AMM with a healthy direct mail acquisition program

List Interaction Strategy Renting Donor Files 2009-2011: AMM only rented names List costs rising Donor file universes shrinking Results declining AMM did not have their 0-18 month active donors on the market Only had access to other organizations’ former donors or paid high fees to rent active names Rental costs from $90/M to $125/M, which included selection fees, dollar, recency and non-reciprocal fees

List Interaction Strategy August 2015 Medal Results by List

List Interaction Strategy Exchanging Donor Files 2012: AMM made the decision to allow Exchanges with the Active Donor file MEGA put names on the market and started requesting Exchange partners for their acquisition appeals Universe of donors available to AMM for acquisition mail campaigns increased by over 1MM names List costs decreased by 80% List cost for exchanges can be $14/M to $20/M) Response rates went up Cost to acquire new donors went down

List Interaction Strategy Leveraging Coops 2013: Introduced AMM to Wiland Profile models built from their housefile donors Acquisition response models built from specific campaigns/packages Opened up a whole new universe of names that otherwise would have been missed Costs to rent were much lower than renting an organization’s donors from their file Duplication was much less than on exchange files

List Interaction Strategy Leveraging Coops (continued) Results from the coop files brought in a high percent of return and a higher average gift than most of the Exchange files in the mailing. Package specific response models are usually the best performing “lists” in our campaigns. Started testing into other coops to see if we could again tap into another new source of potential donors

List Interaction Strategy AMM Acquisition Performance by Calendar Year

List Interaction Strategy Results Lowered overall Cost/Donor or Cost to Acquire new donors Increased available universes for mailing Increased Acquisition quantities, therefore increasing AMM’s donor file By growing their donor file they were able to realize more net income for their program

Modeling Strategy: Ongoing and Iterative Introduction to Wiland and Cooperative Databases Evolving Strategy Delivered nine separate model options since September 2012 Different modeling methodologies focused on different desired results. Six different “response” type models, including four package-specific models focused on driving response rate. Started looking at options/applications for a multi-model solution to test against current continuation strategies.

Modeling Success: Acquisition and Lapsed Reactivation Modeled Prospect Names Consistently performing at or near the top of the mail plan, outperforming conventional rented lists both in terms of initial campaign metrics, and long-term value calculations and/or projections. Scored/Ranked Lapsed Names (37 – 60 months) Performing significantly better than house selects from the inactive (12 – 36 month) donor file. Names from the top rank of the model have delivered a response rate 4X that of the inactive file, with a slightly higher average gift.

Lapsed Reactivation Results Results for Inactive File (12 – 36 Months) for the same campaign = 1.5% response, $20.08 average gift

Where We Are Now For our 2017 Appeal schedule, we are planning to slightly increase rentals and do more data mining on our older inactives. Focus on LTV not only by list, but by individual mailing. Cost per new name acquired has decreased by 58% (from $11.68 to $4.95) Projecting 63,000 new names in 2016. Renewal rates continue to climb. Coop sourced names tend to drive higher response and superior LTV.

What Does This Mean for You? Summary/Key Takeaways – Items We Believe Made A Difference In Our Program Higher quantity and quality names due to decision to exchange actives Using Coops to rent better prospects at a lower cost, and to effectively mine inactive file Creative Process – new group with more staff inclusion Focus Group Leveraging outside vendors/partners for ideas and production on special packages

What Does This Mean for You? Recommended Action Items If not currently exchanging or renting active names, work with your board to make that policy change and begin process Work with consultative oriented list vendors/partners to make sure you are getting the best quality names Test the Coop market – try an initial one, and be open to expanding to using multiple it makes sense for you Work with your internal creative process, but be willing to accept help from outside vendors/partners Make sure to retain focus on you mission throughout the creative process

Questions? Thank you for your time! Reneé Brueckner Operations Director, Association of the Miraculous Medal rmbrueckner@amm.org Kris Matthews President, MEGA, Inc. kris@maryegranger.com Rick Witt Senior Vice President, Client Services, Wiland rwitt@wiland.com