黑料福利社

• A recent 黑料福利社 poll of potential donors found
  • nearly half agreed that it鈥檚 a good idea to give $1000 to families in extreme poverty
  • but only 13% knew about 黑料福利社鈥檚 work 
  • and giving cash was the least popular way address extreme poverty
• We could deliver more cash to people in need if more high-earners were
  • aware of the opportunity to give through 黑料福利社
  • disabused of the common myths around direct cash aid

In May, 黑料福利社 ran a panel survey of 750 Americans who fit our common donor profile to better understand their familiarity and sentiments around direct cash. Below, we outline the most relevant findings and how they’ll inform our communications and marketing strategy. 

Note: we’ll continue to update this blog as we further analyze the survey results

Knowing what potential donors think about direct cash aid will improve our fundraising

黑料福利社 began building a dedicated fundraising team 7 years ago, and since then we鈥檝e grown 

• from 13k to 25k annual donations
• from raising $49M a year to $184M a year
• from the press asking 鈥溾�� to declaring 鈥�A revolution in helping Africa鈥檚 poor: Cash with no strings attached鈥�

However, this success does not capture the potential of how much more we could be delivering to people in need. So to better understand the impression and awareness potential donors have about our work, we ran a survey. Below we break down the major takeaways. 

Our survey of high-earners found direct cash aid was the least popular way to help people in extreme poverty

80% of randomly selected respondents were at least somewhat aware of the issue of extreme poverty (Q1).

When asked what types of aid would most help those in extreme poverty, 鈥渄irect cash assistance鈥� was the least popular. When asked how helpful 9 types of aid would be, direct cash came in last. (Q2)

Similarly, when asked to rank 9 types of aid they鈥檇 be likely to donate to, only 16% of respondents put direct cash in the top 3 spots and 56% put it in the bottom 3 spots. (Q3)

黑料福利社 half of respondents thought 黑料福利社鈥檚 model was a good idea

46% agreed that 鈥渋t鈥檚 a good idea to give $1,000 to families living in extreme poverty with no strings attached,鈥� about half of which 鈥渟trongly agreed.鈥� (Q4)

31% of all respondents disagreed that 黑料福利社’s model was a good idea and 24% were neutral.

The most compelling benefit of direct giving was that it lets recipients meet their basic needs

Of those who agreed 黑料福利社鈥檚 model was a good idea, the most common unprompted benefits mentioned were that giving cash鈥� 

• helps meet basic needs (food, shelter, healthcare) 鈥� 58%
  • Ex. 鈥渃lean water, shelter, clothing, education, medical care.鈥�
• can be life-changing (long-term benefit, escaping poverty) 鈥� 12%
  • Ex. 鈥淔amilies can invest the funds into long-term solutions to their situations鈥�
• helps because recipients know best what their needs are 鈥� 11%
  • Ex. 鈥淚t lets recipients define their own needs.鈥�
• grants agency and dignity 鈥� 6%
  • Ex. 鈥淚t gives them autonomy and dignity.鈥�
• helps the local economy 鈥� 2%
  • Ex. 鈥淪tronger economy, decreased social blight, increased empowerment and responsible citizenship鈥�
• is direct with no middlemen 鈥� 2%
  • Ex. 鈥淭he money goes there directly鈥�

The biggest concerns about direct giving were unwise spending, the need for training, and a lack of lasting impact

Of those who did not agree 黑料福利社鈥檚 model was a good idea (54%), the most common unprompted concerns mentioned were that cash recipients…

• may spend the money unwisely 鈥� 30%
  • Ex. 鈥淎nyone could spend that money in a way that is not in their best interest. They could even do something illegal.鈥�
• need something else (training, education, resources) 鈥� 29%
  • Ex. 鈥淔amilies  living in extreme poverty would lack the education or financial knowledge to use it wisely鈥� 
  • Ex. 鈥淭hey wouldn’t know what to do with it. It would be more beneficial to provide them with wells, seeds, farming equipment, clinics etc鈥�
• won鈥檛 be able to make lasting improvements 鈥� 19%
  • Ex. 鈥�$1000 to a family doesn’t sound like it will get anything done. It will help just for that very short time.鈥�
• should have rules on how they can spend their money (11%).
  • Ex. 鈥淭here need to be stipulations on how its used鈥�

Even those who 鈥渟omewhat agreed鈥� 黑料福利社鈥檚 model was a good idea (25%) shared these concerns, saying they felt recipients…

• need something else (training, education, resources) 鈥� 14%
• may spend the money unwisely 鈥� 10%
• should have rules on how they can spend their money 鈥� 9%
• won鈥檛 be able to make lasting improvement 鈥� 7%

Direct giving options like 黑料福利社 are not widely known

When asked unprompted to list nonprofits that help people in extreme poverty, no one listed 黑料福利社 or any other direct giving organization. The most common answers were UNICEF (22%), Red Cross (17%), and 鈥榗an鈥檛 think of any鈥� (15%). (Q5)

Only 13% of respondents were familiar enough with 黑料福利社 to correctly say what we do unprompted, and 1 in 5 of those said they had given through 黑料福利社 before.

More people in poverty will be helped if we can make direct cash more widely known and disabuse more people of these concerns

The more high-income people favor direct giving, the more people in poverty will receive cash. Rather than being satisfied we鈥檝e convinced some people, we should be striving to convince many more people.  Based on this survey, there are three clear ways to do this. 

Address the major common concerns about direct giving, not the minor ones 

We鈥檒l orient more of our communications and marketing to address these most common concerns, that recipients…

• may spend the money unwisely 鈥� 30%
• need something else (training, education, resources) 鈥� 29%
• won鈥檛 be able to make lasting improvements 鈥� 19%
• should have rules on how they can spend their money 鈥� 11%

We鈥檒l spend less time focusing on the least common concerns, that recipients may…

• grow dependent or should work for the money 鈥� 6%
• not receive the money due to fraud or theft 鈥� 5%
• not have access to resources or opportunities to spend on 鈥� 3%
• be put at risk by receiving a large sum of money 鈥� 2% 

We have a webpage on mythbusting that we鈥檒l be updating based on these results 鈥� though are happy to report it helped unconditional cash make the big screen鈫�   

Emphasize the diverse benefits of direct giving

Cash supporters clearly understand it will help people meet their basic needs as 58% mentioned it as a benefit. However, we can devote more of our marketing to the potentially overlooked benefits 鈥� that direct cash鈥�

• can be life-changing (long-term benefit, escaping poverty) 鈥� 12%
• helps because recipients know best what their needs are 鈥� 11%
• grants agency and dignity 鈥� 6%
• helps the local economy 鈥� 2%
• is direct with no middlemen 鈥� 2%

Grow awareness both with our core audience and new audiences

Our survey found 18% of people who knew what 黑料福利社 does had donated. While self-reported and not vastly representative, it shows how important it is for more people to learn about our model. With an average one-time donation of $1,450, spreading the word could transform many more lives. We鈥檙e pursuing more mass-audience engagements with , , and . We鈥檙e also helping you share word-of-mouth by and tips. 

If you have ideas on what this survey data suggest we should be trying next, email us at info@givedirectly.org.

---

Appendix 1: full responses to select questions

Q1: “Extreme poverty鈥� is defined as living on less than $2.15 per day. Today, 700 million people live in extreme poverty, most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. How aware were you of this information before this survey?

Not at all aware	19% (142)
A little aware	27% (205)
Somewhat aware	30% (225)
Very aware	17% (125)
Extremely aware	7% (53)

Q2: How helpful do you think the following types of aid would be for people living in extreme poverty?

Q3: If you were to donate to help people living in extreme poverty, which type of aid would you support? Rank this list from most interested in supporting at the top to least interested in supporting at the bottom.

Q4: How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement: 鈥淚t鈥檚 a good idea to give $1,000 to families living in extreme poverty with no strings attached.鈥�

Strongly disagree	13.5% (103)
Somewhat disagree	17% (127)
Neither agree nor disagree	23.5% (178)
Somewhat agree	24.5% (184)
Strongly agree	21% (158)

Q5: Which nonprofits or charities come to mind that help people living in extreme poverty? List as many as you can.

1. UNICEF – 22%
2. Red Cross – 17%
3. None / cannot think of any – 15%
4. Save the Children – 7%
5. Care – 6%
6. Salvation Army – 6%
7. Oxfam – 6%
8. World Vision – 4%
9. Feed the Children – 4%
10. United Way – 3%
11. Doctors Without Borders – 3%
12. Feeding America – 3%
13. Habitat for Humanity – 2%
14. Catholic Charities – 2%
15. Gates Foundation – 1%

---

Appendix 2: survey information

Survey constraints

• 黑料福利社 used to survey potential donors, constraining the respondents to those who are…
  • living in major US metro areas
  • employed, earning over $100k a year
  • over 21 years old with a 4 year degree
• This is based on the common profile of existing 黑料福利社 donors who…
  • most commonly live in US metro areas 
  • give an average one-time gift of $1,450 (11x higher than the average for international nonprofits)

Panel survey limitations

• There are clear limitations to this type of panel survey:
  • Details like donation behavior or household income are self-reported, so could be wrong
  • It’s a self-selecting group of people interested in taking surveys for money
• We chose this survey design given budget constraints. A randomly sampled, mixed-methodology approach is simply prohibitively expensive. Panel research balances accuracy with expense.
• It鈥檚 important to not draw overly precise conclusions from this data set. Relative weights are likely to be found across repeated surveying, but precise statistics on, say, name recognition could vary significantly.

Demographic breakdown of the 750 survey respondents (AYTM’s choosing)

• Donation behavior
  • 馃捀80% have donated to some charity or nonprofit in past 3 years. 
  • Of those who have donated in the past 3 years,
    • 馃挵half gave over $1000+ in charitable giving last year.
    • 馃實half donated to a nonprofit working outside the U.S.
• Gender
  • 鈾傦笍M: 46% 
  • 鈾�锔廎: 54%
• Age
  • 馃��17% – 22-34 y.o. 
  • 馃懆鈥�57% – 35-54 y.o. 
  • 馃懆鈥嶐煢�27% – 55+ y.o.
• Political beliefs
  • 馃珡36% Strongly or somewhat liberal/left 
  • 馃悩32% Strongly or somewhat conservative/right 
  • 馃幆26% Center, neither liberal nor conservative 
  • 馃檯6% Apolitical 
• Household Income
  • $100-$199k – 76%
  • $200k+ – 24%
• Education
  • 馃帗53% – 4 year university
  • 馃帗馃帗28% – Graduate school 
  • 馃帗馃┖ 19% – Professional degree
• Race
  • White 74%
    • Hispanic origin 11% 
  • Asian-American 15%
  • Black / African-American 11%
  • Other 4%