Guest: Roger Craver, Craver, Mathews, and Smith
Host: James B. Hyatt, Web editor/writer for the Philanthropy Journal

Question: "The League of Women Voters of New Jersey will do an October direct mail campaign to recent donors to the National League (under $100). Do you have success stories or hints for such a scenario? Do donors who give to a national organization also tend to support their state - or local - levels? What level of return should we hope for?"

Craver: As a general rule, the donors to a national organization are also quite generous when it comes to support of the state and local affiliates. To achieve maximum success, understand what message and set of issue were used by the national organization to bring in these donors/members. And, what are the current messages they are sending to these donors?

The closer you match the issues that the national is communicating to its members - and, in turn, tailor these issues for local application - the better your direct mail will work.

There are no fixed rules on the level of return you can expect. One thing is virtually certain - the return on the list of members to the national organization will be higher than virtually any other list you can obtain.

From Virgil Huston, The Freedom Center:

Question: "Everything I've been reading indicates that the ability to accept credit cards over the Internet is very important. However, for a small, poorly funded non-profit, it is expensive. There are services that allow you to do it without having a merchant account, but they take as high as a 15% cut off the top. Any suggestions for how a small fry can get into accepting credit cards?"

Craver: The issue of credit cards on the Internet is generally thought of by most people as a "security issue." That's only part of the problem, or opportunity. What is really at issue when it comes to credit cards is whether a donor generally makes contributions using his or her credit card, or whether they make contributions through a check. Most donors in the U.S. still use the check, although the use of credit cards is increasing.

What is important is that you offer prospective donors alternative ways to give, both online and off-line. The fact is many people simply prefer to make their contributions the old-fashioned way - with a check through the Postal Service.

If you are going to be promoting the use of credit cards to your donors, the most effective way to deal with the credit card issue is to open a merchant account through your own office with your bank to process the credit card orders that come in from your Web site.

From Leslye Arsht:

Question: "If you are a really small nonprofit that has never done any kind of direct solicitation (we have gotten our funds by grants from foundations and corporations), but we now have access to some lists of people who know the group's leaders and would generally support the work of the group's leaders.

"What are the steps you recommend for deciding whether to use the lists for traditional direct mail or for electronic solicitation?

"What is the cost estimate for developing the right message, whether you use print or electronic means?"

Craver: One of the most difficult parts of effective direct mail is grafting the message to reflect the problem, the solution, and to motivate the donor to become part of that solution.

While the process demands sophistication, it need not be expensive.

In the example you use - the leader's list or list of friends - the message in this case should be a personal one from the leader to his friends, asking for their help and indicating why their help is deserved.

When it comes to the general public, of course, the message needs to be far more pointed and needs to effectively compete with other messages. There's no better way of learning about all this than by studying the communications (direct mail letters) of groups whose direct mail you know works.

There is a formula to direct mail and you need to follow it. The basic formula is that of American advertising - problem, solution ("Upset stomach? Take Pepto-Bismol." "Acid indigestion? Take Rolaids." "Life-Threatening disease? Support Charity's Program.").

Most organizations make the mistake of spending too much time on their financial need and not nearly enough time on the social problem they are trying to solve and the explicit solution for that problem. Money is simply one part of the solution; it is not the solution.

We have a saying at Craver, Mathews, Smith that "no one buys a Buick because GM needs the money." The fact is that people don't give money to a charity simply because you say you need money. People give money to help make a difference, to help solve problems.

Your solicitations, whether they are electronic or paper and postage, need to focus on the problem/solution and how the individual can make a difference.

From Sean Bailey, Philanthropy News Network:

Question: "I have two questions. One, how has the way Congress views letters from constituents changed as technology has enabled more sophisticated and coordinated letter-writing campaigns?

"Two, it seems from what I've heard, Congress is still not sure what to think of e-mails from constituents. Some respond, some don't. Over time, do you think this will change, or is the ease with which e-mail can be generated likely to put it in a lower class of communications that elected officials will tend to dismiss?"

Craver: This has been a perennial question for the 30-plus years I have been involved with citizen action. In the early days of direct mail, we included petitions and postcards. The Washington "insiders" told us these would never work. They worked very well indeed and they continue to work. The same seems to be true for faxes and e-mail.

What I have found is that the mode of communication is not nearly as important as the message and, most importantly, the messenger. When a constituent writes or e-mails a member of Congress and clearly states that she/he is a constituent, these messages are generally taken quite seriously. Where non-constituents are concerned, Congressional offices tend to be far more dismissive of them.

What is also clear is that the more variations there are in the messages - the more personal the messages are - the more effective they will be. It is fairly easy for a congressional office to discount huge numbers of the same message as simply the product of a sophisticated lobbying effort. It is far more difficult to disregard hundreds or even thousands of letters written by individuals that clearly show personal involvement and concern.

To make the most of the technology, the most sophisticated users of it have Web-enabled advocacy pages on their sites. These pages provide the reader with the basic arguments on the issue; suggest key points to be included in any letter, fax or e-mail; and often also provide a draft letter.

The more personal a letter, the more likely it will be to receive serious attention on Capitol Hill or a state capitol.