This story in the New York Times, Checking Out, and Donating Too, got me thinking on who should and does pay cause marketing expenses for register programs–like those at Safeway supermarkets described in the article.
Lucy Bernholz from Philanthropy 2173 asserted “that embedded giving [Lucy's name for cause marketing] was largely unregulated, and that some retailers kept a percentage of donations as a ‘finder’s fee.’”
I was surprised by this and tweeted Lucy for details. She replied publicly:
quote was misattributed. However, co’s that use $ raised to cover costs of running these campaigns are basically doing this
Companies shouldn’t be keeping a portion of the monies raised to pay expenses. But the fact that expenses are paid out of the revenues raised and not from some treasure chest unearthed for just this purpose shouldn’t be surprising to anyone.
None of the retailers I work with pay for the printing of their pinups (and maybe register signs and few other minor supplies). This usually consumes 5% to 8% of the revenues raised. At the end of the program, the company forwards me a check for all monies raised and I pay the bills. I’ve never heard of a company withholding cause marketing dollars or charging a “finder’s fee” to pay expenses. If the company has purchased something that my nonprofit agreed to pay for, we reimburse them.
I don’t require companies to pay expenses for two reasons.
First, I never would have recruited so many partners if I had insisted they pick up the expenses for a cause marketing program. This is especially true for the local and regional companies I work with that don’t have deep marketing or charity budgets. They are happy to help, but when you add a price tag to helping they’ll balk. But as you’ll see, just because they are doing something for free doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable or doesn’t come at a cost.
Second, I subscribe to this basic truth of cause marketing: the most valuable thing a retailer can do to help a cause is ask its customers to support it.
It’s very generous when a company pays the expenses of a cause marketing campaign. But requiring them to won’t win you any partners, and the upside of a register program is just too lucrative to insist on it.
When can you ask companies to pay expenses? When they offer and when your cause is big enough to turn away businesses that won’t.
I haven’t been able to confirm it, but I’ve heard that causes like St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital requires some partners to pay upfront “administrative fees” to cover expenses that ensure 100% of the money raised goes to the kids.
But what does the shopper at the register think about cause marketing expenses?
I’ll hazard to say that they know fundraisers of all kinds have expenses. Do they really think the expenses from that charity gala they attended last night were paid by one generous donor, or supplied by leprechauns laden with gold at the end of the rainbow?
You might be thinking that while the consumer makes the donation in a cause marketing program, the retailer reaps marketing benefits without paying anything. Shouldn’t they pay something? True, they don’t help with expenses, but they do absorb a cost. The company donates its employees to the effort and their time at the register asking shoppers to support the cause.
[Remember, the retailer doesn't reap any tax benefits from a register program. They are merely handling the consumer's donation and can not claim it as a deduction.]
Shoppers only have so much patience and time at the register to answer questions from an already harried cashier. They want to pay for their stuff and leave. And if a cashier is asking the shopper to support a cause what’s the business losing by not asking:
“Would you like to sign-up for our credit card today?”
“Do you need batteries with that?”
“There’s 15% coupon at the bottom of your receipt for your next visit. Will we see you again soon?”
So, we’re back to where we started. Who pays for cause marketing expenses? The answer for me is the company if they want to, but they provide enough value to be excused. Besides, you’ll recruit more partners and raise more money if you don’t look the other way and whistle when the cause marketing bill arrives. Would you rather raise more money or get your expenses paid? Do the math.
That leaves the generous consumers at the register to pick up the tab. They know that fundraising has expenses. And according to the The 2010 Cone Cause Evolution Study, 81% of Americans prefer point-of-sale programs (i.e. register programs, pinups). What they probably don’t know is just how lucrative and cost-efficient register programs are for causes.
Cause marketing is an easy and cost-efficient way for consumers to donate to their favorite causes while they shop. The cost to companies is a modest investment as they earn a halo that has its own rewards. And the gain to causes is hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
Regardless of who’s paying the expenses on cause marketing, its return-on-investment is something we can all take credit for.



Great post, Joe – you raise some interesting points. While I agree that in the case of a huge event, consumers know a portion of their money is going to cover basic expenses (with the assumption that the cause has done their darndest to get as much donated as possible), I don't think most consumers expect there to be much overhead or expense associated with point of sale programs like coin collection efforts or pinups.
It reminds me of the Panera lawsuit (that I believe I heard about through you) where they tried to claim "expenses" against a coin collection campaign and the judge ruled against them in favor of the charity.
But I agree wholeheartedly with you, companies shouldn't be expected to soak up printing or other hard costs – the nonprofit should calculate those costs into their overall cause marketing budget.
@meganstrand
Joe,
You are right on the money. Funds donated at POS should go 100% to the nonprofit benficiary. How program expenses are split between the company and the cause is a matter for them to decide. Clearly, these programs should be designed to produce the optimal combination of funds raised vs. fundraising expense. Compared to direct mail, special events and many other forms of fundraising this is highly efficient.
Interesting post!
I know I aim to have each fundraising initiative pay for itself. So I assume a portion of my gifts pays for printing, etc.
I do think it costs companies–not costs they should be paying against the funds raised. But it is making the checkout a slight bit longer. And it does stress some customers out (or turn them off) who feel they may look cheap by saying no. They just want to shop & be done with it.
That amounts to some cost to the company. And, perhaps, credit card processing fees.
I’d just be clear on both sides when starting a project like this. And come back to companies asking if they’d cover the nonprofit’s costs in addition to their current generosity.
Typing this on my Blackberry. Hope it’s coherent!
Very coherent, Marc! I think the discussion on whether POS programs are the world's BEST fundraiser is a good one. I think when it's done well, consumers find POS pretty positive–like the one William Sonoma is currently doing for St. Jude and I posted on last week. However, sometimes I think they can be just dreadful!
But I do think POS in some form will always stick around–it's just too lucrative. But it will evolve and location-based services will probably usher in something new!
Great post, Joe. I think this issue has been raised due to the lack of transparency in CM campaigns. I am not as concerned as who is covering costs as I am about how much is going to support a cause. Be open & honest about how much of my purchase is going directly to the charity and if there is a maximum donation amount. I do NOT support CM campaigns that state "a portion of the proceeds" but are unwilling to provide additional details.
Cause marketing partnerships that are successful are just that — partnerships. In partnerships both parties incur some sort of expense and are invested in overall success. If a business is unwilling to incur any type of costs, the nonprofit should think long and hard about the opportunity.
- Jen (@PhilanthropyInk)
I think the good news is that most companies that do POS support causes in a lot of other ways than OPM (other people's money). They volunteer, donate inkind, give personally, etc. A great example is Ocean State Job Lot, which you can read about here:
http://selfishgiving.com/cause-marketers-journal/…
Joe, thanks for posting the information and asking the question.
My response was apparently too long … so, I posted it on my causeaholic blog … http://bit.ly/fwfLSI
Steve
Joe, I think the main issue here is about transparency. It seems to me the consumer should know or be able to find out easily what the true costs of the program are and exactly how much of what they give ends up going to the mission of the charity once administrative and other costs are taken into account.