The Year of the Pivot: What 2025 Taught Us About Bucking the Benchmarks

If there was one word to describe the 2025 End-of-Year fundraising season, it was “Pivot.”

In our internal debriefs, the season was described as a “mixed bag” defined by necessary adjustments to breaking news cycles and economic shifts. This mirrors the broader nonprofit landscape: The latest M+R Benchmarks (analyzing 2024 data) revealed that one-time online revenue was flat (0% growth) year-over-year, and email revenue specifically dropped by 11% (All-Sector Benchmark).

Yet, despite a stagnation in industry averages, many of our clients saw record-breaking growth. Why did some soar while others struggled? The answer lies in a divergence of strategy. We saw a clear split between organizations that relied on deep community trust and high-dollar donors, and those that had to fight tooth-and-nail for acquisition in a crowded marketplace.

Here is an anonymized look at the data behind the season, and the three strategic pivots that separated the over-performers from the pack.

1. The “Community Trust” Dividend vs. The “Invisible” Mission

The M+R Benchmarks note that for every 1,000 fundraising emails sent, the average nonprofit raised $58 (All-Sector Benchmark). However, clients with deeply established local roots or tangible, visible outcomes obliterated this ceiling.

• The Community Outlier: One of our clients in the Health & Human Services sector, known for deep community integration, achieved an email response rate of 0.20%—four times higher than the vertical benchmark of 0.05% (Hunger/Poverty) or 0.04% (Health). Their secret? Years of “doing the right things” regarding stewardship meant they didn’t have to scream to be heard.
• The High-Dollar Safety Net: Similarly, a client in the Housing & Shelter sector saw their revenue increase 158% year-over-year (partially due to improved attribution). While they operate in a sector often driven by volume, this client saw an average gift of $467.

The Takeaway: The “middle” donor is disappearing. Success in 2025 came from cultivating fewer donors who made significantly larger commitments. Conversely, clients with “invisible” missions (advocacy or research-heavy causes) struggled to convert volume into revenue without urgent news hooks, reinforcing the 20-year industry trend of “more revenue from fewer donors”.

2. The Match is No Longer Optional

If 2025 taught us anything, it’s that a matching gift offer is no longer a “nice to have”—it is a requirement to cut through the noise.

• The Cautionary Tale: One Environmental client entered Giving Tuesday without a secured match offer. The result was a 72% drop in Giving Tuesday revenue compared to the previous year. Despite high engagement in cultivation emails leading up to the day (CTRs over 5%), the lack of a financial hook meant that interest didn’t translate into action.
• The Multiplier Effect: In contrast, a Rights & Advocacy client leveraged a strong match to drive a 100% increase in total online revenue year-over-year.

The Takeaway: In a distracted digital environment, a match provides the necessary “permission” for a donor to give now. For 2026, securing a match partner must be a Q3 priority, not a Q4 afterthought.

3. Channel Strategy: Search for Revenue, Meta for Volume (Usually)

We observed a distinct bifurcation in how paid channels performed. For most of our clients, Google Search was the revenue engine, while Meta (Facebook/Instagram) served as an awareness tool that struggled to drive an immediate return on ad spend (ROAS).

• The Efficiency King: For a major Housing client, Google Search delivered a 12.63 ROAS, capturing high-intent donors effectively. Meanwhile, their Meta campaigns delivered a ROAS of 1.22.
• The Urgency Exception: There is always an exception to the rule. For a Disaster Response client with a highly visual, urgent mission, Meta was the primary driver, generating 95% of their paid media donations with a strong ROAS of 1.12 compared to a Search ROAS of 0.16.

The Takeaway:

Unless your mission has “breaking news” visual urgency, budget should be prioritized toward capturing intent (Search) rather than interrupting feeds (Social). However, Meta remains vital for feeding the top of the funnel—without it, the search volume eventually dries up.

Looking Ahead to 2026

The data tells us that the “one-size-fits-all” playbook is dead. For organizations with tangible, local impact, the strategy is retention and upgrades—leaning into high-net-worth individuals (Average Gifts $450+) who can offset the loss of low-dollar donors. For advocacy and research organizations, the strategy must be aggressive acquisition and urgency—using paid media to build a volume of new leads that can be nurtured over time.

As we move into the new year, we are focused on helping every client find their specific lane. Whether that means building a “Major Gift” digital experience or an “Acquisition Volume” machine, the goal remains the same: pivoting from what used to work, to what is working now.