Main Article Content
The advent of Internet of Things (IoT) has increased efficiency and amount of cash inflow for various industries including nonprofit and charity, shifting from a classic donation box to an online donation platform. Granularity in givers’ digital footprint allows nonprofit to better understand the behavior of online donors. The paper studies the variables that influence the likelihood of charitable school projects being fully funded. To obtaining donor behavior, samples of 332,281 charitable school projects in United State of America from 2000 to 2016 has been collected and multivariable logistic regression technique is applied. These projects raised fund online through “DonorsChoose” channel. The finding reveals that number of students reach, poverty level, resource type, project cost, student grade level and most and importantly project funding incentives such as “Double your impact” and “Almost home match” are statistically significance. To be more specific, projects regarding charitable trip and visitor experience have greater odds of being fully funded, compared to other resource types. Moreover, projects for higher school grade 9 to 12 also have greater odds of being completely donated, relative to those of younger students. We suggest the use of monetary incentives to incentivize and inspire donors to give more which result in accelerating charitable project success.
Article Screening Policy
- All research and academic articles to be published must be considered and screened by two peer reviews in the relevant field / article.
- All articles, texts, illustrations and tables published in the journal are the personal opinions of the authors. Editors don't always have to agree. And no responsibility whatsoever is the sole responsibility of the author.
- The articles to be published must never be published. Where did you first publish? And not in the consideration of other journals If the audit found that there has been a duplicate publication It is the sole responsibility of the author.
- Any article that the reader sees as being plagiarized or impersonated without reference. Or mislead the work of the author Please let the journal editor know it will be your greatest blessing.
The cause marketing paradox. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 338-345.
Best Charles (2020, March 31). DonorsChoose: Support a classroom. Build a future. https://www.donorschoose.org/data.
Christine M. B., Hakkyun K. and Barbara L. (2013). Corporate sponsorships may hurt nonprofits: Understanding their effects on charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(3), 288-300.
Daniel Teles. (2016). Do Tax Credits Increase Charitable Giving? Evidence from Arizona and Iowa. Proceedings. Annual Conference on Taxation and Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the National Tax Association, 109, 1-76.
Daniel W. E., Ray F. and Brian M. (2012). Charity as a Substitute for Reputation: Evidence from an Online Marketplace. The Review of Economic Studies, 79(4), 1441-1468.
Dean K. and John A. L. (2007). Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment. The American Economic Review, 97(5),
Farnoosh K., J. Andrew P. and Rajkumar V. (2015). Developing Donor Relationships:
The Role of the Breadth of Giving. Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 77-93.
Gabrielle F. and Camille L. (2010). Are Tax Incentives for Charitable Giving Efficient? Evidence from France. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(2), 117-141.
Karen Page W., Vikas M. and William T. Ross JR. (2009). Donation Behavior toward
In‐Groups and Out‐Groups: The Role of Gender and Moral Identity.
Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 199-214.
Karen Page W., Vikas M. and Karl A. (2013). When Does Recognition Increase Charitable Behavior? Toward a Moral Identity-Based Model. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 121-134.
Lalin A., Machael I. N. and Dan A. (2014). Contingent Match Incentives Increase Donations. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(6), 790-801.
Matthew Chao. (2017). Demotivating incentives and motivation crowding out in charitable giving. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America ,114(28) 7301-7306.
Michelle H. Y. and Robert J. Y. (2013). How Does the Incentive Effect of the Charitable Deduction Vary across Charities?. The Accounting Review, 88(3), 1069-1094.
Naomi E. F. (2010). Time is Money: Choosing between Charitable Activities.
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(1), 103-130.
Richard H. (2012). From Web Site Visitor to Online Contributor: Three Internet Fundraising Techniques for Nonprofits. Social Work, 57(4), 361-365.
Sarah Smith. (2012). Increasing Charitable Giving: What Can We Learn from Economics?. Fiscal Studies, 33(4), 449-466.
Steffen H., Imran R. and Andrew S. (2015). Comparing Charitable Fundraising Schemes: Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment and a Structural Model.
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7(2), 326-369.
Walter Wymer and Tanya Drollinger. (2015). Charity Appeals Using Celebrity Endorsers: Celebrity Attributes Most Predictive of Audience Donation Intentions. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(6), 2694-2717.
Wendy L. and Jennifer A. (2008). The Happiness of Giving: The Time-Ask Effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 543-5.