# Lapsed Donors – part one of a diatribe in three parts

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2010/06/15/lapsed-donors-part-one-diatribe-three-parts/
- Published: 2010-06-15T00:45:12+01:00
- Author: Howard Lake

**Q. When is a lapsed donor not a lapsed donor? A. When they don’t think they are.**

I have been thinking a lot about lapsed donors lately. In part this is probably 
because we are engaged in some “reactivation” work for a client in this area, but
more so because very recently I received a letter from a charity we personally support
asking me to renew my support for the organisation.

This gave me pause for thought.

## Advertisement

 [⌊Posthub advert. You create the campaign. We'll handle the postal journey. Get started at post-hub.co.uk.⌉](https://fundraising.co.uk/ads/posthub-20261007-300x250/)

The thought being if I needed to ‘renew’ my support, presumably I was now considered
a lapsed donor.

My first response to this thought was one of irritation.

Irritation that I was considered a lapsed supporter when I considered myself anything
but, and irritation that the charity I was supporting (or should that now be had
supported?) didn’t realise this. Granted I hadn’t given to an appeal for a while,
but I had sponsored someone quite a significant sum who was doing an event for that
same charity – so to my mind, I had still given relatively recently.

My irritation was petty maybe (well definitely), but it is often the small things
in life that annoy the most. In fact, I have found this irritated response is relatively
common from “lapsed donors”. Last year on more than one occasion, I was doing Focus
Groups for a number of clients that included groups of lapsed donors. In one I made
the mistake of referring to the fact that none of the group were actively supporting
the charity any longer, and got a unanimous and very robust rebuttal of such a statement.
Without exception they all considered themselves to be supporters still – they just
hadn’t made a financial gift in a while. For some, that might have been quite a 
long while, but irrespective of this, they were not pleased at being told they had
stopped supporting the charity.

Of course, on reflection I appreciate that a charity cannot know whether each and
every individual still considers themselves a supporter or not. Equally, a charity
has a duty to spend funds wisely and not waste money communicating with those people
who no longer feel engaged or wish to hear from the charity, And I believe it is
sensible to try and establish whether (after a certain amount of time) someone is
still interested in hearing from you or not.

But I do think we could be a wee bit more careful, even thoughtful about the language
we use and the impression it can create.

After all who wants to annoy a donor, lapsed or otherwise.

 * **[Lapsed Donors – part two of a diatribe in three parts…](https://fundraising.co.uk/2010/06/21/lapsed-donors-part-two-diatribe-three-parts/)**(
   21 June 2010)
 * **[Lapsed Donors – being the final part of a diatribe in three parts](https://fundraising.co.uk/2010/06/28/lapsed-donors-being-final-part-diatribe-three-parts/)**(
   28 June 2010)
 * **[Samaritans to reactivate donors with a Christmas thank you mailing](https://fundraising.co.uk/2010/11/10/samaritans-reactivate-donors-christmas-thank-you-mailing/)**(
   10 November 2010)