Of people who have given to charity in England, the average amount which people gave in the month before being asked was 29 British pounds in 2023/24, compared with 20 pounds in 2014/15.

In 2021, there were significant differences in the magnitude of average donations to charity in Canada across age groups of the donors. The average donation by people aged 65 years and older amounted to 3,310 Canadian dollars. By contrast, the average donation by individuals aged 25 to 34 years was of 1,040 Canadian dollars.

Individual charitable donors; Average and median charitable donations of tax filers by age (preliminary T1 Family File; T1FF)

In 2023, the charitable contributions to religious organizations reached approximately *** billion U.S. dollars, significantly more than any other type of organization in the country. Human services organizations received the second highest amount in 2023, which stood at ** billion U.S. dollars.

This bar chart shows the average annual amount of donations made by French people to charitable purposes in 2019, broken down by households' income. It displays that households which had an monthly income of more than ***** euros donated in average *** euros per year.

In 2021, the median charitable donation reported per donor in Canada was equal to 360 Canadian dollars. This statistic reports differences in this figure according to the various Canadian provinces. In 2021, tax filers from Nunavut who had reported a charitable donation amount on their personal income tax form donated about 880 Canadian dollars on average.

Donor rate and distribution of donations, population aged 15 and over, household income, 2013.

Fundraising & Donor Data. With over 30 years of expertise in political and charitable fundraising, this dataset represents an invaluable resource for organizations seeking to engage donors who demonstrate exceptional responsiveness and loyalty. Focused primarily on Democratic political fundraising, the data captures the behavior and preferences of telemarketing donors, who are widely recognized as the most versatile and high-performing contributors across multiple fundraising channels.

Telemarketing donors stand out for their robust engagement, transitioning effectively to direct mail and digital campaigns while maintaining higher retention and giving levels compared to donors acquired solely through other channels. This dataset highlights donor behavior patterns, including frequency of contributions, average gift size, and long-term engagement metrics, offering insights into donor lifetime value and campaign effectiveness.

Beyond political applications, this data is equally valuable for charitable organizations looking to optimize their outreach strategies and improve donor acquisition and retention. By leveraging these insights, organizations can identify key demographic and psychographic trends, refine messaging, and maximize ROI on fundraising efforts.

Ideal for Democratic campaigns, political action committees, nonprofit organizations, and analytics teams, this dataset provides actionable intelligence to elevate fundraising initiatives, strengthen donor relationships, and drive meaningful impact. Whether for identifying high-value donors or building targeted campaigns, this data is a proven cornerstone for effective fundraising strategies.

We analyzed data from thousands of nonprofits to uncover how donor retention really varies by cause—and what one extra donation per person could mean for your bottom line.

This statistic shows the average amount of donations made by French people to associations, foundations, projects or people in need in 2022. It reveals that 42 percent of the respondents declared that they gave each year between one and 50 euros to associations, foundations, projects or to individuals in need.

Consumer Donation Data. With over 30 years of expertise in political and charitable fundraising, this dataset represents an invaluable resource for organizations seeking to engage donors who demonstrate exceptional responsiveness and loyalty. Focused primarily on Democratic political fundraising, the data captures the behavior and preferences of telemarketing donors, who are widely recognized as the most versatile and high-performing contributors across multiple fundraising channels.

Telemarketing donors stand out for their robust engagement, transitioning effectively to direct mail and digital campaigns while maintaining higher retention and giving levels compared to donors acquired solely through other channels. This dataset highlights donor behavior patterns, including frequency of contributions, average gift size, and long-term engagement metrics, offering insights into donor lifetime value and campaign effectiveness.

Beyond political applications, this data is equally valuable for charitable organizations looking to optimize their outreach strategies and improve donor acquisition and retention. By leveraging these insights, organizations can identify key demographic and psychographic trends, refine messaging, and maximize ROI on fundraising efforts.

Ideal for Democratic campaigns, political action committees, nonprofit organizations, and analytics teams, this dataset provides actionable intelligence to elevate fundraising initiatives, strengthen donor relationships, and drive meaningful impact. Whether for identifying high-value donors or building targeted campaigns, this data is a proven cornerstone for effective fundraising strategies.

The willingness to donate human biological material for research purposes is shaped by socio-cultural factors; however, there is a lack of studies analysing the social perception of different human tissues, which may affect such willingness. This study aimed to distinguish different sociocultural categories of human tissues and types of potential donors based on their willingness to donate material. Quantitative research was conducted on a sample of 1,100 adult Poles representative in terms of sex, place of residence and education. According to the study, people were most willing to donate urine (73.9%), blood (69.7%), hair and tears (69.6%) and the least willing to donate post-mortem brain fragments (20%), sperm (males; 36.4%) and egg cells (females; 39.6%). A factor analysis revealed four sociocultural categories of donated tissues: irrelevant, redundant, ordinary and sensitive. Based on these sociocultural categories of tissues, four types of donors were identified: reluctant, highly cooperative, average cooperative and selectively cooperative. The willingness to donate human samples for research is shaped by the sociocultural perception of different body parts and tissues. The lower the sense of “personal relationship” with a specific type of tissue, organ or part of the body, the higher the motivation to donate such biological material for research purposes. Additionally, the willingness to donate is mostly shaped by social trust in physicians and scientists, and potential donors’ engagement in charity activities.

Donor rate and distribution of average annual donations, for the population aged 15 and over, by gender, Canada and provinces.

The donation tax credit (DTC) statistics reports on the number of people who claimed the DTC during an income tax year. It also contains the average amount claimed and which types of organisations are receiving donations.

This statistic shows the average donation per donor through workplace giving programs in Australia from 2010 to 2016. In 2016, the average donation value of workplace giving programs per person amounted to *** Australian dollars.

The table shows the top models (models within 2AICc units of the best model), with AICc values and Akaike weights (wi). The best model is highlighted.GLM to investigate factors affecting mean donation made by Player 1.

THIS UNIT PROVIDES 3 COUNTERBALANCED OPTIONS ON BONUS $ RATIOS AND RECIPIENT GROUP SIZE. -- -IN VS. OUT GROUP -- -ENHANCED OUTGROUP DESCRIPTIONGenerosity vs. Reciprocity and Ingroup vs. Outgroup This situation has elements of the classic prisoner's dilemma game: if everyone cooperates in choices where the give option is greater than the take option then each is better off than if all defect or take. But each person gains the most in these situations by taking, because regardless of the others' choices, the defector always gains an additional $1. The ideal situation from a short term financial view point is to hope the others give and then take yourself. From a long term perspective it is better for all to give. This experiment, with counterbalanced condition assignments will be run 3 times during the semester.Each participant was given three choices. They could take $1 for themselves or give a specified amount to be split to the others in their partnership, team, or department. The give amount was either $.90, $1.20, or $1.50. The combinations of group size and money to give were counterbalanced on group size and in ascending or descending order of money to give.Each participant wa s in one of two reciprocity conditions maintained throughout the BONUS1 to BONUS3 sequence. In the reciprocity condition they were told the others in the group to whom they could give were being given the same choice. In the generosity condition no comment was made about the possibility of reciprocity. Respondents with letters 1 and 3 were in the reciprocity condition and those with letters 2 and 4 in the generosity condition. (These conditions are crossed with assignments in BONUS1-3 in which respondents in CAPS Division A were in the reciprocity and Division B in the generosity condition.) In addition, each participant was in one of two other conditions. The group to whom they could give was either their own partner, team or department (ingroup) or one, three or fifteen individuals from the other division (outgroup). The individuals in the outgroup were people they were unlikely to have any contact with during the CAPS term. Rs in teams A and B were in the ingroup and those in teams C and D in the outgroup conditions. These conditions are crossed with assignments in BONUS 1 -3 in which Rs in CAPS teams A and D were in the ingroup and teams B and C in the outgroup condition. Note: in BONUS1-3 these assignments are the same as in BONUS4-6.In CAPS/87 this unit was BONUS4, except that groupsize order and amount orders have been changed to produce a more counterbalanced design.BONUS5 in CAPS87 allowed each CAPS participant to make a donation to a local charity out of his/her CAPS account. Each person is in one of 6 conditions combining the following: 1. gift in name of the partnership, team or department 2. suggested donations to be added or average d across the groupCONDITION ASSIGNMENTS for CAPS87 BONUS5 DEPT=1 PARTNERSHIP DONATION DEPT=2 TEAM DONATION DEPT=3 DEPARTMENT DONATION TEAM=A OR C ADD AMOUNTS TEAM=B OR D AVERAGE AMOUNTSSee codebook for additional information

Fundraising & Donor Data. With over 30 years of expertise in political and charitable fundraising, this dataset represents an invaluable resource for organizations seeking to engage donors who demonstrate exceptional responsiveness and loyalty. Focused primarily on Democratic political fundraising, the data captures the behavior and preferences of telemarketing donors, who are widely recognized as the most versatile and high-performing contributors across multiple fundraising channels.

Telemarketing donors stand out for their robust engagement, transitioning effectively to direct mail and digital campaigns while maintaining higher retention and giving levels compared to donors acquired solely through other channels. This dataset highlights donor behavior patterns, including frequency of contributions, average gift size, and long-term engagement metrics, offering insights into donor lifetime value and campaign effectiveness.

Beyond political applications, this data is equally valuable for charitable organizations looking to optimize their outreach strategies and improve donor acquisition and retention. By leveraging these insights, organizations can identify key demographic and psychographic trends, refine messaging, and maximize ROI on fundraising efforts.

Ideal for Democratic campaigns, political action committees, nonprofit organizations, and analytics teams, this dataset provides actionable intelligence to elevate fundraising initiatives, strengthen donor relationships, and drive meaningful impact. Whether for identifying high-value donors or building targeted campaigns, this data is a proven cornerstone for effective fundraising strategies.

People that were over the age of 65 were the most likely age group to give to charity in England and Wales in 2023/24, with 80 percent of the two oldest age groups giving to charity in the provided time period. By contrast, those aged between 16 and 24, the youngest age group surveyed, were the least likely to give to charity, at 49 percent.

Overall sample-weighted effect sizes and heterogeneity analysis for each TPB association.