nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Solicit Codes

Jennifer Ramnath

Just wondering how you handle solicit codes. We have a code that is “Do Not Solicit By EMail”. I'm wondering if we should change this to “Do Not Solicit” and also have “Do Not Email." Or would you have “Do Not Solicit by Email” “Do Not Solicit by Phone” “Do Not Solicit by Mail”.

Help! ?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Crystal Bruce

@Jennifer Ramnath Hi! I see it has been about a day since you posted and I want to make sure you are getting the help you are asking for. I've asked the Blackbaud Community All-Stars for their expertise advice and hopefully they'll be responding soon!

Alan French

@Jennifer Ramnath we have both. “Do not email” means we won't send them ANYTHING by email, even if it's not related to fundraising. “No email fundraising” (or “no postal fundraising”, “no telephone fundraising”) means they'll still get other types of communications by that channel but not fundraising.

I suppose it'll depend on what sort of emails your organisation sends - if it's only ever related to fundraising, perhaps you wouldn't need separate ones to distinguish between opting out of emails and opting out of solicitations by email. Also do you want people to be able to opt out of emails but keep receiving postal asks, for example? A blanket “do not solicit” code might not let you do that easily.

Jeff Garmon

@Jennifer Ramnath, we too use both. We have an overall do not solicit (apply to any method), then segmented into communication methods such as do not solicit email, phone, text, etc. for more granular use. We also separate solicit and other communications options, meaning someone can opt out of solicits but still receive communications as Alan references.

Aaren Ballinger

@Jennifer Ramnath I’ve found that it’s generally best to use more specific and granular solicit codes. How granular you go really depends on your organization’s needs and the types of communications you’re sending. For most organizations, I have seen implementation of solicit codes by channel (e.g., “Do Not Solicit by Email,” “Do Not Solicit by Phone,” “Do Not Solicit by Mail”), along with a blanket “Do Not Solicit - All” that would prevent solicitation by any means. I've also seen solicit codes broken down by interest/topic (e.g., “Do Not Solicit - Annual Fund” or “Do Not Solicit - Capital Campaigns”).

It’s also critical to have an internal document that clearly defines your solicit codes, explains what each one means, and provides guidelines for staff on how and when to apply them. This is especially important because there are often gray areas that require interpretation.

For example, imagine you’re sending an e-blast newsletter that is 99% stewardship or cultivation-focused, but it includes a banner at the bottom with a “Give Now” button. Would you still send that to individuals marked “Do Not Solicit - Email”? Defining whether this type of communication is considered a solicitation or not—and documenting how to handle it—can help ensure consistency and avoid confusion among staff.

Ultimately, the goal is to strike a balance between honoring donor preferences and ensuring your team can effectively manage outreach.

Hope this helps! ?

Jennifer Ramnath

@Aaren Ballinger
Thank you everyone for providing your insights. This was most helpful! I'll take this back to my org and share my findings and hopefully help streamline our solicit codes a bit more