My grandparents were part of the depression era generation. They saved leftover string, darned socks and bottled fruit to make sure that nothing was ever wasted. One of my gran’s favourite sayings was ‘take care of the pennies and the pounds will take care of themselves’. If you’re careful with small amounts of money, the bigger ones will eventually accumulate.
This has certainly been the case for charity roundup campaigns, where consumers are asked to make a micro-donation at the point of sale. Whilst we may have dispensed with pennies a while ago in Australia, the USA leads the world in round-up donations, with eBay alone raising $192million for charitable causes.
Are roundup campaigns with corporate partners still yielding value for non-profits? Let’s explore the pros and cons for partnership seekers.
Trends in Australia for retailer-based roundups are not consistent but still demonstrate significant value for non-profits. Hungry Jack’s Wishmaker campaign and Kmart’s Wishing Tree Appeal show rapid increases in funds raised, rising by about 30 % or more year‑on‑year. The combination of corporate matching and compelling storytelling appears to boost customer donations. Officeworks’ Make a Difference Appeal has seen donations fall from $1.0 m in 2022 to $830 k in 2024. The Back to School Appeal also declined slightly from $1.46 m to about $1.3 m. These downward trends may suggest customer fatigue or broader economic pressures.
Pros
Flexibility. Untied funding is the holy grail of every non-profit. Most round-up campaigns only tie very loosely to a specific program and are more likely to tell the story of the overall organisational mission. It provides the non-profit with the maximum flexibility in use of the donated funds. They can leverage their existing storytelling content without the need for detailed program reports or impact measures.
Access to new audiences. Partnering with a corporate retailer can enable the non-profit to reach new audiences that may be beyond their current donor base. That may include geographic or demographic segments that have usually been too hard or too expensive for them to access alone. The JB Hi-Fi Helping Hands campaign allows both customers and staff to round up purchases, with the company matching all staff donations.
Brand awareness. Roundup campaigns allow non-profits to leverage corporate marketing and platforms to build their own brand awareness. This is particularly valuable for grassroots charities still building their profile or those with limited marketing budgets of their own. Over the last decade, BCNA has partnered with Baker’s Delight for the annual Pink Buns campaign and leveraged the retailer’s national footprint, physical outlets and in-store promotion to raise awareness of breast cancer. Corporates also benefit from good brand leverage through association with the charity.
Low cost. For corporates it’s relatively low cost, using existing technology or platforms. It’s also customer money, not corporate donations, although many do claim it as part of their overall community contributions. It’s not cost-free for non-profits, but doesn’t usually require the same investment as a self-generated campaign like a Giving Day or annual fundraiser.
Cons
Lack of direct access to the donor. Roundup donations are tiny, so the corporate partner usually remits them in one lump sum. Whilst the charity benefits from the cash injection, there is generally little insight about donor details or behaviour to help build the donor database.
Some dilution of messaging. Roundups are an impulsive action, relying on a lack of friction at the point of sale to be successful. That means messaging must be as simple and succinct as possible. There is no bandwidth or attention span for complex or detailed messaging about the charity or the cause. The corporate partner may choose to modify it themselves to fit with their own promotions.
Highly transactional. The rapid fire nature of roundups means there’s no relationship between the charity and the donor. Whilst there may be plenty of repeat donors, the charity has no way of telling. It does appeal to younger consumers who prefer one-off impulsive donations to the traditional regular giving approach, but there may be no way for the charity to track this.
Donor fatigue or cost of living pressures. The economic environment is tough for many. Some supermarkets are reluctant to ask customers to round up as they are aware of financial pressures. Some round-up campaigns have attracted negative publicity as the corporate is accused of brand washing, profiteering or being unwilling to put their own money behind it.
Lack of transparency. Reporting on roundup campaigns is mixed, with a number of retailers not communicating the amounts raised or where the money is going. This leads to consumer distrust and can negatively impact on the non-profit brand if not managed carefully.
Overall, the data suggests that checkout donation programs can generate substantial funds when retailers promote them actively and provide matching incentives. However, for stakeholders considering investments in such programs, the lack of consistent reporting across retailers is a significant gap. Transparent annual reporting will build brand trust with consumers and allow both corporates and non-profits to properly evaluate the ROI for their efforts. The experience in the US market shows that roundup campaigns have enormous potential, but need to be managed thoughtfully to balance customer goodwill with the financial constraints of the current economic environment.