The invention relates generally to interactive fundraising. More particularly, the present invention relates to project-directed online fundraising with rules.
Fundraising has traditionally required a combination of personal requests, direct-mail asks, telephone solicitations, special events, etc. Use of the Internet has introduced a significant breadth of complexity, strategies, and advantages. In particular, existing online or Internet-based fundraising allow fundraisers to reach a larger number and variety of potential funders. Many charities and non-profit organizations are increasingly using the Internet as a means to raise funds.
However, existing online fundraising practices typically simply place traditional fundraising practices onto a web format, such as using a ‘Donate Now’ button, where simple web-forms are available to capture credit card gifts. Generally, donations are made to organizations and at the time of the donation, the donors are generally unaware of how the donated funds will be used.
Furthermore, some online fundraising practices rely on intermediaries to pass on the donated funds. The use of intermediaries generally reduces the usable donation amounts as the intermediaries take a fraction of the donated amount.
More sophisticated online fundraising websites, such as GlobalGiving.com and DonorsChoose.org, have been established for pooling multiple donations to fund certain projects. However, existing online fundraising websites typically only provide donors with the option of whether to donate or not; the existing websites typically lack functions that enable donors to impose specific funding conditions. Also, existing online fundraising websites do not provide up-to-date information regarding the success or failure of the donated funds. Potential donors are often hesitant to donate due to lack of information and donor control. In particular, donors generally do not know the significance of their donations to a fundraising campaign and the probabilities of success of the campaigns. Furthermore, donations are generally not returned to the donors when a campaign fails.
The present invention addresses at least the difficult problems of fundraising and advances the art with interactive fundraising techniques.
The present invention is directed to project-based online fundraising with funder rules. An application server operates the internet-based fundraising application for a plurality of users. The fundraising application includes a project creation function and a funding function. The project creation function allows each of the online users to create one or more projects to be funded, where the created projects include project requirements, such as a target funding minimum. The funding function allows each of the online users to select one or more created projects and establish one or more funder rules directed to the selected projects. Optionally, a function is provided for funders to enter financial account information to facilitate transfers of funds. By processing the funder rules of a project, the current and anticipated funding levels of the project can be determined and compared with the target funding minimum. Based on the comparison of the funding levels and the target funding minimum, a fund transfer function is used to at least partially fund the selected project, where the funds are from the users who selected the project.
The project requirements can include a funding minimum, a total funding goal, a target start date, and a latest start date. Online users can also create projects with project requirements, including a draw frequency, a draw amount, and a project duration. The funder rules can include a commitment, a payment frequency, a payment duration, a start funding date, a project minimum, a project maximum, and a project fund by date. The funder rules provide potential funders with control to establish desirable conditions for funding a project. In a preferred embodiment, the funder rules directed to a project and the project requirements of the same project can be processed to find approximate optimal conditions to reach the funding minimum.
In a preferred embodiment, the application server manages an escrow account for at least one of the selected projects. The escrow account holds a funding commitment of the users who selected the project. Some or all of the funding commitment is released to the project if the project is successfully funded, else, the funding commitment is returned to the users who selected the project.
A display function can be provided for displaying the current and anticipated funding levels of one or more of the created projects. Optionally, a list of created projects is provided and is viewable by the online users, where the funding function allows each of the users to select one or more projects from the list to fund. The online users can also use a commenting function to make comments regarding one or more of the created projects.
The present invention together with its objectives and advantages will be understood by reading the following description in conjunction with the drawings, in which:
Online fundraising has the potential to effectively reach out to a large number of funders for a variety of organizations and causes. However, current online fundraising techniques typically simply replace more traditional offline techniques of fundraising for organizations and do not give the potential funders much control over funding conditions. Below is a detailed description of interactive fundraising with funder rules in an online environment of a plurality of users.
It is important to note that the created project P can include one or more project requirements PR. The project requirements PR allow the project creator PC to determine conditions that are necessary to successfully fund a project P. For example, a project requirement PR includes a target funding minimum, a minimum amount for the project P to be successfully completed. The default value of the funding minimum can be set to zero.
It is also important to note that each of the users F1-FN selecting the project P to fund can also establish funder rules FR1-FRN directed to the selected project P. The funder rules FRi allow each funder Fi to impose conditions that must be met to release funds to the project P. In other words, the funder rules FR1-FRN give funders F1-FN direct control over whether or not to fund a project P depending on the circumstances and details of the funding.
For each of the selected projects P, the project requirements PR of the selected project P and the funder rules FR1-FRN directed to the same project P are processed to determine the current and anticipated funding levels of the selected project P. The funding levels can be shown to other online users who may be motivated to contribute to a project due to the displayed funding levels, such as when a project is close to meeting its funding minimum level. Based on the processing, funds from one or more of the selecting users are transferred to the project P. For the example shown in
Multiple draws may be desirable for projects that can be broken up into multiple stages. By allowing multiple draws, a project may more easily achieve adequate funding levels as it can be easier to raise many small sums than one larger sum. The target start date 350 is the date the project creator targets for the project to be successfully funded and for the spending period to commence. The latest start date 360 is the latest date for a project to be funded. Obviously, the latest start date 360 must be on or after the target start date 350. Other project requirements, not listed in
The processing of the project requirements and the funder rules determines if a project is or will be adequately funded.
During the funding period, funding levels on the current date (or any other date) is compared against the latest start date 510 and the target start date 530. For example, if the current date is after the latest start date, then the current funding level CFL is compared 520 with the funding minimum FM. The CFL is determined by an aggregate of the funder rules, including commitment amounts, calculated for the project being processed. If the CFL exceeds or is equal to the funding minimum 520, the project can be considered successfully funded and funds are released to the project, else the project has failed.
If the current date is before the target start date, the funding period continues until the target start date arrives. However, if the current date is between the latest start date and the target start date, the CFL and FM are again compared 540. If the FM has not been reached by the aggregate of funds, the funding period continues. If the CFL meets or exceeds the FM, the CFL is further compared with the total funding goal TFG to see if the CFL is equal to or greater than the TFG 550. If this condition is met, the project is successfully funded and the spending period commences. For the scenario in which the CFL lies between the FM and the TFG, the project creator is given the option to continue the funding period and/or begin the spending period 560. Other conditions based on the funding requirements and funder rules, in addition to or in replacement of one or more conditions shown in
The current and anticipated funding levels, based on the project requirements and funder rules, can also be displayed to the online users, including the project creator and the selecting users. In an exemplary embodiment shown in
For projects with multiple draws, the funding level forecast can be more complicated. An exemplary embodiment of a funding level forecast is shown in
For projects with single or multiple draws, processing the funder rules to determine the funding level at any given moment of time is calculated by the funder rules. However, the calculation may give non-unique results depending on the order in which the contributions from different sets of funder rules are calculated. For example, at the beginning of a given day a project may have a current funding level of $280. A first funder establishes first funder rules with a commitment of $30 and a funding minimum of $300. A second funder establishes second funder rules with a commitment of $11. A third funder establishes third funder rules with a commitment of $20 and a funding maximum of $290. If processed in order from first funder rules to third funder rules, only $11 will be contributed due to the limitations placed by the funding minimum of the first funder rules and the funding maximum of the third funder rules. However, if the third funder rules are processed first, a larger contribution of $61 can be added.
The disparity in contributions shown by the above simple example illustrates that there are optimal conditions to achieve the highest funding levels for a project. In a preferred embodiment, a project is processed to find optimal or approximate optimal conditions to reach or exceed the target funding minimum. Intelligent algorithms, such as “greedy” algorithms, can be used to iteratively find approximate optimal conditions. In the greedy algorithm, initially each funder rules is processed with the assumption that all other funder rules are satisfied. The funder rules that are not satisfied even with this assumption are then discarded and the remaining funder rules are processed with the same assumption. The algorithm is continued iteratively until no further funder rules are discarded and the funding level results become stable between iterations. The greedy algorithm removes the dependency of the funding level on the order of processing the funder rules.
Further complications and degrees of freedom can exist for projects with multiple draws; when multiple draws are allowed, the funding level can be a function of the draw date. For example, a project having monthly draws can have a funding level depending on if the funds are drawn on the 1st of the month or the 15th of the month. Algorithms to optimize or approximately optimize the draw date to find the draw date that gives the largest funding level can be employed.
As one of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate, various changes, substitutions, and alterations could be made or otherwise implemented without departing from the principles of the present invention, e.g. the Internet could be substituted by a local area network and other conditions can be used as project funding requirements and/or funder rules. Accordingly, the scope of the invention should be determined by the following claims and their legal equivalents.
This application relates to U.S. Ser. No. 14/047,297, filed Oct. 7, 2013, which relates to U.S. Ser. No. 12/150,218, filed Apr. 25, 2008, which relates to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/000,459, filed Oct. 25, 2007, each of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61000459 | Oct 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14047297 | Oct 2013 | US |
Child | 15657674 | US | |
Parent | 12150218 | Apr 2008 | US |
Child | 14047297 | US |