What do nonprofits want from giving platforms?
We asked nonprofits whether they use third-party giving platforms to raise money. Find out how much they reply on these platforms for revenue, what their concerns are, and what improvements they want to see.
Third-party giving platforms—websites and apps that collect donations for nonprofits—have proliferated in recent years. They come in all shapes and sizes, from large for-profit organizations, to donor advised funds, to small peer-to-peer fundraising tools. (Full disclosure: Some of these platforms purchase data from Candid.) In spring 2026, we surveyed over 6,000 nonprofits about these platforms, including whether they use them to raise money and what they want to see from these platforms. Here’s what we learned.
The share of revenue nonprofits get from giving platforms varies widely
Around 6,000 nonprofits responded to questions regarding how much of their total revenue they receive from third-party giving platforms. On average, platforms accounted for 17% of revenue; the median was 8%. But there was also a lot of variation. Eight percent of respondents said they relied on giving platforms for most of their revenue. About 37% of respondents received 1-10% of their revenue from the platforms, and 24% received no funds from platforms.
Note: Based on a survey of nonprofits collected in April-May 2026. Around 6,233 participants responded to the question, “Approximately what percent of your revenue comes from giving platforms?”
How much nonprofits relied on giving platforms varied by subsector and size. On average, religious, international, and environmental and animal organizations leaned more heavily on giving platforms than arts, education, public benefit, and membership groups (e.g. professional associations, fraternal societies, retirement funds) did. There was also a slight correlation between organization size and platform dependency, with smaller budgets being associated with depending on platforms for a larger percentage of their revenue , though the practical difference was negligible.
Nonprofits want visibility but also control
Giving platforms can help nonprofits get noticed by potential donors. But they can also introduce challenges for nonprofits trying to maintain control of where and how their names show up. We asked nonprofits to weigh those trade-offs directly by using a sliding scale to indicate whether—if forced to choose—they have a stronger desire to be visible (“I want my organization to appear on as many giving platforms as possible to maximize visibility and donation potential”) or to have control (“I only want my organization to appear on giving platforms that I actively choose and set up”).
Their responses were split almost evenly. Some chose wanting to appear on as many platforms as possible while others chose controlling exactly where they show up; still others landed in the middle.
Note: Around 5,720 participants responded on a sliding scale to indicate which statement they more strongly agreed with: “I want my organization to appear on as many giving platforms as possible to maximize visibility and donation potential” or “I only want my organization to appear on giving platforms that I actively choose and set up.”
Membership, international, and religious groups felt most strongly about control, while health organizations leaned toward visibility. But there was a wide range of perspectives within each subsector as well.
We also asked nonprofits to choose on a sliding scale whether they’re comfortable having platforms create profiles for them that they can edit after they go live or would prefer to approve their profiles in advance. Here, on average, respondents somewhat preferred to approve their profiles before they go live. Around 29% had a strong preference for approval first, while 13% had a strong preference for public profiles they could edit later, and the rest were scattered across the spectrum.
It is also important to note that some states require platforms to get consent from nonprofits to fundraise on their behalf before putting up donation buttons.
Nonprofits want giving platforms to do better
We also asked an open-ended write-in question: “Is there anything else you want us to know about your experiences with third-party giving platforms?” About 1,800 nonprofits, or 20% of those surveyed, shared their thoughts. A sentiment analysis (using natural language processing tools to classify whether the overall emotional tone of a statement is positive, negative, or neutral) suggests a wide range of opinions and experiences: Around 48% were neutral, 42% were negative, 6% were mixed, and only 4% were positive.
The contrast in experiences between organizations was often stark. For example, one respondent called the platforms “amazing” and said donations “more than tripled” after setting up their profiles, while another described them as “terrible” and a source of “more work for already overworked staff.” Nonprofits who were unhappy with giving platforms raised concerns about profiles created without their consent, slow payouts, added administrative burden and the growing number of platforms and the related potential of scams.
Many others said they felt torn, desiring more visibility but worrying that some platforms might not be worth it. Profiles created without their consent may include incorrect or outdated information, and it isn’t clear whether the platform will raise substantial funds. To this end, many nonprofits wrote in ideas regarding how giving platforms could improve how they serve nonprofits. The chart below highlights the top five most common write-in requests.
Note: Around 1,800 participants wrote in responses to the question “Is there anything else you want us to know about your experiences with third-party giving platforms?”
When it comes to giving platforms, nonprofits across the sector have different needs, levels of dependence, and expectations. This means there may never be a “one-size-fits-all” approach that will work for every nonprofit. Still, these results suggest opportunities for giving platforms to improve the ways they partner with the nonprofits they serve.
About the authors
