REPORT OF FINDINGS RESEARCH STUDY OF DENOMINATIONAL GIVING

Transcription

1 REPORT OF FINDINGS RESEARCH STUDY OF DENOMINATIONAL GIVING MENNONITE CHURCH USA submitted by: Michael D. Wiese, Ph.D. Advancement Associates, Inc. Anderson University and Richard L. Gerig, M.Ed. Advancement Associates, Inc. April 9, 2005 Acknowledgements: This project was a true collaboration between members of Advancement Associates, Inc., and staff at Mennonite Church USA. We extend special thanks to Marty Lehman, Ron Byler and Barth Hague for their support and assistance. James Nofziger, research director at Mennonite Mutual Aid, gave important guidance to the project. Two students at Anderson University, Laura Belsley and Jason Clodfelder, also provided valuable help in analyzing open-ended comments. -- Michael D. Wiese, Richard L. Gerig

2 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary and Recommendations. 3 REPORT OF FINDINGS Context of Study The Situation 7 Research Objectives.. 7 Target Audiences for Research 8 Research Methodology.. 8 Profile of Respondents Demographic Profile Congregational Life 12 Theological and Political Categories 14 Summary of Responses for Research Objectives Objective 1: Giving Patterns Objective 2: Reasons Why Mennonites Give 23 Objective 3: Attitudes toward the Denomination.. 27 Objective 4: Actions and Attitudes to Increase Support.. 33 Objectives 5, 6: New Ideas to Garner Support. 38 Objective 7: Responses Mennonites Want for Giving. 43 APPENDICES Appendix I: Focus Group Summaries 45 Appendix II: PGM Phone Status Reports.. 55 Appendix III: Training Material for Phone Interviewers 56 Appendix IV: Listing of Institutions Receiving Designated Gifts 62 Appendix V: Analysis of Members 40 Years of Age and Younger 64 Appendix VI: Frequency Distributions of Members of Multi-racial Congregations. 74

3 3 REPORT OF FINDINGS RESEARCH STUDY OF DENOMINATIONAL GIVING MENNONITE CHURCH USA Research objectives Executive Summary and Recommendations Persons committed to Christian faith have a history of giving of time, talent and possessions to serve others. Data collected this study of 600 lay members of Mennonite Church USA (MC USA), along with information collected in four focus groups, will help church leaders answer the following questions about giving: In what ways do members currently give? At what level do Mennonites give of their financial resources? Do Mennonites give to the ministry of MC USA, and to what form of ministry are they most likely to give? What are members attitudes toward the denomination and how do they impact giving patterns? What motivates Mennonites to give? What differences in the population relate to positive attitudes toward giving and to the actual practice of giving? Responses to these questions provide understanding of current financial realities facing MC USA and suggestions for future strategies. General findings While a giving spirit and relative support for MC USA are found, the potential for giving is limited by church size, personal income, and diffused giving. Giving through the congregation is the strong preference. Those members most likely to insist on giving to denominational ministry, either through the congregation or directly, fit a general profile: they tend to be older, contribute out of a habit of giving in response to what God has given them, are denominationally oriented, and categorize themselves as somewhat liberal theologically and politically.

4 4 Mennonite Church USA is relatively small, yet diverse, denomination. This diversity is found in differences in giving attitudes on multiple levels including, demographic, political, theological, ethnical and cultural. A significant finding of this study is that theological and political views are an important explanation to differences in giving and attitudes toward Mennonite Church USA. The constituency represents the full spectrum of perspectives, and the contrasting views signify a contrasting worldview among those calling themselves Mennonite. This reality may represent the central challenge to unifying the members MC USA around a common identity. Challenges to strategy While almost everyone in the church makes financial gifts, distinct segments of attitudes and behaviors toward giving to denominational interests are apparent. This suggests that a uniform system to fund the denomination is likely to be well received in some segments and, at the same time, not well received in others. A practical reality is that income levels of the membership are constrained. There are many Mennonite-related entities inviting financial support. In the absence of a system that funds all the entities through a uniform approach, each entity is seeking money separately. Further, these organizations and agencies solicit support from a relatively small group of MC USA members. Thus, multiple requests from various good causes create donor burnout among those most able to give. Continued competition for limited resources is likely to occur. One constituent voice heard in the study believes that, before MC USA can expect increased support from its members, it must be perceived as making appropriate sacrifices in expectations and programs itself. Others believe people are likely to respond positively just by hearing there is a funding shortage. Still others seek a compelling reason to be part of something that embodies the church s mission; when they see it, they will be more committed. Prior generations found this in being part of the Mennonite community and in social action. The dedication to the Mennonite Central Committee demonstrated by a segment of the membership is evidence of this commitment. The next generation, however, needs to find a reason beyond the local congregation to be Mennonite. Finally, some members will likely never see needs beyond their local lenses, and therefore will not belong to the group of core givers who support MC USA into the future. Steps moving forward As a result of the above factors, an imposed, uniform expectation for giving is not likely to succeed among MC USA members. What are needed: a unifying call to action and a vision of the future of the denomination that provide a common direction and a renewed sense of Mennonite identity. The actual system

5 5 designed to fund the denomination, however, is likely to reflect a more differentiated strategy. Mennonite Church USA leaders cannot carry an entitlement mentality when considering ideas for increasing the support of the membership. Giving out of pure loyalty to the denomination is likely to diminish even further over time. Ultimately, MC USA will likely need to design a one-to-one approach to build relationships with individual congregations. Such an approach would allow the congregation to give out of its specific ministry needs and interests. Eventually, then, appropriate and mutually supporting relationships with congregations can be built such that each congregation understands that it is connected to the broader denomination in a manner that complements its own expression of becoming missional. Implementing this understanding will first require the clustering of each MC USA congregation by giving propensity, history and potential. Then, denominational leaders must listen to the reasons for giving that are unique to various groups of congregations. While the denomination must maintain its interest in and invite support from all congregations, special focus should be given to congregations that exhibit a history of strong support and/or the potential for such support. In other words, all congregations are part of the MC USA body, but some congregations should receive targeted attention for stewardship development. The idea of a missional church is beginning to take root. While what missional is and means need further articulation, there is evidence that the focus is connecting at the congregational level and leading to new initiatives. Bringing this call together into a unified and synergistic church is both the challenge and the opportunity. For congregational members to become missional in ways that transcend focus on any one dimension of the church, they must see how the entire picture fits together, with each component depending on and complementing the other. The theological underpinnings of first fruits giving are appreciated and motivating, especially among the older generations, who understand and endorse it as a version of tithing. The system that has been established to support implement first fruits giving within Mennonite Church USA, however, is not currently understood or effective in funding the denomination. The same commitment to the biblical habit of giving demonstrated by the groups older than 40 years of age must to be embraced among the younger groups. Younger Mennonites are deeply committed to Christ and want to make a difference in the world. This passion needs to be caught such that giving becomes a natural act in their Christian experience. They express such a desire. Their giving cannot be assumed, however, and they will not automatically support MC USA.

6 6 Several common sense understandings and realities should inform strategies for strengthening financial support of MC USA. Trust of denominational leadership is imperative as transformation to the new Mennonite Church USA continues. Results of this study suggest that a bond of trust has not yet completely formed. Next, people need to know more explicitly to what they are contributing and for what purpose. It is evident that members are not certain of this in the new denomination. People need to see tangible results from their giving outcomes that matter and are documented and reported. Accountability from those receiving support is essential, including assurances that funds are being used wisely and efficiently. Finally, donors appreciate, and are motivated by, personal contact with those directly affected by their gifts. Some creative thought should be given to how the stories of recipients and givers might be better told in genuine, meaningful ways. Strategies for engaging the younger generation are likely to require communication approaches beyond the traditional channels, which may not be the entry point for creating denominational loyalty among younger and newer Mennonites. New forms that are more interactive and visually engaging should be tested. Stories of changed lives and the evidence of making a difference must be told in ways that excite the relational/experiential/pragmatic urges of young adults. It is important to invite young people to sit at the table when these communication approaches are considered. Conclusion Finally, this research reflects substantial optimism and hope, as found in the expressions of commitment and loyalty articulated by MC USA lay members for their new denomination, and in the evidence that the habit of giving persists among many Mennonites. At the same time, there is ample reason to believe that denominational leaders must consider new ways of approaching and engaging the church constituency. This is especially true if Mennonite Church USA is to successfully capture the imagination of its younger and new members, and create a renewed habit of giving in support of the missional church into the future.

7 7 REPORT OF FINDINGS RESEARCH STUDY OF DENOMINATIONAL GIVING MENNONITE CHURCH USA Context for Study The Situation Mennonite Church USA (MC USA) has experienced significant changes in recent years: Following the integration of the Mennonite Church and the General Conference Mennonite Church, a new organizational structure now provides direction for the newly formed denomination. A funding plan ( first fruits ) was designed and implemented to provide the financial resources needed by denominational agencies, programs and services. To date, that funding mechanism has not generated the level of congregational giving needed to fulfill current commitments. It is imperative for the future of Mennonite Church USA that leadership has an understanding of the attitudes, behaviors and will of congregational members pertaining to denominational services and the funding of these ministries. Research Objectives 1. To explore if Mennonites give, to whom and what, how much they give, and their propensity to give to the congregation and/or Mennonite agencies. 2. To identify the reasons why people give financial resources and the justifications shared for not doing so (or not giving at the ten percent level). 3. To understand how attitudes toward the denomination and its services impact individual giving patterns. 4. To identify what actions and attitudes are likely to lead to greater levels of support for MC USA and its ministries at all levels.

8 8 5. To generate new ideas that will garner support for denominational efforts and finance the operations of MC USA into the future. 6. To understand the responses that Mennonites want from the denomination in return for their faithfulness. 7. To understand the kinds of financial appeals to which Mennonites most readily respond. Target Audiences for Research The study gathered data from a sample of lay members of Mennonite Church USA. Attention was given to assure appropriate proportions of the following subgroups within the church. 1. Persons of age 40 and younger 2. Persons of age 41 and older 3. Persons from multi-racial (non-anglo) populations The study was designed to appropriately reflect the current membership of Mennonite Church USA. It was not intended to produce statistically reliable findings for various cross-sections of the denomination, such as analyses of individual conferences. Research Methodology Step One: Framing focus groups using an aided format Two exploratory focus groups were conducted at the beginning of the research process to assess responses to the research objectives in qualitative form. Rich Gerig facilitated both group discussions. One focus group was conducted in Goshen, Ind., and the other in Souderton, Pa. A total of 14 persons attended the sessions, representing a cross-section of congregations in each geographical area. Concern was given to assure that representations of multi-racial members and prior members of the General Conference and Mennonite Church were present. An identical format was used in both groups, designed to achieve the stated objectives (see Appendix I). Information gathered was important in testing our assumptions, gaining important insights, and framing the issues that led to the creation of the questionnaire used later in telephone interviews. The focus group research included an aided response format. With this approach, participants were asked to complete a brief questionnaire prior to attending the focus group session. Therefore, each person came prepared to talk about specific issues and to state opinions prior to interacting with other participants. We then collected and analyzed the questionnaires after the focus

9 9 group sessions, tracking how individual opinions differed from group sentiment and monitoring changes in positions that occurred during the group interaction. Each focus group discussion was audio taped. Both the facilitator and the research director analyzed the discussions independently. Comparisons between the two focus group summaries were then made. Responses made on the pre-focus group questionnaire were also compared with the comments made in the group discussions. Step Two: Questionnaire data collection using telephone interviews Using the information gathered in the focus group sessions, AAI designed a questionnaire to collect specific data relative to the research objectives through telephone interviews. After making multiple revisions, we pilot tested the instrument. The instrument collected both quantifiable data and open-ended responses within an average interview time of 18 minutes. A total of 600 fully completed interviews were successfully conducted. Relative to the total population, this result produced findings at +/- four percent of the population mean at a 95 percent confidence level. All statistical conclusions were made with an alpha value of less than.05. Conclusions relative to specific inferences were within 95 percent certainty. AAI used two primary lists for the sample frame of the research study. One was a list of members of Mennonite Mutual Aid (MMA). The second was a list of MC USA members who are not MMA members. Both lists were stratified into two groups by age and attendance in a multi-racial congregation. Upon the recommendation of Mennonite Mutual Aid, PGM, Inc., of Salt Lake City, was hired to conduct the actual phone interviews. After producing a random sampling, PGM completed the calls using prescribed proportions. The sampling targets were selected to reflect the sub-population proportions within MC USA membership. Additionally, the targets yielded sufficient data to enable appropriate statistical testing. The following represents the goal for each group and the actual number of interviews completed after totally exhausting the available sample frames. 1. Random sample of persons age 40 and younger 200 goal and 212 completed 2. Random sample of persons of age 41 and older 350 goal and 344 completed 3. Random sample of persons from a multi-racial congregation 50 goal and 44 completed

10 10 An average incidence rate of 80 percent was achieved (the percentage of calls completed of those attempted). This rate varied significantly depending on the individual group. The incidence rate for MMA members of age 41 and older was 88 percent. Non-MMA members over 41 had an incidence rate of 76 percent, as did the MMA members of age 40 and younger. Younger persons who are not MMA members responded at a 71 percent rate. The response rate for persons in the multi-racial groups was lower: 67 percent of this population that are MMA members responded and 53 percent of the non-mma members participated. (See Appendix II for the complete status report from PGM.) To ensure accurate data collection by PGM, we took several steps. First, AAI created a packet of training material for the callers (see Appendix III). This material familiarized callers with Mennonite Church USA and the objectives of the study. Importantly, the research director then traveled to Salt Lake City to conduct on-site training. During the first evening of calling, the research director observed the data collection process, critiqued caller performance, made adjustments in the instrument to increase effectiveness, and interviewed callers to verify satisfactory interviews. After final changes were made to the instrument, callers completed 600 interviews. A PGM project manager monitored 10 percent of the calls for quality control. PGM submitted a daily status report to the research director and forwarded the entire set of data in a Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) file for analysis when the study was complete. Extensive open-ended comments were also obtained from the interviews. These valuable data create a story that allows better understanding of the statistical record. To properly analyze the open-ended data, two students from Anderson University joined the research staff. The students individually read and then categorized all of the responses pertinent to the specific questions asked. They created summary responses that captured the findings for each question and then made comparisons. This information provided cross-verification of the study findings. Interpretations of open-ended responses relative to each research objective were then woven into the final analysis. Step Three: Idea testing focus groups After the completion of data collection and preliminary analysis from the telephone survey, Rich Gerig conducted several small group interviews. The purpose of these activities was two-fold. First, the groups allowed for probing into specific areas of interest that emerged from the questionnaire responses. Second, they provided for a qualitative testing of ideas, thus helping to verify findings.

11 11 In an attempt to achieve a broad denominational perspective, these final interviews were held in Lancaster, Pa. (representatives of Atlantic Coast Conference congregations) and Phoenix. A modified aided-response questionnaire was again used. Appendix I contains supporting material for both focus group discussions. Comment AAI conducted its research analysis with the assumption that responses made to the telephone interviews accurately reflect actual behaviors. In this study, persons were asked to disclose financial information without time to provide actual figures. Therefore, we acknowledge some risk of inaccurate answers or responses that may not conform to expected behavior. Profile of Respondents A profile of the respondents, using various demographic variables is summarized here. Variables included were sex, age, ethnic/racial, income, state and conference. In addition, the person s level of involvement in the church and the diversity of the congregation attended were explored. Finally, we posed general questions about theological and political views. All of the variables are important for statistical analysis that explains differences in attitudes and behaviors. Demographic Profile AAI designed this study to yield a respondent profile matching what is known about the population profile of members in Mennonite Church USA. With the caveats noted below, that outcome was essentially accomplished. First, 60 percent of the respondents were male. Analysis will be conducted to determine if attitudes and behaviors differ by gender. Until that information is available, we note that males may be over-represented in the study. Approximately 10 percent of the total membership of MC USA is non- Anglo. Members of multi-racial congregations in this study represent a just over seven percent of the total. This figure is less than the desired proportion, but higher than is typical in survey research. The total number of 44 multi-racial respondents allows for some statistical analysis to glean a greater understanding of this important part of the constituency. The age distribution reflects what is known about the population. Approximately 40 percent of the current members are projected to be 40 years of age or

12 12 younger. Thirty-six percent of the survey respondents are between 18 and 40 years old. The geographic distribution of respondents also matches the proportions in MC USA membership. This is true for both representations by state and by conference. Income distribution suggests that 15 percent of the respondents have household incomes greater than $80,000. Forty-two percent report incomes less than $40,000. Forty-three percent have incomes between $60,000 and $80,000. This distribution suggests a lower average household income in the membership than anticipated. Effort was made in the interview process to solicit total household gross income (defined as income before taxes). As is true on all self-reported survey studies, there is a chance that the responses are not completely accurate. Whether or not household income is understated cannot be ascertained. These results suggest limited income potential within the denomination. And, as will be explained later, level of income is related to various attitudes toward giving to MC USA. What income group best fits your total household gross income (before taxes) in 2004? Below $20, 000 Between $20,000 and $40,000 Between $40,000 and $60,000 Between $60,000 and $80,000 Between $80,000 and $100,000 Between $100,000 and $150,000 Between $150,000 and $250,000 Ov er $250,000 Frequency Percent Percent Percent For the most part, then, the demographic profile for this study suggests that the respondents appropriately reflect the general membership of the church. Congregational Life We asked a question to determine the nature of the respondents congregations. The majority of respondents said they attend a blended Mennonite congregation. This is understood as a congregation that represents a mixture of

13 13 persons who grew up Mennonite and those that did not. Thirty-two percent of the respondents describe their congregation as ethnic Mennonite (as majority of persons have family roots in a Mennonite community linked to immigrants from Europe or Russia). Forty-four respondents (seven percent) affirm that they are part of a multi-racial congregation. Of all respondents, four percent identify themselves as new Mennonite someone attending a congregation where the majority of persons were not raised in the Mennonite church. From the following options, which best describes your congregation? Multi-racial (a mix of persons of dif f erent racial groups) Ethnic-Mennonite (majority persons who have f amily roots in a Mennonite community linked to immigrants f rom Europe or Russia) New Mennonite (majority persons who were not raised in the Mennonite tradition) Blended Mennonite (a combination between persons that grew up Mennonite and those that did not) Frequency Percent Percent Percent An important variable is the level of church involvement expressed by the respondents. Of those persons confirmed as members of MC USA, seven percent say they are not active in their church. Fourteen percent say that they are somewhat active (attend some worship services). Another 32 percent of the respondents claim to be active members (regularly attend services and go to congregational activities). Significantly, 48 percent of the respondents say that they are very active (a person who attends most services, attends activities and is involved in some form of active ministry/leadership). Several interesting statistical relationships were found between level of church involvement and other demographic variables. First, younger persons are less likely to say they are very active. As expected, those older than 65 years of age are very likely to say that they are active, but not as likely as those just younger to say that they are very active.

14 14 How active are you currently in your congregation? Not active (do not regularly attend worship serv ices) Somewhat activ e (attend some worship serv ices) Activ e (regularly attend services and go to congregational activ ities) Very activ e (attend most serv ices, attend activ ities and in some f orm of activ e ministry/leadership) Frequency Percent Percent Percent A second relationship suggests that persons in multi-racial congregations are more likely than statistically expected to say that they are very involved in their congregations. Interestingly, those identifying themselves as attending an ethnic Mennonite congregation are more likely than expected to be not active and less likely to say that they are very active. Comparatively, those persons in blended congregations are more likely to say that they are very active. Gender or income is not related to level of church involvement. Given that 48 percent of the respondents claim to be very active in their congregations, there is the possibility that survey participants reflect those in the population that are most involved in the church. Persons marginally involved in the church may be underrepresented. This may mean that the attitudes and behavior of financial giving may reflect the best case scenario within the membership. Theological and Political Categories Theological and political positions are interesting, especially as they will later be related to views toward the denomination and giving. Mennonite Church USA appears to be fairly evenly split between those who consider themselves conservative and those identifying themselves as liberal. When asked to categorize theological views, 51 percent use the term, conservative, with eight percent indicating very conservative. Forty-five percent of the respondents say that they are theologically liberal (11 percent very liberal ). Four percent chose not to respond to the questions.

15 15 What category best fits your theological positions? Very conserv ativ e Somewhat conserv ativ e Somewhat liberal Very liberal (if needed-do NOT OFFER: "no response") Frequency Percent Percent Percent A similar pattern is found when respondents are asked to categorize their political views. Fifty-one percent say they are conservative (15 percent very conservative ). Thirty percent say that they are liberal (8 percent very liberal ). Twenty percent say they are politically independent. What category best fits your political views? Very conserv ativ e Somewhat conserv ativ e Independent Somewhat liberal Very liberal Frequency Percent Percent Percent Are there any patterns between demographic variables and theological or political perspectives? None are found. No relationships are found between theological conservatism-liberalism and age, gender, income, church involvement, and congregational type. The broad distribution of theological and political views within the church is consistent, regardless of sub-groups. Respondents were not asked to share their educational level or vocation. From general studies, it can be hypothesized that higher levels of education are likely associated with more liberal theological and political orientations. This notion cannot be tested with these data, however. What can be inferred is that level of income is not associated with theological/political views.

16 16 Summary of Responses for Research Objectives Objective 1 To explore if Mennonites give, to whom and what, how much they give, and their propensity to give to the congregation and/or Mennonite agencies. Do Mennonites give? The questionnaire first asked respondents to identify if they supported a broad group of activities. Then the focus turned to financial contributions. In what ways are Mennonites most likely to give? A strong majority of respondents say that they have given in the following ways in the last year. Given non-financial contributions to meet human or church needs: 87% Given time and talent as a lay leader in my local congregation: 75% Prayed for the leadership of Mennonite Church USA: 83% Given money to my local congregation: 97% Given financial resources in support of specific Mennonite ministries beyond the local congregation: 80% Personally encouraged my pastor or another leader in the church: 92% Amount given to any charity We asked respondents what percent of their annual household income is contributed to any form of charity. The responses suggest that members of Mennonite Church USA do give to charity. Thirty-one percent give approximately 10 percent and 29 percent give beyond that level. According to this study, the typical MC USA member gives just less than 10 percent of income to charity. The median and mode suggest that the average Mennonite gives 10 percent to charity. Analysis was conducted to determine if level of giving to charity is related to any demographic variables. Several patterns emerged: First, at the highest giving level (greater than 10 percent of income), persons expressing theological and political conservatism are most prominent. The relationship suggests that conservatives are most likely to give more than 10 percent of their incomes to charity. Strong statistical relationships also suggest that giving levels are related to age. Persons older than 40 are likely to give the highest percentage. Rate of giving is not related to income.

17 17 Persons attending congregations characterized as multi-racial are more likely to give a higher percentage of household income to charity, compared to the non-diverse congregations. As is expected, those persons most involved in the life of the church are most likely to give a higher percentage of income to charity. Approximately what percentage of your annual household gross income (before taxes) do you give to any form of charity or ministry? Less than 1% Between 1 and 5% Between 6 and 9% Approximately 10% Greater than 10% Frequency Percent Percent Percent Amount given to Mennonite Church USA Thirty-four percent say that less than half of their total giving goes to any ministry of Mennonite Church USA. Sixty-six percent give half or more of their total giving to MC USA, with 13 percent of this total saying that they give all of their charity money to Mennonite Church USA ministries. The average contribution to MC USA from members appears to fall between half and a majority of their total giving. Several interesting relationships emerge when looking at giving patterns to Mennonite Church USA and various demographic variables: First, there is evidence that persons identifying themselves as theologically conservative are less likely to be giving half or more of charitable contributions to MC USA. This may suggest that persons with a conservative theological viewpoint are more likely to be giving to charity/ministry beyond the denomination. No statistically significant relationship was found, however, for political conservatism. As expected, persons most involved in their local congregations are also most likely to be giving a higher percentage of total giving to Mennonite Church USA. There is also evidence that persons attending a multi-racial congregation are less likely to be giving most of their contributions to the ministry of MC USA. Other demographic variables such as gender, income, age and type of congregation are not related to variation in the degree to which charitable contributions are channeled to Mennonite Church USA.

18 18 Predictive model for level of giving: total giving to charity What variables are most predictive of the percentage of household income given to any form of charity? We developed a model, using stepwise multiple regression, to answer this question. This statistic allows the identification of the most significant correlations, one variable at a time and controlling for other variables, until the most important variables are identified. The process led to seven variables being found as predictive of a level of giving. They are listed in order of statistical significance. a. The more active the respondents are in the congregation, the more they give to charity. b. When respondents say that they give out of the habit of giving back to God a part of what has been given to me, they are more likely to give a higher percentage of income to charity. c. Persons of an older age are more likely to give a higher percentage to charity. d. If respondents say, my financial ability to give to church and charity has improved in recent years, they are more likely to give a higher percentage to charity. Note that income level is not in the model. It appears that relative financial health, in comparison to prior ability, is more important than absolute income level. e. Higher levels of giving come from persons who have a tendency to give to ministry of Mennonite Church USA beyond giving to the local congregation. f. Persons who give a lower percentage of income to charity say that they are motivated to give in response to a specific need. It appears that these people give to specific concerns when they are presented, but are less likely to give regularly and in higher percentages. g. Respondents who say that the current denominational structure is valued and that funds will be made available as people become aware of the need are less likely to be giving a higher percentage of income to charity. If persons are less likely to agree with this statement, they are more likely to be giving a higher percentage to charity. This profile of the strong charitable giver suggests that giving is a function of: Personal commitment to the church A habit of giving A giving worldview that extends beyond the local level A perception that persons are doing better financially than in prior years

19 19 Predictive model for level of giving to Mennonite Church USA Two variables are most predictive of the level of charitable giving that is designated for the ministry of Mennonite Church USA. First, persons in the habit of giving out of giving back to God a part of what has been given to me are most likely to give a higher percentage to MC USA. This reinforces the importance of the habit of giving for both the willingness to give and the propensity to give to MC USA. Second, persons who believe in the autonomy of the local congregation tend to give less of their total charitable contributions to any ministry of Mennonite Church USA. This is indicated by the finding that the probability of giving a higher percentage of to MC USA is inversely related to the belief that all giving from individuals should go first to the local congregation, and then congregational leaders should decide whether or not funds will be given to the area conference and/or denominational interests. A person who disagrees with this statement is most likely to be giving a majority of personal contributions to some level of ministry in Mennonite Church USA. Predictive models for persons under age 40 compared to those older Persons older in age are more likely to give a higher percentage of income to charity. Normal family life cycle patterns are apparent. Persons under age 30 give the lowest percentage of income to charity. Percentages tend to increase and peak prior to the age 65. Income tends to go down after retirement and there is some evidence of an adjustment down in the percentage of income given to charity after retirement. The category of less than 40 years old does not yield a lower percentage of total giving to Mennonite Church USA when compared to the older group. Rather, younger persons propensity to give to MC USA is approximately the same as the older generation. While young people give a lower percentage to charity and tend to make less money, they are not necessarily less loyal to the denomination. And while there is a small segment of the younger category that is less involved in the church, compared to the older members, there remains a strong majority of the younger Mennonites that is very active, very encouraged and very giving to Mennonite Church USA. For the majority of persons in the younger category the issue, then, is not the willingness to give. Instead, the issue is more the perceived ability to give. What is established is that they are less likely to be in the habit of giving. Fostering a higher level of giving in the future is likely a function of establishing the habit of giving at an early age.

20 20 Analysis was conducted to determine what variables best predict a willingness to give among respondents less than 40 years of age. Then comparisons were made with the model created for respondents over 40. This analysis was conducted on both dependent variables giving to all charity and proportion of giving contributed to Mennonite Church USA. What is most predictive of a higher percentage of giving to any form of charity for persons under 40? The following variables are most important: Being active in the congregation Believing that it is important to give out of the habit of giving back to God a part of what has been given to me A stronger intention to one day give a significant sum of money to some form of ministry Stronger financial ability to give in recent years An inverse relationship between higher giving and the belief that the concept of first fruits giving is motivating persons to financially support the ministry of Mennonite Church USA. This suggests that the young people who believe that it is motivating are likely to be the ones giving less to charity. The only new information that is gained when looking at the dependent variable of the proportion of charitable giving going to Mennonite Church USA is 1) more conservative persons are less likely to give a higher proportion to the denomination and 2) they are more likely to say that they are motivated to give in response to my love for Jesus. Only one difference appears between the models for persons under 40 years of age and those over 40. In the case of the older persons, there is evidence that giving increases to MC USA when the respondent believes that the concept of first fruits giving is motivating persons to financially support Mennonite Church USA. To whom do Mennonites give? It has been established that the primary beneficiary of giving is the local congregation. Ninety-seven percent of the persons say that they have given some money to their local congregations in the last year. It is also clear that a significant number of the membership believe that it is important to give beyond the local congregation. Eighty percent of the respondents say that they have given to ministry beyond the local congregation. Furthermore, 88 percent agree (with 53 percent saying strongly agree ) that their congregations have a responsibility to allocate a percentage of contributions to support area conference and denominational programming.

21 21 What percentage of congregational income do they believe should be designated to area conference or denominational interests? Respondents were asked to share the percentage they think should be given. The average suggestion was that 17 percent of congregational income should go other levels of the denomination. The mode and median suggestion was 10 percent, with the range from one percent to over 50 percent. he next statement is... My congregation has a responsibility to all ocate a percentage of its funds to support area conference and denominational programming. Agree Strongly Agree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly No opinion Frequency Percent Percent Percent Are members willing to personally give to needs beyond the congregation if congregational leadership does not do so? Sixty-four percent say that they believe that they should give to denominational interests even if the congregation does not. Of those feeling this way, 22 percent strongly agree with the statement, suggesting that giving to denominational interests is very important. I have a responsibili ty to contribute funds indi vidual ly to support denominational programmi ng, if the local congregation does not do so adequately. Agree Strongly Agree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly No opinion Frequency Percent Percent Percent For what is personal designated giving earmarked? When members designate giving to a Mennonite agency or ministry, to what do they give? A long and diverse list of ministries resulted from the open-ended question (see list in Appendix IV). The entity most often identified was Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), with 36 percent of the respondents saying that they make designated contributions to that organization. Various church camps are mentioned by approximately 17 percent of the respondents. The area conference is mentioned by 14 percent. Mennonite Mission Network is identified

22 22 for designated gifts by 11 percent of the respondents. Another seven percent say that they give to Mennonite Disaster Service. After that, a list of colleges/universities, led by Goshen College, appears followed by other private Mennonite schools. The list of other entities within Mennonite Church USA that receive designed gifts from Mennonite members is long and can be categorized into four groups: a. 27 different ministry organizations, several of which are not entities of MC USA b. area conferences c. Christian camps d. educational institutions There is some apparent confusion as to what organizations are actually associated with MC USA. For what purpose would persons give $1 million? To broaden the analysis, respondents were asked what they would give to if they had $1 million to contribute. The question was asked in open-ended format. It should be noted that only 29 percent say that they anticipate the capacity to contribute a significant gift (defined as $50,000). Reported income levels also suggest that a small proportion of the population is likely to be in a financial position to make a $1 million gift. you intend to one day be in a position financially to contribute a significant g to an organization/ministry of your choice, for example over $50,000? Definitely Yes Somewhat Y es Somewhat No Def initely No No opinion Frequency Percent Percent Percent Findings are interesting and may suggest priorities. By a significant margin, the most often cited recipient of a large gift is Mennonite Central Committee. In fact, MCC is mentioned more often than the local congregation. Interestingly, the same 36 percent of the sample that say they currently give to MCC also say they would give their $1 million donation to MCC. Those persons who are most committed to the total ministry of Mennonite Church USA and display less of a congregation-only mentality are those most likely to support MCC. They are also more likely to be older and more liberal.

23 23 Importantly, these persons are most likely to be offering a higher percentage of total giving to Mennonite ministries. And it should also be noted that persons saying they would give to MCC are most likely to not split their designated giving among multiple organizations. (There is a sub-set of denominationally oriented persons who say that they would make their substantial gift to the Mennonite church in general. However, this group is much less prominent. Ten percent say that they would designate their gift for some form of service or mission work beyond MCC. Four percent of the respondents identify Mennonite Education Agency as the recipient of such a gift.) The second segment of large givers (approximately 26 percent) would give the money directly to the local congregation and let the leaders disperse to other places based upon needs apparent at that particular time. It appears that this group aligns with the persons who are more congregational in orientation and are less likely to be giving to Mennonite Church USA ministries beyond the local congregation. An important third group is apparent. This sector of the membership indicates they would designate a $1 million gift to a variety of non-mennonite charities and causes. These people tend to be conservative in their political and theological views. It is important to remember that these persons are currently the largest givers to charity, but are less likely to forward a majority or all of their giving to the ministries of MC USA. These members are also less likely to be encouraged about the future of the church. The final large group of organizations selected for major gifts are the educational institutions, primarily the colleges/universities. Almost six percent of the respondents name a specific Mennonite college/university that would receive their $1 million gifts. Objective 2 To identify the reasons why people give financial resources and the justifications shared for not doing so (or not giving at the ten percent level). What motivates Mennonites to give? A series of possible reasons were presented to respondents. The nature of the statements tended to generate positive responses. So, the most critical motivations tend to be a matter of magnitude. When analyzing percentages of income given to charity, four motivations are statistically correlated. The most important variable is the habit of giving back to

24 24 God from what he has given. Other variables in the model are: out of the abundance of personal resources and in response to my love for Jesus. An inverse relationship exists between giving levels and the motivation of giving to meet specific needs. Statistically speaking, one motivational variable serves to predict a high percentage of giving that is directed to Mennonite Church USA ministries the habit of giving. This one motivation is the primary driver to both the propensity to give and the level of giving to the ministry of Mennonite Church USA. Relationships between the various motivations and other demographic variables were explored. Very few relationships are found that explain variations in the importance of the motivation and other demographic variables. Out of the abundance of personal resources I have been given. Missing Definitely Yes Somewhat Yes Somewhat No Definitely No No opinion Sy stem Frequency Percent Percent Percent Generally speaking, respondents appear to be giving out of a sense of personal abundance. But, income levels do not indicate that this is out of wealth. Persons with higher levels of income are more likely to say that they are giving out of abundance. Regardless of income level, members who are most involved in church are more likely to say that they are giving out of abundance. Out of the habit of giving back to God a part of what has been given to me. Missing Definitely Yes Somewhat Yes Somewhat No Definitely No No opinion Sy stem Frequency Percent Percent Percent

25 25 It has already been established that the habit of giving back to God a part of what has been given to me is the most predictive of a giving spirit. Younger members are less likely to strongly agree compared to older members. But, both age groups are most likely to give when this habit is established. One of the challenges may be to encourage and develop this habit at an early age. It apparently is a habit that informs behavior for life. This habit is most pronounced among those describing themselves as conservative, both theologically and politically. Because God expects me to give part of my income back to God. Missing Definitely Yes Somewhat Yes Somewhat No Definitely No No opinion Sy stem Frequency Percent Percent Percent Persons strongly agreeing that they are giving out of this expectation tend to be highly involved in congregational life, and theologically and politically conservative. If people are more liberal in their views, they are less likely to say that this motivation is very important to their giving patterns. So that I can benefit from the tax deduction. Missing Definitely Yes Somewhat Yes Somewhat No Definitely No No opinion Sy stem Frequency Percent Percent Percent Overwhelmingly, members do not acknowledge that the tax deduction is the motivation for giving. The only exception is some statistical evidence that the benefit of tax deduction is most motivating for those with higher income.