Sprint 51 · retention metrics tracker · weekly Monday dashboard

Retention metrics tracker

Eight metrics. Every Monday 09:00 AEDT the retention analyst pulls the numbers, checks the red-lines, and files the delta. Below-baseline three weeks in a row triggers a 30-day stewardship review. Silent underperformance is the failure mode Sprint 51 is built to prevent.

Purpose. This is the operational scoreboard for the stewardship function. It defines the 8 metrics that get pulled every Monday, the baselines they are compared against (Blackbaud, M+R, industry medians where public), the red-lines that trigger escalation, and the end-of-Y1 targets. It also documents the retention forecast model — the shape the 48→56→64 Blackbaud curve should take when fitted to LWD’s actual first-cohort behaviour.

Ownership. AI retention analyst (weekly ownership; Monday pull; delta note filed by 11:00 AEDT) · AI CMO (monthly review; spec updates) · Carla (quarterly review + any red-line escalation).

Rhythm. Weekly (Monday) pull · monthly (last Friday) roll-up · quarterly (end March/Jun/Sep/Dec) trend read against Blackbaud curve.

The single failure mode Sprint 51 is built to prevent. Retention infrastructure that ships and then goes silent. The tracker is the anti-drift instrument: if the retention analyst does not file the Monday pull, the miss surfaces at the next weekly management review. If the delta note reports underperformance on any metric for 3 consecutive weeks, a 30-day stewardship review is triggered automatically. Silent decline is impossible if the tracker runs.

1 — The 8 metrics

1

Y1→Y2 retention rate on recurring cohort

Source: CRM — count of recurring-active donors 365 days after first gift / count of recurring-active donors at first gift.

Baseline: 48% (Blackbaud Australian charity median for recurring giving)

Red-line: < 42% at end of Y1 (Dec 2027) — six points below Blackbaud median

Target: ≥ 48% by end of Y1 (Dec 2027); ≥ 56% Y2; ≥ 64% Y3

Weekly pull: Trending indicator only during Y1 (the number is not final until Dec 2027); measured as % of Christmas Appeal cohort still-active as of pull date.

2

Involuntary decline recovery rate (7-day)

Source: CRM + payment gateway — count of donors whose card was updated within 7 days of decline / count of donors who received a save-flow email in the pull-week window.

Baseline: 70% (Blackbaud median for Australian recurring-giving programmes with active save-flow)

Red-line: < 60% for 3 consecutive weeks — triggers save-flow template review

Target: ≥ 75% — enabled by Card Account Updater once payment gateway supports it

Weekly pull: Rolling 4-week average; single-week can be noisy on small cohort.

3

Voluntary cancellation rate (monthly, annualised)

Source: CRM — count of donors who actively cancelled in the last 30 days / count of active recurring donors 30 days ago, multiplied by 12 for annualised view.

Baseline: 15–22% annualised (industry range for recurring giving; M+R report)

Red-line: > 25% annualised — investigate whether a specific touchpoint is generating cancellations

Target: ≤ 18% annualised (the low end of industry range)

Weekly pull: Trailing 30-day rate; the rolling window smooths week-on-week volatility on a small cohort.

4

Stewardship email open rate (T1/T2/T3/T6 combined)

Source: Email platform — unique opens / delivered sends over the last quarterly window.

Baseline: 38–44% (M+R Benchmarks for charity stewardship emails; higher than acquisition because the audience is already engaged)

Red-line: < 30% on any single touchpoint type — template review

Target: ≥ 42%

Weekly pull: Only meaningful in months with an active send window (see calendar §1). Otherwise reported as “no send this week.”

5

Unsubscribe rate on stewardship sends

Source: Email platform — unsubscribes / delivered per send.

Baseline: 0.2–0.6% (M+R median for charity stewardship)

Red-line: > 1.0% on any single send — halt the template, investigate before next send

Target: ≤ 0.4%

Weekly pull: Per-send basis. Reported per T-type when a send has fired.

6

Complaints received (retention-related)

Source: /enquire inbox + FIA complaints log — complaints tagged as retention/stewardship-related.

Baseline: 0 (aspirational floor)

Red-line: Any complaint mentioning coercion, guilt, or unauthorised charge — immediate escalation to Carla

Target: 0

Weekly pull: Absolute count over trailing 7 days. Any non-zero week is discussed at monthly review.

7

Q-Impact micro-report click-through rate

Source: Email platform — unique clicks on the “read the full micro-report” link / delivered sends.

Baseline: 8–12% (M+R Benchmarks; stewardship reports typically CTR higher than promotional)

Red-line: < 5% on any single Q-report send — content review before next quarter

Target: ≥ 10%

Weekly pull: Reported in the send-week and the following 2 weeks (long-tail readers).

8

Downgrade rate (recurring-to-lower recurring)

Source: CRM — count of recurring donors whose scheduled amount decreased in last 30 days / total active recurring, annualised.

Baseline: 4–8% annualised (industry range)

Red-line: > 12% annualised — investigate correlation with campaign pressure

Target: ≤ 6% annualised

Weekly pull: Trailing 30-day rate. Downgrade is honoured immediately per retention playbook §7; the metric measures pattern, not incident.

2 — The retention forecast model

The Blackbaud curve (48→56→64) describes what best-practice Australian charities achieve. Fitted to LWD’s cohort, the curve should look like the below. The retention analyst plots actual vs. forecast every quarter; a persistent gap means the model is wrong, the stewardship is wrong, or both.

RETENTION FORECAST — Christmas Appeal 2026 cohort
==================================================

Baseline: Blackbaud Australian recurring-giving median (48% Y1 → 56% Y2 → 64% Y3)
Assumption: Christmas Appeal 2026 cohort as first-cohort baseline; new joiners
            through 2027 anchored to their own T+0 and folded into rolling curve.

           Q1'27  Q2'27  Q3'27  Q4'27  Q1'28  Q2'28  Q3'28  Q4'28
              (Y1 progression)              (Y2 progression)

Retained    100%   82%    72%    62%    56%    54%    52%    50%
% cohort     .     .      .      .      ↑      .      .      .
                                       Y2 anchor
                                       target 56%

Red-line    100%   70%    60%    52%    42%    ...
% cohort                                 ↑
                                       Y2 red-line
                                       (Blackbaud -6pt)

Notes:
- Q1'27 (Jan-Mar) drop from 100 to 82 reflects the 4-week new-donor risk window.
  Involuntary declines dominate this drop; save-flow recovers ~70% of those.
- Q2'27 (Apr-Jun) drop to 72 reflects natural card lifecycle + voluntary
  cancellations spread across the second quarter.
- Q3-Q4'27 stabilises as the cohort's remaining donors are self-selected for
  commitment (Stage 2/3 lifecycle).
- Y2 anchor is 56% (Blackbaud Y2 median). If Y1 actual lands significantly above
  or below forecast, the Y2 curve gets re-anchored at Sprint 55 review.

The curve is a target, not a promise. Overperformance means we adjust the model
upward for the next cohort; underperformance means we investigate the touchpoints.
Why the Q1 drop is expected. The 100% → 82% Q1 drop is not a failure; it is the industry-typical new-donor risk window. What matters is what save-flow catches out of that drop. If Q1 lands at 82% and save-flow attribution shows 60%+ of the 18-point drop was recovered from involuntary declines, we are on track. If Q1 lands at 82% but save-flow recovered only 30%, we have a save-flow problem, not a retention problem.

3 — Escalation triggers

Not every red-line breach requires a Carla escalation. Three categories:

Category Trigger Escalation SLA
P0 — Trust breach Any complaint mentioning coercion, guilt, or unauthorised charge (Metric 6). Any unsubscribe rate > 1.0% on a single send (Metric 5). Immediate to Carla + halt affected touchpoint Within 1 hour of pull discovery
P1 — Systemic underperformance Any red-line breach 3 consecutive weeks (Metrics 2, 3, 4, 7, 8) 30-day stewardship review + AI CMO recommendation to Carla Within 2 weeks of third consecutive breach
P2 — Trend drift Metric worsening for 6 consecutive weeks even if within red-line (any metric) Note at next monthly review + AI CMO recommendation Reported at monthly review; no immediate action
Do not sit on P0. A donor complaint alleging coercion is a Constitutional §4 matter. It does not wait for the next weekly pull. The retention analyst forwards to Carla within the hour of surfacing, then continues normal duties.

4 — Weekly Monday pull — template

The retention analyst files this template each Monday. It lives in the retention/monday-pulls/ folder in the operations drive. AI CMO reviews the last 4 weeks at monthly close.

MONDAY PULL — Week of [DATE]
Filed by: [retention analyst] at [TIME] AEDT
==================================================

M1 Y1→Y2 retention (trending):
    Cohort still-active: [N] of [N_start] = [%]
    Delta vs prior week: [+/- N]
    On track for 48% Y1 target: [YES / NO / MONITOR]

M2 Involuntary decline recovery (7-day):
    Rolling 4-week avg: [%]
    Delta vs prior week: [+/- N pts]
    Baseline check (70%): [ABOVE / BELOW]
    3-week red-line status: [OK / BREACH-1 / BREACH-2 / BREACH-3 → REVIEW]

M3 Voluntary cancellation (30-day annualised):
    Rate: [%]
    Delta: [+/- N pts]
    Baseline (15-22%): [WITHIN / ABOVE / BELOW]

M4 Stewardship email opens (last send):
    Send: [T-type + date]
    Open rate: [%]
    Baseline (38-44%): [WITHIN / ABOVE / BELOW]

M5 Unsubscribe rate (last send):
    Rate: [%]
    Red-line (>1%): [NO / YES-INVESTIGATE]

M6 Complaints:
    Count this week: [N]
    Any P0 flag: [NO / YES-see-escalation]

M7 Q-Impact CTR (if send in window):
    Rate: [%]
    Baseline (8-12%): [WITHIN / ABOVE / BELOW]

M8 Downgrade rate (30-day annualised):
    Rate: [%]
    Baseline (4-8%): [WITHIN / ABOVE / BELOW]

==================================================
ONE-LINE SUMMARY: [analyst free-text, max 40 words]
FLAGS: [none / P0 / P1 / P2 - with detail]
ACTIONS TAKEN THIS WEEK: [bullets]
ACTIONS PROPOSED NEXT WEEK: [bullets]
==================================================

5 — Data hygiene rules

The tracker is only useful if the underlying data is clean. Four rules govern data hygiene:

  1. Attribution must survive. Every donor in the CRM has an attribution_source field populated at first gift (from the Sprint 48 attribution infrastructure). Retention is measured per cohort by attribution source. Undefined attribution = data quality bug, not a legitimate cohort.
  2. Involuntary vs voluntary must be separated. Metrics 2 and 3 are never combined into a single “churn rate.” The CRM tags every cancellation with either reason:involuntary-[gateway-code] or reason:voluntary-[category]. Reports that mix them are wrong.
  3. Test sends are excluded. Internal test-send addresses (marked test:true in the CRM) do not count in open/click/unsubscribe calculations. Weekly pull filters these out at query time.
  4. The Monday pull is timestamped and immutable. Once filed, the pull is not edited. Corrections go in the following Monday’s pull with a note. This is an integrity discipline — retrospective adjustment of numbers erodes trust in the tracker.