20 Engagement Signals. Monitored Continuously. The Alert That Fires Before the Relationship Ends.

The development director looked at Jennifer Martinez's giving record and saw six consecutive years of on time annual gifts. Nothing in the giving record indicated a problem.

The Donor Risk Alert looked at Jennifer Martinez's full engagement profile and saw a risk score of 87 out of 100. Critical. The alert had fired 47 days ago. Nobody had seen it because the Donor Risk Alert was not yet deployed.

What Continuous Monitoring Actually Means

Most donor monitoring happens at intervals. Quarterly lapsed donor reports. Annual wealth screening. Event attendance reviewed after the gala. By the time any of those reports surface a risk, the relationship has already cooled past the point of easy recovery.

Continuous monitoring means the moment a new signal arrives, the score updates. An email opened. An event declined. A website visit. A gift that did not arrive on its historical cadence. Each signal is weighted, combined, and recalculated against the donor's baseline in real time.

The result is not a static risk label. It is a living score that reflects the current state of the relationship, updated as often as the donor interacts with the organization or fails to.

The 20 Signals the Donor Risk Alert Monitors

No single signal tells the full story. The Donor Risk Alert monitors the complete behavioral signature across five categories. Each category contains multiple signals, and the system weights them based on their historical predictive value for your specific donor population.

Communication signals complete the picture: survey response history, response rate to personal outreach, days since last personal contact, and days since last donor initiated contact. Together these twenty signals produce a behavioral signature far more accurate than giving history alone.

How the Risk Score Is Calculated

The system does not treat every signal equally. Some signals are stronger predictors of lapse than others. A drop in email open rate may carry less weight than a missed expected gift. A sudden stop in website visits may matter more for a donor who previously visited weekly than for one who never visited.

The Donor Risk Alert weights each signal based on its historical predictive value for lapse within your specific donor population. It compares the donor's current pattern against their own baseline, not against a generic average. A donor who was highly engaged and dropped off scores differently than a donor who was always moderately engaged.

The output is a risk score from 0 to 100. Scores below 30 are healthy. Scores between 30 and 60 warrant attention. Scores above 60 are elevated. Scores above 80 are critical. The threshold for alert firing is configurable by your team based on capacity and intervention strategy.

The Jennifer Martinez Case

Jennifer's giving record showed six consecutive annual gifts. Clean. Consistent. No warning. Her engagement profile showed something different. Her email open rate had dropped from 68 percent over the previous 18 months to 31 percent over the previous 90 days. Her click through rate had fallen from 14 percent to 3 percent. She had not attended an event in 14 months after attending two per year for four consecutive years. She had not visited the website in 47 days after visiting consistently every two to three weeks for years.

In combination, those signals produced an 87 out of 100 risk score. The behavioral signature of a donor whose relationship with the organization was cooling.

What the Alert Looks Like When It Fires

The development director's dashboard showed Jennifer Martinez at the top of the at risk list on a Tuesday morning. Risk score: 87. Category: Critical. Days since last gift: 341. Days until renewal expected: 24.

Below the risk score: the specific signals driving it, each one with a trend line. Below the signals: a recommended retention action. Below the recommendation: a draft outreach message, generated from Jennifer's engagement profile and the relevant program update, ready for the development director to review, personalize, and send.

The development director read the draft. She added two sentences referencing a conversation she remembered having with Jennifer at the last gala. She sent it. Jennifer responded within 24 hours. She renewed. The alert fired at the right moment. The human added the right touch. The relationship was saved inside the window where it was still savable.

The Operational Shift

Before StewardWise AI, donor monitoring was reactive. After, it is predictive.

The development team stops generating reports to identify who might be at risk. The full donor file is monitored continuously. The ones who need attention get it at the right moment. The leak slows.

Your CRM was never designed to monitor the full behavioral signature of every donor relationship. StewardWise AI was.