Nonprofit-First: Considerations for Platforms Enabling Charitable Donations: A Message to AFP Members from Art Taylor
AFP is a globally recognized leader in the fundraising profession and prides itself on holding its members, affiliates, and sponsors to the highest level of professional practice and ethics, as expressed in the organization’s Code of Ethical Standards. It is in that spirit that I am sharing these considerations today.
For months now, our field has been grappling with a difficult and consequential debate: how should digital giving platforms operate, and what obligations do they owe to the nonprofits and donors they serve? The concerns raised have been real. Some platforms have collected and displayed information about nonprofits without their knowledge. Some have not been transparent about how fees work. Some have created donation mechanisms that organizations never asked for and cannot easily correct.
At the same time, the stakes of overreaction are equally real. As my colleagues Shannon McCracken of The Nonprofit Alliance and Woodrow Rosenbaum of GivingTuesday and I argued in a recent opinion piece in the Chronicle of Philanthropy, the digital giving infrastructure at the center of this debate moves billions of dollars to nonprofits each year — including an estimated $5 billion through workplace giving channels alone and $2 to $3 billion in corporate matching funds. GivingTuesday estimates that the United States has $52 billion in unrealized generosity that never reaches nonprofits because the giving process is too cumbersome. Sweeping legislative restrictions or mandatory opt-in requirements, particularly at the state level, risk cutting off that flow entirely — and small and midsize community organizations would bear the heaviest losses.
The shared conclusion in that piece was clear: the field needs accountability, not legislation that could cut off billions in donations.
I promised you that I would deliver something concrete to respond to. What follows is my attempt to do that — a set of considerations for how platforms should operate, offered not as a finished product but as a starting point. I am sharing this because we need something tangible to react to. I expect disagreement on some points and agreement on others. Both are welcome. That dialogue is the goal.
I am pleased that both GivingTuesday and The Nonprofit Alliance have endorsed this approach, and that the AFP Ethics Committee has found these considerations consistent with AFP’s ethical standards.
“GivingTuesday and The Nonprofit Alliance welcome Art Taylor’s leadership in releasing these considerations. Both organizations are committed to working alongside Art and colleagues across the field, including platforms, nonprofits, and donors, to gather feedback, build alignment, and strengthen these ideas over time. This is exactly the kind of effort the moment calls for.” - GivingTuesday and The Nonprofit Alliance
“The AFP Ethics Committee has reviewed these considerations and finds them consistent with AFP’s long-standing ethical commitments to donors, nonprofits, and the fundraising profession. The principles of transparency, donor autonomy, and accountability reflected here align directly with AFP’s Code of Ethical Standards and the Donor Bill of Rights. Platforms that handle charitable funds have an ethical obligation to the donors and organizations they serve. These considerations provide a meaningful framework for meeting that obligation.” - AFP Ethics Committee
Why This Matters Now
The controversy of recent months — involving platforms such as GoFundMe, Charity Navigator, PayPal, and others — surfaced genuine failures. Some platforms have not clearly disclosed how they source and display organizational data. Some have not made it obvious that nonprofit descriptions were drawn from public records rather than submitted by the organization itself. Some have not offered clear, low-barrier mechanisms for nonprofits to correct inaccurate information.
The regulatory response has been swift, and in some cases blunt. Nearly two dozen state attorneys general have demanded removal of unauthorized nonprofit pages from platforms. In Alaska, the attorney general filed suit against six crowdfunding platforms for creating donation pages without nonprofit consent. These actions reflect real concerns — but they also risk dismantling infrastructure that many nonprofits, particularly smaller organizations, depend on to be found by new donors.
We cannot afford to lose that infrastructure. We also cannot afford to defend practices that are genuinely harmful to donor trust and nonprofit autonomy. These considerations are my attempt to thread that needle: acknowledging what has gone wrong while preserving what works.
The Five Considerations
1. Fee Transparency
2. Discoverability and Public Data
3. Responsible Data Use
4. Responsible Fund Management
5. Resolution and Accountability
Join the Conversation
These considerations are a starting point, not a final word. I will be hosting member town halls to discuss them and hear your reactions directly. Details will follow shortly. I want to know what resonates, what is missing, and where you think I have it wrong.
I also welcome input from any interested party, inside and outside of our membership, who wants to engage with these ideas.
Author Information
Read More
