Should Your Nonprofit Add Gamification? 5 Questions to Ask First

The Gamification Trap

You’re in a meeting. Someone—probably someone who just got back from a conference—says: “We should gamify our fundraising campaign.”

Heads nod. It sounds exciting. Modern. Engaging.

“Let’s add leaderboards! And badges! And… what else? Points? Levels? Like Pokémon Go but for donations!”

Everyone’s enthusiastic. You start researching vendors. You get quotes. Some are $15K. Some are $75K+. You’re not sure what the difference is, but you know you want “gamification.”

Here’s what happens next in most cases:

Scenario A: You build it. It launches. Nobody uses it. You spent $50K on leaderboards that 12 people checked once. Your team shrugs and says “I guess our donors don’t like gamification.”

Scenario B: You build it. People use it initially. Then engagement drops. Maintaining it becomes a burden. By year two, it’s outdated and nobody wants to pay to update it.

Scenario C: You build it. It’s wildly successful. But you didn’t plan for scale. Now you’re manually calculating badge awards for 500 people and drowning in spreadsheets.

Here’s the truth: Gamification isn’t the problem in any of these scenarios. The problem is that gamification was added without asking the right questions first.

Gamification works. We’ve seen it increase donations by 40-50% for the right organizations. We’ve built gamified systems for campaigns that raised $3M+ with 70% participant retention rates.

But it doesn’t work for everyone. And when it’s implemented wrong, it’s an expensive mistake.

This post will help you figure out if gamification is right for your nonprofit—before you spend a dollar building it.

We’ll walk through 5 critical questions. Answer them honestly. By the end, you’ll know whether gamification is a strategic investment or a shiny distraction.

What We Actually Mean By “Gamification”

Before we assess if you need it, let’s clarify what we’re talking about.

Gamification in fundraising means: Applying game mechanics—progress tracking, competition, recognition, rewards, achievement—to make giving more engaging, motivating, and habit-forming.

It’s NOT:

• Turning fundraising into a literal game
• Adding cartoons and coins to your donation page
• Making it “fun” instead of mission-focused

It IS:

• Progress bars showing how close you are to a goal
• Leaderboards creating friendly competition between teams, schools, or cities
• Badges recognizing milestones (first donation, $500 raised, 10 social shares)
• Challenges adding urgency (“Raise $100 in the next hour for bonus entry”)
• Rewards incentivizing specific actions (t-shirt at $250, VIP experience at $1K)
• Community features making donors feel part of something bigger

The goal: Make the experience of supporting your cause more engaging so people give more, give more often, and bring others along.

Real example: Instead of just “Donate,” you show:

• “You’ve raised $340 of your $500 goal (68%)” ← Progress
• “You’re #7 on the individual leaderboard” ← Competition
• “Earn your Goal Crusher badge at $500” ← Achievement
• “5 people have donated because you shared” ← Social proof

That’s gamification. And when it’s done right, it transforms passive donors into engaged participants.

But only if you answer these 5 questions correctly first.

Question 1: Do You Have Recurring Campaigns or One-Time Events?

This is the make-or-break question.

Why It Matters

Gamification infrastructure—leaderboards, badge systems, progress tracking, reward management—takes time and money to build.

If you’re running one campaign, one time, ever: The ROI isn’t there. You’re spending $30K to use something for 6 weeks, then never again.

If you’re running the same campaign annually (or more often): Now you’re building an asset. Year 1 is your investment. Years 2, 3, 4+ are pure leverage. The system improves. Your team gets better at using it. Participants expect it and look forward to it.

The Right Answer

✅ YES to gamification if:

• You run an annual walk/run/plunge event
• You have an ongoing peer-to-peer fundraising program
• You do a yearly giving day (university, community, etc.)
• You have monthly/quarterly fundraising campaigns
• You’re building a sustainable fundraising model, not a one-off

❌ NO to gamification if:

• This is a one-time campaign pilot
• You’re testing whether this fundraising model works for you
• You don’t know if you’ll do this again next year
• Your campaigns are sporadic and inconsistent

Real example from our clients:

Special Olympics Illinois runs their Polar Plunge every year. They’ve invested in gamification infrastructure—leaderboards, Cool School competition, College Cup, badges, incentive tracking.

Year 1: They raised $1.8M
Year 2: $2.1M (with minimal gamification changes)
Year 3: $3M+ (with strategic gamification refinements based on what they learned)

The gamification paid for itself in Year 1. Years 2 and 3 were pure upside.

If they’d been running a one-time event? That same investment wouldn’t have made sense.

The Exception

One scenario where one-time gamification works: You’re piloting for scale.

If you’re running one campaign now but plan to expand to multiple locations, multiple chapters, or franchise the model, investing in gamification infrastructure early makes sense. You’re building the template for replication.

But be honest: Are you actually going to scale, or is that just something you’re saying to justify the expense?

Question 2: Can You Commit to Maintaining It?

Gamification isn’t “set it and forget it.” It requires ongoing attention.

What “Maintaining” Actually Means

Weekly during active campaigns:

• Checking that data is syncing correctly
• Updating featured content or spotlights
• Responding to “why didn’t I get my badge?” questions
• Sharing leaderboard updates on social media

Monthly between campaigns:

• Reviewing what worked and what didn’t
• Updating badge triggers based on campaign goals
• Assessing engagement metrics
• Planning improvements for next campaign

Quarterly:

• Analyzing performance data
• Adjusting reward tiers based on fundraising patterns
• Refreshing badge designs if needed
• Training new staff on the system

Annually:

• Major refresh (new campaign theme, updated graphics)
• Reviewing and updating all leaderboard categories
• Soliciting participant feedback and implementing changes

Time Investment Reality Check

Minimum: 5-10 hours per month managing gamified elements during active campaigns
Ideal: One person owns it (or responsibility is clearly shared)
Content creation needs: Badge graphics, milestone celebration posts, social media updates, email campaigns featuring leaderboards

The Right Answer

✅ YES to gamification if:

• You have (or can hire) someone to own this
• You’re willing to dedicate staff time to managing it
• You understand this isn’t a “launch and leave” situation
• You can create content regularly (graphics, social posts, emails)

❌ NO to gamification if:

• Your team is already maxed out
• You’re hoping this will “run itself”
• You don’t have capacity for content creation
• “Set it and forget it” is your operating model

Real example from our clients:

One organization built a Plunge Promoter gamification feature. It was well-designed, had great functionality, and should have driven tons of engagement.

But they didn’t promote it. Didn’t create content around it. Didn’t train participants on how to use it. Didn’t send reminders.

Result? Minimal adoption.

Their reflection: “We just did a terrible job at it. That’s on us.”

The feature wasn’t the problem. The lack of maintenance and promotion was.

Another organization (SOILL) learned this lesson and adjusted. Year 3, they’re strategically planning how to highlight Plunge Promoter more, where to place it on the site, and how to integrate it into their marketing.

That’s the difference between gamification that fails and gamification that works.

Question 3: Do You Have Data to Track?

Gamification requires measurable actions. If you can’t measure it, you can’t gamify it.

What You Need to Be Able to Track

At minimum, you need:

Donation data:

• Amount raised per person/team
• Number of donations received
• Fundraising goals vs. actual
• Donor frequency (first-time, repeat, recurring)

Participation data:

• Who registered
• Which team they’re on
• Their role (individual, captain, ambassador)

If you want advanced gamification, you also need:

Activity tracking:

• Miles walked/run
• Minutes of activity logged
• Volunteer hours contributed
• Actions completed (petition signed, advocacy email sent)

Social sharing data:

• How many times someone shared
• Which shares drove traffic/signups
• Recruits brought in by each participant

Team/affiliation data:

• Corporate partner
• School/university
• Department
• Geographic location

Integration Requirements

Your fundraising platform needs to either:

• Provide this data via API (so it can feed into leaderboards automatically)
• Allow export in a format that can be processed
• Support custom questions that create the data points you need

Platforms with strong gamification support:

• GoFundMe Pro (formerly Classy): Excellent API access, custom questions, team structures (our most frequent integration)
• Givebutter: Good API, customizable forms, integrates well with leaderboards
• Qgiv: Solid data export, supports peer-to-peer campaigns
• Fundraise Up: Modern API, good for recurring giving tracking
• Donorbox: Decent API for basic tracking needs

If you’re on a platform with limited API or no custom fields: Gamification gets much harder. You might be manually updating leaderboards, which defeats the purpose. Consider if a platform migration makes sense before investing in gamification.

The Right Answer

✅ YES to gamification if:

• Your platform has API access or good data export
• You can track the metrics that matter to your campaign
• You’re comfortable with custom registration questions
• You have (or can get) the technical capability to integrate data

❌ NO to gamification if:

• Your platform doesn’t provide the data you need
• You’re planning to track everything manually in spreadsheets
• You can’t add custom questions to registration
• Your data is siloed across multiple systems that don’t talk to each other

Real example from our clients:

SOILL wanted to create a College Cup leaderboard showing university totals—even when some universities were plunging at traditional community events, not their own dedicated campaigns.

The challenge: How do you pull “all University of Illinois participants” when they’re scattered across 5 different community Plunge campaigns?

The solution: Custom registration question: “Are you participating with a university? If yes, select your university from dropdown.”

Now the data exists. The team captain’s answer tags the whole team. Leaderboards can aggregate across campaigns.

Without that custom question capability? College Cup wouldn’t be possible.

Question 4: Is Your Audience Tech-Comfortable?

Not all audiences respond to gamification the same way.

Age and Digital Fluency

Highly responsive to gamification:

• Millennials and Gen Z (grew up with games, apps, social media)
• University students and young professionals
• Urban populations with high smartphone usage
• Audiences already using fitness trackers, apps, social platforms

Less responsive (but not impossible):

• Older donors (65+) who aren’t digitally native
• Rural communities with limited internet access
• Populations with lower smartphone ownership
• Audiences unfamiliar with app-based experiences

This doesn’t mean older or less tech-savvy audiences can’t be gamified. It means you need to adjust your approach:

• Simpler mechanics (progress bars work, complex point systems don’t)
• Clear instructions and support
• Phone/email support for questions
• Physical components (mailed milestone certificates, not just digital badges)

Organizational Culture Fit

Beyond age, consider your organization’s culture and community:

Good fit for gamification:

• Youth programs and schools
• Health/fitness causes (already tracking activity)
• Social justice movements (younger, digitally active base)
• University giving (alumni engagement, competitive spirit)
• Corporate workplace giving (natural team competition)

Trickier fit:

• Senior-focused organizations (not impossible, just requires adaptation)
• Very small grassroots nonprofits (complexity may outweigh benefits)
• Audiences with privacy concerns about public recognition

The Right Answer

✅ YES to gamification if:

• Your audience is digitally active
• They already use apps, social media, fitness trackers
• Friendly competition aligns with your community culture
• You’re reaching people comfortable with technology

⚠️ MAYBE (with adaptation) if:

• Your audience skews older but is active and engaged
• You’re willing to simplify mechanics significantly
• You can offer phone/email support alongside digital
• Physical rewards complement digital recognition

❌ NO to gamification if:

• Your audience actively resists technology
• Privacy concerns make public leaderboards problematic
• Your community culture doesn’t align with competition
• You can’t provide the support needed for less tech-savvy users

Real example from our clients:

SOILL’s Cool School Challenge targets middle and high school students. This is their MOST tech-savvy audience.

The problem they discovered: Students said “it just doesn’t sound fun to me” and “we don’t need the website, we’re looking at prizes.”

The insight: Even tech-comfortable audiences won’t use features that aren’t prominently placed and actively promoted.

The fix for Year 3: Redesigning Cool School page to be MORE interactive, MORE competitive, with leaderboards front-and-center so students check them in real-time instead of relying on staff to tell them rankings.

Tech comfort isn’t enough. The features still need to be compelling and well-promoted.

Question 5: What’s Your Content Creation Capacity?

Gamification requires content to drive engagement—but you don’t have to create it all yourself.

What Content Is Needed

Before launch:

• Badge designs (5-15 different badges)
• Reward tier graphics
• Leaderboard promotional graphics
• Social media announcement posts
• Email campaign explaining how gamification works
• Tutorial videos or guides

During campaign:

• Weekly leaderboard update graphics
• Milestone celebration posts (“We hit $100K!”)
• Individual shout-outs (“Maria just earned her Goal Crusher badge!”)
• Countdown graphics for time-limited challenges
• Email updates featuring current rankings
• Social media posts highlighting competition

After campaign:

• Winner announcements
• Final leaderboard graphics
• Recap videos or infographics
• Thank you posts featuring top performers

Who Creates What

Here’s the reality: Most organizations don’t have the capacity to create all this content themselves. That’s normal and expected.

What we typically handle for clients:

• All badge designs and graphics
• Leaderboard templates and automated graphics
• Initial social media templates you can customize
• Email templates for different campaign phases
• Tutorial videos showing participants how to use features

What works best when you handle internally:

• Posting the graphics we provide to your social channels
• Personalizing milestone celebrations with participant names
• Sending the email templates to your list
• Responding to participant questions about features

Think of it this way: We build the engine and give you the fuel. You just need to drive the car.

The Right Answer

✅ YES to gamification if:

• You have someone who can post to social media 2-3x per week during campaigns
• You can send emails to your list regularly (using templates we provide)
• You’re willing to celebrate milestones and winners publicly
• You understand that even with templates, you need to actively use them

⚠️ MAYBE if:

• You can only post occasionally (once a week or less)
• Email communication is sporadic
• You prefer “set it and forget it” approaches
• Your team is stretched extremely thin

❌ NO to gamification if:

• You have zero capacity for any social media or email during campaigns
• You’re hoping we’ll manage all your communications (we don’t)
• You can’t dedicate even a few hours per week to promotion

The Content Partnership Model

What successful gamification looks like:

Mittun provides:

• Badge designs for all milestones
• Leaderboard graphics that auto-update
• Customizable social templates
• Email campaign drafts
• Tutorial content

You provide:

• Regular posting schedule (we give you the content)
• Personalization (adding participant names, local context)
• Internal promotion to your team captains and participants
• Timely responses to questions

Real example from our clients:

SOILL has a communications team that takes our graphics and templates and makes them their own:

• We designed custom “snowglobe” badges
• They posted them to social with personalized captions
• We created leaderboard update templates
• They shared them weekly with city-specific callouts
• We provided email templates
• They customized them for their audience voice

The result: Content looked professional, felt authentic to their brand, and engaged participants—without their team needing to design everything from scratch.

If you have literally no one who can post to social or send emails during your campaign, gamification won’t work. But if you have someone who can dedicate 3-5 hours per week to using the content we provide, you’re in good shape.

The Decision Matrix

Let’s make this concrete. Here’s how to use your answers:

✅ STRONG YES to Gamification (5 out of 5 YES answers)

You should absolutely invest in gamification. You have:

• Recurring campaigns that justify the investment
• Capacity to maintain and promote features
• Data infrastructure to support it
• An audience that will engage with it
• Content creation resources to make it work

Recommended investment: $30K-75K+ for comprehensive gamification
Expected ROI: 30-50% increase in funds raised, 20-40% improvement in retention

✅ YES with Caution (3-4 out of 5 YES answers)

Gamification can work, but start strategic and scale over time.

Start with:

• Basic leaderboards (less complex than full badge systems)
• Simple progress bars and goal tracking
• One or two incentive tiers (not 10)

Plan to add:

• More complex features in Year 2 after you’ve learned what works
• Additional badge categories as you build content capacity
• Advanced team-within-team structures once basic leaderboards prove valuable

Recommended investment: $15K-30K for strategic implementation
Expected ROI: 15-25% increase in funds raised

⚠️ MAYBE (2 out of 5 YES answers)

You’re on the edge. Gamification might work, but you have significant gaps to address first.

Before investing in gamification:

• Solve your data tracking issues
• Build content creation capacity
• Confirm your audience will engage
• Ensure you have someone to own it

Alternative approach:

• Use free/low-cost tools (manual leaderboard graphics, simple progress tracking)
• Test engagement with basic features before investing in custom build
• Spend a year building infrastructure, then gamify Year 2

Recommended investment: Under $10K for testing
Expected ROI: Unclear—you’re still validating the model

❌ NO to Gamification (0-1 YES answers)

Don’t do it. Gamification will not solve your problems and will likely create new ones.

What to do instead:

• Focus on fundamentals (strong storytelling, clear CTAs, simple donation process)
• Invest in content and marketing, not complex features
• Build the infrastructure you’re missing (data systems, staff capacity)
• Revisit gamification in 2-3 years when you have recurring campaigns and capacity

Why this is okay: Not every nonprofit needs gamification. Some of the most successful fundraising campaigns are beautifully simple. Don’t add complexity you can’t support.

Real Case Study: How to Get Gamification Wrong (And Then Right)

Let’s look at an actual example of an organization that struggled with gamification adoption, learned from it, and is now fixing it.

Year 1-2: The Plunge Promoter Problem

What they built: A “Plunge Promoter” feature allowing non-fundraising supporters to share campaigns, recruit participants, and earn recognition based on their influence (not their donations).

The concept was solid:

• Lets people contribute without giving money
• Tracks shares and recruits
• Gamifies advocacy, not just fundraising
• Rewards top promoters

What happened: Minimal adoption.

Why it failed:

• Staff didn’t promote it heavily
• It was buried on the website
• No ongoing content highlighting promoters
• No clear call-to-action driving people to it
• Team assumed “if we build it, they will come”

Their honest reflection:
“We just did a terrible job at it on our end. That’s on us. So hopefully this year we’ll be better at it.”

Year 3: The Strategic Shift

Now they’re approaching it differently:

Website placement changes:

• Moving Plunge Promoter higher on homepage (not buried)
• Adding it as a “Step 2.5” in the participation flow
• Including it prominently on Cool School page (where students are most active)

Content strategy:

• Creating dedicated marketing about what Plunge Promoters do
• Highlighting top promoters in social media and email
• Explaining the concept clearly in kickoff communications
• Training team captains to recruit promoters, not just fundraisers

Measurement improvements:

• Tracking who’s using the feature
• Celebrating Plunge Promoter milestones publicly
• Reporting on recruits brought in by promoters

The Lesson

Gamification doesn’t fail because the features are bad. It fails because:

1. The organization doesn’t commit to promoting it
2. Content creation doesn’t happen consistently
3. It’s not integrated into the overall campaign strategy
4. Participants don’t understand what it is or why they should care

If you can’t commit to solving those problems, don’t build the features.

What If You’re Still Not Sure?

If you’ve gone through all 5 questions and you’re still uncertain, here’s a final framework:

Start Small, Prove Value, Scale Up

Phase 1: Manual Gamification (Year 1)

• Create leaderboard graphics manually (using Canva)
• Post updates weekly on social media
• Recognize top fundraisers publicly
• Track engagement and donations

Cost: Mostly staff time
Goal: Prove that leaderboards and recognition drive behavior

Phase 2: Basic Automation (Year 2)

• Invest in simple automated leaderboards
• Add basic progress bars
• Implement 2-3 badge categories
• Keep it simple and manageable

Cost: $5K-15K
Goal: Reduce manual work while maintaining engagement

Phase 3: Comprehensive System (Year 3+)

• Full custom gamification build
• Complex badge systems
• Team-within-team structures
• Activity tracking beyond donations
• Personalized participant dashboards

Cost: $30K-75K+
Goal: Maximize engagement and retention at scale

This Approach Works Because:

• You’re validating demand before big investment
• You’re learning what your audience responds to
• You’re building organizational capacity gradually
• You’re not betting everything on an unproven strategy

The Bottom Line

Gamification is powerful. When implemented correctly, it can:

• Increase donations by 40-50%
• Improve donor retention by 20-30%
• Drive 3-5x more social sharing
• Create communities, not just donor lists
• Transform one-time givers into lifelong supporters

But it only works if you can answer YES to these 5 questions:

1. Do you have recurring campaigns? (Not one-time events)
2. Can you commit to maintaining it? (Ongoing content and management)
3. Do you have data to track? (Platform with API access and custom fields)
4. Is your audience tech-comfortable? (Will engage with digital features)
5. Can you create content consistently? (Design and social media resources)

If you answered YES to most or all: Gamification is a strategic investment that will pay for itself.

If you answered NO to most: Focus on fundamentals first. Build capacity. Revisit in 1-2 years.

If you’re somewhere in between: Start small. Test. Learn. Scale only when you’ve proven it works for your organization.

Ready to Explore Gamification for Your Nonprofit?

If you answered YES to 3+ questions and want to talk about what gamified fundraising could look like for your campaigns, let’s have a conversation.

[Book a Gamification Strategy Call →]

We’ll discuss:

• Your current campaign structure
• What level of gamification makes sense
• Technical requirements and timeline
• Realistic budget and ROI expectations
• Examples from similar organizations

Not ready to talk yet?

Read our other resources on gamification and fundraising technology:

• The Complete Guide to Fundraising Gamification for Nonprofits
• How Leaderboards Increased Donations by 47%
• Creating Custom Fundraising Portals for Peer-to-Peer Campaigns

About Mittun

Mittun specializes in gamified fundraising solutions for nonprofits running peer-to-peer campaigns, giving days, and annual events. We’ve built systems for campaigns that have raised $50M+ collectively, including record-breaking results for Special Olympics Illinois ($3M), Columbia University ($2.3M in 24 hours), and Special Olympics Michigan (70%+ retention rate).

We integrate with GoFundMe Pro, Givebutter, Qgiv, and other major fundraising platforms to create custom leaderboards, badge systems, and engagement tools that drive results.

We don’t believe every nonprofit needs gamification. But for the ones that do, we build systems that actually work.

Tags: nonprofit gamification, fundraising gamification strategy, should we add gamification, donor engagement gamification, gamification decision framework, peer-to-peer fundraising