Over the past few years, I’ve studied how trauma manifests in fundraising—sometimes loudly, more often quietly. The work I’ve been doing with my colleague Lisa Temoshok, LMHC, is qualitative by nature. We look at what helps fundraisers stay steady: pacing, boundaries, language, repair after hard interactions, and the self-regulation skills that keep the work human without letting it take you down.
Recently, my colleague Cherian Koshy released Neurogiving: The Science of Donor Decision-Making. It approaches similar questions from a neuroscience lens. While written primarily from the donor’s perspective, the book naturally intersects with the fundraiser’s experience because it treats giving as more than a rational, financial transaction. It treats giving as a human process—and humans have bodies, histories, and stress responses.
The Bridge That Matters
Here’s the bridge that matters: if giving can trigger physical reactions in donors, then asking can trigger physical reactions in fundraisers—and the two experiences meet in the same room.
Most fundraisers don’t need a neuroscience textbook to recognize this—you’ve felt it. A donor gets energized, and suddenly you’re energized. A donor gets anxious, and suddenly you’re managing anxiety—yours and theirs. A donor hesitates, and you start narrating a story in your head about what it means. You leave a meeting keyed up, drained, foggy, or strangely raw. That isn’t a character flaw. It’s your system doing exactly what it does when the stakes are high and emotions are present.
Making Neuroscience Practical
This is where donor neuroscience becomes useful for our side of the table. It doesn’t replace the qualitative, trauma-informed work—it strengthens it. When we understand that a donor’s decision-making can be physiological, not just intellectual, we get better at staying curious instead of reactive. We stop treating every pause as rejection. We stop interpreting a “not now” as a sign of danger. We build conversations that are clearer, slower, and more respectful of the fact that something real is happening for both people.
What I’m Taking Into 2026
So here’s what I’m taking into 2026:
- Before an ask: I want fundraisers to notice the pressure in their own bodies and name it for what it is: anticipation, not catastrophe.
- After a donor interaction: I want fundraisers to take two minutes to return to baseline before sprinting to the next thing.
- Over the long haul: I want us to stop pretending this work is purely strategic when it is also deeply emotional labor.
Try This
After your next donor call, take two minutes before you open your inbox. Notice what your body is doing—tight jaw, shallow breath, racing thoughts, fatigue. Did you leave that interaction energized or depleted?
If you’re a fundraiser who wants a sharper, more grounded way to think about what’s happening inside donors—and why this work can linger in your body after the meeting ends—I recommend Koshy’s Neurogiving. It’s a practical read that will give you language you can use immediately to frame the ask, interpret donor behavior, and take care of yourself in the process.
