This is the presentation of a report I wrote analyzing how nonprofit organizations in Duval County, FL utilize social media platforms.

1. 3.14.2012Presented at FPSA’s Annual Conference, Tampa, FL
© GetteinJax, 2012

2. Report Purpose
To understand how nonprofits in Duval County,
FL are utilizing Internet technologies.
 Mediums used
 Benefits Derived
 Measurement
3.14.2012

3. Data collection
 Snowball Sampling
 Twitter and Facebook
 2 months of posts & tweets
 Total number of tweets
 Retweets, direct tweets
 Friends & Likes
 Networks
 Archival data: org type, 990
 Web site analysis
 Interviews
3.14.2012

4. Sample
 464 accounts, 348 nonprofits (most formal,
some informal)
 129 Twitter accounts
 335 Facebook accounts
 78 nonprofits use both
 E-survey – sent to 258 nonprofits
 22 no email
 48 no phone number
 20 bounced
 Responses: 111 (43%)
3.14.2012

5. 9/24/2011
Descriptives

6. Type
No
Budget
<$100k
$100k-
$500k
$500k
- $2m
$2m -
$10m
>$10m Total
Arts and
Culture
4 3 5 2 8 0 22
Education 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Env.
/Animal
Welfare
1 2 2 0 5 1 11
Health 0 4 2 2 1 4 13
Human
Services
1 5 5 4 12 1 28
International 0 2 0 0 0 0 2
Societal
Benefit
0 1 6 8 2 0 17
Religious 1 0 0 0 2 0 3
Membership 3 8 1 1 2 0 15
Unknown 1 0 0 1 0 0 2
Non- (c)(3) 0 1 1 2 0 1 5
TOTAL 11 26 22 21 32 7 119
Size & Type
9/24/2011

7. SM Maintenance
9/24/2011

8. 9/24/2011
Mediums

9. Social Media Adoption
9/24/2011
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Facebook Twitter Blog YouTube LinkedIn
100%
78%
35%
39%
27%
0
22%
65%
61%
73%
Yes
No

10. Initial Purpose of Mediums
9/24/2011
Facebook
Twitter

11. Importance of SM to Organization
3.14.2012
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Very
Unimportant
Somewhat
unimportant
Neither Somewhat
important
Very important
Facebook (111)
Twitter (81)

12. 9/24/2011
Benefits

13. Impact of SM on Constituents
3.14.2012
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Facebook (102) Twitter (76)

14. Impact of SM on Organization
3.14.2012
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
72%
68%
58%
26%
92% 93%
85%
55%
44%
58%
67%
90%
94%
30% 31%
18%
12%
54% 55%
43%
23%
30% 28%
38%
55% 55%
Facebook (N=105)
Twitter (N=80)

15. 9/24/2011
Measurement

16. 9/24/2011
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
yes no
48%
52%
20%
80%
Facebook (104)
Twitter (78)
Do you measure the results from SM?
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
46%
42%
30%
70%
80%
18%
42%
26%
16%
37%
84%
26%
Facebook
Twitter
How do you measure the results from SM?

17. Key Findings
 Facebook and Twitter are most
utilized mediums, followed by
YouTube, blogs, and LinkedIn
 Facebook viewed as more
important for organization
 SM main purpose: marketing &
raising awareness
 Used predominately as push
medium; provide info
 Less than half of respondents
measure SM
 Things of note…
 SM is social by nature;
however use it as push
medium/brouchureware
 Friends/followers main
measure of SM, effectiveness
 Interviews are noting similar
perception of social media by
those who are noted as high
utilizers
9/24/2011

18. Social Media Conceptualization
Facebook
Twitter
Dynamism
Depth
FeedbackMessage

19. Future Research
 Deeper analysis of survey data combined with
990 date, interview data, and VA Index.
 Content analysis of tweets and posts
 Model building
3.14.2012

20. Thank you!
3.14.2012© GetteinJax, 2012