Poll Results | Click Here
Hover Over Graphics for More Detail
How nonprofit professionals are using artificial intelligence in 2025
Do you have an AI usage policy?
How comfortable are you using AI in your work?
Has AI saved you time?
What's your biggest concern about AI?
How are you primarily using AI?
Do you ask AI to rethink or refine its answers?
Do you check AI's answers against another AI tool?
What sector are you in?
Before we go further, let’s be clear: this isn’t a Gallup poll. It’s not a double-blind, peer-reviewed scientific survey. It’s a wake-up call—one based on real practitioners telling us how fast the ground is shifting beneath them. Our recent survey of nonprofit development and communications professionals reveals a sector that has already crossed the AI tipping point—quietly, and far faster than many leaders realize. AI isn’t an experimental tool in nonprofits anymore. It’s operational. What isn’t operational? Governance. And some of this may sound like bad news, but remember—I’m only the messenger.
I’ve Seen This Pattern Before
And before you think I’m overstating the speed of change, let me remind you: early implementers always get laughed at. I learned this firsthand. When I put planned giving online in 1998, the reaction wasn’t skepticism—it was hostility. I received actual hate mail, long, furious letters telling me I was naïve, reckless, and destroying the field. People said donors would never respond to anything digital. A few years later, the same people quietly followed suit. So did every planned giving vendor. The pattern never changes:- Pioneers get mocked.
- Then ignored.
- Then copied.
- Then, eventually, everyone forgets who went first.
Who’s Weighing In
The survey drew responses from roughly a hundred nonprofits across the sector. Higher education, social services, faith-based organizations, healthcare, private schools, foundations, arts groups, and environmental organizations all weighed in. The sample is large enough to give us a respectable directional accuracy—roughly a ±10% range—without pretending to be a lab-coat, peer-reviewed exercise (1,000 gives you ±3%).
This cross-section matters because it shows that AI adoption isn’t confined to one niche. It’s everywhere donors, communications, and public stewardship intersect.
When AI Becomes a Class War
“An over-hyped word-extruding machine that does nobody any good but billionaire tech-bros.”
This respondent works in fundraising. Let that sink in.
You can’t cultivate major gifts while resenting the people who have the money.
Fundraising and wealth hatred don’t mix.
The Killer App: Writing
One use case towered over all others: 82% use AI for drafting and proofing copy.
Emails. Appeals. News releases. Acknowledgments. Web content. The writing workload is crushing nonprofits, and AI is being deployed where the pain is greatest.
Other uses trail far behind:
- Brainstorming and planning: 56%
- Summarizing documents: 43%
- Data analysis: 26%
- Donor research: 21%
AI has become a core part of nonprofit communications—because that’s where the relentless cycle of deliverables never stops.
Time Savings Are Real
AI adoption is not an experiment at the edges. It’s a functional efficiency tool embraced by staff who desperately need the help.
- 44% say AI saves them significant time.
- 35% say it saves them moderate time.
- Only 8% say it hasn’t helped at all.
In organizations where one person handles marketing, donor communications, stewardship, and events, these regained hours aren’t theoretical. They’re survival.
Nonprofits aren’t “trying” AI. They’re depending on it.
The Trust Problem
Respondents’ biggest concerns reflect the risks built into AI use:
- 46% worry about accuracy and hallucinations.
- 36% worry about data privacy.
Nonprofits trust AI enough to use it—but not enough to fully believe it.
And here’s the paradox: 48% never verify AI outputs using another tool.
Concern is high. Verification is low. That’s how errors become liabilities.
On the positive side, most users now iterate:
- 52% frequently ask AI to revise.
- 30% do so sometimes.
The “accept the first answer” era is dead. Good.
The Policy Gap
This is the statistic nonprofit leaders should lose sleep over: 70% of nonprofits have no AI policy.
Only 30% have guidelines. Another 13% are drafting them.
Once AI becomes infrastructure—and we are already there—policy cannot be optional. Without clear rules, individual staff members are forced to make judgment calls about:
- Data handling.
- Confidentiality.
- Acceptable use.
- Disclosure.
- Donor information.
That’s a dangerous place for a mission-driven organization to be.
But again: I don’t write the reality. I just deliver it.
What This Means
AI is already embedded in nonprofit workflows. The question isn’t whether nonprofits will use AI. The question is whether governance, training, and verification can catch up.
The roadmap is simple:
- Acknowledge AI is already operational.
- Build sensible policies before issues escalate.
- Train your staff in responsible use.
- Implement verification standards that match the risk.
The window for “wait and see” leadership has closed. AI is not emerging—it’s already part of your infrastructure.
Final Thoughts
Here’s the uncomfortable truth—again from the messenger:
AI isn’t the threat. User incompetence is.
Used correctly, AI is leverage. Used poorly, it’s another shortcut for the chronically careless.
And let’s be clear: AI will not level the playing field. It will widen it.
It won’t create competence. It will magnify whatever competence—or incompetence—is already there.
The smart will get sharper. The unprepared will fall further behind. And the complacent, even further.
AI Teammates—The Nonprofit Staff You Don’t Need to Hire
If you still think AI is just for drafting emails faster, you’re already two steps behind. The next phase isn’t “assistance.” It’s staff replacement.
A company called Vee is already pushing in that direction. After surveying 300 nonprofits, they heard the same blunt message:
“We don’t need ideas. We need hands.”
So they built AI “hands” — virtual staff:
- Maggie for social media and marketing
- Grant for grant research and writing
- Donna for donor communications
- Penny for finances and reporting
These aren’t tools; they’re role replacements. Now — about the results being claimed.
You’ll see stories about Maggie generating 100+ content pieces, creating 400,000+ views, growing followers, and helping sell out a gala. Let’s be candid: numbers like that usually come with a fresh coat of PR gloss. No AI system on earth today is quietly producing 100 flawless, context-aware, on-brand pieces of content without a human steering the wheel. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something—usually themselves.
And that’s exactly the point.
The accuracy of the claims doesn’t matter. The direction of the market does.
Startups are already positioning AI as a full-blown communications team. Nonprofits are buying it. Funders are starting to subsidize it. And the tech is improving whether we like it or not.
The shift has begun:
AI → assistant
AI → operator
AI → staff substitute
The accuracy of the claims doesn’t matter. The direction of the market does.
So while nonprofit leaders are still debating policies, the marketplace has already moved on. Tools are being sold as teammates. Workflows are being automated. Roles are being replaced quietly, without fanfare.
You don’t have to believe every PR success story. You only need to recognize what they signal: AI is sprinting. Governance is sleepwalking.
And the gap between adopters and laggards is about to get wider.
