How UNICEF Cut Donor Acquisition Costs 43% with a Low-tCPA Strategy
In short:
Delve Deeper helped UNICEF improve donor acquisition efficiency by running a head-to-head Demand Gen experiment comparing a low target CPA strategy against a value-based approach.
By capping acquisition costs and scaling budget in line with Google best practices, the low-tCPA campaign lowered cost per donor by 43%, grew conversions by 43%, and improved overall ROAS by 77% — delivering more donations, more donors, and stronger total fundraising revenue than the value-optimized alternative.
The challenge:
UNICEF’s Demand Gen campaigns were optimized to prioritize higher-value donors, but winning those donors came at a steep price per acquisition. The question was whether a more cost-efficient approach could bring in more donors overall and ultimately raise more funds.
It was a classic trade-off: chase fewer high-value gifts, or acquire more donors at a lower cost. Without testing both approaches under identical conditions, there was no clear answer.
The approach:
UNICEF ran a head-to-head Demand Gen experiment to find out. One campaign used an aggressive $50 target cost per acquisition, with budget scaled well above the recommended threshold in line with Google best practices. Its performance was measured against an equivalent campaign optimized for maximum donation value.
By putting the two strategies side by side under identical conditions, UNICEF could see clearly which approach delivered stronger fundraising results. Delve Deeper designed and ran the experiment end to end, structuring both campaigns to ensure a clean, like-for-like comparison.
Summary:
Delve Deeper Results:
The cost-efficient strategy was the clear winner. By capping acquisition costs, it lowered cost per donor by 43% and freed the bidding to focus on winning more donors rather than paying a premium for a few large gifts.
That shift didn’t just cut costs, it grew results. Conversions rose 43% and overall ROAS improved 77%. The value-based approach, despite aiming for bigger donations, couldn’t bring in enough high-value gifts to justify its far higher costs.
In the end, the cost-efficient campaign delivered more donations, higher total donation revenue, and stronger overall return on ad spend.