While 42% have done a major update in the last year, 1/3 of all non-profit websites have not had a major overhall in more than 2 years.
When it came to an overall rating of the person or team responsible for the last major upgrade of their website, most respondents gave solid scores. But it was outside professionals that really delivered the goods. (If an organization hadn't performed an upgrade, they were asked to rate the original website team).
When it was time to upgrade, 1/4 were done by professionals at a discounted rate - and almost 1/3 were done at no cost.
While upgrades were mostly carried out by outside professionals, 1 in 10 upgrades were carried out by generous members of the public!
The majority of people performing upgrades for the survey respondents were outside professionals and even though it wasn't their website, they did a good (or very good or excellent) job of understanding the organization's needs.
The redesign person/team didn't do quite as well at handling the non-profit's expectations compared with understanding the needs of the non-profit.
While very few teams broke their promises on the last major upgrade, only 1/4 scored 'excellent'.
The success rate for delivering on timelines were even more widely spread out from 'adequate' to 'excellent'.
A much higher percentage of upgrade teams scored 'excellent' marks when it came to meeting budgets, but almost 2/3 got less than excellent results.
When it came to dealing with the design teams, less than half the respondents gave out 'very good' or 'excellent' scores.
A real mixed-bag of responses when it came to responsiveness of design teams.