Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
Hi everyone.... this is a really long scenario-based question... huge thanks to anyone who takes the time to read it!:
We pull our Program Name Listing report based off of lists that look for Active, Pending, or Lapsed Membership levels. Now, we have a Campaign associated with an annual special program we produce, and there is no Membership Organization attached to this Campaign. Both Institutional and Individual donors give to this Campaign.
Previously, if an Individual donor to this special Campaign was not also a Member based on their contribution to our annual Individual Giving Campaign, we did not recognize them in the program at all, we did not add this money to their annual Membership, or give them additional benefits. NOW, for Individuals, we’ve decided to manually add this contribution to the “Recog Amount” associated with their annual Membership, OR, manually create a Membership for them based on this donation (but most Individuals who give to this special program are also Members as they are intimately attached to our theater).
Similarly, those corporations and foundations that have given to this campaign did not get a Membership. But, as is the nature of Institutional Giving, they normally did not have another Membership and this was their only contribution to our theater, and it was normally part of the grant stipulation that we DO recognize them, yet they were missed when we pulled the Program Name Listing Report against those lists based on Membership Status and Level. These institutions would be perhaps caught by the eye of our Director of Institutional Giving and manually added, or not, and thus forgotten in the Playbill.
There is obviously something wrong with this system.
So, I’m looking for some suggestions. I would rather not change the way we pull Playbill—I like doing it based on a dynamic list that searches for Active or Pending Memberships, because then we don’t have to be as vigilant about updating or deleting Program Listing Names. The dynamic list we run the Program Name Listing Report against instead weeds out the old donors.
My first idea was to create a new Membership Organization to attach to this special Campaign. But I don’t want individuals who give to this campaign to get these special memberships—we want to keep adding the donation to their Individual Giving memberships, or manually creating an Individual Giving membership for them (but this is also a manual process…..)
Is the most logical idea to discontinue using the special Campaign and instead use Funds to delineate the contributions and have those funds associated with the annual Individual, Foundation, and Corporate Campaigns? Then they will get the Membership levels associated with those Campaigns and we can dodge this problem?
Is there a reason why it would be dangerous to stop using Campaigns to separate this money?
Any advice appreciated. Happy to provide more detail on the situation if necessary.
Thank you!!!!!
Frannie
The way I generated our program recognition level is via extraction. I created dynamic lists of people who are at each donor level, based on the criteria that Dev wanted. Then I set up an extraction with the first segment the top donor recognition level, the next segment the next-to-top level, and so on down. I saved the lists, and used them to populate new program book listings via SQL Server Management Studio query (i.e. “the back end”). The resulting program book listings were then vetted by Development.
I’d be happy to share my query, if it would be helpful; but it is specific to us in that we have a separate listing in T_PROGRAM for every season book we do, with new donation levels set up for each program in TR_DONATION_LEVEL.
Lucie
Wow, neat!
No need to share the queries just yet, I think once I've applied a bit of virtual elbow grease I'll have our records set for the next program. I like the idea of using an extraction, though, I'm going to experiment with that as another method to double check levels. I'll have to figure out how to account for the folks with the open endowment pledges, but maybe since we know who they are and they're a relatively small population I'll just ignore them.