looking for opinions about updating past GIK to $0

Nicole S

A while back I started working at a new organization.  They've not used RE appropriately in a lot of ways.  It looks like they were often "making it work" instead of learning how a few simple guidelines would help them use the database correctly.  No consistency or even a general understanding of basic campaign, and appeals.  So now I'm tasked with some epic clean up that will likely include going back at least a little and fixing bad data entry.

One of the many issues that I'm dealing with is in kind gifts.  Instead of putting the value for these down as $0 like I would typically do, they've been assigning all kinds of values from a few dollars to tens of thousands of dollars.  Many times it isn't even so much as a real value of the items donated as it is a way of grouping certain kinds of giving.  For instance, everyone who volunteered to decorate a table for an event was entered as $1000 so that they could group all of the table settings.  I am also under the impression that there may have been some pressure or insistence by board or committee members that we credit them certain amounts -- certainly not how I like to handle things.

As you can imagine, this is a mess.  So many people who've never given any money are looking like major donors.  (I know I can exclude GIK from queries or reports, but seriously the data entry is so messy that at times I'm  not sure what I'm looking for.)

My instinct here is to start using some global/imports to update the value on these gifts from whatever to $0.  Any thoughts?  Am I overlooking anything?

Allie Serious

We often use Inkind and never enter a zero.  The donor has the responsibility of assigning the dollar value to the inkind gift when we then use in RE and the donor uses in their taxes.  This is very important for us when we get inkind items for events.  When we sell those items if the purchaser at our auction pays more than the stated value they get to consider that difference a direct donation.  I dont think you want all the crazy values but I would think you would want something in there... we also give time to volunteers based on hours worked or a vendor who gives us a discout on the bill gets that discount entered as inkind.  As you said though, we dont include inking giving in many of our gift pulls. 

JoAnn Strommen

As GIK are given for many purposes, one needs to also recognize that in recording in RE.  But gifts for auctions as mentioned by Allie present an even bigger issue. 

I, as owner of Company ABC,  donate an item that I give a FMV of $1000 for you auction.  How will you record it?  Yes, if buyer at auction pays $1300 for the item they potentially have a $300 tax deduction.  As the donor, I do not have a tax deduction of $1000.  Generally it's more like $500 - the cost value of the item to me as business.  My deduction as donor is based on my tax basis. So what will you enter in RE: $1000 or $500.  The sources I've read suggest entering 50% of FMV.  If I donate a service - say 10 massages - I don't have any tax deduction as the donor.



You can read more about charity auctions at: http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Charitable-Organizations/Charity-Auctions



Just somethings to consider when setting your procedures

 

Aldera Chisholm

We enter all our GIK with the true value for receipting purposes. If a donor cannot provide true value, we don't enter it. Most of our GIK is either receiptable, or part of a sponsorship deal, so we require valuation back up for all of it.



If someone gives us something, and doesn't have a defined value, we simply put a note in their profile so that we have a record of it for perspective, but that's it. 

 

Nicole S

Many of the items donated are given to the people we serve, so I think that my issue is not so much the acutions, but the various crazy values.  Like the table settings, $1k was entered as the value for these, but there is no rhyme or reason for this logic other than grouping the people who decorated a table.  It's created a lot of data clutter.