Gift Entry Protocol and integration with Financial Edge

Lanetta Gilder

Hello!
I hope all is well. This is the first time I’ve worked at an organization that has RE and FE. I have a few questions to ask.

The organization where I’m currently working has an interesting way of recording Matching Gift Pledges and Recurring Gifts. They enter Matching Gifts as “Cash” when they’re received and they write notes in the Reference in batch (ie SC: Jane Doe matching gift from Google. SC equals “Soft Credit”). They do soft credit the donor. The reason for the information in the “Reference Field” because in the Gift Summary Report, the gift officers can see it in the report, which will let them know 1) where the gift originated from (match gift) and 2) keeps them aware of/on the lookout for “individuals on their portfolio” that had their employer to match their gift. The question for this is, why would you enter gifts this way?

For Recurring Gifts, they also enter them as “Pledges” instead of using “Recurring Gifts”. They say they want to control the giving timeframe. For example, if someone wishes to donate for 36 months, they create 3 different pledges – one for each fiscal year. On the other hand, if a donor doesn’t have an end date, they create a pledge for each fiscal year and ask the donor if they wish to continue the pledge each year. Can someone explain why would you enter gifts this way?

The last set of questions has to do with Financial Edge and Raiser’s Edge.

With the FE integration, how does it work with Matching Gifts and Recurring Gifts in Financial Edge? How are they counted/credited in FE?

1. Since both products are integrated, how does your organization handle adjustments for gifts only? How does your organization handle adjustments for pledge payments (Pay-Cash, MG-Pay-Cash)? How about recurring gifts (Recurring Gift-Pay)?
2. Should the database administrator have access to FE (restricted privilege)? Should finance/business office/accounting staff have full access to Raiser’s Edge or restricted privilege to Raiser’s Edge?
3. In your organization, who post to the general ledger (GL) – a member of development/advancement or a member of business office/finance/accounting?
4. Does your organization reconcile RE and FE? If so, what’s your process and how often do you reconcile?

Thanks again in advance! Looking forward to your responses! Take care and have a good day!

 

JoAnn Strommen

Lots of questions, Lanetta,


Having recently started at a different organization, I understand your 'why do they do it this way?' feelings. I'm probably only taking time to hit a few of your questions. 


If gift officers, need info IMO they can get it through other means.  It is not how I would enter MG and it would be on my list of potential data entry changes/corrections for the future. (My list continues to grow.) 


The definition of a recurring gift is that it is an open ended 'pledge.'  This sounds like it was initiated by someone who was used to doing pledges and perhaps didn't grasp the difference.  While it works, IMO it's not efficient use of data entry time or the best option provided by RE.


Have seen both instances of MG being posted to FE and MG marked do not post. The university does not post and seeing the number of potential MG that come in, one could certainly make a case that posting them would create need for cleanup down the road. 

Recurring gift payments are recorded just like a cash gift in FE.


Any adjustments are marked to flow back to FE with adjustment date.  As DBA, I personally do not see a need to be in FE.  Several people in finance have access to RE, this allows them to look at gifts if they have questions and they actually ran NetCommunity, processed ACH batches etc in absence of DBA.


In both my positions with RE, the finance office has done the posting. Yes, FE & RE are reconciled - I'm not sure of the time frame here. Previous org, much, much lower gift level, it was monthly.


My philosophy on changing operating procedures here is to take my time, prioritize changes, research asking everyone for input on why it's done the way it is (have gotten some unique responses) and then presenting my proposed changes with rationale, taking into account concerns expressed, to everyone for consideration. Most suggestions from past two months have been openly accepted so I'm on my way.