Committee Members as Solicitors/Fundraisers

Alisa Forman

We're currently grappling with how to account for committee members who solicit sponsors in RE (both database and web view). A decision was made that they wouldn't be marked as solicitors but we still need a way to keep track of them and their prospects.

I've been considering three options:

1. Just make them solicitors and have staff (me) monitor their accounts - this isn't ideal because our other fundraising staff really doesn't use RE.

2. Use the relationships tab and enter the “solicitor” as an individual relationship (but not solicitor, if that makes sense).

3. Add an attribute for each committee member and tag the appropriate constituents.

Any opinions on what might work the best? What has or hasn't worked for you? Thanks!

Crystal Bruce

@Alisa Forman
Discussion moved to Raiser's Edge® forums. Thanks!

Karen Diener 2

@Alisa Forman
Is your concern about giving them access to Raiser's Edge? You can make someone a solicitor / fundraiser without them having access.

karen

Alisa Forman

@Karen Diener Thanks for the response but that actually isn't the concern (they won't have access to RE regardless). A decision was made on an executive level that the fundraiser/solicitor label would be reserved for staff. I'm willing to argue against it if it seems like that's clearly the best path forward but I'm just not sure if it is. Right now, most of our donors/sponsors are coded to nobody. Granted, I'm the one making 90% of the changes in RE (at least) but I want the data to be clear and correct. Does that make sense?

JoAnn Strommen

@Alisa Forman At my first org 98% of our solicitors were volunteers/committee members. They didn't have access but we definitely used the solicitor function and made assignments. Worked very well.

Here, we have development staff that are assigned records/portfolio. However, we recently ran a special project with hundreds of alums and used volunteer solicitors and assignments to track. We used a solicitor type name related to the project. Very distinct from MGO type. Has worked fine. Granted no access to database. We pulled lists that they needed and could report on their progress.

I don't think I would try to do this with attributes. You might make it work but I think it would be very messy and more of a challenge to report from.

It's using RE functions as intended IMO.

Karen Diener 2

@Alisa Forman:

@Karen Diener Thanks for the response but that actually isn't the concern (they won't have access to RE regardless). A decision was made on an executive level that the fundraiser/solicitor label would be reserved for staff. I'm willing to argue against it if it seems like that's clearly the best path forward but I'm just not sure if it is. Right now, most of our donors/sponsors are coded to nobody. Granted, I'm the one making 90% of the changes in RE (at least) but I want the data to be clear and correct. Does that make sense?

Oh! I see! When you said “monitor their account", I was confused by that. Thought you meant their Blackbaud account or something.

I've definitely worked in environments where there are staff solicitors and other non-staff solicitors - usually board members or committee members. Marking the board member as a solicitor helped with give/get reporting, but also allowed us to easily see who was connected.

I have no problems at all with non-staff solicitors, as long as you use an appropriate Solicitor Type to help you manage information.

Karen