Addressees/Salutations Clean-up

Options
Our organization has quite a lengthy list of Addressees/Salutations to scroll through.  Some are duplicates.  I have printed our list and determined which should be removed because they are a duplicate or not used.  I feel some of these were created years ago when there may have been some experimentation happening.  I know that in order to remove any, we have to ensure it is not used in a record, so I have queried those using the one(s) I want to remove so that I can use the query in a global change function to have those records use a different Addressee/Salutation.  THEN when you go to delete it, it states it cannot be deleted because it is still found in records.  You next need to ensure you are checking that any relationships do not have the addressee/salutation - query that; do the global change...  But it still says it's in a record.  Is there anyone out there who has gotten through this particular clean-up successfully?  Blackbaud tech support hasn't been able to get any further than I have and we've spent A LOT of time.  Most users are not going to have the time for all of this and I have suggested that developers allow users to do some of this moving and then DELETE the addressee/salutation 'at their own risk' but they have not wanted to do that yet.  If one were to go ahead with such a thing, it's not a difficult task to query those with no addressee/salutation and do a global add to put the info back in.  Anyone?

Comments

  • Have you looked at non-constituent records or Event name tags?  I do believe this could be the problem.
  • JoAnn Strommen
    JoAnn Strommen ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ancient Membership Facilitator 4 Name Dropper Photogenic
    If it's not as Jenny Stephens‍ replied, could it be that it was format selected and then the 'editable' box was checked?  If so, that about makes cleanup impossible. 
  • I moved this discussion to the Raiser's Edge forums. Thanks!
  • Suzi, if you create a new constituent query and click the Find binoculars, there are many instances of Addressee/Salutations (spouse, contacts, organizations, individuals, etc.) so I think you may need to include more fields in your query to find the ones you want to delete. You would also need to check through the Specific Addressee/Salutation fields to find them.


    Also, Crystal Bruce, I see that you moved this discussion to the Raiser's Edge forums, but without a link, I'm not going to try to find the right place to post my response - sorry!
  • Thank you all for your responses.  I'm refreshed to see this.


    Linda Burns - yes indeed!  All of the varying options have certainly been touched upon within this very deep process.  I have queried as many options as I could find to then use in the global replace process so that I can then delete the ones I want...to no avail.  That's why I'm finally here.  Thank GOD I have some slow/project time to get a second wind and go back to this.  Thank you.


    JoAnn Strommen - I actually queried those with editable = yes to eliminate that from hindering the process.  Still didn't work.  (I've been shocked as I've unturned so many of these 'stones'.)  Thank you!


    Jenny Stephens - Thank you.  I did relationship queries in this process so that should cover the non-constituent records, right?  We haven't used event name tags.  Good considerations.


    COUPLE QUESTIONS:

      1)  Have any of you tried this process and been successful?

      2)  Since the various articles in Knowledgebase that have steps to follow did not fully get me there, what do you all think of the question I posed to developers:  Why can't the clean up process of querying the addressee/salutation that one wants to delete from these various fields all be part of the steps, and then finally include a step where the user can delete the addressee/salutation 'at their own risk' be an option?  Once it's deleted, if there is some very hidden area where the addressee salutation is being used, it wouldn't be hard to choose another.  And there could be sidebar instructions showing how to query any addressee/salutations that are blank and using global add to insert an active choice?  In each of your individual database/work scenarios, do you see this possibility being a problem?


    Thank you all!!
  • I don't see a problem with the solution you're posing. If you have a link to a sugestion that I can vote for it, I'll gladly do so.
  • Awesome Linda - I will look into how to share the suggestion!  I'll let you know when it's out there.  Thank you!  ~Suzi
  • Dariel Dixon 2
    Dariel Dixon 2 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Seventh Anniversary Facilitator 4 Name Dropper Photogenic
    This is a fundamental issue with the way RE was designed.  Specifically, there's no way to effectively query non-constituent data, whether that be spousal/relationship or contact or even event participant data.  So, I don't know what can be done here.


    However, you can find this information if you are patient.  I have a query that I found on these boards many years ago (I can't find it right now, but I printed it out somewhere at the office).  Keri Barnhart‍ goes through the gist of it in great detail here.  My query is similar, and has about 30 something conditions.

    https://community.blackbaud.com/forums/viewtopic/147/50910?post_id=197749#p197749


    Regardless, it can be done.  I wish you good luck and godspeed with it.  It's a taxing process, but the beast can be slain.  
  • Wowwwwww Dariel!  Thank you SO MUCH!  I can't wait to dig into this!  Thank you for the assistance to slay this beast!!  ?  I truly appreciate it.  Wonderful-Wonderful-Wonderful!


    Best regards,

    Suzi
  • Keri Barnhart‍ You ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Thank you so much for all of this detail now and from your previous post ?
  • For what it's worth, one of the thing that frustrated me the most is this part of your original post:
    THEN when you go to delete it, it states it cannot be deleted because it is still found in records.  You next need to ensure you are checking that any relationships do not have the addressee/salutation - query that; do the global change...  But it still says it's in a record.  Is there anyone out there who has gotten through this particular clean-up successfully?


    If attempting to delete the formula gives me an error saying "No! Do you really want to break something on one of your many users right now? This is still in use!" warning, why can't the error message also pop out the list of associated records? Is it too processing intensive or something? It would save so much headache for so many of us... and not just for these configurations, but all the tables. We had some oddities leftover from that conversion issue where we literally could not find an instance of a particular table entry anywhere - and NXT didn't think it existed and wouldn't give it as an option in the relevant drop-downs! - but RE wouldn't let me delete it.


    But unless your database is also haunted by echoes from an earlier upgrade/conversion, any time you see that message for addressee/salutation related things, it's probably because RE is finding it in one of the places I listed above. Getting creative with how you suss out Editables and using Global Change to point assigned Types to a different-but-similar formula can make a big difference quickly!


    And another caution - be careful that if you do have a lot of Editables, you're looking at why before you delete or change them!

    Is it because users couldn't get into config to create new formulas, and a lot of constituents go by a nickname? is it because of mismatched commas with suffixes? That can help identify formulas you need. It can also help identify if the rules for deceased spouses or people changing their names need to be cleared up. We had a number of women whose names were made editable apparently because some users couldn't update the name data fields but COULD change the add/sals... and then sometimes the women changed their names again and the editables were stuck with the previous version. And for some reason, we were missing one really common "Mr. and Mrs." format for assigning to the Mrs....
  • WOWWWW Keri Barnhart!  THAT IS A LOT!  But so has this process been, so I totally get it.  I look forward to digging into this.  Thank you SO MUCH for sharing regarding this intense project.  It's very kind of you and I know it's because you understand how labor-intensive it is and want to help the next guy.


    One response from my initial reading of all of this is that, YES, when it says the addressee/salutation exists in records, it WOULD BE NICE if it could list where!  I don't understand why it wouldn't be possible if the process is being stopped by those records.  Again, this would be something to take to a suggestions page or to the developers?
  • Suzi Briscoe:

    WOWWWW Keri Barnhart!  THAT IS A LOT!  But so has this process been, so I totally get it.  I look forward to digging into this.  Thank you SO MUCH for sharing regarding this intense project.  It's very kind of you and I know it's because you understand how labor-intensive it is and want to help the next guy.


    One response from my initial reading of all of this is that, YES, when it says the addressee/salutation exists in records, it WOULD BE NICE if it could list where!  I don't understand why it wouldn't be possible if the process is being stopped by those records.  Again, this would be something to take to a suggestions page or to the developers?

    I have never been accused of writing too little. ? But add/sal cleanup is a huge project with a lot of moving parts that you have to work out! My tips and guides for it are much easier to read when I have a full powerpoint set-up available and can use visual aids.


    Maybe one day, if I ever have the time, I'll put together a more complete presentation guide with handy boxes and arrows and color coding. (I used to do training for my team, so I know how useful a good picture with color-coded labels can be when explaining database structure and clean-up!) Until then, if you need someone who has spent hundreds of hours with Addressee/Salutation clean-up and has a lot of advice from experience, I am happy to share what I know to hopefully prevent headaches.

  • Keri Barnhart‍ Sounds like a great bbcon topic to me!!!
  • Linda Burns:

    I don't see a problem with the solution you're posing. If you have a link to a sugestion that I can vote for it, I'll gladly do so.

    Linda Burns‍   I just shared some thoughts in Ideas for Raiser's Edge (RE7-I-5897) if you or anyone else would like to comment or vote on it!

  • @Suzi Briscoe A big reason that very few people should be able to create tables.

  • @Suzi Briscoe
    Agreed - relationships always hide these things. And Editables - zug. When I have done clean up I have reviewed every editable to see if it can be made into a standard in the dropdown choices or if it does already exist but no one found it at the time. Goal being as few records with editable add/sals as possible. Oh! and the add/sals that is “under” the editable, those need to get changed to something standard in your menu.

    Helpful hint – I found that if I broke the Add/Sals into sections in the dropdown, others that might be looking could more easily find what they were looking for and now just wanna make a new one or click editable. So I made Add/Sals that are --Primary Addressee-- , --Primary Salutation--, etc. and then the appropriate format choices are in that section, so then you look in the dropdown and it's not as overwhelming to find what you are looking for

  • @Dariel Dixon - I was successful in querying non-constituents with the offending Add/Sal, but I have found no way to delete that Add/Sal type from non-constituents en masse. Is there a way? Global Change worked perfectly to delete it from the constituent records, but I still can't remove the value from my table b/c it still exists on tens of thousands of non-constituent spouses. Any suggestions? ? Many thanks!

  • Dariel Dixon 2
    Dariel Dixon 2 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Seventh Anniversary Facilitator 4 Name Dropper Photogenic

    @Amelia Ketzle: I wish I had words of encouragement here, but unfortunately I don't. I've always had to manually remove them from the non-constituents, and from there delete them. There may be a way to do so through the API, but I don't think the option exists through the regular UI. I imagine that you could use table cleanup to move them to another addressee, but that might not be helpful either.

    @Dariel Dixon - I was successful in querying non-constituents with the offending Add/Sal, but I have found no way to delete that Add/Sal type from non-constituents en masse. Is there a way? Global Change worked perfectly to delete it from the constituent records, but I still can't remove the value from my table b/c it still exists on tens of thousands of non-constituent spouses. Any suggestions? ? Many thanks!

  • @Dariel Dixon
    Thanks for your suggestions. Yes, I thought about Table Cleanup, but we don't have a suitable value to move them to, and really we want them gone (they're not adding value to our operations). Appreciate your ideas. I suppose there are worse problems to have.

Categories