Matching Gift Company Relationships

Options
We currently have companies who will match gifts, but the Foundation is the one who pays the match and the company and foundation are set up as two separate Orgs in RE. For tax reasons of course. We currenly use Current Employer/Current Employee for the company, and Current Match Source/Match Recipient for the foundation. Would there be a way to link the two orgs? And then to link any new employees that are added in the future? We only want one source (company/foundation) to have the Matching Gift factor, otherwise it would double the matching gift on a constituents record. Has anyone found a way to handle these types of relationships?
Tagged:

Comments

  • JoAnn Strommen
    JoAnn Strommen ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ancient Membership Facilitator 4 Name Dropper Photogenic
    Mechelle Quattrociocche:
    We currently have companies who will match gifts, but the Foundation is the one who pays the match and the company and foundation are set up as two separate Orgs in RE. For tax reasons of course. We currenly use Current Employer/Current Employee for the company, and Current Match Source/Match Recipient for the foundation. Would there be a way to link the two orgs? And then to link any new employees that are added in the future? We only want one source (company/foundation) to have the Matching Gift factor, otherwise it would double the matching gift on a constituents record. Has anyone found a way to handle these types of relationships?

    Mechelle,

    When you get notification/paperwork/online link to complete/verify for the match is it in name of local company or the foundation?  I was going to say our MG are entered on local company record and then applied to pledges when payment comes in from foundation, BUT when I looked, I found that our submission for the match is actually to the company foundation.  That record is where MG factor info is, where MG are recorded and whom payments are received from.  So when employee submits for the match it's only recorded on foundation record.

    The employees only have a relationship link to the local branch where they are employed.  The local branches and the foundation have a relationship that we've named 'Local Co/Branch' and 'Parent Co/HQ/Corp Office.

    If you don't know where match payment is coming from I would make local company the match-er and enter MG there.  Then when payment comes in apply the payment from the foundation to the MG pledge.  MG pledge is only entered once. Their employer is still the one who is matching in a sense, payment is just coming from different address.

    Just how we've done it.  You're right, you definitely do not want the MG entered twice as it will inflate reports and show as unpaid on one record.

  • JoAnn Strommen:

    Mechelle,

    When you get notification/paperwork/online link to complete/verify for the match is it in name of local company or the foundation?  I was going to say our MG are entered on local company record and then applied to pledges when payment comes in from foundation, BUT when I looked, I found that our submission for the match is actually to the company foundation.  That record is where MG factor info is, where MG are recorded and whom payments are received from.  So when employee submits for the match it's only recorded on foundation record.

    The employees only have a relationship link to the local branch where they are employed.  The local branches and the foundation have a relationship that we've named 'Local Co/Branch' and 'Parent Co/HQ/Corp Office.

    If you don't know where match payment is coming from I would make local company the match-er and enter MG there.  Then when payment comes in apply the payment from the foundation to the MG pledge.  MG pledge is only entered once. Their employer is still the one who is matching in a sense, payment is just coming from different address.

    Just how we've done it.  You're right, you definitely do not want the MG entered twice as it will inflate reports and show as unpaid on one record.

    Thank you JoAnn for your response. I like your solution of naming the local company and the founation as Local Co/Branch and Parent Co/HQ/Corp Office. I believe this is someting our office could implement and would solve the relationship issue between the two.

     

    Mechelle Quattrociocche

    Program Gift Specialist

    UWF Advancement Services

    University of West Florida

     

Categories