Advancement Services under Finance?

6. RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Recommend

Tracy Forkin

Posted 11-19-2024 11:05 AM

Hi, everyone. I always find this topic interesting. I equate Advancement and Finance with a restaurant; you have the 'front of the house' and the 'back of the house.' It can be challenging to go from one to the other.

My background (over 20 years) is in Advancement / Fundraising. In 2023, I transitioned to the Finance Office, managing our restricted funds. I've essentially gone from the front of the house to the back. One primary objective of this role is to work with the fund stewards to spend restricted funds according to the donors' wishes in a timely fashion and report back to Advancement. Fortunately, I can address gift-related questions and communicate with stakeholders university- and community-wide. I do not do gift processing, but I can review the gifts processed by Advancement and address any concerns before I post them to the general ledger. I believe I am in a unique position.

When I joined the university in 2005, gift processing was done by Finance. All entries into Raiser's Edge were pledges and pay-cash (debits and credits). The Finance person was not fully versed in IRS regulations or CASE, making reporting challenging. In 2008, gift processing became my responsibility. That said, specific tasks should remain in Advancement Services, not just for knowledge purposes but also for separation of duties.

I have many more thoughts on this topic, but I will spare you! Overall, Advancement Services gift processing, metrics reports, mailing lists, data hygiene, etc., does not belong in Finance. I'm with John on this one.

Best regards,

Tracy

Original Message

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 11:22:00 AM
From: John Taylor
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

I, too, have seen this structure work - but less than 10% of the time.

I discourage these structures for the reason you articulate. My paper at the aasp Knowledge Base on the differences between Advancement and Finance goes into great detail. What tends to suffer the most when AS is under Finance is donor relations. Donors are treated more like "dollars" than people who require time and attention. Under Finance, donors often take a back seat to get money in the door unless you have an incredibly strong Advancement leader.

I oppose the structure of Advancement Services under Finance. You cannot convince me that it's "better." I understand why some organizations go this route. And if you have a strong AS leader, it can work. But, as I mentioned, the structure more often fails to serve our donors as well as when AS is within Advancement.

John

John H. Taylor, Principal

John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC

2604 Sevier Street

Durham, NC 27705

johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com

919.816.5903 (cell/text)

Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 10:33:00 AM
From: Hillary Cote
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Hi, we are recently under this structure. I find that although our Finance team is a group of excellent people, and more donor-focused than others, they are still institute-focused at the end of the day. The CFO also has started making gift determinations, although she is less versed on CASE standards and IRS policy than the Advancement Services team.
This may be growing pains, but in my thoughts, it makes the case for separation of systems - simply due to the separate goals. Finance is going to offer their opinion on gift processing because they have one, and if they are running the department, they will probably be the deciding vote, which will impact whether a gift is entered for the donor or for the institute.
I feel encouraged that Isaac has seen it work. I consider myself a fundraiser at the end of the day, so it's also a little disheartening to be away from my field!

------------------------------
Hillary Cote
Fort Lewis College
hlcote@fortlewis.edu
------------------------------

7. RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Recommend

Isaac Shalev

Posted 11-19-2024 12:46 PM

I think the best case for advancement living under finance -- and it's still not my preferred setup -- is at cultural institutions, not in higher education.

Thank you,
Isaac Shalev
Data Strategy Expert
Sage70, Inc.
(917) 859-0151
isaac@sage70.com

Schedule a 30-minute consultation now:

https://calendly.com/sage70/30min

Original Message

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 12:05:00 PM
From: Tracy Forkin
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Hi, everyone. I always find this topic interesting. I equate Advancement and Finance with a restaurant; you have the 'front of the house' and the 'back of the house.' It can be challenging to go from one to the other.

My background (over 20 years) is in Advancement / Fundraising. In 2023, I transitioned to the Finance Office, managing our restricted funds. I've essentially gone from the front of the house to the back. One primary objective of this role is to work with the fund stewards to spend restricted funds according to the donors' wishes in a timely fashion and report back to Advancement. Fortunately, I can address gift-related questions and communicate with stakeholders university- and community-wide. I do not do gift processing, but I can review the gifts processed by Advancement and address any concerns before I post them to the general ledger. I believe I am in a unique position.

When I joined the university in 2005, gift processing was done by Finance. All entries into Raiser's Edge were pledges and pay-cash (debits and credits). The Finance person was not fully versed in IRS regulations or CASE, making reporting challenging. In 2008, gift processing became my responsibility. That said, specific tasks should remain in Advancement Services, not just for knowledge purposes but also for separation of duties.

I have many more thoughts on this topic, but I will spare you! Overall, Advancement Services gift processing, metrics reports, mailing lists, data hygiene, etc., does not belong in Finance. I'm with John on this one.

Best regards,

Tracy

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 11:22:00 AM
From: John Taylor
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

I, too, have seen this structure work - but less than 10% of the time.

I discourage these structures for the reason you articulate. My paper at the aasp Knowledge Base on the differences between Advancement and Finance goes into great detail. What tends to suffer the most when AS is under Finance is donor relations. Donors are treated more like "dollars" than people who require time and attention. Under Finance, donors often take a back seat to get money in the door unless you have an incredibly strong Advancement leader.

I oppose the structure of Advancement Services under Finance. You cannot convince me that it's "better." I understand why some organizations go this route. And if you have a strong AS leader, it can work. But, as I mentioned, the structure more often fails to serve our donors as well as when AS is within Advancement.

John

John H. Taylor, Principal

John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC

2604 Sevier Street

Durham, NC 27705

johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com

919.816.5903 (cell/text)

Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987

8. RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Recommend

John Taylor

Posted 11-19-2024 01:18 PM

That's an interesting observation, Issac. I have seen that, but mostly when the organization focuses its revenue stream on memberships and corporate sponsorships. Do you think that's a key to why we see that structure? But even then, it doesn't always work!

John

John H. Taylor, Principal

John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC

2604 Sevier Street

Durham, NC 27705

johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com

919.816.5903 (cell/text)

Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987

Original Message

9. RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Recommend

Alan Hejnal

Posted 11-19-2024 01:35 PM

My experience isn't as extensive as John's, but what I've observed is that, when gift recording is under Advancement, all of the data points relevant to Finance are still managed and maintained successfully-they pretty much have to be! In addition, the data points relevant to Advancement (appeals, campaigns, soft credits, etc.) are also managed and maintained successfully. That makes sense, because the people doing the gift recording are immersed in the work of Advancement, and they understand those aspects and why they are important and how they work. And addresses get maintained, names updated, spouses added, etc., based on the supporting documentation. And quid pro quo information is associated based on the characteristics of the solicitation and the gift. And so on.

In the (few) cases I've seen where gift recording is under Finance, all of the data points relevant to Finance are managed and maintained successfully. However, the data points relevant to Advancement are managed and maintained less consistently and less successfully.

My US$0.02 worth; the usual disclaimers apply.

Good luck!

Alan

Alan S. Hejnal (he/him)

Data Quality Manager

Original Message

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 11:22:00 AM
From: John Taylor
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

I, too, have seen this structure work - but less than 10% of the time.

I discourage these structures for the reason you articulate. My paper at the aasp Knowledge Base on the differences between Advancement and Finance goes into great detail. What tends to suffer the most when AS is under Finance is donor relations. Donors are treated more like "dollars" than people who require time and attention. Under Finance, donors often take a back seat to get money in the door unless you have an incredibly strong Advancement leader.

I oppose the structure of Advancement Services under Finance. You cannot convince me that it's "better." I understand why some organizations go this route. And if you have a strong AS leader, it can work. But, as I mentioned, the structure more often fails to serve our donors as well as when AS is within Advancement.

John

John H. Taylor, Principal

John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC

2604 Sevier Street

Durham, NC 27705

johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com

919.816.5903 (cell/text)

Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 10:33:00 AM
From: Hillary Cote
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Hi, we are recently under this structure. I find that although our Finance team is a group of excellent people, and more donor-focused than others, they are still institute-focused at the end of the day. The CFO also has started making gift determinations, although she is less versed on CASE standards and IRS policy than the Advancement Services team.
This may be growing pains, but in my thoughts, it makes the case for separation of systems - simply due to the separate goals. Finance is going to offer their opinion on gift processing because they have one, and if they are running the department, they will probably be the deciding vote, which will impact whether a gift is entered for the donor or for the institute.
I feel encouraged that Isaac has seen it work. I consider myself a fundraiser at the end of the day, so it's also a little disheartening to be away from my field!

------------------------------
Hillary Cote
Fort Lewis College
hlcote@fortlewis.edu
------------------------------

10. RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

Recommend

Valerie Nguyen

Posted 11-19-2024 02:02 PM

Valerie Nguyen reacted to your message:

Original Message

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 2:35:00 PM
From: Alan Hejnal
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

My experience isn't as extensive as John's, but what I've observed is that, when gift recording is under Advancement, all of the data points relevant to Finance are still managed and maintained successfully-they pretty much have to be! In addition, the data points relevant to Advancement (appeals, campaigns, soft credits, etc.) are also managed and maintained successfully. That makes sense, because the people doing the gift recording are immersed in the work of Advancement, and they understand those aspects and why they are important and how they work. And addresses get maintained, names updated, spouses added, etc., based on the supporting documentation. And quid pro quo information is associated based on the characteristics of the solicitation and the gift. And so on.

In the (few) cases I've seen where gift recording is under Finance, all of the data points relevant to Finance are managed and maintained successfully. However, the data points relevant to Advancement are managed and maintained less consistently and less successfully.

My US$0.02 worth; the usual disclaimers apply.

Good luck!

Alan

Alan S. Hejnal (he/him)

Data Quality Manager

Original Message:
Sent: 11/19/2024 11:22:00 AM
From: John Taylor
Subject: RE: Advancement Services under Finance?

I, too, have seen this structure work - but less than 10% of the time.

I discourage these structures for the reason you articulate. My paper at the aasp Knowledge Base on the differences between Advancement and Finance goes into great detail. What tends to suffer the most when AS is under Finance is donor relations. Donors are treated more like "dollars" than people who require time and attention. Under Finance, donors often take a back seat to get money in the door unless you have an incredibly strong Advancement leader.

I oppose the structure of Advancement Services under Finance. You cannot convince me that it's "better." I understand why some organizations go this route. And if you have a strong AS leader, it can work. But, as I mentioned, the structure more often fails to serve our donors as well as when AS is within Advancement.

John

John H. Taylor, Principal

John H. Taylor Consulting, LLC

2604 Sevier Street

Durham, NC 27705

johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com

919.816.5903 (cell/text)

Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987

FundSvcs Community