[Robin]

I've received a fairly large check for a tribute gift with a long list of donor names. However, the amounts given by each donor are not listed and I'm sure are unknown at the point by the person who sent the check. The check writer should be the one to get the tax receipt, correct? Should I then soft-credit the donors?

[Melissa Siobhan]

Even if you knew the amounts given by each donor the only one who can get full tax credit for the gift is the check writer.

How will you soft credit if you do not know the amounts?

[Robin]

Sorry. I should have been more clear with my questions - I just went through a NetSolutions implementation so I'm a little fuzzy!

We use the Tribute module when compiling lists of tribute gifts for our newsletter. I want a way to list each of the donors as having given a tribute gift so their name appears - most people read our newsletter only for those lists - go figure. Would it make sense to soft-credit with $0.00 for each?

[Melissa Siobhan]

Maybe yes and maybe no. It all depends on how you pull data for your recognition. For us that would not work as we would exclude all $0 gifts.

[vsiegel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

We use the Tribute module when compiling lists of tribute gifts for our newsletter. I want a way to list each of the donors as having given a tribute gift so their name appears - most people read our newsletter only for those lists - go figure. Would it make sense to soft-credit with $0.00 for each?

If this is a common occurrence, you could always determine a set amount (i.e. $0.02) to SC for all "contributing donors" to a combined check tribute donation. That way they'll always pull when you run a gift report, and you'll also be able to immediately recognize them for what they are.

Unless, of course, you often get two cent donations from other sources, my own two cents notwithstanding.

[Simon Stacey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

most people read our newsletter only for those lists - go figure.

Ah - school magazine sports team syndrome. Back when I was an editor for our school magazine, it was suggested that it would be simpler to replace the sports section with a randomised list of all pupils - that way they could still have all the fun of trying to spot their name in the list, without us having to actually get articles written. [sigh]