...
| Drawio | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Illustrated below is the structure of record for Bequest process. It needs to be fleshed out and communicated to the team with proper documentation. Based on initial assessment, inconsistencies in data arise when certain connections are missed. Linkage of objects are loose and lead to inconsistent interpretation of data.
Referring to a comment made in AQ community, having the Account to Account relation as in our example below makes a lot of sense. What could be looked into then is do we have to connect the deceased contact to its former account?
...
| Drawio | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Challenges:
Alain: Big part of the planned giving is not solicited. which is not TAP driven.
Harpeet: Alot of the time they don’t know if the donor is an Alumni or not. The matching process is manual process
Harpeet: main is is on Reporting. Currently it takes a lot of manually going through lists. For example he needs to report on all the estates received last month. He has to manually prepare them. The reporting process is challenging.
Alain: Challenge is mapping the estate and the deceased person.
Allain: wants to generally have a wholistic view of a contact how much hard and soft credit given. As well as if a person left us a bequest.
Alain: its not easy to understand different activities of a contact based on their estates. (engagement history) before the bequest.