prospect ratings workaround

Drew Peterson

Hi all,


My org is preparing to import a wide variety of prospect ratings from a third party. We have done this before and I've been frustrated with the lack of functionality exporting these ratings from RE. From the database, specific ratings cannot be exported in the same column (as far as I've found). Only the source of those ratings can be specified in the export, which leads to the same rating categories being exported into different columns for different constituents.


Wondering if anyone has experience importing ratings in an alternate way to how RE is set up. For instance, storing all the different ratings categories as ratings sources, importing as constituent attributes instead, etc. Something that enables these ratings to export in a cleaner fashion.

Faith Murray

There is definitely some lack of functionality in exporting ratings. In Export, you can only filter by Source, not by Category or Description. I learned the hard way but now recommend defining the Source to include actual source+type. For example, "DonorSearch 3-year capacity" or "RUF Persona", or "House RFM". Then, place in the Description the actual rating score.


Category can, at least, be queried on -- which does allow one to narrow the group before exporting, reducing some of the extraneous output data when exporting Ratings.


Wish functionality on this could be improved!

Dan Snyder

I have wanted to do this, but haven't gotten around to it. However, I like Faith Murray‍'s suggestion to combine them.

Jeannie Goings

We are new to this and I have been super cautious trying to get this right. Forgive me, I'm not sure I follow. Faith Murray‍, I think I may have done something similar to what you recommend. We imported ratings from Target Analytics; I listed Target Analytics as a source and named the ratings TA_Gift Capacity ... If this is in alignment with Faith's recommendation, I also recommend to prioritizing the order the table entries by frequency. The top three ratings that your org uses, should be the first three table entries. This way you're not exporting 10 columns to get the value you're chasing.

Faith Murray

Jeannie Goings‍, to clarify I have never had 10 output columns because I try to keep our Source field specific enough that there are at most 2-3 data outputs of that type. For example, when importing FM values calculated in-house info, I would create Source fields:


House RFM

House R

House F

House M


...each as their own Source label. As such, each Source selection would only have one column output. As far as Category, it is a fairly useless field since it cannot be exported.


To reduce the number of Rating Sources, I also recommend only putting into Ratings what is truly a Rating. For example, with DonorSource info, I would import the total capacity and the 3-year capacity as Ratings. But estimated Real Estate value and political contribution information would be imported under Prospect-Financial Information and Prospect-Philanthropic Interests. Donor Type (monthly, major, etc.) can be stored under Prospect-Classification. For true Ratings, I have found only a few limited needs:


Giving capacity

RFM scores

Persona/Modeling type

NXT Overall Wealth

In-House Affinity scores


Therefore, your list should be fairly slim even if you give each unique Rating its own Source type.

Jeannie Goings

Faith Murray‍, clarification helps. Thanks!

Karen Diener

I've done something similar to what Faith suggested in the past. It's frustrating when you are integrated with any software that adds ratings for you though, because you may need to adjust them all to fit your naming scheme. I really wish Blackbaud would focus on fixing some of these things that have been issues for 15+ years!


Karen