Critical Information About Check-in

re: Critical Information About Check-in

ttrotter — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:36:39 GMT

While I agree with many of the points listed above, I discourage the use of phone number searches in our church. There are a number of reasons for this:

1. Grandma may bring Johnny, but doesn't recall Johnny's phone number (his family is Speed Dial 2 on her phone). Or Neighbor Nancy brings Johnny, but doesn't know Johnny's phone number. When our check-in volunteers try to check-in Johnny, they are encouraged to do a name search...if they search for Grandma's number or for Neighbor Nancy's number, Johnny won't be in their households. The volunteer then adds Johnny as a visitor to Grandma or Neighbor Nancy's household (if Volunteer Valerie isn't careful, she may add Johynny as a household member--which creates more mess!). Now Johnny is in the system 2 times...and I must try to determine if Johnny has moved, or if there is a child with the same name and DOB as Johnny in the system. Shall I merge? Hmm...I've got some homework to do (and a few phone calls!).

2) We have several cases of split custody. Mom has Susie one weekend, and Dad has her the next weekend. We are thrilled that Mom and Dad will both continue to attend our church, however it creates a lot of unneccessary work for the parents--and for me. When mom brings Susie, she says "Our last 4 are 1234," and we check-in Susie with no problems. Next week, Dad will say, "Our last 4 are 6789," so Volunteer Valerie adds a member to that household. Susie is entered in F1 two times...although she is one person. Through calls to the families, I learn Susie's situation, and we come to an agreement...for the purposes of our database, Susie will remain in one household, but will be issued a barcode that the "other" household will use to check her in (for instance, Susie is in Mom's household, but the barcode assigned to her is in Dad's possession). While keeping Susie in both households is an option, it distorts our stats when figuring how many children we have in a particular grade/age.

3. I've learned that many families will falsify a phone number, to make it convenient for check-in, but the phone number isn't a legitimate phone number at all! For instance, Leslie's parents will tell us their phone number has changed. The last 4 digits are 1111. Later, when a Pastor or Ministry Leader needs to contact Leslie's parents, the phone number doesn't work.

No method is fool-proof, it's true. I find--at least in our community!--that the phone number method causes more mistakes. When I train volunteers to do check-in, I "teach" them to use 2-3 letters of first name, space, and 2-3 letters of last name (mic mou, instead of Mickey Mouse...or is it Mickie Mouse...or is it Mickey Mowse). Most folks know when their name is a difficult one to spell, and are happy to start spelling it for us.

I just wanted to "defend" our church's use of the names... :)

re: Critical Information About Check-in

Renee Conners — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:32:46 GMT

Thanks for a great article!!

Since we are a portable church running F1 on a wireless system, it is so much faster to search by phone number. I think our volunteers fall into the routine of knowing people's names and searching by that just because it is most convenient.

Thanks for the reminder though! I love the humor behind it!

Renee Conners

re: Critical Information About Check-in

FTDeliverySvcs — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:17:02 GMT

ttrotter,

I hear you! :) Most churches have different situations that cause the phone number search to not work every time. I have heard and sympathize with every situation you have mentioned above. I would still have to say that for 80% or more of almost every church that I have visited (Excluding Ecuador) the phone number is still the way to go. It is faster, less prone to mistakes (decreases number of people being added because they spelled the name wrong), and it is faster (did I mention it is faster?).

There have been some recent improvements to the Check-in application that will improve communication value responses. The biggest is that we are searching on all communication values and not just home phone number.

One issue to consider is when to add Johnny or Suzie to both households. I think we have written blogs on this issue in the past. If Johnny's mom or dad get's married again and either inherits more kids or produces more kids they will want to check in all of their kids at the same time without having to pull up the other families record and getting multiple receipts and slowing the entire process down.

Duplicate kids is an acceptable problem to have as long as you look at the numbers in respect to how many kids are attending an event or all events in a certain age range and not strictly by demographics. Another reason it is acceptable to have Suzie or Johnny in both households (Mom and Dad, Granny and Parents, Parents and Neighbors) is that when you are sending out mailers or communications to those households all parties need to be notified of upcoming events, thank you emails, follow up emails, etc.

Matthew McMaster

Delivery Manager

Fellowship Technologies

re: Critical Information About Check-in

Kim Ludwick — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:32:33 GMT

Sorry Matt but we too use the same methods as ttrotter. That is for people who forget their checkin cards on a regular weekend service or we are running a special event where we switch to all assisted. We utilize the self checkin for all our weekend services.

Although it may be slightly faster typing in the last 4 of the phone, using this method almost always brings up more then one household so then you have to clarify who is actually checking. Plus, people change phone numbers like you wouldn't believe. Or, they fill out paperwork one week and and provide their cell number as primary then the very next week they will fill something else out and use their home number as primary. So, we get the form and change the number in the DB thinking their number has changed.

We also get those people that come up who have a home phone,cell phone for dad, cell phone for mom. They give you the last 4, that doesn't work so they say "o well try ..." and if that doesn't work "lets try one more". We train our volunteers to do 2 and 2 or 3 and 3 of the first and last name to reduce the chance of error.

Kim Ludwick

Champions Centre

re: Critical Information About Check-in

mallison — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:00:26 GMT

Ummm.... I'm just going to apologize now: I'm sorry.

Please explain why it matters how folks get checked-in? Although, I agree that I would LOVE for our families to use the scan cards we purchased and have assigned to them.

Thought: to encourage families to use their cards, we could have a contest, where we draw a name from each service, who used their check-in card and they receive a small prize (coupon for free drink at our coffee shop). Is there a report that shows all the cards scanned for a particular service?

re: Critical Information About Check-in

katiesmith — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 01:48:43 GMT

Matt,

I beg to differ, Mr. Swiffer! We use the name, but our check-in workers are also alert enough to recognize many of our members who come in. Sometimes, they will even have the family's record pulled up before the family gets to the kiosk because they actually recognize the family (I know that seems foreign, but it's true). I would much rather someone ask me my name than ask me what my phone number is. A name is much more personal, don't ya think?

Katie Smith

CSPC

re: Critical Information About Check-in

Lee Holley — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:08:43 GMT

Wow... We tried the phone number searches and you would be amazed how many tried to give us their last 4 of their ss# or a number that we don't have in the system. We have chosen to use the name search (we only have assisted check-in). We encourage our teams not to try and spell out the whole name and we achieved fewer errors. Lee Holley

re: Critical Information About Check-in

Kim Ludwick — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:50:07 GMT

Lee Holley

Your absolutely right, for any church choosing to use the name method they should never ask their volunteers to type in the whole name. We use the rule of 3 and 3, first three letters of both the first and last name. If for some reason that doesn't work we try at least once using 2 and 2.

The times we find that 3 and 3 might not work is when you have someone who goes by a nick name. For example their legal name Charles but they go by Chuck. So out of habit they say Charles so you enter Cha, only to find out that its in the system as Chu. So, if you do the 3 and 3 it won't come up but if you do 2 and 2 it will.