Skip to content

Settings and activity

66 results found

  1. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dana Jeffery commented  · 

    Yes, to all of the above. I came to the Idea Lab to ask for this. We have a board member that wants to see what the Fail responses are. We are probably not going to want to reach out to help folks, but we want to see if we can learn from these to make things clearer. We have a fairly large quantity of folks that do not meet our requirements, unfortunately.
    I can see that I can add Eligibility information into Quick Export, but this would mean that they have passed, which is not what we want.

    Also, we find it a tad frustrating that we can only see the User name, and not the organization they are associated with. It would be great if within the Eligibility Center you could select all, and instead of just Reset Eligibility, there was a Quick Export option there.

    I would welcome a conversation about our Eligibility Quiz sore spots. I think we have a few.
    (Not sure if the Feedback Needed was just for Jennifer, or for any of us)

  2. 21 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  3. 6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  4. 148 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  5. 41 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  6. 50 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  7. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  8. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dana Jeffery commented  · 

    Our foundation talked about this, and while recognizing that there is the GuideStar option to prepopulate some of the standard responses, we have a majority of applicants that use a fiscal sponsor - so selecting the GuideStar response is not going to help them.
    My supervisor was thinking there should be an internal repository (like what is proposed in Grant Hub) to have some of the responses they can pull to populate common answers. We currently have no way to know which of our users have Grant Hub to know if that will work for them, or if the auto fill feature is being used.
    Are there other solutions we can use that we haven't considered? Just wanted to chime in to see if this idea would work not just for follow ups but for all applications across processes.

    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  9. 25 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  10. 16 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  11. 12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  12. 38 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  13. 16 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  14. 5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  15. 31 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dana Jeffery commented  · 

    Yes, this is a real problem. For various reasons we ask for the Follow Up submission to be uploaded within the renewal request, but when a new applicant comes in to apply under renewal, they cannot view the previous follow up information, and they then have to get in touch with us. So we have to get the copy in there for them...

    We have the Organization View open on our site, and it seems strange that they can view the request information and the award details, but no follow ups. Why would this tab be unavailable?

    I was actually unaware of this issue, mostly because -in the past- organizations would share log in details when there was a change in staff, and so they would have had access, in this scenario.
    We have now made a note to applicants that we prefer to keep track of changes in staffing and now create log ins for each organization's new contacts, so this is posing quite an issue. They should be able to see everything in the Organization View for these grant histories. I am trying to understand why this wouldn't be available...
    Any information about the reasoning might help us, so we can figure out a way to find a work around. Or convince you to change the setting! :)

    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  16. 29 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  17. 39 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  18. 13 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  · 
  19. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Dana Jeffery shared this idea  · 
  20. 32 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Dana Jeffery commented  · 

    If I remember correctly this used to be how the document uploads worked, back in 2012 or so, but a release somewhere along the way separated this out.
    It may have been the Comments section from a request, or both, as they would appear on both the Request page and the Organization Profile page.
    I agree though, because there are times that something is pertinent to the specific request, but the organization as a whole.
    Right now I just upload on both pages...

    Dana Jeffery supported this idea  ·