Hi Jessica and Lynn,

First, thanks for the feedback.

Jessica - in answer to your first question, at this point, yes, selecting the details means all the information (applicant, organization, form, process and project name) will be added to the notification going to administrator(s). We discussed allowing administrators to configure a subset, but that quickly made the specification quite a bit bigger and would have added a fair bit of time to the development.

The subject line will be whatever the subject line of the selected template is, but yes, if you include the "Details" on a notification going to administrators, then the form, process, and project names will be included at the bottom of that email.

At this point, we didn't want to alter the subject of the email to includ the form name. As we continue to develop merge capability for emails, that will be something that will be an option, though that will not be available for a while.

Hope that helps, and I look forward to hearing more as you actually start using the new feature. Thanks again

posted June 17, 2013 by Chris Dahl, Foundant Technologies

I ditto Jessica's comments and thank you again. This will be very helpful.

posted June 17, 2013 by Lynn Larson, Fred and Jean Allegretti Foundation

Hi Chris:

Here are my thoughts in regards to the new notifications process. First off, Thank You! for working so diligently on creating this new process. It will certianly make our lives here a little easier....One question I have is this: Is it necessary to include the applicant information? Really all we need to know is who the organization is and what form they have submitted as you noted in the second set of lines (org, form name, process name, project name)-that part of it is great. Also, if I understand correctly, the subject line will still read 'applicant has submitted a form', but the type of form they have submitted will be listed in the email as long as we have set it to each proces we want to use, right? Finally, is it possible that instead of the subject saying, 'An applicant has submitted a form for review' it could say 'an applicant has submitted form (insert form name here)? I think you may have already mentioned it was not quite possible to do it this way and I understand. Overall, I am pleased with the setup you have provided for a new notification system here.

Thanks again!

posted June 17, 2013 by Jessica Leuthold

Hi all,

I have tried to notify each of you regarding this upcoming functionality. If you have specific questions, please let me know. We anticipate having this in production in the next 2-3 weeks.

Thanks again for all the insight

posted June 11, 2013 by Chris Dahl, Foundant Technologies

Chris,

Yes, I would be willing to go in and see what it's looking like.

Thanks!

posted June 6, 2013 by Lynn Larson, Fred and Jean Allegretti Foundation

Hi Lynn and Jessica,

I'm happy to say that we're close to releasing what I believe is an improvement to the notifications that will address your concerns.

In the next few days, I'd really like to have you look at it in our development environment and give us some feedback.

Please respond and let me know if that's something you would be willing to do. If so, I'll work with you on getting access to the development environment (will only take a minute or 2).

Thanks, and I look forward to hearing from you both.

posted June 6, 2013 by Chris Dahl, Foundant Technologies

Chris,

Yes, it would be very helpful to have notifications assigned to a process and stage. It would also be helfpful to have some applicant information included. For us, the organization name and the form name & process would be great. We wouldn't necessarily need the applicant name, but it might be helpful to others. A link to that form submission would be a bonus.

Thanks for considering.

posted May 28, 2013 by Lynn Larson, Fred and Jean Allegretti Foundation

Hi Lynn and Jessica,

We've discussed this a bit more internally and are looking at doing some work to make the notifications (specifially those with an Event Type of "Submission Verification", "Form Submitted" or "Follow Up Reminder") to be able to be assigned to a process and stage (say "2013 General Grants" process and the "Application" stage).

First, would this be useful?

Second, we discussed adding a configuration option for you to be able to say something like "Include legend" or "Include applicant / form info" or something. If you checked this, we would insert the applicant's name, organization, address / contact information, and the form name / process name into the bottom of the email. We would also MAYBE try to include a link (tho it might just be the text of the link) to that form submission.

Would this be acceptable?

Thoughts? Any feedback you have would be appreciated.

posted May 23, 2013 by Chris Dahl, Foundant Technologies

I agree with Jessica on being notified of a form being submitted and knowing what type of form that is would be helpful.

posted April 4, 2013 by Lynn Larson, Fred and Jean Allegretti Foundation

Hi Jessica,

First, thanks for the feedback – sometimes, as we focus on the bigger aspects of a feature, we overlook some of the minor touches that can be real difference makers for users. And that’s one of the key things that Idea Lab discussions can help us address.

From a technical perspective, it wouldn’t be too hard to add the document type to either the email’s subject or body. However, since foundations create their own subject and body content, we don’t know where each client would want the document type to go. While I would opt to put it at the start of the subject, some folks might object. I’d like to hear what you think, and we could try reaching out to a handful of customers that are using this feature to see if we can get some consensus. If there’s some general consensus, this is the type of request that we could potentially move on in the short-term.

In general, though, I think the bigger issue is around being able to include database merge fields (i.e. Organization Name, contact information, amounts, dates) in emails. While email merge functionality is something we have internally discussed, it is a more significant and complex development effort. It is something we will be addressing, but as we balance different priorities, it probably will not in the near-term.

posted June 22, 2012 by Chris Dahl, Foundant Technologies