Override Follow-up sequential order
It would be ideal if the order of follow-ups was not enforced. We assign our follow-ups all at once. These usually include a grant terms and conditions form, sometimes an interim report, final report, and now i just created a followup for our grantees to electronically share their acknowledgements.
I get an OVERLOAD of questions from our grantees asking why they cant access a report form ( usually they ask after they submit the terms form by before i have had a chance to mark the follow-up complete)
The ackknowledgment follow up is optional and could be submitted at any time but the way the system works, it could only be submitted in the particular order of the due dates.
Also, not sure if helpful but having to mark followups complete on our end is not something we would do if we had a choice but we have to given the way the system is set to operate.
This morning we released a new site setting that will allow you to set follow up logic to either Sequential (how site exists now) or Open.
Your can learn more at this help article: https://support.foundant.com/hc/en-us/articles/4411213334935
We hope the new Open setting will help solve the questions you are getting applications. If you have additional feedback on this functionality please create a new idea!
21 commentsComments are closed
Carol Sloper commented
It would be useful to have an "optional" response follow up that is not date dependent and does not stop the workflow of "required" responses.
Also, if there are more than one follow ups required, they might all need to have specific hard coded dates rather than system generated.
Gloria Dillard commented
It would be nice to be able to reassign a follow-up with a new due date so the applicant can update their information. With this, the automatic email will go out when the follow-up is reassigned.
It would also be useful to our organization if follow-up's could be worked on in whatever order the grantee chose.
For configuration - overall or as a process setting would work best.
Avery Guess commented
I was just coming here to ask about the possibility of having multiple forms accessible at the same time. We are using GLM and wanted to assign three follow up forms at the same time (each form has a different purpose - end of year one reporting, year one expenditure reporting, year two plan/budget) and it is frustrating to ask our grantees to fill out one at a time with a staff member having to go in and mark the form "complete" before they can move on. It takes up staff time and, more importantly, makes reporting from grantees burdensome. I hope that you'll be able to make these changes!
Rachael Watkins commented
Please also implement this change in SLM. I will make a post (or vote for one if there is already one) specific to this same topic in SLM. It is super inconvenient that the students can't log in and complete their biographical details for donors form and upload their class schedule as proof of enrollment at the same time. Results in lots of emails wondering where to access the second one after they submit the first one. Thanks!
Caitlin Stanley commented
We would want to apply this to all follow ups so an overall as a site setting would be easiest, but process or form by form settings would be fine too.
Amy Bonner commented
I would prefer overall as a site setting. Process setting would be fine too.
I would like to see it as a site setting, however would be happy with any of the options listed.
Erinn Todd commented
I agree with the other comments - due dates are important, but I would like them to be able to submit at any point. Automated emails are still important, especially with respect to the due dates and reminders. I think having it available on the site overall (with customization per process) or as a process setting would be best.
Since our main reason for wanting this is so grantees can review and start working on later followups, our preference is for a process setting.
Thank you all for your feedback it is very helpful!
I will keep you updated on the progress of this functionality!
Amy Bonner commented
Thank you!! For our organization, we have 2-3 follow ups and sometimes the final report is due days after another follow up, giving our recipients very little time to complete the longest form!
1. Would love option for input and submit out of order
2. for us, due dates are still a requirement, yes.
3. n/a - still want due dates and auto emails.
Lorna Sandberg commented
Like a lot of the comments, our issue is just so the grantee can view the forms at any time prior to submitting the first one due. Due dates and auto emails are still needed.
So glad to see this issue being addressed! For our purposes:
1) we need them to be able to submit
2) due dates would still be a requirement and auto emails would also still be needed
Currently when more than one follow up is due about the same time I'm having to set them with the same due date and after submission promptly marking them as complete, even if there are questions or more info is needed, so the other follow up can be submitted. This can sometimes be challenging, especially when the follow ups relate to different "departments", such as accounting for budget revisions and compliance for outcomes reporting.
Thank you for considering this enhancement!
I agree with the points below. For our grantees, it's mainly so they can see what they will need to work on for their progress reports when they haven't completed prior follow-ups such as grant agreement, so the due dates and reminder emails aren't an issue (follow ups would still be due in chronological order).
Meg Turville-Heitz commented
1) Ideally, for me, each follow up could have it's own deadline (e.g. event information, request for payment, publicity, final report) and they could submit them at ANY time. For example some may have publicity to share well before their event dates are set. Or they may need to request funds before they can provide event dates. Some have multiple events to report but they don't have them all set at the same time.
2) Some of our reports have hard deadlines and some have soft deadlines that are dependent on the progress of the project (e.g., many soft event deadlines due to COVID). Having a due date is a way to trigger reminders and remind the applicant as well as me.
3) I think automatic emails can be optional, as they are in the processes. In some cases (e.g. publicity) they may end up not having anything to submit, or they may report it on award, or at the time of events. For those items I wouldn't have a reminder email.
Caitlin Stanley commented
1. Yes, ideally grantees could work on any follow up at any time and submit when needed.
2. Yes, due dates would still need to be a requirement at my organization. I would just like the flexibility for them to work on forms simultaneously (i.e. they can access their final report and fill in information as they go throughout their grant period).
3. N/A we would still have due dates at our organization and would keep our reminder auto emails set.
1- could also submit
2-3: We often use the due date as an "expected" to submit by. auto emails are very useful to send reminders to the grantees.
For us, we mainly encounter the issue, as our officer and the grants manager don't always have the time, due to our high volume, to review the follow-up to mark it complete prior to the next follow-up being due. This generates a lot of questions from our grantees that monitor their grants as they know a report is due, though cannot access it.
I have a related issue. I assigned two follow-ups at the same time, but only one can be viewed by the grantee—apparently because they have different due dates. One of the follow-ups is the grant agreement, which lays out the terms and conditions of the grant; the other is the final report assignment. I understand the grantee will be able to access the final report once the agreement is marked complete.
The problem: since funds are not released until the grant agreement is signed, grantees are put in the position of having to agree to the terms and conditions of the grant without knowing the specifics of the reporting requirements.
Mike deHilster commented
Agree with this idea and the comments. another middle ground solution could be if the sequence of due dates could be broken if there are different forms assigned to different contacts.