This is a significant gap in the system capability, one that may result in the need for our organization to consider other system solutions in the future. A very important part of our process is, and other organizations that I've worked with, is the review of progress reports (follow-ups in the GLM system). A majority of the grants we fund are multi-year projects. We have fiduciary and regulatory requirements to review on an ongoing basis. Reviews cannot be completed by a single individual, and the reviewer(s) must have the capability to review complex, scientific data, which dictates the need to assign the review of the follow-ups in a similar manner to the LOIs and Applications. Even with an advanced license, the review process is not efficient and will require a number of steps to administer. Ideally, an evaluation stage as is available in the LOI and Application stage would provide the functionality to fully utilize the system for end-to-end grant management and minimize unnecessary manual work outside of the system which negates the effectiveness of the system use by all areas.

Yes, the ability to somehow designate the program officer "assigned" an awarded grant would be very helpful when it comes time to review follow ups and issuing additional grant payments. Currently administrators are notified when follow ups come in or a payment is due. Then Admin has to look up who is the assigned program officer and send them the info. Huge opportunity for streamlining workflow here.

This would be incredibly helpful, especially since we are trying to streamline our grant request/report system for repeat grantees.

Yes! Or a way to auto assign an internal reviewer to the follow up report. It is time consuming to go into each submitted report, find out what staff member reviewed the application, and assign them the follow up to review.

This would be beneficial to use as a Conflict of Interest Confirmation for our reviewers/committee members.

This has been suggested elsewhere, so I feel like the votes for this are much higher if you combine all the related suggestions.

The work arounds are annoying, to be honest, so it would be helpful if the Follow Ups were not like a dead-end in the process. Especially when we think about Multi-Year grantmaking.
Thanks!

You could download the pdf packets of completed follow ups from the batch option in followups complete tab and then send in an email?