Additional Process Visibility Option
Currently, for active processes, there are three visibility options: Public, Restricted, and Internal.
Public: Visible to applicants; applicants able to apply when open
Internal: Not visible to applicants
Restricted: Only visible to applicants with the corresponding access code
Based on the use of our applicants & grantees, I would love to see a fourth option added that would allow a process to be visible to applicants, but locked, so that applicants would need an access code to apply. Essentially a restricted visibility where the applicants could still view the process as if it were public, but still requiring a code.
The basis for this is that currently the only options are to allow processes to be fully open, or not visible. This addition would allow applicants to still view the host of processes available, but would give the administrator(s) the ability to maintain some control over the flow of new applications.
Many of our applicants get confused when applying to a restricted application, and occasionally default to beginning an open process that is incorrect for their application, causing staff to have to copy their request over to the correct process, which may not always copy all entered information, as well as taking time.
This feature would give grantmaking organizations more control over how they display and guide applicants to their programs in GLM.
Jason Andrews
shared this idea
Hello,
Thanks for your time in the idea lab. This message is to let you know we are going to archive this idea based on the level of engagement in comparison to other idea lab items. The reason we do this is to keep the Idea Lab clean and up to date based on feedback from clients like yourself. Keep in mind this idea may exist somewhere else in the Idea Lab, a quick search may give you a similar idea with higher engagement. Also, feel free to recreate this idea if you would like to, and keep in mind specific wording can help people find and vote for your idea.
If you have any questions, issues or concerns please let us know!
Thank you
-
Philip Woods
commented
In support