76 results found
-
pdf with no comments
We use the Administrator Comments feature to provide draft review feedback to our applicants. Many applicants use the comments, then want us to remove them so that they can create a clean PDF of their completed application. We don't want to delete our comments as that is part of the grant process record, but we also don't want reviewers to be able to see the comments. Right now, our only option is to make all the comments not visible to applicants, proxy as the applicant, download the PDF, then make all the comments visible to the applicant again. This is…
1 vote -
Apply Page Appearance
It would be great if the apply page could be shown in a grid or have a sort of table of contents on the side/top of the page -- we had several applicants apply to the wrong process because they clicked on the first opportunity (which takes up most of the screen). It seems some of them did not realize they could scroll/did not realize that there were multiple opportunities on the apply page.
55 votes -
Improve application with icon sections and progress toolbars
View for students needs updating. We previously used a different software. Each section (family, academics, essays, etc.) had it's own customizable icon with a picture and a progress bar to show what % of that section was completed. SLM UA looks so daunting for students.
19 votes -
Telephone Number
It would be nice to have a 'phone number' question type to select when creating an application so that the applicant doesn't have to worry about how to format their phone number when entering it. Something like --xxxx would be great so that every phone number entry followed the same formating.
3 votes -
Ability to track 'clicks' to know when/where an applicants abandons the application process
We would like to be able to track applicant clicks through the system so we can see if changes made impact user abandon rates in certain parts of their online journey with us. For example, when/where in the process do they give up? This would allow us to identify where we might need better instructions or a change in the questions or flow.
20 votes -
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 codeBased 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.
…
9 votes -
Shared Documents for Applicants
We would to have a 'Shared Documents' folder specifically for our applicants/grantees to be able to access.
I.e. This way the Agreement to Grant Terms is available for them to access at any time through their profile.
13 votes -
Stand-alone LOI
LOI - generally called a Letter of Intent - we call it a Letter of Introduction. It's kind of an 'elevator speech' for applicants where we get a snapshot of some financial needs (we ask for up to 3). We use is as a guide and have a phone conversation with the applicant once the LOI is submitted. depending on our yearly goals, we may pass on this applicant for the year, but want to keep them for the next year.
It would be great to have a 'stand-alone' LOI that can be branched to an application at another date…
2 votes -
Jump applicants to part(s) of application that are incomplete
When the universal application lists things that still need to be completed before an applicant can submit, is there a way they can be linked so an applicant can click and be taken to that incomplete section?
26 votes -
Allow Copy Previous Requests from Organization (Instead of User)
It would be really useful if the Copy Previous Answers function worked for all requests under an Organizational profile instead of just the specific User profile. This would be helpful for some of our organizations who experience high turnover or for folks who are applying when other colleagues are on leave.
10 votes -
Unnecessary Spacing On Forms
There appears to be unnecessary spacing added below the instruction field when building an application or other form. I suggest removing this formatting so instructions appear more naturally grouped with the relevant questions. If the additional spacing is necessary, I suppose we could add that in by adding a blank question field.
9 votes -
Question Mark Icons
I'd love the option to add question mark icons next to our application questions that would invite applicants to hover over them if they want information as to why we are asking the question. It would go a long way in making the process more transparent and minimizing the power gap. (Similar to what you offer in the Process Manager)
17 votes -
Add User text restrictions
Please remove restrictions on "Add User" information fields!! Only allowing certain formats for phones/addresses/postal codes restricts inputting accurate information. (Can't input extensions for phone numbers, international phone numbers, international addresses.)
1 vote -
Change application language to eligibility for first stage of UA
When using a UA, those first common questions are really for eligibility, at least the way we are using it. So when the potential applicants get to the confirmation page, for either the failure message or to see what scholarships they are eligible for, it says your application has been submitted, but really, it hasn't. They are, at that point, ready to enter the application and its questions. Can there be some terminology changes set for the first stage? I make it clear in my instructions what's to happen, but an applicant as you define it shouldn't really be one…
9 votes -
Custom URL capability for SLM and GLM grant processes
It would be nice to be able to create a custom URL for grant and scholarship programs instead of the grantinterface.com address.
11 votes -
Universal app confirmation page
I find the language on the Universe confirmation page confusing. It says the applicant is eligible for the following opportunities, it's not 100% clear that the applicant must continue to apply. I'd suggest moving the blue "Continue" button to the top, or changing the message to read: "Based on your answers, you may apply for the scholarships listed below. Click the blue Continue button at the bottom of the page to complete the applications."
7 votes -
Make the Preview button on Apply Page Optional and/or Customizable
The ability to turn off the 'preview' button (per process) on the public apply page would be helpful. If the Eligibility phase is being used or if the application form in a process has a lot of branching, the preview does not accurately represent the application requirements.
Alternatively, it'd be great to be able to insert a custom link so that users are taken to an informational page/pdf when they click the preview button.
5 votes -
Organizing Universes
It would be nice if Universes were ordered alphabetically or if administrators could drag/drop to order. You can drag/drop Processes to order them, but not Universes. Universes show in the order in which they were built, which doesn't make much sense when an applicant scrolls down the page.
9 votes -
Allowing larger file sizes
Our applications typically require a lot of uploads. They also have a lot of conditional logic. For instance, if someone is applying for a smaller amount of money, we ask for less financial documents, It would be nice if the allotment for file size allowance per application took the conditional logic into account instead of making it all cumulative. We bump into the issue of not having enough file size space in our applications all the time, and often steal a megabyte or two from one upload field to accommodate another, only to need to steal from somewhere else, etc.
6 votes -
SLM Flow of Application Questions for Student
So I'm working on YR 2 for our UA. Making edits and trying to get a better handle on it all. I'm in now as an applicant. We have sections of questions: shared by all of the scholarships, shared by some of them, and then ones that are only for one scholarship. Question groups are collapsible, right? Going on the scenario that a kid is eligible for several, wouldn't it be good for those shared question sections that they've already completed to be hidden or collapsed? Now I'm old, but it seems clunky and confusing to even have them there…
6 votes
- Don't see your idea?