321 results found
-
schedule emails
It is as simple as, we would like to have the option to schedule send emails in SLM.
8 votes -
Evaluation Option for Follow Up Forms
It would be very helpful to have the evaluation option available in the follow-up phase like the LOI and application phases. We use follow-up forms for reporting and having the option to add an evaluation to a follow-up form would be a great way for our team to save grantee report review notes within Foundant. (We currently save notes in Word and upload to the documents section, but having a built in feature to evaluate reports would be much better.)
18 votes -
Custom Column Widths in Tables
Currently the columns in tables are all the same width, but there are use cases where it would make sense for one column to be wider than another.
For example, in our budget we have 5 columns - Expense, Request, Cash Match, In-Kind Match, and Calculation/Description. By my calculation if you have 5 columns only 33 characters are visible at one time. However, in our use case, 3 of the fields would not contain more than 7 characters (plus the characters for the column headings). Being able to resize those columns would free more real estate for fields where users…
15 votes -
font
It would be helpful to have different font options when creating or modifying email templates. We have noticed that when our templates are exported (or sent to applicants), the font type changes inconsistently. Some sections will be Ariel and others Segoe. It's hard to tell if the different fonts are present in GLM, but we would like the ability to highlight/ select all and then choose one font type.
9 votes -
DocuSign & Merge Templates Single Signature
Currently, you can only add one signature in the Word template in Foundant. It would be helpful if you could have at least two signatures. One for us (our President) and one for the Letter of Agreement recipient to agree to the terms of the grant.
6 votes -
Blind Review
In SLM evaluations, you are only able to add two custom columns to the user dashboard and are required to keep applicant first and last name.
Our foundation uses blind review to align with our DEI initiative. When following blind review, the applicant first and last name appear as [HIDDEN] (see screenshot) and are unable to be removed. Our reviewers have given feedback that they would like the opportunity to have those be optional columns so that they are able to pull in more relevant information like high school attended, major, GPA, etc.
Removing the requirement to keep first and…
12 votes -
How many applications an evaluator has left to score
I've heard from several of our evaluators that they would like to be able to see the actual number of applications that they have left to score. For instance, under Pending it might say they have 50 left but if students qualify for multiple opportunities, they might only physically look at 15 (because the scores are automatically applied to the other opportunities of that student). They find it frustrating not knowing how much time they will need to carve out of their schedule for scoring.
16 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.
…
10 votes -
allow us to enter the number of rows we want when cloning rows in tables
Have the option to enter the # of rows you want when cloning. Instead of having to clone 10 times, i can click "clone row" 1 time and enter a number and badaboom badabing i have that many copies of the row. Magic!!!
11 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.
14 votes -
Copy Collaborators in Email Communications
I'm hoping there is a way our foundation can copy collaborators in email communications and send them auto-generated emails for a request within GLM. Just as there is the option to CC/Copy a primary contact, It would be GREAT to have that same checkbox for CC/Copy collaborators. So many of our organizations use grant writers who are not affiliated with their organization to submit proposals and we need our communications to go to them!
14 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?
29 votes -
Score based on answers to questions on application.
Need the system to generate a score for the application based on how questions on the application are answered. For example: a GPA between 3.8-4.0 would receive 10 pts, 3.6-3.79 would receive 8 pts, etc. This could be a % score.
9 votes -
"Select all fields" option.
When creating a new report data set, it would be nice to have a "select all fields" option in order not to have to select each field.
9 votes -
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…
14 votes -
Denied applications on Dashboard
On numerous occasions, I have been asked how many organizations were declined for a specific process in a prior year, and which organizations were declined. It would be helpful to see this from the dashboard. Currently, denial drafts are visible, but not denials. Since there is no way to see this from the dashboard, I need to create a report to obtain this information which seems like a lot of effort for something that should be quickly accessed from a dashboard. I realize I could go to Search-->Requests and Decisions, but usually I also need to capture how much $…
15 votes -
Add a status to Application
I'd like to have an additional bucket I can put LOIs and Applications in that shows I've reviewed the application and there's an issue. As it is now, if it's in "Submitted", it implies we haven't looked at it yet, and if it's in "Complete" it implies there's no issue. I realize GLM was designed so that if there is an issue with an LOI/Application, we revert it to Draft status so the applicant can correct the issue, but in an effort to be as burdenless as possible, we often just reach out with an email and ask them to…
7 votes -
Make "Next Pending Application" button stay in the same scholarship process
Students can apply for multiple scholarship opportunities with our UA. If an evaluator saves an evaluation and clicks "next pending," the system takes them to the first scholarship opportunity the student applied for, which isn't the opportunity the evaluator was trying to read. This makes the "next pending" button basically useless. We would like a way to adjust this feature to stay within the same process.
7 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.
11 votes
- Don't see your idea?