Ideas

My feedback

  1. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Custom Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Ideas supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    We have a number of different individuals who apply from a particular organization. They even apply via the same process sometimes. It would be useful to have a listing of names to accompany the grant history when viewing the organization summary.

    I recognize that space is tight but perhaps a single letter or number could be used instead of a full name in the history listing. For example, a number 2 by Jane Smith, the 2nd contact listed, would be placed by her applications in the grant history (say inbetween the date and process columns). Alternatively, one could add a second row instead of another column for grant history.

    thanks

    Idea posted June 24, 2013 by Jim Beck, Parkinson's Disease Organization

  2. 10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Merge Docs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Ideas supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hello:

    I'm glad you did this webinar on this feature. I used this feature thorugh the export data option. I believe that this will be much easier. My idea is to include the Evaluation data fields into this option. I send the grant applicants who are denied the reviewers comments and it would be nice to use this feature to create the word document and I woudl just need to edit the document and send it out.

    Thanks for listening and I hope you consider this.

    Idea posted June 27, 2013 by Gloria Dillard, American Osteopathic Association

  3. 14 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  7 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Custom Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    My solution begins on the applications submitted screen where I can click on review, add our grant number before the project name and save changes.

    A screen shot is attached. We've just begun doing this after working in GMS for three years so I don't know if there are any pitfalls.

    http://foundant-community.custhelp.com/files/a782629924/screenshot.png (88KB)

    posted September 18, 2012 by Mary Yager, Nebraska Humanities Council

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    We need to start addressing this issue ourselves. We have been using the system generated id # from our previous software. I wish the GLM generated id # was a report field that could be added to approved grants. It looks like I have to create this field, find the id # via a report and then go back and put this # in the report field. We include this id # in the grant agreement.
    posted September 10, 2012 by Erin Baird, Allegany Franciscan Ministries

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Shortly after posting my previous comment I did discover that once I mark an application complete I can go in and save our grant number before the project name. That does allow our number to show on the screens.

    posted August 27, 2012 by Mary Yager, Nebraska Humanities Council

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  4. 16 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    7 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » UI/UX  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi All,
    It would be so helpful if I were able to choose the data that appears on the Organization Summary Page. For example, it provides the date of the grant, but we don't use that date and would much prefer to use a date we have as a custom field.

    Additionally, before the request is decisioned, it would be very helpful to see the amount requested field.

    By bottom line, it would be great to make this section "customizable"!

    Thanks

    Laura

    posted June 12, 2013 by Laura Kurzrok, Eastern Bank Charitable Foundation

  5. 5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  3 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Being able to report on evaluation data would be very helpful!. Thanks for making the suggestion Monica!

    posted March 27, 2013 by Diana Rode, Judy Family Foundation

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  6. 71 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  56 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Reviewing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    This is also an issue for us, so I'm happy to see the good ideas shared.

    We do not need to assign Final Grant Reports for review, but we would like to share these documents with our staff who are not Foundant Administrators. Currently we save the print packets of the reports to our shared drive which does not allow the staff to refer back to the original application. We could combine it with the print packet of the application, but that would take add another step that we may not be able to take the time to do. But if you were able to at least provide a way to add a Staff Evaluator to a report with access to that applicant's entire application, then it would really streamline the process and make it so much easier to keep our other staff updated and connected to our grant programs.

    posted July 16, 2012 by Teresa Crane, National Environmental Education Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Thanks for your comments, Sarah. As I started reading your post I was thinking I could save the followup and evaluation as a pdf and attach it to the new application, which I currently do with the grantee's followup reports. I will be working on this when we finish our first round of grants on Foundant. I think this is a good way to handle it.

    posted February 2, 2012 by Laura Gilbertson, The William Bingham Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Laura, as noted in my post above we have been trying to find a solution for this same issue too. I think if you use the suggestion by Ron in his post above it would let you do what you are describing. You would make a new "Application Process," but it would have the form of the grant follow-up report form that you are using. Then you can ask grantees to fill out the f/up report just as they would an application and submit it, and then you have the ability to assign it to a Board member and it will show up on their Dashboard as a new "Application" (except it will have a different Process name to help them distinguish it as a f/up report). Big con to this work-around: the follow-ups are no longer linked in the system to the grant they are related to, and you can no longer search for them as "Follow-ups" -- they are technically Applications and you would have to narrow down by process name.

    I was concerned about these cons, so I spoke with Mark L. from Foundant the other day and he had what I thought was a good alternative suggestion that we are going to be trying in our upcoming grant round. After a grantee submits a Follow-Up report (in the regular "linked" way), staff downloads the PDF of that report and then attaches it as a "Supporting Document" to an application (using the "Add Document" internal option on the application summary page). However, in our case our practice previously was to send the prior year grant reports to our Board along with new applications, so we are going to be attaching the PDF f/up reports to the new applications (we have a lot of repeat grantees). I am not sure this solution would be helfpul for you if you want to attached to already-funded grants, because then I don't think there is a way to have a funded grant "re-show up" on a Board dashboard -- so then Board members would still have to search for the old grant using the search feature to see the f/up, and at that point they might as well search for the f/up report itself, or just search for the org. itself as you describe above.

    I hope one of these solutions may be helpful -- I have spent a lot of time considering their pros and cons in the last few days!

    posted February 2, 2012 by Sarah Kelley, Island Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Also, is there any way (other than have the grantee click "Save as draft" 6 months after the application was granted then "Submit" a year after) to allow the grantee to have some kind of mid grant report that fits into the process like the followup? I can only find the ability to attach one followup report.

    posted February 1, 2012 by Sally Weldon, Community Foundation of Western North Carolina

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    We are new Foundant users currently going through our first round of grant applications and have not yet started working on followups. However our procedure has been that when we receive a final report from a grantee it is evaluated by at least one board member, who shares the evaluation with the other board members. Staff sets up the follow-up evaluation and sends to the board reviewer as an email attachment, it would be great if this could be done in the same place as the applications. During the training of our Board members on Foundant one of them asked about this and everybody agreed it would be helpful to have this capability. Currently we are uploading evaluations of closed-out grants to the organization so board evaluators can see the ratings of previous grants.

    posted January 26, 2012 by Laura Gilbertson, The William Bingham Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hello All, We are new Foundant users as well and have quickly come across this same issue of needing a streamlined way for Board members to review and evaluate grant Follow-ups.

    Previously, we used a process identical to Susan's -- groups would send in their grant reports (in fact, returning grantees were required to submit their reports before a new proposal could be considered), and we would include these in the mailed paper packets that we sent to Board members, so that they could review groups' reports before turning to their renewal applications.

    Using the current Foundant set-up of attaching the Follow-ups to prior year grants, I count 5 different "clicks" before a Board member would be able to see a group's grant report, and they would have to know it was there in the first place (as opposed to being able to see it on their dashboard). Not to get too philosophical about it, but with so much emphasis on grant evaluation in the philanthropy world in general, and with all the effort that groups put in to their grant reports, we feel that having our Board review grant follow-ups is just as important as having them review new applications, and we would like to see the system reflect that.

    So, we would like to add our vote -- please make a way that Board members could see grant Follow-ups right on their Dashboard, and have a way to evaluate and comment on them!

    Raymond, I can see your point about how multiple follow-ups could be assigned, but I don't see why that should prevent staff from being able to choose some or all of them to assign to Board evaluators?

    And Ron, I thought that was a great idea to create a new Follow-up Process using the Application form, so I did that, but I am wondering if you have any solution for how to link those follow-up reports to the prior year grants?

    Thanks a lot,

    Sarah Kelley

    Island Foundation, MA

    posted December 9, 2011 by Sarah Kelley, Island Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Thank you for your comments thus far. With the ad hoc nature of Follow-ups (assigning as many as one wants) versus our other forms, this implementation could be a bit daunting. Please keep the comments coming. I'm going to retreat into my cave :-) to consider this and come back with some questions and perhaps ideas.

    -raymond

    posted August 3, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    We have a similar issue. We decided to create the follow up report as an "application" which has the capabilities we desire, but ideally, it would be good for follow up reports to have this flexibility.

    posted August 1, 2011 by Ron Katz, United Way of Asheville and Buncombe County

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    You are not alone Susan. Our follow up reports need to be evaluated by the appropriate program officer and in some cases the ED. It seems ashame to have to do this outside of the system where it is much harder to track. I'd like the evaluation option on the follow-up forms in place as soon as possible.

    posted July 25, 2011 by Anne Rogers, Mass Humanities

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    As with applications, I think that there should be a way to assign follow-up reports to individual reviewers for approval/denial.

    Idea posted October 18, 2012 by Gloria Dillard, American Osteopathic Association

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  7. 14 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  20 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Statuses  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Daren,

    Thanks for the update. I second what Amy and Mary have said. If an application has been submitted, it's important to maintain an accurate record of that application in the GLM system. With the number of grant processes we are working on (upward of a dozen), we need to keep things as transparent as possible to avoid confusion for the applicant and for us. We are currently limiting the use of the delete option to unsubmitted applications.

    As to the two scenarios you mention: By our definition, an application would be labelled "Withdrawn" before decisions are officially finalized. After decisions are made, if a grantee cannot meet the grant terms and conditions and returns the funding, we call this a "Cancelled" grant. The amount awarded is adjusted to $0. (In our terminology, changes to approved grants are known as "grant adjustments".)

    Stephanie

    posted May 22, 2013 by Stephanie Tuxill, Vermont Community Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Daren-

    I like to have a record of it. That way if they come back the next year, I know that there is a history there. I do manually creat a new grant for the projects that we fund within the foundation, but for things funded in other ways, it isn't so easy. Keeping the grant application allows me to keep the information somewhere that trustees can acess in the future if they want to.

    Amy

    posted May 22, 2013 by Amy Moore, O.P. & W.E. Edwards Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Daren,

    We would also be looking for one before the decision. As to your question about just deleting it, sometimes there's a specific reason (like an issue with financials, for example) that we'd want to make sure people knew about the next time they applied, so we might need the original submitted documents for reference.

    -Mary

    posted May 22, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I really need a "withdrawn" category before a decision has been made about the grant. Often, a grantapplicaiton that comes to our general fund would be better funded through one of the donor advised funds at our foundation or through one of the trustees personally or through other grantmaking vehicles that our trustees use. In this case, I would prefer to mark the grant as withdrawn or something softer than denied. While it is true that the grant is denied by the General fund, we are still funding it thorough other means. Seeing "denied" as the status can throw off the grantee as welll as our trustees when they are looking at funding history. If I saw withdrawn or something similar, I would know to dig a little deeper into the grant history.

    Amy

    posted May 21, 2013 by Amy Moore, O.P. & W.E. Edwards Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I have had to switch grants to a different process as well - similar to Example 1. Having a withdrawl or similar category would be helpful.

    posted May 3, 2013 by Amy Moore, O.P. & W.E. Edwards Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I agree and was about to suggest the same thing. Approved and Denied are two ends of the spectrum, and there are many reasons (on our end or the applicant's) as to why an application might be submitted but then withdrawn before final decisions are made. Since it's not truly denied we don't want it to mess up our statistics. We use FIMS, and are used to choosing Withdrawn as a third option.

    Example #1: In the first few months of being live we already have 2 instances where an application is submitted through one process (i.e., small community grants), and the decision is made to approve it as an out-of-cycle grant through a different process (i.e., Arts grants) because it is a better fit withour funding priorities. In order for our statistics to be accurate, we need to Withdraw it from one process and then create a manual (Approved) grant in the second process (attaching the original application as a PDF).

    Example #2: During the evaluation process an applicant informs us that due to an unforeseen circumstance their project cannot move forward on a timeline that fits that grant round. They don't want to impact their ability to apply this calendar year, so they ask to withdraw their application. They hope to be able to resubmit at the second deadline, but it's unclear if they will be in a postion to do so. Again, the only way to accurately capture this in the system is to change the status to Withdrawn. (The only other options seem to be Abandon or Delete.)

    thanks for your consideration! Stephanie

    posted May 2, 2013 by Stephanie Tuxill, Vermont Community Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi - I just wanted to bring this back up to the front. We have a couple of clients who use the denied to determine eligibility (ie - if you were denied, you can't reapply for two years), so I have program officers who are looking up applicants, see they've been denied, and tell them they're not eligible. The reply I got nearly a year ago says a Withdrawn category is high on the priorities list. Is there an update?

    Thanks,
    Mary

    posted May 2, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I would like to see a Withdrawn option with a comment box.

    posted June 21, 2012 by Bob Coakley, Thomas J. Long Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi - Would it be possible to add a Withdrawn category?

    Thanks,
    Mary

    Idea posted June 8, 2012 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

  8. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  8 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Custom Data  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I would like to see multiple contacts - currently our work-around is to keep a report field called Contacts for Email List. (We export the info anytime we need to send an important notice... and for our general Outlook email list.) Most applicants want to have at least two people on every notification - and some want as many as five or six different email addresses notified. I know this is a tall order in contact management...

    posted September 16, 2013 by Mary Giraulo, United Arts of Central Florida

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Many of our organizations want to include multiple contacts for e-mails. Is there a way to include a back-up e-mail contact automatically? Thanks, Amy Palmer

    posted May 24, 2012 by Amy Palmer, Cultural Council of Greater Jacksonville

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    For this next release we are looking at making more of these fields available. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. Thank you Mary!

    posted June 21, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technoloiges

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Along the same lines, it would be great to be able to pull the ED's name when doing exports. We have some clients who do not want checks going to anyone else in the organization. Currently, that means, giong into each merged letter and changing the name, which can only be found by going into each record individually.

    posted June 21, 2011 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    A very valid request Amity. As you probably know, we currently capture only two instances of contact information on the registration form. This information applies to an applicant/organization for all subsequent requests as well. The scenario you're describing would probably benefit from having the ability to associate other contacts, outside the of the registration page, to a specific grant request. Currently we work around this need by asking folks to enter additional contacts in the application form. This works, but we don't flag those folks as "contacts" from a Grant Lifecycle Manager (GLM) point of view. They are just text boxes.

    In the long term, we'd like to see GLM have the ability to associate multiple contacts to a grant request. In the short term, I think it might worth a quick phone to go over our options around capturing additional contact information in grant requests. Myself or one of my cohorts will contact you around your question sometime today or tomorrow. Thank you!

    -raymond

    posted June 16, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  9. 9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Terrific idea. If they could check personnel info as well as organizational information as well, that would be a plus. I would like to know if I should deactivate users, add new ones, change email addresses, etc, or re-set who the primary contact should be.

    Implementing Mary's idea would be a great start.

    posted September 23, 2013 by Amy Moore, O.P. & W.E. Edwards Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Both the applicant dashboard and every application start with the applicant's contact info in a tidy box... why couldn't there be a similar box above it showing the organization contact info? Not editable - I understand why that should stay on the admin side - but with a mailto: link to notify us via email if the contact info needs to be updated. Or a link to a system template email. (If a link isn't possible, I could add a question on each application or followup form that allows them to notify me of needed updates.) Otherwise, the only view the applicant has of their organization address is if they happen to view the Application Packet.

    posted September 6, 2013 by Mary Giraulo, United Arts of Central Florida

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Chris,

    Thanks for the update. I hope it moves up on your list of pressing items at some point and is considered more than just "useful." Getting checks returned to us means money wasted on postage and more admin time to fix a problem that didn't need to happen in the first place.

    Thanks,

    Mary

    posted April 30, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I just wanted to bring this idea back to the table for discussion/action as I just had two checks returned to our offices because the addresses were incorrect. The users had updated the addresses in their user profile, but had not notified us of the change, so the organization address was still incorrect.

    We always use the organization address to mail out checks as we've had users put in their home addresses under their profiles.

    It would be great if the grantees could see and edit the organization information when they log in.

    Thanks,

    Mary

    posted April 26, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    This would be an awsome thing to have! Everytime an application is submitted for a grant, we have to verify the information. In the Contact portion of the process, we find that the person filling out the online form will put their contact information instead of the contact information for the organization. We send the Award/Denial letters to the Executive Directo/Presidentr for the organization and sometimes it is a real time consuming job to track down who that is. It would be nice if it was clearer that the contact information we are looking for is the President/Executive Director, not the person filling out the form unless there was a separate contact block for that.

    The notification regarding the Tax ID would be great as well. Especially since the person filling out the application can be diffeent each time.

    We also have a few organizations who use a consultant to apply and complete the forms. Since the username is based on an e-mail address, they end up creating a different e-mail address for each organization they are applying for. Which creates the problem of an e-mail going out to an e-mail address that is not correct.

    posted May 23, 2012 by Janet Remmel, Southwest Florida Community Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I was thinking when they started a new process or when they fill out a report. Basically at the beginning of any "major" event but a time interval would be good too. Also haivng a simple "Information is correct or current" button so they can fly through the step if they have updated info recently.

    Another idea as I have just gotten another alert that the same Tax ID is already in the system - Can you alert the person trying to make a whole new account that there is already an account with that Tax ID and then not let them continue but require that they are added on as a user to that organization instead of alearting me after the fact.

    posted May 1, 2012 by Amy Moore, O.P. & W.E. Edwards Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Kathryn,

    I was thinking just when they initiated a new request process. You bring up a great idea though, perhaps we could make it a bit more "intelligent" by noting the last time their information was reviewed/updated and asking based on that interval. More to consider. Thank you for bringing that idea up!

    posted April 30, 2012 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Encouraging grantees to review and update their Contact Info when they begin a new application or follow-up sounds very helpful. Will they have to do this each time they access a form that they have begun? If so, perhaps include a button that says "We have recently updated our Contact Info" ?

    posted April 20, 2012 by Kathryn Treanor, Dietel Partners, LLC

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Amy,

    We're on the same wavelength. We had exactly the same inspiration recently here at Foundant as we were talking about challenges with Organizations and Contacts. That you independently came up with the idea tell me we're probably on the right track.

    One question that did come up. Do we ask folks to review/update their information BEFORE accessing an LOI/Application form, or upon submitting the LOI/Application. Part of me prefers the former as it could better facilitate communication during the application process in case information in the system was out of date.

    We'd love to hear others thoughts on this direction, pros and cons. Let us know. Thank you Amy!

    -raymond

    posted April 20, 2012 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  10. 42 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    20 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Chris,

    Thanks for responding to my suggestion! It didnt really take much time to create the questions, and I actually did paste the text most times, its just that I had to do the same ones about three times each and could have saved myself a few minutes if I could have copied the entire thing over. The copy/paste feature is a pretty stardard thing so I thought it might be something easy to include, but as I have no idea how to develop a system like this, that was just a guess.

    As for the question library, I can see how that might be useful for some, but other than the basic name/org/contact info type of questions, ours are pretty specific and I don't know that I would find what I needed in a library of standard questions.

    Thanks,

    Rob

    posted August 7, 2012 by Robert Williams, Virginia Department of Transportation

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  11. 21 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    16 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Batch  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    As for what point in the lifecycle... all. I expect to use it most after the application is submitted and after the grant is awarded, BUT I can also see myself postponing this step and getting stuck if the batch option isn't available in Application Evaluation Open, for example.

    posted September 13, 2013 by Mary Giraulo, United Arts of Central Florida

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Yes, I would be very interested in a Batch Charity Check - just went into 44 applications and did them one by one, but had the sneaking feeling that I might have missed one by accident. It would be nice to have a one-click.

    Short of that... would it be possible to retrieve the charity check info (last date the check was run, and result) in a report or export data? I would like to verify that I did the Charity Check on all the applications, without having to open each record again.

    posted September 13, 2013 by Mary Giraulo, United Arts of Central Florida

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Ray - For Barra, we do an initial charity check when the LOI is reviewed. After that, we would not plan to check again until the day we write the check.

    posted November 4, 2011 by Lyn Church, Barra Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Thank you Lyn and Meredith. We've been having some discussions here and I'm working on understanding is when folks feel they need to perform CC. In other words, at what stages or points in a request/grant lifecycle is CC required (to be in compliance with the IRS) and then what points are optional, but perhaps helpful. I have much to learn and would love any help our customers can offer. Thank you!

    posted November 3, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    We use Charity Check when we do our initial review of LOI's and Applications. Since they come in staggered, the batch would not be an issue at that point. If we want to do a check on the day we write checks, batch would make a huge diffference because we write 75 - 150 checks at once three times a year.

    posted November 3, 2011 by Lyn Church, Barra Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Thanks Raymond -- I will be interested in hearing responses from other colleagues -- but I would think that the major difference between your clients that utilize the Charity Check module in GLM is simply WHEN in their process they do the checks. I would imagine that batch checks would likely be helpful to anyone using this feature if their applicant pool is large at all.

    posted October 6, 2011 by Meredith Huffman, Genuardi Family Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Your suggestion makes complete sense given the parameters you've described. It seems like Charity Check and compliance should be (for the most part) something all foundations could agree and standardize upon. This in turn would help us design the software a bit better to meet these requirements. Thank you for your thoughts and getting the dialog started. Does anyone else have ideas around compliance and the ideal workflow? Are there areas in terms of compliance where foundations might differ from one another?

    posted October 5, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    My request: I would love for GLM to allow administrators to select a group of applicants in a given process and perform a "batch" Charity Check.

    Background: A recent incident of a grantee changing tax status from a public charity to a private foundation between the time of application and issue of grant funds has spurred our foundation (at the behest of our tax professional) to commit to an extra layer of due diligence as part of our current and all future grant processes.

    Our plan: The very day we will mail grant checks, we'll re-perform a charity check on every single proposed grantee. As a side note, we also perform Charity Checks at other points of the cycle, including initial LOI submission.

    Rationale: If an organization's tax status changes in the interim period between LOI submission and final grant decisions (whether the status change was from that of a public charity to that of private foundation, which violates our particular foundation's guidelines, or whether the 501c3 was revoked altogether for compliance issues), Charity Check would reveal this. In the event that an organization's tax status HAS changed, and updates to IRS' Pub 78 (and thus Charity Check) are lagging and showing an organization to still be eligible for a grant, our Foundation would still be within IRS compliance, by the virtue of our having performed a due diligence check on the actual date of grant issue. (As per our tax guru).

    The ability to select a group of applicants in a given process (in this instance, the proposed grantees of given grant cycle) and perform a "batch" charity check would save a lot of time, versus our current option of going into 100-150 records for each proposed grantee and perform individual Charity Checks.

    Thanks for your consideration

    Idea posted September 13, 2011 by Meredith Huffman, Genuardi Family Foundation

  12. 44 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Proposed Idea  ·  22 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Batch  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Batch close applications - DONE!!

    YOU GUYS ROCK!

    posted August 7, 2013 by Sarah Copeland, Grand Rapids Area Community Foundation Grant

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Emily & Daren -- Like Emily the variable is grant amount. Everything else in a given grant process would be the same (grant report assignments, etc.).

    posted June 6, 2012 by Meredith Huffman, Genuardi Family Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Daren:

    We would definitely use batch approval. Although, we would still need to manually enter the grant amount, in general, all of the other info (follow ups) would be the same for that process. For payment due date and grant date, we need a little more clarification on these in general- we are still manually entering grants into FIMS as the import process we have found to be difficult- and it seems to quicker to manually enter the grants.

    So, the only one-off parameter for us would be the grant amount- everything else within a process is the same.

    Thanks!

    posted June 6, 2012 by Emily Bronson, Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I second that request!

    posted June 4, 2012 by Meredith Huffman, Genuardi Family Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I know we can currently batch DECLINE applications- would it be possible to batch APPROVE applications as well?

    Idea posted May 2, 2012 by Emily Bronson, Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation

  13. 7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  8 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Email  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I agree! Anything that makes it easier for grantees to get the information out is a plus! It is great to be able to filter everything in through the same system.

    Thank you,

    Michele Emery

    Island Foundation, Marion, MA

    posted April 4, 2013 by Michele Emery, Island Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi, I would like to agree with Dee Ann's suggestion!

    We have always sent a Word version of our online report form attached to our report reminder emails, so that grantees can preview the form, and so that they can draft their answers right in the Word document and then paste them in to the online form if they choose.

    We'd love to continue doing that with our auto report reminder emails through Foundant! Hoping this may be a quick fix as Chris mentions above.

    Thanks,

    Sarah Kelley

    Island Foundation, MA

    posted April 4, 2013 by Sarah Kelley, Island Foundation

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  14. 23 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    8 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Payments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I apologize if this has already been suggested but I would like to see a "Batch Pay" option under the Payment Tracking. Sometimes I send out 60 grants in one month (more in December), sometimes 25 in one day and it would be nice to just pay them all at one time. Is that possible now? Thanks!

    posted April 23, 2013 by Kishawn Leuthauser, The Louis and Harold Price Foundation

  15. 29 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  21 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » UI/UX  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I would like to see declined grants on the dashboard, as well as closed grants. I've mentioned this in the past and I'm glad to see others agree. I've actually held off closing grants so that we'd be able to still get to the Granted list quickly.

    posted April 25, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I would like to see declined grants show up on the dashboard....mbracken,ittlesonfoundation.org

    posted April 17, 2013 by Maureen Bracken, Ittleson Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    From Raymond's original post:

    "Alternatively I could see where one might find it helpful to see some subset of declined grants on the Dashboard as a reference--perhaps for a particluar grant cycle?"

    I think as it pertains to a particular grant cycle it would be helpful. Once the applications are closed, they don't matter as much to us. They can disappear. But, during a particular grant cycle it would be helpful to see how many we had denied in the process.

    This would be a great addition for us.

    posted April 16, 2013 by Lynn Larson, Fred and Jean Allegretti Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi, Chris.

    Closed grants would be my own highest priority. This would essentially give us a very quick snapshot of all of the granting activity made in a particular process. Denied grants would not be as crucial, but it would be helpful (again to show demand for funding, but this can also be pulled in a report.)

    Personally, I really don't care much about abandoned requests - for us they are most often an applicant who is merely looking through an application or they are duplicate applications that never got off the ground that we simply don't need. I hope that helps - I'm happy to talk more about it if needed.

    Thanks!

    Marla

    posted March 27, 2013 by Marla Collum, National Trust for Historic Preservation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Marla,

    I would like to see this topic discussed again too. It is a restriction that doesn't allow me to properly manage my applications and therefore leads to a lot of manual management which is not ideal.

    Thanks,

    Michelle

    posted February 27, 2013 by Michelle Sullivan, The Joyce Foundation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I'd like to revive this topic because I also love the ability to find things quickly on the dashboard. It would be really helpful to see denied grants, but also closed grants on the dashboard.

    We often need quick access to the total number of applications submitted (to show demand for funding, e.g.) or a good example of a particular type of project that was awarded. When a grant is closed, it disappears from the dashboard.

    We can run a report, but the dashboard is so much faster and easier.

    Thanks, all.

    Marla

    posted February 27, 2013 by Marla Collum, National Trust for Historic Preservation

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Fair question. Our current reasoning around what we display in the Dashboard was to only show "Active" requests/grants. That is, requests and grants that are still in play. Other than abandoned or deleted requests, we consider all of them to be active. In terms of decisions (grants and declinations) we only consider grants active as they may still be in play in terms of payments or grant reports or simply the activity that the grant is funding. Declinations we consider dead (no grant reports, no payments, no grant activity), and so don't show them in the Dashboard.

    All of the above said, we're here to learn and I would love to understand a little more about the "why" of seeing declined grants on the Dashboard. It seems like over time that number would get pretty large and I wondered if that would really be meaningful or helpful on a daily basis. Alternatively I could see where one might find it helpful to see some subset of declined grants on the Dashboard as a reference--perhaps for a particluar grant cycle?

    To see declined grants in the current system, one must go to Search Requests and then filter on a status of declined. It's around three clicks to do this.

    I hope this helps you understand our thought processes (for better or worse!). The other thing I'll offer up customization. Different folks have different ideas about what they'd like to see on the Dashboard. I hope someday to give folks more ability to customize what they actually display on their Dashboard. That may well be the ultimate solution!

    Thank you for posting Alison!

    -raymond

    posted August 11, 2011 by Raymond Burket, Foundant Technologies

    Ideas shared this idea  · 
  16. 23 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    14 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Hi All,
    Merged to similar ideas together so we can see the discussion in one spot.

    While we have heard this in the idea lab and in multiple user groups and you fly, we buys I believe we still have some outstanding questions before this hit the GLM roadmap.

    1) Is this on the request or organization level or both?
    2) would you want to limit the number of documents someone could upload, labeling specifically what needs to be uploaded? A concern that we have heard in the past is just an open upload area might be filtered with clutter, thoughts on that?
    3) Do they need due dates/expiration dates? How will you know they a still current?

    Thoughts are just a couple thoughts I have right off the bat. Thanks for helping to continue the conversation.
    Sammie

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Thanks, Chris!

    posted September 16, 2013 by Amy Palmer, Cultural Council of Greater Jacksonville

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I love the new feature of being able to provide shared documents for evaluators. I think the same feature would be very useful to have available for applicants as well. There are many informational items that we use in our grant processes that are needed by all applicants in a process. For example: grant hearing schedules, on-site visit assignments, panel contact information, etc. Currently, I provide these items as hard copies and/or in e-mails. I can always count on several applicants losing this information and requesting it again. It would really be an efficiency to have a place in Foundant where all this information could be posted for reference by the applicants.

    posted September 13, 2013 by Amy Palmer, Cultural Council of Greater Jacksonville

  17. 14 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Under Consideration  ·  9 comments  ·  GLM & SLM Idea Lab » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I would like to be able to export comments (request, organization, application, follow-up) - for some reason I thought we could... and I wouldn't mind having them show up in the same field when exported to Excel. It's being able to see them all in one glance that's helpful.

    posted September 13, 2013 by Mary Giraulo, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    Hi Chris,

    I'm not sure if this should have its own thread, but I just wanted to add that it would be great to be able to export Follow-Up comments, as well. We have program officers who will make comments on the submitted reports and would like to be able to give those comments as a sort of write-up to the board members when they are considering another grant for the same applicant.

    (Let me know if this needs its own thread and I'd be happy to do that.).

    Thanks,

    Mary

    posted September 9, 2013 by Mary Nicosia, GMA Foundations

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Ideas commented  · 

    I love the new one stop shop for request comments. It's very helpful to see all the comments for one application in one place with info on who made the comment and when. It would be even more helpful if I could see all the comments for an application round in one place via an export so I know which ones I need to respond to with out opening each individually. It looks like decision comments and payment comments can be exported. Is there any possibility of making the request comments exportable?

Feedback and Knowledge Base