Skip to content

Mark

My feedback

17 results found

  1. 1 vote

    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)
    Mark supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Mary,

    This issue comes up every once in a while. As online systems become more prevalent, it seems some non-profits are becoming more sophisticated and learning how to use the system to learn information not yet meant to be public. What we discussed with one client is the idea of setting a "RESPONSE DATE" field at the process level which would keep status changes from being enacted in the system until that date. If the field was not filled out or it was set for date in the past, the status would change immediately. We have not begun development on this but would welcome feed back! Do you think this would work for you?

    Thank you for your continued involvement in the Ideal Lab. We truly appreciate it.

    Look forward to seeing you in Montana this summer!

    posted March 30, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  2. 1 vote

    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)
    Mark supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Kyle,

    I am assuming you are talking about the Grant Program Description where you provide information regarding application guidelines and dates for the applicants to read before the begin the application process. If not, please let me know which area of the software your request is directed. We actually discussed this in customer team (our product development team) yesterday and we hope to address this relatively soon. Keep an eye on the release notes for this change. We will also notify you using this Idea Lab post.

    Thank you for your feed back!

    posted March 30, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  3. 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)
    Mark supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Lynn,

    This is a great idea which we have heard from others as well. It is not currently being worked on but we have had conversations about the best way to implement this feature. The key consideration from our perspective is implementing this in a way that does not open your system to security concerns. While a user is logged into our servers, their communication is encrypted. However, when an email is sent with login data (user name and password) already included in the URL, the data is not encrypted and there are potential data security issues.

    Is the above scenario where it is part of the work flow to go from LOI to Application or to Follow up the main use you would like to see? What about invitation only applications? That is the other scenario we have heard from customers where this would make sense.

    If you have time, please consider you thoughts on the trade off between security and convenience of this feature and let us know your thoughts.

    posted March 30, 2012 by Mark Larimer

  4. 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

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    Cheryl,

    How we handle an Organization's information is something we are currently discussing. This would likely be part of a larger development effort to redesign our registration page(s) to allow you to capture distinct information about the applicant, the executive director of the organization and the organization. I will add your suggestion that we allow Payment address to be included for those people who would like it to be available.

    I do not have a specific time frame on when you should expect to see this work completed but it is something we are actively researching in order to provide clear guidelines to our development team of what our client's needs are in this area. If you any other specific feedback, we appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.

    Best,

    Mark Larimer

    posted June 11, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  5. 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

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    Kathryn and Aaron,

    I wanted to update you regarding adding this type of functionality. We are currently looking at modifying the request summary page to include some of what you are asking for in this post. You may receive a call from someone on the team asking for more feedback.

    Thanks for helping us.

    Mark

    posted April 17, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  6. 1 vote

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    Everyone,

    It has been a while since we have updated this post so here is status check:

    Batch Deny and Batch Close have been released and are currently available. We continue to work on other ways to reduce workload and keystrokes for our users. Batch Evaluation Assign and Batch Emails' design specifications have been built and are part of the development queue but are not currently being worked on for the next release

    Batch Approve and Batch Print have been suggested and we are currently looking at the technical requirements and work flow considerations reagarding these prior to developing product specifications for these functions.

    There several posts with similar requests within the Idea Lab so I have included links below so you may see other discussions taking place.

    Batch Approvals Post

    Batch Evaluator Assign Post

    Batch Print Post

    Batch CharityCheck Post

    As usual, we appreciate your thoughts and suggestions.

    Best

    posted July 2, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    After talking to Ron Katz in more detail about his needs regarding assigning evaluations to evaluators in bulk, we identified a way that we could solve the problem for organizations similar to his.

    Here is the scenario:

    As applications come into GLM they are verified complete but are not immediately assigned to evaluators for review and are queued in the Applications Complete stage of GLM.

    He could then tag or check 10 to 20 of the applications in the Applications Complete group and choose from a list of evaluators and assign all of the selected applications to that group of evaluators.

    Would this be helpful to others? Are there other ideas or scenarios that we need to consider? Please provide confirmation that this would work for your organization or ideas of what else we need to consider.

    Thanks!

    posted June 16, 2011 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Ron,

    We hear the request to assign to evaluators using a batch process from our community foundation, scholarship and now United Ways clients. The question is: how do we do this without eliminating the check in process for the applications? It doesn't do any good to assign an evaluation to a volunteer evaluator if it is incomplete or a poor fit. We don't want to fix one problem to cause a new one.

    If you have an idea of how we could do this, can you describe the workflow you would like to see that would best save your staffs' and evaluators' time?

    Thanks

    posted June 16, 2011 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  7. 0 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
    Mark commented  · 

    Jessica,

    I think the best way to address your needs is through using an internal report field which is available at the Grant Stage. I would recommend you talk to support if you need help configuring one or talking about your needs.

    The One-time, Installment and Matching grant types all have unique data they capture and each is handled differently in GLM based on that grant type. If you have more information regarding your needs or some type of work flow our grant types are not managing well for you, please provide additional feedback with a sample work flow explaining what you are suggesting.

    Thank you for posting in the Idea Lab.

    Best,

    Mark

    Foundant Customer team

    posted March 30, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  8. 1 vote

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    Meredith,

    Foundant's current support system login process is out of our control so there is, unfortunately, little we can do with our existing tool. However, we we have begun looking at what our needs are / will be for supporting our customers best as we continue to grow and are researching new options to make working with us easier and more user friendly.

    This is not a change that will happen overnight but within the next 6 to 12 months, we may have a new system in place or will invest to improve our current system.

    Thank you for your thoughts.

    Mark

    posted July 26, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  9. 0 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
    Mark commented  · 

    Jen,

    As we discussed at the Summit, this is something we are interested in doing but want to make sure we are ready to commit to it. I will follow up with you regarding this next week.

    Thanks for the nudge.

    Mark

    posted September 12, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  10. 2 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
    Mark commented  · 

    Becky,

    We have built specifications to redo our comments functionality within Foundant GLM that may meet your needs. This work has not been started within development and it not expected to be available shortly but it is within the development queue. I will check back with you after this is available to determine if your needs have been met of if there are other considerations we need to understand.

    One thought that may be able to help you immediately. If you have the full version of Adobe Acrobat (not Adobe Acrobat Reader) you do have the ability to modify the print packets built in Foundant GLM. Highlighting and comment bubbles are available using Adobe Acrobat but modified document would need to be saved and posted the Document upload section of the grant record. I know this is not a true solution but wanted to offer this choice to you, which is available now.

    As always, thank you for your thoughts and suggestions on how to make Foundant GLM better.

    Best

    posted July 2, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Becky,

    I need a little clarification on this before I can provide more specific feedback or comments.

    Are you looking for a way to actually highlight(as in color over words in yellow) a section or are you just looking for ways to draw attention to a certain section within the proposal?

    Thanks

    posted April 17, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  11. 0 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
    Mark commented  · 

    Everyone,

    Thank you for your thoughts on this issue. We have begun working on a spec to address this issue. I hope to be able to spell out our thoughts on how to fix this for everyone. There are a few issues we need to consider about archived forms. Do they show up as available forms to use in Process Manager? Can they be copied? Can they be archived if there is a process using them? In regards to Follow Up forms, what if they are still assigned to grantees?

    When we have a product spec finished, I will have it posted to this comment thread so you all can read it and provide feedback. While I would expect this functionality to be available in 2012, I want to make clear it is not currently being developed, just planned. However the planning of the product spec is the first and the most important step to bringing this functionality to the productions system.

    As usual, Thank you all for your participation and thoughts. They do help us make Foundant GLM better and more useful for all.

    Best

    posted July 2, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Janet and Ron,

    We have begun to look at designing how we want this function to work withing GLM. We may reach out to you for additional feedback before we send something to development.

    posted April 17, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    I have heard this request from many customers.

    posted April 22, 2011 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  12. 0 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
    Mark commented  · 

    Everyone,

    Adding contact and organization details to the report grids in the new reporting functionality is one of the things we are currently working on as the next upgrade to the new reporting tool. There are some technical challenges in including standard text fields to a reporting area but contact information is currently included in the specification of the update.

    Hopefully you will see these changes soon but I will update this discussion as we learn more.

    Thanks

    posted July 2, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  13. 1 vote

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    James,

    Kris Thorson brought your issue up to the Client Team (our product management team) and this issue will be resolved in the next release.

    In the next release, we have redone how we handle registration and will have distinct contact information at the Org, ED and Applicant level. These changed fields are being added to the Data Export and Reporting. We made sure to add Title to both as well.

    You will receive notification of the new release as it is sent to demo for final testing and when it is released to production.

    posted November 15, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  14. 1 vote

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    We did a micro-update to GLM last night to eliminate list fields from being printed in the print packets. This was an attempt to fix the biggest complaint we have heard about the new print packets. However, I would like to encourage all of you to continue to suggest other ways we can improve this feature of GLM as it is very widely used by almost every customer.

    Thank you,

    Mark

    posted June 28, 2011 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  15. 2 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
    Mark commented  · 

    I am happy to say the process of making it easier to merge organizations and then delete the old ones is the next development effort. It was important to release 3.1 so we could better distinguish organization data from user data. Armed with the feedback from the Big Sky Summit, we will be working on this release. At this point, I am not willing or able to set a definite timeline for when it will be in production but we will keep you updated on the process,

    I want to thank all of you for your patience and hope you understand that not allowing organizations with GuideStar history to be deleted was not due to it being hard to delete but rather us not wanting people to delete something that could be very important in an audit. The process on merging all needed data into a single record is complex, but I am confident that the end result will meet your needs while ensuring the process does not expose your organization to purging important historical data.

    posted December 19, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Mary,

    With the IRS now actively revoking status of Nonprofit organizations who do not file on time, we have had several instances where a customer has encountered the scenario where payment of a multi-year grant is interrupted due to temporary loss of status. Which points to the importance of checking CharityCheck prior to payment of any grant.

    I look forward to seeing you in Big Sky.

    Cherie,

    I do not know if we will be able to record the discussion in a format that will be useful for our non-attending customers, however, I can commit we will post the finished product specifications document we develop during the session for additional feedback from our entire user community. I'll look into if we can somehow webcast or record the discussion.

    posted July 26, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Mark commented  · 

    Mary,

    This is something we are aware of and have been considering options on how to best resolve. We do not want to take the chance of letting a foundation delete proof of their due diligence and end up needing it for an audit sometime in the future.

    However, this is a great way to introduce a new planned general session at the Summit 2012 Users' Conference you are attending this Fall. We have been discussing all of the issues around both merging duplicates as well as reducing or eliminating the creation of duplicates in Foundant GLM. Your issue from above is tied directly to how to properly merge contact into a single organization.

    For a general session, we plan to open up to the group and show where we are at in the planning stages and what questions we are still uncertain of and then break into smaller groups to give all customers a chance to voice suggestions on how to solves this very real problem. Our commitment from the session is to have time scheduled within our development schedule to work on the solution we come up with from the session.

    posted July 9, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  16. 0 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
    Mark commented  · 

    A past version of Foundant GLM actually allowed users to check a box to copy the information to the organization fields. Based on customer requests, we disabled this feature. The problem customers ran into was receiving incorrect data about the organizations.

    It is not uncommon for applicants to be in a hurry and they do not realize the importance of this data to be correct for the foundation and skip it (if not required) or take the fastest path through the system to get to the application. We are always looking for ideas on how to best balance our clients need for accurate data with ease of use for applicants.

    Any additional thoughts you may have are certainly appreciated.

    Foundant Client Team

    posted February 9, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

  17. 1 vote

    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
    Mark commented  · 

    Grant,

    Thank you for your Idea Lab suggestion. Some sites, Foundant GLM fits better then others. Looking at your new site, you have a few components that are difficult for us to match. Top of page navigation and the rounded corners are not possible within Foundant Styling tools.

    To be very honest, this is not something we will address in the near future. However, we are using Idea Lab to help us determine priorities for future development so we will keep this comment available as a regular reminder of your needs and as a spot for other Foundant GLM users to provide their two cents as well.

    Thank you for posting in the Idea Lab.

    I look forward to seeing you in Montana this summer!

    Best,

    Mark

    posted March 30, 2012 by Mark Larimer, Foundant Technologies

Feedback and Knowledge Base