Settings and activity
16 results found
-
5 votes
Renea Muellerleile
shared this idea
·
-
41 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Renea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment Renea Muellerleile
commented
Many organizations conduct "blinded" reviews, am interested in how others may have resolved the challenge, to uphold the integrity behind conducting a blinded review.
Renea Muellerleile
shared this idea
·
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Renea Muellerleile
commented
Adds functionality and flexibility for the use of multiple Evaluations and evaluators assigned and maintains the integrity of the original review.
Renea Muellerleile
shared this idea
·
-
93 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Renea Muellerleile
commented
Many organizations require "evaluation" of follow ups (a common use case, grantee progress reporting that needs to be reviewed). It is not as professional, clean as it could be with the current recommendation to enter questions in the Follow Up form which, in turn, requires them to be completed by Admin or GM which are not roles that the evaluators have, or should have, in many organizations. It would be great if there was Evaluation stage and forms for Follow Up as there are for LOI and Application
-
3 votes
Thank you for this feedback. We currently have the limitation to making sure tables easily appear on screens and print packers but are continuing to evaluate ways to expand this functionality.
Renea Muellerleile
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
105 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
33 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
13 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
15 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
-
29 votesRenea Muellerleile
supported this idea
·
This is a significant gap in the system capability, one that may result in the need for our organization to consider other system solutions in the future. A very important part of our process is, and other organizations that I've worked with, is the review of progress reports (follow-ups in the GLM system). A majority of the grants we fund are multi-year projects. We have fiduciary and regulatory requirements to review on an ongoing basis. Reviews cannot be completed by a single individual, and the reviewer(s) must have the capability to review complex, scientific data, which dictates the need to assign the review of the follow-ups in a similar manner to the LOIs and Applications. Even with an advanced license, the review process is not efficient and will require a number of steps to administer. Ideally, an evaluation stage as is available in the LOI and Application stage would provide the functionality to fully utilize the system for end-to-end grant management and minimize unnecessary manual work outside of the system which negates the effectiveness of the system use by all areas.