With Foundant GLM, users can create, launch and receive online applications and grant reports, manage online proposal reviews, and manage grants and information from a single, integrated solution from anywhere they have internet access.
N/A
Submittable
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Submittable offers tools to launch, measure, and grow social impact programs, locally and globally. From grants and scholarships to awards and CSR programs, Submittable partners with users to make a difference. The vendor states Submittable has supported over 95,000 social impact programs, receiving nearly 20 million applications, and that teams save an average of 12 hours per week and launch in an average of 14 days.
This product is great and well-suited for smaller organizations who are interested in doing an online grantmaking system for the first time or upgrading from a simple survey-type application. You would love this product for basic applications and reports; [...] [its also great] if you want to do some light reporting. This is not a product that is robust enough to handle complex budgets, contact or email management, or complex outcomes metrics. It also will not work if you are trying to track your conversations with potential grantees before they apply.
Submittable is great for grant management, grantmaking, and scholarship awards. It's a very useful tool also when there are multiple reviewers and committees involved in the assessment of the application. The table feature is helpful, but to download the information in a usable report is a pain. Overall a very useful tool for funding.
Customer Service: Foundant is always super helpful and speedy in their responses to my questions, whether it's an email or call.
Connections to other users: There's a great online community that's willing to share what works for their organizations.
Company Response/Development: Foundant is continually updating (where it needs to) to make their product the best it can be, and is willing (and does) take comments and suggestions from clients for how the software could be improved.
Training: A variety of training options- ranging from in person conferences to web-based tutorials. Very helpful, and updated as the product is.
I don't think about what's lacking. This is much better than our previous grants management software.
The landing page could have a snappier design.
I wish our grantees could see more than one follow-up for a process at a time. Sometimes there needs to be a project mod submitted while that is an active renewal going on.
It used to be easier to download submission files from the submissions screen; now, you have to run a report and request a download.
Giving access to reviewers could be easier. It would be nice if we could create the email account and password and then give that to the reviewer. Right now, the invites are often junk, spam, or quarantine.
Submittable is easy to use for our applicants, streamlines the grantmaking process and provides structures for a range of reviewers on our panels. i like that you continue to come up with new tools, although I wish many didn't come with additional costs.
Submittable is very user-friendly. As both a application builder and an applicant myself I find the system intuitive and easy. Many pre-populated questions allow a grant administrator to build an application quickly. The start-up time we first joined as a Submittable client was fast, too. Submittable does not take much time for a first-time user to understand.
We have thankfully never experienced an outage nor been affected by a technology issue on Submittable's side that has delayed our grant process. We have instead been able to distribute over $6M in donated dollars to AAPI small business owners because Submittable is trustworthy and available
We've had a quick and efficient submittable experience that has always been easy to use. When we need a report it downloads within seconds, even the larger reports are 30 seconds or less to download. Pages are quick to load and reports complete in a more than reasonable time frame
I think that they are good at answering our questions and solving our problems. We occasionally get reports from applicants about problems the Submittable team has not solved, but I do not know what the applicant has done to get the problem solved.
We have been using this for many years but my memory is that we had a human walk us through how to use basic features. We also used the resource library to learn about specific topics or issues as they came up.
10/10 because we were able to meet virtually and still get all of our questions answered! Online was effective too because we could easily record the sessions and review them later. Since we had to onboard our reviewers virtually, it was actually convenient that this was the same method we learned how to use the entire program virtually too.
I would say, provide Submittable as much detailed information on your planned use of the platform and your desires with the platform as possible, and the implementation will be tailored to accommodate your organization with minimal lag time and issues/problems.
I used GIFTS more than 10 years ago. Their development was glacial, and it was clumsy software. They took much longer to develop the on-line application process. I also reviewed Philan Tech. They did not offer the same flexibility that Foundant's GLM did. Nor did the company have the depth of software engineering experience that Philan Tech had at the time. Finally, I used a back-office support company for a short time that has an on-line grant management component. This option proved to be too cumbersome and too expensive. And I did not personally get along with the staff there. Definitely not a good fit for the Replogle Foundation and me.
When we decided on Submittable: a) Most cost-effective: solution would cost under USD3,000 per year with no setup fee. b) We needed key features of this solution that were available out-of-the-box, e.g., Online Application Form -- including answers to approximately 20-30 questions, completing a financial income/expense summary spreadsheet, and submitting supporting docs in Word, PDF, or other common file formats. Also, applicants would get instant feedback if they do not qualify, so they won't even bother completing their submission. Backend workflow allows up to 8+ committee members/reviewers to review application submissions, submit and share comments/questions, approve/reject, grant amount recommendations, etc. Basic reporting will include lists of applicants and key data by submission year (e.g., contact details, funding requested, key metrics, etc.). Email alerts to reviewers as applications are submitted. Summary of completed application emailed to applicant upon submission so they have a copy for their records—the ability to centrally track any email exchanges with applicants.
We have been easily able to grow. Not only are we able to process different applications, but Submittable makes it easy to add applications onto our plan. Additionally, their eligibility form before the application does a good job of screening applicants so we do not pay for extra applications.
This software has made it much easier to work with reviewers (panels of community volunteers who provide scores and comments for the grant applications). While we only use the Evaluator function for two of our many grant programs, the merge templates have saved a lot of time in assembling the materials to send digitally (one PDF per application) for the other grant programs. In our old database, I had to download each document from the application, convert to PDF, then combine. That was very labor intensive! In this software, I create a merge template and all the documents that I want included are automatically converted to PDF, in the order I want them. This was a big reason we moved to this software and it continues to be a fantastic feature.
The automatic email reminders that have been built into the software (this is one example of an excellent improvement that has been added since we got the software - showing their constant efforts to get even better) have saved a lot of time and effort. I used to set reminders on my calendar every year to write a long involved email to all the grantees for a particular grant program, to remind them to submit their grant reports. And then, if they still forgot, I had to chase them down. Now, I just set up the reports in the software and there is an automatic reminder that goes out two weeks before; if they still forget, there is an automatic reminder that goes out one day after the deadline to let them know that it's late. I still have to chase a few of them down but the majority are taken care of.
We were able to launch our first-ever community grants program on time, and received over 300 applications (we were anticipating ~50 in our first year out.)
This has substantially improved our application and tracking capabilities for our employee relief fund grants, and ensured we are following IRS guidelines.
