Foundant Grant Lifecycle Manager vs. FrontStream Panorama

From where I stand, GLM is well-suited for use by small-staffed charitable foundations who make more than thirty (30) grants a year and distribute more than $500,000 in funds to non-profits. The software is able to handle every step in the grant-making process from receipt of a request, to the evaluation and decision regarding the grant, to tracking the pay-out, and to closing the grant when the work or the year is completed.

Incentivized

Given the experience I have had this year, I couldn't recommend any part of their service. The product doesn't function as advertised and they don't communicate with customers to let them know what they are doing to fix it. It is a level of service that is completely unacceptable on every level.

• Foundant provides a streamlined grants management solution for reasonable cost.
• The company listens to its users, collecting ideas and making improvements. Updates to the software are rolled out several times a year. When something cannot be changed right away, the company gives context and forecasts when the change might be possible.
• While the software is easy to use, it also offers more advanced features (such as merge templates) that allow more customization for the advanced user.

Incentivized

• FrontStream Panorama allows you to customize a larger portion of your pages that you design if you have experience with HTML and coding.
• FrontStream Panorama allows you to integrate their other platforms, such as bidding for good, which is for auction items, and connect those to their ticket registration software.
• FrontStream Panorama allows you to pull reports and customize and save reports you might use often.

Incentivized

• Need a smother process for third party responses. Currently individuals recommending more than one student for scholarships have many emails to deal with to find the correct link to upload the correct student's letter.
• Questions that would filter which applications the applicant would apply for.

• Looks dated in my opinion.

Incentivized

They do not seem to care about the problems of their customers. They do not return phone calls. They do not provide the updates on their support page that they promised. They have had two weeks to repair the basic functionality of their system and they have been unable to do so. This is a complete failure as far as I am concerned.

I have not used other online grantmaking products or evaluated others. I used to use MicroEdge Gifts, but not the online application version. It was a stand alone management system. This is hands-down better, easier to use and a more complete system

We switched from Classy.org to FrontStream Panorama and then back to Classy.org. But, originally what intrigued us about FrontStream Panorama was the ability to customize our fundraising pages. Visual design is so important to storytelling and to raising revenue and it seemed like a real opportunity for us to create beautiful campaigns that raised more money. They were also slightly less expensive than competitors.

Incentivized

• Positive customer service--fairly easy to use for applicants.
• Positive--easy to run reports you have already set up, so [it] saves time.
• Negative--limited question types makes it harder to gather the data we want to track.
• Negative--our budget is more complex than can be tracked in Foundant, so we have to use a separate program.
• Negative--we have to track potential grantee conversations in a separate program.
• Negative--getting data ready to display in a dashboard takes a lot of time to manipulate in Excel.

Incentivized

• Saves staff time
• Increases donor participation

Incentivized