ETO by Social Solutions Review
Updated April 13, 2021

ETO by Social Solutions Review

Dennis Farez | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 1 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with ETO by Social Solutions

We have been using the Automated Reentry Management System (ARMS) suite of ETO Social Solutions since summer 2015. We have different applications related to managing and tracking incarcerated individuals in at least 33 institutions for various programs including the California Identification Card Program with DMV, operated by DAI (Division of Adult Institutions), and DRP (Division of Rehabilitative Programs), etc., for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). The software is supposed to allow manual entry of individuals in a comprehensive timeline of events through touchpoints within a tailored dashboard.
  • The main dashboard page/portal is attractive in color and font design.
  • Honestly I'm really trying to be fair, but there is nothing this software does particularly well from the users standpoint.
  • Some of the support staff have been responsive over the years.
  • Still waiting for a seamless connection with SOMS (Strategic Offender Management System which is CDCR's main software for the State). We have been promised these two systems would speak to each other, but there has been zero progress in 6 years, and locally, ETO blames SOMS which is not helpful since SOMS is robust and functional unlike ETO-ARMS. Human manual entry of data dumps has been the "solution".
  • The interface is far from friendly or intuitive. It also has serious functionality issues. It requires multiple duplication and excessive clicks for data entry (ex: entering the same date multiple times, not showing pertinent required info on the same screen, not remembering last entries and ERASING previous data entered when entering new data, using different terms for the same action, disallowing some corrections, not speaking to itself on basic logic - like having to enroll an individual profile just so you can tell the software to un-enroll him in 3 different fields etc). Another big problem is the reports generator cannot be trusted as the data is often wrong or dated (perhaps because it requires data from SOMS which speaks a different language).They don't understand how to filter previous entries and terms, so the coding is probably defective or misunderstood at the root. This is taxpayer funded programming that the state legislature requires for budget decisions. Entry touchpoints have fundamental basic flaws and reports are basically garbage. We have so many examples of issues...too many to list here. 2-3 years ago a team was set up to assess contract renewal with ETO, and despite multiple examples of problems submitted, we have zero progress, the team was disbanded and the contract renewed.
  • I understand that the issues we are dealing with may have more to do with the way our product was customized for California, and not necessarily the software's inherent capabilities, but either way, the ARMS part of ETO has become somewhat of a running joke. Even an ARMS support Manager admitted to me that ARMS "sucks". In my honest opinion the entire ARMS suite should be trashed and rebuilt with consultations from actual users. It is costing countless man-hours of lost productivity and employee frustration. Sorry but we have been dealing with these problems for years.
  • That's not my wheelhouse so to speak, but I [think] hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions have been wasted in lost productivity due to this flawed software.

Do you think ETO by Social Solutions delivers good value for the price?


Are you happy with ETO by Social Solutions's feature set?


Did ETO by Social Solutions live up to sales and marketing promises?


Did implementation of ETO by Social Solutions go as expected?


Would you buy ETO by Social Solutions again?


6 years of experience dealing with a poor interface, unreliable reports, and broken promises with virtually zero improvements. I have too many issues to list but have an entire file if anyone ever shows interest from a site Manager. I listed some of the issues in some of the first questions in this review and I appreciate the opportunity to share my experiences.
6 years of sub-par support. The local team tries but they are hampered by bad software design and a fundamental lack of knowledge about the end user's experiences. Not much else to say except even our Divisional ETO-ARMS support Manager expressed frustration with the software.
ETO Social Solutions should be avoided until they start caring about the problems generated by their software. In regards specifically to the ARMS suite utilized by the entire state of California, until the ETO software learns how to speak with SOMS, and unless it can be customized by knowledgeable people who consult with front-line users. It is not appropriate to provide the state legislature with bad data. I have 6 years of experience with it and I have multiple sources of agreement from fellow users throughout the state.

Using ETO by Social Solutions

Site Managers and Office Technicians. Contract Service Providers and Executive Staff in Headquarters
Consultants who have experience with departmental terminologies and requirements, and who can manage projects with strong technical and people skills.
  • Supporting and managing multiple programs related to helping Inmates re-enter into society.
  • Tracking the CAL-ID program as required by law. PC3007.5
  • Tracking the progress of the ISUDT participants at 33 Institutions.
Worst software I have ever used in 21 years.

ETO by Social Solutions Support

Good followup
No escalation required
Support cares about my success
Slow Resolution
Less knowledgeable
Need to explain problems multiple times
Not sure not my decision. We do have an ARMS support team of at least 2 individuals, and they are usually responsive, but I rarely bother them anymore as I have come to a state of acceptance that they can only provide band aids and not fix the disease. I find work-arounds or
Yes - No it was never resolved and is still a major issue that should be more characterized as a design flaw than a bug.
On a few occasions I requested data corrections and they were corrected very promptly within the same hour. This is a good reflection on support staff obligated to resolve issues generated by this less than smart software.