Overall Satisfaction with MIP Fund Accounting (formerly Abila MIP)
Accounting primarily, monitoring employee and grant productivity. Agency-wide. Braided funding, accounting primarily for regulatory bodies and audits. MIP allows me to see expenses across categories, As I stated, I would spend funds according to HRSA, SMHSA, state, and other funding requirements. Categorical and aggregate data is available for end-users.
- Positive: productive, but using ADP for many functions due to user-friendliness, but ADP is more expensive.
- Regulatory accounting improvement.
- Aggregate reporting for braided funding.
ADP is more user friendly for staffing, salary, etc. Both systems are essential for our business and funding, audits, regulatory requirements. ADP does not create reports for BOD, other entities as well as MIP. We have to import data across systems on a frequent basis. I am not sure of a possible go-between.
Accounting, fund monitoring; less friendly for payroll and HR. ADP seems better. I find the aggregate and specific coding reports for grants very useful across departments. I have to pull other data from ADP all of the time, which is more challenging. I also have to pull data form billing software and an EMR. I would prefer one system.