FundSvcs Community

Hi Kathy, I always use a script for CRM demos, which is based on the university’s top functional use cases and technical requirements. Every vendor must follow the script and answer questions that arise (within time limits). The rating form mirrors the script (though not typically every step) and also asks overall questions about the vendor and software. It requests numeric ratings and comments that explain those ratings. Robert _____________________________________________________________________________ Robert L. Weiner Consulting 415/643-8955 <mailto:robert@rlweiner.com> robert@rlweiner.com <http://www.rlweiner.com/> www.rlweiner.com Twitter: @robert_weiner FundSvcs … a service of <http://www.advserv.org/> AASP. fund-logo Strategic Technology Advisors to Nonprofit and Educational Institutions From: Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG] On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 6:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> BOLDLY BUFFALO <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign <http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> buffalo.edu/alumni

Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: > > Hi Kathy, > >   > > We just went through this process in the fall.  We actually had two > evaluation forms.  We had a general survey that was open to everyone > that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + > campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos).  We had a > second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into > every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done > by the four of us on the project team. > >   > > The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a > narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; > did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it > meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional > benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed > related to your work; and general feedback/observations.  The survey > then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key > areas:  event management; mobile functionality; moves management; > communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; > team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; > interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; > integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. > >   > > Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious > about the project team’s survey. > >   > > Good luck! > >   > > Ian > >   > > *Ian A. Webster > *Director of Advancement Services > cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0 > Loyola University Maryland > 4501 North Charles Street > Baltimore, MD 21210 > > Office:  410-617-2292 > > Mobile:  410-456-0460 > iawebster@loyola.edu <mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>_ > _ > www.loyola.edu <http://www.loyola.edu> > >   > > Facebook logo <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>Twitter logo > <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> Instagram logo > <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> Snapchat logo > <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> YouTube logo > <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ LinkedIn logo > <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> _ > >   > >   > >   > > *From:*Advancement Services Discussion List > <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *Stuber, Kathleen > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > *Subject:* [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > >   > > We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our > current Ellucian Advance Web product.  We have scheduled three > vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone > through this process has developed an evaluation form they would > be willing to share with me.  I was thinking of something like a > rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: > >   > > Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 > >   > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > Kathy > >   > > *Kathleen E. Stuber** > *Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services* > *Division of University Advancement > > University at Buffalo > > 1022 Kimball Towers > > Buffalo, NY 14214 > > 716-881-7492 > >   > > *BOLDLY > BUFFALO <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>*** > > *THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* > >   > > buffalo.edu/campaign <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>__ > > buffalo.edu/alumni <http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> > >   > -- *Dominic Matar* Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give <http://www.cooper.edu/give>

This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu> wrote: > Hi Dominic, > > > > Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing > specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are > unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, > would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would > help you please email me directly. > > > > Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current > solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and > it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put > off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, > we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with > the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By > spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We > closed our campaign in May. > > > > Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for > operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of > project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary > ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project > management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we > invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own > words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. > This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also > included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap > with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories > and build the RFP off of the needs identified. > > > > The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team > reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We > opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in > other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and > an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants > completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey > as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and > subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were > invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more > tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t > get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying > questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. > > > > In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references > and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two > finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been > in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll > sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the > vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > > *Ian A. Webster *Director of Advancement Services > [image: cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] > Loyola University Maryland > 4501 North Charles Street > Baltimore, MD 21210 > > Office: 410-617-2292 > > Mobile: 410-456-0460 > iawebster@loyola.edu > > www.loyola.edu > > > > [image: Facebook logo] <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland> [image: > Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [image: Instagram > logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [image: Snapchat logo] > <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [image: YouTube logo] > <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ [image: LinkedIn logo] > <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> > > > > > > > > *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List < > FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *Dominic Matar > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > > > > Hi Ian, > > I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind > sharing! > > Best, > > Dominic > > > > On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: > > Hi Kathy, > > > > We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two > evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that > attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus > partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH > more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the > RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the > project team. > > > > The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative > response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor > present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day > needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was > there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general > feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product > (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile > functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; > mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data > importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university > departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and > efficiency. > > > > Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about > the project team’s survey. > > > > Good luck! > > > > Ian > > > > > *Ian A. Webster *Director of Advancement Services > [image: cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] > Loyola University Maryland > 4501 North Charles Street > Baltimore, MD 21210 > > Office: 410-617-2292 > > Mobile: 410-456-0460 > iawebster@loyola.edu > > www.loyola.edu > > > > [image: Facebook logo] <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[image: > Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [image: Instagram > logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [image: Snapchat logo] > <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [image: YouTube logo] > <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ [image: LinkedIn logo] > <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> > > > > > > > > *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List > <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On > Behalf Of *Stuber, Kathleen > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > *Subject:* [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > > > > We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current > Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor > demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process > has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I > was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various > features outlined: > > > > Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 > > > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > Kathy > > > > *Kathleen E. Stuber* > Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services > Division of University Advancement > > University at Buffalo > > 1022 Kimball Towers > > Buffalo, NY 14214 > > 716-881-7492 > > > > > *BOLDLY BUFFALO <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* > > *THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* > > > > buffalo.edu/campaign <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> > > buffalo.edu/alumni <http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> > > > > -- > *Dominic Matar* > Director of Advancement Services > Office of Alumni Affairs and Development > The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art > 212.353.4167 > > For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give > <http://www.cooper.edu/give> >

We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni>

Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni>

Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give>

Thanks everyone for your help. Kathy From: Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG] On Behalf Of John Taylor Sent: January 23, 2019 2:09 PM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com<mailto:johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com> 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>> wrote: Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>> On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give>

Superb list, John. And the framework you described, Ian, is excellent. The only thing I’d add is to consider requesting demo/sandbox accounts from the vendors. Then, recruit different types of users who can test the system. They will become your “champions” – something that can be handy when the process is political. These users’ charge is to experience the software first-hand and work through their list of assumptions (e.g. what reports are available, how does crediting work, etc.). That process helps everyone wrap their heads around the various pros/cons of the systems, as well as bridge the disconnects that naturally form between expectations and reality. The combination of their buy-in (resulting, in part, from the testing process), along with your expertise and broad vantage point (and scorecard), will help bring additional clarity to your decision-making process. Best, Ron Ron Eisenstein Partner The Solas Group http://www.thesolasgroup.com<https://www.thesolasgroup.com/> | (773) 315-6014 From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of John Taylor Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 1:09 PM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com<mailto:johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com> 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>> wrote: Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>> On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give>

Wonderful insights, thank you all for sharing! On 1/23/2019 3:10 PM, Ron Eisenstein wrote: > > Superb list, John.  And the framework you described, Ian, is excellent. > >   > > The only thing I’d add is to consider requesting demo/sandbox accounts > from the vendors.  Then, recruit different types of users who can test > the system.  They will become your “champions” – something that can be > handy when the process is political.  These users’ charge is to > experience the software first-hand and work through their list of > assumptions (e.g. what reports are available, how does crediting work, > etc.).  That process helps everyone wrap their heads around the > various pros/cons of the systems, as well as bridge the disconnects > that naturally form between expectations and reality. > >   > > The combination of their buy-in (resulting, in part, from the testing > process), along with your expertise and broad vantage point (and > scorecard), will help bring additional clarity to your decision-making > process. > >   > > Best, > > Ron** > > * * > > *Ron Eisenstein* > > Partner > > The Solas Group > >   > > _http://www.thesolasgroup.com <https://www.thesolasgroup.com/>_| (773) > 315-6014 > >   > >   > > *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List > <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *John Taylor > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 1:09 PM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > >   > > This is all great stuff! > >   > > But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard.  Indeed that is > the way to go.  However, coming up with what to score is the big > question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features.  > There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" > than others. > >   > > Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale.  And the attached might > give you some ideas on what to rate. > >   > > John > >   > > John H. Taylor > > Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting > > 2604 Sevier St. > > Durham, NC   27705 > > johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com <mailto:johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com> > > 919.816.5903 (cell/text) > >   > > Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 > >   > >   > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu > <mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>> wrote: > > Hi Dominic, > >   > > Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list.  I’m not comfortable > sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every > organization’s needs are unique.  However, the vendors we invited > for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by > most on this list.  If knowing specifics would help you please > email me directly. > >   > > Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our > current solution for years.  We’ve been with our current vendor > for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times.  We had been > in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we > finished the campaign.  Last winter, we put in a capital > budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the > endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be.  By > spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY.  > We closed our campaign in May. > >   > > Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for > operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s > head of project management was formed.  We gathered some > preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor > possibilities.  Our project management office lead some exercises > to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of > our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they > use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work.  This was everyone > from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP.  We also included a few > members of other departments that have some over overlap with > advancement.  The project team condensed and categorized these > stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. > >   > > The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses.  The project > team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for > demos.  We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some > stake holders in other offices.  Vendors were given the same > suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to > present.  After each demo, participants completed the survey and > the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described > in my earlier response.  Based on the objective scores and > subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that > were invited back for a follow-up.  The follow-up presentations > were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address > topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some > specific follow-up/clarifying questions.  Round 2 was open to the > same internal stakeholders as round 1. > >   > > In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked > references and conducted some internal and external due diligence > between our two finalists.  We made a decision right before the > winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over > the last couple weeks.  I expect we’ll sign the contract soon.  We > haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we > are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. > >   > > Hope this helps.  > >   > > *Ian A. Webster > *Director of Advancement Services > cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0 > Loyola University Maryland > 4501 North Charles Street > Baltimore, MD 21210 > > Office:  410-617-2292 > > Mobile:  410-456-0460 > iawebster@loyola.edu <mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>_ > _ > www.loyola.edu <http://www.loyola.edu> > >   > > Facebook logo <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>Twitter logo > <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> Instagram logo > <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> Snapchat logo > <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> YouTube logo > <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ LinkedIn logo > <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552>  > >   > >   > >   > > *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List > <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > <mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>> *On Behalf Of *Dominic Matar > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > <mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> > *Subject:* Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > >   > > Hi Ian, > > I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't > mind sharing! > > Best, > > Dominic > >   > > On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: > > Hi Kathy, > >   > > We just went through this process in the fall.  We actually > had two evaluation forms.  We had a general survey that was > open to everyone that attended the product demos (all > advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and > stakeholders were invited to the demos).  We had a second MUCH > more detailed survey for the project team that got into every > nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was > done by the four of us on the project team. > >   > > The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for > a narrative response on topics such as: perceived > strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to > business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; > did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; > was there anything that was not addressed related to your > work; and general feedback/observations.  The survey then > asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key > areas:  event management; mobile functionality; moves > management; communication; gift administration; mapping; > reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data > importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other > university departments/non-employee access; > integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. > >   > > Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are > curious about the project team’s survey. > >   > > Good luck! > >   > > Ian > >   > > *Ian A. Webster > *Director of Advancement Services > cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0 > Loyola University Maryland > 4501 North Charles Street > Baltimore, MD 21210 > > Office:  410-617-2292 > > Mobile:  410-456-0460 > iawebster@loyola.edu <mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>_ > _ > www.loyola.edu <http://www.loyola.edu> > >   > > Facebook logo <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>Twitter > logo <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> Instagram logo > <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> Snapchat logo > <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> YouTube logo > <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ LinkedIn logo > <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552>  > >   > >   > >   > > *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List > <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> > <mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *Stuber, > Kathleen > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM > *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG > <mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> > *Subject:* [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form > >   > > We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to > replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product.  We have > scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if > anyone who has gone through this process has developed an > evaluation form they would be willing to share with me.  I > was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 > with various features outlined: > >   > > Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 > >   > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > Kathy > >   > > *Kathleen E. Stuber** > *Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services* > *Division of University Advancement > > University at Buffalo > > 1022 Kimball Towers > > Buffalo, NY 14214 > > 716-881-7492 > >   > > *BOLDLY > BUFFALO <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* > > *THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* > >   > > buffalo.edu/campaign <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> > > buffalo.edu/alumni <http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> > >   > > -- > *Dominic Matar* > Director of Advancement Services > Office of Alumni Affairs and Development > The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art > 212.353.4167 > > For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give > <http://www.cooper.edu/give> > -- *Dominic Matar* Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give <http://www.cooper.edu/give>

That’s a great idea. Thanks From: Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG] On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: January 24, 2019 9:33 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Wonderful insights, thank you all for sharing! On 1/23/2019 3:10 PM, Ron Eisenstein wrote: Superb list, John. And the framework you described, Ian, is excellent. The only thing I’d add is to consider requesting demo/sandbox accounts from the vendors. Then, recruit different types of users who can test the system. They will become your “champions” – something that can be handy when the process is political. These users’ charge is to experience the software first-hand and work through their list of assumptions (e.g. what reports are available, how does crediting work, etc.). That process helps everyone wrap their heads around the various pros/cons of the systems, as well as bridge the disconnects that naturally form between expectations and reality. The combination of their buy-in (resulting, in part, from the testing process), along with your expertise and broad vantage point (and scorecard), will help bring additional clarity to your decision-making process. Best, Ron Ron Eisenstein Partner The Solas Group http://www.thesolasgroup.com<https://www.thesolasgroup.com/> | (773) 315-6014 From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of John Taylor Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 1:09 PM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com<mailto:johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com> 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>> wrote: Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>> On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give>

We have also recently been through a tender process for a new CRM, as part of a university wide CRM solution. We went through a similar process to what Ian detailed, with a very extensive RFP detailing a long list of specifications. The selection panel used a scale rating to score each of the vendors against their responses to the RFP. This process was then undertaken again following the vendor demonstrations. All panel members scores were averaged and we used weighting across the four main criteria. · Compliance with specification (as detailed in the RFP) · Capability · Relevant experience, past performance · Pricing and value for money Kind regards Stef -- *STEFANIE HARDACRE * *CPA* Manager, Campaign Strategy & Analysis *External Relations, Development and Alumni* *Office of the President and Vice-Chancellor* Locked Bag 7 Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia M: 0437 929 160 E: Stefanie.hardacre@monash.edu monash.edu *CHANGE IT. * *FOR GOOD.* *Visit* *Giving to Monash* <https://www.monash.edu/giving> *to see how philanthropy is changing it, for good.* *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG] *On Behalf Of *John Taylor *Sent:* Thursday, 24 January 2019 5:09 AM *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG *Subject:* Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu> wrote: Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. *Ian A. Webster*Director of Advancement Services [image: cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu www.loyola.edu [image: Facebook logo] <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[image: Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [image: Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [image: Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [image: YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ [image: LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *Dominic Matar *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG *Subject:* Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian *Ian A. Webster*Director of Advancement Services [image: cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu www.loyola.edu [image: Facebook logo] <http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[image: Twitter logo] <http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [image: Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [image: Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [image: YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland>­ [image: LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> *From:* Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> *On Behalf Of *Stuber, Kathleen *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM *To:* FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG *Subject:* [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy *Kathleen E. Stuber* Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 *BOLDLYBUFFALO <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* *THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign>* buffalo.edu/campaign <http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni <http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- *Dominic Matar* Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give <http://www.cooper.edu/give>

Thanks Stef, much appreciated. From: Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG] On Behalf Of Stefanie Hardacre Sent: January 24, 2019 6:14 PM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We have also recently been through a tender process for a new CRM, as part of a university wide CRM solution. We went through a similar process to what Ian detailed, with a very extensive RFP detailing a long list of specifications. The selection panel used a scale rating to score each of the vendors against their responses to the RFP. This process was then undertaken again following the vendor demonstrations. All panel members scores were averaged and we used weighting across the four main criteria. · Compliance with specification (as detailed in the RFP) · Capability · Relevant experience, past performance · Pricing and value for money Kind regards Stef -- STEFANIE HARDACRE CPA Manager, Campaign Strategy & Analysis External Relations, Development and Alumni Office of the President and Vice-Chancellor Locked Bag 7 Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia M: 0437 929 160 E: Stefanie.hardacre@monash.edu<mailto:Stefanie.hardacre@monash.edu> monash.edu<http://monash.edu/> CHANGE IT. FOR GOOD. Visit Giving to Monash<https://www.monash.edu/giving> to see how philanthropy is changing it, for good. From: Advancement Services Discussion List [mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>] On Behalf Of John Taylor Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2019 5:09 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form This is all great stuff! But back to Kathy's original question of a scorecard. Indeed that is the way to go. However, coming up with what to score is the big question - and the bigger question is how to "weight" those features. There politically might be features that have to get more "credit" than others. Anyway, I suggest either a 3 or 5 point scale. And the attached might give you some ideas on what to rate. John John H. Taylor Principal, John H. Taylor Consulting 2604 Sevier St. Durham, NC 27705 johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com<mailto:johntaylorconsulting@gmail.com> 919.816.5903 (cell/text) Serving the Advancement Community Since 1987 On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:50 PM Ian Webster <iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu>> wrote: Hi Dominic, Happy to share the 30,000’ process on-list. I’m not comfortable sharing specific vendors/conclusions publicly since every organization’s needs are unique. However, the vendors we invited for demos, and our final decision, would be known/recognized by most on this list. If knowing specifics would help you please email me directly. Our external facing advancement staff had been grumbling about our current solution for years. We’ve been with our current vendor for a long time and it hadn’t kept up with the times. We had been in a campaign so we had put off addressing the CRM need until we finished the campaign. Last winter, we put in a capital budget/project request that my AVP and I pitched, with the endorsement of the VP of Advancement, to the powers that be. By spring, the project and capital funding was approved for this FY. We closed our campaign in May. Over the summer, a project team consisting of myself, our AVP for operations, advancement’s “tech lead” in IT, and our IT shop’s head of project management was formed. We gathered some preliminary ideas/concepts/needs and identified vendor possibilities. Our project management office lead some exercises to gather user stories where we invited a large cross-section of our users to highlight, in their own words, scenarios in how they use (would use) a CRM to conduct their work. This was everyone from gift processor to MGO, Admin to AVP. We also included a few members of other departments that have some over overlap with advancement. The project team condensed and categorized these stories and build the RFP off of the needs identified. The RFP was issued and we received 5 – 6 responses. The project team reviewed all of the proposals and invited four vendors for demos. We opened the demos to all of advancement as well as some stake holders in other offices. Vendors were given the same suggested outline of topics and an equal amount of time to present. After each demo, participants completed the survey and the project team completed a more detailed survey as I described in my earlier response. Based on the objective scores and subjective feedback, we narrowed our list down to two vendors that were invited back for a follow-up. The follow-up presentations were a bit more tailored as we wanted these two vendors to address topics that they didn’t get to in round 1 as well as address some specific follow-up/clarifying questions. Round 2 was open to the same internal stakeholders as round 1. In November and December, the project team deliberated, checked references and conducted some internal and external due diligence between our two finalists. We made a decision right before the winter break and have been in contract negotiations/review over the last couple weeks. I expect we’ll sign the contract soon. We haven’t sketched out a project plan with the vendor yet, but we are tentatively looking at go-live in January 2020. Hope this helps. Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG>> On Behalf Of Dominic Matar Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 11:04 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: Re: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form Hi Ian, I'd love to hear about your process & conclusions too if you don't mind sharing! Best, Dominic On 1/23/2019 10:36 AM, Ian Webster wrote: Hi Kathy, We just went through this process in the fall. We actually had two evaluation forms. We had a general survey that was open to everyone that attended the product demos (all advancement/alumni relations + campus partners and stakeholders were invited to the demos). We had a second MUCH more detailed survey for the project team that got into every nuance of the RFP that was 150+ questions – this survey was done by the four of us on the project team. The survey for end users asked some broad questions asking for a narrative response on topics such as: perceived strengths/weaknesses; did the vendor present solutions to business process needs; does it meet your day-to-day needs; did the solution highlight additional benefits to your work; was there anything that was not addressed related to your work; and general feedback/observations. The survey then asked them to rate the product (scale of 1 – 5) across 12 key areas: event management; mobile functionality; moves management; communication; gift administration; mapping; reporting and dashboards; team management and metrics; data importing/data entry/updating data; interacting with other university departments/non-employee access; integration/technical; and flexibility and efficiency. Happy to chat off-line if you need more info or if you are curious about the project team’s survey. Good luck! Ian Ian A. Webster Director of Advancement Services [cid:image001.gif@01CC09AF.D5BA87C0] Loyola University Maryland 4501 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21210 Office: 410-617-2292 Mobile: 410-456-0460 iawebster@loyola.edu<mailto:iawebster@loyola.edu> www.loyola.edu<http://www.loyola.edu> [Facebook logo]<http://www.facebook.com/LoyolaMaryland>[Twitter logo]<http://www.twitter.com/LoyolaMaryland> [Instagram logo] <http://instagram.com/loyolamaryland> [Snapchat logo] <https://www.snapchat.com/add/loyolamaryland> [YouTube logo] <http://www.youtube.com/LoyolaMaryland> ­ [LinkedIn logo] <http://www.linkedin.com/edu/school?id=18552> From: Advancement Services Discussion List <FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG><mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> On Behalf Of Stuber, Kathleen Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:25 AM To: FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG<mailto:FUNDSVCS@LISTSERV.FUNDSVCS.ORG> Subject: [FUNDSVCS] CRM Evaluation Form We are beginning the process of reviewing new CRMs to replace our current Ellucian Advance Web product. We have scheduled three vendor demonstrations and I wondered if anyone who has gone through this process has developed an evaluation form they would be willing to share with me. I was thinking of something like a rating scale of 1 to 10 with various features outlined: Ability to email directly from CRM 1-10 Thanks in advance for your help. Kathy Kathleen E. Stuber Assistant Vice President for Advancement Services Division of University Advancement University at Buffalo 1022 Kimball Towers Buffalo, NY 14214 716-881-7492 BOLDLY BUFFALO<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> THE CAMPAIGN FOR UB<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/campaign<http://www.buffalo.edu/campaign> buffalo.edu/alumni<http://www.buffalo.edu/alumni> -- Dominic Matar Director of Advancement Services Office of Alumni Affairs and Development The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art 212.353.4167 For online contributions, please go to: cooper.edu/give<http://www.cooper.edu/give>