[JaimeB]

Has anyone had experience with "dropping" an RE module?

Right now we have the Membership module, but no valid membership program. At the inception of our organization, donors were considered "members" based on their giving level. Clearly the reporting can all be pulled from gifts. Memberships are not neccesary.

Data entry was done improperly on the mem. module anyway (I have experience with a true membership organization, therefore proper experience with the module), i.e. not linking gifts to membership records, etc. So I believe no information will be lost by not having the membership option.

[sagespot]

Both last year and this year I dropped a module/service from RE with no issue. When my organization started with RE they seemed to purchase everything plus the kitchen sink...when I got the first annual bill after I started I almost died and immediately went through a process with our staff to determine which ones were being used and which were simply purchased so they would be "covered."

This year I'm dropping the prospect research mod as our grant writer can find no point in keeping it. I gave her a year to find a use for the mod or to work with me on creating procedures for using it and before you know it, 12 months went by and it's time to drop it from the bill.

[mwittman]

We did a module "swap" within the last year - if I recall correctly, we were assessed for the difference in value between the two module costs. Everything went fine.

[Matthew]

the one module i would Never drop is the Search module (the Prospect tab). This is really crucial and should be a part of the basic package.

It's unfortunate that you have been unable to get your staff to use it. However, normal staff turnover at nonprofits suggests that this could change in the future. I would urge you to keep this one module. There are no easy efficient workarounds for tracking grants without it.

[Nina Williams]

I talked to BB about dropping the Events module. They said no problem but if we ever in the future wanted it again we would have to pay for all the years dropped. ie. If we wanted it back in 5 years and a fee would be due covering all 5 years support/etc. We decided to keep it, and I am attempting to get staff to use it.

[sagespot]

Matthew: As for the search module, I just can't seem to get the staff interested in usage. They tend to track follow ups on Actions and simply put the copies of the proposals into the notes or media of the record. It's been working pretty well for them and I don't currently see a benefit from making them change their habits. As far as I can tell they've not missed a follow up report or resubmission deadline. Am I missing the "tracking" process that can't be done another way?

[Melissa Siobhan]

Just remember that if you drop a module and decide later to reinstate you gave to pay all of the "late" maintenance fees from the space of time you dropped it. It does cap off at some point (whatever is equal to adding it new, I believe) but I would be sure you are not going to use it ever or for a long time before dropping it.

[Melissa Siobhan]

One thing that you miss using actions and not linking them to proposals in RE: Search is the ability to report on ask amount, expected amount, funded amount (basic forecasting and analysis). Also not having an overall status of each proposal is definitely lacking. We also have some funders for which we have more than one proposal out at a time - all mixed together in actions would not be good for us. Linking them to a proposal and being able to only see the actions for that proposal is crucial.