Future Enhancements
Future Enhancements
NU-RES welcomes your feedback about how we can, together, improve eCD and eCLAWs systems.
See below the list of suggested improvements.
| Application | Suggestion | Problem it Solves | Status | Priority | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eCD | In email being generated to the Discloser by the system, it should dynamically show the status change (e.g. Status: Review complete) | Improves communication | Completed October 2019 | Low | |
| eCD | eCD Discloser to delete uploaded attachments | Improves record accuracy | Under review | Low | UCO Reviewer can send back to discloser if Discloser uploaded incorrect attachment; Discloser should be able to delete; SA should be able to delete at any stop, with comment/audit trail that they deleted/reason |
| eCD | Ability to save private comments between UCO Reviewers and Power Users | Improve internal communication | Not completed | Low | To maintain transparency, all communication in eCD is viewable by those that have a role in the record; private comments between users should occur outside of the system |
| eCD | Append the email generated by the system with the signature of the logged-in user | Utilize email standards improves communication | Under review | Low | Sender is listed in the dynamic text of the email |
| eCD | Download to Excel details of all submitted disclosures so as to segregate each college’s data and determine types of research happening, consulting, etc., as well as provide to Deans for their review | Segregate each college’s data, determine relationship and research types, and provide to Deans for review | Completed May 2020 | Low | |
| eCD | Ability for eCD Discloser to recall a submitted disclosure that has not yet been assigned to a UCO Reviewer for review | Allows for updates to disclosure after submission to UCO Reviewer in workflow | Completed April 2019 | Low | As long as no UCO Reviewer has assigned the disclosure, ok to recall; if assigned, recall is not allowed. |
| eCD | Reports as defined by Compliance Office | Improve ability to assess data and make informed decisions | Under review | Low | |
| eCD | Ability for UCO Reviewer to delete a file they uploaded to a disclosure; SA should be able to delete any file uploaded | Improves accuracy of the record | Under review | Medium | Any one with a role on the record should be able to delete attachments they uploaded when the record is at their stop; SA should be able to delete at any stop, with comment/audit trail that they deleted/reason |
| eCD | Ability to assign review to another reviewer (like in eCLAWs) | More efficient process then having to email the other reviewer to ask them to assign it to themselves | Completed February 2022 | Medium | Initial Reviewer triages and either closes ‘no further action’ or needs to assign to another reviewer in the same pool |
| eCD | Indicator on discloser list for Power User of users in the cycle who have changed to Inactive status after list is generated | Allows for easy identification of users in the cycle that have left NU | Completed February 2022 | Medium | Research concern re: if PI has project, even if they leave, some review is required even if PI doesn’t complete it….can’t bill Gov’t if PI is not in compliance (e.g. did not complete their disclosure). Needs further discussion with Compliance |
| eCD | Give the Power User the ability to designate which response to a question will flag as a possible conflict in a potential conflicts column when building the annual disclosure cycle | Currently, a YES answer to a Y/N type question triggers a flag of ‘potential conflict’ but since there are different types of questions, there is no way to consistently flag an answer to a question as a potential conflict. This would solve that problem and make it easier for reviewer to identify potential issues | Under review | Medium | Remove the automatic trigger of a “Potential Conflict” flag from Y answers to Y/N questions, and allow the Power User to designate which answer will trigger the “Potential Conflict” flag, if any, in all question types |
| eCD | Include email address of discloser when exporting list for UCO Reviewer | Provides the UCO Reviewer the contact info of the disclosers in the downloaded file for ease of contact/escalation | Completed February 2022 | Medium | Many users do not respond to Info Requests in eCD; alternative communication option |
| eCD | Reviewers tool to add comments without closing out disclosure that follow the person; Notes viewable in left menu column; Ability to flag/tag responses to questions (potential issues) and later be able to search/ sort/filter by the tags/flags; Should contain text field for comments and a separate single text field to add a flag for sorting/filtering | Allows UCO Reviewers to collect comments on a users disclosure year to year, and all comments remain accessible; ability to apply custom flags and search for users with those flags makes it easy to identify particular issues and particular disclosers | Under review | Medium | Any notes regarding a discloser that the UCO Reviewer makes in the record should follow the person from year to year…UCO Reviewer should be able to easily add comments at any time to the Persons Notes file (when opening a persons disclosure, on the left frame, have a link to “Comments” which the UCO Reviewer can continuously add comments and they stay with the person’s file year to year); |
| eCD | Ability for UCO Reviewers to tag an entire disclosure ‘on the fly’ with custom tags | Allow UCO Reviewers to create/apply a custom tag on a disclosure | Under review | Low | Ability to add a “tag” to a disclosure (UCO Reviewer can configure on the fly an issue type, e.g. “need CMAP” or “Q12 issue” ) They don’t want a preset list to choose from, but the ability to configure on the fly |
| eCD | UCO Reviewer to have additional option of “Closed-Not Reviewed” | Need to be able to resolve disclosures that were started but are unfinished because of some legitimate reason (e.g. person left NU or is on extended medical leave, etc.) | Under review | Medium | Need new status’: Draft-Closed not Submitted; Returned-Closed not Reviewed (these 2 status’ gets to the 100% resolved)…need to be able to search by this status |
| eCD | Sub-Status to the dashboard (just like eCLAWs) | Improves communication and transparency | Completed January 2022 | High | Substatus is only applicable when record is at UCO Reviewer stop; show Substatus in “Status” column instead of overall status of “Pending UCO Review” when a Sub Status is set at UCO Reviewer stop |
| eCD | In any of a Person’s eCD disclosures, under “Information Requests” on the left frame, have a section for All Disclosures with a + and then have it fan open to show a list of all disclosures | Provides the UCO Reviewer a full view of all disclosures to see patterns/paths/related issues | Under review | Medium | When “plus” selected, show a list of links of all of the person’s disclosures (which are saved in the person’s profile); |
| eCD | Review function of CMAP; currently CMAP can be uploaded to person’s disclosure, but process happens outside of eCD – College Designated COI Reviewer has no approval function in eCD route – communication happens in email or Info Request – Possible ‘Add Reviewer on the fly” to the workflow approval route | Improves the process of CMAP and brings the process into the system | Under review | Low | Changes in CMAP’s should trigger an off-cycle disclosure, and the changed CMAP uploaded to the new disclosure; original CMAP stays with original disclosure |
| eCD | Nested questions in questionnaire (like in eCLAWs) | Would improve the usability of the application | Underway – launching 2023 annual cycle | High | Like eCLAWS, want to nest a question under another question with a Yes/No or Yes/No with comment answer type; allow Power user to select which answer triggers the nested question |
| eCD | Grant a default role of eCD Discloser to all Faculty | Would allow users at anytime to complete an off-cycle disclosure without having to ask NU-RES Help Center for an eCD Discloser role | Completed September 2022 | Low | System would have to differentiate between those that are required to disclose from those who are not required; Research disclosers are treated differently than university disclosure requirements; |
| Application | Suggestion | Problem it Solves | Status | Priority | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eCLAWs | Need due by date (deadline date) on Dashboard, especially when expedited | Improves communication; assists in processing record in a timely manner | Under Review | Low | Requested Start Date should be considered the “due by” date; Expedited Flag indicates quick process needed – need to review process for those that jump queue with Expedited flag (more info on the record and why quick process was needed and what drives the need e.g. other party, PI, etc.), and determine what the loss to NU is if not processed by a certain date); in Advanced Ad-hoc search, Start field is searchable by eCLAWs Reviewer |
| eCLAWs | Confidentiality flag – Reviewer should be able to undo when there’s no gatekeeper | Improves transparency of record | Under Review | Low | SA can remove, but Reviewer should be able to remove, or return with process instructions |
| eCLAWs | Need a refinement re: confidential. Is the contract itself confidential or does the record contain an attachment that is confidential. | Improves best practice use of the application and improves accuracy of the record | Planned | Medium | SA to Add purpose specific questions: is the contract itself confidential (terms or an attachment) {Provide a definition of confidential}? Y/N – If no, does this non-confidential contract contain Ts & C’s related to confidentiality (Provide definition…show distinction) Y/N with comment |
| eCLAWs | Need running comments for reviewers (versus the comments in info or consult) | Improves communication and transparency | Planned | Medium | Provide Reviewer or Signatory a note section of running commentary visible by all who have access; i.e. the ‘checklist’ concept of deviations… |
| eCLAWs | Need ability to delete the attachment if you are the one who uploaded. | Improves accuracy of the record | Planned | Medium | Any one with a role on the record should be able to delete attachments they uploaded when the record is at their stop; SA should be able to delete at any stop, with comment/audit trail that they deleted/reason |
| eCLAWs | Need ability of user who uploaded an attachment to add/modify/delete the comment associated with the attachment | Improves communication | Planned | High | Any one with a role on the record should be able to add/modify/delete comments associated with attachments they uploaded when the record is at their stop; SA should be able to add/modify/delete comments at any stop, with comment/audit trail that they changed/reason |
| eCLAWs | Need to work on the labels so they’re more descriptive | Improves communication | Planned | Medium | future |
| eCLAWs | User dashboard view into the current Substatus; 11/16/20 updating to inject ‘rejected’ and ‘recalled’ flag to status | Improves communication and transparency | Completed | High | Substatus is only applicable when record is at Institutional Reviewer stop; show Substatus in “Status” column instead of overall status of “Under Review” when a Sub Status is set at Institutional Review stop |
| eCLAWs | Ability to add a comment to contact section | Improves communication | Planned | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Ability to add a comment to External Org Profile | Improves communication | Planned | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | On the record have the ability to create an email notification/or within the record. Example, I’m looking at things and I don’t need any info but I want to let the PI know it’s under review but not forgotten etc. | Improves communication and transparency | Planned | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Add Department name to dashboard – My Pool and My Queue; | Improves transparency of record | Completed | High | While user can drill into record to review details (org might not reveal the actual person it should be assigned to), having easier access to this info on the dashboard will help effective management of work |
| eCLAWs | Update note on Contract/Agreement Data tab to eCLAWs reviewer for clarity | Removes confusion and inserts best practice reminder; also clarifies grammar | Planned | Medium | Change note to: As the Institutional Reviewer, please review the attached contract. Throughout your review, please indicate sub-status change for this eCLAWs record. Upon your acceptance of all terms and conditions, please upload the final, signature version of the agreement and submit it to the Institutional Signatory for further action. |
| eCLAWs | Logged in users should be able to search for ALL status’ on My Agreements & Contracts page, including completed records | Logged in users can’t find completed records on My Agreements & Contracts page, and can’t drill into the records on the Advanced Ad-Hoc search page | Completed | Medium | Currently can only search for review status’ (e.g. only those included while record is in the workflow); need all status’ |
| eCLAWs | View access/assign edit to college administrator pool | Provides necessary access to records that aligns with college business process and shared services | Completed | High | Create college admin access for Research & Innovation purpose similar to how Procurement’s Gatekeeper process allows multiple individuals (college gatekeepers) to access/edit records |
| eCLAWs | Roles and responsibilties…invite access to a single record | increases transparency/access | Planned | High | Individual will be able to request that access to a single record be granted to another individual |
| eCLAWs | Confirm Place of performance | shows where work is occurred/occurring | Planned | Medium | Unfunded eCLAWs contracts, e.g. DUA; ISEC report (NU + building, floor, room) |
| eCLAWs | Notification to parties on assigned records in workflow if a document is added after submission | Alerts Reviewer/Signatory when Submitter uploads a new attachment after submitting into workflow (at the Reviewer/Signatory stop, and Submitter adds an attachment) | Under Review | Medium | If new information is added by Submitter, the reviewer is not notified by the system and might be waiting indefinitely or until someone followed up separately; e.g. send some type of notice or alert to the reviewer when new documents are added |
| eCLAWs | Submitter initiate the chat/ information request | Allows submitter to send some type of notice or alert to the reviewer when additional documents or information has been added to the E-claws record that has been assigned for review/signature | Not completed | Low | If there is no reviewer assigned, the info request wouldn’t go to anyone; Reviewer should initiate an info request for add’l docs, and responding to info request will initiate an email |
| eCLAWs | Verify vendor – get the EIN/W-9 | Confirms identify of external party | Planned | Low | If unverified vendor, specify request for W9; if individual, need SS# which will be masked except last 4 (disclaimer: only those with need to know will have access to Vendor profile) |
| eCLAWs | Update route in eCLAWs based on Purpose selected | Procurement business process will match existing route; Res & Inn route should match it’s business process; Eliminate “Other Party Signed” question triggers alternate route | Completed June 2022 | Medium | R&I route should never end with the Submitter having the action to upload final version of contract, as NU-RES always uploads; last stop Pending Other Party Signature is currently eliminated if selected “already signed / unchanged’ …the ‘is it signed’ option needs different workflow if R&I purpose chosen |
| eCLAWs | Remove/hide “Other Party Signed” Question for Res&Inn route agreements -related to “Update route in eCLAWS based on purpose selected” but keeping the existing workflow in place (interim solution) | will prevent users from selecting an option that removes the last stop… eliminating the last ‘Other Party Signature” step in the route disrupts the work around process we have in place for Steven to review all records at that stop so he can update the tracking log. | Not Completed | Medium | This is an interim solution; fixed the bigger issue re: having a different route process for Research & Innovation agreements |
| eCLAWs | Update Info Request/Consult email to include dynamic information on record number and application from which the communication is launched; remove text of communication to direct recipients to log into the system | Improves communication and usability – directs recipient to log into the system to answer the question in the system rather than replying to email out of the system | Completed February 2021 | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Include Gatekeepers from each appointment of NU Contacts with interdisciplinary appointments | Gatekeepers currently assigned from Primary assignment; if contract was unrelated to Primary assignment, and related to a different assignment, need to be able to pick which set of Gatekeepers will be added to the route | Under Review | Low | Currently in Research & Innovation purpose, Gatekeepers are not invoked in the route; if Gatekeepers were to be invoked, or if other purposes started to use eCLAWs that do invoke Gatekeepers, would need to revisit |
| eCLAWs | Allow text entry in Sponsored Research related record field | Allows submitter to manually link eCLAWs record to ePAWs 1.0 related record | Under Review | Medium | Related ePAWs records field should allow text entry of ePAWs 1.0 record number as well as searching the ePAWs 2.0 database for the record and linking it |
| eCLAWs | Add search on Ad Hoc Screen for related ePAWs records | Allows for the ability to search for all eCLAWs records associated with a particular proposal | Under Review | Low | If ePAWs number is in explanation, can search for this now…not consistently entered |
| eCLAWs | Generate email notification to the Submitter when record has been returned to their stop; dynamically show the status change (e.g. Status: Submit) | Improves communication | Under Review | Medium | Current “Submit-Returned” status shows on dashboard, but Submitter won’t see this if they are not actively logged in and looking at the dashboard. While Reviewer can open an Info Request to the Submitter before returning to alert them to the return, they should be able to just return with comment, and the system generate an email to the submitter |
| eCLAWs | Email notifications upon action assigned, or when contract complete | Active communication will help improve the speed at which the tasks are completed, and will alert contract submitter when complete | Under Review | Medium | Examples: Submission receipt, task assigned, request cancelled, returned to previous step, contract added to a pool for review & distribution, review complete |
| eCLAWs | Ability to copy an existing eCLAWs record | Saves data input time for similar records, particularly the Other Party Details Contact | Under Review | Medium | Comment from PI: “I was wondering if you can import / copy paste the same information as all my last orders? The only difference is the construct (AAV-syn).” |
| eCLAWs | Ability to select Other Party Details Contact from an existing Rolodex list | Allows the user to select an already known contact rather than re-keying info | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Select multiple records to “assign to me” | Improves the speed of assigning work | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Ability to ‘un cancel’ a record | Records are cancelled based on a direction, but then are requested to be recreated…reversing a cancelled record will decrease rework | Under Review | Medium | If there is a technical misunderstanding, which is naturally going to be common when scientists and lawyers communicate, we wind up cancelling a record which was actually OK, so then must duplicate. |
| eCLAWs | Route internal person related forms in eCLAWs…tied to personal profile, and not an eCLAWs contract (SVP Academic Affairs request) | automates paper forms; keeps info related to a person in one place | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | CMMC tag similar to “Confidentiality Requested” and “Expedited Review requested…” | Under Review | Low | Need a reportable/searchable data field similar to “Expedited” and “Confidential” that indicates “CMMC Requirement;” creating the static data element; Would be searchable on Basic/Advance Search page….can currently add CMMC to Brief Explanation – is searchable | |
| eCLAWs | Be able to search on My Agreements and Contracts page for all status’ including completed records; add search box to this page | Under Review | Medium | ||
| eCLAWs | eCLAWs Configurable routes… Submitter…Dept Chair….NU-RES reviewer | Under Review | Medium | Keep record at Reviewer stop while they work it through to completion; Disabling the signature route/upload; Using the sub-status to show where the record is in the process e.g. ….Consult+
| |
| eCLAWs | Print out eCLAWs record (have Print button) | Some users like to have a printed copy of the record | Under Review | Low | |
| eCLAWs | Update Info Request/Consult email to include dynamic information on record number and application from which the communication is launched; Remove the text of the communication from the generated email | Improves usability – directs recipient to log into the system to answer the question in the system rather than replying to email out of the system | Completed February 2021 | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Improve search results for common contact names | Only top 5 search results are shown; for searches with multiple hits, can’t find match without any combination (first/last, first only, last only) | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Ability to drop a snapshot image in the Info Request/Consult chat box | Provides an easy to see representation of communication without having to open a saved attachment | Under Review | Low | |
| eCLAWs | Search Multiple in Advanced Ad-Hoc search (Submitter, NU Contact, Other Party fields) | Increases the speed in which you can search for records | Under Review | Low | |
| eCLAWs | E-signature/Mark document for signature (e.g. like Docusign) | Keeps document in workflow/system; no need to download, affix e-signature with 3rd party application, re-upload; Marking the document for signature/initials to assist signatory where action is needed in the document | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Basic reports to assess KPI’s | Allows Reviewers/Signatories to assess annual number/types of contracts processed for performance indicators | Under Review | Low | |
| eCLAWs | Function that resets the “clock” on the route log workflow if the eCLAWs record is returned to the Submitter (e.g. recalculates time at Review/Signatory stops if the records are returned to the Submitter stop) – Keep a history of total time/route log in a History tab | Will provide transparent information on the time the record is at the College/Department, vs. at NU-RES, to better identify roadblocks/process improvements that can be made to the workflow process | Under Review | Medium | |
| eCLAWs | Info request/Consult… Auto reminder/ping if no response in 5 business days | Improves communication and manages the timely processing of the eCLAWs record | Under Review | Medium |
Last Updated on January 30, 2023