Skip to content

Clarity Human Services

Thanks for taking the time to suggest improvements to Clarity Human Services! 

If you don't see a category for your idea or don't know what category to choose, you can leave the category blank. We'll sort it out!

View our full feature request policy here.

Clarity Human Services

Categories

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

584 results found

  1. Some families have children named after a parent, leading to multiple persons with the same first and last name in the household. It would be much easier to navigate to the correct household member if there were their suffixes (Jr., Sr., etc.) listed by the name so you knew which one you were clicking. It would also help to ensure that the right person is assigned with the right member type. Right now, the display can be confusing and lead to errors being made.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. Allowing providers to assign units at the acceptance of referrals will minimize the administrative burden of connecting an enrollment to the specific unit after enrollment completion. This is particularly helpful in emergency shelters.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Inventory  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. Users should have the ability to create a custom notification, for example to alert them when an assessment is due or coming due. This could be similar to the notification for Annual Assessments, except able to be used with any assessment, even custom assessments

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. Customers have expressed the desire to have data fields entered in status/annual/exit screens to cascade into new enrollments. We know that enrollments can cascade into other enrollments, and that there are data fields entered at enrollment that are not collected in the status/annual/exit screens. However, the data would be most useful and accurate if cascading considered most recent data fields from the enrollment AND status/annual/exit screen. The goal would be to have the most recent fields from the enrollment and status/annual/exit screens cascade to subsequent enrollments.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. It would be helpful for there to be an option and/or button on the log in screen to show the password so that users can know if they mistype something.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. Clarity is not currently meeting our CoC’s need to easily understand what’s due with Assessments and add as needed. There are several points of feedback we have about the Assessments tab within a Program Enrollment, to make it clearer for our end users. This is made more important by the Current Living Situation assessment now being required.

    Current issues for our end users are:

    · Current heading is “Status Assessments” which to them = Status Update Assessment

    · “Assessment Due” is unclear- what kind of Assessment is due? Annual, Status Update, Current Living Situation? No way to click through. If…

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. Update the 'Exit' to say 'Program Exit' to make it more clear. Right now it looks like it was an after thought and it is just to xxit the file.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. Whenever the HUD data standards are updated, we find that we have to replicate Bitfocus's constraints for our custom screens. Instead, adding the option to apply the already made constraint to the screen would be useful...either at the field level (Use current constraint for any screen when field is added) option or screen level (copy constraint to screen when field is added) option...

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. It would be help to have a recurring schedule options of the reports within the schedule option now. Currently, an user is able to schedule reports for each day they want the report initiated. It would be extremely useful to have an option to run reports daily, weekly, monthly, etc..

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Services  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. Related to the existing idea advocating for 4.20 Coordinated Entry Events to be Service based Events instead of Inferred Events, (https://ideas.bitfocus.com/forums/930328-clarity-human-services/suggestions/43917810-provide-access-to-data-element-4-20-response-categ), there is an additional need related to how the 'Prioritization Status' associated with 4.19 Coordinated Entry Assessments is captured within Clarity.

    Currently, the only way to capture that a client has been 'Placed on prioritization list' (4.19_7.1) is if the Coordinated Entry Assessment associated with the client is placed on a Community Queue. For communities that choose to take advantage of the CQ functionality offered by Clarity, this works well, but for communities who choose not to…

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. The display constraint for veteran status is built so the question will only display if age = 18 or older. This means the question does not appear for adults that refuse to give a date of birth. We would like a way to populate the veteran question for clients who refuse to give DOB. I created my own workaround for this issue that involved creating a button that hides the veteran status question if the end user indicates "client is a minor" instead of basing the display constraint on the calculated age, but perhaps a better method could be devised.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Agencies and communities are required to provide redacted client records when monitored by HUD. Currently, agency staff print the reports, cross through client PII, scan reports, and submit them to HUD. Often the redaction is insufficient. It would be very awesome if users could choose to pull client-level reports excluding PII to serve this purpose.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. It would be helpful to have a report that can be found in the Client Reports section that returns full details on Assessments. It seems like that should already exist based on what reports are available for clients but somehow it doesn't. Something that allows you to select the Assessment(s) you want included and the date range (like the GNRL-210 Assessment Details Report) but for one specific client that can be easily printed.

    10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. Currently, communities can add certain custom fields to Program Availability to track details on program openings, however, the ability to customize the availability form is limited (e.g. no dynamic screen options, limited field types, inability to edit default fields). In its current state, communities may choose to use 3rd party form solutions outside of Clarity to track program openings or use workarounds to structure the availability form to capture local information (e.g. using a field as a label).

    The Availability Form could be improved by providing screen functionality, offering all field types, and allowing for the editing of default fields…

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Referrals  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. According to the Program Setup: Eligibility page it's noted "When establishing eligibility criteria based on Poverty Guidelines, household size is calculated based on the client's "global" household (the client-level household) and is NOT based on the number of members in a group enrollment." It would be extremely helpful if there was an option to allow household size to be determined based on the enrolled household members using the eligibility function and not at the global level. Is this an option BF is looking to add to Clarity HS in the future?

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Referrals  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Eric Jahn I creating this request per Kerri-Lynne's request. See details
    in JIRA : https://clarityhs.atlassian.net/browse/DM-1992

    Do we have a plan to add the preferred "pronouns" data fields to XML schema for DIT purposes?

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. It would be beneficial to be able to customize eligibility criteria within the CQ to fully integrate a complex prioritization matrix as well as program-specific criteria. Dynamic chronic homeless status is critical to sort by within the CQ.

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  CE Events  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. Currently, the alert icon is not visible in the attendance module when the public alert is set to private. This is a request that this icon be visible to the agency that created the public alert in the attendance module for that agency.

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. Currently, the family_members live marker only counts households where there are 2 or more people. If there is a single person, the live marker counts zero. We would like the live marker to count 1 in that case. This is important because household size is used for CE assessment scoring and matching. Using the live marker would be the easiest way to maintain.

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. Make tooltips text associated with data fields available on mobile devices. Currently, the tooltip text is only accessible on desktop devices.

    9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Outreach  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?