How it created a path for communication between researchers and the labs and our safety group. That and how we were able to engage the researchers in their own health and safety the systematic and scalable way.

Any kind of change is difficult, but the BioRAFT team helped us make this change with the least amount of pain I think is possible.

I generally use BioRAFT to look into problems associated with individual laboratories.

BioRAFT is so much better than our previous audit program. We went from a 30% response rate to 100% response rate in a single audit cycle.

The system could be a little more intuitive. It could also be more customizable to the needs of the individual institutions.

Overall BioRAFT has been more trouble than helpful. It only works if the professors and students use it and many have been very frustrated with it so they do not use it until we tell them to. I have many emails from professors complaining about multiple aspects of the software that I would be happy to share.

I like the tracking of lab members and their training. That s about it. But that only works if the professors do their part. Many professors have complained about the inability to temporarily suspend a member who has left the lab and will return at a later date. they do not like the fact that they have to remove the member and reenter them to stop the harassing emails regarding overdue training.

Everything else. 1. I especially do not like the software bugs and the enormous amount of time it takes to use. Being logged out or loosing entered information after saving has been the biggest problem among many. I have multiple emails regarding lost time and data. I have to copy and paste everything I key into BioRAFT into a word document in anticipation that what I entered could be lost. 2. Exporting the chemical inventory where it is readable and printable has been a real disappointment. 3. The Labs vs Spaces disconnect is absolutely ridiculous and does not seem very well thought out.

The software is very easy and intuitive to use.

There are quite a few places where the wording isn't exactly perfect for our needs and we've been told customization was not possible.

Overall usage perspective system is very good. More customizations needed. Each module requires some improvements. Overall system implementation and support is good. Timely responses for minor tickets. Some tickets which involves more technical work either needs to be fixed on a timely manner or users need to be updated on the status.

. Implementation phase is very interactive and supportive. . System is easy to administer but bit slow. . Records keeping is great. . Presentation of dashboards and data at the lab levels are very useful. . User friendly wizards.

. Application is too slow. . More customizations needed for dashboards and Reports. . More customer centric customizations needed. . Inspection reports need to be more visual. Right now they are all text and not that catchy. . Pictures from inspection reports are not easily accessible. . Permissions at each level (Center level, lab levels) need to be improved. . Institution level permissions need to be added. . Support tickets need to be addressed on a timely manner. We are very new in using the system. Some tickets still not addressed. . Bio and RAD modules need to be customized more as per customer requirements. . Some basic features in trainings are still missing. Like single place view of training calendar. . Administrators should have permissions to view the activities log. . Help and support guides need to be added to the system itself. . Need incident management module. . If the system has interactive learning profile (Training module) it will be great.