Keep the database together or split into two?

Hello! I am looking for some advice. The function of my database is changing slightly and I need the setup of the system to reflect the changes. My organization currently uses Ragic to accept applications for people who want to serve as panelists for our org. We use one database to receive panelist applications (awaiting approval), and another database to store profiles of those who were approved by one of our org’s two committees.

My issue is that now there needs to be a distinction between which committee (A, B, or both) approves each panelist. I could just add a Free Text note on the bottom of each approved profile saying which committee they were approved by. However, these are the issues that I see with this approach:

  1. That’s a lot of note adding if you have a lot of profiles to convert.
  2. The two committees do not meet on the same schedule. So if an applicant has been approved by committee A, but still needs to be reviewed by committee B, they are kind of in limbo between the Applicant database and the Panelist database… and I don’t really have a way to clearly note that in the system. Currently, once a panelist is approved we convert them from the Applicant database to the Panelist database and then delete the original profile in the Applicant database.

Maybe I could add a status check box (like awaiting A approval, awaiting B approval, approved by A, approved by B). Is there a way I could add that so I could see it internally but it didn’t show up on the public application?

Overall, is it still possible for the A and B routes to share an application and database OR would it be best for them to be split apart? The only issue with splitting them apart is that, if the applicants are interested in being approved for both routes (A and B), they will have to fill out nearly identical applications twice - which seems like it might put some applicants off.

Any thoughts are appreciated!


Hi Alex,

You may consider using our linking tool Multiple versions to create a version for external usage (for panelists to fill up the application), and another version for internal usage (for approval and internal notes.) Multiple versions share the data source.

On the internal version of the sheet, yes, you can have a status field(s) to identify each entries are approved by which group or still awaiting approval, or reviewed by which group.

Also, you can apply fixed filter if necessary, if you would also like to create a version for group A, and the other version for group B.

Please let us know if this solution helps!


Thanks, Amy! I read the Multiple Versions page, and it sounds like a possible route. My main concern is that there are going to be three sheets with very similar information, and that might confusing to other users (my fellow staff members). Right now there we have 2 database sheets: one for panelist applications (unprocessed) and another for approved applications (now profiles). If I added another sheet, we would have sheets for: 1) applications - unprocessed, 2) applications - unprocessed with notes, and 3) applications - approved.

Also - right now, the panelist applications database sheet feeds into the approved application database with the click of a “Convert” button. It would be better if the new sheet, “applications - unprocessed with notes,” was the one that fed right into the “applications - approved” sheet. Would you be able to give me some advice about how to make that switch?

Another thing that I wanted to confirm was when I delete a profile in one of the linked Multiple version sheets, it will also be deleted in the other one. I think that is what I read in the description, but wanted to double check.

Finally, I feel like I didn’t completed grasp what a Fixed Filter does from the description. From what I gleaned, it is a way to keep your data organized in a certain way, so it looks the same every time you opened up the sheet. Is that the gist of it or am I missing something? Were you saying that the fixed filter would be helpful, because it would automatically group the applications by which committee(s) each needed to be reviewed by?

I’ve written a lot of clarification questions here, so apologies - I’m not super database savvy and I’m a little nervous about making changes to the system.

Thanks again for your help!

Best regards,

Hi Alex,

  1. If you’re worried about the users may get confused when you have multiple versions, then you may consider configure proper access right so that users can only see the sheet relevant to them.

  2. Currently, there is no way to switch the action button to different sheet. You’ll need to delete the original one and manually re-build it in the “applications - unprocessed with notes” sheet.

  3. Yes. Once you delete the entry in one of the version, it will be deleted in the rest of versions.

  4. Fixed filter can be used when you want to let specific groups to see specific entries.
    From your description, I would suggest creating a “Approval Group” field with selection field type, with section “A”, “B”, and “Both”. Then, when a application created, you can manually input which group should valid the application in the “Approval Group” field.
    Let’s say you eventually have 2 versions.
    For version 1, you can configure the fixed filter such as when “A” or “Both” in “Approval Group” field. Then, when users access to this version, they can only see entries that need to be approved by A group. (In the meanwhile, you can remove the access right of B group to this sheet as mentioned in point 1.)
    For version 2, you can configure the fixed filter such as when “B” or “Both” in “Approval Group” field. Then, when users access to this version, they can only see entries that need to be approved by B group. (In the meanwhile, you can remove the access right of A group to this sheet as mentioned in point 1.)

Thanks, Angie!

I’ve moved forward with Amy’s earlier suggestion to create multiple versions of my panelist application sheet. The new one is for staff to make notes in, track the application’s status, etc.

Question 1: I updated the some options in a Multiple Select category on the original (multi version) panelist application sheet. Then, I selected a new option (from the multiple select category) on one of the entries. Instead of just updating the entry, the system created an entirely new entry (reflecting the change) on both multiple version sheets. It also kept the original version(s) of the entry with the old selection. Did I do something wrong? Might you know how to resolve this?

Question 2: Before I go through the process of removing the action button from the old panelist application sheet version (no notes) and creating a new action button on the new panelist application sheet version (with notes) to feed into the approved panelist sheet, I wanted to make sure - will deleting the action that feeds the profiles from the old application sheet into the approved data affect the approved data sheet in any way (data, formatting, etc.)? The only difference between the old and new application sheets is that the new sheet has additional data fields. Will those new data fields be added to the existing entries / overall formatting in the approved panelist sheet too? That would be preferable. If the formatting doesn’t transfer - if I create it in the approved data sheet, will it populate automatically with converted entries moving forward?

Question 3: Also, is there an option to delete the entry from the original sheet at the same time you convert it?

Previously, I was thinking that I would take Amy’s second suggestion to create duplicate sheets of the approved panelist sheet using different fixed filters – one for those profiles that have been approved by our Grants committee and the other for profiles that have been approved by our Civic Art Committee. But now, I think I’m just going to save the filtered views to be accessible on the left side of the sheet listing. As long as staff knows where to look, that will be just fine.

I think we’re on our way to having the flow of information and updates between the sheets move smoothly.

Thank you again for your assistance!


I was also wondering if there was a way to maintain a link between select information on the approved panelist sheet and the sheet that it’s converted from - i.e. the status of the application (multiple select) while it exists on the both the approved and pending sheets if it is has been approved by one committee but not reviewed but the other committee yet. The only thing would be that we would want that information to remain on the entry in the approved panelist sheet once the corresponding entry on the pending sheet had been fully processed and therefore deleted from the pending sheet. If that doesn’t makes, sense please let me know and I will try to clarify. Thank you again.


Hi Alex,

Regarding question above, would you mind to send us a support ticket so that we could check the sheet design for you? You may click on the “Need Help?” at the upper right corner of your database and click on support ticket and then fill the form.

Thank you. :slight_smile:

Hi guys,

I don’t wanna get banned from using our new Ragic Forum just yet, lol, but thought you may appreciate this…

If you have a unique identifier, usually one of those autogenerated numbers, found on any two sheets (aka a “linked field” as referred to from with the Ragic System), then you can use the “LINK & LOAD” function found in Ragic tools to auto-populate any data from one sheet to another! Remember you can always add linked fields.

Hope that helps!

Thanks, Angie. I was going to submit a ticket for my last question. However, after playing around in the two sheets that I was having an issue with, it seems to me that issue has been resolved.

Do you have any thoughts on Questions 1 and 2?

With thanks,

Thank you!

Hi Alex,

As indicated in the previous reply, our support will need to look at your current form design in order to reply your question 1.

For the question 2, deleting action button won’t affect on existing data. In case that you added fields in approved sheet with notes and want those fields to display in approved sheet without notes, you may refer to this article.

For the question 3, currently there is no way to delete a record after converting. You’ll need to manually delete it. A workaround is that you can create a field to record if the entries have been converted. Then, you can configure the field into fixed filter so that users will only see unconverted entries.