Here's a question most CSR vendors don't want you to ask. Who has to run this platform once we buy it?
For a lot of enterprise CSR software, the honest answer is IT.
CyberGrants was built for that world. So, to a degree, was Benevity. They assume a technical team to configure the platform, own the integrations, and handle changes. If your IT group isn't resourced for that, the platform stalls before it starts.
You shouldn't need an IT department to run an employee giving program. Here's what HR-owned software looks like instead.
Why So Many Platforms Need IT
The older CSR platforms were designed for large enterprises with grants teams and technical staff.
That shaped the product. Complex configuration. Custom integrations that need a developer. Admin changes that require a support ticket and a wait. Reports that someone has to build.
None of that is a problem if you have a systems integrator on call. Most companies don't. So the platform that was sold to HR ends up living with IT, and IT already has a backlog.
The result is a program that moves at the speed of a ticket queue. That's a big part of the hidden admin burden legacy platforms create.
What HR-Owned Software Actually Looks Like
HR-owned means your team can run the program without opening a ticket for every change. Four things make that real.
Setup measured in days, not weeks. Single sign-on and account setup should be quick and standard, not a custom project.
Integrations that don't need a developer. Your HRIS connection should work without custom code. When your headcount changes, the platform keeps up on its own.
A dashboard HR can actually manage. Adding a campaign, launching an event, or pulling a report should be something you do yourself in minutes.
A partner who handles the rest. The work that would otherwise land on IT sits with a Social Impact Manager instead. Not your systems team. Your program partner.
What It Looks Like in Practice
This isn't theory. HR teams run their full programs this way today.
Progress Software's HR team runs its program without leaning on IT, and logged more volunteer hours in six months than in the prior three years combined. Read the Progress story.
Edelman Financial Engines switched platforms and reached 50%+ participation in under three months, with HR owning the program and a SIM running it. Here's how they did it.
In both cases, IT wasn't the bottleneck. It barely had to be involved.
If You're Leaving CyberGrants
CyberGrants customers are in a specific spot right now. The platform has been absorbed into Bonterra, and the transition has left a lot of teams disoriented.
If you owned CyberGrants through IT because you had to, this is the moment to ask a better question. Not "how do we reconfigure this," but "why does our giving platform need IT at all?"
The answer is that it doesn't. Not on software built for HR.
How to Evaluate for This
When you talk to vendors, ask three direct questions. They're part of the fuller evaluation checklist.
How long does setup take, and who has to do it?
Do your integrations require our IT team or a developer?
Once we're live, what can HR change without a support ticket?
The answers sort HR-owned platforms from IT-dependent ones fast.
If you want to see exactly what our IT requirements are, and how little your technical team would need to do, book a demo. We'll walk through setup for your systems.
.png)