Where did my ID credits go?

I second this one, too, and also noticed that aspect since my previous postings.

Deborah and Emily - There's definitely a glitch here. Did you put this concern in as Feedback? If not, please do. USGBC IT needs to hear from us.

I tested a v06 ID form for a LEED-CI project for all three ID scenarios (Innovation in Design, Exemplary Performance, and Pilot Credit).
1. For Innovation in Design: When I typed in “Credit Name Test” in the "Credit name as it should appear on scorecard" field and saved the form, this name appears on the Credits tab.
2. For Exemplary Performance: Here's the glitch and the workaround. When I typed a name into the "Credit selected for exemplary performance" field and saved the form (even after deleting the data in the Innovation in Design field above) LEED Online still displays the previous "Credit Name Test" on the Credits tab. (Definite glitch that it remembers this entry even after it is deleted from the form.) So, as a workaround for now, it appears you can name your Exemplary Performance credits by typing a name into the Innovation in Design option as noted above. That name will appear in the Credits tab even if you have selected Exemplary Performance option.
3. For Pilot Credits: Similar to Innovation in Design, when I typed “Pilot Credit Test” in the “Pilot credit name as it should appear on scorecard” field and saved the form (after deleting all other test data previously entered on the form), this name appears in the Credits tab.

Hope this helps for now. I put in a Feedback ticket referencing this forum.

I am glad this worked for you. As I noted today below under the original post "lots and lots of comments...!),USGBC will be publishing an article on the changes with LEED Online related to the v06 forms.

But rest assured that the feedback we provide is essential and the ticket associated with this ID glitch has been updated and is in their queue.

Deborah - One of my contacts at USGBC told me that the Technology Department is going to address this glitch. They hope to get it fixed this week.

A sort of update on this...I have a project that was registered after all this initial hub-bub, so it automatically has all of the new versions of the forms. I have an EP point for water use reduction that I want to claim and label so that it shows up on the credits page. There is no option to allocate the point under the WE prereq or credit, nor does the ID form give me an option for that credit in the pull-down. It does allow me to type in the name of the credit, but that name does not show up on the Credits page.
I know they removed the functionality of connecting the templates (still a huge inconvenience for many many reasons, but I digress), so have we concluded that there is no way to get the Credits page to show an actual specific label for each of the ID credits?

Hi Emily - Despite assurances I received last May and again in December, the last I checked this (2/9/17) it still had not been fixed; however, the workaround that I outlined on April 27, 2016 above (typing in the name in the Innovation in Design field) still works.

I plan to follow up on this as part of my review of the April 2017 Quarterly Addenda. I'll let you know what I hear.

Emily - I got word last week that USGBC Technology is fast-tracking this fix. Apparently there was a misunderstanding of what the issue was. Stay tuned for an update.

FYI: USGBC is schedule to release the April Quarterly Update for Addenda tomorrow. My summary should be posted by the end of next week here - http://www.leeduser.com/strategy/essential-leed-interpretations-addenda-....

Yippee!

Deborah and Emily - I got word today that the Technology team had addressed the concerns raised with naming issues for Innovation credits. I ran a test using a LEED ID+C: CI v2009 project with v06 forms. The correct credit name appeared in the scorecard (Credits tab) in all three scenarios: Innovation in Design, Exemplary Performance, and Pilot Credit.

If your experience differs please let me know. Otherwise, the comments above about using the workaround have been superseded by this fix.