Add PRA guidance to the 18F UX Guide

[bpdesigns]

A Description of work

Tactical information about how to get PRA approval and the fast track process is not mentioned in the ux guide. PRA is mentioned several times in the guide but it could be more helpful.

references for review

• https://pra.digital.gov/
• slide 35-36 of this slide deck
• 2022 PRA review doc
• notes and recording from this research guild session

Point of contact on this issue

You can reach out to @bpdesigns

Billable?

• [ ] Yes
• [x] No If yes, tock code:

Skills needed

• [x] Any human
• [ ] Design
• [ ] Content
• [ ] Engineering
• [ ] Acquisition
• [ ] Product
• [ ] Other

Timeline Does this need to happen in the next two weeks?

• [ ] Yes
• [x] No

How much time do you anticipate this work taking?

• under two weeks

Tasks

• [x] review references (above)
• [x] create a doc with updated content
• [x] share doc with @bpdesigns and the #g-research slack channel for review
• [ ] implement approved changes.

Acceptance criteria

• [ ] Updated PRA guidance is added to the Plan and Legal pages of the UX Guide.

[melchoyce]

I believe @amandacostello has a PRA presentation as well we might be able to borrow from?

[amandacostello]

I absolutely do! My PRA preso, complete with fluffy cows.

[cmajel]

@amandacostello is also a good person to chat with about the history of PRA guidance at OIRA/TTS.

[egamble23]

Hi @bpdesigns , I've been working on this issue. @amandacostello has kindly share some links to Methods that also mention PRA: https://methods.18f.gov/fundamentals/recruiting/ https://methods.18f.gov/discover/contextual-inquiry/

For the scope of this issue, should I be considering those above and any other pages in other spaces, as well as the UX guide? Just wish to understand better as I'm getting familiar with the content. Thanks!

[bpdesigns]

@egamble23 the scope of this issue is updating content in the ux guide. I think once this issue is complete it would make sense to create a new TLC ticket link to the new ux guide content from the methods site links you shared above. I'm happy to have a call to talk though anything else that would be helpful to clarify.

[egamble23]

Many thanks, @bpdesigns ! Appreciate the clarifications on the scope. I'll follow up.

[egamble23]

I don't have access to edit the ticket to mark progress on this ticket so am updating this comment thread with a checklist for tracking progress made:

• [x] Desk research. Sourced references include Amanda Costello, Megan Moser, Becky Slogeris, PRA website.
• [x] Review of current relevant content
• [x] Scope clarified
• [x] Draft outline check-in – check with ticket author on direction of approaches
• [x] Proposals to Ben on possible cross links
• [x] Content reviews by Amanda Costello - shared (Megan Moser - shared May 9)
• [x] GSA PRA review (shared with Nicole Bynum)
• [x] Refinements based on feedback
• [x] Coordination with Matt Dobson for awareness re: PRA
• [x] Review by ticket author (Ben) and research guild
• [x] Final refinements
• [x] Send final version to main stakeholders for awareness
• [x] Set up new subsection in GitHub as a pull request
• [x] Add pull request with Ben Peterson as reviewer
• [x] Merge PR to UX Guide
• [x] Add pull requests for agreed upon cross-links on other pages
• [x] Post link in research guild Slack channel to Legal page with new subsection to close loop

[MelissaBraxton]

@egamble23 - FYI: I added you to the GitHub Team so you now can edit issues like this (the checklist in the comment is fine though--no need to do anything else to track your progress here!). Sorry you didn't get access sooner!

[egamble23]

Thanks so much, @MelissaBraxton ! Much appreciated! Sounds good.

[MelissaBraxton]

@egamble23 - Checking in on this. Anything I can do to expedite the review here and wrap this up?

[egamble23]

Thanks, @MelissaBraxton , for the check in! There are several TTS groups looking at PRA in different ways, so am coordinating and aiming to align where fits for the scope of this ticket.

Yesterday I met with Ben Peterson, Matt Dobson, and Robert Jolly. I've updated the draft subsection approach based on that discussion and re-shared it with them.

Tomorrow I plan on sharing the draft with Elisa Chen, Kate Fisher, and the Research Guild for a look. I'll also be updating Amanda Costello on some adjustments from an earlier draft I shared with her. Then I'll refine/adjust, as needed. Then it'll go for final review as a pull request I believe.

Hope that works! I expect I'll have more information in a few days.

[egamble23]

Hi @bpdesigns , as you saw on Slack, on May 10 I shared the draft subsection text in the g-research Slack Channel.

I'm going to clean it up and share again as a clean Google doc with Nicole Bynum, Robert Jolly, Matt Dobson, and Amanda Costello, as an fyi as to the cleaned up version for any final comments.

I can then start working on a pull request in GitHub. In addition to you as the issue author, who would be good to add on as a reviewer(s)? Happy to add whoever would be good as final reviewer.

Many thanks for your guidance! Erin

[bpdesigns]

Thanks @egamble23 the list of folks already reviewing is great. No need for another additional reviewer.

[bpdesigns]

Thanks @egamble23! Looks great :)