Program specific audit workflow is unclear for some users

[Leighdiddy]

As a user submitting a program specific audit, I need to know how to answer required questions within the workflow that do not pertain to PSAs, so that I can submit my audit.

We've received feedback via the helpdesk that certain required questions in the current workflow do not apply to program specific audits, so users aren't sure how to answer them.

Tasks

- [x] Write up a short summary of the issue: Please reference specific examples from the helpdesk, you can also include user supplied screen grabs
- [x] Share summary with @jadudm and determine who will send the question to AICPA and monitor for follow-up
- [x] Once response is received, respond to outstanding helpdesk tickets re: single program audits
- [x] Meeting with AICPA to determine how Program specific audit users should reply to existing questions.
- [ ] Create macro and HD article
- [ ] Create helper text or link to HD article.
- [ ] Send to Mary and AICPA team to review for accuracy.
- [ ] Design/Dev handoff/co-work and implementation in FAC app.

[Leighdiddy]

@James-Paul-Mason has assigned himself to outstanding hd tickets mentioned above

[James-Paul-Mason]

@jadudm Here is the program specific summary including pain points and screen captures from users.

[jadudm]

Excellent. @Leighdiddy , we can decide tomorrow live/in Slack who will ship the mail.

[James-Paul-Mason]

Just checked off task #3. In my opinion, the answer to the question of copy changes is YES. I am happy to be a part of that process.

[James-Paul-Mason]

We may want to collect the GH ticket links for users who were experiencing/describing their issues with Program Specific Audits here. Note to self...

[Leighdiddy]

Blocked pending clarification - @lauraherring , would you see this as a case to address with microcopy/helper text on the current site, or wait until the PRA revisions for larger overhaul?

[lauraherring]

Hey @danswick, in looking at the documentation on this issue, I think the best course of action for users is a logic change to what questions are required based on whether or not users select "Program Specific" on the General Info form before they even get to the Audit Info form. I don't think there's really any amount of helper text/copy updates that could clarify this for users because these questions just aren't relevant to them. Even if we tell users to just select one option as required so they can complete the field, we'd then be collecting bad data just for the sake of completing a form. Thoughts?

[jadudm]

1. Are we 100% certain these questions are unnecessary when program-specific is selected?
2. Who can we talk to in order to determine whether a documentation or logic choice is better?
3. Who is responsible for doing that work?

We can discuss this internally and come up with a good course of action.

[danswick]

@James-Paul-Mason to follow up with @jadudm to schedule stakeholder call / get clarity on the above questions.

[James-Paul-Mason]

There is also the PDF page number requirement that is a pain point for users. We even have a macro for it. I suppose it would be appropriate to address that issue in this ticket as well. Here's an example: https://fac-gov.zendesk.com/agent/tickets/4459

[James-Paul-Mason]

Notes/Review https://fac-gov.zendesk.com/agent/tickets/2071 https://fac-gov.zendesk.com/agent/tickets/3554 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-F/subject-group-ECFRfd0932e473d10ba/section-200.507

[James-Paul-Mason]

Email sent to Mary/Brianna proposing the week of September 9th for a call to gather more intel on program specific audits.

[James-Paul-Mason]

Meeting set for Monday, September 9⋅11:00am – 12:00pm with Mary, Brianna, @jadudm & @James-Paul-Mason

[James-Paul-Mason]

Completed meeting with AICPA. Decided that we would create a help desk article to instruct users which selections to make on the screen in question. Also decided to place a link to this article near "Program Specific Audit" option in the user flow. Need to follow up with Mary/Brianna to determine which selections users should make and why.

[James-Paul-Mason]

Blocked pending meeting on Sept. 30th.

[James-Paul-Mason]

Great meeting on September 30th with Tasha, Mary, Brianna, Matt, and Analyn. They provided excellent suggestions in terms of how we can provide better instruction to Program specific audit users both short term (helper text, instructions, question-by-question) as well as things to consider longer term. I have detailed notes documenting all of their suggestions/conclusions. Mary and team agreed to review our help documentation before we publish it to ensure accuracy. Also, as per @jadudm, we are going to take a closer look at the following questions before developing the helper content: