Requesting a one off report of "All Purchase Requests" with additional review fields

[atdservicebot]

What application are you using?

Finance & Purchasing Portal

Describe the problem.

Hello! If possible, I would like a special report (one time/one-off request). This ideally would be modeled after the existing "all purchase requests" export file with additional fields added.

The additional fields I'm looking for are from the "Reviews" section of each PR. Those fields are:

• Reviewer (1):
• Decision Date:
• Reviewer (2):
• Decision Date:
• Reviewer (3):
• Decision Date:
• Budget Reviewer:
• Decision Date:

How soon do you need this?

Flexible — An extended timeline is OK

Is there anything else we should know?

Ideally within two weeks - this is for my own analysis around volume change since the merger and this will help me plan staffing needs/duties.

Requested By Jenny K.

Attachment (667.87kb)

Request ID: DTS24-115930

[stephaniemoorer]

Fields to add for one-off report. From "Reviews" section

• [ ] Reviewer 1
• [ ] Reviewer 1 Decision Date
• [ ] Reviewer 2
• [ ] Reviewer 1 Decision Date
• [ ] Reviewer 3
• [ ] Reviewer 1 Decision Date
• [ ] Budget Reviewer Decision
• [ ] Decision Date

On the mock up attachment Decision and Decision Date is included for Budget Reviewer is this correct?

[stephaniemoorer]

Confirmed with Jenny: I would ideally like the decision for budget review only (because if the PR has made it to budget review, its safe to assume the previous approvers have approved.

[dianamartin]

7/3/24

Stephanie and I synced on this to see what this request needed.

• [x] Created a new page report-2024-july-3-jk/

• [x] Exported CSV The export does give you the information, but the format needs a little help. Overall, it is what the user wanted.

[stephaniemoorer]

@dianamartin Jenny is requesting updates to the report:

• [ ] the Reviewer data be displayed in different columns like the mock up attachment above

• [x] No Approval Level

[dianamartin]

7/8/24

@stephaniemoorer I tried to get it the way that Jenny was requesting, but the data isn't tracked that way so the formatting wouldn't work. I attempted to do something different.

• [x] Added table for Reviews, put in the same field order as the original table, but the reviewers are on their own line v. condensed in a view.
• If this deliverable isn't going to work, perhaps we can see if others have better ideas at Sprint Planning: Apps

[stephaniemoorer]

@dianamartin I like the Review table, I'll have her take a look and see if this format provides what she needs for volume analysis. Thanks

[stephaniemoorer]

@dianamartin Jenny is OOO for several days so we won't have any feedback for a few days.

[stephaniemoorer]

@dianamartin confirmed with Jenny she got wanted she needed from the report. Also confirmed she does not have a need to continuously run the report so it can be removed.

Per Jenny via Teams: [12:56 PM] K, Jenny I don't think so. I really just wanted it for a one-time analysis that I don't plan on doing again.

[12:57 PM] K, Jenny But thank you ~ it helped me gauge increase in volume since the merge and its about where I thought it would be (big increase).

[dianamartin]

7/16/24

@stephaniemoorer So are we ready to deprecate the report?

[stephaniemoorer]

@dianamartin Yes

[dianamartin]

7/16/24

• [x] Deprecated the report page (Report 2024 JULY 3 - JK'

Fields (in case need to recreate)

• Request ID - ID
• Request Status - Request Status
• Subject - Subject
• Total Cost (Equation) - Total Cost
• Accounts>Requester - Requester
• Accounts>Assigned To - Reviewer/Approver
• Division (txtFormula) - Division
• Submitted Date
• Modified Date
• reviews>Reviewer - Reviewer
• reviews>Decision - Decision
• reviews>Decision Date - Decision Date