Display non-approved schools in GI Bill CT Data Dashboards

[saintsoup52]

In order to ensure the data integrity of the data dashboards, we should add the following data points ONLY to the GI Bill CT dashboards:

1. Include information for non-approved school
2. Add a column for approval status

In FY 2016 almost 6% of Post-9/11 GI Bill Students attended a facility code that is no longer approved in WEAMS, going back to FY 2013 that number increases to over 15%

Here is an example of why this matters: I was asked a random question from a VSO earlier this week about why the enrollment data on GI Bill CT for the XXXX University system seemed way off. The Comparison Tool was showing GI Bill enrollment at XXXX Universities at only 4,100, but the other data they were seeing said it should be more like 10,000 GI Bill students.

I think I found the issue… XXX (FC XXXX) had 5,198 GI Bill Students in 2016 but now its approval has been withdrawn in WEAMS which means it does not show up on the CT. What happened to XXX? Is it like XXX University and they just moved somewhere and their facility code changed? Either way this is definitely an argument for including non-approved schools in the data dashboards.

[briangryth]

@nagaborra or @maneshkommidi - do you have specific questions that would help clarify this issue.

The overall goal here is to allow non-approved schools to appear in the GIBCT Dashboard. Currently, only approved schools appear in the dashboard.

Specific questions will help me get you the answers you need..

[saintsoup52]

Not that you asked, but I am pretty sure this is where the database is filtering out the non-approved schools.

https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/gibct-data-service/blob/master/spec/factories/weams.rb

As for the new column indicating approval status, it should be labelled something like:

Column Header: "approval_status"

Possible Responses:

• "Approved"
• "Approved for chapter 31 only" [not currently in the screen above]
• "Not approved"

[briangryth]

@nagaborra and @maneshkommidi does the above address your questions? Or do you need additional information? If so, please address let me know what you questions are?

@saintsoup52 - are those the only possible responses? Or is that a question that Stephanie or Shay would need to verify?

[maneshkommidi]

@saintsoup52 while going through the WEAM model I observed the current logic for approved school's is poo-status field value must be aprvd or applicable_law_code value must be 'educational institution is not approved' or 'educational institution is approved for chapter 31 only'.

Can you please let us know, based on what values we need to change the response for approval_status and also could you please confirm us whether we can remove the current existing logic for unapproved schools.

[saintsoup52]

@maneshkommidi So we need to keep the current logic for identifying "approved" programs, we just need to establish additional logic to define whether it is "Approved for chapter 31 only" or "Not approved".

Here is the logic tree: "Approved" [poo-status] = "aprvd" AND [applicable_law_code] does NOT equal 'educational institution is not approved' or 'educational institution is approved for chapter 31 only'

"Approved for chapter 31 only" [poo-status] = "aprvd" AND [applicable_law_code] = 'educational institution is approved for chapter 31 only'

"Not approved" Every remaining facility code

That being said i thought there was one more test to see if a school was approved... specifically they had to have at least one approved program (TRUE) in any of the following columns:

• [institution of higher learning indicator]
• [ojt indicator]
• [correspondence indicator]
• [flight indicator]
• [non-college degree indicator]

Can you check to see if that particular test is still happening?

I know this is a pain, it is just that while the WEAMS file is very useful, our friends at EDU don't do a lot of data scrubbing at the database level so we need to filter out programs that appear approved in one column but actually don't have any approved programs for a student veteran to attend.

Hope this helps.

[saintsoup52]

@briangryth As to you question... these options are something EDU should confirm but I imagine they don't want to show to much more data than this (e.g., whether is a school is suspended versus withdrawn).

[maneshkommidi]

@saintsoup52 Thanks for clarification, yes the logic is in place. As per my understanding under this ticket we need to have new column approval_status and need to have the respective value for every entry in Weam.csv and Institution.csv and also send the approval_status data to UI.

[saintsoup52]

@maneshkommidi Thank you.

To be clear now every row with a facility code that appears in the WEAMS.csv file will now also appear in the Institutions.csv file, along with an approval status code.

As for the non-approved schools, they should NOT appear on the GI Bill Comparison Tool itself. Where and when in the process you separate the two lists (All vs approved) is up to you.

Hope that helps.

[saneshark]

It looks like only the migrations have been merged here, so work still remains on this ticket. Can someone confirm that this is not part of the Colmery Act changes?

[saintsoup52]

This change was actually required by a statute that passed before the Colmery Act that had been backlogged until now. Needless to say we are WAY behind in delivering this feature.

[zurbergram]

This has been deployed to production with https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/gibct-data-service/releases/tag/gi-bill-data-service%2Fv0.0.86

This was done in support of business requirement: https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/gi-bill-comparison-tool/issues/490

Related issues https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/vets.gov-team/issues/18880 https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/vets.gov-team/issues/18882 https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs/vets.gov-team/issues/18920