Staging Review: Dependency Claims (Form 21-686c/674 - eBenefits)

[jason-gcio]

Steps to complete Staging Review:

• [x] [UPDATE] The application should be code complete for a more accurate review
• [x] Product Manager: create this issue and fill in feature name in the title and other bolded information appropriately
• [x] Link to this issue once created in #vfs-platform-support in Slack; tag @ Megan Kelley @ AndreaHewitt
• [x] Andrea and Megan to schedule meeting with VSP reviewers and eBenefits attendees (as listed below)
• [x] At least 2 days before scheduled meeting, you must complete list of artifacts below
• [x] VSP <> eBenefits review meeting completed
• [x] Practice area reviewers create sub-issues attached to this one with feedback for your team on Dependency Claims
• [ ] eBenefits completes attached feedback tickets based on definition of done included in each practice area feedback ticket (may differ for each practice area, please refer to attached tickets for further instruction)
• [ ] All requesting team attendees complete brief VSP Collaboration Cycle Feedback survey

Artifacts - please provide the following artifacts at least 2 days before scheduled review meeting

• ✔ Link to product outline
• ✔ Link to release plan with the "Planning" sections completed (in each section: Phase I, Phase II, Go Live)
• ✔ Access information for the tool or feature in staging (usual staging password):

User (Mark): vets.gov.user+228@gmail.com (has zero on award, 2 not) User (Eric): vets.gov.user+10@gmail.com (has zero on award, 3 not) User (Jeanette): vets.gov.user+123@gmail.com (has zero on award, 1 not) User (Pauline): vets.gov.user+38@gmail.com (has zero on award, 11 not) User (Sam): vets.gov.user+45@gmail.com (has zero on award, 2 not) User (Claude): vets.gov.user+232@gmail.com (has zero on award, 1 not) User (Terrence): vets.gov.user+102@gmail.com (has zero on award, zero not) User (Randall): vets.gov.user+99@gmail.com (has 2 on award, 1 not) User (Jesse): vets.gov.user+54@gmail.com (has zero on award, 1 not) User (Jerry): vets.gov.user+271@gmail.com (has 2 on award, 4 not)

• ✔ Link to your product test cases/test plan in TestRail with test execution logs (Ready after week of June 1)
• ✔ Link to your Coverage for References and Summary (Defects) reports in TestRail
• ✔ Link to your accessibility test cases:
  • Markdown Github accessibility test cases template
• ✔List of known issues (with links to tickets when applicable)
  • 686 Accessibility Issues #9235
  • Address Issues Resulting From E2E Review #9289

Meeting attendees from eBenefits

• Product Manager (required): Jason Wolf - jwolf@governmentcio.com
• DEPO Product Lead (required): Steve Kovacs - steven.kovacs@va.gov
• Entire VFS team (recommended):
  James Adams - jadams@governmentcio.com Jesse Cohn - jesse.cohn@adhocteam.us Micah Chiang - micah@adhocteam.us Kathleen Crawford - kcrawford@governmentcio.com Derek Dyer - ddyer@governmentcio.com

Scheduling

• Please reference the VSP Collaboration Meetings Calendar (times shown are ET)
• Note an available time slot within a recurring "[CALENDAR BLOCK] Review Group Office Hours" slot that works for your team and is at least 2 business days from now
• Write that preferred time slot here (on this ticket), and VSP will send you a meeting invite: Friday, 2 pm ET
• If no available time slots work for your team, write your availability and requirements here and Megan/Andrea will reach out as needed

Additional Notes

During this collaboration point, you will receive feedback from the following practice areas: design, accessibility, content, QA, and optional: product, analytics, engineering, information architecture

[mnorthuis]

@jason-gcio Is this review for the 686 form AND the view dependents tool or just the 686 form? Can you drop a link to the form I'm not seeing it where anticipated: https://staging.va.gov/view-change-dependents/add-remove-form-21-686c

[jason-gcio]

We have been using https://staging.va.gov/view-change-dependents/add-remove-form-686c/ Should we update that with the "21"?

[mnorthuis]

Oh right, I just had that convo with Jim! Yes, I'll put the URL change in my feedback.

[pjhill]

@jason-gcio - The Summary (Defects) link appears to be the default link from the template. Do you have a more updated link? In the meantime, I will have a look in TestRail to see if I can discover the report.

Nevermind! It looks like the correct link was on the italicized and bold text below.

✔ Link to your Coverage for References and Summary (Defects) reports in TestRail

I'm good now!

[pjhill]

QA Feedback Summary --

1. Looks like a great suite of test cases.

2. 100% reference coverage for test cases - excellent!

3. The one discovered defect is still open and appears to be fairly minor. Are you comfortable releasing to production with the copy/styling differences?