jac-uk / admin

The Vue SPA for managing applications and applicants
https://admin.judicialappointments.digital
MIT License
4 stars 2 forks source link

Redesigned Diversity Checkpoints report #2219

Open NormaJAC opened 1 year ago

NormaJAC commented 1 year ago

Background

We are looking to automate the calculation of the difference in % points between checkpoints of an exercise and enable the information to be downloadable in the format used in SCC papers and AA reports and by EFT for quality assurance purposes.

Note: this is an old ticket that was parked for some time whilst clarity was gained on the requirements. There are a couple of draft PRs attached that suggest Ryan has done some foundational work here; however, the requirements may have changed enough that it is easier to start afresh. I have removed the original estimate of 10 to allow re-estimation. You'll need to remove yourselves personally from the planning poker and then re-add yourselves.

User Story

As Diversity & Engagement, I would like the % change in the diversity of candidates at each checkpoint to be calculated so that I can view on screen and download a report in the appropriate format.

Feature(s) Description

Ticket Champion

Nick Wood

NormaJAC commented 1 year ago

Created a Diversity checkpoint report draft, sent it to Nick Woods for his input, he replied, that he will respond within a week because he has passed it on to Rachael and Sean for their input.

warrensearle commented 11 months ago

Please add your planning poker estimate with Zenhub @drieJAC

NormaJAC commented 11 months ago

Some comments to be considered: Some exercises have multiple shortlisting stages. (shortlisting being broken into two steps, a QT and Scenario Test).

NormaJAC commented 11 months ago

Comments from Rachael: For exercises where there are two shortlisting methods, we would have “post-application”, “post-QT”, “post-ST”, “post-selection day”.

NormaJAC commented 9 months ago

This 2nd requirement of this ticket was blocked at the sprint planning meeting on 19/12/2023, requires further information?

NormaJAC commented 9 months ago

Charlotte's email gave some specifics: says: the diversity report figures SETs sent around needed redoing as they had only selected those who met the VR even though there were more selectable candidates post SD. e.g. the VR was 10 so they only selected the top 10 for the report even though (say for example) they had 15 selectable candidates. So the post SD diversity checkpoint should have been for the 15 selectable candidates and then those who were eventually recommended to make the 10 would then form the next checkpoint.

nickaddy commented 9 months ago

This can be delayed until April.

nickaddy commented 8 months ago

@NormaJAC Can you please reach out to the secretariat to confirm that this is the best format for all instances of its usage, e.g. SCC paper, JO, other?

NormaJAC commented 6 months ago

@nickaddy this was dealt with after diversity checkpoints meeting with the Rachael and Nick W on 08/03/2024