Follow up SMS Check-Ins with "Where Are You?"

[CeciliaHinga]

From tenfour-archive created by caharding: ushahidi/tenfour-archive#1369

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. User wants to be able to add location as part of a check-in and didn't realize it was automatic in a recent user test. But also found that SMS users weren't asked for location. (notes)

Describe the solution you'd like

• [ ] User would like to choose if location should be included on the first page of authoring a check-in, this option should be opt-out
• [ ] If a user says no location, then location field is turned off in the Email and App response
• [ ] If location is on, email and App should work as is. SMS Check-Ins should go out as normal, but when someone replies, there should be a follow-up question sent "where are you?" instead of "message received." "Message received" should be sent AFTER a location is provided.

Describe alternatives you've considered The first part of the logic of getting rid of location may add too much complexity to the app. We could just add the follow-up location message to SMS

[CeciliaHinga]

@mackers and @erioldoesdesign can you take a look at this scope and provide a very quick estimate on difficulty from eng and design perspective. I'll use that to set next priority. Thanks.

[CeciliaHinga]

Location is stored in two ways:

• location_text is the raw user-entered text of a location, e.g. "near the town hall"
• location_geo is the latitude and longitude of that location. We must try to geocode the location response, but in some cases, this cannot be done automatically, e.g. "near the town hall" can never be geocoded automatically.

So, for check-ins, we always show the location_text if we have it, but we have to concede that we might not always have the location_geo, so will not be able to accurately plot responses on a map.

It should be noted that automatic geocoding may return false results. If someone says they're in "Dublin", the geocoding will assume they are in Dublin, Ireland. However, if it is an organization based in Northern California, then the user probably meant they are in Dublin, California.

Regarding SMS logic - the same problems will occur with network delays. We use the last known check-in on the outbound number to determine to what the user is responding. There is possibility that a location will be applied to an erroneous check-in.

Finally, I think it's important to be able to turn off location tracking for check-ins, because some check-ins have no location context.

[CeciliaHinga]

Thank you for your estimates. I will move this issue into ready for design, but P2 so it is below other essential issues (Website, UI for large orgs)

[CeciliaHinga]

UI Design wise, not difficult. Probably a 3 pointer for design of the on/off UI on check-in and a bit of copy finessing for the text message 'Where are you? Please use as much detail as possible' would be my suggestion.

Agreed with DMc re. turning on/off is important and I would argue, helps the author/admin person think more deeply about location as a crisis need.

UX wise, we could do more, like have a section in the help pages of .org (or eventually in the app) which addresses the current functionality/limitations. When the author/admin is looking at collected responses, we could also do more with visuals like maps/lists/proximity/distance numbers etc. to help folks get an 'idea' of the spread of people location wise. ^^^everything in this paragraph is pretty much usertesting questioning I would have after there's a MVP of this ticket in prod

:)