Budget management functionality that FOLIO needs to stay competitive
(UXPROD-3442)
|
|
| Status: | In Progress |
| Project: | UX Product |
| Components: | None |
| Affects versions: | None |
| Fix versions: | Quesnelia (R1 2024) | Parent: | Budget management functionality that FOLIO needs to stay competitive |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | P3 |
| Reporter: | Joseph Reimers | Assignee: | Kathleen Moore |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | LC-priority1, at-risk, loc, requires-discussion | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Issue links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Release: | Quesnelia (R1 2024) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Epic Link: | Budget management functionality that FOLIO needs to stay competitive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimate: | XL < 15 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front End Estimator: | Matt Weaver | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Front-End Confidence factor: | 20% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimate: | XL < 15 days | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back End Estimator: | Matt Weaver | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back-End Confidence factor: | 90% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Estimation Notes and Assumptions: | Assumption is that the currency conversation is happening on the order side. UI estimate confidence lower because of unknowns associated with displaying currency detail. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Development Team: | Corsair | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PO Rank: | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): | R4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Current situation or problem: Some libraries create Orders and keep them in a Pending or otherwise "held" status to streamline end of Fiscal Year ordering. These libraries do not want these funds encumbered, but they do want to know how much would be encumbered if the orders were to be placed. This information should be available at the Fund level (i.e. what is the total pending encumbrance per fund). In scope: Reporting, Orders, Funds Out of scope: Invoices Use case(s): A library operates on a very precise fiscal period and needs to track encumbrances and expenditures very accurately. Certain materials are designated as "acquire if funds are available". The library creates "pending" orders so that if funds are available, they can complete the ordering process before the end of the fiscal year. Budget maintainers for that library want to be able to track those pending encumbrances independently of actual encumbrances, and without committing to a purchase. This is typically managed on a per-Fund basis rather than institution-wide. Proposed solution/stories: Develop a means of identifying and reporting on or otherwise making available a report on monies that would be encumbered at the Funds level if all pending orders were to be opened. Orders calculation logic:Purchase order line attributes value to 1 or more Fund. The sum of all exchanged amounts would be then be calculated This gives us the total pending or value for the current fiscal year for a given Fund ID Links to additional info See use cases and questions here https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/x/XRZU Please see attached ILSFundBalancesFY23_20230224.pdf for a sample of the desired sort of output. Specific columns to be added include "pending expenditures" and "pending commitments." Questions: Is it enough to report on the total prices contained in "Pending" Orders, or is an additional status or other designator required to differentiate these End of Fiscal Year Pending Orders from the regular Pending workflow? |
| Comments |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 16/May/23 ] |
|
Work must be done by Jan 2025. cc: Joseph Reimers and Dennis Bridges |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 08/Aug/23 ] |
|
Hey Joseph Reimers - what is the priority of this feature if it is assigned to "Q" release? |
| Comment by Joseph Reimers [ 09/Aug/23 ] |
|
Hi Khalilah Gambrell, this is flagged as CS1 and just underwent additional refinement and clarification. Based on the user stories provided, we had to pull it forward. |
| Comment by Khalilah Gambrell [ 29/Aug/23 ] |
|
Hey Joseph Reimers. Why is this feature blocked? |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 30/Aug/23 ] |
|
Blocked because we think it may be transferred to another team. However, we need to know whether it is actually possible for them to implement a list that meets these requirements. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 08/Sep/23 ] |
|
Need to consult Tjet regarding whether the calculation logic could be done the orders side so list app does not need calculation. Could be slow if done on list app side. |
| Comment by Mikhail Fokanov [ 10/Oct/23 ] |
|
As far as I can see, it could be implemented in mod-orders or FQM. Implementation in mod-orders is likely to be more straightforward and also in such case it could be tailored to the specific requirements. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 17/Oct/23 ] |
|
Orders currently does not have a reporting solution that suits this use case. There is an order line export BUT the user actually needs the values exported by Fund-budget. The fund-budget are stored in the Finance application. Essentially we need a report that shows all the Fund-budget values and adds the total value of pending orders for each of those fund-budgets. Meaning fund information from mod-finance plus order information from mod-orders. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 17/Oct/23 ] |
|
I have attached a screenshot of the current report that is being used. The FOLIO values are referred to with similar names but as you can see this is from the perspective of Funds rather than orders. Unfortunately in FOLIO pending order value is only known but the orders app. Serhii_Nosko and Yury Saukou would it be possible to calculate this pending order value and add it to the budget export that users can trigger from the ledger record? |
| Comment by Serhii_Nosko [ 18/Oct/23 ] |
|
basically how this Ledger Export works now: UI queries a lot of different endpoints, combines data and generates CSV file for download, so all business logic is concentrated on UI side. This approach is not suitable for clients/customers who use REST api and want to retrieve all aggregated data, instead they need to aggregate on the client's side. If clients/customers would like to leverage existing UI for export, we need to implement some endpoint on mod-orders side that will perform some calculations of expected encumbrances for all pending orders for the desired ledger and UI can join this endpoint response to already aggregated data, but basically this solution is not ideal, better to have aggregating logic on BE side and not UI side, and in this case need to use implement something different/new. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 18/Oct/23 ] |
|
Based on refinement discussion today I have updated the description with more details of how the value of pending orders could be calculated. Ideally we investigate whether there is a relatively simple approach that could be used to get this value into the Ledger fund export. |
| Comment by Mikhail Fokanov [ 24/Oct/23 ] |
|
Based on discussion with Serhii_Nosko, Mikita Siadykh, Raman Auramau, it was decided that it will be better to create separate mechanism in FQM for such reports. I will work on the solution design for this implementation. |
| Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 24/Oct/23 ] |
|
Thanks Mikhail Fokanov, really appreciate you following up. Kathleen Moore can you just confirm that you have included this in scope for Q for Corsair. If so I will remove this from our feature queue and stop medaling with it unless you ask me to |
| Comment by Kathleen Moore [ 07/Nov/23 ] |
|
just realized I missed this comment, Dennis Bridges. Yes - this is in the Q scope for Corsair. |
| Comment by Mikhail Fokanov [ 14/Nov/23 ] |
|
As we discussed with Kathleen Moore and Matt Weaver, this story needs adjustments of FQM (to specify what fields it should return) and introduction of report entity, which is actually a snapshot of data. But regarding the UI, we should decide if the lists app UI could be used for it, or the new UI should be created. Kathleen Moore said that she will provide mock-ups and then we will be able to make the decision. |