hyphaapp / hypha Goto Github PK

will require discovery from team, applicants, and finance

Once any application or proposal receives two reviews it should be automatically reclassified as 'in discussion' if it is in the submit for review state.

• Many empty line
• Signature divider missing space after --
• Missing comma after Dear applicants-name
• Make sure all the links are correct
• Stray line breaks.

opentech/apply/activity/templates/messages/email
opentech/apply/funds/templates/funds/email

This will require discovery with applicants, project managers, and finance to determine fields, workflows, etc

Dear reviewer,

A new [node:content-type] has been added to your review list:

Title: node:title
Link: [node:url]
Write a review: [site:url]node/add/concept-note-review?field_review_concept_note=[node:nid]

[If any nodes in their review list have 1 less reviews, display, else do not include]

And also, there are other application(s) on your list for review:
[list all applications in their list with 1 or less reviews]

[else]

This is the only application in your review queue! Well done and thank you <3

Here's some current numbers:

[number of reviews from users]: Total number of application reviews from you
[average rating from user reviews]: Your average application rating (on a scale of 0 to 5)
[total number of reviews]: The total number of application reviews
[total number of submission responses]: The total number of submission responses sent to applicants
[total number of concept notes] / [total number of proposals] / [total number of approved proposals]: That's the total number of concept notes received / proposals received / and proposals accepted to date
[total number of pending applications]: Total number of pending applications
[total number of dismissed applications]: Total number of applications we've dismissed :-/
[sum of amount field in all approved applications / sum of amount field in all applications]: That's the total amount of money we've awarded / and the total amount of funds requested of us in USD
Kind regards,
[App Lead]

See for more info (to be copied here) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xS9l_-VZ4sUo6yDSnJcN9wax4wGehQRWMDWdpMugdXE/edit#heading=h.wzklsnw0c2ei

• Allow applicant to reply via email to a submission response email, converting their reply to a comment in the WebApp for the appropriate application
• Allow anyone with edit access to begin a comment on an application/submission response/review, with email notifications sent out, and ability to reply comment via email
  Allow known emails of editors for open proposals to create status reports and payment requests from email

• Create a new content type, Status report (see fields below)
• While an application is in the Open state (only available to a app that has been in approved), expose a "Submit status" button, that creates a new Status report referenced to the application
• Allow anyone with edit permissions (team, owner, and others assigned via OTF extras) to create a new Status report
• Create new workflow for Status report type: Submit for review (initial after save), Approved (only set by team)
• Create (add to) a "Status" tab for the proposal (/node/####/status), that displays a view listing all Status reports, anyone with edit permissions can view. Fields: Submitted date[link to node], Approved date, Submitted by, Approved by, Current state
• Add to the OTF info box (hide if empty): Status reports: ## / ## (Approved / Submitted)
• Create #notify and email rules for state changes and actions (see below)

see https://docs.google.com/a/opentechfund.org/document/d/1zxpmFWb1NmiFMKb5GvANQFBzLQXHP2YN_vbUBCc2W68/edit#heading=h.4j80aoqzj8mz

• Create two new states for applications: Open, Closed
• Expose two new field for applications/proposals that are in the approved state: Public title, Public description, and Determination summary.
• Add a new field to projects and fellows called "Why we chose it"
• Display a button for any application/proposal in approved to create a new project or fellow
• Copy all the information over from the application to the new node for editing, using Public title as the node title, Public description as the node body, and Determination summary as the "Why we chose it".
• Create a node reference on both nodes to each other
• Change the active/inactive state of a Project type based on the referenced application's Open or Closed state
• Send a msg to #notify once a new project/fellow has been posted on the website
• A report that shows which approved applications or which people/projects are not associated with a people or project

• Add two fields to an application in OTF extra info and display in the OTF info box (hide if empty): Contract/PO # and Fiscal Year
• Create a new content type, Payment request (see below for fields), enable revisions by default
• While an application is in the Open state (only available to a app that has been in approved), expose a "Request payment" button, that creates a new Payment request referenced to the application
• Allow anyone with edit permissions (team, owner, and others assigned via OTF extras) to create a new Payment request
• Create new workflow for Payment request type: Submit for review (initial after save), Approved (only set by team), Reimbursed (only set by finance user)
• Create a new finance role, which only has access to Request Payment content types in Approved or after.
• Create a "Status" tab for the proposal (/node/####/status), that displays a view listing all Payment requests, anyone with edit permissions can view. Fields: Submitted date[link to node], Approved date, Amount, Submitted by, Approved by, Current state
• Add to the OTF info box (hide if empty): Payment requests: ## / ## (Completed / Submitted) and Balance: $$$$ / $$$$ (Total amount completed / Budgeted)
• Create #notify and email rules for state changes and actions (see below)

• Create an "Add collaborators" section in Basic info for Concept notes and Proposals
• For each click, add new Name and Email fields
• Create an "This is a collaborative submission" check at the end of Basic Info for Concept Notes (link to what that means).
• Create a function that deletes draft concept notes w/o validated users after 30 days, or draft concept notes w/o any activity in the last 30 days
• Allow revisions and save as draft, for all validated (non-staged) users, and allow other collaborators to be added after
• Option to require all applicants to "sign off" on the application before it can be submitted for OTF team review
• Send determination msgs or any other notifications to all applicants, including invite for proposal msgs
• Copy editors from the concept note to a proposal when invited
• Option to require all applicants to "sign off" on the proposal before it can be submitted for OTF review
• Somehow add a filter (maybe a state?) that allows OTF team to see collaborative applications still in draft

• Allow team to edit the page title and description
• Collect email, first name, and last name (only email required)
• Two check boxes, one for OTF Announcements and another for Daily Newsletter
• On submit, send an email confirmation with link for confirm. On confirm, direct add to Google and Mailchimp API's.
• If no confirmation after 48hrs, send an email saying the request has been disregarded, and to visit url if they'd like to try again, then disregard request.

https://github.com/lionheart/django-pwnedpasswords-validator

Some random thoughts...

• Rating rounds align with proposal rounds, every 2 months
• Need to be able to modify the points/values within the app so we can adjust the weights on the fly
• All this is anonymous, w/o db access, not possible to see who submits what
• There is a #slack channel where things are announced as things happen
• There's a ranking that restarts every round and a historical ranking
• Display of how much better or worse the team is doing compared to the last round and year

Things that get points...

• number of reviews per round (1pt for each review submitted)

  • How many sections are completed (.5pt for each section with input)
  • Total text amount per review (0pt for <600char/bytes, +.5pt for every additional 200char/byte)

• Your review ratings per round (1-5 pt [based on received ratings] from each person ie, one review for 3 and another for 4, you get 7pts)

• How many review ratings you submitted (1pt per ratings)

• How many submission response ratings you've submitted (1pt per rating)

• Your submission response rating per round (0 if average rating is 1 or 2, 10 if it's 3, 15 if it's 4, and 20 if it's 5)

  • How customized your submission responses are (0pt for <600char/byte avg [not counting the det. msg field], +1pt for every additional 200char/byte on the average)
  • Ex: If someone's avg sub. resp. rating was 4 and they're avg sub. resp. contained 1200chars on the avg, at the rounds end, they'd get 20pts for the rating and 5 for their text

• Predictive power (add to the current round whenever it happens, but only once)

  • Concept note is decided the same as your review rec (0 for maybe, 3pt for yes/no)
  • Proposal is decided the same as your review (0 for maybe, 6pt for yes/no)

• Give some love for anything at any time

  • Say for weekly review sessions (something we do via hangouts), or from a good point made in a chat, or a 1:1
  • Received from a slack msg to a bot via dm during sessions
  • msg: @ +1-5 (1-5pts based on the rating)
  • when you give love, you get love (.5pts for every 5 ratings you give)

As a reviewer, ability to sign a 'Reviewer Agreement" that I agree to each year or upon change to the agreement text, else I can not view/review applications.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Hypothesis problem: Reviewer panels either 'go stale' or want to not review anymore they can have a journey out of the review process.

Is your feature request related to an existing functionality? Please describe.
It is related to the existence of reviewers but the process for reviewer agreeing on a yearly basis is new. This sits somewhere between a feature and an enhancement.

Describe the solution you'd like
Here's a proposed workflow (from Dan in a comment below)

• In settings, there is a "Reviewer agreement".
• In that settings, options include: Enable/disable; specification of which role this applies to; a text box for the agreement itself; a "Re-require acceptance" check-box, and save.
• When someone in the role Reviewer visits an application page after this feature has been enabled or after "Re-require acceptance" has been checked, they are redirected to an agreement page and asked to accept or deny the agreement.
• If they accept, they are redirected to the application. If they are decline, they are not able to view the application
• Their acceptance is saved so they don't have to do this every time.

Describe alternatives you've considered

• Expect that the current 'sign on' process is either not done or done via comms like email/text etc.
• We could consider an elapsed time period of zero activity to be a 'non sign'
• We also should consider what notifications via email (or other) are needed here

Priority

• Low priority (annoying, would be nice to not see)

Affected roles

Primary:

• Reviewers

Secondary:

• Staff
• Partners
• Applicants

Ideal deadline
To be reviewed in future Rebasing for importance across adopters

Additional context
Validation questions:

• Do adopters need to do this as a legal/compliance process?
• Have reviewers asked for this feature/process?
• How critical is this to reviewers?
• is this enhancement only about the yearly agreement
• What happens if they refuse for now but want to return? a manual re-adding process or is a pause function needed

This sits somewhere between a feature and an enhancement.