Out-of-System Fees (Audit Request)

[atdservicebot]

Out-of-System Fees

AKA # 49 Out of Process TCP Fees, # 211 New GF Subtype, ROW's #1 Priority, Outstanding Audit Request

Note: We discovered that both these issues are part of the same user story.
- #211 will be closed

Stakeholders: Paloma, Kim, Mooney

User Story: As the ATD Cashier at Toomey, I need to record all fees i accept in one system of record. The few remaining fees not in AMANDA should be added ASAP.

User Story: As the person paying an 'out of process' fee, I need to be able to pay those fees online.

Future State:
When ROW staff need to collect an 'out of process' fee

1. In AMANDA, create a new GF folder, choose subtype ATD
2. Add the project location (site address) to the folder property tab
3. Add people record types Applicant, and Billed-To to the people tab
4. Need SME Input Complete required info fields on the info tab
   • Kim was unsure if TCP Review staff will want any info tab fields. Perhaps the TCP #?
5. Insert & bill the fee(s), provide customer with the invoice
   • The folder status will be 'Pending Payment'
6. The customer pays the fee
7. The folder status updates to 'Payment Complete' -End Process-

• Brandi is best to ask for a list of fees collected outside of AMANDA
• The General Fees (GF) folder in AMANDA is what other departments are using to record fees outside of a specific case folder
• TCP Review Fee is being collected manually
  • Need SME Input
  • Amount? Flat Fee - no logic
  • Name of Fee?
  • ATD Surcharge?

---

Old Description: ROW Fee audit recommendation that out of process TCP review fees be captured in AMANDA ASAP.
Two Options TBD:

1. Create new fee and apply it on existing folder types
2. Create new (very simple) folder and fee

Request Date: 2018-12-03 13:37:00

Request ID: DTS18-103160

Status: Backlog

Customer Priority: 0

Level of Effort: Minor

DTS URL: https://atd.knack.com/dts#service-requests/view-issue-details/5c058609a3cc99085ea2bb6f

Migrated from atd-amanda #49

[atdservicebot]

From atdservicebot on 2019-05-10:

A backlog item has been created for this request in the service request portal and the ROW Backlog Trello board.

Created By: Tracy Linder
Created Date: 2018-12-03 13:40:00

[atdservicebot]

From atdservicebot on 2019-05-10:

2/8/19 Backlog Grooming Meeting - Paloma suggested looking into the General Fee folder in AMANDA to see if this i a possible solution.
Ryan Mooney said that on 2/21 we are meeting with DSD to discuss adding these fees to the SP folder.

Created By: Tracy Linder
Created Date: 2019-02-08 10:27:00

[SurbhiBakshi]

Questions from LIT

For Ryan and Paloma -

1. recommended best practice is to enter number of hours, and that will set off calculation with fee amount and 4%surcharge. Will that work for you?
   yes, this will work for ROW.

2. LIT said we could have them work on putting the Out of System fee on Portal in parallel with the creation of the fee in Amanda. Would that work for you?
   yes, that will work, but main focus should be on getting the TCP fee into Amanda. Ryan M would like to see an option where an applicant did not need an account or to be associated with the folder to be able to pay this
   fee.

3. need to confirm GL account numbers for the fees, who would be the right person to contact for that.
   ask Van P, Paloma will confirm TCP GL number.

• Confirmed with Paloma

• Confirmed with Van.

• Sent to Shree and Raj, copied @Nadin-Nader

4. I see that there are two existing “Austin Transportation” Subtypes available in AMANDA, instead of creating a new ATD subtype can I use the existing one? I also need a confirmation on which subtype to use in both of these (it can be compared with production to confirm)
   50694 and 65006 are both subtype codes that are called Austin Transportation. Spoke with Ryan and Paloma. 50694 is associated with ??? and 65006 is associated with ????. As per Ryan, the two different sub codes may denote that one shows Austin Transportation as an applicant , for example for excavation permits, and the other would be a subtype that ATD issues (ECV). Austin Water used two subtype codes, one for ECV and GF, and the other for EX. We would need to determine which is the right one. Follow up with CTM?

5. For GF folder there is no “Pending Payment” or “Payment Complete” Status available right now except Pending, Active, Complete,Void,Aborted. Can I Add those two statuses?
   That is what I have from Tracy. The other way would be to use the existing Folder Status - Pending and show that the Fees are Unpaid as in the attached screenshot. What would you suggest?
   ATD does not own this folder, we would need to see what is the process enterprise wide before adopting anything.

[SurbhiBakshi]

Follow up with CTM on which subtype code is appropriate

[Nadin-Nader]

Followed up with George on 4/13 and spoke about the concerns brought up by Raj in the meeting.
Concern for me to follow up on:
If a Fee is put into the GF folder for the SP folder will it show up on the SP folder or associate it with the SP folder.

This would be a big project as each folder has different processes that it follows and they would have to be assessed individually to change the process properly. Also this can cause issues if the GF folder has something unpaid and the process or user closes the parent or related folder.

If a Misc TCP fee has a tracking number of some sort, is there a field or a way to have that tracking number in AMANDA or can/does AMANDA track it.

This is possible but on the GL folder. The logic would have to be added to the GF folder if a field is available

I also had him look at the demo for the TCP fee and asked for his feed back when he has a chance.

@SurbhiBakshi George would like to be a part of the next meeting if possible.

[SurbhiBakshi]

LIT work video

[amenity]

@raajeshb - can you please add an estimate for this?

[TracyLinder]

Surbhi thinks this is close to being completed. Work still needs to be moved to TEST, pending Sree's permissions issue being resolved.

[TracyLinder]

@Nadin-Nader can you please add an estimate to this one? (Out of system fees)

[TracyLinder]

Also @Nadin-Nader, is the pipeline correct on this one?

[TracyLinder]

Currently moving to test and prod, then will be complete.

[TracyLinder]

Per Sree: Ready to move to production. Sree has sent an email w/ status and a demo.

Next Step(s): Watch demo; get stakeholder approval to move to PROD.

[Nadin-Nader]

@TracyLinder @raajeshb
I reviewed this and all seems well and ready to go to PROD but is there a way that we can address what Paloma mentioned "that when the Fees are modified, deleted or recalculated for any reason (hours change or fee change), When you try to "Insert and Run", it doesn't calculate or insert the fees. They have to be inserted manually."
-Paloma said that this particular little pain was not a must have or need but if we can get it done really quick and soon with no effort, then she would like the Insert and Run Function to work.

Please let me know so i can let Paloma know. I will also reach out to Sree.

[Nadin-Nader]

email to Sree:
From: Nader, Nadin
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 4:08 PM
To: Sreelatha.b@launchitcorp.com; Linder, Tracy Tracy.Linder@austintexas.gov
Cc: Rajesh B. Rajesh.b@launchitcorp.com
Subject: RE: Trello Card # TCP Out of Process - Online payment - DEMO

Sree,

Hope you are doing well. I wanted to let you know that I have reviewed the demo and updated the card with my notes. It looked good to go to Prod but in my previous meeting with Paloma she had a quick question/request:

“when the Fees are modified, deleted or recalculated for any reason (hours change or fee change), When you try to "Insert and Run", it doesn't calculate or insert the fees. They have to be inserted manually."
-Paloma said that this particular little pain was not a must have or need but if we can get it done really quick and soon with no effort, then she would like the Insert and Run Function to work.

Please let me know so i can let Paloma know.

Respectfully,

Nadin A. Nader
IT Business Systems Analyst
Data and Technology Services
Austin Transportation Department

[TracyLinder]

@Nadin-Nader I'm interested in Sree's response on this. If we need to open another ticket for Paloma's unresolved comment about the insert + run, that would probably be best, since it seems to be out of scope for this ticket.

[Nadin-Nader]

@TracyLinder
Spoke to Sree via chat and she suggested to do that part later on. I sent an email and CC'd you but will add the Teams chat to these notes:

TEAMS Chat:

[4:15 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
Hi Nadin, Can we have a meeting regarding 1951?
[4:17 PM] Nader, Nadin
I can chat about it real quick. did you have questions?
​[4:18 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
i dont have any questions as such, but i just want to make sure why Paloma using INSERT & RUN when hours info is aailable
​[4:18 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
Because it is never added to INSERT & RUN
[4:19 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
while creating the folder itself fees gets added....later if they want to change the hours...they need to update hours...so that fee will be recalculated
​[4:19 PM] Nader, Nadin
what if there is a fee change?
​[4:20 PM] Nader, Nadin
will it still calculate it manually?
​[4:20 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
hours need to be updated. so that fees will be calculated automatically
​[4:21 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
say - 2 hours initially - 100 (per hour 50)
​[4:21 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
later they thought its 4 hours...then
​[4:21 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
info field must be updated as 4
​[4:21 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
so that fee will be re-calculated as 200
​[4:22 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
hour flat fee changes, then lookup table needs to be updated by you/ctm with new flat fee
​[4:22 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
thats all
[4:22 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
one time change
​[4:23 PM] Nader, Nadin
ok cool. then of ot recalculates it just by updating the hours, i think it should be good to go. WHat is the level of effort to put it in the Insert and Run function?
​[4:23 PM] Nader, Nadin
*then if it recalculates
[4:25 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
it is not a huge effort...all that i need to do is, create a proc and use hours info and flat fee lookuptable ...however i dont suggest to do it now...because then i need to revert this commit...take all changes back to local host and do everything again and DEV and TEST....it is cumbersome process... though the effort is small
​[4:26 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
instead i suggest - lets move this PROD. create a new ticket and will take care of it in future
​[4:26 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
this makes everyones lives easier.
​[4:27 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
if we identified this in our demo, then i would have made changes there and moved to DEV and to TEST....Now already the changes are in TEST. if I need to touch it.. I NEED TO REVERT BACK from TEST and DEV to LOCALHOST
​[4:27 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
hope you got it
​[4:31 PM] Nader, Nadin
Yes i totally understood and this wasnt a had to have. I think its a good idea for later once this gets implemented. I just want to inform Paloma and give her the level of effort for that so she can have an idea for later.
[4:32 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
sure 2 story points - again i do not suggest as it may not add much value. Going to INSERT & RUN and selecting the fee type is difficult than just giving the hours and save. (smile)
​[4:32 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
Again users wish (smile)
​[4:33 PM] Blaze Kannan, Sreelatha - Vendor
because again, it is going to use the same hours mentioned in the info
​[4:51 PM] Nader, Nadin
Ok i will let her know. Thank you fo responding so fast (smile)

Email sent

Hi Paloma/Kim,

Hope you are both doing well. I wanted to let you know that I spoke to Sree about my notes from the review of the TCP Out of System fees where you stated that “when the Fees are modified, deleted or recalculated for any reason (hours change or fee change), When you try to "Insert and Run", it doesn't calculate or insert the fees. They have to be inserted manually.”

Sree mentioned that it has never been added to the “Insert and Run” since in this case changing the hours will recalculate the fees automatically. It wouldn’t be too much effort to change but she suggests to add it later on once this goes to PROD and you like the function and how it flows. She would need to create a process and use the hours info and flat fee lookuptable.

Also since the change is already in TEST, the changes would need to get reverted and she will need to start everything from DEV again. Once we get this to PROD you can submit a new request to have the new process added to the “Insert and Run”

Please let me know if you are good with this as we just need to give the go ahead for PROD since all went well in TEST.

Respectfully,

Nadin A. Nader
IT Business Systems Analyst
Data and Technology Services
Austin Transportation Department

[Nadin-Nader]

@TracyLinder @raajeshb Response from Paloma:

From: Amayo-Ryan, Paloma Paloma.Amayo-Ryan@austintexas.gov
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 7:15 PM
To: Nader, Nadin Nadin.Nader@austintexas.gov; Perez, Kimberly Kimberly.Perez@austintexas.gov
Cc: Linder, Tracy Tracy.Linder@austintexas.gov
Subject: RE: (1951) TCP Out of Process fees UAT on Dev and (1518) Unpaid Flag Fee on Permit Issuance

Hey Nate!

I’m on board with holding off as Sree suggests. Thanks for checking in on this!

Sent Sree an email informing her to deploy to PROD

READY FOR DEPLOYMENT TO PROD

[Nadin-Nader]

Deployment has been split into two requests:

One is currently with the AMANDA CM Team in their "To-Do Pipeline" (SCTASK0073676). Waiting for the deployment and confirmation to PROD
The manual deployment was to add a lookup to PROD from DEV and TEST (51060 Lookup2=48). I was able to have Andrea from Team Tango add the lookup. SCTASK0074245 she will close this task out as it has been completed.
Copying these notes to #2406 as well

Waiting on CM Team to deploy

[Nadin-Nader]

Paloma will have users test and get back to us next week to give an update.

[Sreelatha-BlazeKannan]

It is in PROD Now.

[TracyLinder]

Email to Stakeholders:

Good Afternoon,

Some good news today. The work for #1951 for the GF folder for out of system fees is now in Production! These fees are also payable on the portal. Yay!

Please let us know if there are any questions.

All the Best,

Tracy Linder, Product Manager

[Nadin-Nader]

Hi Paloma/Kim,

Hope you are both doing well and staying safe. I was reaching out to you regarding the Out of System Fees #2406 and #1951 to see if you were able to gather enough information from your users UAT’ing the Out of system fees changes. Please let me know the outcome as soon as you can.

Respectfully,

Nadin A. Nader
IT Business Systems Analyst
Data and Technology Services
Austin Transportation Department

[TracyLinder]

@Nadin-Nader the comments say this is already in PROD and UAT passed. Is your email to Paloma & Kim correct?

[TracyLinder]

Laura Roy is the primary user of this feature, she may not begin using it until next week (7/13)