This is a general implementation:
Issue A: Cross-cutting dimensions of some deliverables were missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: MARLO was not saving these fields consistently on the backend during AR 2018 so that information could not be replicated in Upkeep 2019. All the information entered in AR 2018 was saved – you can see it on the screen and find it in the summaries. But, for some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered on cross-cutting dimensions from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete in Upkeep 2019.
Solution: The team will compare the date of most recent changes for these fields – cross-cutting dimensions – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 – and select the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019.
Issue B: Geographic scope of some deliverables was missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: MARLO was not saving these fields consistently on the backend during AR 2018 so that information could be replicated in Upkeep 2019. Like with cross-cutting dimensions, all the information entered in AR 2018 was saved – you can see it on the screen and find it in the summaries. But, for some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered on cross-cutting dimensions from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete in Upkeep 2019.
Solution: The team compared the date of most recent changes for these fields – geographic scope – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 – and selected the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019.
Issue C: Some partners contributing to the deliverables (institution, individual(s), and sometimes both) were missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: This issue is more complicated than the other two issues because this sub-section of deliverables is linked to the Partners section of the project. Reminder that the Partners section is replicated from POWB 2019 (not AR 2018) in Upkeep 2019. Three issues were identified. (1) In some cases, it was the inconsistent “saving” exactly as described for cross-cutting dimensions and geographic scope. For some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered for partner contributing from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete. (2) In cases where a deliverable was extended from a previous year, if that individual contributor was not listed under Partners in POWB 2019, MARLO does not have that information in Upkeep, so it ignores it, and both fields (institution and individual) show up as incomplete. (3) The third issue emerged more recently. On August 22, the MARLO team migrated an improved architecture of the partners contributor sub-section. In cases when an institution was selected, but an individual was missing, MARLO registered both fields as incomplete.
Solution: For (1) and (3), the team compared the date of most recent changes for these fields – partners contributing – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 and selected the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019. For (2), users must re enter that information manually by going to the Partners section of the project and adding the individual and/or institution in Upkeep 2019. Keep in mind that AR 2019 will be based on POWB 2019, so any institutions/individuals missing from POWB 2019 are still going to be missing in AR 2019. Those institutions/individuals will show up as missing again in the deliverables when AR 2019 is opened.
We sincerely apologize for any inconveniences this may have caused. As the Managing Agricultural Research for Learning and Outcomes platform, we will continue working hard to keep improving, supporting and helping CRPs, Centers & Platforms on their strategic results-based program planning and reporting of research projects.
As we all know MARLO is still a work in progress, and thanks to our users and technical team, we find improvement opportunities and ways to innovate.
Last Tuesday, we were able to identify some inconsistencies in the rules of saving deliverables between phases (i.e. POWB, AR and UPKEEP). As a result, we had to ask our users to avoid working in the deliverables section (from Tuesday, September 10th until Sunday September 15th). This included the summary reports generated for this section.
Here, we would like to explain what happened:
GROUND RULES REMINDER: All the data entered in the deliverables section from POWB 2019 and AR 2018 is replicated in Upkeep 2019 (refer to the image below). In other words, when Upkeep 2019 opens, it equals 2019 deliverables entered in POWB 2019 + all 2019 deliverables extended from a previous year (AR 2018 or AR 2017). This memo describes three sub-sections where MARLO has not been applying the rules consistently, why, and what the MARLO team is doing to fix it.
Last Tuesday, we were able to identify some inconsistencies in the rules of saving deliverables between phases (i.e. POWB, AR and UPKEEP). As a result, we had to ask our users to avoid working in the deliverables section (from Tuesday, September 10th until Sunday September 15th). This included the summary reports generated for this section.
Here, we would like to explain what happened:
GROUND RULES REMINDER: All the data entered in the deliverables section from POWB 2019 and AR 2018 is replicated in Upkeep 2019 (refer to the image below). In other words, when Upkeep 2019 opens, it equals 2019 deliverables entered in POWB 2019 + all 2019 deliverables extended from a previous year (AR 2018 or AR 2017). This memo describes three sub-sections where MARLO has not been applying the rules consistently, why, and what the MARLO team is doing to fix it.
Issue A: Cross-cutting dimensions of some deliverables were missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: MARLO was not saving these fields consistently on the backend during AR 2018 so that information could not be replicated in Upkeep 2019. All the information entered in AR 2018 was saved – you can see it on the screen and find it in the summaries. But, for some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered on cross-cutting dimensions from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete in Upkeep 2019.
Solution: The team will compare the date of most recent changes for these fields – cross-cutting dimensions – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 – and select the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019.
Issue B: Geographic scope of some deliverables was missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: MARLO was not saving these fields consistently on the backend during AR 2018 so that information could be replicated in Upkeep 2019. Like with cross-cutting dimensions, all the information entered in AR 2018 was saved – you can see it on the screen and find it in the summaries. But, for some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered on cross-cutting dimensions from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete in Upkeep 2019.
Solution: The team compared the date of most recent changes for these fields – geographic scope – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 – and selected the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019.
Issue C: Some partners contributing to the deliverables (institution, individual(s), and sometimes both) were missing when Upkeep 2019 opened.
Diagnosis: This issue is more complicated than the other two issues because this sub-section of deliverables is linked to the Partners section of the project. Reminder that the Partners section is replicated from POWB 2019 (not AR 2018) in Upkeep 2019. Three issues were identified. (1) In some cases, it was the inconsistent “saving” exactly as described for cross-cutting dimensions and geographic scope. For some deliverables, MARLO registered these fields as incomplete on the backend and did not replicate the saved data entered for partner contributing from AR 2018 into Upkeep 2019. As a result, these fields show up as incomplete. (2) In cases where a deliverable was extended from a previous year, if that individual contributor was not listed under Partners in POWB 2019, MARLO does not have that information in Upkeep, so it ignores it, and both fields (institution and individual) show up as incomplete. (3) The third issue emerged more recently. On August 22, the MARLO team migrated an improved architecture of the partners contributor sub-section. In cases when an institution was selected, but an individual was missing, MARLO registered both fields as incomplete.
Solution: For (1) and (3), the team compared the date of most recent changes for these fields – partners contributing – across POWB 2019, AR 2018, and Upkeep 2019 and selected the most recently changed data to insert in Upkeep 2019. For (2), users must re enter that information manually by going to the Partners section of the project and adding the individual and/or institution in Upkeep 2019. Keep in mind that AR 2019 will be based on POWB 2019, so any institutions/individuals missing from POWB 2019 are still going to be missing in AR 2019. Those institutions/individuals will show up as missing again in the deliverables when AR 2019 is opened.
We sincerely apologize for any inconveniences this may have caused. As the Managing Agricultural Research for Learning and Outcomes platform, we will continue working hard to keep improving, supporting and helping CRPs, Centers & Platforms on their strategic results-based program planning and reporting of research projects.
Comments
Post a Comment