21/05/2018

#	Discussion/Action	Responsible	Outcome	Status
1	Programme names/numbers aren’t provided for Dental trainees, they’re created by Admins	JH, AP, IO	Proposed Solution (JH) 3 letter use the prefix of the local office + 3 digit acronym based on specialty 3 digit specialty acronym should be consistent across all Action: AP/IO to impact assess JH: Done mapping and need to do some more work and send to AP. AP has received James ssheet. More generally, we should look to standardise naming conventions around programmes (not just Dental) to be discussed separately Next to put on Microsoft Teams and get SMLs feedback - AP JH/AP - Setup call to briefly explain next week. - Was decided that it should be postponed for the moment on advice from James. IO/AP: Recommendation: show a concatenated display of the programme name in the dropdown list with the Local Office name? To check with DEV on the possible solutions. (P1) TISDEV-3767 - Add indicator to drop downs to highlight "ownership" of values to the user TO DO 19/02: AP/JH: Field limit for programme number? Check field validation (Alistair Pringle (Unlicensed)) Max number of characters is 20 including spaces / special characters favoured approach is to change the programme number <max limit (Alice Thompson / Alistair Pringle (Unlicensed)) see dental spreadsheet prepared by JH 09/04: Sent to Andy, Programme number being changed as this was too long. 30/04: Leave on for next 2-3 data leads call.	ON HOLD till post MVP launch
2	Start post funding discussion with local offices (Amending)	JW/JH	Place holder AP/JH/IO: IO To update with ticket numbers and post on DQ channel. 21/05: CL: London needs this 2 weeks after go-live. IO: There is a task to review how post funding works. Tickets progress?	ON HOLD till post MVP
3	Update on data issues (James/Claire) flagged on DQ channel - Data not pulling through rather than missing placements. Progress update on the checks between Intrepid and TIS UI (Claire)	JH/CL/IO	CL: Spreadsheet uploaded with feedback - Qualifications, Assessments and Placements issues identified.
3		CL/IO	IO to review the feedback from Claire 09/04: Claire Shared with other Data leads to test the UI and feedback - JH, AB & DS 15/04: Update? 19/04: Go through BAU tickets 30/04: Check status of those tickets and review . IO to cite the tickets here for CL to review when ready. 08/05: Former user (Deleted) to update. 14/05: CLH to re test and update spreadsheet - share on DQ channel 21/05: Tickets raised for the feedback posted on DQ. Placements and Assessments tickets prioritized higher.
4	Bulk Assessment template to be reviewed. Assessment - Bulk Upload (DRAFT)	Data leads CL/JH/AB/DS	AR: Share on DQ Slack channel AR 23/04: Alice has added her recommendations and shared on DQ channel, can other data leads review and confirm? AR: 30/04: To review comments from Alice and James AR: 08/05: We had a spike session, outcome of this was this is work 3 weeks of DEV work and the time for this to go into a sprint is to be decided by the business. Reviewed data leads comments and outstanding comments in red on the confluence page. 08/05 Joanne Watson (Unlicensed) to review DQ conversation and remaining outstanding items on the confluence page. 14/05 JW updated assessments bulk upload page Assessment - Bulk Upload (DRAFT) JW to request call for field validation/template agreement
5	Bulk People Import - Feedback Check if the Expectations are correct on the Jira tickets	CL/AB	Check progress end of week on bug fixes. Release to users for testing. AR 23/04: Demo on people bulk upload was done on last Show & Tell. User guides being updated with to include bulk upload. Programme membership rules discussed and agreed to be made consistent on both FE and FE, i.e. where a Programme membership exist against a person where Programme name, number, membership type , start and end dates match exactly to those on the template, it will be flagged as an error. If any of those differ, multiple memberhships of the Programe name + Number allowed. 30/04: IO/Reubs: Review in progress, not ready to test. 08/05: Data leads to go through Fields validation to see if the Backend validation are in line with Bulk? 14/05: Data leads to review changes from DQ call on Friday People - Field Validation \| NEW	CLOSE
7	InterDeanery Transfer (IDT) process and potential issues raised: for trainees moving from the NE or Yorks and Humber to non TIS local offices for trainees moving from non TIS offices to the NE or Yorks and Humber (Trainees NE to Yorks and Humber or vice versa - no issue and trainees moving from non TIS local office to non TIS local office no perceived issues)	All	Assessment of the impact and understand implications. IDT - covered by codes of practice Understand Rebase - Speak to Reuben. CL: Given the small numbers, suggestion is to update on both Intrepid and TIS. Make the updates just before going live - Data leads to coordinate. 2) - Non-issue. CL: Claire Le Houx (Unlicensed) To send comms on the process. 08/05: ST3 to be looked at together. JH: ETL flow from Datawarehouse to Intrepid with TIS updates. 14/05: CLH to send comms to regional data leads - to be disseminated how they feel appropriate	CLOSE
8	Reports on Deleted records requested from Hicom. (Status of 'Delete' on Hicom but still 'Current' on TIS). (#intrepid_Integration slack channel conversation).	AP/IO	08/05: Alistair Pringle (Unlicensed): Chase up with Martin. DS: In Intrepid, Programme is a hard delete, whereas Programme membership is soft delete. 14/05: AB sent details of report criteria to the Intrepid Analysis team. No response from them yet JW to set up meeting with Data Leads, BAs, POs and Reubs on how to manage deleted records on TIS in future. JH/AB: Checked the deleted records. Next step to flag what records on TIS are to be deleted. Send to CL/DS to check. Hicom has not provided the full requested set of deleted records but will follow.
9	Data/Field level analysis	All	1. Sit with Chris and review the output he shared with DQ leads + delete report 2. identify areas of concern 3. coordinate through Reubs/Ashley to fix areas of concern 4. re-test later on versus DQ analyses