Call Information

• 6:00AM PST - Seattle
• 9:00AM EST - New York, DC
• 5:00PM EAT - Tanzania
• 10:00PM GMT +8 - China

Webex Link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=M299H1X42RL8F1ABXL3LOKN9TN-3O29&rnd=371900.06805

Meeting Number: 192 173 465

Host Key: 352864

Audio Connection:  +1-415-655-0001 

AGENDA:

ACTION ITEMS:

ATTENDANCE:

• Lakshmi Balachandran
• Brian Taliesin
• Nuran Idris (Unlicensed) & Josef (is that correct?)
• Rachel Powers (Deactivated)
• Tenly Snow (Deactivated)
• Chris George (Unlicensed)
• Ashraf Islam (Unlicensed)
• Christine Lenihan
• Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated)

NOTES: 

• New participant from Malawi from the PSM group - Nuran and Josef joining the call - welcome :)

Software Development Update

• Things are quite busy - 2 sprints left in February - current sprint ending Feb 1st (tomorrow) - next sprints 19 and 20
• If you have questions on these sprints - know its hard to get through b/c of all the detail - lots of things in this sprint
• Have the 3.0 status updated - Sprint 16 recalibration of scope - mentioned on last PC call
• If people want to get into what we cut on 3.0, contact Mary Jo offline to get into more detail around that
• Reporting - this is specifically what is for the built-in reporting - in Malawi we will have a 3rd party BI tool that will handle their reporting - we’re only doing 2 reports for now - Reporting Rate and Timeliness Rate, run by end users, could be PDF or Excel file
• As we discussed last call, we want to do a preliminary UAT - Sprint ends Feb. 1st, after which we’ll set up environment - testing starts on Feb. 6th - still creating the instructions that we’ll share to the group soon - sign up if you are interested! - have to have you do it on a certain date - email will be sent out for who’s interested soon
• Vaccine work is getting kicked off - WHO, JSI, VR, Gates - starting to look at scope for this - first kick off call is this Thursday - if want more info on this, we can clue you in offline

Open Questions on Stock Management

• MJ: this is for new functionality in stock management and Lakshmi has been doing a lot of work around this - these are open questions
• L: Question we want to do first is #25 - should users be able to go back and edit stock movements that they have edited before? - ThoughtWorks came up with some questions on what this would look like. 4 options around when a user goes back to edit a stock movement edited a week or so ago - (example given by Lakshmi - see wiki page)
• *4 options (these are easier to follow by going to wiki page):
• Questions?
• MJ: can you also highlight on how the system is going to handle it but the view for the user may be different - still open question on how the user may experience doing a reversal
• L: exactly, this is relevant only to how we want to do this in the system, and keep an audit trail in the system
• Ashraf: Is there any mockups for the user interaction on how the users will use this
• L: this discussion was meant to do how this should work on the backend, how the system will deal with this
• Gaurav: should be noted as an adjustment, noted as a correction w/ reason, noted for the day that it is corrected for to maintain the integretity of the transaction; this would maintain data integrity across the system; it could be that you are issuing to another facility and keeping track of what they are receiving - in order to maintain, need to note it as an adjustment
• MJ: isn’t different with the past dates - on Jan. 25th I go back to Jan. 12th and I correct it by adding 10 more that I missed - you’d want the system to record the difference of the change? or do you want it to completely wipe out (do reversal)?
• G: not be a wipeout, but a correction - it would note it as a date for which the adjustment is being made
• L: the plan is to record both the date that user entered the movement and the date for when the actual movement happened
• Brian: that was his idea as well, and that fits audit trail as well - agree with Gaurav’s suggestion - any feedback from audit folks in-country?
• MJ: just to clarify - what you said is more like a reversal - back out the incorrect, and put in the correct - but G was mentioning just adding on to make it correct - would love to get input from Zambia on how they do their reversals and will have a meeting - industry best standard would be a reversal
• Brian: the reversal is what I was thinking of
• G: I agree with the reversal as well so they don’t have to calculate the difference
• Ashraf: there is a concept of inventory counting as well - like every transaction getting recorded - facilities required to maintain on a daily basis their stock card / register - so on day’s when update their bin card and stock register - accounting principal of stock in and stock out with reason - would be capturing details and following principles of inventory counting
• L: are you agreeing with reversal?
• Ashraf: without the UI, hard to understand what is meant by the reversal
• L: good point, where we are at with UI - stock card would show correction as well as original transaction - but for user, probably easier for them to go into original and change
• L: we’ve agreed on reversal but we have an adjustment reason is there as well
• MJ: is it that it is an adjustment or a correction? Adjustment means something different at times (like receive or issue)
• Nuran: more in line with Mary Jo was just saying - say that it is a data correction - and shows as adjustment reason - once that reversal happens - record that it was data correction - as MJ pointed out, adjustment means something separate in context of logistics
• G: so I think it’s not adjustment since it means # of things as far as logistics go - so is it possible to have the adjustment reason be a correction
• L: original action was an issue, so correction was a +10 - 2nd transaction should be an adjustment or an issue
• MJ: we’re toggling b/w what the view looks like vs. what backend is doing - want to check with Josh and TW - if OpenLMIS is at ward or another facility, then the reversal needs to correct two places - issue correction needs to take back stock from other store room - why they are receiving as an issue - important to know what is needed for auditing vs. what UI should do
• L: in this case, when facility corrects transaction, we want a corresponding correction on other ward too - if we just do an adjustment, it looks like they received 30 units and would 
• MJ: which is why TW put this as a receive - this entire entry is a correction, but for accounting princples doing a reversal which is a receive
• (Unsure if I got all this down correctly, so please check wiki page to see final wording around this)
• MJ: all in agreement for reversal but need to ensure it lines up intuitively for a user - i.e. how would it be displayed on stock card itself
• L: we could potentially have this be a receive but can have it as a data correction adjustment - concern correcting one wrong transaction with another wrong transaction
• L: in interest of time, we can move on - agreed on reversal, but cycle back with Josh and TW around how this can work

• L: next agenda item - FYI on mockups
• L: in next PC call, we’ll have some more mockups to discuss and pick between in terms of how stock management should look like
• MJ: FYI, if folks have resources they would like to share with us or people they could connect us to, it would be appreciated to let us know
• L: absolutely
• L: we are looking for teams that are using stock management like Zambia with Facility Edition, we are hoping to get feedback from Zambia - Ashraf, do you know Facility edition enough to answer on these questions?
• Ashraf: after this call, I do have interviews to go to so I can touch base afterwards - but I do know FE so we can definitely discuss
• L: cool, I’ll follow up with you

Update on requests from Governance Committee

• MJ: There is a link to the functional specification template - one of the first users of this will be the vaccine team - they will use this to outline their functional needs and user stories - would want feedback as well during this time to make sure we adapt it to what can work best for future teams to use on how features should be adopted / PC can review 
• MJ: If you highlight Confluence text, you can do inline comments - can use this to give feedback on functional specification template
• Tenly: sometimes you have to enable the inline comments - we can walk you through if need be so just let us know
• Brian: I was intending to a similar model as done for reports over how we spec reports
• MJ: yes, that would be great, so thank you

• MJ: Ashraf, any updates on the roadmap progress?
• Ashraf: I was able to compile the Cote d’Ivoire one that is in French - Excel format, as we had it originally - Issue list also on Excel format - I can share within a day or so - for Tanzania or Zambia one, I figured out how to configure it in JIRA to have a specific dashboard for each list, so now need to go through item by item to know what is relevant for this - within a day or so I can share Cote d’Ivoire one
• MJ: great, sounds good - will keep as an ongoing agenda item
• MJ: Benin update - these are in a Word document and Mozambique is in JIRA, so we can make those available, however much more bug oriented than features
• MJ: Need to still figure out how to converge on having these roadmaps in similar format, meet governance committee request - open question
• MJ: Also, need to think on how to keep this updated moving forward - also open question
• MJ: would like to get more traffic from listserv, so please use listserv for more activity

GS1 Support and Product Model

• MJ: given time, wanted to give update to PC on GS1 and Josh - conversation has moved forward and there has been a resolution - share a presentation on this and there’s been a lot of writing on this - use the link on the agenda to take a look at this

3.0 Website Refresh

• MJ: also quick update on website refresh - things still moving forward - week of Feb. 6th, we’ll loop in volunteers on process the week of the 6th.
• MJ: Any questions?

Other items

• Chris G: Are we able to use the new branding logo in our in-country implementations now?
• Tenly: Yes, and I’m working on getting a new high-res one soon, so I’ll send that out when we get that.
• Tenly: I also want to put a press kit soon that people can use that are interested in doing a presentation and keep consistency in branding - PPT, document, etc. - all is part of our comms strategy and how we present the product - coming together and be pushed out soon

• MJ: Any interest in having the PC call go over the new GS1 product model? May have to take up a whole hour, as there is a lot
• Chris G: I’d be interested in making that a part of the call, but limited to no more than half - if we need to make it run over multiple PC calls that’s fine - would be good for the PC call to know the new language of the underlying product model as that language will become more prevalent moving forward

RECORDING

ADDITIONAL READING: