|
The vision is to support OpenLMIS users with both routine reporting and ad-hoc analysis. Users need a way to visualize and extract data.
Routine reporting
Ad-hoc analysis
User | Tech aptitude | Scope of supervision | Kind of Reports | Access (how/when) | Frequency** | Report Types |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Store Manager | Low | Only responsible for one geographic facility but may have multiple storerooms | Routine |
| Monthly or more (if available) |
|
Intermediate Store Manager (could be district, regional, providence) |
| Supervises a subset of facilities or specific zone. Facilities must be mapped to zones. | Routine |
| Monthly or weekly depending on replenishment schedules |
|
Central Personnel or Central Program personnel |
| National supervision of all geographic facilities OR national supervision of one program. | Routine Some ad-hoc (where VAN is rolled out) |
|
|
|
Administrator (unclear if this persona would support reporting) | ||||||
Implementer |
| Ad-hoc |
**If the implementer is using stock management, frequency of reports would increase.
Short, simple description of a feature told from the perspective of the person who desires the new capability, usually a user or customer of the system.
# | Title | User Story | Label | Importance | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Short identifier for the story | Describe the user and what they are trying to achieve As a ______ I want/need to ________ so that I _______. - High level acceptance criteria | Relevant labels to distinguish source. From which system, or which country? | Must Have, Nice to Have |
|
2 |
Include any business process mapping, mockups, diagrams or visual designs relating to these requirements. Describes the tasks and the personas who perform those activities. The diagram provides the context for the user stories and serves as a focal point for achieving clarity and agreement among stakeholders. Looks like a standard flow chart.
Identify initial dependencies that are on the critical path for this functionality and may affect the delivery time and serving of business goals. Include links to stories.
Description | Link |
---|---|
Create user personas and outline objectives |
Initial communication between stakeholders and the development team to help understand scope and estimates.
Below is a list of questions to be addressed as a result of this requirements document:
# | Question | Outcome | Status |
---|---|---|---|
1 | (e.g. How we make users more aware of this feature?) | Communicate the decision reached | Open, In Progress, Closed, and date of closure |
Assuming the perspective of a national-level program manager who wants visibility into the activity of their program by region/district, but who would also like the option to get granular-level visibility into facility-by-facility data as well.
1 - Stockout days
2- Stock levels/Consumption
3 -Timeliness and completeness of reporting
4 - On Time and full deliveries
Some other ideas we tossed around but didn’t discuss as thoroughly were:
Financial Reports
A program manager would use this report to measure how much money a facility should have (relating to cost recovery)
A program manager could also see a graph depicting the total costs of requisitions for their area (get a clearer picture of where their money is going)
Could see whether facility is in the red/black based on cost recovery analysis
Emergency Orders
Good to show on a map - district level making emergency orders to provincial level, potential risk of stockouts.