Skip to content

[Request]: Consider revising Evaluator worksheet in De-risking Guide #697

@ameliaswong

Description

@ameliaswong

A description of the work

This was an idea/resource shared by Vicki McFadden during approvals:

“GSA Service Delivery has started breaking code review and UX review into two separate things. Asking for a user research plan explicitly. See example: https://github.com/GSA/SmartPay-RFQ/blob/main/RFQ.md#621-technical-submissions

Context: When the FFS Team revised the De-risking Guide, it kept a list of backlog items for possibly addressing in future iterations. As the project lead during close-out, I transferred that list to the Guides repo.

Point of contact on this issue

Amelia Wong

Reproduction steps (if necessary)

No response

Skills Needed

  • Any Human
  • Design
  • Content
  • Engineering
  • Acquisition
  • Product
  • Other

Does this need to happen in the next 2 weeks?

  • Yes
  • No

How much time do you anticipate this work taking?

No response

Acceptance Criteria

This ticket would involve:

  • assessing the utility of the requested content by having conversations with relevant 18F staff (starting with Acq) to decide if the worksheet should be revised
  • if no, you're done (after recording in this ticket a reason)
  • if yes, the next step is figuring out what should be said or linked to with relevant 18F staff input
  • if new content is needed, writing/editing content
  • notifying TTS Outreach of changes to see if new content requires going through GSA concurrence
  • going through GSA concurrence, if needed
  • publishing

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    GuidesInitiative 2Tracks work for "Improving the Maintainability of the 18F Guides and Methods"

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions