@@ -48,25 +48,25 @@ For each question, the administrator can define any number of conditions to
check against the requestor's answer. When a requestor submits an answer that does
not comply with all of the conditions, the answer is flagged in the interface
as making the expense non-reimuburseable. The first release must support the
following conditions:
* Boolean: is yes, or is no
* Selection: the selected value is in a specific subset of values
* Date: the value is N days before and/or after today or a date in another answer
Using these same conditions, the administrator can define questions that are
conditional on other questions' answers. These questions are only presented
to the requestors when they submit an answer that meets the specified conditions.
For illustration purposes, the common deployment is expected to have
For illustration purposes, the canonical deployment will have
relatively few unconditional questions about each expense (type of expense,
receipt, amount), and then a series of conditional questions based on those
answers (e.g., follow-up questions specific to airfare expenses,
accommodations expenses, etc.).
### Requestor workflow
Requestors can log in and see the status of all their requests. They can also
create a new request, which starts either the Pre-Approval or the In Progress
state.
When they view a report, it shows the questions and answers about the entire
@@ -89,39 +89,40 @@ follow-up questions as necessary based on those answers.
When an In Progress report has at least one expense associated with it, and
all questions have been answered, the requestor may submit the request for
approval. If any of the answers do not meet the administrator's conditions
for payment, the requestor may still submit the request, and provide an
explanation for why the request should be paid (e.g., because it was
approved in advance). Once the request is submitted, it moves to the
Submitted state.
### Bookkeeper workflow
Bookkeepers can log into the system and see all requests.
When bookkeepers reviews a Submitted report, they can change the report's
When bookkeepers review a Submitted report, they can change the report's
state, and include a note explaining why the report was moved to that state
(e.g., moved back to In Progress because a specific receipt was insufficient
documentation). When they do this, the system sends e-mail to the requestor
letting them know about the change, including the rationale provided by the
bookkeeper.
The bookkeeper can export any request to the books. The first release of the
software will simply provide an archive that includes all of the request's
supporting documentation, plus a `.ledger` file with entries for each
expense. However, note that when building this feature in the code and UI,
it should be relatively generic. Exporting needs to be abstract enough that
it's simple to integrate with other accounting systems. Even the mechanics
may be different; for example, an SQLedger exporter may add entries to the
system directly, rather than providing the bookkeeper with a file download.
it should be relatively generic. Exporting should remain abstract enough
that integration with other accounting systems remains simple and
straightforward. Note that even the mechanics could be different; for
example, an SQLedger exporter may add entries to the system directly, rather
than providing the bookkeeper with a file download.
## Requirements potentially for first release
These are features that we would like the system to have, and it may make
sense to make them requirements of the first release depending on how it's
built.
* CiviCRM integration: Many NPOs are already using CiviCRM. CiviCRM
integration would provide a familiar interface to users, and simplify
system administration for the organization. It may be possible to build
the system as a CiviCRM extension. If so, we would get this feature for
"free."
@@ -144,24 +145,25 @@ built.
These are features that we would ultimately like the system to have, but we
know aren't necessary for the first version. It's good to keep them in mind
when architecting, but also to know that they've been considered and aren't
immediately necessary.
* Allow optional questions: With this, question conditions probably need to
be extended to address the case of "other question isn't answered"
* Additional exporters:
* Export to SQLedger
* [Certainly many more, feel free to add them here]
* Richer lifecycle management: A leader may need to approve a request before
it's added to the books, like an employee's manager or a program director
* Various currency improvements:
* Automatic currency conversion for validation (e.g., validate that an amount
in an aribtrary currency is within a limit in USD)
* Validate currency amounts from outside data sources: The main case for
this is per diem, where many organizations use rates that are determined
by another party (e.g., US GSA) and updated periodically.
* Handle totaling the request based on currency (e.g., expenses can are in