Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Validation: Improve finding reference controls in findings workbook #3948

Closed
4 tasks done
jadudm opened this issue Jun 6, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #4283
Closed
4 tasks done

Validation: Improve finding reference controls in findings workbook #3948

jadudm opened this issue Jun 6, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #4283
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@jadudm
Copy link
Contributor

jadudm commented Jun 6, 2024

Consider the following:

award_reference reference_number type_requirement is_modified_opinion is_other_findings is_material_weakness is_significant_deficiency is_other_matters is_questioned_costs is_repeat_finding prior_finding_ref_numbers
AWARD-0003 2023-001 L N N Y N N N Y 2022-001
AWARD-0003 2023-002 L N N Y N N N Y 2022-001
AWARD-0004 2023-001 L N N N Y N N N N/A

Award 3 has findings reference 1 and 2. This is good.

Award 4 has finding reference 1. This is appropriate; a single finding can apply to multiple awards.

What does not make sense is that the auditor findings are different for row 1 and row 3. That is, finding reference 2023-001 is being described in two different ways. In the case of finding 001, is_material_weakness is both Y and N.

This can be seen in report 2023-05-GSAFAC-0000027356.

Validation improvement

Our data validation on this sheet should ensure that a given finding reference (e.g. 2023-001) has the same values in every instance.

For error reporting, we should report the first instance we find (in this case, row 1), and report each deviance as a separate error. So, we would expect one error to be reported back in this case, for row three. Something akin to:

On row 1, you reported 2023-001 as ..., and on row 3, you reported it as .... The FAC cannot accept one finding reference with different <insert word...>

Tasks

Preview Give feedback
@jadudm jadudm added this to FAC Jun 6, 2024
@jadudm jadudm converted this from a draft issue Jun 6, 2024
@jadudm jadudm changed the title Validation: Improve findings controls Validation: Improve finding reference controls in findings workbook Jun 6, 2024
@jadudm jadudm added the eng label Jun 6, 2024
@jadudm jadudm moved this from Backlog to Triage in FAC Jun 6, 2024
@sambodeme sambodeme self-assigned this Sep 9, 2024
@sambodeme sambodeme moved this from Triage to In Progress in FAC Sep 9, 2024
@sambodeme sambodeme linked a pull request Sep 13, 2024 that will close this issue
18 tasks
sambodeme added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2024
… section to ensure it passes with the migration flag
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 16, 2024
* Added logic to validate finding reference uniqueness

* #3948 Moved invalid historic record to the 'invalid historic records' section to ensure it passes with the migration flag

* #3948 Improved error message and added invalid test workbook
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Done in FAC Sep 16, 2024
@James-Paul-Mason
Copy link

Documented this ticket/topic for inclusion on the monthly update.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants