human-essentials icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
human-essentials copied to clipboard

Correcting the ability to request item previously associated with a child,when partner is not allowed to request the item

Open cielf opened this issue 3 years ago • 1 comments

Summary

Partners are allowed to select from a subset of all the items the essentials bank offers. This is governed through partner groups.

Screen Shot 2022-05-09 at 1 00 31 PM

When the partner enters a child into the system, they also indicate the Diaper/Item used by the child. The partner selects from the items they are allowed to request.

Then, when making a request through the "Child" Subsection, the partner selects the child that the request is for.

Screen Shot 2022-05-09 at 1 19 18 PM

If the partner is in a group that is not able to select the item associated with the child, the partner should not be able to make a request for that child. I suggest we could still list the child, but the toggle should be replaced with the words "Item not requestable"

Things to Consider

This definitely interacts with something from the May stakeholder circle -- (from Sean's notes) "3) We should have toggles?/checkboxes?/something on the partners to denote if they distribute diapers or period supplies/adult incontinence. Or both. If they don't distribute diapers we shouldn't show the families and children information on the partner side."

Depending on how we attack that, it could render this issue moot.

Criteria for Completion

  • [ ] If the partner can not request the item associated with the child, replace the toggle in the child request with "Item not requestable"
  • [ ] Add a test proving that it works

cielf avatar May 09 '22 17:05 cielf

I think this will be rendered moot by #3091, but confirm before closing

cielf avatar Aug 21 '22 15:08 cielf

@cielf is that the correct issue you are referencing that would make this not needed?

edwinthinks avatar Oct 29 '22 21:10 edwinthinks

@cielf will verify that this is now moot

scooter-dangle avatar Jan 08 '23 15:01 scooter-dangle

It's not moot I do think it's low priority, though. The situation would have to be something like that a partner had been allowed period supplies at one point [and had selected them for a child], and then wasn't allowed period supplies.

cielf avatar Jan 13 '23 13:01 cielf

We agree that it's a potential quirk/bug in the app, but it should be rare enough that we can focus on other things.

scooter-dangle avatar Jan 15 '23 15:01 scooter-dangle