Dispatch & Special Issues Investigation #14433

WTF special issues? Dispatch? aaaaa

starting point: Dispatch ui: two possiblities - "cases ready for dispatch" is displayed on load, and "Establish claim" button to start one

pursuing the text - starts in client/app/containers/CaseWorker/HeaderMessage.jsx which displays it based on availableTasks & tasksRemaining pulled into client/app/containers/CaseWorker/CasejkWorkerIndex.jsx props pulled straight through... props loaded in app/views/dispatch/establish_claims/index.html.erb via tasks.any_assignable_to?(current_user) unsurprisingly, that lives in app/models/dispatch/task.rb

important: Dispatch::Task is not a Task, it's its own thing it does not appear in Task Trees

Dispatch::Tasks live in app/models/dispatch/task.rb and this object serves as the superclass for the EstablishClaim object, which lives app/models/establish_claim.rb. Dispatch::Tasks also have a ClaimEstablishment object.

Dispatch::Task is largely concerned with managing the process in Caseflow, agnositc of the third party we're interfacing with.

EstablishClaim is more specifically concerned with interacting with VBMS (and BGS?)

Dispatch::Tasks belong to a LegacyAppeals, it looks like in the form of an EstablishClaim - when are these created?

CreateEstablishClaimTasksJob find/creates EstablishClaims for Legacy Appeals based on the queries: AppealRepository.amc_full_grants - Full Grants AppealRepository.remands_ready_for_claims_establishment - Partial Grants

Full Grants: app/repositories/appeal_repository.rb:amc_full_grants calls VACOLS::Case.amc_full_grants Query VACOLS for VBMS cases in HIS status (BVA action completed) with allowed issue(s) and no remanded issue(s) since the param date

Partial Grants: app/repositories/appeal_repository.rb:remands_ready_for_claims_establishment calls VACOLS::CASE.remands_ready_for_claims_establishment Query VACOLS for VBMS cases in Remand statue, sitting in location 97.

which user are we interrogating? those with role "Manage Claim Establishment", "Establish Claim" (either)

A: anyone with some roles - back to the Q

Theory: represents the result of establishing the claim in VBMS?

You can hit put dispatch/establish-claim/update-appeal with a list of updated special issues in the params. this invokes app/controllers/dispatch/establish_claims_controller.rb:update_appeal which passes the params that pass special_issues_params, which permits LegacyAppeal::SPECIAL_ISSUES.keys to be passed to an update call on the associated LegacyAppeal.

Leave for where:

• VACOLS
• VBMS

No. Some Special Issues cause routing to be handled distinctly, but no info goes out

Helpful Additional Information

• Why does Dispatch offer all Special Issues on AMA appeals?
• When can we expect that a legacy case is "Done" in Caseflow, in the happy path?

Kat Tipton Jul 16th at 1:06 PM threading notes from the call

Kat Tipton 3 months ago Caseflow Dispatch is not used by the board. its used by AMO

Kat Tipton 3 months ago AMA is dispatched through Caseflow Queue+IDT

Kat Tipton 3 months ago Legacy dispatch (by the board) is done in VACOLS still

Kat Tipton 3 months ago AMO is not integrated with the board. they have their people and do things their way

Kat Tipton 3 months ago some overlap in people, but historically that do their own thing

Kat Tipton 3 months ago Paul doesn't think Dispatch is making that decision at all. The board coding should have been done by the judges

Kat Tipton 3 months ago Paul believes the Special Issues as used by the board and the special issues as used by AMO may have overlap, but probably aren't teh same

Ann-Marie Raposo 3 months ago wow I need to get better at doing this

Ann-Marie Raposo 3 months ago thank you!

Hunter Schallhorn - OOO 10/1 - 10/16:hear_no_evil: 3 months ago Was this call with THE Paul Saindon?

Kat Tipton 3 months ago AND JED

Kat Tipton 3 months ago AND JOHN

Hunter Schallhorn - OOO 10/1 - 10/16:hear_no_evil: 3 months ago AND JED?!

Kat Tipton 3 months ago I was more than a little intimidated

Hunter Schallhorn - OOO 10/1 - 10/16:hear_no_evil: 3 months ago what a crew

Kat Tipton 3 months ago all attending agreed that is was frustratingly hard to deal with repeat terms at the board ("everyone will tell you exactly what a thing is, but what it is is different for each person")

• Queue Special Issues Questions #14524
• Dispatch Special Issues Investigation

1. Confirm with board that Queue Special Issues should affect Caseflow Dispatch (Ask Dustin? Dig into original implementing tickets, design, prs)
   • Interesting to note that in the original issue the language used; specifically "we want to experiment with attorneys entering special isues (in Queue)" and also that "we plan to deprecate Caseflow Dispatch down the line anyway"
     • This description could almost be construed as if Queue SI implementation was
       1. not meant to be a fully mature feature and
       2. a replacement for Dispatch SI if/when Dispatch is deprecated
   • Original PRs:
     • Adding special issue page
       • SpecialIssuesController
       • SpecialIssueList model
     • Test Special Issues Flow
       • Inserts Special Issues into AMA flow
     • Display special issues for legacy cases
     • Remove special issues for AMA
   • Relevant Epics/Issues
     • Create attorney special issues page
     • EP routing for legacy and AMA
     • Remove special issues page for AMA appeals
     • Deprecating Caseflow Dispatch Epic
     2. Confirm the SI responsibility
2. Sanity check Kat's findings that these are fully disconnected
   • There does not appear to be any relationship between the SpecialIssueList object and the SpecialIssues that persist directly on LegacyAppeals
3. Get a sense of the scale of the impact of the disconnect

+-----------------------------------------+                          +--------------------------------------------+
|                                         |                          |                                            |
|      Queue App                          |                          |            Dispatch App                    |
|                                         |                          |                                            |
|                                         |                          |                                            |
+--------+--------------------------------+                          +------+-------------------------------------+
         |                                                                  |
         |                                                         Saves to |
         |                                                         and reads|           Legacy Appeal
         |                                                         from     |   +----------------------------------+
         |                                                                  |   |                                  |
         |                                                                  +-------->Special Issues               |
         |                 Special Issue list                                   |                                  |
         |    Saves to       +-----------+                      +-------------->+                                  |
         |    and reads      |           |                      |               |                                  |
         |    from           |           |     Belongs to       |               |                                  |
         |                   |           |     one of           |               +----------------------------------+
         +------------------>+           +----------------------+                        AMA Appeal
                             |           |                      |               +----------------------------------+
                             |           |                      |               |                                  |
                             |           |                      |               |                                  |
                             +-----------+                      +-------------->+                                  |
                                                                                |                                  |
                                                                                |                                  |
                                                                                +----------------------------------+

Attys & Judges

• Special Issues are a subset of issues that are less frequently handled by the board
  • SIs identified by attorneys are for identifying a subset of issues that are assigned to speciality teams because they are less common
  • is this actually happening in Queue??
• Overlaps with but are not directly coordinated with Dispatch SIs
• When we remand/grant it has to go back to the originating org
• Attorneys are more saavy when identifying Special Issues and could be better suited for marking SIs
  • however this could potentially be outside of their scope of work
• Judge is for a check/second set of eyes
• What purpose is SI in Queue serving for attys & judges?

• Dispatch users just select them based on VBMS info
• SI issues are first entered by Intake into VACOLS??
• SIs are on appeals and means that cases go outside of the line of business and are redirected to certain orgs that aren't part of process (e.g. National Cemetary admin)
• SIs have to go through another different post-Dispatch process so they need to be identified
  • What is this process?
• Special issues identified by BVA Dispatch Users??

• the original idea was to have attys & judges be the ones selecting SIs
• the intention was to implement the routing and deprecate Dispatch completely
• SIs in dispatch only comm w/ Leg appeals (we know this)
• the thinking was that for AMA appeals, they would do that as part of atty & judge checkout
  • for Legacy appeals would still be the dispatch user
  • at some point - the idea came up that what if we have the attys & judges select SIs for Leg appeals as well
• for AMA appeals, SI list is being populated
• for Leg apps, SI list AND SIs on LegApp table
• the work started with org issue, creating the SI list
  • the goal was to do something with them and automate them (not fully understanding this)
• Lot of ppl (Mark Benjamin, LP, Anya) left at the same time who were working on the implementation
• Need to find EP routing (might be on the FE somewhere), then request is made to the backend to create the EP
• BVA Dispatch works with AMAs & Legacy Appeals
  • Goal is to bring in Caseflow Dispatch logic into Queue for BVA Dispatch users???
  • within the BVA Dispatch process
• Code that could prove useful in implementation of Special Issues routing logic
  • DecisionDocument
  • BoardGrantEffectuation

• Q: What is your understanding of the user processes for all the dispatch processes?
  • A:
• Q: Which user types are utilizing Dispatch (i.e. Intake, BVA Dispatch etc.)?
  • A: Veteran Benefits Center, Appeals Resource Center
• Q: What purpose was adding SIs in Queue meant to serve for attys & judges?
  • A: allow attys/judges to select SIs
• Q: Was informed by Dustin that SIs have to go through another different post-Dispatch process, do you know what process he is referring to?
  • A: the routing
• Q: What did we plan to pull out of dispatch to integrate into queue when we deprecated it?
  • A: the phases are listed in the Epic
    • create EPs for Legacy cases
      • we are doing this already for AMA in Caseflow
      • Legacy process is currently done through Dispatch
    • implement additional routing changes that Appeals Resource Center wanted to make (what are these exactly?)
    • could we put tasks in our non-comp Queues (VHA etc.) so they could work legacy tasks as well
    • Missing Decisions Report is generated in Dispatch for Legacy appeals if the BVA Dispatch user outcoded the appeal but didn't upload the decision docs
• For legapps, certain are only adjuticatable by certain ROs
• Dispatch was launched so that ROs could update appeals and benefits info

• When AMA was passed, VBA was using the National Work Queue (NWQ)
  • way for VBMS to automate routing for finalizing benefits after a decision was made
  • if we put an EP for a specific location, the NWQ should route that EP to the specific VBA office that can finish/finalize/update the benefits for the AMA appeals
    • for AMA cases, the EP can be put in the NWQ location
    • for legacy, Caseflow Dispatch has all of that routing
    • VBA/VBMS told Caseflow that NWQ would NOT route legapps
• Motivation behind deprecating Dispatch is that it's old, terrible for Batteam
  • wherever we can automate routing for legaps, why not!?
• We removed the AMA SIs page
  • Remove special issues page for AMA appeals #8616 -- "because the VBMS National Work Queue (NWQ) will be able to recognize special issues attributes that already exist in VBMS and route EPs correctly."
  • Now that we have a AMA SIs page, what if the list of SIs selected for an appeal is different from those in VBMS for the appeal?
• When Dispatch was originally designed, SIs was just for routing

• Attorney looks at Queue, maybe uses Reader, then opens up IDT to draft decision & sign in Word doc format
  • They then come out of IDT and go back to Queue to complete the drafting process
• Looks something like this: Queue -> get task in IDT -> do task in Queue -> pass task off
• BVA dispatch users look at what a judge signs and do QC checks via IDT
  • IDT was built for these folks before Queue existed
  • these 2 products were then combined into the BVA Dispatch users workflow when Queue was created
  • there is a folder of IDT screenshots that exists somewhere

• LP considered it intentional that the Attorney/Judge selections did not affect Caseflow Dispatch
  • there were some plans to compare who was more accurate, and advocate to the board to do it with attys?
• 'Dispatching' to various specific places wasn't supposed to be necesary for AMA

• Q: What does the board want SIs to do, i.e. are they actionable, informational, or a mixture of both?
  • A: There are some issues that have special routing rules, I will need to touch base with John & Mike to inquire which ones those are.
• Q: For the new 4 SIs are any of them actionable or just informational
  • A: Just informational (for congressional reporting), none have any actionable tasks or routing rules associated with them.
• Q: Do attys & judges know what should be happening/what clicking SIs does?
  • A: She will need to inquire on this one.
• Q: Does the board still think Caseflow Dispatch users should have the authority to select these SIs
  • A: Will confirm

Does IDT allow users to select special issues?

• where does it get SIs from
• Chandra may have info on IDT