🆔FP: Adjust codelist Betrokken Lokale Besturen
This page is a template for feature passports and can be copied and filled in/amended.
Status Feature Passport
| STATUS | OWNER | DATE |
|---|---|---|
In proposal | Yassin Sofie (peer review) | 14/6/2022 29/6/2022 |
In refinement - Design Research | ||
In refinement - Technical Research/Feedback | ||
In development | Nordine | 1/8/2022 |
In QA/ Testing | ||
In Final state |
Analysis
Current state
The current state can be found here: [OK] Betrokken Lokale Besturen / Publieke betrokkenheid
Problems
In this feature passport, we will tackle the problems the current state of the feature has:
A deep dive is done with experts in the field, and re-evaluation of the information we want to capture is executed. Then the conclusions were peer-reviewed by LOW and LF. These were the conclusions:
The current codelist is deemed to be too limited and not mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive.
The "werkingsgebied"/("gebiedsomschrijving" in the worship services context) will be an attribute that will be managed - outside - of "Local Related Municipalities"/Betrokken lokale besturen.
A definition is provided for each codelist item, since some exceptional cases led to misunderstanding about what each codelist item meant
Implications
Codelist
A municipality or province can only have one type of betrokkenheid per worship service.
The following codelist changes are needed:
| AS-IS Codelist | TO-BE Codelist | Business rule | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
Toezichthoudend en financierend | Toezichthoudend | Can only be 1 Has a financing percentage >0% | Slight definition change: 117 worship services need to be adjusted |
Deel van het werkingsgebied | Mede-financierend | Can be more than 1 Has a financing percentage >=0% | Big definition change Will be discussed in the Data section
|
Enkel adviserend | Adviserend | Can be more than 1 Has no financing percentage Can only be a gemeente | Slight definition change: can be more than one |
Required validations
Current
If a percentage for financing can be filled (only for type betrokkenheid relationship "Toezichthoudend") the percentage is higher than 0%.
Error message: "Het percentage moet groter zijn dan 0"
The validation on financing has to be 100% - this validation is already in place
Error message: "Het totaal van alle percentages moet gelijk zijn aan 100"
Proposed MVP
There can only be one gemeente/province with the type betrokkenheid relationship of "Toezichthoudend"
Error message: "Er kan slechts één gemeente- of provincieoverheid optreden als hoofdtoezichthouder"
Non-MVP
The type betrokkenheid relationship "Adviserend" can only be related to a gemeente and - not - to a province
Low priority
The attribute "Werkingsgebied" would need to be made visible again.
How to populate it with data?
Empty current data (it was taken directly from EredienstenSharePoint and was very unstructured
After LOW confirms the data quality is ok for the worship services regarding "Local Related Municipalities"/Betrokken lokale besturen, then we can generate this information. The expected output is the names of gemeente as comma seperated values
To be confirmed with Peggy if this is sufficient, and whether it should only contain Gemeenten (and also the special case of some orthodox worship services where ALL the gemeente of a province need to be mentioned in this field)
Peggy: For the Islamic & Orthodox there is manual work (+/- 30)
2. To discuss with Katrien whether this is a free-text field or a selection field
Definitions
Toezichthouder: Kan slechts 1 gemeente/provincie zijn per eredienstbestuur. Dit is de hoofdgemeente/provincie zodat duidelijk is waarnaar de notulen moeten gezonden worden, wie de andere gemeentes/provincies moet betrekken etc. Bij de orthodoxe en de islamitische besturen zal hier dus de naam van een provincie moeten staan en niet de naam van een gemeente. Bijkomend wordt er een financieringspercentage vermeld.
Mede-financierend: Elk bestuur in het werkingsgebied is mede-financierder. Dit is altijd hoger dan 0%, in het erkenningsbesluit (of andere bronnen) kan dit percentage worden teruggevonden. LF zal financieringspercentages voorzien bij onduidelijkheden.
Adviserend: dit is de gemeente waar een gebouw staat van een eredienstbestuur dat op provinciaal niveau wordt georganiseerd (Islamitische en Orthodoxe besturen). Het kan hier gaan over één of meerdere gemeente(s) (enkel bij de isl en de orth): deze gemeente maakt sowieso ook deel uit van de gebiedsomschrijving en is nooit financierend. Er is hier geen mogelijkheid voorzien om een % in te vullen.
Data
In this section the impact of renaming the codelist value is explained. Because the definition has changed, it impacts the recorded values.
Toezichthoudend en financierend > Toezichthoudend
Based on the data quality script, there are 119 worship services that have this relationship more than one. The local municipality that isn't the main "toezichthouder", need to get the role "mede-financierend" assigned.
Data change can only be made after approval of LOW
Deel van het werkingsgebied > Mede-financierend
This one is more tricky. A municipality that finances, is by definition part of the "werkingsgebied". But currently, if a municipality is being recorded as "Deel van het werkingsgebied", there is no possibility to provide a financing percentage.
Is it possible to leave this percentage field blank, but editable if LOW wants to register it?
1/8/2022 Nordine : Yes it is possible to leave it blank
Can we provide a SPARQL query of how many that need to be adjusted?
+/-1620 Gemeente organized worship services (Roman-catholic, Anglican, Protestant and Israeli)
If a gemeente is being recorded as "Deel van het werkingsgebied", then LOW needs to advise whether this record can be be changed to "Mede-financierder". Since having this data correct is not urgent for the November 2022 deadline, it is requested to leave the financing percentage empty.
+/-30 Provincial organized worship services (Orthodox and Islamic)
If a gemeente is being recorded as "Deel van het werkingsgebied", then LOW needs to advise whether this record can be removed OR whether the relationship can be changed to "Adviserend". Changing "Deel van het werkingsgebied" to "Mede-financierder" is incorrect. These gemeenten do not finance the worship service.
If a province is being recorded as "Deel van het werkingsgebied", then LOW needs to advise whether this record can be removed OR whether the relationship can be changed to "Mede-financierend".
Enkel adviserend > Adviserend
This is only relevant for Provincial organized worship services. There is a slight change: previously it was said that it can only be one gemeente, but after deep discussion, it is decided that it can be multiple. The logic goes as follows, a municipality can act as an advising entity in case of recognition or other request cases if a building of that religious community is present in that given municipality.
🤩Expectations
6/2022 : This is not urgent. Loket needs to have a correct list of municipalities with the role "Toezichthouder" by november 2022.
🤔Discussion points
Do we rename all the codelist values or do we create for some instances a new codelist value?
Solution
Design
User research
[If there is any user research preceding the wireframe mock-up stage, it needs to be documented here]
Mock-ups
[link to figma mockups + any explanation or extra documentation]
Technical
This part of the feature passport is owned by the technical team
[Information about the technical solutions for expectations that need it - e.g. using mu-search for showing all types of positions in one table.]
After the designer and/or the technical team finish their task, a meeting follows where the solutions are presented. The team exchanges feedback and amends the feature passport where necessary.
Last updated