Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

How to best support a "work requirements exemption" screener

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#513 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Idoneità per principianti
35/100
Tipo di issue
Funzionalità
Chiarezza
Abbastanza chiara
Stato di attività
Attiva
Ambito
backend, documentation

Direzione di ricerca

Start by reviewing the existing SNAP and Medicaid work-requirements screener approach described in the issue, including its eligibility checks and expression-based OR logic. Compare a few implementation approaches and document their tradeoffs, then evaluate guidance options such as a tutorial or creation wizard. Done means the approaches and analyst guidance are tested against realistic complex screeners.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

big lift research

For the recent (SNAP) and upcoming (Medicaid) work requirements, we need to find a good way to support this concept in our platform.

It feels like the concept of a "benefit" is tenuous here - I'm thinking of Openfisca and how everything is a variable and variables exist in a hierarchy of many other variables.

In that OF conceptual framework, "Meets SNAP Work Requirement" would be a variable that we would either test on its own, or have it be included under the umbrella of the overall "Eligible for SNAP" umbrella.

What this would mean in our project is dissolving the difference under the hood between a "benefit" and an "eligibility check". Both would be variables and you would select a variable to behave as a benefit for the purposes of a screener. Then it's immediate "children" variables would become the eligibility checks.

I'm not convinced (yet) that we need to do the above - i think there is advantage (to analysts building screeners or library logic) in things being as simple (constrained) and straightforward as they are right now.

My belief in keeping constraints extends to the discussion about whether to open up the logical possibilities for eligibility checks beyond the current paradigm (supporting more complexity than "these N number of eligibility checks need to be all true for the benefit to be eligible).

The logical complexity will need to happen somewhere, of course, but I'd like the complexity to be in a single predictable place, if that is possible, by default... with eventual ability to open "escape hatches" to do whatever you want...

That said, there is little guidance in the app to help an analyst architect these different pieces to fit the paradigm... And we still have to prove that real (and complex) screeners can actually be built this way.

So, for this issue I'd like to do two things:

  1. Think through (and/or actually build) a couple of ways to do the SNAP/MA work requirements screeners. What are the pros and cons of each approach?
  2. Experiment with a few ways to guide analysts in how to think of the "benefit", the associated checks, and how the logic could be architected.
  • ideas:
    • AI-assisted "benefit creation wizard", resulting in a skeleton/draft of the benefit and checks needed.
    • Traditional tutorial that walks through the different UI elements and how to map benefit logic into our paradigm via a simple example.
    • AI-assisted "eligibility check creation" that asks for a description of the check (a prompt) and then offers a draft implementation in the app.

Sara's original notes:

Under the current set up, all benefit checks must be true for a benefit to be eligible. For this exemption screener, only one TRUE is needed. I summed all the results into a list, then used expressions to evaluate the results. That's why there is only one 'meets work requirements or exemption' check, which is using either the maQuestionList or snapQuestionList to determine eligibility. This is related to previous discussions we've had about a need for a way to add OR and AND conditions. This is basically one long list of ORs.

Image Image
Lingua principale
Java
Stelle
16
Fork
5
Merge medio
17h 24m
PR unite (30g)
23

Preparare l'ambiente

Non abbiamo ancora controllato i file di configurazione di questo progetto. Parti dal suo README e consulta la nostra guida al primo contributo per i passaggi generali.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di CodeForPhilly/benefit-decision-toolkit

Tutte le issue di CodeForPhilly/benefit-decision-toolkit

Issue simili

Altre issue su Java

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.