Reduce clicks while adding verification on Evidence

Hi Chandra

The Product Development (PD) team is aware of the importance of this issue to Clark County and is actively evaluating the Evidence Verification enhancement request to reduce the number of clicks required during evidence verification, where verification of evidence can happen simultaneously with capturing evidence.

This request is aligned with our overall strategic objectives of improving caseworker productivity through workflow efficiencies. We are reviewing the issue and potential solutions to appropriately assess when this might be included in the Cúram roadmap. We will continue to share updates as additional information becomes available in coming weeks.

regards,

Marina Pascali, Product Management

Thanks Angela. I will pass this information to County Business.

Hi Chandra

We have reviewed your enhancement suggestion.

Based on the information provided, our understanding of your request is as follows:

• The underlying business problem to be addressed is the reduction of clicks during verification of evidence, where verification of evidence can happen simultaneously with capturing evidence.

It is important to note that how this problem is resolved may not be the solution you have described (the popup box of all evidence, checkboxes to select evidence to be entered and iterating through to capture/verify each one checked etc).

The theme is aligned with our current multi-year strategy for our product. As an organisation, we’re continually looking for ways to reduce clicks, increase productivity and better support caseworkers. We take a holistic view across the solution and have already introduced enhancements such as the enhancement delivered to Surfacing Menu Actions, with further improvements underway - like the work on Cúram Action View.

While we can’t commit to a specific date for any single enhancement, these efforts are part of a broader goal to streamline workflows and reduce friction for users, and as such this request is included as part of our product roadmap.

Thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with us. We are committed to involving our users in building our product roadmap and appreciate your suggestions.

Regards,

Angela Brady, Cúram Product Management Team

Hi Angela - I had County Business review your response and below is the update.

"The description in comment from Angela Brady on 9/2 does not fulfill our request. The description is specific to verification's in the system, we envision the option to add evidence along with verification's in one flow; comment doesn't address the addition of new evidence."

Hi Chandra,

Thank you for clarifying the request. It is now clear that for any change of circumstance or application processing, where a caseworkers is maintaining evidence, the citizen will have proof with them and therefore it is possible to process verifications alongside the capture or maintenance of evidence.

The underlying business problem to be addressed is the reduction of clicks during verification of evidence. We currently provide a feature in Curam that multiple evidence records to be verified together rather than verifying each individually. This alternative approach to verifications reduces data entry and clicks. If performed as an action against a single evidence, applying verification proof is repeated evidence by evidence. However, the alternative flow start from a verification document perspective, which will list all evidence that could use that document as proof and the caseworker can simply select which evidence record to apply the proof to. For example, the process could start with a client's passport or birth cert and it will then list all unverified evidence for that client that could use the document for verification purpose. On selecting save, the system processes the evidence verification in same manner as if the document was applied individually to each selected evidence record.

Please let me know if the above feature has been considered. Otherwise the business problem of reducing clicks as part of verification processing is the key business problem to be further explored here.

Regards,

Angela Brady, Cúram product management team.

Hi Angela - Below is the response from our Clark County Business Team. Please let us know if you need more information.

Use case is not specific to change in circumstance, it can be for any and all evidence. Yes, our applicants are aware of what they need to submit as we provide them a verification checklist at the time of application.

We envision the flow as the following:

ACES Currently:

Our evidence entry process currently requires many clicks and toggles to add one evidence screen and its corresponding verification's, which is quite time-intensive for our staff.

ACES Requested Improvement:

We are looking for an automated workflow solution that would streamline the process by reducing the number of clicks and toggles. Below is what I am proposing:

1. A pop-up box appears when staff navigate to the IC, Evidence, Dashboard (this could even start at the Person Page)

2. Staff can check boxes for what they need to add (example: staff would check income, resources, vehicle, update person page)

3. Once staff confirm their selections, the system would automatically navigate them through each required screen in sequence

   1. Take them directly to the first evidence screen (no clicks or toggles)

   2. After they input information and hit “next,” the system will automatically navigate them to the verification upload

   3. Once verification's are uploaded, the system automatically takes them to the next screen

i. There will need to be a ‘next’ button to click in the event the applicant didn’t provide one of the needed verification's

d. ACES continues this automated flow until all selected items are complete

Instead of staff manually navigating evidence and verification input. They would select what they need upfront, and the system would automatically navigate them through the selected screens and verification uploads. This would significantly reduce time spent on navigation.

Hi Chandra,

We have reviewed your enhancement suggestion and require more information to properly understand the issue and the business scenario you are trying to support.

Based on the information provided, our understanding of your request is:

• Provide the ability to combine the addition of verification proof into the evidence maintenance transaction so from caseworkers perspective it is a single flow and not separated

While we understand what you mean and the value this would provide in reducing clicks, we would like to better understand the scenarios if/where this might be used. Is a citizen presenting with a change of circumstance where they have the proof to provide alongside the specific change they are reporting? If so do the citizens know in advance what proof they need to supply alongside any change of circumstance or how are they made aware of this. Does this apply to change of circumstance only and if so, is it to specific change of circumstance?

Please provide the requested information within 30 days so we may proceed with our evaluation. If we do not hear from you within that timeframe, we will have to close the request due to insufficient information.

Regards,

Angela Brady, Cúram product management team.

Hi Chandra,

Thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with us. We are committed to involving our users in building our product roadmap and appreciate your suggestions.

We will review the information you have provided and get back to you within 30 days. If additional details are required to complete our evaluation, we will send you a request for more information.

Thank you,

Graham McCrindle, CURAM Product Management Team