GAU-like object for non-NPSP orgs

[allisonletts]

• EDA - scholarships, for profit use cases
• some orgs would prefer to just Funding Program (idea?)
• same objects in multiple packages (e.g. Affiliations in EDA and NPSP)

[allisonletts]

Github repo: https://github.com/Nickers3/OutboundFundsGAU/

[Nickers3]

Data Model

[farahcharania]

[Nickers3]

Notes from Oct 27th call.

Code Freeze and Deadlines to consider

• Feature freeze - if we are to release for the summer - code complete by June 4th
• If we are to introduce objects or labels and get it translated, that needs to be earlier and that date is May 21st
• Plan for Go/No go leading up to summer release being January 21st.

What should be considered when deciding Go/No-Go?

• Part of the plan for the summer is to go to the community group, talk about it, find out what is needed to make the decision.
• Is this valuable enough to put effort into this?
  Ans: probably yes
  Need documentation on what this will look like. (eg. Data model, 4 objects.)
  How would the community and SFDO work together? Handoff points and back and forth.
• This document would be reviewed, if by the 21st of January there is enough firmness we would be able to make that decision.

Very important to set this team up for After Action Reviews for lessons learned

• There are many other teams / community efforts that would like to learn from us.

How this issue and the wider direction interact

• As the roadmap is being built out. Especially about GAU and tying in the allocation of funds. Between now and Jan 21st, we need to check in with the team to make sure that it is coherent / not-detrimental to the future vision.
• Possible to use OBF as a lean experiment and innovate. This is an opportunity to try something new. Doing something like this, getting the data model out there and we could grow on top of it (or terminate this early)
• Q: Would we try this new model out and make it available to the community?
  A: maybe.
  There are folks on the call with use cases
  Maybe get access to it early, but also good to get feedback from others first. This is inline with the narrative of how well adopted this product is by the community.
• Q: We'll be having a large Community Sprint in about mid February now if that timing works?
  Yes
  The result of this sprint would inform the Go/No-Go
• Q: Any packaging issues if we try feature ?
  A: No, especially if we did the same flow and let the packaging org be adopted.
• Q: If we get it out as a community package for now and it doesn’t use any tweaks and SFDO adopts it as a package, would there be negative connotation in the community when it comes to credit?
  A: We would communicate to the wider community as being well-discussed. This is not a paid product.
  We should also communicate our discussion early.
  This is a hybrid model of close source / open source. This is not common and so would take some effort to communicate.
• Q: Could it become a situation where the community package and stays that way - would it somehow compete with a paid product?
  A: Yes That’s a possibility. This is one reason why OBF was adopted. It is possible that it is not adopted by the SFDO for various reasons. (Currently no/low intention to monetize this feature)
  Also there is the support piece to consider. Once the community is no longer able to support users, then revenue is required for sustainability.

Comments (from Chat)

• Do we have a plan to reach out to people who does not have NPSP but want to manage their funds?
• Other open source commons teams really embraced the survey. There is a partner survey for DEI. To gain info and generate interest.
• Higher ed community group roadshow, with scholarships, grants and distribution of funds that has to be used for specific items. Should be easy to get 10mins to chat about it and recruit participants.
• Launch it without automation / integration. Keep it bare-bones to get feedback.
• Daniel: if you are looking for feedback, and do unmanaged deployment or start with a Throwaway packing org. STRESS TO USERS NOT TO PUT THIS ON TO THEIR PRODUCTION. Packaging things early doesn’t add too much.

Next actions:

• Nick: Create that rough doc (what it looks like, how would the community and SFDO work together).
• Daniel: Get folks to help with CCI
• Mark: Sample data to show different scenarios
• Shari: We would need to start now to recruit early adopters and testers. We should assign someone to recruit as this takes time.
• Meet again in 2 weeks.

Later:

• Recommendations to get Josh Simmons (SF Director of Open Source) to give his take on the hybrid model.

[Nickers3]

@sharireily @allisonletts I put together a quick summary of the Non-NPSP package. Feel free to add your comments prior to our chat next week: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nQBTGmeKk979sYM2qv9YhLt4r0zWvxmyUNxZoGe5qCs/edit?usp=sharing

[Nickers3]

Did some work on virtualsprint92420 branch adding Page Layouts and Lightning Pages for testing fund concept.

Also created sample dataset for individuals to use while testing. Added dataset to dev_org flow to allow for one command to test.

[Nickers3]

Fund reports don't filter on record ID so will need to resolve before creating package.

[Nickers3]

Here is a presentation doc I put together to showcase the Non-NPSP package: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/19Nil0A5uP51SVEmpcicR3XKQoFpxlTxN023LVLvySmk/edit?usp=sharing