Simplified HT Reporting Site

Discussions around miscellaneous technologies and projects for the general membership.
User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Simplified HT Reporting Site

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:23 am

While brado426 keeps up the great work on the real solution to HT/VT reporting, I am wanting to create a simplified site that would comply with current church policy and still allow the ward to leverage the power of the internet for Home Teaching reporting. Of course, a stripped down version limits the effectiveness, but in this case it seems that some functionality is better then none.

The challenge then is to come up with a solution that fits within church policy and yet begins to meet the needs of the EQ/HP/RS for reporting purposes.

Here's what I'm thinking, let me know of any problems you foresee:

Disclaimer on each page something to the effect of: "This is not an official church site. This page is being used by the ____ Elder's Quorum as a means to aid in Home Teaching reporting and is not produced, endorsed, or supported by the church. Use of this site complies with current church policy and is subject to local leadership discretion."

Features:

1. In quorum meetings or in PPI's Home Teachers can give their email address to the quorum presidency for inclusion in the site. Alternatively a printed reminder can be given in quorum meetings with a form to complete and hand back.
2. Periodic e-mails will be sent out with a HT reminder and a link for reporting
3. A page will be provided with an e-mail form to be filled out where the HT fills in the field indicating which family was visited
4. E-mail sent directly to district supervisor to be manually recorded in church system
5. Printable form for Home Teachers to fill out manually and hand to/mail to district supervisor

I think this can be expanded within the context of the current church policies, but I think it's a good place to start. Like I said, it excludes an immense amount of the functionality and benefit of Brado's system, but it is at least something to work with. The goal is simply to make reporting a little bit better/easier than it currently is.

What do you think? Would such a system be acceptable?

Nick


User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Wed Nov 21, 2007 10:32 am

I think you might be missing one of the major security concerns with brado's site: the fact that sensitive member data is being hosted on non-Church servers.

If that problem was resolved, then there would be no need for a stripped-down or lighter-weight version; we would just go with brado's solution.

EDIT:
By the way, let's not get into a discussion of whether it really is sensitive data or not. Been there, done that argument...

Thanks.

User avatar
brado426
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Foothill Ranch, CA
Contact:

Postby brado426 » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:12 am

I thought he was suggesting that instead of having member data on the site, a form is presented to the user that needs to be filled in manually.

I have tried very hard to think of ways to "dumb down" my application so that it could be used and provide some benefit, however I always end up concluding, "What's the point?" The biggest problem I see is that if a blank form is presented to the Home/Visiting teacher, the likelihood of the brother or sister reporting online would be significantly reduced. I have found, by experience, that if you remove too much functionality of a system like this, it ends up being easier to continue with the current method of making phone calls. If you provide the needed functionality, the benefits are enormous.

In my opinion, the key to making this work is to make it as simple and fast as possible for the Home/Visiting teacher to report and also just as easy for the Presidency to retrieve the results. This requires the individual's names and e-mail addresses to be available to the website.

Brad O.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20778
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:32 am

mkmurray wrote:let's not get into a discussion of whether it really is sensitive data or not.


To do a simplified HT/VT site was a good idea, but until we resolve the "what's sensitive" issue, there's no way it can be done.

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:27 pm

brado426 wrote:I have found, by experience, that if you remove too much functionality of a system like this, it ends up being easier to continue with the current method of making phone calls. If you provide the needed functionality, the benefits are enormous.

I agree 100%. That's why I would like to see your full solution move forward.
RussellHltn wrote:To do a simplified HT/VT site was a good idea, but until we resolve the "what's sensitive" issue, there's no way it can be done.

I guess what I mean is that us continuing to argue over what is sensitive data is proving fruitless, unless we can have more input from Church employees. I'd like to hear their side of the discussion. It's been pretty quiet from their side.

User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:05 pm

mkmurray wrote:I think you might be missing one of the major security concerns with brado's site: the fact that sensitive member data is being hosted on non-Church servers.


I haven't missed that at all! In fact, what I'm proposing is designed to completely bypass the need to host any data about anyone that does not specifically give you the information themselves and say, "Please send me an email to remind me to report my home teaching and oh bytheway send it to this email address."

As far as I'm concerned, any data obtained from MLS is sensitive. If however, Brother Smith gives me his e-mail address personally and gives me permission to send him an email, his e-mail is not sensitive data even if it is the same email address he has listed on LUWS.

I think there is a lot we can do in the confines of the current policies to make reporting good, maybe better, but I agree, certainly not best. I know brethren who don't report simply because they don't want to tell someone in person that they didn't home teach this month, so they ignore the phone call or don't return the call when they get the message. It's a lot less intimidating to click an email link, click didn't teach, and click send. It also gives the home teacher an opportunity to give real feedback about the family each month, not just taught or didn't teach.


User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:06 pm

RussellHltn wrote:To do a simplified HT/VT site was a good idea, but until we resolve the "what's sensitive" issue, there's no way it can be done.


I disagree. There may be no way to include every feature you want, but there are certainly ways to improve reporting.


User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:09 pm

mkmurray wrote:I guess what I mean is that us continuing to argue over what is sensitive data is proving fruitless, unless we can have more input from Church employees.


I agree. So throw out all data supplied to the church; I think there are still ways we can improve reporting until Brado's system is approved and put into action. "Every little bit helps."

I'm with you, I can't wait until Brado's or a system similar is available, it is the full solution. I'm looking for an interim band aid.


User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:11 pm

brado426 wrote:I have tried very hard to think of ways to "dumb down" my application so that it could be used and provide some benefit, however I always end up concluding, "What's the point?"

Brad O.


It doesn't make sense to dumb down your application because it is just too good. I totally agree! But that doesn't mean that lesser applications don't serve any purpose at all.


User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:13 pm

I'm confident that this will be productive. I'm going to start putting my time where my fingers are and I'll put a prototype together. I'll let you know what I come up with.



Return to “Other Member Technologies”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest