[Request]: Consider revising Evaluator worksheet in De-risking Guide

[ameliaswong]

A description of the work

This was an idea/resource shared by Vicki McFadden during approvals:

“GSA Service Delivery has started breaking code review and UX review into two separate things. Asking for a user research plan explicitly. See example: https://github.com/GSA/SmartPay-RFQ/blob/main/RFQ.md#621-technical-submissions”

Context: When the FFS Team revised the De-risking Guide, it kept a list of backlog items for possibly addressing in future iterations. As the project lead during close-out, I transferred that list to the Guides repo.

Point of contact on this issue

Amelia Wong

Reproduction steps (if necessary)

No response

Skills Needed

• Any Human
• Design
• Content
• Engineering
• Acquisition
• Product
• Other

Does this need to happen in the next 2 weeks?

• Yes
• No

How much time do you anticipate this work taking?

No response

Acceptance Criteria

This ticket would involve:

• assessing the utility of the requested content by having conversations with relevant 18F staff (starting with Acq) to decide if the worksheet should be revised
• if no, you're done (after recording in this ticket a reason)
• if yes, the next step is figuring out what should be said or linked to with relevant 18F staff input
• if new content is needed, writing/editing content
• notifying TTS Outreach of changes to see if new content requires going through GSA concurrence
• going through GSA concurrence, if needed
• publishing