Form audit view: Form administration filter does not show VACO option; shows VAMC Facilities option

[jilladams]

Description

VA Forms can belong to any VA administration:

• VHA
• VBA
• VACO
• OCTO

In the Forms audit view, the Form administration field no longer shows VACO as an option on which to filter forms.

To reproduce

• Visit Form audit view: https://prod.cms.va.gov/admin/content/va-forms/audit
• Select Form administration, and see that VACO is not an existing option, but 'VAMC Facilities' is.
• In "Name/Title" type VA, Filter by -Any- form administration, and click Filter button
• Scroll the view results table and see several forms where Form Administration = VACO (Example search)

Screenshots

User story

Describe the audience/user, enhancement or fix, and value / outcome desired.

AS A Product manager / owner
I WANT to be able to filter by existing Form admin options
SO THAT I can gather insights about forms data across admins.

Engineering notes / background

I suspect this might be connected to recent work that pertained to forms / form admins, #12933

Acceptance criteria

• Form administration filter on VA Forms content audit view displays all valid selections for Form Administration on VA forms content type
• Behavior from Fix: VA forms are incorrectly showing up in VBA and VACO sections #12933 is maintained:
  • Forms are not listed in VACO or VBA Editor views.
  • Forms Section remains OCTO > Sitewide.

[jilladams]

@dsasser @FranECross FYI that this bug appeared today in prod. I suspect it's related to changes in #12933 . We're the only team that uses this audit view, afaik, but I do think it's worth looking into while the #12933 changes are somewhat fresh. Queueing for next sprint, and for refinement.

[dsasser]

@dsasser @FranECross FYI that this bug appeared today in prod. I suspect it's related to changes in #12933 . We're the only team that uses this audit view, afaik, but I do think it's worth looking into while the #12933 changes are somewhat fresh. Queueing for next sprint, and for refinement.

This bug must have been around for a while, since it was introduced back on Thu Nov 3 19:47:23 2022 via the commit 0cc8fa4 for #11246

Here is a screenshot showing the change and the related Sections that the IDs represent:

The correct IDs should be:
5
2
1
3
193

The only other way this could have been caused is if someone re-worded the existing Section terms, which seems very unlikely. Either way, it is a quick fix.

[jilladams]

Ahhh, so that must've come along with the Offices changes. Sorry to point the finger at you without receipts!!

(reading comprehension, Jill. wow.)