Project Status Inventory

Purpose and status basis

This inventory summarizes the plans, technical documentation, analyses, and prototype status recorded in the PG Facts repository. The repository is primarily a documentation and planning site, not a project tracker. It does not provide one authoritative status field for every work item. “Not started or not yet delivered” below means the repository describes the capability as proposed, future work, or missing; it is not a confirmation from a project owner.

Not started or not yet delivered

• Searchable knowledge base: The repository describes the intended content and search-result model, but states that authored PG content has not been loaded and production search is future work. A visitor cannot yet search across the site’s knowledge base using a question such as “How do I help my husband cope with pain?”
• Content authoring, review, and publication workflow: The database content model is documented, but the technical documentation says there is no finished authoring and review application. The workflow and ownership for adding, reviewing, approving, and maintaining content still need to be established.
• Migration of existing website content: Migration is described as a planned path. The reviewed documentation does not show that Phase 1 content has been migrated into a populated, searchable system.
• Searchable provider and facility directories: The existing Clinic Finder is a promising concept, but the Phase 1 analysis records six provider listings, manual entry, and fixed options. A useful directory with search, filters, verification, and support for other facility types is not delivered.
• Searchable news, events, research, and trial records: These are identified as content that should be organized and discoverable. The Phase 1 analysis describes adding news and events as cumbersome and their presentation as fixed.
• Complete audience-focused information paths: The proof of concept documents patient, caregiver, provider, pharmaceutical, and guest examples. The repository presents these as prototype patterns, not complete, reviewed content and task flows for each audience.
• Community and research capabilities: The wish list and deliverables document patient and caregiver stories, wound-care and mental-health resources, surveys and statistics, a patient registry, clinical-trial interest, research participation, and peer support. These entries are plans, not evidence that these capabilities are operating.
• Accessibility, mobile, and performance validation: The analyses recommend direct testing. The reviewed inventory contains recommendations and checklists, but no evidence of completed audits or measurements.
• Content governance and quality controls: Medical review, source attribution, review dates, ownership, editorial standards, and publishing quality checks are identified as needs. A complete operating process is not documented as established.

Present or documented

• Phase 1 website: Project documents describe it as an attractive foundation that established All Things PG’s web presence and provides introductory PG information and engagement paths.
• Phase 1 maintenance guidance: The repository contains platform, maintenance, development, and site-guide documents. Recent project work also records the practical limits of maintaining content through the fixed CMS.
• Phase 1 analysis: Separate analyses and a unified comparison document shared strengths and limitations, including the lack of a database and the effect of the fixed CMS on adding capabilities and making content searchable.
• Database and DCMS design and prototype: The repository contains substantial schema, menu, routing, content-model, and proof-of-concept documentation. The technical pages describe the SQL schema and menu/import workflow as implemented, and the proof of concept demonstrates selected behavior.
• Prototype boundary: The technical documentation says the menu has data and linked placeholder documents, but those placeholders are drafts and unpublished. It also says authored PG articles have not been loaded and production search has not been built. The database and prototype are groundwork, not a delivered knowledge base.

Consolidated recommendations

1. Track delivery separately from design. Give each item a clear status such as proposed, designed, prototyped, implemented, or in use. Detailed design documentation can otherwise make a capability appear more complete than it is.
2. Complete the content system end to end. The schema is one part of the work; useful delivery also requires real content, authoring and review, publication behavior, and search that returns relevant pages.
3. Make search a central discovery path. Organize articles, trials, research, providers, events, and other resources so visitors can find them by subject and need, with audience context where useful.
4. Set expectations for the Clinic Finder. Preserve the value of the idea, while recognizing that the map alone is not a useful directory. The analysis and owner observations point to the need for adequate verified listings and meaningful search and filters before expanding it.
5. Reduce update friction for recurring content. News, events, trials, and provider records need manageable workflows and control over how entries are categorized and displayed.
6. Define ownership and review. Establish who can add, review, approve, and maintain information, especially medical content and listings that can become outdated.
7. Validate visitor tasks directly. Test with patients, caregivers, and clinicians, including mobile and accessibility checks, rather than relying only on appearance or automated text review.

Status to confirm

The repository does not provide a reliable current status for approvals, staffing, budget, production deployment, backups, or the operational state of the database and web prototype. Confirm these with the responsible project owners before turning this inventory into a schedule.

Back to top