NAM Q4a 2011 UAT Strategy Document v1 0

NAM 2011 Q4A Change Release
Version: v 1.1
Date: September 21, 2011
Page 1 of 18
(Including first part of Automated Data Gathering)
User Acceptance Test Strategy

Version: v 1.1
Page 2 of 18
Document History
Version Changes Author Date
1.0 1st Draft David Crane 8/3/2011
1.1
2nd Draft – Added description for
acronyms, update to Show All History,
change name of release, move ECIF
testing to first in the list
David Crane 8/9/2011
1.2 Final Draft – Added Closeout to the
items being tested, Added Reviewers
and Approvers, Update LOBs Affected
David Crane 8/10/2011
Document Reviewers/Approvers
Name
Position
Reviewe
r (only)
Reviewer
and
Approver
Steve Dayton UAT Manager / Delivery Manager X
Alan Parsowith AML Operations Director X
Virginia Hibbard AML Advisory Compliance X
Kaushik Sinha Technology – Project Manager X
Kavya Kalyana Production Support Lead, Americas
HUB
X
Rachael Blanchard PMO PM X
Christie Vita AML Operations X
David Roset AML Operations X
Maryjane Noberto PMO PM X
David Crane UAT Coordinator X
Kisha Merrell UAT Project Manager X
Manoj Jejware Technology X
Prerak Vora AML Operations PM X

Version: v 1.1
Page 3 of 18
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 3
1. Introduction 4
1.1. Purpose of this document 4
2. Scope 4
2.1. In Scope 4
2.2. Out of Scope 5
3. System Access 5
3.1. System Access 5
4. UAT Strategy 6
4.1. Assumptions 6
4.2. Entry Criteria 6
4.3. Specific Deliverables 6
4.4. UAT Dates 7
4.5. UAT Testing Strategy 7
4.6 Exit Criteria 15
5 Progress, Issue Tracking & Resolution 16
6. Roles and Responsibilities 17

Version: v 1.1
Page 4 of 18
1. Introduction
1.1. Purpose of this document
This document describes the key activities for the NAM User Acceptance Test (UAT)
required for successful implementation of the Q3 (Third Quarter) Change Release.
This project delivers enhancements to the QuickScreens NAM software system by
introducing new functionality to create Manual cases, rollup household focus LSB alerts and
team lead assignment of cases. It will introduce productivity enhancements for Quick
Clearing and showing all transaction history, and will incorporate functionality for automated
data gathering from the ECIF system.
2. Scope
The goal of this project is to produce fully functional and acceptable software product that satisfies
the high level requirements defined below
2.1. In Scope
This project delivers enhancements to the QuickScreens NAM software module of the AML-
M: AML MANTAS Analytic system (CSI App Id 34916), by introducing the following new
functionality:
1. Automated Data Gathering from ECIF.
(Americas Data Gathering BRD #3.1.1.4; Global Technology WorkSlate #3c-2)
This functionality will allow AML users to view data related to an AML case from
ECIF as required by the AML review processes without having to log into ECIF
directly.
2. Ability to create Manual cases for CPB, IPB, IAML and LSB.
(Global Technology WorkSlate #94; CR3575 or CR11147)
Following manual case types can be created:
1) Know Your Customer (KYC)
2) Suspicious
3) Subpoena
4) Senior Public Figures (SPF)
5) Non Government Organization (NGO)
6) Embassy Credit Card
7) Cash Sales Logs (CSL)
8) Payable Upon Proper ID (PUPID)
3. Rollup Household focus alerts
For LSB business line, Household focus cases should be rolled up to Customer
focus cases.
4. Show All Transaction History - Americas Data Gathering
(Americas Data Gathering BRD #3.1.6; Global Technology WorkSlate #3c)

Version: v 1.1
Page 5 of 18
This functionality will provide a way to view all transactions associated with an alert’s
account’s customer, not just those transactions that triggered the alert.
This feature utilizes only MANTAS data and therefore only goes back to the extent
that the MANTAS data is available (current month and previous six months)
5. Quick Clearing Functionality - Americas Data Gathering
(Americas Data Gathering BRD #3.1.8; Global Technology WorkSlate #3c-7)
This functionality will allow for the ‘quick clearing’ of cases such as those where a
similar case was recently reviewed. Identify previously closed cases when a new
case generates.
6. Team Lead Case Assignment
(Global Technology WorkSlate #95; CR3580 or CR11152)
This functionality will allow Team Lead roles to have functionality to assign cases to
themselves without ability to disposition cases.
7. Closeout
(Global Technology WorkSlate #75; CR10984 or PID 20081110-100)
This functionality will create a link between the Closeout case and the underlying
case, to track the case number from which the Closeout case stems from. This is an
item from 2010 QSQ4 being added to this Change Release.
2.2. Out of Scope
The following areas are out-of-scope of testing:
1. General systems efficiency testing is out of scope of UAT testing.
2. Updates or creation of procedures for AML Monitoring Operations, Production Support,
Staffing, and Communications about changes within Citi are out of scope of the UAT
portion of the effort.
3. System Access
3.1. System Access
Access to source systems (production access), Mantas, QSCM UAT UI and QSCM back-
end will be arranged for the System Implementation Support Group team prior to starting of
the UAT activities.
UAT testers should have access to all systems used for alert monitoring as well as ECIF.

Version: v 1.1
Page 6 of 18
4. UAT Strategy
4.1. Assumptions
 All entry criteria for UAT have been met.
 It is assumed that all UAT activities and tests are carried out on the basis of successful
completion of Technology SIT testing, as well as successful implementation of rules
defined in the FRD.
 UAT should focus on end to end business processes from an end user perspective to
confirm usability. All UAT activities will be carried out on the production data loaded in
UAT environment.
4.2. Entry Criteria
The following will be the entry criteria that must be met prior to the commencement of UAT:
 Approval of UAT Strategy document (this document)
 Confirmed availability of UAT testing resources
 Confirmed availability of systems (Mantas, QS, ECIF)
 Confirm performance of UAT systems to similar level of Production
 Access to all necessary systems and applications for each respective UAT tester
 Completion of required data loads
 Coding logic changes deployed to Quick Screens
 By end of 1st week of UAT: New Alerts from prospective business groups will be
identified:
o CPB
o IPB
o IAML
o LSB
o CBNA
o GTS
4.3. Specific Deliverables
This section describes the specific deliverables from Technology & Compliance to help
facilitate the testing, and when those deliverables need to be provided; whilst some are
required before UAT starts, others are only needed when a particular test is being
executed.
Team Business Deliverables Due Date
Technology ICG/GCG All evidence entry criteria are met
UAT start
date
Technology ICG/GCG
Status on all issues found (on
daily basis)
Ongoing

Version: v 1.1
Page 7 of 18
Technology ICG/GCG Any scenario rerun, as necessary Ongoing
Compliance ICG/GCG Approvals, as needed Ongoing
Compliance ICG/GCG Attendance on Project level calls Ongoing
Compliance ICG/GCG Escalation, w hen necessary Ongoing
Operations ICG/GCG Approvals, as needed Ongoing
Operations ICG/GCG Attendance on Project level calls Ongoing
4.4. UAT Dates
Q3 Release START DATE END DATE
UAT Commence 08/08/2011 08/12/2011
UAT Testing 08/15/2011 09/07/2011
UAT Closure 09/08/2011 09/09/2011
Move to Production 09/09/2011 09/12/2011
Data Testing Plan Start End Resource
SystemsSetupTesting 08/10/2011 08/12/2011 IT
IngestedDataTesting 08/10/2011 08/12/2011 IT
UAT Test – Functionality(testsbelow) 08/15/2011 09/05/2011 UAT
ECIF AutomatedDataGathering 08/15/2011 08/19/2011 UAT
Create Manual Cases 08/22/2011 08/23/2011 UAT
RollupHouseholdFocusAlerts 08/24/2011 08/24/2011 UAT
ShowAll Transactions 08/25/2011 08/30/2011 UAT
QuickClearingFunctionality 08/31/2011 09/01/2011 UAT
Team LeadCase Assignment 09/02/2011 09/03/2011 UAT
Closeout 09/04/2011 09/05/2011 UAT
4.5. UAT TestingStrategy
Listed below are details of the tests that are to be performed for NAM. The scripts will need to be
updated and modified to match to the specific test plan. Test Plan is available here:
The table below summarizes the tests that should be performed as part of the UAT phase.

Version: v 1.1
Page 8 of 18
4.5.1. Automated Data Gathering from ECIF (Test 1)
Overview
Test
#
Title Type Purpose Test
Applicability
Line of
Business
Affected
1
Automated Data
Gathering from ECIF
Quickscreens UI
Functionality
Test new feature which allows AML users to
view data related to an AML case from ECIF
without having to log into ECIF directly
NAM GTS
2
Create Manual Cases
for CPB, IPB, IAML,
and LSB
Quickscreens
UI Functionality
Test that the QuickScreens environment will
be able to accommodate the new
functionality to be able to add the following
case types:
1) Know Your Customer (KYC)
2) Suspicious
3) Subpoena
4) Senior Public Figures (SPF)
5) Non Government Organization
(NGO)
6) Embassy Credit Card
7) Cash Sales Logs (CSL)
8) Payable Upon Proper ID (PUPID)
NAM
CPB, IPB,
IAML,
LSB
3
Rollup Household
focus alerts for LSB
line
MANTAS
Data
Test to check for successful rollup of alerts to
Customer focus cases
NAM LSB
4
Show All Transaction
History – Americas
Data Gathering
Quickscreens UI
Functionality
Test functionality of new feature to view all
transactions associated with an alert’s
account customer, not just those that
triggered the alert
NAM
All
5
Quick Clearing
Functionality –
Americas Data
Gathering
Quickscreens UI
Functionality
Test functionality of new feature to ‘quick
clear’ cases and identify previously closed
cases when a new case generates
NAM All
6
Team Lead Case
Assignment
Quickscreens UI
Functionality
Test functionality of new feature to allow
Team Lead roles to assign cases to
themselves without ability to disposition
cases
NAM All
7 Closeout
Quickscreens UI
Functionality
Test functionality of new “Initiate Closeout”
button which will initiate the closeout
process. Also test link between Closeout
case and the underlying case.
NAM
CPB, IPB,
IAML,
LSB

Version: v 1.1
Page 9 of 18
Purpose To test that QS front end performs in expected manner. Test to ensure new
enhancements work as expected and existing functionality is not impacted
by changes.
Strategy Create test scripts based on the existing QS application. The script should
encompass verification for all functionalities (new fields/functionality,
amendments to user roles, permissions and workflow, etc.). Execute test
scripts( in the UAT environment and test that QS interface behaves as
expected.
Expected Outputs / Acceptance
Criteria
 QS user interface behaves as expected including requested
enhancements.
 No severity High, Medium level issues outstanding.
 Any severity Low level issues outstanding have agreed workaround’s in
place.
Testing Requirements
Dependencies Technology SIT complete on SIT data.
Mantas UAT environment loaded with required data (Mantas data pre-
processing and data loading complete).
Completeness of data ingestion from source system to Mantas.
Supporting Documentation To enable creation of test scripts, availability of: BRD and MDD
Inputs / Data Requirements Sufficient data sets available to enable sample checking of customers,
accounts, and transaction data covering data items required for all
applicable scenario types.
Data feed from Source Systems.
Transaction details in Mantas and source systems.
Access Requirements Access to sample data extracts from Mantas back-end database.
Access to Mantas UAT environment.
Access to QSCM UAT environment.
Access to Source systems or to output files for the sample identified for
testing.
Access to Mantas and Source systems or to output files for the sample
identified for testing.
Known Issues / Potential
Feedback
Access to source systems
Planning Considerations
Who Project UAT team
Timing As soon as data is available in QS UAT environment.
Effort 4 Days
Location Americas Hub.
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.2. Create Manual Cases for CPB, IPB, IAML, and LSB (Test 2)
Overview
Purpose To test that QS front end performs in expected manner. Test to ensure new
enhancements work as expected and existing functionality is not impacted
by changes.

Version: v 1.1
Page 10 of 18
expected.
Criteria
enhancements.
place.
testing.
Feedback
Effort 2 Days
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.3. Rollup Household focus alerts for LSB line (Test 3)
Overview
Purpose Test that the Rollup up of Household focus alerts rolls up properly with
Customer focus.
Strategy Create test scripts based on the previous roll-ups. Test script should be
organized to find cases in the database and be able to match it to a result
using Quick Screens.
Criteria

Version: v 1.1
Page 11 of 18
place.
testing.
Feedback
Effort 1 Day
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.4. Show All Transaction History – Americas Data Gathering
(Test 4)
Overview
Purpose To test that QS front end performs in expected manner in regards to the new
screen. Test to ensure new enhancements work as expected and existing
functionality is not impacted by changes.
encompass verification for all functionalities (including checking the new
hyperlink, populating the MANTAS Transaction Request Search parameters
and submit, validating that the data response from the All MANTAS
Transaction Request search, etc...) Execute test scripts in the UAT
environment and test that QS interface behaves as expected.
Criteria
enhancements.
place.

Version: v 1.1
Page 12 of 18
testing.
Feedback
Effort 4 Days
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.5. Quick Clearing Functionality – Americas Data Gathering
(Test 5)
Overview
Purpose Allows for the ‘quick clearing’ of cases such as those where a similar case
was recently reviewed. Identifies previously closed cases when a new case
generates. When a new case is generated, identifies any cases closed in
the last 45 days on the same Focus Name or Focus ID. If so, these cases
are flagged in the Case Details screen.
expected.
Criteria
enhancements.
place.

Version: v 1.1
Page 13 of 18
testing.
Feedback
Effort 2 Days
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.6. Team Lead Case Assignment (Test 6)
Overview
Purpose This functionality will allow Team Lead roles to have functionality to assign
cases to themselves without ability to disposition cases. Such cases must
be in Research category and in Initiated status.
When the Team Leads click on the Assign/Reassign button in Case Details
screen, they will be able to see themselves in the "Assign to" dropdown.
expected.
Criteria
enhancements.
place.

Version: v 1.1
Page 14 of 18
testing.
Feedback
Effort 2 Days
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.5.7. Closeout (Test 7)
Overview
Purpose This functionality will allow users to initiate the closeout process with one
button click.
expected.
Criteria
enhancements.
place.

Version: v 1.1
Page 15 of 18
testing.
Feedback
Effort 2 Days
Linked Activities
Linked Activities
4.6 Test Script
Draft Script.xlsx
4.7 ExitCriteria
The following are the UAT exit criteria that need to be satisfied prior to obtaining UAT Sign-off:
 Completed test scripts with test results
 Resolution of all ‘Showstopper’ & ‘High’ severity defects
 List of defects that are outstanding after UAT, including the workaround, resolution and
resolution date
 Updated UAT RICA log
 Closure Document (template attached below)
UAT Test Closure
Memo Template.doc

Version: v 1.1
Page 16 of 18
5 Progress, Issue Tracking & Resolution
The Project Team should ensure that:
 A RICA log (Risks, Issues, Change requests, Actions) is maintained - providing detailed
description, severity(High, Medium, Low, Showstopper), date found, target resolution date,
responsible team/individual for resolution.
Issues in the RICA log will be categorized and tracked as follows:
Category Description
ID Sequential Reference Num
UAT Phase <Comment: can category be based on Test number?>
One from:
 Data Existing data feeds + new sources -> EDW
 Data Feeds, EDW -> Mantas
 Data Transfer Mantas -> QSCM

Description Issue description
Status Open, Closed, On Hold
Technology
Component
“Data Feeds”, “Mantas”, “Quickscreens”, Thresholds.
Severity To assist testing team in understanding impact:
Showstopper-
Critical Issue that is stopping further progress being made; project
timelines are at risk, very severe impact to other issues and continued
testing. Should be worked as the most urgent type of issue. Should be
escalated if a swift resolution is not possible.
High-
Severe impact to ability to meet stated requirements, application / data
feed could not go-live without resolution of this issue, and other UAT is
dependent on, and will be delayed pending resolution of this issue.
Severe impact, application / data feed could not go-live without resolution
of this issue, other UAT activities may be affected but can continue whilst
this issue is resolved
Medium -
High impact, application / data feed could go live without resolution of this
issue, but resolution of the issue would be a high priority post-live and / or
significant re-work to processes / procedures will be required in the interim.
Low -
Moderate impact, application / data feed could go live without resolution of
this issue, resolution would be a medium priority post-live and some re-
work of processes / procedures would resolve the issue.
Moderate / Low impact, application / data feed could go-live without

Version: v 1.1
Page 17 of 18
Category Description
resolution of this issue, simple or no re-work to processes / procedures
required to resolve.
Priority To assist Tech team in prioritizing issue resolution work:
Showstopper – to be addressed as urgently as possible.
High - to be addressed asap
Medium - to be addressed to agreed timescale
Low - to be addressed as “nice to have” time allowing
Owner Business (Operational Readiness Team) Owner (Testing Team Stream
Leader)
Action Plan Record of action to be taken to resolve issue
Open Date Date issue identified
Technology
Contact
Technology team member assigned responsibility for resolution of the
issue
Target Date Target date for resolution – to be discussed and agreed with Technology
contact
Revised Target
Date
If applicable
Resolution /
Decision /
Outcome
Outcome of the issue
Resolved By Who decision, resolution, outcome reached by
Date Closed Date issue resolved / closed
Attached below are Templates for RICA Log.
RICA Log
Template.xls
6. Roles and Responsibilities
User Acceptance Test planning work, including UAT will be carried out in Tampa, Florida for the
migration of AML Monitoring activities from Puerto Rico to the NAM Hub.
Listed below is the UAT Testing Team and key contact:
Name Role Key Responsibilities
Kisha Merrell UAT Project Manager - Coordinateand manage UAT level activities.
David Crane UAT Coordinator - Support UAT team/PM
Steve Dayton UAT Test Lead
- Overall UAT senior project coordination.
Alan Shen
Apps. Dev. Group
Manager
- Development, configuration and
implementation of application (Mantas &
QSCM.

Version: v 1.1
Page 18 of 18
- Development, configuration and
implementation of data (data feeds to Mantas)
components.
- Issueresolution –applications.
- Issueresolution –data.
- Scenarios.
Alan Parsowith Sr. Group Manager,
Americas Hub
Operations
Approver
Kavya Kalyana Production Support
Lead, Americas Hub
Reviewer
Othniel Alexandre Global Production
Support Manager
Approver
Dennis Carey UAT Test Team Writingtest scripts ,addinginto QC
Abbreviation Expanded Form
AML Anti –Money Laundering
BAU Business As Usual
BO XI Business Objects version XI (11)
CSIS Citi Systems Information Security
DIS Data Information Specification
DW Data Warehouse
GIW Global Information Warehouse
FIU Financial Investigations Unit
GTS Global Transaction Services
ICG Institutional Clients Group
KL Kuala Lumpur (Asia Pacific business region)
NAM North American business region
TRP Targeted Review Program
UAT User Acceptance Testing

NAM Q4a 2011 UAT Strategy Document v1 0

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to NAM Q4a 2011 UAT Strategy Document v1 0

Similar to NAM Q4a 2011 UAT Strategy Document v1 0 (20)

NAM Q4a 2011 UAT Strategy Document v1 0