Vacancy and Round Reconciliation

Epic summary

The Vacancy and Round Reconciliation epic proves that the institution’s candidates and seats agree at the end of each round.

For every seat pool:

Opening vacancy
  + seats added or returned
  - valid joined admissions
  = closing vacancy

The workspace identifies discrepancies instead of allowing the institution to carry an unexplained difference into the next round.

Actors and access

Actor	Access
Counselling Coordinator	Performs reconciliation and resolves ordinary discrepancies
Admission Nodal Officer	Reviews and certifies the operational totals
Authorised Dean/Principal	Approves and locks round closure
Directorate/University/Trust Admissions Officer	Consolidated oversight
Counselling Integration Service	Sends or receives authorised status files
Internal Auditor	Read-only reconciliation evidence and exports

Screen structure and data captured

The workspace contains Internal Seat Position, Authority Comparison, Discrepancies, Submission, and Round Closure.

Reconciliation-row fields

Field	Entry type	Meaning
Cycle, process, and round	Selected context	Reconciliation boundary
Institution and cycle offering	Inherited	Programme seat being reconciled
Seat pool and category	Inherited	Authority/quota/category breakdown
Matrix version	Selected	Approved source version used as the opening position
Opening vacancy	System calculated/source	Seats available at round opening
Seats added/withdrawn/converted	System calculated	Versioned matrix movements
Allotted	System calculated	Accepted allotments for the row
Reported	System calculated	Candidates who reported
Admitted	System calculated	Approved admissions
Joined	System calculated	Completed joining events
Upgraded/resigned/withdrawn/cancelled	System calculated	Movement events effective for the round
Closing vacancy	System calculated	Opening plus inflow less valid seat consumption
Authority-reported figures	Imported/entered	Comparable figures from authority source
Difference	System calculated	MedCES figure less authority figure by measure

Discrepancy and submission fields

Field group	Fields
Discrepancy	Type, measure, internal value, authority value, affected seats/cases, severity, owner, due date, and status
Resolution	Root explanation, correction/source action, supporting evidence, deciding officer, and resolved time
Submission	Report type, authority, format version, reporting period, generated file, row totals, prepared by, and generated time
Approval/transmission	Approver, approval time, channel, transmission reference, sent time, acknowledgement, rejection, and resubmission version
Closure	Certified totals, unresolved authorised exceptions, closure authority, closure time, and source order

Manual figures cannot replace system-derived figures without a correction to the underlying source record or a documented authority discrepancy.

Use case 1: Reconcile seat movement

As a Counselling Coordinator
I want to reconcile the opening and closing seats
So that the next round starts from a defensible vacancy position.

Acceptance criteria

The workspace shows opening seats, additions, withdrawals, allotments, reporting, joining, upgrades out, resignations, cancellations, and closing vacancies.
Totals can be viewed by programme, seat pool, quota, category, and round.
Every movement links to its source candidate or authority record.
The system calculates the expected closing vacancy and compares it with the recorded matrix.
Material differences create blocking discrepancies.
The Counselling Coordinator can add an explanation but cannot force-balance the totals without a supported adjustment.

Negative cases and alternate flows

Candidate occupies two seats: Flag both records and prevent closure until resolved.
Negative vacancy: Identify the over-allotted pool and affected candidates.
Unaccounted seat addition: Require an authority source before accepting the change.
Candidate movement pending: Keep the round open or record an authorised unresolved item according to policy.

Use case 2: Compare MedCES with authority data

As a Counselling Coordinator
I want to compare institutional outcomes with the authority’s joined or vacancy file
So that both sides report the same result.

Acceptance criteria

The authority file is retained and linked to the round.
The comparison identifies candidate present only internally, present only externally, or carrying a different status.
Programme, seat pool, category, and joining-date mismatches are listed.
Each discrepancy has an owner, status, explanation, and resolution.
A corrected authority or institutional file creates a new comparison version.

Negative cases and alternate flows

Authority file unavailable: Permit preparation but not final authority-certified reconciliation.
Identifier mismatch: Allow controlled matching without changing the original source value.
Authority correction pending: Record the submitted query and keep the discrepancy open.

Use case 3: Submit joined and vacancy data

As a Counselling Coordinator
I want to prepare the institution’s round submission
So that the authority receives the correct joined and vacant position.

Acceptance criteria

The submission uses only approved admission and joining records.
The user previews candidate and seat totals before export.
The output follows the configured authority format.
Export or transmission records the version, user or service, time, and delivery outcome.
A later correction is issued as a new version.
Candidate information outside the required submission is excluded.

Negative cases and alternate flows

Unresolved blocking discrepancy: Prevent final submission or require the configured higher-level exception.
Delivery failure: Retain the generated file and create a retry task.
Submission after deadline: Record the missed deadline and require authorised escalation.

Use case 4: Close the round

As an Authorised Dean/Principal
I want to approve the reconciled closing position
So that the round becomes an immutable institutional record.

Acceptance criteria

The approver sees the opening, movement, joining, closing, discrepancies, and authority comparison.
Closure is blocked while mandatory discrepancies remain unresolved.
The approved closing position is locked and time-stamped.
Closing vacancies can feed the next applicable round without re-entry.
Reopening requires a reason, source authority, and controlled approval.

Negative cases and alternate flows

New revision arrives during approval: Withdraw the closing version and require review of the revision.
Later authority correction: Reopen through versioned correction rather than editing the locked result.
Insufficient approval scope: Deny closure for institutions outside the approver’s hierarchy.

Success outcome

The institution can explain every sanctioned seat and candidate outcome and can carry a trusted vacancy position into the next round.