BlackFriday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Salesforce Exam Public Sector Solutions Topic 2 Question 22 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's Public Sector Solutions exam
Question #: 22
Topic #: 2
[All Public Sector Solutions Questions]

A government agency is currently using Business Rules Engine (BRE). Part of the current Prioritization matrix includes household income and household size. To correctly calculate the Households Area Median Income

(AMI) pool, the Expression Set needs to calculate the AMI and then evaluate the percentage against a predefined Federal Income Limit table to determine the prioritization pool.

To accomplish this, the BRE designer should include how many decision matrices?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

In the context of a government agency using the Business Rules Engine (BRE) to calculate and determine Households Area Median Income (AMI) prioritization using a matrix, the BRE designer should use two decision matrices (Option C). One matrix is necessary to calculate the AMI and to evaluate it against the federal income limits, which involves determining the percentage of AMI relative to these limits. The second matrix is then used to categorize these percentages into different prioritization pools. This allows for a clear separation of logic in handling the data: one matrix for the determination of AMI percentages and another for the allocation into prioritization pools based on these percentages.

Option A and D, which suggest using only one matrix, would not provide the necessary separation of calculations and evaluations for clarity and maintenance. Option B suggests using three matrices, which overcomplicates the process without clear necessity for three separate matrices when two are sufficient for the tasks at hand.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Elina
4 months ago
You make a good point, I see why the answer would be C now.
upvoted 0 times
...
An
4 months ago
But in the question, it mentions evaluating the percentages against the Federal Income limits, which would require two decision matrices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryrose
4 months ago
Honestly, I just want to know who came up with these weird names for the matrices. 'Prioritization pools' and 'Federal Income limits' - it's like government bureaucracy bingo!
upvoted 0 times
Celia
3 months ago
I agree, they could have just called them 'income categories' and 'income limits'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyce
3 months ago
I know, right? It's like they're trying to make it sound more complicated than it is.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elina
4 months ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is C.
upvoted 0 times
...
An
4 months ago
I think the answer is B.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stanford
4 months ago
I'm going with C. It's the most straightforward and logical approach. Plus, it leaves room for future expansion if the requirements change.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosita
4 months ago
D is tempting, but I don't think you can combine the prioritization pools and the Federal Income limits in a single matrix. That would make the logic too convoluted.
upvoted 0 times
Karl
3 months ago
I agree, combining the prioritization pools and Federal Income limits in one matrix could make the logic harder to follow.
upvoted 0 times
...
Boris
3 months ago
C) 2; One to contain the percentages in each prioritization pool and the second to contain the Federal Income limits to evaluate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eleonora
3 months ago
B) 3; One to contain the percentages in each prioritization pool, a second to contain the household data, and the third to contain the Federal Income limits to evaluate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gerald
4 months ago
A) 1; Only to contain the prioritization pools.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Tracey
4 months ago
B seems like overkill. We don't need a separate matrix for the household data since that's just input into the other two matrices.
upvoted 0 times
Francesco
4 months ago
B) 3; One to contain the percentages in each prioritization pool, a second to contain the household data, and the third to contain the Federal Income limits to evaluate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristal
4 months ago
A) 1; Only to contain the prioritization pools.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lisha
5 months ago
I think the correct answer is C. We need two decision matrices - one for the prioritization pools and one for the Federal Income limits. Keeping them separate makes it easier to update and maintain the logic.
upvoted 0 times
Genevieve
4 months ago
Yes, it definitely helps with organization and maintenance of the logic in the Business Rules Engine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Selene
4 months ago
I agree with you, having separate decision matrices for the prioritization pools and Federal Income limits does make it easier to manage.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel