# Is anyone using the \`accept\_case\_reports\` transition and/or the \`case\_id\` workflows?

**URL:** <https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/t/is-anyone-using-the-accept-case-reports-transition-and-or-the-case-id-workflows/5613>\
**Category:** Technical Support\
**Created:** [May 11, 2026, 2:49pm UTC](https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/t/is-anyone-using-the-accept-case-reports-transition-and-or-the-case-id-workflows/5613 "2026-05-11T14:49:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jkuester](https://communityhealthtoolkit.b-cdn.net/user_avatar/forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/jkuester/32/806_2.png) [@jkuester](https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/u/jkuester)\
**Post date:** [May 11, 2026, 2:49pm UTC](https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/t/is-anyone-using-the-accept-case-reports-transition-and-or-the-case-id-workflows/5613/1 "2026-05-11T14:49:35Z")

</div>

Several years ago, I logged an issue about the problems I was having getting the `accept_case_reports` transition to work.

> <https://github.com/medic/cht-core/issues/9381>
>
> \*\*Describe the bug\*\*
> So, this is some ancient history (and I do not fully under…stand the workflow). But, I was trying to manually configure and test \`case\_id\` functionality by using the \`accept\_case\_reports\` transition to set the \`place\_uuid\` field on a report based on its \`case\_id\` value.
> 
> Unfortunately, I could not get this to work. The transition code would get triggered as expected, but the \`onMatch\` function \[returns the result of \`silenceRegistrations\`\](https://github.com/medic/cht-core/blob/53439767aa828c8bd7e5513ab59f1461ae7a741f/shared-libs/transitions/src/transitions/accept\_case\_reports.js#L97). In order to trigger the updates to the doc to be written to the DB, the \`onMatch\` function should resolve a truthy value. However, the \`silenceRegistrations\` function \[does not seem to ever resolve something truthy\](https://github.com/medic/cht-core/blob/53439767aa828c8bd7e5513ab59f1461ae7a741f/shared-libs/transitions/src/transitions/accept\_patient\_reports.js#L175).  
> 
> \*\*To Reproduce\*\*
> 
> Once again, I am not super familiar with the "proper" case\_id workflow, so maybe I am just doing something wrong here....  
> 
> I started with a \`register\_case\` app form that is associated with a contact when it gets saved. With this form, I enabled the \`registration\` transition and added the following app\_settings config:
> 
> \`\`\`json
> "registrations": \[{
> "form": "register\_case",
> "events": \[{
> "name": "on\_create",
> "trigger": "add\_case"
> }\]
> }\],
> \`\`\`
> 
> When I submitted a \`register\_case\` form, the transition would automatically update the report with a generated \`case\_id\`.
> 
> Then I created a \`case\_event\` form that contained nothing but a field to set the \`case\_id\` (no linkage to any kind of contact). I enabled the \`accept\_case\_reports\` transition with the following config:
> 
> \`\`\`json
> "accept\_case\_reports": \[{
> "form": "case\_event",
> "validations": {},
> "messages": \[\]
> }\],
> \`\`\`
> 
> When I submit a \`case\_event\` report (with the case\_id assigned to my previous \`register\_case\` report), I can see the \`accept\_case\_reports\` transition is triggered. It finds the existing case registration and sets the expected \`place\_uuid\` field onto the \`case\_event\` doc. However, since the \`silenceRegistrations\` function resolves \`undefined\`, this doc update is not persisted to the DB.   
> 
> \*\*Expected behavior\*\*
> I was expecting the \`case\_event\` report to be assigned to the place associated with my \`register\_case\` report.
> 
> \*\*Additional context\*\*
> 
> It seems like this workflow was broken in \`3.9.0\` :sweat: with \[these changes\](https://github.com/medic/cht-core/commit/32f501134ebde24e81075af56018971d1649f28d#diff-3cb63b4eca753069d70e238b3bb489a4857b55751231efd4bd9ffcd47f846b9fL191) to the \`accept\_patient\_reports.silenceRegistrations\` logic. Previously that function resolved \`true\` when it successfully completed. Afterwards, it resolves \`undefined\`.

There has not been any updates on this issue and at this point I want to open the discussion if anyone is still using the `accept_case_reports` transition and/or the `case_id` workflows?

If so, maybe I was just configuring something incorrectly when I logged that issue and all we need to do is update the docs. 🤷 If no one is using it, I think we should consider removing support for it since we are maintaining some bespoke code for it.

@yuv I know you have some experience with these registration transitions, so maybe you have some context?

@kenn you also come to mind as someone with visibility into a lot of the different ways the CHT has been deployed over the years. Do you know anyone currently (or previously) using the `case_id` functionality?

Thank you!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![diana](https://communityhealthtoolkit.b-cdn.net/user_avatar/forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/diana/32/2049_2.png) [@diana](https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/u/diana)\
**Post date:** [May 12, 2026, 7:52am UTC](https://forum.communityhealthtoolkit.org/t/is-anyone-using-the-accept-case-reports-transition-and-or-the-case-id-workflows/5613/2 "2026-05-12T07:52:21Z")

</div>

I saw a Nepali project was using it. tagging @Prajwol .