Jira Software Plan - Summary is not accurate

[Shae Theaker]

Hello friends, 

I'm trying to configure a Jira Plan that pulls stories from multiple projects and aggregates the overall status an initiative worked on by many different groups. The built in "Summary" tab on the Jira plan is lovely, but is largely inaccurate. The pie chart reads "0%" done, when this very untrue. (See screenshot) 



Things I've already tried or double-checked: 

- Plan issue source is a filter - is accurate and inclusive 

- Done items do have resolution code of 'done' - they are resolved 

- included projects share the same workflow/issue scheme/etc. 

- Plan has been configured to include done items for last year (365d)

Clearly something's up as the issue progress shows many done items, but pie chart shows 0%

[Sanam Malleswari]

Hi @Shae Theaker

Thanks for sharing the screenshot — I understand the confusion. The new Plans Summary feature in Jira Cloud can sometimes look misleading at first glance.

Here’s what’s happening in your case:

1) The Status Overview pie chart only reflects issues at the currently selected issue level (e.g., Story, Feature, etc.).
2) In your screenshot, it's filtered by Story, and it shows 3 issues — all in "In Progress".
3) Even though the Issue Progress panel shows several issues partially or fully completed, those might be child tasks or different issue types, and not counted in this specific chart.

Also, for an issue to be marked as "Done" in this view:

• It must be in a status that belongs to the "Done" status category (the green one), not just have a resolution or say “Done”.

[Shae Theaker]

Hey there Sanam, 

Thank you for taking the time to dig into this issue. 
However, I fear we haven't uncovered the root cause yet. 

After analysis, there are several 15+ story tickets in progress which are not reflected on the pie chart. I also double checked for done status & resolution code, and there are 20+ stories in a status of done with a resolution code of done. Your hypothesis would indeed account for the discrepancy, but unfortunately is present in this example. 

I'll keep looking, Thanks!