Hi Venkita,
Based on the limited information available in the scenario that you have shared and assuming that the resource's information can only be derived from the row in question, I would recommend option #1. When it comes to Rate Matrix, you want to keep it as simple as possible. The lesser the number of rows, the better it is.
Re: your questions:
- Is there any impact, if a resource is deactivated but the rate matrix is entered for future dates?
Could you please elaborate on the kind of impacts you are concerned about? Let me try and answer some questions that could arise:
1) From a Financial Planning standpoint the Inactive resources will be accounted for when updating a cost plan. Here is an article that talks about how inactive resources are treated when populating a cost plan - CA Clarity Tuesday Tip: How Do Inactive Resources Affect Cost Plan Populate
2) Inactive resources cannot be used for posting actual costs. A lot of customers have to account for this when their resource deactivation may not be aligned with their cost/time processing.
3) The use of Termination date will require a different post to explain However, for your benefit, the termination date affects the ability to enter time, availability of the resource and a resource's allocation to a project. Here is a thread that may help - CA Clarity Tuesday Tip - Hire Date, Termination Date – What they do!
4) To your specific question on whether the "Termination Date" should be aligned with the "To" date in the rate matrix - No need to do that at all. You just need to take into account #1, #2 and #3 as part of your routine operations for handling resource turnover.
Hope the explanation helps.
Thanks,
Regards,
Debroop