dhis2-devs team mailing list archive

[John Ojo <jnojo@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Lars,

Thank you for the detailed explanation which is quite helpful. As always with new technology, it takes some time to master. I'm rolling up my sleeves and getting my hands dirty with this. Will surely provide feedback and likely need more guidance to pull this through.

Thank you once again. Will be back soon.
John


 
John Ojo MD, FMCPH

Accra, Ghana.

Mobile: +233 234691626+233 234691626
Skype:  Johnojo
Email: jnojo@xxxxxxxxx




On Thursday, February 20, 2014 12:49 AM, Lars Helge Øverland <larshelge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
Hi,

first thanks to Jason for the nice work on upgrading our docs.

In this case John its also relevant to look at the new "attribute" type categories. The categories as you know them are now referred to as type "disaggregation" - the new type is referred to as "attribute" and should be linked to a data set.

This allows you to create a category of type attribute called "Implementing Partner", where you can include category options for each of your partners. Remember to tick "use as data dimension" and dimension type "attribute" when creating the category. Then wrap this category in a category combination also called "Implementing partner" and assign this category combination to the data set where you collect your partner oriented data (in edit data set screen > category combination).

Now when opening data entry you will see that you must, in addition to org unit/data set/period, select the partner that should be "attributed" the data, before the data entry form appears. After entering data and running analytics, the partner dimension will also become available in pivot table and visualizer for data analysis.

All this is available in 2.14.

In 2.15 we will introduce more features like access control per category option (preventing partners to see each others data) and category option groups + group sets (like Jason indicates, for further classification and analysis of category options, for instance by funding agency).

We are interested in feedback on these features so let us know how it goes.

regards,

Lars






On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:50 AM, John Ojo <jnojo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Jason,
>
>Thank you so much for the quick response. Will look at the documentation.
>Many thanks,
>
>John
>
> 
>John Ojo MD, FMCPH
>
>Accra, Ghana.
>
>Mobile: +233 234691626+233 234691626
>Skype:  Johnojo
>Email: jnojo@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 8:56 PM, Jason Pickering <jason.p.pickering@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>Hi John,
>You should probably consider using the new feature of the category option group sets. This allows a mechanism to have multiple reports for a single organisation unit and time period, which would be disaggregated by for instance, "Implementing partner" and "Project". You can take a look at the new documentation here  which describes how to set this up. 
>
>
>The problem with the approach which you propose is that the maintenance of the orgunit hierarchy becomes complicated if you are dealing with a lot of IPs. If it is a small number, it may be possible, but has proven to be a big headache in other implementations where this type of information needs to be recorded. 
>
>
>Best regards,
>Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:21 AM, John Ojo <jnojo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>>
>>I am designing a database for an organization that works with multiple local NGOs (14 NGOs in all) as the Implementing Partners (IPs) for the said organization.
>>
>>There are 40 districts in all. For the sake of this description, I will name the districts as district_1, district_2, district_3, and so on. and the IPs as IP1, IP2, IP3, and so on.
>>Each of the IPs works in multiple districts; for example IP1 and IP2 each works in all the 40 districts. 
>>
>>Each IP specializes in one program area. For example, IP1 does only HIV/AIDS while IP2 focuses on Gender & Human Rights.
>>The organization needs to be able to know the results of each IP from each district every month.
>>
>>I am therefore planning to set up the organisation unit names in the DHIS 2 database as
 follows:
>>For IP1 and IP2, I'm considering the following orgUnit names:
>>
>>District_1
>>  IP1_d1 
>>  IP2_d1
>> 
>>District_2
>>  IP1_d2 
>>  IP2_d2
>> 
>>
>>
>>District_3
>>  IP1_d3 
>>  IP2_d3
>>.
>>
>>.
>>.
>>
>>District_40
>>  IP1_d40 
>>  IP2_d40
>>
>>
>>
>>I would appreciate suggestions on how to handle this piece, especially if there's a better way than this approach and would also like to hear from anyone who had had to deal with this type of situation and how they handled the orgUnit names.
>>
>>
>>Thank you so much.
>>
>>
>>
>>John
>>
>>
>>John Ojo MD, FMCPH
>>
>>Accra, Ghana.
>>
>>Mobile: +233 234691626+233 234691626
>>Skype:  Johnojo
>>Email: jnojo@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
>>Post to     : dhis2-devs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
>>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-users
>Post to     : dhis2-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-users
>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>