dhis2-users team mailing list archive

[Olav Poppe <olav.poppe@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
came over and issue today regarding the calculation of indicators based on
organisation unit groups. Not sure if there are any easy ways to solve it,
but though it was worth discussing.

The problem is ownership reports with indicators using population.
Population data is often entered for districts (of similar). These have
"government" ownership, thus when comparing performance based on
ownership/population, figures will be wrong.

One way to solve this would be to have catchement population for all
facilities, giving a population figure that acutally have an ownership. But
in cases with several aggregation levels for population (facility +
district), the same problem would probably occur in a district or regional
reports?

Another option would be to avoid the ownership of population data, either
by (somehow) not having an ownership for non-facilities, or by computing
such indicators "cumulatively" for org unit groups. This is probably best
explained through an example:
A district has a population of children < 1 years of 100. 60 children are
given BCG at government facilities, 30 at private facilities. An indicator
showing BCG coverage for that district would currently (from how I
understand it) show a coverage of 60/100 = 60% for government and 30/0
= 0% for private. Maybe it would make more sense to show this as 60/100 =
60% for government and 30/100 = 30 % for private, giving the the total
(correct) coverage of 90%? Without knowing the actual catchment population
for the private and government facilities, it's impossible to calculate the
real coverages, but as a whole I believe this method could be better on
average?

Olav