dhis2-users team mailing list archive

[Lars Helge Øverland <larshelge@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Dayo,

have you assigned your user with an organisation unit in users module? Can
you please start a new thread and provide some more info about your problem?

regards, Lars



On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Dayo Adeyomoye <deemoyes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Can anyone help yet? My data entry page is still not loading selected org
> units, its assigned datasets and periods.
>
> This loads in the Mobile and Smartphone modules. I also noticed that the
> mobile client now says invalid username and password even on the phone that
> hasbeen tested and trusted before.
>
> Thank you
>
> BlackBerry: 3114F90C
> Phone: 08028851441, 08035560463
> emails: deemoyes@xxxxxxxxx, addyraph@xxxxxxxxx
> Yahoo IM: deemoyes
> Facebook: pharael
> twitter:pharaell
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* Jason Pickering <jason.p.pickering@xxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* Lars Helge Øverland <larshelge@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc:* "dhis2-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dhis2-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:08 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Dhis2-users] Any suggestions for partner reporting in
> DHIS-2?
>
> As Lars says, there are lots of opinions. We have been running a partner
> reporting system in Nigeria for a few years now. There are lots of
> challenges, including a lot of central administration mostly due to the way
> that DHIS2 delegates authority down the hierarchy. There was a decision
> made there to maintain compatibility with the government system (also using
> DHIS2) and use their hierarchy. If we had used a partner-based reporting
> hierarchy (i.e. Funding agency (e.g. USAID) -> Implementing partner ->
> Facility) things would have been much easier. This would allow the partners
> to maintain their own branch of the hierarchy, without any need for central
> administration, and not require the use of potentially dozens of categories
> which change over time. Personally, I have had a lot of issues changing the
> category options, and would not recommend this approach to dealing with the
> partners entering data. If a partner based hierarchy is used, they can at
> least generate reports and use the data visualizer (and potentially even
> the GIS if you have facility coordinates).
>
> This obviously creates problems if you need to integrate the data with a
> geographically based hierarchy, but with 2.11, you can import just the data
> values. If the facility level UIDs are maintained in sync, then having two
> instances (one with a geographically based hierarchy and one with a partner
> based hierarchy) should be feasible. As long as the UIDs are in sync, then
> data exchange between the two systems should be possible, as long as the
> UIDs of the facilities are kept in check. Of course problems may occur if
> two partner s are reporting on the same activities in the same facilities.
> The M&E people tell me this should never happen however, i.e. NGO 1 and NGO
> 2 both performing PMTCT services in the same facility. There are certainly
> possible complications with this approach, but having to create and
> maintain what Lars suggest also sounds like a very bitter pill to have to
> swallow. I personally think some sort of post-data entry data
> transformation would be a better idea, if compatibility with the government
> system (geographically based) is an issue. Otherwise, the partner based
> hierarchy potentially solves a lot of problems.
>
> My two cents anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Lars Helge Øverland <larshelge@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> on this issue there are lots of opinions - my recommendation would be to
> stick to the aggregate part of the system and leave out the individual
> records module. This is routine data captured at a fixed interval so
> capturing it as events might become messy over time.
>
> My suggestion on how to solve this would be to use categories - you could:
>
> - set up a category and category combination called "Partners".
> - category options for each partner like "FHI" and "ACCESS".
> - create data elements for each service and assign them to the partner
> category combination.
> - create one data set per partner (e.g. "HIV counselling FHI").
> - for each data set you create a custom form, and insert the data element
> + category option combinations for input fields accordingly.
> - you create user roles for each partner.
> - you assign the partner data sets to the corresponding partner user roles.
> - you assign users for each partner to the corresponding user roles.
> - you assign data sets (for partners) to facilities according to where the
> partners operate.
>
> The partners can then select their data set when entering data, without
> having to worry about "who they are". There are no extra org units to
> maintain and the partners cannot mix up data sets when entering data.
>
> One drawback is that you have to create those extra custom forms, but
> since you have a "very simple list of services" this might be affordable.
>
> regards,
>
> Lars
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Wilson,Randy <rwilson@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  Hi all,****
> ** **
> Our HIV team works with civil society organizations and local partners to
> track a very simple list of services provided to persons living with
> HIV/Aids.****
> ** **
> The data elements themselves are all numeric so it would be easy to do in
> a regular data set, except that partners don’t fit well in the reporting
> hierarchy which goes from Province -> district -> sub-district -> sector ->
> health facility.****
> ** **
> Data entered are total numbers per district per partner.****
> ** **
> For example, a partner (FHI) might work in several districts, so there
> would be more than one FHI report for a given period.****
> ** **
>   District****
>  Partner****
>  Period****
>  Dataelement****
>  Datavalue****
>   Rwamagana****
>  FHI****
>  Feb-13****
>  # of PLWHA mutuelle payments made****
>  12****
>   Gicumbi****
>  FHI****
>  Feb-13****
>  # of PLWHA mutuelle payments made****
>  30****
>   Huye****
>  ACCESS****
>  Feb-13****
>  # of PLWHA mutuelle payments made****
>  44****
>   Gicumbi****
>  ACCESS****
>  Feb-13****
>  # of PLWHA mutuelle payments made****
>  23****
>   ** **
> I’ve thought of creating a separate partner’s table and entering a partner
> numeric code as one of the fields that could called up in a special report,
> but referential integrity rules won’t let me enter more than one data value
> record per period per district.****
> ** **
> We can create the report using the Single Event Without Registration
> feature in Individual Records, using an Option set to maintain the list of
> partners, but unfortunately we can’t seem to use any of this data in the
> dashboard, data visualizer, maps or standard reports.****
> ** **
> If Single Event Without Registration is the only way to enter the data,
> would it not be possible to expose the dataelements for use with the
> standard reporting tools?****
> ** **
> I remember Jason had to develop this sort of relationship for some work he
> did in Zambia but I’m not sure if it is documented somewhere.****
> ** **
> Thanks,****
> ** **
> Randy****
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>