FSC Information Management Meeting

1. FSC Information Management Meeting 11-13.2.2013

2. Tool Objectives • Creation of a web-based application to be used by IM Officers for information management & global reporting • Evidence based decision making & reporting • Global comparability of data collection and processing • Predictable and reliable analysis & information dissemination • Identify gaps and needs for humanitarian assistance.

3. Agreement on reporting purposes TENTATIVE • Saving Lives • Restoring Livelihoods • Protecting Livelihood Assets • Market Stabilization • Stabilizing Vulnerable Populations REVISED • Saving lives • Saving and restoring livelihoods • Seasonal support to vulnerable populations • Market stabilization

4. Specifics • Number of beneficiaries • Target categories • B/N sex / age (if possible) • Who • Lead agency… who will be responsible for reporting • Implementing partner(s) • Location + implementing partners • Activity / Project title • Time period (what dates, in what frequency) • Focal point • Donor(s) • Pooled funds mentioned, e.g. CHF > compulsory for lead agencies to report) • Funding status • Modality (food / goods / cash / vouchers / training / services) > specify • Cash or voucher value • Kcal(if there is food component, e.g. based on organisation’s calculation that 100$ equates to XXX kcal; this is needed to ensure comparability between food and C&V)

5. Agreement on minimum geographic IM reporting levels (location vs. admin levels) • Default is GAUL, but if there is a locally agreed GIS data set, use the admin level used by UNCT / HCT • Mandatory to know the location of activity at best to the partner’s knowledge • Monthly reporting; in general minimum L3 required • Camps (IDP, informal settlements…): • Example from SS: informal camps require response wider than a camp it self • Example from Somalia: Mogadishu divided to 16 districts (L4) • Camp as “virtual district”? • > L3 + possibility to markcamps and major urban centres as different to other locations

6. Agreement on planning and reporting tools • Need to specify into activity • Outputs vs outcomes/impacts Report group – standard reporting unit: • People • Open HH conversion - including interventions on livestock/other goods (unique for every country) Basic/standard reports: • Achieved vs planned – % (of a particular period) • Gap: • achieved/target (assessed) - % - time period depends on activity/purpose • planned/target – forecasting

7. Agreement on minimum requirements of the reporting tool Ability to: • Constantly update assessed figures • Categorize/aggregate members’ activities under the purposes (cumulative effect not applicable to saving lives purpose) • Take into account that the response strategy is multidimensional • Differentiate number of responses from number of people • Differentiate timing of reporting by needs/purposes (i.e. saving lives – weekly/monthly reporting) • Promote complementary overlap

8. Specific inputs at activity level Modalities: • Food – ration/basket – Kcal (Kcal and g/PP/day) • Voucher – ration/basket – Kcal • Cash – basket/cash value - Kcal • Goods – need to specify agricultural inputs: i.e. fertilizer (quantity/HH - Kg), tools (type/quantity/HH), seeds (quantity/HH – g), vaccines (number of animals/type of animal/location – to be approximately converted into number of HH and then people) * Need to use Kcal as a common measurement unit to allow comparability * All inputs need to be converted into HH – people * Possibility to add qualitative info in a comment box – produce ad hoc analysis

9. Ad Hoc analyses • Use pivot table for ad hoc analysis – possibility to enquire data, use multiple filters and answer questions • It allows flexibility – not too complex • Data can be drawn out to produce graphs and trend analysis • Should be given to CC/IMOs - used to answer particular questions

10. Mapping Protocol • Gap: actual/target – planned/target • Use of a common colouring for maps – use the Somalia FSC Tool colours • Title – very clear specifying objective and month • Logo – generic food security cluster logo + name of the country • Clear legend – highlight what the percentage mean • 4 maps: actual/monthly; forecast until the end of the time period; planned with the magnitude and planned if there is additional funding • Magnitude indicator (symbols) not to be used in the saving lives • IDPs camps recognized as districts should be marked • Dot map

11. Day 3 – Agenda Items • EPIC Presentation • Revision of Response Objectives/Purposes • User Access/ Data Entry Process • Timeline • Development of User Manual • Date for Tool Review Missions • Revision of Afghanistan/Pakistan Comments

12. EPIC (Emergency Preparedness Integration Centre): Portfolio of tools to bring information from ground to databases, tools display information in a geo-reference style/layering • Layers: locations (warehouses, offices, guest houses, airports), staff tracking, vehicle trafficking, airplane tracking • Capability to zoom in, profiling for particular area, information display (name, street, description, waybill, stock), create tables and graphs of geo-referenced information, contact staff directly through Lync/Skype • Geo-fencing: geographic outline in which action can be taken, ex. send message to all users within particular territory. • Incident: text/picture field, any type of assessment for geo-reference, ex. Security  Potential use for gFSC: overlay global with local clusters.

13. Revised Response Objectives/Purposes • Saving Lives • Saving and Restoring Livelihoods • Seasonal Support to Vulnerable Populations • Market Stabilization *Livelihood component – differentiate between emergency and early recovery phases * Sequencing changed – start at HH level as first measurement unit

14. User Access/Data Entry Process Internal Cluster Users: (within global domain network of the cluster) • Administrator (gFSC): Set-up, customization, shape files, standardization figure for i.e. livestock, may also correct data. • Supervisor (IMO/CC): Validation/data correction (a second check); access to ODBC • User: Data entry/reports *monthly reports/plans provided by partners are not entered into database until approved by IM External Users: • Partner User: Data entry for own activities in their organization (agencies login for publishing own reports) • Donor: Reports (limited to what they fund) • Visitor? Ask cluster secretariat or look at standard reports *Inclusion of Audit System- records who/when makes changes to records *Agree on what information to share with OCHA (i.e. dashboards and dot maps). *At global level – there is a need for comparability across

15. User Manual • Developed by professional author, since extremely time-consuming. • Focal point, core to cluster at field level, must be able to understand manual. • Manual must also be thought of as learning tool-user friendly. Includes: • Background • Definition • How to use: info to be aware of, functionality

16. Timeline Implementation of timeline of tool’s development by gFSC • Meeting with ITC for road map (Tomorrow) possibilities/advantages of various contract models within and outside WFP, explore regional capacity and resources • Tool Review Mission: use of tool for some time to determine what works well and what can be added/improved to make more user friendlyover 2 review periods. • March: programming begins • Once project developed ‘how to’ of manual can be developed. • Tentative deadline: An initial version of the tool (including framework, sample of country info) to be shared with partners during the April 16-18 Meeting. • Second Review: Input from countries after exposure to tool and feedback ‘reality check’ • Finalize • Third Review- October • Develop TORs for Global FSC Reporting Group

17. Revision of Afghanistan/Pakistan Comments Functionality Requirements: • Easy to use/ad-hoc reporting accessible • Easily printable reports- direct exporting? • Good track record, strong presence in marketplace-refers to a recognized platform, to be provided for by IT • Good performance for users, including remote users, when generating reports or queries-especially important at global level. • Vendor able to provide strong support for questions/problems: -ICT/Host: provide technical recommendation on security & platform, maintenance of servers, connectivity-no down time. - gFSC: standardization, advocacy, help desk (user to keyboard), Focal point- customization of tool ready for field use, manual, training (appropriate use of tool, management for timeline of tool’s development) -Programmer/company- support for bugs in code, development mistakes (assure tool working appropriately) • Relatively inexpensive- 50-60k? • Stable product

18. Revision of Afghanistan/Pakistan Comments Technical Specifications: • Runs from web browser • Ability to generate queries and formal reports • Pre-run reports viewed on web • Save queries and reports to run later, including ad-hoc • Creates graphics, charts, pivot tables etc. • Runs against Access and SQL Server Files • Exports data, reports to Excel • IT/End users can generate queries/standardized reports, more detailed analysis X Creates email reports (could be discussed with IT)