Discussions in progress. Next steps:
Akros is working with VW and Tf to explore how CGR functionality for importing and managing location files works (mid-Feb). Once that is evaluated, we will share what it looks like and how it works, so we can decide if we use one of options 1a, 1b, 2 OR option 3 for phase 1.
In March we will start scoping both phases in detail.
fyi Matt Berg Nathan Mceachen Justin Lewis Craig Appl
Any Reveal-CGR integration will have to be phased. We anticipate the following phases.
Phase 1: Get a hierarchy defined in the CGR into Reveal. Cover this Jira story:
https://smartregister.atlassian.net/browse/RVL-410
Phase 1 Option (all would need to support client-based sync changes) | Pros | Cons | Est. LOE |
|---|---|---|---|
Akros would run one instance of CGR to minimize server costs. Requires a one way sync to Reveal from CGR. | One server, one set of costs Production environment for managing location data UI for file prep UI for management Relatively easy “upload”/”download” Open doors to other use of CGR Less GIS experience needed | Additional platform to support, train on, maintain, host (server implications). CGR current limitations - can only visualize one layer at a time, file types for imports are not unrestricted. Manual fixes to hierarchy may take longer in CGR than if someone with GIS experience is doing in QGIS or ArcGIS. | ~2 weeks of exploration, scoping, spec writing (Akros). ~1 week Tf time to customize export format for CGR to fit Reveal. ~1 week Ona time to support and do lite dev as needed Server-set up and monthly support cost (one server - could be shared across implementations) |
As clients have requirements to host own CGR instance, could set up own server and solution. Can do both 1a and 1b depending on client need. | Above, plus full country ownership of hierarchy. | Added cost to own servers. | Same as above but server-set up and monthly support cost, per implementation (could be offset if country self manages) |
2. CGR as a master list. Cloud service | Above, plus benefits of cloud hosting (less downtime, security, streamlined support) | Policy restrictions on this option. | Same as 1.a. |
3. Reveal as master list. UI to load, view, edit, manage locations | Streamlined platform for users. | Rebuilding towards what is already in CGR. May be more than what is really needed. | Significant development effort. We will not pursue this option. |
4. Reveal as master list. Import/Export tool in OpenSRP | Streamlined platform for users. Scripts for start of this already exist. Bulk fix of errors is easier. | No UI for management. Requires skillset to do upfront GIS work to get into correct format for Reveal. | ~3 weeks Ona time |
Options 1, 2, and 3
GOALS
Build process of preparing shapefiles into neat and nested geojson format, into CGR. Currently this is happening manually by Akros GIS team.
Requires Akros and Tf teams to document the process that Akros is currently and build it into CGR
Test would be that an output is the identical geojson that Akros sends to Ona/Pierre
Build a Reveal output in CGR for hierarchy to be sent to Reveal.
Spec for what a json going into Reveal will look like → This is in a Github issue → geojspec, georegistry spec, FHIR spec to build this spec (Tf to build spec, should have this budget already in new grant)
Build a connector from CGR restAPI to Reveal Nifi to connect and transform CGR output and put in Reveal
Deal with/change json properties as needed
Other transformations
Build connector, format, transformation, and hierarchy structure being compatible
Mostly Akros + Terraframe: Documenting what Akros has had to do to prep files for Reveal. Identify the process and how to get into CGR.
End goal/expectation: Client would be uploading their files into CGR and that would ‘port’ over to Reveal
Input to CGR could be all the inputs that CGR supports
*How to we expose the issues in hierarchy alignment (i.e. issues in transformation from CGR to Reveal) to user. This needs to be a part of phase 1 (error capture)
Phase 2: Operationalizing integration, dealing with change management and in-field edits. Cover these Jira stories:
Phase 2 Option | Pros | Cons | Est. LOE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Support field-based updates with less effort than other options. | No UI for managing changes to locations → no admin workflow to “approve” locations Potential significant data issues without way to manage/approve field updates. | M to L t-shirt size. ~1 month dev work |
2. Editing in client using geowidget; update OpenSRP/OpenMRS and sync to CGR | Web-based manage of locations; use of admin approval workflows Audit functionality for change management | Complexity of master list syncing | |
3, Editing in client using geowidget; sync directly to CGR | CGR becomes part of Reveal stack! | CGR becomes a requirement in Reveal stack - unknown how complex this would be for implementation |
We will not support the ability to create new operational areas (this includes drawing a new OA or splitting an existing OA).
Geowidget work done already
Feature 1: CGR adapter
Feature 2: Geowidget download of hierarchy
Did not put these two together
Would need to implement geowideget into Reveal - work for edit process and SAVE as event, sync locations down and up (and someway to undo this in an admin/dev way) in field and sending to server, updating data warehouse
End goal/expectation: Client would be able to make specific changes to the hierarchy either through web UI of CGR or through Reveal mobile client (geowidget).
Phasing considerations
If we use the CGR in phase 1 (options 1 -3), we need to have two way syncing to be able to support Phase 2.
Phase 3 (future): Tighter coupling of CGR and Reveal so that CGR is the system of record
These are already both Java applications so we have these written to work together. Would this tighter coupling make life easier.
Annie’s notes (old)
Client-desired capabilities
Importing coordinates, vector shapes, enumeration/hierarchy data
Updates made in field get into system
What are the nodes of integration that make most sense technically and strategically?
Location hierarchies for Reveal
Initial load
MaintenanceIntegration of front end changes
Field edits that are sent from geowidget and maintained
We need to definitely capitalize on geowidget-CGR work already done, but what else?
Use CGR locations for reporting.
Use CGR locations for reporting on activities over time (time support is being implemented now).
Master list curation
Use CGR WMS/WMTS services for visualization or operations.
Use CGR interface to build out the authoritative data.
OTher possibilities?
improve ability to support front end tools in the geowidget (like drawing new polygons, editing existing) through CGR storage and maintenance strategies and functions
Data structure and storage - any opportunities here?
User-team-plan-location linkages: would bringing the CGR and FHIR models together offer any opportunity for more flexibility?
B. Technical readiness of each tool for integration - how far are we from this and what would it take to get us there ($ and time wise)? And what has already happened/is already underway?