Status

Definitions

There needs to be a clear differentiation between what is classified as a 'mop-up' and what is classified as a 'revisit'. 

A 'revisit' refers to a second or subsequent visit by an IRS spray team to try spray any additional rooms within eligible structures that were previously 'not sprayed' or 'partially sprayed' during the first visit. A 'revisit' may also be needed just for the purpose of editing a form that was previously entered incorrectly. Revisit edits should not be allowed to structures that were previously 'sprayed' or marked as 'not eligible' - Sameen Babur is this correct? EB: This is correct (Craig Appl is it possible to limit editing to a specific time frame?)

A 'mop-up' refers to a planned activity that could be as soon as the next day, in response to poor coverage operational areas and therefore aims to increase coverage in these areas. 'Mop-up' would apply to any structures that were previously 'not visited', 'not sprayed' or 'partially sprayed' but not available to 'sprayed' structures.

Notes

Previous Namibia mop-up skip logic did not allow the user to view the first visit or generate calculations based on the response to the first visit 'rooms sprayed'. Pierre Dane currently working on this today and tomorrow (30th/31st July), adapting Sameen;'s newly created data dictionary form, and checking with Craig that first data can be viewed.

• Both existing IRS forms for Botswana and Namibia had a mop-up field.
• Mop-up field was removed for Namibia (Q for Pierre Dane is this assuming the a second visit is automatically classified as a mop-up?)

• (Q for Pierre Dane assuming the Bots form will also remove the mop-up field if they automatically define any second visit to spray more rooms as mop-up. However, if a mop-up is defined as a planned activity to operational areas to try improve their coverage then the mop-up question will always be required)

Requirements

• The IRS intervention needs to be able to cater to mop-up activities
  • Field workers need to be able to identify structures that require mop-up
  • They should be able to easily capture data on the spray activities during mop-up for a structure while ensuring that they record the correct number of rooms sprayed during a mop-up in relation to how many rooms were sprayed during the first visit. 
  • Mop-up activities should update coverage indicators
  • Data relevant to specific mop-up indicators needs to be captured
• Mop-up indicators need to be displayed in the WebUI as part of the IRS dashboards

Options

There are three possible solutions to fulfil the above requirements: As of 25th July we will be moving ahead with option 1 due to time requirements and will continue to explore options 2 and 3 further down the line when time allows.

One form with skip logic

Complex skip logic can be implemented in order to differentiate between the initial IRS visit and the mop-up visit. This method has been used previously in DiSARM.

Pros: No custom code development, no complex logic to create indicators from multiple forms or plans

Cons: Complex skip logic

(Q for Pierre Dane. This option would need to allow the user to see the previous submission and either 1. edit 'number of rooms sprayed' or add in 'number of rooms sprayed ON THIS VISIT'. This would allow form logic to prevent more rooms sprayed being recored than the number of rooms recorded as eligible during the first visit. This check was not included in the previous DiSARM form.)

Two forms

A second form (task) specifically designed for mop-up visits could be added to structures requiring mop-up. These would need to be added to the structures for the open/active plan during a desk review, most likely through a Nifo process.

Pros: Simple form structure

Cons: No UI for selecting structures requiring mop-up tin order to assign the tasks (this could be done automatically for all unsprayed or partially sprayed residential structures - Q for Pierre Dane, how would 'not visited' structures be tasked with mop-up if they were missed during the first round) - will require some software development. Also needs two tasks to speak to each other which is currently not built out.

Two plans

A second mop-up plan could be created, containing only strictures and tasks that need a second IRS visit. 

Cons: This may become too much of a work load for district staff if mop-up plans are carried out and needed frequently and if mop-ups happen concurrently to the main IRS campaign; difficult to reconcile indicators across the two plans

Pros: This would work well for a planned mop-up event that happens after all first round IRS is complete and there is enough time to create a new plan.

Views

Example IRS Operational Indicators (Namibia)

Example form logic flow for Namibia IRS

Questions

• Which of the above options should we go ahead with?
• EB: I think one form with skip logic or two forms would work best. Mop ups occur after spraying has completely finished in a village, but may be concurrent to spraying in other villages. Also, in previous seasons, mop ups were needed frequently. Thus, the criteria for using two plans probably couldn't be met. 

Dependencies

• Partially-sprayed business status
• Multi-structure household data collection
• IRS Forms and Web UI Dashboards Bots
• IRS Forms and Web UI Dashboards Namibia

Test Case