KAP malaria survey—iFormBuilder

advertisement
Creating Value Through ICT4D Partnerships
Using iPhones for a Nationwide KAP Survey
CRS Sierra Leone
Emily Bostick
Program Manager - Malaria
March 28, 2012
ICT4D Conference
Kigali, Rwanda
Project Background (1)
• Global Fund Malaria – Health Sector –
National Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices
Survey
• Partners – Ministry of Health and
Sanitation / National Malaria Control
Program / Dept. of Planning and
Information, WHO, Statistics Sierra
Leone
Project Background (2)
• Problem – How to efficiently collect highquality data for national surveys for
evidence-based communications
strategies
• Why ICT4D? – Familiarization with
electronic data collection, avoid time and
error of paper, previous discussions with
health professionals
• ICT Solution (1)
ICT Solution (1)
•
•
Solution – using iForm Builder /
iPhone 3GS to collect data
using 89 enumerators over 4
weeks
Necessary Support – p1:
introduce technology for
stakeholder buy-in, build local
capacity to program – p2:
program, train, test, trouble
shoot – p3: transfer final
dataset and analyze with 100%
confidence in data integrity
ICT Solution (2)
• Staff support – programming, tech,
logistics
• Partnership has influenced the choice
based on enthusiasm, sustainability (esp.
in terms of continued expenses), choice
of devices, experience with PDA
randomization
https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?snapid=S403735
RH_E
iFB versus Paper
iFormBuilder
• Develop paper form first
• Auto-calculations, skips
and verification logic
• Longer training in two
steps necessary
• Need backup plan
• Field support line
• Supervisor responsibility
• Cleaner, quicker, geotagged data
Paper
• Develop paper form first
• Dependent on
enumerators to follow
• One training with only
one format
• No backup collection plan
• Less field support
• Supervisor responsibility
• “Dirty” physical data
forms
Key Challenges (1)
• Limited support in phase 1
• Timing of project activity (started before
team was fully operational;
performance-based funding)
• Underestimation of time required for
each activity (response rather than
preparation mode)
• Communication on expected outputs
Key Challenges (2)
•
•
•
•
Procurement and Testing from HQ
Distribution of work amongst team
Security of goods
Partners competing priorities / inability
to accept responsibility re: iPhones
• Rushing led to some programming
errors
• Technology solution unable to process
magnitude of data
Lessons Learned
• Partnership – involve partners early
• Importance of a clear process
• Necessity of resources and tools for
planning process
• Importance of testing
• Necessity to slow down
• Necessity of longitudinal support
Sustainability
• Need trained / invested local staff
• Need financial deals for partners
• Need 100% guarantee that technology
is appropriate and tested choice
• iFB has been able to work directly with
us to resolve issues and has offered
reasonable pricing for MOHS, should
they continue with this technology
Summary and Close
•
•
•
•
Plan early
Demand support
Have a plan B and plan C
Monitor all data in process for
completion, duplicates and glitches
Thank You!
Emily Bostick
[email protected]
Download