UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Darcy, Niamh
Hi everyone,
Here is the summary of our meeting today between RTI/UCC/InSTEDD to address some technical issues that were raised earlier in meetings.
(1) InSTEDD will support UCC on updating the username used for making the request for change in the production collection
a. Nico/Martin to give some quick guidance on what is needed here to make sure the user is authenticated in the API using his/her OpenID server’s credentials when making the API call for each update – this will make it easier when looking at the last updated information to see which user made the request that was approved
b. Then if UCC has questions based on this guidance, UCC/InSTEDD will follow up in email/by phone
(2) Users logging in/Issues: We need to Identify if this is a software issue, or is this a support issue with users not knowing where to go to ask a question
a. Scott will check with his development team if there is a way they can the OpenID Server Log File to see if there is a way to list the users that had issues with authentication over a period of time (specific to the Tanzania HFR). This way UCC/MOHSW could follow up directly with users who failed to authenticate to determine what the issues are
b. Scott to write up brief overview of the steps involved, and then UCC work with MOHSW ICT to facilitate a phone call to debug with specific users
c. We need a more formal support mechanism in place: Googlegroup email, or use DHIS2 messaging system for this, or some form on the Curation Tool home page that users can enter an issue in and submit – hopefully we can discuss in more detail so that the MOHSW can provide this guidance to users (and MOHSW will work with UCC to resolve under their MoU and TOR)
d. Proposed that next Tuesday when Niamh in Dar, the HFR team meet to discuss the specific support structure going forward for the HFR and points of contact, mechanism for users to get support with the MOHSW (who can then liaise with UCC) – if this is feasible?
(3) Updating RM/Curation Tool with the ‘new’ councils
a. Scott/Niamh have worked on this and are ready to upload the new hierarchy (8 councils added as follows)
a. Geita Region. Geita DC split to Geita DC and Geita TC
b. Simiyu Region: Bariadi DC split to Bariadi DC and Bariadi TC
c. Mara Region: Tarime DC split to Tarime DC and Tarime TC
d. Shinyanga Region: Kahama DC split to Kahama DC and Msalala DC. Kahama TC split to Kahama TC and Ushetu DC
e. Tanga Region: Lushoto DC split to Lushoto DC and Bumbuli DC
f. Mbeya Region: Rungwe DC split to Rungewe DC and Busokelo DC
g. Katavi Region: Mlele DC split to Mlele DC and Nsimbo DC.
b. Niamh to send the proposed hierarchy changes to Michael so he knows which users are impacted [DONE]
c. We need to schedule the Curation Tool/RM going offline, doing the hierarchy changes, testing and then making available publicly with notifying the users where the councils changed what has happened, and putting message on the Curation Tool home page to also inform users of the changes
(4) Release Management: Discussion with Scott and Michael separately --
(a) UCC have set a staging curation tool instance (http://curation-stg.ucchosting.co.tz) for release management. They can give access to whoever needs access from MOHSW to do the final User Acceptance Testing for bug fixes. This needs to be discussed with the MOHSW.
(5) Changing RM to include the full hierarchy, with separate column for each level (Zone, Region, Council etc).
(a) InSTEDD have made this change in their staging server. We are waiting to hear from Scott when this will move to the production server – this will mean that it is easy for people to download the full CSV file with all facilities and sort on different columns
(b) UCC and InSTEDD are discussing the possibility of including the Administrative Hierarchy names in the Facility details return-set Feature in the API and RM itself...
Please let us know if there are questions here.
Thanks, Niamh
Darcy, Niamh
And one more item,
There will be a software/technical discussion on Wednesdays for 1 hour every week to continue to address open technical issues.
Thanks, Niamh
Darcy, Niamh
Hi Sotter,
The members of this group were the HFR team starting from back in early Jan 2013. Let me make sure you also have manager access to the group so you can update emails etc. The reason for using the googlegroup was that often times members got left off the discussions so this was one way to ensure that no-one was forgotten as can often happen when typing in emails manually.
Now that the new email server is up and running, the same group could just be created in the moh.go.tz domain where MOHSW can manage within its own servers – the googlegroup was a stop gap ahead of having the new email server setup at the MOHSW. That way the MOHSW can manage etc directly within its own network.
Esther is a manager, and Masasi was originally the owner (as UCC setup the group to facilitate discussions). The group can be found at googlegroups.
Niamh
From: Hermes Sotter. Rulagirwa [mailto:hso...@moh.go.tz]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 3:06 AM
To: Marcos Robert Mzeru
Cc: Darcy, Niamh; hfr...@googlegroups.com; Esther Msechu; Wengaa, Desderi; Sriyanjit Perera (Sri) (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov); Hermes Sotter; Denis Alan Mkwati (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov)
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Again,
I am facing a problem of the "hfr...@googlegroups.com" who are members of this group, who is managing the group? my email alway bounces, is ther any need to be part of our conversation if each members is addressed by his own email address
From:
"Hermes Sotter. Rulagirwa" <hso...@moh.go.tz>
To: "Marcos Robert Mzeru" <marco...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Niamh Darcy" <nda...@rti.org>,
hfr...@googlegroups.com, "Esther Msechu" <emse...@yahoo.com>, "Desderi Wengaa" <dwe...@rti.org>, "Sriyanjit Perera (Sri) (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov)"
<ii...@cdc.gov>, "Hermes Sotter" <hso...@gmail.com>, "Denis Alan Mkwati (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov)" <wl...@cdc.gov>
Sent: Thursday, 2 October, 2014 9:56:07 AM
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Dear Marcos and others,
I had discussion with Masasi just this week and we deliberately agreed to follow agreement made in our formal meeting. This comes after observing that MFR is not moving any how not because of data quality which is beyond our scope but also emerging of new stuff here and there.
Being the case each of us would like to see FR registry up and running according to Ministry and stakeholders wishes, I dont believe and will not believes that this project is as big as time it as taken.
I will insist that we stick in our procedures and step to accomplish this task.
Today, I am going to have a meeting with Director general UCC, and will address same discussion I had with Masasi. I believe this will end long story into output by this October
Let us work as team for big output, lack of unified communication ha brought us at this stage, we real need to follow standard communication.
Thank you
From:
"Marcos Robert Mzeru" <marco...@gmail.com>
To: "Niamh Darcy" <nda...@rti.org>
Cc: hfr...@googlegroups.com, "Esther Msechu" <emse...@yahoo.com>, "Desderi Wengaa" <dwe...@rti.org>, "Sriyanjit Perera (Sri)
(CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov)" <ii...@cdc.gov>, "Hermes Sotter" <hso...@gmail.com>, "Hermes Sotter" <hso...@moh.go.tz>,
"Denis Alan Mkwati (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov)" <wl...@cdc.gov>
Sent: Thursday, 2 October, 2014 9:33:27 AM
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Guys,
Didn’t we agree on the look alike of HRHIS (attached) so that most of the Login Failure and password reset can be resolved easily [ single sign in ]? I would like to see these curation tool issues resolved once and for all [at least declared as support issues] so that we can move on with The portal [which has taken highest priority as we are speaking] ASAP. I would like also for the team to start discussing the Portal [MoHSW current demand/priority], rather than going back and forth with support for curation Tool [DCS are the one who are supposed to work on it, bring arising issues and make sure data are well captured and filled in collaboration with ICT/NIMR] rather than we become major player in ensuring data collections, data cleaning [which I still believe are supposed to be handled by DCS]. Lets move away from Data Collection [not forgetting that we have provided the data collection mechanism/tool electronically].We can help [in collaboration with DCS] to coordinate data quality improvement, data collection and training, but not get involved directly as business owner ensuring all HF are registered and entered in the system.
I would like to propose the communications between UCC and MoHSW to be clearly addressed to parties [MoHSW / UCC] on agreed terms, and issues can be raised by either part [among involved partners, RTI, CDC, NIMR, PMORALG etc.]. This will help MoHSW to Manage its priorities as they arise / planned. I am suggesting the creation of the new heading within the google group [HFR Portal] so that we start discussing the requirements and development of the Portal.
I submit my opinions for implementation and agreement so that we can move forward. Remember the MoU is between MoHSW and UCC. The financial obligations [payments etc.] might involve other stakeholders.
The MoHSW represent the Health sector [including demands and requests from other contributing partners and sponsors], any issues regarding HFR should be addressed to MoHSW so that we can address together as a group to UCC.
I believe its very clear to both of Us…UCC and MoHSW [as a group of interested partners].
Marcos
--
Mr. Hermes S. Rulagirwa,
ICT HEAD,
Ministry of Health and Social Welfare
Box 9083.
Email: hso...@moh.go.tz, alt.
hso...@gmail.com
Cell: +255 754 326 438 / +255 658 325000
Sky Id: hsotter
--
Mr. Hermes S. Rulagirwa,
ICT HEAD,
Ministry of Health and Social Welfare
Box 9083.
Email: hso...@moh.go.tz, alt.
hso...@gmail.com
Cell: +255 754 326 438 / +255 658 325000
Sky Id: hsotter
Darcy, Niamh
Marcos,
Sounds good on discussing the portal – and it might be good to have a separate group for this, and then change the existing group to being more of a group focused on support/ongoing maintenance etc as these issues will continue to arise (as with all software).
And sounds good on clearly defined communication structures – we await guidance from the MOHSW on this – and how this should work. This will as you say clarify things and keep them running smoothly. Then RTI/InSTEDD/UCC can determine communication methods on the software side and then as you say UCC can communicate with MOHSW on this.
Looking forward to the MoU being operationalized.
Niamh
From: Marcos Robert Mzeru [mailto:marco...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 2:33 AM
To: Darcy, Niamh
Cc: hfr...@googlegroups.com; Esther Msechu; Wengaa, Desderi; Perera, Sriyanjit (Sri) (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov); Hermes Sotter; Hermes Sotter; Mkwati, Denis Alan (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov)
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Guys,
Didn’t we agree on the look alike of HRHIS (attached) so that most of the Login Failure and password reset can be resolved easily [ single sign in ]? I would like to see these curation tool issues resolved once and for all [at least declared as support issues] so that we can move on with The portal [which has taken highest priority as we are speaking] ASAP. I would like also for the team to start discussing the Portal [MoHSW current demand/priority], rather than going back and forth with support for curation Tool [DCS are the one who are supposed to work on it, bring arising issues and make sure data are well captured and filled in collaboration with ICT/NIMR] rather than we become major player in ensuring data collections, data cleaning [which I still believe are supposed to be handled by DCS]. Lets move away from Data Collection [not forgetting that we have provided the data collection mechanism/tool electronically].We can help [in collaboration with DCS] to coordinate data quality improvement, data collection and training, but not get involved directly as business owner ensuring all HF are registered and entered in the system.
I would like to propose the communications between UCC and MoHSW to be clearly addressed to parties [MoHSW / UCC] on agreed terms, and issues can be raised by either part [among involved partners, RTI, CDC, NIMR, PMORALG etc.]. This will help MoHSW to Manage its priorities as they arise / planned. I am suggesting the creation of the new heading within the google group [HFR Portal] so that we start discussing the requirements and development of the Portal.
I submit my opinions for implementation and agreement so that we can move forward. Remember the MoU is between MoHSW and UCC. The financial obligations [payments etc.] might involve other stakeholders.
The MoHSW represent the Health sector [including demands and requests from other contributing partners and sponsors], any issues regarding HFR should be addressed to MoHSW so that we can address together as a group to UCC.
I believe its very clear to both of Us…UCC and MoHSW [as a group of interested partners].
Marcos
On Oct 1, 2014, at 9:18 PM, Darcy, Niamh <nda...@rti.org> wrote:
Hermes Sotter. Rulagirwa
I would like to address the issue that have been coming here and there regarding coordination of MFR as follows.
Marcos is an In-charge of eHealth initiatives section coordinating both new and existing solutions and planning initiatives. He also coordinates with other sector and stakeholders on the same matter. Esther is leading MFR under the supervision of Marcos. At this point I hope we are on the same page.
Second, I would like also to share with you the discussion made with UCC Management at together with Dr. Anna Nswila, Cloud, Mariam and Myself, and will share issues that was discussed regarding.
- We agree that UCC will speed up the development of Web portal
- Agreed that Technical support that UCC need from Instedd should proceed without communicating with MoHSW . That means MoHSW will hold UCC accountable not otherwise.
- Agreed that users and stakeholders start using the Web portal will facilitate the quality improvement and therefore this will improve efficiencies and accounatbility.
Regards
Subject: RE: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Marcos Robert Mzeru
Marcos,Sounds good on discussing the portal – and it might be good to have a separate group for this, and then change the existing group to being more of a group focused on support/ongoing maintenance etc as these issues will continue to arise (as with all software).And sounds good on clearly defined communication structures – we await guidance from the MOHSW on this – and how this should work. This will as you say clarify things and keep them running smoothly. Then RTI/InSTEDD/UCC can determine communication methods on the software side and then as you say UCC can communicate with MOHSW on this.Looking forward to the MoU being operationalized.NiamhFrom: Marcos Robert Mzeru [mailto:marco...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 2:33 AM
To: Darcy, Niamh
Cc: hfr...@googlegroups.com; Esther Msechu; Wengaa, Desderi; Perera, Sriyanjit (Sri) (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov); Hermes Sotter; Hermes Sotter; Mkwati, Denis Alan (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov)
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software itemsGuys,Didn’t we agree on the look alike of HRHIS (attached) so that most of the Login Failure and password reset can be resolved easily [ single sign in ]? I would like to see these curation tool issues resolved once and for all [at least declared as support issues] so that we can move on with The portal [which has taken highest priority as we are speaking] ASAP. I would like also for the team to start discussing the Portal [MoHSW current demand/priority], rather than going back and forth with support for curation Tool [DCS are the one who are supposed to work on it, bring arising issues and make sure data are well captured and filled in collaboration with ICT/NIMR] rather than we become major player in ensuring data collections, data cleaning [which I still believe are supposed to be handled by DCS]. Lets move away from Data Collection [not forgetting that we have provided the data collection mechanism/tool electronically].We can help [in collaboration with DCS] to coordinate data quality improvement, data collection and training, but not get involved directly as business owner ensuring all HF are registered and entered in the system.I would like to propose the communications between UCC and MoHSW to be clearly addressed to parties [MoHSW / UCC] on agreed terms, and issues can be raised by either part [among involved partners, RTI, CDC, NIMR, PMORALG etc.]. This will help MoHSW to Manage its priorities as they arise / planned. I am suggesting the creation of the new heading within the google group [HFR Portal] so that we start discussing the requirements and development of the Portal.I submit my opinions for implementation and agreement so that we can move forward. Remember the MoU is between MoHSW and UCC. The financial obligations [payments etc.] might involve other stakeholders.The MoHSW represent the Health sector [including demands and requests from other contributing partners and sponsors], any issues regarding HFR should be addressed to MoHSW so that we can address together as a group to UCC.I believe its very clear to both of Us…UCC and MoHSW [as a group of interested partners].Marcos
<image001.png>
Darcy, Niamh
Dear Sotter,
Thanks for all the clarification here, most helpful. That is really great you and Dr. Nswila, Claud, Mariam and you were all able to meet UCC together as the work UCC doing in all these areas all needs to integrate.
That sounds fine on the technical support UCC need from InSTEDD (which will involve RTI also as Scott/I are working on quite a few areas together) – and UCC can keep the MOHSW up to date.
Yes, RTI/MOHSW/CDC will continue to be one team.
Thanks for this helpful update.
Niamh
From: Hermes Sotter. Rulagirwa [mailto:hso...@moh.go.tz]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 8:10 AM
To: Darcy, Niamh
Cc: Marcos Robert Mzeru; hfr...@googlegroups.com; Esther Msechu; Wengaa, Desderi; Sriyanjit Perera (Sri) (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) (ii...@cdc.gov); Hermes Sotter; Denis Alan Mkwati (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (wl...@cdc.gov); Samuel Masasi; Claude J Kumalija
Subject: Re: UPdated notes from the UCC/InSTEDD/RTI meeting to follow up on some software items
Dear Niamh and others,
I would like to address the issue that have been coming here and there regarding coordination of MFR as follows.
Marcos is an In-charge of eHealth initiatives section coordinating both new and existing solutions and planning initiatives. He also coordinates with other sector and stakeholders on the same matter. Esther is leading MFR under the supervision of Marcos. At this point I hope we are on the same page.
Second, I would like also to share with you the discussion made with UCC Management at together with Dr. Anna Nswila, Cloud, Mariam and Myself, and will share issues that was discussed regarding.
1. We agree that UCC will speed up the development of Web portal
2. Agreed that Technical support that UCC need from Instedd should proceed without communicating with MoHSW . That means MoHSW will hold UCC accountable not otherwise.
3. Agreed that users and stakeholders start using the Web portal will facilitate the quality improvement and therefore this will improve efficiencies and accounatbility.