Proposal to present Target-based dashboards for Annual Indicators

[Yabayabadoo]

There are several annual indicators with required targets. Currently, Panorama presents data from the previous Fiscal Year for these annual indicators. Is it possible to create a dashboard based on targets and/or differences between previous year results and current fy targets to display from FYX Q1-Q3 until results are submitted.

There are some logistical challenges to doing this; delays in target approval in DATIM, for instance. However, there are some pros to presenting that data: 1) Users can readily pose questions during POARTs about progress towards targets, 2) Field teams also remember what their proposed targets are, and 3) All users can follow the target setting logic for annual indicators (a critical caveat that is rarely considered when review progress towards targets).

@KatieOC I've added you so the treatment cluster is aware of this request as well.

Thanks, Yaa

[bowdenj]

Hi Yaa! Thanks so much for submitting this. To make sure I'm clear, are you talking currently about FY18 targets, or would the request be to see FY19 targets?

[Yabayabadoo]

@bowdenj Thanks for your quick f/u. If possible, would be good to get FY18 targets in for FY18 Q2 updates. If not, we can wait and roll out for FY18 Q3 (showing FY18 and FY19 targets because for certain indicators, target setting reqs changed in COP18)?

[bowdenj]

Hi @Yabayabadoo - Makes sense, thank you! In the middle of RPMs, when we realized certain indicators weren't being shown for past years, we added certain semi-annual and annual indicators back to Panorama. This included their FY17 targets, FY17 results, and FY18 targets. It doesn't yet include their FY18 results, of course, but it will starting in Q2 or Q4 depending on the indicator. That currently looks like this (data redacted because this is a public repo, but this is taken from the live "OU Level Results" for retention as a general example). You can see FY18 targets in the column second from the right.

The list of indicators for which this was done is below. Are there any additional indicators that we need to add to this list? We know this isn't the entire list of all indicators reported at Q2 or Q4, so if there is a strong use case for adding in additional indicators, we'll bring it up to Jason R.

OVC_SERV OVC_HIVSTAT KP_PREV PP_PREV TB_ART TB_PREV TB_STAT TX_TB GEND_GBV TX_PVLS TX_RET

Adding in FY19 targets is a little bit of a different story. As we know, these are generally not finalized until quite late in the year. I'm happy to bring up adding them to Pano once they are finalized (before FY19 begins), but that may be a discussion for a future quarter. Would love to hear other opinions on the feasibility of this from a program perspective from others on this chain. I don't think the real issue is getting them in Panorama (from a technical perspective, that wouldn't be a big LoE), but the issue may be finalizing sign-off of them at an earlier date than usual. Thoughts?

[Yabayabadoo]

@bowdenj Thank you for this update. I can't speak for the other program folks, so would love to hear from @ERottinghaus @KatieOC what they think. For the FY 19 targets, I agree that delays in approval might affect presentation in Pano, if the new import process mitigates that delay, then fine, if not we can leave off.

From a VL standpoint, we'd want less of a tabulation of targets, but really how targets across relevant indicators relate to one another. For example, we'd want a dashboard to answer the following questions for VL:

1) What is the anticipated VL coverage? By Prioritzation, Age & Sex 2) How many platforms are currently available, platform optimization plans, etc. (sourced from COP tool)? 3)What is the targeted VLS rate by age and sex? Comparison to Prev FY performance 4) Are there stock outs of key commodities (semi-annual indicator)?

For Retention: 1) Who should be eligible for inclusion in the FY18 retention Cohort? 2) Based on Retention targets, what is the anticipated cohort inclusion rate? 3) What are the anticipated retention rates by age & sex?

Controversial data point: Based on quarterly progress towards TX_CURR and TX_NEW, wil OU X have enough PLHIV on ART to reach its VL coverage target?

If this is one of those requests where a proof of concept is needed, we can work to create a version in AWS for further discussion. Would love your thoughts!

[bowdenj]

Hi @Yabayabadoo - Sounds good about FY19 targets, and definitely looking forward to the feedback from others.

For the FY18 targets, I think I understand - so the issue isn't with whether or not the FY18 targets are in Pano at all, but rather how they are displayed, and there are certain calculations that would be helpful for better analysis of those targets. Correct?

Based on your description above (starting with "From a VL standpoint..."), that does to me does read like a request for a new dashboard. I'd actually think that this sounds like a prime candidate for development in analytic work spaces - but would look to @bshook @shapaklyak or others for this conversation! If not work spaces, the timing for this unfortunately isn't great. We submitted our Q2 requests list last week to the developers and it would be pretty late to re-prioritize this on the top of that list unless there is a strong need to do so. I would think at this point that we'd prioritize it for Q3 if we don't want to try it in work spaces.

[Yabayabadoo]

Thanks @bowdenj! Considering this a new dashboard request absolutely makes sense and I appreciate the difficulty with timing. Once @bshook and @shapaklyak comment, would be happy to send leads a request for an AWS build as well as rationale for a need in Pano proper. Cheers, Yaa

[Yabayabadoo]

and yes to your question about calculation for better analysis of targets, and keep conversation about annual indicators on quarterly review agendas constantly.

[bowdenj]

Thanks @Yabayabadoo ! Looking forward to the feedback.

[ERottinghaus]

The target conversation doesn’t apply to LAB_PTCQI indicator. Regarding TX_PVLS, we in the lab are less concerned with age/sex disaggregation and more concerned with just the total number of tests targeted which sounds like is already displayed in pano. I do support the development of a new dashboard to look at capacity vs. tests targeted.

[KatieOC]

@Yabayabadoo @bowdenj I agree with all your points above. PMTCT has an annual indicator Final Outcome but it is very different from the treatment annual indicators and require a table displaying the disaggs. This is already on the pano list for building in Q3 with hopes of displaying in Q4. I support to proposed additional dashboard to view data and agree that it could have a good impact on POART and partner discussions.

[jb3436]

@Yabayabadoo @bowdenj @KatieOC @shapaklyak I think that we need to think bigger picture about having standard visuals that will allow you to view things like 1. results/targets 2. age/sex disaggregations 3. partner performance 4. trends over time, 5. other disaggregates, etc for ALL indicators, not just annual.

The visuals would then have accompanying tables below them, which would cut panorama dashboards down by 1/4. If we have a universal filtering strategy then we would be able to filter by indicator for these standard visuals and filter by age/sex, agency, geographic unit, etc. and the filters would be responsive/dynamic. We need to start thinking about how to show overall visuals and what is then necessary to customize for specific technical areas or populations.

[bowdenj]

Adding Pano backlog tag so we keep this on the radar for discussion in future prioritization. Thank you!

[shapaklyak]

still relevant? @Yabayabadoo @KatieOC close this issue?

[randyyee]

Closing due to age