Hi Elaine (and Scott, Paul and community)
Good to hear you are pursuing this activity in Mozambique. Sorry I saw
your request for input regarding strategies towards facility registry
implementation in Mozambique a bit late. I’ve belatedly offered a few
thoughts below.
Some of you might not be surprised to hear me say this, but from my
perspective (conditioned by my work within HISP and dhis2 development
and implementation) I can say that our concrete experience of the last
few years has continued to reinforce our longer experience of some 20
years that sustainable facility registry information is best
maintained within active systems in use rather than through the
creation of abstract registries of truth, which on the surface appear
as low hanging fruit but which in fact turn out to be elusive.
So, to turn to Paul’s wise suggestion of understanding the cast of
characters, I suggest it might be worthwhile to investigate (i) the
status of the national deployment of HMIS in Mozambique and (ii) the
quality and scope of facility data being maintained in that national
system. I think (I certainly hope!) you will find that there is a
generally good working copy of current facility information being
curated there with monthly cycles of review. It is very likely that
it can be improved, supported and extended (in terms of technical
detail, scope of coverage and institutional/governance arrangements).
I copy Zeferino in this mail as I am sure he has much better idea of
the “facts on the ground” and I am sure you can query him for more
detailed information and contacts.
My suggestion would be to work closely with that group within the
health ministry to build out missing facility registry functionality.
I think there are two very tangible benefits which can result from
this: (i) a strengthened HMIS which has obvious utility for the
country and (ii) a source of maintained facility registry data which
has built-in institutional motivations to succeed.
DHIS2 does support the standard apis such as they exist and the
developer community is in general responsive to additional user
requirements which emerge. But the central concern is really less
about the technology and much more about its institutionalization
within the ministry.
Even if there might be a longer term plan to move beyond here (and the
argument for that is not always apparent to me) it makes sense in the
short and medium term to concentrate on what is guaranteed to deliver
value at low risk while we allow the learning from Rwanda and Tanzania
to digest and mature.
Best regards
Bob
On 12 May 2015 at 18:16, Paul Biondich pbiondic@regenstrief.org wrote:
Hi Scott (and community),
I had a conversation with Nena and Elaine this morning. They are attempting
to “move the needle” in Mozambique as it relates to the governance, and
iteration of facility lists, as a precursor to a fully realized facility
registry.
We spent some time talking about data specifications, requirements gathering
amongst a diverse set of stakeholders. IE, the hard work that will be long
lived if done right. 
I think you all could help Nena and team by helping them better understand
the cast of characters thinking about architecture and facility metadata
within Mozambique. Perhaps Scott you could put some feelers out and help
them better understand the collection of people sympathetic to their goals?
-Paul
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Scott Teesdale steesdale@instedd.org
wrote:
Hi Nena,
That sounds great. Let’s follow up offline to find a time next month and
then we can send an invitation out over the google group to anyone who is
interested.
Best,
Scott
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 8:56 AM, do Nascimento, Nena
NdoNascimento@futuresgroup.com wrote:
Hi Scott,