Localisation Step 4.1 - Selection of Indicators

[dave-mills]

During the LISP, users can review the full set of indicators present in each module of the survey. (Context, Agroecology, Performance).

• Some indicators are marked as required, and are always included.

• Some indicators are marked as optional. Teams can review this list and tick which ones to include in their survey.

• The selected indicators' questions are included in the XLSform(s).

[dave-mills]

The LISP Process:

1. In a workshop / set of discussions, the local teams work through the thematic areas of HOLPA and discuss the sorts of indicators that would be useful for them to collect.
2. Once they have a list of indicators, they compare that list against the list of indicators present in the HOLPA tool.

• For their local indicators that can be mapped to a HOLPA indicator, that's good - they can use the HOLPA indicator.
• For their local indicators that cannot be mapped to a HOLPA indicator - they need to decide whether to include it - and upload an ODK question group, or to not use it.

3. Any HOLPA global required indicators that are not mapped to local indicators are still included.
4. Any HOLPA global optional indicators that are not mapped to local indicators are not included.

What that means for the platform:

I think we have 2 options:

1. "Light Touch"

• We present the information about how to run the LISP workshop, and then have a page for the local team to review the Global Indicators (after getting the outputs from LISP).
• The platform asks the team to:
  1. Indicate any 'optional' Global indicators that they will use
  2. Add any custom local indicators that they want; with a big clear notice to confirm that these custom indicators are not covered by the global indicators.
  3. For each local indicator added, they must upload an Excel form with the ODK question/questions.
     • They could either upload individual files (1 per indicator), OR upload one single ODK form with questions for all the local indicators (we should include an extra 'indicator' column to map questions to indicators.)

benefit: - quicker to build; just need to ask for the final information needed to build the form.

downside - minimal support to teams doing the key thing that makes HOLPA different and interesting.

2. "More Details"

We could try out the following workflow:

1. On the LISP page, teams are given links to instructions / guides for running the workshop.
2. They are asked to upload or enter the list of indicators they come up with for each thematic area during the workshop.
3. Then they are given the list of Global indicators and are asked to match up local indicators to global ones (drag and drop?)
4. The local indicators that are not matched are then listed, and the team is asked to confirm they want to collect data for those indicators in addition to the global required indicators.
5. For each unmapped local indicator, they are asked for the ODK questions (as above).

We don't need to ask specifically about the optional global indicators. Their use is determined by the matching of local to global indicators.

benefits: - potentially interesting to build up a list of locally relevant indicators generated through the LISP process over time / in different contexts. Mapping of locally relevant indicators to 'global' indicators may be very interesting. Could be helpful to teams going through the process to do work on the platform as a group.

downsides - more complex to build; lots of assumptions made about how the LISP will work in the future; harder to change it up when needed.