The document discusses MEASURE Evaluation's management of a global help desk for DATIM, a PEPFAR-specific version of DHIS 2 used by over 10,000 people across 58 countries. It describes the implementation of a three-tier support system to provide timely assistance to diverse and geographically dispersed users. Key lessons learned include setting clear policies, building support teams, providing training, and ensuring integration and expansion of services at low cost. Continuous quality improvement is achieved through surveying users and implementing suggested changes.

1. MEASUREEvaluation
Managing a Global DATIM
Help Desk:
Lessons Learned
Manish Kumar, MEASURE Evaluation
Steffen Tengesdal, BAO Systems
August 9, 2016
DHIS 2 Experts Academy
Oslo, Norway

2. Agenda
Global DATIM Implementation
• Purpose
• Scope
• Users
Help Desk Management
• Objectives
• Technical Support Tiers
• Technology
• Performance Management
Challenges
Lessons Learned
Going Forward

3. Global DATIM Implementation
DATIM stands for Data for Accountability, Transparency,
and Impact.
It’s a PEPFAR-specific version of DHIS 2.
• Purpose: Collect, analyze, and use data to improve the
accountability, transparency, and impact of PEPFAR’s
programs.
• Scope: More than 10,000 people in 58 countries have
used DATIM’s DHIS 2 platform since its launch in 2015.

4. Users: Diverse and Distributed
• Collect and analyze data to review results and monitor
progress against targets at different levels. For
example:
o Target vs. results
o Care vs. treatment at different levels
o Program review and planning
• Different user types and roles
o Type: implementing partner, agency, interagency, and
global
o Roles: read-only, data entry and submit, accept, recall,
return, de-duplication, user admin, site admin
• Spread across 58 countries PEPFAR operating units

5. DATIM

6. DATIM Help Desk Management

7. Help Desk Objectives
• Provide timely and high-quality user-
support services.
• Connect DATIM users with PEPFAR’s
policy and programs and with the DATIM
systems team.
• Build and improve a user knowledge
base.
• Build the capacity of support staff.
• Facilitate continuous quality improvement
efforts.

8. Three-Tier Technical Support
• Tier I
Basic support for common issues
that can be resolved quickly
• Tier II
Specialized support in topic
areas
• Tier III
Advanced help from the core
DATIM development team (bugs
and rare one-off requests)
Scale & Reach
Users 10,000+
Organization Units 74,000+
Country 58
Data Sets 39
Data Elements 2185
FTE (Average/month)
Tier I 2.75
Tier II (MEval) 1.5-2.0
Tier III 2.0

9. Accessing Support
Within “DATIM Apps,”
users click on “DATIM
Support.”
There, users can browse
DATIM’s knowledge base and
search for self-service solutions
for common tasks and answers
to FAQs. When users can’t find
a solution, they submit a ticket.

10. Help Desk Process Flow
MER Ticket Resolution Process
Tier II (Content
Related)
Tier I
Stakeholders (HQ,
Field)
Tier II (System-related) Tier III (System-related) ZenDesk
Submit ticket to
ZenDesk
1
Review ticket for
canned response
applicability.
2
Use Canned
Response?
Respond to user
within SLA
3
End
Start
Submit ticket status
confirmation to Tier
I.
6
Review and respond
to end user within
SLA.
5
UpdateZenDesk
ticket status
7
No
Yes
Routeto Tier II,
assign priority,
notify user, and
update ZenDesk
ticket status
4
System- or
content-related?
Content
System
Notify Tier I
12
Routeto tier III
within SLA
11
Attempt to identify
solution/
workaround
8
Solution/
workaround
identified?
No
Yes
ZenDesk FAQ
Document & canned
response library
UpdateFAQs
document & canned
response library
9
Attempt to identify
solution/
workaround
13
Solution/
workaround
identified?
CCB
Process
16
No
Notify Tier I
10
UpdateFAQs
document & canned
response library
14
Notify Tier I
15
Yes

11. Help Desk Technology Platform
• ZenDesk help desk SaaS platform
• Custom app and single sign-on with DATIM
• Good Data analytics engine
• Enable help desk performance monitoring
• Ability to empower the largest number of users
at the lowest cost

12. Performance Management
• Service level agreement defined by tier and ticket category
• Tiers staffed by time zone to insure proper coverage

13. Performance Management

14. Quality Improvement
• Based on commonality of tickets, new FAQs and guidance
are drafted and disseminated.

15. Quality Improvement
• Surveys are sent to ensure that support is meeting users’
needs, and positive and negative comments are taken into
account to improve the system.
• When tickets are closed, users are invited to take a survey
and rate the response.
o Ratings average in the high 90th percentile.

16. Challenges
• Dynamic program environment.
• Users are diverse and geographically
dispersed.
• Knowledge and skills gaps.
• Input from others is required; hence longer response
time.
• Users do not always submit enough information
• Permissions need verification to confirm access; each
user has different roles and access level.
• User training needs are evolving.

17. Lessons Learned
• Set policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines.
• Build and nurture a team.
• Provide virtual and classroom training to users.
• Ensure users have access to training and knowledge
resources.
• Create and support communities of practice
(PEPFAR Data Exchange Implementer
Community, under OpenHIE).

18. Going Forward
• Integration of help desk
o Extension of help desk to other PEPFAR
reporting tools
• Building on current help desk model
and leveraging particular resources
from Tier 1 and cross training
• Expansion of help desk support services
with relatively low cost

19. DATIM Resources
• DATIM support page
• PEPFAR.gov
• DATIM OpenHIE Community
https://wiki.ohie.org/display/SUB/DATIM+Data+E
xchange+Implementer+Community
• MEASURE Evaluation project website
(www.measureevaluation.org)

20. Thank You!
Q&A
www.measureevaluation.org

21. MEASURE Evaluation is funded by the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) under terms of
Cooperative Agreement AID-OAA-L-14-00004 and
implemented by the Carolina Population Center,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partnership
with ICF International; John Snow, Inc.; Management
Sciences for Health; Palladium; and Tulane University. The
views expressed in this presentation do not necessarily
reflect the views of USAID or the United States
government.
www.measureevaluation.org