Using Web-Based Technologies for Monitoring

1. Using Web-Based Technologies for Monitoring A Consortium

2. Background • Very high intensity earthquake in northern Pakistan in early October • Mountainous region • Low Accessibility • Poor Communications • Large government, donor, INGO, local NGO and individual response

3. Background • Two large problems in every such disaster • Finding out about conditions in villages • Coordinating responses • Updating conditions • Question: Can new technology help? • www.risepak.com in 2006 (winner Stockholm Challenge Award in 2007) • Similar new sites starting to come up now

4. Typical Information Systems • Designed for logistics and coordination within organizations (UN HIC is separate from Red Cross is separate from MSF) • Not accessible to others • Do not provide information on all villages • Do not update information from individuals outside the organization • Do not record (and make available) information at a level that allows for ex post verification by others (village vs. district)

5. www.risepak.com • Public information and coordination system • Step 1: Pre-load site with all available information at the village level • Step 2: Allow all agencies and individuals to update information, after basic checks • Step 3: Collate and continuously update information on damage and relief • RISEPAK is an enabling environment for self-coordination

6. How does www.risepak.com work? “Give and Take” portal • Take • Pre-Earthquake info on demographics, maps and distances available • Up-to-date info on access, damage and relief • Give • Send village info using phone/fax/sms/web • Help us by using pre-prepared forms or work with ISL team GIVE Info to Risepak Relief Providers Do/Gather

7. Why is www.risepak.com different? • Uses most recent portal technology to integrate demographic, geographical and satellite images • Searchable at village level; all info is PUBLIC • Overlaid with distances from major roads and epicenter • Continuously updated with information received via fax, phone, text-messaging and through www.risepak.com • 8 hour turnaround

9. What does www.risepak.com do? Examples Pre-Loaded Information on high-risk villages

10. What does www.risepak.com do? Examples Pre-Loaded Information: Risk and Accessibility

11. You can plan where to go Smaller relief-organizations may want to go to small villages close to the epicenter first (green); larger organizations to big villages close to the epicenter. To see which ones these are, go to village info

12. What does www.risepak.com do? Examples Information within a week

13. What does www.risepak.com do? Examples Information within a week

14. What does www.risepak.com do? Examples A Valuable Accountability Tool

15. What makes this portal a success? • Give and Take Village-level information • Check in frequently for updated information to help plan and coordinate relief effort • Send damage and relief reports from the field • Help ensure no village is left behind

16. RISEPAK successes • Vast use as a provider of information for all relief groups • Locations of villages • Maps of village areas • Updated information on 1220 of 2500 affected villages (examples here) • Received more than 1800 bulletin board posts

17. Risepak successes • Got relief agencies to think about data and recording relief • Smaller agencies received higher donations once they started posting • (No success with larger organizations) • Accountability and evidence-based policy came on the radar screen • And continues with the www.risepak.com reports

18. RISEPAK Failures: Obtaining Information • Hard to get information from relief-organizations • Boots on the ground critical • Managed to get large number of organizations to record information at the village-level • Great success with smaller organizations, no success at all with larger ones (UN, WFP do not keep such data and do not know where the relief has gone)

19. Risepak failures: The village as the level of data recording • “Village” is the right unit to look at • Small Variation within Villages • Easy to locate villages given names by relief agencies • Received relief and damage information on 2300 villages • BUT could match only 1220 to our database

20. So What’s a Revenue Village: Basantkot

21. Beyond disasters • Typical “supervision” in projects is top-down • But with wide mobile-phone usage, bottom-up reporting is far more efficient • Already happening through flickr, twitter etc. • Perhaps not a great idea for long-term reporting or for services with a public-good aspect (absenteeism of teachers, sanitation) • But probably great for short-term reporting of programs with a big private transfer such as cash-grants

22. Example: Cash Grants • Pre-loaded information can contain the entire beneficiary database with location and other characteristics • Any complaint/issue linked in to the beneficiary • Overall complaint data can point to specific problems (for instance, widows excluded or better delivery in one district vs. other) • Perhaps even more critical in crisis situations where large programs are executed and top-down supervision may be insufficient

23. Lessons Learnt • Contrary to usual perceptions this is not hard to do • Requires body of data collated before hand • Requires business model to be clarified (cannot run on volunteers for ever) • Hardest bit is getting the donors to coordinate • And be willing to make information available publicly • Probably best if mandated rather than on a volunteer basis