GIS for Health Programme Management Training Course

Participants can organise GIS projects and produce operational maps from tabular and spatial data.

• QGIS and ArcGIS Pro interfaces, project files and geodatabases
• GeoPackage, shapefile and file geodatabase formats compared for programme use
• Layer symbology, labels and scale dependencies configured for operational maps
• Attribute tables filtered, sorted and joined using unique identifiers
• Field types, null values and coded domains controlled consistently
• Map layouts exported with legends, sources, dates and coordinate grids

Participants can assess health data quality and document spatial data for reliable reuse.

• Health Management Information System extracts assessed for geographic completeness
• Facility master lists reconciled using names, codes and coordinates
• Completeness, timeliness, consistency and validity checks documented in data dictionaries
• Duplicate records detected through identifier matching and spatial proximity
• Outliers investigated using range checks, temporal trends and local knowledge
• Data provenance recorded through source registers and transformation logs

Participants can prepare authoritative boundary and facility-location datasets for programme analysis.

• Administrative boundaries sourced, versioned and matched to reporting hierarchies
• Facility locations geocoded from addresses, gazetteers and field coordinates
• Coordinate capture accuracy evaluated using satellite imagery and verification records
• Geocoding confidence categories assigned for uncertain facility locations
• Boundary changes reconciled through crosswalk tables and area correspondence
• Settlement datasets linked to catchment and service delivery planning

Participants can design field data workflows for verifying health service locations and attributes.

• Mobile data collection forms designed with required fields and constraints
• KoboToolbox skip logic, GPS capture and offline workflows configured
• Enumerator protocols specify consent, location precision and daily synchronization
• Field verification samples selected using stratified and purposive approaches
• GPS accuracy, datum settings and positional error recorded at collection
• Incoming records reviewed through automated validation rules and exception queues

Participants can create clear maps that accurately communicate health programme findings.

• Choropleth classification selected using quantiles, natural breaks and policy thresholds
• Rates normalized by population denominators before geographic comparison
• Proportional symbols, dot density and bivariate mapping matched to questions
• Colour schemes tested for accessibility, interpretation and print reproduction
• Map purpose, audience and decision action stated in titles
• Cartographic generalization protects readability without concealing material patterns

Participants can estimate and map target populations for geographic programme planning.

• WorldPop and census grids assessed for resolution, vintage and uncertainty
• Population denominators aggregated to administrative areas and catchment zones
• Age and sex disaggregation applied to target population estimates
• Dasymetric mapping refines population allocation using land cover constraints
• Small-area estimates documented with assumptions, confidence limits and source dates
• Target populations compared against service volumes and intervention coverage

Participants can map service availability, facility readiness and referral relationships.

• Facility readiness indicators linked to coordinates through master facility identifiers
• Service availability mapped by commodity, staffing, equipment and operating hours
• Catchment hypotheses defined from referral patterns, terrain and patient origin
• Thiessen polygons contrasted with administrative and reported catchment boundaries
• Referral networks mapped as directed flows between service levels
• Facility gaps ranked using population need and readiness scores

Participants can assess physical access to health services using spatial accessibility methods.

• Euclidean buffers estimated for rapid initial service access screening
• Network service areas calculated from roads, travel speeds and barriers
• Cost-distance surfaces built from land cover, slope and transport assumptions
• Travel-time thresholds aligned with maternal, immunisation and emergency service standards
• Accessibility results disaggregated by rurality, age group and season
• Assumptions tested against journey data and local transport knowledge

Participants can identify and rank geographic priorities using transparent decision criteria.

• Priority areas ranked through weighted overlay and transparent criteria scores
• Multi-criteria decision analysis weights elicited from programme stakeholders
• Coverage gaps identified by intersecting need, access and service capacity
• Intervention sites screened against land availability, hazards and referral links
• Scenario maps compare baseline, proposed investment and constrained resource options
• Decision briefs pair maps with recommendations, caveats and accountable actions

Participants can map disease burden using appropriate rates, denominators and privacy controls.

• Case definitions and reporting units standardized before spatial surveillance analysis
• Incidence and prevalence rates calculated using aligned geographic denominators
• Choropleth maps distinguish counts, crude rates and age-standardized rates
• Kernel density estimation identifies concentrations of point-reported cases
• Standardized morbidity ratios compare observed and expected disease burden
• Privacy thresholds suppress small counts and sensitive locations

Participants can interpret spatial cluster statistics and translate results into investigation priorities.

• Spatial autocorrelation assessed using Global Moran's I and Local Moran's I
• Getis-Ord Gi* statistics identify statistically significant hot and cold spots
• Cluster results interpreted alongside reporting completeness and population density
• Multiple testing, spatial dependence and ecological fallacy addressed explicitly
• Temporal aggregation choices tested for outbreak detection sensitivity
• Cluster alerts translated into investigation priorities rather than causal claims

Participants can select and interpret satellite imagery for health-related environmental analysis.

• Optical, radar and thermal imagery matched to health-relevant environmental variables
• Spatial resolution, temporal resolution and spectral resolution compared for programme questions
• Cloud masking, mosaicking and image compositing prepare analysis-ready scenes
• Land cover classification supports settlement, water and vector habitat mapping
• Normalized Difference Vegetation Index indicates vegetation conditions relevant to vectors
• Remote-sensing uncertainty documented before operational decisions are made

Participants can combine environmental and health data to assess geographic risk patterns.

• Rainfall estimates, temperature and elevation surfaces linked to disease risk
• Drainage, standing water and flood exposure mapped from terrain data
• Land surface temperature derived from thermal imagery with stated limitations
• Seasonal time series reveal environmental conditions preceding transmission peaks
• Environmental covariates combined with surveillance data using lagged indicators
• Risk maps distinguish predictive signals from confirmed epidemiological evidence

Participants can map programme indicators and assess geographic performance trends over time.

• Indicator reference sheets define numerators, denominators, geography and reporting frequency
• DHIS2 data extracts joined to boundaries through organisational unit codes
• Coverage, dropout and equity indicators mapped at appropriate administrative levels
• Time-enabled layers show service trends, campaigns and outbreak progression
• Before-after comparisons account for denominator changes and boundary revisions
• Monitoring maps include data-quality flags and interpretation notes

Participants can assess geographic inequities and compare allocation options using equity criteria.

• Equity stratifiers combine poverty, disability, gender, displacement and rurality data
• Small-area deprivation indices mapped with transparent component definitions
• Concentration curves and equity gaps interpreted alongside spatial patterns
• Intersection analysis identifies populations facing overlapping service barriers
• Resource allocation scenarios test equity, efficiency and feasibility trade-offs
• Distributional impacts stated before approving geographic targeting decisions

Participants can apply privacy, access and ethical controls to health location data.

• Data protection impact assessments identify risks from health location data
• Role-based access controls separate identifiable records from aggregated outputs
• Geomasking, aggregation and suppression reduce disclosure risk in published maps
• Data-sharing agreements specify purpose, retention, access and destruction requirements
• Ethical review considers stigma, security and consequences of geographic labels
• Metadata records document custodians, licences, update cycles and permitted use

Participants can establish repeatable GIS workflows for programme teams and routine reporting.

• GIS standard operating procedures define intake, validation, analysis and publication steps
• Version control and naming conventions maintain traceable spatial project files
• Update schedules align boundary, facility, population and monitoring datasets
• Quality assurance checklists verify projections, joins, classifications and map elements
• Reproducible workflows record parameters, scripts and processing dependencies
• Service request registers prioritize products by decision deadline and user

Participants can communicate GIS findings through suitable products for programme decision-makers.

• Decision-focused map products separate operational, strategic and public communication needs
• Story maps combine maps, charts, narrative and source notes
• Dashboard specifications define indicators, filters, refresh schedules and ownership
• Uncertainty communicated through annotations, ranges and appropriate visual variables
• Briefing notes state geographic findings, limitations, options and recommended actions
• Stakeholder review criteria test usability, credibility and decision relevance

Participants can build, review and present a complete geographic programme analysis with recommendations.

• Programme question scoped with decision owner, users, geography and timeline
• Source datasets assessed, cleaned and documented in a project data register
• Spatial analyses selected to answer access, coverage, risk or equity questions
• Operational map series and decision brief produced with transparent assumptions
• Peer review applies quality, ethics, interpretation and usability criteria
• Final presentation defends recommendations, limitations and implementation priorities to reviewers