Skip to content
WHO/AFRO HIS Review

Search is only available in production builds. Try building and previewing the site to test it out locally.

5 · Preliminary HIS platform inventory

Owner: Simon Adebola · Editors: Steven Uggowitzer Effort: ~2.5 person-days · Due: v0.5 EOD Fri 2026-09-04 · v0.8 Fri 2026-09-11

What WHO expects here

The most tangible chapter of the Inception: an actual list of platforms, structured against the eight-dimension schema, with an honest coverage statement. WHO reviewers use this chapter to test whether the review’s discovery method is capable of seeing the platforms they know exist (as a smoke test) and to spot platforms they did not know existed (as a value-signal).

Ultimate contents

Coverage statement (up-front)

How many platforms are surfaced. How that number breaks down across the four layers (WHO/AFRO-hosted, ministry-hosted, partner-hosted, shadow-IT). How many are confidence-graded high / medium / low based on how many discovery streams surfaced them.

The eight-dimension schema per record

Every platform record carries the same eight dimensions per bid slide 7:

  1. Purpose / primary users
  2. Data model / core entities
  3. Hosting / infrastructure
  4. Integration interfaces
  5. Standards conformance
  6. Governance / ownership
  7. Sustainability posture
  8. Strategic alignment

Anchor definitions and level scales live in Chapter 9. This chapter surfaces the records; the rubric is Chapter 9.

WHO/AFRO-hosted platforms

Named list. iAHO, Regional Health Data Hub, ESPEN, DPC Portal, EPR Hubs, Polio GIS, Mental Health, plus discovered additions.

Ministry-hosted platforms

Named list from country-office focal-point outreach + CT-log discovery + KII surfacing.

Partner-hosted platforms

DHIS2 country instances, HISP-managed platforms, Fjelltopp-managed CKAN, and any other partner-operated platforms surfaced by discovery.

The shadow-IT layer

Platforms surfaced by DNS + CT-log sweep that do not appear in any official register. Sourced without exposing individuals. “Known unknowns” paragraph: what the method can and cannot see (e.g., private GitHub Enterprise instances, off-cloud spreadsheet workflows).

Method limits + confidence grading

Same honest paragraph as in Chapter 4, restated in inventory-facing language. Grade every record: high / medium / low confidence based on triangulation.

Reusable analytical asset

This inventory is not a one-shot list; it is the seed dataset for Phase 2 deep-dives and for the Draft Report platform datasheets. Annex C carries the structured export.

Evidence to draw on

  • Discovery Stream 1 output (documentation ingest)
  • Discovery Stream 2 output (HQ Modernization Task Force spreadsheet, HISP SA design docs)
  • Discovery Stream 3 output (SSLMate CertSpotter sweep — scripts/discovery/harvest.py)
  • Payload CMS afro-inventory-cms — running structured record
  • incoming/AFR-RC74-7...pdf for platform-to-pillar mapping

Complementary effort triggered

Curation of the CMS extract into narrative form. Footnoting of shadow-IT sources without exposing individuals. The “known unknowns” paragraph. Coverage-target reasoning transparent to a WHO reviewer.