Versions Compared

Version Old Version 9 New Version 10
Changes made by

FIS

FIS

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Common Operational Dataset tutorials may be found in the IM Toolbox > Tutorials > Common Operational Database tutorials section.

...

OCHA routinely evaluates the quality and availability of Common Operational Databases.

Table of Contents

Administrative boundary (COD-AB) and population statistics (COD-PS) dashboard

This dashboard documents the quality and availability of the administrative boundary (COD-AB) layers and live services and population statistics (COD-PS) tables on HDX.  The dashboard has four tabs:

...

  • 'ADM1', 'ADM2', 'ADM3', and 'ADM4':  Administrative level 1, 2, 3, and 4 boundaries as 'fully usable' (green dot), 'partly usable' (orange dot), 'needs improvement' (red dot), or 'unavailable' (grey dot).  The evaluation criteria are described below.
  • 'HDX':  availability on HDX (green tick) or unavailability (grey dot)
  • 'LIVE':  availability of live services (green tick) or unavailability (grey dot)

...

  • 'ADM1', 'ADM2', 'ADM3', and 'ADM4':  Administrative level 1, 2, 3, and 4 population statistics as 'fully usable' (green dot), 'partly usable' (orange dot), 'needs improvement' (red dot), or 'unavailable' (grey dot).  The evaluation criteria are described below.
  • 'HDX':  availability on HDX (green tick) or unavailability (grey dot)

...

Frequently Asked Questions

...


Evaluation criteria


COD-ABs and COD-PSs are evaluated by FIS should be evaluated according  according to established criteria to maintain standardized levels of quality.

CODs may be evaluated:

  • Informally by country IM teams at any time
  • Semi-formally by the country IM every year for the re-endorsement process
  • Formally by OCHA FIS when CODs are loaded or re-loaded to HDX.  These evaluations are reflected in the COD Dashboard (discussed below).

...

CODs should be prepared for administrative level 0 (country), administrative level 1, and for additional administrative levels that are available and relevant.

CODs should be evaluated according to the established standard criteria (below) for comparability.  FIS uses a numeric scoring algorithm [to be documented later] that computes usability levels for each administrative level and overall.   (All administrative level 0 data, and the last evaluation Ecriteria groups ‘Link to COD-PS’ and ‘Link to COD-AB’ do not influence the usability evaluation.)  Field IMOs are encouraged to use the same criteria for evaluation of candidate CODs and for periodic review of published CODs.

Each administrative level (except level 0 and any level below level 4) is evaluated individually, although some critera apply to entire COD-AB datasets (comprising multiple administrative levels).  The evaluated levels are:

  • Fully usable:  The COD can be used for any purpose
  • Partly usable:  The COD has some problems that may limit its use
  • Needs improvement:  The COD is only useful for very limited purposes

Indicators are grouped.  Each group has a rule for designation as 'Fully usable', 'Partly usable', or 'Needs improvement'.  The evaluation of the entire administrative level is equal to the worst group evaluation. 

Country statistics depend on the evaluation of the worst administrative level.

Some COD-AB an COD-PS criteria are applicable to the entire COD-AB (an HDX 'datatset') or to the individual administrative layer.  Evaluations for entire datasets are assigned to every component administrative layer.

COD-AB

...

evaluation criteria

Metadata

Attribute structure

indicator group

Indicator
Criterion
ApplicabilityGuidanceFully usablePartly usableNeeds improvement

HDX upload

Is the COD-AB

available

published on HDX?

Dataset
At least one indicator is satisfied






No indicators are satisfied


Public availabilityIs the data
public on HDX?
available publicly?DatasetOptions are 'public', 'private', or 'request data'
Dataset date

Is the date

of the dataset

clearly indicated on HDX?

Dataset'Providing Metadata For Your Datasets On HDX'


Description

Is there a short but complete description of the dataset?

Dataset
Source

Is the data source clearly indicated and defined on HDX?

Dataset
Methodology or commentsIs
there
any
methodology or comments containing clarified
clarifying information provided?Dataset
COD tagIs the
file
dataset tagged as
being
a 'COD' on HDX for easy discovery?Dataset
IMWG endorsementIs the
COD-AB
dataset endorsed by the IMWG?Dataset
LicenseIs the
type of license/rights of use defined on the HDX website?
correct license specified on HDX?DatasetTO BE DISCUSSED WITHIN FIS
Single datasetAre all the COD-AB files (HDX resources) grouped
as
into one
unique entry on
HDX dataset?DatasetBest Practice
Unique levelsIs there only one file (HDX resource) per file format per
level? (e.g., only one SHP for each level)Is
administrative level?Dataset

Exceptions may be made.  For instance, the Bangladesh COD-AB features layers with and without inland waters.

Equivalent files should not be found elsewhere on HDX.

Best Practice

GazeteerAre the COD-AB attribute
table also
tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX?DatasetCAN THIS BE REMOVED?  IT IS REPEATED IN THE  ATTRIBUTE SECTION.
CPG fileIs a .cpg file available for each ArcGIS shapefile?Administrative layerA .cpg file is an ArcGIS codepage that comes with the other files extensions and that can be used to define the code. CPG file
present within the zip (when needed : AB names in arabic, russian, french, spanish)?
  • Is there a metadata file (txt) present with the COD-AB?
    • Is the zip naming convention followed?
    is not mandatory but should be present when needed.
    Metadata fileA metadata file (in .txt format) or gazeteer tab must be available to provide further information on dataDataset
    Zip file namingIs the zip naming convention followed?Administrative layer

    Zip file naming convention helps to standardize referencing of files NOTE LINK HAS NOT BEEN MIGRATED FROM TSP

    Best Practice

    Shapefile nameing


    		Is the shapefile naming convention followed?Administrative layer

    The SHP files should follow the naming convention (standards).

    Best Practice

    Attribute criteria

    IndicatorCriterionApplicabilityGuidanceFully usablePartly usableNeeds improvement
    Feature countAre there the correct number of features?Administrative layerConsult reliable sources, particularly COD-PS datasetsTwo indicators are satisfied













    		Fewer than two indicators are satisfied





    Complete feature namesAre there any missing feature names?Administrative layer
    Clear field namesColumn names must make sense and be clear to prevent any confusion. Is there any explanation/document about standardization of items? Administrative layer
    Latin alphabet namesAre the feature names written in the Latin alphabet?Administrative layer

    If names are written in any alphabet which is not Latin, it must be translated into English in another column.

    (Link to ITOS schema)

    Gazetteer (tabular) fileAre the COD-AB attribute tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX?Administrative layer

    Best Practice


    ParentageLower levels have higher attributes includedAdministrative layer

    Lower levels should include higher levels to see the AB unit it falls in.

    Best Practice

    Unique feature namesDo any features have duplicate names (within the same higher administrative levels)?Administrative layerDuplicates attributes check tutorial




    • Is the count of polygons different between sources (GDAM, Wikipedia) ? If yes put the number with the source in brackets and some eventual explanation in the comments
    • Are there names in all records?
    • Do the column names respect the naming convention?
    • Are all the names transcripted into latin script when required if other script is local language? (e.g., Latin script name included with Arabic name)
    • Is there a specific Excel file containing all the AB level units? (Excel - Gazetteer)
    • Do the lower admin boundaries have the higher admin boundaries in the shp ?
    • Are there any duplicate names within the level?





    P-codes
    Parentage
    • Are there names in all records?
    • Do the P-codes incorporate values from higher levels?
    • Are there any duplicate P-codes within the level?
    • Does each admin level have upper level P-codes? Is the hierarchy the same between levels?
    • Does each admin level have upper level names? Is the hierarchy the same between levels?


    ...