It sounds a bit like we would need escrow funding, where there is money parked in a bankaccount that only becomes available (and then immediately) when there is a disaster that needs our effort.
It would be great if we got to a point where we knew that we could deploy when needed. Building up a good relation with UNOCHA (for example) while there is no disaster yet seems like a good idea. Until we do get that guarantee, all the preparing for off-site deployment is surely valuable as well. rgds, reinier On Friday 16 March 2012 11:21:57 Séverin MENARD wrote: > Hi Francis, > > I totally agree regarding the $, we would need to be funded for this, but > this is smth we could request based on these unique capacities. And > definitely yes regarding the qualifications + the experience on disaster > fields. I do not know how many of us have these capacities in the roster. > Maybe not many, I do not know. This is one of the reasons why we started an > internship program in Haiti. > Reading Kate's answer in the meantime, seems not many :) I agree we may not > be prepared for this now, but from my experience this is smth we should > try to strive for. As an example, if ever a huge disaster as the 2010 Haiti > Earthquake or Pakistan floods occurs again, I would like to help on the > ground again, but having to work for some big agencies losing my time on > useless papermaps products rather than activate communities and HOT > response (even if I could do it a bit in parallel) would be really > frustrating. If we cannot propose a HOT deployment to a funder so far, > maybe we could propose to UN agencies (e.g. OCHA), when they are looking > for GIS consultants, to deploy one or two experienced (and vaccinated) > Hotties for ground activities and coordination with the remote community. > They normally expect consultants able to do not too crappy ArcGIS > papermaps, while we can provide, by combining the skills, baseline data > collected remotely by the volunteer effort and by local mappers, community > activation supported by an Ushahidi platform, trainings, imagery, specific > tools, etc., etc. > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Fran Boon <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 16 March 2012 13:36, Séverin MENARD <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Soory I missed this chat but will be present to the next one. > > > Remote response apart, what should be our potential ground > > > deployment ? > > > > I > > > > > think a ground team who would activate and train quickly the local > > > communities, could drive the HOT remote support, provide imagery > > > > feedbacks > > > > > (precise GPS coordinates, interpretation, etc.) or even imagery > > > itself > > > > taken > > > > > by a drone (some tests are ongoing in Haiti) would make sense. IMHO > > > HOT's kind of uniqueness is to be able to provide coordinated > > > ground and remote response. > > > > Hi Severin, > > > > What you outline sounds great, however it requires an essential > > element which remote support doesn't: $ > > A remote support can be done using relatively little volunteer time to > > set up & then it's up to the community how much they're able to engage > > in the actual work - as HOT we cannot be responsible for that - we > > just set up the infrastructure and make the call (being careful not to > > abuse this so we don't get volunteer fatigue). > > > > Ground support would either require HOT to have it's own funds or else > > to have the requesting Organisation sponsor it (even if the time was > > all donated). > > I agree that we should have a clause in about this and this can start > > by saying 'As HOT has no funds of it's own, a ground support request > > would require the requesting organisation to find funds for this' > > What else do we need to define around this? > > * Role descriptions (I know Kate has done this) > > * Being sure we don't send people out uninsured? > > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably qualified? > > * Being sure that people we send out are suitably equipped? (which > > might not require very much) > > > > Anything else? > > > > F > > > > > Severin > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:00 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Send HOT mailing list submissions to > > >> > > >> [email protected] > > >> > > >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > >> > > >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > >> > > >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > >> > > >> [email protected] > > >> > > >> You can reach the person managing the list at > > >> > > >> [email protected] > > >> > > >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more > > >> specific > > >> than "Re: Contents of HOT digest..." > > >> > > >> Today's Topics: > > >> 1. 1st Activation Working Group meeting report (Schuyler Erle) > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ---- > > >> > > >> Message: 1 > > >> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 00:22:42 +0530 > > >> From: Schuyler Erle <[email protected]> > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Subject: [HOT] 1st Activation Working Group meeting report > > >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > >> > > >> Hello Team, > > >> > > >> Today we had the first meeting of the HOT Activation Working Group > > >> on > > > > the > > > > >> IRC channel. The meeting lasted an hour. Pierre Beland, Fran > > >> Boon, > > > > Andrew > > > > >> Buck, Robert Banick, Harry Wood, and I participated. > > >> > > >> The stated objective of the working group is to develop a strategy > > >> and > > >> tactics for optimally allocating HOT's resources in response to > > > > humanitarian > > > > >> crisis. We noted that humanitarian crises range quite widely in > > > > severity and > > > > >> in level of international response, and that HOT's response should > > >> be > > >> commensurate with the degree to which our services will be used by > > >> responders on the ground. > > >> > > >> The substance of the discussion today revolved around identifying > > >> HOT's possible responses to crisis (including documenting data > > >> sources,> > > acquiring > > > > >> imagery, setting up volunteer tasking services, and mobilizing > > > > volunteers), > > > > >> and working backwards to identify the triggers for those > > >> activities. > > >> > > >> We also discussed at length the distinction between "activation", > > >> and > > >> simply responding to requests made by partner organizations. We > > >> agreed > > > > (I > > > > >> believe) that prompt and reliable response to partner inquiries > > >> should > > > > be a > > > > >> priority for HOT and should be taken up as a subject for > > >> discussion and recommendation by the working group. > > >> > > >> I think that the working group members agreed to start documenting > > >> some> > > of > > > > >> these ideas on the OSM wiki for further discussion. We also agreed > > >> after talking for an hour to pick up the discussion again one > > >> week from> > > today, at > > > > >> 14:00 UTC on Thu 22 Mar 2012. > > > > >> The IRC log for today's meeting is here: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OpenStreetMap_Team/Activ > > ation_Working_Group_22_Mar_2012> > > >> Hope to see those of you who are interested in the subject on #hot > > >> next Thursday! I'll send out a reminder a couple days ahead of > > >> time. Cheers! > > >> > > >> SDE > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> HOT mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > >> > > >> > > >> End of HOT Digest, Vol 25, Issue 13 > > >> *********************************** > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > HOT mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot -- rgds, Reinier Battenberg Director Mountbatten Ltd. www.mountbatten.net tel: +256 758 801749 twitter: @batje _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
