You will need to select an administrative level (Admin level) for reporting — for example, Admin 1 (regions), Admin 2 (districts), or Admin 3 (communes or wards). The greater the level of detail (e.g., Admin 3), the more precise the spatial analysis and gap identification; however, this also significantly increases the time and effort required from partners to enter data (e.g., more rows and more detailed disaggregation in the 5Ws).
The choice of reporting level should balance the need for detailed spatial data to support coordination and decision-making against the reporting burden on partners. This decision is usually taken during the HPC process, in consultation with the ICCG and the IMWG.
Shapefiles and administrative boundary data to support this decision are often available on the Humanitarian Data Exchange (HDX).
Country examples:
- In Syria, partners report primarily at Admin 3 level (sub-districts), and in some cases, analysis is carried out even at Admin 4 (community or village) level. While data collection at these lower levels can be challenging, results are generally presented at Admin 3 for clarity and comparability.
- In Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), reporting is done consistently at Admin 3 level to capture local dynamics and improve targeted assistance.
- In Sudan, partners typically report at Admin 2 level (localities), which strikes a balance between operational detail and reporting feasibility.
These examples illustrate that the choice of reporting level is context-specific and should be aligned with operational priorities, partner capacity, and available data resources.