I have now read the report. I found that it brings to light the way that different agencies use (or don't use) victim data. I think that Reto and his team will find your report useful.

As I mentioned in my first email if you want to compare the other databases with IMSMA you have to take in account the relational aspect of the IMSMA database. IMSMA contains more information than what can be found on the data collection forms. Alternative city names for instance would be stored in the city tables and not in the victim/incident tables. Reto can probably help you with this.

You mention that one of the questions that the study aims to answer is "For what purpose is the data collected?". In retrospect I do not regard question number one in the survey as being sufficient in indicating which views that the mine action programs have. I find detailed knowledge of the purpose important since the data needed to be collected, stored and analyzed is very different depending on its intended use (purpose). What is considered to be victim assistance data in one organization is considered mine awareness or operational data in another. All mine action programs (MAPs) have their own firm view on what constitutes victim information. Most MAPs fail to see and take advantage of the whole picture. In question one you covered the main areas, but they can be defined more exactly and some were missed out (i.e. to evaluate demining accidents). All applications require different input. Some of them are significantly different, like data needed to reduce deminer accidents compared to data needed to evaluate a mine awareness program. Some are closely related like the victim assistance to deminers and civilians. Through your survey you identified all the collected data that is common between all the different applications of victim assistance information management. At the same time you might have missed to show which data that is vital to one single type of application. Maybe you should also look at which data that is important in relation to its intended use and not only in general?

Daniel