TBHSSERV Health

Health data is only useful when it reaches the person deciding.

Health and public health organisations do not usually have a data shortage. They have records at population scale, systems that predate the question being asked, and reporting obligations no private operation would survive. What goes missing is the path from all of that to a decision somebody makes on Monday.

Score my operation

What we do here

The practices, in health language.

Nothing here is a separate service line. It is the same method meeting the constraints this sector actually has.

Reporting under public accountability

Numbers that hold up when an auditor, a health authority, or the public asks how they were produced. Agreed definitions, a traceable path back to source, and no figure that only one person knows how to rebuild.

Population-scale records

Data models and pipelines built for volumes where a query pattern that works on a sample quietly stops working in production.

Legacy government systems

Integration with the systems you actually have, including the ones nobody wants to touch. Replacing them is rarely the fastest route to the answer.

Field tools where connectivity is not a given

Tools for frontline workers that keep working offline and reconcile when they come back, because the places with the worst reporting are usually the places with the worst signal.

Proof that an intervention worked

A baseline before the change and the same measurement after it. In public health the counterfactual is the whole argument, and it cannot be reconstructed later.

How a number becomes a decision

A dashboard nobody opens is a cost, not an asset.

Most analytics work stops at the chart. The work that matters carries a number all the way to somebody changing what they do on Monday. Here is that arc, from an engagement inside a national public health system.

The question
Why were some regions barely reporting certain diseases?
Not "let us analyse the surveillance data." A specific question somebody actually needed answered. Low case counts look like good news, which is exactly why nobody had questioned them.
The signal
Low case counts did not match anything else in the data.
Population, clinic coverage, and treatment records all pointed one direction. Reported cases pointed the other. When two sources disagree, one of them is wrong, and the interesting question is which.
Two sourcesdisagreeing is the finding, not a data quality problem to be cleaned away
The insight
The disease was not absent. The reporting was.
Underreporting, concentrated in places least equipped to report. The gap was not medical, it was operational, which meant it was fixable without a single clinical intervention.
The decision
Medication distribution was scaled to where the need actually was.
Health authorities redirected supply and targeted treatment programs by region, and field tools were built for community health workers so the reporting gap would close at the source. That is the whole point: not a chart, a decision that moved.
Supply follows needrather than following whoever files the most paperwork

The delivery behind it

Project management for a national-scale public health data program.

TBHSSERV was founded out of project management on a big data and innovation program inside a national public health system in Brazil. The work integrated federal health, demographic, and spending data into a single platform so the health authority could monitor facilities and evaluate where public money was going.

Analysis that moved policy

Study of disease underreporting informed where the health authority scaled medication distribution and targeted treatment programs. Not a dashboard nobody opened, a number that changed a decision.

Field tools for frontline workers

Digital tools for community health workers doing active case finding, built to work offline and deployed to remote municipalities where connectivity could not be assumed.

Scale and scrutiny

Population-level record volumes, legacy government systems, and public accountability standards stricter than most private reporting will ever face.

Free, and no pricing conversation

Find out what the gaps are costing you.

Twenty questions about how your operation actually runs, answerable without opening a single report. You get a score across five dimensions, an estimated annual range for the cost of the gaps, and the three things worth fixing first. No email and no sign-up, and nothing you enter leaves your browser, so the question of patient data never arises.

Start the assessment