Data Quality Index Consultation - sub-section 1.3 Timeliness - Spend Updates and 1.4 Timeliness - Active Publishers
Instructions for submitting your feedback
1. Read through the proposed methodology for this measure and / or download the PDF at the bottom of this page;
2. Share your feedback through the comment- box below, consider the guiding questions in your comments and include the question number in your response;
3. And finally you can suggest track-changes or add comments directly on the specifics of the methodology of the Timeliness and Validation measures - go to this DQI Live-Editing-Page
Proposed Measure - 1.3. Timeliness - SPEND UPDATES
Please find below the proposed methodology for this measure. Only active activities* will be assessed in the Timeliness measures.
*Active activities refer to activities which have an actual-start-date in the past and an actual-end-date in the future. If actual start and end dates are not present, the planned start and end dates will be used.
DEFINITION assess if an organisation has published timely spend (transaction + expenditure) updates.
OBJECTIVE / EXPLANATION
Data quality objective: Publication of timely spend data in all activities.
Based on the methodology, this is measuring whether all activities contain spend transactions for the month being assessed. For example, if a publisher has 100 activities in March, it will assess the percentage of those activities that contain at least one disbursement or expenditure transaction with a transaction date in March.
As such, this will motivate publishers to ensure that all of their activities contain at least one spend transaction.
Bigger picture, the goal is to motivate publishers to publish timely spend transactions in all of their activities.
Count the number of activities with disbursement and / or expenditure transactions for each of the past 12 months.
Divide by total number of activities per month.
Please find below a visualisation for this proposed measure. Do note that this has been created to help participants picture what the DQI could look like. It is not final, nor part of the proposed methodology.
Guiding question - please refer to the question number when you respond via the comment box below!
1. Should the total activity count (denominator) only include active activities or all activities?
- If only active activities, this would be assessed using the activity dates.
2. Should aggregates also be assessed and visualised?
- For example, to assess the percentage of activities that contain spend transactions for each quarter or for the year?
Proposed Measure - 1.4 Timeliness - ACTIVE PUBLISHERS
Please find below the proposed methodology for this measure.
DEFINITION assess if an organisation has updated their data within the past 12 months.
OBJECTIVE / EXPLANATION
- Data quality objective: reduction in the number of publishers failing to update their data at least annually.
- Based on the methodology, this is measuring whether an organisation has made any update to its file in the past 12 months. It will help data users to easily identify organisations that are inactive and thereby unlikely to have recent or good quality data.
As such, this will motivate publishers to update their data so that they can be moved from inactive to active.
Guiding questions - please refer to the question number when you respond via the comment box below.
3. Should this measure rely on each publisher's reporting of the last updated date? Any other suggestions?
4. Should the information on whether a publisher is active or inactive be added to all pages (with various different measures) of the DQI visualisation?
For each discussion, the IATI Secretariat will organise a webinar to explain the proposed methodology, answer questions and further explain how to engage.
- Please find an overview of the most frequently asked questions of the Timeliness and Validation webinar here.
- Missed the DQI Webinar on Data Completeness held on March 30? Watch the recordings here or read the summary here!