Discussion

Data Quality Index - Section: Timeliness

IATI Secretariat • 1 September 2021
Data Quality Index Consultation - sub-section Timeliness

Instructions for submitting your feedback
  1. Access the Timeliness-section by clicking on the button below, or download the attached full report.
  2. Share your feedback through the comment-box below, and consider the guiding questions in your comments.

3.1 Timeliness

  • Do you agree that  frequency and time lag are good assessments of timeliness and should be retained?
  • Do you agree with the additional measures of spend data updates and consistency as a measure of timeliness? 
  • Do you agree with the additional disaggregation assessing any updates in IATI activity, splitting publishers into active and inactive?
  • Do you have any other suggestions?

BACK TO MAIN DQI-PAGE

Files

Comments (4)

Herman van Loon
  • Do you agree that  frequency and time lag are good assessments of timeliness and should be retained?

    Yes
     
  • Do you agree with the additional measures of spend data updates and consistency as a measure of timeliness?

    Possibly. Could you give some examples? Usually only a subset of all activities will be changed. Finished activities will not be changed anymore.
     
  • Do you agree with the additional disaggregation assessing any updates in IATI activity, splitting publishers into active and inactive?

    The current proposal has i.m.o. some problems. The text seems to suggest you propose to do this on a XML activity file by file basis. In the Netherlands case, IATI XML activity files are split on a two yearly basis. In other words we split activity files across  time instead of countries (to avoid duplication of activities in multiple XML files). The older files will not change any more since most activities will be finished. This would mean that the Netherlands data might be flagged as inactive, where they are not. Only the finished activities will be inactive. 

    So I suggest to do this test on a publisher by publisher instead of a file by file basis or skip the test at all.
     
  • Do you have any other suggestions?

    Consistently assess publishers activity data as a whole instead of on a file by file basis. The splitting of data into multiple XML activity files is a  measure to avoid technical problems when processing data. It does not really represent something functional. 
leo stolk
  • Do you agree that  frequency and time lag are good assessments of timeliness and should be retained?

Yes but only look at transactions, frequency and time lag should also look at updates in result entries, updates in recipient activity ID, provider activity ID, title and description narrative changes.  improving these aspects of an activity may be as important as updating a transaction.

  • Do you agree with the additional measures of spend data updates and consistency as a measure of timeliness? 

possibly yes, again update of non spending elements may be as important and should be looked at in my opinion

  • Do you agree with the additional disaggregation assessing any updates in IATI activity, splitting publishers into active and inactive?

Agree, suggest turning the active publishers in shades of green, and leave the less actives without colour.

  • Do you have any other suggestions?

see above my plea to look at more than transactions alone. 

Yohanna Loucheur

Agree with others that we should not look only at changes in financial data - updates in other aspects of activity information can be just as important. Why not use the time-stamp on the IATI file, this provide the last-updated information?  

Also agree with the Netherlands about closed activities. These files are no longer updated but are still very useful, they should not be classified as inactive. Let's make sure the tests are properly designed (e.g. check the status of the activities in the file to determine whether updates are expected). 

On frequency: a "weekly" category could be added to recognize publishers updating their data more frequently (several now do it daily).

Additional measures: it is not clear to me what the new measures aim to capture in addition to what is already included. A consistent update to important data such as spending - isn't this the same as disbursement? What would be expected?  Similarly, what are we looking for regarding transaction dates alignment? 

Marie-Line Simon
  • Do you agree that  frequency and time lag are good assessments of timeliness and should be retained?

Also agree with the remarks above: any update is important, not only financial. An interesting indication would be that any data change is dated and highlighted.

  • Do you agree with the additional measures of spend data updates and consistency as a measure of timeliness? 

Agree with the Netherlands about this: only a part of the information will and can get updated. An absence of change does not mean the information is outdated.

  • Do you agree with the additional disaggregation assessing any updates in IATI activity, splitting publishers into active and inactive?

As for us, Belgian ngo's, registering data in IATI has become mandatory for all Development cooperation orgs receiving state donations as from 2017. We work on a 5-year basis, which allows us to plan all activities and expenses over 5 years. The (legal) minimum frequency has been set to once a year (April) for the past activity year, which means we usually publish data only once it is definitive and approved. Therefore:

1- our follow up of our IATI register is in line with our planning and reporting processes, and its timeliness is limited by the one of our reporting (only once a year) - we cannot register real-time information. And we do not expect to record accurate data more than once a year.

2- the process of filling IATI in is generally in charge of someone who does not have the time and posibility to centralize such data more than once a year.

3- What is being published will supposedly not change, as we register only planned and reported data. So labelling it as 'inactive' is not correct.

  • Do you have any other suggestions?

Donors (especially official/state donors) should be better informed of what is expected from IATI in terms of timeliness.

A distinction should be made between the types of reporting organizations, as there is a large set of capacities, expectations, willingness, etc.


Please log in or sign up to comment.