We’re asking for feedback on the organisation reference requirement for new IATI publishers, specifically when no suitable registration agency and number can be found. This is relevant to anyone interested in how organisations are uniquely identified in IATI or how new publishers are supported to register.

Note: while “organisation reference” is true to the IATI Standard, “organisation identifier” and “org ID” are widely used across IATI tools to refer to the same thing. In this post, we will use “organisation reference”.


Background to organisation references 

IATI has led the field in uniquely identifying organisations. Doing so supports the strategies and goals of the Initiative, including the development of networks of IATI datasets. Whilst there is an ongoing discussion on how we best refer to any organisation in these datasets, this post highlights the specific challenge of finding references for new IATI publishers.

An organisation reference aims to:

  • verify the existence of and uniquely identify an organisation 
  • facilitate links between organisations, development funding and activities, within and external to IATI datasets

Each organisation requires a reference (from a recognised registration agency) to register as an IATI publisher. Trying to find a reference for a publisher with no obvious registration agency available causes delays and confusion during their IATI onboarding process - it is clear that many of these organisations are giving up on publishing

How can we make the registration process smoother, whilst maintaining the benefit of uniquely identifying organisations in IATI datasets?

 

How are organisation references found and used in the IATI Standard?

Org-id.guide grew out of early work on IATI and is used by a number of data standards. The site does not have formal backing or governance, but is a valuable resource to find registers and unique references for organisations by jurisdiction. It is not comprehensive, particularly for aid-dependent countries with less digitisation, and there are often cases where the IATI Secretariat cannot find a suitable persistent reference. For example, an organisation may be registered in a country which renews registration numbers annually, or where no national register exists for their organisation type. Alternatively, an organisation may have several possible references if it appears on multiple registers.

Each publisher’s organisation reference is used to populate reporting-org/@ref in their IATI activity and organisation data files. reporting-org/@ref then forms the prefix for the activity-identifier field, which helps uniquely identify IATI activities and can't change once published.

 

What happens if a suitable organisation reference can’t be found?

When an organisation reference can’t be found, the IATI Secretariat currently uses IATI Connect’s Standard Management Consultations group to propose creating a new reference on the XI-IATI codelist, which the Secretariat maintains. IATI Community members are given up to two weeks to suggest an alternative before it is approved.

This process often results in:

  • delays to the new publisher’s registration - their Registry account can't be approved without an organisation reference as stands.
  • significant use of IATI Secretariat time trying to find a suitable reference (without us necessarily having the reach or domain knowledge required).
  • additions to an XI-IATI codelist that the IATI Secretariat has to maintain indefinitely for little benefit; XI-IATI references also prevent joining publishers’ data up with non-IATI sources and provide no information on which country the organisation is located in.

Question: Can we agree on a streamlined approach to register a new publisher when no suitable reference can be found?

Options A and B below are two possible approaches that we could take to help minimise delays to new publisher registrations.

 

OPTION A: Stop creating XI-IATI references and allow a publisher to register without an organisation reference 

Example:

“Organisation X” registers as a new IATI publisher and enters a publisher ID “org_x” for their IATI Registry account. After contacting the IATI Secretariat for help finding an organisation reference, no suitable registration agency and number have been found. 

A screenshot of the IATI Publisher registration page

The IATI Secretariat could approve their Registry account by using their publisher ID “org_x” as their organisation reference, which completes their registration and lets them move on to publishing data. The organisation reference could then be updated in future if a more suitable one is found - e.g. following addition of a new register to org-id.guide. We already update references when organisations merge or split into new entities, and we know how to do it in a way that leaves activity identifiers unchanged.

Motivation:

This decouples the need for a unique reference to distinguish IATI’s 1600 different publishers in the Registry from the need to link the same organisation across open datasets. 

To ensure the benefits of an organisation reference are kept, we would ensure that proportionate steps are still taken by the IATI Secretariat to find a suitable reference before taking this option. This would include searching org-id.guide and asking the publisher for a registration certificate, but stops short of conducting research to add a new register to org-id.guide (which delays the publisher’s registration). 

Implications for the IATI Standard schema and tools:

To accommodate this approach within schema rules and IATI tooling, we would need to:

  1. Relax the requirement for reporting-org/@ref to be a string in the format {RegistrationAgency}-{RegistrationNumber} as described here. It could use the publisher ID string instead if no organisation reference is available. 
  2. Agree that the IATI Secretariat can approve a new publisher account on the Registry, in exceptional cases, without an organisation reference.
  3. Update IATI tools accordingly to relax validation rules on the organisation reference and associated reporting-org/@ref element.

     

OPTION B: Continue creating XI-IATI references without requiring a community consultation

The current two week consultation process on IATI Connect to create a new XI-IATI reference is not efficient or sustainable for registering new publishers. It's clear that this is delaying registrations and damaging engagement.

This option proposes that the IATI Secretariat takes proportionate steps to try to find a reference (i.e. checking org-id.guide and asking the publisher for a registration certificate), after which an XI-IATI reference would be created without the need for an IATI Connect community consultation.

The Community can still be engaged periodically and have the chance to feedback, but in a way that avoids holding up new publisher registrations.

 

Feedback and next steps

Both options presented here sit alongside the need to invest time into maintaining and adding registers to org-id.guide. We are already doing this in the IATI Secretariat, where we have the expertise and reach, but there will remain cases where references are not available. 

We're looking for community feedback on the two options presented above - please comment on this post by Friday 29th March 2024 to share your thoughts. This will inform further discussion at April’s Members' Assembly and Community Exchange.

Comments (8)

Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat)
Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat) Moderator

(for interest - Herman van Loon  , Siem Vaessen  , Michelle Levesque  , Yohanna Loucheur  , Mark Brough  , Steven Flower  )

Michelle Levesque
Michelle Levesque

Dear Emma,

I think the secretariate can create IDs without consulting the community but I also don’t believe XI-IATI should be what is used. I also think that every org should have a minimally structured reference code that is reviewed by the secretariate.

I would like to propose a hybrid third solution to what you have above.

The hybrid I propose is that reference codes for publishers where no official registry exists should still start with 2-digit ISO country code which correspond to the country in which the publisher is located/headquartered. After that the code can be an acronym or short name of the organization. Using your example it would be AF-Org_X.

As you may have seen my comments in the past when IATI issued the numbers, using XI in the the IATI issued IDs serves no useful purpose in my opinion. I do not believe having that part of the ID represent where the registry agency is located as opposed to the organization itself is useful. For those looking to assess the use of local implementing partners, having the country of the organization as the first two digits helps with data analytics to determine when a IP has two digits which correspond to the benefiting country or not.  It might not be a perfect fit but it sure beats having no idea where the organization is from when XI is used. It also helps because many already registered publishers have to HQ Country/Region listed which makes no sense.  Even multi-laterals have a HQ location that should have been listed.  But I digress.

Happy to discuss if my proposal is considered controversal or impractical.

Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat)
Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat) Moderator

Thanks Michelle Levesque  - that's a good suggestion to add the country prefix, which would make the organisation references more meaningful as you say. I don't see why we couldn't incorporate that into the Option A approach above.

Michelle Levesque
Michelle Levesque

Emma Clegg  Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat)  the only reason I suggested it as a hybrid rather than part of option A is that I read option A to mean publisher could register without a reference and I don't think that is a good idea.  I think every publisher should have a reference but I just think the reference should start with the country the publisher is in not the country of the registering agent (i.e. xi for IATI).  I hope that makes sense. 

Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat)
Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat) Moderator

Ok, noted Michelle Levesque . By allowing a publisher to register "without a reference", I'm meaning without a reference in the currently allowed format (i.e. one that uses a recognised registration agency prefix from org-id.guide).

So, that could be clearer in my explanation(!), but I see there being flexibility in what we use instead as a reference. The publisher ID string was just an example, but even better if we can choose something that provides more information about the organisation (e.g. the country)

Herman van Loon
Herman van Loon

Both option A & B (and Michelle's hybrid option) seem viable. The most important thing to guard here is that IATI activity identifiers, once published, should never change since that would cause havoc for chain transparency. This means, if I understand correctly, that with option A it is possible that the prefix of the IATI activity identifier might be different from the IATI organization reference. No big deal, unless existing tools rely on the conformity of the IATI activity identifier prefix and the organization reference (which they shouldn't i.m.o.). 

Michelle Levesque
Michelle Levesque

I am not advocating for a wholesale change but I do think if one were needed it could be done as long as there was a lot of warning and communication as to what what being changed and why.  The US government changed how they published their various departments and those of us with published references were able to make the necessary changes to our systems to keep up with the change.  If we could start over I'd recommend a better structure for many of our publishers because we aren't consistent.  Some governements use their DAC number and GOV  (X-GOV) others just the numbers.  The inconsistency makes it hard to analyse the data without a translation table. Not every user has access to technical people to do their data mining. Again, I'm not advocating for changes to existing numbers but I stand by the fact that XI-IATI is a wasted opportunity to be slightly "smarter" in the code structure.  

Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat)
Emma Clegg (IATI Secretariat) Moderator

Thanks both. Herman van Loon  - yes, we would always prevent activity identifiers from changing once published. We already deal with organisations who need to update their reference after publishing (e.g. when their legal entity changes), so IATI tools should not always expect conformity between activity ids and the current organisation reference.

And noted, Michelle Levesque. We have started thinking about cases when it might make sense to retrospectively change organisation references, but are not proposing anything imminently. The focus here is on new publisher registrations.


Please log in or sign up to comment.