Originally from ticket #1581.
my NGO "Aidrating" is addressing issues of transparency and data
comparability in aid since many years. We do not have large resources,
and I will be away till early August. However, I would like to place a
remark regarding the IATI components specifically with regard to
1. environment of a project (local setting)
3. output- outcome- impact
For the three of these, we think a more systematic and detailed
classification system should be applied. The reason: These three groups,
properly implemented, are the most relevant if one of the great
advantages of IATI- w the standardized coverage of as many aid
"projects" as possible- should be put to proper use for
scientific/statistic analysis of aid methodologies ("what works, what
doesn't, and why"), for instance of success and failure factors.
I am not able to provide further comments at this time, but on our page
aidrating.org some clues might be found. If there is interest at IATI
secretariat, I would try to further expand on what I am trying to say.
PS: By the way: Mr Mark Brough, member of your panel, was a contact of
ours and we met at the Busan conference in 2011. He might comment on
PO Box 1992