CRS Channels of Delivery (included 2.03)

activity_standard
2-03_org_types

(IATI Technical Team) #1

This proposal is part of the 2.03 upgrade process, please comment by replying below.

Standard
Activity

**Schema Object** iati-activity/participating-org

**Type of Change** Add attribute and codelist

**Issue** The IATI standard is meant to be fully compatible with OECD DAC CRS++ reporting directives. While the IATI OrganisationType codelist is similar to the generic CRS channel codes they are not the same and it is therefore not possible to derive CRS++ from IATI data.

**Proposal**

  • Add attribute participating-org/@crs-channel-code
    • Occurrence: min = 0; max = 1
    • Definition: Under CRS++ Reporting Directives this code identifies the implementing agency. Codes ending in ‘00’ are generic and are similar to the [OrganisationType](http://iatistandard.org/202/codelists/OrganisationType/) code.
    • Rule: Must contain a valid value from the CRSChannelCode codelist.
  • Add a non-embedded codelist : CRSChannelCode
    • Values are from latest published DAC and CRS code lists published [here](http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/dacandcrscodelists.htm).
**Standards Day** An option to harmonise DAC Channels and IATI Organisation types was rejected. The above proposal was accepted subject to further consultation.

**Links** http://bit.ly/2lCMYvS


(IATI Technical Team) #2

The attribute discussed in this topic has been included for consideration in the formal 2.03 proposal. The CRSChannelCode codelist already exists and does not need adding.


(Andy Lulham) #3

That’s true… But note this discussion on adding the CRSChannelCode-category codelist. I wonder if it would constitute scope creep to include that here?


(Bill Anderson) #4

There is no problem for us to add the category as metadata. The AidType Category codelist, for example, “exists to group the Aid Type codelist into categories. It is not used as a codelist in its own right.”


(Andy Lulham) #5

Yeah, exactly – AidType Category was the example I highlighted here.

Okay, ace – let’s do that :slight_smile:


(IATI Technical Team) #7

This proposal has been been included in the 2.03 upgrade. It can be viewed in the following two Discuss posts:


(IATI Technical Team) #8