Hi, we are seeing a number of organisations who are now either voluntarily or contractually required to use the Results element of the IATI Standard. This element is probably the most under-developed of the IATI Standard, and yet open data on results remains a key aspiration of both IATI (it’s included in the new Vision and Mission) and the Sustainable Development Goals work.
I’d like to set up a discussion on the Results element here (recognising that this has been attempted before) which then feeds into a Results path at the next TAG meeting (in 2016 or early 2017?) to help develop both some consistency in how the element is used, share best practice and solve some problems.
There are pockets of expertise developing, for example in the Netherlands and amongst development resource providers, and it would be good to bring this together in one place in a very practical way.
I think we need to develop a common understanding of what the word ‘results’ means, and what IATI results data can and can’t be used for.
We need to gather and share evidence from Monitoring and Evaluation people within organisations, to check what results they want to record, and how they are want to record them. And also evidence from users that the information that they are getting from the Results element is meaningful and not misleading (ie through the attempted aggregation of apples and pears).
In terms of outputs from this discussion and particularly the TAG, I can see the following would be really useful:
A recommendation to the IATI technical team on any updates needed to the Results element of the Standard to make it fit for purpose.
I think it would be good to develop and publish a set of examples - real-world problems and solutions in order to share the knowledge more widely and to ensure much better quality data. So for example, who records what results in a group of organisations working on one project? How do you define attribution? How do you report qualitative results in a way that’s useful to data users?
What do you think?