NGO Aid Map: We Built It. Have They Come? (Part 2: Making it Easy to Participate)
In the second post in this series, I discussed what we’ve learned about what motivates InterAction members to provide data for NGO Aid Map, an initiative that pools and shares data about the work of InterAction members around the world. But incentives are just one part of the equation. Given that collecting data for NGO Aid Map represents additional – and unfunded – work for our members, we’re also very conscious of the need to make it as easy as possible for them to submit data. Significant progress will come about only if we can combine willingness with a lower level of effort for participation.
In the survey conducted in November 2011, we asked organizations, “If your organization has discontinued its participation in one of the Aid Maps, what is the primary reason for this?” About half (47 percent) of those responding cited “lack of staff” time as the major reason for disengagement. This finding echoed conversations we’d had with members. Finding the time to compile, review and submit information that is not required by a donor or the organization itself is clearly a challenge, especially since most organizations do not have central repositories of project data.
To address this problem, we decided to change the way we collect data from our members. Initially, we gathered data using Excel templates. These were not popular, and were increasingly difficult to work with as the number of projects an organization had grew. They also made InterAction a bottleneck. “Calls for data” would go out every three or four months, meaning we received a lot of data at once. With only two people to review and enter information for a large number of organizations, there were unnecessary delays in getting the data on the site.
Last year, we created what we call “Member Workspaces,” accounts each organization can use to contribute data to the site directly. The response was universally enthusiastic. People now find it much easier to add or update information, and it means that data appears on the site immediately – a nerdy version of instant gratification. We review the data for completeness and quality soon after submission.
There were other benefits as well. Since organizations can log in to their account at any time, the site is more likely to have timely and accurate information. We found, for example, that some organizations were holding off on making minor corrections or updates until a data call went out. Now they can make those changes right away. Similarly, if field staff or others spot an error in the data – such as an incorrect donor or missing locations – our data contact can quickly correct it, without having to go through InterAction. Having this control over their information makes it easier for organizations to participate, but also, importantly, gives them a greater sense of ownership over the data. And greater ownership means they may feel more compelled to keep their data accurate and up to date.
We still issue data calls every four months, since members have told us that having a "deadline" is useful, and they help keep NGO Aid Map current. In addition, however, we've set up automatic end-date notifications; on the 15th of every month, organizations receive an email with a list of projects ending within the next 30 days. This was done not only to ensure that projects that had been extended did not disappear from the map, but also to try to prompt members to regularly review and update their data. Soon we will be sending members “we miss you” emails if they have not logged in to their workspace in a certain amount of time.
Looking Ahead
Despite the progress we’ve made in lowering the barriers to participation in NGO Aid Map, we still have a ways to go. If our ultimate goal is for NGO Aid Map to include everything our members are doing across every sector and country, we need to find a new way to collect data. While a noteworthy accomplishment, the 3,600-plus projects in our database represent a miniscule portion of the work of our roughly 190 members. Clearly, entering projects one by one is not the way to scale up. Batch uploads are one option, and will likely be our solution in the short-term. In the medium- to long-term, though, we hope to be able to move to automatic data feeds. As a larger number of organizations publish data according to a standard like that set by the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), we can import that data, eliminating the need for members to submit it directly to us.
Laia Grino is Manager of Transparency, Accountability and Results at InterAction. Read the other posts in this blog series: Two Years Older and Wiser, We Built It. Have They Come?, The Tricky Question of Use, and Balancing More Data with Data Quality. Follow us on Twitter at @NGOAidMap.
