See the answer
Choose your institution and a decision. Read the source or sample label, chart title, date and unit.
DATA → REVIEW → USEFUL ANSWERS
Start your SHARED review.
Try the prototype. Check your institution’s data, screens and proposed decisions. Use your review document to tell us what to change before development is finalised.
41 institution reviews820 proposed decisions105 presentation screens
A SHORT REVIEW JOURNEY
Follow one question from start to finish.
Try the inputs
Enter sample values or upload the matching template. Save a draft and try the separate reviewer view.
Check the result
Open the accepted chart, map or report. Check the formula and compare the result with the entered values.
Tell us what to change
Open your institution document below. Check the proposed decisions, required data, library, structure and access screens.
Start with Irrigation Department public data · Try the clearly marked paddy water example
About this review
This is a demonstration for client feedback and development planning. Public data keeps its source and date. Samples stay clearly marked. Test drafts, uploaded files and review answers stay in this browser and website address. User-management screens create no real accounts or permissions. The real SHARED system and its records are unchanged.
INSTITUTION VERIFICATION
Choose your institution.
Each document includes 20 decisions, charts, sample calculations, required data, screen images and questions for your team. Use very simple example data when testing.
Answers save in this browser. Use Download answers to keep a copy, or Print / Save PDF. Use Import answers to continue from a downloaded copy. Nothing is sent automatically.
Land Use Policy Planning Department20 decisions · Land UseNatural Resources Management Centre20 decisions · Soil and Land ResourcesDepartment of Agriculture20 decisions · AgricultureDepartment of Agrarian Development20 decisions · Agrarian ServicesIrrigation Department20 decisions · Irrigation/HydrologyMahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka20 decisions · Water ManagementForest Department20 decisions · ForestryDepartment of Meteorology20 decisions · MeteorologyDepartment of Export Agriculture20 decisions · Export CropsProvincial Departments of Agriculture20 decisions · Provincial AgricultureProject Management Unit20 decisions · Programme GovernanceCIFOR-ICRAF and Research Partners20 decisions · Research/EcosystemsSub-Watershed Integrated Delivery Teams20 decisions · Field DeliverySurvey Department20 decisions · Survey/GISNational Spatial Data Infrastructure20 decisions · Spatial DiscoveryDisaster Management Centre20 decisions · Disaster ManagementNational Building Research Organisation20 decisions · Landslide HazardsCentral Environmental Authority20 decisions · Environmental MonitoringDepartment of Wildlife Conservation20 decisions · Wildlife/BiodiversityDepartment of Census and Statistics20 decisions · Official StatisticsWater Resources Board20 decisions · GroundwaterNational Water Supply and Drainage Board20 decisions · Water SupplyGeological Survey and Mines Bureau20 decisions · GeologyLand Commissioner General's Department20 decisions · State LandHARTI20 decisions · Agricultural EconomicsExport Development Board20 decisions · Export MarketsNational Enterprise Development Authority20 decisions · Enterprise SupportIndustrial Development Board20 decisions · IndustryDistrict Secretariats20 decisions · Local AdministrationDivisional Secretariats20 decisions · Local AdministrationGrama Niladhari Officers20 decisions · Community Field AdministrationFarmer Organizations20 decisions · Farmer GroupsFarmers20 decisions · Farm OperationsPlantation Companies20 decisions · Plantation OperationsPlantation Workers/Community Groups20 decisions · Community LivelihoodBuyers and Traders20 decisions · Trade and MarketsProcessors and Exporters20 decisions · Value ChainsBanks and Finance Institutions20 decisions · Sustainable FinancePES Intermediaries20 decisions · PESUniversities and Researchers20 decisions · ResearchCommunity-Based Organizations and NGOs20 decisions · Community Delivery
Prototype checks
The mock screens cover data entry, source review, maps, decisions, project work, documents and reports. Extra business details are under More details. The coverage workbook records each requirement and its remaining checks.
Use this prototype for design review. Real sign-in, server security, external integrations, load, mobile synchronisation and restore tests belong to future service delivery.
Published methods
Verified means the published formula was checked against its source. For a component, only the named part is verified. Confirm local settings and use in the list below.
| Method and status | Published source | Local use to confirm |
|---|---|---|
| USLE factor product Verified published formula | United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service 1980 technical publication SA-TP 11; Universal Soil Loss Equation, printed page 2; metric conversion appendix, printed page 40 | The historical source verifies the factor product. Local factor choice and suitability still need confirmation; this is not a full RUSLE2 implementation. |
| Enterprise gross margin Verified published formula | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Chapter 4, Gross margin and section 4.7.1 | Per-hectare and variable-cost break-even outputs are algebraic rearrangements. Local costs, prices and interpretation still need confirmation. |
| Discounted cash-flow NPV Verified published formula | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, discounting and Net Present Value | The five-year horizon, discount rate and cash assumptions are local settings. Verification does not approve an investment or loan. |
| Carbon stock-difference component Verified published component | Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Section 2.3.1.1, equation 2.8, stock-difference method | The screen reports the period total. IPCC annualisation requires elapsed years. Pools, inventory inputs and local application still need confirmation. |
| Soil-carbon stock with volume correction Verified published formula | Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Section 4.3.3.5.4, equation 4.3.3, printed page 4.106, PDF page 18 | The screen converts carbon percent to a fraction and uses the published coarse-fragment volume convention. Sampling and bulk-density conventions still need confirmation. |
| Difference-in-differences arithmetic Verified published formula | World Bank Chapter 7, table 7.2, printed page 140, PDF page 170 | The formula is verified. Causal interpretation still requires a defensible study design, comparison and assumptions. |
| Sample coefficient of variation Verified published formula | National Institute of Standards and Technology United States Description, sample coefficient of variation and ratio-scale restrictions | Use a meaningful zero and positive mean. Local series selection and decision limits still need confirmation. |
| HHI concentration component Verified published component | United States Department of Justice Definition and four-firm worked example | The screen uses fractional shares on a 0–1 scale, equivalent to the published percentage-share score divided by 10000. Local exposure categories and policy thresholds are not verified by this source. |
| Matched-pair RMSE Verified published formula | Environment and Climate Change Canada Displayed RMSE equation and definitions of forecast, observation and verification count | Local verification periods, observation quality and forecast applicability still need confirmation. |
| Binary Brier score and skill component Verified published component | Japan Meteorological Agency Sections A.3.1 and A.3.2, equations A.3.1 and A.3.3, printed page 239, PDF page 7 | The Brier score is checked for binary events. The prototype permits a supplied reference forecast; confirm its independent baseline and comparability before interpreting skill. |
| Crop evapotranspiration ETc component Verified published component | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Chapter 5, Crop coefficient approach, equation 56 | This verifies the ETc component only. Local water-balance allowances, coefficients and operating decisions still need confirmation. |
| Weighted estimation component Verified published component | United Nations Statistics Division Chapter 9, paragraphs 38 and 39, printed page 9-9, PDF page 417; Chapter 8 weighting | Local weights, population coverage, design variance and ratio-yield interpretation still need confirmation. Positive illustrative weights do not demonstrate every calibration design. |
| IWA water-balance components Verified published component | Asian Development Bank Figure 4, printed page 15; Annex 1 Water Balance Definitions, printed pages 39–41, PDF pages 47–49 | Apparent-loss estimates and the residual real-loss estimate remain local inputs with measurement uncertainty. |
Client and expert decisions
These decisions remain pending in Institution review. Each decision should state what was checked, who checked it, the outcome and any conditions. One review can cover the same method used by several screens.
| Topic | What to confirm | Who |
|---|---|---|
| Scope and institutions C01, C02, C12 | Confirm the final features, proposed decisions, participating institutions and what stays in existing tools. | Client |
| Responsibilities C02 | Name who owns data, submits records, reviews them and approves sharing. | Client and institutions |
| Maps and boundaries C03 | Confirm official boundaries and area codes. Resolve the different GN totals. | Data custodian and GIS expert |
| Data sources C04 | Confirm datasets, fields, units, update frequency and access or sharing conditions. | Source institutions |
| Privacy C05 | Confirm access to personal records, sensitive locations and retention periods. | Client and privacy specialist |
| New or changed calculations E01 | Review proposed scores, weights, thresholds, missing-value rules and method changes. For published methods, confirm local inputs, units, settings and intended use. | Relevant expert or statistician |
| Land soil and water methods E02 | Confirm local suitability, sampling, laboratory methods and model factors. | Relevant domain experts |
| Ecosystem services and PES E03 | Confirm eligibility, rights, rates, safeguards, verification and payment authority. | Client and relevant experts |
| Indicators and payments C10 | Confirm indicator definitions, acceptance measures, milestones and payment weights. | Client and monitoring or finance specialists |
| Languages and access needs C06 | Confirm wording, supported devices and accessibility requirements. | Client and representative users |
| Technical choices and service targets C07, C08 | Agree architecture, hosting, operator, costs, performance, security and recovery targets. | Client and technical adviser |
| Complaints and appeals C09 | Confirm receiving officers, response times and the appeal process. | Client |
| Final SRS acceptance C11 | Confirm consultation comments, agreed revisions, validation, final presentation and final acceptance. | Authorized client representative |
Live-system security, load and recovery tests belong to implementation. The SRS needs agreed requirements and a test plan. No separate expert approval is needed for each mock screen or repeated calculation.
Source details to confirm
LUPPD: the alternative publications provide planning context. The applicable local planning procedure still needs confirmation under C04 and E02.
HARTI: the published prices support the quoted observations. They do not automatically support proposed volatility, spread or other analysis; review these under C04 and E01.
ONE SET OF REVIEW MATERIALS
Prepare the development brief.
Decision registerAll 820 proposed decisions and the information they need.SRS comparisonOriginal outcomes, requirement coverage and remaining acceptance work.System diagrams46 diagrams showing the design, workflows and prototype boundaries.Production decision studyCompare software, databases, hosting, warehouse, security, backup and costs before choosing.
Keep agreed changes with the institution review answers and the development brief. A working sample or screen image alone is not evidence that a live service, scientific method or access rule has been approved.