Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka

Tell us what to change or add.

Your name (optional)Your roleReview date

Continue a saved review

1. Check a decision

Open a decision below. Check the area, period, inputs, result and proposed next step.

2. Try the inputs

Use Example input to change a sample. Use Source input to check the fields and source details. The land-use change decision has its own comparison views.

Record your corrections below, then download your answers or print them.

3. Check each decision

1. Review cropping plans against calculated water requirements 2. Correct system-level water-delivery shortfalls 3. Review linked-reservoir storage and transfer scenarios 4. Restore stale data feeds used in seasonal planning 5. Compare agriculture energy and domestic-water allocations 6. Choose what to handle first: demand-management options during shortages 7. Refer agricultural and commercial land requests for approval 8. Review proposed uses against approved system plans 9. Check activities within tank and canal reservations 10. Target livelihood support to uncovered eligible settlers 11. Find systems with low agricultural water productivity 12. Compare alternative cropping patterns for system plans 13. Choose what to handle first: Mahaweli infrastructure maintenance 14. Plan service capacity for settlement growth 15. Select riparian and catchment restoration alternatives 16. Review reservoir-use conflicts involving fisheries 17. Prepare coordinated operating options during high inflows 18. Escalate delayed system-development milestones 19. Resolve objections to system development proposals 20. Compare and correct differences in inconsistent land and water system codes

1. Review cropping plans against calculated water requirementsDEC-DP06-001 · Seasonal cropping · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Review cropping plans against calculated water requirements.

Verified published component · Crop evapotranspiration ETc component

Method. ETc = ETo × Kc. Net = max(0, ETc + percolation + desired storage increase − rainfall after runoff − capillary contribution). Gross = net × hectares ×10 / application efficiency.

Next step. Review evidence. Propose crop demand, scheduling or allocation alternatives for authorized review.

Inputs, example and sources

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56 Crop Evapotranspiration
Institution publication · Chapter 5, Crop coefficient approach, equation 56

This verifies the ETc component only. Local water-balance allowances, coefficients and operating decisions still need confirmation.

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Irrigated crop area [ha]; Reference evapotranspiration [mm/day]; Crop coefficient [ratio]; Rainfall reaching the field after runoff [mm/day]; Deep percolation and paddy allowance [mm/day]; Capillary contribution [mm/day]; Desired change in stored soil water [mm/day]; Field application efficiency [fraction]

Other required evidence. System; crop hectares; crop coefficients; rainfall; soil storage; efficiency.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — seasonal cropping · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Irrigated crop area	85	ha
Reference evapotranspiration	4.5	mm/day
Crop coefficient	1.1	ratio
Rainfall reaching the field after runoff	1.6	mm/day
Deep percolation and paddy allowance	2	mm/day
Capillary contribution	0	mm/day
Desired change in stored soil water	0	mm/day
Field application efficiency	0.68	fraction
Gross daily irrigation requirement	6,687.5	m³/day
Net field requirement	5.35	mm/day

The full local balance, rooting depth, stress, crop stage and operating constraints still matter. The paddy allowance is explicit and must be zero where inapplicable. This is not an authorized reservoir release.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Delivered water, crop stress, unmet demand and downstream conditions.

FAO 56: crop evapotranspiration — Institution publication. FAO 56 Chapter 5 equation 56; ETc = Kc × ETo. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO56 root-zone water balance — Institution publication. Chapter8 equation85 and ETc = Kc ETo. Daily water balance components; local coefficients and operating assumptions still need review.
FAO Irrigation Water Management Training Manual 3 — Institution publication. Chapter 4.4 Irrigation water need of rice; steps 1 to 8. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

Your checks for this decisionDoes this decision belong to your institution?Is the required data list complete?Are the sources, places and time periods suitable?Can staff use the proposed entry or upload steps?Are the calculation, units and limits correct?Do the chart and result help you decide?Are the checking officer and decision authority correct?Are the access and sharing limits suitable?

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

2. Correct system-level water-delivery shortfallsDEC-DP06-002 · Water delivery · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Correct system-level water-delivery shortfalls.

Validation required

Method. Observed value minus Planned value. Relative change = 100 × difference / Planned value when the earlier value is positive.

Next step. Review evidence. Investigate a material deviation, assign correction, or propose a target revision.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Planned value [m³]; Observed value [m³]

Other required evidence. System ID; approved allocation; actual delivery; season; command hectares.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — water delivery · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Planned value	100	m³
Observed value	90	m³
Difference	-10	m³
Relative change	-10	%

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Subsequent variance with original and revised targets retained.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

3. Review linked-reservoir storage and transfer scenariosDEC-DP06-003 · Reservoir networks · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Review linked-reservoir storage and transfer scenarios.

Validation required

Method. Calculated closing = opening + inflows − releases/transfers − other outflows. Residual = independently observed closing − calculated closing.

Next step. Reconcile closing balance. Investigate unexplained balances and propose revised measurement or operating action.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Opening storage [m³]; All measured inflows and transfers in [m³]; Releases and transfers out [m³]; Evaporation and other outflows [m³]; Independently observed closing storage [m³]

Other required evidence. Reservoir storage; inter-basin transfers; inflow; releases; evaporation; spill.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — reservoir networks · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Opening storage	160,000	m³
All measured inflows and transfers in	48,000	m³
Releases and transfers out	35,000	m³
Evaporation and other outflows	9,000	m³
Independently observed closing storage	163,500	m³
Calculated closing storage	164,000	m³
Observed minus calculated closing	-500	m³

Use the same physical boundary, period and units. A residual is a reconciliation issue, not automatically a measured loss.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Reconciled balance residuals and verified operating results.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

4. Restore stale data feeds used in seasonal planningDEC-DP06-004 · Planning evidence · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Restore stale data feeds used in seasonal planning.

Validation required

Method. Completeness = 100 × valid / expected. Age = assessment date − latest valid observation; compare with the explicitly supplied interval.

Next step. Check overdue observation. Repair missed observations, contact the owner, or suspend stale evidence from current decisions.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Expected observations in the window [observations]; Distinct valid observations [observations]; Latest valid observation; Assessment date; Required observation interval [days]

Other required evidence. Source ID; expected cadence; last valid reading; completeness; calibration.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — planning evidence · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Expected observations in the window	30	observations
Distinct valid observations	24	observations
Latest valid observation	2025-06-28
Assessment date	2025-06-30
Required observation interval	1	days
Completeness	80	%
Age of latest observation	2	days
Missing observations	6	observations

A recent observation does not fill earlier gaps. Unknown schedule or observation time cannot establish freshness.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Valid observations received on time and recurring gaps.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

5. Compare agriculture energy and domestic-water allocationsDEC-DP06-005 · Multi-sector allocation · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Compare agriculture energy and domestic-water allocations.

Validation required

Method. Budget minus option cost. Compare benefits, adverse effects and mandatory constraints separately; no weighted score or automatic best option.

Next step. Compare feasible trade-offs. Choose a feasible alternative with rationale and conditions, commission evidence, or defer.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Option cost [LKR]; Available budget [LKR]; Mandatory constraints; Expected benefit and its evidence; Resource needs and adverse effects

Other required evidence. Sector demand; storage; conveyance capacity; environmental requirements; allocation authority.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Command-area maintenance · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Option cost	1,500,000	LKR
Available budget	1,800,000	LKR
Mandatory constraints	Met
Expected benefit and its evidence	Compare agriculture energy and domestic-water allocations; Sector demand and storage evidence needed
Resource needs and adverse effects	Sample water, labour, access and safeguard trade-offs
Budget remaining after option	300,000	LKR

Affordability does not prove feasibility or scientific suitability. A missing mandatory condition keeps an option unresolved.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified benefits, costs and adverse effects versus the agreed baseline.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

6. Choose what to handle first: demand-management options during shortagesDEC-DP06-006 · Drought response · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Prioritize demand-management options during shortages.

Validation required

Method. Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.

Next step. Complete the evidence. Select a feasible control, escalate beyond authority, or seek technical inspection.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. System shortages; System shortages evidence reference; crop stages; crop stages evidence reference; essential demand; essential demand evidence reference; feasible options; feasible options evidence reference; impacts; impacts evidence reference; Documented unresolved critical condition; Evidence observation date; Existing control and its evidence; Competent recipient

Other required evidence. System shortages; crop stages; essential demand; feasible options; impacts.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — drought response · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
System shortages	Missing
System shortages evidence reference
crop stages	Documented
crop stages evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
essential demand	Documented
essential demand evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
feasible options	Documented
feasible options evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
impacts	Documented
impacts evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
Documented unresolved critical condition	Unknown
Evidence observation date	2025-06-30
Existing control and its evidence	Sample documented control
Competent recipient	Responsible specialist / duty authority
Evidence gaps	1	items

Show the hazard, exposure and verified controls separately. No generic score, probability, diagnosis, site clearance or official warning is derived from a count.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified control effectiveness and residual risk with evidence.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

7. Refer agricultural and commercial land requests for approvalDEC-DP06-007 · Land allocation · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Refer agricultural and commercial land requests for approval.

Validation required

Method. Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.

Next step. Complete the evidence. Submit a recommendation to the appointed authority, request evidence, or record an appeal.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Parcel ID; Parcel ID evidence reference; applicant evidence; applicant evidence evidence reference; permitted purpose; permitted purpose evidence reference; plan edition; plan edition evidence reference; current rules; current rules evidence reference

Other required evidence. Parcel ID; applicant evidence; permitted purpose; plan edition; current rules.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — land allocation · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Parcel ID	Missing
Parcel ID evidence reference
applicant evidence	Documented
applicant evidence evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
permitted purpose	Documented
permitted purpose evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
plan edition	Documented
plan edition evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
current rules	Documented
current rules evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
Evidence gaps	1	items

Evidence completeness alone cannot establish suitability, eligibility, safety, permission or method validity.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Documented determinations, processing time and appeal outcomes.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

8. Review proposed uses against approved system plansDEC-DP06-008 · Land conversion · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Review proposed uses against approved system plans.

Validation required

Method. 100 × union of constraint overlap / proposal footprint. Count intersecting constraint areas once.

Next step. Review evidence. Refer affected sites for technical/legal review, revise the footprint, or request a field survey.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Proposal footprint [ha]; Union of overlapping constraint areas [ha]; Boundary edition; Constraint definition

Other required evidence. Proposed footprint; approved zoning; conservation reservations; affected tenure.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — land conversion · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Proposal footprint	75	ha
Union of overlapping constraint areas	18	ha
Boundary edition	Sample boundary1
Constraint definition	Sample constraint class
Overlap share	24	%
Overlapping area	18	ha

Geometry preparation must use matching coordinate systems, dated boundary editions and valid spatial predicates. Overlap supports referral; it does not determine ownership, permission or site safety.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Resolved constraints and independently checked site conditions.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

9. Check activities within tank and canal reservationsDEC-DP06-009 · Reservation protection · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Investigate activities within tank and canal reservations.

Validation required

Method. 100 × union of constraint overlap / proposal footprint. Count intersecting constraint areas once.

Next step. Review evidence. Refer affected sites for technical/legal review, revise the footprint, or request a field survey.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Proposal footprint [ha]; Union of overlapping constraint areas [ha]; Boundary edition; Constraint definition

Other required evidence. Reservation geometry; observed occupation; dated inspection; cadastral evidence.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — reservation protection · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Proposal footprint	75	ha
Union of overlapping constraint areas	18	ha
Boundary edition	Sample boundary1
Constraint definition	Sample constraint class
Overlap share	24	%
Overlapping area	18	ha

Geometry preparation must use matching coordinate systems, dated boundary editions and valid spatial predicates. Overlap supports referral; it does not determine ownership, permission or site safety.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Resolved constraints and independently checked site conditions.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

10. Target livelihood support to uncovered eligible settlersDEC-DP06-010 · Farmer livelihoods · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Target livelihood support to uncovered eligible settlers.

Validation required

Method. 100 × distinct covered eligible units / eligible frame. Known uncovered = frame − covered − unknown.

Next step. Review evidence. Select eligible underserved units for outreach, investigate missing coverage, or revise the verified frame.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Required eligible frame [households]; Distinct members of that frame covered [households]; Frame members with unknown coverage [households]

Other required evidence. Settler ID; assessed need; services received; eligibility frame; system.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — farmer livelihoods · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Required eligible frame	100	households
Distinct members of that frame covered	65	households
Frame members with unknown coverage	5	households
Verified coverage	65	%
Known uncovered	30	households
Unknown coverage	5	households

Count each eligible unit once for the selected service and period. Received messages, attendance, adoption and outcomes are separate measures.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified eligible units receiving service and remaining unmet need.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

11. Find systems with low agricultural water productivityDEC-DP06-011 · System productivity · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Identify systems with low agricultural water productivity.

Validation required

Method. Saleable crop output / Matching irrigation water input, for the same product, process and period.

Next step. Review evidence. Investigate low productivity, compare practices, or improve the input/output measurements.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Saleable crop output [kg]; Matching irrigation water input [m³]

Other required evidence. Harvest kg; delivered cubic metres; cropped hectares; season; crop type.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — system productivity · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Saleable crop output	19,780	kg
Matching irrigation water input	7,200	m³
Crop water productivity	2.747	kg/m³

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Output per relevant input alongside quality and resource impacts.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

12. Compare alternative cropping patterns for system plansDEC-DP06-012 · Crop diversification · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Compare alternative cropping patterns for system plans.

Validation required

Method. Budget minus option cost. Compare benefits, adverse effects and mandatory constraints separately; no weighted score or automatic best option.

Next step. Compare feasible trade-offs. Choose a feasible alternative with rationale and conditions, commission evidence, or defer.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Option cost [LKR]; Available budget [LKR]; Mandatory constraints; Expected benefit and its evidence; Resource needs and adverse effects

Other required evidence. Crop margins; seasonal water; labour; markets; soil suitability; constraints.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Command-area maintenance · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Option cost	1,500,000	LKR
Available budget	1,800,000	LKR
Mandatory constraints	Met
Expected benefit and its evidence	Compare alternative cropping patterns for system plans; Crop margins and seasonal water evidence needed
Resource needs and adverse effects	Sample water, labour, access and safeguard trade-offs
Budget remaining after option	300,000	LKR

Affordability does not prove feasibility or scientific suitability. A missing mandatory condition keeps an option unresolved.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified benefits, costs and adverse effects versus the agreed baseline.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

13. Choose what to handle first: Mahaweli infrastructure maintenanceDEC-DP06-013 · Irrigation assets · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Prioritize Mahaweli infrastructure maintenance.

Validation required

Method. Open age = assessment date − received date. Days past due = max(0, assessment date − recorded due date) for open cases. Show documented critical conditions separately.

Next step. Follow up overdue case. Authorize feasible repair through the proper work process, inspect further, or restrict unsafe use.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Received or defect observed; Recorded due date; Assessment date; Case/work closed; Documented critical unresolved condition; Responsible office or maintainer; Actual closure date when closed

Other required evidence. Asset ID; condition; defects; criticality; inspection date; repair estimates.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — irrigation assets · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Received or defect observed	2025-04-01
Recorded due date	2025-06-01
Assessment date	2025-06-30
Case/work closed	No
Documented critical unresolved condition	Unknown
Responsible office or maintainer	Proposed responsible office
Actual closure date when closed
Open days past due	29	days
Calendar age	90	days

Example due dates are not legal service standards. Do not alter statutory deadlines by silently subtracting pauses, or infer severity from age alone.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified defect closure, service availability and repeat failures.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

14. Plan service capacity for settlement growthDEC-DP06-014 · Settlement services · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Plan service capacity for settlement growth.

Validation required

Method. Usable capacity = rated capacity − documented unavailable capacity. Surplus/shortfall = usable − matching demand.

Next step. Review capacity shortfall. Redistribute usable resources, propose expansion, or manage demand within authorized limits.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Demand in the selected period [m³/day]; Rated capacity for that period [m³/day]; Unavailable or restricted capacity [m³/day]

Other required evidence. Household demand; water and road capacity; service locations; projected occupancy.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — settlement services · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Demand in the selected period	150	m³/day
Rated capacity for that period	180	m³/day
Unavailable or restricted capacity	45	m³/day
Usable capacity minus demand	-15	m³/day
Usable capacity	135	m³/day

Match peak/average basis, time window, skill, staffing, accessibility and other binding constraints. One aggregate capacity does not override a safety constraint.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Actual usable capacity, unmet demand and service quality.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

15. Select riparian and catchment restoration alternativesDEC-DP06-015 · Environmental restoration · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Select riparian and catchment restoration alternatives.

Validation required

Method. Budget minus option cost. Compare benefits, adverse effects and mandatory constraints separately; no weighted score or automatic best option.

Next step. Compare feasible trade-offs. Choose a feasible alternative with rationale and conditions, commission evidence, or defer.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Option cost [LKR]; Available budget [LKR]; Mandatory constraints; Expected benefit and its evidence; Resource needs and adverse effects

Other required evidence. Site condition; land rights; restoration costs; biodiversity; watershed benefit evidence.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Command-area maintenance · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Option cost	1,500,000	LKR
Available budget	1,800,000	LKR
Mandatory constraints	Met
Expected benefit and its evidence	Select riparian and catchment restoration alternatives; Site condition and land rights evidence needed
Resource needs and adverse effects	Sample water, labour, access and safeguard trade-offs
Budget remaining after option	300,000	LKR

Affordability does not prove feasibility or scientific suitability. A missing mandatory condition keeps an option unresolved.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified benefits, costs and adverse effects versus the agreed baseline.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

16. Review reservoir-use conflicts involving fisheriesDEC-DP06-016 · Aquaculture coordination · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Review reservoir-use conflicts involving fisheries.

Validation required

Method. 100 × distinct respondents / invited people. Record unresolved issues individually; one respondent may raise several issues.

Next step. Resolve participation barriers and issues. Address concerns, revise the proposal, seek required responses, or escalate unresolved conditions.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Distinct relevant people invited [people]; People who responded [people]; Unresolved issues [issues]; Proposal/version being discussed; Required participation channels accessible

Other required evidence. Use proposals; water-operation calendar; fisheries needs; consultations; conditions.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — aquaculture coordination · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Distinct relevant people invited	95	people
People who responded	68	people
Unresolved issues	16	issues
Proposal/version being discussed	Sample proposal1
Required participation channels accessible	Unknown
Response share	71.579	%
Unresolved issues	16	issues

Response, attendance and silence are not consent. Participation does not transfer decision authority or settle rights.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Resolved concerns, participation and compliance with recorded commitments.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

17. Prepare coordinated operating options during high inflowsDEC-DP06-017 · Flood operations · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Prepare coordinated operating options during high inflows.

Validation required

Method. Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.

Next step. Complete the evidence. Select a feasible control, escalate beyond authority, or seek technical inspection.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Official forecasts; Official forecasts evidence reference; reservoir levels; reservoir levels evidence reference; downstream exposure; downstream exposure evidence reference; approved operating rules; approved operating rules evidence reference; Documented unresolved critical condition; Evidence observation date; Existing control and its evidence; Competent recipient

Other required evidence. Official forecasts; reservoir levels; downstream exposure; approved operating rules.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — flood operations · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Official forecasts	Missing
Official forecasts evidence reference
reservoir levels	Documented
reservoir levels evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
downstream exposure	Documented
downstream exposure evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
approved operating rules	Documented
approved operating rules evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
Documented unresolved critical condition	Unknown
Evidence observation date	2025-06-30
Existing control and its evidence	Sample documented control
Competent recipient	Responsible specialist / duty authority
Evidence gaps	1	items

Show the hazard, exposure and verified controls separately. No generic score, probability, diagnosis, site clearance or official warning is derived from a count.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Verified control effectiveness and residual risk with evidence.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

18. Escalate delayed system-development milestonesDEC-DP06-018 · Investment delivery · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Escalate delayed system-development milestones.

Validation required

Method. Observed value minus Planned value. Relative change = 100 × difference / Planned value when the earlier value is positive.

Next step. Review evidence. Investigate a material deviation, assign correction, or propose a target revision.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Planned value [m³]; Observed value [m³]

Other required evidence. Project milestones; actual progress; contracts; budget; dependencies; verification.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — investment delivery · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Planned value	100	m³
Observed value	90	m³
Difference	-10	m³
Relative change	-10	%

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Subsequent variance with original and revised targets retained.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

19. Resolve objections to system development proposalsDEC-DP06-019 · Public consultation · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Resolve objections to system development proposals.

Validation required

Method. 100 × distinct respondents / invited people. Record unresolved issues individually; one respondent may raise several issues.

Next step. Resolve participation barriers and issues. Address concerns, revise the proposal, seek required responses, or escalate unresolved conditions.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Distinct relevant people invited [people]; People who responded [people]; Unresolved issues [issues]; Proposal/version being discussed; Required participation channels accessible

Other required evidence. Proposal version; affected users; responses; unresolved concerns; approval conditions.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — public consultation · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Distinct relevant people invited	95	people
People who responded	68	people
Unresolved issues	16	issues
Proposal/version being discussed	Sample proposal1
Required participation channels accessible	Unknown
Response share	71.579	%
Unresolved issues	16	issues

Response, attendance and silence are not consent. Participation does not transfer decision authority or settle rights.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Resolved concerns, participation and compliance with recorded commitments.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

20. Compare and correct differences in inconsistent land and water system codesDEC-DP06-020 · System reporting · Suggested priority: Lower

Try this decision

Reconcile inconsistent land and water system codes.

Validation required

Method. Check each required item and retain its reference. A documented item is not a scientific, legal or institutional approval.

Next step. Complete the evidence. Approve a documented mapping, keep it Draft, or create a governed concept after review.

Inputs, example and sources

Keep the same place, observation period, definitions, units and source versions.

Analysis inputs. Source system labels; Source system labels evidence reference; official system registry; official system registry evidence reference; geometry edition; geometry edition evidence reference; steward decisions; steward decisions evidence reference

Other required evidence. Source system labels; official system registry; geometry edition; steward decisions.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — system reporting · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Source system labels	Missing
Source system labels evidence reference
official system registry	Documented
official system registry evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
geometry edition	Documented
geometry edition evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
steward decisions	Documented
steward decisions evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
Evidence gaps	1	items

Evidence completeness alone cannot establish suitability, eligibility, safety, permission or method validity.

Proposed checking role. Water-planning engineer and land/settlement specialist.

After the action. Unmapped/conflicting concepts and history preserved across revisions.

SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.

Institution and data context

Mahaweli Water Management Secretariat — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Mahaweli land-use planning — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
FAO crop evapotranspiration 56 — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Confirm local scope, data rights, parameters and responsible roles in this Institution review. Published components retain their source; they do not approve the local application.

What must change? Include corrected fields, rules, limits or words.Who supplies the data, who checks it, and who makes the decision?How often is this decision needed? What would make it urgent?

4. Existing data forms for your institution

Check which existing source fields can supply the decision inputs.

Irrigation Schemes · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: 648a6f28a711dfa9

Field	Unit	Required
System Name	Confirm if needed	No
Systems	Confirm if needed	No
ID	Confirm if needed	No
ID_Systems	Confirm if needed	No
MASL_System	Confirm if needed	No
DSD_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Ground Water Prospect · Water Systems

Existing form reference: ce5ed1b99bb3102f

Field	Unit	Required
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Aquifier	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Ground Water · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 8d60801843516765

Field	Unit	Required
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Aquifier	Confirm if needed	No
Original FID	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Village Tank · Water Systems

Existing form reference: ba56f4a118b8defb

Field	Unit	Required
Number	Confirm if needed	No
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Data	Confirm if needed	No
Sheet	Confirm if needed	No
X	Confirm if needed	No
Y	Confirm if needed	No
XCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
YCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
Sheet Number	Confirm if needed	No
Quantity	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No

Village Anicut · Water Systems

Existing form reference: f173e69599dc5331

Field	Unit	Required
Serial Number	Confirm if needed	No
XCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
YCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
Code	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No

Basin · Water Systems

Existing form reference: aab19eb1fe26e99f

Field	Unit	Required
Basin Name	Confirm if needed	No
Number	Confirm if needed	No
Boundary	Confirm if needed	No
River Basin	Confirm if needed	No
area	Confirm if needed	No
Perimeter	Confirm if needed	No
Watershed	Confirm if needed	No
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Water Shed · Water Systems

Existing form reference: f0192290b75919c0

Field	Unit	Required
Watershed_Type	Confirm if needed	No
Watershed_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Catchment_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Basin_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Region_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
Perimeter	Confirm if needed	No
area	Confirm if needed	No
Watershed_Number	Confirm if needed	No
Hectares	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Dam · Water Systems

Existing form reference: ccd11935ddd740eb

Field	Unit	Required
Dam Name	Confirm if needed	No
Dam_Type	Confirm if needed	No
Dam Storage Capacity	Confirm if needed	No
Hydraulic Head Size meter	Confirm if needed	No
Dam Size	Confirm if needed	No
Dam Construction Type	Confirm if needed	No
Dam Construction Material	Confirm if needed	No
Dam Structural Behaviour	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro Point ID	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

River Mouth Locations · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 8123426118305c93

Field	Unit	Required
Name	Confirm if needed	No
Capture_Type	Confirm if needed	No
WB_Number	Confirm if needed	No
Point_X	Confirm if needed	No
Point_Y	Confirm if needed	No
Zone_Name	Confirm if needed	No

Stream · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 46072ad6caa5f83d

Field	Unit	Required
Stream Type	Confirm if needed	No
Stream Name	Confirm if needed	No
Length In Km	Confirm if needed	No
Width In Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro Line ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Pond · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 66361481a1066277

Field	Unit	Required
Pond_Type	Confirm if needed	No
Pond_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Capacity_Acre_Per_Feet	Confirm if needed	No
Perimeter_km	Confirm if needed	No
Area_In_sqkm	Confirm if needed	No
Depth_In_Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Spill_Level_MLS	Confirm if needed	No
Catchment_Area	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro_Area_ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Canal · Water Systems

Existing form reference: f38ab955cf2f6bd4

Field	Unit	Required
Canal Type	Confirm if needed	No
Canal Name	Confirm if needed	No
Length In Km	Confirm if needed	No
Width In Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro Area ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Lake · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 1bb76fa1770b0049

Field	Unit	Required
Lake_Type	Confirm if needed	No
Lake_Name	Confirm if needed	No
Capacity_Acre_Per_Feet	Confirm if needed	No
Perimeter_km	Confirm if needed	No
Area_In_sqkm	Confirm if needed	No
Depth_In_Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Spill_Level_MLS	Confirm if needed	No
Catchment_Area	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro_Area_ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

River · Water Systems

Existing form reference: d15540e8ecb12c69

Field	Unit	Required
River Type	Confirm if needed	No
River Name	Confirm if needed	No
Length_In_Km	Confirm if needed	No
Width_In_Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro_Area_ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Lagoon · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 0f0d24cef4bd6481

Field	Unit	Required
Lagoon_Type	Confirm if needed	No
Lagoon Name	Confirm if needed	No
Primary Inflows	Confirm if needed	No
Primary_Inflows	Confirm if needed	No
Length_In_Km	Confirm if needed	No
Width_In_Km	Confirm if needed	No
Capacity_Acre_Per_Feet	Confirm if needed	No
Area_In_sqkm	Confirm if needed	No
Depth_In_Meters	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro_Area_ID	Confirm if needed	No
Creation_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision_Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year_of_Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Spill Point · Water Systems

Existing form reference: dd591850f1e639e2

Field	Unit	Required
Type	Confirm if needed	No
Name	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No

Sluice Point · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 70efb0310e727bec

Field	Unit	Required
Type Hydro point	Confirm if needed	No
Name	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
hydro_point_id	Confirm if needed	No

Cascades · Water Systems

Existing form reference: a23c11282c20ec1d

Field	Unit	Required
RiverBasin Number	Confirm if needed	No
RiverBasin Name	Confirm if needed	No
SWS Number	Confirm if needed	No
SWS Name	Confirm if needed	No
Tank Cascade Number	Confirm if needed	No
Tank Cascade Name	Confirm if needed	No
Number of Tanks	Confirm if needed	No
Number of Tanks1	Confirm if needed	No
Climatic Zone	Confirm if needed	No
Remarks	Confirm if needed	No
area	Confirm if needed	No
Perimeter	Confirm if needed	No
Hectares	Confirm if needed	No
UP Code	Confirm if needed	No
Color Code	Confirm if needed	No
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Sea Ports · Water Systems

Existing form reference: 7caa76b009c9aa66

Field	Unit	Required
Port Name	Confirm if needed	No
ID	Confirm if needed	No
Port Type	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No

Water Area · Water Systems

Existing form reference: d89ee67747f1e131

Field	Unit	Required
Type_Classification	Confirm if needed	No
Water Area Name	Confirm if needed	No
Creation Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Creation	Confirm if needed	No
Revision Method	Confirm if needed	No
Year of Revision	Confirm if needed	No
GFCODE	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No
Hydro_Area_ID	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Mahaweli authorities · Administrative & Planning Areas

Existing form reference: a928ea0c164539db

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
authority Id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
city	Confirm if needed	No
latitude	Confirm if needed	No
longitude	Confirm if needed	No

Mahaweli systems · Administrative & Planning Areas

Existing form reference: 8e71c080613ac3a4

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
system Id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / authority Id	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / city	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / latitude	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Authority DTO / longitude	Confirm if needed	No
city	Confirm if needed	No
latitude	Confirm if needed	No
longitude	Confirm if needed	No

Mahaweli blocks · Administrative & Planning Areas

Existing form reference: 1b6608ff1b096b55

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
code	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / system Id	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / mahaweli Authority DTO	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / city	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / latitude	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli System DTO / longitude	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
land Area	Confirm if needed	No
cultivated Area	Confirm if needed	No
irrigated Area	Confirm if needed	No
non Irrigated Area	Confirm if needed	No
created Date	Confirm if needed	No
modified Date	Confirm if needed	No
district DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
district DTO / name	Confirm if needed	No
district DTO / code	Confirm if needed	No
ds Division DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
ds Division DTO / code	Confirm if needed	No
ds Division DTO / name	Confirm if needed	No
ds Division DTO / created Date	Confirm if needed	No
ds Division DTO / modified Date	Confirm if needed	No

Mahaweli units · Administrative & Planning Areas

Existing form reference: b2dbe12695570d5c

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
unit Id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / land Area	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / cultivated Area	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / irrigated Area	Confirm if needed	No
mahaweli Block DTO / non Irrigated Area	Confirm if needed	No

5. Documents and images

Your institution has its own document and image library. Use the same library for reports, photos and other evidence.

Open this screen for Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka See the presentation example

Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka Documents and images prototype screen — Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

Open Documents and images. Check the institution name.
Use All files, Documents or Images to find a file. Open its preview or download the original.
Use a sample file to try Add file. Private is the starting choice. Public needs a source, permission to share and review.
Use Access preview to try the institution reviewer and Public visitor views.

Files added in the prototype stay in this browser. Public sharing is an access preview. Existing public reference links already work online.

What your institution needs to confirm

Does a separate library for your institution meet your needs?Should new files start as Private for the permitted institution team?Should Public access require a review of the file and sharing permission?What documents and images will you store? Give the file types, usual sizes and need for earlier versions.Which job roles may add files, read Private files and approve Public files?Which files must stay Private? What permission, licence or expiry rule is needed for Public files?What else should change in this library?

6. Data structure management

Data structure keeps the existing source tree, records, charts and map. Manage structure adds a place to propose changes to definitions.

Open this screen for Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka See the presentation example

Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka Data structure management prototype screen — Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

Open Data structure and choose Manage structure.
Use Add base domain for a main information area. Add inside creates a subject area, a nested subject, an entity type or a field under the right parent.
Give the definition a clear name, code and meaning. Reuse an existing definition when the meaning is the same.
For a field, check the data type, unit, required value, limits and missing-value rule. Save a Draft, then try the separate reviewer view.

An entity type means a kind of thing or event, such as a reservoir or an inspection. Drafts stay in this browser. A demo approval does not change real definitions, data, chart links or sharing rights.

What your institution needs to confirm

Do the existing main topics and subject areas match your institution’s work?Should definition changes stay Draft until the responsible reviewer checks them?Is it right to reuse the same entity type or field when its meaning is the same?Which main topics, subject areas, entity types or fields should we add or change?Which units, choices, limits, decimal places and missing-value rules must each new field use?Which job roles may edit definitions and review them? Who owns each main information area?When a meaning, unit or calculation changes, what review and version history does your institution need?

7. Users and access

User management shows example profiles for each institution. People and Roles and access let you review the proposed account screens.

Open this screen for Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka See the presentation example

Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka Users and access prototype screen — Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

Open User management and choose the institution. The rows are examples, not a list of your staff.
Use View access to check a role. An administrator title alone does not give access to Private files.
Try Preview invitation or Preview access change. Check the role, start date, optional end date and reason.
Review the example permissions and tell us which job roles should receive each one.

These are interface previews only. They create no account, send no email and change no access. Use example details in the preview. Institution verification does not grant a real permission.

What your institution needs to confirm

Do the proposed role names and responsibilities match your institution?Should access be limited to the assigned institution and the agreed dates?Should reading Private files need a separate permission, even for an administrator?Which job roles should view data, add files, review Public requests, edit definitions and manage users?Who should approve new access, set an end date or remove access when someone changes duties?Which user fields, roles or access checks are missing? Give role names rather than passwords or private account details.

9. Anything else we should change?

Which decisions or services are missing?Which forms or fields should change? Give the existing form reference where possible.What should change in the entry, checking, expert, map or report steps?Are the English, Sinhala and Tamil words clear? Give the screen name, current word and your suggested wording.Who should join the next review and what should happen next?

Use the Download answers button at the top of this page. Share the downloaded file or printed copy through your agreed review channel. Nothing is sent automatically.

Mahaweli Authority of Sri Lanka

1. Check a decision

2. Try the inputs

3. Check each decision

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

Fictional worked example · 2025

4. Existing data forms for your institution

5. Documents and images

What you can try

What your institution needs to confirm

6. Data structure management

What you can try

What your institution needs to confirm

7. Users and access

What you can try

What your institution needs to confirm

8. Can you share data regularly?

9. Anything else we should change?