Provincial Departments of Agriculture

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. Target district-specific rice variety extension 2. Allocate support by rainfed and irrigated cultivation needs 3. Check high local farm production costs 4. Adjust extension schedules to planting progress 5. Address differences between crop targets and accepted output 6. Choose what to handle first: local pest investigation visits 7. Redistribute extension effort where service demand exceeds capacity 8. Match approved seasonal seed demand to valid stocks 9. Schedule sampling where fertilizer advice lacks evidence 10. Select comparable sites for technology demonstrations 11. Follow up training participants reaching verified adoption 12. Choose what to handle first: verification of provincial crop-loss reports 13. Plan shared machinery services for uncovered farming areas 14. Compare irrigation-management practices on equivalent farms 15. Shortlist locally viable alternative crop programmes 16. Choose what to handle first: vegetable and fruit post-harvest support 17. Compare and correct differences in provincial agriculture funding and verified activities 18. Address underserved smallholder and vulnerable farmer groups 19. Correct differences between district crop returns 20. Compare provincial agricultural programmes

1. Target district-specific rice variety extensionDEC-DP10-001 · Variety adoption · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Target district-specific rice variety extension.

Validation required

Method. Category share = 100 × category amount / total compatible category amounts. HHI = sum of squared fractional shares, displayed on a 0–1 scale.

Next step. Review evidence. Investigate material differences and redirect planning or field verification where justified.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Sown hectares in the stated variety [ha]; Area with accepted observations [ha]; Native class/variety and definition edition

Other required evidence. District; variety; sown hectares; season; survey coverage.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Bg 300 · Laggala Pallegama reporting frame

Input or result	Value	Unit
Sown hectares in the stated variety	120	ha
Area with accepted observations	72	ha
Native class/variety and definition edition	Sample classA
Class area	120	ha
Share of selected mapped area	4.762	%
Class observation coverage	60	%

Categories must be mutually exclusive and cover the stated frame. Do not mix values, quantities, plots or hectares, or treat an HHI competition threshold as an institutional policy.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Change in the approved composition indicator with coverage disclosed.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Allocate support by rainfed and irrigated cultivation needsDEC-DP10-002 · Irrigation classes · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Allocate support by rainfed and irrigated cultivation needs.

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 [farms]; Distinct members of that frame covered [farms]; Frame members with unknown coverage [farms]

Other required evidence. Farm; irrigation class; cultivated hectares; drought exposure; eligibility frame.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — irrigation classes · Laggala Pallegama

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

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

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Check high local farm production costsDEC-DP10-003 · Input costs · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Investigate high local farm production costs.

Validation required

Method. Sum non-overlapping costs, then divide by the matching verified quantity for the same currency and accounting period.

Next step. Review evidence. Investigate cost drivers, compare suppliers/practices, or revise the budget proposal.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Labour cost [LKR]; Material/input cost [LKR]; Other non-overlapping cost [LKR]; Verified matching hectares [ha]

Other required evidence. Crop; district; input costs LKR; hectares; season; production system.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — input costs · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Labour cost	180,000	LKR
Material/input cost	255,000	LKR
Other non-overlapping cost	62,000	LKR
Verified matching hectares	5.4	ha
Cost per matching unit	92,037.037	LKR/ha
Total cost	497,000	LKR

An absent or zero denominator has no unit-cost result. Keep fixed, variable and opportunity costs identifiable.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Actual comparable unit cost and service/output 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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Adjust extension schedules to planting progressDEC-DP10-004 · Sowing progress · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Adjust extension schedules to planting progress.

Validation required

Method. Check start/end order, operating window, effort, predecessor completion and overlapping bookings for the same resource. A conflict is flagged; no optimal schedule is invented.

Next step. Resolve overlapping resource bookings. Assign a feasible timetable, redistribute resources, or escalate the blocked dependency.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Required resource; Task start; Task end; Earliest permitted start; Latest permitted finish; Required resource effort [hours]; Available resource effort [hours]; Predecessor task reference; Mandatory permits and prerequisites

Other required evidence. Crop calendar; planned dates; actual sowing dates; locations; officer capacity.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — sowing progress · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Required resource	Watershed field team
Task start	2025-06-01
Task end	2025-06-04
Earliest permitted start	2025-05-28
Latest permitted finish	2025-06-08
Required resource effort	16	hours
Available resource effort	24	hours
Predecessor task reference	None
Mandatory permits and prerequisites	Met
Planned duration	3	days
Resource hours remaining	8	hours

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. On-time completion with verified outputs and resource use.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Address differences between crop targets and accepted outputDEC-DP10-005 · Provincial production · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Address differences between crop targets and accepted output.

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 [kg]; Observed value [kg]

Other required evidence. Crop; provincial target; actual output; reporting period; target version.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — provincial production · Laggala Pallegama

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

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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: local pest investigation visitsDEC-DP10-006 · Pest response · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Prioritize local pest investigation visits.

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. Pest reports; Pest reports evidence reference; verified incidence; verified incidence evidence reference; crop stage; crop stage evidence reference; affected fields; affected fields evidence reference; expert criteria; expert criteria evidence reference; Documented unresolved critical condition; Evidence observation date; Existing control and its evidence; Competent recipient

Other required evidence. Pest reports; verified incidence; crop stage; affected fields; expert criteria.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — pest response · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Pest reports	Missing
Pest reports evidence reference
verified incidence	Documented
verified incidence evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
crop stage	Documented
crop stage evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
affected fields	Documented
affected fields evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
expert criteria	Documented
expert criteria 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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Redistribute extension effort where service demand exceeds capacityDEC-DP10-007 · Extension staffing · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Redistribute extension effort where service demand exceeds capacity.

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 [staff hours]; Rated capacity for that period [staff hours]; Unavailable or restricted capacity [staff hours]

Other required evidence. Farmer requests; handling hours; officer availability; travel; service areas.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — extension staffing · Laggala Pallegama

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

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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Match approved seasonal seed demand to valid stocksDEC-DP10-008 · Seed distribution · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Match approved seasonal seed demand to valid stocks.

Validation required

Method. Usable = physical−quarantined−expired (non-overlapping groups). Available = usable−commitments. Additional gap = max(0, new demand−available).

Next step. Review replenishment gap. Reorder approved quantities, redistribute stock, or quarantine affected lots.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Physical stock [kg seed]; Quarantined stock [kg seed]; Expired stock [kg seed]; Committed usable stock [kg seed]; Additional demand [kg seed]; Supplier lead time [days]; Remaining shelf life of usable stock [days]

Other required evidence. Variety; seed stock kg; commitments; requested kg; lead time; expiry.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — seed distribution · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Physical stock	1,200	kg seed
Quarantined stock	100	kg seed
Expired stock	50	kg seed
Committed usable stock	740	kg seed
Additional demand	500	kg seed
Supplier lead time	14	days
Remaining shelf life of usable stock	30	days
Uncommitted usable stock	310	kg seed
Additional demand gap	190	kg seed

Stock must be compatible by item, lot, condition, expiry and delivery window. Do not allocate quarantined/expired stock or silently erase overcommitment.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Stockouts, expiry, losses and verified lot traceability.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Schedule sampling where fertilizer advice lacks evidenceDEC-DP10-009 · Soil testing · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Schedule sampling where fertilizer advice lacks evidence.

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 [farms]; Distinct members of that frame covered [farms]; Frame members with unknown coverage [farms]

Other required evidence. Farm frame; recent soil tests; crops; sampling capacity; geographic coverage.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — soil testing · Laggala Pallegama

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

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

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Select comparable sites for technology demonstrationsDEC-DP10-010 · Demonstration farms · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Select comparable sites for technology demonstrations.

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. Shortlist technically feasible alternatives, reject exclusions, or request site evidence.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Candidate farms; Candidate farms evidence reference; soil; soil evidence reference; crop; crop evidence reference; water; water evidence reference; farmer consent; farmer consent evidence reference; trial objectives; trial objectives evidence reference

Other required evidence. Candidate farms; soil; crop; water; farmer consent; trial objectives.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — demonstration farms · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Candidate farms	Missing
Candidate farms evidence reference
soil	Documented
soil evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
crop	Documented
crop evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
water	Documented
water evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
farmer consent	Documented
farmer consent evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
trial objectives	Documented
trial objectives 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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Field-verified limiting factors and observed performance.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Follow up training participants reaching verified adoptionDEC-DP10-011 · Training outcomes · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Follow up training participants reaching verified adoption.

Validation required

Method. 100 × verified completed members / original unique cohort. Keep unknown follow-up separate; stages are nested, not independent populations.

Next step. Review evidence. Address stage bottlenecks, follow up dropouts, or revise service delivery.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Unique original cohort entrants [cases]; Entrants reviewed [cases]; Entrants with verified completion [cases]; Entrants with unknown follow-up [cases]

Other required evidence. Training cohort; attendance; assessment; practice adoption; follow-up date.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — training outcomes · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Unique original cohort entrants	180	cases
Entrants reviewed	132	cases
Entrants with verified completion	96	cases
Entrants with unknown follow-up	12	cases
Verified completion share	53.333	%
Not verified complete	84	cases

Attendance, receipt, adoption, delivered service and outcomes are distinct stages. Repeated visits must not become new people.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Verified progression, waiting times and outcomes for the same cohort.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Choose what to handle first: verification of provincial crop-loss reportsDEC-DP10-012 · Crop damage · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Prioritize verification of provincial crop-loss reports.

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. Request correction, refer mandatory failures, or accept the inspected item with conditions.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Incident; Incident evidence reference; crop; crop evidence reference; affected hectares; affected hectares evidence reference; weather; weather evidence reference; field evidence; field evidence evidence reference; claim date; claim date evidence reference

Other required evidence. Incident; crop; affected hectares; weather; field evidence; claim date.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — crop damage · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Incident	Missing
Incident evidence reference
crop	Documented
crop evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
affected hectares	Documented
affected hectares evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
weather	Documented
weather evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
field evidence	Documented
field evidence evidence reference	Sample Laggala Pallegama field register / 2025
claim date	Documented
claim date 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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Evidence-backed corrective closure and recurring nonconformances.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Plan shared machinery services for uncovered farming areasDEC-DP10-013 · Mechanization access · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Plan shared machinery services for uncovered farming areas.

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 [machine hours]; Rated capacity for that period [machine hours]; Unavailable or restricted capacity [machine hours]

Other required evidence. Farm demand; machines; capacity hours; locations; road access; crop calendar.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — mechanization access · Laggala Pallegama

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

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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Compare irrigation-management practices on equivalent farmsDEC-DP10-014 · Water-saving practices · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Compare irrigation-management practices on equivalent farms.

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. Crop output; water input; practice; soil; season; controlled trial evidence.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — water-saving practices · 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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Shortlist locally viable alternative crop programmesDEC-DP10-015 · Diversification · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Shortlist locally viable alternative crop programmes.

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 suitability; gross margins; demand; water; labour; programme cost.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Seasonal field service · 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	Shortlist locally viable alternative crop programmes; Crop suitability and gross margins 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. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Choose what to handle first: vegetable and fruit post-harvest supportDEC-DP10-016 · Horticulture · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Prioritize vegetable and fruit post-harvest support.

Validation required

Method. Unaccounted = input − saleable output − usable by-products − closing stock − transfers out. Share =100 × unaccounted / input.

Next step. Review evidence. Target the loss stage, compare prevention options, or improve missing measurement.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Batch input on stated moisture basis [kg]; Saleable output [kg]; Usable by-product [kg]; Closing stock [kg]; Documented transfers out [kg]

Other required evidence. Batch weights; losses; cold storage access; handling methods; market distance.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — horticulture · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Batch input on stated moisture basis	1,200	kg
Saleable output	970	kg
Usable by-product	85	kg
Closing stock	45	kg
Documented transfers out	20	kg
Unaccounted physical share	6.667	%
Unaccounted mass	80	kg

Use a consistent moisture basis and process boundary. Unaccounted mass is not automatically avoidable food loss or spoilage.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Verified physical loss and quality loss on comparable batches.

FAO food loss measurement — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. 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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Compare and correct differences in provincial agriculture funding and verified activitiesDEC-DP10-017 · Budget delivery · Suggested priority: High

Try this decision

Reconcile provincial agriculture funding and verified activities.

Validation required

Method. Unfunded = need − commitments. Undisbursed = commitments − disbursements. Unspent = disbursements − eligible spending.

Next step. Review unfunded need. Resolve funding gaps, release only authorized commitments, or revise the finance plan.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Approved financing need [LKR]; Confirmed commitments [LKR]; Funds actually disbursed [LKR]; Verified eligible expenditure [LKR]

Other required evidence. Approved budget; commitments; disbursements; expenditure; verified outputs.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — budget delivery · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Approved financing need	3,500,000	LKR
Confirmed commitments	2,650,000	LKR
Funds actually disbursed	1,640,000	LKR
Verified eligible expenditure	1,200,000	LKR
Unfunded need	850,000	LKR
Committed but not disbursed	1,010,000	LKR
Disbursed but not spent	440,000	LKR

Keep commitments, cash receipts, expenditure and verified physical outputs separate. Negative balances flag overcommitment or reconciliation; no automatic accounting adjustment.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Verified funding, spend and deliverables reconciled without double counting.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Address underserved smallholder and vulnerable farmer groupsDEC-DP10-018 · Service inclusion · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Address underserved smallholder and vulnerable farmer groups.

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 [farms]; Distinct members of that frame covered [farms]; Frame members with unknown coverage [farms]

Other required evidence. Eligible farmers; service participation; consented group attributes; location; period.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — service inclusion · Laggala Pallegama

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

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

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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. Correct differences between district crop returnsDEC-DP10-019 · Reporting consistency · Suggested priority: Lower

Try this decision

Correct differences between district crop returns.

Validation required

Method. Later/comparison value minus Earlier/source value. Relative change = 100 × difference / Earlier/source value when the earlier value is positive.

Next step. Review evidence. Assign discrepancies to the custodian, accept documented corrections, or retain unresolved versions.

Inputs, example and sources

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

Analysis inputs. Original source measurement [kg]; Independent comparison measurement [kg]; Original measurement unit; Comparison measurement unit; Compared measure and definition

Other required evidence. District return; crop code; unit; season; revised record; source custodian.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — reporting consistency · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Original source measurement	100	kg
Independent comparison measurement	90	kg
Original measurement unit	Sample matching unit
Comparison measurement unit	Sample matching unit
Compared measure and definition	Sample comparable kg measure; same input scope
Difference	-10	kg
Relative change	-10	%

Keep both originals, units, scope, method, calibration and correction history. A difference does not identify which source is correct; no automatic averaging or overwrite.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Discrepancies resolved with evidence and repeat error rate.

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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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 provincial agricultural programmesDEC-DP10-020 · Provincial outcomes · Suggested priority: Medium

Try this decision

Evaluate provincial agricultural programmes.

Verified published formula · Difference-in-differences arithmetic

Method. (Treatment after−before) − (comparison after−before), using the same outcome definition and periods.

Next step. Supply study-design evidence. Continue, adapt, expand or stop a programme based on defensible outcome evidence.

Inputs, example and sources

World Bank · Impact Evaluation in Practice Second Edition
Institution publication · 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.

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

Analysis inputs. Treatment Crop productivity before [kg/ha]; Treatment Crop productivity after [kg/ha]; Comparison Crop productivity before [kg/ha]; Comparison Crop productivity after [kg/ha]; Study design and comparability evidence; Outcome definition, method and reference basis

Other required evidence. Programme cohort; baseline outcomes; follow-up; comparison areas; weather; prices.

Fictional worked example · 2025

Laggala Pallegama — provincial outcomes · Laggala Pallegama

Input or result	Value	Unit
Treatment Crop productivity before	42	kg/ha
Treatment Crop productivity after	59	kg/ha
Comparison Crop productivity before	39	kg/ha
Comparison Crop productivity after	46	kg/ha
Study design and comparability evidence	Missing
Outcome definition, method and reference basis	Crop productivity /example matching definition1
Difference in changes	10	kg/ha

The arithmetic alone does not establish causation. Design, parallel trends, confounding, attrition, uncertainty and adverse effects need appropriate evidence.

Proposed checking role. Provincial crop specialist and extension coordinator.

After the action. Verified outcomes, costs, distributional effects and evidence strength.

World Bank Impact Evaluation in Practice Second Edition — Institution publication. Chapter7 difference-in-differences. Published difference-in-differences estimator and study assumptions; aggregate examples do not establish causation.
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

Department of Agriculture publications and regulations — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
Seed Certification Service — 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 Offices · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: b5701ed646f0f063

Field	Unit	Required
name	Confirm if needed	No
category	Confirm if needed	No
district_n	Confirm if needed	No

AgroEcological Zones Point · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: cc316b77dd9398f9

Field	Unit	Required
fid_1	Confirm if needed	No
left	Confirm if needed	No
bottom	Confirm if needed	No
right	Confirm if needed	No
top	Confirm if needed	No
x	Confirm if needed	No
y	Confirm if needed	No
fid_2	Confirm if needed	No
join_count	Confirm if needed	No
target_fid	Confirm if needed	No
id	Confirm if needed	No
gridcode	Confirm if needed	No
final_id	Confirm if needed	No
zone	Confirm if needed	No
climatic_z	Confirm if needed	No
agro_eco_z	Confirm if needed	No
agro_eco_r	Confirm if needed	No
terrain	Confirm if needed	No
major_soil	Confirm if needed	No
land_use	Confirm if needed	No
anualrfmm	Confirm if needed	No

ASC Locations · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: a64b0a6754afd4ed

Field	Unit	Required
ASC Number	Confirm if needed	No
ASC Name	Confirm if needed	No
XCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
YCOORD	Confirm if needed	No
Location Code	Confirm if needed	No
Description	Confirm if needed	No

Agro Ecological Zones · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: 592c3b578787edcd

Field	Unit	Required
Zone	Confirm if needed	No
Climatic_Zone	Confirm if needed	No
Agro_Eco_Zone	Confirm if needed	No
Agro_Eco_R	Confirm if needed	No
Final_ID	Confirm if needed	No
Terrain	Confirm if needed	No
Major_Soil	Confirm if needed	No
Land_Use	Confirm if needed	No
AnualRFmm	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

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

Irrigation Lands · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: e877698582fc591c

Field	Unit	Required
Landuse Type	Confirm if needed	No
Landuse Classification (CropType)	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

Crops Suitability · Land Suitability

Existing form reference: 54fb1fe96af4f04c

Field	Unit	Required
Province Name	Confirm if needed	No
Province Code	Confirm if needed	No
District Name	Confirm if needed	No
District Code	Confirm if needed	No
DS Division Name	Confirm if needed	No
DS Division Code	Confirm if needed	No
GND Name	Confirm if needed	No
GND Number	Confirm if needed	No
MC UC PS Name	Confirm if needed	No
MC UC PS Code	Confirm if needed	No
Polling Division Name	Confirm if needed	No
Polling Division Code	Confirm if needed	No
id	Confirm if needed	No
Area Hectare	Confirm if needed	No
ASC Name	Confirm if needed	No
Area Sq Km	Confirm if needed	No
Square Km	Confirm if needed	No
Crop Type	Confirm if needed	No
st_area(shape)	Confirm if needed	No
st_length(shape)	Confirm if needed	No

Crop categories · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 816a25e50e472c74

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
category Id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No

Crop sub categories · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 9ec496a5e0c6aadf

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
sub Category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Category DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Category DTO / category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Category DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No

Crops · Crop Production

Existing form reference: f6a51a2d7e2080bc

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Id	Confirm if needed	No
description	Confirm if needed	No
crop Type	Confirm if needed	No
scientific Name	Confirm if needed	No
optimum Temperature	Confirm if needed	No
nursery Establishment Period	Confirm if needed	No
harvesting	Confirm if needed	No
family	Confirm if needed	No
is Multi Pick	Confirm if needed	No
micro Green Available	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / sub Category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
soil Type DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
soil Type DTO / soil Type Code	Confirm if needed	No
soil Type DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
soil Type DTO / created Date	Confirm if needed	No
soil Type DTO / modified Date	Confirm if needed	No
is Plantation Crop	Confirm if needed	No
annual Rainfall	Confirm if needed	No
altitude	Confirm if needed	No
suitable Cultivation Areas	Confirm if needed	No
soil Characteristics	Confirm if needed	No
soil Ph Range	Confirm if needed	No
nursery Management	Confirm if needed	No
land Preparation	Confirm if needed	No
seeding Transplanting Planting	Confirm if needed	No
planting Time	Confirm if needed	No
seed Or Cutting Requirement	Confirm if needed	No
spacing	Confirm if needed	No

Crop varieties · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 4407b75d4bb7f035

Field	Unit	Required
id	Confirm if needed	No
variety Id	Confirm if needed	No
variety Name	Confirm if needed	No
variety Description	Confirm if needed	No
pericarp Color / id	Confirm if needed	No
pericarp Color / code	Confirm if needed	No
pericarp Color / description	Confirm if needed	No
grain Size	Confirm if needed	No
average Yield	Confirm if needed	No
maturity Time	Confirm if needed	No
is Imported	Confirm if needed	No
is Multi Pick	Confirm if needed	No
grain Color	Confirm if needed	No
bearing Period In Days	Confirm if needed	No
scientific Name	Confirm if needed	No
released Year	Confirm if needed	No
duration Between Two Picks	Confirm if needed	No
edible Part Shape	Confirm if needed	No
seed Requirement	Confirm if needed	No
spacing	Confirm if needed	No
soil Problems	Confirm if needed	No
number Of Pics	Confirm if needed	No
farmer Yield	Confirm if needed	No
research Yield	Confirm if needed	No
grain Quality	Confirm if needed	No
croplook Variety Id	Confirm if needed	No
variety Type	Confirm if needed	No
pollination Type	Confirm if needed	No
grain Type / id	Confirm if needed	No
grain Type / code	Confirm if needed	No
grain Type / description	Confirm if needed	No
age Type	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / scientific Name	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / is Multi Pick	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / sub Category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / category Id	Confirm if needed	No
crop DTO / crop Sub Category DTO / crop Category DTO / description	Confirm if needed	No
harti Items DTO / id	Confirm if needed	No
harti Items DTO / item Num	Confirm if needed	No
harti Items DTO / item Name	Confirm if needed	No
harti Items DTO / group Name	Confirm if needed	No
file Resource DTOList	Confirm if needed	No
discontinued	Confirm if needed	No
discontinued Date	Confirm if needed	No
research Yield Dry Weight	Confirm if needed	No
average Yield Dry Weight	Confirm if needed	No
paddy Variety Type	Confirm if needed	No
grain Category / id	Confirm if needed	No
grain Category / code	Confirm if needed	No
grain Category / description	Confirm if needed	No
farmer Selection	Confirm if needed	No
plant Growth	Confirm if needed	No
age Group / id	Confirm if needed	No
age Group / code	Confirm if needed	No
age Group / description	Confirm if needed	No
age Group / crop / id	Confirm if needed	No
age Group / crop / description	Confirm if needed	No
aromatic	Confirm if needed	No
low Gi	Confirm if needed	No
sticky	Confirm if needed	No
soft Cook Rice	Confirm if needed	No
general Cultivation	Confirm if needed	No
wz Only	Confirm if needed	No
salinity Areas	Confirm if needed	No
iron Toxicity	Confirm if needed	No
drought Tolerant	Confirm if needed	No
heat Tolerant	Confirm if needed	No
submergence Tolerant	Confirm if needed	No
cold Tolerant	Confirm if needed	No
acid Sulfate	Confirm if needed	No
upland	Confirm if needed	No
seed Testa Color	Confirm if needed	No
harvest In Many Picks	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Size Unit	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Color	Confirm if needed	No
pest Disease Resistance	Confirm if needed	No
number Of Seed For Pod	Confirm if needed	No
number Of Bulbs	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Size	Confirm if needed	No
chilli Pungency Level	Confirm if needed	No
special Characteristics	Confirm if needed	No
harvest To Seed	Confirm if needed	No
multi Pick Per Variety DTOList	Confirm if needed	No
grain Category	Confirm if needed	No
age Group	Confirm if needed	No
pericarp Color	Confirm if needed	No
grain Type	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Color / id	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Color / code	Confirm if needed	No
pod Fruit Bulb Color / description	Confirm if needed	No
harti Items DTO	Confirm if needed	No

Export crops · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 31afd4eae072f89f

Field	Unit	Required

Paddy, OFC & VEG — 2025/26 Maha - November · Crop Production

Existing form reference: aa35b2a397b5c03d

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Roots & Tuber, Leafy Vege — 2025/26 Maha - November · Crop Production

Existing form reference: ddb475db65cb5155

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Fruit — 2025/26 Maha - November · Crop Production

Existing form reference: a58a0587ce2979e4

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Paddy, OFC & VEG — 2026 Yala - March · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 63278eb926593608

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Roots & Tuber, Leafy Vege — 2026 Yala - March · Crop Production

Existing form reference: f0b5ebbaf3b23649

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Fruit — 2026 Yala - March · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 198a6e47d9d0d6c7

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Paddy, OFC & VEG — 2026 Yala - April · Crop Production

Existing form reference: f2c8e1b979a467f1

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Roots & Tuber, Leafy Vege — 2026 Yala - April · Crop Production

Existing form reference: c73f38e8793641c8

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Fruit — 2026 Yala - April · Crop Production

Existing form reference: 718ca532ca18dd77

Field	Unit	Required
Crop	Confirm if needed	No
District	Confirm if needed	No
Measure	Confirm if needed	No
Value	ha	No
Unit	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No

Paddy seed categories by district and season, 2020–2024 · Crop Production

Existing form reference: d0b6b5027371b418

Field	Unit	Required
District	Confirm if needed	No
Season	Confirm if needed	No
Seed category	Confirm if needed	No
Sown area	ha	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 Provincial Departments of Agriculture See the presentation example

Provincial Departments of Agriculture Documents and images prototype screen — Provincial Departments of Agriculture. 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 Provincial Departments of Agriculture See the presentation example

Provincial Departments of Agriculture Data structure management prototype screen — Provincial Departments of Agriculture. 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 Provincial Departments of Agriculture See the presentation example

Provincial Departments of Agriculture Users and access prototype screen — Provincial Departments of Agriculture. 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.

Provincial Departments of Agriculture

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?