Insights
Analysis built on evidence you can inspect.
Each piece rests on a coded evidence base. Every item links to its source and quotes the passage it relies on, and each was independently re-checked against its source.
Flagship analysisThe impact gap: where impact finance falls short, and who bears the costDrawn from 186 source-checked items: complaints to accountability mechanisms, evaluations, research and news investigations.Read the analysis →DataEvidence explorerFilter every item by cause, affected group, actor, region and strength of evidence.Explore the evidence →MethodHow the evidence was gathered and checkedSources, time windows, the coding rules, independent verification and known limits.Read the method →
How the evidence was gathered and checked
From search to publication. Counts are records at each stage. Coding and checking were done under a written protocol commissioned and overseen by a human lead, who did not code or verify the records.
- SearchAccountability mechanisms, evaluation units and audit offices, research and watchdog organisations, and twelve months of news.
- Code221 records coded under a written protocol. Every code rests on a passage quoted from the source.
- VerifyEach record checked against its source by a separate checker, corrected where needed, and checked again.
- Exclude17 records excluded and 18 set aside as not verifiable.
- ReviewA spot check of 20 random records, four reviewers taking different perspectives, and a final check of every figure.
- Publish186 records included in the analysis and listed in the evidence explorer.
Records coded
After exclusions
Included
Excluded (17)
- Out of scope10
- Opinion, not evidence3
- Superseded by a newer edition2
- No shortfall reported2
Not verifiable (18)
- Source not accessible at verification12
- Coding disputed at second check6
Included (186)
- Complaints to accountability mechanisms112
- Evaluations and research reports44
- News investigations30