User talk:MCruz (WMF)/Sandbox/Program Reports

Active discussions

Overview tabEdit

Should be the first tab.   OK

History of programsEdit

Jaime, Edward:
on the original draft on office, we had set a section at the beginning to describe the program and its history. I think we could consider this first section for that. Also, with <div id=XX> we can call this section directly at any point, like at the beginning of «Highlights»
Thoughts? MCruz (WMF) (talk)

Maria - Hmm... I think having all the history on this page makes it a bit too long and it would be better within each program report. After the highlights tab, the second tab should be "Goals and Background" ("Data turnout" is confusing"), where we include response rates, and goals for the program, and then program history. - Thoughts Jaime?
  OK We ended up splitting the history between the Program list and the Program Overview MCruz (WMF) (talk)


Current name New name Applied?
Highlights * Program Overview [1]
* Program Outline
Data turnout * Limitations [2]
* Data Collection [3]
* Context (of the report) [4]
* Response Background / Context
* Response outline
* Response review
Make clear in the opening paragraph that it's data limitations.
Inputs Inputs   OK
Outputs Outputs   OK
Outcomes Outcomes   OK
Key Takeaways * Key Findings [5]
* Conclusions and Recommendations
* Conclusions and key notes
* Key notes
* Overall Progress [6]
* Overall Findings [7]
The blurb needs to be «Key Findings and next steps», make it more of a call to action.
Appendix Appendix   OK

Other ideasEdit

  • Maybe a small icon next to name tab?
  • «Overview» and «Takeaways» seem to be popular concepts in reporting.
  • «Appendix» could be called «Dataset». Would this be accurate? MCruz (WMF) (talk)
  • «Overview» could also be called «Overview of Programs» or «Executive Summary». Or maybe make a new section called «Executive Summary»[8], that has similar information to the subtitle Data and Analysis that is currently under Overview, and some point about next steps in Evaluation capacity development.
  • Overview could have a section called «Background on Evaluation Initiative [4]»


  1. I like to use Overview here because it is consistent with the landing page
  2. I think it talks both about the data limitations and the goals it is restricted to
  3. I like this one in that it goes back to the term we used to callout participants
  4. a b See benchmark case study Mid Term Review. Final Report, Transparency International,, page 2
  5. See benchmark case study, Human Rights Map, by IHRFG
  6. I am not particularly happy with the word progress. For once, I think progress is only a part of the takeaways. For other thing, it's not always about progress, right? Sometimes programs don't work, and we report that.
    For this terminology, see benchmark case study Mid Term Review. Final Report, Transparency International,, page 26
  7. The one problem I see with this terminology is that, if we have Program Overview at the beginning of the navbar, it might be confusing to have a similar word at the end
  8. See benchmark case study, The Web Index
Return to the user page of "MCruz (WMF)/Sandbox/Program Reports".