The Short Answer

Give the data one page of its own and link it from your accountability or transparency section. The page states your IATI organisation identifier, links to the data in a portal a person can read, says how often each file is updated and when it last was, and links your exclusions policy. If you have signed Charter4Change, the same page carries your funding share with its year, its definition of a local partner and its source. Each figure on the page should match the one in your accounts and in your IATI data.

Both commitments are kept somewhere else. Both are checked on your website.

Two Commitments That Live Off-Site

FCDO's IATI guidelines say it "encourages, and in most agreements mandates" implementing partners to publish organisation and activity data to the IATI Standard. Activity files are expected quarterly and the organisation file annually. The publishing happens through IATI's systems, and the guidelines say nothing about your own site. How that clause sits among the other things an FCDO assessor reads is covered in what an NGO's website can answer before FCDO due diligence.

Charter4Change is voluntary. Its commitments page says "Publish the amount or percentage of funding that is passed to NNGOs", and the full charter commits signatories to publish it "in our public accounts" and "to the IATI standard". It does not mention a web page either.

Yet a funder, a partner or a journalist starts on your site, not in an XML file. The section checklist gives the open-data page its own row for that reason. Why partners in particular look for the funding share, and why it means little without its basis, is the subject of what local partners look for. This post deals with the page that holds it.

The Registry Has Gone

Many transparency pages were written around the IATI Registry. IATI's own documentation says the Registry "was permanently replaced by a new site, IATI Account, in December 2025", with public information about publishers and their files moved to the IATI Dashboard. An old Registry address now opens a notice saying the Registry has been replaced. FCDO's guidelines, last updated in April 2023, still describe the Registry, so take current locations from IATI rather than from the guidelines.

The result is a page that broke without anyone touching it. Christian Aid's IATI page still sends readers to its Registry listing and says it publishes data on its "DFID-funded work". Its data, viewed on d-portal, lists activities ending in October and November 2026. I loaded both on 1 October 2026. The data is current. The page that points to it is not.

What the Open-Data Page Carries

Five things, each one short.

  • Your organisation identifier, written out. IATI's guidance on identifiers builds it from two parts: the code of the agency you are registered with and the number that agency gave you. Christian Aid's, for example, is GB-CHC-1105851, built from its charity number. Write it as text so it can be copied into a search, not only inside a link.
  • Somewhere a person can read the data. A link to the raw files serves a developer. A link to d-portal filtered to your identifier serves everyone else, and FCDO lists d-portal among the tools it uses to monitor partners. Link the IATI Dashboard as well, for readers who want the files.
  • What the data covers. All of your funding or only some funders' grants, and from which year. A reader who finds one programme missing should be able to tell whether it was left out by design.
  • How often, and when last. The guidelines expect the activity file quarterly and the organisation file annually. State both, and the month of the last refresh. A frequency without a date is a promise nobody can check.
  • Your exclusions policy, and who to ask. The guidelines make each partner decide what can safely be published and set that out in "a publicly available exclusions policy". Link it, and give a role mailbox for questions about the data.

Picture an assessor checking a new partner. They open your page, copy the identifier, find the activities, see that the last refresh was this quarter and read why two countries are absent. Every question they would have emailed is already answered.

The Funding Share, Beside Its Workings

For a Charter4Change signatory, the funding share sits on the same page, because it should be the same number in three places: the accounts, the IATI data and the website. The charter asks signatories to categorise partners "using a recognised categorisation", and that choice is where the three versions part company.

IATI records each recipient's type from a fixed organisation type list. It has a code for "National NGO" and a separate one for "Partner Country based NGO", described as a "Local and National NGO / CSO based in aid/assistance recipient country". If your page counts one group and your IATI data codes partners as the other, a reader who adds up the transactions will not reach your percentage. State on the page which definition the figure uses, the financial year it covers, what it is a share of and where in the accounts it comes from. Then make sure the IATI data is coded the same way.

CBM Global's Charter4Change page shows the figure on the web, dated, and says the partner expenditure is "published through our annual reports". That sentence is the cross-reference a reader needs. A link to the report, and the note it comes from, would let them follow it in one click. I loaded the page on 1 October 2026 and have not checked how its figures were calculated.

Few signatories get this far. Charter4Change's 2025 Spotlight, self-reported by signatories for 2024, found "only half of reporting signatories publishing their accounts publicly and/or through IATI". When the 32 responding signatories scored their own compliance from 0 to 5, transparency came out at 3.5, the lowest of the seven commitments scored. A page that shows the figure with its workings is still unusual, which is what makes it worth publishing.

Who Keeps It True

The page draws on three owners. Finance owns the funding share and the accounts it comes from. Whoever publishes the IATI files, often finance or grants, owns the identifier, the coverage statement and the refresh date. The web team owns the links. None of them alone will notice when another changes.

Tie the page to the calendar the data already keeps. Each quarterly activity refresh, the page's "last updated" line changes. Each set of approved accounts, the funding share and its year change, and the old figure moves to an archive with its own source. Each change in an external tool, as with the Registry, means checking every outbound link. Put those triggers in your content governance cycle, and treat the funding share with the same discipline as a where-your-money-goes page: a number traced to approved accounts, never a number typed in once.

I would review the page on the same quarterly cycle as the activity file, because that is the rhythm the data sets and the one an assessor will test it against.

An open-data page is short, and it is easy to write once and forget. The data moves every quarter and the tools around it move too. IATI holds the data. Your website holds the claim that it is there.

Further Reading

What This Post Does Not Cover

This is about the website: what the open-data page carries, how its figures should agree and who keeps it current. It is not guidance on producing IATI files, on what your exclusions policy should withhold or on how to calculate a Charter4Change funding share, which belong with your finance, programme and security leads and, for the technical side, with IATI's own documentation. Where your funding agreement says something different from this post, the agreement governs. The examples are public pages, loaded on the date given, and naming them implies no working relationship with Socialectric.