– DRAFT –
Common Impact Data Standard - TPAC 2022 breakout

https://www.commonapproach.org/

https://www.commonapproach.org/common-impact-data-standard/

https://www.commonapproach.org/what-is-impact-measurement/

<aliciarichins_> https://www.canva.com/design/DAFLdrk6jJ4/j1LaWpAmljJmLFmJn4vndg/view?utm_content=DAFLdrk6jJ4&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link&utm_source=publishsharelink

<aliciarichins_> ontology document: https://www.commonapproach.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Common-Impact-Data-Standard-V1.1.pdf

Q&A

mcf: are there European counterparts

aliciarichins_: [mentioned a few], always happy to make more connections

Joe_M: How do you ensure the comparability of two data sets you're comparing, apples to apples?

MarkF: two levels, specificaiton of the impact model, stakeholders, outcomes trying to achieve for those stakeholders, and how impact will be measured
… how outcomes are reported
… characteristics of the stakeholders are described
… using taxonomies published by 3d party organizations
… outcomes are described similarly, referring to taxonomies from poressional organizations

<aliciarichins_> How CIDS relates to other data standards: https://commonapproach.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/CommonApproachImpactDataStandards-Fit-with-other-standards-DrKerr.pdf

MarkF: we integrate with 3d party taxonomies
… To measure outcomes, we use indicators
… there's an ontology for representation of indicators, ISO-IEC standard

<aliciarichins_> Case study that elucidates the roll up of dissimilar indicators: https://www.commonapproach.org/case-study-summary-using-the-common-impact-data-standard-and-common-framework/

MarkF: indicator ontology decomposes indicators into components
… enables cross-org comparisons

aliciarichins_: I shared a link above showing the methodology ^

martin_alvarez_: this could be a good methodology to be implemented by the Web Foundation
… good showcase, measuring the impact of the web

aliciarichins_: will you support development of a WG around this work at W3C

<marie> wendy: you could go through a Community Group to drive interest and build a community around that topic

<marie> ... there might be some existing groups so to talk to and see if there is an helpful overlap

<marie> wendy: there is a large SW community in W3C, might be less active these days ...

<marie> ... if you create a CG, there is an auto tweet from @w3c that help communicate what you intend to do

<marie> ... a question to ask forehand is "what do you want to get from the W3C standardization process"

Joe_M: Speaking individually, I'm hearing from the builders of web specs that they're looking for something actionable
… e.g. understanding how people in low income communities use phones and data

aliciarichins_: our work is at the organization level, not the client; what kind of impact measurement are the orgs using

MarkF: The Common Approach group has done work on training organizations on impact management
… how many social impact organizations have work with Common Approach?

aliciarichins_: in the thousands.
… We're looking to expand into the W3C community

Bart: +1, we'd like to connect with broader community

Daniela: excited to see the project expand

Bart: enocourage people to look at the extended study on ArchiveX

<aliciarichins_> Link to that work with Helpseeker and the Canadian Digital Supercluser project: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.11061.pdf

<aliciarichins_> Alicia.richins@commonapproach.org