01 / THE BLUEPRINT
The problem to investigate
A community may find project announcements easily but struggle to locate later public updates. Investigate one documented project and the sources available for it. Missing online information is a transparency question, not evidence of corruption or a failed project.
02 / THE BLUEPRINT
A possible solution
Build a timeline that separates announced plans, dated source documents, reported milestones and unresolved questions. Link each entry to the original public record. Allow factual corrections with a change log, and avoid scoring people or agencies as corrupt.
03 / THE BLUEPRINT
Start without an app
A manually maintained public reading list and quarterly explainer may deliver more value than a live tracker. Work with existing local journalists or civic groups who understand the records. First test whether the source material is sufficient and useful to readers.
04 / THE BLUEPRINT
Technology that could help
A document catalogue, structured milestones and a small web interface can support the concept. Preserve lawful copies where permitted, record retrieval dates and identify changed links. Any automated extraction should go through human checking before it becomes a public entry.
05 / THE BLUEPRINT
Your first experiment
- Choose one project with a clear public record and a local partner.
- Create a private timeline of ten or fewer documents, separating what each document says from your interpretation.
- Ask an independent reviewer to check dates, quotations and missing context.
- Test whether readers can answer a narrow question, then seek responses before publishing contested claims.
06 / THE BLUEPRINT
People, resources and cost drivers
You need document research, editorial judgement and a corrections owner. Costs include staff time, translation, document access and legal review for sensitive coverage. The ability to obtain and interpret reliable records matters more than a sophisticated dashboard.
07 / THE BLUEPRINT
What to validate — and when to stop
Check document provenance and whether readers understand the distinction between a plan and completion evidence. Stop publication of an entry when its source is ambiguous or a factual dispute cannot yet be resolved. Do not fill gaps with generated claims.
08 / HYPOTHESIS TO TEST
Potential impact and how to measure it
The proposed impact is easier access to verifiable information. Measure source discoverability, reader comprehension and corrections resolved. Website views are not evidence that corruption decreased; any broader public-interest effect requires careful independent assessment.
09 / THE BLUEPRINT
Risks and safeguards
Public-interest reporting can affect reputations and expose contributors. Do not publish private addresses, unverified accusations or confidential whistleblower material through an open form. Establish a responsible editorial and safety process before soliciting sensitive information.
10 / THE BLUEPRINT
Who might pay or maintain it
A newsroom, research organisation or transparent grant could maintain the board. Disclose who funds it and any conflicts concerning tracked projects. Budget for corrections and archival continuity; a tracker abandoned without dates can mislead readers.