Mohinga Aid Information Management System Data Analysis

Leigh Mitchell
2 min readMar 30, 2019

Inspired by this article which analysed the quality of aid data reported to the AidStream platform by Belgian organisations, I thought I’d try to do something similar looking at the quality of aid data contained within Myanmar’s ‘Mohinga’ Aid Information Management System (AIMS).

“The Mohinga AIMS — a simple, open and modern cloud-based web-application — is Myanmar’s officially- designated platform for reporting, storing and analysing all development assistance information.” Source: Myanmar Development Assistance Policy

I wanted to start by checking whether development partners were keeping their activity status and start/end dates up-to-date. To do this, I used Flourish to design several simple dot plot charts.

My thinking was:

  • there should be few activities in the implementation stage if their planned end date has passed;
  • there should be no activities being implemented if there is an actual end date reported; and
  • there should be no activities with a pipeline/identification status if its planned start date has passed.

While not perfect, the visualisations created should help to identify 🚩 red flag activities that may need to be updated.

For example in Figure 1.1, by filtering for U.S. Agency for International Development, we see a number of activities which are reported to have ended in 2018, are still listed as being implemented. I suggest these activities should be reviewed by USAID and have them a) either revise the planned start/end dates, b) revise the actual start/end dates or c) update the activity status.

Figure 1.2. is similar to Figure 1.1. but only shows data reported by the European Union. We can see that the majority of activities in the completion phase have a planned end date prior to 2019. That makes sense. However, there are still a number of activities reported as being implemented where the planned end date has passed. This chart serves as a 🚩 red flag, allowing users to easily identify activities that may need updating.

Figure 1.3 and Figure 1.4 are two charts with different perspectives of the same dataset.

Figure 1.3 plots activities by their actual end date and status. There should, in theory, be no activities being implemented which also have an actual end date. Users can, for example, filter the chart to show only activities being implemented to identify which activities need to be updated.

Finally, Figure 1.4 shows the same data but allows development partners to filter to see only activities they have reported and more easily identify which activities need to be updated.

Hopefully this type of analysis helps to contribute to better quality reporting to the Mohinga AIMS.