Department of Meteorology

Sri Lanka decision proposal

Tell us what to change or add.

Archived decisions

1. Check a decision

Open a decision below. Check the area, period, inputs, result and proposed next step.

2. Try the inputs

Use Change example to try different values. Use Data needed to check the fields and sources. The land-use change decision has its own comparison views.

Record your corrections below, then download your answers or print them.

3. Check each decision

1. Check consecutive low-rainfall daysDEC-DP08-002 · Dry and wet spells
Try this decision

Identify the dated low-rainfall runs supported by the supplied daily series.

Validation required

Illustrative data
DayValue stateRainfall (mm)
2025-06-01Measured4
2025-06-02Measured0
2025-06-11Measured0
2025-06-12Measured3

Longest observed dry spell (days) = 3.

2025-06-01 records 4 mm; this does not meet the stated example dry-day rule.

Next step. Review the dated daily sequence and any gaps.

Data and method

The saved official table is one three-hour snapshot. A continuous daily rainfall series is still required for a real dry-spell analysis.

Count a run only across distinct consecutive observed days at one gauge using one daily convention and cutoff. Trace and missing days break the known run unless a documented measurement rule supplies a usable value.

This is a known observed run, not a drought diagnosis or warning threshold. A three-hour snapshot cannot replace a daily history.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • WMO SPI user guide record — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
2. Check missing and late station observationsDEC-DP08-003 · Station completeness
Try this decision

Check received records against an explicit observation schedule and quality review.

Validation required

Official observations; comparison records missing
Station IDLatest time as recordedValid observations (%)Observation age (hours)
434442026-11-10T17:30UnavailableUnavailable
434042026-11-10T17:30UnavailableUnavailable
434102026-11-10T17:30UnavailableUnavailable
8215012026-11-10T17:30UnavailableUnavailable
7215012026-11-10T17:30UnavailableUnavailable

The source reports 43444 at 2026-11-10T17:30. A schedule and QC delivery log are needed to calculate completeness.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Confirm the observation or product time zone before joining records or measuring elapsed time.
  • Source details: Station and instrument metadata reference; Observation schedule reference; Validity and duplicate-check reference.
  • Period: Monitoring window starts; Monitoring window ends; Assessment time.
  • Completeness: Expected observations; Distinct valid observations; Required observation interval.
Data and method

The saved table identifies 24 stations and their published report times. It does not provide a complete delivery log or source QC flags.

Completeness = 100 × distinct valid / scheduled observations in the stated window. Age = assessment time − latest valid time in a confirmed common time zone. Compare age with the supplied reporting interval.

One public snapshot does not establish how many readings were scheduled, received or quality-checked.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • WMO SPI user guide record — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
3. Compare matching temperature observationsDEC-DP08-005 · Temperature extremes
Try this decision

Compare the same temperature statistic and observation interval before investigating a difference.

Validation required

Official observations; comparison records missing
StationStatisticPublished temperature (°C)Observed minus reference (°C)
43444Instantaneous24Unavailable
43473Instantaneous16.7Unavailable
43486Instantaneous25.8Unavailable

Published instantaneous temperature is 24 °C. A matching reference has not been established.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Confirm the observation or product time zone before joining records or measuring elapsed time.
  • Matching reference temperature and its statistic, interval and source.
  • State the temperature statistic of the reference.
  • Source details: Station and instrument metadata reference; Quality-control or review reference.
  • Comparison: Reference observation or baseline period; Matching reference and method.
Data and method

The saved station table supplies instantaneous air temperature, not a daily maximum/minimum history.

Temperature difference = observed − matching reference in °C. Match station, statistic, observation interval, units and source definitions. Do not calculate a relative percentage from Celsius values.

An instantaneous reading is not a daily maximum or minimum. A difference does not identify a sensor fault or establish a climate trend.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • WMO SPI user guide record — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
4. Prepare a weather-warning review caseDEC-DP08-006 · Severe weather
Try this decision

Sri Lanka source match. Check the area and time covered by a warning.

Match the affected area and selected time to the Department’s warning. Check the warning ID, original level, issue time and validity window. Use Sri Lanka time (UTC+05:30).

Department of Meteorology, Sri Lanka · Weather Advisory System. Warnings endpoint, response fields and time format. CAP 1.2 format reference.

Confirm the duty officer, observation evidence and escalation procedure in Institution review.

Check the original warning product and accepted observations before a duty-officer review.

Validation required

Illustrative data
BulletinHazard / areaIssuedValid until
Heavy rainfall / proposed Laggala Pallegama review

This case identifies the bulletin and evidence needed for a duty-officer warning review. It does not issue a warning.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Confirm the observation or product time zone before joining records or measuring elapsed time.
  • Record: Official bulletin ID.
  • Period: Official issue time; Valid from; Valid until.
  • Source details: Original bulletin and revision; Accepted observations and their period; Applicable warning procedure and criteria; Responsible duty role.
Data and method

The official site publishes advisories and states that warning API access is available on request. No API key or operational warning feed is used here.

Check bulletin identity, issue and validity, replacement history, accepted observation references, affected area, applicable procedure and duty responsibility. No hazard threshold is inferred.

This prepares a review note. It never issues or approves a warning.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • WMO SPI user guide record — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
5. Compare archived rainfall forecasts with observationsDEC-DP08-007 · Forecast verification
Try this decision

Measure errors for matching forecasts and observations at one stated lead.

Verified published formula · Matched-pair RMSE

Illustrative data
Interval endsForecast (mm)Observed (mm)Forecast minus observed (mm)
2025-06-02T08:3048426
2025-06-03T08:302025-5
2025-06-04T08:301082

Matching observations = 3; Root mean square error (mm) = 4.655; Average absolute error (mm) = 4.333; Mean forecast minus observation (mm) = 1 Positive mean error means wetter forecasts on average; negative means drier forecasts..

Forecast 48 mm; matching observation 42 mm. Forecast minus observed is 6 mm.

Next step. Review the matched sample scores and its coverage.

Data and method

The saved observations do not contain matching archived daily point forecasts. Issued seasonal category probabilities cannot be substituted for rainfall amounts.

Error = forecast − observed. For complete matching pairs: RMSE = sqrt(mean(error²)), MAE = mean(abs(error)), bias = mean(error). Match station, variable, accumulation, lead, time zone and observation QC before pooling.

Scores describe the selected sample. They do not establish future forecast reliability or authorise an operational change.

  • Environment Canada: root mean squared error — Government publication. RMSE formula and verification sample definition. Published matched-pair RMSE; does not validate local forecast application.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • Agro-climatology and climate change division — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.
  • WMO SPI user guide record — Institution publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
6. Check seasonal probability forecast performanceDEC-DP08-008 · Seasonal forecasts
Try this decision

Compare a defined seasonal event with archived probabilities and verifying rainfall.

Verified published component · Binary Brier score and skill component

Illustrative data
YearProbability (fraction)Season rain (mm)Event occurred (0 or 1)Squared probability error (0–1)
20230.71,04010.09
20240.474000.16
20250.698010.16

Matching observations = 3; Brier score (0–1) = 0.137; Reference Brier score (0–1) = 0.336; Brier skill = 0.593 Smaller Brier scores mean smaller probability errors. Positive skill means better than the supplied benchmark on these examples; it is not forecast accuracy..

The supplied 1,040 mm exceeds the example 900 mm cutoff. The squared probability error is 0.09.

Next step. Review the matched sample scores and its coverage.

Data and method

Saved seasonal outlooks are source products. They do not include an archive of matched hindcasts and seasonal observations.

For the predefined event, y = 1 when rainfall exceeds the stated cutoff, otherwise 0. Brier score = mean((p − y)²). Brier skill = 1 − score/reference score for matching cases and a positive reference score. Category and benchmark choices are local assumptions.

A published Brier formula does not verify a local category threshold, benchmark or forecast. No complete seasonal calibration assessment is claimed.

  • JMA numerical weather prediction outline — Government publication. AppendixA.3, equationsA.3.1 and A.3.3. Brier score and reference skill for binary probability forecasts; the prototype uses one specified event, not an undifferentiated seasonal score.
  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology seasonal rainfall outlook — Government publication. SF-2026-11, issue information and seasonal/monthly outlook. Issued forecast product metadata and category-probability context; not a matched hindcast archive.
  • Department of Meteorology consensus seasonal outlook — Government publication. NDJ 2026/27 outlook, issued 30 October 2026. Published outlook and issue/validity context; no future-performance guarantee.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
7. Check a proposed weather-station siteDEC-DP08-009 · Station siting
Try this decision

Prepare a site-survey worklist from coverage, exposure and operating evidence.

Validation required

Illustrative data
Proposed siteAssessment basis
Rambukoluwa demonstration candidateWMO No. 8; applicable edition to be recorded

The site-survey checklist identifies coverage, exposure, access and operating evidence for Rambukoluwa demonstration candidate. It does not rank or select a site.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Source details: Network coverage gap and intended variable; Surveyed terrain, location and elevation; Instrument exposure and obstacle survey; Access and land-use permission; Power arrangement and reliability; Communications coverage and delivery test; Responsible site-survey role.
Data and method

The public station table supplies station identities. It does not establish a coverage-gap study or candidate-site survey.

Review variable-specific siting and exposure against the cited standard using a surveyed site and operating records. No generic distance score or automatic preferred site is generated.

Complete records support a site review. They do not select or authorise a station.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • WMO Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation — Institution publication. WMO No. 8; applicable instrument, siting and maintenance chapter and edition to be recorded. Instrument observation, siting, calibration and maintenance context. No universal site score or calibration acceptance is inferred.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
8. Check weather inputs for a water-needs calculationDEC-DP08-013 · Evapotranspiration
Try this decision

Check daily weather variables, units and station conditions before an evapotranspiration calculation.

Validation required

Official observations; comparison records missing
StationTime basisSnapshot temperature (°C)Reported wind (km/h)
43444Three-hour snapshot240
43473Three-hour snapshot16.72.5
43486Three-hour snapshot25.83.6

Published snapshot: 24 °C, humidity 92%, wind 0 km/h. Daily extrema, radiation, humidity convention and reference-site wind metadata remain separate inputs. No ETo is calculated.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Supply matching daily weather statistics; the source snapshot is not a daily dataset.
  • Source details: Station and instrument metadata reference; Humidity statistic and method; Reference-site location, elevation and surface.
  • Daily weather: Daily maximum temperature; Daily minimum temperature; Daily solar radiation; Wind measurement height.
Data and method

The saved snapshot supplies temperature, humidity and wind. It does not supply daily temperature extrema, solar radiation, wind height or reference-site metadata.

Check the daily temperature, humidity, radiation and wind definitions required by the selected reference-evapotranspiration method. Wind unit conversion alone does not provide a 2 m wind observation. This screen checks inputs; it does not calculate ETo.

A three-hour observation is not a daily weather dataset. Missing radiation, wind height or daily extrema must remain missing.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56 meteorological data — Institution publication. Chapter 3 meteorological data; wind speed, climatic data acquisition and minimum requirements. Weather-variable definitions and reference-site requirements. The input checklist is a project implementation, not a published ETo result.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
9. Compare annual station observationsDEC-DP08-017 · Climate trends
Try this decision

Compare the same annual statistic at one station with its quality and station-history evidence.

Validation required

Illustrative data
YearAnnual statisticTemperature (°C)Daily coverage (%)
2,023Mean temperature25.6100
2,024Mean temperature25.8100
2,025Mean temperature25.7100

Matching observations = 3; Mean annual temperature (°C) = 25.7; Sample standard deviation (°C) = 0.1.

The supplied 2023 mean temperature is 25.6 °C, with 100% reported daily coverage. No trend or attribution is calculated.

Next step. Review the documented case with the responsible role.

Data and method

A real annual station series and aggregation/QC history are still required. Annual figures below are labelled demonstration values.

Display comparable annual statistics for one station and definition. Report their mean and sample standard deviation only for complete compatible selected records. No trend significance or climate attribution is calculated.

Three illustrative annual values do not establish a long-term climate trend. The saved three-hour snapshot cannot supply an annual mean.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • WMO climate-data quality and homogenization guidance — Institution publication. Climate data quality, metadata, homogenization and dataset-management guidance. Need for original data, metadata and climate-series quality assessment. The prototype performs no homogenization or trend attribution.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
10. Check a weather product before SHARED publicationDEC-DP08-020 · Forecast publication
Try this decision

Sri Lanka source match. Verify the original warning before sharing.

For a Department warning, check the warning ID, original level, issue time, validity and affected area against the Department’s current record.

Department of Meteorology, Sri Lanka · Weather Advisory System. Warnings endpoint, response fields and time format. CAP 1.2 format reference.

Confirm reuse permission and the publication reviewer in Institution review. Public availability does not grant permission.

Check source rights, product version, validity and audience before a publication review.

Validation required

Official product metadata; SHARED review records missing
ProductTypeIssuedStated valid periodPeriod definition
Issued seasonal outlook2026-10-30November, December and January (NDJ) 2026/27Clear
SF-2026-11Issued seasonal/monthly/weekly rainfall forecast2026-10-30November–January 2026/27Clear
Issued probabilistic maximum/minimum temperature forecast2026-11-04November–January 2026 in heading; NDJ 2026/27 and OND captions also appearConflicting

Original Issued seasonal outlook issued 2026-10-30. Validity as printed: November, December and January (NDJ) 2026/27. SHARED reuse permission, audience and publication review are separate records.

Next step. Obtain the records listed below.

Information still needed
  • Record: Publisher product ID.
  • Source details: SHARED reuse and redistribution permission; Proposed SHARED audience; Responsible publication reviewer; Editorial and technical review record.
Data and method

Three saved issued outlooks populate the source records. Conflicting temperature-outlook period labels remain flagged for publisher clarification.

Retain the original product, issue and validity, source version, replacement history, intended audience, review evidence and permitted SHARED use. Public availability alone is not redistribution permission.

The original Department publication is separate from a SHARED publication decision. No publication is authorised or sent by this screen.

  • SHARED domain decision contracts — Validation required. Domain decision rules and matching fictional examples. Local comparisons, constraints, source matching, sorting and follow-up proposals; developer checks do not establish scientific or client approval.
  • Department of Meteorology seasonal rainfall outlook — Government publication. SF-2026-11, issue information and seasonal/monthly outlook. Issued forecast product metadata and category-probability context; not a matched hindcast archive.
  • Department of Meteorology consensus seasonal outlook — Government publication. NDJ 2026/27 outlook, issued 30 October 2026. Published outlook and issue/validity context; no future-performance guarantee.
  • Department of Meteorology temperature outlook — Government publication. Issued 4 November 2026; headings, captions and availability note. Original product with conflicting printed period labels retained; unavailable districts are not filled.
  • Department of Meteorology products — Government publication. Full method locator not established. Institutional context; does not establish the calculation or local approval.

Calculation appendix

Your checks for this decision
11. Compare drought signals from stations using the same SPI periodDEC-DP08-021 · Published method
Try this decision

Source. Sri Lanka publication.

Data needed. Station and month, SPI accumulation and reference periods, reviewed SPI, monthly rainfall and matching monthly normal.

Method. Compare reviewed SPI for the same month, accumulation period and reference years. Apply the Department’s SPI classes. Separately calculate rainfall as a percentage of normal: 100 × monthly rainfall ÷ matching positive monthly normal.

Worked example. A reviewed 3-month SPI of −1.60 falls in the severely dry band. Separately, 72 mm of monthly rainfall against a 120 mm normal is 60% of normal.

Next step. Ask a climatologist to review comparable stations with dry conditions and verify the inputs before advising users.

Department of Meteorology, Sri Lanka · December 2024 Drought Bulletin. Pages 1–3: Interpretation of Maps, Figure 2 and SPI Classification.

Confirm the matching month, SPI period, reference years and station records in Institution review. The cited bulletin uses 1981–2010 for monthly rainfall normals. Rainfall percentage does not calculate SPI.

Your checks for this decision

4. Existing data forms for your institution

Check which existing source fields can supply the decision inputs.

Hydro Meteorological Stations · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 678a3e2dcda3b2df

FieldUnitRequired
Station NameConfirm if neededNo
River BasinConfirm if neededNo
QuadrantConfirm if neededNo
X_MeterConfirm if neededNo
Y_MeterConfirm if neededNo
DescriptionConfirm if neededNo
Agro Meteorological Stations · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 4404e8d7fb7938f5

FieldUnitRequired
Station IDConfirm if neededNo
Station NameConfirm if neededNo
Station CodeConfirm if neededNo
LatitudeConfirm if neededNo
LongitudeConfirm if neededNo
YearConfirm if neededNo
DescriptionConfirm if neededNo
qualifierConfirm if neededNo
elevationConfirm if neededNo
Rainguage Stations · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 34f3d59c2619b006

FieldUnitRequired
Serial NumberConfirm if neededNo
Station NameConfirm if neededNo
DistrictConfirm if neededNo
LatitudeConfirm if neededNo
LongitudeConfirm if neededNo
Begin DateConfirm if neededNo
End DateConfirm if neededNo
DescriptionConfirm if neededNo
qualifierConfirm if neededNo
elevationConfirm if neededNo
Rainfall · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 1d5963784380e5d7

FieldUnitRequired
stationidConfirm if neededNo
dateConfirm if neededNo
rainfall_mmConfirm if neededNo
st_area(shape)Confirm if neededNo
st_length(shape)Confirm if neededNo
Synoptic Stations · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: c7953153a5200702

FieldUnitRequired
Serial NumberConfirm if neededNo
Station NameConfirm if neededNo
DistrictConfirm if neededNo
LatitudeConfirm if neededNo
LongitudeConfirm if neededNo
Begin DateConfirm if neededNo
End DateConfirm if neededNo
DescriptionConfirm if neededNo
qualifierConfirm if neededNo
elevationConfirm if neededNo
Climate Zones · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 2fd8102b7732d899

FieldUnitRequired
Zone_NameConfirm if neededNo
Climate_ClassificationConfirm if neededNo
IDConfirm if neededNo
AGCODEConfirm if neededNo
AGNAMEConfirm if neededNo
areaConfirm if neededNo
PerimeterConfirm if neededNo
TerrainConfirm if neededNo
AGRO_ZoneConfirm if neededNo
st_area(shape)Confirm if neededNo
st_length(shape)Confirm if neededNo
Hydro Zones · Rainfall & Weather

Existing form reference: 8645ce85db37fa03

FieldUnitRequired
Zone IDConfirm if neededNo
Zone AreaConfirm if neededNo
PerimeterConfirm if neededNo
Hydro_TypeConfirm if neededNo
DescriptionConfirm if neededNo
st_area(shape)Confirm if neededNo
st_length(shape)Confirm if neededNo

5. Documents and images

Your institution has its own document and image library. Use the same library for reports, photos and other evidence.

Department of Meteorology Documents and images prototype screen
Department of Meteorology. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open Documents and images. Check the institution name.
  2. Use All files, Documents or Images to find a file. Open its preview or download the original.
  3. Use a sample file to try Add file. Private is the starting choice. Public needs a source, permission to share and review.
  4. Use Access preview to try the institution reviewer and Public visitor views.

Files added in the prototype stay in this browser. Public sharing is an access preview. Existing public reference links already work online.

What your institution needs to confirm

6. Data structure management

Data structure keeps the existing source tree, records, charts and map. Manage structure adds a place to propose changes to definitions.

Department of Meteorology Data structure management prototype screen
Department of Meteorology. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open Data structure and choose Manage structure.
  2. Use Add base domain for a main information area. Add inside creates a subject area, a nested subject, an entity type or a field under the right parent.
  3. Give the definition a clear name, code and meaning. Reuse an existing definition when the meaning is the same.
  4. For a field, check the data type, unit, required value, limits and missing-value rule. Save a Draft, then try the separate reviewer view.

An entity type means a kind of thing or event, such as a reservoir or an inspection. Drafts stay in this browser. A demo approval does not change real definitions, data, chart links or sharing rights.

What your institution needs to confirm

7. Users and access

User management shows example profiles for each institution. People and Roles and access let you review the proposed account screens.

Department of Meteorology Users and access prototype screen
Department of Meteorology. Prototype screen. Select the image to enlarge it.

What you can try

  1. Open User management and choose the institution. The rows are examples, not a list of your staff.
  2. Use View access to check a role. An administrator title alone does not give access to Private files.
  3. Try Preview invitation or Preview access change. Check the role, start date, optional end date and reason.
  4. Review the example permissions and tell us which job roles should receive each one.

These are interface previews only. They create no account, send no email and change no access. Use example details in the preview. Institution verification does not grant a real permission.

What your institution needs to confirm

8. Can you share data regularly?

We currently use public data and published reports where available. Please confirm whether your institution can provide data directly, so we can avoid retyping or reading figures from PDFs.

Do not enter passwords, access keys or private account details.

9. Anything else we should change?

Use the Download answers button at the top of this page. Share the downloaded file or printed copy through your agreed review channel. Nothing is sent automatically.