If you are a reviewer, please login to review
2016 / Surrey, BC / Expenditure (Detailed)
Records of actual (past) municipal spending at a detailed transactional level, for example, at the level of month to month expenditure on specific items (usually this means individual records of spending amounts at a fairly granular level - e.g. $5-50k rather than at the $1m+ level). (Note: a database of contracts awarded or similar is not considered sufficient. This data category refers to detailed ongoing data on actual expenditure)
- Status: pending
- Submission date: 12:01am on 26th Jul 2016
- Submitter: A Wong
Please read first
Please review this submission carefully as we have updated the guidance around what each dataset refers to and the data availability question explanations.
1. Official data sources
Please answer regarding official (government or government associated) sources of data. Often data is available from various sources both official and unofficial but we only want answers on the basis of official sources.
To illustrate: suppose election results data is available both from government sources and from a third party website and that the government data is in PDF (so not machine readable) but that the unofficial source has the data in spreadsheets (machine-readable). Then the answer to the machine readable question would be 'No' as the official source is not machine readable (but please do list the unofficial source in the details and comments section).
2. Provide evidence
Please try to provide relevant evidence to back up responses. For example, if data is public and online the URL field should not be empty, or, if the data is openly licensed there should be information (e.g. link) for relevant license of terms-of-use in the details.
3. Assessment Point
Questions should be answered on the basis of the situation as of today. Do not answer based on what may happen in the future (or the situation previously). So, for example, if data will be online soon but is not online now the answer to the 'online' question should be 'No' (though please mention that it will be available in the details and comments section).
Comments
comments powered by Disqus