1. Home
  2. Knowledge Base
  3. Methods overview
  4. Overview: Method audit process

Overview: Method audit process

The problem we are trying to solve on CaSTCo is a proliferation of citizen science methods, with few nationally standardised protocols, which means confusion for citizen science groups who don’t know which is the best monitoring method to use, and fragmentation of the locally-derived evidence base means it is hard to know what data is available, how to access it and therefore how to combine it with other datasets to get the data into the hands of decision-makers, and for them to know whether they can trust the data.

Aim

The partners on CaSTCo set out to audit and shortlist a range of citizen science methods to:

  1. Reduce confusion for groups wishing to select the best monitoring method for their purposes and provide a shortlist of recommended methods and guidance
  2. Select a few methods which would be the first to receive CaSTCo investment, to improve data quality and interoperability to put data of known quality in the hands of decision-makers
Diagram showing a complicated mess of citizen science data sources, data platforms, decision-making. Under, the title reads: "Fragmented decision making = higher costs & poor decisions.

How we went about it

We set up a Technical Working Group comprising monitoring experts, volunteer coordinators and end users of citizen science data to initiate the method audit, and the first step was to design an approach and decide on the scope of the audit. The group came up with a method audit framework which was refined in consultation with the project partners. This set out the proposed steps for the method audit and how this would then feed through to the linked work on developing a training programme and investing in data systems.

Through a series of collaborative workshops involving the CaSTCo demonstrator catchments and monitoring experts, a thematic grouping of monitoring methods was developed, and thematic prioritisation was undertaken to decide which themes would be the first ones to commence. We initially agreed to audit two themes but subsequently expanded this as partners and available resources allowed.

Diagram showing the progression from Long-lists, to short lists, to protocol/library. It then goes into training plans, and reviews of data systems.

Each thematic method audit was led by an individual or partner organisation, but as there were such diverse monitoring methods within each theme, we allowed the groups some freedom to find their own way to run their audits. Each one developed a long list of methods, agreed on some criteria against which to assess the methods, developed a consensus among experts and users and then shortlisted some methods, which were likely to be recommended for uptake by CaSTCo demonstrator catchments and beyond. The method audit leads were also asked to produce a short summary document setting out contextual information about the monitoring theme and key terms, units of measurement, etc.

Monitoring theme columns, with Biodiversity, Water Quality, Pollution and issues, Soile and Landuse, Habitat and hydromorphology

Outputs

Each method audit produced a set of outputs, which are summarised on the method library pages, but the full outputs are shared here: Methods lists and categories

Related Articles

Questions?

Consult our FAQs or contact us.
View FAQs