Connect programme records, participant feedback and reporting in one workspace. Give field colleagues consistent forms, define the indicators your team needs to follow, and calculate results for agreed reporting periods. Bring the answers, review history and measurement rules into the conversation when colleagues or funders ask what changed.
Changing spreadsheets and indicator definitions make each reporting round difficult to explain and repeat.
Keep versioned measurement rules and period results connected to the programme records behind them.
Activity summaries arrive separately from participant feedback and records that need investigation.
Review collection activity, configured quality findings and participant responses within the programme project.
Preparing a report requires finding the right questionnaire, figures and explanations across multiple files.
Return to agreed definitions, reviewed records and reusable reporting views when preparing the next report.
Use these existing workflows to connect your team’s task with a result it can review and use.
Agree what the indicator measures, define its numerator and denominator from collected answers, and retain a revision when the definition changes.
Give colleagues a consistent explanation of what each reported figure represents.
Collect records through reviewed forms and compute indicator results for selected periods using the agreed definitions and documented weights where needed.
Follow the measured pattern over time without rebuilding the reporting rules for every round.
Collect structured ratings and written experiences, review quality findings and organise the comments using shared codes and reviewed themes.
Bring participant explanations alongside the programme figures your team is discussing.
Inspect supporting submissions, review the methodology summary and generate a project PDF or authorised original-data export.
Prepare a defined evidence package for colleagues or funders while keeping the measurement scope visible.
Your workflow brings analysis and quality review together in the same workspace. Match the published plan allowances and optional AI credits to the work your team needs.
Ask questions across approved fields, compare relevant groups and organise written responses. Review field meanings, filters, statistical assumptions and supporting answers, then save analyses for the next team discussion.
Ask questions of approved programme fields and organise written participant feedback. Review group comparisons, statistical assumptions and the supporting responses before discussing a programme finding.
Provider-assisted dataset questions require workspace enablement, a configured provider, permission and credits. Review the analysis and sampled text themes before using them in a decision.
Investigate configured quality findings, assign follow-up and record review decisions. Apply approved corrections in tracked batches, retain the original submissions and reconsider derived corrections through rollback.
Investigate incomplete or inconsistent programme responses, assign follow-up and record the review decision. Retain the original answers alongside approved derived corrections.
Quality flags guide investigation and depend on the available collection metadata. Corrected values are retained separately; submission exports currently contain the original answers.
Repeated programme reporting needs room for projects, field colleagues, reviewers and incoming records. Compare the published Team allowances for that workload and keep reusable forms, measurement definitions and reports in the same workspace. The subscription supports the evidence workflow; your team remains responsible for programme design and evaluation.
Loading published plan prices…
Use these measures to evaluate your own improvement. They are not promised customer results.
Define the programme questions, reporting periods, consent and indicator rules. Build and pilot the forms your colleagues will use.
Give colleagues appropriate project access, publish the forms and investigate configured quality findings as records arrive.
Calculate the selected indicator periods, analyse approved responses with optional AI assistance and prepare reports with their definitions and assumptions available.
Results describe the records collected and the measurement rules your team defines; they do not establish causal programme impact. Statistical assumptions need review. Indicator series group records by period; segmented series and automatic target alerts are not included. Jorip does not supply evaluators or automatically submit donor reports.
Choose the service, compare the current plan and test the workflow with your team.
Discuss your team’s requirementsBuild a form for your next survey, application or feedback request. Collect responses in one workspace and give your team a clear place to review them.