How civic reports can fuel journalistic investigations on EU funding: Insights from Palermo

What happens when citizens and journalists join forces to investigate how public investments truly impact local communities? How can civic monitoring reports become the foundation for journalistic inquiries that reveal unseen contradictions, inefficiencies, or even success stories?
Investigative journalism has the power of transforming raw civic data into compelling narratives that can spark public debate, hold institutions accountable, and drive meaningful change.
This post reflects on the dynamic relationship between civic activism and investigative journalism, exploring mutual benefits and the challenges of sustaining such impactful collaborations.

Empowering journalists to investigate public spending with civic data

An example of this collaborative approach is the AwareEU initiative, a project co-funded by the European Union, which explored how civic monitoring stories can be transformed into investigative journalism. It is likely the first time that, under the IMREG funding line of the DG REGIO, a project was conceived and implemented entirely by civil society organizations. We gathered in Palermo at a public event organized by the OnData civic association.

As part of the initiative, Info.nodes, in partnership with Action Aid, Ondata and Monithon Europe, coordinated a comprehensive training program for aspiring and professional journalists, focused on European funding mechanisms such as the EU Cohesion Policy and the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF).

Federica Bonalumi from Info.nodes coordinated the school for journalists.

Out of 140 course participants, 70 actively joined the program, which combined technical modules with hands-on investigative work. Journalists were encouraged to select specific projects previously monitored by civic groups and develop them into full investigative stories. Supported by experienced reporters and data experts, these journalists conducted fieldwork, uncovered contradictions, and gave new narrative life to existing civic data. The result was a set of seven investigative stories—most of them published on national media outlets and all included in a dedicated publication. The initiative demonstrated the potential of data-informed civic monitoring to seed rigorous, long-form journalism capable of reshaping public conversations on public spending.

The process began with Antonella Ciociola and Cinzia Roma from the Monithon staff selecting a subset of civic monitoring reports from its extensive public database, focusing on projects with strong community involvement, tangible territorial impact, and narrative potential—whether due to conflict, resolution, or relevance to broader national issues. These reports provided the initial foundation for the investigative work.

Notably, all selected journalists were women, bringing a diverse and often underrepresented perspective to the coverage of public investment. Throughout the project, they received support from senior journalists and data experts who acted as mentors, guiding them through the complexities of field research, data interpretation, and narrative construction. This support structure allowed the journalists to go beyond desk-based reporting and carry out on-the-ground investigations that exposed both shortcomings and successes in the implementation of EU-funded projects.

Spotlight on key issues

Several significant themes emerged from this collaboration, which sometimes led to documented impact:

• Urban regeneration and the risks of gentrification:
  In Milan’s Corvetto neighborhood, civic data revealed how beautification projects might unintentionally push original residents out of their community. Investigative reporting amplified local voices, highlighting how superficial urban improvements risk deepening social inequalities.
• Social services and long-term sustainability:
  Another inquiry focused on shelters for women victims of violence, illustrating that essential services often fall short in duration and resources. Journalistic follow-up ensured continuous attention to these issues, pushing institutions to provide lasting solutions.
• Institutional accountability:
  Civic monitoring at Ferrara prison uncovered unplanned structural changes funded by public money, leading to reduced space for rehabilitation activities. This discovery prompted parliamentary inquiries, demonstrating the power of civic journalism to trigger institutional responses.

Challenges and opportunities for investigative reporting

While these collaborations proved impactful, journalists still face significant barriers in bringing these stories to a wider audience. While a few stories reached national outlets—such as L’Espresso—major national outlets are often reluctant to feature investigations rooted in local contexts. Most found better traction in local or thematic publications. To bridge this gap, the initiative developed a network of senior journalists who acted as editorial coaches and facilitators, leveraging their professional relationships to help bring these investigations to the right platforms. Collaborations with outlets like IRPI Media and FADA Collective also proved instrumental in reaching specialized audiences interested in social justice, transparency, and civic participation.

Patrizia Caruso from Action Aid Italy and Andrea Borruso from Ondata introduced the AwareEU project

Journalists can also frame their stories in a way that transcends the specific case, identifying patterns, trends, or implications that resonate on a national scale. This editorial reframing is not always straightforward, and demands time, experience, and strategic guidance.

The economic model of investigative journalism also poses limitations. Without external funding, many of these investigations—especially those involving fieldwork and long-term research—would not be possible. Journalists in this initiative received financial support to cover travel, interviews, photography, and production costs, which are rarely covered by the media outlets themselves. Mentorship from senior journalists played an equally vital role, offering editorial advice and helping build bridges with potential publishers. These relationships were crucial not only for refining the quality of the investigations but also for navigating the often opaque mechanisms through which freelance stories are accepted and published.

Another challenge was the extended timeline required to produce high-quality investigative work. Stories often took three to four months to complete, involving multiple iterations, unexpected data gaps, and evolving hypotheses. In some cases, journalists started with assumptions that were later contradicted by field evidence, forcing them to shift narrative direction. This ability to adapt was key to maintaining journalistic integrity, but it required a supportive and flexible working environment.

Despite these obstacles, the project demonstrated that with the right infrastructure—financial, editorial, and relational—investigative journalism rooted in civic monitoring can thrive. It also showed the value of building networks of journalists and civic actors that can sustain each other beyond the scope of individual projects.

Enhancing civic monitoring for better journalism

To maximize the potential of civic monitoring for journalism, participants at the Palermo meeting emphasized the need to move beyond one-off collaborations and toward building more systematic, long-term relationships. Rather than expecting journalists to independently discover and interpret civic data, a sustained dialogue between monitoring groups and the media would allow for a more strategic and timely use of available information.

A key suggestion was to enhance the editorial role of Monithon, not only as a data platform but as an active intermediary capable of supporting journalists in identifying the most promising stories. With over 1400 civic reports available, the abundance of information can be overwhelming. Therefore, helping journalists navigate this repository—by curating stories based on civic engagement, local impact, narrative tension, or even the willingness of monitoring teams to go public—would greatly increase the chances of those stories gaining media traction.

Participants also noted the importance of preparing civic activists to engage with journalists more effectively. This could include training on data communication, storytelling, and how to support fact-checking and sourcing. Civic monitoring groups, especially those formed by students or local associations, often collect valuable information but may lack the capacity or confidence to present it in a journalistic format. Bridging that gap would empower communities to contribute more directly to shaping public narratives around public spending.

Mutual gains and lasting impact

Ultimately, collaboration between civic monitors and investigative journalists creates a virtuous circle that benefits both sides. Journalists gain access to grounded, community-driven data that adds depth and authenticity to their investigations. Civic actors, in turn, see their work amplified and contextualized through powerful storytelling, increasing their influence and credibility.

For Monithon, these collaborations represent more than visibility—they demonstrate how citizen-generated data can trigger real institutional reactions. In the case of the Ferrara prison investigation, for example, civic monitoring uncovered plans that could reduce rehabilitation spaces, prompting a parliamentary question. Without journalistic follow-up, that insight might have remained buried in a report. The added value comes from combining civic insight with professional narrative skills to push stories into the public sphere where decisions are made.

Participants also recognized the importance of structuring this collaboration as a repeatable model, not a one-time experiment. The Palermo event highlighted how pairing civic monitoring with journalism training, mentorship, and editorial guidance can yield high-quality, impactful results. Rather than waiting for media interest to arise spontaneously, this approach actively constructs the conditions for civic stories to evolve into national conversations.

These experiences inspire future collaborations, showing how citizen-generated data combined with investigative journalism can significantly influence public discourse and policy-making. By enhancing civic narratives through powerful journalism, communities can more effectively hold public institutions accountable and ensure investments truly benefit local people.

AwareEU Resources

• Investigations and Stories
• Podcasts
• Infographics
• Video Tutorials
• Full Publication (in Italian)

Appendix: Criteria for selecting civic monitoring stories

As part of the preparatory work for the journalism training and investigations, Monithon’s team developed a classification framework to assess the potential of existing civic monitoring reports to be expanded into investigative stories. The table below summarizes the key dimensions that guided the selection process:

Priority was given to stories where project partners had contacts with local stakeholders, increasing the feasibility and depth of journalistic investigation.