## 2 Methodology
### Understanding the Initial WQMPs and Data Validation and Integration  
Figure 4 illustrates the questions raised by the IDSS in order to understand and evaluate the existing WQMP. These questions include queries on the initial incentives and stakeholders that led to the WQMP and the underlying objectives. Further questions focused on the rationale behind the choice of sampling sites and water quality parameters, sampling frequency, laboratories, probes, etc. All the answers to these questions were documented in the system. Understanding the initial WQMP is closely linked to the data validation and integration procedure. Figure 5 provides an illustration of the dashboard of the W1 WQMP, as well as the features that may be consulted to understand the WQMP and the available data sets.  
Figure 3: Outline of the Rivière du Nord WQMP (W2) and the three optimization objectives retained for this paper [1].  
Figure 4: Questions to be asked (and integrated) into the system in order to understand the design of a WQMP.  
The procedures to understand the rationale of the initial WQMPs, as well as the data validation and integration process were tested on the lake data from W1 and on the river data from W2. Also, the continuous updating of the data was tested on users from both APEL and Abrinord. The data validation and integration processes, based on six steps, are illustrated and described in Figure 6.  
All data for the W1 WQMP were batch imported from the EnkiTM prototype, an ACCESS database, built and tested previously [12]. Data included information from sampling contexts, laboratories, and probes from 2011 to 2015. Data from 2016 were integrated directly into EnkiTM during the testing phase. For the cyanobacteria monitoring program, 15 sampling sites were created and some 2000 sampling contexts and more than 100,000 probe and laboratory records were entered.  
Data from the W2 WQMP were stored in an Excel file with several sheets created in 2009 and continuously adapted and updated. This Excel file combined information on the sampling sites, field observations and the results of the laboratory analysis. However, not all information needed to complete the onboarding process to EnkiTM was available in these files to complete step 1 (system setting) (Figure 6). For instance, the sampling site justifications had to be retrieved from old paperwork related to the W2 WQMP. Also, the results from the laboratories had been transferred manually into the Excel files. Several incongruities were detected when comparing the original files from the laboratories with the Excel files serving as data storage for the WQMP.  
In addition, some of the changes in laboratories and analysis methods were not documented in these files. Therefore, we opted to integrate all sampling contexts manually by retrieving the missing information from different source files, such as probe data results and precipitation regimes. Laboratory data was then batch imported from the original Excel files of the laboratories. The origin of the data was attributed to the respective laboratories. All in all, 66 sampling stations and more than 2500 sampling contexts were created. Approximately 10,500 probe and laboratory records were batch imported and connected to the sampling contexts and sampling stations.  
Figure 5: Illustration of the dashboard of the W1 WQMP, as well as the features that may be consulted to understand the WQMP and the available data sets.