Difference between revisions of "Indicators"
From IMSMA Wiki
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This page summarises an initial, internal brainstorming on indicators. | This page summarises an initial, internal brainstorming on indicators. | ||
| + | == Principles for the development of indicators == | ||
| + | === From a presentation from DDG: === | ||
| + | * '''Valid''' - Does the indicator directly represent the change it is intended to measure? Is the change within the scope of the project? | ||
| + | * '''Objective''' - Is the definition precise, simple and unambiguous about what is to be measured? | ||
| + | * '''Reliable''' - Is the data needed to measure the indicator consistent or comparable over time? | ||
| + | * '''Practical''' - Can data be collected easily, on a timely basis and at reasonable costs? | ||
| + | * '''Useful''' - Will the indicator data be useful for programme decision-making and learning? | ||
| + | * '''Owned''' - Do the local communities and programme management agree that this indicator makes sense? | ||
| + | === Other approaches? === | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Categories of indicators == | ||
| + | This is just to have different sets of indicators, for different levels/purposes/areas... | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Output-level indicators | ||
| + | * Outcome-level indicators | ||
| + | * Performance indicators | ||
| + | * Impact-level indicators? | ||
| + | * Activity-level indicators? | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Collection of indicators == | ||
| + | This is an initial collection of indicators encountered so far in the mine action context. '''It is not yet an assessment regarding their applicability/usefulness/relevance!''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Indicators mentioned in the Copenhagen initiative output document: === | ||
| + | |||
| + | {| class="wikitable" | ||
| + | ! Outcomes | ||
| + | ! Indicators | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | '''Physical and Psychological Safety''' | ||
| + | * Reduced number of mine/ERW related accidents/incidents reported in area of operation | ||
| + | * Reduced at-risk behaviours of target population at high risk of a mine/ERW accident | ||
| + | * Increased feeling of safety among beneficiaries | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | * Number of mine/ERW accidents/incidents | ||
| + | * Number of beneficiaries at risk of a mine/ERW related death or injury | ||
| + | * Number of reported instances of unsafe behaviour | ||
| + | * Level of awareness about mines/ERW in at-risk communities | ||
| + | * Level of concern about mines/ERW on the part of the target population | ||
| + | * Level of confidence in use of released land by target population | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | '''Land Use and Livelihoods''' | ||
| + | * Released land contributing to improved livelihoods | ||
| + | * Safe access to previously contaminated land | ||
| + | * Improved productive use of released land | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | * Proportion of released land put into productive use | ||
| + | * Number of people directly benefitting from use of released land | ||
| + | * Numbers of people accessing previously blocked resources and infrastructure | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | | '''National Mine Action Ownership''' | ||
| + | * Improved national ability to oversee, manage and implement mine action activities | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | * Realistic estimation of mine and ERW problem | ||
| + | * Proportion of mine action activities driven by national strategy | ||
| + | * Level of national implementation capacity | ||
| + | * Level of compliance of database and information management system with national and international standards | ||
| + | * Proportion of mine action budget funded by national contribution | ||
| + | * Percentage of national staff in management and operational advisory positions | ||
| + | |} | ||
[[Category:NoPublic]] | [[Category:NoPublic]] | ||
Revision as of 13:40, 13 May 2014
This page summarises an initial, internal brainstorming on indicators.
Contents
Principles for the development of indicators
From a presentation from DDG:
- Valid - Does the indicator directly represent the change it is intended to measure? Is the change within the scope of the project?
- Objective - Is the definition precise, simple and unambiguous about what is to be measured?
- Reliable - Is the data needed to measure the indicator consistent or comparable over time?
- Practical - Can data be collected easily, on a timely basis and at reasonable costs?
- Useful - Will the indicator data be useful for programme decision-making and learning?
- Owned - Do the local communities and programme management agree that this indicator makes sense?
Other approaches?
Categories of indicators
This is just to have different sets of indicators, for different levels/purposes/areas...
- Output-level indicators
- Outcome-level indicators
- Performance indicators
- Impact-level indicators?
- Activity-level indicators?
Collection of indicators
This is an initial collection of indicators encountered so far in the mine action context. It is not yet an assessment regarding their applicability/usefulness/relevance!
Indicators mentioned in the Copenhagen initiative output document:
| Outcomes | Indicators |
|---|---|
Physical and Psychological Safety
|
|
Land Use and Livelihoods
|
|
National Mine Action Ownership
|
|
