Example Indicator Reference Sheet

Indicator Reference Sheet
Objective: Decreased acceptance of violence

Indicator: Proportion of people who say that wife beating is an acceptable way for husbands to discipline their wives.
Date Established: When did the relevant parties agree on the reporting of this indicator?
Date Last Reviewed: When did the relevant parties last review/discuss this indicator?
a. Description
Precise Definition(s): Proportion of people who consider wife beating an acceptable way for a husband to discipline his
wife for any reason, at a specified period of time.
Unit of Measure: Percentage
Method of Calculation:
Numerator: Number of respondents in a community who respond “yes” to any of the following questions related to what
justifies wife beating by husbands, as listed below.
Ask: Sometimes a husband is annoyed or angered by things that his wife does. In your opinion, is a husband justified in
hitting or beating his wife:
 If she is unfaithful to him?
 If she disobeys her husband?
 If she argues with him?
 If she refuses to have sex with him?
 If she does not do the housework adequately?
Denominator: Total number of people surveyed in the community
Disaggregated by: Age, sex of respondent, region, number of reasons stated

Justification/Management Utility: This outcome indicator measures the level of acceptability of wife beating in an area
region, country, community) for any reason, at the point in time it is measured. A high proportion would indicate that
most people in the targeted population feel that wife beating is acceptable under certain conditions. The intervention takes
place at the community-level and tracking the measurement of this indicator over time has value in evaluating the
program. While a direct causal relationship cannot be established, a decrease in the proportion of men who tolerate wife
beating in a community may indicate that the community-based awareness-raising activities to change gender norms are
having a positive effect on norms and attitudes at the community level.
b. Plan for Data Collection
Data Collection Method: List the source(s) of the raw data, the levels of collection (is a third party aggregating data or
calculating some intermediate indicators that may affect your indicator values?), and describe the steps involved in the
collection of any/all information needed to construct the indicator’s value for a given reporting period. Too much detail is
better than too little detail here.
Data Source(s): As specifically as possible, identify the documents, databases, organization, and or individuals that/who will
provide raw information or final figures that will be reported through this indicator.
Timing / Frequency of Data Collection: Normally, this should be reported here in terms of the timing or frequency of
indicator calculation. If data are collected every month but the indicator will be calculate/reported (i.e., collected by USAID)
only annually, the frequency listed here should be annually.
Estimated Cost of Collection: Unless this is a special survey or other new M&E activity outside of current or ongoing
plans, it will often be appropriate to note here that the cost will fall within the contract budget, or other similar language.
This section helps USAID keep tract of new budget items or any not previously included in standard or routing obligations.
Responsible Organization/Individual(s): With as much clarity as possible, identify the person and position within each
relevant organization that will have responsibility either for providing relevant data or for otherwise contributing to indicator
calculation. In most cases, there will be at least one USAID person and position identified here AND at least one
implementing partner person and position.
Location of Data Storage: In cases where raw data and calculated indicators will be stored by separate organizations, it is a
good idea to note each location where portions of the information that would be necessary to reconstruct the indicator value
will be stored.
c. Plan for Data Analysis, Reporting, and Review (schedule, methodology, responsibility)
Data Analysis: Calculation of the percentage from raw data sources and comparison with baseline and targets.
Presentation of Data: Most often, indicator values will be presented in tables. Graphic presentation may be more
appropriate for some indicators. Qualitative indicators may require more narrative explication.
Review of Data: Most often, indicator values will be reviewed annually, or less frequently for less frequently
calculated/reported indicators.
Reporting of Data: Annual report to stakeholders
d. Data Quality Issues
Initial Data Quality Assessment: Validity concerns: Given what you know at this point in time, how do you feel about the
potential for problems with the quality of data that you will eventually collect and use to calculate this indicator? Do you
think your data validly measure the result targeted by this indicator? Do you think your measurements are valid metrics for
the (conceptual) result you are trying to track here? Do you expect institutional or other challenges to arise that may affect the
degree of measurement error or other systematic errors in your data set?
Known Data Limitations and Significance (if any): Reliability concerns: Even if your indicator is valid, are your data
reliable? Do you foresee any gaps or inconsistencies in the data that might affect the soundness of the indicator’s calculated
value, or your ability to interpret/understand the meaning of the indicator? If limitations arise, do you judge them likely to be
highly significant, trivial/unimportant, or somewhere in-between?
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations: Think of all of the things that could go wrong with your
planned indicator when you start trying to gather information about real results of your program activities. How will you try
to mitigate or correct for any gaps or mismeasurement that may be due to difficulties with the data as noted in the previous
two sections?
e. 1 Performance Data Table
Key to Table: If items are disaggregated or if subsets are provided in parentheses or any other key to understanding the table
at a glance is required, explanatory information should be provided here.
Rationale for Selection of Baselines and Targets: How exactly have you determined your baseline for your indicator
value(s)? If no exact baseline was available, what information did you use for a proxy measure and how did you adjust or
otherwise interpret the data in order to arrive at what you consider to be a reasonable approximation of a baseline?
How exactly have you determined a target (or targets) for your indicator values? If you have extrapolated form existing
partial data or estimated based on data from another geographical area, explain your reasoning.
TARGET/PLANNED ACTUAL COMMENTS
2001 (Baseline)
2002
2003
2004
2005
Comments
After calculation of indicator values for one or more periods, note here any adjustments you may have had to make.
Adjustments may be needed, for example, according to information provided in any of the sections above (e.g., data that were
expected to be available turned out not to be available for certain disaggregations, for example; data whose quality was
already suspect was in the end judged to be of insufficient validity or reliability; data collection that depended on cooperating
government or NGO entities did not occur or was incomplete). In addition, further (unanticipated) issues may have arisen in
defining, collecting, calculating, or otherwise arriving at sound and transparently interpretable indicator values. Any such
additional information that would be helpful for people interpreting the meaning or significance of the indicator values should
be discussed here.

Example Indicator Reference Sheet

Uploaded by

Example Indicator Reference Sheet

Uploaded by

Indicator Reference Sheet

Objective: Decreased acceptance of violence

Denominator: Total number of people surveyed in the community

Disaggregated by: Age, sex of respondent, region, number of reasons stated

You might also like