Section

3.5
11

Indicator Module
This module will help the user understand and use indicators in
project planning and proposal writing, implementation, and
evaluation.
 THIS MODULE INCLUDES:

Contents Interactive Pages

(Direct links clickable below) (i.e. Worksheets) will help you…

 What is an Indicator?
 Practice Distinguishing between
 Why use Indicators?
Indicators
 When Should Indicators be used?
 Practice Revising Quantitative and
 Types of Indicators
Qualitative Indicators
 Indicators on different levels?
 Practice Revising Output and Outcome
 What are the features of a good
Indicators
indicator?
 Practice Creating and Developing
 Who should be involved in Creating
SMART Indicators
and Developing Indicators?

 Ways to Create and Develop

Indicators

 Things to Note when Developing and

Using Indicators

 Additional Resources

Page 2 of 27
Pre-test- Check your knowledge!

Please answer the following questions. Read each statement below. If you agree with a
statement, write A = YES. If you disagree with a statement, write B = NO. Also, explain
why you believe that statement is wrong.

__________ 1. Thoughtfully developing indicators is an optional step in the proposal

development process.

__________ 2. Indicators are only used during the proposal writing stage of a project.

__________ 3. An indicator is vital for every project cycle and useful for problem-
identification and measuring progress towards project goals and objectives.

__________ 4. It is important for the project manager and staff, stakeholders,

proposal writer, and the DME specialist to all be involved in developing indicators.

__________ 5. An example of a SMART indicator is: “Participants reporting an

improvement in their relationship”.

If you answered 3 or more incorrect, you must complete this module!

Page 3 of 27
 What is an indicator?
An indicator is used to answer the
question: ‘how do we know whether or An indicator is a factor or variable
how much we have achieved our that provides a simple and reliable
objective?” It refers to a measure used to means to reflect changes. An
demonstrate change in a situation, or the indicator enables us to perceive the
progress in, or results of, an activity, differences, improvements or
project, or program. It is a sign showing developments relating to a desired
where we are (current situation/actual change (output, objective, and goal).
results), the progress made so far (from In DM&E, the term indicator is
baseline), and the remaining distance compatible with such terms as
performance indicator, performance
towards achieving our objective (expected
measure, indicator of success, and
results). For example: indicator of change.
 # of trainings organized on
collaboration between military
personnel and civilians since program start
 # of civilians who attended the training and can cite 2 behaviour changes of the
military after the training
 % over baseline of military who can identify 3 examples of military behaviour
that is in violation of human rights by end of project

Example
“Indicator” is a general term that
can be applied in many different
fields and contexts. To name a few, A smoke detector in a room is an
in conflict settings, in development indicator that detects the presence
settings, in economy, education, of smoke particles in the room,
health, governance, environmental alerting when it reaches dangerous
protection, etc. No matter what
levels. It is an indicator of smoke
kinds of fields they are used in, all
and danger. It alerts us to a
indicators have one thing in
common; they consist of specific potential fire.
information that signals change in
the field they measure and they can
be used by project managers and A thermometer is an indicator that
directors as a basis for relevant
measures temperature. When the
decision-making and/or policy
change.
temperature goes down, the scale
on a thermometer goes down. It is
an indicator of temperature. It alerts
Top of the Document us to the change of weather.
The difference between indicators, targets and benchmarks are:

Page 4 of 27
An indicator is a measure of change or progress, e.g.:
 # of new projects in which residents and repatriated refugees collaborate since
the beginning of the project
 Increase over baseline in % of military personnel who can cite 5 appropriate attitudes of
a military person towards a civilian

A target is a clear and specific statement of desired results for a specific indicator over a
specified period of time. It is usually specified in terms of quantity or quality, target
area, target group, and time, e.g.:
 65% of high-level officials practice decision-making for common good in Morocco
by end of phase 1 of the program
 16 skilled advocates of coaching as a tool of leadership and conflict resolution in
the region at end of the third year of the project
 Reduction of severe and moderate malnutrition in Africa by 20% by 2012

A benchmark is a standard of measurement used to compare and judge the

performance of similar components, groups of people, programs, and systems. In
DM&E, a benchmark presents a reference to a standard of what is achievable, e.g.:
 The existence of ongoing dialogue groups where there were none before is a
benchmark in post conflict settings.
 In the first post-conflict election 70% more people voted than in the election
during the conflict. Future benchmark would be 90% voting in the next election.

Top of the Document

Why use indicators?

Indicators are an integral part of a DM&E system. The main functions of indicators can
be summarized as:

1. Monitoring program operations: monitoring if and how an activity, a project or a

program is performing to an agreed standard. Indicators enable program managers and
directors to assess progress towards the achievement of intended outputs, outcomes,
objectives, and goals.

2. Improving program performance and management: providing information on how an

activity, a project or a program works and how it might be improved. Indicators enable
program staff to perceive differences, improvements or developments relating to the
achievement of intended outputs, outcomes, objectives, and goals. Indicators are at the
bedrock of a DM&E system, especially in the framework of management by objectives.
In project management and implementation, most of the monitoring activities are

Page 5 of 27
conducted towards the development and measurement of the indicators. Meaningful
indicators obtained from a system of data collection, analysis, findings and
recommendations can lead to management information and thus play a key role in
making management information systems operational.

3. Enhancing accountability: providing data that allows program staff, managers and
directors to hold accountable to themselves, funders, beneficiaries and all other
stakeholders.

When should Indicators be used?

Indicators are used at several stages in the project or program cycle including
establishing baselines, monitoring, and evaluation. Information is gathered in the
baseline to set the target for the indicator. Indicators can then be used for determining
progress toward results in monitoring as well as in monitoring the context of the
conflict. E.g. peace activists often track changes in militarization in order to be able to
anticipate changes in the conflict context. If we want to know about changes in
militarization, military recruitment is one good indicator. Recruitment may signal a
number of different things: the replacement of an aging force, an increase in
soldier/officer ratios, or a more equitable regional representation within the military.

Top of the Document

Types of Indicators
Generally speaking, there are two types of indicators: quantitative indicators and
qualitative indicators

Quantitative indicators are measures of quantities or amounts, e.g.:

 A 50% increase over the baseline in the number of people who enrol their
children in ethnically mixed schools by the end of the project
 500 disputes resolved by trained mediators over 18 months
 100 new soap opera episodes produced and aired on local conflict issues

Qualitative indicators are measures of changes in attitudes, knowledge and

behaviour/skills, e.g.:
 25% increase in the level of confidence people have in their ability to circulate
safely in all areas in their community by end of project
 10% decrease in fear of violence in village D in 6 months

Page 6 of 27
Quantitative indicators are usually measures of outputs and always include a number (#,
%, $, etc.). Qualitative indicators can often include a target number, usually a %, to
indicate the percentage of change from baseline to program end in knowledge, attitude
or behaviour/skills. These are, in many cases, outcome indicators, though many projects
may also use quantitative measurement for DM&E at outcomes or impact level.

Wherever possible, indicators should be direct, meaning they describe the subject to be
measured specifically, e.g., number of radio shows, number or percent of people
listening, the percent of change from pre to post, etc. When this is not possible, an
indirect or proxy indicator may be used. Normally this is used to demonstrate the
change or results where direct measures are not feasible due to data collection
constraints or time constraints. For example, SFCG often uses general listenership
surveys to estimate the number of people who may hear an SFCG radio program, or, if
ethnicity figures are unavailable, you might use data on how many speak the different
languages spoken in a region.

Direct indicators can provide the best evidence of the condition or result they are
measuring. Interpretation of indirect indicators needs to be done in a cautious and
careful manner. However, the use of an indirect indicator can be more cost-effective
than the use of a direct one, and is better than having no evidence at all.

Both quantitative and qualitative indicators provide valuable information. Often

quantitative indicators are preferred over qualitative indicators as their numerical
precision may make interpretation of results data easier and more concrete. They tell
us what happened and how much. However, qualitative indicators can supplement
quantitative indicators by revealing more meaningful, deeper information on how
something is working or not working and why this happens. Therefore a combined
usage of the two types of indicators is always recommended in program design,
monitoring and evaluation.
Top of the Document

Indicators on Different Levels

There are different levels of indicators and their uses are different. These include
indicators for inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impact.

Input indicators reflect the resources (input) allocated to an activity, a project, program
or intervention. This is a measure of all resources including human, financial, material,
technological, and information resources, e.g.:
 Amount of funds allotted
 Number of local consultants available
 Number of radios/TVs available for distribution
 Number of days available

Page 7 of 27
  Number of trainers eligible for the program

Output indicator: Products and services produced (Immediate or short-term results)

Output indicators measure the quantity of products and services needed to meet an
objective and the efficiency of production, e.g.:
 # of people in the municipality attending facilitated events that are geared
toward strengthening understanding among conflict-affected groups that were
supported with USG assistance in the past three months
 # of coaching sessions conducted in the 10 communities by end of the project

Outcome indicator: Immediate or Intermediate results

Outcome indicators describe knowledge, behaviour, attitude and skill changes resulting
from our work. The nature of our work often makes it difficult to track these types of
changes accurately and realistically, e.g.:
 Increased # of youth participating in a youth parliament and interacting with
government parliament after participation in a SFCG program
 Increased % of citizens voting in current election as compared to previous
election after participation in an SFCG program

Impact indicator: Long-term results

Impact indicator measures the impact or the achievement of the project or program
goal. It indicates the quality and quantity of long-term results generated by
programmed outputs, e.g.:
 Building the capacity for collaboration and conflict mitigation at the
Parliamentary level in Kenya
 Reconciliation facilitated between divided ethnic/religious groups in Côte
d’Ivoire
 Reduction in community and regional tensions over territorial conflicts in Côte
d’Ivoire

The two indicator levels usually applied at SFCG are output and outcome indicators. As
with the balance between qualitative and quantitative indicators, there should also be a
balance between output and outcome indicators. Output indicators tell us
implementation is on track. Outcome indicators tell us the desired change is on track.

Top of the Document

What are the features of a good indicator?

Criteria for good indicators vary across organizations. They depend on the types of goals
and objectives and the type of project focus. However, all criteria for good indicators
share something in common. At the very least, an indicator should be relevant to what

Page 8 of 27
 is to be measured, should be clear, practical, doable, and appropriate. Indicators need
to contain certain basic information and also be able to pass tests of reliability,
feasibility, and utility in decision making.

One of the most commonly used standards to assess an indicator is SMART (Specific,
Measurable, Achievable/Attainable, Result-oriented, and Time-bound). It is also the
criteria we use at SFCG when creating indicators in proposal writing, and in monitoring
and evaluation.

Specific: measures as closely as possible the result it is intended to measure;

disaggregated data (where appropriated)
Measurable: quantitative (where possible); no ambiguity on what is being measured
Achievable/Attainable: it is technically possible to obtain data at a reasonable cost
Result-oriented: reliable; general agreement over interpretation of the results
Time-bound: data can be collected frequently enough to inform the progress and
influence the decisions

SMART Indicators Example #1

Example Indicator:
Increase the percentage of participants from the southern districts reporting an
improvement in their relationship with other groups to the point where they now enter each
other’s homes from 20% in 2005 to 70% by 2008.

 Specific:
Participants reporting improvement in their relationship with the other(s)
 Measurable:
Percentage of participants

 Achievable/Attainable:
From 20% of the participants in 2005 to 70% of the participants in 2008
 Result-Oriented:
Improved to the point where they enter each others’ homes
 Time-bound: SMART Indicators Example #2
Between 1 January 2005 and 1 January 2008

Example Indicator:
Increase the number of men and women participating in at least two inter-community activities
from 75 men and women/year in 2005 to 450 men and women/year for all ten program
communities before the end of 2007

 Specific:
The number of men and women participating in at least two intercommunity activities
Page 9 of 27
 Measurable:
Number of men and women
 Achievable/Attainable:
 Sometimes we will see some other criteria for good indicators which are very similar to
SMART. See the SPICED and the CREAM criteria illustrated below.

SPICED (Roche, 2002)

 Subjective: using informants for their insights

 Participatory: involving a project's ultimate beneficiaries,
involving local staff and other stakeholders CREAM (Schiavo-Campo, 1999)
 Interpreted and communicable: explaining locally defined
indicators to other stakeholders  Clear: precise and unambiguous
 Cross-checked and compared: comparing different  Relevant: appropriate to the
indicators and progress, and using different informants, subject at hand
methods, and researchers  Economic: available at
 Empowering: allowing groups and individuals to reflect reasonable cost
critically on their changing situation  Adequate: able to provide
sufficient basis to assess
 Diverse and disaggregated: seeking out different indicators
performance
from a range of groups, especially men and women, to  Monitorable: amenable to
assess their differences over time independent validation

Who
should be involved in Creating and Developing
Indicators?
Keep in mind that the following varies by project, context, and personnel:

Page 10 of 27
The donors: Sometimes donors will provide us with a set of indicators before a project
starts, e.g., USAID. In this case, we will need to use, add to or adapt the indicators from
the donors in project design, monitoring and evaluation. If the donors do not provide us
with indicators, it is a good idea to involve them in the process where possible.

The project manager, DME coordinator and other staff, along with relevant
stakeholders, will make decisions about the goals, objectives, and activities of the
project. Consultation of mission plans and interviews with project staff may be
necessary to select indicators. Often, this process can help reveal differences in
assumptions of varying members of staff. Everyone should be on the same page
regarding how the program will contribute to peace and development.

The proposal writer will need to clearly describe and discuss the selected indicators in
the proposal and should therefore be familiar with the underlying premises of the
project.

The DME Specialist in the DC office can be used as a resource to help the team develop
and decide on indicators.

Top of the Document

Ways to Create and Develop Indicators

There are different ways to develop indicators. Below is one suggested way using four
steps for indicator development.

1. Preparation
 Clarify goals, objectives and intended results for your project of interest;
 Articulate your theory(ies) of change as well as the types of change specified
in the objectives;
 Check what indicators have already been developed, tested, and refined in
your program and other programs with which you are in contact. You can ask
other practitioners in peacebuilding for their indicators.

2. Generation
 Brainstorm all related things or dimensions that can be counted, measured,
or sized and look for creative ways to combine some of those;
 Consult the parties or stakeholders in the conflict what they consider to be
significant signals of change;
 Break issues into smaller components. Rather than measure reconciliation,
consider its components: mercy, justice, truth, and peace. Try not to use
vague “buzz” words. Be able to describe in operational terms what,
reconciliation, mercy, etc. will look like; have a descriptive criteria. To

Page 11 of 27
 measure capacity, focus on skills, technical knowledge, process, motivation,
and opportunity. This practice also goes by the name of factor analysis where
all factors that influence the change are identified and, where possible,
weighed according to the degree of influence each factor has;
 Develop a list of possible indicators.

3. Refinement and Selection

 Modify your draft indicators to make them as specific and simple as possible.
 Come up with at least one or two indicators for each key activity or objective.
 “Select no more than 10-15 indicators per area of significant program focus”
(MENTOR).
 Select indicators that can realistically be collected with the resources
available.
 Use a mix of data sources so that indicators could be collected from different
data sources.

4. Testing Indicators
 Test your new and newly modified indicators for their utility in decision
making as early as possible, preferably during the design phase while there is
still time to make changes. This test is different from a test of the data
collection method. The idea is to determine the utility of the indicators in the
analysis and subsequent decisions. Pick hypothetical extremes using fictitious
data and consider how the different extremes will influence decisions. If
vastly different information has no influence over the decisions, the indicator
is probably not useful and should be changed. Select the best indicators for
your use.
 You should also test both the most promising indicators and those which are
also viable but not as ideal to ensure there is an alternative in the event that
the ideal indicators don’t survive the test;

You can also use the Levels of Conflict Transformation Framework. In peacebuilding and
conflict resolution settings, sometimes people follow an organizing framework proposed
by Lederach, et al. (2007) when creating and developing indicators. Lederach, et al.
comments that as social conflict can cause changes in four dimensions: the personal, the
relational, the structural and the cultural, peacebuilding and conflict resolution work
should also try to act at each of these levels and achieve results at all four levels (as
illustrated by the diagram below).

Page 12 of 27
The organizing
framework
proposed by
Lederach, et al. is
certainly a choice
we may adopt in
our work to guide
our questions and
design for
indicators. Actually
the SFCG Nepal
Office has been
using this model in
their proposal
writing and
monitoring system.
The information
below is provided by the SFCG Nepal Office explaining the use of the Lederach, et al.
framework and how their office managed to use the Lederach, et al., framework to plan
their work. To know more about the Lederach, et al. framework, the Further Research
section at the end of the module.

The Four Levels Conflict Questions to Think about

of Transformation in Developing Indicators
Conflict Objectives for each for each Level
Transformation Level
The Personal Enhance personal  What has changed?
Level capacities, attitudes  How do we know if participants have
and behaviours developed skills and positive attitudes
toward cooperation?
 What has changed?
 How do we know if they are applying our
methods to foster peace?
The Relational Create relationships  What has changed?
Level among different  How do we know whether we are
groups in society building relationships across dividing
lines?
 What has changed? How do we know if
our beneficiaries are working together to
foster peace and reconciliation?
The Structural Create opportunities  What has changed?
Level and space for  How do we know whether we are
potential facilitators creating spaces for all cross-sectors of
society?

Page 13 of 27
  What has changed?
 How do we know whether we are
working with key sectors of society?
The Cultural Overcome  What has changed?
Level stereotypes and  How do we know whether we are
cultural constraints working to overcome stereotypes which
that led to conflict led to conflict?
 What has changed?
 How do we know whether we are dealing
with cultural issues in a sustainable
manner?

Below are some examples of indicators the SFCG Nepal Office have created and
developed in their work using the Lederach, et al. framework.

Nepal Indicators Example

Personal Objective: To increase ownership and local participation in the transition to peace
and democracy

Indicators:
 Increase the % of people trained who demonstrate knowledge in peacebuilding
 Increase the % of people trained who incorporate our methods in their activities
 The # of peacebuilding initiatives that result from our programs

Relational Objective: To strengthen inter-communal relations across ethnic, caste, and

geographical lines.
Top of the Document
(Continued on next page)

Nepal Indicators Example (continued)

Relational Indicators:
 Increase the % of citizens in target VDCs who report cooperation from across
dividing lines
 The # of initiatives resulting from our programs led by people from across dividing
lines
 The # of projects initiated by participants which aim to break down dividing lines
Page 14 of 27

Relational Objective: To involve multiple stakeholders, particularly those who have

been traditionally marginalized, in democratic processes at local and national levels
There are different ways to create and develop indicators, and the Lederach, et al.
framework is one of the examples that we can follow to guide our thoughts in indicator
development. One thing is certain. That is, no matter what kind of framework we choose
to follow or what steps we choose to adopt, we must try our best to develop SMART
indicators. Indicators that are not SMART will be of little use for problem-identification
and measuring progress towards our project goals and objectives.
Top of the Document

Things to Note When Developing and using

Indicators
 Developing good indicators requires in-depth conflict analysis and a good
understanding of the context. Good indicators need to be applicable to the local
context. There are no universally good choices of indicators. Indicators suitable for
one project might not suit the same or a similar project in a different setting. When
we use existing indicators for a new project or a different setting, careful

Page 15 of 27
 consideration should be given as to whether and how the indicators could be
adapted to suit the objectives of the new project or population in the new context.
 For each outcome indicator, a baseline is necessary. This is crucial in measuring
progress toward an intermediate result or objective. Depending on the type of
indicator being measured, the baseline data can be a point-in-time observation, a
cumulative or an average value over a period of time. For output indicators we do
not compare with a baseline, but with our benchmarks or targets.
 Indicators must be chosen and used in a way that relates very specifically to the
objectives of the project or program.
 When selecting indicators, be sure to select at least one or two for each objective.
 Do not rely on a single indicator to measure the significant effects of a project
because, if the data for that one indicator became unavailable, it would be difficult
to document the effects. Thus it is important to try to select a diversity of indicators
in DM&E. However, you probably need no more than two or three indicators for
each outcome.
 It can be cost-effective and time-effective to build on existing indicators when
developing new indicators. However, they must be adapted to fit, or supplemented
with others that are more locally relevant.
 Sometimes an indicator applied to an entire population will hide the fact that there
are variances and discrepancies among different groups in that population. Thus it
may be important to collect information on an indicator separately for each group.
This is called “data disaggregation.” Typically, information is collected in ways that
reflect the components most relevant to the project such as gender, identity,
ethnicity, age, or area of origin. e.g., if we are considering youth involvement in
politics, an increase in the number of youth joining political parties may conceal the
fact that young women are not becoming more involved.
 Indicators can tell us that a change we are interested in is occurring, but they
cannot explain why or how that change occurs. Determining why change happens
requires additional research and analysis. This is because the activities a project
implemented may be the sole contribution to the change happening, or to some
degree, or not at all. There could be other factors at work. Therefore, a more
credible approach is to identify and acknowledge all the major contributing factors
and illustrate how the program contributed along with the other factors. This implies
some analysis and understanding of the many forces bearing on the issues under
consideration.

Top of the Document

Page 16 of 27
 Summary

 Indicators are a means to measure change. They are the raw

materials for much of monitoring and evaluation. Yet indicators
are approximations, based largely on assumptions: the smaller
or more accurate the assumption, the more reliable the
indicator.
 Indicators need to be clear, practical, doable, appropriate,
relevant, and reliable.
 It is important to involve and engage all stakeholders in the
design and implementation of indicators for their insights and
inputs.
 A mix of qualitative and quantitative indicators usually reveals
nuances and greater insight into what is happening.
 Test or pilot indicators before staring to use them in monitoring
and evaluation. If some indicators are found not working well
in piloting, they must be dropped or modified.
Good indicators are context specific. Indicators that are useful

Practice Exercises
Answers are provided below, but try getting as far as you can in the
examples before looking at the answers!

Page 17 of 27
 Exercise 1:
Distinguishing between Indicators

The table below lists in its left column some indicators used in SFCG proposals. Go
through these indicators. Think what types or levels of indicators they are in the four
choices given below (Quantitative Indicators, Qualitative Indicators, Output Indicators,
and Outcome Indicators). Then put a “√” in the corresponding column you choose in the
table. Note that you may need to put more than one “√”in the corresponding columns
for each indicator. When you are finished, click here or scroll down to the next page to
see the answer sheet.

Table 1
Indicators Quantitative Qualitative Output Outcome
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
# of leadership coaching training sessions
provided for decision makers in Kenya in
2008
Increase over baseline in 15% of survey
respondents in targeted areas who can
name candidates from special populations
(e.g. a woman, person with disabilities, or
from other special population) within one
month of elections
Media outlets surveyed that have
increased their elections-related
programming by two or more
programs/articles each week between
beginning of project and end of election
period
# of public fora/educational events to
teach public about peace process
supported by USG assistance from June
2006 to December 2007
Reduced % of reported acts of violence
over baseline per month as reported to
community police stations
Increase in 12% of trained youth leaders
who can name three conflict resolution
strategies, basic rights according to the
UN Declaration on Human Rights, and
citizen roles in civil society by EOP over
baseline

Page 18 of 27
 Practice Exercise 1 – Answer 1

Here is the answer sheet for Table 1. Compare it with your own answer sheet to see
how many correct choices you made. For the wrong choices you made, can you
understand now why the indicator(s) is/are not the type or level you chose?

Answer Sheet for Table 1

Indicators Quantitative Qualitative Output Outcome
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
# of leadership coaching training sessions √ √
provided for decision makers in Kenya in
2008
Increase over baseline in 15% of survey
respondents in targeted areas who can
name candidates from special √ √
populations (e.g. a woman, person with
disabilities, or from other special
population) within one month of
elections
Media outlets surveyed that have
increased their elections-related
programming by two or more √ √
programs/articles each week between
beginning of project and end of election
period
# of public fora/educational events to
teach public about peace process √ √
supported by USG assistance from June
2006 to December 2007
Reduced % of reported acts of violence
over baseline per month as reported to √ √
community police stations
Increase % of trained youth leaders who
can name three conflict resolution
strategies, basic rights according to the √ √
UN Declaration on Human Rights, and
citizen roles in civil society by EOP over
baseline

Page 19 of 27
Practice Exercises
Exercise 2:
Revising Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators

Below you will see two tables (Table 2 and Table 3). Each table uses the same three
project objectives. You will see three draft quantitative indicators in Table 2 and four
qualitative indicators in Table 3 corresponding to the objectives. None of these
indicators are SMART. Considering the objectives, can you revise these indicators to
make them SMART? Write your answers in the blank column in each table below. When
you are finished, click here or scroll down to the next page to see suggested revision for
Table 2 and Table 3 by SFCG.

Table 2
Draft Your Revised
Objectives Quantitative Quantitative
Indicators Indicators
Increase in solidarity More former enemies to
between 450 former join mixed-community
enemies in five organizations
municipalities in
Chalatenango over three
years
Enhance capacity of Number of disputes
regional and local
government institutions and
communities to monitor,
report, and manage conflict
in two years in three
southern provinces
Increase the political More women to be elected
empowerment of women in parliamentarians
the province over two years

Table 3

Page 20 of 27
 Draft Your Revised
Objectives Qualitative Qualitative
Indicators Indicators
Increase in solidarity More former enemies
between 450 former identifying themselves as
enemies in five members of the larger
municipalities in community rather than
Chalatenango over three belonging to one group or
years faction
Enhance capacity of Authorities to believe more
regional and local often that monitoring
government institutions and reports lead to a timely
communities to monitor, intervention and the
report, and manage conflict prevention of escalation
in two years in three
southern provinces
Increase the political More women
empowerment of women in parliamentarians believing
the province over two years that their voices are making
a difference in decision
-making

Elected women feel less

that they are marginalized
in decision-making

Page 21 of 27
Practice Exercises - Answer 2

Below is a suggested revision for the draft quantitative and qualitative indicators.
Compare it with your own revision and think how you may be able to write SMART
quantitative and qualitative indicators of your own next time. Note that there is not one
answer to each revision. Different people might come up with different ways for
revision. It depends on goals and objectives of the project and the context where the
project is implemented. All indicators need to be SMART and they need to suit the
objective, population, condition and context of the project they are developed for.

Suggested Revision for Table 2

Objectives Draft SMART
Quantitative Quantitative
Indicators Indicators
Increase solidarity between More former enemies to % of the former
450 former enemies in five join mixed-community enemies in five
municipalities in organizations municipalities
Chalatenango over three in Chalatenango who have
years joined mixed-community
organizations at the end of
year one

Enhance capacity of Number of disputes # of disputes reported at

regional and local each level during the course
government institutions and of the project
communities to monitor,
report, and manage conflict
in two years in three
Southern provinces.
Increase the political More women to be elected 50 women elected
empowerment of women in parliamentarians parliamentarians in the next
the province over two years election

Suggested Revision for Table 3

Page 22 of 27
 Objectives Draft SMART
Qualitative Qualitative
Indicators Indicators
Increase solidarity between More former enemies % of former enemies who,
450 former enemies in five identifying themselves as at the end of year one,
municipalities in members of the larger routinely identify
Chalatenango over three community rather than themselves as members of
years belonging to one group or the larger community
faction rather than belonging to one
group or faction
Enhance capacity of Authorities to believe more # of instances at each
regional and local often that monitoring level where authorities
government institutions and reports lead to a timely believe that monitoring
communities to monitor, intervention and the reports lead to a timely
report, and manage conflict prevention of escalation intervention and the
in two years in three prevention of escalation
Southern provinces. over the course of the
project
Increase the political More women 10% increase in women
empowerment of women in parliamentarians believing parliamentarians’ belief that
the province over two years that their voices are making their voices are making a
a difference in decision difference in decision
-making -making

15% decrease in elected

Elected women feel less women’s perception that
that they are marginalized they are marginalized in
in decision-making decision-making

Top of the Document

Practice Exercises
Page 23 of 27
Exercise 2:
Revising Output and Outcome Indicators

Below you will see two tables (Table 4 and Table 5). Each table uses the same two
project objectives. You will see two draft output indicators in Table 4 and two outcome
indicators in Table 5 corresponding to the objectives. None of these indicators are
SMART. Considering their objectives, can you revise these indicators to make them
SMART? Write your answers in the blank column in each table below. When you are
finished, click here or scroll down to the next page to see suggested revision for Table 4
and Table 5 by SFCG.

Table 4
Objectives Draft Your Revised
Output Indicators Output Indicators
Increase trust between the Training events
two communities.
Increase inter-community Public policy debates
collaboration on public or forums
policy issues that address
common interests.

Table 5
Objectives Draft Your Revised
Outcome Indicators Outcome Indicators
Increase trust between the More mobility among
two communities. residents living on both sides
within the areas
Increase inter-community More public policy debates
collaboration on public or forums among the three
policy issues that address communities
common interests.

Practice Exercise 3– Answer 1

Page 24 of 27
Below are suggested revisions for the draft output and outcome indicators. Compare it
with your own revision and think how you may be able to write SMART output and
outcome indicators of your own next time. Note that there is not one answer to each
revision. Different people might come up with different ways for revision. It depends on
goals and objectives of the project and the context where the project is implemented.
All indicators need to be SMART and they need to suit the objective, population,
condition and context of the project they are developed for.

Suggested Revision for Table 4

Objectives Draft SMART
Output Indicators Output Indicators
Increase trust between the Training events # of men, women, and
two communities. children in the two
communities participating
in the SFCG trust building
training events in the year
Increase inter-community Public policy debates # of public policy debates
collaboration on public or forums or forums where all three
policy issues that address communities contribute
common interests. interest-based solutions on
natural resource
management disputes by the
end of 2009

Suggested Revision for Table 5

Objectives Draft SMART
Outcome Indicators Outcome Indicators
Increase trust between the More mobility among 50% of men, women, and
two communities. residents living on both sides children from each side
within the areas increase their mobility
within the areas controlled
by the other side by at least
one square kilometre per
year
Increase inter-community More public policy debates All three communities
collaboration on public or forums among the three contribute interest-based
policy issues that address communities solutions on natural
common interests. resource management
disputes by the end of 2009
through expansion from
twice/year to six times/year
public policy debate
forums.

Page 25 of 27
 Top of the Document

Additional Resources
The following resources are particularly good for the development of
goals and objectives.

Anne J. Atkinson and Carolyne Ashton, Planning for Results: The Safe and Drug-Free
Schools and Community Program Planning and Evaluation Handbook (Richmond:

Page 26 of 27
 Virginia Department of Education, 2002), accessed 24 September 2010,
[Link]

Cheyanne Church and Mark M. Rogers, Designing for Results: Integrating Monitoring
and Evaluation in Conflict Transformation Programs Part 1 (Washington DC:
Search for Common Ground, 2006), accessed 24 September 2010,
[Link]

Department for International Development, Log Frame Guidelines (London: DFID, 2005)

European Commission, Aid Delivery Methods Vol. 1: Project Cycle Management

Guidelines, Part 2 Chapter 5 (Brussells: EuropeAid Cooperation Office, 2004).

J.P. Lederach, Neufeldt, R., Culbertson, H. Reflective Peacebuilding: A Planning,

Monitoring, and Learning Tool Kit. (Baltimore: Catholic Relief Services, 2007),
accessed August 25, 2011,
[Link]

MENTOR (Monitoring and Evaluation Network of Training Online Resources), accessed

August 25, 2011,
[Link]
_and_e_concepts/what_is_monitoring_and_evaluation
Salvatore Schiavo-Campo. “’Performance’ in the Public Sector,” p. 85. (World Bank
Manual - Building a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System, 1999) ,
accessed August 25, 2011,
[Link]
[Link]
8A14-1E1833901BFE_BBA5D8DC-5C40-4F9C-A6A4-0268098134D7_1.htm

UNICEF Monitoring & Evaluation Training Package. Indicators: definitions and

distinctions. UNICEF, accessed August 25, 2011,
[Link]
1_indicators.doc

Following are various models that complement the

ABCDE and SMART models in developing indicators:

SPICED
(Roche, 2002, [Link]
47D5-8A14-1E1833901BFE_BBA5D8DC-5C40-4F9C-A6A4-0268098134D7_1.htm
[accessed 15 September 2010])

Page 27 of 27