Experiences in developing Global Indicators

1. Experiences in developing Global Indicators Statistics & Monitoring Section/DPS October 2013

2. Outline Positioning global indicators Range of approaches taken for indicator development Useful common elements Balancing Rigor and Usability

3. Indicators in need of a “global standard” Global Audience • Linked to global goals/targets • MDGs, post MDG agenda, etc., • Need to monitor globally (for >80 countries periodically for global reporting) • Need to harmonize data on the topic (for select audience/global audience - at least)

4. Indicators in need of a “global standard” Relevant Programmatically • Potential for major impact on global advocacy/policy • Evidence shows clear link with outcomes (e.g. hand-washing→diarr/pnuemonia→ death) • Allows partners to speak with one voice - if have standard data can push for action at global and national level

5. Indicators in need of a “global standard” Applicability for Global Monitoring Need to have a global standard Concepts are similar enough across cultures and regions (or can be made to be) Methods to collect data related to the concepts involved are suitable for large HH surveys or other means of gathering global data in country

6. Range of approaches TAG within Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group (Malaria, Child Protection) Stand alone Special Task Force/ TAG (IYCF led by WHO and Handwashing led by UNICEF) Special Task Force/ TAG within larger Programme group (Maternal health)

7. Useful Common Elements • Types of agencies/experts involved should include: • Normative: e.g. WHO, FAO, UNESCO, etc., • Technical experts from: academia, research institutes, UN, donor agencies, etc • Measurement Experts: e.g. DHS, MICS, academia • Endorsed document with agency logos • Extensive (e.g. Definition and Measurement manuals for IYCF) • Simple (2 pager for handwashing) • Other – peer reviewed (IYCF)

8. Balancing Rigor and Usability Global monitoring ≠ research Explain limitations clearly to pre-empt criticism (IYCF lists bullets under definitions) Working with normative groups as well as technical and measurement experts is key

9. Balancing Rigor and Usability • Limitations in IYCF indicator document • EBF – perception it overestimates • MDD – populations with more non-BF kids may do better • MDD – does not reflect what it is meant to represent well – does not include iron • Minimum Meal Freq – question is not clear to many • Clear explanations of what not to do for HW • Why not to measure attitudes or direct practices

10. Summary suggestions • Set up an interagency TAG: • Purpose: to provide input to and endorse the indicators • Composition of TAG: • Agencies already involved • Measurement experts from large HH surveys (MICS and DHS) • other agencies – UN, technical /donor (e.g. EU, USAID, etc.) • Develop a Technical Global Indicator Document • Similar to WHO IYCF indicator document – with logo endorsement by all relevant agencies • Highlighting Limitations (pre-empt criticism – helps to explain the balance between usability and rigor ) • Include justification for these indicators (as per slides 3-5 in ppt above)