03 · Topic cluster

Indicator design and measurement

Indicator types and levels, quality criteria, reference sheets, proxy and composite measures, and baselines, targets and disaggregation.

Most reporting problems are definition problems that surfaced late. An indicator that seemed obvious at design turns out to mean three different things to three field teams, and by then a year of data has been collected against all three readings.

The work in this section is mostly upfront and unglamorous: deciding what precisely is being counted, at what level of the results chain, from which source, how often, by whom, and disaggregated how. Done properly it produces a definition a new officer can pick up and apply identically in year three. Done poorly it produces numbers that cannot be defended when a funder asks how they were derived — and the answer arrives too late to fix.

  1. 01 · Updated 18 August 2026

    Indicator types and levels

    Input, output, outcome and impact indicators; quantitative vs qualitative; direct vs proxy; cumulative vs milestone — with precise definitions.

  2. 02 · Updated 18 August 2026

    Indicator quality criteria: SMART, CREAM, SPICED

    The competing quality tests for indicators — SMART, CREAM, SPICED — what each catches, what each misses, and how to run a structured indicator review.

  3. 03 · Updated 18 August 2026

    Performance indicator reference sheets (PIRS)

    The PIRS is the contract behind every indicator: definition, unit, disaggregation, data source, method, frequency, known limitations. Template walkthrough.

  4. 04 · Updated 18 August 2026

    Proxy indicators and composite indices

    Measuring the unmeasurable: defensible proxy indicators, and composite indices — normalisation, weighting, aggregation — per the OECD/JRC handbook.

  5. 05 · Updated 18 August 2026

    Baselines, targets and disaggregation

    Setting baselines that exist, targets that mean something, and disaggregation that reveals who is left out — with target-setting methods compared.