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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.