Loading…
Review of indicators for measuring OfD Program goals in Lebanon
There is an increased focus on measuring the effect of Norwegian funded development programs. Using Result Based Management (RBM) and developing a good goal hierarchy, with a well specified baseline description and indicators that can capture the change over time, are important aspects of better mea...
Saved in:
Published in: | Notater/Documents 2015 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Online Access: | Request full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | There is an increased focus on measuring the effect of Norwegian funded development programs.
Using Result Based Management (RBM) and developing a good goal hierarchy, with a well specified
baseline description and indicators that can capture the change over time, are important aspects of
better measurement.
Statistics Norway (SN) has experience in working with indicators and was asked by the Norwegian
Oil for Development Secretariat to evaluate a set of indicators developed for a three-year cooperation
project with Lebanon.
The impact level indicators proposed in the Program Document for Lebanon were primarily
international indicators that are well defined and documented. These indicators show how Lebanon is
doing in general and are helpful as background information for the project. Since Lebanon will not
have extensive petroleum activity that has a major impact on the economy during this Program period
(2015-2017), it is not likely that the Program will have much influence on these impact indicators.
However, since the goals at the impact level are very general, the indicators will provide some
indication about how well one is doing related to the goal. More specific indicators could be
developed, but given the time and financial constraints, the best option is to simply use the present set
of impact indicators – with a few minor changes and additions.
On outcome level, the originally proposed indicators were mainly too ambitious for what can be
accomplished in the 3-year program period. Some were also difficult to measure. SN has, therefore,
proposed a new set of indicators based on the present level of knowledge. The aim has been to cover
the Program broadly and include both quantitative and qualitative indicators that together measure the
success of the Program. However, as SN does not have detailed knowledge of the different aspects or
activities, and partners have not yet established a baseline on all areas, adjustments will be needed. It
will be up to Program partners to establish a final set of indicators based on these proposals. They also
need to agree on the baseline description and set goals for each of the indicators they decide to use. |
---|