Why are indicators important for SRGBV?
SRGBV indicators can be used to: guide legislative and policy reforms; ensure adequate provision of targeted and effective services; monitor trends and progress in preventing and responding to SRGBV; and assess the impact of measures taken (Janson, 2012).
There is currently a lack of international consensus about what constitutes standard indicators to monitor and evaluate SRGBV programming. However, there are several relevant criteria that have been developed on violence against women, and more broadly for the UN and international system on what constitutes a good indicator, which have been adapted for this global guidance on SRGBV (see Annex III).
When developing indicators, it is critical to have a clear definition of SRGBV that is in line with international standards and that reflects local realities.
Individual indicators may monitor specific sub-components of SRGBV, for example, corporal punishment or sexual harassment – in each case it is important to give a clear definition of the type of violence.
|
Examples of SRGBV indicators |
|
|
Qualitative indicators |
Means of verification |
|
1. Increased use of positive discipline methods in school (by teachers, prefects and school management) • Positive class rules developed and displayed in the classroom • Teachers’ use of praise and positive reinforcement techniques during lessons • Corporal punishment eliminated • Clear discipline policy developed (and understood) at school level |
Classroom observations, interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs) |
|
2. Teachers’ increased practice of child-centred and gender-sensitive teaching methodologies |
Classroom observations, interviews, FGDs |
|
3. Parents’ and communities’ increased awareness of rights and equal value accorded to the education of boys and girls • Community identifies mechanisms and takes action to prevent SRGBV and promote a safe school environment |
Community level plans, baseline and endline (linked back to enrolment and attendance) |
|
4. Increased knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) regarding gender and GBV in the school community (teachers, students, staff, support workers) • Increased knowledge/understanding of the mechanisms for reporting and confidence to use them • Increased reporting of incidents over baseline • Timeliness of actions on reported cases • Monitoring who is doing the reporting – monitor the cases brought forward by the community |
KAP baseline and endline, impact assessment at endline, interviews, FGDs, school records, documentation of cases |
|
Quantitative indicators include: increased girls’ enrolment, attendance, retention and completion rates for affected groups; improved girls’ learning achievement. (Note: in this case the quantitative indicators focus on girls, but could be adapted for a wider range of children who are vulnerable to SRGBV – such as boys, LGBTI, children with disabilities etc.) |
|
|
Source: Leach et al (2013), p. 95, based on a meeting of Concern Worldwide in Addis Ababa, 2010 |
|