Page 36 - Special Topic Session (STS) - Volume 3

STS513 Sabrina O. R.
Table 2. Count of Proposed Indicators Classified by their Way Forward
Count of Proposed

Next Step Recommendation Indicators

Ready for Institutionalization 11
Not Ready for Institutionalization 25
No Need for Institutionalization 2
TOTAL 38

Table 2 shows the distribution of the proposed indicators depending on
their way forward. Out of the 38 indicators, only 11 of which are ready for
institutionalization. This means that these indicators are the only ones ready
to be reviewed by the PSA for institutionalization as these are the indicators
with sound conceptual and operational definitions, clear method of
computation, and available data sources. The indicators that were deemed
ready for institutionalization are indicators 2.1.1 Prevalence of
undernourishment; 2.a.2 Total official flows (official development assistance
plus other official flows) to the agriculture sector; 3.1.1 maternal mortality
ratio; 3.b.2 Total net official development assistance to medical research and
basic health sectors; 3.c.1 Health worker density and distribution; 3.3.1 HIV
Incidence rate ; 16.1.4 Ratio of policemen to total population; 16.3.1 Police
Reporting Rate;4.2.1 Proportion of children 5 years of age who are
developmentally on track in health, learning and psychological well-being, by
sex; 4.3.1 Participation rate of youth in formal and non-formal education and
training in the previous 12 months, by sex; and 16.6.2 Proportion of services
(government offices with frontline services) that the public were satisfied or
very satisfied in accessing public service. Out of these 11 proposed indicators,
the first 5 are matched with their global indicators counterparts, the next 3 are
proxy indicators, and the remaining 3 are sub indicators.
On the other hand, it can be seen that 25 proposed indicators were
deemed not yet ready for institutionalization. These 25 indicators are: 1.4.1
Proportion of population living in communities with access to basic services;
2.5.2 Proportion of local breeds classified as being at risk, not-at-risk or at
unknown level of risk extinction; 2.a.1 Agriculture orientation index for
government expenditures; 2.c.1 Indicator of food price anomalies; 4.a.1
Proportion of schools with access to: (d) adapted infrastructure and materials
for students with disabilities: (f) single-sex basic sanitation facilities, (g) basic
handwashing facilities; 4.4.1 Proportion of youth and adults with information
and communications technology (ICT) skills, by level of skill; 4.4.1 Proportion
of population with exposure to internet; 4.5.1 Parity indices (rural/urban,

25 | I S I W S C 2 0 1 9