List of Save the Children’s Global Indicators

(Contact the point people list for further information)

Global Initiative Global Indicator
1. Costed National Plans are in place that address Maternal, Newborn and Child
EVERY ONE mortality (this can include plans to resource a minimum package of direct
interventions, across the 0-5 age group and pregnant and breastfeeding mothers, for
Contact example)
2. Agreed strategy, commitment, policy or bill to address malnutrition equitably (this
Ben Hewitt can include National stunting targets or signing up to the SUN Initiative, for
example)
3. Amount of government resources allocated and spent on MNCH or primary health
Ben.Hewitt@savethechildren.org
care (in line with the Abuja target of 15% of total government expenditure on
health)
4. Agreed strategy, commitment, policy or bill to strengthen Human Resources for
Health (this can include for the training of Health Workers, for example)

Health and Nutrition
(HIV/AIDS is part of the H&N GI)
Contact
Health and Nutrition Global Initiative M&E
Help Desk
HealthandNutrition.ME@savethechildren.org
1. Health workers: # of health care workers who complete pre-service or in-service
training in defined list of priority child health and nutrition topics using
standardized curricula.
2. Curative health: # of cases of malaria, pneumonia, acute malnutrition and diarrhoea
among children under five treated through Save the Children supported activities or
facilities
3. Preventative health: # of children under 5 years accessing a high-impact preventive
intervention through Save the Children supported activities or facilities (either
skilled-birth attendance and/or DPT3 / Penta-3 immunisation).
4. Social transfers: # of households receiving a social transfer product (food, NFI,
cash, voucher) designed to protect, restore, or grow the household asset base
through Save the Children supported activities.
5. Prevention 1 (Mandatory) : Number and % of young people at higher risk of HIV
reached by Save the Children supported prevention programmes who show care
seeking behaviour by utilising key preventive services in those same settings
6. Prevention 2 (Optional): % of targeted children in SC project area (program
participants) who can correctly identify ways of preventing the transmission of HIV
 and who reject major misconceptions about HIV transmission

1. Quality learning environment: % of Save the Children Basic Education /Early

Education Childhood Care and Development schools/learning sites supported by SC that
achieve 4 guiding principles to quality learning. These guiding principles state that
Contact: SC supported learning environments: meet the emotional and psychological needs
Nitika Tolani-Brown, of learners; are protective of children’s physical wellbeing; encourage and support
active engagement for learners, child-centered teaching, and improved learning
Nitika.Tolani- outcomes of all learners; and actively involve parents and local communities in
Brown@savechildren.org planning, decision-making and action to improve education
2. Learning outcome: % of Basic Education students in a representative sample
schools/sites supported by SC, that achieve mastery of literacy in the language of
instruction (P)

Child Protection
1. Utilisation of child protection services: % of children and caregivers in a 12-month period
Contact
who have used prevention or response interventions delivered or supported by Save the
Children
Child Protection Initiative Helpdesk
2. Quality of services: % of prevention and response interventions supported by Save the
Cpi.me@rb.se
Children which meet quality standards
3. Child Protection Legislation and Policy Change: # of countries where 1 or more policy or
Child Protection Initiative M&E Advisor
legislative changes to improve children’s protection rights in line with the CPI priority
Meri Ghorkhmazyan
areas has taken place in the last 12 months with the support of Save the Children
Merigh@rb.se
4. OVC: % of OVC receiving services that address priority needs

Child Rights and Governance 1. Supplementary reporting:% of countries in which child-informed supplementary
reports are being prepared or have been submitted by civil society partners and
Contact children’s networks supported by or partnering with Save the Children
2. Child rights policy change: # of countries where 1 or more policy or legislative
Jennifer Grant changes for children’s rights (e.g. Independent bodies/ ombudsperson or State
jg@redbarnet.dk monitoring mechanism/ State data collection mechanism introduced) has taken
place with the support of Save the Children
3. Child rights coalitions: # of countries where coalitions for children’s rights
supported by Save the Children and partners have demonstrated impact or
influence
Humanitarian 1. % of affected children who’s needs have been met by Save the Children
humanitarian responses
Contact 2. % of affected children reached by Save the Children humanitarian responses that
strive to meet international quality standards
Carmen Rodrigues 3. % of children and adults reached by Save the Children humanitarian responses
MEAL Advisor reporting satisfaction with the SC response
Carmen.Rodrigues@savechildren.org

Child Participation 1. % of Save the Children-supported projects ended that year, involving child
participation and complying with the SC Practice Standards voluntary, safe and
Contact inclusive.

Bharti Mepani – Queries on child participation

b.mepani@savethechildren.org.uk

Lilly Saganelidze – Queries on monitoring and

evaluation
lilly.saganelidze@savethechildren.org
 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

Bangladesh READ PMP – Handout

A. Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

The READ M&E system will provide a continuous flow of high quality data to inform project
implementation, management and strategic decision making. M&E data will be reviewed during
project meetings, routinely discussed with partners, and regularly shared with communities
where the project operates, MOPME and USAID. Because early grade reading assessments will
be at the heart of READ’s M&E activities, the project will collaborate closely with the DPE’s
M&E unit and USAID’s EdData project to ensure compatibility across assessment activities,
instruments and systems.

READ’s research and M&E activities will support MOPME capacity to collect analyze and
prioritize policy/program decisions based on EGRA -linked information. EGRA data collected
by READ will be used to inform impact and effectiveness studies on READ’s intervention
packages. Evidence will contribute to national and global discussions children’s reading outcome
improvements and will support READ’s contribution to quality improvements at national level
with PEDP III and national-level advocacy and civil society forums. The Read M&E system will
be built on the following underlying principles:
• Performance management: Monitoring and performance evaluation data will be used for
continuous project improvement. Quarterly Program Results and Learning Workshops will
bring together project staff to review progress against key indicators and targets, interpret
trends, and to plan quality improvements. A draft READ PMEP is included in Annex B.
• Data quality: Extensive and repeated training of staff on data collection and processing
procedures, triangulation of data on key indicators, use of technology, and verification of all
collected data will ensure data quality.
• Continuous improvement: In collaboration with, partners, MOPME officials and staff, the
M&E team will continuously improve the M&E system and processes. In addition, data
collection instruments will be carefully tailored to local contexts through extensive piloting.

Management of M&E activities. SC will coordinate READ M&E activities. The Senior
Manager for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (SMPME) will oversee the design and
functioning of the entire system, and set up systems to support SC and partner teams in using
M&E data for decision making. In each region, the Senior Technical Officer, M&E will ensure
training, supervision and data quality checks. Field Officers will be equipped with tablets to
collect and upload data at regular intervals through their program visits.

Data system. READ’s PMEP will detail the steps to ensure data is accurate, reliable, timely,
complete, and precise, in compliance with USAID policies. READ will track key project
performance indicators, including USAID standard indicators. All people-level indicators will be
disaggregated by sex in data collection and used for gender analysis of project results. The M&E
system will ensure READ staff; USAID and GOB officials are able to track READ’s progress in
terms of program outputs and outcomes from national to local level. READ will conduct regular
Data Quality Assessments (DQAs) to ensure data meet USAID’s Operational Definitions on
Data Quality.

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 1

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

Assessment and Evaluation. A school profiling exercise will be conducted with schools and
communities at the start of each READ Phase for output and outcome monitoring against the
PMEP. READ will conduct two evaluations of learning outcomes: a small-scale evaluation of
READ Phase 1 activities, Cohort A PROTEEVA schools; and a large-scale more rigorous
evaluation of READ Phase 2 activities, Cohort C and D schools. The Cohort A evaluation will
begin with an Y1 baseline (end of 2013) and repeat at the end of SY14 and SY15. A random
sample 10-15% of all schools in the Cohort (approximately 60-90 schools) will be chosen and 10
randomly-selected third grade children per school assessed. To ensure sufficient statistical
validity in each geographic area, the assessment will be stratified at the district level.

The Phase 2 evaluation will use a randomized control methodology with Cohort C schools
forming the treatment group and Cohort D schools serving as the control group in the first
implementation year and then joining the treatment group in the second year. READ will assess
10 randomly selected third grade children in each of 20 Control, 20 Core package and 20 Core+
package schools in the four Phase 2 regions thus providing sufficient statistical power to ensure
the findings are statistically valid at regional and project levels. A baseline assessment will be
conducted at 2014 end and repeated at the end of 2015 and 2016. READ will contract an external
investigator to lead the impact evaluations and conduct more in-depth mixed-methods research
into questions of particular relevance to READ and the global evidence base.

Action research. READ will fund a series of action research studies to further refine the
program models and ensure they are properly tailored for broader uptake by GOB actors.
Guiding study questions will include: how to strengthen EGR support to the most marginalized
and hard to reach children; and how to continue to develop and refine READ activities to be
integrated into national education and donor initiatives under PEDP III. These research studies
will include applications of modified EGRA assessments alongside analysis of the effectiveness
of implementation tools and modalities.

Technology. READ’s M&E system will use state of the art technology to improve data quality
and analysis. GIS will be an integral part of regular monitoring, analysis and reporting. READ
will gather GPS information during the monitoring visits using an industry standard format
compatible with existing Bangladesh MIS systems. PMEP data will be tagged by geographic
location and geographically referenced data will be incorporated into analysis and reports for
senior level decision making. Reports will use a common digital map interface, such as Google
Maps, to present project data and findings that are visually stimulating and illuminate learning
for internal and external audiences. READ will also expand tablet use for EGRA data collection.
SC has already tested Android tablets for data collection in Bangla language. Using ICT for
EGRA data collection ensures data quality as it minimizes errors that typically occur during data
entry using paper-based forms, and make data readily accessible to analysts and program staff.
READ staff will use the technology to facilitate EGRA data collection and build GOB capacity
to develop grade-appropriate electronic EGRA tools, analyze EGRA data, and use EGRA
findings to inform policy decisions at division, district and upazila levels, and school
improvement decisions at classroom and SMC levels.

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 2

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

Annex B: READ Bangladesh Illustrative Performance Monitoring Plan

DATA ACQUISITION &

REPORTING 2013
METHOD/APPROACH OF
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITION BASELINE & DATA QUALITY
DATA COLLECTION OR
INDICATOR AND UNIT OF MEASURE FUTURE SY ISSUES & ACTIONS
CALCULATION FREQUENCY TOOL
TARGETS

SO: Improved quality of reading skills among early grade students in Bangladesh, particularly in low-performing districts
SO1: Proportion of Disaggregated by sex Individual assessment with Annual Literacy Baseline: Literacy Boost
students, who, by the Number of children covered by sample of target grade Boost TBD Assessment has been
end of two grades of READ achieving at least 50% of students from representative Assessment Target: 60% developed and piloted
primary schooling, literal reading comprehension sample of schools in Bangladesh.
demonstrate that they questions and meet fluency Electronic data
can read and benchmark /total # of children collection will be used
understand the assessed to improve data
meaning of grade quality.
level text
IR1: Improved provision of evidence-based, interactive early grades reading instruction
1.1 [USG 3.2.1-14]: Disaggregated by sex Annual visits to schools one Annual School Baseline:
Number of learners Number of children enrolled in month after beginning of enrollment TBD
enrolled in primary primary schools and/or school year records Target:
schools and/or equivalent non-school based 853,605
equivalent non-school settings targeted by the READ
based settings program
1.2 [USG 3.2.1-35]: Disaggregated by sex Individual interviews with Annual Literacy Baseline: 0 Multiple questions will
Number of learners Number of children reporting representative sample of Boost Target: be piloted and cross-
receiving reading involvement in at least one target grade students from Assessment 768,244 correlated to ensure
interventions at the relevant classroom or one representative sample of (student construct validity
primary level relevant community activity schools background
portion)
1.3 [USG 3.2.1-3]: Disaggregated by sex Trainers required to collect Annual Training Baseline: 0 Verified against field
Number of school Number of school administrators and submit attendance and attendance Target: coordinator records
administrators trained who attend at least 90% of participation records after records 3,109
in early grades relevant training sessions and each training
reading supervision are judged to have sufficiently
with USG support participated by their trainer

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 3

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

DATA ACQUISITION &

REPORTING 2013
METHOD/APPROACH OF
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITION BASELINE & DATA QUALITY
DATA COLLECTION OR
INDICATOR AND UNIT OF MEASURE FUTURE SY ISSUES & ACTIONS
CALCULATION FREQUENCY TOOL
TARGETS
1.4 [USG 3.2.1-31]: Disaggregated by sex Trainers required to collect Annual Training Baseline: N/A Verified against field
Number of teachers/ Number of teachers who attend and submit attendance and attendance Target: 7927 coordinator records
educators/teaching at least 90% of training sessions participation records after records,
assistants who and are judged to have each training trainer
successfully sufficiently participated by their records
completed in-service trainer
training or received
intensive coaching or
mentoring with USG
support
1.5: Percent of school Disaggregated by sex Annual visits to representative Annual School head Baseline: N/A Verified against spot
heads and Number of school heads and sample of schools after records and Target: 95% checks throughout the
supervising teachers supervising teachers submitting completion of training in tools teacher year
using READ documentation of completed questionnaire
classroom classroom observation tools
observation tools
1.6: Number of GoB Disaggregated by sex Trainers required to collect Annual Training Baseline: N/A Verified against field
in-service teacher Number of GoB in-service and submit attendance and attendance Target: 1124 coordinator records
trainers/primary teacher trainers/primary participation records after records
education officials education officials who attend at each training
trained in early least 90% of training sessions
grades reading and are judged to have
mentoring, sufficiently participated by their
supervision and trainer
support with USG
assistance
IR2: Increased use of early grade reading assessment
2.1 [USG 3.2.1-34]: Number of standardized learning Review of project records End of project Project records Baseline: 0
Number of assessments administered with Target: 2
standardized learning USG support (early grade
assessments reading and math)
supported by USG

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 4

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

DATA ACQUISITION &

REPORTING 2013
METHOD/APPROACH OF
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITION BASELINE & DATA QUALITY
DATA COLLECTION OR
INDICATOR AND UNIT OF MEASURE FUTURE SY ISSUES & ACTIONS
CALCULATION FREQUENCY TOOL
TARGETS
2.2: Percent of Number of partner schools able Interviews with school heads Annual School head Baseline: N/A Triangulated between
partner schools taking to indicate at least one action and SMC leaders questionnaire, Target: 80% school head and SMC
action based on that was taken based on the SMC leader leader reporting, and
reading assessment sharing of early grade reading questionnaire SMC records.
result assessment results with
SMC/other community
stakeholders, divided by total
number of partner schools
2.3: Percent of Percent of sampled teachers Annual visits to representative Annual Teacher Baseline: 0% Verified through
targeted teachers reporting use of classroom sample of schools questionnaire Target: 75% interviews with
using diagnostic tools diagnostic assessment to sample of teachers
to identify and support identify and support struggling
struggling readers readers in the previous month
2.4 [USG 3.2.1-38]: Number of laws, policies, Review of project advocacy End of project Project Baseline: 0
Number of laws, regulations, or guidelines records records Target: 4
policies, regulations, developed or modified at local,
or guidelines district, or national level with the
developed or modified aim of improving primary grade
to improve primary reading outcomes or increasing
grade reading equitable access
programs or increase
equitable access
IR3: Expanded provision and use of relevant and appropriate supplementary reading materials
3.1: Percent Schools Number of schools observed to Classroom observation of Annual School Baseline: 0% Spot checks of
using supplementary be using supplementary early- early grade reading observation Target: 90% representative sample
early-grade reading grade reading materials during instruction from a checklist to be done twice per
materials spot checks, divided by the total representative sample of year to verify findings
number of target schools schools
3.2 [USG 3.2.1-33]: Number of textbooks and other Review of procurement and Annual Project Baseline: 0
Number of textbooks teaching and learning materials distribution records records Target:
and other teaching provided to target schools 357,000
and learning materials through READ program
(TLM) provided with
USG assistance

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 5

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

DATA ACQUISITION &

REPORTING 2013
METHOD/APPROACH OF
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITION BASELINE & DATA QUALITY
DATA COLLECTION OR
INDICATOR AND UNIT OF MEASURE FUTURE SY ISSUES & ACTIONS
CALCULATION FREQUENCY TOOL
TARGETS
3.3: Number of Number of supplemental early Review of project records End of project Project Baseline: 0
supplemental early grade print materials converted records Target: 100
grade print materials to digital formats usable by
transformed into early-grade language arts
digital formats for teachers for multimedia
multimedia projection projection or web usage
or web usage
3.4 [USG 3.2.1-36]: Number of schools with at least Individual interviews with Annual School Baseline: 0% Verified against
Percent of target 50% of students reporting use of representative sample of observation Target: 37% teacher questionnaire
schools using ICT ICT early-grade reading target grade students from checklist
due to USG support materials in the classroom, representative sample of
divided by the total number of READ ICT supported schools.
target schools
IR4: Strengthened community support for early grade literacy
4.1: Percent of Number of schools with SMCs Review of school-level Annual SMC school- Baseline: 0% Verified against
targeted schools with containing reading-focused improvement plans during level Target: 80% school head
SMCs that include activities in their school-level annual visits and interviews improvement questionnaire
reading-focused improvement plans or schools with school heads plans
activities in their where such plans have been
school-level carried out, divided by the total
improvement plans number of target schools
(SLIP)
4.2 [USG 3.2.1-18]: Number of PTAs or similar Review of project records Annual Project Baseline: 0 Verified against
Number of PTAs or school governance structures records Target: 3001 school head
similar 'school' documented to have received questionnaire
governance assistance from READ program
structures supported
4.6: Percent of Disaggregated by sex Interviews with parents Annual Parent Baseline:
trained family Percent of sampled trained questionnaire TBD
members family members reporting having Target: 70%
implementing conducted activity to support
activities to support their child’s reading
literacy learning for
girls and boys at
home
Gender Integration (Cross cutting for all indicators above)

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 6

 Training Module 13 – Proposal’s Performance Monitoring Plan

DATA ACQUISITION &

REPORTING 2013
METHOD/APPROACH OF
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DEFINITION BASELINE & DATA QUALITY
DATA COLLECTION OR
INDICATOR AND UNIT OF MEASURE FUTURE SY ISSUES & ACTIONS
CALCULATION FREQUENCY TOOL
TARGETS
G.1: Number of Number of project Review of project records End of project Project Baseline: 0 N/A
project activities/design decisions records Target: 4
activities/design reviewed or refined on the basis
decisions reviewed or of a gender analysis of school
refined on the basis of profile information, baseline
a gender analysis of reading assessment data,
school profile project monitoring data, and
information, reading qualitative research activities
assessment data,
project monitoring
data, and qualitative
research activities

For Internal Use Only- Revised April 2014 Page 7