Back to Details

indicator-designer

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Indicator Designer

指标设计器

Indicators that do not disaggregate to current standard are below publication quality. This skill prevents that from shipping.
不符合当前分类标准的指标达不到出版质量。本技能可避免此类不合格指标被交付。

When to use

使用场景

Trigger for any indicator-related request: new results framework, donor indicator set, MEL plan indicators, outcome indicators for a ToC, SDG alignment, indicator audit or adaptation.
Do not trigger for general monitoring plan design or data collection planning beyond indicator definition — those are separate workflows.
适用于任何与指标相关的需求：新成果框架、捐赠方指标集、MEL计划指标、理论框架（ToC）的成果指标、SDG对齐、指标审核或调整。
请勿用于通用监测计划设计或指标定义之外的数据收集规划——这些属于独立工作流程。

Required inputs

必要输入

Ask in one batch. First three are required.
  1. What is being measured: the outcome, output, or impact statement the indicator must capture (required; ideally pulled from an existing ToC)
  2. Programme context: country or region, population, programme scale (required)
  3. Measurement purpose: accountability to donor, adaptive management, advocacy, contribution analysis (required; shapes indicator choice)
  4. Existing indicators Ane wants to retain or adapt (optional)
  5. Data source constraints: what data Ane can and cannot collect (optional but often decisive)
  6. Reporting frequency required (optional; default annual)
一次性询问以下内容，前三项为必填项：
  1. 衡量对象：指标必须捕捉的成果、产出或影响陈述（必填；理想情况下取自现有理论框架ToC）
  2. 项目背景：国家或地区、目标人群、项目规模（必填）
  3. 衡量目的：对捐赠方负责、适应性管理、宣传倡导、贡献分析（必填；影响指标选择）
  4. Ane希望保留或调整的现有指标（可选）
  5. 数据源限制：Ane能够和无法收集的数据（可选但通常起决定性作用）
  6. 要求的报告频率（可选；默认年度）

Method

方法步骤

Step 1 — classify the measurement level

步骤1 — 分类衡量层级

State whether the indicator measures:
  • Output: something the programme directly produces (services delivered, people trained)
  • Outcome: a change in behaviour, knowledge, or condition in the target population
  • Impact: population-level change the programme contributes to
Misclassification is a quality failure. Donor reports often conflate these. Do not.
明确指标衡量的是：
  • 产出：项目直接产生的成果（如提供的服务、培训的人员）
  • 成果：目标人群在行为、知识或状况上的变化
  • 影响：项目对人群层面产生的变化
分类错误属于质量问题。捐赠方报告常混淆这三者，请勿犯此类错误。

Step 2 — propose candidate indicators

步骤2 — 提出候选指标

For each outcome or output, propose 2-4 candidate indicators. Mix quantitative and qualitative where both add signal. For each:
  • Name: noun phrase, specific
  • Definition: one sentence, unambiguous
  • Numerator / denominator: if rate or proportion; if count, say so
  • Data source: survey, routine service data, secondary source, qualitative interview, observation
  • Frequency: how often measured
  • Disaggregation: at minimum age cohort, gender identity, disability status, geographic stratum (WHO/UNFPA 2023). Flag any missing.
  • Tier:
    • Tier 1 — globally validated indicator from an authoritative source (WHO, UNFPA, SDG indicator framework). Cite source and year.
    • Tier 2 — validated indicator adapted for this context. Note the original and the adaptation.
    • Tier 3 — novel or bespoke indicator. Flag confidence level. Explain why a Tier 1 or 2 indicator was not sufficient.
针对每个成果或产出，提出2-4个候选指标。同时结合定量和定性指标以增强信号。每个指标需包含：
  • 名称：具体的名词短语
  • 定义：清晰明确的一句话
  • 分子/分母：若为比率或比例则列出；若为计数则说明
  • 数据源：调查、常规服务数据、二手资料、定性访谈、观察
  • 频率：衡量的频次
  • 分类：至少包含年龄组、性别认同、残疾状况、地理分层（遵循WHO/UNFPA 2023标准）。标记缺失项。
  • 层级:
    • Tier 1：来自权威来源（WHO、UNFPA、SDG指标框架）的全球验证指标。注明来源及年份。
    • Tier 2：针对本场景调整后的验证指标。说明原始指标及调整内容。
    • Tier 3：新颖或定制化指标。标记置信度等级。解释为何Tier 1或Tier 2指标无法满足需求。

Step 3 — cross-reference global frameworks

步骤3 — 交叉参考全球框架

For every indicator, check and cite where applicable:
  • WHO/UNFPA Sexual Health Indicators (2023)
  • SDG indicator framework (targets 3.7, 5.6 for SRHR)
  • ICPD+25 commitments (2019)
  • Donor framework, if specified
If a candidate indicator predates the 2023 WHO/UNFPA revision, flag it. Propose the current equivalent.
针对每个指标，检查并引用适用的框架：
  • WHO/UNFPA性健康指标（2023版）
  • SDG指标框架（针对SRHR的目标3.7、5.6）
  • ICPD+25承诺（2019）
  • 若指定则引用捐赠方框架
若候选指标早于2023年WHO/UNFPA修订版，需标记并提出当前等效指标。

Step 4 — apply intersectionality substantively

步骤4 — 实质性应用交叉性原则

Disaggregation alone is parallel, not intersectional. For each indicator, note at least one interaction effect that must be tracked (e.g., adolescent girls with disabilities, rural young women, LGBTQI+ adolescents).
If interaction-effect analysis is not feasible given data volumes, say so explicitly. Do not pretend.
仅分类属于平行分类，而非交叉性分类。针对每个指标，至少记录一个必须追踪的交互效应（如残疾少女、农村青年女性、LGBTQI+青少年）。
若因数据量限制无法进行交互效应分析，需明确说明，不得隐瞒。

Step 5 — define the measurement mechanism

步骤5 — 定义衡量机制

For each indicator, specify:
  • Who collects the data
  • What tool or instrument (cite if standard; describe if bespoke)
  • Quality assurance step
  • Cost or burden flag if collection is resource-intensive
针对每个指标，明确：
  • 数据收集人员
  • 使用的工具或仪器（若为标准工具则引用；若为定制工具则描述）
  • 质量保证步骤
  • 若收集过程资源密集，标记成本或负担情况

Step 6 — flag data gaps

步骤6 — 标记数据缺口

For any indicator that cannot be measured with available data, use the format: 
⚠️ Data gap: [indicator] — [what is missing] — [recommended action: proxy, new collection, or descope]
对于无法用现有数据衡量的指标，使用以下格式： 
⚠️ 数据缺口：[指标名称] — [缺失内容] — [建议行动：替代指标、新增收集或取消该指标]

Output structure

输出结构

Produce an indicator table with these columns:
| # | Indicator name | Type (output/outcome/impact) | Definition | Numerator | Denominator | Data source | Frequency | Disaggregation | Tier | Framework reference | Data gap flag |
Follow the table with:
  • Intersectionality note: which interaction effects the set tracks and which it does not
  • Measurement mechanism summary: one paragraph on who does what
  • Tier distribution: count of Tier 1/2/3 indicators. Flag if Tier 3 exceeds 20% of the set — Ane may be reinventing standards unnecessarily.
  • Sources: full citations for every framework referenced
生成包含以下列的指标表格：
| # | 指标名称 | 类型（产出/成果/影响） | 定义 | 分子 | 分母 | 数据源 | 频率 | 分类 | 层级 | 框架参考 | 数据缺口标记 |
表格后需附带：
  • 交叉性说明：指标集追踪哪些交互效应，未追踪哪些
  • 衡量机制摘要：一段关于各角色职责的说明
  • 层级分布：Tier 1/2/3指标的数量。若Tier 3指标占比超过20%需标记——Ane可能不必要地重复制定标准。
  • 来源：所有引用框架的完整参考文献

Citation requirements

引用要求

Mandatory versions:
  • WHO/UNFPA Sexual Health Indicators (2023 revision)
  • SDG indicator framework (UN Statistics Division, latest)
  • ICPD+25 Nairobi Summit commitments (2019)
  • For rights-based framing: UNFPA HRBAP + WHO/OHCHR sexual rights working definition (2006/2010)
  • For gender-transformative indicators: IGWG Gender Integration Continuum
必须使用指定版本：
  • WHO/UNFPA性健康指标（2023修订版）
  • SDG指标框架（联合国统计司最新版）
  • ICPD+25内罗毕峰会承诺（2019）
  • 基于权利的框架：UNFPA HRBAP + WHO/OHCHR性权利工作定义（2006/2010）
  • 性别转型指标：IGWG性别整合连续体

Writing rules

写作规则

Follow CLAUDE.md house style. Indicator names lead with verbs where possible ("Proportion of adolescent girls who access..."). Definitions never use "should" or "must" — they describe what the indicator measures, not what the programme intends.
遵循CLAUDE.md的内部风格。指标名称尽可能以动词开头（如“获得……服务的少女比例”）。定义中不得使用“应该”或“必须”——仅描述指标衡量的内容，而非项目的预期目标。

Limitations

局限性

This skill does not design data collection instruments, sampling frames, or analysis plans. It does not assess whether indicators are feasible at scale — that requires field knowledge Ane brings. It does not replace participatory indicator co-design with target populations; it prepares a rigorous draft for that consultation.
本技能不设计数据收集工具、抽样框架或分析计划。不评估指标在大规模场景下的可行性——这需要Ane提供的实地知识。不能替代与目标人群共同参与的指标协同设计——仅为该磋商准备严谨的草案。