mel-framework-citation
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseMEL Framework Citation
MEL框架引用规范
Applies Ane's non-negotiable MEL/SRHR citation standard from CLAUDE.md. Generic framework references are a quality failure. This skill prevents that.
应用CLAUDE.md中Ane不可协商的MEL/SRHR引用标准。泛泛提及框架属于质量问题，本技能可避免此类情况。
When to use
使用场景
Trigger whenever the output is an MEL or SRHR deliverable: theory of change, evaluation design, indicator framework, donor report, programme analysis, decolonial or feminist evaluation note, OECD-DAC review, participatory method recommendation, SRHR rights analysis.
Do not trigger for non-MEL documents, general correspondence, or requests unrelated to evaluation/SRHR.
当产出为MEL或SRHR交付成果时触发：变革理论、评估设计、指标框架、捐赠方报告、项目分析、非殖民化或女性主义评估笔记、OECD-DAC评审、参与式方法建议、SRHR权利分析。
非MEL文档、一般通信或与评估/SRHR无关的请求请勿触发。
Required behaviour
必选行为
Every MEL/SRHR claim must carry author surname, year, and specific document title. Minimum. Section or page when available.
每一项MEL/SRHR主张必须至少包含作者姓氏、年份及具体文档标题。若有可用信息，需添加章节或页码。
Current authoritative versions to enforce
需强制执行的当前权威版本
Use these. Flag any alternative as below current standard.
| Topic | Current standard | Supersedes | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contribution analysis | Mayne (2019) "Revisiting the Contribution Question", Evaluation 25(3) | Mayne (2011) | Use "contribution plausibility" vocabulary, not earlier "contribution story" alone |
| Feminist evaluation framing | Cornwall & Rivas (2015) Third World Quarterly 36(2) | — | Pair with Batliwala & Pittman (2010) for participatory design, Podems (2014) for positionality |
| SRHR indicators | WHO/UNFPA Sexual Health Indicators (2023 revision) | 2015 edition | Cross-reference ICPD+25 (2019), SDG 3.7, 5.6 |
| Rights-based approach | UNFPA HRBAP + UN Common Understanding HRBA (2003) | — | Pair with WHO/OHCHR sexual rights (2006/2010), UNFPA State of World Population 2021 |
| Gender-transformative | IGWG Gender Integration Continuum | — | Pair with Rao & Kelleher (2005) for institutional change |
| Theory of Change | Vogel (2012) DFID review | — | Feminist ToC: van Eerdewijk et al. (2017) KIT |
| Decolonial evaluation | Chilisa (2020) 2nd ed. | Chilisa (2012) 1st ed. | Pair with Chouinard & Cousins (2015) for practitioner application |
| Participatory methods | Davies & Dart (2005) MSC; Wilson-Grau & Britt (2012) Outcome Harvesting; Patton (2011) Developmental Evaluation | — | Fals Borda (1987) for PAR epistemology |
| OECD-DAC criteria | OECD (2019) "Better Criteria for Better Evaluation" | 1991 edition (5 criteria) | Must include Coherence or flag omission |
使用以下版本，任何替代版本均标记为不符合当前标准。
| 主题 | 当前标准 | 替代版本 | 说明 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 贡献分析 | Mayne (2019) 《Revisiting the Contribution Question》，Evaluation 25(3) | Mayne (2011) | 使用“贡献合理性”表述，而非仅使用早期的“贡献叙事” |
| 女性主义评估框架 | Cornwall & Rivas (2015) Third World Quarterly 36(2) | — | 需搭配Batliwala & Pittman (2010)用于参与式设计，搭配Podems (2014)用于立场性分析 |
| SRHR指标 | WHO/UNFPA Sexual Health Indicators (2023修订版) | 2015版 | 需交叉参考ICPD+25 (2019)、SDG 3.7、5.6 |
| 基于权利的方法 | UNFPA HRBAP + UN Common Understanding HRBA (2003) | — | 需搭配WHO/OHCHR性权利(2006/2010)、UNFPA《2021世界人口状况报告》 |
| 性别转型 | IGWG性别整合连续体 | — | 需搭配Rao & Kelleher (2005)用于机构变革分析 |
| 变革理论 | Vogel (2012) DFID评审 | — | 女性主义变革理论：van Eerdewijk et al. (2017) KIT |
| 非殖民化评估 | Chilisa (2020) 第2版 | Chilisa (2012) 第1版 | 需搭配Chouinard & Cousins (2015)用于从业者应用 |
| 参与式方法 | Davies & Dart (2005) MSC; Wilson-Grau & Britt (2012) 成果收获法; Patton (2011) 发展性评估 | — | 认识论层面需参考Fals Borda (1987) |
| OECD-DAC标准 | OECD (2019) 《Better Criteria for Better Evaluation》 | 1991版（5项标准） | 必须包含一致性标准，否则标记遗漏 |
Mandatory disaggregation for indicators
指标的强制细分要求
Any indicator set must disaggregate by at minimum:
- Age cohort
- Gender identity (not sex alone)
- Disability status
- Geographic stratum
Flag any indicator missing any of these as below current standard.
任何指标集必须至少按以下维度细分：
- 年龄组
- 性别认同（而非仅生理性别）
- 残疾状况
- 地理层级
任何缺失上述任一维度的指标均标记为不符合当前标准。
Protocol
执行流程
When producing MEL/SRHR output:
- Identify every framework, concept, or indicator invoked.
- Match each against the table above. If current, cite with full author + year + document title + section if available.
- If the user's draft references an outdated version, flag it in-line: .
⚠️ Outdated version — current standard is [author year] - If a claim lacks a source, flag with .
⚠️ Data gap: [claim] — needs source — [recommended action] - Never hedge with "according to WHO guidelines" or "feminist scholars suggest". Cite specifically.
生成MEL/SRHR产出时：
- 识别所有引用的框架、概念或指标。
- 对照上表匹配每项内容。若为当前版本，需完整引用作者+年份+文档标题+可用章节。
- 若用户草稿引用过时版本，需在文中标记：。
⚠️ 版本过时——当前标准为[作者 年份] - 若某项主张缺乏来源，需标记：。
⚠️ 数据缺口：[主张内容]——需补充来源——[建议行动] - 切勿使用“根据WHO指南”或“女性主义学者认为”此类模糊表述，必须明确引用。
Lens application
视角应用
Feminist, decolonial, intersectionality, and participatory lenses must change the analysis, not appear as acknowledgement sentences. When applying a lens, show what it changed.
- Feminist: whose voices shaped evaluation questions, power differentials named, norms questioned, bodily autonomy centred for SRHR.
- Decolonial: framework origin examined, Global North assumptions named, co-design vs consultation distinguished.
- Intersectionality: disaggregation plus interaction effects, not parallel disaggregation alone.
- Participatory: position on Hart (1992) ladder named, consultation vs co-design distinguished.
女性主义、非殖民化、交叉性和参与式视角必须改变分析内容，而非仅作为致谢语句出现。应用视角时，需说明其带来的改变。
- 女性主义视角：明确谁的声音塑造了评估问题，指出权力差异，质疑规范，以SRHR中的身体自主权为核心。
- 非殖民化视角：审视框架起源，指出全球北方的假设，区分共同设计与咨询。
- 交叉性视角：除细分维度外，需考虑交互效应，而非仅进行平行细分。
- 参与式视角：明确在Hart (1992)参与阶梯中的定位，区分咨询与共同设计。
Output
产出要求
Produce the requested MEL/SRHR artefact. Inline citations throughout. At the end, append a short section listing every citation used, full bibliographic form.
## Sources生成所需的MEL/SRHR成果，全文嵌入引用。在末尾添加简短的章节，列出所有使用的引用，采用完整书目格式。
## 参考文献Writing rules
写作规则
Follow CLAUDE.md house style. For this skill specifically:
- Never write "recent research" or "best practice" without a named source.
- Never use "should" or "must" without a framework warrant.
- If a claim cannot reach publication standard with available information, flag the gap rather than fill with competency-level content.
遵循CLAUDE.md的内部风格。针对本技能需特别注意：
- 若无明确来源，切勿使用“近期研究”或“最佳实践”表述。
- 若无框架依据，切勿使用“应该”或“必须”表述。
- 若现有信息无法达到出版标准，需标记缺口，而非用通用内容填充。
Limitations
局限性
This skill does not retrieve new literature. It enforces the standards list in CLAUDE.md. When a framework outside the list is invoked, ask Ane whether the reference is current, or flag for verification. Update this skill when CLAUDE.md's framework standards change.
本技能不检索新文献，仅强制执行CLAUDE.md中的标准列表。当引用列表外的框架时，需询问Ane该参考是否为当前版本，或标记待验证。CLAUDE.md中的框架标准更新时，需同步更新本技能。