Coordinated Responses
Our Partners
Related Tools

Examples of indicators on coordination bodies

Last edited: March 07, 2019

This content is available in


Allen and Hagan (2003) have proposed indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of coordinated responses from the perspective of its members, focusing on the following four main areas.  They also include template evaluation forms for each area.

1. The quality of the internal working climate:

  • To what degree do members feel their input informs decision-making?
  • To what degree has a shared mission been developed?
  • To what degree are disagreements handled effectively when they arise

2. The quality of the infrastructure:

  • To what degree are adequate organisational tools (e.g. committees, problem-solving processes) employed to support coordination efforts?
  • To what extent is membership diverse?
  • To what degree is leadership adequate?

3. The breadth and nature of activities:

  • Context-specific

4. The outcomes associated with coordinated activities:

  • To what degree have efforts increased collaboration and communication among stakeholders?
  • To what degree have efforts increased exchange of information, resources and/or referrals?
  • To what degree have efforts increased knowledge of and access to community resources?
  • To what degree have efforts improved the response of sectors (e.g. criminal justice system, health, NGOs etc.) to violence against women?
  • To what degree have efforts stimulated positive changes in the community response to violence against women?

Source: adapted from Allen & Hagan, 2003.

Additional tools:

The Wilder Foundation has developed an online survey tool for members of collaborations to assess their efforts across 20 key areas seen as factors for success (PDF to upload).

The Kansas Coalition for Domestic and Sexual Violence has developed a guide to measuring outcomes of collaborative responses, which includes examples of the type of measures that could be included in an assessment of changes resulting at the individual group member, collaborative group and community level.

A Practical Guide to Evaluating Domestic Violence Coordinating Councils (Allen, N. and Hagen, L., 2003), Harrisburg: National Resource Center on Domestic Violence.  This manual focuses on evaluation of domestic violence coordinating councils, but it could easily be adapted to other coordination structures on a range of forms of violence against women.  It also includes more general information about the uses of evaluation.  It contains sample tools for self-evaluation and information gathering from a range of stakeholders.  Available in English.

Additional resources:

Violence Against Women and Girls: A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators (Bloom, S., 2008), North Carolina: MEASURE Evaluation.  Available in English.

Kelly, L. (2008) The Next Step: Developing Transnational Indicators on Violence against Women, Addendum to Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, Yakin Ertürk, Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural, Including the Right to Development, 7th Session of the Human Rights Council, A/HRC/7/6.Add.5, available in English.

Indicators to Measure Violence Against Women, United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Indicators to Measure Violence against Women, Invited Paper (Walby, S., 2007) Geneva, 8th-10th October.   Available in EnglishDeveloping Indicators on Violence Against Women (Walby, S., 2006), Lancaster: Department of Sociology, Lancaster University, UK.  These two documents provide a useful summary of the nature and purpose of indicators, types of indicators and examples of indicators of prevalence and policy actions on violence against women proposed by various bodies from the European Union to UNDAW Expert Group on Good Practices.  They include recommended options for the development of violence against women indicators.