Results and Indicators
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Security institutions are effective, internally coherent and adequately staffed and equpped to perform their duties; clear separation of military and civilian components of the security system is ensured and the chain of command is respected |
Number of instances per year when the army was unlawfully used for civilian purposes
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Oversight bodies' reports, civil society reports
Additional Information:
Please further specify type of unlawful acts.Â
|
Average time from a request for the intervention of security forces until the intervention begins
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Ministry/agency administrative data and reports
Additional Information:
Disaggregation by regions of intervention or ethnic groups requesting intervention may be considered depending on the local context.Â
|
|
Proportion of crime complaints that are investigated
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Ministry/agency administrative data and reports
Additional Information:
This indicator may be disaggregated by institutions carrying investigation.Â
|
|
Territorial coverage of police and state security actors vs percentage coverage by non-state armed groups (km2, or number of districts/communes)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline studies conducted and budgeted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
2011 Failed States Index included Indicator 10 “Security Apparatus Operates as a "State Within a State" measuring:
- Emergence of elite or praetorian guards that operate with impunity
- Emergence of state-sponsored or state-supported private militias that terrorize political opponents, suspected "enemies," or civilians seen to be sympathetic to the opposition
- Emergence of an "army within an army" that serves the interests of the dominant military or political clique
- Emergence of rival militias, guerrilla forces or private armies in an armed struggle or protracted violent campaigns against state security forces.
|
|
Criminal conviction rate (percentage of prosecutions resulting in conviction)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline Ministry/court administrative data to be requested by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Data can be disaggregated for specific crimes (GBV, corruption, etc.) when relevant.
Possible example for corruption: Cases resulting in a conviction (including cases of grand corruption) as % of cases investigated.
|
|
Status of legal provisions / regulations defining the independence of the system of command and control for police and military
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Laws and regulations
Baseline and endline expert assessments conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Expert assessment may be required to review current policies.Â
|
|
Status of institutional provisions ensuring the independence of the system of command and control for police and military
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Laws and regulations
Baseline and endline expert assessments conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Expert assessment may be required to review current policies.Â
|
|
Number of Code of Conduct breach cases
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Oversight bodies reportsÂ
Additional Information:
Please check if data for this indicator is available from the oversight bodies prior to using this indicator.Â
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Impact: To ensure human security at individual and community level |
Country based Security Perception Indexes
(Numeric)
Data Source:
National Surveys
Expert assessments
National statistical report
Additional Information:
It is advisable to refer to country based Perception Indexes when available.
|
Country status as fragile according to the OECD Fragility Index
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
OECD States of Fragility Reports, http://www.oecd.org/dac/conflict-fragility-resilience/listofstateoffrag…
Additional Information:
The OECD characterises fragility as the accumulation and combination of risks combined with insufficient capacity by the state, system, and/or communities to manage it, absorb it, or mitigate its consequences; the approach is based on the five dimensions deemed most relevant for measuring and identifying fragility: economic, environmental, political, security and societal. Each dimension is evaluated according to a number of indicators that measure the most important facets of risks and coping capacities relevant to fragility. The overall value or disaggregated values for one of the dimensions can be looked at, depending on needs. The scale for dimensions is divided in five segments between severe and minor.Â
NB: In the States of Fragility Report, the OECD provides a list with countries that are considered fragile to varying degrees in the 5 different dimensions (rather than a ranking of countries). So, at impact level, the indicator would be: "country status as a fragile state" [yes/no]. Only the 56 countries that are identified as fragile are included in the report, so this indicator can be used for a sub-set of partner countries.
|
|
Fundamental Rights Country Score according to the World Justice Project
(Numeric)
Data Source:
WJP World Justice Project  - Rule of Law Index https://worldjusticeproject.org/our-work/wjp-rule-law-index
Additional Information:
The World Justice Project (WJP) Rule of Law Index is the world’s leading source for original data on the rule of law. The 2016 edition covers 113 countries and jurisdictions, relying on more than 100,000 household and expert surveys to measure how the rule of law is experienced in practical, everyday situations by the general public worldwide. Factor 4- Fundamental Rights of the Rule of Law Index measures the protection of fundamental human rights. It encompasses adherence to the following fundamental rights: effective enforcement of laws that ensure equal protection,  the right to life and security of the person (possibly the most relevant one for SSR ADs),  due process of law and the rights of the accused,  freedom of opinion and expression , freedom of belief and religion, the right to privacy, freedom of assembly and association, and fundamental labour rights, including the right to collective bargaining, the prohibition of forced and child labour, and the elimination of discrimination.
|
|
Order and Security Country Score according to the World Justice Project
(Numeric)
Data Source:
WJP World Justice Project  - Order and Security https://worldjusticeproject.org/our-work/wjp-rule-law-index
Additional Information:
Factor 5 - Order and Security measures how well the society assures the security of persons and property. This factor includes three dimensions that cover various threats to order and security: crime (5.1 particularly conventional crime), political violence (5.2 including terrorism, armed conflict, and political unrest), and violence as a socially acceptable means to redress personal grievances (5.3 vigilante justice).Â
|
|
Group Grievances Country Score according to the Fragile State Index
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Fund for Peace's - Fragile State Index http://fundforpeace.org/fsi/indicators/
Additional Information:
The Fragile States Index, developed in 2005 by a United States think-tank, the Fund for Peace, and the magazine Foreign Policy, is an annual ranking of 178 nations based on their levels of stability and the pressures they face. The Index is based on The Fund for Peace’s proprietary Conflict Assessment System Tool (CAST) analytical platform. The ranking is based on total scores in a number of dimensions, such as demographic pressure, uneven economics development and others, for which there are also specific scores.
Based on comprehensive social science methodology, data from three primary sources is triangulated and subjected to critical review to obtain final scores for the Fragile States Index.Â
The Group Grievance is one of the sub-indicator of the Fragile State Index. It includes pressures and measures related to: Discrimination, Powerlessness, Ethnic Violence, Communal Violence, Sectarian Violence and Religious Violence.
|
|
Human Rights and Rule of Law Country Score according to the Fragile State Index
(Numeric)
Data Source:
 Fund for Peace, Fragile State Index  http://fundforpeace.org/fsi/indicators/p3/
Additional Information:
The Fragile States Index, developed in 2005 by a United States think-tank, the Fund for Peace, and the magazine Foreign Policy, is an annual ranking of 178 nations based on their levels of stability and the pressures they face. The Index is based on The Fund for Peace’s proprietary Conflict Assessment System Tool (CAST) analytical platform. The ranking is based on total scores in a number of dimensions, such as demographic pressure, uneven economics development and others, for which there are also specific scores.
Based on comprehensive social science methodology, data from three primary sources is triangulated and subjected to critical review to obtain final scores for the Fragile States Index.
When human rights are violated or unevenly protected, the state is failing in its ultimate responsibility. The Human Rights and Rule of Law score includes pressures and measures related to: Press Freedom, Civil Liberties, Political Freedoms, Human Trafficking, Political Prisoners, Incarceration, Religious Persecution, Torture and Executions.
|
|
Security Apparatus Country Score according to the Fragile State Index
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Fund for Peace, Fragile State Index http://fundforpeace.org/fsi/indicators/c1/
Additional Information:
The Fragile States Index, developed in 2005 by a United States think-tank, the Fund for Peace, and the magazine Foreign Policy, is an annual ranking of 178 nations based on their levels of stability and the pressures they face. The Index is based on The Fund for Peace’s proprietary Conflict Assessment System Tool (CAST) analytical platform. The ranking is based on total scores in a number of dimensions, such as demographic pressure, uneven economics development and others, for which there are also specific scores.
Based on comprehensive social science methodology, data from three primary sources is triangulated and subjected to critical review to obtain final scores for the Fragile States Index.
The security apparatus should have a monopoly on use of legitimate force. The social contract is weakened where affected by competing groups. Includes pressures and measures related to: Security Apparatus, Internal Conflict, Small Arms Proliferation, Riots and Protests, Fatalities from Conflict, Military Coups, Rebel Activity, Militancy, Bombings, Political Prisoners.
|
|
Country ranking according to the Political Stability and Absence of Violence Dimension of the Worldwide Governance Indicators
(Numeric)
Data Source:
World Bank Report on Political Stability and Absence of Violence Dimension http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/#reports
Additional Information:
The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project reports aggregate and individual governance indicators for over 200 countries and territories over the period 1996–2016, for six dimensions of governance: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, Control of Corruption.Â
Political Stability and Absence of Violence measures perceptions of the likelihood of political instability and/or politically-motivated violence, including terrorism. Higher values corresponding to better governance outcomes.
|
|
EURF - Country ranking according to the Rule of Law Dimension of the Worldwide Governance Indicators
(Numeric)
Data Source:
World Bank Report on Rule of Law http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/#reports
Additional Information:
This is an EURF Level 1 indicator. The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project reports aggregate and individual governance indicators for over 200 countries and territories over the period 1996–2016, for six dimensions of governance: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, Control of Corruption.Â
Rule of Law captures perceptions of the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, property rights, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence.
|
|
SDG 16.1.2. Number of conflict-related deaths per 100,000 population (disaggregated by sex, age and cause)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Global SDG Indicators Database, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/database
Additional Information:
SDG Indicator 16.1.2. Tear II. This indicator is defined as the total count of conflict-related deaths divided by the total population, expressed per 100,000 population.
‘Conflict’ is defined as ‘armed conflict’ in reference to a terminology enshrined in International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and applied to situations based on the assessment of the United Nations (UN) and other internationally mandated entities.  ‘Conflict-related deaths’ refers to direct and indirect deaths associated to armed conflict.  ‘Population’ refers to total resident population in a given situation of armed conflict included in the indicator, in a given year. Population data are derived from annual estimates produced by the UN Population Division.Â
For further information on the indicator, please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.1.
Â
|
|
SDG 16.1.1. Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population (disaggregated by sex and age)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
National sources: Â a) criminal justice system and; b) public health/civil registration. Â
International sources:  UNODC and WHO: https://dataunodc.un.org/GSH_app    http://apps.who.int/violence-info/homicide/
Additional Information:
SDG Indicator 16.1.1 (Tier I). This indicator is widely used at national and international level to measure the most extreme form of violent crime and it also provides a direct indication of lack of security. It is calculated as the total number of victims of intentional homicide recorded in a given year divided by the total resident population in the same year, multiplied by 100,000. For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.1
|
|
Number of terrorist attacks designated as such by the government of the country
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Government press releases
ACLED Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, https://acleddata.com/#/dashboard
Uppsala Conflict Data Program, https://ucdp.uu.se/#/Â
Additional Information:
Please provide the definition used for categorization of the terrorist attacks.Â
|
|
Incidence of misdemeanour offences per capita
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Ministry/agency administrative data and reports
Additional Information:
Please further define misdemeanour in accordance with the national legislation.Â
|
|
Number of robberies per 1,000 residents
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Ministry/agency administrative data and reports
Additional Information:
Please further define robbery in accordance with the national legislation.Â
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Security institutions are effective, internally coherent and adequately staffed and equpped to perform their duties; clear separation of military and civilian components of the security system is ensured and the chain of command is respected |
Percentage of [equipment - please specify] provided by the EU-funded intervention that is used and maintained by security sector staff in line with its purpose and regulations
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Inventory conducted by the EU-funded intervention of the use and maintenance of equipment donated through the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
Please specify the type of equipment the EU-funded intervention will provide and after what period its use and maintenance should be assessed.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Strengthened internal and external accountability of security sector actors |
Number of internal inspections and/or audits within the individual security institutions (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Internal inspection/audit services' administrative records within the individual security institutions
Additional Information:
This indicator tracks whether the inspections/audits foreseen by the law are being executed. |
Number of complaint cases received by the internal inspection/ audit services within the individual security institutions
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Internal inspection/audit services' administrative records within the individual security institutions
Additional Information:
This indicator tracks to what extent individual complaints are submitted to the inspection/audit units.Â
|
|
Number of complaint cases related to a security sector institution filed with the independent complaints body responsible for this sector
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Internal inspection/audit services' administrative records within the individual security institutions
Additional Information:
This indicator tracks to what extent individual complaints are submitted to the independent compalints body.Â
|
|
Percentage of cases resolved by the internal inspection/audit services of the security sector institutions within 12 months, out of the total number of complaint cases (disaggregated by institution)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Internal inspection/audit services' administrative records within the individual security institutions
Additional Information:
This indicator tracks to what extent the reported cases are resolved within 12 months in relation to the total number of complaints.Â
|
|
Proportion of cases that are resolved by the independent oversight body within 12 months, out of the number of new complaint cases relating to a security sector institution
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Internal inspection/audit services' administrative records within the individual security institutions
Additional Information:
This indicator tracks to what extent the reported cases are resolved within 12 months in relation to the total number of new complaint cases in the subject year.Â
|
|
Percentage of security sector representatives against whom there has been a complaint filed who are disciplined (disaggregated by sex)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Security sector institution's administrative records
Additional Information:
Please check data availability before selecting this indicator.
|
|
Status of internal inspection and/or audit services within the individual security institutions
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Government decision on the establishment of internal inspection/audit services within the individual security institutions.
Additional Information:
Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council (2016): Effective internal accountability systems, such as internal inspection services and audits, should be in place within individual security institutions, which should also be subject to external financial and operational conduct control by the national court of auditors and other oversight or equivalent bodies. Mechanisms such as vetting, codes of conduct, independent complaints bodies and scrutiny by civil society also contribute to accountability. To avoid impunity, it is important to uphold the principle of equality before the law, avoidance of arbitrariness, and procedural and legal transparency when a security actor is brought to justice. The remit of any separate military justice system should be clear and circumscribed; in all cases, civilians should be tried by civilian courts.Â
|
|
Status of an independent oversight body with a security sector mandate
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Government/parliamentary decision on the establishment of an independent body with a security sector mandate
Additional Information:
This indicator enables us to check whether an independent oversight body with a security sector mandate exists in the country. It may also be interesting to examine what measures are at the disposal of this independent body (i.e. legal intervention, recommendations, etc.).
|
|
Percentage of the budget that is executed by the independent oversight bodies with a security sector mandate, out of the amount that was allocated
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Government budget document
Additional Information:
It is important to track both - budget allocation and execution. Â Please feel free to adjust the indicator as needed.
|
|
Ratio of investigators employed by the independent oversight bodies compared to the number of police officers
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Independent oversight body's report on the number of staff employed and Ministry of Interior's report on the number of police officers employedÂ
Additional Information:
Please define the independent oversight bodies
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Security sector is more inclusive, legitimate and security actors are respected and positively perceived |
Percentage of citizens who believe security sector institutions serve their interests (disaggregated by sex, religion, ethnicity, income – or proxy such as neighbourhood of residence)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline public perception surveys (national or local) conducted by the EU-funded interventionÂ
Additional Information:
The public opinion survey can have separate questions on each of the security sector institutions in the country. This type of survey may be sensitive if the trust to the security institutions is low, so the survey methodology and implementation needs to be adjusted accordingly.Â
|
Percentage of population who express confidence in the security actors (disaggregated by sex, religion, ethnicity, income – or proxy such as neighbourhood of residence)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline public perception surveys (national or local) conducted by the EU-funded interventionÂ
Additional Information:
The EU-funded intervention should implement at least two rounds of a public opinion survey with separate questions on each of the security sector institutions in the country. This type of survey may be sensitive if the trust to the security institutions is low, so the survey methodology and implementation needs to be adjusted accordingly.Â
|
|
Percentage of victims who report crimes to the police (disaggregated by sex, disability status, ethnicity, religion and age)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline household surveys (national or local) conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
The EU-funded intervention should implement at least two rounds of a household survey. This type of survey may be sensitive if the trust to the police is low, so the survey methodology and implementation needs to be adjusted accordingly.Â
|
|
Difference between the proportions of positions held by representatives of the different sexes in the security sector public institutions and the proportion of positions they hold in the public sector as a whole (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
National sources: Baseline and endline analyses of administrative data from the line ministry/ies. If administrative data is not available: baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention. International sources:UNODC data portal, https://dataunodc.un.org/
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.7.1 was adapted for security sector (Tier III). Security sector institutions should not exclude or discriminate against any particular group. Women should have equal opportunities and be empowered within the security forces (EU Joint communication 2016). The EU-funded intervention should compare the % of women/people with disabilities/ people from different age groups/people of different religions/people of different ethnicity employed in the public security sector institutions - with the % of the same groups employed in the public sector in general. For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target= |
|
Difference between the proportions of positions held by representatives of different age groups in the security sector public institutions and the proportions of positions they hold in the public sector as a whole (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline analysis of administrative data from the line ministry/ies. If administrative data is not available: baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.7.1 (Tier III) was adapted. Security forces should not exclude or discriminate against any particular group. Women should have equal opportunities and be empowered within the security forces (EU Joint communication 2016). The EU-funded intervention should compare the % of people from different age groups who are employed in the public security sector institutions - with the % of the same groups employed in the public sector in general. If data are not available from the external sources, the EU-funded intervention can conduct a survey which could be based on a sample of departments/ministries (depending on the available funding) where staffing characteristics will be compared. |
|
Difference between the proportions of positions held by representatives of persons with disabilities in the security sector public institutions and the proportions of positions they hold in the public sector as a whole (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline analysis of administrative data from the line ministry/ies. If administrative data is not available: baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.7.1 (Tier III) was adapted. Security forces should not exclude or discriminate against any particular group. Women should have equal opportunities and be empowered within the security forces (EU Joint communication 2016). The EU-funded intervention should compare the % of people with disabilities who are employed in the public security sector institutions - with the % of the same group employed in the public sector in general. If data are not available from the external sources, the EU-funded intervention can conduct a survey which could be based on a sample of departments/ministries (depending on the available funding) where staffing characteristics will be compared. |
|
Difference between the proportions of positions held by representatives of different ethnicities in the security sector public institutions and the proportions of positions they hold in the public sector as a whole (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline analysis of administrative data from the line ministry/ies. If administrative data is not available: baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.7.1 (Tier III) was adapted. Security forces should not exclude or discriminate against any particular group. Women should have equal opportunities and be empowered within the security forces (EU Joint communication 2016). The EU-funded intervention should compare the % of people of different ethnicity who are employed in the public security sector institutions - with the % of the same groups employed in the public sector in general. If data are not available from the external sources, the EU-funded intervention can conduct a survey which could be based on a sample of departments/ministries (depending on the available funding) where staffing characteristics will be compared. For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.7 |
|
Difference between the proportions of positions held by representatives of different religions in the security sector public institutions and the proportions of positions they hold in the public sector as a whole (disaggregated by sex)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline analysis of administrative data from the line ministry/ies. If administrative data is not available: baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.7.1. was adapted. Â Security forces should not exclude or discriminate against any particular group. Women should have equal opportunities and be empowered within the security forces (EU Joint Communication 2016). The EU-funded intervention should compare the % of people of different religions who are employed in the public security sector institutions - with the % of the same groups employed in the public sector in general. If data are not available from the external sources, the EU-funded intervention can conduct a survey which could be based on a sample of departments/ministries (depending on the available funding) where staffing characteristics will be compared. For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.7.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Security sector is more transparent and open; Civil society actors are more involved and better represented within the security sector |
Status of information on classification of ranks/posts
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Law/regulations outlining the classification
Additional Information:
Classification and recruitment criteria should be clear and publicly accessible. Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council (2016): Transparency and openness should apply and legal guarantees be put in place to prevent arbitrary decision-making. Recruitment and promotion procedures and appointments to senior positions in the security structure should be based on clearly defined, publicly available criteria. Official chains of command must be respected. The classification and dissemination of, and access to, security sector documents (including procurement processes) should be subject to officially agreed and predictable procedures. Information should be public, so as to enhance transparency and understanding. Limitations to openness and transparency may be justified on grounds of clearly defined public policy (e.g. data protection), but should always be kept to a minimum.Â
|
Status of measurable recruitment criteria
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Law/regulation outlining the recruitment criteria
Additional Information:
Recruitment criteria should be clear, enabling the recruitment committee to compare candidates and measure their qualifications for the given position, and they should be publicly accessible.
|
|
Extent of availability and disaggregation of statistics on the security sector available to the public (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline expert analyses conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Please provide a scale for measuring quality, for example: 1 - no information on the security sector is publically available, 2 - only basic information is publically available (i.e. number of military and civilian staff but without disaggregation), 3 - information is available and disaggregated when needed. An expert analysis should be conducted by the EU-funded intervention to define the different levels on this scale and assess the quality (consistency, frequency, disaggregation, etc.) and availability of statistics on the security sector to the public. The expert should also provide recommendations for new types of security sector data that should be made to the public. |
|
Frequency of availability of statistics on the security sector to the public
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline expert analyses conducted by the EU-funded interventionÂ
Additional Information:
Please define here types of statistical data and their frequency.
|
|
Existence of local peace-oriented structures to provide security services
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline expert studies/mappings conducted by the EU-funded interventionÂ
Additional Information:
Local security services can mediate the resolution of disputes and ensure property security (from theft/vandalism/misuse) and human security. An external analysis will need to be conducted by the EU-funded intervention in order to assess the existence, capacities and mandate of such local structures in the target area.
|
|
Existence of locally-based organisations that contribute to effective dialogue with central authorities and security actors
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline expert studies/mappings conducted by the EU-funded interventionÂ
Additional Information:
A baseline and endline analyses will need to be conducted by the EU-funded intervention in order to determine to what extent CSOs are able to contribute to effective dialogue with central authorities and security actors. The analysis may also examine what factors are affecting the effectiveness of this dialogue (other than the CSOs' capacity) and recommend EU-funded interventions to be taken by the EU-funded intervention during implementation.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Reduced trafficking of arms,narcotics and access to weapons |
Number of illicit SALW in the country per capita
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Ministry of Interior statistics requested by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Illegal small arms are routinely used by criminals and drug dealers, or by warlords and child soldiers in wartorn countries, even under arms embargoes. Due to their illegal nature, statistics on the trade and use of illegal small arms are rare and not always reliable. An estimate of the Ministry of Interior may be used here.
|
Number of deaths and injuries caused by small arms and light weapons disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, religion, age, disability status and age of the victim and perpetrator
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Ministry of Interior statistics requested by the EU-funded intervention. If administrative data is not available: Baseline and endline surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Please collect data for both, victims and perpetrators.
|
|
Number of kg of illegal narcotics seized by the police annually (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
National sources: Law Enforcement or other Agencies responsible for narcotics. International sources: UNODC https://dataunodc.un.org/drugs/seizures
Additional Information:
Quantities in the UONDC reports reflects the bulk weight of seizures, with no adjustment for purity or potency. Seizures reported by volume (litres, millilitres, etc.) are converted to kg equivalents by assuming a weight of 1 kg per litre. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Reduced crime rates related directlyto physical safety, incl. humantrafficking, kidnappings, homicides,assaults, armed robberies, SGBV,etc. |
SDG 16.2.2. Number of victims of human trafficking per 100,000 population (disaggregated by sex, age and form of exploitation)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
National sources: national authorities competent in detecting trafficking victims, law enforcement institutions, or services assisting the victims.
International sources: UNODC Global Report on Trafficking in Persons every two years.
Additional Information:
SDG indicator 16.2.2 (Tier I). The indicator will be calculated as the ratio between the sum of detected and undetected victims of trafficking and the population resident in the country, multiplied by 100,000, For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.2
|
Percentage of migrants held in detention centres while their asylum claims are being assessed (disaggregated by sex and age)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline Ministry of Interior records requested by the EU-funded intervention
International sources: https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/
Additional Information:
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Enhanced reconciliation and reintegration into the communities of ex-combatants in post-conflict and fragile context |
Number of ex-combatants having abandoned an armed group (disaggregated by sex and age)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline community surveys conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Community and religious leaders may be a good source of information for collecting data. Data collection in this field is sensitive and methodology and implementation of survey should be adjusted accordingly.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Legal guarantees of transparency and openness of the security system are enhanced |
Status of legal provisions outlining mechanisms/principles of transparency and openness in the security system developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development/update of legal provisions outlining mechanisms/principles of transparency and openness in the security system this indicator is suitable for the output level. |
Number of security sector representatives having participated in events promoting SSR transparency organized by the EU-funded intervention (disaggregated by sex, rank/function and institution).
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of event participants, disaggregated by sex, rank/function and institution
Additional Information:
Please specify event topics and target participants.
|
|
Number of security sector representatives trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of mechanisms and tools for promoting transparency and openness (disaggregated by sex, rank/function and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sex, rank/function and institution.Â
Pre- and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Organizational and structural reforms of all relevant security actors’ institutions in charge of defence and security are developed, e.g. the chain of command, internal audit processes and inspection mechanisms are clearly defined |
Status of legislation/policies regulating internal inspection and/or audit services within the individual security institutions developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development/update of legislation/policies regulating internal inspection and/or audit services, this indicator is suitable for the output level. |
Status of legal provisions/regulations outlining the chain of command developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development/update of legislation/policies outlining the chain of command, this indicator is suitable for the output level.
|
|
Status of code of conduct for different security sector actors developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Code of Conduct developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of a code of conduct for different security sector actors, this indicator is suitable for the output level.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Security actors' rules, regulations, structures and processes, including Integrated Boarder Management and Customs, are legally defined |
Status of laws/regulations on relevant security actor's structures and processes developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations on integrated border management, this indicator is suitable for the output level.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Criminal justice chain, especially with regard to evidence collection, prosecution and detention, is better aligned with international human rights standards |
Status of laws/regulations outlining penitentiary standards and processes in line with international standards developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations aligning penitentiary standards with international norms, this is an appropriate output-level indicator. This can include policies aiming to prevent over-crowding, ensure accessibility for detainees with disabilities, promote the protection of minors, facilitate access to healthcare, and other fields of reform. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Enhanced crime reporting mechanisms and protection systems for victims and witnesses of crime |
Number of new crime reporting mechanisms established with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Notes from the meetings; Written procedures for the mechanisms.
Additional Information:
This can include a unified emergency number, phone numbers for anonymous tips, specialised numbers/focal points for crimes relating to domestic and gender-based violence, trafficking or other issues. |
Status of laws/regulations outlining the principles and mechanisms for the protection of victims and witnesses of crime developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations outlining the principles and mechanisms for the protection of victims and witnesses of crime, this indicator is suitable for the output level.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Formal oversight mechanisms by parliamentary and independent bodies (e.g. court of auditors, public accounts committees, parliamentary commissions, CSOs) are defined |
Status of laws/regulations outlining the functioning, composition and budget of formal oversight mechanisms including parliamentary and independent bodies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations outlining the functioning, composition and budget of formal oversight mechanisms in the security sector, this indicator is suitable for the output level. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Improved capacities of civil society actors, parliamentary and independent bodies allowing them to participate in security sector reform and oversight |
Number of representatives of the civil society, Parliament and independent bodies trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of SSR aspects and oversight (disaggregated by sex and type of actor)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Â
Database of participants
Pre- and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
Number of recommendations of civil society and independent bodies' on SSR published with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Written recommendations; Notes from meetings with the actors.
Additional Information:
Please specify the actors participating in development of recommendations.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Criteria for recruitment (including vetting procedures and representation of ethnic groups / minorities and women), remuneration, training & promotion of security actors are clearly defined |
Status of regulations outlining criteria for recruitment, training and promotion of security actors developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations outlining criteria for recruitment, training and promotion of security actors, this indicator is suitable for the output level.
|
Number of human resources and management staff in the security sector trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of standards/processes relating to recruitment, training and promotion (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Database of participants Pre- and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Enhanced capacities of security actors on aspects linked to their competencies, duties (ethics and deontology rules), response protocols, equipment and infrastructure |
Number of security actors trained by the EU-funded intervention with improved competencies, as well as skills and/or knowledge of their duties and response protocols (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Database of participants Pre- and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and institutions. Some examples are: Integrated Border Management rules, regulations, structures and processes; Human trafficking channels, the rights of migrants and response protocols; Small arms and light weapons collection and destruction protocols; Response protocols for different types of emergency situations/protection of minors. All trainings should address compliance with human rights standards. |
Number of border management/police officials trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge and/or skills on Integrated Border Management rules, regulations, structures and processes (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of participants
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
|
Number of penitentiary staff trained by the EU-funded intervention with knowledge and/or skills on response protocols for different types of emergency situations/protection of minors (or another topic) (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sexÂ
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Anti-trafficking efforts (incl. smuggling of arms and narcotics / human trafficking incl. smuggling of migrants) are strengthened at national and local levels (e.g. awareness raised, capacities strengthened, legal measures defined) |
Number of police officers trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of human trafficking channels, the rights of migrants and response protocols (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sexÂ
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
Number of national or local strategies for preventing and combatting human trafficking / smuggling of arms and narcotics developed with support of the EU-funded intervention (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Strategy document, notes from working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If only one strategy is foreseen, please change the formulation of the indicator to "Status of". |
|
Number of police officers trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of mechanisms for preventing and combatting the smuggling of arms and narcotics (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sexÂ
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
|
Number of persons reached by public awareness campaigns on the risks of human trafficking, illegal migration (or related topics) implemented with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Press clipping, event notes and attendance records, online analytics reports
Additional Information:
For each type of awareness raising activity, please use specialized methodology. For traditional media - press clipping and estimates of or surveys on media reach may be used, for online campaigns - online analytics, and for direct contacts and events - attendance records.
|
|
Status of laws/regulations outlining the rights of human trafficking victims developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations outlining the rights of human trafficking victims, this is an appropriate output-level indicator.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Reduction of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW) is promoted (e.g. awareness raised, capacities strengthened, legal measures defined) |
Number of police officers trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge and/or skills in the small arms and light weapons collection and destruction protocols (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sexÂ
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
Number of national or local strategies for promoting SALW reduction developed with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Strategy document, notes from working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If only one strategy is foreseen, please change the formulation of the indicator to "Status of".
|
|
Number of persons reached by public awareness campaigns on the SALW collection/destruction (or related topics) implemented with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Press clipping, event notes and attendance records, online analytics reports
Additional Information:
For each type of awareness raising activity, please use specialized methodology. For traditional media - press clipping and estimates of or surveys on media reach may be used, for online campaigns - online analytics, and for direct contacts and events - attendance records.
|
|
Status of laws/regulations outlining the rules for SALW collection and destruction developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Legislation/policies developed/updated with support of the EU-funded intervention. Notes from the policy development working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If the EU-funded intervention will support the development of laws/regulations outlining the rules of SALW collection and destruction, this is an appropriate output-level indicator.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) is promoted and/or strengthened (e.g. awareness raised, capacities strengthened, strategies developed) |
Number of police officers trained by the EU-funded intervention with increased knowledge of DDR challenges and the available support services (disaggregated by sex and institution)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants, disaggregated by sexÂ
Pre and post-training test reports
Additional Information:
Please specify training topics and target participants.
|
Number of national or local strategies on DDR developed with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Strategy documents, notes from working group meetings.
Additional Information:
If only one strategy is foreseen, please change the formulation of the indicator to "Status of".
|
|
Number of ex-combatants benefitting from psycho-social support, VET or similar services provided by the EU-funded intervention (disaggregated by sex and age) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Database of beneficiaries, training materials, mentoring reports.
Additional Information:
Please specify the type of support/services provided to the ex-combatants. |
|
Number of persons reached by public awareness campaigns on the importance of DDR and promoting the re-integration of ex-combatants (or related topics) implemented with support of the EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Press clipping, event notes and attendance records, online analytics reports
Additional Information:
For each type of awareness raising activity, please use specialized methodology. For traditional media - press clipping and estimates of or surveys on media reach may be used, for online campaigns - online analytics, and for direct contacts and events - attendance records.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Reduced crime rates related directlyto physical safety, incl. humantrafficking, kidnappings, homicides,assaults, armed robberies, SGBV,etc. |
Proportion of population that feel safe walking alone around the area they live
(Percentage)
Data Source:
UNODC data portal, https://dataunodc.un.org/
Additional Information:
Â
SDG Indicator 16.1.4. Tier II. This indicator refers to the proportion of the population (adults) who feel safe walking alone in their neighbourhood.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Enhanced reconciliation and reintegration into the communities of ex-combatants in post-conflict and fragile context |
Percentage of ex-combatants who were effectively integrated into their communities, out of the number of ex-combatants having abandoned an armed group who received support from the EU intervention (disaggregated by sex and age) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline community surveys to be conducted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Please define what "effectively integrated" means in the local context, i.e. finding employment, finding a fixed residence. Data collection in this field is sensitive and methodology and implementation of the baseline and endline surveys should be adjusted accordingly. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Enhanced capacities of security actors on aspects linked to their competencies, duties (ethics and deontology rules), response protocols, equipment and infrastructure |
Number of detention facilities that comply with international standards thanks to support of this EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Written recommendations and conclusions on standards; Reports from detention facilities inspections conducted by the EU-funded intervention.
Additional Information:
Please identify specific standards which the EU-funded intervention supported.
|
Number of [types of equipment - please specify] that are put in service with support of this EU-funded intervention
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Equipment inventory; Handover documents.
Additional Information:
Please specify the type of equipment the EU-funded intervention will provide.
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Security institutions are effective, internally coherent and adequately staffed and equpped to perform their duties; clear separation of military and civilian components of the security system is ensured and the chain of command is respected |
Number of confirmed cases where civilian control was not properly exercised
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Baseline and endline studies to be conducted and budgeted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
Please further specify how the civilian control was not properly exercised.Â
|
Citizens' perception of the effectiveness of the witness protection system
(Qualitative)
Data Source:
Public records
Additional Information:
The EU-funded intervention will need to conduct a survey that will assess the citizens' perception of the witness protection system. The survey can include a scale on perception of effectiveness (i.e. Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly disagree) and qualitative questions to understand what are the reasons for this perception.
|
|
Number of internal security officers and police per 100,000 people (disaggregated by sex) (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
National sources: Security sector institutions. International sources: UNODC data portal, https://dataunodc.un.org/
Additional Information:
This indicator at the international level is sourced from the UNODC Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems and refers to the civil police force. Police means personnel in public agencies whose principal functions are the prevention, detection and investigation of crime and the apprehension of alleged offenders. It is distinct from national guards or local militia. |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Strengthened internal and external accountability of security sector actors |
Percentage of citizens who report that they were a victim or witness of a crime but say that they did not report it to the police (disaggregated by sex)
(Percentage)
Data Source:
Public records
Additional Information:
This type of survey may be sensitive if the trust to the police is low, so the survey methodology and implementation needs to be adjusted accordingly.Â
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Reduced trafficking of arms,narcotics and access to weapons |
SDG 16.4.2 Percentage of seized, found or surrendered arms whose illicit origin or context has been traced or established by a competent authority in line with international instruments (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
National sources: Security sector institutions responsible for firearms issues. International sources: UNODC https://dataunodc.un.org/firearms
Additional Information:
SDG Indicator 16.4.2. The indicator is calculated as a proportion. The denominator of the proportion is the total number of arms seized, found and surrendered. The numerator will include all those arms for which the point of diversion was established / identified, either through tracing or by a competent authority (e.g. through intelligence). For the detailed indicator methodology please see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.4 |
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Specific Objective - Outcome: Reduced crime rates related directlyto physical safety, incl. humantrafficking, kidnappings, homicides,assaults, armed robberies, SGBV,etc. |
SDG 16.1.1. Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population (disaggregated by sex and age)
(Numeric)
Data Source:
Database of training participants; pre- and post-training tests
Additional Information:
SDG Indicator 16.1.1 (Tier I). This indicator is widely used at national and international level to measure the most extreme form of violent crime and it also provides a direct indication of lack of security. It is calculated as the total number of victims of intentional homicide recorded in a given year divided by the total resident population in the same year, multiplied by 100,000. For a detailed methodology of the SDG indicator please see: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=16&Target=16.1
|
| Result | Indicator(s) |
| Output: Organizational and structural reforms of all relevant security actors’ institutions in charge of defence and security are developed, e.g. the chain of command, internal audit processes and inspection mechanisms are clearly defined |
EURF 2.29. Number of state institutions and non-state actors supported on security, border management, countering violent extremism, conflict prevention, protection of civilian population and human rights (OPSYS core indicator)
Data Source:
Progress and final reports for the EU-funded intervention ROM reviews Baseline and endline surveys conducted and budgeted by the EU-funded intervention
Additional Information:
This is the EURF indicator 2.29. The indicator refers to the number of different state institutions and non-state actors supported in their work in the areas of security. Please avoid double counting of organisations. For full details on methodology, please visit https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/eu-rfi. |