Criteria
Please rate the draft below and send your feedback by using the form below!!!
This section provides a draft of the Criteria of the framework (see here and below). The criteria provide the basis for a systematic evaluation of the different elements of the framework, ensuring that they are consistent with our values, and combine to form a coherent framework which can achieve our purpose and drive sustainable change towards our vision.
(NB the guding questions below are just examples to illustrate how the table would work once populated).
Criteria (Darft v.2.0)
|
Framework Criteria evaluating overall coherence of the group of goals selected to achieve our purpose and secure progress towards our vision |
Goals Criteria evaluating each goal proposed |
Targets Criteria evaluating the targets identified under each goal |
Indicators Criteria evaluating the indicators identified to measure progress against targets and goals in order to achieve our purpose |
Implementation Criteria evaluating proposed methods and approaches used to implement action to achieve targets, goals and purpose |
|
|
Foundation Values |
|||||
|
Environmental Sustainability |
1) Does the framework specifically recognise global resource constraints? |
||||
|
Poverty Eradication |
1) Does the framework clearly define what is meant by poverty and is this a holistic definition? |
1) Is the monitoring framework clearly targeted at eradication and not reduction? |
|||
|
Human Rights |
1) Does the goal reference and is it consistent with international human rights law and standards? |
||||
|
Equity and Inclusion |
1) Does the framework clearly identify equality of outcomes as part of its purpose? |
1) Does each target clearly set expected milestones towards greater equity and equality within the goal? |
1) Does each indicator allow for the collection of data disaggregated by key marginalisation factors such as by gender, disability and by age… |
||
|
Global Responsibility |
1) Does the framework clearly identify roles for all states? (other actors?) |
||||
|
Implementation Values |
|||||
|
Accountability |
1) Does the framework set out clear accountability for each goal and the framework as a whole at the national, regional and international levels? |
1) Is the monitoring framework clearly targeted at eradication and not reduction? |
1) Does the framework establish milestones for each target and clear accountability mechanisms should progress go off track? |
||
|
Evidence-Based |
|||||
|
Effectiveness |
|||||
|
Participation |
1) Has the framework demonstrated how it has included stakeholders in its development, particularly people with experience of poverty and marginalisation? |
1) Are clear mechanisms established by which stakeholders hold each other to account – particularly the role of people living with poverty in holding state actors to account under international human rights law and standards? |
|||
You can see the previous version (v. 1.0) of this statement here.
What now?
You can rate the current draft of the criteria and send your feedback by filling in the form below.
Whenever the satisfaction levels on these sections dip below 50%, this will trigger an automatic redraft. There will also be pre-established moments for rewriting, notably ahead of key advocacy moments (eg. January 2013 – ahead of the HLP report, June 2013 – ahead of the UN Special Event, and one further date to tie in with Open Working Group decision-making). You will find more information on this process in Beyond2015's Content Strategy here.
Average rating
Latest comment
The frame work is fair, but if time -line could be included any proposed projects might escape time suffering.






















All comments
View more