36. Percentage of organizations reporting that they are satisfied with coordination led and/or co-led by WFP

36. Percentage of organizations reporting that they are satisfied with coordination led and/or co-led by WFP

VERSION

V1.0 - 2026.03 — NEW

INDICATOR CODE

36

TECHNICAL OWNER

SCD & TEC

INDICATOR TYPE

Country Level Outcome Indicator

INDICATOR CLASSIFICATION

Mandatory

INDICATOR SCOPE

Programme specific

APPLICABILITY

The selection of this indicator is mandatory against the following sub-activities in CSP logframes. Selection of the below sub-activities will trigger in COMET the mandatory selection of this indicator:

1. Coordination (CORD)

This indicator is also recommended against the following sub-activities:

1. Food Security Cluster (FSC)

UNIT OF MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Unit of measurement: Number of organizations

Unit of analysis: Percentage of organizations

DEFINITION

This indicator measures the satisfaction rate of organizations who have engaged with formal coordination mechanisms that were led or co-led by WFP during the reporting period.

Below are some key terminologies for this indicator:

Formal Coordination Mechanisms: are those country-level coordination forums established by a UN Country Team, Humanitarian Country Team, or national disaster management agency; having the endorsement of the RC or RC/HC, and the agreement of the UN Country Team and/or Humanitarian Country Team. They include, but are not limited to, country level Clusters (activated by the IASC), HCT and UNCT working groups (incl sectoral working groups and working groups established under the Operations Management Team), etcetera.

Lead/Co-lead: describes a formal role assumed by an organization, with the endorsement of the RC/HC and country team, wherein that organization becomes responsible to regularly convene an appropriate group of stakeholders (i.e. a coordination forum) and lead them in working together to achieve the stated objectives endorsed by the RC/HC and country team; including managing a common/joint workplan, maintaining records of any joint work, reporting back and providing secretariat support to the forum.

RATIONALE

This indicator is required to measure WFPs performance as a lead or co-lead of coordination forums and platforms at country level; in line with both Article II section d (i.e. providing services to bilateral donors, UN agencies and NGOs) and Article III (i.e. consulting with, seeking advice from and cooperating with the UN, FAO and other relevant organizations) of the General Regulations approved by the EB in 2025.

DATA COLLECTION TOOL

Each country office drafts and conducts a feedback survey to be administered to relevant partners. User feedback surveys are conducted, in line with the standards set by the relevant HQ Divisions, for each CSP Activity of the following categories: Mandated Logistics Support, Mandated Telecommunications Support, Aviation Services, and On-demand Services. Where the CSP Activity includes the Coordination Sub-Activity, these surveys must include an appropriate question (see Indicator Calculation for Reporting section below) to solicit feedback on this specific sub-activity.

A variety of digital tools are used to collect this feedback, including but not limited to Survey Monkey, Microsoft Forms; records of surveys conducted, and user feedback received must be collected digitally and held per corporate guidance on reporting and record keeping.

SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS

N/A

INDICATOR CALCULATION FOR REPORTING

DATA ENTRY AND DISAGGREGATION IN CORPORATE SYSTEMS

Values are recorded in the logframe. Each value has a reporting combination which is created based on:

• Sub-activity

• Location

Baseline, target and Follow-up value is reported in the COMET logframe as one overall number.

BASELINE

Baselines are set only once, per CSP, at the beginning of the relevant activity. Baselines remain fixed for the entire CSP period and are not recalculated annually, unless applicable to an entirely new activity.

TARGET SETTING

Annual targets:

The minimum recommended target is 80%.

End of CSP target:

Gradually higher than the annual targets established by the CO based on the relevant context.

FREQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION

User feedback surveys must be conducted at least once per-year for each CSP Activity of the following categories: Mandated Logistics Support, Mandated Telecommunications Support, On-demand Services. It is also recommended that:

1. An initial user feedback survey be conducted 6 months after the approval of a CSP or CSP revision where the Coordination Sub-activity Tag has been newly applied to a CSP Activity; targeting users of the WFP support provided under that activity.

2. A final user feedback survey be conducted no later than 1 month after the approval of a CSP revision where an Activity including the Coordination Sub-activity Tag has been discontinued or otherwise deactivated.

INTERPRETATION

This indicator should be considered a ‘health check’ on WFP’s role in coordination forums and architecture at country level; values below 75%, indicating that 1 in 4 organizations are ‘not satisfied’ with WFP in this regard, can be an early sign of difficulties and can assist country offices in identifying underlying causes (e.g. insufficient resourcing, misaligned objectives, a failure to manage expectations, etcetera).

REPORTING EXAMPLE(S)

N/A

INDICATORS COLLECTED & ANALYSED AT THE SAME TIME

The following indicators may be reported and analysed along with this indicator:

• 104. Percentage of organizations reporting that coordination led and/or co-led by WFP has contributed to the effectiveness.

• H.31 Number of government and partner organizations supported by WFP coordination and/or services.

COMPLEMENTARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

N/A

DECISIONS DATA CAN INFORM

Low values for this indicator should trigger a more thorough review of Coordination activities led/co-led by WFP (see below Limitations; see above Interpretation).

VISUALIZATION

N/A

LIMITATIONS

This indicator is dependent on a subjective measure of satisfaction experienced, or not, by individuals engaged in coordination forums led/co-led by WFP; as such it can indicate potential issues but is not an objective measure of WFPs performance. Low levels of “satisfaction” may be attributable to external factors, similarly high levels of “satisfaction” may be attributed to unrelated improvements in the operational context. For these reasons other Mandatory Indicators, including objective and subjective measures of efficiency and/or effectiveness gains as well as objective output measures should always accompany this indicator.

FURTHER INFORMATION

N/A