73. Proportion of eligible population enrolled in national programmes contributing to ending hunger with WFP capacity strengthening support

73. Proportion of eligible population enrolled in national programmes contributing to ending hunger with WFP capacity strengthening support

VERSION

V3.0 - 2026.03 — Existing with revisions

INDICATOR CODE

73

TECHNICAL OWNER

PRGS - CCS Workstream

INDICATOR TYPE

Country Level Outcome Indicator

INDICATOR CLASSIFICATION

Complementary

INDICATOR SCOPE

Sector Neutral

APPLICABILITY

This indicator is recommended for all CCS sub-activities, when efforts focus on strengthening national programme coverage, targeting, or entitlements.

Note: This indicator measures progress achieved by national stakeholders, to which WFP contributes but is not the sole driver. It should therefore be used in combination with other indicators that more directly reflect WFP’s capacity‑strengthening support.

UNIT OF MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Percentage of population

DEFINITION

Eligible population: The eligible population refers to all individuals who meet the official criteria to receive assistance under the national programme. These criteria are defined by the national stakeholder (e.g. ministry or agency) and may include factors such as age group, geographic location, vulnerability status, school grade, household income, or other nationally set eligibility rules. The eligible population represents the total number of people who could be enrolled if the programme reached full coverage.

Enrolment refers to the number of eligible individuals who have been formally registered and accepted into the national programme. This means their information has been captured through the programme’s enrolment or registration system (WFP-managed or national), and they are officially included as programme participants for the reporting period.

National programme: A structured set of interventions designed and managed by national actors within the country to deliver essential goods and services to the population. It operates within and depends on national systems, serving as a practical mechanism for implementing national priorities, strategies, and commitments and achieving development outcomes.

Leadership is generally exercised by government ministries (central or local), parastatals (semi-autonomous state agencies or state-owned enterprises), and recognized national institutions (including public-private partnerships or federations). At sub-national level, leadership typically rests with regional or local governments but may also include decentralized agencies or parastatals operating under local mandates.

WFP capacity strengthening support: Engagements with national stakeholders aimed at enhancing the capacity of national systems and programmes to function efficiently, effectively and sustainably. WFP applies a mix of support types – from accompaniment to advocacy, convening, piloting, modeling, secondment, physical and financial assets, knowledge products and training – to address diverse needs and entry points.

* WFP does not work alone as an enabling partner, and results cannot always be attributed exclusively to WFP. Contributions from other stakeholders should be acknowledged in narratives.

RATIONALE

This indicator assesses the extent to which national programmes are reaching eligible populations, providing insight into whether WFP’s capacity strengthening efforts are contributing to improved programme coverage and system performance. By comparing enrolment against the estimated eligible population, it reflects the functionality of national systems for identifying, registering, and serving intended beneficiaries, while recognizing that progress depends on multiple institutional and contextual factors.

DATA COLLECTION TOOL

The primary data source is the national stakeholder with whom WFP collaborates (e.g. relevant ministries, government agencies, or private‑sector entities). Data may also be sourced from other government institutions responsible for national statistical or M&E systems, even without a formal partnership.

For certain sectors, such as nutrition, alternative methods like SQUEAC or SLEAC cross‑sectional surveys may be used.

It is recommended that the activity manager and monitoring staff maintain a single Excel file for the duration of the CSP, stored on the CO shared drive. This sheet should record:

• the estimated number of people eligible for the programme and the source of this estimate;

• the number of enrolled people and the corresponding data source (WFP system or partner/national system);

• notes on data quality, including any cleaning, assumptions, or reconciliation steps applied;

• metadata on each data point (e.g. date received, institution providing the information, version history);

• evidence of the calculations used to derive indicator values (including baselines and targets);

• any disaggregation details (e.g. geographic location, gender where available); and

• any relevant comments to support traceability and future verification

SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS

Not applicable, unless using a sampling methodology, such as SQUEAC and SLEAC (see row above)

INDICATOR CALCULATION FOR REPORTING

Estimating eligible population

Estimate the number of people eligible for assistance in the programme using available national data, such as the number of registered or officially recognized eligible individuals.

Determining enrolment

• If the national programme is implemented through WFP systems, the number of people enrolled can be obtained from internal WFP data.

• If the programme is implemented through national systems, enrolment figures must be obtained from partner data sources.

Calculation

The indicator is calculated using the following formula.

DATA ENTRY AND DISAGGREGATION IN CORPORATE SYSTEMS

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

• Sub-activity

• Country

Follow-up values are reported in COMET as shown below.

BASELINE

Baselines are set only once, at one of the following points:

1. At the beginning of the CSP, or

2. When the indicator is selected for reporting after the commencement of the CSP, or

3. A change in target, location and/or modality that triggers a new reporting combination (target, location and modality) for an existing indicator.

Baselines remain fixed for the entire CSP period and are not recalculated annually, unless applicable above.

For a new national programme, the baseline is zero. For an existing programme, the baseline should be the enrolment level from the year prior to the start of WFP’s capacity strengthening support.

TARGET SETTING

Annual targets:

Annual targets should reflect gradual, realistic improvement over the course of the CSP and be informed by the CCS workplan jointly developed by WFP and the national stakeholder. Where applicable, they should also align with sector‑specific international standards.

End of CSP target:

The end‑line target should reflect the results anticipated at the conclusion of the CSP period.

FREQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION

Annual data collection.

INTERPRETATION

This indicator measures the proportion of eligible people who are enrolled in a national programme. Higher values may reflect improvements in national systems related to targeting, registration, data management, outreach, service delivery, or coordination, but such interpretations must be supported by additional evidence. The narrative should therefore explain the system changes that have contributed to improvements in programme coverage, how WFP’s capacity strengthening support influenced those changes, and what other contextual or institutional factors may have affected enrolment levels.

REPORTING EXAMPLE(S)

The following example illustrates how capacity‑strengthening efforts can lead to improved enrolment outcomes and how to report this through the indicator.

WFP supported the Ministry of Social Development (MoSD) to strengthen enrolment practices for the national cash assistance programme through updated standard operating procedures, training of 250 frontline staff, and the introduction of a simple SMS‑based appointment system to reduce long queues and missed registrations. These improvements followed a joint bottleneck analysis conducted by MoSD and WFP, which identified outdated enrolment procedures and limited staff capacity as key barriers to eligible households joining the programme.

As a result of these capacity‑strengthening efforts, the MoSD processed enrolments more efficiently in 2022, enabling 18,000 new eligible households to register. In 2022, the estimated number of eligible households nationwide was 60,000, of whom 42,000 were enrolled, resulting in 70% of eligible households covered, compared with 40% the previous year.

WFP will continue supporting the MoSD to further improve case management and outreach so that remaining eligible households can access the programme in future enrolment cycles.

INDICATORS COLLECTED & ANALYSED AT THE SAME TIME

Other indicators that should be collected alongside this indicator include relevant CCS output indicators that capture WFP’s capacity strengthening support to national systems (C.25, C.26, C.27, C.8, C.28), as well as complementary outcome indicators (#37) that help explain changes in key system functions that support effective enrolment. This includes programme delivery capacity (e.g. targeting effectiveness, outreach and case‑identification processes), digital information system performance, human resource management (workforce capacity), and financing for national programmes. Monitoring these indicators together provides a clearer picture of whether national systems have the capacity, resources, and operational functionality needed to reach eligible populations at scale.

COMPLEMENTARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Complementary qualitative evidence should help verify how WFP’s capacity strengthening support contributed to changes in programme enrolment and system performance, as the quantitative measure alone cannot explain the reasons behind shifts in coverage. Such evidence may include confirmation from national stakeholders or partners, through key informant interviews, meeting minutes, email correspondence, written acknowledgements, or other documentation, that clarifies WFP’s technical, advisory, or facilitative role. Additional qualitative materials, such as records of coordination meetings, analyses produced with WFP support, or documentation of pilots and operational improvements, can help illustrate the system changes that affected enrolment and the pathways through which WFP contributed to those changes.

DECISIONS DATA CAN INFORM

Data from this indicator informs where to focus capacity strengthening efforts, how to adjust delivery modalities and outreach to reduce access barriers, and whether to reallocate resources and technical assistance toward specific bottlenecks, such as in registration, verification, or payment systems. It supports target‑setting and course corrections, guides policy dialogue and advocacy (e.g. eligibility criteria, grievance/redress, interoperability of registries), and helps determine partnership needs with ministries or service providers to improve data quality and system performance. Trends also feed into risk management (identifying persistent gaps) and into decisions on scaling, sustaining, or exiting WFP support as national coverage approaches targets.

VISUALIZATION

A simple bar chart comparing the estimated eligible population with the number enrolled is the most appropriate visualization for this indicator. This straightforward display helps illustrate the coverage gap without implying greater precision than the underlying administrative data support (e.g. varying quality and definition across reporting periods).

LIMITATIONS

Potential limitations of this indicator are outlined below. These largely stem from the complexity of national programme delivery and the varying quality of administrative data systems. However, they can be managed through clear documentation of data sources, ongoing engagement with national stakeholders, and data‑quality checks.

• Limited by national data quality and completeness. Enrolment and eligibility figures depend on administrative systems that may be outdated, inconsistent, or incomplete, affecting accuracy.

• Challenges in estimating the eligible population. Eligibility criteria may change, be interpreted differently across regions, or be imperfectly recorded, making it difficult to produce a reliable estimate of the total eligible population.

• Influenced by factors beyond WFP’s control. National policy decisions, funding constraints, political changes or system reforms can alter enrolment trends independently of WFP’s capacity strengthening efforts, making it harder to interpret progress.

• Potential delays in accessing data. When relying on partner or government systems, data may be shared infrequently or with significant lag, limiting real‑time decision‑making.

• Does not measure the quality of participation or assistance. The indicator shows whether eligible people are enrolled, but not whether they receive timely, adequate, or equitable services once enrolled.

• Variation in availability of disaggregated information. Geographic or gender‑disaggregated data may not be collected consistently by national systems, limiting the ability to assess equity or identify underserved groups.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Refer to the CCS Framework, 9 Types of Capacity Strengthening Support, and additional resources in the CCS section of the Programme Guidance Manual.