32. Climate adaptation benefit score (CABS)

32. Climate adaptation benefit score (CABS)

VERSION

V6.0 - 2026.03 — Existing

INDICATOR CODE

32

TECHNICAL OWNER

PRGR

INDICATOR TYPE

Country Level Outcome Indicator

INDICATOR CLASSIFICATION

Complementary

INDICATOR SCOPE

Programme specific

APPLICABILITY

The selection of this indicator is recommended against the following sub-activities in CSPs logframes. Selection of the below sub-activities will NOT trigger the mandatory selection of this indicator:

1. Climate Adapted Assets and Agricultural Practices (CAP)

2. Other Climate Adaptation and Risk Management Activities (CAR)

3. Climate and Weather Risks Information Services (CIS)

4. Food Assistance for Assets (FFA)

5. Smallholder Agricultural Market Support (SMS)

UNIT OF MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Percentage of households

DEFINITION

This indicator measures households’ perception of the extent they benefited of training, information or advice received to improve their resilience to climate shocks, stresses, and variability by adapting agricultural practices and livelihoods.

This indicator is based on 5 components referring to expected benefits of training / information /advice provided by WFP or its cooperating partners:

1. Soil health

2. Yield

3. Crop loss

4. Water availability

5. Animal loss

The perception on each applicable component is gauged by 3 options:

1. Noticing a positive change since last year

2. Maintaining a level equal to other households in the same community

3. Satisfaction with results compared to the amount of resources and work invested

RATIONALE

CABS is used to monitor the relevance and effectiveness of training, information, or advice given to adapt agricultural practices and livelihoods and/or to improve their resilience to climate variability and weather-related shocks.

Whenever any of the 5 components measured by this indicator is relevant or applies to a WFP intervention, the perception of beneficiaries is expected to improve gradually until being positive for all 3 options assessed. In other words, the CABS score ranges from 0 to 3, where 0 means that there is no perception of benefit and 3 means that the perception of benefit is optimal. Depending on its value each household is classified in three levels (low, medium, high – see calculation section).

DATA COLLECTION TOOL

The electronic version of the questions associated with this indicator (listed below) can be found in Survey Designer by selecting the Climate Adaptation Benefit Score (CABS) Indicator of the Adaptation and resilience to climate shocks Indicator Area.

A minimum module of six questions is required for this indicator. Only the last question is used to calculate the score, while the first five questions are used to ensure consistency and efficiency during the data collection exercise by filtering applicable questions.

Preconditions (Questions 1-3)

1. HHCABSAccessLand - Does your household have access to productive/cultivable land? 0=No,1=Yes

2. HHCABSSeed12Months - Did your household seed the land in the last 12 months?

0=No,1=Yes

3. HHCABSOwnLvstk - Does your household own livestock and/or poultry? 0=No,1=Yes

(if the answer is “No” to all the pre-questions above, end the survey and replace this household in your sampling)

Information on the Food Consumption Score indicator can be collected using the standard food consumption module available here as well as in

SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS

Sampling requirements are the same applicable for PDMs or monitoring surveys where the questions of the CABS data collection tool will be included. Detail guidance on sampling options is available here. Panel sampling and the use of control groups are strongly recommended for the follow-up of this indicator.

INDICATOR CALCULATION FOR REPORTING

The CABS is calculated using answers of questions of the last three questions in each area (soil health, yield, crop loss, water availability, animal loss)

For follow-up values the calculation considers only those components/benefits for which households answered “yes”. This means, that follow-up values of this indicator report only the perception of beneficiaries that have received and used the information / training / advice provided by WFP and/or its cooperating partners.

It is however recommended that (sampling size allowing) these results are compared within the same target group with those of households where the information / training / advice was not received or used. The difference between the two types of results could be interpreted as the percentage of improvement in the perception of beneficiaries attributable to the use of this information/training/advice.

Detailed calculations

A. Calculate the total SCORE per household and per type of expected benefit

All answers are numerically converted (Yes = 1, No=0). Individual answers are then used to compute an overall score for each household as follows:

• Calculate the total sum of positive answers for Q1-Q5 for each household:

Q1 (Soil health) = HHCABSSoilImprov + HHCABSSoilCompare + HHCABSSoilSatisf

Q2 (Yield) = HHCABSYieldsImprov + HHCABSYieldsCompare + HHCABSYieldsSatisf

Q3 (Crop loss) = HHCABSCropImprov + HHCABSCropCompare + HHCABSCropSatisf

Q4 (Water availability) = HHCABSWaterImprov + HHCABSWaterCompare + HHCABSWaterSatisf

Q5 (Animal loss) = HHCABSAnimalImprov + HHCABSAnimalCompare + HHCABSAnimalSatisf

• Calculate the total CABS of each household as follows:

  Being n = The number of applicable Qs for each household:

CABS = / n

B. Classify all household in three categories

Once the CABS is calculated for each household, households are classified in three categories (low-medium-high) to show the distribution of the results within the target population. Therefore:

• if CABS<=1 the household is categorized as reporting a low CABS,

• if 1<CABS<=2 the household is categorized as reporting a medium CABS, and

• if CABS>2 then the household is categorized as reporting a high CABS.

Once all households are categorized, counting the number of households in each category (low-medium-high) is divided by the sample size (N). N is defined as the number of households that answer “yes” in question 5 to at least one type of benefit.

C. Disaggregating CABs by its components (Expected benefits)

To disaggregate this indicator, the same three categories (low, medium, high) explained in step b), are used to classify the Q scores obtained in step A for each of the following components:

Q1 = Soil health

Q2 = Yield

Q3 = Crop loss

Q4 = Water availability

Q5 = Animal loss

The sample size (N) for each component might be different as it is the number of households that answer “yes” in question 5 to the corresponding type of benefit (see the example section).

This is the percentage of each level to be reported in COMET. (see disaggregation section)

Link to a detailed Excel example and SPSS guidance 

DATA ENTRY AND DISAGGREGATION IN CORPORATE SYSTEMS

Mandatory:

• type of expected benefit

The table below shows the minimum set of figures that should always be captured in COMET for this indicator:

As each figure represents the percentage of households on each level, the sum of all rows must be equal to 100% to be consistent. Likewise, the total to be entered at CO level needs to be validated by COMET to ensure that this figure is between the Min and Max value reported under the same column.

Cohort/target group desegregation is mandatory.

Panel sampling and the use of control groups are strongly recommended. Therefore, it is particularly important when entering information into COMET, that the sampling size and sampling frame of each data collection exercise are entered into the corresponding COMET field of the outcome data entry module.

For each follow-up it is also required to specify the type of applicable weather-related shocks (multiple choice between Floods, Drought, Storm/Cyclone, Heat Wave, Wildfire, other) or other shocks to which the target groups were exposed in the previous year to the data collection round.

For this indicator's purpose, a cohort is defined as a group of beneficiaries that minimally share characteristics such as receiving the same type of WFP assistance/support and during the same period. They can also share other characteristics such as geographic area, vulnerability level, transfer modality, residence status, donor, or cooperating partner.

Recommended:

• Sex of the household head

• Transfer modality

Important data entry options: Since SO2 CSP activities commonly combine, sequence and/or layer multiple sub-activities to support the same cohort/target group, this indicator can be reported with all applicable sub-activities. COs are requested to use multiple sub-activities to report on this indicator when its results should be presented as the outcome of multiple sub-activities supporting the same target group.

BASELINE

Baseline should be established once per activity, regardless of activity duration.

In line with the business rules, baseline values should be established within 3 months before and after the starting date of the activity. However, it is strongly recommended to collect baseline values before the start of the activity implementation.

If the baseline is collected after the start of the activity implementation, the calculation is made as noted below for a regular follow-up (see calculations section). If it is collected before the start of the activity implementation the calculation does not consider question 4 and 5 but uses all answers to question 6 (See section – Data Collection Tool).

TARGET SETTING

Annual targets:

For categories ‘medium’ and ‘high’: The annual target should be at least equal and ideally higher than the latest follow-up of the previous year or than the baseline figure if there is no previous follow-up.

For the category ‘low’: the value is expected to be lower than in the baseline and to continue decreasing over time until the end of the CSP/assistance provided to the same target group.

End of CSP target:

This is country specific and depends mostly on the baseline figures, context conditions, CSP duration and programme design (e.g., duration of assistance, complementary activities, etc.).

In any case, for multi-year interventions with the same beneficiary group, annual targets of the category “low” are expected to decrease towards the end of the CSP.

FREQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION

Frequency of measurement is based on programme objectives and timeline. However, monitoring twice a year is mandatory and should be conducted during the same periods every year to enable comparability across surveys.

If the component referring to yields applies to the target group, this indicator should be measured after the harvest season.

If part of the programme objective is to improve the resilience of farmers to climate variability and weather-related shocks, the follow-up data for this indicator should be collected immediately after the occurrence of this type of shocks.

For years when a baseline is conducted, only one follow up is required.

INTERPRETATION

The overall score measures households’ perception of the extent they benefited of trainings, information or advice received to improve their resilience to climate shocks, stressors, and variability by adapting agricultural practices and livelihoods.

The performance of this indicator should always be explained by the performance of its components (type of expected benefit). Low scores could be explained also by external factors, such as the occurrence or magnitude of a weather-related shock. These explanations are a key part of the narrative and interpretation of this indicator.

As this indicator is reported as a percentage, and the total of households considered in the overall total could be different from the total of applicable households of each component, besides highlighting the increasing percentage of households in the upper two categories (medium and high), the narrative must also include a reference to the type of benefit where more households (in number) are reporting an improved perception of the usefulness of the related training/information/advice.

Applicable benefits scoring low show opportunities where activities’ content, approach and strategy could be reviewed their ensure relevance and effectiveness.

REPORTING EXAMPLE(S)

Consider the following calculation (step A) for 5 households benefiting from adaptive practices and climate sensitive assets:

“NA” means that the specific benefit does not apply to the type of support provided to a specific household.

Note that the number of applicable Qs is different for each household, and for that reason their CABS are as follows:

Following step B, and considering that the CABS is calculated for 5 households in this example, these households are distributed in three categories as follows:

• Low 20%

• Medium 60%

• High 20%

Following the same steps for each type of benefit, results are as follows:

Following step B (see calculation section) and considering the number of applicable options for each Q, the detailed percentual distribution of households is as follows:

All key results to be reported in COMET are summarized in the following table:

See graphs in the visualization section to see how this information could be compared against the baseline.

INDICATORS COLLECTED & ANALYSED AT THE SAME TIME

This indicator could be measured together with any other CRF indicators reported under SO2, but CSP activities measuring this indicator can also report as applicable on the following outcome indicators:

• 103. Humanitarian Food Assistance (HFA) Needs

• 33. Climate / Resilience Capacity Score (C/RCS)

• 27. Percentage of verified assets that demonstrate improvement in biophysical conditions as confirmed through remote monitoring from space (LCI)

• 101. Assets Benefit Score (ABI)

Also, other output and outcome indicators linked to the following sub-activities should be reported as relevant:

• Food Assistance for Assets (FFA)

• Smallholder Agricultural Market Support (SMS)

COMPLEMENTARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Depending on country specific context conditions and key programmatic assumptions noted in the corresponding TOC exercises, the information of this indicator can be analyzed together with process monitoring data/results that can be collected through qualitative approaches such as direct observation, Key Informant Interviews or Focus Group Discussions. No additional tools, questions or templates are required to do this apart from what already used for the regular process monitoring.

DECISIONS DATA CAN INFORM

The CABS indicator provides relevant information which is used to monitor the relevance and effectiveness of trainings, information, or technical advice given to adapt agricultural practices and livelihoods and/or to improve their resilience to climate variability and weather-related shocks.

VISUALIZATION

Overall CABS levels – Baseline vs. Follow-up

CABS level by type of expected benefit – Baseline vs. Follow-up

Option 1

Option 2

LIMITATIONS

As the type of benefits that applies for each household could be different, the percentages of households reported under each level (low, medium, high) by type of benefit cannot be used to calculate the overall score and are not necessarily referring to the overall sample size, but only to those households for which the questions are applicable.

If this indicator is used to compare results of different target groups, it is important to make sure that they are referring to the same benefits and that the application of those benefits among households is also comparable between target groups.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Guidance: Planning and Reporting on Climate Action