• Impact

• Ownership and access to productive assets

Presence of key durable consumer goods reflects economic status. Change in number of livelihood assets owned or accessed [specify: particular productive good/asset/service] by the supported households Increased access to particular asset lost during crisis indicates stabilized household livelihoods, economy and proxy for food security and resilience. The assumption underlying this indicator is that households with a greater investment in key consumer durables are more economically secure, i.e., they have access to more income. The set of key assets can change from one rural context to another, but generally it includes means of transportation, agricultural equipment, fishing equipment, televisions, radios, sewing machines, jewelry, etc.

Geography/Livelihoods zone; Head of household’s gender, age, disabilities, chronic diseases, dependency ratio, and any other relevant criteria, such as urban/rural context, religious, ethnic or political identities; Wealth groups; Livelihoods group (e.g. pastoralist, farmers, traders); Period to achieve the objective;

• Remain stable or increase

Both secondary and primary data collection can be used according to context. Baseline/Endline. If multiyear programme consider also a mid-term evaluation Secondary data. Reliable/relevant sources from other actors, clusters or government. Data Collection methods: Secondary data analysis; Households Survey, Focus Group Discussion; Market assessment

• Income Generation Activities and Employment
• Primary production

Household assets index (An index of 10 assets which a household may or may not have, which can then be used to ascertain which wealth quintile they fall into). Firstly to identify the poorest households (suitable for targeting) and secondly to see how they progress during the implementation of a specific intervention. The challenge will be to define the appropriate list of assets to be included. This can be initially done with the analysis of a household survey, but it would also be appropriate to get the beneficiaries to identify the most important assets for inclusion. Identification of the 10 assets to be assessed - possibly during a contextual analysis. Compile assets lists in survey, attribute a unit value to each asset. Land and livestock values have also to be included A higher score on the assets index (representing an improvement in their welfare) means households “poverty” status is improving - this can be considered a proxy for the more difficult to calculate poverty line. Does not provide any data on an intra-household basis (that is, will not distinguish between men and women, or boys and girls in a target household). Similar to the CSI (above) challenges will relate to the weighting and the somewhat arbitrary nature of the inclusion of some assets in a particular context Vs. the desire to have a comparable list from one part of the country to another. > Number of people/households accessing the particular good/asset/service > Number of or percent change in animals (by type), agricultural or fishery equipment (by type), land acreage, household assets, etc. > Change in household expenditure on particular good/assets/services relative to baseline > Quantity of goods/assets/services accessed by households through transferred resources relative to baseline > Household usage of cash assistance (by type) Compile assets lists in survey, attribute a unit value to each asset. Land and livestock values have also to be included - Needs agreement on key assets by type. 6 capitals of the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework can be used as a guide.