Table 1.

Characteristics of indicator sets identified

Source, Year	Title	Intended Setting	Intended Stage of Emergency	Number Indicators Included in Mapping by SRMH Domain							Data Sources Used for Indicators					Resources Available
				ARH	CAC	FP	GBV	HIV	MH	STI	Facilities	Service Providers	Affected Population	Program Records	Not Specified
IAWG, 2010 [15]	MISP Indicators	All humanitarian settings	Acute	0	0	0	2	3	1	0	✓				✓	• Some data collection guidance provided in IAFM manual
IAWG, 2010 [15]	Comprehensive Reproductive Health Service Indicators	All humanitarian settings	Extended	4	4	4	4	6	14	4	✓	✓	✓		✓	• Some data collection guidance provided in IAFM manual
CDC, 2013 [13]	Indicators for Pregnant and Postpartum Women after Disaster	Post-disaster settings in the United States	Acute	0	0	3	6	0	5	1			✓			• Extensive data collection guidance and data collection instruments available upon requestc
	Health Information System Standards and Indicators	Camp and urban settingsa	Both	1	0	2	4	22	19	4	✓					• Extensive data collection guidance, data collection instruments, data entry software, and automated analysis available online via UNHCR’s Twine systemd • System for ongoing data collection and reporting • Centralized data repository
CDC, 2007 [11]	Reproductive Health Assessment Toolkit for Conflict-Affected Women Key Indicator List	Conflict-affected settings	Both	0	0	6	13	7	8	3			✓			• Extensive data collection guidance, data collection instruments, and analysis guidance available online in Toolkite • Web-based trainings on data collection and data use also available online
Sphere Project, 2011 [3]	Sphere Standards Indicators	All humanitarian settings	Both	0	0	0	1	4	4	1	✓				✓	• Some guidance on data collection provided in Sphere Handbook
	Response Monitoring Indicator List for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health and Nutrition in Emergencies	All humanitarian settings	Both	0	0	0	0	2	3	0	✓	✓	✓	✓		• Some guidance on data collection provided in Guide to Maternal, Newborn and Child Health and Nutrition in Emergencies
	OCHA Indicators Registry	All humanitarian settings	Both	0	0	0	10	0	4	0	✓		✓		✓	• Guidance on data collection and suggested tools provided for some indicators but not others on registry websitef • Suggested data collection tools include the WHO’s SARAg health facility assessment tool, and the HeRAMSh approach
IAWG, 2017 [16]	MISP Process Evaluation Indicatorsb	All humanitarian settings	Both	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	✓	✓	✓			• Extensive data collection guidance, data collection instruments, and analysis guidance available online in Toolkiti

^aWhere health facilities are managed by UNHCR implementing partners-- two different versions available

^bNot included in mapping as these indicators are intended for assessing MISP implementation, rather than monitoring SRMH services over time and across settings; however, this indicator set covers all domains

^cThis indicator set is part of the Reproductive Health Assessment after Disasters (RHAD) toolkit which is being updated and is projected to be available in 2020; data collection tools are currently available upon request from the CDC’s Emergency Preparedness and Response Team in the Division of Reproductive Health

^dAvailable at: http://twine.unhcr.org/app/

^eAvailable at: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/global/tools/crisissituations.htm

^fAvailable at: https://ir.hpc.tools/

^gService Availability and Readiness Assessment: available at http://www.who.int/healthinfo/systems/sara_introduction/en/

^hHealth Resources Availability Monitoring System: available at: http://www.who.int/hac/herams/en/

ⁱAvailable at: http://iawg.net/resource/misp-process-evaluation-tools-2017/