VIC 3.2 People with confidence in local governance

This indicator measures the proportion of individuals, including marginalized groups such as women, migrants, and forcibly displaced persons, who express confidence in local governance structures. For this indicator, confidence refers to the general belief or trust that local governance structures are functioning effectively in serving the community's needs and are perceived as transparent, accountable, and/or inclusive. It combines:

• A general sense of trust in governance (measured by the general confidence question).

• A perception of governance qualities, specifically transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness (measured by the Likert scale questions).

A respondent is considered confident if they express general confidence and perceive governance structures as exhibiting at least one of the three key qualities.

Local governance:

People: It is important to note that, in VIC projects, "people" refers to all individuals within the target area, with particular emphasis on women, underserved, vulnerable, and marginalized groups, as well as those in the Leave No One Behind (LNOB) categories. This includes migrants, such as forcibly displaced persons, ensuring that those who are often excluded or face barriers to participation are prioritized in governance initiatives.

• Gender 

• Age  

• Left behind/vulnerable population group  

Optional Migration status

• Refugees / Asylum Seekers/International Migrant Workers/Internal Migrants (Internally Displaced, Rural-to-Urban)/Returnee/other

The proportion of people refers to the percentage of the population in areas where Helvetas-supported local governance initiatives are active who express confidence in their local governance structures and perceive these structures as transparent, accountable, and/or inclusive.

• Primary Source: Surveys with a representative sample of the target population.

• Additional Source: Focus group discussions, key informant interviews, or participator methods for qualitative insights.

Note: Data for VIC 3.1, VIC 3.2, VIC 3.3, and VIC 3.4 should ideally be collected in the same survey (if relevant).

• Baseline

• Annual monitoring/midterm

• Endline

 Annual surveys help track ongoing progress. Baseline and endline studies will be more comprehensive than annual outcome monitoring as they should include in-depth data on service access (collected also for VIC 3.1), providing a fuller picture of long-term impact.

Surveys: Ask a sample of people in the community about their confidence in local governance. Focus on questions related to transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness. Use stratified random sampling to ensure representativeness of relevant groups. Do not sample the same individuals repeatedly. Instead, gather data from new representative samples each time.

While surveys are the primary method for collecting data, it is encouraged to use complementary qualitative methods to enrich findings:

• Focus Groups: Gather detailed feedback on perceptions of governance from different groups, especially marginalized communities.

• Key Informant Interviews: Interview local leaders, CSO representatives, or governance officials to understand systemic issues affecting confidence.

• Participatory Methods: Use tools like community scorecards or social audits to capture collective feedback on governance performance.

• These methods can provide context and nuance to quantitative results, allowing for a more holistic understanding of governance perceptions.

Challenge: No budget/capacity for doing surveys. 

Approach: Result measurement should be part of every projects’ budget, so remember to include this early in the planning phase. Conducting the data collection planning and data management will make it much more cost efficient and more valuable than hiring consultants. Possible approaches to reduce the complexity and cost of data collection could be to use digital platforms or mobile apps (preferably KOBO). Train local stakeholders or community volunteers to conduct surveys, ensuring cost-effective and culturally sensitive data gathering. Incorporate participatory methods, such as focus groups or community mapping, to complement quantitative surveys and enhance local ownership of the process. And leverage partnerships with other NGOs or academic institutions to co-develop survey methodologies and share resources. 

Challenge: Difficulty in reaching and surveying marginalized r hard-to-reach populations, such as migrants and forcibly displaced persons, who may lack stable housing or access to communication channels.

Approach: Use mobile data collection teams, partnerships with local NGOs, or community leaders to reach these groups and gather accurate data.

Challenge: Different groups in the community may have different views and needs.

Approach: Make sure to include voices from all parts of the community, especially marginalized groups.

Challenge: Some people might not trust surveys, especially if they have low confidence in governance.

Approach: Build trust by explaining the purpose of the survey and how it will help improve their community.

SDC

GOV_TRI_1 Percentage of voting age population who are satisfied with their parliament or other political representative bodies

• VIC 3.1 Number of people who benefit from social, economic, and/or protection services resulting from good governance processes

• VIC 3.4 Proportion of people who believe that they are better informed and have more say due to supported civil society initiatives or public interest media

• GCS 3.1.1 Number of people capacitated to participate in and/or influence public service provision and/or decision-making in their localities

• GCS 3.1.2 Number of civil society, public or private actors supported to promote good governance, responsive budgeting and/or inclusive service delivery

• GCS 3.1.3 Number of initiatives established or supported which enhance multi-level governance, inclusive policy, public finance, and/or services for more social equity

• MIG 3.3.1 Number of individuals affected by migration or forced displacement capacitated to know their rights, and/or how to access social, economic and/or protection services in their home/host communities

• MIG 3.3.3 Number of initiatives established or supported which enhance inclusive policy and/or services for migrants, including forcibly displaced people, and/or their home/host communities for more social inclusion