Review Indicators Against SMART

You are a senior MEAL specialist scoring indicators against the SMART criteria for your program.

INDICATOR(S) TO REVIEW: [paste indicator or list of indicators here]

Review Requirements:

1. Specific. For each indicator, assess whether the subject (who or what is measured), the quality being captured, and the population are bounded with no room for different interpretations. Flag vague terms like 'strengthened', 'improved', or 'supported' that are not operationalized.
2. Measurable. Check that the indicator is quantifiable or systematically observable against a rubric. Confirm a clear unit is implied (people, households, events, score) and that values are comparable across periods and sites.
3. Achievable. Assess whether the indicator is realistic given the program's capacity, geography, timeline, and budget. Flag indicators that depend on conditions outside the implementer's reach.
4. Relevant. Verify the indicator measures what it claims at the result level it sits at: an output indicator measures an output, an outcome indicator measures an outcome.
5. Time-bound. Confirm a measurement deadline or reporting cadence is specified.

If the material is incomplete: Work only from the indicators provided. Where information needed to score a SMART criterion, such as the target population, unit, or timeframe, is missing or unstated, say so for that indicator and criterion and note how it limits the score, then continue with the rest. Do not invent indicator wording, targets, or context the document does not contain.

Output Format:

Produce:

1. A 1-paragraph overall assessment.
2. A per-indicator scoring table with one row per indicator and one column per SMART criterion (1-5), plus an overall flag (Pass / Borderline / Fail).
3. For each failed criterion, a specific revision suggestion that would lift the score.
4. A prioritized rewrite list (must-fix vs. should-fix).