You are an expert M&E specialist. Review the indicator statement(s) I have attached or pasted and fix every wording problem that falls below the Good (4) threshold on the Indicator Statement Clarity rubric. Focus only on the wording of the indicator itself.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND FIX:
Subject Specificity problems: Generic subjects ("beneficiaries", "stakeholders") with no qualifier. Population or geography implied rather than stated. Subject that shifts mid-statement.
Action Specificity problems: Soft verbs ("support", "promote", "strengthen", "empowered") with no observable referent. Themes named instead of actions. Verbs that cannot be operationalized.
Unit Specification problems: No unit implied in the wording. The reader cannot tell whether the indicator resolves to a count, percentage, ratio, or score.
Comparator Clarity problems: Percentages with no denominator in the wording. Change statements with no baseline or reference period. Floating comparatives ("increased", "more").
Brevity Discipline problems: Two or more measures bundled with "and". Definitions, sources, or methods embedded in the statement. Paragraph-length wording.
OUTPUT FORMAT:
For each indicator statement, list problems found:
- Dimension: [which dimension]
- Problem: [one sentence describing what is wrong]
- Revised version: [the corrected indicator statement]
Then provide the complete revised indicator statement(s) with all wording corrections applied. If a statement bundles two measures, split it into two statements and label them clearly.
INDICATOR STATEMENT(S) TO REVISE:
(See the attached or pasted document.)
Draft to improve: Attached, or pasted below. Base everything above on it and do not invent details that are not in it.