III. >> M  ethodological Approaches to Human Rights Indicators >> Ethical, statistical and human rights considerations in indicator selection Box 12 RIGHTS criteria for indicator selection In selecting human rights indicators, the RIGHTS criteria, which take into account the desired statistical and methodological properties in an indicator as well as the principles and human rights concerns, could be useful. R Relevant and Reliable I Independent in its data-collection methods from the subjects monitored G Global and universally meaningful but also amenable to contextualization and disaggregation by prohibited grounds of discrimination H Human rights standards-centric; anchored in the normative framework of rights T Transparent in its methods, Timely and Time-bound S Simple and Specific An important statistical consideration in identifying and developing human rights indicators, or any set of indicators for that matter, is to ensure their relevance and effectiveness in measuring what they are supposed to measure. This relates to the notion of indicator validity. It refers to the truthfulness of information provided by the estimate or the value of an indicator in capturing the state or condition of an object, event, activity or an outcome for which it is an indicator. Most other statistical and methodological considerations follow from this requirement. While there are several desirable statistical considerations in the selection of indicators,5 in general indicators for use in human rights assessment ought to be: Simple, timely and few in number; Reliable; Based on transparent and verifiable methodology; 5. In the context of organizational management, undertaking impact assessments or managing change, the role of quantitative and qualitative indicators or targets is well recognized. Several templates of indicator characteristics that can be useful in this regard have been developed. Two of the more commonly known are SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-bound) and SPICED (subjective, participatory, interpreted, cross-checked, empowering, diverse), see Chris Roche, Impact Assessment for Development Agencies: Learning to Value Change (Oxford, Oxfam Publishing, 1999), pp. 41–52. 50 Human Rights Indicators