What is the difference between a baseline and a target?
The baseline is where you start. The target is where you plan to be. Together they turn an indicator from a number into a measure of progress.
Say 30 percent of surveyed households use a protected water source today. That is the baseline. If the project aims for 70 percent by the end of year two, that is the target. Without the baseline, “70 percent” says nothing about change.
How do you collect a baseline?
Follow these steps.
- Fix the definition first. Use the same wording as the indicator reference sheet. A baseline measured with a different definition cannot be compared. See how to write an indicator reference sheet.
- Use the same method. If you will repeat a household survey at the end, run the baseline as a household survey too, in a comparable way.
- Cover the same group and area. Measure the people and places the project will reach.
- Do it before activities start. If activities have begun, note it, because the baseline may already include some change.
- Record the date, source and sample. Anyone should be able to see when and how the number was found.
What if the baseline is zero or unknown?
Some indicators start at zero, such as “number of health workers trained in a new protocol”. Write zero. Do not leave the cell empty, because empty looks like missing data.
If you cannot collect a baseline right now, write “to be collected by [date]” and name who will do it. Do not make up a number. Targets set on an invented baseline fall apart at the first review.
How do you set a realistic target?
A target is a judgment, and it improves with evidence. Look at these inputs:
- The baseline. How far is the gap?
- Your activities and budget. How many people can you really reach?
- Past results. What did similar projects achieve in similar places?
- The context. Access, season, security and the capacity of partners.
- The donor’s expectations. Are there minimum levels in the agreement?
A target should stretch the team but stay believable. If every target is met by a wide margin, they were probably too low. If none is ever met, they were probably too high.
Which mistakes should you avoid?
| Mistake | Why it hurts | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline with a different definition | Results cannot be compared | Reuse the reference sheet wording |
| Targets with no reasoning | Cannot be defended later | Write one line on how each was set |
| Mixing cumulative and per-period targets | Reports contradict each other | State the type for every indicator |
| Silent target changes | Looks like moving the goalposts | Log each change with a reason |
| Targets for sub-groups left out | Hides gaps for women, older people or people with disabilities | Set disaggregated targets where it matters |
On the last row, our article on disaggregating by sex, age and disability shows how to decide which breakdowns need their own targets.
How should you review baselines and targets over time?
Review targets at planned points, such as a mid-term review, and whenever something major changes: funding, access, or a new donor requirement. At each review:
- Compare actuals with targets.
- Ask what explains the gap.
- Decide whether to change the activity, the target or neither.
- Record the decision.
Targets are tools for managing, not weapons for blame. A missed target with a clear explanation is useful learning.
A short example shows how the pieces fit together. A project plans to train 200 teachers in a new reading method over two years. The indicator is “percent of trained teachers who use the method in at least three lessons a week, observed by a supervisor”.
- Baseline: zero, because the method is new. Write 0 and the date.
- Target, year one: 40 percent of the first 100 teachers trained. The team bases this on a pilot in two schools where about half used the method after training.
- Target, year two: 60 percent of all 200. The team lowers it a little because the second group is in remote schools with fewer supervisor visits.
- Reasoning: one line for each target, saved with the indicator.
Notice that the targets come from evidence, a pilot and the context, not from a wish. If the pilot had not existed, the team would say so, and set a cautious target to review after the first six months.
Where EMPOBase fits
EMPOBase’s MEAL module tracks indicators for each project, with actual values recorded against reporting periods. When your team uses collection links, a reviewer approves or rejects each submission, and only approved submissions update the indicator actual. Pending and rejected submissions are not counted. You still decide the baseline and target values, and the software does not judge whether they are realistic. See the field-to-results workflow for the review steps, and the indicators page for the library.