A Review of Highway Agencies in the South Asia Region

A Review of Highway Agencies in the South Asia Region
A3: Guidance Note on the Method for Determining the Score against
a Particular Indicator
A3.1 It may be noted that some individual indicators are given a comparatively higher
weightage. The consideration behind such a suggestion is basically to signify the indicator’s
relatively higher importance from the point of view of:
• Good database for planning;
• Efficient delivery of programs;
• Proper operation and management of the road network;
• Good level of service and safety for users of improved road; and
• Enhanced transparency and governance.
A3.2 The proposed method for determining the score against each indicator is as follows:
(a) For all (Yes/No) indicators, the score should be maximum, i.e., full marks for ‘Yes’ and
zero for ‘No’.
(b) For other indicators, the highway agency would need to establish its own benchmarks
for determining the score against each indicator. A simple approach could be to set the
benchmarks at three levels, that is, Good, Fair, and Poor. The suggested range of scores
may be:
(i) Benchmark ‘Good’ – 80 to 100 percent
(ii) Benchmark ‘Fair’ – 40 to 60 percent
(iii) Benchmark ‘Poor’ – 20 to 40 percent
91