A/HRC/33/24 (d) Existence of a national plan on sexual and reproductive health; (e) Specific budget system in place to track the proportion of public sector and total resources dedicated to sexual and reproductive health services; (f) Medical terminations of pregnancy as a proportion of live births; (g) Proportion of complaints received on the right to health that have been investigated and adjudicated by the national human rights institution, ombudsperson or other mechanisms and the proportion of those to which the Government has effectively responded. 66. Furthermore, the indicators selected should include a mix of structure, process and outcome indicators, as well as qualitative and quantitative indicators. That is important in order to account for the measures required to establish an enabling environment for the realization of rights; for example through examination of legal frameworks, budgetary allocations and key interventions for women’s health, such as skilled attendance at birth. It is also key to assess whether rights are being realized in practice, for example, through reduced adolescent birth rates and the availability of a range of modern contraceptives, as well as to capture the actual experience of individuals, for example by documenting experience of discrimination, disrespect and abuse in health-care settings. 67. In prioritizing indicators, the technical guidance specifies that “quantitative indicators should be (a) continuously or frequently measurable in order that the actions taken by an administration may be measured in a timely manner; (b) objective, to permit comparison across time and countries and/or subregions; (c) programmatically relevant, to enable priority setting and identification of accountability gaps; and, ideally, (d) subject to local audit to promote accountability to populations served” (A/HRC/21/22 and Corr.1 and 2, para. 71). Well-established indicators should be re-examined against those criteria. For example, maternal mortality rates do not meet the criteria because they are inadequate for assessing whether policies are working. Additionally, for the indicator of skilled attendance at birth to be meaningful and objective, there must be a common standard of what qualifies as “skilled”, an area where there is important ongoing work. 68. Attention is also required to ensure that indicators do not incentivize action that would undermine enjoyment of human rights. For example, indicators pertaining to contraceptive usage should not obscure the fundamental importance of choice of modern methods and informed consent by women and girls. 69. In addition, where indicators are identified as important from a human rights perspective but methodologies for collecting such data remain underdeveloped, that must be taken as a signal to give greater attention to those potential methodologies rather than an insurmountable barrier. For example, the lack of comprehensive and emergency obstetric care remains a critical factor contributing to the death of women in pregnancy and childbirth, and provision of such care is considered a core obligation of States under human rights law. The United Nations has developed indicators to capture the availability of emergency obstetric care;13 however, current systems of data collection have prevented meaningful use of those indicators for monitoring access. More effort must be directed to overcoming those obstacles in order to find suitable ways of understanding to what extent women and girls are able to access the care they require in order to survive pregnancy and childbirth in good health and with dignity. 13 16 WHO, UNFPA, UNICEF and Averting Maternal Death and Disability, Monitoring Emergency Obstetric Care: A Handbook (2009).