Data disaggregation is the process of breaking down aggregated or compiled data into smaller, more detailed subgroups based on specific characteristics, such as gender, age, disability, and ethnicity. Disaggregating data allows for deeper analysis to reveal who is being left behind and is is foundational for inclusive policymaking. 

It helps decision-makers to identify inequalities, target interventions more effectively, and monitor progress toward leaving no one behind. The tools in this section provide tested approaches for plugging gaps and aligning or updating approaches to match international best practice to produce high-quality disaggregated data. These resources should be used to design context-appropriate approaches across the data value chain and data systems that are ethical, accurate, and rights-based with the broader goals of equality and inclusion.

This section provides practical guidance on planning, implementing, and using disaggregated data. The first subsection covers general frameworks and guidance, followed by specific resources for key population groups, recognizing that each group faces unique measurement and inclusion challenges. 

Users may explore the entire section for a holistic understanding or jump directly to population-specific areas relevant to their work. These resources can help practitioners to design more inclusive data collection, analysis, and reporting processes. 

Effective data disaggregation begins with understanding its core purpose, methods, and ways of identifying who is represented in data and who is not. The resources in this subsection provide broad guidance on data disaggregation strategies, including both technical methodologies and institutional planning tools. Users can start here to gain an overview of what data disaggregation entails before delving into subsequent subsections on specific population groups. 

Gender disaggregated data is one of the most widely used forms of inclusive data, yet there continue to be gaps in data systems, especially when surveys, administrative systems, and sectoral data are not designed to capture gender-specific information comprehensively. This subsection provides critical insights into gender inequalities across sectors, including health, education, and economic opportunity, supporting evidence-based, gender-responsive, and participatory decision-making through a range of tools, such as guidance, maturity models, online repositories, and case studies. These resources will help users to plan, produce, and strengthen gender data systems with targeted tools to close the gaps. This subsection can also serve as an entry point to broader inclusion for other groups, deepening understanding of inequality.

Working with children’s data presents unique opportunities and responsibilities. Disaggregated, child-focused data is key to monitoring well-being, designing policies, and upholding children’s rights. However, collecting and managing children’s data involves ethical, privacy, and protection considerations. This subsection highlights resources that help users to produce child-related data responsibly and effectively. These tools show how to build strong administrative data systems and safeguard children’s rights, providing both conceptual and practical tools, balancing risks with active participation. These resources can complement tools in the subsections focusing on other populations, such as gender and disability, to reflect the diversity of children.

Resource/LinkTypePurposeData Value Chain
Data Ecosystem Mapping ToolMapping toolHelps to visualize actors, data flows, and institutional roles in the child data ecosystemConnect, Use, Reuse
22 Questions to Assess Responsible Data for ChildrenChecklistSelf-assessment checklist to examine strengths and gaps in responsible child data workIdentify, Collect, Analyze, Use
Decision Provenance MappingMapping toolTraces how decisions about child data are made, including who makes them and under what conditionsIncentivize, Influence, Use
Opportunity and Risk Diagnostic ToolDiagnostic toolIdentifies potential harms and benefits in child data initiatives to support risk-aware decision-makingIdentify, Collect, Process, Analyze, Use
Studio MethodologyParticipatory method/ facilitation processFacilitates collaborative exploration of core principles through real-world child data projectsCross-cutting

Includes case studies/examples: Yes, there are country case studies on responsible child data practices and lessons for several countries, including Colombia, Kenya, and Uganda. 

Additional information: Most relevant for planning, governance, and review phases of data concerning children, especially for privacy, consent, or cross-sectoral data considerations. Complements more technical statistical guidance.

Collecting data on sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) is essential to understanding and addressing inequalities faced by these groups. However, this data is scarce and often contested, given the privacy, security, and stigma concerns of these groups. This subsection presents one comprehensive resource to help users design ethical, rights-based approaches within data systems for these populations, offering practical guidance on safe, inclusive approaches grounded in consent.

Data disaggregated by race, ethnicity, or Indigenous group is essential to monitoring discrimination, ensuring equality, and recognizing collective rights. However, each national context presents challenges, and data can carry a history of misuse and mistrust. This subsection highlights frameworks and guidance to collect, use, and govern data responsibly, emphasizing self-identification, consent, participation, and sovereignty. They reinforce the shift from extractive to participatory approaches. Used in conjunction with resources on citizen data and intersectionality, users can adopt approaches that build trust.

Disability disaggregated data is essential for identifying barriers and advancing inclusion of persons with disabilities across services and sectors. However, collecting accurate, comparable, and rights-based data on disability presents challenges. This stems from outdated measurement tools, underreporting due to stigma, and inconsistent definitions of disability. 

This subsection focuses on a suite of tools aimed at generating high-quality, comparable data on disability. It covers the full data lifecycle, featuring guidance, survey question sets and how to choose between them, case studies, and advice to tackle common challenges. These tools align with international best practice and may be used in conjunction with subsections covering other populations as well as the section on intersectionality. 

ResourceTypeDescriptionData Value Chain
The Data Collection Tools Developed by the WG on Disability Statistics and Their Recommended Use GuidanceOverview of the various question sets with advice on selection and useIdentify, Collect, Process
WG Short Set on Functioning (WG-SS)Question setCore set of 6 questions to identify persons with disabilitiesCollect
WG Extended Set on Functioning (WG-ES)Question setExpanded version of the Short Set, including psychosocial disabilities (anxiety and depression), upper body functioning, pain, and fatigueCollect
WG Short Set on Functioning— Enhanced (WG-SS Enhanced)Question setBroader tool covering more functional areas intended for population-based health surveys or disability-focused surveysCollect
WG/UNICEF Child Functioning Module (CFM)Question setDesigned for child/adolescent population with two submodules of children ages 5-17 and another for children ages 2-4Collect
Implementation Guidelines: How to use the WG QuestionsGuidanceInstructions for each question set, including rationale, limitations, common pitfalls, instructions on administering questions, and interviewer guidelinesIdentify, Collect, Process
Analysis OverviewGuidanceTechnical guidance for tabulation, disaggregation, and interpretation of dataProcess, Analyze, Connect, Influence, Use
The WG Blog

Blog/

guidance

Searchable repository of common challenges, reflections, and questions from usersDisseminate, Influence, Use
NSO TrainingsTraining Materials from WG trainings for NSOsIdentify, Collect, Process

Case studies/examples: Yes, there are examples from several countries that have used WG questions in their censuses and surveys, including Malawi, South Africa, and Fiji. Examples are embedded across guidance documents and in the blog.

Additional information: The WG questions are extensively tested and widely accepted by civil society and NSOs, supporting internationally comparable disability disaggregated data. They  should not be used to diagnose disability or determine eligibility for disability programs, services, or benefits. Guidance on translation is provided, and multiple language versions are available to ensure consistent implementation.