ADS 200.6 defines an output as “[a] tangible, immediate, and intended product or consequence of an activity within USAID’s control.” - Examples of outputs include items such as people fed, personnel trained, better technologies developed, and new construction.
Outputs are important because they are critical to achieving results. Such outputs are specifically described in contract statements of work, and describing grant agreement program and monitoring the quality and timeliness of outputs produced by implementing partners is a major task of USAID technical officers and assistance objective teams, because delays in completing outputs or problems in output quality provide an early warning that results may not be achieved as planned.
Ensuring that the annual implementation plans (some partners refer to these plans as performance monitoring and evaluation plans) of the mission’s implementing partners include targets for outputs is important because such targets enable USAID technical officers to monitor the partner’s progress on outputs effectively during the year.
Annual implementation plans are the blueprints for the specific tasks to be done and outputs to be achieved during the year. Without established, documented, and approved annual implementation plans and performance management plans, USAID officials do not have a reliable and sound basis for monitoring the performance of their partners during the year.
Require that partners’ annual implementation plans include targets for the outputs to be achieved during the year and (b) approve these implementation plans in writing.
Source: AUDIT REPORT NO. 4-663-10-003-P MARCH 30, 2010
The recommendations are derived from audit reports of the Office of the Inspector General. The source refers to the audit report, which is available on this site as part of the Audit Database Project: an educational tool for compliance with USAID regulations. Please see the disclaimer of this site before using recommendations.
|←Previous Reported Results Were Not Verified – ADS 184.108.40.206. - ADS 202.3.6.||Lack of a Current Performance Management Plan (PMP) - ADS 203.3.3 Next→|
- Baseline Data, Indicators, and Targets Needed to Measure Progress and Achievement - ADS Chapter 203
- Indicators Do Not Effectively Measure Program Impact - ADS 220.127.116.11 - ADS 200.2.b
- Performance Data Lacked Support - ADS 203.3
- Performance Indicators and Targets Did Not Facilitate Program Management - ADS 203.3
- Setting Performance Targets for Partners - ADS 203
- Thorough Site Visits Not Conducted - ADS 202.3 - Performance Management Toolkit
- Data Quality Assessments Not Completed - ADS 203.3.5 - Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 103–62) - Performance Management Toolkit
- Performance Management Plan Not Completed - ADS 203.3 - Performance Management Toolkit
- Performance Indicator Definitions Not Consistently Applied - ADS 203.3 - GAO Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government
- Reported Results Were Not Verified – ADS 18.104.22.168. - ADS 202.3.6.
- Lack of a Current Performance Management Plan (PMP) - ADS 203.3.3
- Thorough Site Visits Were Not Conducted - ADS 22.214.171.124 - ADS 202.3.6
- Data Quality Assessments Were Not Completed - ADS 126.96.36.199 - Performance and Results Act of 1993
- Performance Management Plan Was Not Completed - ADS 203.3.3
- Improve Data Quality and Program Monitoring - ADS 188.8.131.52 - ADS 184.108.40.206.b
- Performance Management Plans Were Not Approved - ADS 203.3.3
- Monitoring and Evaluation of Activities Was Weak - ADS 303.2(f) - ADS 220.127.116.11
- Some Results Reported by Implementing Partners Were Unsupported or Inaccurate - ADS 18.104.22.168. - ADS 22.214.171.124 - ADS 126.96.36.199
- Performance Targets Were Inconsistent - ADS 188.8.131.52 - ADS 184.108.40.206
- Impact Indicators Not Tracked - ADS 203.3.4