USAID’s results-oriented approach to management calls for its managers to consider performance information when making decisions. Sound decisions require accurate, current, and reliable information, and the benefits of USAID’s results-oriented approach depend substantially on the quality of performance information available (13 ADS 126.96.36.199).
ADS 202.3.6.states that monitoring the quality and timeliness of implementing partners’ outputs is a major task of cognizant technical officers (now referred to as contracting officer’s technical representatives) and assistance objective teams. It specifies that problems in output quality provide an early warning that results may not be achieved as planned and that early action in response to problems is essential in managing for results.
To assess the quality of partner data, USAID’s Performance Management Toolkit (Toolkit) recommends periodically sampling and reviewing partner data to ensure completeness, accuracy, and consistency and determining whether the partner appropriately addressed known data quality problems. The Toolkit also recommends developing a simple site-visit guide, covering all topics of interest, to be used systematically by teams visiting all sites.
Having accurate and reliable data is a key element in making well-reasoned management decisions. Without knowing the strengths and weaknesses of reported data, USAID officials cannot adequately determine the extent to which such data can be trusted in making sound management decisions.
Establish written procedures to ensure that site visits provide for data quality testing and adequate documentation of the test results.
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 Performance Indicator Definitions Not Consistently Applied - ADS 203.3 - GAO Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government||Partner Implementation Plans Lacked Vital Information – ADS 200.6 Next→|
- Reported Results Did Not Meet Data Quality Standards - ADS 203.3
- Baseline Data, Indicators, and Targets Needed to Measure Progress and Achievement - ADS Chapter 203
- Indicators Do Not Effectively Measure Program Impact - ADS 188.8.131.52 - 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
- Partner Implementation Plans Lacked Vital Information – ADS 200.6
- Lack of a Current Performance Management Plan (PMP) - ADS 203.3.3
- Thorough Site Visits Were Not Conducted - ADS 184.108.40.206 - ADS 202.3.6
- Data Quality Assessments Were Not Completed - ADS 220.127.116.11 - Performance and Results Act of 1993
- Performance Management Plan Was Not Completed - ADS 203.3.3
- Improve Data Quality and Program Monitoring - ADS 18.104.22.168 - ADS 22.214.171.124.b
- Performance Management Plans Were Not Approved - ADS 203.3.3
- Monitoring and Evaluation of Activities Was Weak - ADS 303.2(f) - ADS 126.96.36.199
- Some Results Reported by Implementing Partners Were Unsupported or Inaccurate - ADS 188.8.131.52. - ADS 184.108.40.206 - ADS 220.127.116.11
- Performance Targets Were Inconsistent - ADS 18.104.22.168 - ADS 22.214.171.124