Managing for Results: Latest and Greatest ADS …pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pbaaf808.pdfManaging for...

Managing for Results: Latest and Greatest ADS Guidance

USAID/AFR Basic Education Summer Training

DRAFr July 17, 2000

.lJSA.I.f->

******~

1616 North Fort Myer Drive Arlington, VA 22209-3195 (703) 741-1000

Contract #: AEP-C-00-99-00034-00

Session objectives

This workshop seeks to increase participants' ...

• Knowledge of basic principles of strategic ·planning within USAID

• Awareness of changes in upcoming release of revised programming policies

• Understanding of reasons for the revision, including guiding principles

• Ability to apply revised guidance and best practices in the strategic planning phase

2

Agenda

2.

3.

Integrated Managing for Results

Review of Changes

Discussion/Questions

3

Introduction to the ADS

+ What is the ''ADS''? • The Automated Directives System (ADS) contains the standard

operating procedures for the Agency

+ Where did it come from? • Until October _1995, handbook system was used

• ADS 201, 202, 203 issued in November 1995 and replaced HB 3

4

• ADS was written in a very skeletal way - many mandatory procedures such as pre-obligation requirements were not covered

• Useful for staff who already knew the "how to", but almost useless for those who did not have prior experience


Why was the ADS updated? 5

The evolving regulatory context

• The Results Act (GPRA)- a new paradigm • From "accountability for inputs" to "accountability for results"

• The evolution of reporting standards • How to measure and aggregate development results?

• Data quality standards

• Management Cost Accounting • Linking each dollar spent to a development result


Why was the ADS updated?

Internal calls for revision

• Gaps in the ADS • Examples: Activity Planning, SO Team management

• Disconnects between practices and intended reforms • Examples: Expanded teams, use of "PP-Iike RPs," Rote Strategic

Plans, Customer Service Plans

• Need for clearer guidance • Examples: Data quality, activity planning, A&A, SO Teams


6

Guiding principles of revision 7

Revision effort sought to ... • Offer staff proven and practical guidance on how to apply results

based management in a development context

• Allow more flexibility (options and tools), with increased rigor

• Provide staff with comprehensive, user-friendly documentation on how to achieve more effective and sustainable development results in the coming years

• Return to principles underlying 1995 vision of Managing for Results


How the ADS was updated

• Early Input

• Participatory Analysis

• Iterative Drafting

• Extensive Vetting

+ Clearance

• Final issuance in August

8

9

1. Background to Revision

3. Discussion/Questions


Overview of the new ADS 200 series

• Reflects up-to-date internal and external trends • Supports how the Agency really works today

~ Smaller missions, non-presence, regional/central programming

• Reflects current state of the art in performance management

• Captures essence of relation between State Dept. and USAID

• Includes more detail on implementation and planning • Specific guidance is complemented with best practices

• Includes the' Core Valuesj much more on teamwork

Integrated Managing for Results ·

10

USAID Core Values 11


Overview of the new ADS 200 series

• Mandatory references and helpful materials outside of the ADS are referenced and hyper-linked • Includes new Agency-wide Managing for Results training

material

• "Plain language" makes the chapters clear, concise, and easy to read

12

13

ADS 200 "Introduction to Managing for Results"


ADS 200: New introductory chapter

+ Introduces ADS 201-203

+ Discusses Core Values as drivers of MFR

• Emphasizes the importance of teamwork

• , Describes analytical framework of the Managing for Results (MFR) programming system

11-il£!1 wea '1\*•'111 Integrated Managing for Results

14

USAID's Approach to Strategic Planning and Performance Measurement 15

• Emphasize Results

• Increase focus and choose strategies and resources "strategically"

• Measure and report on results

• Analyze performance information to learn, re-plan and improve performance

• Use performance information to tell USAID's story

Conceptual framework 16

The Managing for Results Programming System

IBn'i ~ Clf,*lfl Integrated Managing for Results

ADS 200: New introductory chapter

Provides useful resources

• Presents hyperlinks to complete list of references, incorporated from old Handbook 3 • Active policies

• Additional help

• Presents the ADS 200-203 Glossary

• Represents a useful introduction for new employees

17

18

ADS 201 "Planning"

11-i!!ti ~ \l\',111 Integrated Managing for Results

The strategic plan 19

• The framework which an operating unit uses to articulate the organization's priorities, to manage for desired results, and to tie the organization's results to the customer

+ Approved Operating Unit Strategic Plans represent an Agency-wide commitment to a set of objectives and Intermediate Results to be accomplished by an Operating Unit

IPJ.m!!i ~ tr.•,Yfl Integrated Managing for Results

Strategic Objective (SO)

The most ambitious result in a particular program area that an operating unit (with its partners) can materially affect and for which it is willing to be held accountable.

lm&l!~l

~ \t1

111*111 Integrated Managing for Results

20

Strategic Objective 21

• A significant development result • Clear, precise & objectively measurable

• · The highest level result for which the operating unit is willing to be held accountable

• Unidimensional, in so much as possible

• Linked to Agency objectives & goal

• Achievable within 5 - 8 years

Representative results framework

tR1 Farmer$' ac:ceiStl to commercial capital

jncroased (5 yea.a)

Farmers' capa(;ity to

davekJp bankabla

loan appllcatfona Increased (4 years)

BankS' Joan poJicles be coma

more favorable for rural sector

(3 years)

IR 1.1.1 Farmers' capacity

to make enterprise management

decisions incraased (3 years)

CriUcal Aaaumptluna

Ag~ncy Objective 1 •. 2: More rapid and enhanced

agricultural development and food security encouraged

Strategic Objective Increased ll&e of improved

production practices by farmer.s In the Upper River Zone

(6years)

IR2 Farmers' transport costs decreased

(5 years)

IR2.1 VIllage

associa· tiom;'

ea pacity tonegotiate contracts Increased (4 years)

IR3 CQmrnunity control over local resources

increased (5 years)

1. Market prk~~ for rarmer!t • prodw:ta ~em ~tin atable or ll"lcreaik'!l. 2 . Pncesofagri~llt\lral ~puts.(& g , fettlllzer, seede;)remain &cableordec:-ea&e. 3. Roa~ nocdcd 1o get produce to market are maintained. 4 . Rai:"'fall and oUl&r mucal w~atlllllr condiOOtl$ r0mait\: atabte.


IR4 Farmer&' knowledge

about production options ln(;reesed

(4 yaars)

Key

Farmers' 6lC:posure to

on-fatnl experiences

or peers Increased (3 years)

US/YO solulv tnaU:Ui~ly

t&apct'lsiblo

22

Resu,lts Frameworks- Functions

lldi!t.J ~

+ Communication, which includes building understanding and increasing ownership

• Reporting

'1\','111 Integrated Managing for Results

23

Results Framework

• Presentation of SO and key Intermediate Results (IRs) and the cause-and-effect linkages between them

• Identifies all IRs necessary to achieve the SO regardless of who is taking responsibility

• through USAID assistance

• through other development partners

• As part of the Strategic Plan, it illustrates the Mission's development hypothesis

• Serves as a Mission management tool

24

Results Framework

• Identifies organizational responsibility and timeframe for each result

• Shows integration of results from other 50s where appropriate • The RF is not necessarily linear in its logic nor in its

presentation)

• Serves as a reporting and learning tool • Validating & reassessing the development hypothesis as

activities progress and the environment evolves)

• Defines performance indicators and targets


25

Results Statements Components

+ A results description typically includes: •:• reference number •:• results statement •!• indicator(s) -----~ •:• implementers/partners

IR 2.3.1 Statement of an end-result

Indicator(s)

responsible for the result ~USAID I World Bank

l!l&!d ..

•!• timeframe, and possibly, resources ----------J~

fl\11*111 Integrated Managing for Results

I Host Gov't, etc

3.5 years $ 150,000

26

Logical associations between SOs and IRs within the RF graphic

What other necessary results?

Why? Leading to what result ?

sta~-. ~ ~

(-\:"

For whom?

By whom?

What other necessary results?

27

Assuming what?

What are the contributing results ?

Results Framework graphic 28

Strategic Objective

Key Indicators:

Development Partner(s):

Intermediate Result Intermediate Result

Key Indicator(s): ~Then Key Indicator(s):

Development Partner(s): Development Partner(s):

Intermediate Result

Key Indicator(s):

Development Partner(s):

What are the changes/results necessary and sufficient to get to the next "higher" level ? How do you achieve the "higher"

Causal relationships between results need not always be strictly hierarchical, i.e., an intermediate result o~

one "level" can contribute to the achievement of intermediate result on two or more "levels." level of results?


General Characteristics of Results Statements

• Meaningful and realistic

• Statement of results- not an activity or process

• One, unidimensional result - not a combination of · several results ·

• Customer/stakeholder driven

• The result is measurable and objectively verifiable

• ReasonablY. within your realm of manageable interest, working w1th other partners

29

Good Results Frameworks Must Show Logical Consistency

• Linkages between Intermediate Results (IRs) and Strategic Objectives (50s) are causal in nature

• Logical relationship between IRs and 50s is direct and clear where IRs are lower-level results which contribute to 50s

• IRs include key partner as well as USAID-funded results

30

Good Results Frameworks Reflect A Realistic Level of Responsibility

• The SO is the highest result which the Mission can expect to materially affect and for which it is willing to be held accountable

• The causal connections between IRs and SO are reasonable

31

Difficulties in Formulating Rfs

• Determining logical causality • Assuring sufficiency and allowing flexibility in the

development strategy • Identifying RESULTS versus "activities," "steps" or

''means'' • Critical Assumptions versus IRs • Limitation of using linear graphics to depict inter

related causes & effects

32

Categorical or Definitional Linkages 33

. \)e • i' \0 ..--~fl----------.

~0~\.1 . S)~~V Strategic Objective

~ 0 t Increased transfer of

~ '' \ State-owned assets to the private sector ••

I Intermediate Result 1

Increased transfer of State-owned land to

the private sector


Intermediate Result 2

Increased transfer of State-owned housing to the private sector


Increased transfer of State-owned enterprises

to the private sector

Causal Logical Linkages 34

Cor~ ------------~ro ect

Strategic Objective ~ G J. Increased transfer of f f C

State-owned assets to the private sector • • /


Legal authorities and

regulations established


Intermediate Result 2

Increased capacity of public and private

institutions involved in the privatization process


Increased citizen and business community

participation in privatization programs

Chronological Linkages

I!Hlld ~

Intermediate Result 1.1

Sustainable NRM methodologies

' ~ implemented in pilot areas ,~

I IR 1.1.1

Improved NRM technologies identified and tested in pilot areas

IR 1.1.1.1

Current practices (sustainable & non-sustainable) identified and analyzed

'f.111lfl Integrated Managing for Results

35

Causal Logical Linkages

Intermediate Result 1.1

Sustainable NRM methodologies

-t implemented in pilot areas

I IR 1.1.1 p

• • AGA and Community Environment groups develop NRM plans in pilot areas

IR 1.1.1.1

AQA- Agricultural and Game Authority's NRM analysis and testing units functioning in pilot areas


36

Sufficiency and Flexibility

• Ensure that, at each level of the RF, you identify all the results which, if achieved, will be sufficient to cause the result on the next level.

• You may also identify results that reflect alternative strategies or innovative and supplementary approaches.

• Over time, as you work under your hypothesis, you may need to change strategies and therefore alter your IRs. The RF should allow for flexibility.

37

ADS 201: "Planning"

• A Results Framework should be kept current

• RFs should be revisited and/or revised when:

• Results are not achieved as expected

• Critical assumptions prove to be invalid Underlying development theory is wrong

• Critical policy, operational, or resource constraints are not adequately recognized

• Revisit at least annually as part of the portfolio review


38

Strategic Planning Checklist 39

• Are 50s/IRs stated as results? ........... _. .............................................................................................................. D • Are results unidimensional? .................................................................................................................................... D • Are they objectively verifiable? .................................................................................................................... D • Are the relationships between results causal, not

definitional/categorical? ................................................................................................................................................... D • Are the how/why, if/then relationships direct, plausible

and clear? ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... D • Are the 50s results which USAID programs and

activities can materially affect? ...................................................................................................................... D • Are the assumptions reasonable? ........................................................................................................ D • Do the IRs include partner as well as USAID-funded

results~ .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... D


ADS 201: "Planning"

Revision eliminated three tools (though underlying functions still valid):

• Strategic Support Objectives (returned to original concept)

• Separate Customer Service Plans

• Results Packages

40

ADS 201: "Planning"

New Topics

• Option to do an "interim" or "medium term" strategic plan in situations of high uncertainty and risk

• SO end dates, in relation to end dates for grants and contracts

• Contracts can be made available to other 50s

• Public release of planning documents

• Country sanctions

• Non-presence programming procedures

41

ADS 201: "Planning"

• More clarity on required analysis • Strategic analysis prior to selecting an SO

~ Environmental, Conflict Prevention, Gender, others in parameters

• Technical analysis in preparing an Activity

• More on pre-obligation requirements and documentation options • Must document that you have met requirements

• Must have approval of designated official


42

ADS 201: "Planning" 43

• Specifies documentation on SO Team establishment • Identification of the SO for which the Team is being established

• Name of the SO Team Leader

• Names of the initial set of core members

• Names of other team members

• Commonly used and acceptable formats include:

• A management agreement between the OPU and SO Team

• An action memorandum

• A team charter

• A delegation of authority notice, if the notice includes information showing that the SO Team(s) was established


ADS 201: "Planning" 44

Expanded Guidance on Activity Planning

• ACTIVITY: "A set of actions through which inputs such as commodities, technical assistance and training are mobilized to produce specific outputs (e.g., number of vaccinations given, schools built, micro-enterprise loans issued etc.)"

+ All program-funded activities must be documented in writing through an acceptable activity approval document (AAD)

• An authorized Agency official must approve each activity

I!Bl!d xes Cf.?lll Integrated Managing for Results

ADS 201: "Planning"

Principles of Activity Planning

• Activities achieve approved objectives

• Bureaus approve Strategies and SO Teams, and Operating Units approve activitjes

45

• Simplicity and low management cost are vitally important

• Documentation flexibility is key

ADS 201: "Planning"

New emphasis on "performance management" (beyond basic performance monitoring) .

• New mandatory PMP requirements related to data quality (discussion of data limitations, description of data quality assessments planned)

• Encouragement of preliminary PMPs and milestones

• More guidance on numbers of indicators, use of qualitative indicators, how to change indicators

• Guidance on when and how indicators and evaluation should reflect gender considerations


46

ADS 202

"Achieving"


47

ADS 202: "Achieving"

Highlights

• Financial planning and funds management

• Tools and guidance related to activity management, pre-obligation documentation, and instrument selection

• Guidelines for managing audit vulnerability • Conflict of interest

• Procurement integrity

48

ADS 202: "Achieving" 49

SO Teams

• The full SO Team is a decision-making body comprised of members internal and external to USAID

• Need for multi-functionality on the SO Team • Not just technical expertise

• Core members are a subset of the SO Team • Attend to inherently USG functions

• Not the major decision-making body


SO team membership

l!k&i!!J ~ efi*t'lff Integrated Managing for Results

50

* USAID employees responsible for carrying out inherently governmental functions related to the achievement of the SO

ADS 202: "Achieving" 51

SO Teams (continued)

• Inclusion of new COl guidance favoring the involvement of partners on SO Teams

• More guidance on effective team functioning

• Distinctions between • Offices and SO Team

• Activity Manager and era roles

ADS 203

''Assessing and Learning''


52

ADS 203: "Assessing and Learning"

• New conceptual framework emphasizes tools for gathering performance information • Monitoring, evaluation, special studies, portfolio review

• Re-emphasis of importance of evaluation

• Shift of emphasis towards Managing for Results (vs achieving results, or reporting to Washington) • More explicit reference to the ongoing role of the SO Team in

· assessing and learning

• Different phases of strategy implementation may require different indicators, approaches


53

Reaching results: the strategic process

Early in life of SO

-------- I ...... ......... ......... ,.,. ..........

~ / ' / ' (1) / \ ...J I J!l I \

( Results level data may not be

\ ...... available for R4 reporting purposes ::s I ~ \ early in life of SO

I I a:: \ /

' ' / ........ /

......... """" -- -?zn

...... Outputs I ~

(1)

...J p

Inputs s ;: (.) q:


Later in life of SO

Strategic Objective

Intermediate Results

......... ..........

' ' \ Activity level data is not

usually appropriate for R4 reporting later in life of SO

\ I

I /

/ / ......... ____ _ ,., --

54

ADS 203: "Assessing and Learning" 55

Includes more detailed guidance on:

• Portfolio reviews, including specific requirements

• How to plan evaluations, develop scopes of work

• How to respond to evaluation findings

• Special studies

ADS 203: "Assessi-ng and Learning" 56

• R4 report • Contents of the R4 report

• .Requirements for selecting and changing indicators

• Data quality • Emphasis on standards for indicators reported in R4

• New standards of integrity and precision

• Specific guidance on how to conduct data quality assessments

• New mandatory requirement for SO close-out report


57

1. Background to Revision

2. Review of Changes

l!k&l!!i ~ '1\*1'111 Integrated Managing for Results

Managing for Results: Latest and Greatest ADS …pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pbaaf808.pdfManaging for...

Documents

Transcript of Managing for Results: Latest and Greatest ADS …pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pbaaf808.pdfManaging for...