INFORMATION BULLETIN (FFPIB)

Updated: October 5, 2007

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL FOOD FOR PEACE OFFICERS AND COOPERATING SPONSORS

TO: USAID/W and Overseas Distribution Lists; FFP Cooperating Sponsors

FROM: DCHA/FFP, Jonathan Dworken, Acting Director

SUBJECT: USAID and Food for Peace Indicators and Reporting Systems

FFPIB 07-01 (updated)

**Background and Purpose:** USAID uses multiple reporting systems with
different sets of indicators which can become confusing for Food for
Peace (FFP) implementers and staff alike. The purpose of this document
is to orient FFP Cooperating Sponsors (CSs) and FFP Officers to the five
main types of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) reporting requirements
that affect Title II programs, primarily Multi-Year Assistance Programs
(MYAPs). Items 1, 2 and 4 listed below apply to Single-Year Assistance
Programs (SYAPs) as well.

1.  Cooperating Sponsor's Program Indicators

2.  FFP/Washington's Performance Management Plan (PMP) Indicators

3.  USAID Mission Indicators

4.  "F" Indicators

5.  IEHA Indicators

These represent distinct requirements that serve different purposes.

**1. Cooperating Sponsor's Program Indicators**

CSs implementing MYAPs are required to develop M&E plans and track and
report on performance indicators that permit them and FFP to assess
progress made towards objectives. Each MYAP has its own indicators
specific to its program. MYAP performance indicators are identified in
the Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) submitted with the
original proposal, and updated each November in the program's annual
Results Report to reflect progress made in the previous fiscal year
(FY). The IPTT indicators should be selected based on the MYAP's
strategic framework and implementation strategies, and should be useful
for program management and performance reporting. To the extent
feasible, these indicators should include well-established food security
indicators commonly used by FFP programs[^1]. There are generally two
types of indicators in the IPTT--- impact indicators and annual
monitoring indicators. As of FY 2006, the M&E system of MYAPs may also
include "trigger" indicators, which form part of an early warning system
that alerts the CS and FFP to increasing food stress in the MYAP
intervention region.

Applicable to MYAPs awarded in FY 2007 and later (and for SYAPs, where
applicable), is the new requirement to report on a limited set of
standard indicators in addition to the program-specific indicators (see
the next section).

Similarly, CSs implementing SYAPs are also required to develop M&E
plans, and to report semi-annually on progress as defined in the program
proposal. While the reporting requirements for SYAPs are less
exhaustive, CSs must provide clarification for any targets not met or
exceeded.

**2. Food for Peace/Washington's PMP Indicators**

FFP Washington has its own Performance Management Plan (PMP) designed to
measure progress on the Office's 2006-2010 Strategic Plan[^2]. The PMP
identifies a limited set of indicators developed to capture results from
a wide range of FFP-funded programs. The data source for most of FFP's
PMP indicators is the Standardized Annual Performance Questionnaire
(SAPQ). As of FY 2006, all CSs implementing MYAPs or SYAPs are required
to fill in and submit an SAPQ with their annual Results Report in
November of each year. Some of the data for the PMP indicators also
comes from the Summary Request and Beneficiary Tracking Table, also
submitted as part of the annual Results Report.

New SYAPs and MYAPs awarded in FY 2007 and later are required to report
data for the applicable indicators in the SAPQ. Ongoing MYAPs and SYAPs
are asked to provide data where possible (see Results Report Guidelines
for m ore information). New MYAPs should integrate the FFP indicators
into their IPTTs and if they already have a similar but different
indicator of their own, they should replace it with the standard FFP
indicator so that FFP can aggregate results from across all of its
programs and countries. Ongoing MYAPs may want to add FFP indicators to
their IPTT, mid-course, if they are able to report on them.

The FFP PMP indicators and the type of program for which they are
applicable are:

> [Strategic Objective: Food Insecurity among Vulnerable Populations
> Reduced]{.underline}

1.  Percentage of underweight children 0-5 years of age in Title
    II-assisted areas in FFP priority countries (MYAP)

2.  Percentage of applicable programs reporting maintenance or
    improvement in nutritional status (SYAP/MYAP)

3.  Average number of months of adequate food provisioning in Title
    II-assisted program areas (MYAP)

4.  Percentage of applicable programs reporting maintenance or
    improvement in household food consumption (MYAP)

> [IR 2: Title II Impact in the Field Increased]{.underline}

1.  Percentage of targeted direct beneficiaries reached (SYAP/MYAP)

2.  Percentage of Title II program beneficiaries with improved health,
    nutrition or hygiene behaviors (MYAP)

3.  Percentage of Title II-assisted producers using a project-defined
    minimum number of sustainable agricultural technologies (MYAP)

4.  Percentage of Title II-assisted communities with disaster early
    warning and response systems in place (SYAP/MYAP)

5.  Percentage of Title II-assisted communities with improved physical
    infrastructure to mitigate the impact of shocks (SYAP/MYAP)

6.  Percentage of Title II-assisted communities with safety nets to
    address the needs of their most vulnerable members (MYAP)

7.  Percentage of Title II-assisted communities with improved capacity
    (MYAP)

**3. USAID Mission Indicators**

USAID Missions have multiple and complex reporting requirements. They
are likely to ask CSs to provide data on, and ideally participate in the
development of, the Mission's PMP indicators. These indicators can vary
widely, depending on the strategy and programs of the individual
Mission. Missions are also required to report to the Director of U.S.
Foreign Assistance on a set of standard indicators. The Mission may ask
CSs to provide data for these indicators, which are also referred to as
"FACTS", "OP", or "F" indicators (see below). Missions may have
additional reporting responsibilities that they ask a CS to contribute
to, such as PEPFAR (HIV/AIDS) indicators or other special programs.

CSs should work with Missions to identify which of the Mission's
indicators apply to their MYAP and they should integrate these
indicators into their IPTT. Missions will generally ask CSs to provide
indicator data as soon as the fiscal year ends, in October or November
of each year.

**4. "F" Indicators**

"F" refers to the Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance, who has authority
over all Department of State and USAID foreign assistance funding and
programs[^3]. The F indicators are a set of standard indicators
established by F to measure what is being accomplished with U.S. foreign
assistance funds under the U.S. Strategic Framework for Foreign
Assistance. Starting in FY 2007, all USAID operating units
(OUs---country Missions and Offices in Washington) are required to set
targets for and report on these standard indicators. OUs also have the
option of setting targets for and reporting on their own "custom"
indicators. OUs enter targets for their F indicators into a database
called "FACTS" and they do this in October or November when submitting
their Operational Plan (OP). The F indicators are subject to change as
the F process evolves.

CSs implementing MYAPs should work with Missions to identify the
relevant and feasible indicators from the list of F indicators (or the
Mission's custom indicators), and adjust their own program information
systems to enable collecting and reporting on these indicators to
Missions.

The F indicators relevant to SYAPs are collected by FFP in Washington
through the SAPQ and Summary Request and Beneficiary Tracking Table,
which CSs fill out annually.

**5. IEHA Indicators**

The President's Initiative to End Hunger in Africa (IEHA) relies on
evidence-based performance data to demonstrate the impact of U.S.
Government agricultural assistance in Africa[^4]. The inclusion of Title
II in the results reporting of IEHA provides FFP and its CSs an
additional mechanism to demonstrate the effectiveness of development
food aid.

At present, IEHA supports efforts in Ghana, Kenya, Mali, Mozambique,
Uganda, and Zambia and three regional programs in east, west, and
southern Africa. Title II CSs implementing non-emergency programs in
IEHA countries are asked to report annually on select IEHA indicators,
if possible. CSs should work with their Mission counterparts to discuss
which indicators are applicable and should be adopted into their annual
monitoring and reporting systems. IEHA has developed and circulated a
standardized reporting tool for Missions to use, from which annual data
will be collected and reported.

[^1]: <http://www.fantaproject.org/focus/monitoring.shtml>

[^2]: Available at
    <http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/ffp_strategy.2006_2010.pdf>

[^3]: See <http://www.state.gov/f/>

[^4]: See
    <http://www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa/initiatives/ieha.html>