APPENDIX 3 - Results Monitoring Plan Template.docx

Statement of Work (SOW)

I. Project Overview Award #:

Project Title:

Organization:

Problem Statement: [Implementer: provide the problem to be addressed. Available in the NOFO and/or the application.]

Description: [Implementer: provide brief (1-5 sentences) project description. What will your project use the funding for? What result(s) do you intend to achieve through this project? How will you know whether you have achieved the desired result(s)? And how will you show success?] II. Theory of Change and Logic Model [Implementer: insert the project’s Theory of Change and Logic Model here or at the end of this document, including Assumptions and External Factors.] III. Project Goal and Objectives [Implementer: insert the project’s connection to higher level strategic goal or intermediate results as provided in the NOFO as the Project Goal. Insert the project’s Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timebound (SMART) Objective(s).]

a. Project Goal

b. Project Objective(s)

IV. Project Workplan The project will carry out the main activities referenced in your completed Logic Model (mentioned above) to achieve the Project Objectives. These Activities/Milestones will become the RPM Workplan in MyGrants. They will become a contractual obligation to either complete or modify in coordination with NEA during the project.

[Please complete the table below outlining all planned project activities with a corresponding timeline under each project objective. Please identify target completion dates (milestones) for each activity. We understand that these dates are estimates and may change.

Milestones are the specific events/activities/tasks that need to take place during the period of performance to achieve the Project Objectives; if these milestones are not completed, outputs and outcomes will not occur. Milestones are binary in that you either complete them or you do not. The corresponding timeline and associated deliverables will be used to monitor progress. The first entry below serves as an example. Please modify and add additional lines to the table as needed.]

Activity # (Align to Logic Model)

What will this Activity/ Milestone Achieve? When will it start?

(Outputs and short-term outcomes in your logic model) Location Where will this take place?

(Region/ province/ virtual or in-person) Public Event?

(Yes/No) Activity/ Milestone Completion Date (When will this be completed?

MM/YYYY)

Objective 1

Start Date: 06/2024] ☐Virtual ☒In-person – location: Western Region ☐ Yes ☒ No

[Completion: 05/2026]

☐Virtual ☐In-person – location:

☐ Yes ☐ No

Objective 2

☐Virtual

☐ Yes

☐Virtual

☐ Yes

Objective 3

☐Virtual

☐ Yes

V. Results Monitoring Plan (RMP) - Project Indicators The project will be accountable for achieving the Project Objectives and Targets listed below. Project Indicators should monitor the progress occurring over time towards Outputs, Outcomes, and Objectives from your logic model. This Results Monitoring Plan (RMP) will become the RMP in MyGrants. They will become a contractual obligation to either complete or modify in coordination with NEA during the project.

Progress towards both project Work Plan and RMP should be reported on in accordance with your project reporting schedule, and more details for suggested narrative reporting is in Attachment 1 – Qualitative Reporting Guidelines and Prompts.

Please fill in the below table, and add rows as needed. See Attachment 2 – Results Monitoring Plan Field Details, below, for full definitions of each field. Proposed indicators should be direct, objective, adequate, and practical measures of the result(s) to be achieved. See Attachment 3 - Selecting High Quality Performance Indicators, Setting Targets & Baselines, below, for more information on selecting high quality performance indicators.

When selecting indicators for your RMP, please only select 4-20 indicators total for the RMP. They should be relevant to the project and useful for adaptive management.

For RMP indicators, please include the following:

· 2-6 Total Indicators per Objective (see Appendix #6 Program Indicator List from the NOFO for a list of suggested indicators and program specific disaggregate requirements). These should include:

· At least 1 F Standard Indicator; a suggested sub-set most relevant to the project area is included in Appendix #6 Program Indicator List. The full list of available Foreign Assistance Standard Indicators is available here: Foreign Assistance Resource Library - United States Department of State

· At least 1 Outcome indicator per Objective (the Most Significant Change (MSC) can count as an outcome indicator)

· Outcome indicators monitor longer term project results as articulated in the Logic Model; outcomes are the changes made by the outputs of the project and help NEA convey project effects to internal and external stakeholders.

· 1 - 4 Output indicators per Objective

· Output indicators track immediate or near-term results or deliveries of products, services, or trainings. They should not include basic activities like holding meetings which can be tracked via the Project Workplan.

· When applicable, 1 MSC Indicator (see Attachment 4 - Most Significant Change Indicator Guidance below).

· When applicable, add the Advocacy Index (see Attachment 5 - Advocacy Success Index Reporting Guidance below)

· If necessary, suggested project custom indicators along with a rationale for their inclusion

Please note Definitions need to fully define each term used in the indicator name to clearly explain what the indicator will measure to improve data quality. If you’re suggesting a custom indicator, explain the justification for its inclusion there.

Results Monitoring Plan

Project Objective 1:

An individual may attend a higher education institution with USG-support in the US, in the individual's country of residence, or in a third country. A country of residence is where the individual resides, regardless or nationality or citizenship. A third country is a country that is neither the individual's country of residence or the US. These designations help USAID missions track investments within and outside the country in which they work.

“Attending” a higher education institution can be for the purpose of long-term training or short-term training. Long-term training is defined as degree-earning coursework that requires six or more months of commitment. Short-term training is a training that is fewer than six months in duration, but typically a one-to-two week classroom-style course that is led by a professional instructor or technical expert with the goal of helping participants acquire new knowledge and skills in their area of employment.

"USG scholarships and financial assistance" are defined as USG-funded, full or partial financial aid provided for a student to further his or her education. This includes financial assistance, waivers, or other support for experiential opportunities such as research assistantships, internships, apprenticeships, etc. This also includes assistance for expenses accrued while furthering one’s education such as housing, health insurance, materials, etc. Such financial aid may be awarded based on a range of criteria (e.g. merit-based; needs-based; career-specific).

"Individuals" are those who have received a scholarship or other form of financial assistance to attend a higher education institution in their own country or another country. This includes financial assistance to US citizens to study in another country and to citizens of other countries to study in the US, their own country, or a third country.

This indicator should report all individuals who received scholarships and financial assistance and attended courses or participated in an academic or training program at a higher education institution during the year being reported, even if some of these individuals may also have been counted in previous years. In other words, if a student is attending a higher education institution with current funding and was counted towards this indicator in a previous fiscal year, the student can be counted towards the indicator again in the current fiscal year.]

Note: you must identify both the disaggregation, in this case Sex, and disaggregation categories, in this case Male/Female]

Target per Fiscal year:

Note: for AC use only, not for entry to MyGrants

[FY25: 100

FY26: 100]

Describe where the data used to report against this indicator is from, for example, existing administrative records, a participant feedback survey, etc.]

Note which Activities from the Work Plan, above, contribute to this performance indicator.]

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Project Objective 2:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline:

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

2.4

☐ Standard Indicator ☐ Custom indicator

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

Indicator:

Definition:

Disaggregation:

Target:

Target per Fiscal year:

Baseline

Data Source:

Activities:

VI. Attachment(s)

1. Qualitative Reporting Guidelines and Prompts

2. Results Monitoring Plan field details

3. Selecting High Quality Performance Indicators

4. Success Story Guidelines

5. Most Significant Change Indicator Guidance

6. Advocacy Success Index Reporting Guidance

Attachment 1 – Qualitative Reporting Guidelines and Prompts

These qualitative prompts will elicit feedback that is not captured in the quantitative indicators. The prompts help to understand how a project is progressing. They capture insights and observations of both project staff and project beneficiaries and allow everyone involved to reflect on the project’s activities and progress.

Qualitative Reporting Guidelines These guidelines summarize suggested sections of reporting for the project. Addressing these guidelines may not be necessary each quarter.

· Description of Statistics: Describe the basic features of the data in the report. Provide simple summaries about the findings and the measures.

· Performance/ Progress Narrative: Describe the key activities completed this quarter and respond to the qualitative prompts, below, as relevant.

· Success Stories: Provide examples that demonstrate the success of this project. Were there any expected/unanticipated results stemming from the project’s implementation? What were the project’s greatest achievements? Use applicable information from the Success Story guidelines (see Attachment 2).

Qualitative Reporting Prompts

· Logic Model & Theory of Change: Does this quarter still fall on track with the project logic model, how or why not? Is there evidence to support your theory of change this quarter? Alternately, is there any evidence that your program assumptions no longer hold, and your theory of change needs to be updated? As a result of this review, are any program adaptations necessary?

· Reactions and Feedback: What feedback from stakeholders are you receiving about this project? Are there any improvements that can be made to enhance the feedback process or the project? If so, what are they? How are you communicating any project adaptations back to the stakeholders providing the feedback? Use quotes when appropriate.

· Challenges: What obstacles or setbacks did the project encounter? What effects did these obstacles have on project activities? How did project staff adapt and respond? Was the response effective? Does the challenge still remain?

· Lessons Learned: What skills, information, and techniques did the beneficiaries learn? Which activities did they find most beneficial for improving their skills/knowledge/attitudes? Which activities did you observe to be most beneficial for improving beneficiaries’ skills/knowledge/attitudes and why? What can be improved to receive better results? Provide examples.

· Behaviors Changed: Provide details regarding how the behaviors of beneficiaries changed throughout the implementation of the project, using the following model: Unaware >> Aware >> Concerned >> Knowledgeable >> Motivated to change >> Practicing trial behavior change >> Sustained behavior change. Describe how stakeholders apply/will apply what they have learned. How do external factors affect the beneficiaries’ ability to apply what they have learned? Example: Social & economic conditions, cultural context, mental health, etc.

· Results: Were outcomes and objectives achieved? If so, were they achieved through anticipated or unanticipated mechanisms? Have there been unforeseen consequences (negative or positive) resulting from project activities?

· Return-on-Investment (ROI): What were the project’s greatest achievements in comparison to the cost of the program? What activities provided the most cost-effective results for value? Which activities were not cost-effective? What suggestions can you offer to increase the return on investment for this project? Provide cost per person/cost per activity when applicable.

Attachment 2 – Results Monitoring Plan field details f Attachment 3 – Selecting High Quality Performance Indicators, Setting Targets & Baselines Key Principles for Choosing Indicators The development or selection of indicators should be based on a logic model that links the goals and objectives of a project with its activities, outputs, and outcomes. Indicators monitor progress towards achieving the project outputs, outcomes, and objectives.

· Relevant: It must align with your project's goals, objectives, and the output or outcome it’s monitoring. If improving education is the goal, focus on academic indicators rather than unrelated measures like event attendance.

· Clearly Defined: Specify exactly what you're measuring. For instance, if your project aims to improve education, an indicator could be “the number of students who improve their math test scores.”

· Measurable: Ensure it can be observed, counted, analyzed, or tested. For the above example, test scores can be measured.

· Achievable: The indicator target should be realistic within your project's timeframe and budget. Example: Aim for a 10% improvement in test scores within a year, rather than 100%.

Types of Indicators

1. Output Indicators: Output indicators measure the direct results of activities, like “number of textbooks distributed," or “number of training attendees”, and even “number of vaccine doses delivered.”

2. Outcome Indicators: measure the changes that result from a project/program. For example, “Percent of students graduating,” or “Percent of children immunized.” A long-term outcome might be, “Reduction in prevalence of disease in the target community.”

Setting Indicator Targets A target is a specific amount of achievement/result that a project aims to achieve/reach. These targets are essential for measuring progress towards desired outcomes and implementers must establish targets for each performance indicator prior to reporting actual data. Targets must be realistic and account for the project context, timeframe, and available budget. Setting targets should occur through negotiations with all program team members – the Implementer, Programs, Budgets, Grants, and MEL.

TIP: For both output and outcome indicators, it is advisable to break down the targets into more detailed components. For example, if you’re aiming to improve literacy rates in a community, you might start by reviewing the current literacy rate of the community, success rates of past literacy projects, consult educational experts, and look at studies of similar literacy programs.

· For Output indicators, consider a project aimed at improving environmental awareness among local government officials. On the demand side, you’d need to figure out how many officials are actually interested in and able to attend such training sessions. On the supply side, think about how much money NEA/AC can provide, how much it costs to train one official, and whether the organization doing the training can effectively use the fund to organize and conduct these sessions. It’s also important to consider how experienced the organization is in environmental training and how likely they are to successfully improve awareness based on their track record.

· For outcome indicators setting targets for a project is more complex because many factors, not just the project activities themselves, can influence whether the expected outcomes are achieved. These factors often include external elements beyond the project’s control. To make target setting for outcome indicators more manageable consider these strategies:

· Look at historical data or contextual data for the same or similar indicators to understand past trends and baselines.

· Consult an expert in the projects field to gain insight based on their experience and knowledge.

· Review available research from similar projects or programs to learn from their successes and challenges.

Finally, set sub-targets by Fiscal Year, if possible, to inform the Performance Plan and Report and to track progress towards targets per year of the award.

Setting the Indicator Baseline

1. What Is a Baseline? The starting point of your indicator before the project begins. It's essential for tracking progress. Throughout an award lifecycle, the baseline should always reflect the beginning of the period of performance, even if the project end date is extended.

2. When to Set Baseline at Zero? For new outputs directly resulting from your project, like “number of students attending after-school tutoring sessions,” start at zero. New outcome indicators may also be set at zero. If you're building on existing conditions, such as improving test scores, use pre-existing data to establish your baseline if it’s available and relevant.

Updating Indicators During a Project Period of Performance:

Before modifying or creating new indicators for an active project, the NEA/AC MEL team needs to assess the tradeoff carefully and analyze whether the changes will benefit or hinder the project from monitoring progress towards achieving its goal. Modifying targets or indicators (e.g., removing an indicator or lowering a target because the project did not achieve the target) within the final months of a project is discouraged from the standpoint of ensuring accountability and accuracy (i.e., a project’s inability to meet its targets is actionable information that could inform future project design and implementation decisions).

Updating or removing an indicator may be justified if there was a major change in the project’s activities, a better monitoring method was developed, or existing indicators were found to not capture output/ outcome data accurately. If modifying the RMP to include new or modified indicators, the NEA/AC MEL team, in consultation with the implementer, programs, and grants team, should consider:

· Determine if the indicator should be updated or retired: If an indicator definition is being updated to provide clarity that was previously lacking, and the indicator continues to measure the same thing as before, the indicator can be updated. However, if an indicator is updated to meaningfully change what it is measuring, it should be retired and no longer reported on, and any new indicators should be added.

· Retaining one or two core outcome-level indicators that track higher-level results: Core outcome-level indicators can act as a guiding “north star" to ensure the project stays on the intended course, to preserve trend data, and to maintain accountability on whether the project is achieving its goal. Any changes to the work plan can be compared to the outcome-level indicators to assess if the changes have made the project more effective and attained the results it set out to achieve.

· Consideration of establishing a proxy indicator as an indirect measure: there will be instances when data will not be available for the most suitable indicators of a particular result. In these situations, the NEA/AC MEL team should consider a proxy indicator which is a less direct way of measuring against a result. For instance, where tests of exchange students’ achievement have not been systematically applied to assess education quality, a proxy measure might focus on the student completion rates. The assumption is that if there is a high completion rate, then it may be reasonable to assume improvement in education quality. Proxy indicators must be carefully assigned; the use of inadequate proxy indicators can threaten the validity of the data collected (for instance, students’ self-reported levels of achievements in mathematics won’t tell us anything about the quality of education).

Example: updating an indicator target during the project period of performance

Target: 100 Explanation: the initial project planned to train 100 students over a two-year period. At the beginning of the project’s period of performance, no students had been trained.

Baseline: 0 Target: 100 Explanation: the initial project planned to train 100 students over a two-year period. At the beginning of the project’s period of performance, no students had been trained. The project requested a NCE to complete the initial target of 100 students trained due to unforeseen delays in the final training cohort.

Baseline: 0 Target: 150 Explanation: the initial project planned to train 100 students over a two-year period. At the beginning of the project’s period of performance, no students had been trained. Additional funds became available to support this project, leading to plans for an additional year of training, with a target of 150 students trained.

Target: 80% Explanation: The implementer has trained students on similar topics in the past, with generally 70% of students passing the course. Through course improvements funded by the current award, and the addition of extra tutoring support, they have set a target pass rate of 80% for this project.

Baseline: 70% Target: 80% Explanation: The project requested a NCE to achieve the initial target of training 100 students, due to unforeseen delays with the final training cohort. They do not anticipate that the extended timeline will change the pass rate for students and have maintained the target at 80%.

Baseline: 70% Target: 85% Explanation: The project achieved its target of 80% pass rate for the course in the first two years of performance and decided to create a stretch goal of 85% for the additional year of performance to encourage continued improvements in course delivery and student support.

Attachment 4 – NEA/AC Success Story Guidelines

What is a success story? A success story focuses on the achievement(s) of grant recipients (implementers) or project participants as a direct result of the NEA/AC project. A success story should show widespread changes at the outcome level of a NEA/AC project on participants, organization, or policy, and relate to the projects strategic Goals or Intermediate Results (as applicable), such as expanding economic prosperity, participatory and responsive governance, and greater access to services. For example, success stories may include:

· An organization successfully advocating with government officials and how their advocacy is affecting policy changes.

· Improved capacity and professionalization of project trainees using a new learned skill as reported or observed in their jobs, and how it may be affecting their organization’s capacity.

Success stories are different from highlights: A highlight covers an important accomplishment(s) by grant recipients or project participants. A highlight is predominantly anecdotal in nature and typically focuses on an individual’s personal successes. Examples of highlights include:

· Significant and/or positive press coverage of an event.

· Individual accomplishments of grant recipients or project participants.

Formatting your success story When developing your story, please address the following points:

1. Title: Capture the overall message of the story, include an action verb.

2. Problem Overview: Describe the problem being addressed and why it’s important. Use data to frame the problem. Specify the affected population(s).

3. Description of Program/Activity: Identify who is involved, including NEA/AC partners, and list of activities implemented, including where and when it took place and how it addressed the problem. Identify the target audience of the activities and describe how the project achieved its objectives.

4. Outcomes of Program/Activity: Identify the short-term or intermediate outcomes that demonstrate how the program/activity addressed the problem (e.g., change in policy, use of curriculum, increase in employment, creation of NGOs, and establishment of additional funding). Provide a conclusion to the success story that avoids using broad, sweeping statements such as “there was a noticeable increase in young entrepreneurs.” Use quantitative measures and tangible results when possible. We want to show strong impact by answering “so what?” questions.

5. Additional Information: Name of the agency and name and credentials of program contract. Organization’s website address (if available). Any other supporting materials you wish to share, such as testimonials, quotes from partners/participants.

6. Relate the story to NEA/AC Program Goals, Objectives, and Sub-objectives

7. Remember: Sometimes a success story is a “work in progress.” Consider updating or enhancing your story as new information and outcome data become available.

Style Reminders

· Keep story short – 150-200 words.

· Stick to the facts. Do not interject an opinion unless you attribute it to someone.

· Avoid using passive voice (e.g., “Trainings were provided.”). Use active voice (e.g., “X partner provided Y trainings”), and be clear about who is doing the action in every sentence. Include direct quotes if they strengthen the story.

· Avoid using the words “recent,” “soon,” “last week,” etc. because they can quickly get outdated. Everything should have a specific date.

· Limit use of acronyms. If you use acronyms, spell them out on first mention.

· Keep messages simple and concise.

· Write it for someone who knows nothing about the project.

What makes a good success story?

· Catches attention

· Contains compelling, noteworthy facts

· Includes outputs (e.g. number of people trained), and outcomes (e.g. number of people who obtained jobs as result of training)

· Tells the story through both visualizations (graphs, charts, maps, photos, etc.) and concisely written narratives whenever possible

· Answers: “So What?”

Example of a success story:

Institute of International Education – Women’s Enterprise for Sustainability (Grant: $3,000,000.00):

Title: NEA/AC Continues to Invest in Efforts to Encourage the Active Participation of Women in Shaping Their Own Futures The Women’s Enterprise for Sustainability, implemented by the Institute of International Education (IIE) Centers provide technology, social media, entrepreneurship, leadership, business management training to individual women entrepreneurs and to local organizations, which provide SME training to additional women using a cost-recovery model: 2,991 women have been trained at WES centers since the program’s start. Since 2012, 346 women have launched or expanded their businesses while nearly 1,700 women have developed business plans and are poised to start businesses once financing becomes available. WES Centers have developed a number of agreements with local and regional finance institutions including Taysir Microfinance, ENDA, Banque Tunisie de Solidarite (BTS), and NGOs that provide micro finance. In addition to working with financial institutions, WES Centers have also developed partnerships with other NGOs or entities in the public and private sectors that provide incentives to support entrepreneurs’ business development: WES’s unique sustainable business model and tangible impact has attracted over $240,000 in cash donations, computer equipment and in-kind contributions to local partners.

Attachment 5 – Most Significant Change Indicator Guidance

For use if the MSC Indicator is selected for use in the RMP.

Most Significant Change (MSC) is a participatory monitoring and evaluation technique focused on documenting the qualitative effects of social change interventions. Implementers describe the change(s) that occurred and the reasons why they consider such changes to be significant. The technique is participatory in that it requires the involvement of project funders, project implementers and project stakeholders; these actors can be involved in both the collection and analysis of outcome data. It allows project stakeholders at all levels to have regular discussions about what observed changes are significant and why.

MSC is a flexible technique that can be adapted to a variety of programming contexts. It is particularly suited to complex environments where conventional quantitative measures may be inadequate to assess project effects, or where outcomes are diverse in scope and there is a potential for unexpected effects or consequences. MSC is particularly useful for complex or innovative activities where cause and effect relationships are not well understood, and for activities that seek to influence policy or social change.

Grantees (or the funder) will include MSC as a qualitative outcome indicator in the RMP. The following is the information that should be included in proposed RMPs, which will be finalized in coordination with NEA/AC’s MEL Specialist and then uploaded into MyGrants, as appropriate:

· Indicator Code: MSC-1

· Bureau Indicator: Most Significant Change

· Indicator Definition: Total number of significant change stories collected from project stakeholders that tell the story of significant changes and outcomes that are directly or indirectly linked with the NEA-funded projects. Data collection activities with stakeholders will begin approximately six months after the start of their participation/involvement in the project and continue when appropriate within the project until the conclusion of the award. The data collection process and reporting templates will be shared by the NEA MEL POC. During the project lifecycle at minimum one significant change story with a maximum of four will be submitted each project year.

· Indicator type: Qualitative

· Indicator Level: Outcome

· Target Number: [total number of years the project spans]

· Frequency of Reporting: 1-4 per project year

· Data Source: Implementer records, interviews, or discussions with direct or indirect project stakeholders Please see the MSC-NEAAC Implementer Guide for more information related to implementing MSC and selecting the “most” significant change story for submission to NEA/AC.

Attachment 6 – Advocacy Success Index Reporting Guidance

For use if the Advocacy Index is relevant to your project.

Please submit this data within your quarterly narrative report. The purpose of this framework is to help grantees capture a nuanced and meaningful picture of how advocacy campaigns (IRs 3, 4, or 6, if applicable and available from the NOFO) have made short to medium-term progress. Changing the discourse around a given issue, successfully tapping into a social movement, or building a broad coalition of advocacy organizations can represent a major success. The framework is intended to help conceptualize the overall civic advocacy process as NEA envisions it and as a tool to help hone grantee narrative reporting. An Advocacy Success can also be a Most Significant Change submission.

Please submit, using the template below, outcomes for which you have evidence that your project has contributed to. This reporting should, for learning purposes, include both positive and negative outcomes (for example, the introduction of a law contrary to the aims of the campaign.) This framework is not meant to be prescriptive or exhaustive. Report on significant intermediate successes or failures that fall outside this framework. NEA/AC also recognizes that not all stages will be relevant to all NEA/AC-funded projects, and that stages often occur in parallel and sometimes in different order.

Importantly, NEA/AC recognizes that there are variables outside grantees’ control such as political constraints, project budgets, project lengths, and the scale of the change the campaign seeks to have made, which narrative reporting should describe.

Outcome Suite 1 - Shifting the Discourse and Creating Bottom-up Pressure: Engagements in stage one contribute to shaping broader discourse. For example, the media is covering the policy issue differently; mainstream outlets not directly tied to the grantee are framing the issue differently or are just discussing it to a greater extent; the advocacy issue at stake gains popular support; new items appear in political discussion. As evidence of this type of outcome, grantees are encouraged to cite news articles or public influencer engagement on the issue in their narrative reporting.

Outcome Suite 2 - Recognition from Decision Makers: Positive public statement or changes in the framing of the policy issue from a government official(s) or other decision-maker(s) about the target advocacy issue.

Outcome Suite 3 - Official Adoption: Official policy proposal under consideration or legislation drafted. Targeted norm is changing in a specific but limited number of instances.

Outcome Suite 4 - Policy or Norm Change: In the case of campaigns for formal changes or decisions such as policy, regulation, process changes, change has been approved by all required relevant bodies.

Outcome Suite 5 - Policy Implementation: Policy is being effectively funded, implemented, and enforced by relevant officials. Examples of this include government bodies using allocated funds to execute new laws or regulations, courts applying precedents or practices, or enforcement of changed regulations. In the case of a changed norm, grantee should be able to demonstrate widespread behavior change or similar cultural shift.

Reporting Chart

regional, national)

image1.png image2.svg Indicator: ☐ Standard Indicator ☐ Custom indicator Bureau Indicator: ☐ Output ☐ Outcome Indicator Type: Definition : Disaggregation : ☐ Integer ☐ Percentage ☐ Qualitative Report By: Target : Baseline Target per Fiscal year: Data Source: Activities : Indicator : The indicator name should be concise and clear about what exactly is being counted or measured, and should spell out acronyms. Bureau Indicator: Standard indicator : from Annex #5 Program Indicator List, including F Standard indicators. Custom indicator: designed specifically for this project. Indicator Type : Output: Monitors Outputs from project Logic Model, the direct results of activities Outcome: Monitors Outcomes from project Logic Model, the intended changes that result from a project/program activities and outputs Definition : The definition clearly defines all terms, and if needed, how to calculate the data collected to measure the change expected . C larify everything the program design team needs to know to understand how to use this indicato r. Disaggregation: Defines any breakdown of data reported into sub - categories relevant to analysis. Categories are the specific categories that your data will fit into. For example, Sex is a Disaggregation, and male/female are the Categories. Report By: Integer : Reported as a number. Percentage : Monitors a percentage and is reported as a numerator and denominator. Qualitative : Reported as text Target : Intended result, see Attachment 3, Selecting High Quality Performance Indicators, Setting Targets & Baselines for more guidance Target per Fiscal Year: break out the intended total target by targets per Fiscal Year, which should add up to the total target Baseline : Reference point for results at the beginning of performance, see Attachment 3, Selecting High Quality Performance Indicators, Setting Targets & Baselines for more guidance Data Source : Source of data gathered to report on the indicator. Activities : List the Activities from the Work Plan that contribute to this Indicator