Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) ... 1 - 7 - SFMP

Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) ... 1 - 7

Appendix 1: Performance Indicator Reference Sheets

1. Number of hectares of biological significance and/or natural resources showing improved biophysical conditions as a result of USG assistance

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of hectares of biological significance and/or natural resources showing improved biophysical conditions as a result of USG assistance
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: 4.8.1-1 Indicator Type: Impact
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): Area under improved management where there is biophysical monitoring data showing stability, improvement, or slowing in the rate of decline in one or more selected parameters over time. Parameter(s) selected will depend on the type of management actions taken and may include one of the following, or others: Changes in fish stocks, biodiversity, and abundance Land-use changes over time in areas where project interventions are implemented.
Unit of Measure: Hectares
Disaggregated by: Terrestrial/Aquatic
Rationale or Management Utility (optional): The purpose of this indicator is to document the geographic area where we see an improvement in biophysical condition as a result of project supported activities in natural resources management. This is a good indicator to measure real changes in the environment. However, it is a costly indicator since it requires biophysical monitoring and does not always prove that the changes in environmental condition can be attributed to project activities.
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Baseline and biophysical monitoring reports
Method of Data Acquisition: GIS mapping of hectares where biophysical conditions (e.g. coral cover and fish abundance) are measured through periodic surveys (baseline and follow up biophysical monitoring reports)
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Baseline and end of project
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

1.1 Fishing Mortality at MSY (Fmsy)

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.1: Increased competitiveness of major food chains IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.1.1: Increased agricultural productivity IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Fishing Mortality at MSY (F_msy)
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: (IR 2.1 indicator from Ghana CDCS) Indicator Type: Outcome
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): This indicator measures maximum level of harvest rate allowed by the fishery in order to produce the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) and which maintains the biological sustainability of the stock. *(This indicator used to determine if Indicator: hectares of biological significance have improved)* Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): is a fisheries management term to describe the highest average catch (by weight) that can be safely taken from a single species stock without reducing its abundance overtime while taking into account the stock’s reproductive and growth rates under prevailing environmental conditions
Unit of Measure: Rate of harvest
Disaggregated by: Not Applicable
Rationale or Management Utility (optional): Targets of stock sustainability: F_msy and B_msy Fishery managers use a set of monitoring parameters to evaluate the adequacy and achievement of management measures in reference to the sustainable standards. An annual stock assessment will provide measures of fishing mortality and current biomass by single or multiple species (F_current and B_current). These two parameters will be analyzed annually against the targets (F_msy and B_msy). Each stock has its own sustainability target F_msy and B_msy based on species life history and population dynamics. However, monitoring the performance of management measures against the target is measured using a standardized frame of reference, based on a ratio of F_current/F_msy and B_current/B_msy. The rebuilding target is achieved when F_current/F_msy < 1 and B_current/B_msy > 1. The target biological reference points (F_msy and B_msy) will be established in the first year of the project by the Science and Technical Working Group (STWG). The targets will be computed using a yield per recruit model with available primary data. Targets will be revised as data become available and/or measured by project’s special studies in collaboration with the University of Cape Coast and the Fisheries Commission
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Landing Records of the fisheries
Method of Data Acquisition: surveys and interviews
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Every Year
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional): Every Year
Presentation of Data (optional): Every Year
Initial Review Conducted by (optional): Every Year
Mission/Team Review (optional): Every Year
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional): FY 2015
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

1.2 Biomass to Produce MSY (Bmsy)

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.1: Increased competitiveness of major food chains IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.1.1: Increased agricultural productivity IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Biomass to produce MSY (B_msy):
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: (IR 2.1 indicator from Ghana CDCS) Indicator Type: Outcome
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): This indicator measures is a Management Reference Point referring to the level of biomass (by weight) necessary in the natural environment to produce MSY and maintains the long-term sustainability of the stock. *(This indicator used to determine if Indicator: hectares of biological significance have improved)* Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): is a fisheries management term to describe the highest average catch (by weight) that can be safely taken from a single species stock without reducing its abundance overtime while taking into account the stock’s reproductive and growth rates under prevailing environmental conditions
Unit of Measure: Metric Tons
Disaggregated by: Not Applicable
Rationale or Management Utility (optional): Targets of stock sustainability: F_msy and B_msy Fishery managers use a set of monitoring parameters to evaluate the adequacy and achievement of management measures in reference to the sustainable standards. An annual stock assessment will provide measures of fishing mortality and current biomass by single or multiple species (F_current and B_current). These two parameters will be analyzed annually against the targets (F_msy and B_msy). Each stock has its own sustainability target F_msy and B_msy based on species life history and population dynamics. However, monitoring the performance of management measures against the target is measured using a standardized frame of reference, based on a ratio of F_current/F_msy and B_current/B_msy. The rebuilding target is achieved when F_current/F_msy < 1 and B_current/B_msy > 1. The target biological reference points (F_msy and B_msy) will be established in the first year of the project by the Science and Technical Working Group (STWG). The targets will be computed using a yield per recruit model with available primary data. Targets will be revised as data become available and/or measured by project’s special studies in collaboration with the University of Cape Coast and the Fisheries Commission
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Catch per unit of effort (CPUE)
Method of Data Acquisition: surveys and interviews
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Every Year
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional): Every Year
Presentation of Data (optional): Every Year
Initial Review Conducted by (optional): Every Year
Mission/Team Review (optional): Every Year
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional): FY 2015
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

2. Number of indirect project beneficiaries (number), the percentage of which are female (percent) disaggregated by rural, urban (Project indicator)

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.1: Increased competitiveness of major food chains IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.1.1: Increased agricultural productivity IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of indirect project beneficiaries (number), the percentage of which are female (percent) disaggregated by rural, urban (Project indicator)
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: (Project indicator) Indicator Type: Outcome
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): This indicator measures the number of individuals (men and women) who benefit indirectly from project interventions. It includes individuals with increased household income as well as economic benefits from ecosystem services, etc. Economic benefits may be based on actual cash transactions or other economic value of natural resources. For example, areas where sustainable natural resources management, climate change adaptation, or fisheries plans and/or implementation actions have been adopted, number of individuals who are benefitting from those will also be counted.
Unit of Measure: Individuals
Disaggregated by: Sex
Rationale or Management Utility (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Secondary data from government and other reports such as FRAME SURVEY estimating number of fishers and fish processors
Method of Data Acquisition: surveys and review of project records
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Every two years (years 1, 3, and 5 of project)
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 17/01/2017

3. Number of agricultural and nutritional enabling environment policies analyzed, consulted on, drafted or revised, approved and implemented with USG assistance (RAA) EG.3.1-12

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet

CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated

Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth

Intermediate Result: IR 1: Improved Agriculture Productivity and Sub IR

Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 1.3: Improved Agricultural Policy Environment.

Name of Performance Indicator: Number of agricultural and nutritional enabling environment policies analyzed, consulted on, drafted or revised, approved and implemented with USG assistance (RAA) EG.3.1-12

Performance Plan and Report Indicator:

Foreign Assistance Framework: EG.3.1-12 Indicator Type: Outcome

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION

Precise Definition(s):

The indicator counts the number of agriculture and nutrition policies related to the institutional architecture for improved policy formulation, the enabling environment for private sector investment, agricultural trade, agriculture input provision, land and natural resource management, or food and nutrition that have completed one or several of the following 5 steps or processes:

Underwent analysis (review of existing policy and/or proposal of new policy);
Underwent public debate and/or consultation with stakeholders on the proposed new or revised policy. This can also include proposed repeal of an existing policy;
Were newly drafted or revised;
Received official approval (legislation/decree) by the relevant authority (legislative or executive body) of a new, revised, or repealed policy;
Were fully and effectively implemented by the relevant authority (this includes U.S. Government support to implementing the effective repeal of a policy).

Policies can include laws, legal frameworks, regulations, administrative procedures, or institutional arrangements.

Note that the indicator has been revised to acknowledge that these processes are not always linear: newly drafted laws can be defeated by a legislative body and require redrafting or new analysis; or approved regulations can prove difficult to implement and need to be revised. Because of this nonlinear approach, double-counting is no longer a concern and is in fact appropriate: Operating Units should indicate if multiple processes/steps were completed in a given year, as this more accurately represents work under a given activity. The disaggregate “Total policies passing through one or more processes/steps of policy change” will count the total number of policies that completed any process/step, regardless of the number of processes/steps each policy completed during the reporting year.

Full and effective implementation must meet the following criteria: (1) The policy must be in force in all intended geographic locations and at all intended administrative levels with all intended regulations/rules in place (“full”); (2) Any ongoing activities or tasks required by the policy (e.g., various kinds of inspection, enforcement, collection of documents/information/fees) are being executed with minimal disruptions (“effective”). For example, a new business registration procedure that has been rolled out to just four of six intended provinces would not meet these criteria (not full), nor would a new customs law that is on the books but is not being regularly enforced at the border (not effective).

For regional Missions, approval (step 4) counts any regionally agreed policies that have been regionally approved (i.e., reached the minimum number of signatory countries to be passed) during the reporting year. Full and effective implementation (step 5) would count any regionally agreed policy for which all countries falling under the policy’s jurisdiction have fully and effectively implemented the policy. To capture individual countries’ progress toward full and effective implementation of regional policies, use FTFMS-only indicator EG.3.1-b.

Unit of Measure: Laws, policies, strategies, plans, or regulations

Disaggregated by:

Policy area:

Institutional architecture for improved policy formulation

Enabling environment for private sector investment

Agricultural trade policy

Agricultural input policy (e.g. seed, fertilizer)

Land and natural resources tenure, rights, and policy

Resilience and agricultural risk management policy

Nutrition (e.g., fortification, food safety)

Other

Process/Step:

Analysis

Stakeholder consultation/public debate

Drafting or revision

Approval (legislative or regulatory)

Full and effective implementation

Total policies passing through one or more processes/steps of policy change

Rationale or Management Utility (optional):

This indicator measures the number of policies (disaggregated by policy area) completing the various processes/steps required to create an enhanced enabling environment for agriculture and nutrition. This indicator is easily aggregated upward from all operating units. On the Feed the Future (FTF) Results Framework, this indicator contributes to Intermediate Result (IR) 1: Improved Agriculture Productivity and Sub IR 1.3: Improved Agricultural Policy Environment.

PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID

Data Source: Implementing partners collect this indicator through observation and analysis of host government legal status of the various policies being addressed.

Method of Data Acquisition: Monitoring by Governance & Capacity Development Specialist

Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Ongoing, report annually

Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:

Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):

Location of Data Storage (optional):

DATA QUALITY ISSUES

Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):

Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):

Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):

Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):

PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING

Data Analysis (optional):

Presentation of Data (optional):

Initial Review Conducted by (optional):

Mission/Team Review (optional):

BASELINE AND TARGETS

Baseline Timeframe (optional):

Rationale for Targets (optional):

Other Notes (optional):

CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR

Changes to Indicator:

Other Notes (optional):

THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 17/01/2017

4. Number of institutions with improved capacity to develop and implement managed access fisheries management plan

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of institutions with improved capacity to develop and implement managed access fisheries management plan
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: (IR 2.4 indicator from Ghana CDCS), Indicator Type: Outcome
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s):Institutions refer to host country organisations such as a Ministry, departments, government office, sub-national government unit, working groups, NGOs, fishing groups) and research organisation or others. Some examples of ways to enhance capacity could include participating in assessment or planning exercises, receiving relevant training ,or gaining new equipment or inputs necessary for planning, assessment and management, technical exchanges, certifications ,or training could improve the capacity of an institution to engage with fisheries management .Institutions with improved capacity will be better able to govern, coordinate, analyse, advise, or make technical decisions or to provide inputs to decision-making related to fisheries management
Unit of Measure: Number of institution
Disaggregated by: Organisation type(Government, private sector)
Rationale or Management Utility (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Records of training or technical assistance provided, baseline assessment, post intervention assessment
Method of Data Acquisition: Institutional assessment tool
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Annual
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional): Reliability: If initial and subsequent capacity assessments use different methods, reliability will be degraded. Timeliness: Many institutional capacity assessments are time-consuming.
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional): Tool should be reviewed by a Governance Specialist and relevant stakeholder groups prior to assessment to ensure relevance, appropriate level of detail, and minimize later changes that would limit comparability over time.
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

5. Number of days of USG funded technical assistance in NRM and/or biodiversity provided to counterparts or stakeholders

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of days of USG funded technical assistance in NRM and/or biodiversity provided to counterparts or stakeholders EG 4.8.1-28
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: EG 4.8.1-28 Indicator Type: Output
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): Technical assistance can be provided in the form of tailored training, mentoring, peer education, twinning, job aids, manuals or other support that transfers know how.
Unit of Measure: Days
Disaggregated by: None
Rationale or Management Utility (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Project training and travel reports
Method of Data Acquisition: Track days of TA provided to counterparts and stakeholders
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Ongoing, report quarterly
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional):
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

6. Number of information products disseminated in local media reports, radio shows, conference papers, and research studies (Project indicator).

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.1: Increased competitiveness of major food chains IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.1.1: Increased agricultural productivity IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of information products disseminated in local media reports, radio shows, conference papers, and research studies (Project indicator).
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: N/A - Custom Indicator Type: Output
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): Information products will include best practices, success stories, and program lessons learned. They can be published as peer reviewed or non-peer reviewed articles or through other forms of media (excluding the USAID APR), or at international conferences.
Unit of Measure: Information products
Disaggregated by: Topic (fisheries management/biodiversity conservation/climate change adaptation)
Rationale or Management Utility (optional): The purpose of this indicator is to document the number of success stories and lessons learned that are published and made available to the public through written media The indicator is simple and straightforward to collect, but does not give information on if messages were used, adopted, and disseminated. It also does not show the quality of the messages or if they reach target audiences.
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Articles, radio shows, newspaper articles, conference papers, etc.
Method of Data Acquisition: Collection and tracking of media reports published
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Ongoing, reported quarterly
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional): Distinction between lessons learned/key findings and small subcomponents is relatively subjective.
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional): Multiple stakeholders will evaluate counted lessons/findings and decide on a consensus count for this indicator.
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014

7. Number of hectares of biological significance and/or natural resources under improved natural resource management as a result of USG assistance

USAID/Ghana Performance Indicator Reference Sheet
CDCS Goal: Ghana's Transition Towards Established Middle Income Status Accelerated
Development Objective: DO 2 – Sustainable and Broadly Shared Economic Growth
Intermediate Result: IR 2.4: Increased government accountability, responsiveness
Sub-Intermediate Result: IR 2.4.2: Improved local community management of natural resources
Name of Performance Indicator: Number of hectares of biological significance and/or natural resources under improved natural resource management as a result of USG assistance
Performance Plan and Report Indicator: Foreign Assistance Framework: 4.8.1-26 Indicator Type: Outcome
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Precise Definition(s): “Improved natural resource management” includes activities that promote enhanced management of natural resources for one or more objectives, such as conserving biodiversity, sustaining soil or water resources, mitigating climate change, and/or promoting sustainable agriculture. Management should be guided by a stakeholder-endorsed process following principles of sustainable NRM and conservation, improved human and institutional capacity for sustainable NRM and conservation, access to better information for decision-making, and/or adoption of sustainable NRM and conservation practices. An area is considered under "improved management” when any one of the following occurs: a change in legal status favors conservation or sustainable NRM; a local site assessment is completed which informs management planning; management actions are designed with appropriate participation; human and institutional capacity is developed; management actions are implemented; ongoing monitoring and evaluation is established; adaptive management is demonstrated; or on-the-ground management impacts are demonstrated (e.g. illegal roads closed, snares removed, no-fishing zones demarcated). Reported as total number of hectares improved during the fiscal year in question, which can include maintained improvement in previously reported hectares and/or new, additional hectares. A subset of this indicator may also be reported as “Number of hectares of natural resources showing improved biophysical conditions as a result of USG assistance” if the latter indicator is used; double counting IS allowed. Reported as total number of hectares improved during the fiscal year in question, which can include maintained improvement in previously reported hectares and/or new, additional hectares. Improved management should be reported for activities where the USAID supported program was plausibly linked to the improvements observed. Partners should articulate clearly the benchmarks that are being used within the program to gauge success, and provide a short narrative to describe the benchmarks that have been reached in the past year.
Unit of Measure: Hectares of natural resources
Disaggregated by: Terrestrial/Aquatic
Rationale or Management Utility (optional):
PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION BY USAID
Data Source: Site-based conservation plans and policy documents; area calculated by mapping targeted areas in GIS
Method of Data Acquisition: Targets are linked directly to site-based management plans. As management plans are finalized, hectares under improved NRM will be reported.
Frequency and Timing of Data Acquisition: Annually
Individual(s) Responsible for Data at USAID:
Individual(s) Responsible for Providing Data to USAID (optional):
Location of Data Storage (optional):
DATA QUALITY ISSUES
Date of Most Recent Data Quality Assessment and Name(s) of Reviewer(s):
Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional):
Known Data Limitations and Significance (optional): Precision: “improved management” is a relative term, and narrative is required to explain the quality of this management improved. Equal weight is given to unequal improvements along a continuum: e.g. creating, adopting and implementing management plans may each be an improvement over a baseline. Likewise, a small management improvement across a large area may be as important as a large improvement across a small area.
Actions Taken or Planned to Address Data Limitations (optional): Reports will include a narrative explaining quality of improved management.
PLAN FOR DATA ANALYSIS, REVIEW, & REPORTING
Data Analysis (optional):
Presentation of Data (optional):
Initial Review Conducted by (optional):
Mission/Team Review (optional):
BASELINE AND TARGETS
Baseline Timeframe (optional):
Rationale for Targets (optional):
Other Notes (optional):
CHANGES TO PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
Changes to Indicator:
Other Notes (optional):
THIS SHEET WAS LAST UPDATED ON: 11/3/2014