Education Reporting Toolkit
This toolkit contains a complete listing of resources related to changes to USAID education reporting that went into effect in 2019 and 2020.
Overview
This toolkit contains a complete listing of resources available related to changes to USAID education reporting that are in effect in 2020. These changes are a direct response to two key documents published in 2018: USAID Education Policy and the U.S. Government Strategy on International Basic Education (USG Education Strategy). As a result, the Center for Education has updated its reporting requirements, including its education-related indicators and Key Issue Narratives, to support reporting on the Education Policy and USG Education Strategy and to facilitate internal learning. New requirements were introduced in 2019 and new indicators and updated guidance is available for 2020.
What’s New for 2020
Changes to the education-related Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators by DDI/EDU for FY 2020 onward are highlighted below. Consult each section of this Toolkit to see specific changes that are in effect.
Standard Indicators
- 2 new standard indicators
- 16 revised standard indicators
- 1 archived standard indicator
Supplemental Indicators
- 3 new supplemental indicators
Reporting Guidance
- New and revised instructions for disaggregation
- New instructions for the new Engagement of Higher Education Institutions Narratives
- New COVID-related FAQs have been added to the Toolkit
Infographic - Measuring Impact in Education: Reporting Requirements
Reporting guidance covers five areas:
- Target Setting
- Indicators
- Data Disaggregation
- Program Area and Key Issue Narratives
- Streamlined Reporting
Reporting Guidance
The Education Reporting Guidance discusses four types of indicators. Understanding these terms is essential for understanding this guidance and navigating reporting for education activities.
- Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators (Standard Indicators)
These indicators are assigned, as applicable, to USAID operating units. For 2020, there are 26 Standard Indicators: 2 new and 16 revised. Many of these indicators will be familiar, even if the definitions and methodologies have been updated. - Supplemental Indicators
These relatively new indicators complete the picture of USAID education sector reporting by adding new areas of measurement, such as numeracy, teacher quality, social emotional skills, and an expanded set of youth skills. Unlike Standard Indicators, uptake of Supplemental indicators is voluntary, but strongly encouraged. There are 17 supplemental indicators for use beginning in 2020. - Custom Indicators
These indicators are specific to operating units and were likely created to satisfy individual reporting or measurement needs. These indicators remain unchanged unless an operating unit decides it is appropriate to transition an existing Custom Indicator into a Standard or Supplemental Indicator. - Archived Indicators
Twelve standard indicators have been archived. Operating units can continue reporting on an Archived Indicator if they are unable to transition to a new indicator. However, the Center for Education strongly encourages the transition to new indicators because using them makes it easier for the Center for Education to report accurate results to Congress.
Disaggregates
Missions should report on disaggregates as applicable to their programming.
Disaggregates are a way of breaking out data by key categories of interest, such as demographic characteristics. Under the new education reporting requirements, disaggregates have been updated across indicators to facilitate reporting on marginalized or vulnerable populations and to meet requirements of the Education Policy and the USG Education Strategy. Complete reporting of disaggregates is essential for accurate reporting and for tracking USAID’s achievements in equity and inclusion.
Sex Disaggregates
Disaggregation by sex is required for all individual-level data.
Geography
Per ADS 201, It is recommended that indicator data be disaggregated by a geographical level that is feasible and useful for management purposes.
Crisis and Conflict-Affected Individuals
OUs should report on these disaggregates if they work in crisis- and conflict-affected countries or areas, or with crisis- and conflict-affected populations in any context. If the total sum of an indicator is composed of crisis and conflict-affected individuals, the aggregate value of the indicator should match the crisis and conflict disaggregate figure.
We encourage Missions to not use this disaggregate for beneficiaries affected solely by the COVID response. We would instead encourage the flagging of that data through the Current/Future Year Indicator Narrative for the specific relevant indicator.
Persons with Disabilities
OUs should report on these disaggregates for the ES.1 standard indicators if they have activities that focus specifically on children with disabilities as target beneficiaries or sub-beneficiaries. For EG.6 indicators, report these disaggregates for all participants age 15 years or older, regardless of the activity’s focus or target group.
Missions should note that revised guidance on measuring disability will be released by DDI/EDU later this fall.
Resources
Standard Indicators
Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators (Standard Indicators) are assigned, as applicable, to USAID operating units. For 2020, there are 26 Standard Indicators: 2 new and 16 revised. Many of these indicators will be familiar, even if the definitions and methodologies have been updated. See all changes described below.
A list of Standard Indicators is below, followed by links to the Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS), which contain detailed information about how to measure each indicator and should be reviewed comprehensively before reporting against an indicator.
2020 Compendium of standard pirs for Education Programming
New & Revised for 2020
Archived
ES.1-49: Number of primary or secondary textbooks and other teaching and learning materials (TLMs) that are inclusively representative provided with USG assistance
This indicator will be archived starting in FY 2020.
New
ES.2-53: Number of physical spaces built, repaired, or refurbished for higher education with USG assistance
This is a new standard indicator starting in FY 2020.
ES.2-54: Number of USG-supported partnerships that address regional, national, and/or local development objectives through or with higher education institutions
This is a new standard indicator starting in FY 2020.
Revised
All reading proficiency indicators (ES.1-1, ES.1-2, ES.1-47, ES.1-48)
In the definitions for all reading proficiency indicators, DDI/EDU has removed the 80% comprehension benchmark as an approved method for measuring reading proficiency. It has been replaced by locally-developed reading fluency benchmarks as a third option after internationally-linked and nationally-set benchmarks. The PIRS also notes that the best option for these indicators is internationally-linked benchmarks developed through the Global Proficiency Framework and policy linking methodology.
ES.1-6: Number of educators who complete professional development activities with USG assistance
For the disaggregate, “Number of educators trained in special education content”, special education has been defined as the specially designed instruction of educating students with disabilities, which accommodates their individual needs. This process entails individually planning, systematically monitoring, adapting equipment and materials, and developing accessible settings.
ES.1-55: Percent of primary grade learners targeted for USG assistance who have the appropriate variety of reading materials in the language of instruction with inclusive representation of diverse populations
The indicator definition for ES.1-45 now has new materials standards for pre-primary and grades 1-6. With the addition of the pre-primary standard, a pre-primary disaggregate has been added. The measurement approach for this indicator has also changed from an evaluation approach (measuring learners with books as part of a reading proficiency assessment) to a monitoring approach (regular site visits). With the change in approach, the indicator has changed from an outcome to an output indicator.
ES.1-47: Percent of learners with a disability targeted for USG assistance who attain a minimum grade-level proficiency in reading at the end of grade 2
Reporting for this indicator is no longer linked to the disability disaggregate of ES.1-1, “Percent of learners targeted for USG assistance who attain a minimum grade-level proficiency in reading at the end of grade 2”. For activities that specifically target learners with disability, ES.1-47 should be used to measure minimum grade-level proficiency in reading at the end of grade 2. For learners with disabilities who are participating in a general USAID reading program, ES.1-1’s disability disaggregate should count those learners.
ES.1-53: Number of learners in pre-primary schools or equivalent non-school based settings reached with USG education assistance
The definition now instructs users to count kindergarten learners under this indicator regardless of kindergarten’s status within the formal education system of the country where the indicator is being used.
ES.1-54: Percent of individuals with improved reading skills following participation in USG-assisted programs
The disaggregates for the number of females and males age 30+ have been removed.
ES.2-1: Number of host country higher education institutions receiving capacity development support with USG assistance
Language has been added to the definition to clarify that this indicator is applicable to all higher education institution capacity development support regardless of program area or funding stream.
ES.2-2: Number of individuals attending higher education institutions with USG scholarship or financial assistance
Language has been added to the definition to clarify that this indicator is applicable to scholarship and financial assistance support regardless of program area or funding stream. Language was also added to the definition to clarify that scholarship or financial assistance recipients attending a variety of programs in a variety of locations can be counted under this indicator. These types were added as disaggregates. Age disaggregates were also revised to only counting those males and females under 30 toward this indicator.
ES.2-52: Number of individuals affiliated with higher education institutions receiving capacity development support with USG assistance
Language has been added to the definition to clarify that this indicator is applicable in capacity development support regardless of program area or funding stream. Disaggregates have also been revised to include participant role disaggregates and to reduce the age disaggregates to just counting the number of males and females under 30 toward this indicator.
ES.2-53: Number of physical spaces built, repaired, or refurbished for higher education with USG assistance
This is a new standard indicator starting in FY 2020.
ES.2-54: Number of USG-supported partnerships that address regional, national, and/or local development objectives through or with higher education institutions This is a new standard indicator starting in FY 2020.
EG.6-11: Average percent change in earnings following participation in USG-assisted workforce development programs
Changes in the definition specify that individuals measured under this indicator must have been previously employed and making an income in order to be included in the indicator calculation. The disaggregates for the number of females and males ages 30+ have also been removed.
EG.6-12: Percent of individuals with new employment following participation in USG-assisted workforce development programs
The disaggregates for the number of females and males ages 30+ have been removed.
EG.6-13: Percent of individuals with improved soft skills following participation in USG-assisted workforce development programs
Changes in the definition provide additional clarity on the types of measurement that can be used to measure this indicator and establish standards for those measurements. The disaggregates for the number of females and males ages 30+ have also been removed.
EG.6-14: Percent of individuals who complete USG-assisted workforce development programs
The disaggregates for the number of females and males ages 30+ have been removed.
Download PIRS
2020 Compendium of Standard PIRS
ES.1-6 Number of educators who complete professional development activities with USG assistance
ES.1-14 Number of classrooms built or repaired with USG assistance
ES.1-50 Number of public and private schools receiving USG assistance
EG.6-14 Percent of individuals who complete USG-assisted workforce development programs
CBLD-9 Percent of USG-assisted organizations with improved performance
YOUTH-1 Number of youth trained in soft skills/life skills through USG-assisted programs
Supplemental Indicators
Purpose of Supplemental Indicators
Responding to the priorities of the Education Policy, Supplemental Indicators provide metrics for topics that the Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators do not capture, such as numeracy skills, teacher quality, social emotional skills, and an expanded range of youth workforce readiness skills. Supplemental Indicators allow Missions to provide further context and detail in their education reporting. While uptake of Supplemental Indicators is voluntary, their use is strongly encouraged if they are relevant.
Although many of the Standard Indicators remain familiar, even if revised, the Supplemental Indicators represent important intermediate outcomes that help USAID tell its story and learn about contributors to learning outcomes. Such intermediate outcomes enable Missions to show progress as they work toward strengthening systems, which also contribute to learning outcomes.
Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) contain detailed information about how to measure each indicator and should be reviewed comprehensively before reporting against an indicator.
2020 Compendium of Supplemental Pirs for Education Programming
New for 2020
Supp-15: Education System Strengthened: Policy Reform
Supp-16: Education System Strengthened: Data Systems
Supp-17: Percent of learners regularly participating in distance learning programming funded with USG education assistance
Download PIRS
2020 Compendium of Supplemental PIRS
Supp-1 Percent of pre-primary learners achieving school readiness
Supp-9 Number of students who have improved social and emotional skills, as locally defined, with USG assistance (NO PIRS AVAILABLE)
Supp-10 Percent of teachers providing quality classroom instruction with USG support (NO PIRS AVAILABLE)
Supp-11 Percent of instructional time lost to teacher absenteeism
Supp-15 Education system strengthened: policy reform
Supp-16 Education system strengthened: data systems improved
Performance Narratives and Key Issue Narratives
In addition to indicator data, Standardized Program Structure and Definitions (SPSD) Performance Narratives and Key Issue Narratives provide important information needed for USAID/Washington’s reporting. The two main education-focused SPSD Performance Narratives for ES.1 Basic Education and ES.2 Higher Education have been revised to better support the Education Policy.
The Engagement of Higher Education Institutions Key Issue Narrative (EHEI) was added in 2019 as a tool for gathering information necessary for a variety of reporting on the Agency’s engagement of HEIs in the United States and in host countries.
USAID uses the information to prepare the annual Title XII Report to Congress and the annual Minority Serving Institutions report, and to report on Congressional directives on higher education partnerships.
This Key Issue Narrative could apply broadly across sectors and activities, many that may not consider themselves in the category of higher education. There are important differences between this Key Issue Narrative and the ES.2 Higher Education Performance Narrative. The Reporting Requirements and Considerations for SPSD and Key Issue Narratives section of the Education Reporting Guidance Note explains the distinct requirements of each narrative.
Operating Units should plan to report on these as applicable.
Revised for 2020
Higher Education Program Area Narrative
The instructions for the narrative have been changed to three main sections to be included in the narrative: 1) Activity Descriptions and Results; 2) Contributions to the Journey to Self-Reliance and 3) Descriptions of Innovative Financing.
Engagement of Higher Education Institutions Narrative
The instructions for the narrative have been changed to clarify what activities should be included in the narrative.
FAQs
Why are there new reporting requirements and why are these changes happening now?
In 2018, USAID published two key documents: The U.S. Government Strategy on International Basic Education and the USAID Education Policy. These documents help guide and define the purpose of education programming, while calling for a renewed emphasis on measuring learning outcomes for a broad set of skills. This requires changes to education reporting, beginning in 2019, to enable USAID’s Bureau for Development, Democracy and Innovation/Center for Education (DDI/EDU) to tell a complete story of collective ambitions and achievements of USAID education programming.
Where can I find the new and revised indicators?
This Education Reporting Toolkit features the Education Reporting Guidance Note and is hosted online at EducationLinks. This toolkit contains a listing of all new and revised indicators, Performance Indicator Reference Sheets, Standardized Program Structure and Definitions (SPSD) Program Area Narratives, and Key Issue Narratives.
What do we do with our existing activities? Do we need to incorporate these changes now?
DDI/EDU understands that a full transition to the new reporting requirement and indicators will take time, and highly encourages OU's to transition to the new indicators as quickly as reasonable to make sure we are telling a complete story.
Although the new indicators will be assigned during the 2019 and 2020 fiscal years’ Performance Plan and Report (PPR), individual missions’ timeline for transition will depend on various factors, such as what data are collected for existing activities. The Contracting/Agreement Officer’s Representative (COR/AOR) and the implementing partner should work together and consult existing guidance to determine the best course of action. If a contract or agreement mandates the use of an Archived Indicator, in the absence of a modification, the activity can continue to report on that indicator, despite its archived status. The Helpdesk is available to answer further questions.
What is required for new activities?
The new reporting requirements must be reflected in the Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (PMEP) for new awards.
My indicator was archived, now what?
Programs may still report on indicators that were archived, using them as Custom Indicators, but results reported through archived indicators will not be included in aggregate reporting to Congress. Archived Indicators should only be used if an operating unit (OU) is unable to transition to a new indicator. Contact the Helpdesk for help handling your individual situation.
What happened to the data call?
The PPR will be DDI/EDU’s main reporting mechanism starting in 2019; the Data Call used with the previous USAID Education Strategy (2011–2015) will be done away with.
Missions and implementing partners will still be asked to help DDI/EDU with current tasks, such as submitting datasets and learning assessments to the Development Data Library and updating the Education Activity Roster.
How should USAID OUs approach target setting?
There will be a shift from a top–down, USAID/Washington-led exercise to a bottom–up, mission-led approach to target setting. Missions should report targets for all indicators in PPR, even if the target is zero. The ADS 201 currently provides general guidance on target setting. Education-specific guidance is being developed for the Education Reporting Toolkit and is expected to be available in 2020.
Where can I learn more about target setting?
The ADS 201 currently provides general guidance on target setting. Education-specific guidance will be available in the Education Reporting Toolkit in 2020.
What Is the difference between standard and supplemental indicators?
DDI/EDU assigns Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators (Standard Indicators) to OUs; they include 26 Standard Indicators. OU's are required to report Standard Indicators that are relevant to their programming.
Supplemental Indicators are a new category. They respond to the priorities of the Policy and focus on topics such as numeracy skills, teacher quality, social-emotional skills, and an expanded range of youth workforce skills. Although DDI/EDU does not assign these indicators to OUs, OUs are strongly encouraged to use them because they help tell a more complete story of USAID’s education programming worldwide and ensure programs reach intended beneficiaries. Performance Indicator Reference Sheets for both types of indicators are available in the Education Reporting Toolkit.
Why are there more disaggregates and how do I know which ones to use?
Disaggregates are essential to making sure programs reach their intended beneficiaries, and monitoring USAID’s engagement with children and youth who are marginalized and vulnerable. While not all disaggregates are mandated, DDI/EDU includes them in reporting requirements because the information they provide is central to the Policy and USAID’s education work that promotes equity and inclusion.
Disaggregates are a way of breaking out data by key categories of interest, such as demographic characteristics. Under the new education reporting requirements, disaggregates have been updated across indicators to facilitate reporting on marginalized or vulnerable populations and to meet requirements of the Education Policy and the USG Education Strategy. Complete reporting of disaggregates is essential for accurate reporting and for tracking USAID’s achievements in equity and inclusion.
Missions should report on disaggregates as applicable to their programming.
Sex Disaggregates
Disaggregation by sex is required for all individual-level data.
Geography
Per ADS 201, It is recommended that indicator data be disaggregated by a geographical level that is feasible and useful for management purposes.
Crisis and Conflict-Affected Individuals
OUs should report on these disaggregates if they work in crisis- and conflict-affected countries or areas, or with crisis- and conflict-affected populations in any context. If the total sum of an indicator is composed of crisis and conflict-affected individuals, the aggregate value of the indicator should match the crisis and conflict disaggregate figure.
We encourage Missions to not use this disaggregate for beneficiaries affected solely by the COVID response. We would instead encourage the flagging of that data through the Current/Future Year Indicator Narrative for the specific relevant indicator.
Persons with Disabilities
OUs should report on these disaggregates for the ES.1 standard indicators if they have activities that focus specifically on children with disabilities as target beneficiaries or sub-beneficiaries. For EG.6 indicators, report these disaggregates for all participants age 15 years or older, regardless of the activity’s focus or target group.
Consult the Performance Indicator Reference Sheet for more information on using disaggregates with specific indicators, and contact the DDI/EDU Indicator Helpdesk with questions about the reporting requirements for your specific context. Please email questions to the Helpdesk.
Where can I learn more about setting internationally linked benchmarks in early grade reading and math?
DDI/EDU is developing a training plan and toolkit, which are expected to be available early 2021. More information about these resources will be announced when available.
Does this replace PPR Guidance and ADS Monitoring Policy?
No. These changes are intended to complement, not replace existing guidance on the PPR or the monitoring policy in the Automated Directive System (ADS) 201.
COVID has made it impossible to meet my original education indicator targets for FY 2020. What do I do?
Missions should report on any key output or outcome data achieved at the activity or project level for the full fiscal year. If that data falls short of the Mission’s original FY 2020 target, the Mission should use the deviation narrative for that indicator to explain how COVID has prevented the achievement of the original targets.
Missions should also think about their indicator targets for FY 2021 and FY 2022 in light of any COVID-related programming changes. We encourage Missions to set targets for out-years that best reflect what is possible with their current and planned portfolio of programming.
We want to encourage Missions to avoid dropping education indicators unless those indicators are no longer applicable for any current or future programming.
How do I qualitatively explain/report COVID-related shifts in education programming?
Missions should use the Basic Education and Higher Education Program Area narratives to summarize changes made in FY 2020 to education programming as a result of the COVID crisis. Where applicable, Missions should also use other relevant Key Issue Narratives to report on relevant programming.
Example of Key Issue Narratives that might be relevant for COVID-related shifts in education programming include:
- Engagement of Higher Education Institutions
- Relief and Development Coherence
- Countering Violent Extremism
- Focused Resilience
- Gender Equality/Women’s Empowerment-Secondary
- Gender-Based Violence
- Gender-based Violence: Child, Early and Forced Marriage
- Trafficking in Persons
- Inclusive Development: Participation of People with Disabilities
- Science, Technology and Innovation
- Research
- Water, Sanitation & Hygiene
- Youth Development
- Adaptation
For example, if a Mission shifted its basic education programming from in-person classroom instruction to a distance learning program, it should be noted in the Basic Education Program Narrative. If Missions have paused their youth workforce and higher education programming, that should be captured in the Youth Development Key Issue Narrative and the Higher Education Program Area Narrative. Another example that should be reported in the relevant narrative is when an activity changes the content of an education program such as the addition of interventions to address psychosocial needs of learners and educators or the addition of school-based WASH interventions.
Along with reporting programming shifts, DDI/EDU would like to encourage Missions to use the relevant Program Area and Key Issue Narratives to report any education sector-related learning, particularly where they contribute to answering priority question in Education Sector Learning Agendas, that has happened as a result of COVID-related decision-making and programming.
Please see Q3 (below) for information about how to use existing F-indicators to capture achievements and progress during COVID-19.
How do I report data from COVID-related shifts in education programming?
Missions should continue to use the education Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators where applicable and possible to meaningfully monitor and measure the status of inputs, outputs or outcomes in the context of COVID-19. For activities utilizing distance learning modalities, many of the education standard indicators are still applicable (e.g. ES.1-3, ES.1-4, ES. 1-6 and others). If needed, a Mission may add an existing Standard Foreign Assistance indicator to their PPR in order to report against the achievements of an education program in the context of COVID-19. Where Missions are using standard indicators to report against COVID-related programming, we encourage the use of the Current/Future Year Indicator Narrative to flag this data.
Where the education Standard Foreign Assistance Indicators are not applicable, Missions should develop custom indicators that best monitor and evaluate the implementation or performance of COVID-related programming.
Any education activity that has received COVID-19 supplemental funding under the USAID and State Department Strategy for Supplemental Funding to Prevent, Prepare for, and Respond to Coronavirus Abroad is required to report against the relevant or applicable indicators from the Strategy’s MEL Framework. The list of those missions can be found here (only available internally to USAID staff).
Where can I get more help?
DDI/EDU has set up a Helpdesk to create a direct line of communication to monitoring and evaluation professionals who can answer questions about the reporting requirements. Please email questions to the Helpdesk.
Helpdesk
The Helpdesk is a direct line of communication to monitoring and evaluation professionals at the Center for Education. Readers are encouraged to reach out with any questions or concerns they have about education reporting requirements. They are also encouraged to document challenges and best practices they uncover while working with the new reporting materials—indicators, Key Issue Narratives, and PIRS—and to share feedback with the Center for Education through the Helpdesk.