Guidance on the Indicator Tracking Table

List of Acronyms

MCC Monitoring and the Indicator Tracking Table

What is the ITT?

The Indicator Tracking Table (ITT) is a quarterly reporting tool that serves as the primary mechanism to operationalize a compact or threshold program’s[[Unless otherwise specified, references to “compact” or “program” throughout this document should be applied equally to compact and threshold programs. Where practice differs between ITTs for compacts and thresholds, the distinction will be clearly made.]] commitment to monitoring. The ITT tracks the progress of indicators included in the program’s M&E Plan towards program targets and is submitted as part of the Quarterly Disbursement Request Package (QDRP) for compact and threshold funds.[[ITTs are not required for QDRPs for Compact Development Funds or Compact Facilitation Funds.]] Data reported in the ITT are used to inform project implementation decisions, and for internal and external reporting.

The ITT is derived from a program’s M&E Plan, which provides a detailed framework for monitoring and evaluating the program. All MCC programs must have an M&E Plan approved by MCC and the Accountable Entity (AE) Board. As part of this framework, the M&E Plan must include a summary of the program’s monitoring strategy,[[Detailed information on a program’s monitoring strategy can be found in the program’s M&E Plan. With some contextual variations permissible, the monitoring strategy is generally consistent across all MCC programs.]] including detailed indicator information for monitoring indicators, such as definitions, units, classifications, anticipated reporting timelines, baselines, and targets.

Monitoring indicators are mapped to the program logic to provide timely, high quality data about whether the program is proceeding as planned during program implementation. Indicator data (i.e., reported values) should generally be reported on at least an annual basis (with the exception of date indicators, which are reported on once per program) and should be easily understandable by the public. Monitoring data can be taken from a multitude of sources, including administrative data and consultants’ reports. They generally are not based on sampling or provided by a program’s independent evaluators.[[Monitoring indicators can, however, be used by a program’s independent evaluators to help inform an evaluation.]] Based on these criteria, the majority of monitoring indicators are process or output level indicators; however, relevant outcome indicators, particularly those already tracked by partner institutions, ought to be included when possible.

All monitoring indicators, as well as their detailed information must be documented in Annexes I and II of the M&E Plan[[The following detailed indicator information is required for each monitoring indicator in the M&E Plan: common indicator code, results statement, indicator level, indicator name, unit of measure, (optional) disaggregations, primary data source, responsible party, frequency of reporting, (optional) additional information, classification, baseline, yearly targets, and end of compact target. A subset of this information is also included in the ITT.]] and the ITT is created based on the information provided in these annexes. All indicator information taken from the M&E Plan must match the M&E Plan exactly and any changes to the indicator information in the ITT must first be made in the M&E Plan as part of a formal revision. Therefore, care must be taken when developing Annex I and II of the M&E Plan to ensure the indicators are clear, well-suited to the program, and conform with MCC’s M&E Policy. Additionally, the M&E Plan should be reviewed regularly to consider changes in program implementation and revised if and when appropriate and allowed by the M&E Policy. After each M&E Plan revision, the ITT is updated by MCC M&E to match the revised M&E Plan.

This guidance describes the roles of both MCC and a compact or threshold program’s AE in completing the ITT each quarter and sets forth standards to ensure consistent reporting across MCC partner countries. Section II "Introduction to the ITT" provides an introduction to the ITT, including describing its standard and non-standard formats, the ITT submission cycle, and the role of the ITT in MCC reporting.

The remainder of this document expands on the information provided in Section II "Introduction to the ITT" and is intended for those within MCC and AEs who work closely with the ITT. Section III "The ITT Grid by Column" provides detailed information on how to populate all required columns in the ITT grid. Section IV "Entering Data in the ITT" and Section V "Quarterly ITT Submission Cycle" define the roles and responsibilities of both MCC and AEs in completing the ITT each quarter. Section VI "Reporting ITT Data" presents the standard reports generated from ITT data. Section VII "Closeout ITT" and Section VIII "Post-Program ITT" provide detailed guidance on two non-standard ITTs: the Closeout ITT and the Post-Program ITT. Finally, the guidance concludes with several annexes to help facilitate data entry and monitoring processes.

The ITT Guidance has been drafted with several end readers in mind. Section II "Introduction to the ITT" is appropriate for all readers, including the general public and those encountering the ITT for the first time. The primary audiences of the ITT Guidance are the AE and MCC M&E units, both of whom should have a complete understanding of the guidance in its entirety. Finally, the AE and MCC technical teams must also be familiar with the ITT, particularly with respect to their roles in reviewing and approving the ITT, and therefore sections V "Quarterly ITT Submission Cycle", VII "Closeout ITT", and VIII "Post-Program ITT" are of particular relevance to them.

Introduction to the ITT

Understanding the ITT Format

This information is recorded in one of two formats, referred to as the “Excel ITT” and the “MCC MIS ITT.”[[The MCC MIS serves as a single data repository and reporting tool for auditable fiscal, procurement, and indicator performance data. All compact countries are required to submit their QDRPs, including the ITT, through MCC MIS.]] All compacts are required to submit an MCC MIS ITT as part of the standard QDRP process. At this time, threshold programs do not use MCC MIS, so all threshold ITTs must be submitted in the Excel format. If required by MCC, compacts may also submit an Excel version of the ITT; however, this does not replace the requirement to submit the ITT through MCC MIS. The Excel ITT can be used to facilitate review by the AEs and during MCC country team (CT) technical review. If an Excel ITT is required, the finalized version should be uploaded as part of the MCC MIS QDRP under “Other Documents.” The two formats closely mirror each other; however, major distinctions between the formats are highlighted throughout this document.

For both ITT formats, the ITT grid allocates a row to each indicator, disaggregation or input, as specified in Annexes I and II of the M&E Plan. Figure I below displays the columns in the ITT template and the source for each column.

Understanding the ITT submission cycle

The submission cycle is comprised of four phases, containing several steps each. In Phase I, the ITT is populated and internally reviewed by the AE. In Phase II, the ITT is reviewed by MCC M&E and any comments are addressed by the AE M&E unit. During this phase, approved updates may be made to historical data (i.e., data reported prior to the previous quarter). Depending on the complexity of the ITT and any noted issues, the M&E review may take several rounds of exchanges between the AE and MCC M&E units.

In (optional) Phase III, MCC recommends as best practice that the AE submits components of the QDRP, including the ITT, to the CT for technical review. Doing so allows the entire CT to review the ITT and raise any questions or data quality concerns before the official QDRP submission. In instances where a technical review is not conducted, CTs will first have access to the ITT during formal review, which minimizes the opportunity to resolve issues before QDRP approval. Finally, in Phase IV, the AE formally submits the entire QDRP, which includes the ITT. The submission cycle ends once the QDRP has been approved by MCC. Section V “Quarterly ITT Submission Cycle” of this guidance describes the ITT submission cycle in detail.

Reporting monitoring data

Variations of the ITT

Finally, in the last year of implementation, each program must develop a Post Program M&E Plan. This M&E Plan includes a subset of indicators for which MCC and the partner country agree to report on post-program. These indicators are included in a Post-Program ITT, which is submitted annually by a partner government’s designated representative as part of the Post-Program M&E Report. Post-Program ITTs are circulated within MCC but not made available externally. Please refer to Section VIII of this guidance “Post-Program ITT” for more details on the Post Program ITT and its format.

The ITT Grid by Column

The grid also includes a variety of required columns from the three types of sources referenced in Section II “Introduction to the ITT”: (i) Annexes I and II of the M&E Plan; (ii) quarterly reporting; and (iii) manual or automatic calculations. The remainder of this section provides detailed descriptions of each required column of the ITT grid, organized by source of the information. A particular emphasis is placed on what the different columns mean for AE reporting.

Note:  In addition to the required columns, MCC and the AE may choose to include additional information from the M&E Plan in the ITT if it would help facilitate data entry and review of the ITT. Common additional columns include indicator code, definition, and frequency of reporting.[[In the MCC MIS format, the following fields cannot be added as new columns, but are automatically available for all indicators by selecting the indicator name in the ITT grid: definition; additional information; results statement; and frequency of reporting.]]

Column Source: M&E Plan Annex I and II[[This guidance is not intended to guide development of Annexes I and II of the M&E Plan. However, in some instances, detailed information on specific columns of the Annexes is provided to clarify ITT reporting requirements.]]

Common Indicator

All common indicators must be measured in a manner consistent with the Common Indicator Guidance (or “CI Guidance”). Specifically, the following columns in the M&E Plan and ITT must match the CI Guidance exactly: (i) indicator name; (ii) definition; (iii) unit of measure; (iv) level; and (v) classification.

Within the ITT, the “Common Indicator” column identifies which indicators are common. All common indicators are designated with the appropriate common indicator code found in the CI Guidance. For example, the CI code E-6 designates the common indicator “Students participating in MCC-supported education activities.”

The CI Guidance also includes recommended disaggregations and inputs for each common indicator. Each common indicator disaggregation and input is also assigned a unique CI code, which is included in this column as well. For example, the CI codes E-6.1 and E-6.2 correspond to female and male students participating MCC-supported education activities.

If an indicator is not common, the Common Indicator column is blank.

Indicator Level

Goal indicators quantify a program’s intended impact of economic growth and poverty reduction. As per MCC’s mandate, a program’s goal will generally be a direct measure of income. However, in instances where a program’s anticipated impact is an alternative measure of growth, such as increased sales, the program’s goal indicators will be defined accordingly.

Outcome indicators measure the intermediate effects of an activity or set of activities within the same intervention and are directly related through the program logic to the intervention’s outputs.

In many instances, an ITT may not contain goal or high-level outcome indicators because a measurable effect on these indicators will not be seen during the program lifecycle or may require a sample-based survey; such indicators will be reserved for measurement and reporting through an independent evaluation. Additionally, a program’s goal and outcome indicators may be similarly reserved for an independent evaluation if the interpretation of reported data requires careful analysis to understand changes or issues of attribution.

Output indicators describe and quantify the goods and services produced directly by the implementation of an intervention.

Process indicators measure the progress of a program’s activities and are used to ascertain whether the implementation work plan is proceeding on time.

Occasionally, an ITT may include an indicator that does not measure a specific results statement, but rather monitors a risk or assumption that is critical to the program logic. In these cases, the indicator is assigned the level “Risk / Assumption.”

Indicator Name: Indicator Families, Disaggregations, and Inputs

Each indicator family contains one main indicator (e.g., “Stakeholders trained”). If the family contains only this main indicator, it is referred to as a single-tier indicator family, or simply an “indicator.” However, if the indicator has associated disaggregations or inputs, the indicator family is considered a multi-tier indicator family.

Disaggregations: Disaggregations report on distinct subsets of the main indicator. For example, if the AE would like to know how much of the total value recorded for an indicator is attributable to male and female participants, the AE would disaggregate the indicator by sex.

Typically, summing the values reported for the different subsets should equal the value reported for the main indicator. In some instances, however, an indicator may be disaggregated but the different sub-populations are not intended to add up to the main indicator. For example, the indicator “Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)” is frequently disaggregated by the different road segments where the AADT is measured. However, the AADT of each individual road segment cannot be added together to calculate a global AADT. Even in these cases where the disaggregations are not additive, the disaggregations should be representative of the entire population the indicator is tracking. In this example, if MCC is rehabilitating three road segments, each road segment should be included as a disaggregation to AADT.

A list of frequently used disaggregations can be found in Annex III of this document.

Inputs: Inputs are used to calculate common composite indicators, such as percentages, ratios, and averages and are frequently included in M&E Plans to verify the accuracy of data reported for the main indicator.  For example, the indicator “Percent disbursed of construction contracts” is calculated by dividing the “Value disbursed of construction contracts” by the “Value signed of construction contracts.” In this example, “Value disbursed” and “Value signed” are considered indicator inputs and should be included in the ITT to calculate the “Percent disbursed” actuals.

A list of all indicator input calculation types that may be included in the ITT can be found in Annex IV of this document.

An indicator family may include any combination of disaggregations and inputs but can be a maximum of three-tiers. For example, an indicator (e.g., “Stakeholders trained”) may be disaggregated by sex (e.g., “Female,” “Male”) and each disaggregation may be further disaggregated by land zone (e.g., “Rural,” “Urban”). However, the land zone disaggregations would represent the third tier and cannot be further disaggregated.

In both formats of the ITT, indicator families are grouped together with any second-tier or third-tier children placed immediately below the main indicator. All children are indented slightly from the main indicator to visually distinguish each tier of the indicator family. For disaggregations, the name of the main indicator may be omitted, and the disaggregation name placed in parentheses. The names of indicator inputs are included exactly as they are captured in Annex I of the M&E Plan.

Unit of Measure

Units are limited to those on the standard list of units established by MCC and included in this document as Annex V. AEs may request to add additional types of units to the list, if necessary. Any requests for new units must be made and approved by MCC’s Senior Director of Monitoring before the M&E Plan is finalized.

Indicator Classification

Level indicators report the total measured during the reporting period. Each actual is calculated independently of previous reporting periods. These indicators are used to track trends over time and may fluctuate up or down depending on performance.

For level indicators, the reporting period may vary based on the indicator’s definition and the frequency of available data. Unless data for a level indicator are reported quarterly, it should not be assumed that an actual reported for a level indicator only measures the quarter the actual is reported in. For example, “Dropout rate” for a primary school program is generally reported annually. However, an annual actual recorded will measure all students who dropped out at any point in the school year. The relevant report frequency for each indicator is documented in Annex I of the M&E Plan. Additionally, if different from the report frequency, the M&E Plan should also clearly document the reporting period that each data point covers.

Cumulative indicators report the total progress achieved throughout the program, up to the current quarter. Each reported actual includes the previously reported data point plus any progress made during the current reporting period. The total progress made during the current period is referred to as the incremental actual (i.e., the difference between the cumulative total reported in the current reporting period and the cumulative total reported in the previous period).

For example, if 1,000 instructors have been trained between Q1 and Q9 of a program and an additional 200 instructors are trained during Q10, the cumulative total for Q10 is 1,200. In this example, the incremental actual is 200.

Date indicators use calendar dates (in the format DD-MMM-YY) instead of numbers as targets and actual values. A date indicator records the date a milestone is accomplished in the quarter it is achieved.

For example, an AE may identify signing a partnership agreement by a certain date as a critical step to accomplishing the program’s objectives. In this case, the M&E Plan may include the indicator “Signed partnership agreement” with a target of 30-Aug-14. The date the partnership agreement is signed, 28-Oct-14, is entered as the actual.

Level (Average) indicators are similar to level indicators in that they track trends over time and may fluctuate up and down. However, a level (average) indicator measures annual progress by comparing the yearly target to an average of all actuals recorded during the program year. Level (average) indicators are most useful when data are available on a quarterly or semi-annual basis, but progress is most appropriately assessed for the whole year and not solely according to the most current quarter. Level (average) indicators are frequently used for utility data, in particular when certain seasonal factors (such as droughts) may render a single quarter an inaccurate representation of overall indicator progress.

For example, the indicator “Available power plant generation capacity” records the minimum dependable capacity of a hydropower plant within a quarter to supply power. The target for the year is 75 megawatts of generation capacity. However, the dependable capacity varies drastically between the wet season (Q1 and Q2) and the dry season (Q3 and Q4). In Q1 and Q2, the power plant can generate at least 100 megawatts of power at any time. However, in Q3 and Q4, this value falls to 50 megawatts of power at any time. The annual average for this indicator is 75 megawatts, which meets the target.

Level (Cumulative) indicators track the cumulative value for each program year. At the beginning of the subsequent program year, the cumulative calculation begins again at zero. Level (cumulative) indicators are used when the AE would like to monitor annual progress in situations where annual progress from separate program years are not additive. Level (cumulative) indicators are frequently used for indicators with an annual life cycle, such as annual budgets or crop yields. With these indicators, targets are set annually, so adding data from separate program years would not generate meaningful data points.

For example, the indicator “School budget spent by principals” tracks the total amount of the budget spent in the current year. If $1,000,000 was spent between Q1 and Q3 of a program and an additional $250,000 was spent in both Q4 and Q5, the cumulative value for Q4 would be 1,250,000. Between Q4 (i.e., the last quarter in program year 1) and Q5 (i.e., the first quarter in program year 2), the aggregation would reset and the cumulative value for Q5 would be 250,000.

Level (cumulative) indicators are also used for some common indicators that may be reported either quarterly or annually to ensure that end-of-year actuals are comparable across programs.

Indicator Baseline and Targets

Baselines and targets are not usually required for disaggregations; however, when progress on a disaggregation is critical to a program’s success, e.g., results for women for an intervention focused on women, targets may be required for such disaggregations. Finally, when the baseline of a main indicator in the M&E Plan is zero, the baselines for all disaggregations and inputs are assumed to be zero and populated as such in the ITT.

Column Source: AE Quarterly Reporting

Quarterly Actuals

Most ITT quarters will span exactly a three-month period, corresponding to each quarter of the calendar year. However, the length of the first and last “quarter” in an ITT will vary depending on the program start date. If a program’s entry into force (EIF) is within 45 days of the start of a new fiscal quarter (i.e., EIF dates between August 16 – September 30; November 16 – December 31, February 14 – March 31, or May 16 – June 30), the first quarter of the program will span the remainder of the existing quarter and the entirety of the following quarter. This is referred to as a long first quarter. Subsequently, all programs with a long first quarter will have a short final quarter.

For example, if a program EIFs on March 15^th, the first quarter in the ITT will span from March 15^th – June 30^th. The final quarter of the same program will span from January 1^st – March 14^th.  If a program EIFs more than 45 days before the start of a new fiscal quarter, the ITT will have a short first quarter and a long final quarter.

The frequency with which data are reported for each indicator depends on the indicator’s definition, frequency of reporting, classification, and implementation timeline. In particular, in the first year of a program, very little data may be reported as implementation works are just commencing.

Once monitoring data are available, cumulative and level (cumulative) indicators must be recorded in all quarters after the first actual is entered. Level and level (average) indicators may be recorded at any frequency, as specified in the M&E Plan. However, level (average) indicators are frequently recorded on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. Date indicators may only be reported once during the program. All actuals must adhere to the formatting guidelines described in further detail in Section IV “Entering Data in the ITT” below.

Notes Columns

In the event that the necessary information is too detailed to comfortably fit in the Comments column, the M&E Lead and AE may agree to report more detailed information in an ITT Progress Report.[[For more information on the ITT Progress Report and its potential uses, please refer to the ITT Progress Report Guidance.]]

Column Source: Calculation

Actual to Date

Progress to Date

In some instances, assessing indicator progress requires more context than can be provided by the percent complete calculation alone. For many indictors, exceeding the target means that we have achieved even more of a desirable result than planned. This is true for many cumulative indicators, such as those counting the number of participants enrolled in a program or the number of infrastructure projects built. However, in some cases, exceeding a target is considered less desirable than meeting it exactly. For example, the indicator “Power plant availability” measures the amount of hours in a month that a plant is able and available to produce electricity as a percentage of the total number of hours in a month. The target is 95 percent because the power plant requires some non-operating time, to allow for repairs and regular maintenance. Exceeding the target could indicate poor management of the facility and ultimately costly breakdowns of machinery.

For indicators where exceeding a target represents a less desirable outcome than meeting it exactly, or other cases where the percent complete formula might not be informative on its own, additional context should be provided in the Comments column of the ITT. For example, the AE and MCC might opt to include the “percent deviation” metric in the Comments column as this assesses indicator progress by measuring the relative distance of an actual from the target. An actual that exceeds the target by a value “x” has the same percent deviation as an actual that falls short of the target by the same value “x.”; in other words, exceeding a target by a large margin would look just as undesirable as failing to meet it by a large margin. Percent deviation may also be provided as a supplemental metric to represent program progress in MCC-generated reports.[[If the AE and MCC opt to include the percent deviation calculation in any report, please ensure the indicator name and additional information are sufficiently clear so an end user can correctly interpret the calculation. This calculation, while it can be useful, is more complex than the standard percent complete formula and may cause confusion unless properly clarified.]]

The specific formulas for each metric of progress are given below.

Entering Data in the ITT

Put simply, the AE should adhere to the following steps when entering actuals or notes in the ITT:

1. Locate the quarter for which data must be added.
   1. ITT data should be reported in the quarter the data are measuring, not the quarter in which the data become available.
2. Locate an indicator for which data must be added.
3. Click on the cell for the desired indicator and quarter.
4. Enter the actual according to the classification and hierarchy-level requirements.
   1. The classification and hierarchy-level requirements may also differ by ITT format. The differences in data entry between the Excel and MCC MIS ITTs are described further below.
5. Enter the detailed data source and comments, when necessary.
6. Save as needed.

For single-tier indicator families, actuals are entered based on the indicator’s classification.

Entering Data for Level and Level (Average) Indicators

Entering Data for Cumulative and Level (Cumulative) Indicators

• The cumulative total is the total progress achieved to-date, including all progress accomplished during the current quarter. The total progress achieved spans either the entire program for cumulative indicators or during the current program year for level (cumulative) indicators.
• The incremental actual is the total progress made during the current quarter.

In the example below, 72 educational facilities have been constructed between Q1 and Q19, with 11 facilities constructed in Q19 specifically. For Q19, 11 is the incremental actual and 72 is the cumulative total.

Entering Data for Date Indicators

Entering Data for Multi-Tier Indicator Families

When an indicator family includes multiple disaggregation types at the same tier (e.g., multiple second-tier disaggregations), only one disaggregation type is used to calculate the main indicator value. However, the sums of the disaggregations for each disaggregation type should be equal. In the example below, “Number of formal connections” is disaggregated by sex (i.e., female, male) and by connection type (i.e. newly connected, reconnected). Although only the connection type disaggregations are used to calculate the main indicator, the sum of sex disaggregations also equals 700, the value calculated for the main indicator.

Updating Calculations and Notes Columns

In Excel, the Actual to Date, and yearly and percent complete columns are updated using Excel formulas. The AE or RRA is responsible for updating the formulas each quarter and ensuring the formulas correctly calculate these columns according to the guidance provided in Section III “The ITT Grid by Column” and Annex VI.

When using automatic formulas anywhere in the ITT, it is strongly recommended that the AE and MCC designate either the AE or the RRA as the official “owner” of all calculations, and responsible for verifying formulas are correct and updated quarterly. Doing so should minimize errors that may occur when ownership over the formulas is divided or unclear.

In both the Excel and MCC MIS ITTs, the AE must review the Notes columns each quarter and make manual updates when necessary. All text reported in these two columns automatically carries over from the previous quarter’s approved ITT. The AE is responsible for reviewing the notes and updating the fields with the most recent information.

Indicator Input Worksheets

Formatting Data in Excel

Formatting actuals and the Actual to Date: All actuals must be entered to two decimal places and include commas for thousand separators. The cells should not contain any non-numerical characters.

Formatting metrics of progress: Percent complete formulas must be formatted as percentages with no decimals. If no target is provided or the target is TBD, the Percent Complete column should be shaded. If a target is provided but no progress has been recorded, the Percent Complete column should be “0%.”

Formatting Notes columns: All text in the Detailed Data Source and Comments columns must be written in English and without typos.[[In certain cases and as agreed to by MCC, comments may be provided in the local language. However, all publicly released comments should be provided in English.]] The cell text must be wrapped and all text viewable.

Shading and Blank Cells: In the Excel ITT, shading can be used to distinguish cells for which data are not expected from situations where data are expected but have not been reported. This formatting is intended to facilitate ITT reviews if there is enough information about when reporting is expected (e.g., information from implementation work plans or the data source is a standard annual report) but is not required. When data are expected but are not available, the cell should be left unshaded and blank. All historical percent complete cells should be shaded if no calculation is required.

Quarterly ITT Submission Cycle

The remainder of this section details the four phases of the ITT submission cycle that were outlined in Section II of this document “Introduction to the ITT”. In particular, each phase identifies the applicable role, an approximate timeline to complete the steps, and where the submission cycle differs based on the format of the ITT. Each quarter, the RRA should provide a detailed timeline, including each step of the ITT review process and the date by which the step must be completed. A simplified diagram of the quarterly submission cycle and a template of the detailed timeline can both be found in Annex VIII; however, the RRA should update the timeline quarterly with specific dates, taking into account non-working days and program-specific factors.

Phase I: Preparing the ITT

Phase I Step IA: Preparing the Quarterly ITT Template in Excel

Each quarter, the assigned MCC M&E RRA will email the upcoming quarter’s Excel ITT template to the AE M&E Director for all MCC programs in implementation that require the Excel ITT. The Excel ITT template leaves editable the current quarter and most recent previous quarter’s actuals, the Actual to Date, Percent Complete to Date, and Notes columns. All other cells in the ITT are locked and can only be unlocked by the RRA.

In addition to the ITT, the RRA should provide a quarterly timeline for the ITT submission cycle and any updates to the submission process for the current quarter.

Phase I Step IB: Beginning the Quarterly ITT Submission Cycle in MIS

Six weeks before the QDRP due date, the RRA is responsible for emailing the AE M&E unit and asking them to begin inputting ITT data in MCC MIS. In MIS, the current quarter’s ITT is automatically created as soon as the previous quarter’s QDRP is officially approved by MCC; the preparation of a quarterly ITT Template is not required. Additionally, the RRA’s email should include the quarterly timeline for ITT review and any updates to the submission process for the current quarter.

Phase I, Step II: Completing the Draft ITT and AE Internal Review

Once the AE M&E unit receives the ITT template or email, they may begin populating the ITT. During this step, the AE M&E unit is responsible for: (i) entering any data available for the current quarter; (ii) updating the previous quarter’s data with finalized figures; (iii) adding any relevant indicator comments or detailed data sources; and (iv) reviewing all historical data to see if historical updates are needed.[[“Historical data” is defined as all data earlier than the program’s most recent previous quarter. For example, if the AE is submitting an ITT in Q5, all data in quarters 1-3 are “historical.” By default, historical data are not editable in either format of the ITT. ]] Additionally, if the draft ITT is being prepared in Excel, the AE must update all relevant calculation columns.

M&E is committed to including the most accurate, up-to-date information in the ITT while recognizing that complete quarter data is not possible for the quarter in which the ITT is being prepared (i.e., the quarter in which the QDRP is submitted) due to the QDRP deadline. For each indicator, the AE and MCC M&E units should work together to determine the most recent data that can be provided. For most indicators, minimally, the first month of the quarter in which the QDRP is submitted should be included in the ITT. However, more recent data can be reported if easily obtained and verifiable.

Once the draft ITT is prepared, it must also be reviewed internally by the AE, including program technical leads, relevant cross-cutting personnel, and AE management. The process for internal review may vary based on the structure of the AE, its M&E unit, and the projects being implemented. However, the following recommendations are provided:

• Be proactive, not reactive. The M&E unit should not assume all data shared by the technical leads represent all data available. The M&E unit should meet directly with AE project personnel and discuss each relevant indicator in the ITT. Whenever possible, the M&E Unit should obtain ITT data directly from the primary data source.
• Data collection is ongoing. Whenever possible, the AE should obtain and review primary data sources when they become available and be prepared to enter the data as soon as the ITT submission cycle begins.
• Clarify indicators early. The AE is responsible for ensuring reported data are consistent with the indicator’s definition. In support of that, the M&E unit should review all indicators and their definitions with the technical leads in the context of developing or modifying the M&E Plan, and well in advance of the quarterly reporting process. Additionally, the AE should clarify the requested format of the quarterly data submission.
• Engage with the project personnel. The M&E unit should participate in sectoral meetings and deliverable reviews to have a general understanding of program progress.
• Flag any known data issues before submission. If the AE M&E unit is aware of a data issue, this should be documented in the Comments column of the ITT upon submission of the initial draft so that MCC can begin exploring possible solutions and mitigation measures as soon as possible.

Approximately one month prior to the QDRP due date, the AE should have completed its internal review of the ITT and submitted the first draft to the RRA. Once the draft ITT is completed in MCC MIS, the AE M&E unit should alert the RRA by email that the draft is ready for review. In addition to the draft ITT, the AE M&E unit should submit via email, or other agreed means, all source documentation cited for the current and previous quarter, a summary of any requested changes to historical data, and the ITT Progress Report, if required for the program.

Phase II: M&E Review and Historical Updates

Phase II Step I: M&E Review of the ITT

After receiving the draft ITT, or notification that the draft ITT is ready for review in MCC MIS, the RRA and MCC M&E Lead have five (5) business days to review the draft ITT and submit any requested clarifications or corrections to the AE. The RRA and MCC M&E Lead should not make changes directly to the ITT.

During the M&E review, the RRA is responsible for verifying all actuals against the source documentation provided by the AE M&E unit, ensuring that calculations are correct, that entered data are consistent with the indicator information, and that the formatting is correct. The M&E Lead is responsible for a comprehensive review of the data, including confirming that the data align with implementation timelines and that the Comments column sufficiently explains any delays or irregular data. If necessary, the M&E Lead may review actuals or comments with members of the CT during this period. If any significant data quality or ITT compliance issues emerge during this review, the M&E Lead should raise these with the Resident Country Director (RCD) during this phase to allow appropriate time for management to respond. Additionally, the M&E Lead will review and provide feedback on the ITT Progress Report during this period, if applicable.

Once the review period is complete, the RRA will compile all feedback and submit to the AE via email. After receiving MCC’s feedback, the AE M&E unit has an additional five (5) business days to review the comments and update the ITT accordingly. Near the end of these five (5) days, it is highly recommended that the MCC M&E Lead, RRA, and AE M&E unit meet to discuss any questions or lingering issues.

Depending on the specific issues flagged in the ITT, several rounds of review may be required. In some instances, internal M&E review may overlap with CT technical review (if applicable). However, the AE and MCC M&E units should make their best effort to complete their internal review at least two weeks before the QDRP due date, or by the time that the QDRP is submitted for technical review.

Phase II, Step II: Historical Actual Change Requests

By default, all historical actuals are finalized and locked in both the Excel and MCC MIS formats. However, occasionally, updates to historical data may be required if new data become available or if a previously unknown issue emerges. In these cases, the AE M&E unit may request that historical data sections be made available for updates. To do so, the AE M&E unit must send a Historical Actual Change Request (HACR) via email (for Excel ITTs) or MCC MIS (for MCC MIS ITTs). In the HACR, the AE M&E unit must provide (i) the indicators affected; (ii) the quarters affected; (iii) original and revised data points; and (iv) the reason for requested change. HACRs may be submitted at any time during Phase I or II of the ITT submission cycle. However, it is strongly recommended that HACRs are submitted as soon as possible to ensure all requests are approved before CT technical review.

After an AE M&E unit submits the HACR, the RRA and M&E Lead must strive to review and approve or deny the request within three (3) business days.

If the AE M&E unit is submitting the draft ITT in Excel, the RRA will unlock the applicable cells in the draft ITT, highlighting all unlocked cells. When the draft ITT is shared with the AE M&E unit for additional updates, the AE M&E unit is responsible for making any changes to historical data points.[[In rare occasions, if there is not sufficient time for another round of review, the RRA may make approved HACR changes directly in the Excel ITT. However, the AE should make every effort to request historical changes with enough notice so that they may make the edits directly.]] At this point, the RRA must submit a HACR in MCC MIS to reflect all approved changes.

If the AE M&E unit is submitting the draft ITT in MCC MIS, they also must submit the HACR directly through MCC MIS. In the MCC MIS HACR, the AE M&E unit is responsible for both providing the justification and making the historical changes to the data simultaneously. If the HACR is approved, the MCC MIS ITT is automatically updated with the HACR values.

Optional Phase IIIA: Country Team Technical Review

MCC recommends as a best practice that the AE submit a draft QDRP for technical review approximately 10 days prior to the required QDRP submission date. Since this step is part of the broader QDRP package, MCC’s program Point of Contact (POC) manages the workflow. More details on the process for technical reviews can be found in the QDRP Guidance.

During technical review, the entire CT has the opportunity to review and provide feedback on the ITT. In particular, the CT’s technical leads and cross-cutting specialists in Economic Analysis (EA), Gender and Social Inclusion (GSI), and Environmental and Social Performance (ESP) are asked to review all relevant indicators. The M&E Lead may also use this period to direct targeted questions to team members on specific indicators for which outstanding questions remain. At the end of the technical review period, the M&E Lead should review all comments related to the ITT and ensure clarity to facilitate AE review. Feedback on the ITT will be included as part of MCC’s broader package of feedback on the draft QDRP.

If the CT and AE choose not to have a technical review, the ITT is not circulated to the CT until formal review. In these instances, the AE and MCC M&E units may proceed directly to Phase IVB or adjust the submission cycle timeline to allow more time for Phases I and II. Additionally, the M&E Lead may use this time to reach out to members of the CT directly about specific questions related to the ITT.

Optional Phase IIIB: Upload the Excel ITT in MCC MIS

After all comments from MCC have been addressed, and the Excel ITT has been informally cleared by the RRA, the AE M&E unit must update the MCC MIS ITT to match the Excel ITT. The AE M&E unit must take care to ensure all data are properly reported in MCC MIS, including where there are variations in reporting requirements between the Excel and MCC MIS ITT formats. Additionally, the AE M&E unit is required to upload the finalized Excel ITT as an attachment to the QDRP in MCC MIS.

Before the QDRP is submitted for formal review, the RRA verifies that the MCC MIS ITT data matches the Excel ITT data exactly. The RRA will communicate any issues in the MCC MIS ITT to the AE M&E unit, and the AE M&E unit should strive to address these issues prior to the QDRP due date.

Phase IV: Formal Review and Approval

After submitting the QDRP for formal review, MCC has a final opportunity to review the ITT. During formal review, the RRA should confirm that all previous questions raised by MCC have been addressed and no new issues with the ITT have emerged. Additionally, if a member of the CT has any concerns about sensitive data, poor data quality, or other possible risks, these must be mentioned to the M&E Lead during formal review, if not already raised previously. After the QDRP has been submitted, it is no longer possible for the AE M&E unit to update the MCC MIS ITT. However, the RRA may make minor adjustments to the MCC MIS ITT up to the moment the QDRP is approved.

After QDRP approval, all indicator data are considered final and are reported as such in a number of standard reports, summarized further in the next section of this guidance. Therefore, approval by CT members on the QDRP includes approval of ITT data for reporting. Note that issues with one or more specific indicators are not in and of themselves a reason for a CT member to reject a QDRP; rather, these issues should be raised with M&E as soon as possible so they can be resolved with the AE M&E unit. However, persistent ITT issues, including persistent data quality concerns or missing data, may be a reason to reject a QDRP.

Detailed Data Sources

The structure of the repository should be agreed upon by the M&E Lead and RRA and may vary based on the types of indicators and data sources provided. For example, if multiple indicators are provided quarterly from the same data source (as is common with utility data), it may make sense to organize files by data source. However, when the majority of indicators have a unique data source, it may be more beneficial to organize the repository by indicator. At a minimum, the repository should be structured in such a way that any actual can be easily and independently verified by those not assigned to work on the program.

The AE M&E unit should be informed of the structure of the repository so data sources can be organized in support of said structure. When organizing data sources, MCC M&E recommends the following best practices:

• Clearly label document names. Documents should be renamed to inform the user of the information included in the document and its relevance to the ITT. For example, if the repository is organized by indicator, each document name could include the indicator name and quarter of the data point. The naming convention should be consistent throughout implementation of the program.
• Highlight data points. If an ITT actual is taken from a file with a substantial amount of additional information, the specific data point(s) used to populate the ITT ought to be highlighted.
• Submit complete documents. Primary data sources should be submitted in their entirety to provide additional context for each data point. These should be accompanied by any additional reference sheets used to transform the data into the format necessary for ITT reporting, when not already included as an indicator input worksheet.

Factors to Consider during Review

Data Entry Errors

• Transcription errors: Errors in copying data from the primary data source for the ITT. Source documentation must be submitted with the draft ITT for this reason, and the AE and RRA are responsible for verifying the ITT actual matches the data reported in the primary data source.
• Classification errors: A common cause of data entry errors is inconsistency with the indicator’s classification. For example, once an actual has been reported for a cumulative indicator, data must be reported for all future quarters. Additionally, both level (average) and level (cumulative) indicators have unique methods to calculate Actual to Date and percent complete information. These distinctions are frequently overlooked in the ITT.
• Entering unmeasured zeros: Zeros should not be entered in either ITT format unless they have been measured. For example, the indicator “Number of days road is impassable” may have an actual of zero if the road is passable every day of the year. However, if the number of days the road was impassable during a quarter is unknown, no actual should be entered. Reporting should not begin on an indicator until a non-zero actual is reported. For example, no data should be reported for the indicator “Stakeholders trained” until at least one stakeholder has completed training.
• Calculation errors (Excel format only): The AE is required to use Excel formulas to facilitate calculation of the Actual to Date, percent complete columns, and formulas are strongly recommended for main indicators when disaggregations or inputs are present. The AE and RRA are responsible for ensuring all formulas are defined to equal the correct calculation for the indicator and reference the most recent relevant quarter’s data.

“Irregular Data” Concerns

All irregular data should be explored fully by the MCC and AE M&E units in consultation with program staff and any corrections made to the ITT before it is finalized. Additionally, irregular data do not always mean the data are incorrect. In instances where data appear irregular but have been confirmed to be correct, a brief explanation of the steps undertaken to confirm the accuracy of the data should be provided in the Comments column of the ITT.

Formatting

Reporting ITT Data

Preparing ITT data for reporting

Finally, MCC’s default is to release all monitoring data. However, should a concern about data quality or other risks arise that cannot be resolved during the QDRP formal review, the AE and M&E Lead must closely consider appropriate mitigation measures. Requests not to publish data should be rare and will be considered on a case-by-case basis by the Managing Director for M&E.

Whenever possible, the appropriate mitigation measure should be made and relayed to the program’s RRA by the start of the fiscal quarter (e.g. January 1^st, April 1^st, July 1^st, and October 1^st), so they may make any necessary updates to standard reports and the Tag Editor.

Summary of ITT reports

Closeout ITT

The Closeout ITT allows the AE to make final updates to the last two quarters of the program ITT (i.e., Q19 and Q20 for compacts; the specific quarter numbers are variable for threshold programs). Progress attained for any indicator after program closure is never included in the Closeout ITT. The specific process for preparing, reviewing, and finalizing the Closeout ITT mirrors the process established for the quarterly ITT. However, since the Closeout ITT is the final opportunity during a program life cycle to update indicator data, additional steps are required of both the AE and CT to document the accuracy of all reported data. In particular:

• Both the AE and CT must thoroughly review all quarterly data reported during the program lifecycle (i.e., Q1 through the final quarter of the program).
• The AE must organize and submit final detailed data sources for all indicators. Data sources that have previously been submitted do not need to be resubmitted.
• Closeout ITT supplemental tables must be prepared for each ITT indicator. These tables document (i) any known data quality concerns; (ii) explanations for indicators that failed to meet or exceeded their targets by more than 10 percent; and (iii) notes to accompany data released externally.

Closeout ITT Required Documentation

Detailed Data Sources

Closeout ITT Supplemental Tables

Each supplemental table includes twelve required fields and is populated from a variety of sources, including the M&E Plan, Closeout ITT, and original text drafted by the CT or AE. The tables are developed jointly by the CT and AE in a process managed by the M&E units. The initial draft of the tables may be prepared by either the AE or the MCC; the decision around whether the AE or MCC should lead the process for preparing the supplemental tables should be documented in the program closure plan.

For compacts, the supplemental tables can be generated from MCC MIS, with all fields taken from the M&E Plan and Closeout ITT automatically populated; however, the tables must be populated manually for threshold programs. For ease of reference during the review process, all supplemental tables should be saved in a single file folder, or one folder per program project.

• Data quality concern and Quarters affected: These columns document any data quality concerns raised by the AE or CT. The explanation must include the current status of the issue, how the issue has evolved over time, and any measures that have been taken to understand or mitigate the issue. The “Quarters affected” column will list all quarters for which the data quality concern exists (e.g., Q8-Q20). Examples of data quality issues include:
  • Concerns related to the data systems or methodologies used to produce the reported data
  • Misalignment between the data reported and the indicator definition
  • Data source deviating from the source specified in Annex I of the M&E Plan
  • Missing or unverifiable data

• 10% over/under target justification: An explanation must be provided for all indicators that failed to meet their targets by or exceeded their targets by more than 10 percent (i.e., 90% > % Complete > 110%).
• Publicly released notes: This column includes any notes that should accompany indicator reporting post-program closure to improve the interpretability of the reported data. By default, the supplemental tables are populated with the notes include in the comments column of the Closeout. However, the M&E Lead and CT are responsible for reviewing all notes and revising as appropriate for public release. After being finalized, these notes must be added by the RRA to the MCC Indicator Tag Editor for compacts.
• Year 5 KPI: This column identifies whether an indicator is selected as a KPI at the time of program closeout. KPIs for closed programs are posted publicly on a regular basis in fulfillment of MCC’s commitment to the IATI initiative. Therefore, particular attention should be placed on the publicly released notes for KPIs.

Closeout ITT Review Process

The specific timeline for revising and approving the Closeout ITT may be determined by the M&E Lead. However, to ensure all critical questions pertaining to the Closeout ITT are resolved before the AE dissolves, a recommended timeline is included below. Although the Closeout ITT is not submitted with a QDRP, the process is still managed by the CT POC.

Data Quality Issues

Updating the Closeout ITT Post-Program Closure

If a Closeout ITT is revised, all relevant reports using Closeout ITT data must be updated by the RRA. For each of the following documents, the RRA must review the data reported for the program and update any actuals that were revised in the Closeout ITT: (i) Closeout Table of Key Performance Indicators; (ii) Common Indicator Report; (iii) Star Report (and program webpage); and (iv) Sector Packages. In all reports where an update has been made, a footnote should be added providing a justification and the date of the change.

Any inter-agency or ad hoc reports made using closeout data do not need to be updated unless an additional request for the same report is made after the Closeout ITT is revised. It is only necessary to update the most recent version of all reports – it is not necessary to update reports prepared for previous quarters.

Post-Program ITT

Post-Program M&E Plan

In accordance with the approved Post-Program M&E Plan, the designated representative shall submit an Post-Program M&E Report, including a Post-Program ITT (PP ITT), which allows the partner government to inform MCC of continued progress related to MCC programs, and sectoral or institutional reforms. Typically, MCC requires submission of the Post-Program M&E Report for five years post-program, but the time period and frequency should align with the evaluation planning or other considerations for individual programs. In particular, for many programs, more frequent (i.e., quarterly or semi-annual) reporting may be required for the first year or more after the program closes while works funded by other parties may still be ongoing.

Post-Program ITT Format

The PP ITT adds one column for each additional reporting period agreed to in the Post-Program M&E Plan; as mentioned above, this is typically five (one per year) but may be more frequent and should be determined based on the post-program evaluation timeline or other relevant considerations. Post-program targets are not required unless already documented in the program M&E Plan before closure; columns for post compact targets and progress to date are included when post program targets exist or teams would like to compare post program actuals to end of program targets. All PP ITTs are submitted in the Excel format, following the formatting guidelines describe in Annex VII.

Post-Program ITT Reporting Requirements

After receiving the PP ITT, the RRA will review the document for formatting and data entry errors and verify the actuals against the submitted source documentation. After which, M&E will circulate the PP ITT with remaining members of the CT, as well as the Regional MD and relevant PLSDs. Feedback from reviewers on the PP ITT is welcome. However, due to the limited engagement expected of post-program designated representatives, detailed responses or extensive revisions may not be provided in response. Considering the limited engagement and limited ability to verify the accuracy of the reported data, the PP ITT is filed internally but not distributed publicly.

Annex I: Glossary

* Accountable Entity — The entity designated by the government of the country receiving assistance from MCC to oversee and manage implementation of the Compact or Threshold Program on behalf of the government. The Accountable Entity is often referred to as the MCA.

* Activity — Actions taken or work performed through which inputs, such as funds, technical assistance and other types of resources are mobilized to produce specific outputs. Typically, multiple Activities make up one Project and work together to meet the Project’s Objective.

* Actual — A data point that shows what has been completed, as opposed to a number that is a target or a prediction.

* Baseline — The situation prior to a development intervention, against which progress can be assessed or comparisons made.

* Closeout — Refers to anything deemed final as of the end of the Compact.

Closeout ITT — The final ITT of a Compact or Threshold Program that includes all data as of the program end date.

* Common Indicator — An indicator that MCC uses to aggregate results across countries within certain sectors and report internally and externally to key stakeholders.

* Compact — The agreement known as Millennium Challenge Compact, entered into between the United States of America, acting through the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the government of the country receiving assistance pursuant to which MCC provides such assistance to the country.

* Closure Date — With respect to a Compact, the last day of the Compact’s Closure Period, which is exactly 120 days after the CED.

* Closure Period — The 120-day period after the CED, during which the MCA closes out all remaining contracts and transfers any remaining assets.

* Cumulative — An indicator classification. These indicators report a running total, so that each reported actual includes the previously reported actual and adds any progress made since the last reporting period.

Cumulative total — The total progress achieved for a cumulative or level (cumulative) indicator, including all progress accomplished during the current quarter. The total progress achieved spans either the entire program for cumulative indicators or the current program year for level (cumulative) indicators.

* Date Indicator — An indicator that records the occurrence of a one-time event.

Disaggregation — Indicators in an indicator family used to report on a distinct subset of a main indicator.

Draft ITT — An ITT being reviewed as part of an ITT submission cycle. An ITT is considered draft between the time the AE begins preparing the submission until the ITT is formally approved as part of the QDRP.

* Entry into Force — The point in time when a Compact or Threshold Program Agreement comes into full legal force and effect and its term begins.

* Goal Indicator — Indicators that measure the economic growth and poverty reduction changes that occur during or after implementation of the Program.

Historical data — All data that are recorded in quarters earlier than the program’s most recent previous quarter.

Incremental actual — The total progress accomplished during the current quarter for a cumulative or level (cumulative) indicator.

* Indicator — Quantitative or qualitative variable that provides a simple and reliable means to measure achievement of a development intervention.

Indicator family — A collection of indicators grouped together to report on the same piece of information. Each indicator family is comprised of a minimum of one indicator, plus any associated disaggregations or inputs.

Indicator information —Information taken from the M&E Plan to populate the ITT, including the indicator name, level, unit of measure, classification, baseline, yearly targets, and end of program target.

* Indicator Inputs —These indicators are the components of a composite indicator, such as a percentage or ratio. In most cases, they will be the numerator and denominator used to calculate the indicator.

* Indicator Tracking Table — A quarterly reporting tool that tracks progress on the indicators included in a country’s M&E Plan towards program targets. It is part of the Quarterly Disbursement Request and Reporting Package.

Irregular data — Reporting on an indicator that does not adhere to reasonable expectations for indicator progress.

ITT template — An updated version of the Excel format of the ITT prepared by the RRA at the start of each ITT submission cycle.

ITT Progress Report – An optional supplement to the ITT, which includes additional information to help interpret and contextualize ITT reporting and to provide M&E staff with a forum to report the findings of monitoring efforts outside of the ITT.

* Key Performance Indicator — An indicator selected from the M&E Plan that is reported quarterly in the Table of Key Performance Indicators.

* Level — An indicator classification. These indicators track trends over time, and may fluctuate up and down between quarters.

Level (Average) — An indicator classification. A type of level indicator in which progress is assessed by comparing the yearly target to an average of all actuals recorded during the program year.

Level (Cumulative) — An indicator classification. These indicators track the cumulative value for each program year. At the beginning of a new program year, the cumulative total begins again at zero.

* M&E Plan — Tool for outlining a country’s approach to monitoring, evaluating, and assessing progress towards Compact objectives.

* MCC Management Information System — A system designed to collect and process data to assist in the management of programs. The MCC MIS serves as a single data repository and reporting tool for auditable fiscal, procurement, and indicator performance data.

Metric of Progress — A calculation that assesses indicator progress against a yearly or end of program target.

* Monitoring — A continuous function that uses the systematic collection of data on specified indicators to gauge progress toward final program objectives and achievement of intermediate results along the way.

* Outcome Indicator — An indicator that measure the intermediate effects of an Activity or set of Activities and are directly related to the Output Indicators.

* Output Indicator — An indicator that directly measure Project Activities. They describe and quantify the goods and services produced directly by the implementation of an Activity.

Percent deviation — A calculation that assesses an indicator’s progress by measuring the absolute difference between an indicator and its yearly or end of program target.

Post closure – The period of time after Compact or Threshold Program end date.  

* Post-Program M&E Plan — Describes post-program monitoring and evaluation activities, identifies the individuals and organizations that would undertake these activities, provides a budget framework for future monitoring and evaluation which draws upon both MCC and country resources, and document the role the partner country will play in results dissemination.

Post-Program ITT — A version of the ITT that is derived from the Post-Program M&E Plan and due after program closure; the Post-Program ITT is part of the Post-Program M&E Report that tracks continued progress related to MCC programs, and sectoral or institutional reforms.

* Process Indicator — An indicator that measures progress toward the completion of a Project Activity, a step toward the achievement of Project Outputs and a way to ensure the work plan is proceeding on time.

* Program — A group of Projects implemented together to achieve a goal.

* Program Closure Plan — The plan developed by an Accountable Entity describing the closure strategy for each Project and Activity of a Compact, the winding-up or continuing of the Accountable Entity, financial plan for the closure period, post-compact M&E plan, and other important aspects as appropriate in order to close-out the Compact.

* Program Logic — An explanatory model that demonstrates how a Program’s Activities lead to the expected outcomes, objectives, and goal of a Compact, presented graphically.

* Project — A group of Activities implemented together to achieve an objective.

Quarterly Disbursement Request Package — A reporting package that provides information on execution of program activities; financial management; procurement, grant, and partnership actions; progress towards compact or threshold program goals (as defined by monitoring and evaluation (M&E) indicators and targets); and the status of conditions precedent (CP) to disbursement. The package also details projected commitments and disbursements for the life of the grant.

* Table of Key Performance Indicators — A public document that reports on a sub-set of the indicators reported on in the Indicator Tracking Table. The indicators are selected yearly by the country teams to best reflect the current state of the Compact.

* Target — The expected result for a particular indicator to be met by the end of the compact.

* Threshold Program — A program authorized by Section 616 of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, as amended, pursuant to which MCC provides assistance to a qualifying country for the purpose of assisting such country to become eligible for a Compact.

Unspecified disaggregation – A disaggregation used in MCC MIS to record the difference between a main indicator and the value(s) available for all defined disaggregations.

Annex II. Indicator Tracking Table – Frequently Asked Questions

The Indicator Tracking Table (ITT) is a quarterly reporting tool that serves as the primary mechanism to operationalize a compact or threshold program’s commitment to monitoring. The ITT tracks the progress of indicators included in the program’s M&E Plan towards program targets and is submitted as part of a Compact Quarterly Disbursement Request Package (QDRP). Data reported in the ITT are used to inform project implementation decisions, and for internal and external reporting (ITT Guidance, page 4).

How is the ITT developed?

The Indicator Tracking Table is derived from a program’s M&E Plan. All programs must have an M&E Plan approved by MCC and the Accountable Entity (AE) Board, which provides a detailed framework for monitoring and evaluating the program. As part of this framework, the M&E Plan must include a summary of the program’s monitoring strategy, including detailed indicator information for monitoring and evaluation indicators, such as definitions, baselines and targets. All monitoring indicators, as well as their detailed indicator information, baselines, and targets, must be documented in Annexes I and II of the M&E Plan. The ITT is created based on the information provided in these Annexes. All indicator information taken from the M&E Plan must match the M&E Plan exactly and cannot be updated in the ITT without formally revising the M&E Plan prior. (ITT Guidance, pages 5). For more information on the M&E Plan, please see the MCC and the forthcoming Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Guidance.

How does the ITT fit into MCC’s Quarterly Disbursement Request Processes?

The ITT is officially submitted by the AE to MCC as part of the Quarterly Disbursement Request Package. The ITT shares information related to program progress. Once the QDRP is submitted, the ITT is reviewed by M&E and members of the CT. Clearance of the QDRP by CT members includes clearance of the ITT and approval of ITT data for reporting. If there are persistent and unaddressed data issues in the ITT, the QDRP may ultimately be rejected and spending authority denied (ITT Guidance, page 28).

How is the ITT data verified?

The submission cycle is comprised of four phases, containing several steps each: (I) preparing the draft ITT; (II) M&E review and historical updates; (III) (optional) country team technical review; and (IV) formal Review and approval. During the M&E review, the RRA is responsible for verifying all actuals against the source documentation provided by the AE, ensuring that calculations are correct, that data are entered consistently with the indicator information, and that the formatting is correct. The M&E Lead is responsible for a comprehensive review of the data, including confirming that the data align with implementation timelines and the Comments column sufficiently explains any delays or irregular data. If necessary, the M&E Lead may confirm actuals or comments with members of the CT during this period (ITT Guidance, pages 35-36).

How is ITT data used?

MCC is committed to transparency about the results of its programs as a means of ensuring accountability for itself and promoting learning in the development community. As one mechanism to fulfill this commitment, monitoring results taken from the ITT are released publicly on a quarterly basis. These results are captured in reports that highlight program-level, agency-wide, and inter-agency initiatives, as well as direct exports from ITTs. While any monitoring data may be reported publicly, the majority of these reports focus on common indicators and performance indicators key to monitoring program process (ITT Guidance, page 37).

Is historical data ever updated?

By default, all historical actuals are locked in both the Excel and MCC MIS formats. However, occasionally, updates to historical data may be required if new data become available or if a previously unknown issue emerges. In these cases, the AE may request that historical data be made available for updates. To do so, the AE must send a Historical Actual Change Request (HACR) via email (for Excel ITTs) or MCC MIS (for MCC MIS ITTs) (ITT Guidance, page 32).

What is the official record for ITT data?

The ITT is displayed in one of two formats, referred to as the “Excel ITT” and the “MCC MIS ITT.” All compacts are required to submit an MCC MIS ITT as part of the standard QDRP process. At this time, MCC MIS is not available for threshold programs, and all threshold ITTs must be submitted in the Excel format. If required by MCC, compacts may also report an Excel version of the ITT. The Excel ITT can be used to facilitate review by the AEs and during country team (CT) technical review. If an Excel ITT is required, the finalized version should be uploaded as part of the MCC MIS QDRP under “Other Documents” (ITT Guidance, page 6).

Annex III. Frequently Used Disaggregations

 Annex IV. Indicator Family Calculation Types

Annex V: Standard List of Indicator Units

Annex VI: Metrics of Progress Detailed Definitions

This table provides the formulas used to populate these columns of the ITT. The specific formula used varies based on the metric of progress, and baseline and target values of each indicator.

Annex VII. Formatting Guidelines for Excel ITTs

Annex VIII. ITT Submission Cycle Diagram and Timeline

Annex VIII A. ITT Submission Cycle Diagram

Annex VIII B. Timeline for AEs submitting ITTs exclusively in MCC MIS

Annex VIII C. Timeline for AEs submitting ITTs in Excel and MCC MIS

Annex VIII D. Timeline for AEs submitting ITTs exclusively in Excel

Annex IX. Sample Process Map for AE ITT Review

Annex X. ITT Review Checklists