Note: This chart summarizes new or revised policy/procedures or other changes, as applicable.

Disclaimer: Archived entries may have been recently changed or removed. Please check the current ADS chapters and references, as well as recent interim updates for the latest information.

ADS 200, 201, 202, and 203 have been revised and are effective as of January 31, 2003.

Most Important Changes/Improvements
January 2003 Revision

• Reflects USAID reorganization in both name (i.e. bureaus and offices) and substance (i.e. roles and responsibilities). Integrates the Global Development Alliance throughout all programming policies and procedures.
• Clarifies a fundamental USAID management principle: that approved Operating Unit Strategic Plans and Strategic and Special Objectives reflect the Agency's unified vision and strategic priorities for any given country, sector or program.
• Refers to USAID's role in the larger U.S. foreign policy community with references to the National Security Strategy and the International Affairs Strategic Plan.
• Introduces the term, "strategic budgeting," and clearly states the importance of integrating performance and commitment into the Agency's overall management and resource allocation systems.
• Clearly states when Operating Units are exempted from strategic planning requirements.
• Introduces the term, "crisis modifier" and refers Operating Units to DCHA and relevant geographic bureau for guidance on using this term in scenario-based planning.
• Incorporates the new Agency operational plan for "Stepping Up the War Against HIV/AIDS" and describes the related strategic planning requirements.
• Clearly states the content requirements for each planning level: strategic plan, strategic objective, activity.
• Introduces concept of a Program Support Objective; i.e., an objective composed only of activities (e.g., training) intended to be at the service of other objectives. No separate results reporting is required for Program Support Objectives because their results are captured under the SOs and SpOs that they support.
• Amplifies the use of Program Development and Learning Objectives (PD&L) to include pilot activities and pre-implementation items.
• Clarifies (and removes inconsistencies in) the Agency clearance and approval processes for setting planning parameters, approving Strategic Plans, approving new SOs "mid-stream", modifying existing SOs, approving Bureau Planning Frameworks, modifying Management Agreements.
• Clearly requires a preliminary Performance Management Plan (PMP) for SO-level indicators (with baselines and ultimate targets) at the time of Strategic Plan/SO approval.
• Makes clear that new Strategic Objectives may begin during the life of an already-approved strategy, and/or extend beyond the Strategic Plan timeframe. Emphasizes the importance of clearly established SO Start and End Dates.
• Directly states that each Strategic or Special Objective has an authorized "Life of SO" funding level and provides clear procedures for increasing this authorized level. Eliminates the possibility of "SO funding creep" without Agency-wide vetting.
• Assures that the ADS 201 planning policies are consistent with forward funding guidance.
• Distinguishes clearly between pre-obligation requirements and activity planning requirements.
• Provides an outline for an "Activity Approval Document". Mission Directors may be as rigorous (or as flexible) as they deem appropriate in approving activities.
• Briefly mentions non-project assistance (NPA) and refers the reader to the reference document on Program Assistance.
• Incorporates the recently revised Agency policy on cost-sharing with NGOs.
• In response to concerns from the E&E Bureau, makes the use of SO Teams a recommended "best practice" rather than a mandatory requirement.
• Clarifies that all USG employees (e.g. USDH, USPSC, FSN, TCN) can be SO Team Leaders or SO Team core members. Refers readers to other documents that describe those authorities that cannot be delegated to various categories of employees.
• Updates the language and references for documenting contractor performance, thus making ADS 202 in step with ADS 302 and 303. Removes the reference to a Contract Monitoring Plan as a separate document, thus reducing paperwork and possible audit vulnerability. (Note: CTOs are still responsible for managing their contracts.)
• States the new mandatory requirement that Operating Units review the status of all obligated funds on an annual basis. This updated language makes the ADS 202 in step with the upcoming revision to ADS 621.
• Includes the streamlined reporting process, known as the "Annual Report," instead of the "R4."
• Clearly explains when Operating Units can and cannot change performance indicators.
• Provides better guidance on data quality standards and assessments. Also, increases flexibility and limits audit vulnerability by stating explicitly that data quality assessments are required only for data formally reported to Washington in the Annual Report or for external Agency reporting, not to all indicators in a mission's Performance Management Plan.
• Closes an open audit recommendation from the IG on "Performance Monitoring for Indicators" by describing the self-assessment process for Annual Report.
• Turns many "musts" into "shoulds", thereby reducing audit vulnerability.
• Clarifies that Bureau AAs have authority to waive mandatory requirements as necessary with PPC/SPP and GC clearances.
• Re-introduces the word "project" as a standard term in the USAID lexicon. A "project" is defined as one type of "activity".
• Does not re-introduce the term "Results Package", which we eliminated in 2000.

• Steve Giddings, AFR
• Frank Alejandro, EGAT
• James Painter, PPC/RA

a. Add the following new references:
     1. Deobligation Guidebook
     2. Reobligation Policy and Procedures
     3. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Monitoring Obligations;

b. Clarify procedures and responsibilities in USAID/W and field Missions for specific parties/roles in the areas of ongoing obligations monitoring and providing end of year certifications, deobligating/reobligating funds, and maintaining financial documentation (621.2);

c. Document PPC/RA's responsibility for providing Agency policy/procedures on reobligation as well as for redistributing the deobligated funds (recoveries) to the Bureaus (621.2f and Reobligation Policy);

d. Clarify types of obligations and how they are managed and deobligated (621.3.4 and Deobligation Guidebook);

e. Document and clarify the minimum documentation for purchase orders required for a valid obligation and refer to ADS 302, Direct Contracting, for more information on contracts (621.3.4c);

f. Update the new forms for interagency agreements in conformance with the recently revised ADS 306 (621.3.4d);

g. Document new policy/procedures for Section 511 funds availability (621.3.9);

h. Document that Missions must transmit expired accounts (i.e., appropriations that were not obligated during the initial period of availability) to USAID/W (621.3.10b);

i. Institute changes regarding the submission of the annual certification of unexpended balances and the annual certification of the validity of obligations (621.3.14 and 621.3.15); and

j. Document the establishment of a rough materiality threshold of $100,000 in reported "excessive" residual funds that may be used to determine if deobligating funds ahead of the closeout process is warranted (Deobligation Guidebook - paragraph V.B.1.c.).

This critical guidance will continue to be reviewed and updated as needed. For example, the GH Bureau cleared the chapter with the understanding that additional guidance will be issued later, based on the outcome of the Business Transformation Executive Committee's (BTEC's) assessment of the procedures for deobligating and reobligating field support funds. Also, LAC Bureau's clearance was contingent upon the Agency's commitment to continue to identify procedures to deobligate funds in a timely manner, thereby increasing program management efficiency and giving validity to the annual certification statement, as well as making resources available to the Agency for additional uses. GH and LAC Bureaus' concerns will be documented in the Quick Hit Team's final report, which will be presented to BTEC on January 22.

Bureaus are asked to take a conscientious approach to deobligating funds with the understanding that, after taking out amounts necessary to fund upward adjustments, the Bureau for Policy and Program Coordination, Office of Resource Allocation (PPC/RA) will return 50 percent of each Bureau's remaining current year recoveries to the Bureau once the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (M/CFO) certifies these funds as available. Within 60 days of receiving the funds, Bureaus must return these recoveries to the deobligating operating unit unless their Assistant Administrator (AA) determines that there are overriding circumstances that result in the need to use the money for other purposes.

• Federal Claims Collection Standards (31 CFR 901)
• OMB Circular A-11, Preparation and Submission of Budget Estimates, Part 5, Section 185, Federal Credit Programs
• Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) No. 19 - Technical Amendments to Accounting Standards for Direct Loans and Loan Guarantees

• 5 CFR 1315
• 31 U.S.C. 3527-3529
• 31 U.S.C. 39, Prompt Pay
• 22 CFR 226, Administration of Assistance Awards to U.S. Non-Governmental Organizations

Questions about this web page or the ADS? Please contact us by using our Questions/Comments form page or send an e-mail to ads@usaid.gov.

To view PDF files, download the accessible version of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

This document was last updated on Wednesday, 02-Aug-2006 09:56:46 EDT