GAO-16-819, INTERNATIONAL CASH-BASED FOOD ASSISTANCE: USAID Has Established Processes to Monitor Cash and Voucher Projects, but Data Limitations Impede Evaluation

To monitor the implementation of these projects, USAID has assigned monitoring roles and responsibilities to staff, is developing country monitoring plans and monitoring tools, and is working to verify information that partners have provided through actions such as conducting site visits, and speaking with beneficiaries. Implementing partners, who are responsible for delivering assistance according to USAID's procedures and to the targeted beneficiaries, monitor distributions, and interview beneficiaries regarding the distribution of the assistance. Additionally, implementing partners conduct postdistribution surveys to gather information about the relevance, efficiency, and effectiveness of the assistance. USAID's implementing partners have established processes for monitoring cash and voucher projects, including conducting site visits and speaking with beneficiaries. For example, in Liberia, implementing partner representatives conducted distribution monitoring for a USAID Emergency Food Security Program cash transfer project, as shown in Figure 4. Similarly, in Kenya, implementing partner representatives conducted postdistribution monitoring for USAID Emergency Food Security Program cash transfer projects, as shown in Figure 5. Despite these efforts, incomplete reporting and weaknesses in certain performance indicators limit USAID's ability to use monitoring data to evaluate cash transfer and food voucher projects' performance. A review of 14 final reports, which USAID requires for each project, found that a majority of the reports lacked required data elements, such as prices for key staple foods. Only one report included all 12 required data elements, and the other reports were missing up to 8 elements. As a result, USAID has limited ability to assess the overall performance of these projects. USAID's indicators for measuring cash and voucher projects' timeliness, cost-effectiveness, and appropriateness also have weaknesses. The indicator for timeliness does not track delays in implementation, and the indicator for cost-effectiveness does not include a standardized unit for measuring project costs. Furthermore, the indicator for project appropriateness does not have associated benchmarks for measuring cash transfer and food voucher projects' impact on local markets. As a result, USAID lacks information that would be useful for evaluating the projects' effectiveness relative to that of in-kind food aid. The use of cash-based assistance has increased in recent years, with USAID providing about $432 million for cash transfer and food voucher projects through its emergency cash-based food assistance program, the Emergency Food Security Program (EFSP), in fiscal year 2015. This increase is due in part to the growing recognition of the benefits of cash-based assistance, including its ability to address food emergencies more quickly and effectively than in-kind food aid. However, the effectiveness of cash-based assistance depends on various factors, including local market conditions and beneficiaries' preferences. Studies have shown that cash, vouchers, and food transfers can improve food security, and contextual factors may explain impact variations. For example, a review of 14 studies comparing the impacts of cash transfers, food vouchers, and food transfers on selected food security outcomes found that cash transfers and food vouchers were more effective than food transfers in improving food security in some contexts. However, the effectiveness of these modalities also depends on various factors, including the local market conditions and beneficiaries' preferences. In conclusion, USAID has established processes to monitor cash transfer and food voucher projects, but incomplete reporting and weaknesses in certain performance indicators limit its ability to use monitoring data to evaluate these projects' performance. USAID should take steps to ensure compliance with its requirements for data in final reports and strengthen the indicators it uses to measure the timeliness, cost-effectiveness, and appropriateness of cash transfer and food voucher projects.