The Army Resilience Directorate Measurability Assessment Guidebook is utilized by Program Managers and evaluators to prepare, conduct, and complete effective measurability assessments of the ARD portfolio. Currently, the Employee Assistance Program is undergoing a Measurability Assessment. Let's break down the nuts and bolts of the ARD Measurability Assessment Guidebook and see why it's a great tool for the ARD portfolio.
What is it?
The ARD Measurability Assessment Guidebook is tailored from the measurability assessment developed by the state of North Carolina. Standards were established to assess programs before intensive evaluations.
"This guide primarily provides a framework to facilitate PMs in constructing and maintaining an environment that empowers the execution of evaluation efforts. Evaluations have one purpose--to provide feedback to the proponents, their PM as well as stakeholders, to promote continuous improvement and identify if their programmatic efforts are making their desired impact," said David Collins, ARD evaluation branch chief, at Fort Knox, Ky. "Information generated through evaluations will enhance decision-making by senior Army leaders."
Essentially, through the collection of data, Army leaders can determine which programs are making the most long-term impact on Soldiers, Family members, and Army Civilians, as well as allocate appropriate resources to maintain them.
How does it work?
The guidebook addresses three main elements: mission alignment, results-focused, and return on readiness. Each element is broken down into a set of in-depth performance indicators and assessed first by ARD portfolio PMs and second by an independent evaluator who verifies their validity. The assessments yield one of three outcomes for each performance indicator: meets indicator, partially meets indicator and does not meet indicator.
How does this affect our Soldiers, their Families and stakeholders?
Routine evaluations on programs in the ARD portfolio assess their effectiveness for our Soldiers, their Families, and stakeholders. These evaluations can affect funding, staffing, and allotment of resources for each program. If a program does not meet indicators, further analysis will be performed, which could improve, consolidate, or eliminate programs.