Where we are

No results yet, and we are not going to imply otherwise

USAW is in Phase 1 of a three-phase implementation strategy: organizational setup, running through the first two years. Community Chapter and enterprise counts are zero because delivery has not started.

A new organization can either fill this page with figures about the wider problem and let them read as its own achievements, or it can publish its measurement framework and wait. We are doing the second. The conditions we were formed to change are described on the homepage, with each figure attributed to its source.

Results framework

Five-year results framework

Four headline indicators, one per strategic goal, with their baselines and five-year targets.

USAW five-year results framework
Strategic goalKey outcome indicatorBaselineYear 5 target
Sustainability EducationWomen and youth trained annuallyTo be set - Phase 1 baseline research5,000+ trained cumulatively
Economic EmpowermentWomen-led green enterprises supported0 (pre-launch)250+ enterprises supported
Community EngagementActive Community Chapters0 (pre-launch)25+ chapters across Ghana, the US and Canada
Advocacy & LeadershipWomen in environmental policy forumsTo be set - Phase 1 baseline research100+ policy engagements cumulatively

MEAL

How we measure

Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning - the system that tracks performance against the theory of change.

Measures of success

  • Number of women and youth trained and engaged
  • Number of programmes conducted and Community Chapters active
  • Measurable community impact - waste reduced, water reclaimed, gardens created, businesses supported
  • Participant feedback, satisfaction and reported outcomes

Full indicators, baselines, targets, dashboard design and reporting templates sit in the MEAL Framework, which will be published on the resources page once approved.

  • Disaggregated by default

    Every participation indicator is reported by sex and age. An aggregate number hides exactly the pattern USAW exists to change.

  • Baselines before claims

    Where no baseline exists, we say so rather than reporting a change we cannot evidence. Two of the four headline indicators have no baseline yet.

  • Targets published in advance

    The five-year targets below were set before delivery began, so the first impact report can be measured against something stated in public rather than chosen afterwards.

  • Consent and dignity in evidence

    Participant stories and photographs are collected under a documented consent standard. No image or story is published without it.

Risk

Risk register

Published because a funder will ask, and because an organization that cannot name its own risks has not examined them.

USAW principal risks and mitigations
RiskRatingMitigation
Funding concentrationMediumDiversify across grants, corporate partnerships, membership and social enterprise revenue.
Programme scope overreach - ten pillars against current capacityHighPhase the rollout; prioritise pillars with existing partnership readiness. This is why most pillars are published as "in design".
Delayed institutional registration in Ghana and CanadaMediumSequence registration within the Phase 1–2 timeline with dedicated legal support.
Volunteer Board capacity constraintsMediumIntroduce paid Secretariat roles as funding allows; stagger committee workloads.
Political or regulatory shifts in target geographiesMediumMonitor the policy environment; maintain flexible, locally adapted programme design.

Ratings are likelihood × impact, each scored 1–5. The full register with root causes and monitoring indicators follows the same methodology used across USAW's programme risk assessments.

Next

The logic these indicators test

Every indicator above exists to test one causal claim. It is worth reading alongside this page.

Read the theory of change