Financial Management

STRUCTURE Human Resources Impact Assessment Career Development Strategic Planning SYSTEMS Supervision Objectives Monitoring and Evaluation SUSTAINABILITY
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Series 2
ORGANIZATIONAL

2/

MANAGEMENT

Module

Program Design and Management

Program Design and Management

Introduction Before you design a program project Starting the program design process Whats the solution Establishing program objectives The project life cycle Preparing a detailed work plan Justification of budget items Illustrative Year One Program work plan Programatic assessment Evaluation Reporting on your program Participatory planning processes Some practical considerations in using participatory processes Institutional relationships Summary Proposal development Tips and Tools A proposal preparation checklist Monitoring and Evaluation Program management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 1 3 1 5 1 7 20 2 1 22-23 24 25 26

ii

Figures, Tables and Exercises

Table: Providing some methods for data collection Figure 4: Advantages and Disadvantages Some exercises Community Mapping Table: Keys to good program management Some recommended time frames 1 1 16 18 19 26-30 3 1

Annexes
Annex A: Annex B: Annex C: Annex D: Annex E: Annex F: Steps and considerations in designing a program Checklist for reviewing a program plan Guidelines for planning programs Results framework Log frames Critical review of program performance 32-35 36 37 38-42 43-46 47-50

Introduction
Programs are an organizations life blood. Without well-designed and well-managed programs, most organizations cannot achieve their goals, fulfill their missions, or see their visions become a reality. Good program design and management are even more important today as many organizations experience scarce and uncertain resources. Good programs as an index of organizational effectiveness, professionalism, and commitment may be the best way of convincing donors, communities, governments, and the private sector to invest in all aspects of an organizations growth and development. Moreover, good, clear, comprehensive planning can result in improved performance. A sound program plan provides a guide for effectively using human, material, and financial resources, enables organizations to track and document progress, clarifies desired outcomes, and reinforces common understandings and shared vision among key staff. Although the words program and project tend to be used interchangeably, there are differences. A program is the more comprehensive of the two, involving a series of interlocking activities or projects for the achievement of key organizational goals or strategic objectives. Programs tend to be longer term, such as an organizations commitment to providing services for adolescents, or its interest in quality health care service delivery, or its advocacy for more broad-based participation in political or governmental affairs. A project is a more discrete undertaking, usually focused on some aspect of the overall program (e.g., implementing or expanding community-based reproductive health (RH) services or developing an initiative to train teachers to provide accurate RH information). Nonetheless, a program is only as good as its constituent parts, and a project is only successful if it contributes to dynamic growth and progress. In this module, we will use both terms because the characteristics of well-designed, well-managed, and effective programs and projects are generally the same. Approaches for designing and implementing programs or projects have evolved. First, these processes require commitment and involvement of staff at all levels especially at the operational or implementation level. A program is vastly improved when all staff members have a stake in its success and feel that they have contributed to, or been heard in, the design process. Program design efforts may also contribute to team building and improve communications at all levels. Second, high level support, through the organizations leadership (see Series 1, Module 3), is also critical. But increasingly, for appropriateness and sustainability, community participation has been identified as an important aspect of the program design and implementation process. This module will enable a manager should be able to: Understand the various components of, and tools for, program design, implementation, and management. Recognize key elements in proposal preparation. Use participatory processes (both with staff and communities) more effectively. Understand the linkages between programs or projects and organizational goals or strategic objectives. Use various formats for planning, monitoring, or resource allocation (e.g., operational plans, Gantt charts, log frames) with greater ease. Recognize how well-designed program plans can be used to market the organization.

Before you design a program project

Have You:
Ensured that an adequate needs or other

assessments will occur before the project plan is developed? Reviewed the financial, technical, and staffing implications of the project? Does this project fit: Current organizational priorities? The organizations strategic directions? Current staff configuration? Shared your concept with staff and stakeholders at all levels including financial or administrative staff to ensure common commitment? Have you considered how each person or unit can or should be involved? Is a planning or proposal preparation team needed? Reviewed existing organizational systems to see what revisions, if any, will be needed? For example, can your MIS incorporate and track new indicators? (See Series 2, Module 4). Can your supervisory or logistics structures absorb new responsibilities? Determined what donors might be interested or what resource mobilization approaches must be in place before initiating the project? Proposed means of guaranteeing community or stakeholder involvement at every critical stage of development and implementation? Incorporated sustainability measures or activities into the design from its inception? Determined how to document project results or outcomes, and how to use them as a marketing tool for the organization? Assessed the environment? Are their many potential allies or competitors? Is the policy environment or framework conducive for implementing the proposed project or the organizations goals? Would the project benefit from high-level or highly visible support from outside?

Starting the Program Design Process

Each program or project must be developed in response to documented needs or problems in the community, region, or for the group to be served. Therefore, program justification depends on demonstrating a clear understanding of the problem and preparing a coherent, appropriate, relatively detailed set of proposed solutions. (See Annexes A, B, and C for step-by-step program design or development process guidelines and checklists).

Exercise: Whats the Problem?

A. Identify all major problems uncovered in your assessments, community diagnoses, surveys, or other data gathering activities. B. Rank each problem (Replace A, B, C in the chart below with the actual problem identified during assessments, e.g., A=poverty, B=lack of access, C=myths and misconceptions) against each criterion, using a numerical scale (1-3 or 1-5, with the higher numbers indicating a high degree of-or strong-linkages to criteria). Add the rankings for each problem; those with the highest scores are those you may wish to consider giving priority in the project. But be sure to use the exact terms from the assessments charts. (Do not limit yourself or your team to three choices only).
Criterion Severity Extent Within our control Feasibility Possibility of simple solution Relationship to organizational policy/mission Relationship to government advocacy Long-range impact Organizational image/influence
Adapted from CAFS: Family Planning Programme Management. Module VI, p.36

Problem A

Problem B

Problem C

C. Note that this is not a foolproof system; several problems may have similar totals despite very different ratings for the same criteria. And the problem with the highest score may simply not feel like the highest priority. It may be necessary to rank the criteria in order of priority, to decide which are the most important and give extra weight to them. Remember, different individuals and groups are highly likely to rank the same criteria differently. There is no perfect, objective system. But this exercise can be used to air and elaborate different views, reach consensus, or build your team.

Specific problem(s) to be addressed by the program should be clearly articulated and supported, whenever possible, by some baseline data. You should be able to: Describe the extent, scope, or severity of the problem, in order to put proposed results in perspective. Describe the geographic area and demographic characteristics of the population. Make an analysis of the causes of the problem. Describe results of previous efforts to solve the problems, by your or other organization(s). Identify intended beneficiaries, stakeholders, and principal actors (especially an organizations staff), or interested agencies.

Whats the Solution?

Based on your description of the problem(s), your design should be so clearly linked to problems solutions that it is easy to justify the design of your program, planned activities, resources requested, etc. Problems may be effectively addressed in a variety of ways. Those aspects of your approach which you think best address the problem should be emphasized. Your recommended solutions should be detailed enough to provide answers for the following questions. What approach(es) will you use and why have you chosen this approach or approaches over other possibilities? What other local organizations and donors are addressing this problem and how does the proposed approach complement their activities? If applicable, how will you coordinate with these other organizations?

How will target groups or communities specifically benefit, i.e., how will they be better off because of the program or project? What innovations can be expected? What tangible deliverables? How can it be replicated in other areas? What changes do you expect will result from this project? What sources of support are likely to be available to you for continuation of the program for the longer term?

Figure 1: Relationships Among Various Planning Levels

Strategic Plans Goals/Strategic Objectives Program Plans Programmatic Objectives/Tactics Project Plans Project Objectives Broad Activity Plans Targets Detailed Activity Plans Tasks

Adapted from CAFS: Family Planning Programme Management. Module V, p.31

Establishing Program Objectives

All programs need goals and strategic objectives. In different ways, each type of objective describes the results to be achieved by the project and the degree to which the problems described will be resolved. The activities outlined in the work plan will describe or set forth the processes or steps through which the results will be achieved.

Goals
Goals should describe in a broad, non-quantified manner, the long-term changes that will result from your work on identified problems. Normally a small number of goals (one or two) is sufficient to describe desired overall program outcomes.

Strategic Objectives
For each goal that you prepare, there will be a number of strategic objectives. These objectives can be annual or for the 2 3 year life of the program or project. These objectives relate to the problems and describe specific anticipated results, representing changes in knowledge, attitudes and behavior of the program participants or beneficiaries (e.g., to provide information and RH services to 6,200 adolescents by the end of the first year). These objectives will be directly linked to indicators and evaluation criteria to ensure the effectiveness of future evaluations.

Remember
All strategic objectives should be smart:

S pecific Measurable Appropriate Realistic Time bound

Projects and programs have a life cycle. There are many ways to describe the linkages between and flow of, project design and implementation activities. One of the best, illustrated below in Figure 2, has come from the Centre for Development and Population Activities (CEDPA). Figure 2: The Project Life Cycle

Assess Needs

6
Monitor and Evaluate Identify and Define Problems

Undertake Activities

Define Project Goal and Overall Strategy

Start-up Activities

Select Project Objectives

Determine Budget

Determine Activities and Prepare Workplan

Establish Recordkeeping System

Develop a Staffing and Training Plan

Develop Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Preparing a Detailed Work Plan

This section outlines the step-by-step schedule of work, or work plan, needed to accomplish program objectives. The work plan provides the project staff and stakeholders with a clear picture of their responsibilities and the activities scheduled during the program period. The work plan may change during the project period, but it remains a vital aid to proper program management. In developing a work plan, one should always think ahead to a proposal able to describe, and solicit resources for the program. The work plan should be complete enough to allow you to: a. Describe clear actions to be undertaken [a narrative]; b. Indicate [step-by-step] what will occur and in what sequence or priority order; who will be responsible, involved, beneficiaries; what will be measured or monitored and how it will be monitored; which resources are needed; what outcomes are expected [detailed work plan, log frame, Gantt chart, chronogram]; and c. Outline innovations, model approaches, new initiatives [e.g., income generation strategies, uniquely tailored approaches based on target group or community needs, developing/testing new materials, etc.]

Tips and Tools...A Format for Project Planning

Outlining Project Activities
Describe and place or list each project activity in the sequential order it will occur. Sequence is very important since it will show that you have thought through the implementation issues, determined which are fundamental, and logically organized what should happen next for maximum effectiveness. This also allows you to determine whether the budget is appropriate for the project and to see how the specific objectives will be achieved. It helps to think about the following:

Staffing
Summaries of job descriptions for key program staff, including their relationship to the existing organizational structure. A program staff organizational chart.

Implementation
Description of major activities to be carried out, answering the questions what, where, by whom and when? Description of the management systems supporting these activities (e.g., supervision, integrated service delivery, quality assurance, training, management information system, financial management etc.).

Justification of Budget Items

Justifications of items contained in the budget which are critical to the achievement of stated objectives (for example, hiring a trainer to train new fieldworkers). The work plan should be specific enough to make the need for each budget item evident.

Inputs by Others
Activities which must be completed by staff, consultants or other outside sources in order for the project to proceed on schedule. (For example, assistance from community groups in selecting community-based RH Workers (CBRHWs) or a graphic artist to prepare additional IEC materials). Areas which require technical assistance.

2. Logframe, Gantt Chart, Detailed Workplan, Chronogram

A written, detailed work plan chart (using one of these formats see, for example, Figure 3 must be prepared. To prepare a work plan, Program Managers must outline the major activities, define responsibilities, clarify the budget, and understand the sequence of events necessary for project monitoring and implementation.

A complete work plan is a condensed description of project activities. At a single glance, the work plan enables program planners to perceive the work load of each staff member and to ensure that staff with multiple responsibilities are available when needed.

3.

Income Generating and Other Innovations

Increasingly, programs are required to demonstrate how they will sustain themselves after program funding ends. Sustainability may be achieved in several ways including: a. Income generation by some means (e.g., fees for services, sales of materials, charges for training, etc.). b. On-going community support (e.g., a community agreement to contribute funds or inkind donations, such as labor or materials) to sustain an activity. c. Turning over to the government or some other larger agency to maintain or replicate program activities. Resources generated may be used to: Support program activities as defined in work plan; Support future program activities; Support complementary activities at any time during the life of the program. Creating and promoting innovations within the program is another, more indirect, way of sustaining program activities. To the extent that an organization is known as a cutting edge innovator or pioneer, other donors may become interested in investing resources to sustain its

Figure 3: Illustrative Year One Program Work Plan

Strategic Objective: Timeline Person(s) Responsible 9 10 11 12 Resources Needed Expected Outcomes

Proposed Activities

Time Frame/Month 6 7 8

activities. The donor diversification approach cannot be overlooked by organizations that often focus on marginalized, disadvantaged, underserved groups which cannot afford service fees or to make donations to sustain even needed programs. In designing programs, staff and managers should be alert to opportunities to attract local corporations or in-kind donations. For example, local corporations seeking to appear as good corporate citizens may donate funds, or items that can defray costs and help stretch an organizations resources (e.g. art supplies for a poster contest; booths for a health fair; printing of IEC materials; T-shirts or other give-aways; technical resource persons; pharmaceuticals or other supplies; etc.) The ability of a project to generate income or other support, and to increase the amount of income or support raised in succeeding years, will help greatly in determining that projects ability to continue without external assistance.

Programmatic Assessment
Plans for monitoring and evaluating a program must be developed. Monitoring and evaluation are usually the joint responsibility of staff at all levels and of a specific donor.

Monitoring
Monitoring is a regular review of program activities conducted by program or project personnel. From time to time, a donor may also conduct monitoring visits. Monitoring the program ensures that there is adequate progress being made on the work plan and helps to determine the following: whether the work is on schedule; if the general and specific objectives will be achieved; and, if the program is deviating from the original goals and objectives. Monitoring also enables managers to see whether the budget is being followed, document the reason why it is not being followed and determine whether revisions are needed. While some monitoring will occur daily as part of the general program administration, a monitoring plan should be developed and include at least the following information: How and when the program or other staff (e.g., financial staff) will monitor program activities, including a specific written, widely circulated schedule or a plan with tentative dates. A list of the personnel who will be involved in monitoring the program and their specific monitoring responsibilities. Proposed time for site visits by senior staff (e.g., Program Coordinator or Executive Director) or donors, and purposes of visits. Annex F contains a simple monitoring format called a Critical Review of Program Performance that may also assist managers and staff in problem-solving and determining which program components are underperforming or in need of urgent or more sustained attention.

10

Table 1 provides some methods for data collection. Can you and your team think of others?
Method/Instrument Questionnaire Advantages Questions can be structured to yield exact data sought, without extraneous data Can be self-administered (saves time and money) Supervisory Checklist Provides information on daily activities, problems, needs, permits specific feedback. Also facilitates gathering of data on performance (e.g.,service statistics Provides observer with information on actual events Can be combined with checklist for increased accuracy Interview (Community Leaders, Local Facility Team Members or Workers, Clients or Customers) Review of Records and Reports Interviewer can dialogue with respondent for greater depth of understanding Much information is readily available for extracting desired data Can yield qualitative data which requires probing Allows respondents to express opinions and feelings better than structured interviews or questionnaires Group members can augment each others information Reports of Inventories and Activities in Government or Other Facilities Easy to obtain information from records in the Ministry or visits to facilities (public, NGO, or private sector) Number grades are easily found in annual reports and staff returns Respondent may provide answers he/she thinks interviewer wants to hear Records might be outdated, incomplete, or inaccurate creating gaps in data Method requires that interviewer have considerable skill in handling groups Individual group members might talk too much or too little, biasing responses or results Disadvantages If self-administered, respondent is unable to clarify, expand on issues Cannot be self-administered by semi-or illiterate respondents Existing checklists may not include desired data elements and may not be properly used

Observation Visit

Observers presence may influence activities and bias data

11

Focus Group Discussions

Team building may be necessary

Ministry records may be incomplete or inaccurate Facility visits can be costly Analysing attitudes requires research skills and considerable time

Analysis of Grades and Attitudes of Staff Members

Managers and staff planning programs may also review other data and information in preparing their programs. These include: Organizational strategic plans or annual reports Government surveys, e.g., Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) Census Data National sector-specific or multisectoral plans (e.g., Poverty Alleviation Plans) Evaluation reports of on going projects Annual program reports from governmental and private sector programs and projects Global/country inventories and reports (UNFPA, USAID, WHO, UNICEF, UNIFEM, UNAIDS, World Bank) Survey data (including rapid needs and baseline assessments, knowledge, attitudes, and practices [KMAP] studies, exit interview surveys or feedback from clients and customers) Outputs from community participatory processes Maps, such as those used in malaria control programs or HIV/AIDS sentinel surveillance

Question:
How many more sources and methods of data collection can you and your team think of? What additional methods to generate useful data will be included in the program plan? How will you use the data you generate?

12

Evaluation
A plan for assessing program achievements during and after implementation is vital to measuring the overall program success. The program evaluation will analyze the implementation process (completion of planned activities), as well as the impact (longterm changes) that the program has had on the target population. Staff should know in advance the information and the plan that will be used to measure and document the programs achievements. The accomplishment of stated objectives will be reviewed by the program personnel and donors at the time that the program is slated to end, or at other designated points within the program period.

Evaluation Criteria
To facilitate program evaluation, criteria on which the evaluation will be based should be determined. The criteria should be Directly related to previously established objectives.

 The basis for evaluation instruments, protocols, and formats. Measurable, observable or otherwise capable of being documented. Designed to facilitate dissemination of results, lessons learned, and replicable models. Evaluation criteria can be presented in chart form, leaving spaces to indicate the percentage of achievement of stated objectives and the percentage increase or decrease against established baseline data.

Evaluation Plan
A specific plan for carrying out the evaluations during and after implementation should describe or identify: Who will perform the evaluation (if an outside consultant will be hired or additional staff time allocated, include line items in budget showing expense). General qualifications of the evaluator. When or at what intervals during the program the evaluation(s) will occur. What specific indicators have been routinely monitored, and what data are generated against these indicators. How and when data on indicators and other collateral data will be collected and submitted, and what formats or tools will be used. How and when data will be analyzed and reported. How evaluation findings will be reported, used or disseminated during and after program implementation.

13

Reporting on Your Program

Program staff are generally required to report at regular intervals on program progress and finances, providing detailed information on program implementation. Narrative reports should refer directly to the stated objectives, work plan and evaluation criteria and include a description and analysis of program progress. Achievements, challenges, levels of service, and constraints should be highlighted. Information that will be gathered and reported should be specified, along with timing of reports. Program narratives must usually be accompanied by a detailed financial or income expenditure report. Often, donors will have specific formats for financial reports. Program reports are usually required on a quarterly basis (every 3 months), but this may be adjusted according to the programs work plan. Quarterly reports should summarize program activities, such as: service delivery data; training; IEC activities (where applicable); community outreach or joint activities; consultation with other stakeholders or allies; and innovative initiatives or events (e.g., income generating, advocacy, community sponsored events such as health fairs or public policy forums). Reporting formats and other routine data collection instruments or protocols should be established as part of an organizations MIS. Once appropriate procedures and formats are in place, they should govern aspects of an organizations regular program/project report mechanisms. Reporting requirements should be harmonized so that they are consistent across programs/projects and throughout

the organizations network (i.e., if an organization has multiple projects in multiple sites, it should try as much as possible to harmonize procedures and formats. Organizations should be proactive to negotiate interlocking approaches to data collection and reporting that satisfy multiple donor requirements or needs whenever possible). This often requires substantial donor coordination.

Process PointsRemember the Steps

Study the reality Assessment Identify priority problems Analysis of Problems StrategyTactics Opportunities for NGO/its allies PROGRAM PLAN Goal Purpose Problems/Solutions Outputs (Objectives) Resources Activities Budget/Resources Needed

Develop programs Review Tactics

14
Implement Program Implement Monitoring Systems

Program organization, management and administration

Systems for monitoring implementation

Evaluate/ Disseminate

Evaluation system

Reprogram

Program reviewed and new projects identified

Participatory Planning Processes

Increasingly, communities are expecting or demanding more inclusive program planning, implementation, and monitoring approaches. Moreover, program design based on principles and strategies of equity, participation, empowerment, ownership, and solidarity often yield more sustainable programs over time. In adhering to these principles, community-based or development organizations may also emerge with strengthened management or advocacy capacity. To the extent that NGOs integrate community stakeholders into ongoing program processes, activities are usually more locally appropriate, widely supported, and likely to achieve desired results or outcomes. Some of these principles have been systematized, validated, and included in various workbooks, handbooks, or monographs. Two of the most well-known are Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) and Participatory Rural Appraisal and Planning (PRAP). These methodologies are generally adapted by NGOs in planning with volunteers or community residents whether or not they are organized into a formal structure. Usually, participatory processes are geared to ensure rapid but systematic, accurate and revealing analyses and problem solving. This is so, in part, because many community participants have other jobs and responsibilities, with only limited time to spare for such exercises. They also emphasize speed because skeptical participants often need to be convinced that they can truly help shape beneficial processes and programs. Protracted processes often make participants wary or cynical about longer-term prospects. A good manager will use participatory processes to strengthen program implementation and sustainability. This section of the module describes participatory processes generically and suggests some exercises that might be used, or adapted, with community residents. Some of these same approaches can be used with target group members to solicit their inputs, priorities, and preferences. The keys here are: creativity, dialogue, receptivity, and responsiveness. In other words, be open to the processes and adapt them as needed in local contexts where you, or the organization, are working. The dividends will be many!

15

Remember
Participatory processes include methodologies that help to identify community problems and plan solutions with the active participation of community members. They allow for rapid and systematic: Description and analysis of the community and its context. Identification of problems and potential solutions. Project design and programming of activities for project implementation. Enlistment of community residents in supporting the project. Analyses of feasibility and prospects for sustainability.

Participatory processes are not a panacea. In fact, they may raise several logistical, design, and implementation issues. They are often difficult to start because of issues of trust, lack of familiarity with program implementers, intra-community rivalries, engrained gender biases, and the multiplicity of problems, especially in disadvantaged communities. NGO program officers may also have their own biases and preferences. To facilitate participatory processes, one must be entirely open to the possibility that what emerges is not expected! Table 1 below outlines some of the advantages and the disadvantages of participatory processes.1 Figure 4:
ADVANTAGES Extremely useful for community mobilization, since it is carried out in communities by community members. It also can help raise awareness of problems and trends. Uses visual techniques for gathering, analyzing, and presenting data that makes these data more accessible. Promotes active and sustained participation of community members in identifying problems and promoting solutions. Promotes grassroots, sustainable development by allowing community members to search for solutions in accordance with local criteria and priorities in areas such as technical and social feasibility, sustainability, cost, and role of participants. Strengthens collaboration between the community and external organizations. Promotes realistic solutions or proposals. Promotes reductions in gender and age biases by integrating diverse groups into the processes. Is relatively low in cost and rapid. Assists NGO program or development workers to grasp realities that they and the communities confront. Cedes some measure of control over program design to the intended beneficiaries. Is based on first-hand, rather than derivative, information, including local knowledge, values, and needs. Encourages systematic processes for the long term. DISADVANTAGES Can raise false expectations of total control within the community, especially over financial or other program resources. Can lead to expectations of quick fixes or immediate attention to identified problems. Can generate false or misleading information based on communities desire to convince NGO officials. Can affect the level and quality of trust because the exercises are rapid and not designed, initially, to foster relationships. Can falter because of overbearing, inexperienced facilitation by NGO workers. The workers must facilitate only instead of conducting the exercises FOR the community. This is often difficult to do. Can fail because of difficulties in communication (including language) or vastly different levels of sophistication. Sometimes difficult for community residents to grasp and use effectively. Can fail because communities are just not interested or cynical. Levels and quality of community participation may fluctuate widely from visit to visit or in differing locales. Some community leaders may seek to hijack the process for their own purposes. Sometimes it is difficult to see the larger picture and help participants relate their issues to district, regional, or even national trends because processes are localized. Desired diversity within groups of participants may not always be possible.

16

Participatory processes may not only help NGO workers develop more effective programs. They may, in fact, lead to specific proposals (or amendments) to the program being proposed. Local institutions may increase their capacity, and a body of suggestive data describing the community and its structures, problems or needs may be created. More important, many
Based on Selener, D. Endara, N. Carvajal, J. Participatory Rural Appraisal and Planning Workbook. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction. Quito. Equador. 1999
1

communities may feel more empowered to act or advocate on their own behalf, thereby resulting in implementation of more sustainable alternatives.

Some practical considerations in using participatory processes

1. Incorporate discussion about participatory processes as part of your entry strategy for a community or even an alliance of CBOs and NGOs. Discuss the concept and ascertain whether it is feasible or desirable from the point of view of potential partners. Use participatory processes to supplement data gathering from the earliest stages. For example, assemble groups of community members to help you map or diagnose target areas. Include them in focus group discussions (FGDs) or interviews with other residents. Ensure open and full participation to the extent possible. Let your partners know that you want to hear diverse views so that the program has the widest possible appeal or impact. At the same time, be sensitive to local traditions and customs that may shape how participating groups are organized or facilitated. Think about numbers. Is it feasible or possible to facilitate a large group? Are smaller groups preferable? Do local organizations have the capacity to assist? Is this a good time to strive for public-private partnerships? Choose your facilitator(s) carefully and be open to the prospect of cofacilitation with community leaders or residents. The facilitator should maintain a respectful attitude at all times, an attitude sometimes described as equal to equal. The facilitator should not interject his or her opinions or hoped for outcomes into discussions or exercises. The facilitator should have some experience and be able to set the stage and explain why an exercise is useful, what is to be done, and how the outputs will be used. Most critically, the facilitator should be open to the possibility that his or her expectations are contrary to participants wishes or priorities. Structure the participatory processes by using a wide variety of exercises and techniques. Try to make the sessions lively and engaging, and help those who may be uncertain or shy recognize that they are equally valued participants in the processes. Make sure that process outcomes are brought back to the NGO and to the community so participants know what has been done with their inputs. Find ways to conduct the planning processes or exercises in the community. This is essential! Be prepared to allocate enough time before, during, and after the initial processes are conducted. For example, it may take time to determine where, when, and how to conduct such processes, and whom. The answers may be different depending on what is to be done (e.g., planning

2.

3.

4.

17

5.

6.

7. 8.

versus monitoring or evaluation). The average planning meeting lasts between two and three days; most exercises take between two and four hours. A lot will depend on the skills of the facilitator and the receptivity of participants. 9. Be sensitive to gender concerns. Often, processes involving decisions about programs or development initiatives are left to men, or in the case of reproductive health, viewed as the province of women. Care should be taken to integrate both sexes into participatory processes as potential change agents. In many instances, including younger people is also advised. The diverse perspectives and world views will enrich program design and implementation and potentially increase impact. 10. Think about the possibility of having a community interlocutor that is, someone or a representative from an organization that is respected throughout the community. This interlocutor can explain exactly what is intended by participatory processes, and help the facilitators or NGO workers interpret what is being shared by participants. The right interlocutor can also help legitimize the process and refine or apply its results.

Some Exercises

18 I. Community Mapping
One of the most common exercises is community mapping. This exercise can be very revealing in that it may help program implementers know how and where to target their activities. It may also give some clues about the kinds of problems the community is facing. Community mapping may be done by individuals or small teams. A sample map is found on the next page. The technique is simple: a. Ask participants whether they would like to work as individuals or in teams. If the group is very large, teams are preferable. b. Provide newsprint, blank paper, or even transparencies and pens to participants. c. If there is time, or the venue is fairly localized, the participants may wish to conduct a walkabout around the community before making their map(s). d. Ask participants to draw and label the major features of their communities and add or highlight its demographics. e. Review the resulting maps in a plenary or roundtable discussion. f. Ask participants to list and agree on the major issues, institutions, and needs affecting their communities. Ask them also to rank these in priority order. g. Review the maps again in light of this prioritization and ask participants to select the most accurate map(s). At this stage, the group may wish to re-draw the map to reflect their discussions. h. Describe how the NGO may use the maps to direct its program.

Frans Map here

19

II.

Institutional Relationships

This is an exercise in which participants show how external public and private sector organizations (including your own) intersect their lives and prospects. The exercise also shows what institutions are active in the community and how they are perceived. It also may suggest good alliances or resource sharing opportunities. a. Conduct a brainstorming exercise to identify influential institutions and individuals. These should then be prioritized. b. On a piece of large paper, place the identified institutions at their proper locations inside a circle representing the community. Major institutions should always be labelled. c. Each institution can be drawn ( e.g., drawing a church with a stuple to represent a major religious institution in the community) or represented by a square . The size and position of the square may reflect how important (or unimportant) participants think the institution or individual is. For example, if an institution is very important (e.g., the church, a health care facility, a school), it should be closer to the center and larger. If it is more peripheral, it should be at the edge of the larger circle representing the community. d. Participants should be encouraged to draw the linkages among the institutions or individuals using lines or arrows. For example, if one of the institutions sponsors micro-credit projects, it may be linked to the large market that occurs three times a week. Participants may want to note on the line linking the market with the microcredit that they provide funds for market women. Another possible linkage is between the health care facility and community-based health workers.

20

III.

Preference Matrix

Participants may be encouraged to prepare a preference matrix in which they 1) identify key problems and 2) prioritize solutions. This is almost akin to a series of voting exercises as participants discuss, debate, and reach consensus about preferred approaches. a. Participants prepare a matrix using a large piece of newsprint. They brainstorm a list of the priority problems and write them on the left side. (Note: this can be the same list of problems emerging from the discussion on mapping.) Refer to the sample matrix below. b. Across the top of the matrix, participants list a number of more generic solutions (e.g., implement income generating activities, build advocacy skills, strengthen local organizations, etc.). c. Participants then vote on the best solution(s) to the identified problems. d. Participants can also go further and outline simple plans of action to make sure that solutions are implemented. e. Sample matrix:

Issues/Problems Identified

Proposed Solutions Income Gen. Better Health Strengthening Advocacy/ (IGA) Care CBOs Sensitization # Participants voting for this solution as a priority

Improved Education

a. Poverty

b. Declining health status c. High unemployment, high risk behavior for youth d. Limited public sector inputs, support e. Poor environmental sanitation f. Traditional practices that are no longer useful, safe

IV.

Problem Tree

This exercise may be especially useful in a rural community. It is basically a drawing of a tree which shows 1) a significant problem; 2) its main effects; and 3) its root causes. a. The group draws a diagram of a tree with branches and roots and puts the main problem on the trunk. b. The group then fills in the branches with the effects of this problem and shows the overall effect or most significant consequence in the tree top. c. The group then brainstorms about the root causes. They should write these causes into the roots of the tree. d. The group should then list the most important, feasible, or effective proposed solutions. These should be listed in priority order. The matrix above can also be used to stimulate a discussion and selection of the best solutions. If the group has time, it can draw more than one tree, or it can outline specific action steps to be taken to implement solutions.

21

Summary
Participatory processes should not be limited to entry or early stages of implementation. They can be used at every critical juncture of the program design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation stages. What is important is that you and the organization agree on and have: Clear goals and objectives for community participation at each stage. Clear roles, responsibilities, functions, and procedures. Clear activities related to overall program objectives, including those set by the community in earlier consultative or participatory processes. As a manager, you should use participatory processes as advocacy and sustainability tools, relying on strong community support to ensure desired outcomes. Participatory processes

should not be static. Rather, they should respond to community perceptions and reinforce communication and information flow within the community and between the community and your organization. Where possible, community participation should be guided by, and build upon, existing community structures and organizations. There may be times, however, when participation can be maximized by facilitating or creating a new coalition or structure designed to assist in program implementation and sustainable development. Let the community be your guide

Proposal Development
A proposal is a vehicle for an organizations search for resources to improve services to its constituency. In many instances, public and private sector donor agencies are explicit about the guidelines that apply to applications for financial or other support. In those instances, it is advisable to comply with the guidelines as stated. But what if there are no guidelines? And what if the organization has limited experience in preparing proposals? What if you as a manager are unsure whether the expenditure of time and effort to prepare a proposal is truly worth it? There are some tips to preparing sound proposals and budgets. One of the first is the five cs : be creative, clear, complete, comprehensive, and concrete. A sixth c might be careful consideration of the consequences of your proposal. In other words, whats the potential impact? Aside from improved services for communities or target groups, a good proposal may have benefits for the organization beyond the funds awarded including2 : Enhanced credibility Identification of deficiencies in your organizations planning Better use of internal resources Strengthening staff skills and building and effective team planning Improved record-keeping or other systems Clarity of goals and strategic objectives Increased knowledge of the technical areas and the locations or groups to be served Better program evaluations Improved financial management

22

Before undertaking preparation of a proposal, an organizational commitment should be clear. That is, the proposal should be consistent with the mission, strategic plan, and organizational
Adapted from Kiritz, Norton J. Program Planning and Proposal Writing. The Grantsmanship Center. Washington, DC. 1980.
2

What are the components of a good proposal?

A. Strong, concise (and even eloquent) summary of the request. B. Good solid introduction that describes your organizations structure, track record, achievements, credibility, and outreach. C. Thorough assessment of the problems the program will address. D. Description of the solutions being proposed. E. Set of goals and specific strategic objectives that outlines benefits from funding in tangible, measurable terms. F. Brief narrative expanding on the work plan and the activities that will be employed to achieve desired results. Sustainability or income generation initiatives should also be described here. G. Work Plan (or Gantt or chronogram) chart that shows activities, time frames, persons responsible, resources required, expected results. H. Monitoring and evaluation plans that outline indicators for measuring progress, the degree to which objectives are met, plans for documentation and dissemination, and roles or responsibilities for all major participants. I. Clear, complete budget showing relative contributions of all donors and the organization and linked to Work Plan or other organizational plans such as those outlining strategic or sustainability directions.

niche. The proposal preparation process should engage staff at all levels, since few organizations have full-time Development or Fund-Raising Directors: Those preparing the proposal should have access to organizational decision-makers so that they can be confident that what is being proposed has support throughout the organization. Finance and program staff should be integrated throughout the proposal preparation exercise. Too often, these very important staff perspectives and skills function in isolation from one another, with the result that neither group is aware of the views and concerns of the other. Outcomes of community participatory processes should also be used to enrich the proposal. This does not mean that proposal writers should not use creativity. In fact, innovative approaches or models that address major problems are often deemed more worthy of funding than business as usual. What matters is that the plan is coherent, solid, and comprehensible to those who are reviewing it. Tactically, it is sometimes useful to meet with potential donors before you have a plan of action or proposal in mind. In this way, you can have a more comprehensive and free discussion that may yield valuable information about donor preferences and strategic directions. You might also ask for copies of the donors guidelines or examples of programs that have been funded. Visits to, or conversations with, donor-funded organizations may be very helpful. Involving your Board of Directors or volunteers in these meetings can also be useful. Often, they are influential persons who are recognized by the donor; their association with your cause can only help. Also, they may have personal donor contacts or relationships that can smooth the way for proposal consideration. Finally, you might write a letter to a donor outlining your concept and ascertaining their interest by their response. This is to be distinguished from the letter that accompanies, or

23

serves as, a full proposal. Such a letter must be extremely clear and concise. It should tell who you are, describe the problem you are seeking to address, and outline your plan of action. Innovations should be highlighted. The letter also must indicate what level/amount of funding you are seeking. The CEO, Chair of the Board, President, or Executive Director or your organization should sign such a letter.

Tips and ToolsA Proposal Preparation Checklist

The following checklist may assist you in remembering the kinds of steps or information that should be included in the proposal preparation process.

Proposal Summary
Clearly identifies the grant applicant and its qualifications/credibility. Includes at least one sentence on the problem. Includes at least one sentence on objectives. Includes at least one sentence on proposed activities. Includes a chart clearly showing inputs or funds needed and expected results. Is brief, interesting, and clear.

24

Proposal Introduction
Clearly establishes who is applying for the funds (e.g., clearly describes the organizations structure, purpose, goals, programs, clients, and credibility). Offers specific evidence of, and/or statistics on, achievements. Specifically demonstrates credibility in areas for which funds are sought. Leads logically into the problem and solution statements. Is brief, interesting, free of jargon, and relevant.

Problem Statement
Relates to the organizations mission and goals. Is reasonable, feasible, and within the organizations capabilities. Is supported by statistical evidence particularly related to target communities or groups. This is a good opportunity to use participatory processes to develop a rich and evocative problem statement. Should not make unsupported assumptions. Is free of cliches, jargon, and meaningless phrases.

Program Objectives
Are SMART. Quantify specific program-related outcomes (describe in numerical terms). Clarify the group(s) to be served, trained, informed, assisted, facilitated, included, and supported. Make clear the number of items to be produced, introduced, or created in a set period of time. Demonstrate the progression or progress over time using charts as needed.

Activities Section (or Work Plan Narrative)

Flows naturally from problem, solution, and objective descriptions. Describes major activities clearly and in sequence. Identifies clients, target groups, or target locations/communities. Outlines participatory processes. Demonstrates sustainability measures or plans, including IGA. Describes staffing, systems or procedures, and program innovations. Links with the Work Plan chart (or chronogram) and budget. That is, no activity should appear in the narrative that does not appear in the chart or the budget. If an activity has a specific number of participants (e.g., a training exercise for 20 persons), the cadre or number to be trained, the duration of the training, and the persons to do the training should be identified. This will help make budgeting and monitoring more specific and accurate. It is not necessary to provide an exhaustive description of each training curriculum.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Covers outcomes or results and processes. Clearly describes who will be monitoring and at what intervals, who will be evaluating and what criteria will be used to select evaluators. Identifies clients, target groups, or target locations/communities. Lists key indicators and evaluation criteria. The proposal does not have to list each and every indicator but should show how indicators will be used (e.g., incorporated into the MIS, turned into checklists, subjects of staff training in data for decision-making). Describes reporting requirements, intervals, and production (e.g., monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, annually), by whom and to whom. Feedback mechanisms should also be described. Shows how report, monitoring, review, and evaluation findings will be used to improve program design or performance, to validate approaches or requests for new funding, to document lessons learned, better practices, and replicable models, and for advocacy. Outlines ways in which these functions will result in community participation and review. Preparation of budgets is covered in Series 2, Module 3. Program Management

25

Program Management
Throughout these modules, there are tips and techniques that can help you improve your program management. They will not be re-stated here. However, there are some important management activities related specifically to programs or projects that should become second nature to effective managers and staff teams. Here are some of them.

Keys to Good Program Management

Program Element Assessments, baselines, surveys, community diagnoses, participatory process outputs

Management Tips Schedule and conduct studies before the program is designed. Incorporate community into the processes. Institutionalize use of resulting data for planning, services to target groups, decisionmaking, budgets. Identify all agencies working in com-munity. Ensure data are part of your MIS. For a program lasting over three years, consider a mid-term review.

Who is Involved Staff who will manage the program Community members Consultants (if you are not sure you have adequate skills levels among staff) Partners

What Outcomes A data base that can be used to gauge progress and performance Basis for more sensitive and appropriate designs, procedures Program priorities based on solid data New information about trends, attitudes, knowledge, practices, players Identification of target groups (e.g., adolescents and men) and opportunities for multi-sector programs More efficient operations Better coverage More technically proficient staff More clear roles and responsibilities More accurate job descriptions Improved staff morale

26

Staffing

Re-examine organization chart. Review job descriptions. Determine whether your staff has the requisite skills for the program. Prepare a staff deployment plan for the program and determine if the number of staff is adequate. If not, check budget to see if recruitment is feasible. Institute staff development and training if needed.

Board of Directors Human Resources Manager Senior Staff Trainers (if on board)

Program Element Orientation/ Sensitization

Management Tips Include sensiti-zation of community leaders, influentials, and policy makers as part of program design. Provide comprehensive staff orientation on program elements, requirements, objectives, results. Consider consultative meetings or brief orientations for potential partners, community structures. Consider capacity building linkages and interventions for Advisory Committees, CBOs or partners with potential. Use to support monitoring and supervision Transform into a checklist. Incorporate sustainability strategies into Work Plan from program inception. Conduct monthly update meetings on progress, problems at all levels and annual review meetings. These can include partners/ primary beneficiaries. Ensure that Work Plan activities are fully budgeted Dont just sit at your desk. Go out and see for yourself! Implement oral and written feedback mechanisms.

Who is Involved Senior Staff Community, NGO, CBO leaders Trainers, consultants, facilitators Local authorities

What Outcomes Policy makers Increased awareness and program support Consensus about problems, solutions More informed staff Linkages and coordination mechanisms

27
Senior Staff Line managers Community workers Partners Community Structures Donors Explicit plans of action Improved monitoring, supervision, reporting, resource allocation, mobilization Better staff team work More clear community perceptions about program directions, deliverables, outcomes Better staff deployment and coverage More sustainable programs

Work Plan

Program Element Work Plan (continued)

Management Tips Make sure program indicators are integrated into MIS. Make sure the Plan is clear about planned activities person/units responsible resources needed expected results inputs from others Develop and enforce schedules at all levels. Incorporate and systematically feedback mechanisms. Consider team supervision. Incorporate supervisory observations into staff appraisals. Use supervision to identify/address staff deficiencies, provide skills transfer, training and TA Modify or simplify supervisory or monitoring tools for use by community members. Institute joint monitoring and supervision with program staff, partners, community members when planning. Use a variety of supervisory tools, techniques to assist staff and workers. Review outputs from other systems (e.g., MIS) and previous visits before conducting new visits. Document supervisory findings in written reports to files or senior staff. Use findings from supervisory or monitoring visits to suggest budget/ staffing changes.

Who is Involved

What Outcomes

Supervision and Monitoring

Staff at all levels Community members Directors Donors Partners and collaborators Technical resource persons

28

Improved performance Better supervisorstaff interactions. Improved problemsolving More effective skills transfer, training, and technical assistance More specific data about program progress and problems Increased community participation and support

Program Element Reporting

Management Tips Make sure your reports are accurate, clear, comprehensive, timely Follow guidelines for reporting. Try and harmonize various reporting requirements when funded by multiple donors. Give and respond to feedback on reports. Compare reports on programmatic activities with the work plan and those on finances with the budget. Help staff at all levels to analyze and use data and reports for decisionmaking. Remember that stock, supplies, equipment inventories, fixed assets should also be reported on systematically. Prepare annual reports highlighting accomplishments, innovations, and challenges. Consider using multimedia technologies when reporting on your program (e.g., videos, photos, audio cassettes, Power Point presentations, etc.) Review the budget side by side with the work plan, reports. Ensure budgets are adequate. Provide training so program staff can understand rudimentary financial management.

Who is Involved Managers, supervisors, staff at all levels Board of Directors Regulatory bodies Donors Community structures Technicians Storekeeper(s) or supply clerks

What Outcomes Clear records on program income, expenditures, activities, achievements, and constraints. Useful data for marketing, advocacy, modeling. More efficient and targeted resource procurement and allocation. Timely data that can be used to pin-point, solve problems. Improved donor coordination. Better information flow within the organization.

29

Budget

Chief Executive Officer Financial Director Board of Directors Managers Donors Community structures Technical resource persons

Increased ability to project program resource needs. Clear, more complete information about feasibility because program and financial planning/management integrated.

Program Element Budget (continued)

Management Tips Integrate financial personnel into all aspects of program design, planning, implementation, monitoring, reporting, review, and re-design. Keep financial records rigorously up to date. Insist on capabilities for generating income and expenditure statements or balance sheets at any interval. Make sure adequate financial controls are in place, including adherence to budgets. Make separate budgets for special initiatives contained within the plan (e.g., events, training courses) Link budgeting and financial management to your MIS. Segregate income generated from grant funds. Make resource mobilization (grants, in-kind, community) a shared team responsibility. Use guidance in this module to improve proposal development. Seek, implement, scale up, or replicate innovative program models. Invite donors, policy makers and others to review your programs regularly. Make proposals responsive to local needs, concerns.

Who is Involved

What Outcomes Increased ability to anticipate, fill fund gaps. Improved managerial efficiency and effectiveness. Increased accountability and transparency.

30

Resource Mobilization

Chief Executive Officer Board of Directors Managers Technical resource persons Community members Public-private partnerships or coalitions Director of Development or Fund-raising if in work force.

More resources available to meet organizational, community goals and objectives. Scaling up or replication of innovations, effective models. A better organizational image or more influence. Improved advocacy. Increased sustainability through community support or diversification of an organizations resource base. Better, more accessible services for the hard-to-reach or at risk.

Some Recommended Time Frames

Activity Monitoring and Supervisory Visits Interval Senior Staff at least quarterly Line Managers at least monthly Board of Directors/Donors at least annually Community members at least quarterly Financial Director at least quarterly As set out in donor guidelines Financial at least monthly Field workers at least monthly CEO to Board at least quarterly Organization-wide Annual Report annually

Reporting

Inventories

Stock, supplies at least monthly Equipment, fixed assets at least annually At least annually

Operational Assessments (e.g. systems effectiveness: MIS, quality assurance, supervision/ monitoring, financial management, personnel, facilities, staff deployment) Program design review

31

At least semi-annually (every six months) with full-scale review and planning exercise annually Monthly, based on income and expenditure reports Oral every six months Written annually [Use work plans, job descriptions, supervisory reports] Usually quarterly

Budget Review

Staff Appraisals

Advisory Committee/ Board Meetings Community Participatory Processes

At critical junctures in the program process (e.g., assessments, planning, resource mobilization, monitoring, evaluation). As part of annual program review

Annex A: Steps and Considerations in Designing a Program

Step # 1 Identifying Critical Programmatic Issues and Trends

Entry strategy and approach
Broad consultation, tailored to the context but including community (religious, civic, womens, youth, union, mens, or sports groups, etc.) leaders, potential stakeholders, local government officials, other service providers in your area of specialization.

32

Rely on
Local staff Previous project experience Potential or previous stakeholders Strategic plan targets Demographic data Existing services

Step # 2 Identifying stakeholders/ partners/target groups

Approach
Conduct joint problem identification activities.

Rely On
Approaches with joint problem identification, problem solving activities e.g., Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) or Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) Particular needs assessment (i.e., training, facilities/infrastructure, institutional capacity building, IEC/behavior change communication (BCC), service delivery, quality) Observations

 Simple, targeted questionnaires Community forums Discuss/create ongoing consultative mechanisms for existing or new programs. Identify resource needs and existing organizational/community capacity (tie to technical assistance or other responses to build capacity as required). Examine policy/strategic implications. Identify groups most affected by problems or most in need of services (e.g., poor, disadvantaged, high transmitters, hard-to-reach).

Step # 3 Create a range of options

Approach
Prepare and discuss detailed alternative solutions to identified problems. Set priorities among proposed solutions. Test feasibility/appropriateness of tactics or options. Identify potential partners and target groups (including segmentation within groups e.g., differences in approach between adolescent boys and girls). Relate options and tactics to Strategic Objectives (SOs) especially if a strategic plan is in place.

Rely On
Program reports, proposals, and evaluations Your organizations Strategic Plan Mix of organizations working on issue (potential allies, competitors) Results of needs assessments, consultations with communities (especially on what is locally appropriate, most feasible, tried before) Preliminary cost or budget estimates (as an additional indication of feasibility)

33

Step # 4 Program Design

Approach
Detail the following elements and include information on the expected inputs and outputs: Program objectives Step-by-step building blocks or implementation approach Specific activities

Rely On
Inputs Staff required to supervise, monitor, implement Resources on hand and needed Equipment needed Material needed Space needed Training/TA to be provided IEC/BCC/awareness or demand generation activities to be conducted Systems/structure in place or needed to support implementation

Outputs Specific achievements Quantitative (measurable) outputs Qualitative outputs Improvements resulting from the project Interest in project expansion, changes in knowledge, attitudes , and practices, (KAP), behavior change or modification, motivation, increased acceptance, perceived ownership of project/outputs Resources generated Skills developed

34

Step # 5 Monitoring/Evaluation
Approach
Increased number and use of organizational tools (e.g., improved MIS, report formats, checklists, system guidelines for program design, supervision, monitoring, to ensure consistency and enhanced coverage or performance review) Monitoring/evaluation/supervision activities, and appropriate feedback mechanisms, must be built in from start of program design process, and include elements described below. Specific inbuilt, large-scale documentation and dissemination activities designed to share and build upon lessons learned, better practices, and replicable models.

Rely On
Supervision Monitoring Problem identification & problem-solving Motivating, encouraging line staff and community participants Engaging in team building Close review of progress against selected indicators (quantitative/qualitative)

Indicators Complete understanding of your organizations core indicators Systems to measure performance, progress, impact, change, size of the unmet need/ continuous problem Data analysis and use in decision making Re-design/replication Design of new projects Planning Resource allocation Marketing Documentation for internal/external consumption Evaluation (measuring changes between baseline and current period, program performance, and potential for replication)

35

Annex B: Checklist for Reviewing a Program Plan

Is the plan clearly outlined and articulated, and is it realistic? Can the plans main component activities, objectives, and expected outcomes be specifically identified? Is it consistent with identified community or target group needs? Have mechanisms to gauge these needs been put in place and relied upon in designing the program? Is it reasonably flexible? Does it allow for variations or exceptions? Is it clearly feasible? Can it be accomplished? Is it in line with the time allotted? Does it take into account the time factor throughout the program? Does it include adequate human, material, and financial resources? Does it consider existing resources as well as the additional ones needed? Does it ensure coordination and cooperation among the various implementing units? Is it clear and comprehensible to those involved? Is it timely? Was it prepared with due anticipation and consideration of trends, strategic focuses, receptivity of community or target groups? Can it be easily monitored? Were specific indicators selected and responsibilities and techniques for supervising, monitoring, reporting, evaluating, documenting, and disseminating developed? Will it be funded? Is it an attractive, innovative, or unique program that is in line with major donors priorities or targets?

36

Annex C: Guidelines for Planning Programs

Clearly state the objectives. What do we want? What

problems are we trying to address?

Determine the degree and priority of each specific

objective. How much do we want, and in what order? Determine the obstacles that appear in the course of attaining the objectives. What constraints/implementation issues lie ahead? Think about ways to eliminate obstacles. Think about all the possible means or solutions, and select the best ones. Create a list of specific, properly sequenced, and effective activities or actions to move the program forward, step-by-step. What innovative, useful, and effective ideas should be implemented, and in what order, and by or with whom? Determine what will be needed in terms of staff. How many people do we need and what are their scopes of work? Determine what will be needed in the way of facilities and resources including technical assistance, training, and money. Assign responsibilities. Who has to do what, and how? Establish a time line. When will the work get done? Establish how to measure progress and results. What type of monitoring and evaluation systems, and feedback mechanisms, do you need? Determine what administrative action(s) will be needed to ensure that the program is approved and set in motion. Who approves and what process is used for decisionmaking?

37

Annex D: Results Framework

Food for Thought

38

As a consequence of USAIDs and other donors re-engineering, the lexicon of program planning has changed. For example, most donors are now developing STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES. Strategic Objectives, in some ways, are a synthesis of goals, purposes, and objectives and are designed to convey the highest level OUTCOMES or RESULTS that the organization hopes for. Although many donors have adopted the strategic objective approach, others still use LOGICAL FRAMEWORKS. Both formats have a great deal in common and can be used almost interchangeably.

The Results Framework

Defining our terms...
RESULT Highest level result in results package (RP), e.g., Government decentralized in selected district Should define, as required, key aspects of the Result: example, Number of districts in Nampula and Zambezia Provinces to which authorities have been delegated and in which municipal elections are held.

INDICATOR

CRITICAL HYPOTHESES

The theoretical foundation(s) upon which the hoped for developmental change is predicated, e.g., the direct election of local leaders will improve government accountability to the electorate. Critical assumptions are defined as the general conditions under which a development hypothesis will hold true, or conditions outside of the control or influence of the NGO, either of which are likely to affect the achievement of results in the Results Framework, e.g., elected local governments will have the human and financial resources to effectively respond to citizens concerns. Finally, the Framework should also include any key results that are, or will be produced by development partners. Program outcomes necessary before a higher level result can be achieved. Some sub-program outcomes may just be sub-results, i.e., lower level results related to main results, but not required for their achievement, e.g., local authority mandated to generate revenue, and develop and execute budgets. Terminology used above also applies to all sub- or intermediate results

CRITICAL ASSUMPTION(S)

39

INTERMEDIATE RESULTS:

TARGET:

Performance targets establish the amount or degree of change [improvement] to be achieved in a given timeframe, e.g., first two districts decentralized by 2000, and the final two by 2002. Responsibility for achievement, including on the part of the NGOs development partners, e.g., National Assembly and Ministry of State Administration. Note: Since final results depend upon the achievement of intermediate results, a Results Framework should convey some idea of the (intermediate) results timing. In other words, if the highest level results are expected in the fifth and final year of a

RESPONSIBILITY:

strategic plan, and two levels of intermediate results are identified for a particular result, then the lowest level results may be expected (required) in Year 2, while the intermediate level results must be achieved by Year 3 or 4. The Results Frame work is therefore a key management tool that can and should be used to gauge progress towards achievement of higher level results. Indeed, in the development of intermediate results, an explicit attempt should be made to identify measures which serve as progress indicators, e.g., different, sequentially linked intermediate results leading, over the life of a strategic plan, to the highest level result (such intermediate results are often referred to as benchmarks).

Results Package for Sub-Objective 3.1

Result of SO 3.1
An example of a Results Framework

Increased Supply of Quality MCH/FP and STD/HIV Services

The Results Package Linkage to the Strategic Objective

The increased use of health services is dependent upon the supply and availability of quality health services.

40

Critical Hypothesis The increased access to and availability of quality MCH/FP and STD/HIV services will lead to increased use of these services, which in turn will lead to improved health for women and children. Critical Assumptions The government (GRM) will continue to work closely with international PVO and indigenous NGO partners, and will coordinate the provision of services. The GRM will continue to support the devolution of decision-making for health care delivery to the provincial and district levels. The GRM will continue its interest in examining health financing issues and develop policies favorable to appropriate roles for both the public and private sectors. The GRM will increase the number of rehabilitated health facilities that, in turn, will support communitybased outreach.

Indicator Proportion of the population with access to quality health services.

Target
Access to quality health services will increase from possibly 33% (baseline to be provided by the DHS and health facility survey of the populationpossibly 50%). The actual percentages will depend upon baseline data.

Result of Sub-Objective 3.1.1: Increased outreach to communities

Critical Hypothesis The delivery of health services through the MOH, PVOs/NGOs, along with favorable policies and regulations supporting the non-government development of health services, will result in increased use of basic quality-health services. Critical Assumption The GRM will support favorable policies and incentives for the delivery of health services by outreach workers. Indicators Proportion of communities with regular visits from outreach workers. Number of communities with health committees. Communities with access to trained TBAs. Target The proportion of communities with access to outreach services will increase to X% (to be determined). The number of communities with health committees will increase to # (to be determined). The number of communities with access to trained TBAs will increase to # (to be determined). Illustrative Programmatic Activities Health site to community outreach (community based distribution CBD) Training and support for village health committees and TBAs.

41

Result of Sub-Objective 3.1.2: More health sites equipped to provide essential

MCH/FP and STD/HIV Services Critical Hypothesis The regular supply and availability of essential drugs, supplies, and family planning commodities will enable health sites to provide dependable-quality services and will increase the use of these sites.

Critical Assumptions The GRM will assume increased responsibility for financing a portion of the vaccines, essential drugs, and family planing commodities. Other donors will continue to support the provision of essential drugs and family planning commodities. Indicator Health sites equipped to provide essential MCH/FP and STD/HIV services. Target The proportion of health sites with no stock-outs of essential drugs, supplies, and family planning commodities will reach X% (to be determined) Illustrative Programmatic Activities Provide MCH/FP and STD/HIV supplies and commodities. Provide MCH/FP and STD/HIV equipment. Strengthen the delivery of family planing at MOH facilities and through PVO and NGO projects.

Result of Sub-Objective 3.1.3: Improved human resources and skill

development among health providers at provincial and district facilities and among outreach workers

42

Critical Hypothesis The availability of health providers with appropriate skills will improve the quality of services provided, and in turn, increase the use of these services. Critical Assumption The GRM will aggressively pursue pre-service and in-service training programs for all health facility personnel and expand recruitment for new personnel. Indicator Health providers with appropriate skill development. Target The proportion of health providers with appropriate skills, at district level, will reach X% (to be determined). Illustrative Programmatic Activities Provide technical assistance to help the MOH develop standards of practice in MCH/ FP and STD/HIV for all health cadres. Provide MCH/FP and STD/HIV skill development for: Traditional birth attendants Mothers home-based education Traditional healers Health cadres based at fixed sites clinics, health posts, etc. Outreach workers

Annex E: Log Frames

In the 1970s, several foreign assistance programs, including the UN system and the World Bank, began using LOGICAL FRAMEWORKS to help design programs that show clear, measurable RESULTS. A logical framework assumes that a development project is an instrument of change and that planners select the most potentially cost-effective approach to achieving desired, beneficial results. A log frame approach accepts and attempts to manage uncertainty using a systems analysis approach. The following is the 3-level program management hierarchy that is most used with the logical framework. Program Management. To simplify programs we first recognize that there are three basic levels of program responsibility: Inputs: the resources consumed and activities undertaken. Lowest levels of log frame; equal to activities, resources required, persons responsible, and timeframes that will be undertaken. Outputs: the things good managers are committed to produce, stated as results. If one fails to produce those results, then the burden of proof is on the manager to show cause as to why he or she failed. Second level of the log frame; results that are directly accomplished by management of the inputs. Purpose: the reason for producing the outputs, i.e., the higher-level objective that causes an organization to invest in producing outputs. A higher level objective describing what is expected to result from achieving the outputs.

Defining our terms: Logical framework

43

To this, a fourth, superior level is added: THE GOAL. A goal is the higher-level objective above a program or project purpose. The highest order objective for which the project or program is necessary but not necessarily the only means, for achieving the desired result. Usually a broad-based statement of principal or aspiration.

When designing a project using the log frame, planners make a series of predictions based on definite causal relationships. These predictions are called hypotheses, such as If the inputs are managed properly, then the outputs will be produced. If outputs are produced, then the purpose will be achieved. If the purpose if achieved, then this will contribute to achieving the goal.

Hierachy of Objectives

GOAL Global Objectives

PURPOSE Rationale

44
OUTPUTS Direct Results

INPUTS Resources/Activities

Taken from ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY REVIEW JULY/AUGUST 1989

Other Important Parts of a Log Frame

Assumptions: Factors affecting the project/program that are necessary for achieving success but most often outside the planners control. Targets and Indicators are the means for establishing what conditions will signal successful achievement of the project objectives. Thus we can use indicators to clarify exactly what is meant by narrative statements of objectives at each of the project levels.

Indicators demonstrate results. They are not the conditions necessary to achieve those results. Indicators: Measure what is important Must be plausible Must be targeted Are independent Data Sources answer the questions How will we be able to track or monitor our indicators? Examples include: Internal Sources of Data MIS outputs Evaluation Studies Baselines Periodic reports Monitoring/supervisory visits

External Sources of Data Census Demographic and health or other surveys Reports Government policies Parliamentary hearing or other records

45

Illustrative Log Frame

Expected Outputs (Results) Assumptionss Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) Means of Verification (Data Sources)

46

Purpose

Inputs/Activities

Annex F: Critical Review of Program Performance

Advocacy Life Skills Community mobilization/outreach Peer education Resource mobilization Service Delivery Research Income generating Other:

Activity Areas Covered on This Sheet: Program planning/design Training Supervision and Monitoring IEC

Rankings: 5 = Fully on targeted/completed; 4 = On target; 3 = Implementation Issues; 2 = Major Problems; 1 = Off target/not initiated

Planned Activity

Activity Status

Rank

Activity Quality

Success Factors/Constraints

47

Annex F: Suggested Proposal Cover Sheet and Outline

COVER SHEET A. Project Identification Number (if applicable) B. Project Title C. Implementing Agency Address (P.O. Box, Street) Telephone/Fax/E-mail Project Manager (with Title) D. Start Date End Date

E. Project Budget Total Budget: Grant Amount: Implementing Agency Contribution: Contributions by Others (Description and/or amounts) Income to be Generated: ______Yes ______No

48
F. Project Partner Agencies (Please list with address, contact person) G. Project Summary Brief highlights of the project (inputs, outputs, expected results) and principal implementing agencies or target groups. Innovations or unique approaches should also be briefly described. A chart like the one below is also useful. Inputs Donor Outputs # Trained # Events #Docs Dist

Year One Year Two Year Three Total

Grantee # Served #Informed

Proposal Outline
Implementing Agency Qualifications A. Organizational Experience (comparable programs, comparable grants, leadership in the field, major achievements) B. Key Project Staff (for the proposed project). An organizational chart is sometimes useful. Project Justification A . A brief Problem Statement, or description of the issues/problems/needs the project is designed to address. Statistical information relevant to the projects scope and objectives is needed but not a long, generic description of the country, location, sector, or target group. B . A brief statement of the Proposed Solutions that is linked and responsive to the problems identified in the Problem Statement. It is also useful to refer back to the Agencys qualification, experiences, or lessons learned to highlight why what is being proposed is the best, or most feasible, solution. Project Objectives A. General Objective (usually the long-term project goal) B. Specific Objectives (usually the specific, measurable outputs or results the project hopes to achieve. It is sometimes useful to construct charts for training and IEC objectives such as the following: # Trained Cadre Course Title Person Hours Training (PHT)

49

[Note: This chart can also be used for IEC events by changing the titles.] Document or Materials Title IEC Events Work Plan A. B. C. D. E. F. Narrative Services and Special Activities Training Project Management and Systems Income Generation Activities (if relevant) Work Plan or Gantt Chart (See Figure 3, page 8) Target Audience # Participating # Produced # Conducted # Distributed Location

Programmatic Assessment A. Monitoring 1. By the Implementing Agency 2. By the Donor Agency Note: It is useful to describe some of the key project indicators or benchmarks here. B. Evaluation C. Reporting (by interval, i.e., monthly, quarterly, annually) Detailed Budget The budget should follow donor guidelines and be clearly linked to activities in the work plan and specific objectives. If an activity is listed in the work plan, funds must be allocated for it in the budget.

50