Download Generic Powerpoint on Program Shift - P

Achieving Lasting Impacts
Understanding the shift to more
programmatic approaches in CARE
Presentation Plan
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
External Trends and Challenges
Meeting These Challenges and opportunities
Changes
Program Definitions and Characteristics
Internal Organizational Changes
Organizational Performance Measurement
Learning Structures
External Challenges & Opportunities
 Underlying causes of poverty
 Project do not address poverty
 New development approaches pull in
two directions
 Northern policies
 Critique of International NGOs
 Importance of impact assessment
CI’s Response: 5 Strategic Directions




Emergency Response
Global Advocacy
Organizational Evolution
Information and Knowledge
Management
 Building Shared Expertise
CARE USA’s Response
CARE helps
communities
achieve
long-term
reductions
in poverty
by…
Demonstrating
a long-term
commitment to the
community
Addressing all three
components of the
Unifying Framework
Leveraging our areas
of expertise, informed
by our
deep understanding of
community needs
Measuring impact and
advocating for policy
change
=
Developing
human
capacity &
providing
economic
opportunity
Addressing basic
human conditions
through sectoral
interventions
x
And
addressing
social
injustice
& inequity
Addressing power
imbalances resulting
from
• Poor governance
• Gender inequities
• Discrimination
• Social and economic
exclusion
x
With
a focus on
marginalized
women
& girls
Understanding that
women and girls are
the most vulnerable,
with the strongest
impact on whole
communities’ wellbeing
Acknowledging that
working with men
and boys will be
crucial to our
ongoing work
Changes
SAME









CI vision, mission, values
CI program principles
RBA and UCP
Unifying framework
Commitment to women and
girls
Humanitarian + development
Multi-sectoral identity
Local identity and relevance
Stewardship of resources
DIFFERENT






Global identity and brand
Advocacy function at all levels
National-level impacts
Strategic partnerships
New practices and knowledge
Impacts not just
outputs/outcomes
 Reward program quality and
impact
FY09 Deliverables
•21 Programs Designed and under way in 10
Learning Laboratories
•Program analysis and design competencies
developed in additional 10 COs (satellites)
Defining
a
Program
Approach
•300 staff with adequate reflective practice
competencies
•Standard program quality and impact indicators
tested and finalized for use in all COs
•Accountability and compliance mechanisms
established
Defining a
Defining a Program Approach
Programmatic Approach
Definition of a Program
A program is a coherent set of initiatives by
CARE and our allies that involves a long
term commitment to specific marginalized
and vulnerable groups to achieve lasting
impact at broad scale on underlying causes
of poverty and social injustice. This goes
beyond the scope of projects to achieve
positive changes in human conditions, in
social positions and in the enabling
environment.
8 Characteristics
1.A clearly defined goal for impact on the lives of a specific group, realized at
broad scale.
2.A thorough analysis of underlying causes of poverty, gender inequality, and
social injustice at multiple levels with multiple stakeholders.
3.An explicit theory of change that is rigorously tested and adapted to reflect
ongoing learning.
4.A coherent set of initiatives that enable CARE and our partners to contribute
significantly to the transformation articulated in the theory of change.
5.Ability to promote organizational and social learning, to generate knowledge
and evidence of impact.
6.Contribution to broad movements for social change through our work with and
strengthening of partners, networks and alliances.
7.A strategy to leverage and influence the use and allocation of financial and
other resources within society for maximizing change at a broader scale.
8.Accountability systems to internal and external stakeholders that are transparent.
COs in a programmatic world
 Consists of 3-5 programs
 Long-term measurement systems and
learning processes
 Common quality/impact indicators
 CO-level quality assurance system, impact
assessment and reporting
 Define and brand CARE locally; allow us to
make better use of existing project modalities
Regions in a Programmatic World
 Focus on COs’ programs (as opposed to
projects)
 Focus on accountability for quality/ impact
 Regional programs
 Regional learning and knowledge sharing
Signature Programs
 Both CARE Aus and CUSA
 Need to meet all eight characteristics
 In CO may contribute to a locallydefined program or be a long-term
program itself
CARE International in a programmatic
world
 Non-lead members continue as before:
o add value to project-based donor
modalities
o Engage deeply in CO and regional
strategy processes
 International policy advocacy aims
Marketing and Communication
 Communicating impacts to our stakeholders:
will differentiate CARE from peers
 Helping with internal communication and
messaging: plain and simple language use;
assisting with internal communications strategy
Internal Organizational Changes
Financial
 Increase UNR/Flexible funds to COs
 Align financial management policies
 Linking COs and new donors
Human Resources
 Clearer accountabilities
 Better talent retention
Internal Organizational Changes
Knowledge Sharing and Learning
 Stronger incentives
 Global reporting on common indicators + reflective practice
 More focused (clearer goals for) global learning and knowledge sharing system
Communications and Marketing


Differentiates CARE
Understand Impacts on underlying causes
and


Simple impact story
Consistent internal messaging
Organizational Performance Measurement
1.
2.
3.
4.
UBORA: A global performance measurement system
that:
• connects program and program support
• uses common indicators
• reflective practice competencies
• performance story at multiple levels
Program Support “Basic” indicators - all COs,
immediate
Program Support “Plus” indicators - Learning Labs in
FY ’09
Program quality/impact indicators – Learning Labs
Program Quality Indicators
Promote
Empowerment
1. # and % of program initiatives* that have deliberate
strategies to shift power relations and to empower specific
marginalized and excluded groups, in particular women.
Work with
Partners
2. # of strategic partnerships and alliances (non-project;
non-contract specific) in place.
Ensure
Accountability
and Promote
Responsibility
3. # and % program initiatives that have a functioning
system in place to be held accountable by participants and
civil society.
4. # and % program initiatives that have a clear approach
for compelling those with responsibilities toward poor and
marginalized people to fulfill their obligations.
Address
Discrimination
5. # and % of program initiatives that have a deliberate
strategy for opposing discrimination and promoting
equity, in particular gender equity.
Program Quality Indicators
Promote NonViolent Conflict
Resolution
6. # and % of program initiatives that have a deliberate
strategy* to mitigate and address potential or existing conflicts
arising from shifts in power relations.
Seek Sustainable
Results
7. # and % of program initiatives that have a coherent
strategy* to address and measure impact on the underlying
causes of poverty and social injustice.
Advocacy
8. # and % of program initiatives that include a specific
advocacy strategy*.
Learning and
Knowledge
Management
9. # and % of program initiatives that have learning objectives
linked to the program’s theory of change and processes in
place for pursuing their learning objectives.
Program Support Indicators
Managing the Basics
Program Process
1. # and % of program initiatives that apply relevant technical
and project management standards adopted by CARE
2. Level of risk versus level of preparedness (DRR Scale)
Beyond the Basics
Learning and
Knowledge
Management
1.# and % of units that show evidence that learning is being
obtained and used for organizational improvement.
Resource
mobilization
and finance
2. % of required program budget mobilized for the next two
years
Human resources
3. % staff retained across funding gaps between program
initiatives
Learning & Knowledge Sharing Strategy
Sites of Knowledge Generation
Learning Laboratories
Key Actors
for Moving
Knowledge
From Site to
Site
• DRDs
• Regional PQ Groups
• Thematic Teams and
Networks
• CUSA global KL and
OPM teams
Learning
Culture
• LL Satellites
• Other COs
• CI members
• Regions
• Sectors
• Partners
• Investment in staff
• More strategic mix of learning/knowledge sharing
• Better incentives to staff
• Clearly defined learning objectives
• New Tools and Technologies
Knowledge Sharing and Learning Processes
Key Learners
and Testers of
applicability of
Knowledge and
Practice
What is a Learning Lab





Holistic change
Investment in staff to for shift
Investment in better knowledge products
Learning culture of accepting mistakes
Capacity to help others learn
What is a Satellite?





Learning relationship with learning labs
Supported by global resources
Engaged in programmatic shift
Feed back improvements
Knowledge transfer monitored
Since Istanbul
 Launches in Ethiopia, Malawi, Laos/Vietnam
 Preparation for launches in Egypt, Mali, and Sri
Lanka
 Deepening of work in Bangladesh
 Final ID of most satellites
 Testing and finalizing of quality indicators and the
process for establishing a quality baseline
 Rethinking of plans based on actual budgets
 Production of five basic briefs on the program shift
w/ translation