Transcript No Slide Title

Introduction to the Institutional
Development Tool
Windows to Learning



1. Realistic: What can it do for my
organization?
2. Theoretical: How does it work?
3. Practical: How do we get it done?
1. Realistic: An Example from
USAID
2002: National
NGO Association
to run USAID
Program technically/
NNF financially
1992: USAID
USPVO/local NGO
Program begins.
NNF viewed as
very flawed.
1999: USPVO grants
$3 million to NNF
to Mange funds;
NGO association
leads Steering Committee
1993: NNF completes
IDP Process.
Commits to improve
The Tool…

Can be used to help an organization
– increase its efficiency
– improve the organization as a place to
work,
– increase the likelihood that the
organization will have a lasting effect on
society

Helps an organization chart its own path
to Institutional Development
It helps an organization…






Consider what makes it successful
Assess its own strengths and
weaknesses in light of those factors
Appreciate individual’s role in
organization
Map a prioritized plan for improvement
Measure progress
Communicate with potential donors
For whom?
Donor
Organization
Constituents
The Miner and his Canary
2. Theoretical




Holistic Approach
Principals
Setting aside time
Tools
Health Analogy:
Pulse isn’t everything






Vision/planning
Financial systems
Management
Systems
Leadership
Information systems
External Relations\




Circulatory
Respiratory
Digestive
…..
Empower
Allies
Transparency
Principles
Neutralize
Foes
Assure
Quality
Systematic
Assure survival
Motivation
Principles
Participatory
Approach
Responsiveness
Programmatic
Approach
Customer
Orientation
Providing
Excellent
Services
Principles
Take advantage of
outside resources
Outward
Focus
Avoid Threats
Paradox of Monitoring
 People
are over-worked
 Monitoring is final priority everywhere
 Data seldom collected; when collected
not analyzed
 Mistrust of internal data; scorn for
external
 Therefore, monitoring data is almost
never used for decision making
Special monitoring events


avoiding the “not-to-do listing”
compress into one event
– data collection
– analysis
– decision making
How?



Subjective Vs. Objective
Continuously Vs. Special Events
External Vs. Internal
3. Practical
Measurement Process
Scope task
Implement
change
P la m en 's S a v e th e P o ta to F o u n d a tio n 1 9 9 3 -1 9 9 5
Identify
participants
In stitu tio n a l D ev elo m en t P ro file
S ta r t-U p
D e v e lo p m e n t
E x p a n sio n / C o n so lid a tio n
S u sta in a b le
C a p a b ilities
O v ersig h t/V isio n
IS C B/Bo ard
ulgaria D raft Institutional D evelopm ent F ram ew ork
(revised
M issio n12-M ar-00)
A u to n o m y
C R IT E R IA F O R E A C H P R O G R E SSIV E S T A G E
M aRneso
a g em
en t R eso u rces
u rces
4
F o u n d in g
L ead ersh ip S ty le
D ev elo p in g
P lan n in g
E x p an d in g / C o n so lid atin g
S u stain in g
O V E R S IG H T /V IS IO N
P articip ato ry
M an ag em en t
R o les o f B o ard m em b ers an d
B o ard m em b ers u n d erstan d
B o ard m em b ers assist o rg an ization
B o ard m em b ers p ro v id e po licy
A spect
R esource
A reaC om
/Cponent
om ponent:
__________________________________________________________
th e relatio n sh ip o f B o ard
th eir ro le an d h o w to relate to
th ro u gh access to k ey p eop le an d to
d irectio n fo r actio n an d o v erall
M an ag em en t S y stem s
Progress Rank i ng
B oard
3
B oard’s R ole
C o n situ en cy P articip atio n
M & E S y stem s
m em b ers to th e E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r are u n clear.
E x ecu tiv e D irecto r.
o th er o rg an ization s.
ctive B oard
R esult
H u m a n R eso uArces
S k ills
A ctivities
Source
co m m ittees fo rm ed , b u t on ly so m e
N eeded
D eci si on
activ e m em b ers.
C om pleti
on date
P otential for
M ulti-SO activity
S ig n ifican t fu nd s raised b y
B o ard an d m an y m em b ers o f
B o ard p lay activ e ro le.
b u t no t y et activ e p artn er.
C o n trib u tes an d p u rsu es
reso u rces.
B o ard selected b ased on in itial
en th u siasm o f fou nd in g o f
o rg an izatio n , no t n ecessarily o n
its lo ng -term d ev elo p m en t.
B o ard m em b ers’ sk ills d o n o t
m atch w ith g ro w in g n eed s o f
o rg an izatio n .
Resource
I mpl i cati ons
N o M issio n S tatem en t. G rou p
Q uadr ant indicating
Pl anni ng as
U sef ul CTlear
oolM issio n S tatem en t. It
ar eas needing
most
M issio n S tatem en t ex ists, bu t is
M issio n S tatem en t is clear an d is
n o t fo cused . D iv erse p o rtfo lio
g en erally co nsisten t w ith p o rtfo lio .
can b e articu lated by B o ard
ur gent attention
o f p ro jects and p rop o sals is no t
H o w ev er, staff are n o t u n ifo rm ly
an d staff an d is co nsisten t w ith
Fl ow
S tategy
Prioritize
Improvement
p ro g ram m in g .
M i ssi on/
Institutional D evelopm ent
R esources
Strategi c Overvi ew
B o ard is fo rm ally co nstitu ted ,
B o ard b eco m ing activ e p artn er.
B o ard p rov id es so m e lead ersh ip and
2
T raining
M ento ring
A dvancing
O rganization
M o tiv atio n
F in a n cia l R eso u rces
M ission
F in an cial
M an ag em en t
1
F in an cial V u ln erab ility
F in an cial V iab ility
co alesces aro u n d g en eral
o b jectiv es, su ch as a
co m m itm en t to en v iron m en t,
h ealth o r d ev elo p m en t.
E x tern a l R eso u rces
co n sisten t w ith M ission
B o ard ’s sk ills m atch n eed s o f th e
d ev elo p in g o rg an ization .
B o ard m em b ers are catly st fo r
lo n g -term d ev elo p m en t o f
o rg an izatio n .
Parti ci pati on
S tatem en t.
T
otals:
cap ab le o f articu latin g th e M ission
S tatem en t an d p eop le ou tsid e
o rg an izatio n m ay n o t id en tify it w ith
th e o rg an ization .
p o rtfo lio . O u tsid ers id en tify
th e sam e m issio n w ith th e
o rg an izatio n .
O rg an izatio n is ab le to respo nd
to m o re th an on e do no r an d th e
o rg an izatio n’s B o ard .
O rg an izatio n is ab le to o b tain
fu n d ing to sup p o rt its p rog ram , in
co n su ltatio n w ith th e B o ard .
In ad d ition to m an ag erial an d
fin an cial au to no m y ,
o rg an izatio n is ab le to
su ccessfu lly ad v o cate, o n
b eh alf o f its con situ ten cy (ies),
to g ov ern m en t, do no rs, an d
p riv ate secto r.
Craft
process
P u b lic R elatio n s
A u ton om y
C o n stitu en cy O rien tatio n
A b ility to W o rk w ith
O rg an izatio n is th e
im p lem en tin g ag en t o f o n e
d o no r.
C en tral & L o cal G o v 't
A b ility to W o rk w ith
1
2
o th er N G O s
Priority Ranking
L eg en d :
B aselin e: as o f A p r-0 0
M id -C o u rse: as o f A p r-0 1
Identify
weaknesses
P o st-G ran t: as o f A p r-0 2
Analyze/
Present
Results
3
4
Adapt
tool/
Collect
Data
The TOOLKIT

Framework
• the HEART of the toolkit


Profile
Calculation Sheet
Development Continua
Birth
Egg
Fertilize
Embryo
Birth
Adult
Life
Infant
Child
Adolescent
Psychology
Trust
Identity
Productive Integrity
Building
Design
Frame
Complete
Use
Institutional Development Continuum
Room to Improve
Start-up
Expanding/
Development
Consolidating
Forming
Storming
Norming
Getting
started
Getting
Organized
Strong
?????
Sustaining
??????
Performing
Here to Stay
???????????
??????????
Organizational Characteristics
Institutional Development Continuum
Oversight/Vision
Management Resources
Human Resources
Financial Resources
External Resources
Institutional Development Continuum
St art -up
Development
Expansion/
Consolidat ion
Sust ainabilit y
All Board members
Vision increasingly comes
contribute to leadership
from Board with increasing
and development of the
input from staff
organization
Decision Flow
All leadership emanates
from founder
Leadership comes from
founder and one or two
Board members
Part icipat ion
Staff provide technical
input only
One or two staff provide
organizational impetus, in Staff increasingly provide
addition to Executive
vital drive to organization
Director
Staff understand where
boundaries of their
participation lay.
Organization would survive
without current Executive
Director
Planning
Management Resources
Organizational Characteristics
Leadership St yle
Planning is expanded and
more forward oriented,
long term/strategic in
nature and structured
around Mission
Based on Mission
Statement, strategic plan
development and annual
plans continue as
operative instruments with
regular review of long-term
plans
Mission/St rat egic Overview
Annual workplans are
developed and reviewed
Planning is predominately
during course of the year.
ad hoc, incremental
Often not integrated into
longer-term strategic plan
Planning Flow
Planning is top-down in
orientation - Executive
Director and Board driven
The participation of staff in
planning is widened with
contributions to decision
making
Beneficiaries provide
information for planning,
but beneficiaries excluded
from decision making
Beneficiaries and staff
contribute to planning
decisions along with
Executive Director/Board
Resource Implicat ions
Objectives set without
assessment of resource
requirements, nor
consideration of important
external factors
Accomplishment of
objectives tied to budget,
but important external
factors still overlooked
Plans are based on
budgets and consideration
of important external
factors, but organization
does not review plan
during implementation
Annual and strategic plans
are comprehensive and
specific enough to permit
accurate budgeting but
flexible enough to be
modified as warranted
Planning as Useful Tool
Organization does not
produce workplans
Workplans are used by
Workplans are drafted, but management and
seldom used by
operations staff, but not
management and
viewed as dynamic
operations staff
instruments to be modified
as warranted
XYZ Resource
Key Component
Key Component
Workplans are viewed by
management and
operations staff as useful
tools and are modified as
required
Framework Excerpt
R eso u rces
C R IT E R IA F O R E A C H P R O G R E S S IV E S T A G E
F o u n d in g
D ev elo p in g
E x p an d in g /C o n so lid atin g
S u stain in g
M A N A G EM EN T R ESO U R C E S
A sp ect
C om pon en t
L ead ership
S tyle
B oard
S taff
A ll lead ersh ip em an ates fro m
co re fo u n d er(s).
L ead ersh ip co m es fro m co re
fo u n d er(s) an d o n e o r tw o
B o ard m em b ers.
V isio n in creasing ly co m es fro m
B o ard as B o ard m em b ers im p ro v e
in v o lv em en t.
A ll B o ard m em b ers
co n trib u te to lead ersh ip an d
d ev elo p m en t o f th e
o rg an izatio n .
S taff p ro v id e tech n ical in p u t
o n ly . D ecisio ns tak en b y co re
fo u n d er(s).
O n e o r tw o staff p ro v id e
o rg an izatio n al im p etus, in
ad d ition to E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r.
S taff in creasin g ly p ro v id e v ital d riv e
to o rg an izatio n .
O rg an izatio n w ou ld su rv iv e
w ith o u t cu rren t E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r o r C h airp erso n o f th e
B o ard .
Institutional Development
Skeleton
Institutional Development Continuum
Organizational Characteristics
Start-up
Development
Expansion/
Consolidation
Sustainability
Management
Resources
Board
X
X
Mission
Autonomy
X
Leadership
Style
X
Measures of
progress along
Continuum
Using the Framework: “X”
Marks the Spot

Each row shows a desired path to
improvement
Determine where along the continuum
you are now situated
Mark an x@ on the spot

Be honest with yourself


“X” Marks the Spot
Institutional Development Continuum
Suggested
Scale
,00
Start-up
Development
Expansion/
Consolidation
1
2
3
,25
,50
,75
,00
,25
,50
,75
,00
,25
,50
,75
Sustainability
4
,00
Leadership Style
x
Decision Flow
x
Planning
Management Resources
Organizational Characteristics
Participation
x
Mission/Strategic Overview
Planning Flow
Resource Implications
Planning as Useful Tool
XYZ Resource
Key Component
Key Component
Not Applicable
x
x
Measures of
progress along
continuum
,25
,50
,75
Program Note


Research, field tests, and trial and error, and
a local adaptation process went into making
the cells as broadly useful as possible
But, they can not be applicable to all
organizations, nor should they be
– Keep what works for you
– Dump what does not
Keep A Record of Your Decisions
IS C /B u lg aria D raft In stitu tio n al D ev elo p m en t F ram ew o rk
(rev ised 1 2 -M ar-0 0 )
C R IT E R IA F O R E A C H P R O G R E S S IV E S T A G E
R eso u rces
F o u n d in g
D ev elo p in g
E x p an d in g / C o n so lid atin g
S u stain in g
O V E R S IG H T /V IS IO N
A spect
B oard
C om pon en t
B oard’s R ole
R o les o f B o ard m em b ers an d
th e relatio n sh ip o f B o ard
m em b ers to th e E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r are u n clear.
B o ard m em b ers u n d erstan d
th eir ro le an d h o w to relate to
E x ecu tiv e D irecto r.
x
x
B o ard m em b ers assist o rg an ization
th ro u gh access to k ey p eop le an d to
o th er o rg an ization s.
B o ard m em b ers p ro v id e po licy
d irectio n fo r actio n an d o v erall
p ro g ram m in g .
B o ard p rov id es so m e lead ersh ip and
co m m ittees fo rm ed , b u t on ly so m e
activ e m em b ers.
S ig n ifican t fu nd s raised b y
B o ard an d m an y m em b ers o f
B o ard p lay activ e ro le.
A ctive B oard
B o ard is fo rm ally co nstitu ted ,
b u t no t y et activ e p artn er.
B o ard b eco m ing activ e p artn er.
C o n trib u tes an d p u rsu es
reso u rces.
A dvancing
O rganization
B o ard selected b ased on in itial
en th u siasm o f fou nd in g o f
o rg an izatio n , no t n ecessarily o n
its lo ng -term d ev elo p m en t.
B o ard m em b ers’ sk ills d o n o t
m atch w ith g ro w in g n eed s o f
o rg an izatio n .
B o ard ’s sk ills m atch n eed s o f th e
d ev elo p in g o rg an ization .
B o ard m em b ers are catly st fo r
lo n g -term d ev elo p m en t o f
o rg an izatio n .
N o M issio n S tatem en t. G rou p
co alesces aro u n d g en eral
o b jectiv es, su ch as a
co m m itm en t to en v iron m en t,
h ealth o r d ev elo p m en t.
M issio n S tatem en t ex ists, bu t is
n o t fo cused . D iv erse p o rtfo lio
o f p ro jects and p rop o sals is no t
co n sisten t w ith M ission
S tatem en t.
M issio n S tatem en t is clear an d is
g en erally co nsisten t w ith p o rtfo lio .
H o w ev er, staff are n o t u n ifo rm ly
cap ab le o f articu latin g th e M ission
S tatem en t an d p eop le ou tsid e
o rg an izatio n m ay n o t id en tify it w ith
th e o rg an ization .
C lear M issio n S tatem en t. It
can b e articu lated by B o ard
an d staff an d is co nsisten t w ith
p o rtfo lio . O u tsid ers id en tify
th e sam e m issio n w ith th e
o rg an izatio n .
O rg an izatio n is th e
im p lem en tin g ag en t o f o n e
d o no r.
O rg an izatio n is ab le to respo nd
to m o re th an on e do no r an d th e
o rg an izatio n’s B o ard .
O rg an izatio n is ab le to o b tain
fu n d ing to sup p o rt its p rog ram , in
co n su ltatio n w ith th e B o ard .
In ad d ition to m an ag erial an d
fin an cial au to no m y ,
o rg an izatio n is ab le to
su ccessfu lly ad v o cate, o n
b eh alf o f its con situ ten cy (ies),
to g ov ern m en t, do no rs, an d
p riv ate secto r.
M ission
A u ton om y
x
D e m o c ra c y N e tw o rk II In s titu tio n a l D e ve lo p m e n t C a lc u la tio n S h e e t
O rg an izatio n :
R eso u rce
A sp ect
B o ard
D ate:
2000
2001
Change
O ve r T im e
K ey C o m p o n en ts
C o m m en ts
B oard has begun to play an im portant role in gaining access to
B oard's R ole
2,00
3,00
1
governm ent and donors.
A ctive B oard
1,00
1,00
0
N o change
A dvancing the O rganization
2,00
4,00
2
1,67
2,67
B oard has fully participated in the trem endous grow th in fund
1
raising and advocacy for the organization
Graphing the results: The Profile
D e m o c ra c y N e tw o rk II In s titu tio n a l D e ve lo p m e n t C a lc u la tio n S h e e t
O rg an izatio n :
R eso u rce
A sp ect
B o ard
D ate:
2000
2001
Change
O ve r T im e
K ey C o m p o n en ts
C o m m en ts
B oard has begun to play an im portant role in gaining access to
B oard's R ole
2,00
3,00
1
governm ent and donors.
A ctive B oard
1,00
1,00
0
N o change
A dvancing the O rganization
2,00
4,00
2
1,67
2,67
B oard has fully participated in the trem endous grow th in fund
raising and advocacy for the organization
1
Plamen's Save the Potato Foundation 1993-1995
Institutional Development Profile
Start-Up
Capabilities
Oversight/Vision
Board
Mission
Autonomy
Development
Expansion/ Consolidation
Sustainable
Completed
Profile
P la m en 's S a v e th e P o ta to F o u n d a tio n 1 9 9 3 -1 9 9 5
In stitu tio n a l D ev elo m en t P ro file
S ta rt-U p
D ev elo p m en t
E x p a n sio n / C o n so lid a tio n
C a p a b ilities
O v ersig h t/V isio n
B o ard
M issio n
A u to n o m y
M a n a g em en t R eso u rces
L ead ersh ip S ty le
P lan n in g
P articip ato ry
M an ag em en t
M an ag em en t S y stem s
S erv ice D eliv ery
C o n situ en cy P articip atio n
M & E S y stem s
H u m a n R eso u rces
S k ills
S tategy
T raining
M ento ring
M o tiv atio n
F in a n cia l R eso u rces
F in an cial M an ag em en t
F in an cial V u ln erab ility
F in an cial V iab ility
E x tern a l R eso u rces
P u b lic R elatio n s
C o n stitu en cy O rien tatio n
A b ility to W o rk w ith
C en tral & L o cal G o v 't
A b ility to W o rk w ith
o th er N G O s
L eg en d :
B aselin e: as o f A p r-0 0
M id -C o u rse: as o f A p r-0 1
P o st-G ran t: as o f A p r-0 2
S u sta in a b le
IS C /B u lg aria D raft In stitu tio n al D ev elo p m en t F ram ew o rk
(rev ised 1 2 -M ar-0 0 )
C R IT E R IA F O R E A C H P R O G R E S S IV E S T A G E
R eso u rces
F o u n d in g
D ev elo p in g
E x p an d in g / C o n so lid atin g
S u stain in g
O V E R S IG H T /V IS IO N
A spect
Review
B oard
C om pon en t
B oard’s R ole
R o les o f B o ard m em b ers an d
th e relatio n sh ip o f B o ard
m em b ers to th e E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r are u n clear.
B o ard m em b ers u n d erstan d
th eir ro le an d h o w to relate to
E x ecu tiv e D irecto r.
B o ard m em b ers assist o rg an ization
th ro u gh access to k ey p eop le an d to
o th er o rg an ization s.
B o ard m em b ers p ro v id e po licy
d irectio n fo r actio n an d o v erall
p ro g ram m in g .
B o ard b eco m ing activ e p artn er.
C o n trib u tes an d p u rsu es
reso u rces.
B o ard p rov id es so m e lead ersh ip and
co m m ittees fo rm ed , b u t on ly so m e
activ e m em b ers.
S ig n ifican t fu nd s raised b y
B o ard an d m an y m em b ers o f
B o ard p lay activ e ro le.
B o ard ’s sk ills m atch n eed s o f th e
d ev elo p in g o rg an ization .
x
x
A ctive B oard
B o ard is fo rm ally co nstitu ted ,
b u t no t y et activ e p artn er.
A dvancing
O rganization
B o ard selected b ased on in itial
en th u siasm o f fou nd in g o f
o rg an izatio n , no t n ecessarily o n
its lo ng -term d ev elo p m en t.
B o ard m em b ers’ sk ills d o n o t
m atch w ith g ro w in g n eed s o f
o rg an izatio n .
N o M issio n S tatem en t. G rou p
co alesces aro u n d g en eral
o b jectiv es, su ch as a
co m m itm en t to en v iron m en t,
h ealth o r d ev elo p m en t.
M issio n S tatem en t ex ists, bu t is
n o t fo cused . D iv erse p o rtfo lio
o f p ro jects and p rop o sals is no t
co n sisten t w ith M ission
S tatem en t.
O rg an izatio n is th e
im p lem en tin g ag en t o f o n e
d o no r.
O rg an izatio n is ab le to respo nd
to m o re th an on e do no r an d th e
o rg an izatio n’s B o ard .
M ission
A u ton om y
x
B o ard m em b ers are catly st fo r
lo n g -term d ev elo p m en t o f
o rg an izatio n .
x
M issio n S tatem en t is clear an d is
g en erally co nsisten t w ith p o rtfo lio .
H o w ev er, staff are n o t u n ifo rm ly
cap ab le o f articu latin g th e M ission
S tatem en t an d p eop le ou tsid e
o rg an izatio n m ay n o t id en tify it w ith
th e o rg an ization .
C lear M issio n S tatem en t. It
can b e articu lated by B o ard
an d staff an d is co nsisten t w ith
p o rtfo lio . O u tsid ers id en tify
th e sam e m issio n w ith th e
o rg an izatio n .
x
O rg an izatio n is ab le to o b tain
fu n d ing to sup p o rt its p rog ram , in
co n su ltatio n w ith th e B o ard .
D e m o c ra c y N e tw o rk II In s titu tio n a l D e ve lo p m e n t C a lc u la tio n S h e e t
In ad d ition to m an ag erial an d
fin an cial au to no m y ,
o rg an izatio n is ab le to
su ccessfu lly ad v o cate, o n
b eh alf o f its con situ ten cy (ies),
to g ov ern m en t, do no rs, an d
p riv ate secto r.
P la m en 's S a v e th e P o ta to F o u n d a tio n 1 9 9 3 -1 9 9 5
In stitu tio n a l D ev elo m en t P ro file
S ta rt-U p
O rg an izatio n :
D ev elo p m en t
E x p a n sio n / C o n so lid a tio n
C a p a b ilities
D ate:
O v ersig h t/V isio n
B o ard
M issio n
R eso u rce
A sp ect
B o ard
2000
2001
Change
O ve r T im e
K ey C o m p o n en ts
A u to n o m y
C o m m en ts
B oard has begun to play an im portant role in gaining access to
B oard's R ole
2,00
3,00
1
governm ent and donors.
A ctive B oard
1,00
1,00
0
N o change
M a n a g em en t R eso u rces
L ead ersh ip S ty le
P lan n in g
P articip ato ry
B oard has fully participated in the trem endous grow th in fund
A dvancing the O rganization
2,00
4,00
1,67
2,67
2
raising and advocacy for the organization
M an ag em en t
M an ag em en t S y stem s
S erv ice D eliv ery
C o n situ en cy P articip atio n
M & E S y stem s
1
H u m a n R eso u rces
S k ills
S tategy
T raining
M ento ring
M o tiv atio n
F in a n cia l R eso u rces
F in an cial M an ag em en t
F in an cial V u ln erab ility
F in an cial V iab ility
E x tern a l R eso u rces
P u b lic R elatio n s
C o n stitu en cy O rien tatio n
A b ility to W o rk w ith
C en tral & L o cal G o v 't
A b ility to W o rk w ith
o th er N G O s
L eg en d :
B aselin e: as o f A p r-0 0
M id -C o u rse: as o f A p r-0 1
P o st-G ran t: as o f A p r-0 2
S u sta in a b le
Prioritization of Organizational
Characteristics
Score
Makes or Breaks
Organization
4
Crucial to Our
Survival
3
Priority Area
of Concern
2
Significant,
not a Priority
1
Not Significant
to us in
Near Future
0
Participation
(1.5)
Decision
Flow (3)
Mission/
Strategic Overview
(1)
Advocacy
(1)
Financial
Management
(3)
Most Urgent Targets for
Institutional Strengthening
4
Decision
Flow
Progress Ranking
3
Financial
Management
2
1
Mission/
Strategic Overview
1
Participation
Quadrant indicating
areas needing most
urgent attention
2
Priority Ranking
Advocacy
3
4
Setting Targets
Capabilities
Just Starting Getting
Organized
Strong
Here to Stay
External/
Resources
Target
Advocacy
(No change)
targeted
Ability to Work
with Gov’t
Target
Public Relations
Plan to achieve targets
C ap ab ilities
Just S tarting G etting
O rganized
S trong
H ere to S tay
T arget
O versigh t/
V ision
(N o change)
targeted
T arget
R eso u rce A rea /C o m p o n en t: _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ __
R esu lt
In stitu tio n a l D ev elo p m e n t
A ctiv ities
T o ta ls:
R eso u rces
N eed ed
S o u rce
C o m p leti
o n da te
P o ten tia l for
M u lti-S O a ctiv ity
Tailor tool to be inspirational




The “progress cells” are normative -they are meant to convey an agreed
approach
The revision process spurs consensus
and reveals inconsistencies
Only focus on what matters
Make what you focus on matter
Don’t Fool Yourself
Measurement Process
Scope task
Implement
change
P la m en 's S a v e th e P o ta to F o u n d a tio n 1 9 9 3 -1 9 9 5
Identify
participants
In stitu tio n a l D ev elo m en t P ro file
S ta r t-U p
D e v e lo p m e n t
E x p a n sio n / C o n so lid a tio n
S u sta in a b le
C a p a b ilities
O v ersig h t/V isio n
IS C B/Bo ard
ulgaria D raft Institutional D evelopm ent F ram ew ork
(revised
M issio n12-M ar-00)
A u to n o m y
C R IT E R IA F O R E A C H P R O G R E SSIV E S T A G E
M aRneso
a g em
en t R eso u rces
u rces
4
F o u n d in g
L ead ersh ip S ty le
D ev elo p in g
P lan n in g
E x p an d in g / C o n so lid atin g
S u stain in g
O V E R S IG H T /V IS IO N
P articip ato ry
M an ag em en t
R o les o f B o ard m em b ers an d
B o ard m em b ers u n d erstan d
B o ard m em b ers assist o rg an ization
B o ard m em b ers p ro v id e po licy
A spect
R esource
A reaC om
/Cponent
om ponent:
__________________________________________________________
th e relatio n sh ip o f B o ard
th eir ro le an d h o w to relate to
th ro u gh access to k ey p eop le an d to
d irectio n fo r actio n an d o v erall
M an ag em en t S y stem s
Progress Rank i ng
B oard
3
B oard’s R ole
C o n situ en cy P articip atio n
M & E S y stem s
m em b ers to th e E x ecu tiv e
D irecto r are u n clear.
E x ecu tiv e D irecto r.
o th er o rg an ization s.
ctive B oard
R esult
H u m a n R eso uArces
S k ills
A ctivities
Source
co m m ittees fo rm ed , b u t on ly so m e
N eeded
D eci si on
activ e m em b ers.
C om pleti
on date
P otential for
M ulti-SO activity
S ig n ifican t fu nd s raised b y
B o ard an d m an y m em b ers o f
B o ard p lay activ e ro le.
b u t no t y et activ e p artn er.
C o n trib u tes an d p u rsu es
reso u rces.
B o ard selected b ased on in itial
en th u siasm o f fou nd in g o f
o rg an izatio n , no t n ecessarily o n
its lo ng -term d ev elo p m en t.
B o ard m em b ers’ sk ills d o n o t
m atch w ith g ro w in g n eed s o f
o rg an izatio n .
Resource
I mpl i cati ons
N o M issio n S tatem en t. G rou p
Q uadr ant indicating
Pl anni ng as
U sef ul CTlear
oolM issio n S tatem en t. It
ar eas needing
most
M issio n S tatem en t ex ists, bu t is
M issio n S tatem en t is clear an d is
n o t fo cused . D iv erse p o rtfo lio
g en erally co nsisten t w ith p o rtfo lio .
can b e articu lated by B o ard
ur gent attention
o f p ro jects and p rop o sals is no t
H o w ev er, staff are n o t u n ifo rm ly
an d staff an d is co nsisten t w ith
Fl ow
S tategy
Prioritize
Improvement
p ro g ram m in g .
M i ssi on/
Institutional D evelopm ent
R esources
Strategi c Overvi ew
B o ard is fo rm ally co nstitu ted ,
B o ard b eco m ing activ e p artn er.
B o ard p rov id es so m e lead ersh ip and
2
T raining
M ento ring
A dvancing
O rganization
M o tiv atio n
F in a n cia l R eso u rces
M ission
F in an cial
M an ag em en t
1
F in an cial V u ln erab ility
F in an cial V iab ility
co alesces aro u n d g en eral
o b jectiv es, su ch as a
co m m itm en t to en v iron m en t,
h ealth o r d ev elo p m en t.
E x tern a l R eso u rces
co n sisten t w ith M ission
B o ard ’s sk ills m atch n eed s o f th e
d ev elo p in g o rg an ization .
B o ard m em b ers are catly st fo r
lo n g -term d ev elo p m en t o f
o rg an izatio n .
Parti ci pati on
S tatem en t.
T
otals:
cap ab le o f articu latin g th e M ission
S tatem en t an d p eop le ou tsid e
o rg an izatio n m ay n o t id en tify it w ith
th e o rg an ization .
p o rtfo lio . O u tsid ers id en tify
th e sam e m issio n w ith th e
o rg an izatio n .
O rg an izatio n is ab le to respo nd
to m o re th an on e do no r an d th e
o rg an izatio n’s B o ard .
O rg an izatio n is ab le to o b tain
fu n d ing to sup p o rt its p rog ram , in
co n su ltatio n w ith th e B o ard .
In ad d ition to m an ag erial an d
fin an cial au to no m y ,
o rg an izatio n is ab le to
su ccessfu lly ad v o cate, o n
b eh alf o f its con situ ten cy (ies),
to g ov ern m en t, do no rs, an d
p riv ate secto r.
Craft
process
P u b lic R elatio n s
A u ton om y
C o n stitu en cy O rien tatio n
A b ility to W o rk w ith
O rg an izatio n is th e
im p lem en tin g ag en t o f o n e
d o no r.
C en tral & L o cal G o v 't
A b ility to W o rk w ith
1
2
o th er N G O s
Priority Ranking
L eg en d :
B aselin e: as o f A p r-0 0
M id -C o u rse: as o f A p r-0 1
Identify
weaknesses
P o st-G ran t: as o f A p r-0 2
Analyze/
Present
Results
3
4
Adapt
tool/
Collect
Data
Next Steps







Gain better understanding of tool in workshop
Meet with Facilitators to agree on approach
Complete assessment
Prepare Improvement Plan
Submit proposal to CAP
Embark on Improvement
Re-assess
6. Discussion