Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
www.birdlife.orgBirdLife International is a UK registered Charity No. 1042125
Capacity Assessment Tool (CAT)For Site Support Groups (SSGs)
BirdLife Africa Partnership
Conserving Biodiversity in Africa: Guidlines for Applying the Site
Support Group Approach
Capacity Assessment Tool (CAT)For Site Support Groups (SSGs)
BirdLife Africa Partnership
www.birdlife.orgBirdLife International is a UK registered Charity No. 1042125
F
A Sida-funded programme atthe Swedish Biodiversity Center
Swww.birdlife.orgBirdLife International is a UK registered Charity No. 1042125
Funded by
A Sida-funded programme atthe Swedish Biodiversity Center
SwedBio
Compiled by: Ms. Jane W. Gaithuma - BirdLife Africa Secretariat
Contributors: BirdLife International (2007), Building on Conserving Biodiversity in Africa, Guidelines for applying the Site Support Group approach, ICIPE Science Press, Nairobi Kenya
Comments and inputs by : Nature KenyaBirdLife BoyswanaNaturamaDr. Hazel S. Thompson - BirdLife Africa SecretariatDr. Julius Ariraitwe - BirdLife Africa Secretariat
Funded by: SwedBio;Swedish International Biodiversity programme.Box 7007,SE-750 07 Uppsala, SwedenVisiting Address; backlosavagen 8Tel:+46 (0)18 67 13 44Telefax: +46 (0) 18 30 02 46Website: www.swedbio.org
The designation of geographical entities in this strategy and presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BirdLife Africa and globally concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or of its authorities or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Published by: BirdLife Africa Partnership, Nairobi, Kenya
Copyright © 2009 BirdLife Africa Partnership, Nairobi, Kenya
Reproduction of this publication for educational and any other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.
Recommended Citation: Conserving Biodiversity in Africa: Guidlines for Applying the Site Support Group Approach
BirdLife International (2008) Capacity Assessment Tool for Site Support Groups (Printer) Nairobi, Kenya
ISBN No: 9966-7191-6-4
Photo credits: For cover page, Nature Kenya, Nature Seychelles, BirdLife Africa Secretariat
Editing: Fluer Ngweno - Nature Kenya Nick Langley - RSPB John Mwazemba - Publishing Manager, Macmillan Kenya
Layout and Design: Blue Sun Africa - www.bluesunafrica.com
Printed by:
Available from: BirdLife Africa SecretariatP.O. Box 3502, 00100Nairobi, KenyaTel: +254 20 8562490Fax: +254 20 8562259
Printed on Paper Made from% post consumer recycled paper.
v
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement ........................................................................................ ii
Abbreviation .................................................................................................. iii
Introduction .................................................................................................. 4
Assessment Process .................................................................................... 8
Scoring Instructions ................................................................................... 11
SSG CAT ...................................................................................................... 13
Macro-economic Analysis ......................................................................... 34
Annexes ........................................................................................................ 35
vi
Acknowledgments
Birdlife Africa Partnership wishes to thank all the Partners in Africa for the recognition that it’s important for community engagement at local level and that when these communities are recognised and supported effectively, conservation action and sustainable development goals are likely to be achieved faster.BirdLife Africa Partnership also acknowledges contributions from all involved in compilation of the present publication of the Capacity Assessment Tool; specifically, Nature Kenya (BirdLife in Kenya), BirdLife Botswana and Nautrama (BirdLife in Bukina Faso) whose use of the tool enabled further editing into the current form. Many thanks also go to all staff members who took time to give inputs especially Jane Gaithuma for compiling the current form. We also wish to thank all others who may have contributed in one way or the other.
Compiled further by Jane Gaithuma – current version, 2008 from the 2007 version
Contributors: Jane Gaithuma, Dr. Hazell Thompson, Julius Arinaitwe- and BirdLife Africa Partners
vii
Abbreviations
CAT: Capacity Assessment ToolCET: Conservation Empowerment IndexFBO: Faith Based OrganisationIBA: Important Bird AreaOCA: Organisational Capacity AssessmentNGO: Non-Governmental OrganisationSSG: Site Support Group
1
Introduction
BirdLife International is a global partnership of national Non-Gov-ernmental Organisations (NGOs) working with people to conserve wild birds, their habitats and global biodiversity and striving towards the sustainable use of natural resources and livelihoods improvement. Currently, the Partnership works in more than 106 countries organised under six regional groupings. In Africa, BirdLife Africa Partnership is a growing network of 22 national Partners, Affiliates and Programmes with about 300 staff and over 30,000 members. An additional 200,000 children from 5000 Wildlife Clubs are involved in Partnership activities
School Children at Seychelle Bird FestivalPhoto credit: Nature Seychelles
2
every year. Partners are involved in among others, research, conservation action, environmental education, policy and advocacy and sustainable development. BirdLife Africa Partnership works with local community groups living within and around Important Bird Areas (IBAs), sites considered critical for biodiversity conservation. These groups are commonly known as Site Support Groups (SSGs). In general, SSGs aim at promoting conservation, improving their livelihoods, and engagement in advocacy for enabling decisions and desired policy for sustainable development and conservation. In Africa, there are about 150 SSGs across 1,231 IBAs. However, their activities are diversified, depending on the ecological and socio-economic context in particular sites. The most common activities include monitoring of habitats and species, education and awareness, policy and advocacy, and local projects on income generation for livelihoods improvement.
Capacity Building within the BirdLife African PartnershipThere is no overall theory of capacity building. It encompasses institutional development but goes beyond individual organisations and institutions to broader systems, groups of organisations and networks by addressing complex multi-faceted problems. It thus requires the participation of various actors, organisations and institutions1. A regional review of the experience of SSGs approaches at national level in Africa by BirdLife Africa Secretariat2 revealed a clear and definite need for sustained capacity building strategies for the SSGs customised to local context. SSGs require increased support (from national Partners and the network) to build their capacity for effective co-ordination of
1 For an evaluation of capacity building approaches by civil society organisations, see: Blagescu & Young (2006). Capacity Development for Policy Advocacy: Current Thinking and Approaches among Agencies Supporting Civil Society Organisations. ODI Working Paper 2602 Zeba, S. 2004. Experience of SSGs Approaches at National Level-Taking stock of Early Experience in Africa: Regional Review Report, BirdLife International Africa Partnership Secretariat.
3
projects at IBA sites. This need is also increasingly being reflected in SSGs work given the dynamics of conservation and development policy processes at local and national levels. Significant support to SSGs is already being provided by national Partners in Africa. In order to continue with this support in a most effective way, it is important to determine the development and capacity status of SSGs so as to design need-based intervention strategies. As a capacity enabler, BirdLife Africa Secretariat, therefore, seeks to identify effective intervention strategies, determine resource needs for SSGs, and evaluate the ability of SSGs to implement projects at the local level. The secretariat has developed a standard Capacity Assessment Tool (CAT) for use to evaluate SSG capacity status across the African network. This will provide a standard baseline to understand the aggregate capacity strengths and challenges of each SSG.
Elements of the Capacity Assessment Tool (CAT)The CAT has been developed based on the Conservation Empowerment Index (CEI) – a capacity assessment tool produced by Nature Kenya, the BirdLife Partner in Kenya. All the 40 organisational capacity assessment aspects contained in the CAT are derived from the CEI, the BirdLife’s Quality Assurance Standard3, the McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid4 and from Pact’s Organisational Capacity Assessment (OCA) Tool5 which measure individual capacity needs of NGOs and Faith Based Organisations (FBOs) and the effectiveness of those organisations’ capacity building initiatives. The use of the CEI aspects ensures continuity of a process already established within the network by the BirdLife Partnership in Kenya. BirdLife’s Quality Assurance Standard helps to
3 BirdLife International. Quality Assurance System for BirdLife Organisations.4 The McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid is a tool designed to help non-profit organisations assess their organisational capacity. The Grid can be used to identify those particular areas of capacity that are strongest and those that need improvement, or to measure changes in an organisation’s capacity over time Ref: “Effective Capacity Building in Non-Profit Organisations”, prepared by McKinsey & Co for Venture Philanthropy and Partners (www.venturepp.org) 5 Pact Ethiopia OCA tool, 2001
4
maintain the high standard set by BirdLife Partners, and serves as a basis for developing a standard SSGs capacity evaluation mechanism for all African Partners. The McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid is a widely used tool and represents global best-practice on capacity assessment for non-profit organisations. The grid can be tailored and customised to different situations due to its flexibility. Pact’s OCA tool is also widely used and adopted and adapted by many NGOs, FBOs and people’s organisations working in all areas on sustainable development.
The Capacity Assessment Tool (CAT) contains the following features:
1. An assessment of forty aspects of an organisation’s capacity. Thirty four of these aspects are drawn from the CEI and the remaining six have been drawn from both the BirdLife Quality Assurance document and the McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid (these are underlined in the matrix chart) while Pact’s aspects have been adapted and mainstreamed across the 40 aspects
2. The capacity assessment aspects are clustered into four broad categories: (i) Aspirations and Strategy; (ii) Organisational Skills; (iii) Human Resources; and (iv) Systems, Infrastructure and Organisational Structure
3. The weighting on the assigned ranks are standardised to 10 aspects of organisational capacity. This enables the assessors to identify clear and targeted areas of capacity building intervention based on the four broad categories
4. A space is provided for filling in the explanations of the scores. This allows the assessor to capture the reasons behind the selected scores, as well as additional information relevant to the analysis.
5
Assessment Process The CAT takes into consideration the fact that SSGs are at different stages of growth and development, and that their capacity needs and intervention strategies will largely depend on the circumstances of individual SSGs. A few assumptions are, therefore, worth noting before using the CAT. These are that SSGs are locally based, more often rural entities operating at the site level; the approaches to SSG formation and management are different in each site; and that assessment should be based on a process of consultation with SSGs and national Partners. BirdLife highly recommends flexibility regarding local capacity issues and approaches, including the use of this assessment tool. A very participatory way of doing the assessment is also highly encouraged where not just the group members are involved but also represen-
Forest Guards in trainingPhoto credit: Nature Kenya
6
tatives from all the other stakeholders such as relevant government personnel, other groups, NGOs, and private sectors that work in the area, area administration offices among others. The following steps are suggested in undertaking the assessment process:
1. Meet with the SSG officials and explain the process at least two weeks before the actual assessment date. It’s recommended that one or two of these be well-versed with the process and be the ones to lead the group together with the main assessor for ownership
2. Provide the questionnaire to the group officials after the briefing meeting and give an overview of the purpose of the whole exercise, explaining any terms which could potentially have any hidden meanings
3. Encourage the group to organise a consultative meeting with a few selected members of the group – preferably the old members – to go through the questionnaire
4. During the joint assessment meeting, encourage participants to think about the aspects of the organisation in creative and interesting ways – a well thought-out and relevant ice-breaker could elicit this.
5. When attaching a score to any of the indicators, encourage the participants to think and write down reasons for their scores – this is very helpful during the analysis and discussions thereafter. A space is provided for entering this information. Explain to the participants to mark the box that is closest to describing the situation at hand: descriptions will rarely be perfect. Consensus must be reached by the participants before the score is put down.
6. Officials together with the main assessor then do the analysis and get results for each aspect, working out the weakest points in the SSG where capacity needs to be built but also the strongest aspects which can sustain the SSG.
7. Confirm with the members that the results are a true reflection of the situation in the group and where necessary work out changes through group consensus.
7
8. The next thing is to discuss how they think capacity will be built and what resources will be needed to do it and where they think they could get the resources.
9. A macro-environment analysis can then be done with guidance from the assessor
10. The assessor will then do the report, share it with all stakeholders for input and then do a final report which is endorsed and owned by the SSG and which the SSG, BirdLife Partnership and other willing stakeholders can officially use to build the capacity of the SSG.
11. The report serves as a baseline and other future assessments can use it to gauge the gains made.
12. Another assessment can then be done after two years to assess improvements and chart way forward.
Peers learning about birdsPhoto credit: Nature Kenya
8
Scoring InstructionsEach statement should be scored with a number from 1 – 6 denoting the following:
1. Needs urgent attention and improvement2. Needs attention3. Needs improvement on a fairly wide scale, but not major or
urgent4. Needs improvement in limited aspects, but not major or urgent5. Room for some improvement6. No need for immediate improvement
The scores above correspond to different stages of development of a given organisation . Such organisational development stages of the group or institution are described below1:
Nascent: The organisation is at the earliest stages of development. All the components measured through this assessment are in either a rudimentary form or non-existent.
Emerging: The organisation is developing some capacity. Structures for governance, management practices, human resources, financial resources, and service delivery are in place and functioning
Expanding: The organisation has a track record of achievement: its work is recognised by its constituency, the government, the private business sector, and other NGOs active in the same sector.
Mature: The organisation is fully functioning and sustainable, with a diversified resource base and partnership relationships with national and international networks.
(1 - 2.4)
(2.5 - 4.0)
(4.1 - 5.0)
(5.1 - 6.0)
1PACT Ethiopia (2001), Organizational Capacity Assesment Tool, PACT Ethiopia
9
Rating Stages
1.0 to 2.4 Nascent
2.5 to 4.0 Emerging
4.1 to 5.0 Expanding
5.1 to 6.0 Mature
Participants during MonitoringPhoto credit: Nature Kenya
10
SSG
Cap
acit
y As
sess
men
t Too
l
Nam
e of
SSG
.....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.D
ate
of A
sses
smen
t ..
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..Ass
esso
r ...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Back
grou
nd In
form
atio
nW
hen
was
the
SSG
foun
ded?
.....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
..W
hat
is t
he t
otal
num
ber
of S
SG m
embe
rs?
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Dis
aggr
egat
ed b
y ge
nder
: Mal
e ...
......
......
......
......
...
Fem
ale.
......
......
......
......
......
..H
ow m
any
are
yout
h? M
ale
......
......
.....
Fem
ale
......
......
..... T
otal
.....
......
......
11
Asp
ects
bei
ng a
sses
sed
Ran
k as
sign
edBr
iefly
ex
plai
n th
e re
ason
s fo
r yo
ur
scor
e
Asp
irat
ions
and
Str
ateg
y
Asp
irat
ions
Mis
sion
, Vis
ion
and
Stra
tegi
c G
oals
1.
Valu
es a
nd P
urpo
se: T
he S
SG
has
a cl
ear
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
th
e pu
rpos
e of
the
ir m
issi
on
and
stra
tegi
c go
als,
and
wha
t it
aspi
res
to a
chie
ve, a
nd
adhe
res
to t
he v
alue
s of
the
gr
oup
12
34
56
2.
Ris
k as
sess
men
t: T
he S
SG
unde
rsta
nds
and
resp
onds
to
the
ris
ks t
o w
hich
the
gr
oup
is e
xpos
ed, i
nclu
ding
lik
elih
ood,
impa
cts
and
pote
ntia
l sol
utio
ns/m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s
12
34
56
12
3.
Con
stitu
ency
: 3.
1.
The
ent
ire m
embe
rshi
p is
wel
l inf
orm
ed
abou
t th
e gr
oup’
s pr
ogra
mm
es, t
o th
e le
vel t
hat
they
can
co
ntri
bute
effe
ctiv
ely
in
the
grou
p’s
obje
ctiv
es
and
plan
s
12
34
56
3.2.
T
he S
SG m
embe
rshi
p is
invo
lved
in a
dvoc
acy,
capa
city
bui
ldin
g an
d re
sour
ce m
obili
satio
n w
ork
12
34
56
4.
Ove
rarc
hing
Goa
ls: S
SG’s
visi
on t
rans
late
d in
to c
lear
, bo
ld s
et o
f (up
to
thre
e go
als)
tha
t th
e gr
oup
aim
s to
ach
ieve
spe
cifie
d by
a
wel
l-defi
ned
time
fram
e fo
r at
tain
ing
goal
s
12
34
56
Con
serv
atio
n G
oals
5.
Invo
lvem
ent
in C
onse
rvat
ion:
T
he S
SG h
as a
dem
onst
rabl
e in
tere
st in
con
serv
atio
n, h
as
proj
ects
and
act
iviti
es t
hat
rela
te t
o th
e co
nser
vatio
n is
sues
at
thei
r IB
A s
ite
12
34
56
13
Stra
tegy
Ove
rall
Stra
tegy
6.
Stra
tegi
c Fo
cus:
The
SSG
ha
s a
stra
tegi
c ac
tion
plan
com
plet
e w
ith c
lear
ob
ject
ives
, ach
ieva
ble
targ
ets
and
clea
r fo
cus
on
envi
ronm
enta
l con
serv
atio
n
12
34
56
Org
anis
atio
nal
Rev
iew
7.
Gro
up R
evie
w: T
he S
SG
lead
ersh
ip p
erio
dica
lly
revi
ews
the
stru
ctur
e an
d pr
ogra
mm
es o
f the
gro
up t
o en
sure
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d be
st
use
of r
esou
rces
12
34
56
Prog
ram
D
evel
opm
ent
8.
Proj
ects
Dev
elop
men
t: T
he S
SG u
nder
stan
ds t
he
proj
ect
deve
lopm
ent
proc
ess,
impl
emen
tatio
n pr
oced
ures
, in
clud
ing
wor
k pl
anni
ng, h
ow
dono
rs w
ork,
M&
E, r
epor
ting
acco
untin
g, an
d pr
ojec
t m
odifi
catio
ns
12
34
56
14
Sust
aina
bilit
y, Fu
ndra
isin
g an
d R
even
ue
Gen
erat
ion
9.
Sust
aina
bilit
y M
easu
res:
9.1.
T
he S
SG h
as r
elia
ble
and
vari
ed s
ourc
es
of in
com
e (fo
reig
n an
d lo
cal),
and
is
able
to
mob
ilise
re
sour
ces
thro
ugh
prop
osal
wri
ting
and/
or h
as e
stab
lishe
d (o
r ha
s th
e po
tent
ial o
f es
tabl
ishi
ng)
inco
me
gene
ratin
g na
ture
-bas
ed
ente
rpri
ses
12
34
56
9.2.
T
he S
SG n
etw
orks
with
ot
her
like
orga
nisa
tions
to
mob
ilise
res
ourc
es
12
34
56
9.3.
T
he S
SG h
as li
nks
to
netw
orks
, coa
litio
ns a
nd
spec
ialis
ed in
stitu
tions
th
at a
re u
sefu
l to
it an
d ha
s pl
ans
for
its
cont
inui
ty
12
34
56
15
Goa
ls/P
erfo
rman
ce
Targ
ets
10.
Mon
itori
ng:
10.1
. The
SSG
tog
ethe
r w
ith
the
entir
e m
embe
rshi
p ke
eps
trac
k of
the
im
plem
enta
tion
of p
lans
ag
ains
t th
e gr
oup’
s ob
ject
ives
12
34
56
10.2
. SSG
pro
ject
s ha
ve
a se
t tim
e fr
ame
betw
een
initi
atio
n an
d co
mpl
etio
n
12
34
56
10.3
. SSG
has
cle
ar s
et
of in
dica
tors
for
all
proj
ects
12
34
56
10.4
. M&
E re
sults
are
sha
red
with
all
mem
bers
and
ot
her
stak
ehol
ders
and
al
so u
sed
for
proj
ects
de
velo
pmen
t
12
34
56
Tota
l Ran
ks10
2030
4050
60
Rat
ings
1-10
=111
-20=
221
-30=
331
-40=
441
-50=
551
-60=
6
16
Org
anis
atio
nal
Skill
s
Ope
ratio
nal
Plan
ning
-
1.
Plan
ning
Pro
cess
: The
SSG
ha
s a
clea
rly
docu
men
ted
and
wel
l und
erst
ood
proc
ess
on
how
it s
houl
d pl
an a
nd r
evie
w
its w
ork
12
34
56
1.2
SS
G p
lans
are
bas
ed o
n av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s an
d in
clud
e M
&E
aspe
ct.
12
34
56
2.
Res
ourc
es: P
lann
ing
with
in
the
SSG
tak
es in
to a
ccou
nt
finan
cial
and
hum
an r
esou
rces
av
aila
ble
12
34
56
Fina
ncia
l Pla
nnin
g an
d Bu
dget
ing
3.
Budg
et M
anag
emen
t: 3.
1.
The
lead
ersh
ip t
oget
her
with
the
tre
asur
er
man
ages
the
gro
up’s
budg
et t
o av
oid
finan
cial
de
ficits
12
34
56
3.2.
SS
G h
as a
n an
nual
bu
dget
aga
inst
whi
ch
expe
nditu
re is
don
e.
12
34
56
17
3.3.
In
tern
al a
udits
are
co
nduc
ted
on a
reg
ular
ba
sis
12
34
56
Inte
rnal
C
omm
unic
atio
n4.
C
omm
unic
atio
n w
ithin
SSG
: 4.
1.
Plan
ning
and
all
othe
r ac
tiviti
es w
ithin
the
gr
oup
are
prop
erly
co
mm
unic
ated
. Key
in
form
atio
n is
effe
ctiv
ely
shar
ed in
a t
imel
y m
anne
r w
ith a
ll th
e of
ficia
ls, a
nd t
he e
ntire
SS
G m
embe
rshi
p
12
34
56
4.2.
SS
G m
embe
rs w
ork
on v
olun
tary
bas
is a
nd
valu
e th
eir
mem
bers
hip
with
in t
he S
SG
12
34
56
18
5.
Mee
tings
: SSG
mee
tings
are
co
nven
ed r
egul
arly,
invo
lvin
g th
e en
tire
mem
bers
hip
(alw
ays
mee
ting
the
quor
um
regu
latio
ns). T
he a
gend
a is
ci
rcul
ated
wel
l in
adva
nce
to
ensu
re e
ffect
ive
cont
ribu
tion
and
delib
erat
ions
are
re
cord
ed in
min
utes
ava
ilabl
e to
all
mem
bers
12
34
56
Exte
rnal
R
elat
ions
hips
6.
Lear
ning
from
Oth
ers/
Col
labo
ratio
n an
d Pa
rtne
rshi
ps:
6.1.
T
he S
SG t
akes
tim
e to
le
arn
and
draw
less
ons
from
oth
er p
artn
ers
and
stak
ehol
ders
who
hav
e re
leva
nt k
now
ledg
e an
d ex
peri
ence
be
fore
und
erta
king
w
ork.
The
SSG
has
ag
reed
gui
delin
es o
n co
llabo
ratio
n
12
34
56
6.2.
SS
G b
elon
gs t
o a
netw
ork/
coal
ition
and
is
res
pect
ed b
y ot
her
orga
nisa
tions
in t
he
netw
ork/
coal
ition
12
34
56
19
6.3.
T
he S
SG w
orks
cl
osel
y w
ith r
elev
ant
gove
rnm
ent
sect
ors
and
its p
lans
con
trib
ute
to
Nat
iona
l Pla
ns
12
34
56
6.4.
T
he S
SG is
reg
arde
d as
cr
edib
le a
nd v
alua
ble
by d
onor
s an
d ha
s di
vers
ified
con
tact
s w
ith
dono
r co
mm
unity
12
34
56
7.
Exte
rnal
Com
mun
icat
ion:
7.
1.
All
com
mun
icat
ion
from
ou
tsid
e in
clud
ing
lett
ers,
e-m
ails
, pho
ne c
alls
etc
. is
dea
lt w
ith p
rom
ptly
by
offi
cial
s
12
34
56
7.2.
T
he S
SG is
kno
wn
by lo
cal m
edia
and
is
resp
ecte
d by
the
m
and
uses
the
med
ia
effe
ctiv
ely
12
34
56
7.3.
T
he S
SG a
cces
ses
loca
l re
sour
ces
and
has
good
re
latio
ns w
ith lo
cal
priv
ate
busi
ness
sec
tors
12
34
56
20
Perf
orm
ance
A
naly
sis
and
Prog
ram
A
djus
tmen
ts
8.
Man
agin
g C
hang
e: W
here
m
ajor
cha
nges
tak
es p
lace
in
the
grou
p, i.e
. in
man
agem
ent,
proj
ects
, par
tner
s et
c. –
the
orga
nisa
tion’
s le
ader
ship
w
orks
tog
ethe
r as
a t
eam
to
inst
itute
nec
essa
ry
man
agem
ent
inte
rven
tions
12
34
56
Kno
wle
dge/
Dat
a M
anag
emen
t9.
Fi
ling
Syst
em: T
he S
SG h
as a
fil
ing
syst
em t
hat
ensu
res
all
docu
men
ts a
re w
ell o
rgan
ised
m
akin
g it
easy
to
acce
ss a
nd
trac
k in
form
atio
n
12
34
56
10.
Shar
ing
Kno
wle
dge:
The
SS
G e
ncou
rage
s op
enne
ss
and
tran
spar
ency
in s
hari
ng
of k
now
ledg
e/da
ta a
mon
gst
grou
p m
embe
rs a
nd t
o ot
her
stak
ehol
ders
12
34
56
Tota
l Ran
ks10
2030
4050
60
Rat
ings
(N
asce
nt,
Ener
ging
, Exp
andi
ng
& M
atur
e)
1-10
=111
-20=
221
-30=
331
-40=
441
-50=
551
-60=
6
21
Hum
an R
esou
rces
Mem
bers
hip
Com
posi
tion
and
Com
mitm
ent
1.
Com
mitm
ent
and
Invo
lvem
ent:
SSG
m
embe
rshi
p sh
ows
com
mitm
ent
to c
onse
rvat
ion,
to
the
nee
ds o
f the
ent
ire
mem
bers
hip
and
wid
ely
invo
lves
the
mem
bers
hip
in
grou
p’s
activ
ities
, con
sist
ent
with
indi
vidu
al’s
skill
s, ex
peri
ence
and
ava
ilabi
lity
12
34
56
Mem
bers
hip/
G
over
nanc
e2.
G
over
nanc
e: 2.
1
Res
pons
ibili
ties
are
shar
ed a
mon
gst
offic
ials
. M
embe
rs a
ssis
t th
e le
ader
in e
stab
lishi
ng
and
artic
ulat
ing
the
SSG
’s ob
ject
ives
, pla
ns
and
in r
evie
win
g th
e SS
G’s
perf
orm
ance
12
34
56
2.2.
SS
G M
anag
emen
t is
ch
arge
d w
ith fu
ndra
isin
g an
d pu
blic
rel
atio
ns
12
34
56
22
2.3.
M
anag
emen
t is
cha
rged
w
ith m
akin
g po
licy
for
the
SSG
and
sha
ring
w
idel
y to
mem
bers
12
34
56
3.
Lead
ersh
ip:
3.1.
T
he S
SG’s
lead
ers
are
dem
ocra
tical
ly e
lect
ed
(thr
ough
ele
ctio
n an
d co
-opt
ion)
, ar
e an
swer
able
to
mem
bers
an
d ar
e co
mpe
tent
12
34
56
3.2.
G
ende
r ba
lanc
e ex
ists
in
the
SSG
Man
agem
ent
12
34
56
3.3.
SS
G le
ader
s ar
e ac
cess
ible
and
fost
er
part
icip
atio
n of
m
embe
rs
12
34
56
Prof
essi
onal
ism
an
d Sk
ills
4.
Mem
ber
Skill
s an
d Ex
peri
ence
s: M
embe
rs o
f th
e SS
G h
andl
ing
diffe
rent
as
pect
s ar
e pr
oper
ly t
rain
ed
and
expe
rien
ced
to d
eliv
er
effe
ctiv
ely
and
effic
ient
ly
12
34
56
23
5.
Kno
wle
dge
and
Expe
rtis
e on
Con
serv
atio
n: T
he S
SG
has
scie
ntifi
c an
d te
chni
cal
expe
rtis
e on
bio
dive
rsity
is
sues
(e.
g. bo
tani
sts,
ecol
ogis
ts e
tc)
and
soci
o-ec
onom
ic is
sues
(la
wye
rs,
econ
omis
ts, s
ocio
logi
sts
etc)
12
34
56
6.
Lear
ning
Opp
ortu
nitie
s: T
he
SSG
pro
vide
s op
port
uniti
es
for
its m
embe
rshi
p to
in
crea
se k
now
ledg
e, s
kills
and
ex
peri
ence
12
34
56
Co-
ordi
natio
n Te
am/P
roce
ss7.
D
eleg
atio
n an
d C
o-or
dina
tion:
7.
1.
The
SSG
lead
ersh
ip
dele
gate
s w
isel
y, gi
ving
ot
her
mem
bers
an
oppo
rtun
ity t
o ta
ke
resp
onsi
bilit
y in
the
ru
nnin
g of
the
gro
up
12
34
56
7.2.
T
he le
ader
ship
ens
ures
co
-ord
inat
ion
of
activ
ities
of t
he g
roup
12
34
56
24
8.
Con
flict
Man
agem
ent:
The
SSG
has
laid
dow
n pr
oced
ures
for
confl
ict
man
agem
ent
and
reso
lutio
n.
Mem
bers
can
app
eal i
n ca
se
they
feel
the
y ha
ve b
een
trea
ted
unfa
irly
12
34
56
Mot
ivat
ion
and
Rew
ards
9.
Mem
ber’s
Mot
ivat
ion:
The
SS
G le
ader
ship
und
erst
ands
its
mem
bers
hip
and
take
s tim
e to
enc
oura
ge, d
evel
op,
cong
ratu
late
, rew
ard
and
reco
gnis
e, e
tc.,
to e
nsur
e m
embe
rs a
re m
otiv
ated
at
all
times
12
34
56
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g Fr
amew
ork
10.
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g: T
he S
SG
lead
ersh
ip t
akes
into
acc
ount
th
e vi
ews
of it
s m
embe
rshi
p an
d ot
her
stak
ehol
ders
, the
ri
sks,
finan
cial
situ
atio
ns, e
tc.
befo
re m
akin
g an
y de
cisi
ons
on b
ehal
f of t
he g
roup
.
12
34
56
Tota
l Ran
ks10
2030
4050
60
Rat
ings
1-10
=111
-20=
221
-30=
331
-40=
441
-50=
551
-60=
6
25
Syst
ems
& In
fras
truc
ture
and
Org
anis
atio
nal S
truc
ture
Syst
ems
&
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Mon
itori
ng
Syst
ems
1.
Mon
itori
ng S
yste
m: A
bas
ic
mon
itori
ng s
yste
m is
in
plac
e w
here
info
rmat
ion
is
reco
rded
abo
ut p
roje
cts,
inpu
ts a
nd o
utpu
ts a
gain
st
obje
ctiv
es a
nd a
ctiv
ities
and
us
ed in
pro
ject
dev
elop
men
t
12
34
56
Fina
ncia
l O
pera
tions
M
anag
emen
t
2.
Fina
ncia
l Man
agem
ent:
2.1.
T
he S
SG h
as a
ba
nk a
ccou
nt, a
nd
a tr
easu
rer
who
is
dem
ocra
tical
ly e
lect
ed,
and
is r
espo
nsib
le fo
r m
anag
ing
the
grou
p’s
finan
ces
12
34
56
2.2.
Fi
nanc
ial i
nfor
mat
ion
is
used
in fu
ture
pla
nnin
g1
23
45
6
26
3.
Acc
ount
ing
Proc
edur
es:
3.1.
T
he S
SG k
eeps
boo
ks
of a
ccou
nts,
and
has
relia
ble
proc
edur
es t
o en
sure
tha
t re
sour
ces
are
man
aged
pro
perl
y an
d th
e re
cord
s pr
oper
ly k
ept
12
34
56
3.2.
Se
para
te p
roje
cts
have
se
para
te a
ccou
nts
12
34
56
3.3.
T
he S
SG k
eeps
cle
ar
reco
rds
for
all i
ts
tran
sact
ions
12
34
56
4.
Fina
ncia
l Tra
nspa
renc
y: 4.
1.
The
SSG
’s fin
anci
al
man
agem
ent
and
repo
rtin
g is
tra
nspa
rent
an
d th
e le
ader
ship
is
ope
n to
dis
cuss
fin
anci
al m
atte
rs w
ith
the
mem
bers
hip
as
appr
opri
ate
12
34
56
27
4.2.
Fi
nanc
ial r
epor
ts a
re
prep
ared
in a
tim
ely
man
ner,
are
accu
rate
an
d ar
e us
ed fo
r pl
anni
ng, m
onito
ring
and
re
view
pur
pose
s
12
34
56
4.3.
In
tern
al a
udits
are
co
nduc
ted
on a
reg
ular
ba
sis
12
34
56
4.4.
In
tern
al a
udits
are
co
nduc
ted
on a
reg
ular
ba
sis
12
34
56
5.
Budg
etin
g: 5.
1.
The
SSG
mem
bers
are
in
volv
ed in
dev
elop
ing
and
mon
itori
ng t
he
budg
et a
nnua
lly
12
34
56
5.2.
SS
G h
as a
n an
nual
bu
dget
aga
inst
whi
ch
expe
nditu
re is
don
e.
12
34
56
28
Infr
astr
uctu
re6.
Bu
ildin
g an
d O
ffice
Spa
ce:
The
SSG
ow
ns o
r ha
s ac
cess
to
an
offic
e to
con
duct
m
eetin
gs, c
arri
es o
ut g
roup
op
erat
ions
, and
sto
res
the
grou
p’s
reso
urce
s. T
he S
SG
also
has
acc
ess
to r
elia
ble
com
mun
icat
ion
faci
litie
s (t
elep
hone
, com
pute
rs e
tc.)
12
34
56
29
Org
anis
atio
nal
Stru
ctur
e
Org
anis
atio
nal
Stru
ctur
e7.
Pa
rtic
ipat
ion
of M
embe
rs:
The
SSG
’s le
ader
ship
en
cour
ages
mem
bers
to
expr
ess
thei
r op
inio
ns
abou
t th
e gr
oups
’s w
ork
and
oper
atio
n an
d is
ope
n to
di
ffere
nt p
oint
s of
vie
w
12
34
56
8.
Con
stitu
tion/
Bye
law
s: T
he S
SG m
eets
all
lega
l req
uire
men
ts. A
co
nstit
utio
n is
dev
elop
ed in
a
part
icip
ator
y m
anne
r, w
hich
cl
earl
y de
fines
the
rol
es a
nd
resp
onsi
bilit
ies
of t
he o
ffici
als
and
is o
pera
tiona
l
12
34
56
Org
anis
atio
nal
Des
ign
9.
Org
anis
atio
nal D
esig
n: T
he
SSG
has
a s
truc
ture
tha
t en
sure
s ef
fect
ive
and
best
use
of
res
ourc
es
12
34
56
30
10.
SSG
Ope
ratio
nal S
truc
ture
: T
he S
SG s
truc
ture
ch
art
show
s th
e lin
e of
re
spon
sibi
lity
betw
een
the
diffe
rent
pos
ition
s in
the
gr
oup.
12
34
56
Tota
l Ran
ks10
2030
4050
60
Rat
ings
1-10
=111
-20=
221
-30=
331
-40=
441
-50=
551
-60=
6
31
Farm products from around Kiriita.
The Macro-environmental Analysis
The is need to look at the macro-environment from three perspectives:
Political Context• Socio-cultural Context• Economic Context•
Photo credit: Nature Kenya
32
1. Political IssuesOpportunities and Threats
1. Put down the main political related opportunities that may exist that the SSG can exploit.
2. List down some main political related threats that the SSG could be exposed to that exist in the environment.
2. Social - Cultural IssuesOpportunities and Threats
1. Put down the main socio-cultural related opportunities that may exist that the SSG can exploit.
2. List down some main socio-cultural related threats that the SSG could be exposed to that exist in the environment.
3. Economic IssuesOpportunities and Threats
1. Put down the main economic related opportunities that may exist that the SSG can exploit.
2. List down some main economic related threats that the SSG could be exposed to that exist in the environment.
33
Annex 1
Checklist Questions on Areas for Assessment - Not presented in order of capacity form structure.
1.0 Governance 1.1 Governance Structure
a) Is there an independent governing body?b) Does it represent all interest groups?c) What has been the role of this body?
1.2 Vision /Mission a) Does the organisation have a clear vision and mission?b) To what extent has the vision and mission been
internalised and understood by stakeholders c) Are the activities of the organisation in tandem with
the vision and mission?1.3 Constituency
a) Does the organisation have a well-defined constituency?
b) To what extent is the constituency involved in organisation activities?
c) Are there baseline surveys that have been done to assess the needs of the constituency? Have the needs been incorporated in programme planning?
d) Is the organisation taking up some advocacy issues?1.4 Leadership
a) How are leaders selected/appointed?
34
b) Is there a clear constitution guiding the organisation’s leadership?
c) Does the leadership have the competence, experience and knowledge required by the organisation?
d) Is the leadership and senior management clear of their roles?
e) Assess the relationship between senior management, leadership and staff.
1.5 Legal Status a) Is the organisation legally registered?b) Does it have a constitution that is well understood by
the constituency?c) Assess the extent to which the organisation complies
with the constitution.
2.0 Management Practices 2.1 Organisational Structure
a) Does the organisation have a clearly defined structure?
b) What policies are in place to promote good management practices?
2.2 Information Systemsa) Does the organisation collect baseline data before
commencing work?b) Is there a system of assessing impact of work done?c) Are there trained personnel for collecting the
information?2.3 Administrative Procedures and Personnel
a) Are there clear policies on staffing? (i.e. recruitment, employment, disciplinary action etc.)
b) Are there procedures for solving conflicts and grievances?
35
c) Are manuals in place to guide administrative activities? d) Are staff performance appraisals done?e) Are there activities designed to promote teamwork?
2.4 Planning a) Does the organisation have formal plans? b) Is the planning process participatory? c) Is there a mechanism of reviewing the plans?
2.5 Program Development a) Assess the extent to which programmes are based on
priority needs of the constituency. b) Does the programme design incorporate monitoring
and evaluation and reporting activities?2.6 Monitoring and Evaluation
a) Is there a monitoring and evaluation system? b) Are performance indicators clear?c) How are results of M&E used in programming?
2.7 Program Reporting a) Does the organisation have a clear reporting system? b) Are reports published?
3.0 Human Resources 3.1 Human Resource Development
a) Does the organisation have a clear policy and plan in human resource development?
b) Assess the extent to which staff development activities are liked to their skills and organisational performance
3.2 Staff Roles/ Volunteers a) Are there clear job descriptions? b) Is the staffing level adequate to execute organisational
activities?
36
3.3 Work Organisation a) Are there regular staff meetings? What is the extent of
staff participation?3.4 Diversity of Issues
b) Assess the extent to which major stakeholders are involved in the organisation.
c) Is there a gender policy? d) Has there been any training in gender?
3.5 Supervisory Practices a) Assess the quality of staff supervision
3.6 Salaries and Benefits a) How competitive is the staff compensation package?b) Are all labour laws adhered to?
4.0 Financial Resources a) Assess the quality of accounting system in place. b) How are budgets prepared? Are they used as a management
tool to control resources?c) Assess the quality of financial reporting. d) Is a control system in place? e) Are regular audits carried out?
5.0 Service Delivery a) Does the organisation have the capacity to deliver services
to its beneficiaries?b) Assess the extent to which the constituency owns the
programs. c) Are impact assessments carried out? And are the results
used in planning?
37
6.0 External Relations a) How is the organisation perceived by the stakeholders and
the public?b) Does it collaborate with the government and other
agencies?
7.0 Sustainability a) What strategies are in place to ensure organisational
sustainability?
Notes
Notes
Notes
BirdLife International Africa Partnership
www.birdlife.orgBirdLife International is a UK registered Charity No. 1042125
Funded by
A Sida-funded programme atthe Swedish Biodiversity Center
SwedBio
