Effectiveness Programme. Health Check. Coordinator guide

Transcription

1 Effectiveness Programme Health Check Coordinator guide 0

2 About Bond As the UK network for international development organisations, a vital part of Bond's role is to strengthen the sector. We achieve this by providing opportunities for people to develop their skills, knowledge and expertise and by supporting organisations to better demonstrate their impact and improve their performance. bond.org.uk bond.org.uk/effectiveness About the Bond Effectiveness Programme The Bond Effectiveness Programme supports UK NGOs to improve how they assess, learn from and demonstrate their effectiveness. This includes:. Developing agreement and supporting implementation of: A n Impact Builder: a sector wide framework of indicators, data collection tools and assessment methods to improve the consistency of how NGOs measure, learn from and report results An online Health Check and resource database to help identify an organisation's strengths and weaknesses. Building knowledge and skills to support member organisations to measure and manage effectiveness through training, peer learning and support, and resource development. Creating an enabling environment that encourages and supports organisations to deliver improvements in their effectiveness through engagement with donors, NGO leaders and promoting greater transparency about performance If you have further questions or comments please contact the Effectiveness Programme team: ngoeffectiveness@bond.org.uk The Effectiveness Programme is supported financially by: ActionAid UK, CAFOD, CARE International UK, Christian Aid, Comic Relief, Department for International Development, EveryChild, Islamic Relief, Mercy Corp, Oxfam GB, Plan UK, Practical Action, Save the Children UK, Sightsavers, Tearfund, VSO, WaterAid, World Vision and WWF. 0

3 What is the Health Check? The Health Check is an online self-assessment that helps to identify an organisation's strengths and weaknesses and enables benchmarking with peers. It is complemented by a comprehensive set of online resources that signpost to other relevant initiatives, guides, training and support. The Health Check helped us to look systematically at the whole range of areas across our organisation and prioritise where we needed to be stronger. Philip Goodwin, Chief Executive, TREE AID 0

4 About this guide This guide provides all the information needed to ensure that your organisation gets the most out of the Health Check. This guide is structured according to the five Health Check steps and explains how to:. Prepare your organisation: decide on the approach your organisation should use to collect and analyse the data, who to involve, how and when.. Gather the data: decide how you will collect the data and how you will ensure that it is robust.. Analyse the results: take an in-depth look at the strengths and weaknesses of your organisation with those who took part.. Develop an improvement plan: prioritise which areas to take forward, agreeing who will be responsible and the resources required.. Use the online resources: identify the quality standards and principles, guides, training courses and consultants that will help your organisation improve. Before you start To get the most out of the Health Check it is vital that there is buy-in to the process at a senior level and that everyone involved is clear about why the organisation is doing it, understands what will happen once the data has been gathered, and are willing to act on the findings to improve the organisation. It is crucial that discussions on these issues take place before starting the Health Check. We used the Health Check to get an idea of what the organisation feels about itself. It's especially useful for providing insight so you can smartly put new resources into the right areas. Edward Watkiss, Head of Operations, Farm Africa 0

5 Stage of an organisations growth Example from Identity and integrity (pillar ) Health Check structure There are pillars. These correspond to the core functions found in most organisations for example, finance, programmes and human resources (see the table on page 0). Each pillar is broken down into a number of building blocks these represent the specific and most important elements of a pillar against which an organisation assesses itself. Each building block has five levels these represent the different stages of an organisation's development. You will need to decide which level best describes your organisation. The following table displays broadly the progression across the levels. The right hand column provides an example from the Partnership building block. Nascent: your development is at an early stage. You recognise there is scope for improvement. Evolving: you are taking steps to develop but your approach is ad hoc and not necessarily informed by a logical strategy. Maturing: you recognise the importance of developing this area and have a logical approach. Your development and practice is of a good standard. Flourishing: you have a systematic and coherent approach and have evidence that it is developing consistently across your organisation. You are starting to move towards best practice. Leading: you have a strong evidence base collected over time that indicates your development is of a very high standard. The development is consistent across your organisation at all levels. Your practice is recognised by external actors. We have mixed understandings within our organisation of why and how we work with partners in the south. We only seek their views on the project activities they are involved in. Some staff have an understanding of why and how we work with partners in the south. Amongst others this is unclear. We are looking at ways in which we can reflect partner's views in the development of our strategies and policies as well as project activities. The majority of our staff have a shared understanding of why and how we work with partners in the south. This understanding is consistent across most of our activities. We try to ensure the views of partners are reflected in the development of our strategies and policies as well as project activities. We have a clear and widely shared understanding at all levels of our organisation of why and how we work with partners in the south. This understanding is consistent across all activities and our external communications. Partners views are reflected in project activities, the development of our strategies, policies and in our governance. We have a clear and widely shared understanding at all levels of our organisation, including the Board, of why and how we work with partners in the south. This understanding is consistent across all activities and our external communications. We have processes for ensuring partners views are reflected in project activities, the development of strategy and policy and in our governance and we can show how they influence our thinking and decisions at all levels. 0

6 Scoring You may find that your organisation does not neatly fit into one of the five levels and achieves some elements of one level and some of another. In these cases, you will need to select the level that best reflects your organisation's current practice. There is no expectation that you should reach level for all the building blocks. The Health Check was designed to be used by organisations of all sizes and complexities and for some building blocks the highest levels may be more relevant for larger organisations. It has been designed so that level reflects a good benchmark for any organisation operating in the international development sector and should be attainable irrespective of size. Ensuring a robust selfassessment process The Health Check requires your organisation to be self-reflective and open about its strengths and weaknesses. To ensure an accurate picture, it is important that those engaging in the process are specific about why they think the organisation is at a certain level. As the coordinator, you should encourage people to make reference to existing policies and procedures, provide specific examples of practice and quote evaluation findings when doing the assessment. This is particularly important as you start to move up the levels. At level and you should have a strong evidence base that supports why the organisation has been scored at this level. There is a space for comments under each building block to help collect this evidence. It s important to gather a wide-range of perspectives during data collection to help mitigate biases and create a more objective and balanced picture of your organisation's strengths and weaknesses. Similarly, involving different stakeholders in analysing the results can help to foster ownership and increase the likelihood of staff implementing the improvement plan. A checklist of questions to test the quality of your Health Check data is on page. Encourage people to reference existing policies and procedures, provide specific examples of practice and quote evaluation findings when doing their assessment. 06

7 How do I prepare my To get the most out of the Health Check, work through the following steps: Approach: identify who you want to involve in the process and how representative you want them to be of the organisation Timing: identify the best time to undertake the Health Check Build commitment and ownership among colleagues: those involved need to understand what the Health Check is, why the organisation is doing it and what it will get out of the process The Health Check provided us with a systematic process for assessing effectiveness and a source of evidence for funding proposals. Mark Ireland, Programmes Director, Self Help Africa 07

8 Approach The first step is to decide how in-depth and detailed you want the process to be. The main things to consider are who to involve and how representative they are of the wider organisation. In planning who you will involve and how you will do the assessment you might find it helpful to think in terms of these categories: Light touch approach might involve a small, self-selected group of staff (e.g. senior management team) undertaking the self-assessment. They might individually complete the online survey before a regular team meeting, or they might do the assessment collectively at the team meeting itself. For example, at Leonard Cheshire Disability the senior management team completed the Health Check during a three hour focus group and four regional managers working overseas completed the online survey. Moderate approach might involve a group of staff representing different perspectives within the organisation gathering the opinions of their team either through asking them to complete to online survey or provide their feedback individually, followed by a discussion of the results in a workshop. For example, at Toybox representatives from teams across the organisation completed the Health Check individually and then representatives from most teams joined a workshop to discuss the results. In-depth approach might involve sending the online survey out to a large number of staff across all teams and to external stakeholders such as partners. All staff, partners, and board members might be invited to complete the survey individually followed by a discussion of the results in a workshop. For an example of an in depth approach, see the Mothers Union case study on page 9. In planning who to involve and how you will do the assessment, you might find it helpful to think in terms of a light touch, moderate or in-depth approach. 08

9 Approach The type of assessment process you adopt is not determined by the size of your organisation. For example, if you are a small organisation but involve all members of staff across all teams, partners and board members you have selected an in-depth approach. When you come to use the benchmarking you will be able to compare yourself to organisations that used a similar approach to you (see section ). Once you have identified your approach, you will need to decide which pillars you want to assess and the people and teams you might like to involve. The Health Check is designed to enable you to signpost individual staff and teams to the pillars most relevant to their areas of work. The table on page 0 provides suggestions. Case study Mothers Union Decide who should assess each pillar We invited people to complete the Health Check. People completed different pillars according to their role, for instance, trustees and all staff at our UK headquarters completed all pillars, while the coordinator of the Mothers Union in Kenya and a selection of Mothers Union staff working overseas completed the pillars related to programmes (pillars - and 9-0). This method ensured that those with direct knowledge and experience only answered the questions relevant to their role. The Health Check was comprehensive and useful, especially as we have a positive volunteer policy and prioritise staff involvement in all aspects of strategy and direction. Marianne Rowley, Head of International, Sue Ryder 09

10 Who assesses each pillar? Pillars Building blocks Who is the best person/team to involve? Identity and integrity Shared values and vision, Distinctive contribution, Transparency, Partnership, Beneficiary voice Board, senior management team, human resources and communications teams Leadership and strategy Developing strategy, Monitoring strategy, Strong governance, Diverse governance, Inspiring leadership Board, senior management team, human resources teams Partners Selection, Shared values, Roles and responsibilities, Monitoring partnerships, Staff capacity, Staff continuity, Capacity development, Partner sustainability Senior management, monitoring and evaluation and programmes teams, country offices and partners Beneficiaries Transparency, Participation, Feedback, Staff capacity Programmes and institutional funding teams, country offices, partners, and beneficiaries Programmes Identification, Planning, Indicators and targets, Monitoring and learning, Evaluation and learning, Programme resources, Resources for monitoring, Strategy for impact, Sustainability of impact 6 People Skills and capacity, Recruitment, Policies, Managing performance, Learning and development, Interns, Health, safety, and security, Feedback 7 Money Planning and fundraising, Financial risk management, Value for money, Budgeting, Accounting systems, Financial reporting, Financial controls, Staff capacity 8 External relations Communications strategy, Creative communications, Media, Supporters, Institutional donors, Private sector, Civil Society Organisations, Networks, Government, Research community Senior management, monitoring and evaluation, programmes, and institutional funding teams, country offices and partners Senior management, and human resources teams, and all line managers, staff and interns Treasurer, senior management, finance teams, and all budget holders Board, senior management and communications teams, fundraising team including institutional, corporate and individual giving staff, advocacy and policy team 9 Monitoring Culture, System, Communicating results, Knowledge management, Innovation, Staff capacity Board, senior management, monitoring and evaluation and programmes team 0 Internal communications Communication, Collaboration, Staff participation, Country offices, Affiliates/ members Board, senior management and human resources teams, all staff, country offices Influencing Strategy, Evidence base, Context analysis, Planning, Monitoring and learning, Evaluation and learning, Staff capacity, Collaboration, Public mobilisation, Beneficiary involvement, Policy influence Senior management, advocacy, policy and campaigning teams, monitoring and evaluation team 0

11 Organisation Purpose and timing Timing The timing of the Health Check has a big influence on its overall success. It may help to discuss: Why are you doing the assessment now? Is it the best time to do it? What else is going on? What is it responding to or contributing to? What will you do with Will they be used in a way that can lead to sustainable organisational development rather than ad hoc initiatives? How much investment are you prepared to make in the process? (time and money) Farm Africa EveryChild Strategic planning and allocating resources at organisational level We used the Health Check during our strategic planning period which coincided with finalising a funding agreement with DFID. We used the Health Check results when we were at the end stage of formulating our strategy. It was good to get an idea of what the organisation feels about itself, what should be included in the strategy, and what resources were required. It was especially useful for us as a PPA recipient as it enabled us to put new resources into the right areas, smartly. Organisational change involving structural or strategic focus shift When we rolled out the Health Check, we were in the process of changing our operating model. Our Health Check results were positive and none of them were serious enough for us to take any immediate action. The fact that there were no major trouble spots gave us confidence and confirmed that we were moving in the right direction. When will you repeat the process? Having clear answers to these questions will show staff that working through the Health Check is worth their time and will lead to tangible benefits for the organisation. The table opposite details how some NGOs have incorporated the Health Check into their ongoing processes. Self Help Africa ADRA and TREE AID Collecting baseline data and evidence to input into a funding proposal The main purpose of going through the Health Check process was to collect baseline data for organisational learning and to add data into a funding proposal. The Health Check provided us with a systematic process for assessing effectiveness and a source of evidence. Our funding proposal to DFID was successful and we now have a PPA funding agreement with Farm Africa. In our funding proposal we were able to highlight that we were using the Health Check to track progress over time. Preparing for becoming compliant with other standards and principles Two organisations made reference to using the process of going through the Health Check as an intermediary step before applying for Humanitarian Accountability Partnership (HAP) certification. ADRA Last year we had two DFID-initiated KPMG due diligence reviews which have already helped us to streamline the organisation and catalogue processes and procedures. The ultimate goal of these exercises is to apply for HAP certification in the very near future. TREE AID We don t currently use any existing tools or standards, but the Health Check and resources are useful in pointing us to relevant standards. We will work on some kind of formalised internal standards, for example, we are renewing our partnership policy and the Health Check has reinforced our need to do that. We will also think about using external standards and principles.

12 Ownership Building shared commitment and ownership amongst colleagues Whoever you involve, make sure that they understand why the organisation is doing the Health Check, their role in the process and how the results will be shared and used. Some of the ways in which you could generate wider interest and commitment are: bringing together a working group of staff representing different levels and teams to work with you to promote the roll out of the Health Check getting the working group involved in planning how you will discuss, analyse and use the results (the discussions around the results and action planning are an exciting part of the process and it is important to emphasise this whenever you can) collaboratively develop an action plan outlining the steps needed to improve the organisation s effectiveness While the reasons for doing the Health Check will be specific to your organisation and will have already been agreed at a senior level, some general benefits can be found in the Health Check leaflet on our website. Case study EveryChild Establishing a working group to lead the process The responsibility for rolling out the Health Check was shared by an internal effectiveness working group made up of departmental and functional leads and also individuals who had been with EveryChild for long enough to have a broad view of organisational effectiveness. They championed the tool internally and broke off into subgroups, analysing trends and looking at the results we needed to understand further. More specifically, the group analysed and debated discrepancies in scores, looking to understand whether these were due to individual differences in opinion, or indicators of pockets within the organisation where more work was needed. They assessed whether the overall level of effectiveness for each area was appropriate for EveryChild s current and planned future state, or whether further improvements were desired. Where improvements were desired, they began preparing action plans for enhancing effectiveness. Finally, the effectiveness working group instilled confidence in the participants involved in the Health Check by communicating clearly that the survey responses have been taken on board, assessed, and that relevant actions would be taken. Our effectiveness working group analysed and debated discrepancies in scores. and assessed whether the overall level of effectiveness for each area was appropriate. Richard Ponsford, Effective Programmes Officer, EveryChild

13 How do I gather the The Health Check has been designed so that it s easy to gather data from as many participants as you want. There are direct links to the different pillars so that you can ask people to only complete certain sections. Users can save their responses and return to them at another time, and leave comments against individual indicators to either explain their scores or provide suggestions for improvement. The comments sections helped respondents to think through the choices they had selected. It encouraged more people to respond as they viewed it as a full staff consultation. Lucy Brealey, Learning and Accountability Officer, Anti-Slavery International

14 Gathering data Those answering the Health Check need to set up a personal profile and select their role and location. The role and location details are then pulled into the CSV data file containing individual survey responses that you can download from the results page. The obvious benefit of people using the online survey is that individual responses are automatically aggregated so there is no need for you to do any data inputting. That said, you may want to supplement the survey with data collected through other methods. Other options include: Focus groups this could involve teams completing relevant pillars together in a small group. If you choose a focus group there are PDF versions of each pillar that you can download and print out to use in a workshop. Telephone interviews the Health Check coordinator will need to unpack the level descriptions and break them down into a set of questions. Of course, if you choose to run a focus group or conduct telephone interviews you will need to add the data you collect into the Health Check yourself in order for all responses to be represented in your aggregated results. Robust data collection Whichever approach you take it is recommended that you don t rely on assumptions or the information people already have on their department or area of work. You will get a more accurate picture of the health of your organisation if staff review key documents including organisational strategies, policies, guidelines and partner agreements in order to provide evidence to back up the responses and why the particular levels within the building blocks were chosen. Evidence needs to be robust, gathered honestly and critically analysed - cutting corners will skew the findings and defeat the object of doing the Health Check. Evidence checklist The checklist on page provides a list of key questions to help your organisation assess the quality of evidence. Whilst it is not essential for you to work through the questions before you start, doing so will help ensure the evidence you collect through the Health Check is robust and will enable you to draw more accurate conclusions about the health of your organisation. To find out more about how you can use the checklist, please contact us: ngoeffectiveness@bond.org.uk Case study TREE AID Approaches to collecting data We used a combination of focus groups facilitated by staff from TREE AID and Bond. All UK based staff were invited to participate in two focus groups to assess two of the Health Check pillars. The other pillars were split up based on technical expertise and availability, for example external relations (pillar 8) and internal communications (pillar 0) were assessed as part of a prearranged meeting about programme information and communication and fundraising. Similarly, managing money (pillar 7) was reviewed as part of a regular finance team meeting. Finally, we reviewed a piece of research we had commissioned on our strategy process and organisational leadership to inform our assessment of Identity and integrity (pillar ) and Leadership and strategy (pillar ). We chose this approach because at the time of doing the Health Check we were in the middle of a very participative strategy process to which staff were committing time.

15 Assessing the quality of evidence checklist Principle ) Voice and Inclusion We present beneficiaries views on the effects of the intervention, and identify who has been affected and how Criteria a. Are the perspectives of beneficiaries included in the evidence? b. Are the perspectives of the most excluded and marginalised groups included in the evidence? c. Are the findings disaggregated according to sex, disability and other relevant social differences? d. Did beneficiaries play an active role in designing the evidence gathering and analysis process? ) Appropriateness We use methods that are justifiable given the nature of the intervention and purpose of the assessment a. Are the data collection methods relevant to the purpose of the enquiry and do they generate reliable b. Is the size and composition of the sample in proportion to the conclusions sought by the enquiry? c. Does the team have the skills and characteristics to deliver high quality data collection and analysis? d. Is the data analysed in a systematic way that leads to convincing conclusions? ) Triangulation We make conclusions about the intervention s effects by using a mix of methods, data sources, and perspectives a. Are different data collection methodologies used and different types of data collected? b. Are the perspectives of different stakeholders compared and analysed in establishing if and how change has occurred? c. Are conflicting findings and divergent perspectives presented and explained in the analysis and conclusions? d. Are the findings and conclusions shared with and validated by a range of key stakeholders (e.g. beneficiaries, partners, peers)? ) Contribution We can show how change happened and explain how we contributed to this a. Is a point of comparison used to show that change has happened (e.g. a baseline, a counterfactual, comparison with a similar group)? b. Is the explanation of how the intervention contributes to change explored? c. Are alternative factors (e.g. the contribution of other actors) explored to explain the observed result alongside our intervention's contribution? d. Are unintended and unexpected changes (positive or negative) identified and explained? ) Transparency We are open about the data sources and methods used, the results achieved, and the strengths and limitations of the evidence a. Is the size and composition of the group from which data is collected explained and justified? b. Are the methods used to collect and analyse data and any limitations of the quality of the data and collection methodology explained and justified? c. Is it clear who has collected and analysed the data, and is any potential bias they may have explained and justified? d. Is there a clear logical link between the conclusions presented and the data collected?

16 How What do are I use the online the online Timeframes It is important to be clear with those gathering the data how the process will move forward and key milestones. They are more likely to engage positively in the process if they understand how their input fits into the bigger picture. Make sure that you give a realistic timeframe and a firm deadline for people to complete the self-assessment. Finally, before you run the results workshop make sure you and/or the working group have sufficient time to do an initial analysis of the results to start to draw out emerging issues, areas of possible focus and key strengths and weaknesses. This will give you a strong base for a detailed and informed discussion at the workshop itself. We invited 0 members of staff and board members and eight partners to complete the Health Check and gave them three weeks to enter their Health Check scores. The Health Check was completed alongside developing our Theory of Change and we ll use both to revise our strategy and develop an improvement plan. Lucy Brealey, Learning and Accountability Officer, Anti-Slavery International 6

17 Once you have the results, you will need to investigate the scores thoroughly and take stock of the findings. Benchmarking your results against other similar organisations might help you to prioritise the areas you want to improve. How should I analyse the results? A workshop to analyse and interpret the results is a vital part of the process as what emerges from these discussions should be an accurate picture of current practice in your organisation. Our approach to segmenting the results involved looking at why particular groups were responding in specific ways. Ian Hanham, Director of Corporate Resources, EveryChild 7

18 Average scores per pillar Results Once all your data has been collected and entered into the Health Check, the results page displays a spider diagram with the aggregate results for your organisation for each of the pillars you have completed. The scores are an average of all survey responses. A second-level spider diagram displays the aggregate results for the building blocks within each pillar. Again, each second-level spider diagram presents the average of all responses. You can either print the results page or download it as a PDF file. Internal communications Influencing Identity and integrity Leadership and strategy Partners CSV file On the results page you can also download a CSV file containing respondent s data for each of the pillars, including their individual comments. Respondent usernames are hidden so that data is anonymous. As the Health Check coordinator, you can contact us to a receive a more detailed file to help you disaggregate the data. ngoeffectiveness@bond.org.uk Monitoring Beneficiaries For example, if you want to know how responses for Leadership and strategy (pillar ) varied according to whether a respondent was on the senior management team or not, the data in the CSV file allows you to do this segmentation. External relations Programmes Key Organisation score Money People Benchmark score 8

19 Benchmarking If you are interested in seeing how your organisation is doing against other organisations there is the option to use the Health Check benchmarking filters. Results can be filtered by: organisation size themes of work countries of work approach to programmes approach to the assessment Using the benchmarking filters will give you a unique opportunity to get a picture of where your organisation sits in relation to the average score among a group of peer organisations. Some organisations have found it useful to use the benchmarking to galvanise staff interest in the process. Some have found that the benchmarking can help prioritise the areas to improve, while others have decided not to use it at all. TREE AID, for example, felt that emphasising the benchmarking could skew people s responses and discourage them from honestly reflecting on current practice. You will need to decide how best to use the benchmarking within your organisation. Interpreting the results Organisations complete the assessment in different ways and while we have emphasised the need to be robust when evidencing your scores, Bond has no control over the accuracy of the scores that are inputted to produce the benchmark score. Similarly, while we have tried to be as specific as possible in defining what best practice for each level looks like, there will always be differences in interpretation. It is important to view the benchmarking as providing an indicative picture of current trends. Interpreting the results is more of an art than a science. Segmentation of respondent groups really added something. We could identify where there was a difference in understanding. Richard Ponsford, Effective Programmes Officer, EveryChild Case study EveryChild Analysing your results and developing an improvement plan We used an in-depth approach. We circulated the survey to team members and some teams completed the scoring as a group exercise. When it came to analysing the results, we held a workshop to moderate scores and propose priority action areas. The management team then met to review the proposals and allocate responsibilities. We didn t focus on low scores versus high scores; instead we concentrated on where we were and where we needed to be in order to deliver our plans. We used a traffic light approach - if we were close to achieving an area of improvement it was labelled green, if we were moving in the right direction and had a plan it was amber, and for all others it was red. Red didn't always mean an area needed urgent work as for some we expected to score low. Segmenting the results by respondent group was extremely useful and probably the most insightful part of the exercise. 9

20 Analysis Preparing for a results workshop Before the results workshop, make sure that those taking part have a chance to see the picture of the organisation that s emerging. You can print out and enlarge the spider diagrams or send them as PDFs. At the workshop you will want to take stock of the emerging picture and check that it accurately represents current practice within your organisation. Key considerations Do the results provide you with a full enough picture of the health of your Are there follow up questions you could discuss at the results workshop that will provide you with more insights and a way of validating responses or are there more people you could interview to provide a fuller understanding of a pillar? Was there anything that came out of the results that surprised you? Did you expect to score higher in specific areas? What does the overall distribution of levels look like? If there are lots of high and low levels you may need to discuss why this might be. Are you deliberately prioritising your development in some areas at the expense of others? Are there patterns where the same type of building block is at a similar level? For example, levels may be consistently low in the strategic dimension of a number of pillars (ie, developing strategy in pillar, planning and fundraising in pillar 7, communications strategy in pillar 8, strategy in pillar ) Where you reached levels and, what helped you get there? Can you repeat this for other pillars? What are the key things holding the organisation back from achieving the higher levels? Case study International Childcare Trust Involving an external facilitator in your results workshop The advantage of working with an external facilitator who has worked on assessing organisational effectiveness is their impartiality. Within most organisation s there will be differences of opinion. An external facilitator will have worked with diverse organisations and have a broader knowledge of the sector and so can help to break down power dynamics and facilitate conversation to ensure that different voices are heard. From a practical point of view, it was our external facilitator s idea to show the visual matrix of how we scored, which helped us to decide how we would focus our time and energy. How will you ensure that all groups involved in the Health Check are involved in the discussion of results? How did the results differ amongst the different groups involved and what does this tell you? People tend to be more critical of the areas they have the most involvement with. Which areas do you think need to be tackled as a priority? When could you repeat the Health Check to see if progress has been made? 0

21 There are two phases to developing an improvement plan: prioritising capacity building needs, and planning the strategic approach. How do I develop an improvement plan? After you have decided what to focus on, you should write a development plan detailing how you are going to make the improvements. This could also be used to form part of an organisational strategy or business plan, or added into country or departmental workplans. Our Health Check results have provided very useful intelligence, highlighting priority areas in our systems and practice where more focus is needed. Michael O'Donnell, Head of Programme Support and Impact, Plan UK

22 Improvement plan There are two phases. Prioritising capacity building needs The final spider diagram shows the areas where your organisation may need to build its capacity. Your next step will be to prioritise which areas to focus on. This should be done through participatory discussion, taking into account a number of factors including the need to: strengthen the areas critical to the success of the organisation address serious capacity deficits consider where a capacity deficit creates a problem in meeting important internal and external stakeholder requirements consider where improvements to individual building blocks would have positive effects on a number of other related building blocks consider where improvement in capacity could be achieved quickly or relatively easily to give confidence to those involved and send a signal to others in the organisation that change is attainable and the assessment process can lead to tangible benefits consider the resource implications of making any required changes avoid over-committing the organisation by tackling too many capacity needs at the same time consider other change processes that are happening in the organisation and the potential for synergy. Planning the strategic approach Once you have decided which areas to focus on, discuss and agree practical and realistic steps to address the issues. Ideas could be generated and analysed in a workshop, which could also include discussion of possible consequences of the interventions and any likely risks. When examining options for the interventions, you should consider those which you can do yourselves, those which you can do with other organisations and those where you may wish to bring in additional, external help. Bring in external help only where it will add value. Writing the plan The development plan can be a standalone document or form part of an overall organisational strategy or operational or business plans. It can also be fed into country or departmental work plans. The plan should include: for each building block addressed in the plan, include the current average score and the goal score and description to remind you what you are aiming for a brief description of the proposed capacity building intervention or activity and details of how you will carry it out timescales additional resource requirements (finances, tools, specialists) who is responsible for delivering the activity how progress will be monitored, when, and by whom a space for comments, for example, noting when an activity has been completed or delayed The Health Check process provided a way to arrange the discussion around formally improving the organisation and enabled all staff to participate. Philip Goodwin, Chief Executive, TREE AID

23 What are the online For each pillar there are a range of online resources including: Practical handbooks with case studies Step-by-step how-to guides Best practice standards and principles Diagnostic tools that help identify organisational strengths and gaps in capacity and performance Organisational performance and impact measurement frameworks Links to relevant Bond training The tool is timely and it coincided well with our our existing strategic planning cycle. Other staff could definitely see the usefulness and value of the tool. Mark Ireland, Programmes Director, Self Help Africa