The Transition to Programmatic Approaches and Programming Principles & Project Standards

Transcription

1 The Transition to Programmatic Approaches and Programming Principles & Project Standards C ARE International approved a Program Standards Framework that relates the Vision and Mission to selected Principles, Standards and Guidelines for informing and shaping all CARE programs and projects. Its components are usually shown graphically in a pyramid. As CARE seeks to move to a program approach, this framework will need revision. In developing programs that seek to have a greater impact on underlying causes of poverty and social injustice over a year period, we are starting to develop a concept of program cycle management that is distinct from and provides a framework for project cycle management. Thus in the existing CI framework it needs to be recognized that we have a set of program principles, but lack a set of program CI Vision and Mission CI Programming Principles CI Project Standards Core Guidelines Sector/technical d l standards that relate to a program management cycle, and which need to precede a revised set of project standards. What we mean by a program management cycle and the effective practices that are emerging from this is something we will need to delineate more clearly in the coming months. In addition, we will need to show how this alters the requirements for a project management cycle. For example, the kind of analysis into underlying causes that we are now recognizing we need to have in place if we are to achieve greater impact in our work should be in place at program level, and provide a platform for every project designed within that program. In addition, the outlined strategy for that program will also provide a framework, which each project should be contributing to. This program strategy, we are also recognizing, will contain a number of assumptions and hypotheses, and is therefore a contingent theory of change, which we will have to explore and test through a reflective learning cycle. Understanding that projects within a program are contributing to this reflective learning will also change the nature of project information systems. In beginning to think through these changes, this paper looks at the ongoing relevance of the CI program principles, and how they can help us in the shift to a program approach. It also starts to look at how the existing set of project standards needs to change. 1 of 6

2 Programming Principles In November 2003, the CARE International Board of Directors approved six Program Principles, which inform and guide, at a fundamental level, the way we work. It is no coincidence that these principles were defined as programming (and not project) principles; it is therefore central to keep them in mind as we transition from projects to programs. How may they help us in shifting to program approaches? Programming Principles Principle 1: Promote Empowerment. We stand in solidarity with poor and marginalized people, and support their efforts to take control of their own lives and fulfill their rights, responsibilities and aspirations. We ensure that key participants and organizations representing affected people are partners in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of our programs. Principle 2: Work with partners. We work with others to maximize the impact of our programs, building alliances and partnerships with those who offer complementary approaches, are able to adopt effective programming approaches on a larger scale, and/or who have responsibility to fulfill rights and reduce poverty through policy change and enforcement. Principle 3: Ensure Accountability and Promote Responsibility. We seek ways to be held accountable to poor and marginalized people whose rights are denied. We identify individuals and institutions with an obligation toward poor and marginalized people, and support and encourage their efforts to fulfill their responsibilities. Principle 4: Address Discrimination. In our programs and offices we address discrimination and the denial of rights based on sex, race, nationality, ethnicity, class, religion, age, physical ability, caste, opinion or sexual orientation. Principle 5: Promote the non-violent resolution of conflicts. We promote just and non-violent means for preventing and resolving conflicts at all levels, noting that such conflicts contribute to poverty and the denial of rights. Principle 6: Seek Sustainable Results. As we address underlying causes of poverty and rights denial, we develop and use approaches that ensure our programs result in lasting and fundamental improvements in the lives of the poor and marginalized with whom we work. As we shift to programs, it is useful to reflect about what enacting these principles at the different stages of a program cycle may mean. For the purpose of clarity and brevity and recognizing that the program cycle may involve more stages the next paragraphs share thoughts of how the Programming Principles may guide program (and not only project) analysis, design, implementation and evaluation. Program analysis. Using the Programming Principles for program analysis means: Analyzing the underlying causes of poverty at the international, regional, national and local levels. It is only recently that we have begun to look closely and systematically at social, political and economic structures, especially power relations, at all levels (and not just the household and community levels). Involving stakeholders in the analysis. Program analysis needs to include the active and meaningful participation of partners and participants. In the analyses that led to projects, it was not uncommon to find studies at CARE which were carried out for the most part by staff and/or consultants. Carrying out policy analysis on the extent to which the absence and/or poor implementation of policies contribute to poverty. Few analyses at CARE have focused on identifying the extent to which policy makers live up to their obligations. Policy analysis must be an essential element of our program analyses. Analyzing the needs and rights of the most marginalized and discriminated-against. An understanding of the many degrees of poverty is essential for program analysis. We need to differentiate and disaggregate our analysis so as to uncover (and then address) discrimination, marginalization and extreme poverty. Integrating analysis into our ongoing activities. In the past, analysis has often been a onetime activity that led to the design of a project. When shifting to programs, it is important to think of analysis as an ongoing process in which we continue to deepen our understanding about the factors contributing to poverty. At the same time, it is important to avoid analysis paralysis. Knowing how deep to probe while moving forward will become a key element of our analysis, and an essential skill for program staff. Program design. Using our principles for guiding program design means: Developing programs that work with and strengthen civil society. Community empowerment and civil society strengthening have become key elements of most of our strategies 2 of 6

3 and are central to our work. A vibrant civil society contributes to more representative and responsible governance and, by extension, an environment in which all people can realize their rights. When designing programs, it is therefore critical to become more conscious of CARE s own identity, roles and contributions within civil society, and to select our interventions in ways that strengthen civil society. Designing programs in partnership with others. Partnership has been part of our programs for several years. However, we often partner with others once we have decided on our interventions and are looking for others to help us with their implementation. True partnership starts at the onset of the program cycle and is critical when deciding on strategies. We have to interact with communities and other partners to define priorities, pace and program approaches. Designing advocacy strategies for promoting the responsibilities of policy makers. Our advocacy has to be based on systemic reasons of why people are poor, and be guided by CARE s program base. Seeking program strategies for addressing discrimination. CARE has made progress in the last years by looking at deeply-rooted inequalities, mostly in the area of gender. We have also developed program tools that help us redress these imbalances. At the program design stage, it will be critical to always look at strategies to combat imbalances. Including conflict management plans in our programs. Challenging the balance of power, which is essential for meaningfully combating poverty, is risky business. Therefore, it is important that we include risk assessment and tools and methods for dealing with these risks. Such practice needs to be institutionalized at the program design stage. Targeting the key leverage points or factors which, if not addressed, will impede significant, lasting impact. Designing programs that go beyond addressing the immediate causes of poverty is essential in the shift from projects to programs. No fundamental cause of poverty should automatically be excluded from our program design for being too political, sensitive, or complex for CARE to touch. In fact, if our analysis shows that a certain cause is a critical leverage point, we should carefully assess opportunities for and potential risks of addressing it at different levels. Including strategies to address the underlying causes of poverty at the international, regional, national and local levels. Ensuring that our work at multiple levels is connected (e.g. work at the macro level should be guided by action at the program level in countries in which we work) will require designing programs in a different way, and deepening our understanding of when and how to scale up our programs from one level to another. Broadening the menu of CARE s program elements. The depth of the challenge associated with combating poverty requires expanding CARE s range of program responses. We are, and need to be, thinking more and more in terms of multi-dimensional, longer-term programs that engage with a wide range of actors. Broadening the elements of our programs will also lead us into new roles. Design programs that reflect a long-term, in-depth investment in processes. Having a significant impact on poverty requires more time than allowed for in individual project timelines. When designing our programs, we need to make a commitment to partnering with communities and working with them for a longer time. Program implementation. Using our principles for program implementation means: Ceding power and increasing the participation of the people we serve in program decisions. In shifting to programs guided by our principles, it is essential to give away and share power, and increasingly let participants make decisions about direction, pace, and other aspects of program activities. Working with/ through partners. We should continue improving the quality of our partnerships and, in particular, move away from subcontracting to a relationship of mutual learning and decisionmaking. Engaging constituencies around issues. Developing and engaging constituencies around our vision, both in member and host countries, is a key element for advancing towards our goals. Working with constituents also means giving a more substantial role to them and letting them influence dimensions of CARE. Carrying out advocacy initiatives. Our advocacy should be centered on pursuing the adoption and implementation of pro-poor policies which have the potential of resulting in systemic changes. 3 of 6

4 Exemplifying non-discrimination in program implementation. Across all our operations, both internally and in program implementation, it is critical that we exemplify non-discrimination and promote an open dialogue about any form of discrimination. Opposing the promotion or practice of violence. Conflict management, prevention and mitigation will all become essential tools for the implementation of programs, especially when our focus shifts to looking at power imbalances and seeking to redress them. Conflict is, and will continue to be, a part of our work. When the status quo is altered, it creates tensions. For resolving these tensions, it is important to have tools available and know how to use non-violent and consensus building methods. Prioritizing reflection and revision in the implementation cycle. We have to plan space and opportunity and incentives for internal reflection and social/stakeholder feedback and thinking as we go through our work, and plan for re-planning. Reflection has to be about the work itself (singleloop), but also about our working hypotheses. Program evaluation. Using our principles for guiding program evaluation means: Evaluating processes. Inclusion, participation, and empowerment become essential program objectives, not only for their potential to enhance our impact on food, health, and educational security (although this is important) but, rather, in their own right. This requires a commitment to evaluating impact not only in outcome terms (i.e. in terms of conditional change), but also in process terms. Providing all important program information, including evaluations, to those we serve, as well as opportunities to orient, assess and reorient our programs. In the same way participants should be part of program analysis, design, and implementation, they also need to take part of program evaluation. This includes defining appropriate indicators for measuring success. Including downward accountability mechanisms. Downward accountability is important in all program stages, but critical for evaluations. More concretely, these might include local stakeholder advisory/review committees, who are jointly accountable with us for the achievement of shared goals. We need to be answerable for our actions/inactions to our primary stakeholders (the people we serve). Differentiating and disaggregating evaluation data so as to uncover discrimination. To ensure that we are achieving our intended impact and positively affecting women or other marginalized groups, it is critical to disaggregate our evaluation data. In addition to the gender breakdown, other distinctions may be important to make. Reconciling household-level indicators with longer-term effects. Most of our measurement systems look at tangible impacts in the areas of health, water and sanitation, education, etc. However, our programs also work on issues such as power relations, societal attitudes, participation in public affairs, capacities of local groups, institutional policies and practices, and legal and other systems. It is important to develop measures and indicators for tracking these often less tangible, slower to materialize changes at the local, regional and national levels. Project Standards do we need to change them? Together with the Programming Principles, CARE developed and approved Project Standards. As their name suggests, these standards are intended for projects. Are they still of relevance when shifting to a program approach? Could they become CARE s Program Standards? Can we replace project by program or is a more fundamental change needed? The analysis below provides input for a dialogue about whether the standards need to change or not. It describes the essence of each standard and suggests maintaining or changing it. 4 of 6

5 Standard Description of the standard 1 Keep/change 1. Each CARE project should be consistent with the CI vision, mission, and Programming Principles. 2. Each CARE project should be clearly linked to a Country Office strategy and/or long term program goals. 3. Each CARE project should ensure the active participation and influence of stakeholders in its analysis, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation processes. 4. Each CARE project should have a design that is based on a holistic analysis of the needs and rights of the target population and the underlying causes of their conditions of poverty and social injustice. It should examine the opportunities and risks inherent in the potential interventions. 5. Each CARE project should use a logical framework that explains how the project will contribute to an ultimate impact upon the lives of members of a defined target population. 6. Each CARE project should set a significant, yet achievable and measurable final goal. It must be clear how a project contributes to social justice, the eradication of poverty and the dignity and security of people. Projects must be part of a wider strategic plan and fit in with other things that either CARE or other agencies are doing. That makes it possible for several different projects to reinforce each other and contribute to a larger outcome. Every project should explain clearly how people affected will be involved and consulted. Stakeholders include target communities, partner organizations, governments, and CARE staff. The project should show how their opinions have been taken into consideration. When deciding what to do and how to do it, the project should try to understand all aspects of peoples lives, rather than looking at only one issue. Some problems are visible at the household level, but have their roots in wider issues such as culture or laws or environmental constraints. It is key to understand who has power over whom. The project should show what you intend to do, to achieve what results, and how those results will improve people s lives. The logical framework is a good way of doing this, because it forces you to set things out in a clear way and can be used for communicating to others what the project is about. A project must state what difference it is expecting to make to people s lives by the time the project ends. That is not enough on its own though; it should also contribute to solving the cause of the problem for a lasting improvement. Keep Keep programs, too, should reinforce each other and a larger strategy. Keep closely related to Programming Principles 1 and 3 (empowerment and accountability). Keep UCP analysis is an essential part of the shift to programs. Consider changing there may be other ways of presenting programs than logframes. May not always be the most useful summary tool. Broaden to other possibilities (include logframes as one option). Keep programs will need significant and measurable objectives. 1 The simple (and not technical and official description of the standard) is based on a paper by CARE UK. 5 of 6

6 Standard Description of the standard Keep/change 7. Each CARE project should be technically, environmentally, and socially appropriate. Interventions should be based upon best current practice and on an understanding of the social context and the needs, rights and responsibilities of the stakeholders. 8. Each CARE project should indicate the appropriateness of project costs, in light of the selected project strategies and expected outputs and outcomes. 9. Each CARE project should develop and implement a monitoring and evaluation plan and system based on the logical framework that ensures the collection of baseline, monitoring, and final evaluation data, and anticipates how the information will be used for decision making. 10. Each CARE project should establish a baseline for measuring change in indicators of impact and effect, by conducting a study or survey prior to implementation of project activities. 11. Each CARE project should use indicators that are relevant, measurable, verifiable and reliable. 12. Each CARE project should employ a balance of evaluation methodologies, assure an appropriate level of rigor, and adhere to recognized ethical standards. 13. Each CARE project should be informed by and contribute to ongoing learning within and outside CARE. March 2008 Very few projects are trying ideas for the very first time. All projects should learn from the successes and mistakes of others. CARE and other organizations, through their years of experience, have developed standards and guidelines that can help design a project well. You must be sure that you are providing value for money. Have a monitoring and evaluation plan The project must be able to measure its progress and its final results, and should decide how it is going to do this from the start. Information should include any unintended or even harmful impacts your project may have. The baseline study should be done at the start of a project. Baseline indicators can be numbers (quantitative) or descriptive (qualitative), as long as they describe the initial situation clearly enough to be able to measure changes over the life of the project. Relevant means that they actually refer to the thing you are interested in; measurable means you can actually collect the information; verifiable means that someone else should be able to check it and get the same result; and reliable means that what they tell you is clear and does not change over time. In all projects there should be a final evaluation that summarizes the achievements and lessons learned. Always remember that we are dealing with people, not numbers, and treat the information you get from people about their lives with the same respect as if it were about you. Learning will improve the design of future projects, but will also contribute to wider studies that draw together lessons from a range of different projects, both within and outside CARE. Change and place the emphasis on learning. Change and broaden to different levels of accountability, including cost-effectiveness. Change include a standard instead, which focuses on impact measurement and learning (which includes M&E; explain within impact measurement and learning the importance of M&E). Change - baselines are an integral part of the M&E cycle and should not be singled out. Include in the wider standard on learning and impact measurement. Change a program standard about objectives and their indicator for measuring progress may be more adequate. Change and include a standard on learning and impact measurement. Change and include in a more comprehensive standard on learning and impact measurement. Prepared by: PIKL Alliance, CARE USA, 6 of 6