Title: Assessing NGOs for community service delivery
1Assessing NGOs for community service delivery
- AFSAs experience
- Vhumani Magezi
- 23-24 October 2008
- Ac3 NGO CONFERENCE 2008
2The purpose of the presentation.
- NOT to present a lecture on organisational (NGO)
assessment - but as colleagues in the NGO sector in SA
- to share experiences - particularly -
challenges by some NGOs funded by AFSA. -
- . the experiences were revealed by AFSAs
assessment of the Swedish International
Development and Co-operation Agency (SIDA) funded
organisations (22) -
- 12 Northern Cape
- 10 Eastern Cape
3Background informationNGOs a booming sector
- It is important to note that NGOs are an
important sector in every country. - According to data compiled by researchers at
Johns Hopkins University from the civil society
of 36 countries, it represented US1.3 trillion
industry. - If it were a separate national economy it would
be the seventh largest economy slightly smaller
than France but bigger than Italy in GDP. - Organizations of civil society employ 45.5
million people (one in 20 employable people in
the world). - Therefore, we should note that NGOs are a
significant part of countries economies. - http//www.rbf.org/usr_doc/The_Role_of_NGOs_in_Mod
ern_Societies_and_Increasingly_Interdependent_Worl
d.pdf - The Role of NGOs in Modern Societies and an
Increasingly Interdependent World. Stephen
Heintz President - Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Annual Conference of
the Institute for Civil Society, Zhongshan
University, Guangzhou, China.
4NGOs in SA..1
- At least 2500 registered NGOs Prodder has
information on more than 2 500 South African NGOs
and development organizations. - At least 3600 NPO Prodders intention is to
expand to incorporate the NPO directory from the
National Department of Social Development, which
consists of 36 000 organizations. - Conclusion there are 6100 NGOs
- Prodder is a comprehensive directory of NGOs and
development organisations in South Africa.
Compiled by SANGONeT, it covers strategic
development stakeholders such as non-governmental
organisations (NGOs), community-based
organisations (CBOs), academic institutions,
donor agencies, CSI programmes, development
consultants and parastatals. - http//www.cio.de/news/cio_worldnews/812176/ and
- http//www.prodder.org.za/about-prodder
5NGOs in SA2
- womens issues
- HIV/AIDS
- adult basic education
- rural issues
- early child development
- disability
- environment
- gender
- land
- Science and Technology
- Voter education issues (Zhang 20058).
6NGOsmajor player in implementing NSP1
7NGOsmajor player in implementing NSP2
8Reasons for the rapid development of NGOs
- The reasons for the rapid development of NGOs
are - international donors losing confidence in
governments due to their failure to deliver
services, which NGOs tend to do better - NGOs ability to mobilize communities
- NGOs have ability to advocate and influence
governments. NGOs comparative advantage in
promoting micro development over public and
private institutions lies in their ability to
touch base at grassroots level and their freedom
in organizing themselves (Brown and Korten
19891).
9Observations in the SA NGO sector
- The number and size of NGOs has increased and
continues to increase dramatically. - The increase is not always accompanied by an
improvement in services or performance. - In fact, there are indications that overall the
sector may be weakening as many organizations
have been established by people with limited or
no experience of the voluntary sector.
http//www.childhope.org.uk/resources/oadp-part1.p
df - This is limiting NGOs to
- Access donor funding due to poor ability
demonstrate accountability and competence. - Fulfill programme implementation timetables,
frameworks and budget processes. - Implement effective community programmes and even
account for their work. - These challenges require effective and efficient
NGO structures and systems. - Therefore, there is need to assess organizational
capacity of NGOs.
10What is organizational assessment?...
- An Organizational Assessment (OA) is an
evaluation of an organization's capacity and
performance. It is an essential first stage in a
capacity building process that aims to develop
healthy and resilient organisations that can
effectively achieve their objectives. - It covers the organization's internal
performance, relations and image performance in
achieving its objectives, internal functioning,
resources, role, strategy i.e. its an attempt to
determine an organization's overall strengths,
weaknesses and development needs. - http//www.rapidbi.com/created/NGO-organisational
-assessment-diagnosis.html
11Assessment critical to organization's performance
- Notwithstanding the various assessment
methodologies, research has shown that
organizational assessments are significantly
contributing to a growing realization that poor
NGO performance is often related to
organizational capacity. - There is no single or right way to conduct an
organisational assessment (OA), or to devise a
plan for organisational development (OD). - There are several methodologies that could be
employed include - 1. Organizational Assessment Framework
9. Organizational Effectiveness -
Questionnaire - 2. Checklist for Organizational Assessment
10. Discussion Orientated Self - Assessment
- 3. Open Systems Analysis 11. Participatory
Organizational Analysis Process - 4. 7-S Study 12.
Culture Audit - 5. Organizational Elements Model
13. SWOT Analysis - 6. Burke Litwin Model
14. PESTLE Analysis - 7. EFQM Excellence Model 15. Stakeholder
Analysis - 8. Capacity Assessment Guide 16. Change
Plan Development
12Assessment focal areas (KPA)
- The organizational capacity areas that are
generally assessed are - Governance, service delivery / programme,
financial resources, human resources, management
practices and external relations (MTOMU, VISAHUJA
and MKUTU http//www2.ilo.org/dyn/empent/docs/F18
43278473/Assesment20of20capacities20CBOs.pdf - Representative membership, effective
leadership and management, identification of
organisational needs, vision and strategy
development, advocacy, visible public support and
visibility - http//www.google.co.za/search?hlenqSTRENGTHEN
INGMIDWIVES27ASSOCIATIONSPROJECTbtnGGoogleS
earchmeta - Factors that often guarantee organizational
effectiveness and programme success clearly
defined goals and strategies to achieve them,
strong visionary leadership, a strong
well-organised staff, a sound resource, good
systems for management and decision making,
appropriate mechanisms for monitoring
performance, good relationships with key external
organizations especially partners, value system
which emphasises performance, mutual support,
creativity and flexibility, ability to respond
fast to opportunities and threats (ChildHope
Organisational Assessment For Development
Planning Tool Kit) - (http//www.childhope.org.uk/resources/oadp
-part1.pdf)
13Assessment at AFSA
- AFSAs assessment focuses on the following
organizational capacity areas - OD areas
- Operational systems particularly work plans
- Organisational systems - constitutions,
registration status and policies - Governance structures roles of management
Board/committees, organograms, and
decision-making processes - Knowledge and skills (professional skills)
staff skills and knowledge to perform tasks - Financial management bank accounts, basic book
keeping, budgets and audited books - Resources personnel and financial base
- Programme implementation areas
- Programme implementation (PMEL) activities,
monitoring and evaluation tools, existing
learning opportunities, networking and
collaboration with other stakeholders,
data-capturing techniques, community development
processes and coverage (number of beneficiaries)
- Programme sustainability exit strategies,
fundraising and community sustainability
structures - CBOs environment level of poverty, basic
service provision (medical facilities, number of
social workers, number of nursing staff, access
to water and roads), HIV statistics, level of
HIV knowledge or beliefs and the impact of HIV.
14Assessmentvarying focal areas but same objective
- Despite somewhat different focal assessment areas
the basic objective of assessment is the same - To ascertain organizational capacity (strengths
and weaknesses) in order to provide
recommendations for organizational development. - Observation Many Organizational assessments (OA)
only focus on NGO leadership and financial
aspects in their assessments. But AFSA in
addition to the above areas assesses programme
implementation aspects as well. - AFSAs Approach
- AFSA views target communities and populations as
participants in addressing their needs rather
than objects of charity. - AFSA therefore treats (or at least strives to
treat) CBOs and NGOs as true partners due to
their close proximity and access to vulnerable
households and groups at higher risk of
infection. - AFSA does not directly render services to end
users at local and household level. Instead AFSA
equips organizations working in communities with
the resources and skills to implement projects
and deliver services directly to beneficiaries.
AFSA does this by - Providing financial grants to selected NGOs
CBOs, over a multiple year period, for project
implementation and core costs - Building the organizational capacity and skills
of the target NGOs CBOs through quarterly
monitoring site visits and a structured training
and mentoring programme.
15AFSAs Assessments
- At AFSA therefore we conduct assessment to
- To diagnose and draw pertinent information from a
potential programme implementation partner
organisation to establish its existing systems
and structures. The assessment seeks to determine
the organisations financial, technical and
operational systems legal status convergence of
activities between AFSA and potential partner
CBO and resources of the CBO among other things.
- Purpose of assessment at AFSA
- Upon obtaining the information an informed
decision is made to proceed or terminate the
prospects of collaboration or partnership. This
information becomes the basis for programme
planning and implementation while in some
instances is followed by an extensive baseline
study for a deeper understanding.
16AFSA programme SIDA funded organizations
- South Africa has one of the most severe HIV and
AIDS epidemics in the world. - 5.7 million South Africans were living with HIV
at the end 2007(UNAIDS report 200840). - Although data from antenatal clinics reported by
the Department of Health 2007 suggests that the
epidemic might be stabilising, there is no
evidence yet of major changes in HIV-related
behaviour. - The high level of HIV prevalence is not matched
by relevant behaviour change which reveals the
depth of the challenge posed by the epidemic.
17AFSAs contributory bite..HIVAIDS response
- To address the situation, AFSA was awarded a
grant by the Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency to support 15 community
organisations in the Northern Cape and Eastern
Cape provinces (from 1 July 2004 to June 2007).
The grant was renewed and increased - To cover additional 7 organisations 22
organisations (for the period of 1st July 2007 to
30th June 2010) - Expand support to organisations beyond the
present districts, particularly in the Northern
Cape and - Deepen PME and capacity building interventions
to assist its partner CBOs to take a more formal
approach to community development.
18Purpose of assessment
- The purpose of the assessment to determine and
gain insight the overall picture of the
SIDA-funded CBOs organisational structures and
systems, programmes and activities, and their
capacity. The following aspects of the CBOs
wiere assessed - Operational systems particularly work plans
- Organisational systems - constitutions,
registration status and policies - Governance structures roles of management
Board/committees, organograms, and
decision-making processes - Knowledge and skills (professional skills)
staff skills and knowledge to perform tasks - Resources personnel and financial base
- Financial management bank accounts, basic book
keeping, budgets and audited books - Programme implementation (PMEL) activities,
monitoring and evaluation tools, existing
learning opportunities, networking and
collaboration with other stakeholders,
data-capturing techniques, community development
processes and coverage (number of beneficiaries)
- Programme sustainability exit strategies,
fundraising and community sustainability
structures and - CBOs environment level of poverty, basic
service provision (medical facilities, number of
social workers, number of nursing staff, access
to water and roads), HIV statistics, level of
HIV knowledge or beliefs and the impact of HIV.
19Assessment methodology
20Data (assessment) analysis1 - framework
- The data analysis and presentation was in two
parts - Individual CBOs rating, followed by a detailed
matrix giving a brief description of each key
performance area and identifying corresponding
weaknesses, and recommendations. - The analysis deliberately ignored the
organisational strengths and concentrated on the
weaknesses. This approach was based on the view
that organisations learn and improve more by
focusing on improving weaknesses than by
celebrating strengths this is particularly so
with regard to emerging organisations such as
those targeted by this programme.
21Data (assessment) analysis2 - framework
22Findings1 NC organizations
23Findings 2 NC organizations within AFSA typology
24Findings3 EC organizations
25Findings 4 EC organizations within AFSA typology
26Consolidated ratings for the 22 organizations1
27Consolidated ratings for the 22 organizations1
28Consolidated organizations (22) within AFSA
typology framework
29Observations and comments SA CBOs weaknesses
and strengths
- Despite their location their weakest areas seem
to be - Long term (or strategic) planning in most cases
there is no long planning and long term
strategies for the organizations survival. They
just exist living on from hand to mouth. In
short they lack sustainability. - Governance lack of roles of management,
board/committees, organograms, and
decision-making processes. - Resource mobilization -limited or no ability to
broaden their support (funding) base leading to
overdependence on one donor e.g. AFSA. - Financial management lack of basic book keeping
and budgeting skills resulting in unaudited books
i.e. poor financial management. - Despite their location their strongest areas seem
to be - Networking External Relations ability to link
with other structures within their communities
though the links in most times result in funding
relationships. - Information Management (ME) they seem to
demonstrate a fair degree of ability to assess
and track their progress though they dont always
document it in technical terminology such as
PMEL. - Human Resources as CBO in communities,
considering unemployment in South Africa there
are always people prepared to work in the CBOs
though significant number of these people are
driven by careerism. - NB There are organizational capacity parallels
(similarities) between CBOs in the NC and EC on
these weak and strong areas.
30Correlation- CBO leadership literacy
management performance
- There is correlation between literacy level of
CBOs leadership and performance of
organizational management Leadership EC 40
and NC 67). Highly literate CBO leaders often
times stir the CBO to health situation though
sometimes leads to abuse of systems and resources
by some of these leaders. In EC the majority of
the leaders have low literacy level while their
counterparts in NC are more literate, which
clearly reflected in the assessment. - Therefore CBOs comprising lowly literate
leadership should be coached differently.
31General concluding observations probing
questions
- There is general lack of focus on developing the
skills of CBOs to be able to implement their
programmes but an overemphasis on finance. Should
this be the main focus for CBOs effectiveness??? - The assessment frameworks and tools seem top-down
(though there is talk of participatory
approaches). Some concepts are totally foreign
and unfamiliar to CBOs particularly those in
rural areas e.g. the distinction between
management and governing board (or board of
directors). This corporate practice being
imported to CBOs seems not to be working and
confusing CBOs. Could there be a different model
more suitable to CBOs that ensures
accountability without imposing these top down
practices may be stokvel model??? - What about the popular notion in development
discourse dont give a person fish but give him
a rod and teach him to fish! What do you do when
there are no dams and there is no fish in the
dams or rivers? There are some organizations that
have limited growth/development potential. They
will forever not be able to write a proposal that
will be considered by EU and USAID neither will
they be able to report on the funds. - There will always be a need for organizations to
work with some CBO and NGOs but there is need to
develop effective ways to assess these
organizations in order to provide them with
relevant assistance.
32Acknowledgements
- Special thanks to all the following
- Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency (SIDA) for funding these partner
organisations and making a budget provision for
the study. - All interviewees who sacrificed their time to
spend long hours of discussion with fieldwork
teams Board members staff managers and
beneficiaries of the Projects that were visited
in the various parts of the Northern Cape and
Eastern Cape Provinces. - AFSAs Administration team for assisting with
logistics. - Research team for their hard work particularly
putting long hours into this project. These
include Precious Greehy, AFSA Research Support
Officer, UKZN Research Interns and others who
participated in this project. - Full reports (part 1 and part 2) accessible at
http//www.aids.org.za/research_internal.html