Introduction to the Institutional Development Tool

1. Introduction to the Institutional Development Tool

2. Windows to Learning • 1. Realistic: What can it do for my organization? • 2. Theoretical: How does it work? • 3. Practical: How do we get it done?

3. 1999: USPVO grants $3 million to NNF to Mange funds; NGO association leads Steering Committee 1992: USAID USPVO/local NGO Program begins. NNF viewed as very flawed. 1993: NNF completes IDP Process. Commits to improve 1. Realistic: An Example from USAID 2002: National NGO Association to run USAID Program technically/ NNF financially

4. The Tool… • Can be used to help an organization • increase its efficiency • improve the organization as a place to work, • increase the likelihood that the organization will have a lasting effect on society • Helps an organization chart its own path to Institutional Development

5. It helps an organization… • Consider what makes it successful • Assess its own strengths and weaknesses in light of those factors • Appreciate individual’s role in organization • Map a prioritized plan for improvement • Measure progress • Communicate with potential donors

6. Donor Constituents For whom? Organization

7. The Miner and his Canary

8. 2. Theoretical • Holistic Approach • Principals • Setting aside time • Tools

9. Vision/planning Financial systems Management Systems Leadership Information systems External Relations\ Circulatory Respiratory Digestive ….. Health Analogy: Pulse isn’t everything

10. Empower Allies Neutralize Foes Assure Quality Assure survival Principles Transparency Systematic

11. Motivation Responsiveness Providing Excellent Services Principles Participatory Approach Programmatic Approach Customer Orientation

12. Take advantage of outside resources Avoid Threats Principles Outward Focus

13. Paradox of Monitoring • People are over-worked • Monitoring is final priority everywhere • Data seldom collected; when collected not analyzed • Mistrust of internal data; scorn for external • Therefore, monitoring data is almost never used for decision making

14. Special monitoring events • avoiding the “not-to-do listing” • compress into one event • data collection • analysis • decision making

15. How? • Subjective Vs. Objective • Continuously Vs. Special Events • External Vs. Internal

16. 3. Practical

17. Implement change Identify participants Craft process Prioritize Improvement Adapt tool/ Collect Data Identify weaknesses Analyze/ Present Results Measurement Process Scope task

18. The TOOLKIT • Framework • the HEART of the toolkit • Profile • Calculation Sheet

19. Egg Fertilize Embryo Birth Birth Development Continua Trust Identity Productive Integrity Psychology Infant Design Child Frame Adolescent Complete Adult Use Life Building

20. Institutional Development Continuum Strong Expanding/ Consolidating Development ????? Forming Start-up Getting started Storming ?????? ??????????? ?????????? Norming Here to Stay Performing Sustaining Getting Organized Room to Improve

21. Institutional Development Continuum Organizational Characteristics Oversight/Vision Management Resources Human Resources Financial Resources External Resources

22. Institutional Development Continuum Organizational Characteristics Management Resources

23. Framework Excerpt

24. Institutional Development Continuum Expansion/ Start-up Development Sustainability Consolidation Management Resources X Board X Mission Organizational Characteristics Measures of progress along X Autonomy Continuum Leadership X Style Institutional Development Skeleton

25. Using the Framework: “X” Marks the Spot • Each row shows a desired path to improvement • Determine where along the continuum you are now situated • Mark an x@ on the spot • Be honest with yourself

26. Institutional Development Continuum Organizational Characteristics Measures ofprogress alongcontinuum “X” Marks the Spot Suggested Scale Not Applicable Management Resources

27. Program Note • Research, field tests, and trial and error, and a local adaptation process went into making the cells as broadly useful as possible • But, they can not be applicable to all organizations, nor should they be • Keep what works for you • Dump what does not

28. Keep A Record of Your Decisions x x x

29. Plamen's Save the Potato Foundation 1993-1995 Institutional Development Profile Start-Up Development Expansion/ Consolidation Sustainable Capabilities Oversight/Vision Board Mission Autonomy Graphing the results: The Profile

30. Completed Profile

31. x x x x x Review

32. Score Makes or BreaksOrganization 4 Crucial to OurSurvival 3 Priority Areaof Concern 2 Significant,not a Priority 1 Not Significantto us inNear Future 0 Prioritization of Organizational Characteristics Participation (1.5) Advocacy (1) Decision Flow (3) Financial Management (3) Mission/Strategic Overview (1)

33. 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 Most Urgent Targets forInstitutional Strengthening Decision Flow Financial Management Progress Ranking Quadrant indicatingareas needing mosturgent attention Participation Advocacy Mission/Strategic Overview Priority Ranking

34. Getting JustStarting Strong Here to Stay Organized Capabilities Target Advocacy (No change) Resources targeted Ability to Work with Gov’t External/ Target Public Relations Setting Targets

35. Plan to achieve targets

36. Tailor tool to be inspirational • The “progress cells” are normative -- they are meant to convey an agreed approach • The revision process spurs consensus and reveals inconsistencies • Only focus on what matters • Make what you focus on matter

37. Don’t Fool Yourself

38. Implement change Identify participants Craft process Prioritize Improvement Adapt tool/ Collect Data Identify weaknesses Analyze/ Present Results Measurement Process Scope task

39. Next Steps • Gain better understanding of tool in workshop • Meet with Facilitators to agree on approach • Complete assessment • Prepare Improvement Plan • Submit proposal to CAP • Embark on Improvement • Re-assess

40. 6. Discussion