The right proposal

1. The right proposal Basic elements for high quality proposals

2. Programme • Introduction Actualised Human Rights Strategy • Jean-Pierre Kempeneers, Head Human Rights Division • 2. Proposal Drafting • Lex van der Hoeven, Controller

3. Rules of the Game For this session Interruptions and questions are permitted You are invited to put forward doubts, cases and bottlenecks However: Questions on the policy framework and grant decisions will be answered during the session, where possible, and published on the website of the MFA Discussions on policy issues or criteria will not be entertained Individual cases of participants will not be discussed. Replies will be given through (similar) examples

4. Rules for assessing proposals Relevant for applicants Proposals will be evaluated on the written information provided before the deadline for submitting proposals This means: Evaluators cannot take into account information obtained through previous interaction with the applicant or other means Contrary to the past – it is notpossible to submit additional information after the deadline. In other words: if its not there when the deadline expires, it will not be considered. This can lead to (very) unfortunate proposal rejections!

5. The times, they are changing…. In the past, a good idea, sympathetic target group and some good prose were good enough for donors…. …Now the buzz words are ‘Log-Frames’, ‘Local ownership’, ‘ Value for Money’, ‘Result-Based management’, etc.

6. From good ideas to intervention strategies… MFA adjusts its requirements for proposals • Basic elements: • Context analysis • Inputs, Output, Outcome and Sustainability • Progress monitoring based on quality indicators • Linking output + resources (value for money); • defining Monitoring Protocols;

7. Context analysis A clear problem definition is the basis for a well drafted programme • Multi-stakeholder analysis: • Target group – preferably involved in all succeeding steps of the drafting process • Legal frameworks and role of the authorities • Other relevant actors • Other initiatives in the same area / region • Problem definition: • Should be specific, precise and referring to relevant bottlenecks: • Legal • Access to ... (capital, markets, information) • Skills / knowledge • Non functioning... (markets, institutions, etc.)

8. The core of the proposal … Definitions OECD/DAC Inputs Total of resources (Activities) (Unspecified) Outputs Delivered products Outcome Positive changes Sustainability Sustainability of outputs

9. Outputs Definition OESO/DAC: The products, capital goods and services which result from a development intervention. This may also include changes resulting from the intervention which are relevant to the achievement of outcomes. These products, services or changes are within the span of control of the Organisation and its Southern partners (formulated SMART) Remarks: The level for defining outputs depends on the type of program and the organisation In case the programme is to be carried out with southern partners, the outputs have to be defined at this level Outputs should have a direct relation with the outcome(s);

10. Outcomes Definition OESO/DAC: The achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention's outputs. It refers to a change (f.i. in behaviour or in organisational capacity) relative to the situation at the outset. These changes are within the span of influence of the Organisation and its Southern partners

11. Target Group ORG S-Part. Outputs Outcome Span of control Span of influence Relation outputs and outcomes

12. a) # Trained Southern-partner staff (Output) Number of people connected (Outcome) Y% economical growth in region A (Outcome) Examples Relation outputs - outcomes Drinking water + Sanitation This is not an output trough the partner; it is at activity level Within span the of control, this is an output b) X people connected (Output) Is outside of the span of influence! c) X people connected (Output) Z% less cholera in 10 villages (Outcome)

13. % Economical growth in Region A Decrease % Cholera in 10 villages Target group Span of influence Outcome # people connected Southernpartner Span of control Trained staff Southern partn. NGO Output

14. a) # S-partner with Result Based Management (OP) X S-citizens involved in GG activities (OC) Examples Relation Output - Outcome Good Governance (GG) – for reduction of poverty This is not an output trough the partner; it is at activity level Within span the of control, this is more like an output b) For each cry 10 civilian initiatives in favour of the poor (OP) Improvement of democracy in 10 countries (OC) Is outside of the span of influence! c) For each cry 10 civilian initiatives in favour of the poor (OP) For each country 5 cases on changes in policy in favour of the poor (OC)

15. Sustainability Definition OESO/DAC: The continuation of the benefits of a development initiative, after the intervention stopped; Scope for continuation of benefits – Mitigation of risks Dilemma: Only at the end of the program its sustainability can be evaluated • Solution: • Identifying inputs (e.g. contribution of target group) and outputs, which are critical for sustainability • Based on the progress of these indicators, it is assumed likely that the outputs are will be sustainable

16. Type of results Ownership Sustainability The nature of the added value… … determines the sustainability strategy surfaced road Professional training Tangible Intangible Human rights HIV-AIDS education Collective Individual

17. Tangible – individual Balance between added value and the user costs + efficient collection are central Tangible – Collective Maintenance systems + collective payment mechanisms (social structures) Intangible – individual Making visible the ‘benefits’ – linking them to tangible results and products Intangible – collective Strategies aimed at diversifying financial resources – ODA / private sector + Making visible Added Value Professionalizing volunteers Sustainability Implication added value matrix

18. Sustainability Three Levels Target group Citizens in destination countries - previous sheet Private organisations Policy makers Partner organisations Institutional capacity to reach their target groups and to add value for these Value added Value added Retribution Retribution Own organisation Institutional capacity

19. The core of the monitoring … Measuring for results Procedure: 1. For each programme and aspect (Inputs, Outputs, Outcome, Sustainability) 2 to 4indicators should be chosen, for which targets need to be specified 2. The monitoring of progress for these targets can be basis for annual reports and -plans

20. Targets Function Definition: Operational quality criteria for the chosen indicators related to Inputs, Outputs, Outcome and Sustainability • Defining targets: • Targets are preferably both realistic and ambitious. They are attainable, but clearly demand (management) effort of the NGO + Southern-partners • Discussions with regard to monitoring protocol are not meant for making changes to the proposal

21. Indicator Target Inputs Output Outcome (% cholera) Sustainability Targets - examples Drinking Water and Sanitation Effort professionals drinking water companies 50 months each year # people with access to DW+SS 100.000 Quality conform WHO standards Quality drinking – or groundwater 100% maintenance costsend of program Contribution target group

22. Indicator Streefwaarde Inputs Output (500.000 pers. resached) Outcome (% HIV/AIDS) Sustainability Targets - examples HIV AIDS – use of condoms 50% of program resources Public fund raising Satisfaction of attendees of the seminars 75% finds it useful Increase of 1,0 mln. per annum Sales of condoms in target areas # schools including the educational tools in the curriculum 50% in target area

23. Contribution other donors 33% of the budget Inputs 90% gets attention in national media partner countries Quality of campaigns (10 per country) Output Number of initiatives selected by parties with +20% seats 75% Outcome (policy) Largest donor <20% - Local donors > 20% Donor diversification Sustainability Target - examples Good governance Indicator Target

24. More information Website Dutch MFA http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/subsidies-voor-ontwikkelingssamenwerking-en-europa/subsidies-maatschappelijke-organisaties