PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 1

table of contents T 1. Multi-year institutional funding strategy checklist...08 T 2. Situation monitoring checklist...09 T 3. Idea screener...10 T 4. Pool of IF project ideas and project brief templates...12 T 5. Guidelines for contacts with institutional donors...13 T 6. Partner policy sample...16 T 7. (Pre-) feasibility assessment checklist...17 T 8. Field visit checklist...18 T 9. Concept note template...19 T 10. Guidelines for baseline study...21 T 11. Quality assessment checklist...24 T 12. Tools for donor intelligence and tracking grants...27 T 12a. Grant tracking tables...28 T 12b. ToR for market research...32 T 13. NA Capacity assessment checklist...35 T 14. Funding application checklist...40 T 15. Coordination plan sample...42 T 16. MoU Tools...44 T 16a. MoU Template for IMP-APP...45 T 16b. MoU Template with external partners...48 T 16c. Small scale funding agreement template...50 T 17. Formulation workshop checklist...52 T 18. Logical Framework Approach...54 T 18a. Stakeholder analysis...57 T 18b. Problem analysis...61 T 18c. Objectives analysis...63 T 18d. Strategy analysis...65 T 18e. Logical framework matrix template...67 T 19. Participatory planning methods...69 T 19a. Community mapping...71 T 19b. Transect walk...72 T 19c. Ranking matrix...74 T 19d. Stakeholder diagram...76

T 20. How to develop indicators...77 T 21. Risk management guidelines...82 T 22. Assessing risks and assumptions in the logframe...84 T 23. DNH Analysis...86 T 24. Activity schedule template...90 T 25. Resource and cost scheduling...92 T 25a. Resource and cost schedule sample...93 T 25b. Checklist for establishing a good budget...94 T 26. Job profile "Project Manager/Coordinator...96 T 27. Internal Partnership Agreement Template...99 T 28. Cash flow planning...103 T 29. Internal harmonisation checklist...104 T 30. Matching budget codes sample...109 T 31. Agenda points for kick-off meetings checklist...111 T 32. Annual operation plan template...112 T 33. Monitoring framework tool compilation...114 T 34. Progress report template...117 T 35. Start-up activities checklist...119 T 36. Planning and review meeting checklist...120 T 37. Exit strategies thinking aid...121 T 38. Final project report template...124 T 39. Evaluation methodology guidelines...126 T 39a. TοR for evaluation...128 T 39b. Management response & action plan...131 T 40. TοR for annual project audit...132 T 41. Lessons learnt checklist...134 T 42. Framework agreements checklist...136

Introduction The Institutional Funding Toolkit provides a comprehensive set of tools in order to effectively implement the different requirements in each of the four phases described in the Practical Guide. You will note that reference is made to the relevant tool number in support of each step within the PRAG. These tools will continue to be further developed via the IPD network and any comments or suggestions for improvement can be directed to ipd@sos-kd.org. While these tools are intended to provide guidance and support, they should ideally be used at all times when implementing an Institutional Funding project and adapted as necessary to local contexts and settings. At the same time there are mandatory steps which refer to obligatory SOS processes. They require the use of the tools outlined below: Required tools for mandatory processes Explanation T14. Funding application checklist Obligatory format to be used for AFME T15. Coordination plan sample Gives guidance on how to design the coordination plan T16a. MoU Template for IMP-APP Sets minimum requirements for an internal MoU T27. Internal partnership agreement template Sets minimum requirements for an internal partnership agreement T29. Internal harmonisation checklist Describes how IPD processes are inter-linked with other SOS processes The toolkit includes the following types of tools: Template Checklist Guidelines Sample ToR Template (file format), a standardized file type, can be a pre-formatted example or empty form on which to base other files; a standard document containing layout and styles; a template can be part of a tool or a tool itself, e.g. a template of a logical framework matrix is part of the LFA tool. A list of criteria to keep in mind while undergoing a certain activity. An introduction to a topic with steps on how to proceed. A sample is a concrete example which can be reproduced and adapted according to the context. Terms of Reference define the purpose, scope, structure, roles and responsibilities for a contract, project, meeting, negotiation, etc.; setting a road map. All content of this Toolkit will continuously be updated and improved and is also available on the Intranet: https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/fdc/content/channels/grant-seeking/ Pages/Institutional-Funding-Practical-Guide.aspx PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 7

T 1 MULTI-YEAR INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING STRATEGY CHECKLIST CONTEXT This checklist enables associations to assess their institutional funding strategy and/or to use it as guidance in developing such a strategy. To indicate short to medium-term ambitions for institutional resource mobilisation that allow timely identification of projects and matching of NA partners and needs, PSAs provide a Letter of Intent to inform about their strategy. A Letter of Intent template is incorporated to this checklist. d Have you carefully analysed the external environment in terms of potential (strategic) partners (i.e.other NGOs, like-minded organisations )? d Have you carefully analysed your institutional donor environment and have you found geographic and thematic matches? d What are the thematic priorities? d What are the geographic (countries, regions) priorities? d Do you have preferences for certain types of programmes (including infrastructure)? d Are you taking part in development education activities (concrete measures to inform your domestic public about issues relevant to the international development context)? d Do you have clear qualitative and quantitative public funding targets? d Do you have sufficient staff trained in project cycle management? d Do you have internal awareness raising programmes, trainings or measures to build competence in development issues? d Have you considered cross-cutting issues like gender, HIV etc. in programming and action planning? d Have you put in place measures to ensure reliable control systems and steering instruments? d Do you have plans to enter into partnership with external partners (be they state or non-state, local or international)? d Do you have plans to go for multi-country / multi-year / framework agreements 1? Letter of intent for planned IPD applications To be prepared and submitted in the years 20xx and 20xx. This information is requested by the PSAs once a year in fall. With this Letter of Intent the PSA communicates to the GSC IPD network their ambitions in terms of Institutional Partnership Development (IPD) for the coming two years in order to enable the IPD network to coordinate efforts and plan resources. Should the PSA become aware of any unforeseen change in their plans over the year, the PSA is asked to send an updated letter of intent to allow IPD to incorporate the new plans into their planning of resources in a timely manner. Name of PSA: Planned focus regions/countries (preferably ISO country codes): Planned thematic focus (preferably DAC codes): Number and targeted budget scope of planned FSPs/programmes to be handed in for institutional funding: Please describe briefly your plans for the coming year: Which donors would you like to approach? What kind of support will you potentially need? Indicate the proposed timeline for activities (if known). Describe kind and complexity of the planned applications. Date, Signature 1 Particularly relevant for PSAs 8 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

SITUATION MONITORING CHECKLIST T 2 CONTEXT All (new) projects or programmes should meet needs based on accurate, reliable and sufficient information. Such information will be gained by keeping an eye on major changes in the external environment with possible impact on current and future programme design and plannings. Regular studying of latest news and reports will be equally important as periodic primary research (direct observations, talking to people etc.) The below presented checklist provides guidance to overall key areas for monitoring; yet can and should be disaggregated in accordance with the country context & needs! Criteria Yes No N/A Comments CONTEXT OF THE AREA Geography (climate, environment, seasonal problems) is taken into consideration Political system (local political hierarchies, central/decentralized government ) have been analysed National economic situation (labour, market, price levels, investment sectors...) has been studied and analysed Social systems (status of women, ethnical groups), religion and cultural background (norms and practices, languages) were analysed and taken into consideration National and/or local statistics are available and valid CRSA & SOS NATIONAL PLAN The vulnerable geographical areas identified in the CRSA are still valid Living condition of the population in the identified area have been analysed in the CRSA The National Plan foresees a project in the identified area for the coming year SOS CV PRESENCE IN THE AREA Presence of other SOS CV programmes in the area Possibilities of synergies with other SOS CV programmes have been taken into account OTHER KEY ACTORS The key actors working on child issues in the region have been identified Reports from these key actors are available and have been analysed PARTNERSHIP Presence of potential partners to support the implementation of the project Potential donors are interested in this region, area of intervention and target group PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 9

T 3 Idea Screener CONTEXT The Idea Screener is a concept that intends to motivate innovation within teams. It stipulates that anybody can have an idea that can contribute to raising effectiveness or efficiency within a given environment. Analysing new ideas against a set of criteria can help applying an objective filter in order to first check whether an idea fits the organisation s strategy or objectives before further investments are made. The idea screener described below is a proposed method of filtering new ideas through a list comprised of seven criteria in total. If four out of seven criteria achieve positive rating, an idea can be presented to higher management, which can assess the idea and give "green light" for further development of the idea. If several ideas pass the idea screener, a pool of ideas is created. Out of this pool, potential project ideas for institutional funding can be extracted. The idea screener ensures that only ideas with potential, which have been checked against the criteria, reach project selection stage. The following criteria should be applied when undertaking an idea screening. This is a non-exhaustive list and further criteria can be introduced if considered necessary: 1. Is the idea compatible with mission and strategy of the unit/organisation? Ask yourself if the idea contributes to the mission and strategy of your unit. You may rate the idea with: a. Supports our strategy. b. Does not contradict our strategy (is compatible). c. Is not in line with what our unit aims to achieve. a. and b. are answers that make the idea positively pass this check, c. is an answer that makes the idea not pass this check. 2. Impact Ask yourself if the impact of the idea will be strong enough to invest in realization. You may rate the idea with: a. Strong impact (beyond your organisation effect on target group). b. Medium impact (within your organisation effect on your organisation). c. No impact. a. and b. are answers that make the idea positively pass this check, c. is an answer that makes the idea not pass this check. 3. Sustainability Ask yourself if the idea is relevant to the target group in such a way that it can go on also once you are not proactively pushing for it anymore. You may rate the idea with: a. The idea answers a request from the target group and is likely to be picked up by somebody to implement it. b. The idea needs limited time of implementation (for example to raise awareness for a certain problem and change behavior). c. The idea cannot be implemented without permanent support. All answers can make the idea pass this test but c. will need specific commitment from your organisation such as permanent funding unless the idea also generates permanent benefit. 4. Degree of innovation Ask yourself if the idea or a similar one has already been brought up in the past and what has happened to it. If your organisation or unit has never made a negative experience with a similar idea then further consideration should be reflected upon. You may rate the idea with: a. There is no record of a similar idea within my department in our organisation. 10 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 3 b. There are examples of this idea and they are known as good practice. c. This idea has been practically applied a few years ago but it was a failure. a. and b. are answers that make the idea positively pass this check, c) is an answer that makes the idea not pass this check. 5. Likelihood of replication Ask yourself if this idea can be replicated in other departments or other communities You may rate the idea with: a. Yes the idea can be applied in any circumstances. b. The idea requires certain preconditions concerning the target group. c. The idea is only valid for my department. a. and b. are answers that make the idea positively pass this check, c. is an answer that makes the idea not pass this check unless you specifically target your department. 6. Competence check Ask yourself under which circumstances you can implement the idea. You may rate the idea with: a. We can implement this idea alone. b. We need partners to implement the idea. c. We need to acquire external expertise. a. makes the idea positively pass this check, b. make the idea pass this check if partners are available, c. makes the idea pass if external expertise can be acquired. 7. Long term running cost Ask yourself if the implementation of this idea will generate more benefit than investment in the long term. You may rate the idea with: a. The idea generates benefit during project implementation. b. The idea does not generate any costs after implementation of the project. c. The idea will require permanent investment. a. and b. make the idea positively pass this check, c. makes the idea pass if you can afford the permanent investment. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 11

T 4 Pool of IF project ideas and project brief templates CONTEXT Based on the monitoring analysis, the implementing organisation should at this stage have conceptualised several ideas on possible interventions. After passing through the idea screener (T3), the pool of ideas and related project brief will allow the implementing organisation to compile ideas in one, simple table, ensuring that the main information on each idea is within easy reach, making the potential match for funding opportunities more successful. This tool allows partners to share ideas amongst each other, which should ensure a comprehensive, collaborative process and create a feeling of ownership already at the project design stage. If an idea is considered for project implementation, programme plan registration is required and approvals by relevant higher management. Overview of project ideas Compiled by: Date: Updates: N Title Type of CV Programme Country/ Location Approx. n of beneficiaries Approx. cost in USD Approx. duration in months 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Project brief template Proposed by (NA, Name, Facility/ Office, Position): date: General information Project title Brief description Location Duration "Estimated number of beneficiaries" Estimated total cost Intervention logic Development goal Specific Objective Expected results Main activities Quality Check (Consider the following issues) Sustainability Degree of Innovation Potential Partnership Opportunities Replication Possibilities Estimated long term running cost 12 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

GUIDELINES FOR CONTACTS WITH INSTITUTIONAL DONORS T 5 CONTEXT This tool provides guidance on recommended processes and communication mechanisms for establishing and maintaining successful partnerships with institutional donors at national level. Why have contacts with institutional donors? Funds are increasingly dispersed through decentralized mechanisms of funding by donor agencies and multilateral bodies, such as the UN or EU delegations. In this regard, already existing partnerships with institutional donors are significantly benefiting SOS CV National Associations. These relationships should be effectively maintained and new opportunities should be sought in order to ensure continued and informed funding support, which is easily accessible. In general, institutional donor contacts, whether formal or informal, will form the basis for partnership agreements and long-term relation with the donor. 1. Before contacting the Institutional Donor Step 1: Prepare yourself, find out more about the donor! The first step in this process is to identify what the different types of institutional donors in your respective country are. These may include: Delegations of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), donor countries 1 such as embassies and development cooperation delegations. Multilateral organisations such as UN agencies and the EC delegation. Foundations. Use the tools for donor intelligence (T12) for further assistance in identifying these actors. Before contacting an institutional donor directly, it is advisable to undertake prior research. A good starting point is to review the donor s website. Most websites will provide basic information about the donor s programme/services in the host country as well as contact lists which will indicate which person is the most appropriate for a meeting concerning possible partnership opportunities. Before you personally get in touch with staff of the institutional donor, it is advisable to know the context and the donor s goals in your country and the general development policy guidelines. For instance, if you plan to meet en EC delegation, the main document to be aware of is the Country Strategy Paper (CSP) as it defines priorities for EU development aid and represents an agreement between the EU and the respective government. In the case of a meeting with a ministry of your government, it can be useful to know the country s general Poverty Reduction Strategy which can be found on the website of the IMF. 1 Poverty Reduction Strategies define a country's economic, structural and social policy and programmes to promote growth and reduce poverty, and identify the corresponding external financing needs. 2. Establishing the contact Step 2: Initiate contact in writing The first contact with the institutional donor should be in writing. Although many institutional donors have staff designated for contacts with civil society, initial correspondence should be addressed to the Head of the Office. The letter should be accompanied by a brief description of 1 http://www.imf.org/external/np/prsp/prsp.asp PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 13

T 5 SOS CV and recent projects/programmes, e.g. in the area of family strengthening, health and education interventions etc. In order to prove competence, it is also useful to provide information on cooperation with other international institutional donors (such as World Bank, UN agencies etc.) Step 3: Ask for a meeting Firstly, ask for a meeting and provide contact information. If you do not obtain an immediate response from the donor, do not hesitate to contact them again. Send a copy of your initial letter by email or fax and/or phone to the Secretariat of the Head of Office. Generally, the person contacting and meeting with donor staff should be the National Director. Even if the purpose of having contacts with the donor is ultimately fundraising, it is not advisable to delegate this task to a national fundraiser from the start, unless this person has a background in development cooperation or governmental funding. It is very unlikely and probably also not the most useful for you to meet the Head of Office (although his/her good will is of course desirable). Usually you will speak to a person in charge of non-state actors or someone in charge of the social sector. If necessary, write again Step 4: Present your purpose The purpose of your visit is either to present the organisation (SOS CV) in general or to present a specific project. If you present the organisation in general you should try to illustrate SOS CV s work by practical examples. Special consideration should be given to fields of work which are less well known than the Children s Villages in order to widen potential funding opportunities. Furthermore, classic SOS CVs are usually not considered as development cooperation projects and are therefore of lesser interest for potential institutional donors active in development cooperation. You may invite the donor to a project visit (e.g. a Social Centre) but do not expect that this invitation is directly taken up. If the aim of your meeting is to present a specific SOS CV project, it is particularly important that you enquire about donor development cooperation focus areas and current projects. Presenting a project should be supported by written documents, such as a problem tree graph, a logical framework matrix and an activity schedule. These project planning tools are explained in the IPDs Practical Guide for Institutional Partnership Development (PRAG) and in numerous training documents available on the Intranet. Please note that it is not advised to lobby for a project proposal that you want to submit under a call for proposals that has already been published! In extremis, this may lead to you being excluded from this and future calls. Step 5: Write a thank-you letter Provide your contact details during the meeting and ask the donor that you would like to be kept informed about the donor s cooperation with your National Association and the donor s activities and calls for proposals. After the meeting you should send a follow-up letter (or email) addressed to the head of the meeting delegation in which you express your gratitude, summarise the meeting and indicate follow-up opportunities. 3. Maintaining the contact Step 6: Keep donors informed After you established the initial contact, you should inform the potential donor regularly about developments and projects that may be of interest. Also new partnerships you concluded with other international organisations or EU member states bilateral agencies are of interest to the donor. Special events of the NA (inaugurations, anniversaries, open door days etc.) are a perfect occasion to invite donors, where appropriate. Once you have become a reliable partner of the institutional donor, presenting a project idea that responds to a clearly identified need may ultimately result in a call for proposals being launched for which your project will be suitable. 14 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 6 PARTNER POLICY SAMPLE CONTEXT This sample provides an overview of how the relationship with partners should be driven (in this case between the PSA and NA) and introduces core values supporting this relationship. It describes the process for selecting new partners, the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder as well as how to best establish & maintain communication. This shall ensure full accountability between all parties. The sample s purpose is not necessarily to copy but rather provide orientation for PSAs and NAs to further develop their individual Partnership Policies. When the sample refers to We, the PSA, the specific name of the funding partner (PSA) should be inserted. General approach to partner relations Our relationship with partners is based on equality and mutual support. While the responsibilities are different, we work together to achieve a common vision with shared objectives. The partnership process is predominantly initiated with implementing partners indicating an identified need at local level. This request is then assessed to ascertain whether it is within the capacity of SOS CV and in accordance with our core priorities. Once agreed, the partnership can be developed in a collaborative manner, while acknowledging the distinctive roles and strengths of each stakeholder. It is the PSA bringing its fundraising and coordination expertise and the implementing partner bringing its diverse implementation expertise. Like all SOS partners, both parties are guided by the same global mission, vision and values. This greatly facilitates alignment of our expectations and efforts. Furthermore, cooperation is guided by our shared core values, which are as follows: Courage: We take action. With a sensitive yet confident approach we are determined to question, learn and take action for vulnerable children around the world. Commitment: We believe that by entering into a long-term commitment we have a meaningful and sustainable impact. We do this by nurturing lasting relationships with our partners. We believe that commitment comes naturally when our joint programmes answer to the partners priorities. We understand each other s expectations and agree on our respective roles and responsibilities. Trust: In an atmosphere of trust we are inspired to support one another, share our experiences and learn from each other. Accountability: Our greatest responsibility is guaranteeing the well-being of children, whereby we are committed to using all funds and resources wisely, with respect and accountability. Selection of new partners Our partners are SOS National Associations in countries where we work. These National Associations are autonomous national NGOs, firmly rooted in their communities, with a strong local network. Partner selection is therefore closely linked to the choice of programmes and countries. This selection is based on requests from SOS National Associations within the priority regions and themes of the relevant PSA. 1 Mutual roles and responsibilities In programme selection and design, it is the implementing partner who establishes the preliminary agenda; applications are then formulated jointly in a participative manner. The PSA commits itself to mobilising funds for jointly formulated programmes, and thereby takes on the financial responsibility. 1 These priorities are set as limitations to ensure that the PSA does not overstretch its capacity or expertise PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 15

T 6 The predominant responsibility of programme management lies with the implementing partner, who has local expertise and community networks. Furthermore, the PSA recognises that not all SOS National Associations have the same level of capacity and that the oversight and advisory requirements of the respective PSA may in these cases be necessary in a wider form (mainly regarding Project Cycle Management), and also more specific follow-up may be required in some cases. The PSA agrees not to exert influence on the management or policies of the implementing partners, on their local networks and external partnerships. Equally, the implementing partners do not have formal influence into the management of the PSA. Both parties are represented in the General Assembly of SOS CV, as well as various policy bodies, through which we jointly exert influence on the overall steering of the International Organisation. Communication The core values imply a professional and collaborative relationship with implementing partners. Their establishment and maintenance is an important aspect of the PSAs work. We (the PSA) do this by collaborating closely with the implementing partners, for example through undertaking programme formulation at the implementing partner s location; regular phone and e-mail contact; yearly field visits and exchange in other SOS platforms such as thematic training sessions and/ or seminars. Accountability In (financial) reporting we are guided by SOS CV shared standards, which are adequate to ensure transparency. In some cases, additional requirements are set by donors, which the PSA communicates clearly to the implementing partner in the initial stages of programme formulation and implementation. Any additional requirements are clearly outlined and agreed in the original Partnership Agreement. Conflict prevention and mediation We, the PSA and our implementing partners share the same vision, mission and guiding principles. This significantly assists our shared aims of preventing misunderstandings and conflicts of interest. For each programme, roles and responsibilities are defined together and outlined in the original Partnership Agreement. If conflicts arise, SOS CV and in particular our colleagues at the Institutional Partnership Development Team (IPD) are available to act as neutral mediator(s) in order to resume and/or maintain a collaborative, mutually responsible and successful partnership between the PSA and the implementing partner. We strive for transparency and a free exchange of information. Like this, a strong professional relationship and mutual trust is built, learning is enhanced and there is a greater chance of crossfertilisation of ideas. Spoken and e-mail communication is predominantly in XXX (insert language here), and in some cases in XXX. Programme documents and reports are in XXX; any translation costs are included in the programme budget where XXX is not a spoken language in the programme country. 16 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

(PRE-) FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST T 7 CONTEXT The purpose of the (pre-) feasibility assessment checklist is to provide a basis for decision-making for the development of a future project(s). This checklist provides minimum requirements for an affirmative decision. Any potential challenges or problems that may arise from the responses should be taken into account and be addressed as risks for consideration in the project design. Criteria Yes No N/A Comments CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AREA The CRSA and the NA National plan indicate high needs in the area and the location concerned The local and national statistics and other independent sources indicate high needs in the area and the location concerned Lack of or capacity within the community to respond to the target group s need for services Local and national/federal authorities are willing to support a programme or at least approve it Potential conflict and security measures will not affect the implementation of the project CAPACITIES Qualified staff are available to be recruited in the location Quality goods and services are available in the area or in proximity to where project implementation takes place PARTNERSHIP Presence of interested potential partners to support the implementation of the project Interest from potential institutional donors on the thematic and area covered by the project PAST AND PRESENT PROJECTS Are there similar projects currently going on in the area? If yes, is there any added value to this project and are there possibilities to work together with other organisations? If there is a similar project that was previously implemented by SOS CV or another NGO, did we take into consideration lessons learned from past successes and failures COHERENCE OF RESPONSE AND ACTIONS Proposed actions are in line with our organisation s mission and values Risk assessment indicates no major programme constraints PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 17

T 8 FIELD VISIT CHECKLIST CONTEXT The field visit checklist provides essential points to consider when visiting a country for one of the following purposes: to conduct a pre-feasibility assessment, to conduct a field analysis/monitoring visit or to hold an annual review and planning meeting with local stakeholders. It is a preparatory tool and can also serve as a reminder during the field mission and can be used to give structure to the trip report / back-to-office report. What is the purpose of the visit? Pre-feasibility assessment. Field analysis/project monitoring. Annual review/planning meeting. Other. Which activities should be conducted during a visit? Depending on the purpose of the visit, the following activities should be conducted before, during and after the visit: 1. Before the visit Draft the Terms of Reference. Collect and study reports and relevant background information (official publications from government institutions or large organisations) on the location to be visited. Plan and describe activities to be undertaken. Arrange meetings with stakeholders. If the purpose of the visit is a pre-feasibility assessment, use the (pre-)feasibility checklist (T7) to assess whether the idea outlined in the project brief is feasible and relevant. 2. During the visit Meet relevant stakeholders including partner organisations, local government authorities, etc. Collect information using participatory methods (T19). Discuss project ideas and feasibility (main challenges and needs, objectives, main activities, support from local authorities and stakeholders, existing structures and entities, main risks, etc.) as well as expectations from the community. Research funding possibilities at local level. In case of a field analysis or monitoring mission as well as during review meetings assess the progress towards results based on indicators. Furthermore discuss challenges encountered and solutions found, any necessities and plans for change management as well as identification of lessons learned. Also look into the involvement of CBOs (Community Based Organisations) and other partners and how previously established partnerships evolve over time. Also discuss any needs in terms of capacity development by the implementing organisation or its partners. Conclude the visit with a final discussion with key project members and stakeholders. 3. After the field visit a. Draft the trip report (3-4 pages within 2 weeks of the visit): Summarise what you have learnt, observed and experienced during the visit. Describe the stakeholders concerns and ideas. Define actions to be taken and person(s)/ unit(s) in charge. If the purpose of the visit was a pre-feasibility assessment, assess and draw conclusions in terms of the feasibility of a possible intervention and prepare an feasibility assessment report for decision-making. b. Conduct all necessary follow up action as outlined in the trip report. Communicate relevant actions taken and any additional follow up required with all relevant stakeholders. 18 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 9 CONCEPT NOTE TEMPLATE CONTEXT Many institutional donors have adopted restricted call for proposal processes;which means in other words that they introduced a submission process consisting of two stages: concept note and full-fledged application. The concept note template presented here below is used in cases where the institutional donor does not have its own template. Otherwise, donor templates for concept notes may replace the internal template; however, the Scope Definition Table (see Annex 1) has to be completed in any case in order to allow entering data into the SOS Programme Planning database. The purpose of a concept note, from the institutional donor s point of view, is to help applicants develop more competitive proposals and to save time by eliminating proposals that are not likely to be funded. It is essential to capture the interest of the institutional donor and demonstrate that the proposed idea is worthy of further consideration. Therefore, the first sentences of a concept note are critical. You want the evaluators to continue reading! Unless donors provide their own specific concept note templates, the following structure should be adhered to: Any concept note shall not exceed 5 pages; the font size should be at least Arial 10 or bigger. Detailed budgetary information should only be included if specifically requested; otherwise only an estimated overall total should be mentioned. 1. General information Title of proposal: Location: Duration (in month): Total budget estimation: Possible Starting Date: Contact person (include name and email): 2. Summary of the action Brief narrative description of the proposal. 3. Relevance 3.1 How relevant is your proposal to the needs and constraints of the target country(ies) or region? 3.2 What are the problems to be resolved and the needs to be met? 3.3 Who are the actors involved (beneficiaries, target groups)? 3.4 What are the objectives and expected results? 3.5 What is the added value of the project (what does the project bring to local communities in addition to and/or in support of central or local government action and actions implemented by non-state actors)? 4. Methodology and Sustainability: 4.1 What are the main project activities? 4.2 Who will be your main implementing partners, for how long and how will they be involved? 4.3 How will the project achieve sustainability? 4.4 Will it have multiplier effects? 5. Expertise and operational capacity: 5.1 What is the experience of your organisation in project management? 5.2. What is the experience of your organisation and your partner(s) of the issues to be addressed? PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 19

T 9 Annex 1 : Programme unit scope (for internal use only) Please fill one table for each programme unit falling under the IF project at hand. SOS Programme Plan Planned SOS Programme Unit Characteristics Comments 1. Programme unit type 1 2. Programme unit category 2 3. Facility type 3 4. Rough description of facility type 5. Estimated number of beneficiaries at full capacity 4 6. Estimated annual running costs at full capacity 5 7. Estimated type of premises 6 8. Rough description of premises 9. Estimated cost of development of programme proposal 10. Site preparation costs 11. Estimated construction costs 12. Planned Duration 13. Approximate Total Cost 1 2 3 Please indicate whether the programme unit (care, education, health) is new, extended or its premises are being modified (NEW, EXT, MOD). NEW: new programme unit, EXT: extension of an existing programme unit, MOD: modification of an existing programme unit. Please indicate the programme unit category according to the new programme reporting structure: SOS Families, Youth Care, Alternative FBC options, Family Strengthening, Short term care, EP, SL1, SL2, KG, TC2, Day care centre, MC1, MC2, Other (please specify). Please specify the facility type(s) that comes nearest to the services of the planned programme unit (Children s Village, Primary School, Kindergarten, Youth home, Social Centre, Polyclinic, etc.). 5 Please estimate the amount of running costs per year (based on the national costs/child/month average) at full capacity if the NA is already in the position of giving estimations. 6 If this point is not applicable as premises are not required for the programme please indicate not applicable. In other cases please indicate the possibilities (multiple answers possible): Not applicable, Construction required, Renovation required, Purchase required, Renting of premises aspired, Donation of premises expected (in this case, please provide further details), Other (please specify). 4 Full capacity is the maximum capacity of the programme unit. If the NA is already in the position of giving estimations, please indicate the number of total beneficiaries at full capacity by entering the total number and then (where applicable) splitting into 0-17 and 18 and older. 20 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Guidelines FOR BASELINE STUDy T 10 CONTEXT This tool provides guidance on how to conduct baseline studies on a target population. Baseline studies are usually undertaken at the very onset of the implementation phase, as they serve to observe the change in socio-economic indicators before and after the project. 1. What is a baseline study? According to the OECD/DAC, a baseline study is an analysis describing the situation prior to an intervention, against which progress can be assessed or comparisons made. Defined as such, baseline studies enable before/after comparisons in monitoring and evaluation and are therefore carried out before the implementation starts. The baseline study establishes the status of the intended change before the start of the project, but after it has been designed. A baseline study focuses on the expected results of an intervention, i.e. gathers information related to the different levels of the results chain. In addition, a baseline study can look at secondary changes, both negative and positive, that have not been intended by the programme as well as underlying assumptions (theories of change). For the latter, information is needed for determining whether the theories of change for the intervention are valid in reality. 2. What is the rational for undertaking a baseline study? Baseline studies are essential to show that change has taken place as they provide a point of comparison, yet they are often neglected elements of the Planning, Monitoring Evaluation & Learning process. Ensure accuracy and utility of indicators as baseline studies provide the opportunity to test developed indicators. It shows whether indicators are accurate lenses for seeing whether change has occurred. 3. How should a baseline study be conducted? In order to conduct a baseline study, the following four steps need to be undertaken: 1. Preparing a baseline plan. 2. Conducting the baseline study according to the baseline plan. 3. Analysis of the collected data and review of the results. 4. Formulation of report/sharing of results from the baseline study. A baseline study aims at being meaningful, relevant, cost effective and not too academic! 3.1 Baseline Plan In order to illustrate what information is needed, and how, where and by whom it can be collected, a baseline plan is a useful tool. A baseline study focuses on changes (expected) that are planned to take place as a result of the intervention. See next page for a sample framework of a baseline plan: Baseline studies are conducted in order to: Compare baseline information with information gathered during monitoring and evaluation to prove that change has occurred over time. Set achievable and realistic targets for the expected results that have been defined in the results chain. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 21

T 10 Baseline focus Indicators Data collection methods Data source and quantity Location of data collection Conflict considerations Means of analysis Time needed Expected Change (Impact): Outcomes (please refer to glossary): Outputs (please refer to glossary): Secondary changes (optional): Underpinning assumptions/ theories of change (optional): Baseline focus: As mentioned previously, the primary focus of a baseline study is to assess the expected change that any given intervention aims to bring about. Optionally, secondary changes and underpinning assumptions can also be assessed. Indicators: Depending on the focus of the baseline study, indicators may need to be developed (T20). Indicators are used where an outcome cannot be measured directly and are developed for the different levels of the results chain. As indicators are used in order to see the changes that take place due to the intervention, the baseline study should establish what specific values indicators assume prior to starting activities. The baseline study will also serve to test indicators and determine whether refinements are necessary. In fact, there is no better time for changing indicators, because if changed later, the baseline data collected earlier could be rendered useless. Data collection methods: This part of the plan describes the way in which the data will be collected, e.g. interviews, Focus Group Discussions, direct observation, analysis of statistics. The methods are selected depending on what information one wants to collect. There are qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. For instance, for quantitative indicators, quantitative data collection methods are used. It is an advantage to apply the same methods for the baseline as for the evaluation. Participatory methods should be used whenever possible. In some rare cases, the data needed for the baseline may already exist, be sure that you have a good overview of what information is already available! The methods used need to be explained and justified in detail in the baseline plan and in the baseline reports. When selecting data collection methods, the context of the intervention needs to be taken into consideration. This includes cultural aspects (for instance it might be necessary to conduct separate Focus Group Discussion for men and women) as well as security considerations (access for data collection). Data source and quantity: This refers to where the data will be accessed and how many data sources will be used. For example: 6 teachers per school (3 schools), official police statistics etc. Location of data collection: Refers to where the data will be collected, e.g. during training, in peoples homes, in the place of work or via email. Conflict considerations: Refers to issues specific to the conflict that may influence conducting the baseline study, e.g. security situation, implications of language selection, nationality of researchers, etc. Means of analysis: This refers to the tools and methods used to analyse data. Here, common social science research tools, such as Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) or Envivo, can be used. Time needed: Refers to the number of days needed to implement each aspect of the baseline including analysing the data. 22 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 10 A budget for the baseline study should also be attached to the baseline plan. Preparing this plan demands a considerable amount of energy and time! If it is done thoroughly, however, it will make starting monitoring much easier. 3.2 Conducting the baseline study Once the baseline plan has been completed, the baseline study should be conducted in accordance with the plan. When should a baseline study be carried out? Ideally, the baseline study should take place some weeks before the implementation of a project starts. If the baseline study has to be done quickly, it can also be done at the same time as the first stages of the project. There should not be too much time between the baseline study and the implementation. In complex programmes, where several different changes are foreseen, resulting from activities that start at different times, a rolling baseline study can be considered. This means that the baseline is broken down in different parts depending on the different anticipated changes, and each part is implemented before the start of activities for each new change. 3.3 Analysis of the collected data and review of the result Analysis of the data collected is one of the most important steps in a baseline study, and it is essential to make sure that adequate time and resources are allocated to it. Analysis involves putting together the data and interpreting the results in the broader context of the activity. It is important that the baseline study and the data collected are stored so that the one carrying out the evaluation can verify the conclusions and analyse the raw data. Upon completion of data collection and analysis, the project team should meet to review the results and set targets for expected results and indicators. Also, refinements of the intervention design/planning might be necessary based on the results of the baseline study. 3.4 Formulation of report/sharing of results from the baseline study The results of the baseline study should be shared within the organisation and with the implementing partners. Donors and other stakeholders could also be interested in the results. Who conducts the baseline study? Ideally, the same individual or team who conducts the evaluation also conducts the baseline study in order to ensure continuity, accuracy and understanding. It is important that the baseline study is implemented in a professional way since it is the basis for many other stages in the project, refining the design as well as measuring change. If hiring an external professional to carry out the baseline study is not possible due to budgetary constraints, and if staff does not have the specialised skills, it can be an alternative to hire an external advisor who provides support in selecting methods, trains the data collectors and conducts a quality check on the analysis. Terms of Reference (ToR) for compiling a study to measure FSP baseline indicators are available on the Intranet: https://intranet.soskd.org/areasofwork/fdc/content/channels/ Grant-seeking/Pages/Institutional-Funding- Practical-Guide.aspx PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 23

T 11 QUALITY ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST CONTEXT This checklist provides a set of criteria and questions for quality assessment during the first two phases of the project cycle (Identification and Formulation). Furthermore, this tool enables the user to consider the project s progress and informs decision-making based on the three following criteria widely used by development cooperation agencies which are relevancy, feasibility and effectiveness / good management. Valid for Notes Quality Attributes, Criteria and Standards IDENTIFICATION PHASE FORMULATION PHASE A RELEVANT the project meets demonstrated and high priority needs 1 Consistent with and supportive of SOS CV policies 1.1 The proposal is consistent with SOS CV policies and a coherent argument is provided to demonstrate how the project will directly support such policies 1.2 The initiative is consistent with the National Strategic Plan (and/or other framework documents such as CRSA and the SOS Global Strategy) X X 2 The initiative is consistent with the National Strategic Plan (and/or other framework documents such as CRSA and the SOS Global Strategy) 2.1 Relevant policy documents and decisions are referred to and described including key ongoing initiatives 3 Key stakeholders and target groups are clearly identified, organisational capacity issues analyzed and local ownership demonstrated 3.1 Disaggregated data is provided on the socio-economic status of target groups (e.g. health, education, income, human rights) and equity issues are explicitly assessed 3.2 A thorough and participatory stakeholder analysis has been conducted and potential conflicts identified 3.3 An assessment of organisational structures, capacity and governance issues are provided (strengths and weaknesses) 3.4 Evidence is provided of local ownership of project ideas, such as previous or current commitments of resources (cash or kind) to related activities and active local involvement in decision making 4 Problems have been appropriately analysed 4.1 The problem analysis includes assessment of cause and effect relationships and identifies underlying problems which impact on target groups X X X X X X X X X X X 4.2 The set of problems and/or opportunities that the project should aim X X 5 Lessons learned from experience and linkages with other ongoing/planned projects or programmes have been assessed and incorporated. 5.1 Reference is made to the lessons learned from other projects/programmes implemented in the sector or in similar environments (from review and evaluation reports) and these lessons are reflected in the proposal X X 5.2 Complementarity with ongoing or planned programmes/projects is assessed X X 5.3 Implementation options/strategies are appropriately analyzed and described X 24 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 11 Valid for Notes Quality Attributes, Criteria and Standards IDENTIFICATION PHASE FORMULATION PHASE B FEASIBLE - The project is well designed and is likely to deliver tangible and sustainable benefits to target groups 6 The (preliminary) objectives are clear and logical and address clearly identified needs 6.1 The project s (preliminary) overall objective is clearly linked to a relevant policy or sector objective, and thus demonstrates how the project is likely to contribute to a long term development outcome 6.2 The project s (preliminary) purpose clearly specifies a direct benefit(s) that the target group(s) will derive from the implementation of the project and is consistent with the analysis of problems the target groups are facing 6.3 The project s (preliminary) results/outputs describe tangible improvements to services, facilities or knowledge that will directly support achievement of the project s purpose 7 The (preliminary) resource and cost implications are clear 7.1 Relevant policy documents and decisions are referred to and described including key ongoing initiatives 7.2 Project investment and running costs are described and analysed in sufficient detail, including the financial contributions of primary stakeholders 7.3 Recurrent cost implications are estimated, and an assessment made of the local capacity to meet these costs at the end of the donor funding 8 The project is (likely to be) environmentally, technically and socially acceptable and sustainable X X X X X X X X 8.1 An appropriate level of environmental impact analysis has been carried out X X 8.2 Gender analysis has been carried out, and the project has a clear (preliminary) strategy to ensure benefits are appropriately shared by women and men 8.3 The project has a clear strategy to ensure benefits are appropriately targeted at identified vulnerable groups 8.4 If the project is set in a conflict environment, possible interactions in between project and conflict have been considered by applying the DNH checklist or DNH workshop to avoid negative impacts X X X X C GOOD MANAGEMENT - the formulation of the project ensures quality management and monitoring arrangements and mechanisms 9 (Preliminary) coordination/management and financing arrangements are clear and support organisational development and local ownership 9.1 Anticipated project management responsibilities are briefly defined, build on the analysis of organisational structure and capacity, and promote local ownership and capacity building 9.2 The arrangements for coordinating the work of different stakeholders are clearly described and practical to implement 9.3 Arrangements for regular review, operational work planning and budgeting are described and fit with local systems. Financial management arrangements are clearly specified (in particular for providing an adequate level of overall internal control) and promote accountability and transparency 9.4 Audit arrangements are clearly specified (including responsibilities and coordination arrangements involving various stakeholders) X X X X X PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 25

T 11 Valid for Notes Quality Attributes, Criteria and Standards IDENTIFICATION PHASE FORMULATION PHASE 10 The monitoring/evaluation and accountability system is clear and practical 10.1 The project s Logframe Matrix includes a set of indicators and sources of verification (namely for the purpose(s) and results), which will allow management information to be collected and used in a timely and cost-effective manner 10.2 Adequate resources are included within the project design to support the implementation of the performance measurement (monitoring and evaluation) system 10.3 Roles and responsibilities for collecting, recording, reporting and using the information are clearly described and build on/support existing systems (capacity building) 10.4 The information needs of target groups are given adequate priority and include providing the means by which they can voice their opinions and concerns (local accountability) X X X X 10.5 Effective anti-corruption monitoring tools and audit requirements are proposed/in place X 11 Assumptions/Risks are identified and assessed, and appropriate risk management is described 11.1 Assumptions in the Logframe Matrix highlight key factors outside the direct control of project managers which have the potential to impact negatively on the project 11.2 The importance of different risks is assessed, including the degree of negative impact they might have on achieving objectives X X 26 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

TOOLS FOR DONOR INTELLIGENCE AND TRACKING GRANTS T 12 CONTEXT Donor intelligence is a process which consists of knowing potential donors and understanding their priorities and modes of cooperation. In order to develop donor intelligence, it is essential to map the donor landscape and analyse it against one s organisational policies, priorities, standards and projects. Sound donor intelligence and a grant tracking system will help enhance institutional fundraising success. Step 1: Develop your donor intelligence and track grant opportunities The purpose of developing donor intelligence is: To have a clear and comprehensive understanding of existing opportunities. To gain a better understanding of the mechanisms used by other NGOs to raise institutional funds (at local level). To identify relevant donors for existing and potential projects in order to ensure a high success rate with high return on investment. In any case, donor intelligence should commence with web research in order to collect relevant data on potential institutional donors working in your region and in your respective area of work. Since institutional donors are increasingly making use of the call for proposal system, especially at local level, it is essential to keep an eye on local newspapers, websites and other communication channels to ensure that no grant opportunities are missed. The outputs of donor intelligence should be the following: A local donor market database providing crucial information on donor contacts, funding modalities and requirements. An overview of other organisations working in the field of children s rights and their approach towards and cooperation with (local) institutional donors. Step 2: Match grant opportunities with IF project ideas Once you have identified funding opportunities, the matching process can start. This means that based on all the information you have captured, you will check whether you have ideas (com- ing from an existing project brief, a concept note or even additional needs considerations) that fit the grant opportunity (see table 1 of the Grant Tracking Table). If this matching process is successful and you plan to develop an application, make sure you have the necessary approval from the Regional Director (see tool 11 Funding Application Checklist). Once you have received the Go-ahead, you will then request an IPD reference number from IO which represents the starting point of the application process. Step 3: Track your grant applications and contracts The prime purpose of the application tracking record is to record critical information and initial actions taken by your staff when a grant is developed and filed with a funding opportunity for consideration. It tells you who developed an application, the funding source with which it was filed, and what official action was taken on the application. Once the formal relationship between your organisation and the funding agency has been established and the grant administration apparatus has been set up internally, you are ready to track essential information associated with managing the grant. Tracking your grant applications and contracts will give you an overview of all the applications in process and potential contracts signed. 1 The IPD reference code is centrally organized and administered by IO IPD. The IPD reference code will be provided by IO IPD following an official info e-mail from the RO to IO (cc CO) along with a positive appraisal of the funding application checklist. If the appraisal has been negative, the RO is still expected to send an info mail to CO IPD. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 27

T 12 a GRANT TRACKING TABLES CONTEXT The grant tracking table allows for the gathering of relevant information related to funding opportunities and once the matching process is successful, to track the application until a contract with the potential donor is signed. The electronic version of this tool has been designed and automatic functions have been introduced to standardize data entry which allows for later consolidation and aggregation of data. 1. Tracking grants opportunity & matching: This sheet helps compiling all the relevant information regarding grants opportunities that you have identified through conducting market research, screening calls for proposals and contacts with institutional donors and match them with the most suitable project idea (T4). Donor DAC code Type of donor Donor country Name of the donor Funding instrument/ programme Sector/ Subsector 1 Sector/ Subsector 2 Sector/ Subsector 3 Bilateral donor Japan International Development Cooperation Agency Japan / Delegation Wonderland Indicate if bilateral /multilateral donor or foundation or government body in the project country Decentralized cooperation / Programme to promote protection of vulnerable groups and their participation in decision-making processes 160 16020 Include DAC Codes (see list on the OECD website) Geographic focus Guidelines Amounts per awarded grant Local currency Submission period / deadline Donor contact person Min Max Min Max Name Contact information Northern Provinces of Wonderland www.btc-guide.org $25 000 $100 000 16 375 000 XOF 65 000 000 XOF 1st Quarter Wada Yukio "wyukio@jap.wd Tel: 33.869.47.85 Include the link to the webpage Some donors accept applications anytime during the year, others have specific deadlines 28 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 12 a available project document Match between grant opportunity & project brief Tentative project title financial scope most likely approach / role of SOS CV Stop or Go by Regional Director 50,000 USD IPD Reference code project brief (idea) "Children NOW - Network Organised for and by children in Wonderland" 50000 U$ to 100000 U$ partner in consortium / sub-recipient go-ahead H 001 11 WL FSP JP Indicate the financial scope in USD: < 50,000 USD 50,000 USD 100,000 USD Indicate the source of your idea: - Project brief - Concept note - Previous project (previously rejected) - No document as of yet - N/A (No match), the next columns remain empty Indicate if you plan to apply as: - Sole applicant (no partner) - Lead applicant (consortium approach) - Partner in consortium/ sub-recipient If go-ahead, insert your IPD reference code Based on the results of the funding application (T14) checklist, indicate if: - Go ahead - On hold - Stop 2. Tracking Applications: This table provides the opportunity to insert detailed information related to each application developed, while simultaneously providing an overview of all applications in progress. ID - IPD reference code Application status Assessment by donor Type of partnership (Role of SOS) Involvement of other organisations / partners [(1) = financial, (2) = expertise, (3) donations in kind] H001 11 WL FSP JP approved no evaluation received Data transferred from "Tracking opportunity & matching" sheet Lead applicant (consortium approach) Unicef Wonderland (1) Save the Children Wonderland (2) SOS Magicland (1, 2) Indicate the status of the application: - In preparation - Cancelled - Suspended - Submitted/decision pending - Approved - Rejected - Other If the application has been rejected, indicate the reasons why If other than rejected, give any insight's as to donor's comments to the proposal (if available) Any other information Donor Project title Short description Donor country Name of donor Funding instrument / programme Japan International Development Cooperation Agency Japan / Delegation Wonderland Data transferred from " Tracking opportunity & matching" sheet Decentralized cooperation / Programme to promote protection of vulnerable groups and their participation in decision-making processes "Children NOW - Network Organised for and by children in Wonderland" Building a child protection and safety network across Wonderland with the help of 2 partners: Unicef, Save the Children; main components include setting up of a child / youth hotline service, training of authorities / duty bearers, fostering child participation in decision-making, installing control mechanism,... PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 29

T 12 a Sector / subsector 1 DAC Codes Total project budget Amount requested from institutional dono Sector / subsector 2 Sector / subsector 3 USD local currency USD 16010 80 000 60 000 000 FCFA 72 000 Use Navision exchange rates or according to donor regulation local currency Date of submission [mm/dd/yyyy] Additional comments regarding donor cooperation 54 000 000 XOF 01/01/2011 donor called twice for a meeting for clarification, particularly as regards some specific budget items; application was reviewed accordingly and returned to donor with changes incorporated Date contract signed 18/04/2011 Indicate comments of how the cooperation with the donor is unfolding 3. Tracking contracts: Once a contract has been signed with a donor, one can complete the data fields in this table, which specifically refer to the contract itself. The use of this table is applicable and relevant until the donor has approved the final report. ID - Reference code Name of donor Name of partner organisation Date contract signed Approved donor funding in USD Share of total project budget (%)/ Planned duration of programme (in months) H 001 11 WL FSP JP International Development Cooperation Agency Japan / Delegation Wonderland "Unicef Wonderland (1) Save the Children Wonderland (2) SOS Magicland (1, 2)" 18/04/11 80 000 90% 12 months Data transferred from "Tracking Applications" sheet Include the entire planned programme period irrespective of the contract period. 30 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 12 a Contract period (from - to) start date end date date amount LCY:U$ x-change rate 01/01/12 31/12/2012 15/1/2012 $50 000 1 USD = 655 XOF Date and amounts received (installments) 1st 2nd 3rd date amount LCY:U$ x-change rate 07/01/12 $300 000 1 USD = 655 XOF date amount LCY:U$ x-change rate 11/01/12 $10 000 1 USD = 655 XOF For multi-year projects/ programmes (e.g. 5 years), you may have up to 7 installments. Include additional columns if needed. Main NA contact person Navision Account Code Assessment Comments (reassessment) Mr. Antoine Diémé 14 350 On track N/A 30/04/2012 Date of completion Indicate if: - On track - Minor issues - Major problems Include the day when the final project report has been accepted by the donor. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 31

T 12 b ToR FOR MARKET RESEARCH CONTEXT In order to have a thorough overview of funding opportunities at local level, it will be necessary to start with market research. However, in most cases, NAs do not have existing human resources to launch such a process. Therefore, these terms of reference (ToR provides a template to assist with the recruitment of an external consultant/company to ensure all results and expectations are met within a short period of time. Market research in country name: Research of Institutional Funding Opportunities 1. Introduction The mission of SOS Children s Villages (SOS CV) International is to build families for children in need and help them shape their own futures and share in the development of their communities. As the largest private, non-political, non-denominational charitable child welfare organisation in the world SOS CV offers an effective alternative to foster care through its services in the Family Based Care (FBC) programme and Family Strengthening Programme (FSP) in 134 countries around the world. SOS CV International also supports educational programmes and medical centres and is active in the field of child protection and child rights. Supporting these programmes requires a large amount of international and national funding. So far, the majority of funding for programmes implemented by the National Association country name has been provided by the Promoting and Supporting Associations (PSA) in the donor countries whose main role is to raise funds for recipient countries 1. One of the objectives of the SOS CV federation is to support NAs based in developing countries to become more and more self-reliant in securing locally raised income, especially from institutional donors, as well as to partner with PSAs in proposal writing to receive additional income. The objective to diversify funding is of high importance since the PSA s potential for growth in regards to private 1 PSA are national associations mainly based in OCDE countries which regularly contribute substantial annual sums in support of international SOS work fundraising becomes more and more limited. In order to reach the objective of SOS CV to reach one million children by 2016, National Associations will need to become more independent from PSA funding. In order to increase the income of the NA, the portfolio of possible local, national, international and multilateral funding opportunities still has to be explored. Furthermore the NA country name needs guidance in choosing their donors in order to move from scattered applications of low value with little return to high value with high return on investment. 2. Background SOS CV started to work in country name in year. The first SOS Children s Village has been opened in year in location. Currently, the National Association is working with xxx SOS Children s villages, xxx Family Strengthening Programmes, xxx Youth Facilities, xxx SOS Kindergartens, xxx Primary Schools, xxx SOS Vocational Training Centres, xxx Medical Centres and add other facilities as appropriate for a total of more than xxx beneficiaries 2. SOS CV country name has already been successful in raising local and international funds with the following donors for the following facilities: Add list of successful proposals to institutional donors. 3. Purpose and objective The purpose of this task is to contribute to the financial sustainability of the National Association by providing information on where local in- 2 More information can be found on the website: add website of National Association 32 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

stitutional funding opportunities exist and how they can be tapped into through an analysis of the local donor market. In addition the task should involve a review of the mechanisms used by other NGOs (working in the field of children s rights) to raise institutional funds at local level that will help the National Associations of country name to develop new strategies to approach the local institutional funding market. 4. Expected outcomes and scope In this respect, it is essential to identify and assess a segment of institutional partnership development institutions. The proposed market research will take place in country name. The tasks and deliverables of the survey should be: Task Deliverable 5. Methodology The market research will be carried out mainly (but is not limited to) through: Desk study of all documents related to NA previous experience with market research and institutional partnership at local level (this includes previous proposals submitted, previous training developed, targets, etc.). Web research (ministries, delegations, UN agencies, etc.). Meetings with programme and operational staff to gather IPD related info. Key informant interviews with key donor agencies (especially the bilateral agencies, European Embassies and INGOs). Key informant interviews with NGO/INGOs working on child rights/development. T 12 b 1 To conduct desk review and face-to-face meetings; To identify potential local, national, international, bilateral and multilateral donors including foundations relevant to the fields of interventions of SOS CV: - Governments from donor states offering grants through ministries, agencies, embassies, delegations - Multi-lateral donors such as European Commission and UN agencies - Government bodies in the country: international funding to NGOs through different government bodies. 2 To develop or revise a local donor market database including crucial information on: - Donor contacts - Funding modalities - Period covered by funding - Donors preference of themes and priorities for programme funding (e.g. poverty reduction, strengthening civil society, capacity development, education, health, human/child rights and emergency response / humanitarian aid) - Funding requirements 3 To provide a clear and holistic analysis of other organizations working in the field of children s rights and their approach and cooperation with local institutional donors 4 To formulate analytical and strategic recommendations based on the research findings - Other donor mapping/surveys identified - List of donors interviewed - Institutional Donor Matrix/ database developed - External funding sources defined, (who operate within the realm of SoS focus areas) process for obtaining funds, funding opportunities forecasted for the next 6 months, and contact information. These should be outlined according to Multi-lateral, bilateral, UN, government, INGOs, NGOs - Analysis of main local actors in the field of child development/rights - List of potential competitive and potential collaborative organisations - Analysis of the what, why and how of crucial networks and partnerships working on child issues that SOS can leverage themselves against - Entry points to donors elaborated - Trends in the funder community described - Donor intervention areas and priorities identified - Recommend top-five donors to approach with a proposal within the next 6 months - Strategies on how to pursue new business development for the NA - Strategies for approaching each key donor The candidate will mainly focus on the following (but is not limited to) potential donors: Domestic government units especially but not limited to the Ministry of Social Affairs, health, education. Delegations of OECD donor countries such as embassies and development cooperation delegations. Multilateral organisations such as UN agencies and EC delegation. International and regional organisations that support child-related development and advocacy work. Foundations (corporate entities and charities). Consortia of partner organisations seeking funding. This should also include a review of networks working on child issues that SOS can leverage themselves against. 6. Liaison The work will be coordinated by Mr./Mrs. name (e-mail address), of SOS Children s Villages country name. Proposals should be submitted to name and address. 7. Proposal specifications Candidates are invited to bid on the programme of work described above by date. Proposals received after this deadline will not be accepted. A decision for contract negotiations will be taken within 10 days, based on a technical and financial assessment of the proposals as outlined below. Detailed technical and financial proposals must be submitted in English language. Proposals can be submitted in soft or hard copy to name at the address mentioned above. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 33

T 12 b The technical proposal is limited to 5 pages and it should demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the tasks set forth above and the candidate s capability and capacity to perform the assignment. The following information should be provided in the technical proposal: In-depth description of the candidate s recent experience with assignments of a similar nature. Description of the methodology proposed to reach the outcomes outline above. Estimated days for preparation and completion. Up-to-date C.V. of the proposed candidate(s). The following information shall be disclosed as part of the technical proposal: Any information about the candidate that presently or with the passage of time could impair the candidate s ability to provide the level of service required. Statement to certify that all the information provided in the candidate s bid is, to the best of its knowledge, accurate and complete, and that it is understood that any misleading or false information may result in disqualification of the candidate at the sole discretion of SOS Children s Villages. References listing previous contracts of similar nature, providing a brief description of each. The financial proposal should be submitted in electronic form in USD or EUR in the format normally used by the candidate. However, it must provide sufficient detail to allow cost comparison and assessment. The candidate must, at the very least, specify the cost of: Consultant fees. Per diem. Travel/transportation. Other direct costs. These are minimal specifications. Detailed budgets with clearly defined and descriptive cost notes are highly recommended. The financial proposal of the selected candidate will be reviewed during contract negotiations to determine the final contract price. The contract will be drawn up during the negotiation stage. 8. Evaluation of proposals Technical proposals received will be evaluated and ranked on the basis of the assessment specified below. The technical evaluation may also include interviews with the experts named in the proposals. The results of these interviews will be factored into the final technical score of the proposals and the original ranking of the bidders will be adjusted accordingly. The following criteria will be used to assess proposals: Criteria Technical approach: Creative and effective mechanisms or methods proposed for implementing the services Personnel: Qualification and demonstrated track records of the candidate in carrying out similar missions Financial proposal: Cost-effectiveness of proposal 9. Final Output 3 The principal output of the market research will be a final report and a donor database (output is not solely limited to those) and it should be presented as follows: 1 Final Report in word containing: a. An executive summary. b. A description of the methodology used. c. A critical analysis of the surveyed local institutional donors. d. An analysis of three major NGOs in the country working in a similar field as SOS Children's Villages containing information about their donors and how they approach them. e. Recommendations for actions and enhancement of current practice. f. Annexes, including data sources and tools. 2. Institutional Database in MS Excel containing: All potential donors broken down into < $50,000 and > $50,000 including all the relevant information (contact person, proposal formats, dates of submission and links to this information etc). 10. Profile of candidate The strongest candidates will have: At least 5 years of experience in working with institutional donors. In depth theoretical and practical understanding of the institutional donor market. Experience in conducting previous market analysis. Experience in developing tools and comprehensive training and materials. Well informed of the last trends in donor intelligence. 3 Refer to the table on expected outcomes; the outlined deliverables should be included in the report and database. 34 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

NA CAPACITY ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST T 13 CONTEXT The capacity assessment checklist works via a list of indicators to help analyse existing capacity, an assessment of what can be strengthened and it provides advice on policy and investment choices that can enhance national capacity for institutional partnerships. Assessing NA capacity is an exercise which does not need to be carried out for each and every funding application, however it should feed into a general awareness about NA strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, the assessment should result in a multi-year capacity development plan for incorporation into funding applications. The assessment process itself should be repeated every 2 to 3 years in order to ensure relevance. Ideally, this assessment is facilitated by the Regional Office, which might also be able to contribute more external viewpoints in order to allow for objectivity and follow up support actions. However, the tool is also intended and can be used to facilitate self-assessments by National Associations. Assessment Steps Capacity Assessment Is an analysis of desired capacities checked against existing capacities. It generates an understanding of capacity assets and needs. This in turn helps the formulation of a capacity development response. Areas of Assessment The checklist is based on six areas which are assessed in order to see where capacities lie and where there is room for improvement: Human resources and organisational development. Programming. Project cycle management. Market and donor analysis. Networking and external partnership activities. Previous experience. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 35

T 13 IPD Capacity Assessment for SOS XXX Nr. Indicator Starting Progressing Prime Guiding questions for capacity assessment 1 Human resource and organisational development 1.1 Governing structure of National Association 1.2 National staff capacity 1.3 National staff development/capacity improvement 1.4 Organisational Capacity Development Activities 1.5 Action plans / ONE Friend 1.6 Implementation of action plans / ONE Friend 1.7 Internal communication lines between departments in the NA that are involved in IPD projects SOS CV runs all operations in the country No interest in IPD / no information available / lack of skills Staff development needs for IPD are not assessed No organisational capacity development is carried out There are no organisational action plans for ONE Friend, actions depend on daily instructions Implementation is random Communication lines are unclear Communication lines are not respected Newly established association/work in progress/advisory board in place Interested but with limited capacity or limited resources Staff development needs have been somewhat assessed but actions have not been taken to improve capacities Some capacity development activities are carried out but no holistic concept exists or is put in place Major activities of the organisation are shown on a common action plan including ONE Friend Some planned activities are implemented Communication lines are clear but not always respected Fully functional association with local executive board Proactive and motivated, strong management and leadership Staff is well trained about IPD issues and further trainings for capacity development are initiated Holistic approach including the board and all management levels Organisational and departmental work plan are in place including ONE Friend Staff have developed action plans in line with the operation plan and implement them Communication lines are known and respected What is the reason for no/high interest in IPD? What is the motivation for IPD? What limits IPD activities? How were staff needs and capacities assessed? Which trainings took place? Has there been an internal/external capacity assessment? Which capacities development issues are addressed/which needs have been identified? How are needs addressed? Is the ONE Strategy in place? How many review meetings take place a year? Who follows up on the implementation of action plans? Which communication lines exist? Are you aware of advantages from respecting or disadvantages from not respecting communication lines? 1.8 Organisational Communication lines (NA/RO/CO/ IO) regarding IPD 2 Programme Development Communication lines are unclear Communication lines are not respected 2.1 Strategic approach Traditional approach focusing on family based care and some minor FSP and other activities 2.2 Child Rights Situation Analysis (CRSA) 2.3 Feasibility Studies (FS) There is no CRSA Low quality of CRSA There are hardly any FS and/or they are older than three years Communication lines are clear but not always respected Some elements of innovation and interest to embrace development aspects into programming A CRSA exists but it is older than five years Medium quality of CRSA Nearly all programmes have a FS but all/some are older than three years Communication lines are known and respected Focuses on innovative approaches to child rights and sustainable community development There is an up to date CRSA High quality of CRSA Every programme has an up to date FS Low quality of FS Medium quality of FS High quality of FS Which new programmes do you aim to implement? What are new or innovative project ideas for you? Which new programmes do you aim to implement? What are new or innovative project ideas for you? How often do you consult the CRSA? Do you use the CRSA as a basis for decision making to choose a new location? Was the CRSA only conducted in already existing locations or were national statistics of high risk areas consulted? Is the CRSA based on a number of relevant studies and background papers incl. external resources from ministries, Unicef and other NGOs? How often do you consult a FS? Were the FS conducted before the programmes started? 36 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Nr. Indicator Starting Progressing Prime Guiding questions for capacity assessment 2.4 Educational Programmes HG schools only for children from SOS CV Only school fees are charged to finance schools and no other income is generated 2.5 Health Programmes No efforts for selffinancing No programs to integrate the community into MC activities apart from treatment Around 15% of students come from our target group Some efforts to integrate community into the running and/or financing of activities are carried out and/ or IGAs exist Some efforts of self-financing are carried out Some efforts to integrate the community into MC activities 30% of students come from our target group Innovative and varied approach integrating community and raising income Innovative and varied approach for self-financing Innovative and varied approach to integrate the community into MC activities Are there any ideas to finance part of the school via IGAs or to generate income? Are there any ideas to finance part of the health programmes via IGAs or to generate income? Are there any activities beyond treatment that include the community, such as self-help groups, training on medical issues, etc.? T 13 2.6 Advocacy Activities No efforts/no proactive approach Some efforts Intensive advocacy and lobbying efforts What type of advocacy activities are carried out and how often? What are the objectives of the advocacy activities? 2.7 Family Strengthening Programmes Standard FSP programming Mainly providing direct services/material support Some efforts to integrate community into the running of the FSP but no clear exit strategy exists Material support is part of the FSP but other activities exist (capacity development, etc.) Innovative and varied approach integrating community on a large scale with a clear exit strategy No or very little focus on providing material support Do you have an exit strategy for beneficiaries and/or the FSP in general? Do you work with CBOs, partner organisations, etc. that might be able to take over the FSP? 2.8 Day Care and Early Childhood Development Programmes Day care centres run without paying special attention to early childhood development programming Some activities aiming at integrated child development Holistic child development approach integrated into day care centres and other CV SOS programmes How do you design programmes for your day care centres? How do you address the development of young children under five in other programmes? 2.9 Income Generating Activity Programmes 3 Project Cycle Management 3.1 Staff members with capacities and skills in IPD in general and in proposal writing? No activities implemented No experience No experience Only few beneficiaries are supported Main focus is on funding machinery/ equipment to start IGA that does not have to be refunded to SOS Staff member/s with modest experience Staff member/s with modest experience in report writing? No experience Staff member/s with modest experience in activity or result based M&E? in accounting according to donor requirements? 3.2 PCM knowledge and skills 3.3 Knowledge and skills about Logical Framework Approach as requested by donors No experience No experience PCM knowledge and skills Knowledge and skills about Logical Framework Approach as requested by donors Staff member/s with modest experience Staff member/s with modest experience No knowledge or skills or knowledge is not applied No knowledge or skills or knowledge is not applied Innovative and varied approach to increase income of beneficiaries Staff member/s with excellent experience Staff member/s with excellent experience Staff member/s with excellent experience Staff member/s with excellent experience Staff member/s with excellent experience Some skills available and applied but not in a systematic way Some skills and experience about the Logframe Approach In which SOS programmes do you support IGAs? Do you provide microcredits and do beneficiaries pay back their credits? How many staff members have modest/excellent experience? How did staff members gain the experience (e.g. previous job experience, trainings, etc.)? Do staff members have experience but show limited positive results? Management and Programme Development apply PCM principles and tools Vast experience in Logical Framework Approach as requested by donors PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 37

T 13 Nr. Indicator Starting Progressing Prime Guiding questions for capacity assessment 3.4 Baseline information for project/programme 3.5 Existence and use of activity/result based M&E and usage of data Baseline information does not exist or is old or in poor quality An activity/result based M&E plan or system does not exist and no data is collected 3.6 Financial monitoring Financial monitoring is delayed so that timely budget adjustments cannot be made 3.7 Report writing Reports are written but have poor quality Reports are written but always after the set deadline 3.8 (External) Evaluation Evaluations are conducted but do not have the right information 4 Market Analysis 4.1 Market Analysis A market analysis for institutional donors does not exist 4.2 Knowledge of donor market 4.3 Interest of NAs and PSAs in terms of a direct partnership approach in submitting joint applications (with either the PSA or the NA leading the application process and donor relationship) 4.4 In-country EC delegation 4.5 In-country USAID office There are no institutional donors identified that can be addressed in the near future Low interested / no expressed interest No knowledge of this kind of approach Does not exist or it is not known if a delegation exists Does not exist or it is not known if an office exists The NA collects baseline information but not for all projects The NA collects baseline information but does not use it for evaluation in a consistent manner An activity/result based M&E plan exists and is in use but the findings are not used for further project implementation and/or the data is inconsistent Financial monitoring is carried out every three months so that some budget adjustments can be made Reports are written but do not show the needed information Evaluations are conducted but findings are not used or followed- up upon A market analysis for institutional donors does exist but is older than 5 years or is of low quality and not in use There are one or two donors identified that can be addressed since their funding priorities fit to those of the NA NA works in 2 programmes with PSAs Does exist but no contact has been made Does exist but no contact has been made Baseline information is collected for all projects and is used for evaluation The NA has a comprehensive an consistent activity/ result based M&E plan that is regularly used due to high quality data Financial monitoring is carried out every month/two months and budget comparisons are made on a timely and regular basis Reports are handed in on time and contain all necessary information needed for decision making Reports contain all necessary information and are used for decision making An up to date market analysis regarding institutional donors exists and is used More than two donors will be addressed and contact has already been made with the donor NA works in 2 or more programmes with PSAs Does exist and contact has been made Does exist and contact has been made Do you collect baseline information in a consistent manner so that comparisons can be made? If baseline information exist, is it used for M&E? Do you carry out monitoring visits that use activity/result based M&E compared to "standard" SOS monitoring? Can clear comparisons be made between objectives and achieved results? Do you receive or analyze the financial data in a timely manner so that you are aware of over- or under spending? How much time is spent on improving reports? Can the reports be used to make comparisons between planned and achieved objectives/results? How often do you consult evaluations in order to improve projects? Are you aware of existing evaluations? Institutional partners and foundations (bilateral government agencies, embassies, multilateral donors, etc.) Do you know the donors' objectives and funding priorities? Do you know the deadlines for handing in a proposal? Have you raised funds while working closely together with a PSA? 38 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Nr. Indicator Starting Progressing Prime Guiding questions for capacity assessment 5 Networking and external partnership activities 5.1 External Cooperation and Partnerships 5.2 Formal networking activities 5.3 Informal networking activities 5.4 Knowledge about networks 6 Previous Experience 6.1 Written proposals to domestic government agencies, embassies, etc. There are hardly any informal meetings with other NGOs or partner organisations There is hardly any knowledge about formal networks There are hardly any informal meetings with other NGOs or partner organisations There is hardly any knowledge about formal networks Sporadically working in cooperation and partnerships Networking is done on an on and off basis without a clear way forward Informal network activities are done on an on and off basis Some networks are known but it is unsure what they stand for or what they do Formalized partnerships (based on MoUs), actively seeking cooperations and partnerships; are considered essential in goal attainment The NA is already member in a number of networks or consortia with other NGOs that meet regularly Networking activities are carried out in a consistent manner The NA knows a number of NGOs and their staff with whom they meet regularly in an informal setting The NA has comprehensive knowledge about network activities in the country Do you take part in network meetings with other NGOs on a programme level? Do you approach partners or do they approach you? In how many formal networks do you participate? How well are you linked to embassies, donor agencies in your country, etc.? How often do you meet members of other NGOs or partner organisations in an informal manner? None More than 3 More than 5 Do you know the reason for the rejection of the proposal? Were proposals handed in on time? Successful proposals None Up to 50% success rate 6.2 Written proposals to multinational donors (EC, UN, Global Fund, etc.) More than 50% success rate Did the proposals fit the donors' objectives? None More than 3 More than 5 Do you know the reason for the rejection of the proposal? Successful proposals None Up to 50% success rate 6.3 Written proposals in cooperation with a PSA, where either the NA or the PSA were leading the application process More than 50% success rate None More than 3 More than 5 Do you know the reason for the rejection of the proposal? Successful proposals None Up to 50% success rate More than 50% success rate T 13 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 39

T 14 FUNDING APPLICATION CHECKLIST CONTEXT The funding application checklist is a tool which guides NAs, GSC and partners in assessing whether a planned grants application is in line with internal systems and policies as well as if capacities and resources for project implementation and management have sufficiently been considered. The checklist will guide responsible managers in deciding whether the grant application can go ahead, needs to be revised or whether circumstances demand the process to be stopped. Approval of the checklist is mandatory in AFME for any direct NA funding applications involving more than 50,000 USD or more per year. Mandatory checklist for National Associations of the Continent AFME for direct NA institutional funding applications involving an amount of 50.000 USD or more per year. (Note: EUCB has a CMT approved tool "STOP or GO checklist"; available via the Intranet) Funding Opportunity Are you applying to a call for proposals or did you identify a donor to which you would like to submit a unsolicited funding application? Tick one of the following options: d Response to a Call for Proposals d Unsolicited Funding Application NA Country Place of implementation: Programme Manager/ Officer responsible for application: DETAILS CALL FOR PROPOSAL/ DONOR Donor: Funding Instrument: Amount granted ( minimum and maximum): Deadline for submission: Funding duration: Provide the link to the call for proposals or send a copy of the call for proposals as an attachment if it is not available online. SUGGESTED PROJECT Tick the corresponding box and provide comments for each point. Reference to the concept note title: Is the project an extension of existing activities (FBC, FSP, Advocacy, Education, Health, etc.) implemented in your country? d d Does the proposed project correspond to objectives or activities reflected in the NA strategic plan and has been approved by the board? d d Do you have an approved and valid feasibility study or concept note including scope definition table? d d Have you identified partners for the project? If yes, please mention them in the comments section d d Will the partners be involved in the preparation of the project proposal? d d Are the beneficiaries from already existing SOS programmes? Is there a risk of double funding? d d Does the project foresee an exit strategy? d d Start and end date of the project d d Yes No Comments/Explanation 40 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DONOR SERVICING REQUIREMENTS Tick the corresponding box and provide comments for each point. Yes No Assistance required Does your NA have proven experience in working with public/ institutional donors? d d d Do you have a person with proven capacity to write a project proposal (training and/ or experience)? d d d Do you have persons with experience in supervising the implementation of such a project? d d d Do you know the donor requirements? d d d Will you be able to fulfill the donor s requirement in monitoring and evaluation with your current capacity and resources? d d d Will you be able to fulfill the donor s requirement in reporting with your current capacity and resources? d d d Will you be able to fulfill the donor s requirements in financial procedures with your current capacity and resources? d d d Human Resources requirements: Do you have sufficient and adequately skilled staff for this project? d d d If no, will the grant include additional and adequately skilled staff? d d d FUNDING APPLICATION ESTIMATES Deadline for Submission: Required PD approvals: Efforts in days to prepare the application document (estimation): Total project budget: Donor funding applied for: Funding duration applied for: How much in percentage (%) is the required self-financing contribution to the project s budget? Do you have available funds for the contribution? Do you have a fundraising strategy for the contribution? Is the project going to generate any costs beyond the funding period applied for? Date of submission to RO: Requested date for feedback from RO: Signed by National Director Comments/Explanation Comments/ Explanation T 14 To be filled out by the Regional Office IPD in consultation with regional management team (and shared with NA and CO): d GO AHEAD Approved by: Observations/ Recommendations: IPD Project Reference Number obtained from IO: d ON HOLD Will be again considered for approval if: d STOP Rejected for the following reasons: Observations/ Recommendations: Date Regional Director PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 41

T 15 COORDINATION PLAN SAMPLE CONTEXT This tool helps facilitate the coordination of activities among all stakeholders during the identification and the formulation phases. Gathered in the same table, it can be easily traced who is responsible for what and when and milestones can be identified. Usually, it is Denomination of project date of issue: dd/mm/yyy update: fill in the date of the last update Responsibilities: Name the involved persons related to the different units (e.g.: APP IO CO RO IMP project cycle phase milestone/activity CO IPD = Antoine Hauzeur; CO FSP = Douglas Reed; RO IPD = Chip Bury; RO FSP = Ng'endo Munyui, etc.). The person(s) taking the lead role within a unit are underlined. description milestone/activity Responsible unit from to to fri. 01/01 mon. 28/12 to fri. 8/1 mon. 4/1 Week 01 to fri. 15/1 mon. 11/1 Week 02 to fri. 22/1 mon. 18/1 Week 03 0 feedback / comments to coordination plan d d d d d M1 Preliminary Analysis 1 Monitor the situation i 28.02 16.04 2 Conduct a pre-feasibility assessment i 11.01 29.01 3 Decide if the intervention is feasible i 25.01 29.01 4 Develop concept note i 25.01 09.02 M2 Donor identification and matching 5 Check quality of concept note i i 08.02 12.02 6 Match project and donor i i i i i 08.02 26.02 Identification 7 Stop or go i i 22.02 08.03 8.1. Develop MoU between APP & IMP and request feedback d d i d 01.03 12.03 8.2. Sign MoU i i i 16.03 M3 Conceptualisation 9 Draft project design (logical framework and budget) d d i 15.03 02.04 10 Draft organisational part of the application i 22.03 02.04 11 Hold a formulation workshop i d i 05.04 09.04 12 Develop CV Programme Proposal d i 12.04 16.04 13 Approve CV Programme Proposal d i 19.04 23.04 14 Compile comprehensive application dossier i d i 19.04 30.04 15 Endorse application dossier d i i i 26.04 30.04 16 Submit application dossier i 03.05 07.05 M5 Secure Funding 17 Donor approves application 16.06 18 Otherwise seek funding from other source as stated in the MoU d d d d d 07.06 18.06 19 Formulate Partnership Agreement between APP & IMP and request feed-back d d i d 17.06 25.06 FORMULATION 19' Sign Partnership Agreement i i i 29.06 21 Sign a contract with the donor i 30.06 22 Send partnership agreement & donor contract to IO & NA i 02.07 23 Send partnership agreement & donor contract to CO & RO i 02.07 APP IO KEY STAFF CO RO IMP Legend Responsibilities Avaibility Activity No responsibility available Internal deadline d Contributing partner b difficult to reach Non negotiable ext.deadline i Prime responsibility v not available 42 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 15 developed by the GSC central coordination unit and is agreed to by all the stakeholders. In general, the GSC unit closest to the project will be able to provide the most efficient support. Once a MoU is being developed, the coordination plan should feature as an annex. Week 04 Week 05 Week 06 Week 07 Week 08 Week 09 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13 Week 14 Week 15 Week 16 Week 17 Week 18 Week 19 Week 20 Week 21 Week 22 Week 24 Week 25 Week 26 Week 27 mon. 25/1 mon. 1/2 mon. 8/2 mon. 15/2 mon. 22/2 mon. 1/3 mon. 8/3 mon. 15/3 mon. 22/3 mon. 29/3 mon. 5/4 mon. 12/4 mon. 19/4 mon. 26/4 mon. 3/5 mon. 10/5 mon. 17/5 mon. 24/5 mon. 31/5 mon. 14/6 mon. 21/6 mon. 28/6 mon. 5/7 to fri. 29/1 to fri. 5/2 to fri. 12/2 to fri. 19/2 to fri. 26/2 to fri. 5/3 to fri. 12/3 to fri. 19/3 to fri. 26/3 to fri. 2/4 to fri. 9/4 to fri. 16/4 to fri. 23/4 to fri. 30/4 to fri. 7/5 to fri. 14/5 to fri. 21/5 to fri. 28/5 to fri. 4/6 to fri. 18/6 to fri. 25/6 to fri. 2/7 to fri. 9/7 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 43

T 16 MoU TOOLS CONTEXT A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) can be an effective and flexible tool (non-legally binding) for documenting the common intent of two or more partners. The formulation of a MoU should be one of the first steps in a new partnership, before formalising the Partnership Agreement. The templates contained within this tools package provide sample texts for: 1) a MoU for internal SOS agreements 2) a MoU for SOS when partnering with external stakeholders and 3) small scale funding agreements. Summary of tools: Type Main Purpose Other Features Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Articulate and agree on common goals and interests Involves no transfers of cash or supplies Small Scale Funding Agreement Limited support provided to a partner-not to exceed US$ 20,000. Flexible, with highly simplified planning format and reporting requirements What is a MoU? A MoU is a document that records the common intent of two or more partners when they do not wish to assume legally binding obligations. A MoU is the first step and is usually less complex and less detailed than a Partnership Agreement, but provides a framework and set of principles to guide partners undertaking a project in the formulation phase. MoUs can further assist partners to clarify roles and responsibilities and manage expectations associated with projects that are to be undertaken. A MoU is not a legal agreement but generally recognised as binding and in order to be operational, the document must (1) identify the contracting partners, (2) spell out the subject matter of the agreement and its objectives, (3) summarise the essential terms of the agreement, and (4) must be signed by all contracting partners. 1. MoU for Internal SOS agreements: The MoU usually serves as a first written agreement to define roles and responsibilities between the APP and IMP during the formulation phase. It also helps stakeholders to define a clear timeline, outlook and it provides an overview of the information and approval obligations. The MoU should be signed by the APP, IMP and the Continental Director. 2. MoU for external agreements: The MoU template for external partners establishes a framework of cooperation between SOS CV and any external partner. What is a Small Scale Funding Agreement? A small scale funding agreement refers to an engagement that is similar in scope to MoUs, yet has a monetary value that does not exceed USD 20,000 in terms of funding and/or the equivalent value of supplies as a single or cumulative set of transfers to an individual partner in one calendar year. NB: Any other funding arrangements (from or to SOS) should be supported by a formal Partnership Agreement or contract. 44 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

MoU TEMPLATE FOR IMP-APP T 16 a CONTEXT This template can be used as a first draft to be adapted according to the context. The MoU usually serves as a first written agreement to define roles and responsibilities between APP and IMP during the formulation phase. It will also help stakeholders define a clear timeline & outlook and provide an overview of the information and approval obligations. The MoU should be signed by the APP, IMP and the Regional or Continental Director (in case of a multi-regional process). MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Reference Number between SOS <PSA> (SOS ) its partner association SOS Children s Villages <NA> (SOS..) and SOS Children's Villages International (SOS CV) Preamble The undersigned organisations, henceforth called partners, are hereby entering into a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the development of a funding application to the <donor agency>. <IMP> and <APP> are members of the Federation, SOS CV, and will act in accordance with its statutes, its objectives and policy framework. <IMP> and <APP> are independent legal entities and responsible for their own organisation, acts and affairs. 1. Purpose The purpose of the partnership is to plan for and jointly develop a project proposal to be submitted to <funding agency> for co-funding the, <project/ programme> in <location> which is strategically approved. 2. Validity The MoU is set up for the total planning and application period from <date> until the grant contract has come to an end and the final reports have been approved by the donor. The deadline for proposal submission to <donor> is on <date>. If the application is successful, this MoU will be supplemented by a Partnership Agreement. 3. Benefits of the partnership For <IMP> there is a unique funding opportunity for further expansion of their programme base, thus reaching out to an increased number of children in need. For <APP> a major benefit is to consolidate and/or further expand their partnership with the donor and to become a recognised non-governmental player in development cooperation towards the public and peers. For both, <IMP> and <APP>, cooperation in the joint development of a project will facilitate the sharing of experiences; increased learning from one another, an established network for knowledge sharing, and improved mechanisms allowing for quality programming to attend to the needs of the targeted communities. A track record can be built in this area of work which will increase credibility towards donors and the public. This agreement will contribute to reaching SOS CV strategic objectives such as Enabling ONE million children to grow up in a caring family. 4. Summary of Application Requirements and Estimation of Resource Needs To be determined for individual donors. Timelines and activities should feature in detail in the coordination schedule which should be annexed to the MoU. Kindly provide the following documents in the annex: PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 45

T 16 a Proposal format which is being filled for the application. The main information requirements for the completion of the proposal (research and baseline studies, special database registration activities, etc.) Estimation of needed resources for the preparation of the application document in terms of time, budget for studies, travels and other items should be included as well. This will form the basis for development of the coordination schedule. 5. Roles and Responsibilities of the Partners <APP> represents the applicant partner directly responsible and accountable to the donor and the liaison between the organisation and the donor. <APP> will also be responsible for the following: Submission of application. Interpretation of application requirements. Funding for application preparation activities such as feasibility study, baseline studies, expert consultancies as well as for formulation workshops. Communication with the donor. <IMP> is the implementing partner and is responsible for developing the project/ programme proposal within their country in accordance with the goal hierarchy developed and time frames agreed upon during joint development of the proposal [e.g. during the formulation workshop]. <IMP> is the owner of the project and is responsible to inform about and conduct any activities necessary for the preparation of the programme proposal/ application document as well as to initiate processes for internal approvals. <IMP> will provide resource persons to be available in accordance with the coordination schedule. The coordination schedule is to be proposed by the central coordination unit, which in this case is the <GSC OFFICE/ IPD>, and has to be mutually agreed to by all partners. GSC has a supporting and coordination role based on the coordination schedule. GSC ensures that all internal approvals necessary for application submission are timely granted and that the FIS systems are informed. GSC also participates in programme design and quality assurances for documentation produced. As the case may be, GSC will also serve as mediator between the partners, should challenges or difficulties arise that cannot be resolved between the partners themselves. 6. Communication and Coordination During proposal development and according to coordination schedule direct communication between <APP> and <IMP> is agreed with copies to relevant GSC units at milestones as outlined in the coordination schedule. All communication not explicitly regulated in the coordination schedule should follow usual SOS CV procedures via IO FIS. [The amended partnership agreement will include a detailed communication protocol and reporting schedule for implementation.] 7. Timeline & Outlook The application will be submitted on <date>. A reply from the donor is expected on <date> which will be immediately communicated to the NA as well as GSC relevant stakeholders. If the application is successful a kick-off meeting will be organised and a Partnership Agreement amending this MoU will be developed as a basis for joint project implementation. The future of the project(s)/ programme(s) beyond the envisaged grant agreement will be determined according to needs arising from the final evaluation of the project and funding possibilities. <IMP> should also be prepared to phase out as per <end date of grant agreement> or look for alternative funding opportunities at local level. Exit strategies have to be considered and devel- 46 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 16 a oped during the formulation of the grant application document. 8. Back-up Funding Partners should agree on 1-2 of the following scenarios to be included in the MoU: In case the application will be rejected, the programme proposal will be made available to alternative funding opportunities either at international or local level. SOS PSA is going to fund the project in case the application fails (only for programmes already in operation which are planned to be continued). Funding can also be taken over by the "main PSA" which had originally funded the programme, in case another PSA "borrowed" the programme for the IP application. Other Scenario. 9. Information and Approval Obligations If a valid SOS programme proposal is in place but the partners come to the conclusion that changes are necessary for the benefit of the programme, i.e. with regard to the intervention logic, budget scope, beneficiaries, changes of partners etc., approval need to be sought via SOS CV standard procedures (feasibility study, new programme proposal in accordance with what the programme planning process foresees). If no approved SOS programme proposal is in place yet, the programme planning steps have to be followed. The project budget (in donor currency) needs to be endorsed by GSC and needs to be reflected in the national annual budget (local currency) submitted to SOS CV at the end of the year. If the standard procedures do not adequately meet the needs of the application development process, the IPD department is to be contacted for facilitation of alternative solutions. In case of unforeseen events that have repercussions on the programme, <IMP> will inform <partners> who will jointly decide on the way forward and secure necessary approvals. 10. Snapshot Figures [fill in as much as possible] Estimated total programme/ project funding volume (in donor currency): Estimated funding amount applied for with <donor agency> (in donor currency): Applied Exchange Rates: Estimated beneficiary numbers: Estimated Construction costs: Estimated NA/NO allocation per year and in total: Estimated IPD allocation: Signatures SOS PSA, place, date, Managing Director SOS NA, place, date, National Director CO/RO AFME, place, date, Deputy Secretary- General Annex: Coordination Plan (T15) PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 47

T 16 b MoU TEMPLATE WITH EXTERNAL PARTNERS CONTEXT The Memorandum of Understanding template for external partners establishes a framework of cooperation between SOS CV and external partners. It should be remembered that any MoU needs to be adapted and checked against special requirements and necessities arising from individual partnerships. A. Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between SOS Children s Villages [ ] And [ ] The mandate of SOS Children s Villages [ ], hereinafter referred to as, as laid down in its statutes is to The mandate of [ ] is to Therefore, SOS Children s Villages [ ] and [ ] hereby agree to the following principles governing their cooperation: Article I: Purpose and Scope The purpose of this MoU is to establish an overall framework for cooperation between SOS Children s Villages [ ] and [ ] for the benefit of. 1. To address the needs of 2. To improve current conditions pertaining to 3. To achieve synergies in the delivery of services to the benefit of 4. To increase 5. To promote 6. To combat 7. Etc. Article II: Areas of Cooperation The areas of cooperation between SOS Children s Villages [ ] and [ ] will include the following: 1. Implementation of activities to promote 2. Implementation of activities to support 3. Implementation of activities to improve 4. Implementation of activities to provide 5. Exchange of information relative to 6. Holding of joint events to 7. Monitoring and evaluation of 8. Development of standards / guidelines / common database etc. to 9. Integration of standards into programmes / services to 10. Assessment of to Article III: Responsibilities of SOS Children s Villages [ ] and [ ] 11. SOS Children s Villages [ ] will: a. Develop b. Implement c. Organize d. Facilitate 12. [ ] will: a. Provide b. Organize c. Advise... d. Facilitate 13. SOS Children s Villages [ ] and [ ] will: a. Develop b. Inform c. Organize d. Support Article IV: Timeline and Outlook 1. The application will be submitted on <date> 2. A reply from the partner is expected on <date> and implementation is expected to commence no later than <date> and be completed by <date>. 48 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 16 b Article V: General Conditions 1. Nothing in this MoU shall affect the relations of either signatory to other organisations to which it has a formal relationship (contractual, affiliation, etc.) 2. The implementation of this MoU will respect the administrative procedures and rules of both parties [and be subject to the availability of funds]. 3. The MoU will enter into force upon signature of both parties and shall be of indefinite duration/ (months/ years). 4. This MoU may be modified at any time by mutual written consent of both parties. 5. This MoU may be terminated by either party upon [90] days written notice. Signatures Responsible SOS Director, place, date. External Partner, place, date. Partner Information Table Ref. No. Name of the Partner: Address: Phone N.: Fax N.: E-mail: Name of contact person/s: Date of establishment as an Organisation: Registration documents: Geographical area of operation: Population covered: Area(s) of expertise of the Organisation: PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 49

T 16 c SMALL SCALE FUNDING AGREEMENT TEMPLATE CONTEXT This Small Scale Funding Agreement template should be used as a first draft to be adapted according to the context of the new partnership in the formulation phase. A small scale funding agreement refers to an engagement that is similar in scope to MoUs, yet has a monetary value that does not exceed USD 20,000 in terms of funding and/or the equivalent value of supplies as a single or cumulative set of transfers to an individual partner in one calendar year. Small Scale Funding Agreement Between SOS Place and (Full name of partner, Place) [ ] agrees to co-operate with [ ] as described below. 1. Work plan results to which the small-scale funding agreement contributes: Building on the recommendations of Identifying the specific needs of.and priorities. Sharing examples of good practices and lessons learned in 2. Activity or activities to be carried out with the small-scale funding agreement: Development of Background Paper on. Place and date In collaboration with Support Ensure 3. Expected results/outputs to be achieved: 4. Starting and ending dates for implementation of the activities: 5. [ ] will contribute the following resources: a) Funds (US$ or equivalent): b) Supplies: c) Technical assistance: d) Other inputs: n/a 6. [ ] will contribute the following matching resources: a) Funds: b) Staff/people: c) Equipment/in kind: 7. (If applicable) Portions of the small-scale support will be transferred by [ ] in the following stages: 8. The Organisation, in collaboration with [ ] will support the consultancy to provide the following reports at or near the given dates: Reports and deadlines: 9. The resources provided by [ ] will only be used by [ ] in pursuit of the results as agreed to in 1 3 above. 10. The attached Terms of Reference or Concept Note and Budget are part of this agreement. 11. [ ] and [ ] cooperate to monitor the results of this programme. 12. The Organisation may only use the [ ] name, logo and emblem in connection with this programme with the prior written consent of [ ]. 13. This agreement can only be changed through an agreed modification in writing. 50 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 16 c 14. Signatures: Name, Title and Organisation: Place and date: Signed: Name, Title and Organisation: Place and date: Signed: Ref. No. Name of the Partner: Address: Phone N.: Fax N.: E-mail: Name of contact person/s: Date of establishment as an Organisation: Registration documents: Geographical area of operation: Population covered: Area(s) of expertise of the Organisation: PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 51

T 17 FORMULATION WORKSHOP CHECKLIST CONTEXT Once the Concept Note and the matching process have been finalized, the Applicant (APP) and the Implementing Organisations hold a formulation workshop aimed at informing the stakeholders of the outcome of the participatory analysis, refining the logframe matrix and planning the way forward. In addition, the workshop is also an opportunity to discuss the project budget. This checklist provides a list of elements to be taken into consideration when organizing the Formulation workshop. Objectives: In general, the purpose of the workshop, organised by APP together with IMP, is to assess the situation and shape the main elements of the project together with stakeholders, to gather/ verify as much information as possible for the project document and to formulate the logical framework. The workshop also helps build relationships with the counterpart and other (potential) project partners. 1. Become familiar with, inform and obtain input from stakeholders in order to harmonize views and expectations of the project: Main actors: SOS IMP and APP Regional/continental office (where applicable) Target group Other stakeholders (government, NGOs, donors, etc.) Embassy/donor delegation (courtesy call) 2. Gather/verify information for project proposal: Situation analysis Description of partner (SOS National Office): structure, priorities, etc. Policy environment: relevant domestic/ regional policies, donor policies and priorities, etc. Other initiatives Relevant studies, reports, literature Budget information 3. Brief IMP on procedures (for instance EU financial and reporting guidelines). 4. Discuss and outline coordination, monitoring and financing mechanisms. 5. Formulate logical framework and preliminary budget. Deliverables: Draft logical framework Preliminary budget Revised coordination plan Signed MoU Draft application Workshop report Follow-up: The project officer captures the results from the workshop in a workshop report which is distributed, together with the draft logical framework, to the IMP, GSC and other stakeholders where applicable. Elements to be aware of: Please bear in mind that all plans and budgets developed by the project team need GSC approval according to SOS CV standard procedures (Programme Planning, annual budgeting cycle, etc.). The project budget (in Euro) needs to be reflected correctly in the national budget (local currency) submitted to KDI. The respective IPD-coordinator will facilitate cooperation with PD and FIS. It is recommended to involve also RO FIS for financial matters: please share the 52 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 17 project budgets with them before submission to the donor as they will have to assure the project budgets being properly reflected in the national annual budget and being within the approved financial frame. Avoid raising high expectations! A funding application is a lengthy process with an uncertain outcome, and, if rejected, may lead to disappointment of stakeholders. Be open and listen! Prepare a briefing on the concept note and subsidy requirements; after that, let others do the talking. While preparing the meeting, bear the following in mind: Make introductions or recaps at the beginning of each day. Wrap ups and announcements at the end of each day. Include a leisure programme (field visit, etc.) for people to getting to know each other. Choose the methodology according to the topic and expected outputs (plenary or parallel sessions, presentations, group work...). Costs of the meeting should be covered by the applicant (APP). PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 53

T 18 Logical framework approach CONTEXT The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) allows information to be analysed and organized in a structured way, to address important questions, identify weaknesses and enable decision makers to make informed decisions based on their understanding of the project rationale. It should be considered as an aid to thinking. What is The Logical Framework Approach? The Logical Framework approach or Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) is an analytical process for structuring and systematizing the analysis of a project or a programme idea. It is useful to distinguish between LFA, which is a process involving Stakeholder Analysis (T18a), Problem Analysis (T18b) and Objective Analysis (T18c), Strategy Analysis (T18d) and the Logical Framework Matrix (T18e) often called the logframe, which documents the LFA process. The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is a core tool used within Project Cycle Management (PCM). It is used during the identification phase of PCM to help analyse the existing situation, investigate the relevance of the proposed project and identify potential objectives and strategies. During the formulation phase, the LFA supports the preparation of an appropriate project plan with clear objectives, measurable results, a risk management strategy and defined levels of management responsibility. During project implementation, the LFA provides a key management tool to support contracting, operational work planning and monitoring. During the evaluation and learning phase, the Logframe matrix (T18e) provides a summary record of what was planned (objectives, indicators and key assumptions), and thus provides a basis for performance and impact assessment. Why and how to use the Logical Framework Approach? The LFA provides no magic solutions, but when understood and intelligently applied, is a very effective analytical and management tool. However, it is not a substitute for experience and professional judgment and must also be complemented by the application of other specific tools (such as Institutional Capacity Assessment, Economic and Financial Analysis, Gender Analysis, and Environmental Impact Assessment) and through the application of working techniques which promote the effective participation of stakeholders (T5). Some of the strengths and potential difficulties associated with using the LFA are summarised in the table below. In order to help avoid common problems associated with the application of LFA, users should: Ensure their colleagues and partners have a common understanding of the key analytical principles and terminology used. Emphasise the importance of the LFA process to the same extent as the matrix product. Ensure it is used as a tool to promote stakeholder participation, dialogue and agreement on project scope, rather than imposing 'external' concepts and priorities. Avoid using the matrix as a blueprint through which external control over the project is exerted. Treat the matrix as a presentational summary (keep it clear and concise). Refine and revise the matrix as new information comes to light. 54 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 18 Figure 1: Strengths and Common problems with the application of the LFA 1 Element Strengths Common problems/difficulties Problem analysis and objective setting Indicators and sources of verification Format and application Requires systematic analysis of problems, including cause and effect relationships Provides logical link between means and ends Places the project within a broader development context (overall objective and purpose) Encourages examination of risks and management accountability for results Requires analysis of how to measure the achievement of objectives, in terms of both quantity and quality Helps to improve clarity and specificity of objectives Helps to establish the monitoring and evaluation framework Links problem analysis to objective setting Emphasises importance of stakeholder analysis to determine `whose problems' and `who benefits' Visually accessible and relatively easy to understand Getting consensus on priority problems Getting consensus on project objectives Reducing objectives to a simplistic linear chain Inappropriate level of detail (too much/ too little) Finding measurable and practical indicators for higher level objectives and for projects with `capacity building' and `process' objectives Establishing unrealistic targets too early in the planning process Relying on `project reports' as the main `source of verification', and not detailing where the required information actually comes from, who should collect it and how frequently Prepared in a mechanic way as a bureaucratic `box-filling' requirement, not linked to problem analysis, objective setting or strategy selection Used as a means of top-down control - too rigidly applied Can alienate staff not familiar with the key concepts Becomes a `fetish' rather than a help When is the Logical Framework Approach used? Drawing up a Logframe has two main stages, Analysis and Planning, which are carried out progressively during the Identification and Formulation phases of the project cycle. There are four main elements of the Analysis Stage, namely: Stakeholder Analysis, including preliminary institutional capacity assessment, gender analysis and needs of other vulnerable groups such as disabled (profiling main players). Problem Analysis (profile of the main problems including cause and effect relationships). Analysis of Objectives (image of an improved situation in the future). Analysis of Strategies (comparison of different options to address a given situation). This analysis should be carried out as a progressive learning process, rather than as a simple set of linear 'steps'. For example, while stakeholder analysis must be carried out early in the process, it must be reviewed and refined as new questions are asked and new information comes to light. In the Planning Stage the results of the analysis are transcribed into a practical, operational plan ready to be implemented. At this stage: The logframe matrix is prepared, requiring further analysis and refinement of ideas. Activities and resource requirements are defined and scheduled. A budget is prepared. 1 EuropeAid Cooperation office, Aid Delivery Methods, Volume 1 Project Cycle Management Guidelines, March 2004, Brussels, p. 59-60. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 55

T 18 This is again a progressive process, as it may be necessary to review and revise the scope of project activities and expected results once the resource implications and budget become clearer. Figure 2: Summary of the two main phases of LFA. The Logical Framework Approach ANALYSIS PHASE PLANNING PHASE Stakeholder analysis - identifying & characterising potential major stakeholders; assessing their capacity Problem analysis - identifying key problems, constraints & opportunities; determining cause & effect relationships Developing Logical Framework matrix - defining project structure, testing its internal logic & risks, formulating measurable indicators of success Activity scheduling - determining the sequence and dependency of activities; estimating their duration, and assigning responsibility Objective analysis - developing solutions from the identified problems; identifying means to end relationships Resource scheduling - from the activity schedule, developing input schedules and a budget Strategy analysis - identifying different strategies to achieve solutions; selecting most appropriate strategy 56 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS T 18 a CONTEXT A stakeholder analysis serves to examine the different concerns, needs and interests of population subgroups in order to then decide the predominant focus of any given project. It is the first step in the Logical Framework Approach. This tool provides an introduction to the concepts and presents four different tools to assist in conducting a stakeholder analysis, which can be adapted as necessary. 1. Purpose and key steps Any individuals, groups of people, institutions or firms that may have a significant interest in the success or failure of a project (either as implementers, facilitators, beneficiaries or adversaries) are defined as stakeholders. A basic premise behind stakeholder analysis is that different groups have different concerns, capacities and interests and that these need to be explicitly understood and recognized in the process of problem identification, objective setting and strategy selection. The key questions asked by stakeholder analysis are therefore Whose problems or opportunities are we analysing and Who will benefit or loseout, and how, from a proposed project intervention? The ultimate aim is to help maximize the social, economic and institutional benefits of the project to target groups and ultimate beneficiaries, and minimise its potential negative impacts (including stakeholder conflicts). The main steps involved in stakeholder analysis are: 1. Identify the general development problem or opportunity addressed/considered. 2. Identify all groups that have a significant interest in the (potential) project. 3. Investigate their respective roles, different interests, relative power and capacity to participate (strengths and weaknesses). 4. Identify the extent of cooperation or conflict in the relationships between stakeholders. 5. Interpret the findings of the analysis and incorporate relevant information into project design to help ensure that (i) resources are appropriately targeted to meet objectives concerning equity and distribution and the needs of priority groups, (ii) management and coordination arrangements are appropriate to promote stakeholder ownership and participation; (iii) conflicts of stakeholder interest are recognized and explicitly addressed in project design. In the context of development projects, a key purpose of stakeholder analysis is to understand and address concerns on equity/distribution, particularly in the context of effectively addressing the needs of vulnerable groups (such as poor people, women and children and disabled people). Gender analysis is therefore a core element of stakeholder analysis, the aim being to help promote equitable access to project benefits. Guidelines on undertaking Gender Analysis are referenced in Attachment 2. 2. A note on terminology There are a variety of key words used to differentiate between different types of stakeholder. A summary of the terminology used in the EC context is provided below: 1. Stakeholders: Individuals or institutions that may directly or indirectly, positively or negatively affect or be affected by a project or programme. 2. Beneficiaries: Are those who benefit in whatever way from the implementation of the project. A distinction may be made between: (a) Target group(s): The group/entity who will be directly positively affected by the project at the Project Purpose level. This may include the staff from partner organisations. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 57

T 18 a (b) Final beneficiaries: Those who benefit from the project in the long term at the level of the society or sector at large, e.g. children due to increased spending on health and education, consumers due to improved agricultural production and marketing. 3. Project partners: Those who implement the projects in-country (who are also stakeholders, and may be a target group ). 3. Linking Stakeholder Analysis and the Subsequent Steps Stakeholder analysis and problem analysis are closely connected as part of the initial Situation Analysis. Indeed they should in practice be conducted in tandem rather than one after the other. All subsequent steps required to prepare a Logical Framework Matrix (or Logframe) should also be related to the stakeholder analysis, making it a point of continuous reference. The stakeholder analysis is a progressive process that evolves throughout the stages of the LFA and informs decisions at all stages of both analysis and planning/design. Whenever the Logframe needs to be revised the stakeholder analysis should also be re-considered, as the landscape of stakeholders involved in a project evolves over time. Thus, stakeholder analysis is not an isolated analytical step, but a process. 4. Tools for conducting stakeholder analysis There are a variety of tools that can be used to support stakeholder analysis. Some suggested options are described below, namely: A. Stakeholder analysis matrix B. SWOT analysis C. Venn diagrams In using any of these tools, the quality of information obtained will be significantly influenced by the process of collecting information. In this regard, the effective use of participatory planning methods and group facilitation tools can help to ensure that the views and perspectives of different stakeholder groups are adequately represented and understood. The examples shown below and developed through the subsequent stages of the LFA in this Section of the Guidelines, are based on an issue of river water pollution and its impact on income and health. A. Stakeholder analysis matrix how affected by the general problem or opportunity? Stakeholder Characteristics: o Social, economic o Gender o Structure, organisation, status, o Attitudes o Interests & Expectations Sensitivity to and respect of cross-cutting issues (gender, environment etc) Potentials & deficiencies o Resource endowment o Knowledge, experience o Potential Implications & conclusions for the project o Possible action required o How to deal with the group 58 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 18 a The type of information collected, analysed and presented in the columns of such a matrix can be adapted to meet the needs of different circumstances. For example, additional columns could be added to specifically deal with the different interests of women and men. Also, when analyzing potential project objectives in more detail (at a later stage in project planning), greater focus should be given to analyzing the potential benefits and costs of a proposed intervention to different stakeholder groups. Figure 1 SWOT matrix Strengths Grassroots based and quite broad membership Focused on the specific concerns of a relatively homogenous group Men and women both represented Provide a basic small scale credit facility Weaknesses Limited lobbying capacity or environmental management skills Lack of formal constitutions and unclear legal status Weak linkages with other organisations Internal disagreements on limiting fishing effort in response to declining fish stocks B. SWOT analysis A SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) is used to analyse the internal strengths and weaknesses of an organisation and the external opportunities and threats that it faces. It can be used either as a tool for general analysis, or to look at how an organisation might address a specific problem or challenge. The quality of information derived from using this tool depends (as always) on who is involved and how the process is managed it basically just provides a structure and focus for discussion. Opportunities Growing public/political concern over health impacts of uncontrolled waste disposal New government legislation in preparation on Environmental Protection largely focused on making polluters pay The river is potentially rich in resources for local consumption and sale New markets for fish and fish products developing as a result of improved transport infrastructure to nearby population centres Threats Political influence of industrial lobby groups who are opposed to tighter environmental protection laws (namely waste disposal) New environmental protection legislation may impact on access to traditional fishing grounds and the fishing methods that can be employed SWOT is undertaken in three main stages, namely: 1. Ideas are generated about the internal strengths and weaknesses of a group or organisation, and the external opportunities and threats. 2. The situation is analysed by looking for ways in which the group/organisation s strengths can be built on to overcome identified weaknesses, and opportunities can be taken to minimize threats. 3. A strategy for making improvements is formulated (and then subsequently developed using a number of additional analytical planning tools). An example of a SWOT matrix, further analyzing the capacity of Fishing Cooperatives to represent members interests and manage change, is shown below: C. Venn diagrams relationships between stakeholder groups/organisations Venn Diagrams are created to analyse and illustrate the nature of relationships between key stakeholder groups. The size of the circle used can help indicate the relative power/influence of each group/organisation, while the spatial separation is used to indicate the relative strength or weakness of the working relationship/interaction between different groups/organisations. Venn diagrams are commonly used as a participatory planning tool with target groups, to help them profile their concept of such relationships. Venn diagrams can also be used to analyse and highlight potential conflicts between different stakeholder groups. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 59

T 18 a Figure 2: Venn diagram of stakeholder relationship 1 INTEREST A=high interest / low influence The stakeholder s interests need to be protected; consider empowering these stakeholders! 4 1 5 C=Low interest / low influence Keep them informed! B=high interest / high influence Work in partnership and keep all on board! 3 7 D=low interest / high influence To upset these could be dangerous for your project! 6 2 8 Stakeholder interests overview table This table allows to have an overview of the interest of each stakeholder and the impact it might have on the outcomes of the project. Stakeholder Interests Likely Impact (+, -,?) 0 INFLUENCE LEVEL 1 Participation Matrix This table below gives the opportunity to define the role of each stakeholder during each stage of the project cycle. 1. Group 2. 3. Project Stage Inform Consult Partnership Manage / Control 4. Identification [stakeholder] 5. Formulation Group 6. 7. Implementation (Monitoring) 8. Evaluation Stakeholder classification (interest / influence matrix) SAMPLE The graphic below shows how to classify the different stakeholders based on their interest and their influence. According to their position in the graphic, a specific action is suggested. 60 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

PROBLEM ANALYSIS T 18 b CONTEXT Problem analysis is a step in the Logical Framework Approach, used during the Formulation phase of the SOS project cycle. After a situation and stakeholder analysis has been conducted, you must identify the main problems that the project will attempt to tackle. This tool explains how to produce a problem analysis and provides an SOS sample. How to go about it: A problem analysis identifies the negative aspects of an existing situation and establishes the cause & effect relationships between the identified problems. It involves three main phases: Phase 1 Definition of the framework and subject of analysis. Phase 2 Identification of the major problems faced by target groups and beneficiaries (What is/ are the problem/s?). Phase 3 Visualisation of the problems in form of a diagram, called a problem tree or hierarchy of problems to help analyse and clarify causeeffect relationships. Creating a problem tree should ideally be undertaken as a participatory group event and follow the steps indicated hereafter. It requires the use of individual problem statements, which can then be sorted into cause and effect relationships on a visual display. Step 1 The aim of the first step is to openly brainstorm and collect problems, which stakeholders consider to be a priority. This first step can either be completely open (no pre-conceived notions as to what stakeholder s priority concerns/problems might be), or more directed, through specifying a known high order problem or objective (e.g. improved river water quality) based on preliminary analysis of existing information and initial stakeholder consultations. Step 2 From the problems identified through the brainstorming exercise, select an individual starter problem. Step 3 Look for related problems to the starter problem. Step 4 Begin to establish a hierarchy of cause and effects: Problems which are directly causing the starter problem are put at the bottom. Problems which are direct effects of the starter problem are put at the top. Step 5 All other problems are then sorted in the same way the guiding question is 'Which factors cause the problems identified?' If there are two or more causes combining to produce an effect, place them at the same level in the diagram. Step 6 Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows clearly showing key links. Step 7 Review the diagram and verify its validity and completeness. Ask yourself/the group are there important problems that have not been mentioned yet? If so, specify the problems and include them at an appropriate place in the diagram. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 61

T 18 b Step 8 Copy the diagram onto a sheet of paper to keep as a record, and distribute (as appropriate) for further comment/information. Common difficulties/mistakes: Getting consensus on priority problems. Inappropriate level of detail (too much/too little). Expressing the problem as the absence of a solution. Instead, express it as an existing negative state: No pesticides are available Crop is infested with pests Wrong Right SOS sample problem tree: 62 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

OBJECTIVES ANALYSIS T 18 c CONTEXT The analysis of objectives is a step within the Logical Framework Approach that follows the problem analysis, used during the Formulation phase of the SOS project cycle. Once the main problems have been identified, and their causes and effects clearly stated, develop a set of relevant and focused project objectives. This tool explains how to analyse objectives and provides an SOS objectives tree sample. How to go about it: The analysis of objectives is a methodological approach employed to: Describe the situation in the future once identified problems have been remedied. Verify the hierarchy of objectives. Illustrate the means-ends relationships in a diagram. The negative situations of the problem tree are converted into solutions, expressed as positive achievements. For example, river water quality is deteriorating is converted into quality of river water is improved. These positive achievements are in fact objectives, and are presented in a diagram of objectives showing a means/ends hierarchy. This diagram aims to provide a clear overview of the desired future situation. The main steps in the process are summarised below: Step 1 Reformulate all negative situations of the problems analysis into positive situations that are: Desirable. Realistically achievable. Step 2 Check the means-ends relationships to ensure validity and completeness of the hierarchy (causeeffect relationships are turned into means-ends linkages) Step 3 If necessary: Revise statements. Add new objectives if these seem to be relevant and necessary to achieve the objective at the next higher level. Delete objectives which do not seem suitable or necessary. Once again the analysis of objectives should be undertaken through appropriate consultation with key stakeholder groups. Information previously gained from undertaking stakeholder analysis (including institutional capacity assessment) should also be taken into account. This should help in terms of: Considering priorities. Assessing how realistic the achievement of some objectives is. Identifying additional means that might be required to achieve desired ends. Once complete, the objective tree provides a summary picture of the desired future situation, including the indicative means by which ends can be achieved. As with the problem tree, the objective tree should provide a simplified but robust summary of reality. It is simply a tool to aid analysis and presentation of ideas. Its main strength is that it keeps the analysis of potential project objectives firmly based on addressing a range of clearly identified priority problems. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 63

T 18 c Common difficulties/mistakes: Getting consensus on project objectives. Reducing objectives to a simplistic linear chain. SOS sample objective tree: 64 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

STRATEGY ANALYSIS T 18 d CONTEXT The strategy analysis is a step within the Logical Framework Approach that follows the analysis of objectives, used during the Formulation phase of the SOS project cycle. Once the project objectives have been set, develop a set of adequate strategies to achieve them. This tool explains how to analyse strategies and provides an SOS strategy sample. How to go about it: During the process of stakeholder analysis, problem analysis and the identification of potential project objectives, views on the potential merits or difficulties associated with addressing problems in different ways will have been discussed. These issues and options then need to be more fully scrutinized to help determine the likely scope of the project before more detailed design work is undertaken. The type of questions that need to be asked and answered at this stage might include: Should all the identified problems and/or objectives be tackled, or a selected few? What are the positive opportunities that can be built on (i.e. from a SWOT analysis)? What is the combination of interventions that are most likely to bring about the desired results and promote sustainability of benefits? How is local ownership of the project best supported, including development of the capacity of local institutions? What are the likely capital and recurrent costs implications of different possible interventions, and what can realistically be afforded? What is the most cost effective option(s)? Which strategy will impact most positively on addressing the needs of the poor and other identified vulnerable groups? How can potential negative environmental impacts best be mitigated or avoided? This analytical stage is in some respects the most difficult and challenging, as it involves synthesising a significant amount of information and subsequentlymaking a complex judgment about the best implementation strategy to pursue. In practice a number of compromises often have to be made to balance different stakeholder interests, political demands and practical constraints such as the likely resource availability. Nevertheless, the task is made easier if there is an agreed set of criteria against which to assess the merits of different intervention options. Key criteria for strategy selection should include amongst others: Expected contribution to key policy objectives, such as poverty reduction or economic integration. Benefits to target groups. Complementarity with other on-going or planned programmes or projects. Capital and operating cost implications, and local ability to meet recurrent costs. Financial and economic cost-benefit. Contribution to institutional capacity building. Technical feasibility. Environmental impact. Using these criteria will help determine what should and should not be included within the project scope. The selected strategy will then be used to help formulate the first column of the Logical Framework, particularly in helping to identify the project Overall Objective, Purpose and potential Results. With all these analytical aspects in mind, follow the steps below: 1. Identify objectives you do not want to pursue (not desirable / achievable). 2. Group objectives to obtain possible strategies or components (clustering). PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 65

T 18 d 3. Decision based on and influenced by (criteria should be agreed upon): budget, priorities, human resources available, social acceptability (views of different stakeholders), urgency, experience and comparative advantage of one s organisation and partners, complementarity with other projects, risk & assumptions, appropriateness/ use of local resources, efficiency and effectiveness etc. SOS sample strategy analysis: 66 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Logical framework matrix template T 18 e CONTEXT The Logical Framework is a tool to help strengthen project design, implementation and evaluation. This means that you use it throughout the project cycle. The Logical framework will help you to organise your thinking, relate activities and investment to expected results, set performance indicators and communicate information on the project concisely and unambiguously. I. The logical framework for everybody Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable or SMART Indicators What do I measure here in absolute or relative terms? Sources of Verification Monitoring & Evaluation at different Levels External Factors Assumptions and Risks At different Levels Development VISIONS Overall Objective(s) My contribution to a broader objective / development goal, i.e. as outlined in national policy papers/plans, one or more of the MDGs etc. IMPACT Has something in the wider environment changed to the better? Can I measure my contribution? International and National or external Statistics on MDG Indicators > for Ex-Post Evaluation Analyse the environment and the project context. Find out more about... - sustainability - viability - feasability...here below. Project MISSION Project Purpose = Relevance Clearly focus your intervention to achieve one specific objective. Do I have an answer to the Target Groups need? >> I am responding to Donor Objectives and Priorities OUTCOME Is the target group better off at the end of the project, due to my intervention? Regional/local (Project Area) data Internal and External - on situation of target group - before and at the end of the project > for final Evaluation IMPACT Sustainability Example: Political Stability = not sufficient relate to the project phase and: BE MORE Specific Project STRATEGY Results = Effectiveness Identify the main components (3 5 main lines of intervention) of your project strategy Is my Strategy the right and optimal one? >> I will be effective (doing the right thing) OUTPUT: explains delivery aims and what is to be achieved with the target group (quantity=absolute) OUTCOME: Are project's outputs or services used? (quality = relative) Start measuring OUTCOME at this stage in order to be able to monitor and measure at higher level Local (project internal and beneficiaries response) and Regional (other organisations and Government = external) sources for quarterly monitoring and annual or midterm Review Viability "The target group is prepared to cooperate" is not a sufficient statement (bad practice), it is rather a pre-condition for any project. Project METHODOL- OGY Activities = Efficiency Elaborate 3 to 5 major, summarising activities per RESULT that are in line with your strategy and describe the sequence and the way you implement your project Am I implementing my activities efficiently (no waste of money and time)? >> I am doing things right INPUT Means and Costs Give a brief overview (main budget headings: personnel, operating costs, etc.) Indicate means and the related costs in (main headings from the budget) Local and project internal sources for regular (monthly and quarterly) monitoring and milestone review NB: not in LF but for activity monitoring Feasibility What do I need from the outside world to be successful? Reflect upon positive factors (assumptions) that support successful project implementation and potential risks that can create a project failure. Pre -feasibility This is my project and my responsibility PCMagura 2010 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 67

T 18 e II. Logical framework matrix template Intervention Logic Objectively Verifiable Indicator (OVI) Sources of Verification Partnership Overall Objective: Project Purpose: Result 1: Result 2: Result 3: Result 4: Activities: Pre-conditions: 68 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

PARTICIPATORY PLANNING METHODS T 19 CONTEXT This tool provides guidance on how to incorporate participatory planning methods into development and partnership processes. Participatory Planning aims to ensure that all relevant stakeholders influence a process and share process control. This should help to strengthen ownership and a sustainable process outcome. This tool provides an introduction to the concepts of participatory planning as well as specific tools such as a) Community mapping b) Transect walk c) Ranking matrix and the d) Stakeholder Diagram which can be found as annexes to this tool. 1. Introduction Participatory approaches build on the skills, knowledge, experience and culture of community groups, which are affected by a process, to actively participate in project design and implementation. In other words: influence and control over development initiatives and related decisions and resources are shared. 2. What are participatory methodologies? Participatory methods are part of a broader participatory development process. This process includes a full commitment to: Involving stakeholders in all phases of a project cycle development. Promoting the role of civil society in the development process. Using participatory methodologies to help ensure meaningful participation by all stakeholders, especially vulnerable groups such as children. Enhancing stakeholder participation across every development process. 3. Why use participatory methodologies Benefits of participatory planning methods go beyond single development initiatives. Participation empowers and mobilises people as actors and overseers of their own development; especially critical skills and experience are developed. This also enhances local economic development and therefore more sustainable communities and societies. Participatory approaches help encourage the participation of individuals in group processes. Such participation goes beyond potential participation obstacles relating to age, sex, social class or educational background. Participation can: Improve project design by: Giving more accurate data on environmental, social and cultural issues. Giving better understanding of stakeholders felt needs and priorities. Help resolve / manage conflict by: Identifying common ground. Finding solutions that serve the needs of all. Strengthen local institutional capacities such as; Management skills. Self-reliance. Self-esteem and confidence. Transparency and accountability. Access to more resources. Provide better monitoring of the equitable distribution of benefits, so that: Remedial action can be taken quickly and easily. Fairness and commitment are ensured. Improved credibility of the processes is ensured. If people are involved in decision-making and process implementation, it is more likely that a process will be carried on and maintained directly by the group the process is targeted to. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 69

T 19 4. When are participatory methodologies used? Participatory methods can be used at different stages of development and partnership processes. a) Problem identification: With the help of tools 19a-d and also through other activities deemed useful and appropriate, problem identification should take place in order to explore and discover the challenges a community is facing. If a high number of problems/challenges are identified, it may be necessary to prioritise and choose a few crucial ones for problem analysis and solution activities. b) Problem analysis: At problem analysis stage the following issues should be identified: The extent of the problem The real impacts of the problem Any related problems or factors c) Planning for solutions: Planning for Solutions should entail the following steps: Possible solutions to the problem should be found. The relative impacts of each of the solutions to the problem should be reflected upon. Possible resources (people, materials, funding, etc) that would be needed for each solution should be taken into consideration. d) Selecting options: The identified solutions should at this stage be allocated into different groups, which should be arranged according to priority. The community group should select those solutions from these groups that will have the biggest impact in solving the problem and will also be the most feasible to implement in light of the available resources. e) Planning for change: Afterwards, the selected solutions should be scrutinised and detailed implementation plans should be made. f) Planning for Monitoring and Evaluation: Before or during the early stages of solution implementation, a plan has to be put in place to assist the community to monitor and evaluate the progress, impact, success and failure of the implementation process. This plan should include provisions for taking corrective action if required. g) Participatory evaluation: After implementation, the community should go through a frank and participatory evaluation. This will help to identify whether outcome is satisfactory or whether any further actions are required. This task will also assist in learning from the process to improve for future development. 5. Useful tools Useful tools for undertaking any of the above mentioned activities are described below and in further detail in T19a-d. a) Community mapping Community mapping involves drawing maps of community resources, land use, structures, institutions and associations. The purpose of this tool is to develop a common vision and understanding of the community. b) Transect walk A transect walk is a systematic walk through the village with villagers. It involves observation, listening to villagers descriptions, asking relevant questions, discussing ideas, identifying zones, local and new technologies, identifying problems, seeking solutions and finally, diagramming/mapping the walk and its findings. c) Ranking matrix This tool aims to facilitate a process of democratic prioritisation of different initiatives which should ensure the involvement of the whole community concerned and enhance people s self-development. This is a particularly important tool for micro-planning at village level. d) Stakeholder diagram The stakeholder analysis diagram is particularly useful at the beginning of an initiative to identify all potential stakeholders and the relationships between them. 70 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

COMMUNITY MAPPING T 19 a CONTEXT Community mapping is a useful tool for developing a quick assessment of the community s physical environment and how it relates to everyday life. It involves the process of examining resources, opportunities, land use, structures, institutions, and associations. In line with participatory planning (T 19), community members should be involved in leading this process. Why do it? Mapping can provide insight into the use of land and other resources, as well as identify important landmarks, different socio-economic groupings, access to resources, relationships and interactions within a community, identify OVC (orphans and other vulnerable groups) households etc.. Community mapping can provide an important input when planning an initiative. Also in the monitoring and evaluation of activities, further mappings can be carried out and compared to the initial mapping results. How do you do it? Step 1 Identify people who have an interest in or may be affected by the project (e.g. women from a certain neighbourhood, men, farmers from the same community, and children who play in the potential project area). Invite these groups and ask them if you can obtain their input for planning the project. Ask them to draw a map of their community, for example by using markers or pens and paper or a chalk or a stick on the ground. Demonstrate an example and then hand over the stick to one of the villagers. Mapping is more interesting and detailed if done as a group. Step 3 The discussion part of the mapping exercise is very important. After the map has been drawn, relevant questions to the project should be asked (e.g.: The community wants to build a children s village/ school/clinic -> Where would you put it on your map and why? ). The discussion points can be recorded on the map or noted down on a separate sheet. Step 4 Maps not drawn on paper should be copied onto paper (don t forget to take a photo for later reference and accuracy). You should also ask the community members if they want to keep the original copy for themselves. The maps and the information from the discussion can be used in a community meeting that brings together the findings for the next steps of planning the initiative. The map below has been drawn by women in a village in Guatemala in order to identify land uses in the community for the purposes of planning a forestry initiative. Pine & Different Tree Species Step 2 When drawing a group map, ensure that the marker/ stick is circulated so that everybody has a chance to add their perspective. It should be avoided that the mapping is dominated by one person or just a few individuals. The map-drawing exercise is a chance to gain further understanding of the community and the context of the initiative. Vegetables Flowers River Lucia Sazo Community Map of Las Cebollas, Chiquimula Drawn by women PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 71

T 19 b TRANSECT WALK CONTEXT A transect walk is a systematic walk through the village with villagers. It involves observation, listening to villager s descriptions, asking relevant questions, discussing ideas, identifying zones, local technologies and new technologies, identifying problems, seeking solutions and finally, diagramming/mapping the walk and its findings. This tool provides guidance on how to conduct a transect walk and a template for documenting observations. Why do it and when? Issues raised in discussions during the transect walk, and when the group meets afterwards to discuss their findings, can provide important input into the planning of a project. This information may be useful to include in the proposal/ application document. The same exercise can be carried out later on, when evaluating the activities. Community members walk through the community and the site of the initiative, observing, asking questions, and discussing how the initiative has affected the community socially, environmentally, economically, and so on. They can identify what helped the initiative to get where it is now, what obstacles remain, and how they are being overcome, as well as what the community still has to work on to achieve its vision. How do you do it? Step 1 Identify the route for transect walks by several teams. Provide for local key informants to accompany the teams. Divide the team into small groups of 2 to 4 people. Large groups are not recommended. Step 3 The groups return by an agreed time to prepare a diagram and present their findings. Step 4 The teams then meet as a group and share what they learned on their transect walks. This information can be mapped out on a large surface in order to get the full picture of the results of the transect walks. Information can be grouped together if similar themes start to emerge. The information resulting from this exercise will give the community input for planning the initiative. For example, it can help with choosing a site, identifying environmental concerns, raising waste disposal issues, and identifying other issues that the initiative should focus on. During a debriefing, the discussion should focus on both methodological issues and findings. How did you feel talking to informants? What methods did you use during the transect walk? What did you discover? Step 2 Give the groups time to plan their transect walks. Ensure that the groups focus on what they expect to find and the methods they will use. It is better if the subject of the inquiry is precisely defined, as groups will be able to compare findings on their return. This should be recorded on the first column of the table. Group members should divide the area they are going to cover into sections. 72 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Example of a transect walk Transect walk done by an FSP team in an area X. T 19 b THEME Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 HOUSING Mud houses Few stoned houses Congested houses No. Of households are 400 Mud houses Few stone walled houses Congested houses with at least 6 occupants per block Partially built houses INFRASTRUCTURE Few water point Mosque bore hole Private primary school Day care centre Few water points SOCIO-ECONOMIC Private neighbouring school Small business shops Mnazi Brew dens One bar, Masons Carrier of goods to the Market Day care centre One private preschool Market place with small business Video Show houses One church Shopping centre Butchery, Tailors, Mnazi, Masons Mill-CBO Women empowerment group. Private schools Office of Mzee wa Mtaa. Post office present Many Mnazi brew dens. Butchery, Outside Food catering, Viazi Karai, Commercial sex workers CHILDREN 1-4 years are half dressed. Children of school going age are loitering around. 1-4 years dressed in tartars. Child day care facility present 1-4 years are half dressed. Homes are converted into babysitting Facilities for young children PROBLEMS Drunkard ness, idleness, floods, prostitution, HIV & AIDS Drunkard ness, HIV and AIDS, OVCs Drunkard ness, poor hygiene OPPORTUNITIES A lot of small business Community response to OVCs, present women s groups Day care centres, Community welfare PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 73

T 19 c RANKING MATRIX CONTEXT This tool is used to involve community members in prioritising their needs and preferred type of development initiative. Villagers give scores to development initiatives. They do this either on an individual basis or in small groups and are aggregating opinions for the whole community. This facilitates a process of democratic prioritization by the entire community, ensuring people s involvement in their own development. This is a very important tool for micro-planning at village level. Why do it and when? The ranking exercise can be useful when a community has to make a choice concerning a common good that they will commonly use (e.g. a school or a medical centre, a water project, sanitation, housing, hygiene). A ranking matrix can be used during the planning of an initiative to examine different options for activities, purchases, decisions, and so on. It can be used to conduct environmental assessments to determine which issues are important to address, and to compare different mitigation measures when they are necessary. When the ranking exercise is carried out with members of the community, the criteria chosen and the results of the exercise provide important information for planning an initiative. Matrices and notes from the discussions can be included in a proposal/application document. How do you do it? A good time to use this exercise is when a community faces some choices or decisions regarding their initiative (e.g. the choice of either a HIV/AIDS, education, housing programmes). Step 1 Draw on the diverse group of community members that have an interest in or may be affected by the project. Ask them if they can contribute to ranking some choices regarding the community initiative. Step 2 Introduce the issues for which you would like their input (e.g. choices regarding family strengthening options). Step 3 Ask them to brainstorm and come up with a list of various options that have been raised in community exercises and discussions. It may also be helpful to invite a person with technical expertise on the topic to join in the exercise. Step 4 Draw an empty matrix (see an example below). In the far left column, fill in the various options that the group has come up with during Step 3. The matrix can be drawn on a large sheet of paper or by tracing it on the ground and using stones or seeds to fill it in. Step 5 Ask them to list all the considerations they need to take into account when choosing the best option (e.g. low cost, low maintenance, and so on). List these criteria across the top of the matrix columns. Step 6 Once the participants are satisfied with the criteria they have chosen (usually four or five are enough), and are clear about the meaning of each one, ask them to rate each option against the criteria. 74 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 19 c TREE Characteristics or Criteria Gives Shade Doesn t Need watering Ability to hold soil Bears fruit / medicinal properties Matures Quickly Cashew Eucalyptus Pine Rosewood Mango Example of a Ranking Matrix to Select Trees for a Community Watershed Management Initiative PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 75

T 19 d STAKEHOLDER DIAGRAM CONTEXT This process involves the creation of a visual diagram that identifies all potential stakeholders. Using the diagram, community members indicate the relationships between these stakeholders. They discuss and analyse how these relationships should be taken into account in the initiative, and how all stakeholders can be included (e.g. consultation, decision-making, leadership, sponsorship). Why do it and when? Conducting a stakeholder analysis is an important early step in planning an initiative. It helps identify all potential stakeholders and allows them to voice their opinions. If only few community members, (representing only one or two groups of the community) are involved in the planning phase, there is a risk that the initiative will not take into account the diverse opinions and ideas held in the community and that community ownership of the initiative will be minimal. The stakeholder diagrams, and analysis of the information in them, can be used in initial planning meetings to clarify roles and relationships in the community. How do you do it? Step 1 Use cut-out circles of various sizes and then, ask the group to choose a circle and mark down the names of different groups, organisations, or individuals on the circles. Ask them to choose the size of circle according to the importance of a group, organisation, or individual in the community. Participants may have different perspectives of the importance of the various stakeholders and their amount of contact. These differences should be considered when planning the initiative. You can also ask participants directly: Who needs to be included in the planning phase of the initiative? Copies of the stakeholder analysis diagram can be included in the proposal/application document as a record of who will be involved in the project. For evaluation purposes, the stakeholder diagrams can be reviewed by participants midway through or at the end of the initiative to see if the relationships between the different stakeholders have changed, or if new stakeholders are involved in the initiative. Step 2 Put the circle representing the village or proposed project in the centre (see an example below), either by using a large piece of paper or by drawing it on the floor. Ask the participants to place the circles with the different stakeholders according to the amount of contact each has had with the community so far, and with each other. This may mean that circles will overlap. Step 3 Example of a Stakeholder Analysis from Shauri Yako Mombasa. 76 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 20 HOW TO DEVELOP INDICATORS CONTEXT This tool explains why indicators (often referred to as OVI - objectively verifiable indicators) are crucial in project cycle management and also gives an overview of different types of indicators that can be used for tracking and measuring progress during an initiative. Furthermore, this tool highlights the essential criteria needed to develop and apply indicators. 1. What are indicators? An indicator measures achievement to reflect the changes, progress and results connected to an intervention or to help assess the performance of a specific actor. Indicators are used at several stages in the project or programme cycle and are particularly crucial in defining how to track progress towards the objectives during implementation. 2. Indicators in the project cycle Identification Stage The plan for a project or programme is formulated in a general way at identification stage. Already at this stage indicators can play a crucial role in order to gain more precise information about the context of the intervention and about the difficulties to be addressed. For example, before starting an HIV/AIDS intervention, indicators on HIV prevalence are helpful to compare the situation between regions/areas and/or groups of beneficiaries and justify a regional or target-group focus. Once an intervention is implemented, this data may also serve as important base-line information. Formulation Stage During the formulation stage, more detail needs to be added to the initial project plan and indicators have to be developed.. Indicators are referred to as planning indicators or objectively verifiable indicators (OVI s) at this stage. Objectively verifiable refers to the fact that the same information will be gathered, even if different people are collecting it when using the indicator. Firstly, when objectives are still vague, (planning) indicators are necessary to obtain information about target group, timeframe, baseline and target values. This information is crucial for the development of a complete project plan, particularly resource allocation and budgeting as well as operational planning have to be looked into. For example, an objective such as "increased worker productivity" means little without specifying the exact nature of productivity, and by how much it is supposed to increase, for how many workers and within which timeframe. In this case, the formulation of indicators is even a precondition for finalisation of the plan. Secondly, it is necessary to define how to track progress towards the objectives the project is supposed to reach. For this purpose sources of verification (SOV) are defined to collect data that demonstrates the progress towards the objectives. Thirdly, also monitoring and evaluation activities use (planning-) indicators as a starting point against which progress is evaluated. Indicators in the Logical Framework Matrix If indicators are developed within a logical framework matrix (Tool 18), they are introduced in the second column of this matrix (see Tool 18e). Indicators are generally formulated for the Overall Objective(s), the Project Purpose and for the Results. Together with the indicators, the sources where information referred to in the indicator can be found are also identified. These so-called Sources of Verification (SoV) are included in the logical framework matrix in the third column (see Tool 18e). Identification of SoVs at this stage is highly recommended, since PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 77

T 20 discussions on where to find the information or how to collect it, often lead to reformulation of the indicator. The information referred to in the indicator might not be obtained, which means that a new/adapted indicator should be formulated. Implementation and Monitoring & Evaluation Stage A complete Logframe or a complete plan, put together with indicators as specified above, will provide a solid basis for the management of a project during implementation and thus also for monitoring and evaluation. 3. How do you develop indicators? There is no generally agreed method for developing indicators.one way of developing indicators involves a six-step process: use highlights the different information needs and expectations that different stakeholders have of monitoring and evaluation work. Identification of indicators is best started after a dialogue with the targeted community, which should outline concerns, goals, issues and obstacles, and the vision of the change a community seeks. The indicator-specific discussion begins by asking stakeholders to reflect on what type of information they want to know and why. Information that is already collected should be considered and also which methods of information exchange or reporting are in use that may be appropriate for setting up a monitoring and evaluation framework based on clear indicators. There are different types of indicators that may be used to assess the progress and results of a project: Step A: Agree on indicators purpose and focus (issue area) Regardless of whether you have used indicators before and collected large amounts of data, before initiating a sustainable programme it is always important to: a. Understand what indicators are and how they help achieve your goals. b. Agree what the purpose of the indicators you are developing is (e.g. raise awareness, help decision-making, measure progress). c. Agree on the focus of the indicators will a set of indicators just be used for family strengthening related issues or will it look at other aspects of the community such as education or public health? Step B: Identify potential indicators Identifying and agreeing on which indicators to a) Quantitative / Qualitative 1. Quantitative indicators have a digital value; they are displayed as ratios, rates, number etc. For example: The number of girls enrolled in primary school: 700 girls An average community household family size: 600 family members The ratio between rural/urban incomes: 1:2 2. Qualitative indicators measure perceptions, judgments or attitudes. For example: A Stakeholders assessment of a training: very good, good, bad, very bad A narrative description of living conditions: Housing conditions are appalling and not in line with international standards. Level of wellbeing of a child after joining a SOS CV: After joining the SOS CV, child x increasingly participated in group activities b) Direct / Indirect 1. Direct indicators refer directly to the subject they have been developed for For example: The number of girls enrolled in primary 78 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 20 school directly measures a result (number of girls) at a specific performance level (in primary school). Percentage of projects where community members were engaged in child rights club meetings role pattern, capacity gap analysis. 2. Indirect indicators refer to elements that are difficult to assess due to technical challenges or the expense of measuring them. Look for indirect measures that are appropriate in the context of your project. If there is a clear link between the indirect indicator and the objective you are trying to measure, then you should be able to make informed judgment about the status of the objective. For example: When measuring increases in household income If materials used for house construction change (eg. new tin sheets replace traditional roofing materials), an increase in household income can be assumed. If more households are paying for school fees and purchasing schoolbooks, it could also be an indirect indicator that people have more income. c) Process / outcome 1. Process indicators measure how activities are run and outcome indicators measure how your initiatives are accomplishing their intended results. They compare the result of an intervention to the initial situation. For example: Step C: Select indicators for implementation In many cases the initial brainstorming of indicators will lead to a huge list of possible measures. Indicators have to meet seven major criteria. These are listed as follows: 1. Univocal liaison: indicators result directly from the strategic objectives to which they relate and allow assessment of their level of implementation. 2. Pertinence: among all the indicators which are likely to assess the implementation level of an objective in all its dimensions, only the most pertinent ones should be selected, in order to limit the parameters to abide by and the efforts required to collect information. 3. Clarity: indicators should be easy to understand and define a clear scope. Their definitions must be short, explicit and unequivocal. 4. Consistency: indicators selected should be able to stand the test of time and serve as a solid basis for evaluation. It should be possible to compare the data over time. 5. Efficiency: the assessment of indicators should not require too much energy, time, or means. 6. Traceability: it should be possible to proceed to timely and regular measurement of the values of the selected indicators. 7. Sensitivity: it is indispensable that the influence of the programme is reflected in the indicator. An indicator should therefore be sensitive to the action of the intervention. Indicators should be formulated in a SMART way: specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-bound. For example: If the project objective is to promote the use of better seeds and farming techniques in a particular area, a good indicator would be the percentage of households, which, over a longer period of time, used the improved seeds and the cropping techniques recommended. This information is specific, measurable, (likely to be) available, realistic and has a time bound element. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 79

T 20 Indicators should also be SPICED : Subjective, Participatory, Interpreted and communicable, Cross-checked and compared, Empowering, Diverse and disaggregated. For example: If the project objective is to promote the use of better seeds and farming techniques in a particular area, a good indicator would be households that had used or not used the new seeds and practices. Other indicators that could be established in this context relate to age, gender, health, poverty, etc. of farmers. Step D: Set targets for the indicators A target is a desirable value that you want an indicator to reach within a particular period of time. For example: Specific objective The families of child participants have the capacity and commitment to take care of their children. OVI (objectively verifiable indicators) - 90% of primary caregivers ensure that the child gets 3 meals a day - 90% of primary caregivers ensure the child s access to health care and treatment as required Step E: Collect data for the indicators Collect the data necessary for verification of the indicators and objectives chosen. Ensure that a data collection and processing system is in place and then collect the data necessary for verification of the indicators and objectives chosen. If necessary information cannot be collected you should revise your indicators (see Step F). For example: Specific objective The families of child participants have the capacity and commitment to take. OVI (objectively verifiable indicators) - % of primary caregivers ensure that the child gets 3 meals a day - % of primary caregivers ensure the child s access to health care and treatment as required SoV (Sources/ Means of verification) - Family Development Plan - Household income document Use the following template: Indicators: 1. 2. 3. 4. Target 2009 2010 2011 2012 Sources/ Method of Verification (SoV/ MoV) and collection methods Frequency Responsibility Step F: Evaluate indicator usefulness At this point it is important to evaluate the usefulness of selected indicators and drop or revise them accordingly. Keep the following questions in mind: Will you be able to collect information on your indicator? If so, where will you get the information from? Is the information likely to be accurate (credible)? How much will it cost to get the information in terms of staff time, beneficiary time, money? How often will you have to collect it? Does it require baseline information? If so, can you get this information? Does your staff have the capacity (or desire) to collect the information honestly and accurately? How far can you attribute the indicator to your efforts? Will the indicator tell you anything you did not know before? Will it help you make decisions to improve future performance? Will it help you to be accountable to different stakeholders? 4. What do the indicators assess? 1) Outcomes Is the project having any positive influence on the target group and beneficiaries? Outcome indicators assess progress towards the Project Purpose and Development Goal. They are concerned with whether or not the project is making a difference. 80 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 20 They assess: Target group response: is the target group demonstrating change? Are participants aware of the project s services and products (its outputs)? Are participants using them in the way intended by the plan? Benefits: are beneficiaries receiving any benefits as a result of a project? Is the project making a difference for beneficiaries? How widely distributed are these benefits? The enabling indicators assess the current status of the project s assumptions Key external factors The enabling indicators allow reviewing factors that might influence the project s success. The review assesses if: Important factors necessary for success, but outside of the project s control or previously absent, are now in place? Important factors, present at an earlier stage, continue to be in place? 2) Outputs Is the project making any progress towards its objectives? How efficiently is the project using its resources? The output indicators assess whether the planned support to the target group has taken place, and how it has been carried out. Its concern with progress focuses on the following areas: Performance How are the project outputs achieved in relation to the initial plans? Has the project met its targeted goals for: Quantity were the specified numbers of services or products delivered? Quality were the outputs delivered to the required standards? Timing were there any delays in providing the outputs? Location were the outputs delivered in the targeted locations? People did the right groups of people receive the outputs? Efficiency Has the project made good use of its human and financial resources? Were too many resources used? Were too few resources allocated to activities? Did this affect the performance? 3) Enabling Are key external factors supporting the project s objectives? PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 81

T 21 RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES CONTEXT Donors are more likely to enter into a funding cooperation with an organisation that doesn t ignore risks but actively deals with them. It is therefore essential to have a clear idea of possible risks and most importantly, the identification of actions to neutralise them. This tool provides some inputs on how to deal with risks including a sample of a risk management matrix. 1. Risk definition Risks are external factors which are not under the control of project management and which, if they remain, can undermine success. In other words a RISK: denotes a potential negative impact to an asset / a process may arise from some present process or future event is measurable 2. Risk Management definition Risk Management is the structured approach to managing uncertainty related to a potential threat, through a sequence of human activities including: risk assessment, strategies developed to manage it, and mitigation of risk using managerial resources. Such strategies include transferring the risk to another party, avoiding the risk, reducing the risk (i.e. likelihood and/or negative effect), and accepting some or all of the consequences of a particular risk. Its overall objective is to reduce (where possible) the different risks identified, to an acceptable level. Risks can be either: Subjective (intuitive perception / assessment of a certain event influenced by demographic, socio-economic, structural factors) Objective (assessment of factors according to certain (measurable) criteria) and deal with during the project implementation while external factors are less predictable and should be therefore thoroughly assessed during the development of the logframe. Internal factors External factors Risk categories (examples) - Human resources (staffing issues, etc.) - Logistics - Systems (avalability of..., etc.) -... - Environmental (droughts, flooding, storms, erosion, soil, vegetation, temperatures (climate),...) - (Socio-)economic factors - Socio-political factors -... 4. Steps towards filling the risk management matrix 1. Brainstorm on risk factors (relevant in a distinct project context). 2. Describe potential negative impact. 3. Assess the two following factors for each risk Probability (1 = unlikely; 2 = Medium; 3 = Serious/high). Extent of damage/loss (1 = unlikely; 2 = Medium; 3 = Serious/high). Decide whether it should be included in the logframe (T22). 4. Describe how you are going to deal with the risk. 5. Decide which unit/person will be responsible to deal with the risk: Note: High probabilities tend to be underestimated, low probabilities either neglected or exaggerated. 3. Risk categories According to the type of project, different risk categories can be taken into account. However, internal factors are risks you can easily foresee 82 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 21 Sample of Risk Management Matrix Nature of Risk Impact of Risk on the programme Assessment Probability Extent of loss Action to prevent/ Manage Risk Who High staff-turnover Quality of service delivery is compromised - Break in continuity - Community apprehension 1 2 Carry out regular comparative reviews on conditions of service with other competitors Introduce non-monetary rewards Improve communication channels HR Unit Bureaucracy - Delay in implementation of the programme - Cost-over runs 2 3 Streamline operations from centre to location. Improve internal systems and controls Regular monitoring OP Unit Failures of accountability Families may fail to attain sufficient food 2 3 Contingency measures, e.g. promoting drought resistant crops Encourage and promote use of organic chemicals PD Unit PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 83

T 22 Assessing risks and assumptions in the logframe CONTEXT Once the intervention logic of the Logframe has been drafted and the risks assessed (see tool 21), the project management team should decide which external factors may have an impact (positive or negative) on the smooth running of the project and therefore should be included as real risks and assumptions within the logframe. 1. Risks: Decision-making Process 84 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 22 2. Assumptions: Decision-making process PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 85

T 23 DNH (Do no harm) ANALYSIS CONTEXT Conflict Sensitivity or a "Do no harm" approach takes into account that our work could increase existing conflicts or create new ones and also prescribes action from our side. Knowing that institutional donors either ask explicitly for conflict sensitive programme planning or are at least in favour of it, conflict sensitivity applies to all types of programmes within the scope of SOS Children's Villages. I. Conflict sensitive programme planning 1) What is Conflict Sensitivity? Conflict sensitivity refers to the ability of an organisation to: Understand the context of conflict in which it is operating, particularly intergroup relations. Understand the interactions between its interventions and the context/group relations; and Act upon the understanding of these interactions, in order to avoid negative impacts and maximize positive impacts. 2) What are negative impacts? Negative impacts concern all effects worsening (intensifying or prolonging) a conflict. The use of Conflict sensitivity terminology has evolved from the Do No Harm concept in the late 1990s, and is based on the hypothesis that any initiative conducted in a conflict-affected or resource-scarce environment will interact with that environment and such interaction will have consequences that may have positive and negative effects on that conflict. 3) How to achieve conflict sensitivity? Being conflict sensitive means that programmes are assessed and adjusted in relation to the context of conflict in which they are being implemented, with a view to avoid unintended negative impacts and maximise positive ones. As a minimum requirement, any intervention must be conscious about risks of working in a conflictive environment. 4) What types of SOS programmes can conflict sensitivity be applied to? Conflict sensitivity applies to all types of programmes within the scope of SOS Children s Villages. Institutional donors either ask explicitly for conflict sensitive programme planning or are at least in favour of it, when it comes to financing programmes in a conflictive environment. Hence, conflict sensitive programme planning does not only add to make our programmes ultimately more sustainable, it also enhances our chances to successfully apply for institutional funding. 5) When during the SOS CV Project Cycle should the DNH method be applied? Identification: The classification of the conflict situation in your country should take place during Step 2: Conduct feasibility assessment. (T15) Formulation: Plan your programme in a conflict-sensitive way by using the DO-NO-HARM CHECKLIST or conduct a fully-fledged DO-NO- HARM WORKSHOP (this tool does not provide a detailed description/instruction as to the DNH workshop) during Step 9: Draft project design. (T15) Implementation: During Step 28: Hold annual review and planning meeting (T15), revisit your previous findings as the course of conflict is dynamic and therefore earlier conclusions may be invalid. Therefore, we recommend to use the DNH-CHECKLIST as one of your monitoring tools. 6) What is the DO-NO-HARM CHECKLIST? The DO-NO-HARM CHECKLIST is our tool throughout the project cycle to anticipate possible negative effects of our programmes on a conflictive environment. Through careful attention to our project and how we deliver results, we 86 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 23 are able to identify the checklist s indications of whether our programme is having a negative or positive impact on conflict. 7) Fully-fledged DO-NO-HARM WORKSHOP The purpose of the DO-NO-HARM WORKSHOP is to conduct extensive micro-level conflictanalysis and impact assessment of a programme on conflict to assist project planning respectively and to assess the programme quality. The framework for considering the impact of aid on conflict suggests three major steps. The first step in the DNH method is to analyse the conflict context. This involves identifying the dividers (sources of tensions between groups) and connectors as comprehensively as possible. The second step is to analyse in detail the way our programme operates. This is based on the experience that in conflict situations every aspect of a project, including seemingly minor details, can have an effect. The final step consists in considering options for redesign and re-checking the impact on dividers/tensions and connectors/local capacities for peace: how can the programme be redesigned so it will "Not Harm" and strengthen local capacities for peace? II. Do-no-harm checklist Through the following checklist we are able to identify how we deliver aid and whether our project is having a negative (checklist p.87/88) or positive (checklist p.89) impact on conflict. A yes answer describes a negative (p.87/88) or positive (p.89) impact, which aids decision making on how to adapt programmes carried out in a conflict environment in order to avoid negative impacts. It should be noted that the checklist is only providing indications. An assessment of whether below actions, attitudes or situations actually matter in a given context has to be carried out by the people responsible for a project on a case by case basis. Indications of Negative Impacts [A yes answer indicates a negative impact] 1. Theft, Diversion, Mismanagement Source of Information 1.1. Are any goods/services stolen, diverted or mismanaged, especially by those connected directly to a conflict/crisis? d d 2. Market Impacts 2.1. Are prices of goods connected to the conflict/crisis rising? d d 2.2. Are incentives for engaging in the conflict/crisis rising? d d 2.3. Are prices of goods connected to the peacetime economy falling? d d 2.4. Are incentives for engaging in peacetime economic activities falling? d d 3. Distributional Impacts 3.1. Are our services delivered in ways that benefit one (some) sub-group(s) over others? (Who did we leave out and why?) d d 3.2. Do our beneficiaries share an identity? And do they share an identity with our staff? d d 3.3. Does our organisation employ people more from one group than others? d d 3.4. Do material goods go more to one group than others? d d 3.5. Can goods be used for military purpose? d d NO YES Action required PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 87

T 23 Indications of Negative Impacts [A yes answer indicates a negative impact] 4. Substitution Effects: Is aid providing a sufficiently significant amount of material to meet civilian needs that: Source of Information 4.1. More local goods are freed up to be used in warfare/by armies? d d 4.2. Local leaders take little or no responsibility for civilian welfare? [What are the manifestations of this?] d d 5. Legitimisation Effects: Does aid legitimise dividers? NO YES Action required 5.1. Are our services delivered in ways that legitimize war-related individuals (giving them more power, prestige or access to international attention or wealth)? 5.2. Are our services delivered in ways that legitimize the actions of war (e.g. reinforcing patterns of population movements that warriors are causing; linking to divisions in the society thus reinforcing them)? 5.3. Are our services delivered in ways that legitimize war-supporting attitudes (e.g. rewarding those who are most violent; given separately to all groups in assumption that they cannot work together)? d d d d d d 6. Arms & Power 6.1. Does our organisation rely on arms to protect its goods and/or co-workers? d d 7. Disrespect, Mistrust, and Competition among Development/Aid Agencies 7.1. Does our organisation refuse to cooperate or share information and planning functions with other aid agencies, local government or local NGOs? d d 7.2. Does it openly criticize the ways on how others provide aid and encourage local people to avoid working with other agencies? d d 8. Aid Workers and Impunity 8.1. Does field staff separate itself from local people whom they are working and do they frequently use aid goods, or the power they derive from them, for their personal benefit or pleasure? 9. Different Values for Different Lives 9.1. Does our organisation distribute its institutional benefits (salaries or per diem scales; equipment such as cars, phones, offices; expectations of time commitments to the job; rewards for work done; vacation, Rules and Responsibilities (R&R), evacuation plans) in ways that favour one identifiable group of workers more than others? 10. Powerlessness d d d d 10.1. Do our co-workers express discouragement and powerlessness in relation to their staff superiors, home offices or donors? d d 10.2. Do they express disrespect for these people but often cite them as the reason why something is impossible? d d 11. Belligerence, Tension, Suspicion 11.1 Are co-workers frightened and tense? d d 11.2. Do they express hatred, mistrust, or suspicion for local people (any of the local people)? d d 11.3. Does expatriate staff frequently engage their local staff counterparts in conversation about violence, war experiences, the terrible things they have experienced (thus reinforcing the sense that these are the things that matter)? d d 11.4. Does our organisation promote or in other ways exceptionally reward staff members who have served in more violent places/situations? d d 12. Publicity 12.1. Does our organisation s publicity and/or fundraising approach demonize one side of the conflict? d d 12.2. Does it treat one group as always victimized by the other? d d 88 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 23 Indications of Positive Impacts [A yes answer indicates a positive impact] 13. Do we actively seek to identify things in the conflict area that cross the boundaries and connect people on different sides? Have we designed our programme to relate to these connectors? Source of Information 14. Are our services delivered in ways that reinforce a local sense of inclusiveness and intergroup fairness? d d 15. Was our programme designed to bring people together? d d 16. Is it designed so that for any group to gain, all groups must gain? d d 17. Is our programme delivered in ways that reinforce, rather than undermine, attitudes of acceptance, understanding and empathy between groups? d d 18. Are our services delivered in ways that provide opportunities for people to act and speak in non-violent ways? d d 19. Do we provide opportunities for programme staff to cross lines and work with people from the other side? d d 20. Does the programme respect and reinforce local leaders as they take on responsibility for civilian governance? d d 21. Does the programme provide rewards for individuals, groups and communities that take intergroup or peace-reinforcing initiatives? d d 22. Does programme staff reinforce the attitudes of their friends and counterparts as they remember, or reassert, sympathy and respect for other groups? d d NO YES Action required d d PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 89

T 24 activity schedule template CONTEXT This tool outlines the process for completion of the activity table, which is a step within the Logical Framework Approach, following completion of the Logframe matrix. This sample template assists with analysing the timing, resources and person in charge of project activities. How to go about it: An activity scheduling further analyses timing, dependency and responsibility of the identified activities in the Logframe matrix (T 18e). The format can be adapted to fit with the expected duration of the project in question and the level of detail that is useful and practical to provide. It is advisable that the first year's activities are specified in a detailed manner (e.g. indicative start and end time of activities should be estimated using a weekly and/ or monthly planning schedule). This timeframe of planning can be larger for subsequent years (e.g. estimated activities in a month and/or a quarter). Such estimates are preliminary and should subsequently be revised by project management once implementation starts (i.e. in an inception report). Activities should continually be reviewed and revised during implementation in the light of actual implementation performance. A step-by-step approach to the preparation of a detailed activity schedule can be as follows: Step 1 List main activities The main activities identified through the Logframe analysis are a summary of what the project must do in order to deliver project results. These activities can therefore be used as the basis for preparation of the Activity Schedule which helps to specify the expected schedule and duration of key activities. Step 2 Break activities down into manageable tasks Activities are usually only broken down into manageable tasks once financing is approved and the project implementation phase has started. The purpose of breaking activities down into sub-activities and subsequently into specific tasks is to make them sufficiently simple to be organised. Each task can then be assigned to an individual, and becomes a short-term goal to achieve. Pay attention: Activities should not be broken down into too much detail! An activity should be described for the person responsible for planning to have sufficient detail to estimate the time and resources required and for the person responsible for carrying out an activity to have sufficient instructions on what has to be done. Step 3 Clarify Sequence and Dependencies Once the activities have been broken down into sufficient detail, they must be related to each other to determine their: Sequence - in what order should related activities be undertaken? Dependencies - is the activity dependent on the start-up or completion of any other activity? For example: Building a house consists of a number of separate, but interrelated activities: digging and laying the foundations; building the walls; installing the doors and windows; plastering the walls; constructing the roof; installing the plumbing etc.. The sequence dictates that digging the foundations comes before building the walls; while dependencies include the fact that you cannot start installing doors and windows until the walls have reached a certain height; or you cannot finish plastering until the plumbing has been fully installed. Dependencies may also occur between otherwise unrelated activities that will be undertaken by the same person (i.e. the person may not be able to complete both tasks at the same time). Step 4 Estimate Start-up, Duration and Completion of Activities In order to specify the timing of a project, an estimation of the duration of each project task is necessary, which can then be built into the Activity Schedule 90 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 24 and likely start-up and completion dates can be established. However, it is often not possible to estimate timing with great confidence. Those with the necessary technical knowledge or experience should be consulted. Don't underestimate the time required for an activity! Miscalculations in timing can happen for a number of reasons: Essential activities and tasks were forgotten/ not taken into account Failure to allow for sufficient interdependence of activities Failure to allow for resource competition (i.e. scheduling the same person or piece of equipment to do two or more things at the same time) A desire to impress with the promise of rapid results Step 5 Summarise Scheduling of Main Activities Having specified the timing of the individual tasks that make up the main activities, it is useful to provide an overall summary of the start-up, duration and completion of the different main activities themselves. Step 6 Define Milestones Milestones can provide the basis of project implementation monitoring and management. Milestones are key events that measure progress and provide a target for the project team. The simplest milestones are the dates estimated for completion of each activity e.g. training needs assessment completed by January 200x. Step 7 Define Expertise After specific tasks have been broken down from project activities (see Step 2), the type of expertise required has to be assessed. Available expertise is often already known when planning project activities, nonetheless, it is advisable to check one more time whether task plan and human resources available match. Step 8 Allocate Tasks among Team This step involves more than just specifying who does what. Allocation of tasks goes hand in hand with achieving the milestones set for each task. Each team member is accountable to fulfil a task and therefore also to the project manager and to other team members. Task allocation should therefore take into account the capability, skills and experience of each member of the team. When delegating tasks to team members, it is important to ensure that they understand what a task entails. The level of detail explaining a task may have to be revised at this stage. Activity schedule template nr. Activities In charge Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Month 1 - Month 12 Week 1 W. 2 W. 3 W. 4 Month 1 M. 2. M. 12 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1 Result: 1.1. Result : 1.1.1. Activity 1.1.2. Activity 1.1.3. Activity 1.2. Result : 1.2.1. Activity 1.2.2. Activity 2 Result: 2.1. Result: 2.1.1. Activity 2.1.2. Activity 2.1.3. Activity 2.2. Result : 2.2.1. Activity PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 91

T 25 RESOURCE AND COST SCHEDULING CONTEXT Resource and cost scheduling is a step within the Logical Framework Approach (T18) that follows the activity planning. It helps to estimate costs and resources (both human and material) in order to conduct planned activities. It will also serve as a basis for the Cash Flow Planning (T28) at a later stage. This tool explains how to develop a resource and cost schedule (T25a) and provides both a template and a checklist for establishing a good budget (T25b). How to go about it: Budgets should be based on careful and thorough cost estimates. They will have significant influence on the investment decision at project appraisal and subsequently on the smooth implementation of the project if a project is approved for implementation. The list of activities developed via the activity plan should be copied into a resource schedule. Each activity serves as a checklist to ensure that all necessary resources/inputs required for the activity are provided for. Budgeting of management activities should not be forgotten at this stage. Once the activities have been entered into the schedule, the resources necessary to undertake the activities have to be specified. Given that there will be a need to aggregate or summarise the cost information, the resources should be allocated to agreed cost categories. to have cost codes for each established cost category. By specifying the Cost Code, costs can again be sorted to determine total cost by cost category. Such a system allows for scheduling costs per planning period by using simple formulas to multiply the annual quantity by the unit cost. Once Total Costs have been calculated, it is important to remember that the implementing agency will be required to meet any recurrent costs of maintaining service provision beyond the life of the project. Recurrent Costs may be covered (fully or partly) through increased revenue that has been generated through project activities. Whether or not this is the case, it is important that the net recurrent cost implications of the project are clearly specified so that the future impact on the implementing agency s budget can be determined. For example, in template (T25a) the activity of establishing a Planning Unit requires Equipment, Salaries and Allowances. The Units, Quantity per Period, and estimated Unit Cost should therefore be specified. If entered into a spread sheet, Cost per Period and Total Project Cost can be calculated using simple formulas. If a project is funded by different funding sources, an allocation of budget items to the different funding sources is recommended. This facilitates sorting according to budget headings or by funding source, which allows for a dynamic use of the budget file. Donors are likely 92 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

RESOURCE AND COST SCHEDULe sample T 25 a CONTEXT Cost estimates should be based on careful and thorough budgeting. They will have significant influence on the investment decision at project appraisal and subsequently on the smooth implementation of the project if approved. The sample below shows how to copy the list of activities into a Resource Schedule. Each activity should then be used as a checklist to ensure that all necessary resources/inputs required for an activity are provided for. Budgeting of management activities should not be forgotten at this stage. 1 PROJECT: Establishing a Planning Unit, Ministry of Agriculture Activities/Inputs Unit Quantity per planning period Costs per unit Funding Source Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Donor Cost codes Costs per planning period Code Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Project total Annual recurrent costs 1 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 2 1.1 Establishing Planning unit EQUIPMENT Computers 2 3 1 000 3,4 A/1.3 2 000 2 000 4 000 Fax modem 1 500 3,4 A/1.3 500 500 Office furniture lump 1 3 000 3,4 A/1.3 3 000 3 000 SALARIES & AL- LOWANCES (local) Counterparts mm 4 4 4 4 200 5,2 B/2.1 800 800 800 800 3 200 3200 Office staff mm 2 3 3 3 100 5,2 B/2.1 200 300 300 300 1 100 1100 ETC. Total 6 500 3 100 1 100 1 100 11 800 4 300 1. 1 Copy activities from activity schedule 2. 2 Specify inputs 3. 3 Put inputs into cost categories 4. 4 Specify units 5. 5 Specify quantity 7. 7 Identify funding source 8. 8 Allocate cost codes 9. 9 Schedule costs 10. Calculate total 11. Estimate recurrent costs 6. 6 Estimate unit costs 1 Find an example of a detailed activitiy schedule format for Operational Planningin: Aid: Delivery Methods, Vol. 1 Project Cycle Management Guidelines, March 2004, p.89 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 93

T 25 b CHECKLIST for establishing a good budget CONTEXT This tool provides a collection of points to be considered when developing a project - budget for submission to an institutional donor. For multi-year projects, annual budgeting or a budget review happens not only once in the project cycle, but every year; therefore the relevant phases covered by the checklist are Formulation and Implementation. Formulation Phase Make sure the donor requirements are adhered to (e.g. check guidelines for eligibility of costs, minimum and maximum grant amounts possible, minimum and maximum co-funding shares, maximum overheads, etc.). Make sure your budget is balanced (expenditure = income). The budget should be realistic. It should be high enough to ensure that all planned activities can be carried out, but not too high. The evaluators assessing the applications will compare the plans and budgets and easily discover cases of extreme over-budgeting. In order to use realistic figures it makes sense to collect offers already when developing the budget. All planned activities should be checked for budget relevance (go through log frame and application and make sure all budgetrelevant activities are considered in the budget). Integration of NA/NO/NB-allocation into project budget: Any costs incurring NO running costs (and estimated NA/NO-allocation) should - if eligible according to the donor s eligibility criteria - be formulated as direct project costs and integrated in the donor-budget. In this case it is most important to inform FIS (Financial Service Department) at KDI, because the amount of NA/NO-costs included in the project budget needs to be subtracted from the NO budget before calculation of subsidies and the facility flagged Public Funding for non-attribution of remaining NO overhead. In any case before handing in NA/NO costs as direct project costs to the donor (which means evidence will be needed for these costs), make sure the NO can issue an invoice/ confirmation/any kind of evidence for these costs, that will be accepted by your donor. The budget of a more complex project (multi-country or framework-project) has to include administrative GSC-support. Project coordination costs to be considered when developing the budget: Kick off meeting. Review & planning meetings. Closing meeting, (in the application the relevance and importance of all these face to face meetings need to be demonstrated). Internal and/or external evaluation. Audit on programme- and/or NA-level (if required; standard SOS audit procedures might not be in line with donor requirements). Any additional staff (based on fixed-term contract basis) at National Office level required for programme coordination, reporting, administration or specific expert knowledge or skills. The project team needs to check if the feasibility study or a kind of baseline study can be integrated in the project and budget. Share the budget in time with all involved stakeholders (including FIS) to give them the opportunity to add or correct certain pieces of information. 94 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 25 b When preparing the budget, communicate the exchange rates used to the GSC: local currency transfer currency (USD) transfer currency donor currency (EUR) local currency donor currency The project budget needs to be reflected in the annual budget of the National Association. Implementation Phase (perennial projects) For multi-year projects the annual budgets for the following year have to be agreed by the partners in a joint (face to face or virtual) review meeting. It is important to inform the GSC (FIS) about the agreed outcome concerning next year s project budget (also indicating the exchange rates used). Next year s project budget needs to be reflected in next year s annual budget of the National Association. come (applicant to estimate chance of positive donor feedback!) budget as if the funding was already secured. If the donor s funding approval is rather questionable budget for institutional funds only after donor approval and send the updated NA annual budget to FIS. What to consider when calculating meeting-costs? Rent of meeting room + technical equipment Costs for food and beverages Travel costs Accommodation costs Per diems Visa fee Fee for external facilitator Fee for translator If at NA-level institutional funds are left over at the end of the year unspent (earmarked international transfers minus costs), they have to be budgeted on the facility / programme unit level for the subsequent year. These residual funds are earmarked for the specific programme and can therefore not be allocated to other programmes. If necessary, reporting on the project budget can be done in specifically agreed formats (e.g. donor-format), but it always has to be based on real Navision data, which will be checked by FIS. Interface with SOS annual budgeting cycle Has the planned institutional funding project to be budgeted for in the national budget? Budgeting has to be realistic. If the donor-approval is very likely to PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 95

T 26 Job Profile "Project Manager/Coordinator" CONTEXT Managing/coordinating a project funded by an institutional partner requires acting in a complex and multidisciplinary environment which demands certain skills. This tool lists the requirements and qualifications needed for when recruiting a project manager/ coordinator and it should serve as an orientation for the recruitment process. Depending on the nature of the specific project, the requirements for a project manager/coordinator may differ and not all of the listed skills may be necessary. This list is not exhaustive and can be extended. Furthermore, the tool provides guidance on tasks and responsibilities of a project manager/coordinator, a sample job description and a sample job advertisement. Tasks and responsibilities that can be part of a project manager s jobdescription Project coordination/management Initiate and coordinate institutional partnership processes. Identify suitable funding opportunities and, in cooperation with GSC IPD, match them with projects/programmes in need of funding. Engage in joint application processes with partners including intervention planning and budgeting as well as proposal writing. Cooperate proactively with the relevant IPDcoordinators at GSC level. Coordinate project implementation according to PRAG including monitoring and reporting (prepare/compile and defend both narrative progress reports and financial reports). Support partners in the conception, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of projects. Regular communication with the project partners (give regular management updates, inform on next steps, remind of deadlines and tasks, etc.) Initiate project evaluation processes, summarise and share lessons learnt with other stakeholders (GSC-IPD, project partners, funding partner, etc.) Contribute to improving relevant systems, processes, tools and methods to better integrate requirements arising from institutional (funding) partnerships into SOS organisational procedures. Support the maintenance of the monitoring system in place and contribute to its evolution. Support and organise monitoring missions, evaluations and the implementation of recommendations and findings. Research donors at national and regional level, liaise with headquarters to collate information on donor trends globally. Networking and relationship building Maintain close relationships with internal and external stakeholders (i.e. local partners, GSC IPD network, external partners such as embassies, governments, development agencies, NGO platforms, etc.) and participate in stakeholder meetings and forums. Develop new and deepen existing donor relationships in order to generate increased future income from in-country donors. Build relationships and knowledge exchange with relevant departments/units in GSC Be pro-active in researching potential funding opportunities, including approaching donors with unsolicited Concept Notes. Motivate representatives of member associations to embark on institutional funding processes. Organise and hold training sessions for staff involved in the IF project cycle based on PCM/PRAG material. Research and capacity development Produce and update support materials for resource mobilization. Develop materials for fundraising suitable for dissemination to donors, such as programme and project summaries for different audiences, audio-visual materials etc. (materials 96 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 26 must be in line with brand-standards and correspond to our organisational identity). Regular research and develop one page summary reports on the thematic interest and funding available from donors for dissemination to GSC IPD. Ensure that relevant staff has access to information on funding received from external sources (e.g. Fund Development updates, Supporter Relations and Fundraising Unit updates). Promote the department within the organisation and the funding channel within the federation (be an ambassador for institutional fund development, cooperation development etc.) List of skills and key qualifications that can be considered Academic background (e.g. minimum Bachelor and preferably Master s Degree in a relevant discipline). Knowledge and experience in project management. Previous professional experience (in NGOs, CSOs or donor institutions) with institutional funding. Competences/experience in Project Cycle Management (PCM). Knowledge of Logical Framework Approach (LFA). Knowledge on planning, monitoring and evaluation. Knowledge of results-based planning and implementation. Good proposal writing skills. Firm understanding of planning and budgeting processes. Certain understanding of financial management. Basic bookkeeping knowledge. Experience in working in an international environment/international organisation with a global scope / development NGO. Experience with multi-actor consortia, crosscountry and cross-organisational processes. Awareness of /Interest in child rights. Respect for cultural diversity. Excellent (EN/FR/ES/ ) written and verbal language skills. Excellent communication skills: ability to present information in a clear and concise manner, ability to document information for different target groups, effective liaison skills. Computer skills: sound knowledge of standard software (Word, Excel, Power point, Outlook). Interest in development issues. Interest in socio-political issues. Capacity for networking and teamwork. Excellent analytical and creative problemsolving skills. Good time-, office- and self-management. Ability to set priorities, maintain positive attitude and take decisions. Ability to work under pressure and handle stress. Ability to plan and work systematically towards deadlines. Willingness to travel. Sample job description Job Description Position title: project coordinator Name of employee: Susanne Smith Working location: nowhere city Continent/Region/Country: AFME / AFNM / nowhereland Mission: Coordinate the development of new and the cultivation of existing partnerships with institutions in order to significantly diversify and augment the financial resources available to support the organisation's programmes; Main clients and contacts: representatives of institutional partner organisations co-workers in the field of programme planning/fsp coordinator finance/fis staff GSC IPD staff Key performance areas and main responsibilities: Initiate and coordinate institutional partnership processes. Identify suitable funding opportunities and, in cooperation with GSC IPD, match them with projects/programmes in need of funding (matching for IPD). Coordinate joint application processes with partners including intervention planning and PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 97

T 26 budgeting as well as proposal writing. Coordinate project implementation according to PCM including monitoring and reporting (both narrative progress reporting and financial reporting). Regular communication with the project partners (give regular management updates, inform on next steps, remind of deadlines and tasks, etc.) Liaise with internal and external stakeholders (i.e. local partners, GSC IPD network, external partners such as embassies, governments, development agencies, NGO-platforms, etc.) and participate in stakeholder meetings and forums. Contribute to improving relevant systems, processes, tools and methods to better integrate requirements arising from institutional (funding) partnerships into SOS organisational procedures. Direct supervisor (name and position): Employee is deputised by (name and position): Employee is deputy for (name and position): Date, Signature Employee Date, Signature Supervisor The job description outlines only the general scope of activity and the basic tasks and responsibilities associated with this position. It is updated annually in the course of performance appraisal. It may be supplemented with a more detailed definition of tasks, responsibilities and involvement in processes. Sample job advertisement SOS Children s Villages International is a federation of over 130 SOS Children s Villages associations world-wide. We build families for neglected, abandoned or orphaned children, we help them shape their own futures and we share in the development of their communities. In order to further satisfy this responsibility, we are seeking for our team in <location> a committed. Project Coordinator (f/m) Tasks and Responsibilities: Initiate and coordinate institutional partnership processes. Identify suitable funding opportunities and match them with projects/programmes. Coordinate joint application processes with partners including intervention planning and budgeting as well as proposal writing. Coordinate project implementation according to PCM including monitoring and reporting (both narrative progress reporting and financial reporting). Regular communication with the project partners. Liaise with internal and external stakeholders and participate in stakeholder meetings and forums. Contribute to improving relevant systems, processes, tools and methods for grant servicing. Requirements: Academic background (e.g. minimum Bachelor and preferably Master s Degree). Awareness of / Interest in child rights. Previous exposure to public funding processes and institutional donors. In-depth understanding of the significance and implications of development cooperation. Strong interest in international development agenda and in socio-political issues. Firm understanding of planning and budgeting processes. Competences in Project Cycle Management and the use of Logical Framework Approach (LFA). Ability to work under pressure and to plan and work systematically towards deadlines. Excellent written and verbal English skills, knowledge in French or Spanish is a plus. We offer: Diverse and challenging tasks in an international working environment. Exciting working surroundings in a dynamic team. Performance-linked salary. If you are interested in this position, please send your detailed e-mail application by <date> at the latest to <e-mail address, postal address, websites/ jobs-page> 98 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

INTERNAL PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT TEMPLATE T 27 CONTEXT The Partnership Agreement (PA) is an amendment to the MoU and defines clearly the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders during the implementation phase. It also provides a clear overview the reporting mechanism as well as a communication protocol describing the communication flow and main deadlines. The PA should be signed by the APP, IMP, the Continental Director for multi-regional agreements and the Regional Director for regional processes. PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT And amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) [IPD-Reference Number] Complementary to what has been agreed in the MoU, the following facts and agreements enter into force from [Date] and are valid until the final reports have been approved by the institutional donor. 1. General The grant is provided by the <donor full name and if applicable acronym> and must be implemented and administered in accordance with the approved project application and the approved budget (Annex xy). Moreover, the funds must be managed in compliance with the terms of this agreement and the donor requirements according to the grant contract (Annex xy). 2. Snapshot Figures update [fill in donor-approved figures] Donor-approved figures per year and total: Approved grant amount and co-funding share in % (donor agency) Targeted beneficiary numbers Estimated NA NO allocation per year Estimated GSC allocation as per application Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Applied Exchange Rates Donor Currency/transfer currency (USD) Donor Currency/local currency Transfer currency/local currency 3. Roles and Responsibilities Partners agree to carry out the project in accordance with what is stated in the application. The following roles and responsibilities have been highlighted and outlined for each partner below: 3.1. Responsibilities of <APP> <APP> is responsible to carry out the overall administration of the Project Fund, for the utilisation of the grant and for reporting to <donor > according to their agreement. <APP> is obliged to immediately inform <donor> of any suspected irregularities related to the management of the grant. <APP> is responsible for maintaining regular communication with <IMP> and SOS SOS CV in order to follow up implementation progress and other matters related to the project. <APP> is responsible for the provision of funds in a timely manner according to agreed budget (and cash flow forecast) and based on the receipt and approval of request for transfer of funds (RfT) from <IMP>. <APP> is obliged to inform <IMP> & SOS CV immediately if there are changes in <donor > and its grant rules and regulations. Total programme/ project funding volume (in donor currency) PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 99

T 27 3.2 Responsibilities of <IMP> <IMP> is responsible for the implementation of the project in accordance with the project application. <IMP> is responsible for the reporting and monitoring of the project in accordance with the Monitoring & Evaluation Framework of SOS Children s Villages International and the project application. <IMP> is responsible for tracking all spending on project activities in the country, and providing proof of all expenditures for the duration of the project. <IMP> is required to develop a project workplan and project implementation plan in partnership with <APP>, and to inform <APP> of any deviations from or changes to these plans throughout the course of the project. <IMP> is obliged to ensure that all activities are carried out in conformity with national laws and regulations. It is incumbent on <IMP> to ensure that no employees are discriminated on the basis of race, sex, disability or political or religious conviction. <IMP> is obliged to notify <APP> and SOS CV if it becomes necessary to make significant modifications or changes to the project or project budget, in case of major delays of activities or in case of other essential changes in the conditions for the project. No savings or accumulation of funds may take place. At the end of the project period, or in case of premature termination of the project, unspent funds, including accrued interest and foreign exchange, must be credited to <donor > through <APP>. 3.3 Responsibilities of SOS SOS CV Regional Office Programme Support (FSP) Monitoring of FSP programmes including plan/actual comparison; Supporting NA and PSA in detecting necessary budget-reallocations; Supporting the NA in developing yearly action plans. Finance Support (FIS) Monitoring of the financial part of the country programme (accounting data); Providing plan/actual comparison to FSP on a monthly basis; Monitoring and overseeing of the annual audit processes. Partnership Support (IPD) Monitoring of compliance with donor requirements; Facilitation of partnership exchanges such as kick-off meeting, review meetings, monitoring visits, etc.; Facilitating of GSC approvals on budget reallocations proposed by the NA and PSA; Support upon request by other stakeholders Continental Office CO serves as a mediator between the partners, in case any problems arise that cannot be solved between the partners themselves. CO IPD Formulation: Advice and support in approval processes Evaluation & Learning: Technical assistance (methods and templates) International Office (IO) IO FIS supports the process from a financial and administrative perspective such as calculation of subsidies; request for transfers; monitoring of instalments; separation of NO allocation and direct programme costs. IO IPD Formulation: Promotion of technical support for CO Implementation: Best practice sharing (Intranet logical framework, budgets, application document, donor contract, reports) Evaluation & Learning: Organise institutional memory and inter-functional learning 4. Monitoring and Evaluation 4.1. kick off meeting A kick-off meeting may take place after the signature of the grant contract. Latest during the kick off meeting planning needs to be fine-tuned. The costs of the kick-off meeting are to be included in the project costs or otherwise to be covered by <APP>. 100 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 27 4.2. Annual review The annual review allows partners to jointly carry out possible adjustments to implementation plans and inform about a potential shift of project direction. Annual planning and reviewing meetings will be held with participation of <APP> to discuss budget deviation based on real Navision accounting in the current year and agree on next year s project budget which has to be reflected in the <IMP s> national annual budget. Whatever <IMP> and <APP> agree in terms of budget reallocation has to be communicated via RO FIS to IO FIS including the applied exchange rates! 4.3. Midterm evaluation (external or peer to peer) The mid-term evaluation allows <IMP> to carry out possible adjustments to the implementation schedule and inform a possible shift of project activities. 4.4. Final evaluation (external) The future scope of the project shall be defined according to the result of midterm and final evaluation. The final evaluation of the project will determine the extent to which the operation will continue. 5. Reporting & Communication 5.1. General The half year report should focus on reporting at activities level and shall also assess to risks. The annual report should focus on progress of the results and outcomes and needs and both an activity plan update and a risk assessment update should be included (if needed). The National FSP Coordinator should provide a summary and additional remarks from an overall coordination and programme perspective at national level. The financial report needs to be based on real Navision accounting and provide a clear explanation on budget underspending or overspending as well as proposals for budget re-allocation. Postings have to be included as foreseen in the template. For the exchange rate between local currency and donor currency the average monthly exchange rate should be used. Immediate communication has to be sent to inform <APP> and SOS CV on time in case any unplanned and urgent actions need to be taken. For example: objective cannot be met for some reason budget restructurings (shifts between different budget lines > 10% of total), budget exceeding (>5% of total) significant and unexpected exchange rate increasing/decreasing significant increase/decrease of number of beneficiaries changes of partners any problems or natural disasters and political changes that have repercussions on the programme case of fraud or corruption 5.2. Communication Protocol <IMP> will submit the reports listed below to <APP>. The reports shall only cover activities financed by and belonging to this project. REPORT WHO MAIN INFO FLOW Half Year Report 01 JAN 30 JUN Deadline: 15th of July SOS Narrative NA prepares with RO (FSP Coordinators) NA RO -CO - PSA (cc RO FSP, RO IPD, IO FIS) SOS Financial NA prepares with RO (Reg. OP Advisor) NA RO - PSA (cc RO OP, RO IPD, IO FIS) Yearly Report 01 JAN 31 DEC DONOR FORMAT Narrative NA prepares with RO, CO gives feedback and identifies areas for support / alignment Deadline: 15th of February NA RO - PSA (cc RO FSP, RO IPD, CO FSP, IO FIS) DONOR FORMAT Financial NA prepares with RO (Reg. OP Advisor) NA RO - PSA (cc RO OP, RO IPD, IO FIS) PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 101

T 27 5.3. Storage of evidence All accounts and original vouchers, bids, offers, etc. have to be stored for ten years after the termination of the project. 6. Continuum Strategy The future of the project(s)/ programme(s) beyond the envisaged grant agreement will be determined according to needs arising from the final evaluation of the project and funding possibilities. Annexes: - Grant contract between donor and applicant - Approved project budget - SOS Reporting templates - Donor reporting templates (financial, narrative) - Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) After the present grant contract has come to an end as per <end date of grant agreement> the programme will continue in the scope the final evaluation has recommended. <APP> may decide to provide follow up funding from an institutional donor or finance the programme with private funds. <IMP> should also be prepared to look for alternative funding opportunities at local level or phase out the programme if <APP> cannot make an on-going funding commitment. 7. Validity of this agreement The present Partnership Agreement enters into force as soon as all parties have been informed about the donor approval of the joint application or as soon as all parties have signed the agreement, whichever comes first. Parties may request amendments to this agreement. The implementation of such amendments will call for consensus between the parties. Agreed changes and amendments shall enter into force after an exchange of letters between the parties who have signed this agreement. 8. Signatures SOS PSA, place, date, Managing Director SOS NA, place, date, National Director CO/RO, place, date, Continental Director/ Regional Director 102 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 28 Cash Flow Planning CONTEXT Cash flow planning allows for an enhanced overall coordination of financial flows and the identification of financial gaps and critical moments in spending and reporting. This tool aims to raise awareness on which amounts are needed at what time and which donor requirements have to be taken into consideration (e.g. payments in instalments etc). Organising funds on a timeline To find out how much money will be needed in the implementation phase, it is recommended to allocate budget to all planned activities in the project plan. For example: The project plan foresees "recruitment of additional staff in the start-up phase" --> Calculate budget implications such as "recruitment process (job-advertisement, conducting interviews etc)", "salary of person recruited", "training", "equipment at work place (desk, chair, computer, etc.)" accordingly. Afterwards, planned activities and budget implications should be organised in the format of a timeline. This will result in a clear list establishing a forecast of funds required for each month of the project. Furthermore, the availability of funds and donor requirements have to be checked. interim report. The remaining 20% are then only transferred once the final report is approved by the donor. In other cases, the donor may transfer funds based on annually approved cash-flow forecasts/ liquidity plans. Comparing the funds needed and the donor s rules regarding transfer of funds will help to identify critical moments (e.g. the moment when approximately 70% of the first instalment are spent can be predicted in the funds needed plan, which means that the second instalment can be requested rapidly) or financial gaps (e.g. when the project is almost at its conclusion and the first 80% are already spent, yet, activities need to continue until the end of the project duration and the remaining 20% will only be available several months after the end of the project) Most institutional donors have certain rules on how funds are transferred to contract holders. For example, usually 80% of the grant amount is transferred to the applicant after signing the grant contract; the remaining 20% are transferred once the final report is approved by the donor. The rules governing fund allocation can in some cases be quite complex. For example, the first instalment of 50% is transferred at the beginning of the project, the second instalment of 30% may be requested by the contract holder as soon as at least 70% of the first instalment have been spent. This usually needs to be evidenced by a financial PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 103

T 29 INTERNAL HARMONISATION CHECKLIST CONTEXT At some stages there is an overlap between the IPD project cycle and other SOS Children's Villages internal processes. This concerns programme planning and financial planning (e.g. budgeting, accounting and auditing) in particular. Already in the identification and formulation phases special attention has to be given to these overlaps in order to avoid operational problems during the implementation phase. This tool summarises the existing SOS internal processes requiring harmonisation and gives recommendations on what to consider in terms of operational standards and processes when planning a project funded by an institutional donor. The present document is a working document that reflects the current practice and regulations according to the "Handbook on budgeting of national associations" and will require regular updates. Refer to the flowcharts at the end of this tool for acquiring an overview of the points described below. Questions/Issues to be considered during the Identification phase: Preliminary Analysis Is there a valid Child Rights Situation Analysis (CRSA) available for the country concerned? Depending on the dynamic and context of the country, a CRSA is carried out every 3-5 years. Has a Feasibility Study recently been conducted for the programme? In principle a feasibility study must be provided for every new programme unit. Also, whenever the situation at a SOS location changes drastically (e.g. caused by conflict, natural disasters, law changes, economic downturn, NGO landscape) the feasibility study should be reviewed. In addition, if the actual programme does not commence within 18 months of the completion of the feasibility study (defined as the moment when any costs are incurred related to the programme start-up), a follow-up check will have to be undertaken to ensure the findings of the feasibility study are still valid. This step has to be taken prior to any formal financial agreement with a PSA. The same logic applies to the programme proposal. In exceptional cases, only the alternative scope definition needs to be considered. These exceptions are: Youth care programme units (also known as YF1 or YF2) Constructions or renovations of National Offices and Training Centres (TC1 for the training of SOS employees, not TC2) Modifications of existing programmes units (including renovations and re-innovations costing over 60 000 USD. Renovation costing less than 60 000 USD should be included in NA annual budgets.) Extensions of existing programmes units under threshold to be defined Individual guideline for AFME: Until further development of the AFME alternative scope definition guidelines for planned programme units not requiring feasibility study, T9 IPD concept note can be uploaded to the programme plan. In cases where a concept note including the programme unit scope is developed in response to an opportunity for institutional funding and approved by CO PD, this concept note will replace the feasibility study and the alternative scope definition document. (See: AFME alternative scope definition guidelines for planned programme units not requiring feasibility study ) Is there a valid and CO-approved SOS programme proposal in place? 104 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 29 Please note that the donor-application cannot replace the SOS programme proposal. An approved programme proposal (PP) needs to be entered into the SOS Programme Plan and published in the "Linking Needs and Funds"-Tool (LNF). They provide links to the respective reports and documents which are entered into the TPA (SOS CV Text and Picture Agency). A new PP needs to be developed in case: A completely new Programme (location) is planned. A new programme unit is planned at an existing SOS Children's Villages Programme. An extension of an existing programme unit is planned (for Family Strengthening Programme units: this is defined as the increase of running costs in comparison to the running costs at full capacity as defined in the SOS Programme Proposal in force) A modification (e.g. renovation) exceeding the amount of USD 60,000 is necessary for an existing programme unit, or when a considerable change in the programme unit s content is foreseen. The content of the programme units changes considerably. In this case also a Feasibility Study has to be developed. An update of a PP is required when: A defined end date of SOS involvement was given in the SOS Programme Proposal in force and is planned to be exceeded in the budgeting year in question. A programme has not commenced within 18 months of the SOS Programme Proposal establishment. A follow-up check has to be undertaken to ensure that the findings of the SOS Programme Proposal are still valid. For any subsequent findings, the SOS Programme Proposal needs to be updated. Donor identification and matching The Matching for IPD process conducted by the IO (IPD and FIS) is fed by LNF and other existing project pools. In Q3 IO IPD and FIS start screening for projects which need funding and put them together in the matching database. If a National Association has plans to developing an institutional funding proposal with a PSA, the programme units/facilities need to be registered in the programme plan to be then available via LNF. If a National Association aims to find a partner-psa for handing in an application to an institutional donor for a programme which is not available via LNF (any activities in functional or national budget that are not programme units/facilities, e.g. campaigns, advocacy activities, capacity development, etc.), the NA/RO needs to communicate this to the CO IPD-team which forwards the information to IO IPD. IPD will then integrate the project into the matching process and inform IO FIS. PSAs have access to the matching database and will contact the IO in case they are interested in partnering with an NA. What has to be considered when an NA would like to seek funding with an institutional partner for a programme unit/ facility that is already financed by a PSA? It is of great importance that this information reaches IO FIS via the usual channels (RO FIS) before an application is handed in to a donor. IO FIS has to check with the funding PSA if they have earmarked funds for the programme unit/facility in question or if the programme unit is free for release to NAfunding. IPD-IO and FIS will try to negotiate a temporary release with the PSA. If such a release is granted, the PSA will be asked to continue funding to the extent, which is defined by a final evaluation of the programme unit/facility, after the grant contract between the NA and the donor has come to an end. In any case a PSA is not in principal committed to continue funding a programme unit that was started with local funding. Any regulation regarding back-up funding (in case an application is rejected) and continuum funding (for the period after the grant contract) will be arranged in the MoU (T16a) and Partnership Agreement (T27). PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 105

T 29 Questions/Issues to be considered during the Identification/Formulation phase: Does the planned institutional funding require budgeting in the national budget? Budgeting has to be realistic. Refer to Tool 25b Checklist for establishing a good budget for further information. If donor-approval is very likely (applicant to estimate chance of positive donor feedback!) budget as if the funding was already secured. If the donor s funding approval is rather questionable budget for institutional funds only after donor approval and send the updated NA annual budget to FIS. Only programmes which have achieved 100% of funding commitment in the LNF should be included in the annual national budget. Only programmes with an approved PP and a full funding commitment can be budgeted by the NA for the following year and therefore start operations in the following year. In exceptional cases, for example when a programme is submitted for funding to an institutional donor and the application is approved, funding of new programmes and facilities / programme units outside the regular budgeting process can be obtained. If a 100% funding approval has been achieved with a DSG (Deputy Secretary General) endorsed programme proposal during the year and the programme or programme unit is starting immediately, budgets can be handed in after coordination via IO FIS exceptionally also during the year. N.B. An increase in local income compared to the national budget leads to a subsequent decrease in international subsidy. If this additional local income is to be used for additional expenses which were not included in the budget, this change must also be carried out in agreement with the GSC. How to ensure a continuum funding strategy for the project once the institutional contract ended? Since a new programme can only start when 100% funding commitment is achieved, this must also be the case for programmes funded by institutional donors. To avoid funding difficulties at a later stage of the programme, the following two options should be reflected upon: 1) Find a PSA to secure funding in due time before the grant contract with the institutional donor comes to an end (managed via IO FIS). 2) As a general aim of projects designed for funding through institutional donors, plan the project design in a way that a phase out is possible within the duration of the grant contract (This depends on the type of planned activities and might be difficult especially for activities such as FSPs. A grant contract usually covers 2 5 years and most of the supported families will probably not reach selfsufficiency within this timeframe). Possible outlook-scenarios need to be mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding (T16a) and an agreed future scenario ( Who funds a programme after the end of the institutional funding? ) needs to be defined in the Partnership Agreement (T27). Questions/Issues to be considered during the Implementation phase: How are funds transferred for programmes funded by institutional donors? The transfers follow the usual process: A Request for Transfer (RfT) goes via RO FIS and IO FIS to the PSA which transfers the amount indicated in the RfT to the NA. For programmes funded by institutional donors it is useful to indicate in the RfT, which amount is covering running costs and which amount is allocated to NA/NO costs. The donor might not consider NA/NO costs eligible. In these cases the PSA has to instruct IO FIS accordingly and specify which information the RfTs should include (this information has to be registered in the com- 106 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 29 munication protocol part of the Partnership Agreement PSA/NA/GSC). What to consider at the end of the budget year if institutional funds remain unspent on NA accounts? If an NA received earmarked funds during the year (institutional funding!), possible residual funds at the end of the year (earmarked international transfers minus costs) have to be budgeted as opening balance on the facility / programme unit level for the subsequent year. These residual funds are earmarked for the specific programme and therefore cannot be allocated to other programmes. Link between project budget submitted to the donor and national annual budget especially important for perennial projects! The NA budgets for programme units/facilities funded by institutional donors have to be in accordance with agreements made with the institutional donor (e.g. framework contract budgets, which are to be finalised and forwarded to the donor every fall for the forthcoming year). Both budgets have to match or otherwise discrepancies have to be explained. NAs are requested to properly document the basis for setting the corresponding exchange rate and to submit this information together with the budgets to RO. For projects co-funded with institutional grants the following exchange rate information needs to be transmitted to RO together with the budget after kick off or annual review and planning meetings: exchange rate used from donor currency into LCY exchange rate used from LCY into transfer currency exchange rate used from transfer currency to EUR. This information will support efforts to streamline snapshot figures overview lists with the calculation of subsidies. Interfaces between IPD and Programme Planning at a glance PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 107

T 29 108 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

Matching budget codes sample T 30 CONTEXT Institutional donors often request the submission of budgets and financial reports in a specific format, which is usually directly provided by the donor. Ideally, the original project budget is first prepared in Navision and then translated into the donor specific format according to the given budget lines. If this is not possible, for one or the other reason, the donor budget codes will have to be linked subsequently with the Navision budget codes. Either way it is important to have a sheet which clearly shows how the budget lines between the Navision and the donor budget formats are matched and to follow this matching also throughout the financial reporting. T30 provides a sample to show how the matching of budget codes can be clearly presented. xx BUDGET 20xx Exchange Rates (1 =) Acc. Code Equivalent Code PSA Description Account Group 50000 Current Working Expenditures 53000 Other Current Working Expenditures xx Budget 2012 LCY 53410 Visitors / Meetings xx xx Budget 2012 Euro Donor Budget Items (examples) Childcare & parenting skills workshop = xx Euro/LCY Economic empowerment meeting = Euro/ LCY Reflection/sharing workshop = xx Euro/ LCY Good practice sharing workshop = xx Euro/ LCY Board forum/ joint board conference = xx Euro/ LCY Others/HROD (based on capacity dev. Plans) = xx Euro/ LCY Sum 53000: xx xx 56400 Travel Expenses xx xx Travel FSP Coordinator = xx Euro/ LCY Attendance staff to annual review meeting = xx Euro/ LCY Monitoring travel = xx Euro/ LCY Internal resource persons = xx Euro/ LCY Advocacy support/ LAO coaching = xx Euro/ LCY International travel = xx Euro/ LCY Sum 56000: xx xx Sum Account Group 50000: 59999 Curr. Working Exp. Account Group 60000 Personnel Expenditures 61000 Current Personnel Expenditures 61400 Administration Staff Assistant to FSP Coordinator = xx Euro/ LCY % Accountant Officer = xx Euro/ LCY 61410 Admin. Staff Salaries Sum 61400: 63000 HRD Expenditures Leadership development training = xx Euro/ LCY External trainer fortraining = xx Euro/ LCY 63100 HRD Trainings, Ext. Trainers xx xx Sum 63000: xx xx Sum Account Group 60000: 69999 Personnel Expend. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 109

T 30 Exchange Rates (1 =) Acc. Code Equivalent Code PSA Description xx Budget 2012 LCY Budget 2012 Euro Donor Budget Items (examples) Account Group 70000 Administration & Fundraising 71000 Administration 71500 Bank Charges xx xx Internal audit = xx Euro/ LCY Annual audit = xx Euro/ LCY 71620 Audit Fees xx xx 71630 Professional Fees xx xx Consultant M&E = xx Euro/ LCY 71900 Other Administrative Expenditures xx xx Sum 71000: xx xx Office supplies, telecommunication = xx Euro/ LCY Translation = xx Euro/ LCY Sum Account Group 70000: 79999 Total Administr. & FR xx xx Total RC in LCY xx Total RC in xx Note: In cases where the donor budget and reporting format is more detailed than the Navision format, it might be necessary to include information from the bank register when preparing the financial reports according to donor format. In order to avoid very cumbersome financial reporting, it is advisable to look as much as possible into one-to-one matching between (Navision and donor) budget lines, already when preparing the budget. In order to avoid any misunderstandings during continuous cash flow planning and financial reporting, it is important that the NA and RO finance colleagues are fully involved in the process of budget code matching. 110 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

AGENDA POINTS FOR KICK-OFF MEETING CHECKLIST T 31 CONTEXT This tool provides an overview of standard agenda points for kick-off meetings which are held at the beginning of project implementation. Additional points can be included according to the needs and circumstances of the concrete project. The applicant initiates and convokes the meeting that serves as a planning meeting for the project and brings together relevant stakeholders involved in project implementation. Expected outputs are: an updated logical framework, an updated annual budget, an operational plan, a monitoring framework and a workshop report. Objectives of the kick-off meeting 1. Build project team; 2. Gain common understanding of project framework and environment. 3. Review and update project documents; 4. Agree on monitoring and reporting procedures. 5. Create/strengthen common understanding of mutual roles and responsibilities in project management. Agenda points Project visits as well as meetings with external partners and stakeholders: as necessary and relevant for the project. Try to include a visit to the embassy / delegation representing the donor (alternatively, invite them to attend a 1-2 hours session during your meeting) as well as important government partners. Budget session: Review project budget (all years) and determine budget for upcoming year. Document changes and their justification. Operational plan: Determine activities for the upcoming year, and their timing (indicate in which quarter they will take place). Monitoring & evaluation framework: Review indicators, targets and risks from the logical framework for the project duration. Agree on targets for upcoming year. Agree on how to measure indicators. List means of verification, but also discuss and record how values will be measured. If this can t be done during the meeting, agree on who will take this up and by when. Determine the need for baseline studies or the review of previous baseline assessments. Prepare and discuss reporting format and schedule for both narrative and financial reporting National accountants, RO FIS staff and the project manager in charge within the applicant organisation should jointly define and match budget codes. In such a process each sub-account used in NAV-Dynamics is allocated to a certain heading in the donor financial report. Like this, SOS accounting data can directly be "translated" into the donor report. Revisit team members roles and responsibilities, based on the draft internal partnership agreement. Assess whether everyone is capable of fulfilling their roles and responsibilities, discuss the need for capacity building / training development. Official signing of internal partnership agreement (if not already done). If the partnership agreement has not yet been finalised, a separate session should be planned to discuss open issues. Notes for the organiser The kick-off meeting should ideally be covered by the project budget already; if not, then the applicant organisation should cover the meeting-costs. Ahead of the meeting, agree on who will facilitate (external or team member), who will chair and who will record discussions. The time required may differ depending on how much has been prepared and on the complexity of the project. Generally one week is recommended for the whole meeting. Include social activities outside official workshop hours so that team members can get to know each other in an informal setting. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 111

T 32 ANNUAL OPERATION PLAN TEMPLATE CONTEXT The annual operation plan can be used as a working document for team members and serves as a basis for monitoring progress. This short table provides a quick overview of what needs to be done, by whom, when, and the resources required to implement an activity. If several countries are involved in the project, they may each have their own operational plan. The annual operational plan will be renewed for each project year. Name of the responsible person(s): PD OP HR IPD N Description area / action /activity Responsible unit From To Deadline New deadline January February March April May June July 1 Carry out activities 1.1 Action i d d d a) Task d i d d b) Task d d i d c) Task d d d i 1.2 Action i d d d a) Task d i d d b) Task d d i d c) Task d d d i 1.3 Action i d d d a) Task d i d d b) Task d d i d c) Task d d d i 2 Progress reporting 2.1 Quarterly report d d d d a) Task d d d d b) Task d d d d 2.2 Semi-annual report d d d d a) Task d d d d b) Task d d d d 2.3 Annual report d d d d a) Task d d d d b) Task d d d d 3 Hold an annual review 3.1 Action d d d d a) Task d d d d b) Task d d d d 4 Exit project 4.1 Action d d d d a) Task d d d d b) Task d d d d 112 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 32 August September October November December Resources: travel (T); Meetings (M); Human Resources (HR); Investments (I); Trainings (Tr) T M HR I Tr Total Budget ($) Status (Planned; In progress; Delayed; Done) Done Change history PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 113

T 33 MONITORING FRAMEWORK TOOL COMPILATION CONTEXT The monitoring framework is developed during the implementation phase at the kick-off meeting (T31). A monitoring framework is necessary for assessing whether project results are achieved. The Monitoring Framework tool compilation contains: an explanation of what monitoring is, guidelines on how to develop a monitoring framework, a checklist with quality assessment criteria to be followed during implementation and a monitoring matrix template. For the monitoring progress report, a separate tool (T32) is available. What is monitoring and why do we need it? Monitoring is a regular review to keep track of how a project is progressing in terms of use of recourses, implementation, delivery of results and the management of risks. It implies the systematic and continual collection, analysis and use of management information to support effective decision-making. Its use is usually thought to be highest at operational management decision level and to a lesser extent at policy making and strategic planning level. Monitoring often focuses on inputs, activities and outputs i.e. tangible goods and services delivered ( Implementation monitoring ). Monitoring assesses whether the intended results of the project are being achieved, which corrective actions may be needed to ensure delivery of the intended results, and whether initiatives are making positive contributions towards human development. Questions that monitoring intends to answer: Are the pre-identified outputs produced as planned and are they efficient? What are the issues, risks and challenges that we face or foresee that need to be taken into account to ensure the achievement of results? What decisions need to be made concerning changes to the already planned work in subsequent stages? Will the planned and delivered outputs continue to be relevant for the achievement of the envisioned outcomes? Do the envisaged outcomes remain relevant and effective for achieving the overall national priorities, goals and impacts? What are we learning? How to develop a monitoring framework? A clear framework, agreed among IMP, APP, GSC and optionally with key stakeholders during the kick-off meeting, is essential in order to carry out monitoring systematically. This framework serves as a plan for monitoring and should clarify: What is to be monitored The activities needed to undertake monitoring Who is responsible for monitoring activities When monitoring activities are planned (timing) How monitoring is carried out (methods) What resources are required and where they are committed from In addition, relevant risks and assumptions in carrying out planned monitoring activities should be seriously considered, anticipated and included in the monitoring framework. In general, the Monitoring framework has two main components: 1. Narrative component The narrative component describes how the partners will undertake monitoring and the accountabilities assigned to different individuals and units. In addition the narrative should also reflect: a. Plans that may be in place to strengthen monitoring capacities b. Existing monitoring capacities and an estimate of the human, financial and material resource requirements for its implementation 114 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 33 2. Planning matrix for monitoring This planning matrix consolidates the information required for monitoring for easy reference. Below are the main steps needed for developing a monitoring framework: 1. Developing a monitoring framework: Who will use the information collected? Who will participate in project monitoring? What are the objectives of the project? What indicators will measure success? What methods will be used to gather information? When will monitoring take place? How will the monitoring system be managed? What are the reporting timelines and requirements? 2. Gathering the information: Establish what sort of information you want Select and use appropriate methods 3. Analysing the information: Establish if there are any significant changes Identify the reasons for changes Draw out recommendations 4. Acting on the analysis: Learning Effective decision- making Accountability Useful rescources: UNDP monitoring and evaluation handbook: http://www.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/ Results oriented monitoring, Europeaid http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/ensure-aideffectiveness/monitoring-results_en.htm M&E Guide, UNICEF https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/ Content/QM/SOSDocuments/20091028-MandEguide-UNICEF.pdf Quality assessment criteria during implementation EFFECTIVE & WELL MANAGED The project is delivering the planned outputs and is well managed 1 The project remains relevant and feasible 1.1 The project remains consistent with and supportive of current policy and programme priorities d 1.2 The project strategy and objectives remain relevant to the needs of beneficiaries (target group and ultimate beneficiaries), including women, men and vulnerable groups such as the disabled people d 2 Project objectives are achieved 2.1 Results are being delivered as planned, are of good quality and the project s target group find them relevant to their needs 2.2 The results delivered are contributing effectively to the achievement of the project purpose d d 2.3 The project is likely to contribute to the overall objective, and there is evidence that the project s ultimate beneficiaries will indeed benefit from the project (including women, men and particular vulnerable groups such as the disabled people) d PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 115

T 33 EFFECTIVE & WELL MANAGED The project is delivering the planned outputs and is being well managed 3 The project is well managed by those directly responsible for implementation 3.1 Activities are implemented on time d 3.2 Relevant information on project achievements/results is collected and used, and is accessible to stakeholders in an appropriate format and language 3.3 Operational plans and budgets are reviewed and updated on a regular basis (including risk management plans), and lessons learned from experiences on the ground are reflected 3.4 Transparency and accountability systems (including financial management systems and independent audit) are adequate and effective in identifying/deterring corrupt practices d d d 4 Sustainability issues are clearly addressed 4.1 Financial sustainability issues are addressed (e.g. affordability, budget commitment, cost-recovery mechanisms, private sector management, etc.) d 4.2 The technology used/promoted by the project is appropriate and can be maintained d 4.3 Issues of environmental and social sustainability are appropriately assessed and managed d 4.4 Institutional strengthening and capacity building activities (e.g. policy and systems development, training of trainers) are effectively carried out, and skills are transferred 4.5 There is a plan for the phase out of any external assistance/ta, and the handover of any management responsibilities they may have d d 5 Good practice principles of project cycle management are applied by project managers 5.1 Terms of Reference for SOS funded studies/work are clear and comprehensive, and understood by concerned staff d 5.2 The project is appropriately assessed through the project management cycle, using agreed/relevant Quality Assessment processes and criteria d 5.3 The quality of a key project is assessed and meets established quality standards d 5.4 Use of the Logical Framework Approach and its associated tools are appropriately applied through the project cycle to support analysis and decision making 5.5 Contracts are effectively managed, including the production of high quality contract documents, briefing of contractors, review of reports and timely payment of certified invoices d d Monitoring matrix What do you want to know? Where to find info? How? When? Who does what? Remarks INTERVENTION LOGIC Monitoring Question Indicator/s Method for collecting data Source/s of verification Type of reporting Timing and Frequency Collecting /processing Reporting Receiving Overall objective/s IMPACT Project purpose OUTCOME Results OUTPUT Activities Inputs/ Resources Assumptions (context) 116 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 34 PROGRESS REPORT TEMPLATE CONTEXT Project monitoring and accountability are the main objectives of progress reports. The typical progress report gives a summary of the project goal, states the progress made towards that goal during the reporting period, discusses significant costs and scheduling issues and lists future actions towards goal attainment. Generally, progress reports are prepared at specific intervals, during the fiscal year. The intervals are often specified in the initial project proposal. Before writing this report, gather information on: Any data collection on indicators Self-evaluations Any relevant reviews/ evaluations Multi-year and/ or annual plans, including the logframe. Note: This is a non-exhaustive list 3. Reporting on implementation a) Main activities and outputs (applies to Q+S reporting) Describe briefly the most important activities implemented in the project and the outputs generated during the last months. Give comments when changes have occurred. Result 1 Planned activities Activities carried out and outputs Comments on changes (if applicable) NB: According to the reporting requirements as specified in the original project proposal and agreed in the context, reports may be Quarterly (Q), Semi-annual (S) and/or Annual (A). This tool therefore specifies (using the letters Q, S and/or A) when each reporting chapter applies to one or more of the above mentioned reporting timeframes. Result 2 Planned activities Result 3 Activities carried out and outputs Comments on changes (if applicable) 1. Project brief (applies to Q+S+A reporting) Planned activities Activities carried out and outputs Comments on changes (if applicable) Title: Specific objective: Country: Location: Project: Project duration (in months): Date: Start and end date of the project: Report compiled by: Reporting period: Name of Project Manager: b) Results and objective (applies to B+S reporting) Update the indicator matrix and provide a brief narrative explanation. 2. Developments and/or changes related to the implementation of the project (applies to Q+S+A reporting) What changes have you encountered in relation to, context, target groups, partners, methods? PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 117

T 34 Indicators for Baseline Target Progress Means of verification First 6 Second 6 (data source) months months Specific Objective Result 1 Result 2 Result 3 Remarks 4. Challenges experienced in the past period, any unexpected events/results. 1 (applies to Q+S+A reporting) Describe the challenges faced and any implications they (may) have had for the programme. Indicate if and/or how these challenges have been and/or will be resolved. 5. Briefly describe planned adaptations for the next period and why they are needed. (applies to Q+S+A reporting) 6. Project management (applies to Q+S+A reporting) State if there was staff turn-over, new recruitment or a vacancy announcement within the reporting period. Describe whether there are challenges in project management, and how they will be resolved. 7. Success stories (applies to A reporting) Have there been any successes and good practices during the year? Describe. Enclosures Beneficiary statistics for the reporting period 2 (applies to Q+S+A reporting) (Clearly show the number of beneficiaries within the period under review in the format below) N of families N of children N of child participants Total n of primary caregivers Self-reliant families who have exited Total Total N of families m f m f m f Budget overview for the reporting period (applies to Q+S+A reporting) Original project budget Main budget item 1 Main budget item 2 Main budget item 3 Expenditures to date Forecast Budget deviation N of children Explanation 8. Lessons learned (applies to A reporting) What lessons did you learn from the implementation of the project? 9. Photos (applies to S+A reporting) Add photos. Name the pictures according to the activity 1 Please consider not only internal challenges but external challenges such as political instability, economic situation and social issues 2 Please check with Administrative Guidelines for FSPs (https://intranet. sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/content/programmeinterventions/sup- portfamilies/familiesoforigin/sosdocuments/110101-gscguideline- FSPAdministration-V01-6.doc) 118 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

START-UP ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST T 35 CONTEXT This tool provides an overview of activities that are required in the start-up period of project implementation. This chapter is relevant for the calculation of the budget during the formulation phase and again, once the donor has approved the project and inception starts. In the first year of a project, everything is put in place for implementation: finding the right staff; equipping them; putting in place financial and monitoring structures and if applicable start construction. Furthermore, NA staff, beneficiaries and other stakeholders need to be informed about the project, to ensure awareness and support of the project. Recruitment: The project budget should foresee budget lines for required staff posts for a project. Based on this, the IMP, assisted by the RO, initiates recruitment, taking into accountant the job profile of "Project Coordinator/Manager" as described in T26. If significant time from other staff members is required, their workload should also be adjusted accordingly. The National Director may choose to finance part of their salary from the project budget. If so, this has to be indicated accordingly. Note: the project budget should not provide top-ups for staff, as this distorts the IMP salary structure, and may create the impression of Institutional Funding projects as cash cows. Capacity building: Existing and new staff may require additional skills to effectively implement the project. The IMP assesses this need and may seek support from other NAs/ RO to develop staff capacity. This can be done through exchange visits, on-the-job training, or the seconding of (NA or RO) staff to the IMP. Capacity development activities via external stakeholders can also be considered. (Note: related costs should be taken into account when preparing the project budget). Procurement: Before starting activities, office space may need to be arranged and furnished, and equipment purchased (such as computers, cars, etc.). Donor and/or SOS CV procurement guidelines should be applied. Financial structure: For the sake of transparency, it is sometimes necessary to open a separate bank account for project budgets. Signatories need to be assigned, and the project accountant briefed on how to book expenditures. In some cases a calculation method for exchange rates for financial reporting needs to be agreed with the donor (especially in high-inflation countries). Construction: Construction and other major capital investments are treated separately in the SOS CV chart of accounts. Fixed SOS CV procedures govern construction projects which are also adhered to for Institutional Funding projects. The APP can request the CO/IO to provide more detailed (narrative and budget) information for donor purposes. Baseline surveys: In order to be able to properly measure the indicators (as laid down in the monitoring framework), it may be necessary to carry out baseline studies (see Tool 10) or update research done during the identification and formulation phase. This needs to be done before the start of programme activities. Liaising with beneficiaries and other stakeholders: Good relationships with those involved in the project will greatly help its smooth implementation. Relationship building should start as early as possible; kick-off meetings might be a good way to start. Such meetings serve to inform stakeholders of the start of the project and/or (re) affirm their support. Note that kick-off meetings are only the start; relationship building is an on-going process. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 119

T 36 PLANNING AND REVIEW MEETING CHECKLIST CONTEXT Planning and review meetings allow the project team to annually assess the status of activities, level of achievements, budget consumption and to analyse plan against actual deviations. Ideally the meeting takes place before budgets for the following year are submitted and also allows the contract holder (APP) to negotiate for any required budget reallocations with the funding agency. Plans for the next operational year can only be considered valid once the funding agency has endorsed reports and plans. Preparation of the meeting: The contract holder (APP) is responsible for initiating and convening the meeting with operational support of the respective GSCsupport unit (Regional Office, or Continental Office for projects beyond regional scope). Best time for the review is before budgets for the following year are submitted to the RO but late enough in the year to be able to make a realistic estimation of the total expenditure until end of the current year. Usually quarter 3 is the ideal time. All stakeholders shall be informed in a timely manner via the official invitation letter, which also indicates any necessary preparation work. Identify a suitable person to chair the meeting! Think about venue and other practicalities to make your meeting a success! (One language possible or will an interpreter be needed? etc.) Prepare agenda and circulate for feedback with meeting participants. Costs for meeting participation are ideally covered by the project budget as part of project monitoring expenses. Meeting Inputs: Agenda Logframe and activity schedule Budget (donor-approved budget as well as SOS-internal programme budget files) Latest accounting data on programme level (for plan-actual comparison) Partnership Agreement/Communication Protocol Full application document Objectives of the meeting: Compare plans (according to Logframe) against actual achievements of the project. Discuss and identify reasons for plan/actual deviations. Identify problems/bottlenecks in communication as well as project management and process coordination matters and update related documents such as the communication protocol if necessary. Plan for upcoming operational period (usually one year) based on current status quo; Share lessons learned and best practice examples. Recommended Participants: Contract holder (APP): project manager and, if required, the financial officer / accountant; Implementing partner (IMP): programme coordinator and accountant; GSC support units: RO IPD (PD, FIS to be considered) depending on project scope and context CO IPD if project goes beyond regional scope IO IPD if project goes beyond continental scope; Any external project partners; Any internal or external consultants with specific expertise related to the project context; External guests such as donor representatives. 120 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

EXIT STRATEGIES THINKING AID T 37 CONTEXT When SOS CV and/or donor involvement comes to an end, benefits to the target population generated during the life-cycle of the project should continue. Designed as a thinking aid, this tool provides some reflections on exit strategies for consideration and integration into the project s design. The term sustainability is closely related to the topic at stake - a methodology on how to establish sustainability in family strengthening programmes is available at: intranet.sos-kd.org; some paragraphs have been included here 1. Definition Exiting projects refers to the termination of support (funds, material goods, human resources, technical assistance etc.) to a programme or project. An exit strategy is a plan for withdrawal covering actions to be taken by the main partners and other stakeholders, when the support from a donor or group of donors is gradually terminated. An exit strategy, in the broader sense is a strategy for designing, implementing, and ending external support in a manner consistent with the objective of producing sustainable development outcomes. It is a process, not an event, and as such integral to the entire project design. 2. What are the benefits of exiting? A well organised and incited exit strategy that has involved all the key actors brings the following benefits to the programme: Ensures continuity of the benefits of the programme to the target group long after donor funding has terminated. Develops the capacities of all actors involved. Ensures the empowerment of beneficiaries. Enhances donor confidence in both implementing and applicant organisations and with it the chances for more donor funding for similar interventions. 3. How to exit? The literature distinguishes various forms of exiting projects which can be adopted as appropriate and applicable. They will usually not be adopted on their own but rather as a combination of two, for instance starting with phasing down while at the same time preparing for phasing over (compare point 5 below): Phase down: A strategy where outside support is gradually reduced while the benefiting agency s/community s contribution is gradually scaled up. This concept can be applied on an institutional as well as community and even individual beneficiary (family) level. Phase over is applied where the responsibilities for activities are transferred to another organisation. Phase out is the withdrawal of inputs after the completion of the project or after the project has reached its objectives without making any provision or need for another organisation to take over. Exactly what will or should happen during the exit process depends to a large extent on how the exit issue was managed in the earlier stages of the cooperation. It also depends on the nature of the intervention at stake (e.g. long-term family based care versus strengthening families of origin). In some cases, the supported intervention is a time- PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 121

T 37 bound effort intended to set a self-sustaining process in motion (e.g. family strengthening). In other cases, more common perhaps, the impact of the intervention (those which are not clearly time-bound) will not be sustained unless there is an organisation in place that continues to deliver services and outputs even after donor and/or SOS CV support ends. In an exit perspective this is clearly an important distinction, as, for the latter one, measures have to be put in place to ensure long term viability of the programs in the absence of the external support. 4. In a nutshell Useful considerations when designing the project and identifying the funding source(s). A. General d There should be shared expectations regarding the objectives to be achieved through the partnership including a clear understanding of what should be sustained after the withdrawal of the donor. d Develop an exit strategy concept based on participation and consultation. As part of overall programming considerations, take a broader interdisciplinary approach. Look at it from various angles including that of funding. d Have an idea about how much time (including how much funds) is involved in any of the phasing down / out / over strategies suggested above d An explicit time frame providing the actors with a clear sense of when the relationship or the current phase of the relationship will come to an end. The support that a donor gives to a project is usually divided into phases, each phase lasting for three to five years, depending on the rules for funding set by the donor. d A mutually agreed division of labour that identifies the organisations, groups and individuals who are or will be responsible for providing required resources and carrying activities forward to exit point and beyond. d Develop and implement a communication strategy for your exit strategy. d A system for monitoring and evaluation, including mechanisms for joint periodical review of progress in relation to verifiable performance indicators should be in place. B. Programmatic perspective d Discontinuity of service delivery after a certain period appropriate to generate self-reliance/ sustainable outcomes? d Do we take a beneficiary or community exit perspective? d Depending on the above, how do we ensure continuity of the benefits and positive outcomes project activities have generated? d Shall an exit strategy include a transition phase in which monitoring and evaluation (incl ex-post evaluation) continues for reciprocal learning (community & SOS CV), continued knowledge sharing and supervision? Shall also be an alert system be put in place that would allow responding to potential risks? d With regard to defining exit strategies, be explicit as to which intervention types and practices they refer to (e.g. Children s Village, family strengthening, educational support), as this will differ substantially from one to the other. C - Financial perspective d Levels and structures of funding should be determined in view of financial sustainability d When international funding ceases, are there opportunities for the NA to continue to raise funds locally (private and/or public) to sustain the project financially? d At the time of withdrawing its direct financial support from the community could NA consider transfer of know-how on fundraising and partnership-building? d Are there any potential partners (other organisations from within or outside the community) who would be able to take over responsibility of service delivery / project leadership? d When proposing a project to institutional donors it is necessary to include a scenario describing how the project will be handled after the end of the donor funding period. Excerpt from Chapter 4.5: Our Strategy Towards Sustainability = Phasing Over taken from WORKING TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY in Family Strengthening - Guidance for Programmes in Africa & Middle East 1 1 https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/content/programmeinterventions/supportfamilies/familiesoforigin/afme/pages/workingtowardssustainability.aspx 122 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 37 Our programme Sustainability Strategy describes how the SOS Children s Villages organisation intends to support the development of sustainable community-based responses, so that support for the children of our target group continues after we withdraw from direct day-to-day involvement within the community. From the perspective of the SOS Children s Villages organisation, this can be more narrowly defined as an Exit Strategy. [ ] Our strategy is phasing over of programme responses to other stakeholders within the community, passing through the following stages in programme development: In this process, our role is primarily that of facilitation and capacity-building. While our role stays the same over time, the specific nature of our involvement in the community changes. This is illustrated in the below diagram:[ ] Time frame for sustainability In each community, a clear time frame needs to be agreed with relevant stakeholders, for the development of sustainable community-based responses. Ideally, this happens during programme design, and may be further elaborated in the development of CBO development & empowerment plans with community-based partners [ ], as well as in any broader community development plans. Based on this, the time frame for phasing over and the withdrawal of SOS Children s Villages from direct day-to-day involvement in the organisation of programme responses within the community is made clear to all relevant stakeholders. Some considerations when setting the time frame include: Sustainability strategy is to be built into the programme design from the beginning and communicated to the community. This promotes the development of programme responses that can be sustained in the long-term. Where donor funding is limited to a specific time period, this needs to be clearly communicated to all relevant stakeholders, and plans made accordingly. The setting of a clear goal and objectives, together with indicators of desired outcomes (and impact), are essential and provide the basis for the programme s Monitoring & Evaluation framework. Programmes may also set further benchmarks towards sustainability, for the effective monitoring and evaluation of the development and implementation of programme responses. Such benchmarks should be defined as measurable indicators of agreed steps towards the development of sustainable social support systems and may be linked to programme components to be phased over. It should be noted that we do not have to wait until community-based responses are perfect, before phasing over and withdrawing from direct day-to-day involvement in the community. Rather we should be satisfied when these responses are good enough visà-vis the desired outcomes. [ ] PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 123

T 38 FINAL PROJECT REPORT TEMPLATE CONTEXT The Final Report is designed to provide the donor with information required to close out a grant after completion of project activities. The final report must describe the project activities, background, planned objectives, activities, actual accomplishments and lessons learned. Therefore, this template is divided into 4 main sections: 1) description; 2) assessment of implementation of project activities; 3) partners and other cooperation; 4) visibility and enclosures. Before commencing with drafting this report, it is advisable to gather information from the following sources: 1. Relevant plans including the logframe 2. Data collection on indicators 3. Quarterly, semi-annual and annual reports 4. Self-evaluations 5. Any relevant reviews 6. External/internal evaluations 1. Description 1.1. Location: 1.2. Programme: 1.3. Denomination of the project: 1.4. Start date and end date of the project: 1.5. Target country(ies) or region(s): 1.6. Final beneficiaries &/or target groups (if different including numbers of women and men): 2. Assessment of implementation of Project activities 2.1. Executive summary of the Project Please give a global overview of the Project's implementation for the whole duration of the project 2.2. Planned Activities that took place and outputs Please list all the activities in line with the original plan of the contract since the last interim report if any or during the reporting period Activity 1: Title of the activity: Workshop at location W with X participants for Y days on Z dates Topics/activities covered <please elaborate>: Reason for modification of the planned activity (if applicable): Outputs of this activity <please quantify these outputs, where possible; refer to the various assumptions of the Logframe>: 2.3. Planned activities that have partially or not taken place Please outline any activity and/or publications foreseen in the contract, that have not taken place, explaining the reasons for this. 2.4. Unplanned activities which took place 2.5. What is your assessment of the results of the project? Use the updated indicator matrix Target Indicators : Specific Objective Result 1 Result 2 Result 3 Baseline data Progress indicator Means of verification (data source) Remarks 2.6. Describe if the project will continue after the support from the donor has ended. Are there any follow up activities envisaged? What will ensure the sustainability of the project? 2.7. Explain how the project has mainstreamed cross-cutting issues such as promotion of human rights and gender equality, environmental sustainability and combating HIV/ AIDS (if there is a strong prevalence in the target country/region). 1 124 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 38 2.8. How and by whom have the activities been monitored / evaluated? Please summarise the results of the feedback received, including from the beneficiaries. 2.9. What has your organisation/partner learned from the project and how has this learning been utilised and disseminated? 3. Partners and other Cooperation 3.1. How do you assess the relationship between the formal partners of this Project (i.e. those partners which have signed a partnership statement)? Please provide specific information for each partner organisation. 3.2. Is the partnership to continue? If so, how? If not, why? 3.3. How would you assess the relationship between your organisation and state authorities in the project countries? How has this relationship affected the project? 3.4. Where applicable, describe your relationship with any other organisations involved in implementing the project. 3.5. Where applicable, outline any links and synergies you have developed with other projects. 4. Visibility How is the visibility of the donor contribution being ensured in the project? Number of catchment s of communities Number of Households Number child beneficiaries Number of Adult beneficiaries m f m f Number of households exited Number of new households enrolled 5. Enclosures 5.1. Narrative example / story on the change experienced for SOS beneficiaries (if possible outcome level). 5.2. Beneficiary statistics for the entire project (please refer to Administrative Guidelines for FSPs : https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/content/). 5.3. Financial audit reports, including a brief financial narrative explaining significant changes in expenditure compared to the budget (if any), including the reasons for these changes. Name of the contact person for the Project: Signature: Location: Date report due: Date report sent: 3.6. If your organisation has received previous grants in view of strengthening the same target group, how far has this project been able to build upon/complement the previous one(s)? (List all previous relevant grants). 3.7. How do you evaluate cooperation with the donor in the field? 1 For further information, refer to SOS Children's Villages: Inclusion Policy (https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/content/ Crosscutting/Inclusion/Pages/default.aspx) HIV/Aids Policy (https://intranet.sos-kd.org/areasofwork/pd/content/ Crosscutting/HIVAids/Pages/default.aspx) PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 125

T 39 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY GUIDELINES CONTEXT This tool provides definitions and explanations concerning the evaluation phase. In addition, tool 39a provides ToR for the launch of an evaluation study which will have to be adjusted in accordance with the specificities of the project and the nature of the contract. Tool 39b offers a management response and action plan template to guide discussion and an adequate response by the responsible management representatives once the evaluation study has been finalised and issued. What is evaluation and why do we need it? Evaluation is a time-bound exercise that systematically and objectively attempts to assess the relevance and performance of either ongoing or completed programmes. Evaluation is undertaken selectively to answer specific questions in order to guide decision makers and/or programme managers and to provide information on whether underlying theories and assumptions used in the programme development were valid, what worked and what did not work, and why. Evaluation commonly aims to determine the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of a programme. Relevance describes how well a project addresses a real problem of the target groups and how well it matches SOS CV s strategic objectives. Efficiency stands for how well the inputs are transformed into output and outcomes. The underlying question is Have we done things right? Effectiveness measures the degree to which the project s outputs have generated benefits and contributed to the project purpose. The underlying question is Have we done the right things? Impact describes how and to which degree the project has contributed to the solution of the problem and to the achievement of the overall objective. This is the long-term result of a programme or project that lead to changes in the lives of children, young adults and their families, as perceived by them and their partners at the time of the evaluation. Changes can be positive or negative, intentional or unintentional. In the logframe terminology these perceived changes in the lives of the people may correspond either to the purpose level or to the goal level of a programme intervention. Sustainability introduces a time dimension into the monitoring. It refers to the processes that allow for the continuation of effect and activities relating to programmes. It measures for instance how well a community is meeting the needs and expectations of its present and future members. Evaluations allow assessing how the project has achieved the project purpose and overall objectives. It scrutinises the objectives and strategies chosen for a project. An evaluation should provide information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process. Evaluation is often distinguished from monitoring in terms of its purpose, its empirical base, its depth of analysis and its duration and frequency. Evaluation usually feeds more into programming and strategic planning (rather than operational management decision making processes), involves in-depth data collection and analysis, and is consequently 126 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 39 undertaken only a few times during the project life cycle (such as at, or sometime after, the completion of a project or programme) rather than periodically. The scope and coverage of evaluation issues to be addressed are set out in the evaluation s Terms of Reference (ToR). The ToR should cover: Background and rationale for the evaluation. The objectives of the evaluation. The scope of the evaluation including assessing the activity s relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability and identifying and documenting lessons learnt. The evaluation method, including desk and field reviews to be undertaken, briefings and debriefings, reporting and peer review processes. Outputs to be produced by the evaluation team, such as method and work plan, Aide Memoire, draft evaluation reports and final evaluation report and debriefing. The duration and phasing from preparation of the TOR to the publication and distribution of the evaluation report. The specifications of the evaluation team, including expertise, responsibilities and conditions (such as independence from the design and implementation of the project). The available budget. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 127

T 39 a TοR FOR EVALUATION CONTEXT These Terms of Reference provide a standard format for setting the frame for project evaluation. The most important part of the ToR concerns the category of Desired Results and the format of the final report. Special attention should be paid to these two areas when terms for reference are drafted and attention to detail is required. TERMS OF REFERENCE For the evaluation of Contract n : 1. Introduction These Terms of Reference (ToR) serve as a request for proposals from individual consultants who are interested in conducting an impact evaluation of. Details regarding contents of proposals and submission procedures are explained herein. SOS Children's Villages is a nongovernmental social development organisation that has been active in the field of children's rights and committed to children's needs and concerns since. [Briefly describe your NA profile.] a) Context of the project (political, natural, etc): [insert a paragraph which gives a brief background of the project location, and the political, cultural, social, economic information etc.] b) Project Overview: [insert a paragraph which highlights the main activities of the project and the overall objective it is trying to achieve. This project overview provides the basis of the evaluation.] c) Timing of the evaluation The evaluation will take place between [insert dates]. Selected timings are set to correspond with the end of the operation which is [insert date]. 2. Objectives of the evaluation 2.1. Overall objective [The overall objective of this evaluation is to determine the impact of the programme.] 2.2. Specific objectives 2.2.1 To assess the impact and effectiveness of the activities implemented in [insert project name]. 2.2.2 To evaluate the efficiency of the programme in relation to beneficiaries, cost and timeframe of the programme. 2.2.3 To document the current figures of the Objectively Verifiable Indicators as found in the logframe. 2.2.4 To make recommendations for improved future interventions. 2.3. Desired results The desired results of the evaluation are: To document the impact of the programme with special emphasis on the impact the programme had on women and children. To provide commentary on the overall programme design, the intervention logic and an analysis of the strategy and methodology used in [insert project name]. To critically examine the logframe and verifiable indicators found in the original proposal and provide post-programme figures along with a narrative explaining the reasons for under/over performance achievement. To draw conclusions, make recommendations and state lessons learnt for future strategy and improvements in implementation of the programme. To provide commentary on the current political, social and cultural factors impacting 128 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 39 a the implementation of the programme. To document the communities attitude towards the programme. 3. Work plan The evaluation will be carried out in 3 stages: Stage 1: Undertake a 3-day desk study analysing all documents regarding the operation, context, previous operations, and partners involved in the implementation of the programme. These documents will be presented to the consultant who will then use the information to plan for the field study. At this stage, preparations for the field evaluation exercise will be finalised: key informants will be identified, resources will be mobilised and a final version of terms of reference and timetable for the field visit will be confirmed. Stage 2: At this stage, the consultant will hold preliminary discussions and interviews with key informants from SOS CV, national office staff and key programme implementers. The field work will consist of 3 workshops to be held at field level with key SOS personnel, beneficiaries and partners and should encourage free and frank exchange of views about the implementation and effectiveness of the intervention. Following the evaluation, a one-day workshop should be convened to discuss observations and findings of the evaluation with all the key informants. During this time, key statistics will also be gathered from the adequate sources so as to provide figures for the Objectively Verifiable Indicators found in the logframe. Stage 3: This is the debriefing stage and submission of findings including recommendations and conclusions. The first draft report(s) should be submitted by electronic transmission in accordance with the report format given below to SOS CV no later than 7 (seven) calendar days after the consultant's return from the field. The final draft will be submitted to SOS CV no later than 14 (fourteen) calendar days after the return of the consultants from the field and should incorporate the comments made by SOS CV based on the first draft of the report. 4. Report 4.1 The evaluation will result in the drawing up of [insert project name] evaluation report written in a straightforward manner, in English, of a maximum length of 18 pages including the Executive Summary, which should appear at the beginning of the report. 4.2 The report format appearing below must be strictly adhered to: Cover page Title of the evaluation report: Country, Programme Name Date of the evaluation Name of the consultant Table of contents Executive Summary: A tightly drafted, succinct and freestanding Executive Summary is an essential component. It should be short, no more than two pages. It should focus on the key purpose or issues of the evaluation, outline the main points of the analysis, and clearly indicate the main conclusions, lessons learned and specific recommendations. Cross-references should be made to the corresponding page or paragraph numbers in the main text. The structure of the Executive Summary must be as follows: Evaluated action Date of the evaluation Consultant s name Purpose & methodology Main conclusions: These conclusions should refer to the main evaluation criteria and cross-cutting issues dealt with by the consultant and set out under the purpose of evaluation of the terms of reference. Recommendations Lessons learned PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 129

T 39 a Main body of the report: The main body of the report shall refer to the points listed under desired results. In-depth technical analysis of each intervention will be provided as an annex to the main report. It shall elaborate, although not necessarily in the same order or following the same structure, the elements included in the Executive Summary. It will include references to the methodology used for the evaluation and the context of the project. In particular, for each key conclusion there should be a corresponding recommendation. Recommendations should be as realistic, operational and pragmatic as possible; that is, they should take careful account of the circumstances currently prevailing in the context of the project, and of the resources available for implementation, both locally and internationally (16 pages maximum). Annexes Terms of Reference List of persons interviewed and sites visited Map of the areas covered by the operations financed under the project Abbreviations. 4.3 All confidential information shall be presented in a separate annex. 4.4. An electronic copy of each report (CD-ROM or USB key having the report in Word format) including all annexes must be submitted together with the final reports' hard copies. 5. Required skills for the consultants 5.1. Evaluation will be done by a team of [insert number] experts with experience [insert the sector-specific technical expertise required e.g. experts in food security, community development etc]. Team Leader and will have the added responsibility of the overall co-ordination of the mission, of the elaboration of the Executive summary report and of the final coherence of the report, both in terms of content and presentation. 5.3. The criteria that will be used for selection are as follows: 5.3.1 Method: The proposed method for evaluating the impact of the programme is suitable. 5.3.2 Timetable/work plan: The timetable/work plan are realistic and meet the needs of the programme 5.3.3 Cost: The cost of the proposal given the availability of data, analysis, method, and other aspects of the proposal are reasonable and feasible. 5.3.4 Experience: The level of training and experience of the consultants in undertaking impact evaluations and recommendations from organisations for which the consultant(s) have worked previously. 5.4. Proposals should include details on data use, indicators of impact, method, strategy for institutional analysis, work plan, costs, and CV of the consultant(s). 6. Timetable The evaluation will be conducted within one month and a final report prepared over a period of 2 weeks after the evaluation. The report should be submitted later until [insert date]. 7. Signatures Responsible SOS Director, place, date Consultant, place, date, 5.2. The members of the team will work in close co-ordination. One of them will be designated 130 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE & ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE T 39 b CONTEXT This template provides a structure and elements for the preparation of a Management Response and Action Plan to an internal or external evaluation study and report. The management response framework enables managers to respond to recommendations and findings put forward during the evaluation. The action plan should guide the planning of relevant actions in response to the accepted findings and recommendations 1. Core information a) Title of Evaluation Report: b) Evaluation year: c) Conducted by: d) Commissioned by: 2. Brief summary of evaluation process (ref TOR) e) Background f) Purpose (objectives) of evaluation g) Methodology 3. Assessments of evaluation process i) Assessment of evaluation planning (TOR, timing, cost ) j) Assessment of evaluation implementation and methods used k) Other assessments related to evaluation process and study 4. Management response l) Management response to recommendations (ref annex 1) Annex 1. Table of Management response Recommendations Management response: (Accept/ Partially accept / Reject) Annex 2. Format for action plan Recommendation 1: [ ] Expected result Actions planned Annex 3. Format for reporting Recommendation 1: [ ] Expected result Actions planned If rejected, give reason Responsible Deadline Budget Responsible Deadline Budget 5. Action and Reporting plan m) Action plan (ref annex 2) n) Plan for reporting (ref annex 3) 6. Enclosures Annex 1. Management response table Annex 2. Format for action plan Annex 3. Format for reporting PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 131

T 40 TοR FOR ANNUAL PROJECT AUDIT CONTEXT The main objective of a financial audit is to provide assurance on the legality and accuracy of project income and expenditures.the final project audit is coordinated by FIS. The organisational standard of the final audit should follow the terms of reference found below unless otherwise mentioned. The audit company must be changed at least after 3 to 4 years. TERMS OF REFERENCE For the annual audit of Contract n : 1. Introduction These Terms of Reference (ToR) serve as a request for proposals from audit companies which are interested in conducting an annual audit of. Details regarding contents of proposals and submission procedures are explained herein. SOS Children's Villages is a nongovernmental social development organisation that has been active in the field of children's rights and committed to children's needs and concerns since. <Briefly describe your NA profile.> <Mention any agreements which have been signed between APP and IMP and between APP and the donor> a) List of project(s) to be audited <Insert the name(s) and the locations of the programme interventions to be audited> b) Timing of the annual audit The annual audit will take place between <date> and <date>. Selected timings are set to correspond with the end of the operation which is <date>. 1 NB: A contract based on the TOR has to be signed with the external audit company. All required documents have to be prepared in time by the NO / Finance Departments 2. Required qualification & expertise by the auditor The audit company must be certified and registered in the country of operation or internationally. The expert auditor must not have been involved in the financial management nor otherwise in the project. The expert auditor must not personally be connected in any way with the audited organisation 3. Objectives of the audit The audit needs to check that the expenses are recorded in the NGO s accounts and are backed by originals of supporting evidence. The audit needs to verify sound financial management and accuracy of book-keeping on the basis of original project vouchers. The audit needs to show the yearly budget consumption programme (in %). The audit needs to verify compliance of expenses with budget items and the plausibility of the expenditures. The audit needs to verify that there is no duplicate financing by external funding bodies; The audit needs to check if financial transfers (bank, cash) are understandable and in line with reported expenditures. The audit needs to verify that the financial statements provide a true picture of the project s finances. The audit needs to confirm earmarked funds received by <SOS APP>, the currency exchange (by bank statements) funds remaining and exchange rate gains or losses. 132 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 40 4. Programme activities to be audited The annual audit should be conducted for the year <yyyy> of the following programme intervention: Programme Intervention 1: <Indicate the intervention> Programme Intervention 2: Programme Intervention 3:. With the programme objective to <please fill in>. 5. Workplan A contract between the implementing organisation and the external audit company has to be signed, based on the TOR provided. The audit shall be carried out in the implementing partners offices (Finance Department) and comprises the investigation of (a) bank statements, (b) accounts and (c) invoices. The audit must be carried out between <date> and <date> with the support of the implementing organisation who provides proper project accounts & documentation in a timely manner. The draft audit shall be submitted by e-mail to <SOS APP (e-mail address)> for feedback latest until <date>. The final audit report (3 copies) has to be submitted latest until <date> via e-mail and a courier service (registered mail) to: <Indicate address of SOS APP> 6. Reporting requirements The audit report shall be written in English. The report has to include a) a general statement/ management letter and b) the finance audit. It has to include information on: Auditor's name, position, address, phone, fax and e-mail Date, auditor's signature and authorisation; Project number (contract number) and name; Implementing organisation Reporting period Total actual project income versus actual expenditures in <yyyy> (<specify the period to be covered if less than a year>) in both <local currency> and donor currency Total budget consumption in total figures in <donor currency> and % Exchange rates to the <donor currency> used in the financial project report Comments on rejected vouchers, if applicable Closing balance (including cash, bank and other assets, e.g. advance payments and outstanding checks) The Auditor's Report should offer an opinion on the following areas: Is the financial project report in accordance with the accounts? Do received funds match the bookkeeping? Do the accounts match the vouchers? Are there proper vouchers for all transactions? Do the accounts match the official bank account statements and cash book? Any other comments that may be relevant as part of the audit. 7. Mandate The implementing organisation will provide the expert auditor with the following material and documents: Partnership Agreement between <SOS APP> and the implementing organisations. The Programme Contract including the budget, signed between the donor and the APP. The donor s general terms and condition of contract. Final financial project reports (including financial statements, original vouchers and list of booked expenditures). PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 133

T 41 LESSONS LEARNT CHECKLIST CONTEXT This checklist summarise the lessons learnt, the best practices and challenges encountered throughout the course of the project. This tool should be completed during the evaluation and learning phase, which will enable the outcomes to feed into the planning of other similar programmes to promote institutional learning. Country: Project title: IPD reference number: Name of the donor: Total budget amount of the project: Period of implementation: Specific objective of the project: Compiled by (name / unit): Identification and project formulation: How did you identify the funding opportunity? (website/informed by IO; CO) Was the project designed before or after the funding opportunity was identified (e.g. from the pool of project ideas)? Who was responsible for the formulation of the project proposal? Who else was involved? Did you conduct a formulation workshop? Did you receive any GSC support during the formulation process (e.g. from RO)? If so, explain the kind of support? Would you have needed more support? What kind of support? What were the main highlights in these two phases (identification and formulation)? What were the main challenges faced during these two phases? Indicate how these challenges were resolved? Which of the PRAG tools did you apply? Were they helpful? Any recommendations for improvement? Implementation phase: What were the main challenges faced during the implementation of the project? How did you solve them? Please mention if there were any activities or actions that had to be canceled or adapted to the context and why? How did you manage these changes and was it successful? Please mention some of the most successful outcomes and provide the reasons for success? Was the specific objective achieved? If not, what needs to be changed to achieve it in the future? Which of the PRAG tools did you apply? Were they helpful? Any recommendations for improvement? Evaluation phase: Was there any external evaluation conducted at the end of the implementation phase of the project? If so, what were the main insights of this evaluation? Does this evaluation reveal any relevant information that may be interesting to share (e.g. recommended action) at a broader level for further policy development? If no external evaluation was conducted, did an internal evaluation take place? What were the main insights of it? Do you have any major learning from the external audit process? Which of the PRAG tools did you apply? Were they helpful? Any recommendations for improvement? Comments or any additional information that may be useful to share (good practice or challenges) 134 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 41 Lessons learnt table This table can be used additionally to enable a comprehensive overview of the problems/successes throughout the project cycle and the specific recommendations by implementers. Phase Key issue Describe challenge / good practice Identification Impact Recommendation Formulation Implementation Evaluation PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 135

T 42 FRAMEWORK AGREEMENTS CHECKLIST CONTEXT A framework agreement is an umbrella agreement that sets out the terms under which individual contracts can be made throughout the period of the agreement. To help developing this framework, this checklist provides an overview of critical steps to be followed in the project cycle when applying for a framework contract instead of single- or multicountry projects for which the PRAG is generally valid and developed for. Identification Phase 1. PSA sends a Letter of Intent to IPD IO stating the PSA is willing to enter into a framework contract with a donor (indicate donor s thematic and geographic focus). The PSA has to be ready to recruit or provide a project coordinator support within SOS CV structures (potentially staff on loan). This person should be available from at least 6 months before the application submission deadline or respectively from the formulation meeting onwards. 2. Clarification of overall thematic focus for the framework between PSA, IO and CO in line with donor priorities. 3. Suggestion of relevant countries and programmes from linking needs and funds tool (LNF) by IO IPD and IO FIS (matching-proposal). Critical for success: Keep the geographic scope within one region or at least within one continent which allows smooth implementation of the framework contract (kick off review & planning meetings with all stakeholders must be possible). Ensure that the suggested countries meet the donor s geographical focus. 4. Information about NA capacities or NAassessment by CO/RO IPD. 5. Final matching of NAs and PSA and official release of the intended country portfolio. Formulation Phase 1. Signing of the Memorandum of Understanding* (MoU) between PSA,GSC and NAs should ideally take place at the formulation workshop, to be coordinated by the IPD central coordinating unit. 2. Bringing together all stakeholders for a formulation workshop which should ideally take place at least 6 months before the application deadline; developing the overall log frame, objectives, indicators, budget projection and a clear roadmap for the development of the individual programmes; clarification of roles and responsibilities; appointment of a steering committee. To be considered when developing plans and budget: Include capacity building components into the plans and budget. Include kick-off meeting and mid-term review meeting into plans and budget. Include external evaluation and audit into plans and budget. Critical for success: Make sure that the respective decisionmakers take part in the workshop or that representatives are allocated with the respective decision making authority. 3. Developing country/facility programmes coordinated by the framework coordinator; any pre-project -costs have to be covered by the PSA. 136 PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT

T 42 Critical for success: Don t forget the necessary Programme Planning Steps. In case the programmes to be included in the framework are new or revised ones (modification, extension of programme unit) this needs to be respected in the Programme Planning Process (NAs to conduct feasibility study, fill in IPD concept note/scope definition tool, develop programme proposal). 4. Submission of application. 5. Signing of donor contract. Implementation Phase 1. Bringing together all stakeholders for a kick-off meeting to clarify the reporting format, monitoring, financial arrangements. 2. Signing of a Partnership Agreement* between PSA - GSC - NAs including communication protocol defining reporting deadlines and communication lines. 3. Baseline data needs to be gathered or reviewed. 4. The implementation phase follows the steps as described in the Practical Guide for Institutional Funding with the difference that the framework coordinator is managing the implementation. 5. Holding a mid-term review meeting with all stakeholders for assessing progress, revising targets, preparing annual budgets, etc. Evaluation Phase Bringing together all stakeholders for a final evaluation meeting at the end of the project duration to discuss and extract lessons learnt in terms of project planning, -implementation and management. * In the MoU and Partnership Agreement outlook-scenarios for back-up and/or future funding have to be defined. PRAG INSTITUTIONAL FUNDING TOOLKIT 137

imprint Publisher SOS Children s Villages International Institutional Partnership Development International Office Hermann-Gmeiner-Str. 51 6020 Innsbruck, Austria Tel: +43 512 3310-0 Fax: +43 512 3310-5088 E-mail: ipd@sos-kd.org www.sos-childrensvillages.org Responsible for the contents IPD Global Network; updates have been managed by IPD CO AFME Designed by SOS Children s Villages International Artwork by Green Eyez Design S.A.R.L. www.greeneyezdesign.com Date of publication November 2012