Strategy Review ICTC Strategy Review Workshop I Atlanta, 27./28. Feb 2015 Webinar Presented by John Batten and Markus Hesse with the support of

ICTC Strategy 2012 to 2015 “The strategy and the process of putting it together made us a stronger community” “By acting together we have added value” “Strategy was strong on ‘what to do’ but weak on ‘how to do it?’” “Gave direction for adding value to achievement of GET 2020 Mission”

Reasons for the Review Objective: ‘for all coalition members to generate consensus around the way forward for ICTC over the next 3/5 years’ Many changes within ICTC and the context we work in Our many successes have generated new challenges that we must rise to Next Strategy must keep us relevant from now until 2020

Process of Strategy Review new

Sessions of Workshop I DAY ONE Session 1.1: Welcome and introductions Session 1.2: Introduction to strategic planning Session 1.3: Feedback from pre-workshop information gathering Session 1.4: Consensus on survey findings exercise

DAY TWO Session 2.1: Review of day 1 Session 2.2: World Health Organization presentation Session 2.3: Strategy review exercise Session 2.4: Nature of the coalition exercise Session 2.5: Defining ICTC exercise Session 2.6: Workshop closing remarks and next steps Sessions of Workshop I new

Session 1.3: Input From Online Survey and Interviews

Stakeholder Satisfaction Index

Session 1.4: Consensus on Survey Findings Need to clearly define the roles of individual members as distinct from ICTC as a coalition in the new strategy. “broker function of ICTC” has been highlighted. With attracting new members, new challenges have evolved. WHO is becoming more focused and effective. More governments are engaging in GET Critical importance of the F and E components of the SAFE strategy are vital to the sustained achievement of our mission. Conclusions (1/2)

Session 1.4: Consensus on Survey Findings Need to address both external and internal aspects of the coalition’s work in the updated strategy map. Need to strengthen its relationships with external key stakeholders. Need for focus on what needs to be done and ensuring these tasks are well resourced (e.g. through more voluntary contributions from members, additional funding for the coalition itself or other mechanisms). Conclusions (2/2)

Session 2.1: Review of Day 1 Agreement on the coalition’s role: enabling, coordinating, catalyzing, communicating and developing preferred practice. Joining the coalition is a voluntary decision. As the coalition’s influence takes effect it is the members that step up to implement. Freedom of members to decide when they work as part of the coalition and when they work under their own name. It remains important that the members on the ground choose whether they do something as a member of the coalition or not. Conclusions

Session 2.2: World Health Organization (WHO) WHO is changing rapidly. WHO is now much more active in the field of trachoma. However, such a development needs time. Necessity to align ICTC and WHO to avoid any duplications or confusing messages. Financial assistance and human resources are needed. Anthony Solomon already has a concrete picture of what is needed. He will develop a written plan to share and use for communication and coordination. Conclusions

Session 2.3: Strategy Review Exercise Vision Global elimination of blinding trachoma (as a public health problem) by 2020 Mission * ICTC acts as a catalyst in support of national trachoma programs. In support of the WHO led alliance, ICTC is a dynamic catalyst for the implementation for the SAFE strategy at a scale and quality that meets the priorities of endemic countries’ trachoma control programs. * To be revised once the definition is completed (session 2.5) Conclusions (1/4)

Session 2.3: Strategy Review Exercise Values proposed changes to the current text: Collaboration: fostering a spirit of partnership between key stakeholders Remove ‘coordination’ but use the text to improve ‘technical excellence’ Innovation: add language around addressing unexplored areas, taking risks Sustainability (added from the F&E principles) – sustaining impact By improving best practices, through combining interventions, building capacity, supporting systems. Evidence Conclusions (2/4)

Session 2.3: Strategy Review Exercise Values Focus on trachoma Play to strengths of members Message discipline United behind a common goal Accountability of member actions reported to WHO Alliance, Uniting to combat NTDs, etc Conclusions (3/4)

Session 2.3: Strategy Review Exercise Strategic Drivers The need for robust, actionable data that is shared openly and widely The need for identifying and addressing gaps in practice and resources The need to promote/generate the use of new science/technologies The need to identify and mobilize key sectors to work together The need for necessary capacity and data for country programs, so that they are data driven and sustainable Conclusions (4/4)

Session 2.4: Nature of the Coalition Conclusions Change methodology from balanced scorecard towards Theory of Change approach. ICTCICTC – MembersOutput s OutcomesImpact DRAFT

Session 2.4: Nature of the Coalition Conclusions (1/3) In better defining who we are, what we do and what value we add, everyone has agreed that the theory of change model is the best tool for this process. While we have taken the application of this model so far, we need more time to develop it further in advance of the workshop in April. A workshop between now and the second meeting in Tunisia is needed to further develop the theory of change exercise.

Session 2.4: Nature of the Coalition Conclusions (2/3) The next strategy will mark a new beginning for ICTC, with a clearer definition of who we are, what we do, how we do it and what value we hold within the new context. All we have achieved in the past three years has itself affected the environment and context we now work in and our new strategy should reflect this. We need greater focus on what ICTC needs to do going forward and adequately resource ourselves for those things.

Session 2.4: Nature of the Coalition Conclusions (3/3) John and Markus will have to give careful thought to how they will build consensus at the next meeting, which could potentially have more than 40 participants. They will work with a planning group sometime in April to complete the theory of change model and to complete planning for the next workshop in Hammamet, Tunisia, on 23 and 24 April It is important to stress that the members on the ground choose whether they do something as a member of the coalition or not. Members may choose to act with other members as ICTC and represent themselves as such. Alternatively, they may act in their own right. While ICTC clearly adds value at a global level it can also act at the local level through members working together on the ground.

Session 2.5: Defining ICTC Version 1 ‘(ICTC is) A coalition of like‐minded member organizations working together voluntarily to achieve the common goal of eliminating blinding trachoma. More, Better, Faster.’ Version 2 ‘(ICTC is) A coalition of non‐governmental, donor, private sector and academic organizations working together to support the Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by More, Together, Better, Faster.’

Session 2.5: Defining ICTC Conclusions Our objective is to describe what ICTC is and does to outside audiences. The description shouldn’t replace the mission or vision statement. The description will be included as an addition in the final strategy document (further review and development required).

Session 2.6: Next Steps

London, 14 th April: Theory of Change Workshop Tunisia, 23 rd – 24 th April: Workshop II

Thanks! John Batten and Markus Hesse with the support of