Why is this on the agenda? Our baseline study was highly critiqued Our monitoring method was revised Our mid-term review highlights monitoring and evaluation as the weak link in LGCP Hopefully we can exchange on capacity development monitoring methods

Objective LGCP  The overall objective of the programme is: The capacity of participating local governments, local government associations and water authorities in countries of implementation is developed  Contributes to sustainable local economic development and the four prioritised themes of the Dutch international cooperation policy (water management, security and rule of law, food security and sexual and reproductive health)

Our baseline study critiqued We developed logical frameworks Indicators state whether some activity was done or product or service was delivered, so for example: Land management and PPPs training and sensitisation materials developed by the end of 2013 (Y/N) (capability to act and to commit) Content of existing national policies and regulations of food security, translated into annual action plans as of 2014 (Y/N) (capability to act and to commit) The problem? What does this say about capacity developed?

1. To act and commit Volition, empowerment, motivation, attitude, confidence, leadership 2. To deliver on development objectives To be able to carry out the goals of the organisation 3. To adapt and self- renew Learning, strategizing, adaptation, repositioning, managing change 4. To relate to external stakeholders Manage relationships, resource mobilisation, networking, protecting space 5. To achieve coherence Encourage innovation, and stability, control fragmentation, manage complexity some generic characteristics of capacity development processes, which carry implications for the way external agencies go about supporting capacity development: 5 Capabilities.

The 5 Capabilities explained Equally important No ranking No stages It is a process; the outcome is not central A process that already takes place Indirect contribution from outside

The 5 Capabilities Why looking at Capabilities? It provides a fair insight in the existing level of capacity Three questions: 1.Where are we now? 2.Where do we want to be? 3.What do we need? (as a consequence)

Act & commit Volition motivation attitude confidence leadership Decision making processes Accountability towards the public and to other spheres of government Relationship between executive and full council Relationship politicians and staff Political leadership Visions, strategic planning, implementation plans Deliver development objectives To be able to carry out the goals of the organisation Objects of the organisation are central in decision making Objects are converted in implementable activities Service delivery Resources (budgets and people) are sufficient to reach objectives The right people at the right spot

Adapt & self- renew Learning, strategizing adaptation, managing change Internal organisational processes The learning organisation Learning from others Able to cope with changes Relate to external stakeholders Manage relationships, resource mobilisation, Inter-governmental relations Network analyses Inventory of relevant stakeholders Public participation Form coalitions with other organisations Relationship to local business Achieve coherence Encourage innovation, control fragmentation Relationship between politicians and staff (Middle-) long term planning Distinguish primary tasks and side issues

To act and commit Decision making of local government is transparent, timely, and functional Political leadership of the local government is willing to be open about decision-making to central government and/or to their constituents. Management of the administrative organisation in local government is willing to be open about policy preparation and implementation to the political leadership. Strategies and policies, development plans, association strategic plans, service delivery plans are in place and describe the priorities of the local government. Strategies to mobilize resources (human, institutional and financial) are in place.

To deliver development objectives Decision making by political leadership of the local government takes development objectives into account Number, composition and expertise of staff is adequate in view of the objectives of the local government Relationships between politicians and administrative staff are effective, there are no conflicts of competences Implementation plans are carried out and results are achieved Funding levels are adequate in view of the objectives of the local government

To adapt and self-renew Political leadership of the local government responds adequately to changes in the context and the environment Local government has organised strategies for lobby and advocacy The political leadership of the local government encourages internal learning and reflection Monitoring and Evaluation moments are determined and realised Learning from within the organisation and from other organisations has taken place

To relate to external stakeholders Relevant stakeholders have been identified in strategy papers and implementation plans of the local government The local government maintains relevant relationships with external stakeholders in private, civil society and central government arenas The local government is flexible and adapts to changing circumstances in its relationships with external stakeholders The local government is accountable to its constituents and to central government The local government is participating in coalitions with the private sector and civil society to achieve development objectives

To achieve coherence Political leadership of the local government is capable of maintaining coherence between ambition, vision, strategy and operations The management is able to deal strategically with external pressure and conflicting demands The local government is capable of handling external support coherently in its strategies and policies (plans) (projects, programmes, budgets) The local government is capable of integrating external support in an adequate way into their own strategy and operations There is a balance between innovation and consolidation

Monitoring and evaluation of results

Monitoring results Basic - Score between 0 – 1. “We know this aspect is important, but we do not put it in practice.” The partner is aware of the aspect Developing - Score between 1.25 – 2. “The aspect has our attention, we are working on it, but it is not yet structured.” The partner seriously explores how to take a step forward Performing - Score between 2.25 – 3. “Steps are taken to integrate the aspect in the organisation”. The organisation is in the transition of old customs and habits towards new practices Excellence - Score between 3.25 – 4. “The aspect is fully integrated and rooted within the organisation”. The organisation has completed the process of change

Monitoring results Scoring in quarters: 0.25 after each number. For example: 0.75, 1.25, 1.5, 2.75, 3.25 The score runs from: ‘at least working on it (.25) ‘progress is being made’ (.5) ´it is not yet fully there´ (.75) ‘it is there’ (whole number, for example 1)

Monitoring results The ABELO example

ABELO 2012

ABELO 2013

ABELO to act an commit0,752 to deliver on development objectives 0,551,8 to adapt and self-renew0,951,9 to relate to stakeholders0,651,65 to achieve coherence0,752

Main challenges in working with the 5Cs Methodological pitfalls Mid-term review: Main advantage of the tool seems to be that it stimulate reflection.

Main challenges CapabilityLocal government Non-governmental organisation To act and commitPoliticians - staffStaff To deliver on dev. objectives Plural issueOne-issue To adapt and self- renew By factBy choice To relate to external stakeholders Lawful tasksSelf-chosen tasks To achieve coherencePlural objectivesOne objective

Monitoring results Capacity development results: How to assess results and changes? How to benchmark evolution and changes? What are your experiences?