1. National Society ICT Health Check
Jeremy Mortimer - Manager, IT Advisory Services Unit

2. The question arose when we were designing the ICT Capacity Survey
What are the minimum standards for the ICT capacities of a National Society?
If we could establish a common standard for all National Societies, we could start to work towards all of them achieving that standard

3. But how do you come up with a single standard which is equally applicable to National Societies working in such diverse environments, with such different levels of resources available to them?
Can you really hold the Guinea Red Cross to the same standards as the Swiss Red Cross?
At that time it wasn’t obvious that there was a way to find a common standard.

4. Instead we came up with the ICT capacity index (the Nepalese Red Cross, here, with a score of 50.4)
The ICT capacity index is calculated by a complicated algorithm from the answers to more than 40 questions in the ICT capacity survey.
It gives us a rough numerical measure of the IT strength of a National Society.
As you can see from the previous slide (back) it produces results more or less in line with expectations.

5. Limitations of the ICT Capacity Index
Based only on objective, easily quantifiable responses
What proportion of staff have a computer?
What Internet bandwidth is available at HQ?
Do management consult IT specialists as often as they should?
Can’t be unpacked – provides no guidance on how to improve

6. Is there a better way?

7. Organizational Capacity Assessment and Certification (OCAC)
An IFRC initiative that allows National Societies
to assess themselves against defined international standards
to provide a diagnostic to facilitate tailor-made NS development support

8. OCAC: How do we measure? Core capacities Attributes Indicators A B C D
Statutes A B C D E
A - E
1 - 4
The NS has Statutes that are available at all levels of the NS.
The Statutes have been revised less than 10 years ago.
The NS Statutes meet the requirements of the guidance document.
The NS regularly discusses and disseminates its Statutes. It involves all levels of the NS in this process.
The Core Capacities are: to exist (as in this example), to organize, to relate and mobilize, to perform, to grow
Within the core capacity to exist, we have an attribute: Statutes
Against the attribute we have indicators for levels A through E
A is empty – it means anything less than B
Explain how we assign a level for each attribute

9. OCAC: Benchmarking For each attribute there is a benchmark
Core capacities
Attributes
Indicators A B C D E
For each attribute there is a benchmark
The benchmark can differ from one attribute to another
The benchmark can differ according to the environment
Enabling environment
Organisationally restrictive environment
Financially restrictive environment
OCAC allows us to set benchmarks
In general the benchmark starts at the C level, but can be modified depending on the environment in which the National Society works

10. 4 - Critical OCAC: Prioritization PRIORITIZE 1 – Not relevant
Core capacities
Attributes
Indicators
Prioritize
1 - 4
A-E A B C D E
A or B
A: The NS has no statistics related to volunteer involvement
PRIORITIZE
1 – Not relevant
2 – Relevant but not Urgent
3 – Relevant and Urgent
4 - Critical
Once a level has been assigned, we can assign a priority for further action.

11. OCAC: 85 Attributes

12. Advantages of the OCAC approach
Applicable to all National Societies
Applied through a consultative approach – builds consensus
Attributes are very specific
Can address issues which aren’t easily quantifiable
Immediately suggests steps to take to improve
Prioritization
A couple of disadvantages
The process is heavy
Absolutely dependent on getting the right attributes and indicators (is the success model correct?)

13. ICT Health Check
Uses the OCAC format – attributes, indicators, benchmarks, prioritization
Somewhat simplified, e.g. we assign the benchmark to the C level in all cases
A lighter process (not for the IT manager though!)
Many attributes rather more technical than in OCAC
51 attributes (currently), plus applications
Applications had to be handled a bit differently
So we decided to use the OCAC approach for the Health Check

14. The National Society ICT Health Check
Here’s the beginning

15. Health Check – attribute criteria
(equivalent to Core Capacities in OCAC)
Strategic planning
Operational planning
Project planning
Infrastructure
Operations and user services
Online identity
Skills
Security and Risk Management
Applications
The Health Check pays a lot of attention to management, planning, resourcing, skills etc.
The technical stuff is in there too, but we find that If you get the organizational stuff right, the technical stuff is much more likely to work.

16. Health Check – a couple of examples
Work through an example
Note the C level is the benchmark
If there is a legal requirement (e.g. licensing or data protection) the C level is never less than full compliance

17. Applications
It’s too complicated to develop indicators for every application that may ever exist
Generic indicators for applications – operational and programme support

18. Applications – beneficiary facing

19. Health Check – the process
Facilitated self-assessment (somewhat like OCAC)
An external facilitator will work with the IT manager and NS stakeholders
Headquarters and selected branches
5 days is ideal (preparation, branch visits, etc. take some time)
Interviews with stakeholders, so fairly light except for the facilitator and IT manager
Maybe a presentation of preliminary findings at the end
Outputs: the completed matrix, and a short facilitator’s report

20. Health Check – what do you get?
A comprehensive assessment of your National Society’s strengths and challenges in IT
A set of priorities which can become objectives for your IT development plan
The indicators show rather specifically what you need to do to improve

21. Health Check - pilots
June 2015 Zimbabwe October 2015 Ethiopia February 2016 Kenya March 2016 Indonesia April 2016 Myanmar, Fiji, Kiribati May 2016 Cook Islands, Solomon Islands

22. Health check vs. ICT capacity index
A single figure derived from the Health Check
Assigned a score of 1 for A, 2 for B etc., then normalized to a percentage
Excluding application scores (the applications section can be used to record wished-for systems, which inflates the A scores)
No Capacity Index for the last one (Solomon Is.)
A reasonably good fit. Not perfect, but we’re measuring rather different things.
A higher Health Check score vs. Capacity Index (e.g. the 1st, 4th, 6th) may indicate a NS which is getting IT management right, but working in an economically restrictive environment

23. Distribution of levels
Mostly, the plots are a rather similar shape
Some As, a lot of Bs, a good proportion of Cs, and even some Ds and Es
Note the Cook Islands

24. Distribution of levels
Kenya

25. Distribution of levels
Kiribati and the Solomon Islands
Very small National Societies in a very special environment
I would like to see some NSs whose lines are the same shape, but the other way around

26. Health Check – Next Steps
Roll out to regions (already being used in Asia/Pacific)
If you are interested, contact me or your regional IS manager
Can be used as a standalone tool
Can also be used as part of the follow-up to an OCAC assessment, if it indicates that IT should get more attention
Once we have done a sufficient number, we will start to analyse results to identify common challenges that we can address specifically