1. ® © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 1 WARMU Program Quality Forum March 2010 From Monrovia PQF to Niamey RAC

2. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 2 PQF TO RAC As spokesman of the PQF I have been tasked to:  Share progress made and PQF highlights.  Solicit your reflections/resolutions.  Share with you our plan and commitment and take back your message to PQF.

3. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. OUR COMMITMENTS- OCT 2009  The Program Approach is our #1 priority, coherence=bottom line.  Each CO made specific plans:  In our partnership work, we will have a differential approach (fewer strategic partners, and a range of implementing partners).  To manage tensions: We are prioritizing interdepartmental collaborations that are guided by PA and problem solving. 3

4. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Our commitments  With Impact measurement, we are steadily pushing ahead with baselines, supporting creativity, analytical and learning culture.  On Talents passion & motivation: We will prioritize their partnership competencies (as facilitators, activists, reflective thinkers, networkers)  We will invest available financial resources in a way that builds coherence, not stand alone projects, CIM portfolios. 4

5. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Our Progress  On partnership:Most of the countries reduced the # of partners and are oriented to more strategic partnership: Benin has created a board, Ghana has also identified so,e strategic partners for its 2 programs; CI: 3 partners; Niger reduced its partners by 90%; Sierra Leone is designing a partnership strategy  Managing tension : Program and PS (to be covered on Tuesday) 5

6. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Progress…  Impact measurement : Base line completed in Ghana and Mali, scheduled in Niger, impact measurement and readiness assessment in Niger in few months with Tom Barton: Pi doing learning from Mali and CI  Passion and motivation : progress has been made (see later) 6

7. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. OBJECTIVES OF LIBERIA PQF  Objective 1: Learn from CARE Liberia’s experience on designing program and identifiy lessons for WARMU Cos with focus on  Integrating Emergency prepardness and response into the CARE programing  Implications of Program approach on finance  ToC and Impact measurement 7

8. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Objectives of the PQF ( cont…)  Objective 2: Analyze and assess the capacity of COs to measure impact, including: ° Elaboration and Developement of Impact measurement indicators at CO level ° Systems and structures required for impact measurement at country level in order to implement these systems based on Niger and Ghana experiences 8

9. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 1. Gallery work  There is a deeper understanding of the concept of the Program Approach  High energy and commitment  All COs are moving forward  There is a high commitment to learn and share  The inclusiveness of the process in West Africa  There is high capacity in the region  There is innovation in the region 9

10. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 2.EMERGENCY AND PA Majors recommendations  Integrate/align the EPP with UN, government, others, particularly at county level – find effective ways of engagement from partners  Build staff capacity  Build risk reduction into program approach  Link LRSP with EPP  Include DRR in LRSP  Take advantage of WAERP existing funding 10

11. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 3.INTEGRATING FINANCE & PS in PA  Revision of some of the existing systems, policies and procedures.  Influence support and commitment at higher levels including allocation of resources to support change and integration  Set clear roles and responsibilities for program and finance in program design, implementation and monitoring.  Encourage team work  Influencing and changing the mindset of all stakeholders to reduce resistance; build capacity and hire new competencies Improve communication between program and finance so as to have the same level of understanding  Involvement of finance at program design stage  Regular field visits by finance staff 11

12. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. INTEGRATED STRUCTURE ACD-PQ CD Techn. STAFF IMPACT M INT AUDIT FIN CONT PROG MGR FIN COORD PARTICIPANTS Policy compliance CO performance Pipeline / Viability Cost/BenfitsAccountability ContractualAccountability Budget Management Transparency Capacity Building

13. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 4.THEORY OF CHANGE  Impact group,impact population, impact goal, theory of change, domains of change and breakthroughs for 5 and 10 years  Impact = ( Social Cohesion + Access to Resources and Services) X Capacities X Governance  Risk, opportunities and assumptions  A very high level of learning evident 13

14. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 5. Impact measurement  Testing the theory of change:  Identify and analyze assumptions (test of the ToC) during the program design process  Make sure we have a good communication strategy around our analysis (test of ToC) with stakeholders  Build staff and partners capacity on the test ToC (testing assumptions, selecting tools)  The test of ToC is an opportunity to consider risks and challenges and emergency issues 14

15. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. IM  Tracking changes towards our impact vision:  Clarify the impact group – at the moment the FNR program has too many groups, hard to see the relationship between them.  Reexamine the domains of change  Reexamine the pathways  Do research on sources of data  Select a human condition impact indicator 15

16. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. IM cont  Continuously analyzing context and trends:  In Niger, there is a community based analysis system that started out life as an early warning system. It now functions to track indicators related to:  Food security  Social cohesion  Environment  Health and nutrition 16

17. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. KEY MESSAGES  CHANGE TAKES INVESTMENT  INVESTMENT NEEDS RETURNS  REDUCE WASTE AND SLACK 17

18. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Messages to the RAC Three key messages:  Change is expensive - That is the bottom line, if you want to get it right, it requires time, finance and expertise. We cannot demand a particular outcome and not finance the resources to get that outcome. We need to be clear about what we lacked to take us through to achieve the final outcome. We need to look at the costs and how we invest. 18

19. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Messages..  Investment needs returns - Building on that, we need to present our arguments in terms of returns for investment. At the moment, the investment is low, and EMT is saying ‘if you have done this much, why do you need more money?’ There are dangers to leaving the Program Approach half baked; there is not understanding of the potential gains. We need investment in common aligned systems that are aligned with PA. 19

20. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Messages  Reduce wastage and slack – We all need to commit to find existing resources, there is wastage of energy, passion, money and time. We need to close the gaps. The system traps us – we need to invest more to make it work. Perhaps the resources are adequate to deliver more. We need more systems thought. 20

21. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. 21 ACTIONS AND QUESTIONS.. ACTIONS  RAC to advocate with Atlanta to prioritize and resource PA including impact measurement and talent retention  CD’s should include as priority PQF major recommendations in AOPs  Include emergency risk management into development programs

22. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Actions …  Integration of PS and Program  Review the current reporting of Finance Controller to RMU (this is a barrer for integration of P/PS  Further discuss the integration of Finance Management system in the PA  To do more training and capacity building for CPs in Fin and PA for PS 22

23. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Benin: Save the week September 27  The human aspects of change: understanding how to manage the change and the implications on staff and structures.  Impact measurement preparedness  ?? 23

24. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Questions for RAC  How do RAC and CI members plan to support and accompany COs in a greater advocacy role implied by PA  What support does region need for its emergency prepardness and response  What is the mechanism in place to demonstrate CARE impact in the region  Will the FC continue to report to Regional controller, if yes what is the implication for P/PS 24

25. © 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Questions…  How could RAC push and support expertise and knowledge sharing between COs within the region: funding,leadership and pool of regional expertise 25