CCI Resource Kit June 2007

RESOURCE KIT FOR ASSESSING COMMUNITY CAPACITY
Christian Reformed World Relief Committee June 2007
Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introductory clarifications
3 4 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 15 19 22 24 26 30 33 37 39 40 43 45 47 48 50 51 52 53 62
Background to capacity building in CRWRC Organization and development of tools in this resource kit CRWRCs requirements for community capacity assessment Capacity assessment and annual community evaluations The seven dimensions of transformation CRWRC definition of community Bangladesh and India Framework Ecuador Tool Fulfulde Focus Group Guide Nicaragua Tool Niger Protocol Senegal Organizational Effectiveness Profile Tanzania Level Four Indicators Child Survival Sustainability Assessment Tool Self Assessment Framework for AIDS Competence Rubric for Partner Staff Assessment of Community Capacity H-Diagram Framework for Considering Impact of Development Practice on Community Capacity Project-centered vs. People-centered Development Continuum Tool Practical capacity development and assessment tools Research-based resources on capacity development and assessment Capacity development websites Seven Dimensions of Transformation Qualities of Good Assessment
Tools to use with communities
Tools to use with partners
Additional resources
Appendices
Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007
INTRODUCTORY CLARIFICATIONS
Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity Background to capacity building in CRWRC
CRWRC has been working with local partner organizations to build sustainable communities for nearly thirty years. CRWRC was in the vanguard of the capacity-development discussion through its publication in 1997 of Partnering to Build and Measure Organizational Capacity, based on a three-year appreciative inquiry project carried out in collaboration with Case Western University and financed by USAID. Though the emphasis at that time was on developing organizational capacity with its partners, the need to develop local skills to sustain development at the community level was already recognized in the 1980s, when several of CRWRCs partners adapted the Skill Rating Scale (SRS), an earlier CRWRC partner monitoring tool, to assess community organizational skills. Later, as a result of the 1997 organizational capacity study, some partners applied the appreciative inquiry process to construct tools for assessing community capacity, this time going beyond individual skills to also identifying behaviors, values, and relationships that lead to sustainable local ownership of development. In 2003, CRWRC reaffirmed its commitment to change at the community level by making community transformation one of its two major priorities. Building the capacity of communities to manage and control their own development is foundational to this strategy and has led to renewed emphasis on community capacity development and assessment. Based on field research and experience, the Organizational Development for Community Development Task Force defined seven dimensions of community transformation as a guideline for developing capacity-assessment tools. In 2005 CRWRC began asking all its partners to report on the number of communities who have defined capacity dimensions and are monitoring and reporting community capacity growth. From the beginning, CRWRC has resisted prescribing a single capacity-assessment tool to fit all communities. As one participant at the 2003 Functional Integration Team meeting commented, CCI must be tailored, not standardized! As a result CRWRC encourages its consultants and partners to adapt or develop tools that fit the contexts in which they are working. CRWRC uses community capacity planning and monitoring information as one way of determining whether its staff and partners are achieving the goal of community transformation. In addition to this accountability aspect, staff who developed the tools included in this resource kit repeatedly emphasized that the process of assessing community capacity is as important as the result. The very act of communities regularly evaluating their capacity and planning how to increase it is capacity-building. Contributors also emphasized that the key to success of community-capacity assessment is following through on identified action steps to increase capacity in each dimension.
Organization and development of tools in this resource kit

This resource kit introduces nine tools that communities can use to assess capacity and four tools to be used at the partner organization level to reflect on this process. All but one of these tools have been developed or adapted by CRWRC consultants and partners in Asia, Africa, or Central and South America. Some have been in use for more than ten years. Others are very recent. All are works in progress. Each tool is preceded by a one-page introduction that gives the following information: Who the tool was developed by The date it was developed The process used to develop the tool The process used to facilitate the tool The time it takes to administer and the frequency with which it is used The context in which tool was developed

The strengths/advantages of the tool The challenges of using the tool Where to find out more about the tool
The explanation and presentation of these twelve tools is prefaced by a section clarifying CRWRCs requirements for assessing community capacity and followed by a list of key references on assessing and developing community capacity. In Appendix 1, you will find CRWRCs seven dimensions of community capacity together with indicators for each dimension, and in Appendix II, a guide to good assessment. The tools and resources cited in this kit are continually being modified, and new ones are being added as more partners begin assessing community capacity. Feel free to adapt these tools or others listed in the references to your situation - or to create a new one more suitable to the partners and communities with which you work. If you have developed a tool that youd like to add to this resource kit, please contact Jan Disselkoen at disselkoenj@crcna.ca.
What are CRWRCs requirements for assessing and reporting community capacity?
CRWRCs global ends policy #1 describes CRWRCs community transformation goal as: Communities around the world in circumstances of injustice, poverty or disaster are transformed and improve their situations in sustainable ways. CRWRC assesses community transformation in two ways - by the direct benefits of development programs and by growth in community capacity to sustain development independently over a long term. Since 2003, CRWRC has encouraged staff to develop with partners and communities tools that help communities plan and monitor growth in community capacity. Eventually, CRWRC expects that all of its partners will regularly facilitate the process of planning and assessing capacity growth with every community with which they work. One of the indicators currently used by the co-directors to evaluate ministry teams each year is the percentage of total community groups tracking CCI and the number of groups showing progress. At the same time, CRWRC understands that consultants need to go through whatever process necessary to assure partner ownership of capacity assessment so that it is not seen it as just another hoop the donor requires them to jump through. CRWRC consultants are required to report the following quarterly: 1) the number of communities the partner serves; 2) the number of communities that have identified dimensions of community capacity; and 3) the number of communities that monitor and show progress in community capacity. These can be found in each partners section of Newdea under CCI plans. They are automatically uploaded by the Information Systems Coordinator annually. In addition, CRWRC partners and/or communities are expected to keep on file written documentation of what is being reported on Newdea. These documents should include the plans, indicators, and results of capacity growth for each community being tracked. Each CRWRC field consultant must also write and upload to Newdea a story of transformation taken from a different community each quarter. These stories have two functions: they provide qualitative evidence of community transformation as part of the reporting system, and they give the CORE team narratives that they can use for constituency transformation. The most interesting stories often focus on individuals as evidence of community transformation. When writing about individuals, however, it is still important to highlight how the community was involved in the individuals change. It is acceptable to write stories both about evidence of success and about the process of transforming which at times may be a bumpy road. Some staff find it helpful to highlight a different dimension of transformation each quarter.
Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity How is community capacity assessment related to CRWRCs requirement for annual community evaluations?
Organizing and mobilizing communities for sustained impact requires communities to develop the capacity for self evaluation. CRWRC encourages partners to facilitate an annual self-evaluation with every community with which they work. There has been some confusion as to whether the assessment of community capacity dimensions constitute community evaluation. The answer to this question is no. A complete annual community evaluation should include assessment of both performance and capacity growth. These two elements can be treated separately or at the same time. In some cases, the capacity assessment is done quarterly or semi-annually while a community evaluation is only required once a year. Evaluation of performance focuses on the communitys implementation of plans for specific development activities that improve the lives of community members in the short term. These would include plans for activities such as growth monitoring, savings-credit groups, use of new agriculture technologies, justice initiatives and so on. Ideally, this assessment would be based on baselines and indicators developed by the community themselves. Capacity assessment, on the other hand, focuses on growth over time of the dimensions of community capacity that lead to sustainable ownership of community development processes and serves as the basis for capacity development planning. Both of these types of evaluation give community members the opportunity to reflect on what has happened, to hold one another accountable to their plans, and to make new plans based on what they have learned. That is, they serve both learning and accountability functions. As well, annual community evaluations offer community members, partners, and CRWRC the opportunity to listen to, learn from, mutually encourage and correct one other. What is learned during these times of dialogue feeds into the planning process at every level so that our collaborative efforts grow in effectiveness. For more about community evaluations, you can contact Pat Harper at harperp@crcna.ca
Are the seven dimensions of transformation prescriptive?

CRWRC has no standardized tool or form that all partners are required to use to report on community capacity. Staff, partners, and communities have developed a variety of capacity definitions, indicators, and assessment and planning tools, many of which are included in this resource kit. CRWRCs Seven Dimensions of Transformation (CRWRC, 2003) (see appendix 1), though based on sound research and broad input from CRWRC field staff, are not prescriptive. The seven dimensions are CRWRCs framework they are not categories we impose on communities. Therefore, any given community may have a slightly different list of categories depending on the linguistic and development context. The seven dimensions framework serves as an inspiration to field and partner staff as they develop and test capacity-assessment tools and indicators through participatory research with partners and communities.
Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity How does CRWRC define community for the purpose of community capacity assessment?
According to CRWRCs global ends policy, communities are groups of people sharing factors such as geography, ethnicity, economy, and/or history and who work together toward a common vision or task. For the purposes of CRWRC monitoring and reporting community capacity, a community can be: a village; a neighborhood in an urban area; a church that is seeking to improve its village or neighborhood; a solidarity group (for example, women's group, PWW local chapter, community association) that is seeking to improve its village or neighborhood. But the following do not count as communities for CRWRC reporting purposes: a business; a savings group that operates only to benefit its members; a church that is operating benevolence programs for its members only. Examples: A neighborhood group in a larger city: Abuja Urban Ministries in Nigeria involves small business development and loan programs bringing women together to support each other and create savings groups. In the case of most of the Urban Ministries groups, these women have begun to look outside of their own small group to serve the broader community. They visit the sick in hospital as well as serve meals to families of the sick, not just of group members, but of the other community members. They become a transformative force in the community, creating a sense of neighborhood and community. Thus, each group and its surrounding area are the community to be monitored. A Partners Worldwide Chapter is a community when it reaches beyond its own membership to make an impact. Two Nigerian chapters, Takum and Jos, serve as examples of this. o In Takum, the chapter members are geographically disperse and live in several different towns in the area of Takum. What they share in common is 1) they have formed a group that is inter-tribal, welcoming and demonstrating that various tribal members can and do work together; and 2) they have a joint vision for spreading this message to the community and supporting peace-building work in the community to end inter-tribal conflict. o In Jos, the chapter is well organized with a lot of material and intellectual resources among its members. Their goal is TO REACH OUT to the Takum and Makurdi chapters to provide training and support to the members of these chapters. This will strengthen not only their chapters, but their local businesses. They hope to look for ways to provide markets in Jos for products produced in the smaller towns of chapters.
TOOLS TO USE WITH COMMUNITY GROUPS
BANGLADESH AND INDIA FRAMEWORK

DEVELOPED BY: CRWRCs partners in Bangladesh and India and other members of The Learning Circle. The example tool is the one currently used by CRWRCs Bangladesh partner PARI. HISTORY: Primary solidarity groups revised the original tools in the late 1990s to better fit their needs and goals. Several partners are currently working with communities to integrate CRWRCs seven dimensions of transformation into their tool. DATE DEVELOPED: Early 1990s to present PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. The concept was introduced to the Learning Circle, which came up with the principles, framework indicators, and reporting form. 2. Partner staff created a series of Appreciative Inquiry questions and PLA exercises (ex. Spider web) to determine the capacity areas needed to create sustainable communities. 3. They developed provocative propositions and indicators for each of these capacity areas and a reporting form based on the Road to Health card. 4. They trained staff on how to facilitate the same process with communities. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. The primary group listens to someone read the capacity. 2. They share stories or use PLA tools to give evidence of the capacity. 3. They score the capacity using the pictures of trees (palm, banana, mango) for ranking. 4. They decide which areas need to be improved and develop a plan for the next six months. TIME AND FREQUENCY: 1 hour for each capacity area; every six months CONTEXT IN WHICH TOOL WAS DEVELOPED: Rural and urban areas of Bangladesh and India are heavily populated, making them a center of innovation in development. 95% of the population speaks the same language. CRWRCs partners have similar strat egies and meet in The Leaning Circle regularly. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: The focus on building capacity at the primary group level forms the basis for strong intermediary groups. As groups mature, facilitation of the process shifts from partner staff to group leaders. CHALLENGES: It takes about 5 hours to process all five capacity areas (1 hour for each area). These tools are closely tied to the community development processes that have evolved in the Bangladesh and India setting. They offer a clear guide for the development of facilitators work plans in that context but would probably need major revision to fit into a different context. WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Kohima Daring: kohima@agni.com, or Nancy Ten Broek: nwrc@agni.com. More detail can also found in the 2004 article Using Capacity Indicators to Measure Self -Help Development on the CRWRC Best Practices Website (Section 6 Sector Areas under Community Development) and on the Peoples Institutions CD available from Kohima, Nancy or Jan Disselkoen disselkoenj@crcna.ca.
PARI CCI Assessment Chart
FINANCIAL CAPACITY
Particulars Dependency
PARI teaches the importance of it and helps to maintain it properly. PARI teaches the importance of maintaining a savings book and helps to maintain it properly. PARI teaches the importance of it and helps to maintain it properly. PARI teaches the importance of it and helps to maintain it properly. PARI teaches the importance of audit every six months. PARI teaches the importance of savings and encourages a regular savings program. PARI teaches importance of a bank account and encourages the group to open one. PARI teaches group the importance of budget. PARI teaches the importance of the central cooperative fund creation.
Cooperation
5 members can write/maintain savings passbook with 50% cooperation of PARI staff. 3 members can fill out savings books with 50% cooperation from PARI. 3 members can write it with 50% cooperation from PARI. 3 members can write it with 50% cooperation from PARI. 2 members combined check accounting of their books before audit. 60% fund target has been achieved.
Consultancy
8 members can write/maintain savings passbook themselves. 4 members can fill out savings books themselves.
Savings passbook Savings book
Cash book
4 members can write it themselves. 4 members can write it themselves. 2 members have checked accounting of books before audit. 80% fund target has been achieved.
General ledger
Auditing by outsiders Fund creation
Bank Account
Budget preparation & preservation Central Cooperative Fund
3 members can administer bank accounts in cooperation with PARI staff. 2 members cooperate in budget preparation. Group gives monthly fees to its central committee.
4 members can run bank accounts with PARI acting as a consultant. 3 members prepare budget with PARI consultation. Group provides service charge to CCC for assistance in running of different projects.
10
TECHNICAL SKILL
PARI teaches group about the importance of reading and writing and provides literacy classes for them. PARI teaches group the importance of group IG projects and helps implement them. PARI teaches at least 4 types of IGA skills for group members.
Cooperation
60% of group members have passed basic literacy course. 3 members are capable of planning and implementing IG projects. 50% of members have skills in 3 types of IGAS and apply them.
Consultancy
80% of members have completed post-course classes. 5 members have planned 4 implemented IG projects. 70% of members of knowledge to establish a minimum of 3 types of IGA and apply these skills. 80% of members can give clear-cut answers about health education and apply this knowledge in their life. 60% of members apply modern methods in agriculture.
Literacy
Project planning and implementation Skilled group members for at least three types of IG project Health education arrangements of community Agriculture
PARI gives ideas to group members about health education. PARI encourages group members to cultivate vegetables in their yards.
60% of members can give a clear-cut answer relating to health education. 40% of members get vegetables from their own yards and think about modern methods of agriculture.
11
MANAGEMENT SKILL
Planning and implementati on Responsibility allocation
PARI teaches group the importance of planning and helps with planning and implementation. PARI teaches group about the importance of responsibility allocation and encourages members to take responsibilities. PARI teaches group about the importance of groups work coordination and encourages skill development. PARI explains about the merits and demerits of projects PARI teaches group about importance of CCC cooperation in their projects and planning.
Cooperation
4 members are capable of planning and have a specific 3-month plan. Groups responsibility allocation 50% done by members and 50% done by PARI 3 members coordinate in each of the tasks of the co-op.
Consultancy
5 members are capable of planning and group has a specific 60month plan. Groups responsibility allocation 75% done by members and 25% done by PARI 5 members do coordination task.
Groups skill achievement in coordination work Project monitoring and evaluation Cooperation with CCC in project planning, implementati on and evaluation
5 members can share about merits and demerits of their project Groups delegate attends the CCC meeting and presents reports.
7 members can do monitoring and evaluating of their project with little assistance from PARI When needed, the group takes responsibility for CCC project implementation and receives benefits.
12
COMMUNITY CONTROL
PARI teaches groups about importance of resolution writing and encourages them to do so. PARI teaches group about the importance of leadership development and provides training. PARI teaches group about the importance of weekly meetings and encourages regular attendance.
Cooperation
6 members can share about the necessity of resolution. PARI writes up resolution according to dictation of group members, which they abide by. In resolution book, rotational leadership decision has been written. At least 70% of group members attend weekly meetings, participate in group discussions and with the cooperation of PARI are capable to identify and share their problems. The group has work linkage in their community. Group members make decisions jointly.
Consultancy
7 members can share about the necessity of resolution and write it up with partial assistance from PARI Executive committee has been changed and there is scope for leadership training. In group meetings, 60% of attending members are taking part in discussions, decision-making, sharing their problems and, with little assistance from PARI, resolving them. The group has good work linkage with their community. In case of requirement, mens and womens groups meet jointly.
Decision-making, documentation and implementation
Leadership
Participation and conflict resolution
Existing relationship between group and community Role of group to bring about parity among men and women
PARI teaches group the importance of maintaining a good relationship with the community PARI teaches group about the equal gender rights and encourages members to practice them in their lives.
13
Bangladesh & India Ranking and Reporting Tools
14
ECUADOR TOOL
DEVELOPED BY: CRWRC and partners in Ecuador HISTORY: The prototype tool was created during an October 2005 workshop. This tool is contextualized each time it is used with a new community. As of December 2006, the tool has mostly been used by church groups active in their communities. The plan is to eventually include other community members in the assessment process. PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. Partner staff visited communities and asked the question, In a transforming community, what would you expect to see? To hear? To feel? 2. Using the answers to this question, partner staff prepared the tool, indicators, and questions during a workshop. 3. As part of the same workshop, partner staff tested the tools, indicators, and questions in several communities and refined the tool based on their feedback. 4. The tool is adapted by each community according to fit their particular situation. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Community leaders are trained by partner staff and volunteers to facilitate the tool. 2. A facilitator asks the questions associated with each indicator. 3. The participants vote on the indicator by lining up in front of the persons holding the cards with the number or symbol used for ranking. 4. The symbol or number with the longest line is marked on a chart. TIME AND FREQUENCY OF USE: about 3 hours at least once a year. CONTEXT OS USE: Mainly in agricultural communities of Quichua-speaking people in the mountain and tropical rainforest regions. There are literate and illite rate people in each community. CRWRCs partners in Ecuador have similar strategies and share a language. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Community members facilitate the evaluation process. Community groups adapt the prototype tool and choose their own symbol for ranking. The use of symbols for ranking encourages participation of those who have not gone to school. Using only a few questions for each capacity area makes engagement of non-literates easier. CHALLENGES: As our partner agencies work through their affiliated churches, the groups tended to evaluate the church rather than the whole community. Indicator values dropped considerably when the group began to evaluate the community as a whole. The challenge is to get representatives of the whole community involved in the process. WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Rob and Betty Wood crwrc@accessinter.net
15
Three Sets of Indicators Developed by Communities in Ecuador Pisambilla Group

Dimensions Indicators
1. Teaching in church
Questions
1. What are some examples of what is taught? What topics would you like to know more about? 2. Has church attendance improved? Is family life improving? Please give examples. How has the participation of women increased? 3. How would you rate the collaboration in mingas? Do people fulfill their commitments? Are there groups that study the Bible together? 1. How would you rate the level of education of the community? 2. How many people use organic fertilizers? How many continue using newly learned techniques? 3. Does the community have a development committee? Does it have statutes and internal policy? Are the people aware of & do they follow these statutes and policies? 4. What have been the improvements in environmental health as a result of new learning? 1. What is the average number of sheep per family? How many families have a cow? 2. How many families keep track of their income and expenses? 1. Does the community have a long-range plan? Who made it? Are you all in agreement with the plan? Why or why not?
Spiritual Transformation
2. Behaviour Change 3. Improvement of interpersonal relationships.
1. Level of education. 2. Improved techniques for production
Learning
3. The community is more organized 4. Improved environmental health. 1. Income level. 2. Accounting for income and expenses 1. Participatory planning
Economic Resources
Shared Vision
1. Conservation of the parramos.
Environment
2. Contamination
1. Does the community have a nursery of native trees? What are the affects of planting species that arent native to this area? 2. What chemical products are used in the community? What training have you received in the use of these chemicals?What do you do with garbage?
happy/sad faces
Malo
Regular Bueno
Muy Bueno
Group Pisambilla 16
Cuarto Lote Group

Dimen. Indicators
1. % of the population in churches 2. Quality of the relationship of the churches in the community 3. Participation of the church in community activities 4. The type of change the church has made in people 1. Leader elected in a participatory process 2. Leadership with a Biblical worldview 3. Quality of the relationship the leader promotes b/n church & community 4. The leader can: a) relate well with others b) resolve problems c) train other leaders 1. An integral vision of the future of the community has been developed. 2. Level of community participation in developing the vision.
Questions
1. How many people live in the community? How many people attend church? 2. What type of relationship is maintained b/n church & community? good, +/-, bad 3. How many church members actively participate in community activities? 4. What behavioural changes have you seen in people since the last evaluation? 1. How was the leader elected? 2. What does the leader do to show that she/he is following Gods will? 3. What has the leader done to promote a good relationship of the church in the community? 4. How does the leader relate with others? What type of conflict resolution or problem solving does the leader do in the community? How has the leader trained new leaders? 1. What is the community vision? Where is it written? What aspects of community life are included n the vision? 2. How many people participated in writing the vision? Were all community groups involved? 1. Who participates in community activities? 2. What are the sources of income in this community? 3. What does the community do to prevent soil erosion, deforestation and contamination? 4. What is the average level of education in the community? How does existing education contribute to community development? 5. How do you feel community resources are administered here?
Biblical Principles
Leadership
Shared Vision
1. Human resources
Resources, Know-ledge, 3. Natural resources Skills

4. Education 5. Administration
2. Economic resources
Group Cuarto Lote:
Numbers
Quichua language
Malo Mana Alli
Regular Shina Shinalla
Bueno Alli
Muy Bueno Sumak Alli
17
San Pablito Group

Dimensions
Spiritual Transformation
Indicators
1. Respect for God 2. Respect for His creation
Questions
1. How is the fear of God manifested? Is there interest in knowing Gods word? Are neighbors loved and respected? Do you believe God can change the life in a community? 2. How do you care for nature? Do you use development techniques? 1. What percentage of people is illiterate? 2. What percentage of children completes primary or secondary school? 3. Are young people being trained? 4. What training has happened in the last 6 months? 5. Have newly learned techniques and knowledge been applied? 1. How many leaders does the community have? 2. How were they elected? 3. Do we support our leaders? 4. What do leaders do to resolve problems in the community? 5. Are the forming new leaders? 1. Does the community have legal recognition and internal rules? 2. Do community and church leaders work together in for the development of programs and projects? What projects have been completed this year?
Education
1. Educational level 2. Permanent (continual) training
Leadership
1. Permanent training 2. Forming new leaders with a Biblical worldview 3. Good at orienting
Sense of Community
1. Organized community 2. Execution of community projects
phases of the moon
Malo
Group San Pablito:
Regular
Bueno
18
FULFULDE FOCUS QUESTION GUIDE

DEVELOPED BY: Mary Crickmore HISTORY: This tool was developed for a literacy program with more than eighty Fulfulde-speaking villages in the Sahel region of Mali. Village literacy volunteers manage box libraries, some help communities organize literacy classes locally, and the library users encourage their neighbors to act on new information being learned from reading materials. Some government agencies and many NGOs are doing different though frequently overlapping work in this region. Many have taught literacy and then left with no follow-up. An important gap in the interventions of NGOs diagnosed by CRWRC was a need for reading materials, specifically for literature in the vernacular language, on legal rights, civic education, and health issues such as AIDS. The library/literature program was supplemented by CRWRC with some radio programming since the literacy rate is low. This CCI tool attempts to assess the overall progress in community capacity, which has resulted from the mix of interventions from CRWRC and others. We realize that whatever progress there is cannot be attributed to any one NGO or other actor, in this complex context. DATE DEVELOPED: Began in 2004 PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. Questions were developed for community capacity assessment with villages that are part of a village box library program. 2. They were tested with individual leaders because, initially, the culture mitigated against speaking publicly about things that have not gone well. 3. Questions were revised based on experience. One side of the form is Fulfulde and the other side is French; both are filled in so that a non-Fulfulde speaker can read and tabulate. 4. As leaders became more comfortable with talking frankly about these issues, the assessments were done with focus groups of community leaders. 5. Results are compared from one year to the next. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Animators from the grass-roots association that manages the library program travel out to villages and use the questions with focus groups of community leaders. 2. Animators take along the written community plans of the previous year. TIME TO FACILIATE AND FREQUENCY OF USE: About a half day with each community once a year CONTEXT: Some community leaders are not literate in Fulfulde or French, though those who manage box libraries are. Evaluations must be handled sensitively since culturally it is difficult to talk about anything that would cause shame in the public arena. The Fulani people both resisted or were denied schooling under colonization. Sending kids to school is a good indicator of community development and community capacity. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Covers a large number of villages with very few staff, and enables detailed monitoring at low cost Community leaders comfortable in the focus group setting The form written in two languages can be tabulated by local people who are not literate in French. It produces extensive written information that can be analyzed later in the CRWRC office to look for trends and patterns. CHALLENGES: Our hope to strengthen this approach, and what has been requested by the village leaders as well, is that we will initiate meetings which bring people from different villages together for learning, rather than have the animators just go out to meet with individual villages. They have also proposed a buddy system in which leaders from two villages meet together, mutually monitor one another, and share learnings. WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: MaryCrickmore@compuserve.com
19
Fulfulde Focus Question Guide (2006)

Name of village ________________________ Names of respondents
Were there any conflicts in your village in 2006? If yes, what did you do to resolve these conflicts?
How are your relationships with local government, other NGOs, and other structures outside of your village?
Has your village made progress or accomplished work during 2006? Explain.
How many children were in school in 2006? __________ How many are currently in school? ___________ What do you appreciate about the school? What are your concerns?
What individuals worked towards the well-being of your villages in 2006? (Do not forget to appreciate and thank them!
What are your objectives for your village in 2007 (for development and progress?)
20
One page of report on 39 villages of Tenenkou with box libraries 2006

Women using library Men using library Summary of self-report on community 2006 CED- center of education for development CGS- committee for management of a school local government, commune- local government clinic- community health center 20 11 A large number of the population has been to school. Lots of NGOs have worked in this village and reading has opened a door of knowledge. Their upcoming goals are to construct an irrigated area, do reforestation, and planting of bourgou fodder for cows. 2 10 33 children are in school in this village which is experiencing harmony and good sense of community. The main area of new knowledge acquired is HIV AIDS. In the future the village hopes to establish a savings and loan fund. 8 6 This village has 60 children in school. Womens associations work hard for the well-being of the village. Through literacy people have learned how to manage activities. The village has as objective getting a grain mill and they have begun saving money towards purchase of the mill. They have experience working with NGOs. 20 15 40 children go to school. The teachers of the CED (Center for development education, for older youths) and those teaching in Fulfulde make major efforts in the development of the village. The relations with the local government and the clinic (Community Health Center) are wellestablished. AMPRODE Sahel is the NGO who has worked in the village. The objective of the village is to open a school. 2 7 Only 5 children go to school in this village which has good relations with the local government and the clinic. There is harmony among the inhabitants. Reading has given the village the capacity to do health education on diseases. Their ambition is to have a school in the future. 4 9 In this village mutual aid and solidarity prevail, and it has good relations with the local government and the clinic. Many people have traveled from this village to get work outside of Mali, and these rich relatives do much for the general well-being. 13 children go to school. The village has learned new skills in the areas of managing cereal banks, savings and loan funds, agriculture and gardening. 5 8 There is harmony and sense of community is this village, and its relations with the local government and the clinic are good. Children are in school, and the different village committees invest a lot for development of the village. They have experience working with NGOs. Their priorities for the future are a literacy center and a grain mill. 30 15 Not only are there harmonious relations in the village, they maintain good relations with the local government and the clinic. Some children are in school and the members of the CGS (school board) are very involved. With clean drinking water thanks to a well project, the health of the population improved, and literacy has given them new knowledge in health.
Village name
1 DIONDIORI
2DIAFARABE
3KONA MALI
4PENGA
5FOMBANA
6KOMMBE
7TENEMA
8GILE
TOTAL: __91__women and __81___men are using the box library in these villages.
21
NICARAGUA TOOL
DEVELOPED BY: CRWRC and partners in Nicaragua HISTORY: Fourteen communities have adapted and begun to use this tool. This pilot test has gone well: community promoters are enthusiastic, and community members have adjusted the tool to fit their situations. It will take a few years before we can decide whether or not the tool has been valuable. PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. CRWRCs partners in Nicaragua met and named a task force assigned to come u p with a tool for their country. 2. The task force produced the tool and trained community-level promoters to lead communities in adapting and applying the tool. 3. Two communities have adapted the tool to their own situation. 4. Each community creates a large chart with blank columns for scoring each dimension of community capacity as well as a column for action steps. 6. The charts are laminated so that they can be reused. Normally they are displayed until the next evaluation period. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Evaluation is carried out by between 5 and 20 community stakeholders involved in programming (community leaders, church leaders, participants). 2. As each dimension of transformation is ranked on a scale of 1-5, the result is marked on the chart. 3. Each community decides on their own process to rank the community using a participatory process. Most often they choose locations in the room, each location representing a level. After reflecting on the dimension, they independently physically move to the level where they think the community should be ranked. The group at each level develops an argument to defend their choice. After all the arguments are presented, individuals may reposition themselves if they feel persuaded. The level with the most representation becomes the official level for the next evaluation period. 4. A simple plan is then agreed upon to determine what needs to be done to move to the next level. TIME AND FREQUENCY OF USE: The process can take from 2-4 hours. Ideally, the exercise is repeated annually. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Participants have the opportunity to change their scoring after hearing one anothers arguments. The tool incorporates a column for planning action steps in each dimension. The tool is laminated so that it can be posted and reused. CHALLENGES: If the group merely evaluates itself but doesnt analyze the situation or plan any future action steps, the monitoring has little use. WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Mark VanderWees crwrcnic@ibw.com.ni
22
Nicaragua Laminated Assessment and Planning Poster
Photo of Process (note laminated poster in top right-hand corner)
23
NIGER PROTOCOL
DEVELOPED BY: CRWRC and partners in Niger HISTORY: Initial protocol was used during a 2003 partner evaluation. The tool was refined several years in a row until the translation was right. DATE DEVELOPED: May 2003 PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. Questions were developed by CRWRCs partner ACEN in collaboration with Ary Vreeken, based on research in Nepal in 1993 and a 2003 partner evaluation in Niger. 2. Each year the questions (and their translation) were improved to help communities best represent their concept of development. 3. Sub-questions were developed to go with the questions in order to encourage communities to get beyond superficial answers. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Each year, partner staff meet with communities for an evaluation and planning session during which communities review all the development activities they have undertaken over the year, select activities for the coming year, and set indicators by which to measure their progress. The question protocol is introduced during this process to determine community capacity objectives for the year. 2. Community animators pose the questions to the community group. They encourage further reflection by using the sub-questions. 3. Plans for capacity-building are made based on the answers and subsequent discussion. 4. Each communitys plans are kept on file. TIME TO ADMINISTER AND FREQUENCY: Discussion takes about an hour. Capacity assessment takes place once a year as part of a planning/evaluation cycle, which also includes evaluation and planning of development initiatives. Plans are reviewed throughout the year. CONTEXT IN WHICH TOOL WAS DEVELOPED: Sparsely populated rural area with three local languages. Low literacy rate. Most partner board members are literate in the local language only. Christian minoritylanguage partner is working with Christian and Muslim minority-language and majority-language communities. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Very simple and easily used without demanding lots of forms and paper Questions based on the experience of the community Uses a systems approach where no detailed objectives are specified at the outset, and emphasis is put on generating feedback and learning as the intervention proceeds CHALLENGES: Does not give an overall picture of how a community is progressing from year to year or in comparison with other communities. Niger is working on an observation tool used by community animators as a compliment to the question protocol. (See Rubric) Donors wary of funding a flexible systems approach to monitoring and evaluation WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Harouna Issaka crwrc@intnet.ne
24
Niger Protocol
What does a village need in order to develop itself?

To clarify, you can ask:
What must happen for a village to develop itself?

Sub-question to deepen the discussion:
Give EXAMPLES of this in your village.

With some responses, you can ask:
WHY is this a good example of what has to happen for a village to develop itself?
If the participants come up with a list, you can ask:
What items on this list are most important for you?
What has your group done in this village that has contributed to good development?
Sub-questions to deepen the discussion:
How did you decide to do this work? Who did this work? (Give examples) Who benefited from this work? (Give examples)
25
SENEGAL ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS PROFILE

ADAPTED BY: CRWRC, partners, and community action groups in Senegal HISTORY: The organizational effectiveness profile is a self-assessment tool that has been adapted in Senegal for use with local community action groups. The tool is based on the model of effectiveness developed by the Gore Institute in Senegal. The model posits two fundamental dimensions in managing organizations: the external/internal dimension and the socio/technical dimension. An effective organization finds the balance in managing the 4 quadrants formed by crossing these two dimensions: people (internal, social); accountability (internal, technical); change (external, social); and projects (external, technical). PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. Quinns competing values model was applied to the Gore management model to develop the initial instrument and questionnaire statements. 2. These were adapted in Senegal for use with community action groups. 3. Groups develop their own evaluation symbols and statements as they become accustomed to the tool. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Participants are given a questionnaire with 24 statements describing a group. They rate their own group according to the scale provided. 2. Individual score sheets are filled out, and totals are tabulated. 3. Participants chart their individual ratings on a large spider diagram placed where all can see it. 4. Participants examine the diagram and are invited to remark on what they see: where the dots are clustered for each characteristic, what this tells them about their group, how well balanced the results are for their group. CONTEXT OF USE: Urban community action groups of young people. Most groups have at least one literate member. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Based on a tested management model Adaptable for participants with little or no literacy Circular form that makes visible the relationships between effectiveness areas and any imbalances in group management CHALLENGES: Groups need to use the tool a few times before they fully understand it. WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Wyva Hasselblad: crwrcsen@sentoo.sn Piet Human & Andr Zaaiman (1995) Managing Towards Self-Reliance: Effectiveness of Organisations in Africa, Cape Town, South Africa: Phoenix Publishing in association with The Gore Institute, Dakar, Sngal R.E. Quinn (1990) Beyond Rational Management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
26
Senegal Organizational Effectiveness Profile Name of Organization or Group __________________________ Date__________
Donations Democracy
Creativity Commitment
Results Evaluation
Coordination
Goal clarity
27
Statements for Senegal Organizational Effectiveness Profile

Listed below are a series of statements which describe your organisation. Indicate to what extent these statements occur in your organisation. Write the number on the line following the statement. Use the scale 1 5 5 = occurs all the time 2 = occurs sometimes 4 = occurs very frequently 1 = occurs almost never 3 = occurs frequently 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Our work process is clear to everyone in the organisation ____ Everyone makes an equal contribution to decisions through-out our organisation at every level ____ Our work process is guided by rules and procedures. ____ I know how to monitor the success of the participants in my groups____ The action change indicators are well understood by everyone in the organisation ____ Our projects are accomplished on time ____ Our staff uses the concept of transformation in planning our work strategies ____ All staff respect the time frame of our programs ____ Our working conditions are stable and predictable ____ Our organisation has a systematic strategy (way, procedure) for assessing change in our target areas _____ My creative solutions are used by my organisation ____ There is a positive team spirit between every level of our organisation ____ I have a written plan regarding how to improve my own work results ____ Our organisation emphasises measurement of results ____ Decision-making about planning and execution of project activities is consensual ____ External stakeholders consider our organisation to be effective ____ Our organisation responds quickly and effectively to external change in our target areas and program environment____ Our actions are well planned, and we follow those plans in carrying out our activities____ Our organisation is constantly improving results ____ Everyone in our organisation feels that they belong & are appreciated ____ We have many requests from people who want to join our groups ____ We use many sources of information in order to improve our work ____ I understand the concept of transformation in peoples lives ____ Our staff is constantly learning and using new methods to accomplish our work ____
28
Scoreing for Senegal Organizational Effectiveness Profile

Section a. question 2 question 11 question 24 total Section b. question 12 question 15 question 20 total Section c. question 6 question 8 question 18 total Section d. question 1 question 4 question 23 total Section e. question 9 question 13 question 5 total Section f. question 3 question 14 question 10 total _____ _____ _____ _____ 3 Section g. question 7 question 19 question 22 total Section h. question 16 question 17 question 21 total _____ _____ _____ _____ 3 =_____
= _____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3 = _____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3=_____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3 = _____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3 = _____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3 =
_____
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3 =
_____
29
TANZANIA LEVEL FOUR INDICATORS

DEVELOPED BY: CRWRC Tanzania country team in collaboration with communities HISTORY: The tool was developed through a series of Tanzania country team meetings interspersed by research and testing with communities. Indicators for ultimate goals (Level 4) in each dimension have been defined. The next step will be to define indicators for levels 1-3. DATE DEVELOPED: A work in progress which began in 2004 PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. During the 2004 Tanzania country conference, staff, partners, and community representatives worked in groups to answer the question: What are the indicators of change or movement of change (transformation) towards a community successfully responding to their own needs? 2. The following year, the country team identified six capacity areas: management and leadership, networking, planning, resources, ownership, and vision and mission. 3. They went back to the communities and partners to define the desired end result for each of the six dimensions and refined these in the 2007 country conference. 4. In 2007-2008, they will use these definitions for planning capacity development with communities and consult again in a year to begin defining the intermediate goals for capacity development (indicators for each step). PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Development officer reviews goals for each dimension with communities and helps them determine where they are in each capacity area at the time of planning. 2. Development officer helps them define annual SMART objectives for each dimension. 3. They negotiate a plan that includes the long term goal for each dimension of capacity, the goal for the current year, the role of community, and the role of the community officer. 4. At the end of the year, each community will review their plan to determine which objectives they met, which they did not, and why. This information will be used to make the following years plans. 5. Partners will report the level of each community along with a one sentence description of the current situation for each capacity area. TIME TO FACILIATE AND FREQUENCY OF USE: The time depends on the partner and community. This tool is used annually. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: The tool will help communities to monitor their growth and focus on priorities. The tool will help partners determine the frequency of consultation needed for each community. CHALLENGES: Finding capacity areas that determine the strength of the community to continue development even when set back by drought, disease, or insect infestations Mitigating against communities thinking that if they achieve their community capacity goals, they will be abandoned by the partner WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Margaret Njuguna: njuguna@africaonline.co.tz
30
Tanzania Level Four Indicators

Capacity area End result showing capacity at its highest level 4
Group has a constitution / by-laws. Group has policies guiding each of their projects, e.g. savings & credit policy. Group plans for their own meetings, and over 80% members attend planned meetings. Group has accountable leadership. Leadership structure is clear and well understood by members. There is respect among members. Leadership has a vision of where the group wants to go in terms of their plans and objectives. Group members relate well to each other and participate in individual needs of their members. Group has relationships with other groups and development organizations in the neighborhood. Group members make learning and exchange tours with other groups far and wide. The local government knows the group and is sometimes involved in group activities, e.g. special meetings. Group members are involved in development plans beyond their group, for example, government planned tree planting campaigns, cleanliness campaigns, etc. Group has short and medium term plans they are implementing. Group has a structure that oversees the implementation of their plans. A report on progress of implementation of plans/projects is prepared periodically. Group assesses or evaluates implementation of their plans each year. Group has a clear plan on job distribution and members know their roles well. Group knows the resources available locally and utilizes those resources well, for example, group members doing gardening and those with livestock consult regularly with the local government agriculture and livestock extension workers. Group has working tools that they require to implement their plans. For example, a women sewing group has the required sewing machines and accessories. Group has their own office, dedicated members who volunteer for the benefit of group members, and immovable assets. Group has some savings of cash money for immediate needs and emergencies. Group has members within who are trained and skilled in different areas, e.g. HIV/AIDS trainer, financial records expert, etc. Group members fully participate in activities towards their desired goal or result. Group members volunteer freely in activities of their group. Group members freely express their wish to be leaders and fully participate in group election exercises. Group is registered with the local government and a community based organization (CBO), and certificate or registration document is well kept and or displayed in their office. Group has a bank account, and documents are well kept. Group has group records (membership list, minutes of their meetings, financial records including bank books, ledgers for individual group members showing savings or share contributions, plans and budgets, policies, constitution, periodical implementation reports, etc.).
Management & Leadership
Networking & communication
Planning
Resources
Ownership
Ownership
31

Capacity area End result showing capacity at its highest level 4
Group has a purpose statement of why they exist. Group members periodically review their purpose of existence. Group has a strategy towards reaching their planned goals. Group has governing rules to help them in implementation of plans. Group makes short term plans for short term goals.
Vision & Mission
32
ADAPTED CHILD SURVIVAL SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT (CSSA)

ADAPTED BY: CRWRC, partners, and groups in Bangladesh HISTORY: The child survival sustainability assessment (CSSA) methodology is derived from a 2-year collaborative research effort between the Child Survival Technical Support Project (CSTS+), Johns Hopkins University and a large number of US-based NGOs that implement child health programs and participate as members of the Child Survival Collaboration and Resources Group (CORE). The CSSA methodology provides both a framework for measuring progress towards sustainability and a participatory process for assessment involving communities and local partners. The original framework for the assessment includes three dimensions, each of which has two components (See Annex 1). CRWRC began using the CSSA framework in February 2005 as part of a technical assistance grant awarded by USAID in collaboration with CSTS+. CRWRC was specifically mandated in the proposal to explore the role of the communitys core value s and beliefs in child survival sustainability. CRWRC organized workshops and focus groups to explore values leading to child survival in the Bangladesh context. Monitoring and reporting on values and attitudes has not yet been integrated into the CSSA reporting system; however, CRWRC continues to look into the feasibility of assessing community values. PROCESS USED TO ADAPT AND FACILITATE THE TOOL: 1. Using a participatory approach, define the system to be assessed, its vision and goals 2. Identify elements/objectives for each dimension 3. Choose indicators to measure progress on the determined elements/objectives 4. Measure the status of these indicators choosing appropriate evaluation tools. (In Bangladesh, partners used the OCI tool to measure organizational capacity and viability and an existing CCI tool to measure community competence. They used the Knowledge, Practice, and Coverage Surveys to measure health status and developed a Health Facilities Assessment (HFA) to measure health services. They are still wrestling with the best way to measure the external factors listed in the 6th component.) 5. Combine the indicators and build indices to describe the situation in each dimension 6. Review results and modify programmatic interventions or policies CONTEXT OF USE: CRWRC works with three partner NGOs in three different districts in Bangladesh. They continue to work with each partner organization to select the most appropriate indicators for each of the six components. Each partner organization reports on their progress towards sustainability every six months. This information is shared with the health technical teams of the community-based organizations (Peoples Institutions) in order to establish ownership of the sustainability goals. The dashboard is used to make program decisions concerning strategic focus areas for sustainability for the next six months. A completed dashboard can be found in Annex 2. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: A single tool pulls together outcome measures, capacity measures, and external factors. CSSA can be used as a monitoring tool to assess progress towards sustainability or an evaluative tool to assess the likelihood of program sustainability. Sustainability dashboard makes visible the relationships between the six components of sustainability in order to make program decisions concerning strategic focus areas. The participatory approach creates ownership of sustainability goals. CHALLENGES: It is difficult to come to consensus on indicators that are community-owned as well as effective measures for each component. Building indices to assess progress in each component may require technical assistance from someone who has a background in statistics.
33

WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Nancy ten Broke at nwrc@agni.com Will Story at storyw@crcna.ca A detailed list of evaluation tools for each component of the framework can be found on the CSTS+ website http://www.childsurvival.com/documents/CSTS/sustainability.cfm Will Story (2006) The Role of Values in Assessing Child Survival Sustainability Yourkavitch J, Ryan L, and Sarriot E. 2004. Lessons Learned from Applying the Child Survival Sustainability Assessment (CSSA) Framework to Seven Maternal and Child Health Projects. CSTS+ and USAID. Sarriot EG, Winch PJ, Ryan LJ, Bowie J, Kouletio M, Swedberg E, LeBan K, Edison J, Welch R, and Pacqu MC. 2004. A Methodological Approach and Framework for Sustainability Assessment in NGO-Implemented Primary Health Care Programs. International Journal of Health Planning and Management. 19: 23-41.
34
Annex 1: Child Survival Sustainability Assessment
CRWRC modification of CSSA framework
Dimension 3: Community and Social Ecological Dimension 1: Health and Health Services Dimension 2: Organizational
Core Values and Beliefs
35
Annex 2: SATHI Project Indicators and Dashboard
SATHI 'Sustainability Dashboard'

Health 100 80 Org. Viability 60 40 20 0 Health Services
Achievement Jun-06 Achievement Dec-05 Baseline
Org. Capa
Comm. Capa
Envirmt
36
SELF ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR AIDS COMPETENCE

CREATED BY: The Constellation for AIDS Competence. This is the only tool in this resource kit that was neither created nor, as yet, adapted by CRWRC staff or partners. It was included because it is an innovative example of how the principles of self assessment of community capacity can be applied to specific challenges such as HIV/AIDS. HISTORY: The Constellation for AIDS Competence is a Belgian NGO created in 2005. The original twelve members formed the organization based on their belief in people's capacity to respond to the HIV/AIDS threat. The Constellation stimulates the development of facilitation teams, supporting communities on their way to AIDS competence. Originally formed to help create a world where AIDS competence spreads faster than the AIDS virus, this approach is currently also being applied to the challenges of malaria and tuberculosis. The self-assessment framework is part of a set of tools stimulating local ownership of the problem, dialogue, change within communities, and sharing experiences between local actors. PROCESS USED TO FACILITATE THE TOOL: The Self Assessment framework allows communities to assess themselves on 10 practices according to a level between 1 and 5. The levels for each practice are defined in the tool. In a Self Assessment, a community agrees upon: 1. A level (from 1 to 5) for each practice 2. A target level for each practice 3. The practices on which they want to concentrate 4. Actions they want to undertake to reach the target levels 5. A time frame within which they will reach each target level 6. Indicators which will let them know that they have reached each target level CONTEXT OF USE: Currently AIDS Constellation has coaches in 20 countries in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Australia. Major partners are the Belgian Technical Co-operation and RDC Competence in the DRC, the Aga Khan Foundation in Kenya, the World Health Organization in Papua New Guinea, the Salvation Army in Congo, Handicap International, Plan International in Cameroon, Roll Back Malaria in 12 countries and many others. STRENGTHS: Aligned with community-based/community-owned approach to development An example of how capacity to address a specific development challenge can be built into a capacity assessment tool Part of a set of new tools including The River which maps competencies of communities in one region so that that can be matched for exchange visits where each has something to offer the other CHALLENGES: Integrating competencies for specific issues such as HIV/AIDS into current capacity-assessment tools without creating assessment overload WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: http://www.aidscompetence.org Power Point: HIV/AIDS There is Another Way! Excellent explanation plus examples of tools http://www.coregroup.org/resources/spring07_reports.cfm#thursday http://www.aidscompetence.org/content/2.14_knowledge_asset.htm Click on bottom right hand link for a knowledge asset on how to facilitate a self-assessment
37
Self Assessment Framework for AIDS Competence

1. We are aware of The issue 1. Acknowledgement and recognition 2. Inclusion
We know that HIV and AIDS exist. We know that some of our families are particularly infected and/or affected. We have the basic knowledge for prevention and care. We are aware of the existence of ARVs. We understand the concept and are aware of general factors of vulnerability. We appreciate the need to learn. We recognize the need to measure change. We adapt our response following external interventions. We are aware that AIDS challenges our ways of working. We realize the importance of mobilizing our resources.
2. We react
We know enough about HIV/AIDS in order to respond. We understand the necessity to include in our response persons and families that are particularly affected. We understand the link between care and prevention. We know where and how to access ARVs. We have identified our own factors of vulnerability to HIV. We adopt good practice from outside. We know how to measure change. We recognize that we need to adapt our response to our results, to lessons learned from others and to scientific progress. We seek to mobilize our own strengths. We wait for help from others to implement the activities they determine.
3. We act
We publicly recognize that HIV/AIDS is affecting us as a group/community. We occasionally include in our response people particularly affected by HIV/AIDS. Some of our actions link care with prevention. ARVs are available for some of us who need them. Our response includes some specific actions to address our own vulnerability to HIV. We sometimes exchange our viewpoints to draw lessons from our actions. We occasionally measure our own groups change. We can provide examples of adaptation of our response. We work as teams to mobilize our own strengths, assess our progress, and resolve problems as we recognize them. We take some initiatives based on our own resources.
4. Our performance is Satisfying

We regularly discuss AIDS and have a common program of action to respond. Affected persons are systematically involved n all stages of our response. As a community we systematically link care and prevention activities. Some of us are using ARVs. We systematically address our own factors of vulnerability. We learn, share and apply what we learn regularly and seek people with relevant experience to help us. We measure our change continuously and can demonstrate measurable improvement. We regularly take stock to adapt our response. We find our own solutions and access advice from others. We identify possible sources of support to complement our own strengths.
5. The practice is part of our life-style

Our response to AIDS is part of our daily life. We know our own status and act from strength. Affected persons and families actively take part in all aspects of society. Care strengthens our relations and helps us change. All those in need of ARV drugs are using them effectively. Our actions to address vulnerability to HIV strengthens us in addressing other challenges. We continuously learn how we can respond better to HIV/AIDS and share our experiences with others. We invite others to share our experience of change. We see implications for the future and adapt to meet them. We systematically seek to improve our ways of working and share our experiences with others. We use our own resources and access other resources to achieve more and have planned for the future.
3. Linking care with prevention 4. Access to treatment 5. Identify and address vulnerability 6. Learning and transfer 7. Measuring change 8. Adapting our response 9. Ways of working 10. Mobilizing resources
38
TOOLS TO USE WITH PARTNERS
39
DEVELOPED BY: Jan Disselkoen
RUBRIC FOR PARTNER STAFF ASSESSMENT OF COMMUNITY CAPACITY
HISTORY: A rubric is a tool frequently used for evaluation of student writing. Rather than assigning numerical values, a profile is created by circling a description under each category. The Niger example was developed to compliment the Niger question protocol, which does not provide information necessary to assess a communitys progress over time or to compare it with other communities. The concept of the tool has received positive feedback from colleagues in CRWRC as well as from the CIDA evaluator. A version adapted to the assessment of village communities is currently being field tested in Sierra Leone. DATE DEVELOPED: May 2006 PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: 1. Categories come from CRWRC 6 dimensions. 2. Descriptions are based on experience with partners in Niger. PROCESS TO FACILITATE THE USE OF THE TOOL: 1. Partner community animation staff contextualize and translate descriptions for each community capacity dimension. 2. Based on their observations during the evaluation period, community animators circle the descriptions that best fit the community. They test this on two or three communities they know well and then incorporate feedback from this process to modify the descriptions. 3. Animators complete the modified form for all communities with which they work. 4. Animators use what they learn from assessment process to write annual work plans about interventions in specific communities. Work plans are based both on their own and group assessments. 5. After a year, they repeat the assessment with the same groups and compare with past years results. TIME TO ADMINISTER AND FREQUENCY: Once a year as part of partner evaluation/planning cycle CONTEXT IN WHICH TOOL WAS DEVELOPED: Highly oral and non-analytical culture in which a complex written tool would be difficult to use directly with participants. Partner is working with groups, not with whole communities. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Validates what communities are saying about themselves Measures progress towards community sustainability rather than focusing only on end goals Helps partner staff think reflectively about each group with which they work so that they can gear their interventions to the level of the group CHALLENGES: Needs revision following pilot testing Should be used only as a complement to a participatory tool by which groups evaluate themselves Need to find a simple way to share results of this external assessment with groups WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Jan Disselkoen: disselkoenj@crcna.ca; Mary Crickmore at MaryCrickmore@compuserve.com
40
Rubric for Partner Staff Assessment of Community Capacity

Instructions: For each section, circle the description that best fits this group according to your observations of the group and the records you have been keeping on the group.
Seed
SHARED VISION
Seedling
Group shows evidence of understanding the need to work together and with the wider community to move forward. They have begun to share this vision with others in their community and are active in the formation of new groups.
Small tree
A vision based on shared values unites community members across groups and inspires and motivates them to undertake activities involving the wider community.
Fruit-bearing tree
Community members can describe their vision in detail, their progress towards achieving it, and what remains to be done. Their vision has expanded and become more realistic over time and shows understanding of development based on successful development experiences. Community members speak proudly of their history of development. There is trust and cooperation across ethnic, religious, gender, and class lines. Conflicts are dealt with. The community advocates for itself.
Individual group members seek primarily to improve their individual lives and those of their immediate family. They have chosen a name for their group that represents their values and have made by-laws by which their group is run.
SENSE OF COMMUNITY
The group is a safe place where everyone participates. Members attend meetings and pay their dues. They respect group decisions.
Group solidarity is evidenced by mutual trust and respect for group decisions. Group norms are applied equally. The groups plans include joint activities that will benefit group members and others close to them. Group conflicts are dealt with. Group members speak confidently of their growing resources and experience. Barriers to participation are recognized, and efforts are made to remove them. A variety of avenues of participation is accepted. Group members are becoming confident in their ability to improve their lives.
Community/group members talk about a shared history. They give priority to activities that benefit families and the community. Women and minorities advocate for themselves in the group/ community. People of diverse backgrounds work together on joint activities in harmony.
OWNERSHIP
Meeting times are fitted to group members needs. Decisions about group functioning and activities are deferred to the group.
Women are comfortable speaking up in mixed gender settings. People who choose to not join groups are benefiting from them. The community names issues, shapes solutions, carries them out and evaluates them.
Community/group members defend joint decisions when challenged. Innovation and risk-taking are common. Individuals can specify their own contributions to the development of their community or group. Leaders have taken over roles formerly filled by partner staff. They foster the development of new leaders as well as the development of new groups in other communities. They initiate activities with the partner and work together with leaders of other communities to achieve common goals.
LEADERSHIP
Groups define leadership roles and choose their leaders accordingly.
All members of group contribute to decisionmaking. Group activities continue when outside facilitator is not present.
Leaders build consensus among differing interest groups in community. They mobilize local physical and human resources for activities agreed on by the community. They share leadership or pass the baton to others when appropriate.
41
Seed
Group members realize the potential of growing their group funds. All financial transactions take place with the knowledge of the whole group. Knowledge of group process and of managing group and individual activities is growing ,
Seedling
All members of group have equal access to group resources. Group members are becoming more open about sharing their knowledge with other group members. The group is undertaking an increasing number of diverse activities. The group effectively manages and uses resources that belong to the group.
Small tree
Communities/groups identify the resources and skills they need in order to achieve plans for a diverse number of activities. They effectively manage and use community resources. Their contacts outside the community are diversifying. Members have equal access to and exchange information. Members who receive specific training pass on their learnings to other members of the community.
Fruit-bearing tree
Communities use a variety of resources and approaches to accomplish their goals. They identify knowledge, resources, and skills needed for ongoing development. They have built up sizeable local resources which they manage transparently and can locate and access resources outside the community. Community members with specific knowledge, gifts, and skills are recognized and sought out. There is a community culture of improvement by reflecting on experience and changing subsequent actions according to what has been learned.
ACCESS TO RESOURCES KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS
ONGOING LEARNING
Group members achieve outcomes they have set for themselves for individual activities. They begin to set group goals.
Make annual group plans and evaluate them with help from an outside facilitator. New plans show evidence of learning from experience.
Community-set indicators for success are SMART and results are consistently being achieved.
42
H-DIAGRAM FRAMEWORK FOR CONSIDERING IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT PRACTICE ON COMMUNITY CAPACITY

DEVELOPED BY: Winston Bosch, CRWRC Mali HISTORY: The framework was developed by CRWRC staff and given to a CRWRC partner in Mali to use as a reflection tool. The partner asked their field agents to adapt it into a survey for participants. This helped the partner put into words its intuitive knowledge about community capacity building and begin talking about it with participants. However, in this first use, it did not engender the strategic reflection at the partner level that was initially hoped for. To do so would require being intentional about the purpose of the tool and the group with which it is used. PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE TOOL: The basis of the tool is Mary Andersons Do No Harm model of relief, applied to practices for building sustainable communities. PROCESS FOR USE OF THE TOOL: 1. Moving from the center to the outer edges of the framework, think about how your development practice (decisions, activities, methodology) is born out of certain, and often implicit, ethical assumptions. 2. Explore your current strategies for development under the questions Why? Where? What? When? With Whom? By Whom? & How? 3. Reflecting on each question, ask yourself what implicit messages your current strategies and practices might be sending to communities about their capacity. 4. Do your current practices strengthen community capacity? Weaken it? Have no affect on it? 5. How could you use this information to improve or redesign your development practices and strategies so that they support the growth of community capacity? TIME TO USE AND FREQUENCY: During annual or end-of-phase evaluations; any time when strategy and design questions come up STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Helps partners reflect on development practice and strategies through the lens of how these enhance or undermine community capacity Serves as a launching point for improving or redesigning strategies and practices to be more consistent with community sustainability goals WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: Winston Bosch: wjbosch@mali.crwrc.org
43
Framework for Considering the Impact of Development Practice on Community Capacity

OPTIONS ELEMENTS THAT WEAKEN A COMMUNITY Lack of Shared Vision Why? Division Sense of Community DEVELOPMENT PRACTICE ELEMENTS THAT STRENGTHEN A COMMUNITY Shared Vision OPTIONS
Implicit Ethical Messages.
Lack of Ownership Poor or Selfish Leadership No Use of Community Assets, Knowledge and Skills No Learning from the Past No Real Spiritual Transformation AND / OR REDESIGN Community identified elements
Implicit Ethical Messages.
Where? What? When? With whom? By whom? How?
Ownership Leadership Assets, Knowledge and Skills Ongoing Learning Spiritual Transformation
AND / OR Community identified elements REDESIGN
44
PEOPLE VS PROJECT-CENTERED DEVELOPMENT CONTINUUM TOOL

DEVELOPED BY: Mark VanderWees and adapted by Jan Disselkoen HISTORY: The tool was originally developed as part of orientation materials for tour groups coming to Nicaragua. It was shared among team leaders and eventually reached Jan, who made it into a continuum for a workshop on community capacity building in Nigeria in 2006. PROCESS FOR USE OF THE TOOLWITH DEVELOPMENT PRACTITIONERS: 1. Introduce the handout and give time for participants to read it carefully. 2. Participants reflect individually on their own practice for each element on the continuum and mark on the line with two arrows where they currently are in their work with communities for that element. 3. Participants share their self-assessment with another person from the same organization or program. 4. On post-it notes, each person writes one idea of how they can make their work with communities more people centered. These are shared in plenary session. TIME TO USE AND FREQUENCY: Normally this tool could be used when introducing partner boards, staff, or donors to the concept of planning and assessing community capacity growth. It was used in Nigeria to show where community capacity building fits in the people-centered development paradigm. The learning task was preceded by a task on community visioning and followed by a task reviewing community development principles. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES: Helps development practitioners evaluate their own practice in relationship to key elements of people-centered development Serves as a launching point to a discussion of the importance of building community capacity WHERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT: disselkoenj@crcna.ca; For ideas of how to use it as part of work team or discovery tour orientation, contact Mark Vander Wees: crwrcnic@ibw.com.ni
45
Project-Centered Development/People-Centered Development Continuum

Project Centered People Centered
Short Term (Once it is done, it is done.) Infrastructure or program-orientation (water, schools, hospitals, health, agriculture, literacy)
- Time Frame -
Long Term (Part of longer process) People (researching, analyzing, planning, learning, organizing, evaluating, networking)
- Examples -
Funds ($$$) from outside - Main Resources Used - Local resources Outsiders Problem-solving approach which addresses the manifestations of poverty - Decision makers - Strategy Members of community Community visioning approach which builds community capacity to carry out their own development processes
46
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
47
Practical Capacity Development and Assessment Tools

Bopp, Michael et al (2002) Assessing Community Capacity for Change. Cochrane, Alberta: Four Worlds Centre for Development Learning. Can be ordered on line from Four Worlds Press.
This guide for assessing community capacity, is based on a case study of the Heart of the Land project in rural Alberta. The book includes hands-on information on how to use participatory research to define and assess community capacity.
Bopp, Michael and Judie (2001) Recreating the World: A Practical Guide to Building Sustainable Communities . Cochrane, AB: Four Worlds Press. Available from Amazon.com
Based on the authors experience working in community health development and change processes with Canadian indigenous peoples and around the world, this book maps out a principled approach to community development. Sixteen principles of community development are defined in the 2nd chapter. The 3rd chapter explores themes that community development consultants need to pay attention to. And the 4th chapter has a great selection of capacity-building tools.
Carter, Isabel (2001) Building the Capacity of Local Groups. Tear Fund. Available free on line in English, French, and Spanish at http://tilz.tearfund.org/
This module from Tear Funds Pillars series can be used directly by community animators and/or leaders or can serve as a resource for development workers. The emphasis is on the capacities needed to organize a group including leadership, planning, knowledge, assets and resources, and on-going learning. Bible studies on key themes are included.
Carter, Isalbel. Mobilizing the Community. Tear Fund. Available free on line in English, French and Spanish at http://tilz.tearfund.org/
This module, also from the Pillars series, is meant for solidarity groups to build their capacity to mobilize their communities. It includes material on bringing community leaders on board, the role of a community mobilizer, discovering community assets and resources, tools for community mobilizing including PLA tools and role plays, visioning, planning, and evaluation, and Bible Studies on key themes.
Center for Innovative and Entrepreneurial Leadership (CIEL) (2006) Communities Matrix: 69 Tools, Techniques, and Resources for Communities. Available on line at http://www.theCIEL.com
The community life cycle matrix is a community self-assessment tool for helping communities discover where they are in the four-phased community life cycle: chaos, emergent, vision, or actualization. The document organizes and sources 69 tools according to their usefulness in each phase of the community life cycle. The matrix can be downloaded separately in either a grid or a circular form. Most, but not all, resources listed come from a North American CD context.
Gubbels, Peter & Catheryn Koss (2000) From the Roots up: Strengthening Organizational Capacity through Guided Self-Assessment (Also in French and Spanish). Oklahoma City: World Neighbors.
An excellent resource for local NGO and CBO capacity self-assessment, this field guide is the result of action research in Mali, Burkina Faso, Ghana, and Nigeria. Especially helpful is the adaptation of PLA and other participatory tools to strengthening the capacity of local organizations. See Chapter 4 for illustrated explanations of 16 PLA tools used in the guide.
48

Hope, Anne and Sally Timmel (1995) Training for Transformation, Vol I-III. (Available in English, French and Spanish) London: ITDG Publishing. Available on Amazon.com.
Developed in Kenya in the early 1970s, the 3 volumes remain one of the best resources for building the capacity of communities to transform themselves. T for T offers a myriad of resources for building the capacity of community leaders including sections useful for values formation; team and community building; leadership and participation; planning and evaluation; management and supervision; and local and global analysis. These resources are used most effectively with community of development practitioners in a series of workshops focusing sequentially on personal, community, and global transformation.
Johnson, Scott and Jim Ludema (1997) Partnering to Build and Measure Organizational Capacity. Grand Rapids: Christian Reformed World Relief Committee
The result of action research of organizational capacity by CRWRC and Case Western Reserve University, the appreciative inquiry approach to discovering dimensions of organizational capacity in this book is used by some of CRWRCs partners to design tools for community capacity assessment.
Lamy, Etienne and Pierre Lessard (2005) Capacity Building: A Manual for NGOs and Field Workers. Order electronically at publication@ceci.com Available in English and French.
Written especially for intermediary organizations, at both NGO level and CBO/cooperative level, the manual offers three methodological models, in the form of technical checklists for each of two types of organizations targeted. These modules help in three tasks: the overall profile of the organization, an in-depth diagnostic and a search for solutions. This publication has a dual purpose: to present skills in a systematic way and to transfer these to people involved in development work in the field.
Kretzmann, John P. and John L. McKnight (1993) Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Communitys Assets. Chicago: ACTA Publications. Also see the ABCD website: http://www.northwestern.edu/ipr/abcd.html
The classic of Assets-Based Community Development (ABCD), Chapter 1 introduces the capacity inventory as a tool to help find and use the gifts and capacities of individuals in the community. Chapter 3 emphasizes institutional assets available in communities and how these can be mobilized through partnerships.
Ontario Healthy Communities Coalition How to Prepare a Healthy, S ustainable Progress Report Card http://www.healthycommunities.on.ca/publications/signs_of_progress/index.html
This self-assessment tool for assessing community health includes information on how to create good indicators. It comes out of the determinants-of-health model, which assesses both the physical (structure and form: housing, highways, air, water, income.) and spiritual (energy: motivation, values, happiness) health of communities.
Sanginga, Pascal C. and Colletah C. Chitoke (2006) The Power of Visioning: A Guidebook for Community Development Practitioners. http://www.ciat.cgiar.org/africa/pdf/eri_guide1_visioning_pre-test.pdf
This manual is an excellent theoretical and practical resource for a community visioning approach, or what the authors call a capacity building process. It seeks to help communities develop visions for sustainable likelihoods based on principles of appreciative inquiry, PRA, gender mainstreaming, and environmental sustainability. Based on experience in Malawi, Tanzania, and Uganda.
Van Groningen, Jay (2005) Communities First. Grand Rapids: CRWRC.
CRWRCs seven dimensions of community transformation form the foundation for this series, which includes an introductory book and seven workbooks for churches seeking to partner with their communities to bring about individual and community transformation.
49
Research-based Resources on Capacity Development and Assessment

Eade, Deborah (1997) Capacity-Building: An Approach to People-Centered Development, Oxfam UK and Ireland. Order from Amazon.com.
Eade stresses that capacity-building is an approach to development rather than separate from development. She touches on capacity development at many levels: community, organizational, and coalitions and networks. Building capacity in relief situations and the relationship between reducing vulnerability and building capacity in crisis situations are also treated.
Keijzer, Neils (June 2006 Draft) Mapping of approaches towards M&E of Capacity and Capacity Development Available at http://www.dgroups.org/groups/pelican/docs/Mapping_M&E_Capacity_080606.pdf
This paper classifies current monitoring and evaluation of capacity and capacity development approaches into five categories: systems-based, behavior change, performance-focused, strategic planning, and rights-based/empowerment. Characteristics and case-studies are provided for each approach. An extensive current bibliography on capacity development is included.
Korten, David (1980) Community Organization and Rural Development: A Lear ning Process Approach in Public Administration Review, Volume 40, September/October 1980
Kortens seminal research based on five case studies from Asia is well-known for separating out the three stages of organizational learning; learning to be effective, learning to be efficient, and learning to expand. The paper concludes with a call for skills in building capacities for action through action. Hard photocopy available from Jan Disselkoen.
Morgan, Peter (1997) The Design and Use of Capacity Development Indicators CIDA policy branch. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/34/37/1919953.pdf
This paper addresses the challenges of designing capacity development indicators and offers some excellent operational guidelines for developing indicators that focus on process and behavioral change rather than performance.
Watson, David (2006) Embracing Innovative Practice: Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity and Capacity Development Discussion Paper 58B. European Center for Development Policy Management. http://www.ecdpm.org/Web_ECDPM/Web/Content/Navigation.nsf/index2?readform&http://www.ecdpm.or g/Web_ECDPM/Web/Content/Content.nsf/7732def81dddfa7ac1256c240034fe65/59833d39f5b7dbb2c12570 b5004dcb92?OpenDocument. Also available in French
An analytical framework which links capacity, change, and performance, this paper also includes an extensive bibliography. See especially chapter 9: Innovative approaches to monitoring performance and capacity development.
Wrigley, Rebecca (December 2006) Learning from Capacity Building Practice: Adapting the Most Significant Change (MSC) Approach to Evaluate Capacity Building Provision Intrac. Can be ordered on line from the Development Bookshop.
The Most Significant Change evaluation approach uses a participatory process to establish domains of change and stories as qualitative documentation of change. This article, based on research in Malawi, provides useful information on how to analyze stories for data a rather complicated process which emphasizes transparent sharing of analysis of stories as well as stakeholder verification of analysis at all levels. The methodology adapts well to emergent learning. It evaluates the processes that produce change as well as results of these processes.
50
Capacity Development Websites

www.capacity.org: This site is intended for practitioners and policy-makers who work in or on capacity development in international cooperation in the South. It has a magazine element which commissions interesting articles from people involved in capacity development. It also points to a good range of networks, organizations and individuals doing - or thinking about - capacity development including donor perspectives and projects. As with many capacity development websites, most of the material focuses on bi-lateral and intermediary organization capacity development rather than on community capacity development. Some content in French and Spanish. www.impactalliance.org: The Impact Alliance is an international partnership advancing social change through capacity development. It promotes collaborative learning, innovation and social entrepreneurship for breakthrough performance of individuals and organizations serving the public interest. http://uk.oneworld.net/guides/capacitybuilding: News from social justice organizations. Some news items about state level capacity initiatives and some on community development activities, but the bulk of the content is focused on NGO organizational capacity building programs, particularly with regard to Information and Communication Technology. You can find a range of editors and contributors. http://www.ecddm.org: The ECDPM builds practical and theoretical understandings of capacity through reviewing capacity development projects, undertaking research, and promoting dialogue and reflection. The research program on Capacity Change and Performance is pushing thinking on capacity within development processes. The website contains a huge range of papers, case studies, reports from policy dialogues, etc. generated through the program, details of past and forthcoming events and useful links to other organizations involved in capacity development.
http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/organise.html: ETU is a non-profit organization that works with
community-based organizations in South Africa. Its goals are to deepen democracy and community involvement in development. ETU offers training for local activists and politicians to become better leaders and organizers. This website contains tools/guides on a wide range of skills that are useful for community organizers. Topics include: Organizational Work in the Community Building and Organization, Administrative Skills, Information Technology, and Managing Finances. http://www.scn.org/cmp/site.htm: CSMED is a community empowerment website based in Uganda. Several resources available in a friendly format including a handbook for community mobilization. Web-based translations are available into French, Spanish, Arabic and more.
51
APPENDICES
52
Appendix I: Seven Dimensions of Transformation
TRANSFORMATIONAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Transformational Development in Brief The transformation we seek in communities is as deep as the human heart and as broad as the whole range of the human experience in the world God made. We want our approach to faithfully declare that our God reigns; Jesus is Lord over every inch of creation. From him and through him and to him are all things (Rom 11:36). We want to do community development that reflects the depth and breadth of the Kingdom. God works in us and through us to transform beliefs and actions, reflected in redeemed community, and focused on peace, justice, and righteousness. (WM/ WR statement of common commitment to transformational development at the joint field leaders meetings, April 2002.)
DIMENSIONS of TRANSFORMATION
The Seven Dimensions of Transformation: 1. Shared Vision 2. Sense of Community 3. Ownership 4. Leadership 5. Assets, Knowledge and Skills 6. Ongoing Learning 7. Kingdom, or Shalom NOTE: The "seven dimensions" are CRWRCs framework for conceptualizing, planning, reporting and evaluating "community transformation". This seven dimension document is intended to be primarily for use by CRWRC practitioners, as a conceptual framework for training, evaluating, and for giving shape to site visits. It can also be a framework for consulting with partners and communities, but it must not be used as a blueprint to impose categories on partner or community
53
DIMENSION 7: ENCOMPASSING ALL DIMENSIONS

What is it? This is the KINGDOM dimension, or the SHALOM dimension. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:1-3 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. Col 1:16-17 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. Rev 22:13 Everything comes from him, Everything happens through him; Everything ends up in him. Always glory! Always praise! YES YES YES Romans 11:36 (Message) Its all about Jesus everybody is singing about it. This is the creational Good News: Jesus the Savior and King is the beginning and the ending. This is the basic truth we need to know to live in peace and joy in Gods world. Gods LOVE, His WORD, began it all, sustains it all, brings it all into coherence, and wraps it all up in one triumphant, restored present to the Father. That is what underlies every other fact we can say or discover about our world and ourselves and our future. When communities are in the process of discovering this Good News and what it means well, they are TRANSFORMED. This process of discovering what it means to live out this reality that is transformational development, biblical style. This is the biblical world view; it underlies what CRWRC does, and how we do it. It underlies what we pray for, what we give for, what we plan for, how we evaluate, and how we talk about what we are doing. The more consistent and congruent we are with this view of the world, the more our lives and programs and organizations reflect biblical reality. The more communities adopt and reflect this view of the world, the more they come to resemble what Jesus intends for his world, and the more transformed they become. The beliefs, values, and principles of our world view, which form the interpretive screen on which our goals, judgments, habits, relationships and actions are based, make all the difference in the world in this process. This is what Michael Bopp calls the software that is running our lives. Communities and cultures are shaped by this software. According to Bopp, the life pattern of communities is ultimately rooted in the spirituality of the community. (Bopp, Vreeken) The CRWRC boards definition of Transformation is:
Communities are transforming when members are discovering true identity in Christ and true vocation as stewards of creation, as evidenced by noticeably better relationships with God, each other, and the environment. (see Appendix I)
We are talking about the Old Testament word SHALOM, or the New Testament concept of KINGDOM. We can say that transformation means the community is moving with increasing awareness and intentionality, motivated by and aiming toward the biblical vision of
54

SHALOM, or the KINGDOM of Jesus.
INDICATORS:
What would a transforming community look like?
In general we can anticipate: Ready testimony about being involved in change which is valued by the community An observable process of engaging in learning about core values, spiritual values, in the culture, and increasing congruity with biblical world view. Increasing curiosity about and study of the Bible. Increasing formation of groups seeking to discover implications of core spiritual values for their dreams and plans, and interested in spreading the benefits outward into the community. See the SIX DIMENSIONS that follow; things will usually be happening in the community that reflect these dimensions.
55
DIMENSION 1: SHARED VISION

What is it? A shared vision is a picture of the community at some time in the future, painted in enough detail that people can imagine it, and including relationships with God, each other, and the environment. Communities are transforming when members are discovering true identity in Christ and true vocation as stewards of creation, as evidenced by noticeably better relationships with God, each other, and the environment. When the goal is to build a community, a shared vision is not complete unless it: Is built out of dialog in the community in which core spiritual values are identified / examined and validated. Is realistic enough that people believe it is possible to reach. Presents a tension between the desired future and the current situation. This tension inspires people to take action toward reaching the vision. Includes a statement about how people want to work with one another in order to achieve their goals, and about the values that need to be shared in order for people to work effectively together. Is richly detailed and thereby points to a pathway (possible goals principles and processes to be followed) for action and change. Is shared because it is created through true dialogue and consensus with people from all walks of life in the community. Is built upon individuals needs, experiences, and aspirations people feel they own it. Inspires and motivates community members to actively take part in making their community a better place to live People interpret it and can tell others about it in a consistent manner. Is based on an awareness of an active relationship with God. Flows from ongoing community dialog in which the community progressively discovers the biblical world view and adopts it. INDICATORS: How do we know when we have a Shared Vision? 1. Does our community have a vision for the future? 2. Is the vision doable can we realistically achieve it? 3. Is the vision painted in enough detail so that we can imagine our community in the future? Does it point to a path for action? 4. Does the vision include a statement about how community members want to work together, and about the values that need to be shared in order for them to work together effectively? 5. Was the vision created through dialogue and consensus decision making with people from all walks of life? 6. Is the vision widely shared throughout our community? Do community members feel ownership of the vision? 7. Is the vision inspiring and motivating? Do we tell people about it, and do we all interpret and describe it in a consistent manner? 8. Does our vision reflect an awareness of our relationship with God? 9. Does the communitys knowledge of the biblical world view increase? 10. Does the biblical world view increasingly inform the communitys vision?
56
DIMENSION 2: SENSE OF COMMUNITY

What is it? Sense of community refers to the quality of human relationships that make it possible for people to live and work together in a healthy and sustainable way. When there is a strong sense of community: There is a sense of place and history. People do things together and often share ways of doing things in common, such as decision-making, celebrating, or grieving, which helps give the community a shared identity. Relationships among community people are built on trust, cooperation, shared values, togetherness, and a shared sense of commitment to, and responsibility for, improving the community. There is a climate of encouragement and forgiveness, openness and welcoming. Community members feel they are safe, that they have a voice, and that they can make a contribution to the community. They also feel cared for, and in return, they care for others. The community nurtures its people so that they can develop their potential as human beings. The community embraces diversity, believing that each person is unique. People believe that differences enrich the strength of the community. There is a collective sense of fairness and justice. Not only are people who are disadvantaged cared for and supported, but also the community works with them to change the situation that causes them to be disadvantaged. There is an ability to tackle and solve hard issues, reconcile differences, and cope with crisis. There is increasing evidence of peoples forming groups to explore the biblical worldview its meaning, implications and claims. There is a local community of believers that is vibrant, outreaching, and stewardly. INDICATORS: How
do we know when we have a Sense of Community?
1. Is there a sense of unity and togetherness throughout our community? 2. Are relationships among community members built upon trust, cooperation, shared values, and togetherness? 3. Do we share a sense of place and history? Do we do things together as a community? What are some examples? 4. Is there a climate that is encouraging, forgiving, open and welcoming? 5. Do all community members feel safe, cared for, and nurtured? 6. Are the benefits of the development work shared among the broader community? 7. Do all community members feel they have a voice and that they can make a contribution to the community? 8. Is diversity embraced? Do we respect all community members for their differences? 9. Is there a collective sense of fairness and justice? Are disadvantaged community members cared for and supported; and does the community work with them to change the situation that causes them to be disadvantaged? 10. Is there a shared sense of commitment to, and responsibility for, improving the community? 11. Do we have the ability to tackle and solve hard issues, reconcile differences, and cope with crisis? 12. Is there a local community of believers that is vibrant, outreaching, and stewardly?
57
DIMENSION 3: OWNERSHIP
What is it? Ownership is the active engagement of the hearts and minds of people in improving their own health and well being. Development comes from within. If there is no ownership, there will be no development. This means, for example, that if the community is working on a youth issue, youth must have a primary voice in naming the issue, shaping the solutions, making decisions, carrying out the solutions and evaluating the results. This includes a sense of their own legitimate role in and contribution to the development process. In order for people to have ownership: There must be opportunities for meaningful participation. That is, it must be possible for community members to actually influence the course of events and shape the future. There needs to be a variety of avenues for participation and community members to find their own ways of participating. For example, some people may prefer to attend meetings; others may prefer to have private conversations with more visible community members; and others may wish to help with fundraising or event organizing. Barriers to participation (e.g. meeting times, transportation, baby-sitting, past hurts, and fear) must be recognized, and efforts made to remove them. The appropriate level of participation needs to be negotiated i.e. some activities require the participation of the entire community; others require only a few people. Participants should have confidence in their own ability to make changes. There should be evidence of increased risk taking. There are increasing levels of participation in decision making and implementation. People must recognize their own contribution to the development process. There is increasing evidence that people feel satisfaction in exercising responsibility as an expression of increasing knowledge of biblical worldview. INDICATORS: How do we know when we have Ownership? 1. Do community members have a primary voice in activities aimed at improving their health and well being? Is the power to name issues, shape solutions, make decisions, carry out the solutions and evaluate the results shared? 2. Are there forums and other mechanisms for community members to identify problems and actively participate in addressing them? 3. Do community members feel their contribution matters? Does it matter? 4. Are community members able to participate in a variety of ways? 5. Are barriers to participation (e.g. meeting times, transportation, baby-sitting, past hurts, and fear) recognized, and are efforts made to overcome them? 6. Do we carefully consider and negotiate each step of the way, the appropriate level of community member participation? 7. Are there some segments of the community that have too much power, and others that have too little, in shaping the future? 8. Is there evidence of increased risk taking? 9. Is there evidence of increased scope and depth of participation in development activities? 10. Do participants recognize and value their own contribution to the development process?
58
DIMENSION 4: LEADERSHIP
What is it? Leadership behaviors facilitate the communitys learning and action for Shalom. Leadership emerges from within the community and can be formal (i.e. elected officials and people in positions of power) and informal (i.e. those who are not in formal positions of power, but whose voice is highly regarded). Leadership ability that mobilizes communities toward Shalom is marked by: Recognition that all community members need to be heard, and work hard to create an environment in which all voices can be heard. Acknowledgement of community and individual achievements. Facilitation of community consensus building and collaboration, believing that community members can work together to address their own needs. Engaging others in tackling tough issues and resolving conflicts. Taking risks and forging a path for others to follow. Role models who make the path by walking it. Providing direction in appropriate ways when needed. (Note that different tasks require different kinds of leadership. For example, taking charge in an emergency is different than making a group decision). Understanding and articulating the community development process being undertaken and being able to keep the big picture in mind. Recognizing the leadership ability of others and sharing leadership when it is most appropriate. Fostering the development and emergence of new leaders. Recognizing and activating the resources that are resident in the community. Increasing sense of being servant to the Jesus of the Bible. INDICATORS: How
do we know when we have leadership?
Are there people in our community who take responsibility to: 1. Work hard to create an environment in which all voices can be heard? 2. Encourage, support, and facilitate others to tackle tough issues? 3. Facilitate community consensus building and collaboration? 4. Act as role models? 5. Foster the development of new leaders? 6. Share leadership with others when it is most appropriate? 7. Recognize and activate human and material resources that are resident in our community? Do we..: 8. Support our leaders? 9. Choose leaders in an open and fair way? 10. Work with leaders in consensus building and collaboration, and in solving conflicts? 11. Acknowledge and create opportunities for different kinds of leadership? 12. Support the development and emergence of new leaders, both formal and informal? 13. Hold our leaders accountable, financial and otherwise?
59
DIMENSION 5: RESOURCES, KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

What is it? Resources, skills, and knowledge are the human talents and material goods that a community uses to improve health, such as volunteers, buildings and facilities, money, and time. The dimension resources, knowledge and skills, is about the communitys ability to: Relate the use of resources, knowledge, and skills to the concepts of identity and vocation in the context of the biblical world view. Identify and access the existing community resources, knowledge and skills that will help the community achieve its vision for a healthier future. Use existing resources, knowledge and skills in creative ways (for example, using church facilities for a collective kitchen). Make decisions about the fair distribution of resources and solve conflicts regarding the distribution of resources. Effectively manage and use resources (for example, forming partnerships in order to use resources efficiently). Locate and access needed resources, knowledge and skills that exist outside of the community. Recognize that each community member possesses unique and valuable skills, knowledge, gifts, and talents and to seek these out when appropriate. Identify gaps in skills and knowledge and develop learning plans to fill these gaps, and find the means to gain new knowledge and skills (e.g. funding, training programs). Ensure equal access to opportunity to gain new knowledge and skills. Bring people with different knowledge and skill sets together in a way that builds a creative energy for solving problems and taking action on health goals. Follow-through on its action plans. Achieve concrete, measurable improvements in the communitys physical, social, and economic environment that makes it less vulnerable to the effects of disasters and other events. Addressing issues using a variety of different resources and approaches. INDICATORS: How
do we know when we have capacity to use Resources, Knowledge and Skills?

1. Do we know what resources, knowledge, and skills exist in our community (people, facilities, services, money etc)? 2. Do we know how to access these resources, knowledge, and skills when we need them? 3. Do we use our existing resources, knowledge and skills in creative way? 4. Do we effectively manage and use our resources, knowledge and skills? 5. Are resources distributed in a fair manner? Do we have an effective process in place for solving conflicts about the distribution of resources? 6. Do we know how to locate and access resources, knowledge, and skills outside of the community? 7. Have we identified gaps in knowledge and skills, and have we developed learning plans to fill these gaps? Do we find the means to gain new knowledge and skills? 8. Do all community members have equal access to opportunities to develop new knowledge and skills? 9. Do we bring people with different knowledge and skill sets together to solve problems and take action on our health goals? 10. Are we following through on our intended action plans? Do we do what we said we would do?
60

11. Is there evidence of concrete, meaningful, measurable change in our physical, social, and/or economical environment? HERE IS WHERE THE OUTCOME INDICATORS AS WE HAVE DEVELOPED THEM WOULD GO. 12. Are issues being addressed using a variety of different resources, and approaches? 13. Do our activities make our community more robust and less vulnerable to the effects disasters and disturbances.
DIMENSION 6: ONGOING LEARNING

What is it? Ongoing learning is a process of reflecting upon what is happening within a project or a community in order to learn how to be more effective. Ongoing learning also leads to greater self-awareness and community understanding. The capacity of ongoing learning: Is there ability to hold yourself accountable to your vision, principles, and goals? This means that you regularly, systematically, and intentionally check to see how closely your actions and their results match your vision, principles, and goals. Involves asking the questions: What worked? What didnt work? What have we learned from this experience? What should we do differently next time? Involves reflection on community dynamics, and the impact of these on the communitys ability to work effectively together to improve the health and well-being of all its people. INDICATORS: How do we know when we have Ongoing Learning? 1. Do we have ongoing processes to reflect on our actions and their results? 2. Do we learn from our successes and our failures? 3. Are we open to new ideas and ways of doing things? 4. Do we listen to our critics as well as our supporters? 5. Do we communicate what we learn in ways that everyone can understand? 6. Are we building a learning plan into everything that we do? 7. Are we able to translate all that we learn into action? 8. Do we have processes that help everyone learn and reflect together (for example, agency staff and community people; or youth and seniors learning from each other)?
61
APPENDIX 2: QUALITIES OF GOOD ASSESSMENT

From: Sustainable Development Principles in Practice by Peter Hardi and Terrence Zdan, pp. 146147. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/bellagio.pdf
In its essential attributes, a good assessment process remains the same regardless of its geographic setting or policy context. In all cases, the purposes of assessment are to enable stakeholders to know where they are; to determine where they are going; to define where they want to be; to chart a course for getting there; and, most importantly, to be able to change that course in response to changes in information, values, resources, and priorities. For this to happen, assessment has to be an ongoing reflective process. Sustainability is a dynamic concept. Assessment methods should also be able to adapt to changes along the way. At every stage of strategy design and implementation, assessment should facilitate a process which is able to influence, as well as respond to, changing conditions. The IUCN/IDRC project, and the various methods developed, embrace assessment as a continual and regular exercise rather than a sporadic and separate event. Every step in the evolving cycle of a sustainability strategy should be assessed. Whether assessment is seen as a component of the design and implementation cycle or as a separate periodic activity, good assessment should be iterative, integrative, and adaptive. It should be iterative because conditions, information, values, capacities and priorities are constantly changing; it should be integrative so that these changes can be accommodated (integrated) within strategies for sustainability; and it should be adaptive so that our actions and decisions can respond (adapt) to these changes. Good assessments, therefore, force stakeholders to rethink priorities, reset goals, and rechart their course of action in response to new insights. When coupled with a questioning approach, assessments promote the development of a reflective capability within organizations and groups. Reflection helps people to learn and create channels for this learning to feed back into the decision making process.
62

CCI Resource Kit June 2007

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CCI Resource Kit June 2007

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

RESOURCE KIT FOR ASSESSING COMMUNITY CAPACITY

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee June 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Tools to use with communities

Tools to use with partners

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Organization and development of tools in this resource kit

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Are the seven dimensions of transformation prescriptive?

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

TOOLS TO USE WITH COMMUNITY GROUPS

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

BANGLADESH AND INDIA FRAMEWORK

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

PARI CCI Assessment Chart

Savings passbook Savings book

Auditing by outsiders Fund creation

Budget preparation & preservation Central Cooperative Fund

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Decision-making, documentation and implementation

Participation and conflict resolution

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Bangladesh & India Ranking and Reporting Tools

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Three Sets of Indicators Developed by Communities in Ecuador Pisambilla Group

2. Behaviour Change 3. Improvement of interpersonal relationships.

1. Level of education. 2. Improved techniques for production

1. Conservation of the parramos.

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

Cuarto Lote Group

Resources, Know-ledge, 3. Natural resources Skills

Group Cuarto Lote:

Malo Mana Alli

Regular Shina Shinalla

Muy Bueno Sumak Alli

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

San Pablito Group

1. Educational level 2. Permanent (continual) training

1. Organized community 2. Execution of community projects

phases of the moon

Group San Pablito:

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Resource Kit for Assessing Community Capacity

FULFULDE FOCUS QUESTION GUIDE

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) 2007

Senegal Organizational Effectiveness Profile Name of Organization or Group ________________ Date

___ _ _ _ 3 = ___

___ _ _ _ 3=___

___ _ _ _ 3 = ___

___ _ _ _ 3 = ___

___ _ _ ___ 3 =

___ _ _ ___ 3 =