CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT and CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT and

CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

EU Strategy for the Danube Region

MEETING OF THE WORKING GROUP ON INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY

Identifying Institutional Capacity Needs

March 21 - 22, 2013CEF, Cankarjeva 8, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Capacity Development TeamUNDP Bratislava Regional Centre

Albert SoerCD Practice Leader

Robert (Bob) BernardoCD Policy Specialist

3

Why are we here?

• To provide an understanding of the (UNDP) Capacity Development approach and Capacity Assessment methodology

• To discuss applications of the CD/CA methodology to various thematic needs in the regional context

• To discuss institutional capacity needs in the region

What to expect?

WorkingGroups

Presentations

Sharing

PlenaryDiscussions

Your roles …..

• Are we speaking a common language• Let us know what you think &

know• Interact and participate• Be critical – what is the use for you

Agenda

Morning – sessions 1 and 2: Capacity Development & Needs AssessmentHistoric Roots and Present DebateCD - UNDP’s approach

Afternoon – sessions 3 and 4:Capacity Assessment in the region – working groups

Session 1

Capacity Development

and Needs Assessment

Introduction to a methodological

approach

Historic Roots and Present Day debate

9

Why Focus on Capacity Development?

Trainings, exposure trips = Capacity Development ??

10

Equipment, Facilities, Structures = Capacity Development ??

Why Focus on Capacity Development?

11

Historic roots

Capacity Development is not a new concept. The discussion started in the 1960s!

Over time it was realized that: It is not enough to bring experts from outside

– not enough internal learning, distorts priorities, chooses high-profile activities, fragments management and is expensive

Training individual skills is insufficient to realize change

People work in organizations that function in a

specific legal, regulatory, political and socio-

cultural ‘environment’

Hence, we needed something else; closer to the

local context, integrating individual,

organizational and environment levels.

12

Present state of affairs

Global commonalities in CD approaches:

• Three levels (individual, organizational, institutional)

• Mix expert and self-assessment of capacity assets/needs

• Strong on client engagement

• Dedicated process (engagement, assessment …)

• Dedicated capacity measurement framework

Capacity Development does not exist on its own – it is always in the context of an

organization’s operations, and mostly with a CHANGE OBJECTIVE to improve performance

13

The present day debate on Capacity Development

Change Management in the Public Sector shifted:o ‘assumptions’ from certainty (predictability)

to uncertainty (probability) in result realization

o ‘approach’ from ‘control’ to ‘emergence’o ‘focus’ from ‘Government’ to ‘societal’

objectives

Public Administration Management moved from ‘New Public Management’ to new ‘dynamic governance’ approaches (e.g. New Synthesis)

o Compliance, performance, resilience and adaptability

o From an internal focus to an internal AND external focus

o From we can do all to we need to collaborate

14

The impact of change on Capacity Development

From certainty (predictability) to uncertainty (probability) of result realization:

o requires Integrated Risk and Opportunity Management

What are the things that may hamper results? What are the opportunities that may reinforce

results?o requires flexibility in CD response development

From one partner to multiple partners at the same time

o requires ‘Collaborative Capacities’

From a stable environment to a dynamic environment

o requires ‘environment scanning’

Capacity Development

Consolidated summary, but with a focus on the

UNDP Approach

See handout for overview

Capacity development is more than just a theoretical concept. It is the way in which UNDP provides added value to

its partners.

16

– Bahrain (institute of public admin)– Kosovo (Integrated capacity development

approach for CO programming ) – Moldova (e-governance, EU high-level advisory

support, civil service reform, performance-based-budgeting)

– Montenegro (anti-corruption)– Uzbekistan (local service delivery)– Kyrgyzstan (social justice, CDF)– Turkey (Directorate General for Forestry, Social

Service and Child Protection Agency, Climate Change Adaptation, Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency - TIKA)

– Over 15 countries in Asia Pacific (civil service reform, disaster risk reduction and management, planning and monitoring, change management, human rights, climate change adaptation, ethnic minority development, local governance, local service delivery, etc.)

Some examples of application of CD approach

18

What characterizes the UNDP approach to CD?

Endogenous process that fosters ownership

Comprehensive view of the issues that determine success in change management

Systematic method to assess capacity assets and needs

Quantitative & qualitative data to identify capacity needs and CD response strategies

Makes sense of complex development situations, flexibly adapting capacity development action to evolving change

Systematic innovation to find new (and better) ways of working

19

UNDP Definitions Related to CapacityCapacity: the ability of individuals, institutions,

and societies to perform functions, solve

problems, and set and achieve objectives in a

sustainable manner.Capacity Development: the process through

which the abilities to do so are obtained,

strengthened, adapted and maintained over

time.Capacity Assessment: An analysis of current

capacities against desired future capacities; this

assessment generates an understanding of

capacity assets and needs which in turn leads to

the formulation of capacity development

strategies.

Organisational level(policies, procedures,

frameworks)

Individual level(skills, knowledge,

experience)

Enabling environment(policies, legislation, power

relations, social norms

The Theory of Change: Capacity Development is a structured approach

Institution or systems are performing more effectively and efficiently, (in delivering basic services, etc.)

in a more consistent and resilient manner

Better functioning systems, structures, mechanisms, processes etc.

in one or more areas: institutional arrangements; leadership;

knowledge management; and accountability

Healthy, educated, employed, empowered people / communities

Engagement, change management, stakeholder involvement,

capacity assessments, capacity development strategies and change processes

People and communities are using

the services and changing their behavior or norms, etc.

Increased Capacity

Changes in behaviors, norms

Improved Performance

Capacity Development Processes

Change in Lives

It has a results

structure &

measurement

frameworkIt has a process

Design and

adapt Tools

Step 1: Engage partners and build consensus

Step 2: Assess

Capacity Assets

and Needs

Step 3: Formulate

CD Strategies

Step 4: Implement

CD Strategies

Step 5: Monitor

and Evaluate

CD Strategies

It has a systemic entry

21

Core entry points for Capacity

Assessment/Development Institutional Development – ensuring

effectively functioning national/local institutions (e.g., mission and strategy, business processes, human resources, physical resources)

Leadership – fostering good leadership maximizes capacity investments

Knowledge – CD is underpinned by knowledge or what people know

Mutual Accountability – efficient, responsive, transparent and accountable (public) administration key to sustainable development

Most often we distinguish between Functional and Technical Capacities

22

Capacity development efforts should always address:

o “capacity for why?”

o “capacity for what?”

o “capacity for whom?”

CD: Change Management - How to make it happen

What is the development challenge or

concern that is being

addressed?

• Public Sector

• Civil Society Organizations

• Private Sector

• Other development partners

Which functions are

going to improve?

Session 2

The Capacity Assessment Methodology

Consolidated summary of mainstream CA

approaches focusing on UNDP approach

24

Capacity Assessment:

An analysis of current capacities against desired

future capacities; this assessment generates an

understanding of capacity assets and needs

which in turn leads to the formulation of capacity

development strategies

Is fundamentally a SELF ASSESSMENT. Staff in

an organization rates its own capacities and

skills, identifies the priorities, validates the

results etc. Self Assessment has proven to be the

most effective manner

Before starting, ask yourself:“Do we really need a ‘full’ capacity

assessment?” Other assessments done before? Organization/s open to discuss capacity

issues? Leadership commitment to the process? Clear how to use the results? What timelines are you working with?

BEWARE: Assessment fatigue Skepticism about value and validity of results Suspicion that capacity assessments are

being used by senior management for re-profiling or retrenchment

Seven (7) Steps in a capacity assessment

1. Engage the partners / clarify expectations

2. Prepare yourself – document review

3. Zoom in on the priorities (entry points)

4. Design the analytical process

5. Design the workplan, agree and implement

6. Analyze and agree on the results

7. Discuss the follow-up – prepare design of CD response

Each agency may have its own approach, these are the generic steps

27

Step 1: Engage the partners and build consensus (1/2)

Clarify the objectives and expectations

Why do you / client want a capacity assessment?

Make sure client understand the CD approach What are the client’s concerns? What are the expected results? What is the engagement to follow-up on the

results? Avoid potentially conflicting objectives or

interests.

What are the core concerns to be addressed?

Are the expected results really addressing the concerns?

28

Step 1: Engage the partners and build consensus (2/2) Identify and Engage Stakeholders

throughout the Process

Who should be involved? Who is in the CA team?

For internal stakeholders: which staff members and what levels? Which bureaus/agencies/divisions?

For external stakeholders: who will have substantive information on the capacity of the organization?

This is critical as it establishes the working team for the assessment

29

Step 2: Prepare yourself

Background and document review Legal status, mandate, structure etc of the

organization Their plans, programs, evaluations Assessments, reviews in the sector – search

internet Get to terms with the ‘technical field’ – you

have to understand your client! Who else is working in the ‘technical’ field?

National – International Public – private – NGO sector

Interview ‘core informers’

30

Step 3: Zoom in on the priorities

Prioritize the areas to focus on

Describe the key technical and functional capacities

Discuss with partner and agree!

Focus group to prioritize Use the formats in the next slides (or

design your own….)

Make sure senior management remains in the loop

you lose them > you lose relevance of the effort!

Key Functions of your agency relevant

to (theme)

What are the key issues/

challenges that your agency faces in

performing these

functions?

Whose capacities

(e.g., agencies, divisions,

units, etc.) need to be developed to address

these performanc

e challenges?

What capacities

(e.g., policies, systems, mechanisms, skills, etc.) need

to be developed

within these

agencies/units?

Step 3: Zooming in on priorities – the Scoping Matrix

Core Issues/ent

ries

Technical/Functional Capacities

Capacity to Engage in Multi-

Stakeholder Dialogue

Capacity to Assess

a Situation and Create

a Vision and

Mandate

Capacity to

Formulate Policy

and Strategy

Capacity to

Budget, Manage

and Impleme

nt

Capacity to Monitor

and Evaluate

Institutional Developme

nt

Leadership

Knowledge

Accountability

Step 3 Zooming in - the prioritization sheet (aka CA Framework)

33

Step 4: Design the analytical process

For each priority area decide how to get insight:

Focus group discussions Questionnaire(s) – see next slide Interviews

For each approach, prepare the issues to be addressed; most of the time questions are a good way to go

34

Step 4: Analytical tool – the questionnaires

0: Do not

know1: Not at

all2:

Partially

3: Moderate

ly4: Fully

1) How familiar are you with the vision of BIPA?

2) Do you believe that the vision is an appropriate fit to the situation of BIPA?

SECTION 1: Institutional Arrangement

0: Do not

know1: Not at all

2: Partially

3: Moderately

4: Fully

1) Do you have a formal job description?

2) To what extent are you aware of your job description?

SECTION 2: Human Resources Management

See your hand-outs for examples of questionnaire

Functional Capacity: Capacity for data and situation analysis

Please indicate a capacity rating for each guide statement: Do DNPM technical staff members

have the capacity to analyze sectoral/MDG/poverty data to produce policy recommendations and policy papers?

Do DNPM technical staff members have access to state-of-the-art hardware (e.g., computers) and software (e.g., SPSS, DevInfo) for data analysis and information management?

Do DNPM staff members have the capacity to project and construct viable sectoral planning models/ frameworks for the country?

Do DNPM staff members have the capacity to provide strategic guidance to other ministries/agencies to assist in their respective sectoral analysis and development planning?

Current Rating

Evidences/ Justification for Rating

Future rating (2015)

Step 4: Analytical tool – the questionnaires

36

Step 5: Design, Agree and Implement the workplan

Present the workplan and tools and discuss with senior management – make adaptations if required

Ensure agreement on the Capacity Assessment Framework and workplan is realized!

When agreement is reached, it is important: to ensure staff is available to participate in the

different sessionssenior management informs the staff about the

effort and explains how it worksThat staff feels free to provide honest feedback

Step 5: Facilitating Self-Assessments

#1 Take the Worksheets Home

#2 Collective Self- Assessments

#3 Individual Self- Assessments

• sufficient time to review & study• avoid taking them away from other work• limited guidance• low submission rate

• less data to consolidate and analyze• allows consensus building if facilitated well• may inhibit some staff members• could represent views of dominant respondents

• allows individual perspectives• provides broader range of issues and ideas• more data to consolidate and analyze• entails more facilitation

Facilitation level: • too much may lead to “coached”

outcomes• too little may result in a “wish list” of CD

action

38

Step 6: Analyze the results and present the findings

Analyze findings, but be cautious drawing conclusions. Make linkages between different questions, establish ‘patterns’.

Present the findings Maybe first to senior management Then to all relevant staff

Make adaptations if required or staff shows strong resistance. Pushing through unsupported findings will endanger future cooperation. An assessment is mostly a short exercise, at one point in time; staff needs to feel comfortable with the findings. They generally know better than any outsider what is right and wrong! Staff needs to feel free to provide honest

feedback

Preparing the Capacity Assessment Report

Background and objectives

Process and methodology including stakeholders (internal/external) consulted

Capacity Assessment Results perspectives/insights on the organization quantitative and qualitative information capacity development priority needs.

Recommendations for the CD Response

Validate and enhance results through a client-wide presentation/consultation

Step 6: Analyze the results and present the findings

40

Step 7: Discuss the follow up – prepare design of CD response (1/2)

Once the findings are agreed, discuss how to address them

Some findings can be implemented by the partner without further support

Some findings will require support your organization cannot provide, but you may be able to mediate and connect

Some findings will require further support your organization can provide

Depending on the preferences of the client, the CD response can only focus on the support your organization provides, but it may also include those actions that are not supported by your organization.

41

Step 7 - The CD response depends on the findings(2/2) The CD response always focuses on the

potential answers to the concerns raised and can be structured according:

the Core Issues/Challenges Institutional Reform and Incentives Leadership development Knowledge Management (incl. Education &

Learning) Accountability and voice mechanisms

the functional and technical capacities

The individual, organizational, environmental capacities

Capacity Development Strategies

42

A. Institutional Reform and Incentives • Functional Reviews• Incentives/Salary reform• Business processes, including coordination,

management, communications, procurement capacities, etc.

• Change management• Champions and coalitions• Knowledge Management arrangements

43

B. Leadership development

• Negotiation • Visioning skills• Strategic planning• Coaching and mentoring• Ethics• Advocacy• Cross-Cultural Communications

44

C. Education and Learning – Knowledge Management

• Trainings• Learning events • On-the-job Trainings/Exchanges• Research• Participatory processes• Vocational education • Tertiary education curricula

45

D. Accountability and Voice Mechanisms

• Peer reviews, Citizen watch• Monitoring and evaluation• Stakeholder feedback and forums• Public information campaigns• Group engagement techniques

In defining CD strategies, think in the following dimensions:

Individual level capacities

• Are these skill gaps?• Are these attitudinal issues

ethics and behavior? corruption?

• Are these gaps in leadership style? skills?

47

Organizational Change

• Are attitudes the problem – can these be changed?

• Incentive structure• Organizational processes: is it set up for

coordination and client feedback• Disconnect between organization’s

leadership and its staff?• Capacities on the community side: can

they effectively articulate their capacity needs? Do they have the opportunity to? Where do you want to put more resources into?


48

Enabling Environment/Systemic Issues

• Lack of HR policy may be a problem• Performance appraisal management

system causing behavioral anomalies• Inadequate space/forums for

stakeholders to participate• At the LGU level, organizational

capacities are constrained but policy and devolution frameworks (e.g., fiscal transfers) are equally problematic

• Investments in education?

Work Life Balance Policy


Afternoon Session

50

Institutional Capacity Needs in the Danube Region

The WB Government Effectiveness Index

Country (Year) Percentile rank (0-100)

Governance score(-2.5 to +2.5)

Austria (2011) 93.4 +1.66Germany (2011) 91.9 +1.53Czech Republic (2011) 81.5 +1.02Slovenia (2011) 79.6 +0.99Slovakia (2011) 76.3 +0.86Hungary (2011) 73.0 +0.71Croatia (2011) 69.2 +0.55Montenegro (2011) 59.2 +0.10Bulgaria (2011) 56.4 +0.01Serbia (2011) 49.8 -0.15Romania (2011) 47.4 -0.22Moldova (2011) 33.6 -0.58Bosnia and Herzegovina (2011)

25.1 -0.76

Ukraine (2011) 21.8 -0.83

•On PA10: From your experience and perspective, Institutional Capacity for what?

•Where are capacities needed more urgently?• Enabling environment/policy• Organizational systems,

procedures, regulations, etc.• Human resources/individual

knowledge and skills

Group Work 1

Core Issues/ent

ries

Technical/Functional Capacities

Capacity to Engage in Multi-Stakehol

der Dialogue

Capacity to Assess

a Situation

and Create a

Vision and Mandate

Capacity to

Formulate

Policy and

Strategy

Capacity to

Budget, Manage

and Impleme

nt

Capacity to

Monitor and

Evaluate

Institutional Developme

nt

Leadership

Knowledge

Accountability

Think about your own organization/agency…

• Which core issues/entry points need more urgent attention and CD support? Select two.

• For each entry point, which capacities are you good and weak at?

Key Functions of your agency relevant

to (theme)

What are the key issues/

challenges that your agency faces in

performing these

functions?

Whose capacities

(e.g., agencies, divisions,

units, etc.) need to be developed to address

these performanc

e challenges?

What capacities

(e.g., policies, systems, mechanisms, skills, etc.) need

to be developed

within these

agencies/units?

the CD Scoping Matrix… what and whose capacities matter to address

issues and improve performance

Group work 2:

•Do you think this methodology would be appropriate for your needs? Why? Why not?

•What would you do differently? How would you improve the process?

•What methodologies have you used to assess capacity needs? •Does it make sense for PA10 to use a common capacity assessment approach/methodology for capacity building under EUSDR?

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT and CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

Documents

Transcript of CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT and CAPACITY ASSESSMENT