Organizational Implications



COs
Cos
Tech/HQs
Mang/HQs
RMUs
ER&A (Program Support)
Managing transition:
Stages, management function, competencies, leadership, roles and responsibilities, culture, resources
Human resources:
Retention of right talents for shift across time and project cycle
Mandate:
Multiple programming levels – therefore clarity of mandate for assuring program quality
What are the priorities?
How do we work together to achieve them?

Evidence base:
Invest in building accountability and impact measurement at different levels – generate global knowledge (synthesized)
Why – clear identity and accountability; demonstrate impact; change our story

Following on the RMU restructuring, a need to clarify the roles and mandates of the RMU team in terms of supporting/advancing the project à program shift
Agree fundraising and communications implications are huge. Really, really, really important. Seriously
Financial systems and structure needs to be aligned to a program approach
– is the proposed new structure enabling to the shift? (financial controller reporting outside CO)

Mindset/culture:
Understanding, reaching consensus and accepting new ways of working

Human resources:
Need for new competencies, partners and staff to meet the needs of program:
- UCP analysis
- Scale
- Communication messages
- Knowledge sharing

Staffing:
Retain key staff from project to project inside a program (competency and performance systems)
Program identity vs project identity
Team based working
Improve accountability for ‘initiative’ delivery
Implications for CI members (lead and non-lead)

Clarify authority and accountability roles between CIM, CI units, COs, regional partners, RLTs and interactions with those stakeholders
Fundraising:
- Tension between UR and restricted fundraising priorities - UR savings?
- Challenge in finding private donors for programs vs. projects
- Changing policies for use of UNR: cover SPC totally, learning, personnel

CARE USA needs to live up to its commitment to increase flexible resources to country offices in support of the shift
Funding:
Put your money where your mouth is: hold us accountable.
Resource mobilization:
- Evolving strategies: we are taking different strategies as different groups
- Better communication (advocacy) with restricted (government) donors

Dialogue with donors:
Lobby institutional donors (Paris Declaration) for co-funding program initiative with more long-term flexible funds
Advocate through project proposals about fit within program
Private donors/foundations/trusts
à support CI members to “sell” program approach
Leveraging potential of multiple sources
CARE ‘identity’ and (QCC???) funds

Encourage them to co-fund a program through support of a project; advocate for new long term and flexible funding within the Paris Declaration process; support to CI members to explain and advocate around the program approach vis-à-vis private philanthropy

Roles of technical units should be revisited to accommodate the shifts needed in RMU and COs.
Communications impact:
- Do not confuse “simple” with dumbed-down
- Communication impact is internal, too. GAER needs deep understanding of program work to communicate effectively / clearly / simply. Linked to knowledge sharing

Proactive talent management and retention: systems, skills, flexible resources for long-term program development
Time to work together
Impact assessment M&E:
- Need for greater evidence for advocacy and policy change – and for quality assurance
- Staffing patterns?
- Continuous quality? (monitoring)
- Contracting out?



Business policy and process changes, especially for
- finance (e.g.,SERENIC),
- HR (e.g., JDs and competencies), and
- fundraising (e.g., fund codes).


The nitty gritty of daily operations in these areas will need to change.
Organizing work beyond geographic borders
We need to change – from caterpillar to butterfly




Learning Labs Home | Impact Measurement Wiki | How to Use a Wiki