92590 Capacity Development briefs S h a r i n g k n o w l e d g e a n d L e ss o n s L e a r n e d The Need for a Conceptual and Results-Oriented Framework in Capacity Development: Discussion of a New Approach By Samuel Otoo, Natalia Agapitova, Jenny Gold, and Sharon Fisher Efforts to develop capacity are being hindered by disparate methodologies, insufficient focus on outcomes and indicators, and a lack of concrete results to show improved capacity. The authors examine the need for a new resource to guide, capture, and communicate capacity development efforts. They outline a results-driven and systematic framework—based on rigorous needs assessment, innovative change process logic, and participatory implementation—that is driven by local ownership, adaptive management, and measurable results. This resource could fill a critical gap in capacity development design and reporting, as well as fuel further discussion in the development community. In Kenya, a capacity development project to mitigate work, such as the number of people trained and anec- the adverse impact of HIV/AIDS as part of a multisec- dotal information, rather than the tangible evidence toral response has been deemed a success. The project required to demonstrate whether the program reduced team, which consisted mainly of international consul- the adverse impact of HIV/AIDS. tants, created a social support network for people liv- As the demand for capacity development programs ing with HIV/AIDS and trained more than 300 network increases around the globe, examples such as this members as counselors to distribute educational mate- hypothetical case could proliferate. To orient capac- rials and provide support to infected persons and their ity development toward successful promotion of local families. ownership and measurable results, continuing dia- However, the implementation reveals underlying logue is needed. capacity constraints that were not properly assessed and addressed by project design. The team disregarded Consequences of Poor Design and Measurement stigma-related issues that prevent people from seeking counseling. Other challenges included the low com- mitment of local HIV/AIDS service providers and com- Capacity development has revolutionized the busi- munity leaders to support the initiative, unaddressed ness of international assistance with its paradigm shift links between psychosocial and other HIV/AIDS-related to accelerating development by unleashing the poten- support needs, and limited stakeholder ownership and tial that is already available within countries rather motivation to sustain or further develop the network. than simply resource transfer from abroad. Donors Moreover, the team did not collect evidence on key now spend more than $20 billion a year on a range of outcomes, such as on the creation of the network, par- capacity development activities. ticipation of stakeholders in the network, use of skills However, results have not met expectations, leading built through training, delivery of counseling services, some policymakers and development practitioners to and changes in the behavior of community members. question the merit of such efforts. Why have expecta- As the team prepares to depart, it sees its efforts tions not been met? unraveling while community requests for continued Evaluations, critical reviews, and working groups resources increase. They also realize their report to the note a failure of current practice to build a more ana- donor agency contains only basic outputs from their lytic and rigorous approach to needs assessments, APRIL 2009 NUMBER  31 program design, and the definition and measurement capacity development and support a community of of results.1 The problem begins with a lack of consen- practice? sus on the meaning of capacity development and the • Evidence of aid-effectiveness: A central part of results that can be expected from such programs. This the capacity development program—monitoring lack of clarity makes it difficult to evaluate outcomes, and evaluation—has been largely neglected. How understand impact, and determine accountability. then can one resolve weaknesses in program Capacity development operations frequently lack a design and better deploy capacity resources? conceptual framework. Programs tend to adopt a tech- nical approach without understanding local knowledge and practice and the sociopolitical, policy, and orga- Laying the Groundwork for a New Approach nizational factors that affect capacity. Strategically important questions are also often overlooked: How The World Bank Institute designed the Capacity for will activities create impact and thereby contribute to a Development Results Framework to respond to these development goal? How will the program engage local issues, by bringing together existing thinking and partners and stakeholders to drive the change process practice into a results-oriented resource that can guide needed to improve capacity? Are local stakeholders capacity development efforts. Development practi- committed to allocating resources (time, energy, and tioners can iteratively adapt its elements to specific enthusiasm) to a development goal? contexts to improve the design, implementation, and Such challenges are compounded by a poorly evaluation of capacity development programs from the articulated results chain, that is, weak links among needs assessment stage to the adaptive management needs assessments, capacity development activities, of results to the sharing of lessons learned. outcomes, and impact toward development goals. As According to the framework, capacity development a result, programs regularly fail to capture capacity is a locally driven process by which change agents impact within monitoring and evaluation systems. The affect sociopolitical, policy, and organizational fac- lack of evidence of what changes actually take place in tors to achieve a development goal. The framework different contexts means that potentially inappropriate describes the elements of a capacity development pro- interventions persist. gram (see diagram), as follows: These issues present far-reaching consequences: • A specified development goal that has stakeholder • Results: Current capacity development analysis ownership and motivates the capacity develop- tends to focus on the immediate outputs of activi- ment effort in that local context ties—such as the number of people trained—with • Sociopolitical, policy, and organizational capacity little information about outcomes or impact and factors that can be used to assess capacity needs, lack of accountability to stakeholders. How then inform design, and measure impact can anyone convince clients, donors, and col- leagues of the viability of these approaches, much less build their own confidence in capacity devel- opment efforts? • Comparability: The absence of consistent results A New Approach to Capacity Development frameworks and performance indicators makes it difficult to compare capacity development activi- Capacity for Achieving a Development Goal ties and identify best practices. How then can one avoid falling into the pitfalls of previous pro- Local Ownership, Effectiveness and Efficiency of Resource Use grams? Capacity Factors • Sustainability: Sustainable development requires Conduciveness of Efficiency of Effectiveness of a genuine partnership, with a mutual understand- Sociopolitical Policy Organizational ing of the change process and evaluation terms. Environment Instruments Arrangements Without an underlying framework for the capac- Change Process driven by Change Agents ity development process, how can one inclusively consider goals, strategy, and results with part- Outcomes ners? Capacity Development Program Activities • Learning: The potential for learning among development practitioners is not being fully real- ized because of a lack of common terminology and mechanisms for exchange. How then can one 1 See, for example, OECD (2005, 2006), Taylor and Clarke establish a global knowledge architecture around (2008), and World Bank (2005, 2006). APRIL 2009 NUMBER  31 • A change process through which capacity factors for example, changes in consensus building, coalitions are made more favorable to achieving a develop- and networks, and the formation and implementation ment goal of policy and strategy instruments. • The role of change agents, that is, influential indi- viduals or groups Targeting the Needs of Development Practice • Measurable outcomes for capacity development activities (in particular, technical assistance, knowledge exchange, and structured learning) This innovative framework emerged from analysis of capacity development practice and consideration for the current needs of the development community. The How the above elements fit within the framework is framework was designed to be the following: further described below: • Practical: The framework is a user-friendly Capacity impact: Local ownership and the effi- resource applicable in different contexts. Various ciency and effectiveness with which countries pursue materials to support its application are being con- development goals are determined by three factors: tinuously refined based on feedback from pilot (1) conduciveness of the sociopolitical environment, teams and stakeholder consultations. (2) efficiency of the policy instruments used by gov- ernment and other sectors, and (3) effectiveness of the • Flexible: The framework is not a blueprint to organizational arrangements. Development practitio- control processes; rather, it is a set of recommen- ners can use these factors to design a capacity devel- dations compatible with a range of situations and opment program that addresses targeted development change management methods. Its components can challenges and brings about measurable change in be applied across sectors and programs, promoting these factors. a “learn as you go” mentality for a more adaptive approach to interventions. Change process: The framework can help to iden- tify how capacity development activities can lead to • Results driven: The framework facilitates bench- gains toward development goals by linking activities marking and the harmonization of monitoring and and outcomes from these activities to their impact evaluation practices. This continuous and careful on capacity factors. This link creates a change pro- attention to results helps one to deliver quantita- cess logic that is based on building blocks amenable tive and qualitative proof of the value and efficacy to the development of indicators and measurement of programs. of results. Although change processes can occur • Collaborative: The framework encourages can- through many channels, the framework focuses on did discussion of sociopolitical forces and incen- adaptation on the part of people or organizations tives. By promoting a voice for all stakeholders within a given institutional context in response to and anchoring the development effort in a specific new information, redefinition of institutional rules goal, the framework helps to further local commit- and structures, and shifts in belief systems, power ment and country ownership. balances and relations. Such changes can be fostered and accelerated through interventions that enhance the use of knowledge and information, rather than through resource inputs (human, financial capital, technology, and so on). Change agents: The framework casts individuals How the Framework Can Be Applied in terms of change agents who can initiate or lead the capacity development process. Thus, development In the context of a capacity development program, one can practitioners should concentrate on the potential role use the framework to of local individuals or groups in bringing about favor- • inclusively engage stakeholders in the program cycle— able change in capacity factors to achieve development starting from the needs assessment stage—and ensure goals. local ownership Capacity development activities and outcomes: • define a capacity development strategy to apply at the community, regional, or country level The framework provides a typology of outcomes to • identify intermediate points along the change path for guide the design of capacity development programs adaptive management of the change process and capture their results. Outcomes may refer to the • build indicators into program design to monitor progress effects of changes that occur in an individual, includ- and, when necessary, adjust the program • communicate results to donors and stakeholders ing changes in awareness and skills. Outcomes may • compare programs and determine what does and does also refer to altered processes and new products and not work to improve practice. thus the broader organizational or social environment, Conclusion measurement—such as the framework—can only enrich the practice for the ultimate benefit of country partners. Why do we need a new systematic framework for The authors encourage your comments via capacity development? Capacity development has capacity4change@worldbank.org become the focus of international development efforts. Enormous amounts of funding are invested every year—estimated at 25 percent of global expenditure References on overseas development assistance. Yet, development OECD. 2005. The Paris Declaration on Aid practitioners still lack consensus on capacity develop- Effectiveness. Paris. ment: what it is, what it can do, and what the steps OECD. 2006. Survey on Monitoring the Paris are to attain it. Declaration: Overview of the Results. Paris. A systematic framework that permits examination Taylor, P. and P. Clarke. 2008. Capacity for a Change. of the strengths and weaknesses of capacity develop- Institute of Development Studies. Sussex. ment programs and sharing of experiences is much World Bank Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). desired to satisfy accountability needs and meet the 2005. Capacity Building in Africa: An IEG need for learning as the basis for improvement. No Evaluation of World Bank Support. Washington, longer is it feasible to launch programs, declare them D.C. a success, and then leave without concrete proof of World Bank Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). the achievement of objectives and strong country 2006. Annual Review of Development Effectiveness. ownership. Those able to show results will get the Washington, D.C. resources, which will create incentives for improved monitoring and evaluation. The Capacity for Development Results Framework builds on such thinking for a new working definition and approach that can move development practitio- ners and stakeholders toward a more comprehensive Peer reviewers understanding of capacity development. The frame- Geeta Batra, head, Country Partnerships and work also underscores evaluation as an ongoing man- Advisory Services Monitoring and Evaluations, agement and learning tool, providing a flexible, yet International Financial Corporation; Kebour basic, structure to improve capacity development in Ghenna, lead capacity development and gover- operation and scope. nance advisor to Initiative Africa, and Institute on As capacity development continues to evolve, an Governance and Innovative Leadership, Ethiopia. ongoing dialogue on fresh approaches to design and About World Bank Institute (WBI): Unleashing the Power of Knowledge to Enable a World Free of Poverty The World Bank Institute (WBI) helps countries share and apply global and local knowledge to meet development challenges. WBI's capacity development programs are designed to build skills among groups of individuals involved in performing tasks, and also to strengthen the organizations in which they work, and the sociopolitical environ- ment in which they operate. WBI Contact: Mark Nelson; program manager, Capacity Development Resource Center Tel: 202-458-8041, e-mail: mnelson1@worldbank.org Ajay Tejasvi; program coordinator, Capacity Development Resource Center Tel: 202-458-4064, e-mail: anarasimhan@worldbank.org Visit our website for more information and download the electronic copies of all Capacity Development Briefs at http://www.worldbank.org/capacity APRIL 2009 NUMBER  31 Different Approach, Improved Results What would happen if the Capacity for Development Results Framework was applied throughout the hypothetical case described in the first paragraph of this CD Brief, starting from the needs assessment stage? The framework could improve the program by changing the design to address a more complete set of capacity constraints on the ground and reinforcing the monitoring and evaluation system. Development Goal Reduce adverse impact of HIV/AIDS in targeted communities Capacity Factor Constraints in sociopolitical environment to meeting development goal identified by stakeholders through capacity needs assessment: • Limited community trust, engagement, and commitment of local leaders to HIV/AIDS programs • Prejudices and stigma toward people living with HIV/AIDS that prevent them from getting tested for HIV and seeking support services Measurable Impact Commitment of social and political leaders: • Extent to which community leaders demonstrate support to HIV/AIDS programs Compatibility with social norms: • Percent of community households that accept living with family members with HIV/AIDS • Percent change in uptake of HIV testing in targeted communities Change Process and Change process will be assisted through: Change Agents • Raised awareness of local leaders on benefits of an HIV/AIDS program for the community • Creation of regional action network of community leaders and service providers, with referral network to existing HIV/AIDS services in the community • Formulation of participatory plan to deliver community-based counseling and confidential HIV testing and referral services for HIV/AIDS care and support • Enhanced skills of community members to deliver counseling on HIV/AIDS to support implementation of the par- ticipatory plan Change agents will be community champions who deliver community-based services and form the network core. Program will also engage local leaders, community members, and service providers. Measurable Proportion of local leaders who report increased motivation in supporting community HIV/AIDS programs Outcomes Proportion of community leaders and service providers involved in regional network on provision of resources to the network and monthly progress updates Percent of communities who developed action steps and committed resources to support the participatory plan Proportion of trained community members who deliver counseling Tools for Data Reports from network meeting and consultations, stakeholder interviews and surveys, reports from skills-building Collection activities, field visit reports, testimonies from community members, and budget reports and proposals Activities • Series of structured roundtables that engage local leaders in discussions of HIV/AIDS impact on community welfare • Consultative meetings with local leaders and other stakeholders to develop network and coordination mechanism • National workshop to create and launch action network • Peer-to-peer learning on organization and delivery of community-based HIV/AIDS counseling, HIV testing, and referral services APRIL 2009 NUMBER  31