Project Phase: Planning Phase, Implementation Phase, Exit and Evaluation Phase
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach
Stages of Behaviour Change: Preparation Stage, Action Stage, Maintenance Stage
Project Support: Facilitator Resources, Documentation and Reporting
Specific Topics: Group Formation/Strengthening
The community will go through a process of identifying the different animal welfare issues, prioritizing them, and using the template provided below to document the results of their reflections and decisions.
Facilitation Notes:
The table can be filled after
· After communities identify and ranked them in order of importance, pick the prioritized animal welfare issue. Document the identified major root causes and let them discuss and identify the actions/behaviours or solutions. Such actions need to be owned by the community members to tackle them at community/group level or at each group member’s household level. Ensure appropriate participatory process of exploration, learning and reflection takes place before coming into agreement and developing/populating the community action plan. The developed action plan needs to be monitored, and members should be encouraged to be accountable and also express challenges they encountered.
It is important to note that some of the proposed actions may have been tried out previously by the equine owners with minimal or no success, hence the facilitator should probe further to ensure participants reflect through any previous actions and what was the gap and settle on the actions with greater chances of realising the changes anticipated.
· This document will serve as a living document to plan action as well as to continue to re-prioritize actions to be taken by the group on their own or in conjunction with other external stakeholders that will support them to execute the actions they have identified. It is thus important for facilitator’s to frequently remind community members to review developed action plans and report back or adapt them based on emerging needs and changes.
· *one prioritized issue can have more than one action; so add rows to identify and each action can be monitored by different stakeholders and have different success indicators
· * Actions – could include a specific behaviour/actions they agreed to take individually and/or collectively.
· *frequency could include community members checking/supporting each other as part of peer support to provide practical or/and emotional support to one another
· Timeline – when the identified action is done and when it needs to be reported
· *who is responsible is taking the action and they need to report back when the group meets again/in the group meetings; this could also be used as a behaviour change technique of monitoring each other’s practice of a desired behaviour
This resource includes three example trackers you may wish to use to support your work. These are designed for community engagement staff, as a way to record key discussions from community visits, track progress, and capture outcomes. Using trackers will help you to:
Be accountable to the communities you work with
Provide the support requested by communities during your visits
Keep track of actions and ensure that they are completed on time
Evidence progress and requests for further support from your organisation or potential partner organisations
Report to donors more easily
Each of these trackers are suggestions only, and should be adapted and used as is appropriate for your team and context. It may not be appropriate or required to use some of these trackers for all projects so you can pick and choose as is helpful for your work.
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach, Community Engagement Approach, Societal Outreach and Campaigns Approach
Project Support: Facilitator Resources, Documentation and Reporting
1. Team Action Tracker
The Team Action Tracker keeps a record of actions to be taken by staff/partner staff teams to support identified animal welfare issues. The tracker is informed by PLA activities and directly supports the community action plan.
The tracker should be populated and updated by community engagement staff. It helps to track which animal welfare issues were identified, using which PLA tools, and captures the follow up actions to be taken by the team to both support the community action plan.
Invite a vet to sensitize on colic (1st priority) during next community meeting.
2. Project/Regional Action Tracker
The Project/Regional Action Tracker is designed to collate information from across communities to inform project/regional planning. Information included within the tracker is populated with information taken from PLA activities and community action plans from within the project/regional operational area. The Project/Regional Action Tracker can support with identifying the scale of different issues, tracking different actions/strategies planned, and recording ideas for actions to take/improvement which should be further explored. The goal is to help teams keep track of outcomes of activities with communities for greater strategic coordination and support for planning and development of projects. The utility of this resource will depend on the scale of the project/programme and may not be needed in all project contexts.
Animal Welfare Issue
Regions & communities where issues was identified as priority
Key actions / strategies to take
Person responsible
Timeline / Deadline
Additional actions / Ideas for improvement
Status / Update
Feeding
Halaba: 17 communities
Regional training on proper feeding practices scheduled for 30th May 2019
Drought (water shortage)
Dodola: 14 communities
· Speaking to WaterAid about opportunities to link communities with water savings programmes
3. Staff Action Tracker
The Staff Action Tracker is designed to support community engagement staff to document their community visits, activities, and action points for follow up.
Staff Name: Community/site:
Visit/ Meeting Date
Number of participants and equines targeted
Community engagement activities Key topics/issues discussed (incl. follow up on progress of action points/results identified in previous meeting/visit)
Identified action points and results expected to be achieved by community Persons responsible + expected achievement date
Identified actions for staff Person responsible + expected achievement date
Action point: 1. Sensitization on hoof care & possible handling for women 2. Follow up on how sharing of stable cleaning activities are going Staff responsible: Expected achievement date:
07/06/2019
# Participants: 10
# Equines:
T15 Cost-benefit analysis – not over-loading · Implementation costs · Cost on animal · Cost on HH if adopted or not · Benefits of mixed feed
Action point/result expected: 1. Reduce from 10 quantal/3 trips to 8 quantal/4 trips 2. Buy wheat bran in bulk to reduce cost (10 birr to 8.6 birr / kg) 3. Focus on balance loading Person responsible: Fanos & Azamach Expected achievement date: Meet to discuss in one week
Action point: 1. Check with animal welfare team that reduction in amount over more trips is good welfare 2. Make plan to collect money for bulk purchase of feed 3. Support selection of money managers 4. Provide support/training on cart balancing & feed mixing 5. Sensitizing shop keeper about over-loading 6. Identify feed sellers who are willing to sell in bulk for reduced cost 7. Revisit for support planning in 15 days Staff responsible: Expected achievement date:
07/06/2019
# Participants:
# Equines:
T14 Group inter-loaning
Action point/result expected: 1. Carry out activity in smaller groups
Action point: 1. Evaluate seed money strategy – focus seed money on direct equine-benefited activities
07/06/2019
# Participants: 10
# Equines?
T15 Cost-benefit analysis – not over-loading: · Implementation costs · Cost on animal · Cost on HH if adopted or not · Benefits of mixed feed
Action point/result expected: 4. Reduce from 10 quantal/3 trips to 8 quantal/4 trips 5. Buy wheat bran in bulk to reduce cost (10 birr to 8.6 birr / kg) 6. Focus on balance loading
Person responsible: Fanos & Azamach
Expected achievement date: Meet to discuss in one week
Action point: 1. Check with animal welfare technical support staff to evaluate potential welfare implications of community’s proposed action. 2. Revisit for support planning in 15 days
Staff responsible: TBD, consult with AHM and UK AW team
The resource is intended to support community facilitators design evaluation questions to track the implementation, progress and outcomes of the animal welfare improvement project/behaviour change processes. The resource can be used when developing community project participant’s individual interview or focus group discussion guide. The sample questions explore community vis-a-vis individual level household changes; group sustainability; and tracking behaviour change from the stages of change perspective. Note these are not exhaustive and need to be adapted to fit to your programme/project/context needs.
Keyword Search Tags
Project Phase: Exit & Evaluation Phase
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach, Community Engagement Approach, Societal Outreach and Campaigns Approach
Project Support: Facilitator Resources, Monitoring and Evaluation
It could be helpful to start with questions which encourage the respondent to easily respond to e.g.
Why did you get involved in this project? What did you find the most interesting about this project?
What was the most difficult part for you? What could be done differently to make this project more successful in the future?
You can ask them to recall and explain what things were like before – and then ask them to explain how they are now. Eg) How were animals in your community before this project started? Probe: Were they happy? Why? Did they look healthy? Why? Did they have the things they need? What did/didn’t they have?
Then provide a follow on question, Eg) How are things for animals in your community now? Why? Probe: Do they have what they need? Do they look healthy? If yes, why? If no, why not?
Do people do anything differently with their animals now? Can you give some animal welfare related actions being carried by the community?
Are change agents (if being utilized) playing an active role in supporting your community? In what ways? What do you think they could do differently?
Is there a collective understanding amongst community members of the major animal welfare issues and how to address them?
What are the animal health service providers available in your area? Do these local service providers provide quality services to the satisfaction of community members? Probe: Are group members seeking the help of animal health services?Are local service providers responsive to community requests? Does the responsiveness differ based on people’s gender or socio-economic status? Can you provide examples?
Are community/group members seeking animal welfare related services proactively and in a timely manner? Can you give examples?
Are men, women and children in families who own animals all aware of their animals’ welfare issues and participate in activities that are important to improve and maintain good welfare?
What kind of actions have been taken in your community to ensure better animal welfare improvement is achieved? (Probing questions depending on your focus issue: What examples of community-led animal disease prevention measures are being carried out on appropriate timelines e.g., vaccines and boosters? Are appropriate measures to ensure clean and comfortable environments for animals in place? Are community members engaged in the project have a good knowledge of appropriate and welfare friendly gear? And use them on their animals? e.g., harnessing, saddle-fitting, cart balance and loading, are animals handled in ways that are safe? (Which doesn’t not prevent their development or creates risk of injury. What are the animal – owner/handler interactions? What are the wound prevention or/and management practices in your area? Have you seen changes on that?).
What changes in access to and availability of resources do communities perceive have resulted from their involvement in the project?
Have there been any benefits to the community from this work? Probe: Can you give specific examples?
Have there been any negative consequences on the community from this work? Probe: Can you give specific examples?
Sample questions to ask when assessing group sustainability (if the project included Equine Welfare Group Formation)
Is your community different after forming a group? If yes, in what ways? If no, why do you think this is?
Is the group registered? Is your group functioning well with regular documented meetings? Have there been changes in leadership of your group? Are men and women part of the leadership and membership?
Is conflict resolution mechanism in place, has been used and the outcome recorded in village registers?
Are there examples of collective actions that have been undertaken by the group to meet their animals’ needs and are these recorded in the records of the community group e.g., collective feed purchases, vaccine campaigns, advocacy with government agencies to address their animal needs?
What are the successful animal welfare improvements that were achieved through your collective/group actions? What were your group’s actions to encourage your members to change their behaviour to improve animal welfare? Were there mechanisms that your group established to change your members' behaviour to improve animal welfare? Can you give us examples? Can you tell us more about this?
Sample Questions for Assessing Changes/impact at the individual level
Are all members of your family aware of your animal’s welfare issues? Probe: Your wife/husband? What about your children? Probe: What do they each do for your animal’s welfare?
Have you learnt anything new since being part of this group/work?
What are the changes you have seen in your animals, give examples/specify
What are the practices you have adopted at home that has are helping you improve the welfare of your animals? Give examples.
What kind of support have you received from Brooke/partners or change agents?
Do you do anything differently with your animals now, after being part of this project: Probe: Can you give some examples? Why didn’t you do the things that you do now with your animal, beforehand? What stopped you from doing things with your animal the way you do now, before this project started? What helped you to change your practice or what is a challenge for your not to change your practice? What do you want to know more or practice more to improve your animals’ welfare?
How would you rate your rate of motivation to continue to practice the new targeted behaviour? Do you intend to keep caring for your animal in the ways you do now? If yes, why? What could make it difficult to do this? If no, why not?
What are the prompts and triggers to adopt the new behaviour you identified? [learning questions for reflection and for future programme/project intervention design]
Were you able to identify something that would help you to sustain the desired targeted behaviour? And what is it?
Have you faced unforeseen challenges? If so, what are the unforeseen challenges have you faced?
Is there any resource/time implication of adopting the desired new targeted behaviour when compared to the old practice? Probe: Do you think this will impact whether you continue to do this?
Vulnerable groups’ targeted question: Have you encountered any specific challenges to your gender/situation or position as a result practising this desired behaviour? e.g., making decisions to take the animal to be treated, deciding to pay to a service?
Has it been difficult to continue/maintain the new ways of treating and working with your animal? If yes, why? If no, why not? What or who made it easier for you to keep up these ways of working? What or who made it difficult to maintain the new changes? What kind of support do you still require to maintain/continue with practicing the desired targeted behaviour?
Have you started experiencing the benefits of animal welfare to your livelihood and the associated desired behaviour change?
Tracking Behaviour change using Stages of Change Model
As part of working towards behaviour change, it is important to track progress towards the realization of the desired behaviour. You can use the below questions to monitor progress or as part of overall project evaluation. The below points/questions can help you to check whether you were successful to introduce change within each stage of change. These suggested indicative questions (not prescriptive and exhaustive) can be used for FGD, KII, and within surveys/interviews, or can be included as a follow up of various participatory tools that can be used for evaluation phase. You can also ask these questions retrospectively once the groups/individual project participants progress to the next stage of change to understand the change progress as part of your learning.
Pre-contemplation and contemplation (following Conception phase):
Have community/individual’s knowledge and understanding about animal welfare improved? Do they identify the gap in practice on animal welfare now? You can probe this by asking:- Can you explain what animal welfare means to you? Follow on: What was the standard of animal welfare in your community before this work started/your group formed? Probe: Why was this the case?
Have they become aware of what animal welfare concerns are there in their locality/individual homestead? Probe: Can you provide examples?
Are community/individual’s’ able to link their/o/u/c problem behaviour with the animal welfare gap.
Has the capability (physical and psychological) and motivation (Reflective motivation) of o/u/c changed after the intervention?
What is the belief system of the community/individual about the possibility of change? What is their change talks?
Did their value system change because of the intervention [during conception /planning phase] and/or your organization contribution or that of the CCA?
How would they rate (individual or collective depending on your availability of resource and relevance) their motivation for change? This will be asked retrospectively as part of overall evaluation, or as a question at the end of the first phase? If asked at the end, this could be clearer: “How would you have described your motivation for change at the beginning of this process?”
What kind of steps/actions they are willing to take or have taken so far?
Preparation
How would they rate their motivation to adopt the new desired targeted behaviour?
What is your current understanding about the relationship between the problem behaviour and animal welfare practice gap; and how can you change this?
Did their value system change because of the intervention [during conception /planning phase interactions] and/or your organization contribution or that of the CCA?
What kind of steps/actions they are willing to take or have taken so far?
What kind of support has they received? e.g. Action plan development trainings, etc.
Have they (group and/or individual) developed action plan to act?
What were their barriers to develop action plans before the start of this programme/project? Have these barriers changed? How would they link your programme/project/CCA helped/contributed to reducing the barriers?
What were their barriers to develop action plans before the start of this programme/project? Have these barriers changed? How would they link your programme/project/CCA helped/contributed to reducing the barriers?
Action
Did they find their action plans relevant to their reality when trying to implement them? (This shows doing good COM-B analysis helps in identifying potential barriers and adaptive programming with SI can further help the community/individual to get the relevant/appropriate intervention to help the shift to take concrete actions to perform the desired behaviour change).
What are the prompts and triggers to adopt the new behaviour you identified? [learning questions for reflection and for future programme/project intervention design]
Were you able to reinforce the supporting behaviours that will help you to sustain the desired targeted behaviour? Probe: Can you provide specific examples?
Have you faced unforeseen challenges? If so, what are the unforeseen challenges have you faced?
Is there any resource/time implication of adopting the desired new targeted behaviour when compared to the old practice?
How would you rate your rate of motivation to continue to practice the new targeted behaviour? [for survey or FGD or KII]
Vulnerable groups’ targeted question: what kind of actions were you to take? Have you encountered specific to your gender/situation or position? E.g. making decisions to take the animal to be treated, deciding to pay to a service?
Have you faced any safeguarding issues when practicing this new targeted behaviour [This is particularly relevant when part of the socio-economic and COM-B analysis/gender analysis has shown that it is a hindrance for animal welfare or a prompt/favourable social norm for animal welfare practice without being exploitative of individuals/undermining their dignity and rights]
Who helped you to continue to continue overcome your challenges/distractions to go back to the old way? Did you have supporting relationships or mechanisms?
Maintenance
How long were you able to hold of the maintenance of performing the desired targeted behaviour?
Have you seen the benefit in practicing the new desired targeted behaviour?
Who helped you to continue to overcome your challenges/distractions to go back to the old way? Did you have supporting relationships or mechanisms?
What kind of support do you still require maintaining the desired targeted behaviour?
Termination
How long were you able to maintain/sustain performing the desired targeted behaviour?
Did you have supporting relationships or mechanisms or incentives to perform the desired behaviour and to improve your animal welfare practice? What or who helped you to continue to continue overcome your challenges/distractions not to fall back to the old ways of handling/managing/using your animal?
Have you started communicating the benefits of animal welfare to your livelihood and the associated desired behaviour change to your friends, family, etc.?
Facilitation Notes
Facilitator needs to create an enabling safe space for people/groups who are marginalized to express their lived experiences regarding the different barriers they faced and how they have found the project to help them maintain human behaviour change that benefits their animals’ welfare improvement and also theirs and their family/community lives. Meeting invites to such meetings need to ensure both genders be able to meaningfully participate and for their views to be heard to determine the next steps.
It is important to note that such discussions with communities should be voluntary and use ethical standards which includes informing the participants why they are selected, the purpose of the discussion/interview, that their views won’t affect their involvement in the project and how the interview/the discussion will be take and the purpose of the meeting should be clearly communicated to them. The following tools may also be used to support the evaluation of project success:
4.1.1 Project end line monitoring to assess achievement of project
An overview of the exit and evaluation phase supported by the steps that follow are outlined in Figure 44 below:
Figure 44: Overview of Process for Assessing Whether to Exit Project
To help inform determination of whether to exit and withdraw support, final end-line monitoring of indicators in accordance with the monitoring plan is an essential first step. It is also important to assess where the community are in terms of the stages of change and facilitate whether they feel they can maintain the behavioural changes to sustain their animal welfare improvements. It is also useful for you as the facilitator to listen for change talk, and assess their progression, or the progression of others they sought to influence (e.g. animal health service providers), into the maintenance phase for the behaviours they sought to promote.
Once collected, analyse data, and compare end line results with results from the baseline assessment to determine the extent to which project objectives were achieved and preconditions for adopting and maintaining the desired behaviours have been addressed (e.g. barriers and motivators to desired behaviours). Identify successes as well as underperforming outcomes, for further follow-up discussion, reflection and learning with communities. Providing opportunities for such collective reflection and experience sharing can be powerful tools for learning and change, help inform adaptive management, and can foster motivation and a sense of self-efficacy and ownership of change amongst the community.
In addition, it is helpful to share the lessons learned more widely. They may be shared with the whole community to which the animal owners’ group belongs, and through workshops where different CBOs or communities come together from across a wider geographic area. This can generate motivation amongst others to support or take part in similar activities and helps to increase the reach and effectiveness of your programme.
4.1.2 Community Self-evaluation
The purpose of this step is to assess the longer-term impact of the group’s efforts to improve the welfare of their animals, to enable community group members to understand the positive changing trends in animal welfare and reflect on any issues that might need further action and identify potential needs for external support. Your job is to determine whether the group can stand on its own feet before the project withdraws support and exits.
For this step you will need to gather community members together to perform end-line monitoring to review the effectiveness of their community action plan and decide future objectives. You will need to plan this meeting in advance because it will take longer than a regular group meeting. Some groups decide to hold a two-day meeting, whereas others plan to spend two hours every day for three to four days on the self-evaluation process. It is very useful to involve local stakeholders and service providers identified during the initiation and planning phases. Their involvement will help to strengthen the community action plan by encouraging them to continue working closely with the group on improving service provision for animals.
During these discussions, two main areas will be evaluated:
1. Success and failures of the community action plan
Facilitate the group to look together at their activities to investigate how well they were carried out and whether they led to the desired change in the welfare issue and refer to any monitoring results collected from their Animal Welfare transect Walks and results available from the project’s monitoring. The group analyses which actions have been most effective and which less effective and the reasons why. This helps participants to learn, to change their interventions if necessary and to plan for continuing action.
Start by asking the group to remember what happened right at the beginning when their interventions started. Conduct a Before and Now Analysis (T11b) and/or compile a Historical timeline (T7) of the events and challenges that occurred throughout the period since they began to work together. If changes in the quality of animal health service providers was an aim of the group, reviewing any recent results from the Community Score Card (T35) activity, or conducting the activity anew to evaluate changes from initial results can be helpful. Such activities will set the climate for in-depth discussion. During this part of the analysis, it is also useful to discuss the achievements and difficulties faced while working together as a group, with reasons for these, and how any difficulties were overcome.
2. Evaluating sustainability
Once the community action plan and resultant changes in animal welfare and related impacts have been evaluated, it is important to evaluate whether improvements in animal welfare can be sustained, both in terms of the group’s functioning and members’ maintenance of new behaviours.
Facilitate the community group to reflect on whether their plan has achieved the desired results and agree on any areas that may still require continued action and/or support. If the community finds that at least most of them can sustain their changes in behaviour without any support (are at the at maintenance stage of change) and, if possible, that performing these new behaviours have become part of their norms/values or habits, then it can be said that these changes have become sustainable.
In addition, conduct or revisit results from the Group sustainability mapping (T27), along with the Group Governance Self-Assessment (T31), and Group Inter-loaning Analysis (T14), for CBOs with savings and loaning function, as appropriate. Review results with the CBO and support them to self-evaluate the sustainable functioning of the group and/or association if this has been feasible to organize in terms of the extent to which the necessary elements are in place to enable them to maintain their results and continue functioning without support from the project.
4.1.3 Project Process Evaluation
In addition to end line monitoring, it is recommended the project conduct an evaluation of the project using internal or external evaluators, with preference for using impartial third-party evaluators whenever feasible. These process evaluations are particularly essential if desired changes in animal welfare were not achieved as it will enable you to assess opportunities for the project to improve its implementation strategy or processes to improve outcomes, as well as help inform the determination of whether to continue the project using a different strategy. Evaluations should seek to assess the following in consultation with relevant stakeholders:
The appropriateness and effectiveness of the processes employed to: - improve and sustain animal welfare and the adoption of desired behaviour change, - promote participatory engagement and empowerment of communities, and - promote gender equality and safeguarding of vulnerable groups.
Stakeholder satisfaction with the project: - assess stakeholder perceptions related to the benefits and value of the plan both in terms of animals and people, - satisfaction with the project/implementing organization - recommendations for improvement
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
A group sustainability map is a tool for visually representing the cornerstones for successfully achieving sustainable animal welfare improvements. It enables a community group to visualise the key ‘results areas’ that need to be in place to achieve a long-lasting improvement in their animals’ welfare. It is recommended this activity be conducted in the planning or implementation phase of the project, and then its outcomes referred to during monitoring and reflection and learning processes throughout the project, as well as the exit and evaluation phase. In this way, the tool supports assessment of the extent to which the group can sustain its animal welfare improvements independently and help inform the determination of the group’s readiness for withdrawal of external support.
Sustainability mapping is slightly different from vision or dream mapping which involved visualizing broad goals, with vision statements often drawn by participants in the form of pictures [79]. Sustainability mapping on the other hand, focuses on identifying specific results areas needed to achieve sustainability, then breaking down each results area into the specific activities to deliver them, thereby enabling participants to formulate a concrete action plan for achieving lasting change.
Tool purpose:
Time needed:
• Enable community group members to identify specific results areas that will support their achievement of lasting animal welfare improvements without external support. • Support community action planning by identifying activities community groups need to undertake to deliver each result area and achieve lasting animal welfare improvements. • Support evaluation of group readiness for withdraw of project support.
2 hours
Materials needed:
Chart paper, coloured cards, markers, or other locally available resources, like sticks, stones, straw, beans, seeds, coloured powders or saw dust, etc.
Keyword Search Tags
Project Phase: Planning Phase, Implementation, Exit and Evaluation Phase
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach
Behavioural Drivers (COM-B): Opportunity
Stages of Behaviour Change: Preparation Stage
Project Support: Participatory Learning and Action Tools
Specific Topics: Group formation/strengthening
Group Sustainability Map
An example group sustainability map is provided in figure T28 below. The map illustrates the results areas identified as needing to be in place for a community group to achieve lasting animal welfare improvements.
Figure T28 Group Sustainability map
The following activities were then identified to support achievement of each results area, followed by discussions about opportunities for carrying them out:
Animal owners, carers, and users with the motivation, knowledge, and skills to meet their animals’ welfare needs
Advocate for and secure training for group members on animal husbandry and management best practices from extension service providers
Raise awareness of animal husbandry and management best practices to others in the community
Provide guidance to those who need it on preventing/addressing animal welfare issues as needed
Model best practices in animal husbandry and management and share experiences with other community members to encourage their uptake
Effective and functioning community group governance structures andsavings and loansystem
Group develops and approves constitution with clear vision and purpose to improve animal welfare
Group elects governing body members regularly as per the governance constitution including ensuring women’s and other vulnerable groups genuine participation and leadership
Group has financial system (e.g. records, audit reports, minutes of decisions, etc.) and strong management to ensure efficiency, financial stability and sustainability
All members contribute to group savings as per constitutionally agreed requirements
Group action plan is regularly revisited and adapted as needed based on monitoring results
Secure training for group members in community group governance from extension service providers
Mechanisms for monitoring animals’ welfare needs within the community
Agree on observable indicators of animal welfare within their group and the community at large that the group can monitor
Conduct animal welfare transect walks at regularly agreed intervals
Securing access/availability to/of quality and affordable resources and services necessary to sustaining their animal’s welfare
Establish good working relationships with key animal resource and health service providers to support the community in meeting animals’ welfare needs through quality service provision.
Facilitate collective bargaining and purchases from animal resource and service providers at reduced cost to support group members and others in the community in meeting their animals’ welfare needs
Advocate for and secure water point maintenance training for group members from extension service providers
Establish, maintain or provide support to a water point management committee to maintain water points or other community-led natural resource management important to the community and their animals
Group Sustainability Mapping
Step 1
Invite community group members to identify what they need to put/have in place (sometimes called results areas) in order to maintain good working animal welfare on their own to sustain lasting improvements in their animal’s welfare without external support. Give the participants coloured cards and ask them to draw or write down their thoughts. Some areas to consider are suggested under Step 2.
It is important to ensure that different community members are invited and have a safe enabling space for them to share their views on what sustainability looks like from their point of view.
Step 2
Next, ask participants to analyse what is on each card and sort them into categories, facilitating their debate until they come to a consensus on the ‘results areas’ which they believe need to be in place for them to achieve a long-lasting improvement in their/their community’s animals’ welfare. Once results areas are agreed and paste the cards comprising each area onto a big piece of chart paper and ask participants to develop a results statement on each area.
Some examples of possible results are provided below for reference: • Animal owners, carers, and users with the motivation, knowledge, and skills to meet their animals’ welfare needs • Effective and functioning community group governance structures and savings and loan system • Mechanisms for monitoring animals’ welfare needs within the community • Securing access/availability to/of key resources and services necessary to sustaining their animal’s welfare
Step 3
Once results statements have been created, ask group members to identify activities which they would need to undertake to achieve each result statement. Ask them to draw or write each activity on the chart under the result area which it contributes to, and discuss the opportunities for carrying out these activities. Once completed, encourage the group to incorporate their identified activities within their community action plan.
Step 4
Document results by either transferring it to a piece of paper or by taking a photo of the completed outputs. Ensure a copy of the sustainability map produced is retained by the community. Record any relevant insights from the community’s analysis in your project action tracker. Follow up with the community to further support their action planning and implementation of identified activities as needed.
Facilitation Notes
Note what different sustainability aspects are identified as priorities by different community members considering their lived experiences.
It is also important to identify what form of group formation and structure is relevant for the intended group sustainability.
Based on results of monitoring and evaluation and community self-assessment, and related discussions sharing results, determine which of the following options is most appropriate and feasible. It is important that any decision to exit the project and withdraw support should be based, as far as possible, on the CBO members’ assessment of their own self-reliance, readiness for withdrawal, and desire to continue to act on improving animal welfare.
Withdrawal Support and Exit - this option is recommended when: a. The desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have been achieved, or b. When the desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved/seem unlikely to be sustained and feasibility of achieving them is unlikely.
Continue Support and Do Not Exit: this option is recommended when desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved or are unlikely to be sustained due to issues with strategy, community capacity, or unexpected circumstances, and your project has the necessary resources to continue supporting the project. In such cases, it is recommended you build the necessary capacity and/or adapt the community development strategy and re-plan in collaboration with the community to continue working to achieve desired results.
Any determination to exit and gradually withdraw support, and the projects’ ability and desire to continue support should be shared and discussed with the animal owning community and other relevant stakeholders for full transparency and accountability.
4.2.2 Gradual phase out of project support and exit
The aim of this period is for the community to become gradually independent of regular facilitation while maintaining animal welfare improvements and reacting rapidly and effectively to any threats or downturns in welfare.
Develop plan for withdrawal of regular support with the group. During this stage you should come to an agreement with the group about how much of your support that they will need in the future. The group needs to agree on a transition from your facilitation to a situation where they continue to meet and take action to improve animal welfare without your regular support. This will involve careful planning. Long-term support may include holding an annual meeting, helping to overcome specific problems or crises, and/or linking the group with other relevant agencies and federating local community groups.
Get the community to discuss how they will plan, who will be the representative for the group, whether this will change over time and how new representatives will be decided. Encourage the group to reach out to other resource or service providers for collaboration, find out what further support they might need from the project, agree a timeframe, establish criteria of how group will measure self-reliance and enable identification of their own self-reliance based on criteria.
Prepare an action plan to continue welfare improvement based on the self-evaluation analysis:
Discuss the process of continuing improvement in animal welfare with the group when they develop their new action plan.
Agree what support is needed from you and the project to implement their action plan.
Agree a time frame for giving this support and implementing the plan.
Get the group to decide who their representative will be, whether this will change over time and if so, what will guide decisions about employing new representatives in the future.
Establish criteria with the group for measuring their self-reliance and enable them to identify their current level of self-reliance based on these criteria.
Encourage the group to reach out to other resource- and service- providers
Withdraw your regular facilitation from the group according to the agreed time frame. Provide active support only in response to the group members’ request and only in a crisis, which they cannot resolve on their own.
Gradually withdrawing support will enable you to extend your facilitation into other communities where animals are in need and enable you to support improving the lives of more animals over a larger area in the long term than would be possible if you stayed closely involved with one group or community.
4.2.3 Conduct follow-up monitoring to assess sustainability of change and consider follow up action as needed
Animal welfare improvements are only truly a success if the desired behaviours continue to be practiced by the community and the related improvements in animal welfare are sustained over the long term. As such, it is essential to conduct follow-up monitoring for a period after all support has been withdrawn. This will enable the project to use learnings from results to adapt its implementation strategies as needed, and potentially re-engage the community to support maintenance of desired change. Consider continuing monitoring activities on a yearly basis for up to two to three years before determining the extent to which the project has been a success.
It is recommended you develop post-exit re-entry criteria for providing spot interventions to address underperforming indicators identified through monitoring. For example, you may consider providing additional project support if results show two or three indicators are not being maintained, or if any indicator falls below a certain limit of acceptance. Continue periodic monitoring to assess improvement in underperforming indicators due to any re-entry activities.
This tool can be used to assess the extent to which community (or other) groups and organisations’ decision making and management practices align with good governance principles.
Tool purpose:
Time needed:
• Support the identification and analysis of who makes decisions and how. • To identify and promote understanding of the principles of good governance • To assess the extent to which existing group decision making and management practices meet good governance principles • Help identify and/or negotiate group governance improvement measures as needed and aide in strengthening the adaptive capacity of community groups • To improve organisational/group practices to be inclusive from the perspective of different groups of people, and help promote more equitable participation in decision making and benefit sharing amongst community group members, especially of vulnerable groups,
2 hours
Materials needed:
Chart paper, coloured sticker dots and/or coloured markers, coloured index cards or sticky notes, large circular cut-out of different colours and sizes.
Keyword Search Tags
Project Phase: Initiation Phase, Planning Phase
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach,
Specific Topics: Group Formation/Strengthening
Table T29: Example Community Group Governance Assessment Score Card
1
0
-1
Participation and Non-discrimination
The group’s governing body (e.g., executive committee, council, board) is representative of all group members and is not dominated by any individual/s or sub-group/s or does not discriminate against people who are excluded/marginalized groups and vulnerable.
At least 30% of office bearers (e.g., chair, secretary, treasurer) are women
Other members of the community that are marginalized, excluded or who are vulnerable in that community have a seat in the governing body
There is regular dialogue with, and active involvement of, all members in the community group’s discussions and activities
Equity (Fairness)
Respect and attention are given to all group members’ views and all views weight equal weight unless provided in the Group’s governance constitution
There is no personal bias in decisions made by the community group
Consideration is given to the distribution of costs and benefits (of decisions and actions) between group members
Transparency
All group members are aware of the community group’s rules and regulations and division of roles among members and governing bodies, and among governing body members
All group members are aware of how and why decisions are made by the group governance body
There is clear communication with all group members, including on all financial transactions and decision-made including record keeping
Accountability and Integrity
There is a clear system for the allocation and acceptance of responsibility amongst group members
There is a process of planning, monitoring and reporting to ensure that agreed actions are effectively implemented and reported
There is mechanism or process in place for resolving conflicts or grievances which is accessible by all group members
The group has audit group or gets to be audited to ensure financial accountability and financial health
Group Governance Self-assessment
Step 1
The first stage in the group governance assessment is ‘setting the scene’ by sharing experiences and perspectives of good governance.
To ‘set the scene’ invite community group members to recount an event or change in their community that was because of (or was followed by) decisions made by one or more local groups/organisations. The local group/organization used as an example could be community group itself, or another local group or organisation such as a community council, school board, or church.
It is advisable to carry out this exercise by breaking the community into smaller groups of 2-3 and present back (as a story or role play, if appropriate), or alternatively you can conduct this as a group discussion. Questions to guide the discussion can include the following:
• How, where, when, and by whom were decisions made? • How were they communicated to others? • What possibilities were there to debate decisions? • Was there consensus around the decisions made? How and among whom was the consensus achieved? • Who had most influence over decision making processes? Why? • Who had the least influence over decision making processes? Why? • What was good about the decision-making process? • How could decision making have been improved?
Through this discussion, elicit participants’ perspectives on what constitutes good governance. Then principles of good governance, against which the organisation/group will be assessed, can then be presented, and discussed. Although values are strongly influenced by the local cultural context, there are some universal norms that apply across cultural boundaries. Some principles of good governance include:
• Participation and Non-Discrimination - All stakeholders participate in decision making that affects their lives, including representatives of people from marginalised and disempowered groups. Decisions rendered does not negatively impact in discriminating against women and other vulnerable groups. • Equity - Costs and benefits are shared fairly and impartial judgement is available in case of conflict. • Accountability - Lines of responsibility are clear and those in positions of responsibility are answerable to all stakeholders. • Transparency - All relevant information and records are available, in an appropriate form, to all stakeholders.
Step 2
Prepare an assessment score card table (refer to example in Table T29) to enable the group to score itself against good governance principles using the key indicators identified. Then identify a scoring system. An example scoring system that has proven useful is using a scale of -1, 0, +1, with good = +1, moderate = 0, and poor = -1. The process of discussing good governance practices is more important than reaching a consensus in one session. If there are differences of opinion these should be noted, and the discussion moved on.
Step 3
Encourage individual participants to prepare their own scoring followed by a group analysis and discussion of the patterns that emerge. In this case, it may be appropriate to make the statements as shown in the table (Figure T29) more personal e.g. I feel that respect and attention is given to my views, or I am aware of the organisation’s rules and regulations.
Step 4
Discuss and analyse the results as a group, focusing on why and how the score was allocated to each principle. Any differences of opinion should be discussed. Revisit the table either during or following the discussion to adjust the scores as needed.
Step 5
If time permits and if appropriate, participants can discuss the scores they would like to see in the future and begin to explore the steps needed to improve the group’s governance practices. Consider adding a column to include any actions or steps identified as needed to improve scores or keep track of the key discussion points.
Step 6
If the Table was drawn on a chart on the ground, document it by either transferring it to a piece of paper or take a photo. A copy should be left with the community.
Record the community’s analysis and responses in your project action tracker and follow up with the community later if/when you start action planning together.
Facilitation Notes
The focus of this exercise is about who makes decisions and how those decisions are made within community groups (i.e., governance) rather than the technical or financial capacity of local groups and organisations.
Consideration should be given to whether the exercise is to be carried out with group members or wider ‘community’ who may not be members, but who may support the community group in other ways, including stakeholders who may affect or be affected by the group’s actions. This similar exercise can also be carried out amongst elected governing body members.
The emphasis here is on the principles of good governance, some of which may threaten existing power imbalances in decision making, the facilitators must be aware of how the different principles promote good governance and be able to explain this with examples, as well as awareness on how power imbalances can lead to organisations being destabilized.
The facilitator must also be aware of the group composition, in terms of gender, power, social relationships with the community and how political or social relationships might inhibit group discussion, and the fact that stakeholders may be unwilling to share their true thoughts, this can be addressed through having different group meetings.
This can also be used when an elected governing body is facing governance issues and need to have a facilitated dialogue to ensure governing bodies solve issues using self-assessment tool.
Local participants should be encouraged to build as much of the diagram as possible without interruption and to suggest anything else that should be recorded.
Community Score Card is a widely used citizen’s led accountability tool. It is a highly participatory tool that allows community members and the service providers or local government agents who have a duty to provide services to collaboratively assess the quality of service provision. There are various services animal owning communities may rely on to support them in meeting their animals’ welfare needs, including: animal health services, equipment makers, feed sellers, extension agents etc. This tool can be used to promote constructive dialogue and joint action amongst communities and respective service providers to improve services important to meeting animals’ welfare needs. The tool is designed to be used with a specific service provider and one issue at a time so as to enable meaningful discussion and action.
This tool can be used to further support discussions about animal service and resource providers including as a follow-up to activities such as: T1A: Mapping Resources and Services, T3A. Local Animal Service Provider Venn Diagram, and T9 Matrix ranking & scoring, or T9B Matrix Ranking and Scoring of Animal Service Providers. Through these activities, community members will have identified the local animal health or resource service providers they rely on, discussed their satisfaction or preferences, as well as identified criteria they use to judge their local service providers competence and/or satisfaction with services which can provide a useful foundation for informing use of this tool. In addition, if you conducted T5: Gender Roles and Responsibilities, referring to this may help you develop discussion questions and facilitate discussion amongst community members about different opportunities and constraints faced by men and women in their interaction with different local service providers.
Tool purpose:
Time needed:
• Identify gaps and levels of satisfaction in local animal service provision in terms service quality, availability, affordability, accessibility and adaptability • Promote shared understanding amongst community members and local service providers of common issues and solutions related to service provision and use • Improve accountability and motivation to improve animal service provision and use amongst local animal service providers and community members. • Support identification of indicators for assessing service quality and user satisfaction, and participatory monitoring of local animal health service quality and improvements. • Improve dialogue, feedback, and collaborative working between local animal service providers and communities,
2 hours for community scoring; 2 hours for local service providers self-evaluation scoring; 2 hours for a joint interface meeting. Time may be shortened to 4 hours if the community scoring and local service provider self-evaluation scoring is conducted simultaneously
Materials needed:
Chart paper, coloured sticker dots and/or coloured markers, coloured index cards or sticky notes, meeting halls to post papers for scoring.
Keyword Search Tags
Project Phase: Planning, Implementation, Exit and Evaluation
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Development Approach
Behavioural Drivers (COM-B): Behaviour Change Diagnosis and Planning
Project Support: Participatory Learning and Action Tools, Monitoring and Evaluation, Documentation and Reporting
Specific Topics: Animal Health and Services
Community Scorecard Process
As this tool is about a service provider and the animal owning communities who are using such services, it is important to properly layout the process with adequate care to have a negotiated and empowering results both for animal owning communities and the service providers. Focusing on one service provider at a time removes confusion and to properly identify gaps and recommendations.
Some of these processes can be done simultaneously. The community scoring, the service providers own scoring and the joint interface meeting between the animal owning communities and respective service providers can each take 1.5 to 2hrs. It can be scheduled all in one day or can be done in consecutive days. If you have enough facilitators the animal owning scoring and the service providers scoring can be done simultaneously giving enough time for both facilitators to have a reflection time in between to help them frame the agenda and leading the interface meeting.
If you want to find the views of vulnerable members of the community, you can hold separate sessions with them. So you can make any number of animal owning communities scoring separately and bring the scores together for the interface meetings. (E.g. you can have a women only, youth only, or a specified community group members’ organization, etc.) The essence is to help you understand the perception and the real barriers for them in relation to their lived experience with the LSPs and the kind of services they provide including how they interact with them.
Figure T35: Community Score card processes adapted from [90]
Community Score Card Process
Step 1
Plan and Preparation The first step is to do the preparatory work to the community score card process for the identified service.
Input tracking and planning the process. This includes who gets to be part of this process (identifying key stakeholders from both community and service providers side) and make logistical arrangements like meeting halls, scoring materials, scheduling for the meeting; and allocating separate rooms if the community scoring and the service providers scorings are going to take simultaneously.
When identifying community members that will participate, organizers need to ensure that vulnerable community members understand the community score card process; and enable them to understand and encourage their participation. It is critical to take into consideration that different segments of the community participate and an enabling environment is created for them to share their views in a safe space whereby each of their individual views and scores are taken into consideration, and their experiences valued. At times, depending on the context and the culture as well as preference by the vulnerable groups, separate sessions could be organized for them to do the community scoring. If separate meeting halls or times need to be set up for women and men groups, ensure this is already planned and agreed with the community or have an additional conducive meeting hall/space for both meetings.
To ensure community participation, it is important to create an enabling space and demystify fears around participation for fear of retaliation by service providers and/or local government bodies.
Step 2
Mobilizing community, developing the performance scorecard and scoring
Start by explaining the purpose and process of the exercise and then ask participants (from the community members) to identify the parameters of good quality service (depending on the animal welfare local service identified to be focused on).
This must be an empowering process for communities. Therefore before the actual scoring, it is important to have preparatory sessions with communities by providing appropriate information about the purpose of undertaking community score card, their rights and expectations from the service providers; and the roles and responsibilities of the service provider that is in focus. The discussion needs to be focused on the connection between the service provision and why lack of or limitation in the identified service exacerbates the animal welfare issue; and what quality service looks like and how it will benefit them in addressing animal welfare problems/issues. This is to help them to be focused on the service provider and the quality of service that is relevant to address the animal welfare problem. It is important to have a properly facilitated session to enable them to share their expectation of the kind of quality, affordable service and their satisfaction as clients who own equines.
Limiting Indicators and Prioritizing among them: It helps to have a limited set of indicators that represent the different aspects of quality service. In case that more indicators are suggested, it is important to try to categorize them and create an understanding on the amended indicator. If coming to amending them is not possible, then it might be good to prioritize which criteria to use depending on the issue at hand. Either way, it is important to note the discussions generated during such discussions.
As the literacy level of community members could be mixed, it is important that you be prepared to provide support to them by reading it for them and reminding them what the scoring rates are (whether using smiley faces, or using rating scales in a way they can understand). The scoring should be properly explained and repeated to community members when each of them come to do the scoring so that there is a clear understanding on that among all. Facilitators need to have locally made scoring materials (beads, beans, etc.) or cut out some sticky materials (e.g. dots, etc.) - enough for all participants to score per each identified scoring criteria, and with clear scoring definitions. If such materials are not available or if writing on flipchart is easier, then it is important to do each of the members' scoring and write it down immediately.
Once the individual scoring by each community member is done, discuss among them the potential reasons/justifications for such scoring. Based on the scoring and the discussion, prioritize issues that are pertinent to them, and the kind of solutions they are proposing. The prioritization will help if and when the scoring by the service providers list is different and if the need to narrow down to a maximum of 10 indicators are going to be the focus for the joint action planning, then it will help you to easily identify and take the first top 5 issues for the joint meeting. Include these proposed recommendations for each of the issues, or put them in a separate sheet whereby you will be able to easily refer to/use them during the interface meeting.
Step 3
Developing and scoring the self-evaluation scorecard by respective service provider
It is best practice to focus on a single service provider to make the discussion and scoring more focused. Start by explaining the purpose and process of the exercise and then ask participants who are service providers to identify the parameters of good quality service (depending on the animal welfare local service you have identified to focus on). It is ideal if the facilitator knows and has overall understanding regarding the role of the service providers regarding equine welfare needs, the legal/policy and implementation frameworks that guide the kinds of service the service provider need to provide and the equine owning community’s main concerns regarding the service.
Before jumping into indicator selection by the service provider participants, it is good to brainstorm first on their overall roles and responsibilities to shape the discussion and the indicator selection to focus on their type and quality of service provision. (E.g. is it only to do treatment or are they mandated to provide education or follow up etc. as part of their role, etc.) Such discussion will help to make the discussion and the scoring comprehensive as much as possible.
It is ideal if the facilitator that leads this process needs to have an overall understanding of the service providers’ roles in the animal welfare improvement and the kind of services they provide,
It is good to create an understanding with the service providers (whether they are public/government or private service providers) on the reason for doing and process of community score card. It is good to reiterate that it is to create a smooth interaction for joint action and monitoring of progress with their stakeholders, who are equine owning communities. The discussion should not result in making them feel cornered or be defensive; rather this process needs to also be empowering for the individual service providers. If there are female service providers, ensure that their views and challenges in discharging their roles to provide quality service is also captured during the indicator identification, scoring and recommendation generation.
Depending on the literacy levels of the service providers, it is suggested that facilitators have alternative scoring materials available to accommodate literacy levels as needed (beads, beans, etc.), or have some stickers or similar materials (e.g. dots, sticky notes etc.) in sufficient quantities to support scoring of all identified criteria by all participants. Facilitator may need to read the scoring criteria out loud during the scoring process depending on participant literacy levels.
Once the individual scoring by each community member is done, discuss among them the potential reasons/justifications for such scoring. Based on the scoring and the discussion, prioritize issues that are pertinent to them, and the kind of solutions they are proposing. Include these proposed recommendations for each of the issues, or put them in a separate sheet whereby you will be able to easily refer to/use during the interface meeting.
Step 4
Interface meeting to develop action plan
Ensure that you have ample space to accommodate both community and service providers, and that it is a safe place for all to be. Facilitator(s) need to go through the indicators and scorings, with the commonality and the unique indicators identified by respective groups, the level of score, the prioritized issues and the recommendations before the meeting to structure the meeting with a feedforward mentality.
Start the discussion by reiterating the purpose of doing the score card and the need for this interface meeting. As one of the purposes is to create a shared understanding among community and service providers for a consultative dialogue to generate joint recommendations and action plans, set the meeting tone with that. Display the scoring of both groups so that each of them see the indicators they have identified and the scores they have provided.
Start with a brainstorming session and explore and focus on the common themes to start the discussion. The spirit of the discussion is to get to a common understanding and focus on what can be done in the future. Hence, ensure that both groups present their findings and why they think the issues they have identified are critical. Through the discussions, ensure there is no blame game rather an understanding on the constraints both communities and service providers face, and frame the issues for them to tackle together.
Next write down the prioritized and consensus reached issues/problems to be tackled jointly or separately but will be monitored together. If consensus cannot be reached, it is good to give individual participants a chance to identify what is a priority for them through scoring on the key issue that is important for them. Ensure that illiterate participants’ interests are catered for as stated in step 2 and 3 above.
Once the issues are prioritized, use the below template/table to document the discussion. As much as possible ensure that the issues identified by equine owning communities and the service providers are captured and joint solutions are sought for them. Indicate who the responsible groups are to champion/lead on prioritized issues to be tackled and try to outline clear steps/actions and when that can be delivered.
Step 5
Implementation and Monitoring of Recommended Actions
Once an agreed action plan is drawn, it is good to show commitment to follow up on the agreed action points. As some of the action plans might need the two groups to work within their own constituencies (e.g. equine owning communities might need to work in their groups, or service providers might need to do an internal budgeting/planning, customer service training to their service provider members, etc.), try to ensure that they follow through their respective action plans as well as help them monitor their joint and constituency-based action plans progress together as a joint taskforce. The purpose of this step is to ensure that agreed joint action plans are implemented and monitored together to improve the service provision as well as bridge the understanding/expectations of equine owners’ on the quality of service.
As part of monitoring, once the agreed action plans have been undertaken, it is possible to do another round of scoring to assess the progress from the initial scoring. Following this is equally important to this is also to celebrate successes as well as organize a similar process of community score card if issues identified are addressed and/or if there are still constraints that need to be further dealt with. The initial and the follow up scorings need to be documented to show progress, stagnation or regress on the quality of service. Moreover, the plenary reflections and the action plans notes need to also be captured and distributed to the equine owning community/groups, the service providers and the joint taskforce (if a separate entity is formed) for their records, future reference and/or action planning. Add a copy to your Project Action Tracker and Community Action Plan Template note on quality of service provision and the services rendered by service providers.
Facilitator's Notes
It is your responsibility as a facilitator to ensure adequate understanding is created among all involved stakeholders about the purpose, process and spirit of this tool in advance. (It is to facilitate conversations rather than shifting blame and pointing fingers)..
It is recommended this activity be administered by a trained community facilitator to ensure discussions result in agreement on joint action plans.
This tool is not only about capturing results, but rather is a process orientated approach that empowers communities, facilitates conversations and dialogue between communities and service providers.
It is important to ensure vulnerable and excluded members of the community are aware of the process and how it will help them to voice their concerns when it comes to being able to access, afford and enjoy quality service provision without explicit or tacit discrimination.
Depending on the issue at hand and the time and convenience of setting the meetings, discussion with the community and discussion among service providers can take place simultaneously before the joint session. However, if the community, service providers are done separately it is recommended there be a time gap in scheduling before reconvening for the joint session. This will enable facilitators to summarize points and identify potential sticky and tricky areas for joint reflection and recommendations for potential actions for consideration during the joint session.
It is useful to examine perceptions of animal-related resource and service providers with different groups in a community as they may rely on, or have different perceptions of resources and service providers. Consider asking both men and women from animal-owning households to participate in this activity; or if it is not feasible or appropriate to conduct this activity with both sexes together, consider conducting this activity separately.
Facilitators could ask probing questions when indicators are identified by animal owning communities as well as during the local service providers own self-scoring to encourage people to think about how the identified indicator relates to the local service provider and animal welfare.
Facilitators should not control or insert their ideas into the community or service provider assessment or scoring process, but rather facilitate the process so that people feel free to do their individual scoring. In contexts with participant illiteracy or where assistance is required, facilitators can provide support by reiterating the assessment criteria to use when it is time for them to do their scoring.
Next Steps
Information on resource and service provider gaps identified using this tool if conducted during the initiation or planning phase of a project, can be helpful to refer to during community action planning discussions.
4.1.1 Conduct end-line monitoring and assess achievement of project outcomes
Carry out final end-line monitoring on all indicators of animal welfare and behaviour addressed by the project in accordance with monitoring plan. Once data is analysed, compare end-line results with baseline assessment results to determine the extent to which project objectives were achieved and preconditions for adopting and maintaining the desired behaviours have been addressed (e.g. barriers and motivators to desired behaviours). Identify successes as well as underperforming outcomes for further follow-up discussion, reflection and learning with communities.
4.1.2 Participatory project review
Organize community meetings to present and discuss monitoring results with community members and CCAs, assess outcomes in terms of successes and underperformance and any recommendations for how any underperforming outcomes could have been improved. In addition, reflect on changing trends in the welfare of their animals and their behaviours, as well as reflect on the impact to their lives because of involvement with the project and associated animal welfare improvements.
Conduct an evaluation of the project using internal or external evaluators, with preference for using impartial third-party evaluators whenever feasible. These process evaluations are particularly essential if desired behavioural change is not achieved as it will enable you to assess whether there is anything you could do to improve the project implementation strategy or processes to improve outcomes, can inform your decision as to whether you continue to support the project using a different strategy.
Evaluations should seek to assess the following in consultation with relevant stakeholders:
The appropriateness and effectiveness of the processes employed to: - improve and sustain animal welfare and the adoption of desired behaviour change, - promote participatory engagement and empowerment of communities, and - promote gender equality and safeguarding of vulnerable groups.
Stakeholder satisfaction with project. Stakeholders may include CCAs, target peer groups, partners and local animal resource and service providers as relevant. Consider assessing stakeholder perceptions related to the benefits and value of the project both in terms of animals and people, overall project accountability and transparency, satisfaction with the project/supporting organization, as well as recommendations for improvement.
Based on results of monitoring and evaluation and the participatory project review, determine which of the following options is most appropriate and feasible depending on your assessment:
Withdrawal Support and Exit: this option is recommended when: a. The desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have been achieved, or b. When the desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved/seem unlikely to be sustained and feasibility of achieving them is unlikely.
Continue Support and Do Not Exit: this option is recommended when desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved or are unlikely to be sustained due to issues with strategy or organizational capacity, and the project/organization has the necessary resources to continue supporting the project. In such cases, it is recommended you build the necessary capacity and/or adapt the community engagement strategy and re-plan in collaboration with the community to continue working to achieve desired results.
Evaluation results and next steps in terms of gradual withdrawal of support or the organizations’ desire to continue support should be shared and discussed with the animal owning community and other relevant stakeholders for full transparency and accountability.
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
4.2.1Gradual phase out of external support and project exit
Once the project is ready to exit, it is recommended to withdraw support gradually, establishing mechanisms for ongoing light touch support for 1+ years, or as your project resources and capacity permit. It is important to recognize that without ongoing incentives or compensation from the project, CCAs often do not continue directly supporting their peers through ongoing activities. However, we have found that their involvement with the project often results in their internalization of compassion for animals and animal owning households and has resulted in their continued indirect support and encouragement of animal welfare improvements within their communities. Through CCAs and their target peers’ behavioural modelling and built capacity, the proliferation of knowledge, skills, and social norms related to animal welfare can continue to be maintained and shared throughout their communities.
Consider adopting the following key steps to support a gradual withdrawal from the project area:
Hold discussions with CCAs and their target peers and other relevant stakeholders about how they can continue to support each other and their broader community upon the projects withdrawal of support. Consider including discussions on sustainable financing to promote continuation of any work desired by stakeholders as appropriate.
Conduct outreach with project stakeholders as well as the broader community to inform them about the project ending and withdrawal of project support, as well as promote public recognition of CCAs and any other relevant stakeholders’ efforts and expertise (e.g. government agencies, service providers) to promote their continued utilization by their community.
Leave essential resources with CCAs or other relevant stakeholders as appropriate to support their continued promotion of animal welfare improvements within their community (e.g. posters, training resources).
Ensure necessary linkages have been made between CCAs, target peers, and animal related resource and service providers and/or other relevant stakeholders (e.g. government agencies) to promote ongoing coordination of support for each other and the sharing of key messages. This should include the development and dissemination of a phone directory of CCAs, target peers, animal related resource and service providers and any other relevant stakeholders, which can also help the project team coordinate any follow up visits and/or periodic educational activities as needed.
Establish mechanisms for the community to contact your organization to share its concerns and highlight any emergent welfare issues. Consider the feasibility of establishing a one-way toll-free text/call option the community can use to contact your organization.
Schedule periodic communications with CCAs, target peer groups, and local animal resource and service providers either through mobile communications or site visits to discuss any challenges to the maintenance of desired behaviours and animal welfare improvements and provide support as needed to enable relevant parties to address them.
Conduct an annual CCA retreat to share success stories and discuss challenges and solutions to any issues faced during the project, and which may be anticipated upon project exit, and to celebrate and generate continued buy in for their participation, leadership, and lasting commitment to improving animal welfare in their communities.
Consider including outreach activities to support continued maintenance of desired behaviours, provide reminders to action at relevant times (e.g. regular animal health checks), and/or continue fostering social norms to encourage the long-term sustainability of behavioural change as appropriate (e.g. radio or TV shows, posters, mobile messaging etc.). The Societal Outreach and Campaigns Approach provides guidance on developing effective outreach strategies if needed.
4.2.2 Follow-up monitoring to assess sustainability of change
Animal welfare improvement projects are only truly a success if the desired behaviours continue to be practiced by target groups and the related improvements in animal welfare are sustained over the long term. As such, it is essential to conduct follow-up monitoring for a period after all support has been withdrawn. This will enable the project to use learnings from results to adapt its implementation strategies as needed, and potentially re-engage the community to support maintenance of desired change. Consider continuing monitoring activities on a yearly basis for up to 2-3 years before determining the extent to which the project has been a success.
It is recommended you develop post-exit re-entry criteria for providing spot interventions to address underperforming indicators identified through monitoring. For example, you may consider providing additional project support if results show two or three indicators are not being maintained, or if any indictor falls below a certain limit of acceptance. Continue periodic monitoring to assess improvement in underperforming indicators because of any re-entry activities.
Carry out final end-line monitoring on all indicators of indicators in accordance with the monitoring plan. The Change Analysis – before and now analysis (T11b) tool may be used to aid this process. Once data is analysed, compare end-line results with baseline assessment results to determine the extent to which project objectives, impacts, and outcomes were achieved. Identify successes as well as underperforming indicators for further follow-up discussion, reflection and learning with your team, representative members of the target audience, and any other relevant stakeholders. In cases where some values and behaviours are highly entrenched in the community norms/culture, the SOC project may be met with resistance or backlash. This however should not be construed as a failure, as behaviour change and cultural shifts are processes that take time to change and may require persistence, and continued efforts to achieve.
4.1.2 Evaluate project effectiveness in achieving desired results and determine whether to exit project, and/or continue/adapt as needed
Conduct an evaluation of the project using internal or external evaluators, with preference for using impartial third-party evaluators whenever feasible. These evaluations are particularly essential if desired behavioural change is not achieved as it will enable you to assess whether there is anything you could do to improve the project implementation strategy, or processes to improve outcomes. This can inform your decision as to whether you need to adapt the SOC approach using a different strategy or exit because the project is unlikely to achieve success.
Most often applying a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection gives a more in depth understanding to evaluate the project. The evaluation can be conducted ‘in –house’ by the team or using external actors. Evaluation should be participatory and involve stakeholders involved in the project as this will give an accurate overview of the project and how it was understood and accepted by the target community.
Evaluations should seek to assess the following in consultation with representative members of the target audience and other relevant stakeholders as appropriate (Adapted from [78]):
The appropriateness and effectiveness of any processes employed by the project to:
improve and sustain animal welfare and the adoption of desired behaviour change
promote participation of communities throughout all stages of the project, and
Stakeholder satisfaction with project. Consider assessing stakeholder perceptions related to the benefits and value of the project both in terms of animals and people, overall project accountability and transparency, satisfaction with the project/implementing organization, as well as recommendations for improvement.
Was the process as participatory and empowering as it was hoped for the partners/stakeholders and target audience in particular?
Check which of the strategies, modes of delivery as well as BCTs were effective in coining/framing the messages considering the APEASE criteria.
Ultimately, though it may be difficult to ascertain, try to see whether your communicated messages and the used modes of communication have resulted in tangible understanding of animal welfare and improvement in practicing/embracing animal welfare domains. As the SOC approach is about broader engagement and awareness, it may not be feasible to monitor how the population you have targeted are accurately doing in maintaining the action. If your project aimed to support changes in values and behaviour that have a strong cultural element or are embedded within the community, such change may be incremental and difficult to observe over a short time frame. This means that the evaluation may only be able to assess the basic indicators specifically identified as being important for this project, other benefits may only become apparent over a longer period, although, this is still sufficient to show that the project has been successful. Follow-up monitoring 1-2 years after the project can be useful for assessing the effectiveness of the project, as well as the sustainability of change, especially when conducted at repeated intervals.
Based on results of the assessment determine which of the following options is most appropriate and feasible:
Withdrawal of outreach/ campaign efforts and exit: this option is recommended when:
The desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have been achieved and there is evidence that this change is sustainable. For example, if you have a representative sample of your target audience who are in the maintenance stage of behaviour change using them as champions will help them maintain their behaviour but will be useful in the dissemination of the target welfare practices to community members. Some of the way to incentivise them could be using competition as well as allowing them to host local and regional level contests in the animal welfare practices, they have learned. Or,
When the desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved/seem unlikely to be sustained and feasibility of achieving them is unlikely.
Continue outreach/ campaign efforts and do not exit: this option is recommended when desired behavioural change and related animal welfare improvements have not been achieved or are unlikely to be sustained due to issues with strategy, and the project has the necessary resources to continue supporting the project. In such cases, it is recommended you adapt the outreach/ campaign strategy and re-plan in collaboration with the community to continue working to achieve desired results.
Evaluation results and next steps in terms of gradual withdrawal of support or the project’s desire to continue support should be shared and discussed with the animal owning community and other relevant stakeholders for full transparency and accountability.
Schedule periodic communications with relevant community leaders or key stakeholders, social networks of target audiences, and/or local animal resource and service providers to discuss any challenges and provide support as needed to enable relevant parties to address them.
Consider including outreach activities to support continued maintenance of desired behaviours, provide reminders to action at relevant times (e.g. regular animal health checks), and/or continue fostering social norms to encourage the long-term sustainability of behavioural change as appropriate (e.g. radio or TV shows, posters, mobile messaging etc.).
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
