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.
This community action planning tool supports communities in developing actions to address their priority animal welfare issues and has been adapted from Community conversation on animal welfare: A guide to facilitators [71]. This tool can be informed by outcomes from other tools such as:
Once animal welfare issues are prioritised, this tool can be used to facilitate discussions with community members to identify strategies and actions to address priority animal welfare issues, and help them identify knowledge, skills, and/or resource they required to enable them to take action to improve their animals’ welfare.
Tool purpose:
Time needed:
• Support community to reflect on their identified priority animals’ welfare issues and identify actions they can take to address them. • Identify the knowledge, skills and resources communities need to take action to improve their animals’ welfare.
1.5 hours
Materials needed:
Chart paper, note cards, markers, or other locally available resources, pre-printed pictures, or visual aids of priority animal welfare issues (optional), pre-printed pictures or visual aids on improved animal welfare practices relevant to identified animal welfare issues (optional).
Approaches for Working With Communities: Community Engagement Approach; Community Development Approach
Stages of Change: Preparation Stage, Action Stage
Project Support: Participatory Learning and Action Tools, Documentation and Reporting
Specific Topics: Animal Husbandry and Management; Animal Handling; Animal Welfare, Feelings and Needs; Animal Health and Services Community Change Agents
Community Animal Welfare Action Plan
Table T34 below shows an example of a community welfare action plan developed to address priority animal welfare issues identified through discussions using T33: Community Animal Welfare Needs Analysis.
Priority Animal Welfare Issues
Actions to be Taken (Household and / or community level)
ExpectedChanges /Indicators of Success
Resources / Support Required to implement planned actions
Who Monitors / When?
Feed shortage
Community grow fodder for donkeys
Owners then feed the donkeys the recommended portions as needed throughout the day (as donkeys do not feed a lot at once)
Improved donkey health indicators: • Increased feed volume available • Feed available in all seasons • Improved body score condition • Happy and productive animals
Fodder production requires seeds.
Training on fodder production and storage
Improved understanding of donkey feeding best practices e.g. what types of feed, when/frequency of feeding, and how much to feed
Owners do the monitoring monthly
Animal welfare team assessing body score condition quarterly
No access to veterinary services (for preventative treatment and prevention)
Community mobilization based on scheduled vaccination/ deworming programs.
Owners supported by each other to seek veterinary services whenever their donkeys are sick.
Owners vaccinate donkeys on recommended schedule
Improved Health Indicators: • Reduced incidence of donkey’s sickness • Reduced time lost by owners due to animals being unable to work
Animal health providers have access to vaccinations.
Information on how to identify illness in donkeys and when they should not be worked
Owners assessing how their animal is feeling if it is sick or not daily, while ensuring that the animals are vaccinated yearly
Donkeys have access to water
Owners provide their donkeys with water at regular intervals during the day
Improved donkeys’ health indicators: • Improve body score condition/ health • Improve hydration
Access to safe drinking water for donkeys
Daily monitoring of donkeys status, if its thirsty or okay by the owners.
Table T34a: Example of Completed Community Animal Welfare Action Plan
Work with the community to rank 2-3 of the most important issues one by one. T8 Pairwise Ranking and Scoringor T9 Matrix Ranking and Scoring can be used to support identification of priorities, or results from these activities may be used if previously conducted.
You can prompt the discussion with prep-prepared outreach materials if you have developed them to discuss possible actions for improvement and benefits of acting. An example is provided in figure T34(a) of how to go about manging wounds that you can refer to develop any other animal welfare issues you need to help the community to plan to address (refer to the steps for cleaning wounds in figure T34a as an example).
Step 2
Hand out the pre-prepared outreach materials (pictures or illustrations), illustrating the selected priority animal welfare issues, and ask community members to discuss them. Ask: what do you think about and what feelings do you have when you think about taking steps to improving these animal welfare issues? If communities struggle to answer this, you can use the steps below to prompt this conversation if helpful:
• Step 1 - Observe: Look at the animal shown and identify the welfare issue it is facing. (For example, the image illustrates an animal with wounds.) • Step 2 – Question: Ask yourself, what could an animal in that condition be feeling or experiencing? (E.g. Anxiety, confusion, struggle, pain, distress.) • Step 3 – Reflect: What do you think needs to be done to address the animal welfare issue shown? Do you currently have all the things you need to address the welfare issue? Do you need assistance in sourcing something to help address this animal welfare issue from somewhere else? • Step 4 – Discuss action: What could you try doing to address this animal welfare issue? (Such as cleaning the wounds using the available material within the household, such as salt and water). If these actions turn out to be successful – great. If they don’t – you will reflect and adjust the plan.
If you have prepared outreach materials on solutions to the animal welfare issues in advance, hand them out and discuss them for consideration (refer to the example on Figure T34a on wound management).
Step 3
Ask community members to share what they would do to manage the wound issues in step one in their animals. Or you can remind participants of the first prioritised animal welfare issue from the ranking exercise the community previously completed duringT33: Community Animal Welfare Needs Analysis .
Ask community members to share what they could do to address/respond to this priority animal welfare issue. Probing questions to guide this conversation include:
• Is there someone in the community who already responds to this animal welfare issue well? What do they do, to do this well? • What can be done at the household and community level to respond to this animal welfare issue? • What are the challenges that people face to solve this issue? • What are the benefits of acting on this animal welfare issue? • What are the potential costs or constraints to acting on this animal welfare issue?
Make notes of responses onto flipchart paper. Repeat Step 3 for each of the priority animal welfare issues previously identified by the community
Step 4
Use community reflections from Step 3 as prompts to facilitate completion of a community animal welfare action plan. Facilitate a discussion to identify the following key elements:
• Which prioritised animal welfare issues are community members committed to addressing at this point in time? (Not every animal welfare issue needs to make it onto the community action plan, if community members are not committed to addressing it yet). • What are the actions they realistically commit to taking (at both household and community level) to respond to the selected animal welfare issues? • What are the expected changes (indicators of success) that the community would like to see from their actions? • What resources and support do they require to implement these actions? • How/who will monitor whether these actions have been taken and when?
Document the plan into the community animal welfare action plan table (see example in Table T34a). Ensure that the community are left with copies of the plan in a language/format appropriate and requested by them. Finally, record the community discussions and their agreed actions into your Project Action Tracker
Facilitator's Notes
Ensure that as a minimum the following key elements of a community animal welfare plan are agreed by the community during this exercise, using participatory and gender aware facilitation:
What are the priority animal welfare issues community members are committed to addressing? E.g. some priority issues might have been identified, but there isn’t true commitment from the community yet for addressing these.
What are the actions that participants can realistically commit to taking (at both household level and community/group level) to address selected priority issues?
What are the expected changes/indicators of success of their actions?
What resources and support to they require to implement these actions?
How/who will monitor whether these actions have been taken and when? Be realistic.
Communities will likely require further support and input from you/other organisations in order to implement their action plans. It is vitally important that during the community action planning session you are clear with community participants about what it is realistic and appropriate for you and other organisations to provide, and that you ensure these provisions are sustainable. If a request doesn’t fit these requirements, explain this to the participants and help them to develop a more suitable request.
Next Steps
To support community members in implementing their action plans, it will be important to resources and support identified by community members as needed to implement their action plan are secured, and you may need to consider holding meetings with other relevant stakeholder e.g., local government officials, animal health and resource providers to secure their support as needed.
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.
As you prepare for the implementation phase, you also need to plan how you will monitor the project in terms of activity outputs and animal welfare and behavioural outcomes. While you/CCAs have already worked with target community members to identify their own means of assessing their successes in previous steps, this step focuses on identifying what the project desires to monitor to assess the effectiveness of the project, which may be different than community identified indicators. Remember to ensure that whatever indicators you select identify the intended target by gender or other particularly vulnerable group requiring special consideration as appropriate to the project context and desired results. When thinking about what to measure, consider the following:
Impact Indicators: impact indicators allow you to assess progress towards higher level goals. Impact level indicators may be focused on how animal welfare has improved because of the project, or benefits perceived by the community as a result of the project/improving animal welfare. Examples of impact level indicators to consider may include:
• Indicators of animal welfare that reflect what you would expect to improve due to the project e.g. number of, or severity of wounds, disease prevalence or severity.
• Benefits perceived by communities as a result of improving animal welfare/ the project.
Outcome Indicators: outcome indicators should enable the project to determine the extent to which the project activities achieved their stated aims in terms of desired behaviour change. Outcome indicators are also often related to the identified barriers/pre-conditions which need to be place which the project seeks to address to support adoption of desired behaviours.
Consider assessing the following:
• The extent to which your priority groups practice the desired behaviours, such as “XX% men or women animal carers clean their animal’s shelter daily” [20]
• The most important barriers/pre-conditions for practicing and sustaining the promoted behaviours, such as access to the required resources or services (e.g. “XX% of women animal owners who know where to seek quality animal health services”) (refer to Behaviour Change Planning Table step 4) [20]
• In addition to the indicators above, it is also helpful to assess the following [20]: - Why people practice the promoted behaviours? - such findings provide extremely useful lessons for further promotion of these behaviours in the existing or planned projects. - Why do people not practice the promoted behaviours? - such findings are crucial for re-designing your strategy to address the factors which prevent people from practicing the behaviours.
Output Indicators: indicators related to output should enable the project to assess how well the project activities were implemented, as opposed to measure the resultant changes that emerge because of activities.
• Refer to project activities and develop indicators for each activity.
For example:
- Total number of male/female animal owning community members attending educational event. - Total number of welfare promoting equipment made, purchased, and/or sold (e.g. collars, harnesses, carts etc.). - Total number of women participating in training sessions. - Total number of educational posters or murals displayed publicly.
It is also useful to consider the following recommendations related to when to measure [20]:
At the project’s start: conduct a baseline survey to determine the percentage of people who/do not practice the promoted behaviours; and the existing pre-conditions (identified barriers/motivators) for practicing the desired behaviour (e.g. people’s knowledge, availability of resources), as well as for relevant animal welfare indicators if an animal welfare assessment was not conducted at the start of the project initiation phase.
Throughout the project: keep monitoring 1) the quality of your activities (by using checklists, observations, interviews); 2) the extent to which people start adopting the promoted behaviours and welfare issues are improved (based on observations, regular monitoring data); 3) the progress on addressing the pre-conditions for sustainability, 4) reasons why people adopt the promoted behaviours or not.
At the end of the project: conduct an end line assessment to measure the animal welfare indicators and percentage of priority group members who practice the promoted behaviours and compare this to the results of your baseline assessments. It is recommended the end line assessment also assess the main reasons why people (did not) adopt the promoted behaviours.
2-3 years after the project: replicate the end line assessment of animal welfare and human behaviour to assess the extent to which the desired behaviours have been sustained after the project’s support has ended.
Once you have identified the outcome and output indicators, add them to your Behaviour Change Planning Table and decide on a sampling monitoring plan. Identify the most appropriate methods of data collection and develop appropriate monitoring tools and ensure your sampling plan supports data collection by sex or other marginalized groups as relevant to your project context to enable you to assess the extent of equal participation, impact, and benefits across the target audience(s). As you develop your monitoring plan, think about the indicators CCAs may be able to monitor using participatory tools such as the Animal welfare transect walk, and those which project staff will be responsible for monitoring.
2.4.2 Conduct baseline assessment
Before implementing any project activities with communities, do a baseline assessment using the chosen methods and indicators of animal welfare and human behaviour. If the Animal welfare transect walk is being used as a method for project data collection, you may be able to use the previously collected data as a baseline rather than carry out the activity again.
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
3.2.1 Ongoing Monitoring of Animal Welfare and Behaviour Change
Throughout the course of the project, CCAs should be undertaking participatory monitoring of animal welfare and behaviour change with target peer groups using agreed upon indicators. Monitoring of changes in animal welfare can be achieved by repeating the Animal welfare transect walk every one to three months. The project should also be carrying out monitoring in line with the previously determined frequency.
It is important to ensure that whatever monitoring indicators, methods, and frequencies are selected, that results can be used to promote reflection, learning and adaptive management for both community members and the project/supporting organization throughout the project. It is therefore important to ensure that opportunities for CCAs and their target peers to reflect on monitoring results to:
Support reflection, learning about successes and challenges, and changing trends.
Promote transparency and accountability in terms of what the project is achieving.
Improve motivation for change through a celebration of successes and identify where more effort or adaptations in action plans or community engagement strategies are needed.
3.2.2 Participatory learning and reflection and adaptation of community engagement plans
Collective reflection and experience are a powerful tool for learning and change, and effective learning and reflection processes can foster motivation and a sense of self-efficacy and ownership of change amongst CCAs and their target peers. Reflection and learning should at the very least be incorporated into regularly scheduled meetings with groups of change agents, and when you or change agents meet with their target peer groups. As part of the reflection and learning process, monitoring results should be shared and discussed with CCAs and their target peers as available, and action plans adapted as needed.
Conducting regular site visits and meeting with CCAs and their peer network at a lower frequency throughout the course of the project (e.g. quarterly) is recommended to enable the project to:
Facilitate participatory learning and reflection sessions to enable community members to learn from each another.
Conduct trainings or build capacity as needed amongst members of the animal owning community.
Gather first-hand insights on their successes and challenges, and changes in their awareness and motivation to make animal welfare improvements.
Gauge where the CCA’s target peer groups are in terms of their progress through the stages of change so you can support CCAs in adapting their engagement as needed.
Explore barriers and motivators to the adoption of desired behaviours which require additional resources or support to address.
It is important to remember that in almost all successful change efforts, emotions rather than facts are the most effective agents of change [20]. It is therefore important that reflection and learning opportunities are created to enable target peer groups to feel something about the changes they are making and experience the benefits that the adoption of desired behaviours brings to their lives and the lives of their animals [20].
We recommend using the adult learning cycle whenever feasible as it focuses on facilitating processes for reflection and learning by focusing on:
Direct Experiences: drawing on participants personal experiences related to animal welfare improvements and behaviour change, and/or by conducting participatory learning and action activities, participatory demonstrations or presentations through which participants experience/feel new information for discussion and learning.
Facilitating Reflection: helping participants think about how experiences make them feel, analyse new information, and develop their own ideas about the specific topic or issue.
Generating Conclusions: encouraging participants to generalize lessons learned to draw broad conclusions for themselves about their experiences.
Promoting Application: enabling participants to visualize how they may apply their experience/new knowledge in their own lives in the future.
Figure 48: Reflection and Learning Process for Adults - Image adapted from:[65]
Incorporating reflection and learning through periodic meetings with CCAs and their target peers to discuss and reflect on progress and monitoring results is useful for the following reasons:
Promotes accountability and improves community members’ commitment to adopting desired changes. Specifically, seeking voluntary commitments in these public forums and/or seeking group commitments can improve adoption of desired behaviours [31].
Generates peer pressure and peer motivation to influence individual actions, as well as opportunities for building social networks amongst peers to support change.
Generates increased knowledge about actions which work or don’t work in their action plans, leading to corrective action or improvement.
Better understand the barriers and motivators to adopting desired behaviours, and identify additional resources, support, and/or capacity building needs to address them.
Creates a sense of shared responsibility for dealing with challenges.
Promotes greater understanding of their animals’ welfare and their related behaviours which support or hinder its improvement.
It will enable you and the project to:
Gather insights on participants’ stages of change, as well gauge CCAs understanding of their target peers’ stages and change and discuss support needs and plans for addressing them.
Assess CCAs progress in implementing activities and achieving desired results in relation to their Community Change Agent Personal Action Plan and support them in adapting their community engagement techniques or action plans as needed.
Support CCAs learning and reflection about their own behaviour change which can be applied to strengthen their engagement with their target peer groups.
Create opportunities for CCAs to learn from each other’s successes and failures and support each another in making progress.
Create opportunities for the perspectives of CCAs of different genders and other marginalized groups to be heard and understood by CCAs with social identities that are less marginalized to foster deeper understanding and empathy for different groups’ lived experiences. This will enable CCAs to apply their understandings to more effectively with all of their target peers, as well as model new ideas, norms, and behaviours that that can serve to transform social norms, and promote greater equality more broadly.
Create a safe space to check in and discuss any safety or security issues or concerns CCAs and their peers may have regarding engagement with the project and enable you to take responsive safeguarding actions.
Consider using the Project Action Tracker provided as a facilitator resource to document key insights and actions for follow up that emerge from meeting and site visits and support the project in planning and providing coordinated support.
In addition, reflection and learning sessions can help you identify when behaviours are not being adopted because of unanticipated barriers to adoption which are beyond the scope of the project to address. In such cases it may be necessary to change targets and identify new welfare issues and associated behaviours to change instead. Through this process, you may also find that some target peers are not progressing through the stages of change despite the project’s best efforts to support them to do so. In such cases, it is recommended that the project and CCAs not spend too much time and energy trying to push those individuals to change when they are not ready to do so. It is normal for there to be early and late adopters of change, and energy is best spent supporting the early adopters. These early adopters can be helpful to motivating late adopters by sharing their reflections on their experiences and demonstrating that change is possible.
It can also be helpful to conduct exposure visits between different project sites to promote cross fertilization of knowledge and ideas between CCAs and target peer groups in different areas. This can be particularly useful when progress through the stages of change becomes stalled or relapse is observed, as these experiences can enhance motivation and generate new ideas about potential solutions. Consider using the Open ended story telling (T24c) tool for generating ideas possible solutions when they face challenges in adopting desired behaviours.
3.2.3 Evaluation of change agent’s performance
It is helpful to evaluate change agent’s performance and skills periodically throughout the implementation stage to support their capacity to desired communities’ achievement of desired outcomes.
It is recommended that such processes for evaluation include:
CCA Self-Assessment: self-assessments should promote self-reflection and learning and enable CCAs to identify their own capacity building support needs, as well as discuss their overall satisfaction with the project/your supporting organization.
Evaluation by Community Peers: peer evaluation involves gathering feedback from CCA’s target peers’ groups on their experience working with CCAs in terms of their availability/responsiveness, capability/core competencies, and ethics including but not limited to non-discriminatory support of all members of their peer group. Creating mechanisms for communities to provide feedback promotes accountability and transparency by giving community members a voice and chance to influence issues which affect their lives and engagement with the project.
Evaluation by the Project: the project should assess core competencies of CCAs in accordance with their training plans, as well as overall progress based on CCAs’ reporting and results from monitoring. In addition, it is important the project ensures CCA’s are not discriminatory in their implementation of personal action plans, nor show preference to the views and life experiences of some groups over others (e.g. gender or other minority or vulnerable status). For example, CCAs should be engaging each member of their target peer group in ways that seeks to understand and validate their experience rather than expecting them to behave and/or perform in the same way as other members. Your regularly scheduled community visits can provide useful opportunities to observe CCAs competencies and how they interact with their peers.
Refer to CCAs’ training plans and the recommended resources below to support CCA performance evaluations.
Feedback on evaluations should be provided to CCAs to ensure transparency, as well as to communities in terms of any actions taken in response to their feedback on CCAs. The project is responsible for working with CCAs to give them an opportunity improve poor performance and/or provide additional training to address gaps in capacity as needed.
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
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:
3.1.1 Conduct baseline assessment in accordance with monitoring plan indicators
A baseline assessment should be conducted before any activities take place as it provides a critical reference point for assessing changes and impact because of activities implemented. Note that this baseline assessment should be conducted once the intervention has been designed, although any animal welfare data collected during the preliminary assessment (step 1.1.1.) may be usable depending on the nature of the data collected and indicators and methods outlined in your monitoring plan. Typically, the process will be managed by your project team and involve communities to the extent feasible in accordance with your monitoring plan. Change Analysis – before and now (T11b) will aid this process.
3.1.2 Implement social outreach/awareness campaign activities
Think about the types of actors who can support and aid your SOC approach; can community members be active in the distribution of messaging? Participatory leadership can encourage participants’ commitment to the campaign, giving empowerment and ownership, which will support the sustainability of behaviour change being encouraged.
Things to consider for effective implementation (adapted from [77]):
Engage with communities in ways that are most convenient for them.
Be respectful, listen, and build trusting relationships.
Make resources easily understandable in a format specific for your target audience
Monitor, evaluate, and ask for feedback regularly.
Expand your outreach gradually – begin with a population in a region/ zone that is the most comfortable and least challenging, and gradually expand out into populations that are less familiar and are more challenging. This gives the project opportunity to gain momentum and confidence and to benefit with feedback from an audience more willing or confident to give you constructive feedback for the project to develop and adapt where necessary.
Choose the space where you conduct some outreach activities carefully – think about access for all people, always consider intersectionality as some spaces may make some sectors of your community feel uncomfortable or unwelcome, know your target audience, and ensure safeguarding measures are put in place as needed to ensure the safety of all involved with or engaged by the programme.
Throughout the SOC approach keep in mind the strategy and your implementation plans and refer to them at regular intervals. Update your implementation plan table (as described in section 2.2.2.) if you are using one, to monitor the progress of tasks, including milestones reached and RAG (Red, Amber, Green) status. Maintain the information flow within the project team (e.g. systematic briefings and debriefings before and after outreach events).
3.1.3 Assess understanding and effectiveness of messaging amongst target audience
Refer to your monitoring plans and conduct activities using identified methods and tools throughout the course of the project. To support engagement and to assess the effectiveness of messaging as you implement activities, it is important to create opportunities for interaction with and feedback from the target audience by keeping a continuous flow of informal consultation and feedback. This is important to ensuring the target audience feel heard and included, and that their values and culture are being respected and considered. In addition, it will enable the project to determine whether messaging is being received as intended and communicating effectively with target audience and reflects what they value [77]. Providing these opportunities for ongoing communication and feedback can avoid potential conflict or rejection of messages and desired change.
Consider using the Project Action Tracker to document key insights and actions for follow up that emerge from meetings or site visits where feasible to support refinement of your SOC approach as needed. Learning and monitoring of effectiveness of your activities is not only about understanding the positive changes, but also enables the nuanced things or the negative/relapse or resistance or backlash views and voices to be captured. Depending on the type and depth/strength of the resistance or backlash, it is always important to consider putting safeguarding measures/precautions in place for those who do the public outreach/public interface engagement, whether in face to face or online formats.
Reflection and learning sessions with the target audience, or representative target audience members, can help you identify when behaviours are not being adopted because of unanticipated barriers to adoption that are beyond the scope of the project to address. In such cases it might be necessary to change targets and identify new welfare issues and associated behaviours to change instead. Monitoring during implementation ensures all involved in the approach stay informed of activities, their outcomes, and the degree to which goals and objectives are being met, and to recognise new opportunities or risks that may affect outcomes. In addition, monitoring regularly gives the opportunity to adapt the approach considering new understandings in how your community is interacting with the messaging and information. However, ensure that any adaptations are thought out, and go back through the previous steps of this approach to ensure there are no unforeseen negative consequences to any changes being considered.
No matter how well planned your approach, be ready and create contingency plans for mitigating risks. Even with plans unexpected events may still upset scheduled activities.
If facing unexpected issues, you need to assess:
What happened? If possible, consult different community members or stakeholders to obtain a fuller picture. Listen carefully. Avoid directing blame.
Establish who may be affected.
Investigate what aspects of your SOC approach are affected.
Can the issue/s be resolved, how and by whom?
Analysis undertaken in earlier stages e.g. root cause analysis, influencer maps/rainbow diagram, and risk analysis, can be used to locate the issue and help identify possible options.
Decide what action needs to be taken and inform all relevant members as soon as possible to decide together what further actions must follow.
If actions fail to resolve the situation, assess whether the SOC approach can still reach its goal, if not you may need to consider the only other course of action, which is to exit.
This is a learning opportunity so record the experience and be prepared to share with others.
Tools and resources helpful to supporting this step include:
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:
