BACKGROUND

1
Developing Capacities of an INGO
A
Focus on Disability and Development
Penny Parnes1,2, Deb Cameron1,4, Dina Brooks 1,3,
Karen Yoshida1,3 1International Centre for
Disability and Rehabilitation, 2Department of
Speech-Language Pathology, 3Department of
Physical Therapy, 4Department of Occupational
Science and Occupational Therapy Rehabilitation
Sciences Sector, University of Toronto
BACKGROUND
RESULTS

• International Non-Governmental Organizations
  (INGOs) are key partners in international health
  and play a significant role in the delivery of
  health care services in developing countries,
  including primary health care. While funding for
  global health projects appears to be on the rise,
  it still falls short of the demand.
• Due to the number and complexity of international
  health needs and limited government funds in
  developing countries, INGOs are finding it
  increasingly difficult to secure stable funds for
  their projects, raising concerns about whether
  sustainable and adequate funding is possible.

• 1. Participant Demographics
• Seventy three percent of the respondents were
  above the age of 50, and male all except one was
  of Caucasian or European ethnic background.
  Ninety-one percent had some amount of university
  training with 46 having masters degrees. Eighty
  two percent have been involved in continuing
  education courses/workshops in the area of
  disability and development, and 45 have taken
  continuing education courses related to NGOs.
• Respondents reported a range from 0 to 42 years
  of experience in development (average over 20
  years), and a range of 7 to 36 years of
  experience in disability (average over 18 years).
  In disability and development, the range was 5 to
  36 years of experience (average of almost 16
  years).
• When looking specifically at years of
  experience with this INGO, the range was 5 to 28
  years (average 14 years) 73 reported working
  for the INGO for over 10 years. Within their
  current position, respondents reported a range
  from 1 to 20 years (average close to 9 years 50
  over ten years in current position). On a 7 point
  scale, all of the respondents indicated a job
  satisfaction level of 5 or above.
• 2 Other findings
• Perceived levels of competence in the areas of
  development, disability, and program evaluation
  When starting at the INGO, respondents generally
  felt more prepared to deal with development
  issues in comparison to disability issues or
  program evaluation. In the areas of development
  and disability issues, training on the job, their
  own job experience, and workshops/sessions
  organized by the INGO were rated most highly in
  preparing respondents to work in these areas. For
  program evaluation preparation, respondents
  tended to favour training on the job and their
  own experience.
• Helpful ways to build knowledge in the areas of
  development, disability and program evaluation
  Participants preferred training on the job and
  workshops/ sessions organized by the INGO.
  Personal experience was also identified as
  helpful specifically for the area of disability.
• Preferred format for educational sessions On
  the job training, workshops and courses were
  identified in all 3 areas. For development and
  disability, the use of small groups was
  identified as the most effective teaching method
  for workshops and courses. In program evaluation,
  the use of case based learning was identified as
  the most effective teaching method for workshops
  and courses.
• Annual reports and in writing were the most
  common forms of documentation in the field
  offices.
• The respondents pointed out that there is a lot
  of variability in terms of their staffs
  preparedness and level of training in dealing
  with all 3 areas, but interestingly the results
  seem to show greater preparedness in working with
  disability issues compared to the other two
  areas.

• 3. Qualitative Findings
• Ways of building future knowledge informal
  continental meetings where problems and issues
  could be worked on with colleagues, external
  courses on evaluation, research and monitoring,
  and ongoing learning from people with
  disabilities and their families.
• Top choices for development educational session
  topics evaluation and monitoring, inclusion,
  management and governance, poverty reduction, and
  disability and development.
• Top choices for disability educational session
  topics prevention and management of deafness,
  mental health, CBR, livelihood, and strategies
  for inclusion.
• Program evaluation respondents reported having
  learned skills in this area through participatory
  evaluation workshops and discussion with
  professional advisors. Respondents indicated it
  would be helpful to know what the INGO wants to
  see in an evaluation based on their criteria for
  success, that there was a need to look for
  external resources and workshops by third
  parties, and that continental meetings to share
  best practice would be helpful. Top choices for
  workshops included setting parameters and
  indicators, analyzing data, community
  participation and simple tools for evaluation.
• Documentation other ways that information is
  collected in field offices included project visit
  reports, evaluation reports, statistics,
  financial reports, email archives, letters and
  memos, photos of project work, mapping,
  powerpoint presentations, meetings, intranet, and
  discussion reports.
• Topics that would benefit staff (according to
  field offices) administration and finance,
  disability and rehabilitation issues, project
  management and governance, program planning,
  local fundraising, monitoring and evaluation, and
  sustainability.

OBJECTIVES
Objective 1(See accompanying poster Study of
an INGO focused on Disability) To determine,
within each of the nine member associations of
this INGO 1) the political and economic trends
related to official development assistance, 2)
the government attitudes and history of support
for NGOs as development partners, and 3) the
impressions of opportunities for corporate or
foundations support. Objective 2 To determine
the current level of knowledge and identified
gaps in knowledge within the member associations,
regional offices and continental directors
METHODS
CONCLUSIONS
Participants Managers of the field offices of
the organizations and the continental directors
(n 14). Responses were received from 11 out of
14 participants, giving a response rate of 78.
Data Collection An online web-based
quantitative survey was used. The questionnaire
used closed-ended questions (categorical and
continuous scale responses) with some
opportunities for comments. The instrument was
piloted with an individual who is part of the
INGO but who did not participate in the survey.
The questionnaire was sent to participants in
January/February 2007. They were asked to return
it within three weeks. The survey took
approximately 30 to 45 minutes to complete. After
two weeks and four weeks, reminder emails were
sent to all potential participants. Data
Analysis Basic descriptive statistics were
computed.
In order to more proactive in obtaining funding,
INGO staff require training in Project
management throughout all parts of the
organization. The INGO should review the
requirements of key funders and develop a project
management template. The INGO must expand its
evaluation focus from tracking administrative
accountability, to a more comprehensive outcomes
based format The development of an evaluation
framework which would be generic throughout the
INGO would be useful. Documentation of projects
and programs must be approached as a necessity
for good management. It is recommended that the
INGO develop an ongoing roster of experts in
different areas, which will provide specific
training and can be available to members for
consultation on an individual basis. The INGO in
both the national and regional offices should be
more informed about needs assessment