References

ActionAid, 2006 ALPS: Accountability, Learning & Planning System, ActionAidActionAid’s system for managing Accountability, Learning and Planning – primarily based on a set of principles. See also the 2007 review of ALPS they commissioned and a 2005 field view.
Bakewell & Garbutt 2005 The Use and Abuse of the Logical Framework Approach,SIDABalanced report into practitioners’ experiences of using logical framework analysis. Identifies some advantages (particularly for senior decision makers) and many disadvantages (particularly for front line staff).
Chambers 2007 Who Counts? The Quiet Revolution of Participation and Numbers,IDSExcellent paper making the case the participatory processes can generate credible quantitative data. Packed with examples. A crucial step in making the results of participation accessible to managers.
Cosgrave, 2006 Tsunami Evaluation Coalition Synthesis Report, ALNAPSector-wide evaluation of the international response to the 2004 Asian tsunami, making major recommendations.. See the synthesis report (even just the executive summary).
Ebrahim 2003 NGOs and organisational change,CambridgeDetailed analysis of the relationships between NGOs and funders, drawing on the actual experiences of two Indian NGOs, and how logframes inhibit learning and performance.
Ebrahim & Rangan, 2010 The Limits of Nonprofit Impact: A Contingency Framework for Measuring Social Performance, Harvard Business School, Working Paper 10-099, 2010Synthesis of current debates about measuring performance and impact. Argues that, in the social sector, organisations should measure different kinds of results, depending on their strategy and theory of change. They should not all measure impact.
Ellerman, 2005 Helping People Help Themselves, University of Michigan Press, available as a paper hereSubstantial and accessibly analysis of what it means to help people, drawing on eight philosopher-activists (including Freire). Ellerman emphasises that external actors have to be ‘helpers’ not ‘doers’, respecting their ‘autonomous development’ rather than falling into the trap of thinking we can solve their problems.
Fowler, 1997 Striking a balance, EarthscanComprehensive analysis of managing NGOs, providing practical guidance for managers. Includes many examples of good and bad practice.
Goetz, 2008 Who answers to women? Gender and accountabilityUNIFEM Progress of the World’s Women Report 2008/09UNIFEM’s major international report finds that development progress for women has been unacceptably slow and that progress depends on strengthening the accountability of powerful decision makers to women.
Hummel-brunner 2010 Beyond logframe: critique, variations and alternatives in Beyond logframes; systems concepts in evaluationed Fujita, FASID, 2010Summary of literature considering the strengths and weaknesses of logframes, using the German GTZ experience as an illustration of how a development agency has moved beyond logframes.
Jacobs et al, 2010 Three approaches to monitoringIDS Bulletin 41.6Article comparing the strengths and weaknesses of three different approaches to monitoring: logframes, participatory monitoring & evaluation and feedback systems.
Kaplan, 2000 Understanding Development as a Living Process, available in “New roles & relevance”, ed Lewis & Wallace, Kumarian PressPassionate and highly experienced practitioner explains why development is about people, not project activities or pre-determined outputs – and what this means for NGOs.
Keystone for Bond, 2006 A Bond Approach to Quality in NGOs: Putting Beneficiaries First,BondA report from research from across the UK NGO sector into what drives quality, concluding that it is primarily determined by the quality of relationships with beneficiaries. Now linked to the Bond Effectiveness Programme
Riddell, 2007 Does Foreign Aid Really Work?, OUPHuge synthesis of evaluations of government aid and NGO work. Concludes that we don’t and can’t have the evidence to prove whether aid generates social results, and suggests we should ask ‘how can aid work better?’ instead.
Roche, 1999 Impact Assessment for Development Agencies,OxfamWell regarded book reporting on a lengthy action research project by major NGOs, on the strengths and weaknesses of impact assessment. Shows how impact is locally specific, and has to be negotiated between local actors – i.e. it is not objective or easy-to-measure.
Sen, 2000 Human Rights and Human Development,UNDP, Chapter 1Discussion of what development means, around the idea of enhancing the capabilities that people have reason to value (not just what we think they should value, or just GDP).
Smutylo, 2001 Crouching Impact, Hidden Attribution, IDRCIntroduction to Outcome Mapping, including background analysis which is critical of using ‘impact’ and ‘logframes’ to manage performance. See also much more information on Outcome Mapping here.
Thomas, 2000 What makes good development management? in ‘Development and management’ ed Eade, OxfamPaper that discusses what is distinctive about managing development projects, as opposed to managing other kind of work, and the links with personal development and empowerment.
Wallace, 2006 The Aid Chain,ITDGCompelling and disturbing evidence that shows how (a) NGOs use logframes to describe their work to donors, and (b) logframes actively get in the way of high quality field work.

One Response

  1. […] redefining performance specifically for NGOs, to management tips, and a lengthy list of helpful references for those who want to know more.  This site contains interesting information for all professionals […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: