community scorecard manual
LINK 1 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF
LINK 2 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF
File Name:community scorecard manual.pdf
Size: 2042 KB
Type: PDF, ePub, eBook
Category: Book
Uploaded: 28 May 2019, 20:38 PM
Rating: 4.6/5 from 553 votes.
Status: AVAILABLE
Last checked: 4 Minutes ago!
In order to read or download community scorecard manual ebook, you need to create a FREE account.
eBook includes PDF, ePub and Kindle version
✔ Register a free 1 month Trial Account.
✔ Download as many books as you like (Personal use)
✔ Cancel the membership at any time if not satisfied.
✔ Join Over 80000 Happy Readers
community scorecard manualThese are based on learning from our work with the Citizen Engagement Programme, CESC, N'weti and other partners in Mozambique using this tool. It is easy to use and can be adapted into any sector where there is a service delivery scenario. The Community Score Card brings together the demand side (“service user”) and the supply side (“service provider”) of a particular service or program to jointly analyze issues underlying service delivery problems and find a common and shared way of addressing those issues. When are community scorecards useful. Challenges and considerations with community scorecards Time - implementing a CSC process is time-consuming. It can take a year or longer to complete one full cycle. The time taken can vary significantly depending on the time needed to engage community and provider groups in the process. Facilitation - the process requires strong facilitation skills from the implementing organisation. The process is designed to raise problems with service delivery, which can lead to conflict or defensiveness among the participants. It can also create expecations that the problems raised by participants will be resolved, which is not always achieveable. Research by CARE and ODI also raised the following challenges: CSC require high levels of engagement with, and working through, different levels of the state apparatus. For support based on the idea of civic engagement, this is a counter-intuitive finding. We've reviewed some of the key publications related to this tool. Each of the links below take you to the full text for download. Getting started The Community Score Card CoP - CARE The CSC CoP is intended to bring together both new and seasoned development practitioners in order to advance CARE’s thinking on CSC methodology and practice. The Community Score Card Process - Introducing the Concept and Methodology - Coady International Institute This presentation by the Coady Institute gives an overview of the community score card methodology.http://anmoul.com/userfiles/diplomat-select-oven-manual.xml
- Tags:
- community scorecard training manual, community scorecard manual, community scorecard manual pdf, community scorecard manual download, community scorecard manual 2017, community scorecard manuals, community scorecard training manual.
Citizen Report Card and Community Score Card - World Bank This World Bank web page provides a brief overview of Community Score Cards and Citizen Report Cards. It highlights the differences between these two approaches and references some key resources for each approach as further reading. The Community Score Card (CSC): A generic guide for implementing CARE’s CSC process to improve quality of services - CARE This toolkit gives practical, step-by-step guidance on using the CSC approach. The toolkit is generic in nature and can be applied in any sector including health, education, water and sanitation, and agriculture. Case studies The community scorecard process: methodology, use, successes, challenges and opportunities - Plan International This article covers the use and basic functions of the community scorecard process. It draws on lessons from the community-based monitoring project implemented by Plan Malawi, ActionAid and the Council for Non Governmental Organisations of Malawi (CONGOMA). The Community Score Card Process in Gambia - World Bank This is a Social Development note from the World Bank covering the Community Score Card Process in Gambia. Detailed operational guidance Community Score Card Process - A Short Note on the General Methodology for Implementation - World Bank This note provides an introduction to the community score card process describing it as a community based monitoring tool that is a hybrid of the techniques of social audit, community monitoring and citizen report cards. Operational Manual for implementing the community scorecard process - Maharashtra Rural Water Supply and Sanitation 'Jalswarajya' project This Operational Manual provides implementation guidelines for running community-based performance and expenditure tracking that can be included in the operations of the Maharashtra Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS) “Jalswarajya” project.http://www.crammotorsport.com/diplomat-slimline-integrated-dishwasher-manual.xml Community scorecard manual: A social audit tool to monitor the progress of Viet Nam’s Socio-Economic Development Plan - Ministry of Planning and Investment and Unicef This manual provides nine detailed modules covering the community scorecard tool. Research and evaluation When does community monitoring improve school performance? - iiG This research from Uganda shows that community monitoring improved test scores and pupil and teacher attendance at low cost, but only when communities can choose the criteria by which they judge school performance. Monitoring programmes that assigned criteria centrally did not lead to any improvements. This innovative new study emphasises the importance of participation and coordination between parents and teachers for improving schools. Social accountability - What does the evidence really say? - Global Partnership for Social Accountability This working paper by Prof. Jonathan Fox explores the distinction between tactical and strategic approaches to the promotion of citizen voice to contribute to improved public sector performance. Policy discussion of social accountability initiatives has increasingly focused on questions about their tangible development impacts. The empirical evidence is mixed. Field experiments tend to study bounded, tactical interventions that rely on optimistic assumptions about the power of information alone both to motivate collective action and to influence public sector performance. More promising results emerge from studies of multi-pronged strategies that encourage enabling environments for collective action and bolster state capacity to actually respond to citizen voice. This reinterpretation of the empirical evidence leads to a proposed new series of grounded propositions that focus on state-society synergy and sandwich strategies through which 'voice' and 'teeth' can become mutually empowering. The political economy of community scorecards in Malawi - Overseas Development Institute This research, supported by Plan, seeks to contribute to this evidence base, using political economy methods to understand how community scorecards have worked in Malawi and what some of the wider lessons might be. Do you know of other useful resources. If so, please let us know in the comments so we can review and include them too. What data should I collect when implementing a community scorecard. Many of the resources above provide detailed guidance around this tool. However, few provide examples of the kind of forms you might use to collect data or the kind of indicators you could use to monitor your work. To assist in this area we've assembled a toolkit with some example data collections forms and indicators to help get you started. While it's critical to adapt these to your context, they should serve to give you an idea of what works in other contexts. If you're working on a larger scale then you may be interested in how BetterData can support your work. Our community scorecard app is designed to assist your facilitators in collecting data in the field. This links directly to indicators and reports at the programme level. Read our case study for more information or get in touch for a demo. Our work focuses on challenges associated with performance, impact, effectiveness, accountability, citizen engagement, transparency and value for money. We work with NGOs, Governments and others that need software and associated consultancy to support their work in one or more of these areas. We were established in 2004 and have offices in Brighton (UK), Cape Town (South Africa) and Noida (India). Since then, the CSC has become an internationally recognised participatory governance approach for improving the implementation of quality services. This toolkit gives practical, step-by-step guidance on using the CSC approach.https://infocorrosion.com/images/commtel-205-manual.pdf The toolkit is generic in nature and can be applied in any sector including health, education, water and sanitation, and agriculture. The approach brings together community members, service providers, and local government to identify service utilization and provision challenges, and to mutually generate solutions, and work in partnership to implement and track the effectiveness of those solutions in an ongoing process of quality improvement. This briefing paper outlines CARE’s history in.However, building adaptive programming.This Power Tool provides guidance on how CARE (and others) can engage in strategic partnerships with social movement actors. It.We put women and girls in the centre because we know that we cannot overcome poverty until all people have equal rights and opportunities. Citizens can provide encouragement for good work or express dissatisfaction. In a common collaboration between rights holders and duty bearers, the provision of services can sustainably change for the better. Photo: Welthungerhilfe: Conducting the Score Card with the Community In Welthungerhilfe, especially in South Asia and in some parts of Africa, the CSC process has widely and successfully been conducted for years. In most cases, the CSC process has had a strong focus on the Sustainable Food and Nutrition Security for women and children. The World Bank is a fond promoter of the Community Score Card process, too. For instance, the CSC is part of the current public accountability programmes in Ethiopia and it has been part of the World Bank promoted Programme for Accountability in Nepal (PRAN) that provides practical training, action learning, and networking opportunities aimed at civil society organisations. What is the purpose of the Community Score Card. The purpose of a Community Score Card process is to improve the quality, efficiency and accountability of services at community level. It is a two-way and ongoing participatory process which seeks to strengthen the mutual understanding between service providers and service users to ensure collaborative actions and overcome gaps. It helps you to: Identify how services are experienced by the users and the providers. Establish a feedback mechanism between users and providers. Ensure informed decision making and dialogue between service providers and users. Track if services and programmes are progressing well and compare the performance of services across facilities. Report on the quality of services to a district executive committee or assembly. Strengthen community empowerment and citizen's voice. It is NOT about finger-pointing or blaming. It is NOT designed to settle personal scores. It is NOT supposed to create conflict. How can we apply the Community Score Card. A Community Score Card process can be embedded in any kind of intervention. It can be relevant to assess public food distributions, agricultural extension services, health services, schools or even public wastewater schemes. The scorecards can be used to assess services implemented by the public as well as private services providers, including services provided by NGOs. Community Score Cards can be applied as part of the monitoring system of various programmes or projects, both by state services and by NGOs. A minimum of two sessions needs to be conducted to assess changes. Community Score Cards are a simple tool. However, some preconditions should be met. One should have a good understanding of the local governance context. Most importantly it requires buy-in by the service providers, as they have to participate in the process. Ideally, citizens have some level of awareness about the services, or public awareness and information dissemination campaigns are conducted prior to or in parallel to the scoring exercises. Lastly, it is critical to have good and purposeful facilitation by a technically competent intermediary. Even though there might be no entitlements defined in the legislation, there are always services that users can provide feedback on. Raise awareness for the Community Score Card process with local communities and leaders. Collect and obtain basic community data as population data, data of services provided, service usage statistics, data on poverty level, a list of entitlements, etc. Identify and train the lead facilitator and people within the community, such as traditional leaders, NGO staff, and officials of local governments, who can help facilitate. The target orientation and quality of facilitation are critical for the success of a Community Score Card process. Ideally, chose a women facilitator for women related services. Set up a Community Score Card team: best is a team of two facilitators and one person in charge of the logistics etc. Prepare the community gathering: Invite participants: 1. identify the main user groups in the communities serviced by the focal facility or services (community gathering), 2. clarify with the community members who need to be invited from the service providers and what levels of government need to be represented. For the follow-up session, people who can make decisions about the issues raised should be present. Ensure that the vulnerable households and poorest of the poor are also represented, conduct a social map exercise with a separate community group in advance. Minimum duration: one day for the community, one day for the service providers and one day for the interface. Under some circumstances, depending on the type of service and distance between the service provider and service user, the implementation of one Community Score Card can take up to more than a week. Community gatherings are ideally organised at facility level. Step 2. Conduct the Score Card with the Community (day 1) The participants of the first day are community members that are entitled to the services. The selection of groups or participants depends on the services. For example, for women health issues it is crucial to invite representatives of the pregnant and lactating mothers group. At community level, an assessment of priority issues in one village is carried out: what are the barriers to the delivery of quality services. It is important to take project boundaries into account. The community selects input and performance indicators for assessing priority issues. Lesser number of clear and measurable indicators help to keep discussion focussed; ideally not more than 8 indicators. Input indicators are services which are provided as child vaccination. Performance indicators are indicators such as women giving safe birth or delivering healthy children. It is crucial to assign scores for each performance indicator and give reasons for the scores. It is recommended that participants develop first recommendations on how to improve the situation regarding certain performance indicators. To avoid creating unrealistic expectations it is important to help community members develop an understanding of the constraints faced by service providers. Step 3. Conduct the Score Card with Service Providers (day 2) The participants of the second day are representatives of the service providers. In the next step, self-evaluation indicators are developed. Then the scoring needs to be completed against each indicator and reasons for the scores are noted. Day 2 ends with generated suggestions on how services can be improved. Phase 4: Interface Meeting (day 3: community and service provider) On the third day, both groups come together. Community and service provider present their findings from the Score Cards (based on posters). Community and service providers present identified priority issues (based on posters). All participants prioritize the issues together (in a negotiated way) and agree on possible solutions. Some strategies for mitigating this problem are: highlighting both strengths and weaknesses emerging from Score Card findings; preparing adequately and facilitate effectively to ensure that interface meetings are rather constructive than confrontational; and focussing not only on problems but also on solutions and proposals. Service providers at the local level do not always have the capacity or leverage to make decisions or implement change. It is therefore important that senior officials and decision-makers are also involved in the feedback loop and interface. Phase 5: Implement and Monitor the Action Plan A Score Card process does not stop after generating scores. The next steps are: Compile a report on the Score Card process including a joint action plan. Use the outcomes and action plan to inform and influence any current plans related to the delivery of the concerned services, for instance, the planning process of the district implementation plan and budgeting process. Monitor the implementation of the action plan. Disseminate results through the media and communities. Take steps to institutionalise the process, for example by supporting community-based organisations or service providers to repeat the exercise on an annual or half-yearly basis. There is a risk that the Community Score Card process could result in disillusionment on the part of the community members and service providers in case the proposed solutions are not implemented or if subsequent assessments do not initiate any positive change. What are the advantages. The Community Score Card process can be adapted into any sector where service delivery exists. It promotes dialogue and improves relationships between the community and the service provider. It clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the community members as service users. It shows the service provider how to be accountable and responsible. It generates performance criteria for benchmarking the quality of services that can subsequently be used by community members or the government for ongoing monitoring and evaluation. What are the challenges. The Community Score Card process requires time. Holding service providers accountable might be a new and therefore a difficult concept to understand and get accepted by communities and service providers. Sound facilitation is crucial. The process can lead to conflict or can raise expectations with the service users; like creating a demand that cannot be fulfilled by the service provider. CARE (2013): The Community Score Card, A generic guide for implementing CARE’s CSC process to improve quality of services. About the Author: Julia Escher started her career working with the German International Cooperation as an advisor for the Vietnamese Women’s Union. Since 2009 she has been working for Welthungerhilfe as an advisor for Planning, Monitoring, and Nutrition. Contact: Julia Escher Would you like to give feedback to the Civil Society Academy, or are you interested in our courses or our support.Subscribe Now. This is the original CSC toolkit, created by CARE Malawi to provide CSC practitioners from various institutions with practical CSC implementation guidance. The toolkit is generic in nature and can be applied in any sector including health, education, water and sanitation, and agriculture. It is easy to use and can be adapted into any sector where there is a service delivery scenario. The Community Score Card brings together the demand side (“service user”) and the supply side (“service provider”) of a particular service or program to jointly analyze issues underlying service delivery problems and find a common and shared way of addressing those issues. It is an exciting way to increase participation, accountability and transparency between service users, providers and decision-makers. The core implementation strategy to achieve the goal is using dialogue in a participatory forum that engages both service users and service providers. The Community Score Card is a participatory tool that: It offers a theoretical-and case-based guideline to. In particular, collaborating with community members in a way that will identify barriers and enablers to accessing and utilizing HIV services is pivotal to PEPFAR’s client-centered focus. Approaches like Community-led monitoring allows communities to themselves design, implement and carry out routine, ongoing monitoring of the quality and accessibility of HIV treatment and prevention services. Through use of community-led monitoring approaches, PEPFAR programs and health institutions can pinpoint persistent problems, solutions or enablers, and barriers to service uptake at the facility- and community- level. This approach can help ensure PEPFAR is providing quality HIV services that beneficiaries want to utilize, improves the patient experience, and ultimately improves patient outcomes. WHAT IS THE TOOL? Community-led monitoring is a technique initiated and implemented by local community-based organizations and other civil society groups, networks of key populations (KP), people living with HIV (PLHIV), and other affected groups, or other community entities that gather quantitative and qualitative data about HIV services. The focus is on getting input from recipients of HIV services in a routine and systematic manner that will translate into action and change. Through the use of quantitative and qualitative indicators, community-led monitoring initiatives have monitored a wide range of issues that are associated with effective and quality HIV service delivery. Community-led monitoring is especially important for gathering crucial information and observations regarding HIV service delivery from and about key populations and other underserved groups. But, Community-led monitoring is distinct in that it is focused on improving service quality rather than generating generalizable knowledge.PEPFAR Implementing partners who currently work on service delivery at the site level cannot be funded to do this work, even if they will sub-grant to a local civil society organization What is monitored. Systematic and routine, with follow up and continuous improvement. One-off assessments are not sufficient tailored to the needs identified by local communities, with communities directly determining the scope allow for community and host country government development of the specific metrics, measures or tools to be used for community-led monitoring. Metrics or measures should be tailored to a given context, and address the needs and concerns of community members. SIMS tools are publicly available. How is monitoring done. Community groups that implement the Ritshidze Program in their communities could interview facility managers using this 17-question observational survey in order to understand the quality of HIV and health care service delivery. This document is made up of three different appendixes: Toll-free Helping Social Harms Reporting Form, Social harms and Adverse Events Grading Guide, and a Distributors Social Harms Tracking Form. Analysis and Translation TBD Engagement and Dissemination TBD Advocacy TBD Monitoring TBD Additional Resources: 1. HEALTH GAP Global Access Project ( ) 2. International Treatment Preparedness Coalition (ITPC) ( ). Join Renew Explore membership Today’s version of LEED, LEED v4.1, raises the bar on building standards to address energy efficiency, water conservation, site selection, material selection, day lighting and waste reduction. Access on-demand LEED v4.1 education available for each LEED rating system. Visit the USGBC events calendar to view live and virtual LEED v4.1 events. This rating system is for buildings that are new construction or major renovations. You must include the entire building’s gross floor area in the project. Buildings that are new construction or major renovation for the exterior shell and core mechanical, electrical, and plumbing units, but not a complete interior fit-out.Includes both direct customer service areas (showroom) and preparation or storage areas that support customer service. Buildings used to store goods, manufactured products, merchandise, raw materials or personal belongings, such as self-storage. In addition, at least 60 of the project’s gross floor area must be complete by the time of certification. Interior spaces dedicated to functions other than retail or hospitality. Includes both direct customer service areas (showroom) and preparation or storage areas that support customer service. This rating system is for buildings that are fully operational and occupied for at least one year. The project may be undergoing improvement work or little to no construction. Must include the entire building’s gross floor area in the project. Existing whole buildings. Existing interior spaces that are contained within a portion of an existing building. Interior spaces may serve commercial, retail or hospitality purposes. Must include the entire building’s gross floor area in the project. New single-family homes that are attached or detached, and multifamily buildings with up to four units. Multifamily buildings that are new construction or major renovation for the exterior shell and core mechanical, electrical and plumbing units, but not a complete interior fit-out. It is the appropriate rating system to use if more than 40 of the gross floor area is incomplete at the time of certification. Recertification helps you maintain and improve your building, while keeping your sustainability investment in place.Step 2: Contact us to activate your project’s recertification. Currently that is LEED v4.1. Learn about the LEED development process. To access the resources, select the item(s) that you would like to download and fill in the information requested on the next page. It provides comprehensive information to apply the Viral Response module, outlining detailed strategy requirements and compliance documentation necessary to achieve Fitwel Viral Response Certification for a user-defined entity, followed by Fitwel Viral Response Approval for specific assets. With people around the world spending an increasing amount of time indoors and in their local neighborhoods, the spaces where we live, work, study, and play have shifted dramatically. The Center for Active Design has published content to respond to this demand, using the best available evidence to date. Each chapter is designed to contribute to an ever-evolving conversation, and we will stay abreast of new science and update the resource periodically as the research base expands. Topics covered will include healthcare access, food access, housing quality, job roles, among others. This is a pivotal and timely resource for anyone who designs, builds, manages, studies, or advocates for public space. The Center for Active Design (CfAD) collaborated with QuadReal, a global real estate investment company based in Canada, to offer this resource to assist the industry in advancing health within commercial office buildings. The manual draws from a well of scholarly research connecting holistic health and design, translating an ever-growing evidence base into actionable design and operational approaches. This inspiring resource celebrates the significant achievements of the affordable housing industry, and explores the many ways that health-supporting design is being championed by affordable housing developers—and influencing the broader housing market. Healthy Housing for All captures the growing momentum of expressly incorporating active design within housing. Tenants that locate within a Fitwel certified building benefit from the existing healthy amenities provided by the building owner, and likewise, the overall building will benefit from additional healthy policies that are prioritized and implemented by a tenant. Based on this mutually beneficial relationship, we have developed this tool, corresponding with Fitwel v2.1, to provide direction on the roles of the building owner and tenant, and to foster collaboration in the implementation of the Fitwel Strategies. During this period, we received informative feedback, which we used to clarify the strategy language, expand pathways for compliance, and update a few of the strategy requirements. A version aligned with v2.1 will be released in January 2020. The Course includes a 60-minute pre-recorded training video and access to the Fitwel Reference Guides for participants to take a follow up online exam. Once completed, Ambassadors receive recognition through a certificate and listing on fitwel.org, an introductory presentation, and AIA credits, when applicable. Ambassadors also receive a fast track through the project review and certification process (12 weeks rather than 16 weeks). This will be the first in a series of courses, which are focused on the research, trends, and innovations connecting buildings and communities with health. These Courses mark an expansion of the Fitwel Ambassador program -- As we continue to grow the Ambassador and ancillary professional programs, the Fitwel Courses will become an essential piece for individuals to signify their expertise and skills. The Food and Nutrition in the Built Environment course highlights research and case study examples on the significant role that buildings can play in supporting healthy food access and behaviors that impact mental and physical health.