(October 15, 1997)![](media/image1.wmf){width="2.2493055555555554in"
height="2.2423611111111112in"}

NCNW UMI PVO Development Project

Annual Results Report (Oct 96-Sept 97)

Results Report (Oct 1996 - Sept 1997)

# Part 1: Overview and Factors Affecting Program Performance

## A. Factors Affecting the CSO Situation in Egypt

Egypt is witnessing a pronounced increase in domestic and foreign
investment as the private sector responds to the strong macro-economic
fundamentals and intensification of structural reforms (privatization,
deregulation, and trade liberalization, among others). Signs of advances
are apparent; school attendance and literacy rates have increased, a
higher percentage of the population has access to safe water, child
deaths are lower (Egypt Human Development Report 1996). Egypt rated an
"investment grade" in 1996 (El-Erian 1997). For this process to be
sustainable, it must be supported by strengthened institutions and
information flows. Egyptian decision-makers recognize that NGOs have a
vital role to play in the sustainable development process and that a
modicum of citizen participation is an imperative so they can preside
over a smoother trajectory of societal development (see for example the
Shorouk program launched in 1994).

> Egypt's NGOs or civil society include some 14,000 PVOs/Private
> Foundations, 5,000 club and youth associations, more than 100 chambers
> of commerce, 25 professional and trade unions, and 14 political
> parties. A study of 1990 data of registered PVOs with Ministry of
> Social Affairs (MSA) indicates that is many as 5,761 PVOs provide
> financial aid to as many as 5.5 million of Egypt's poor.
>
> A 1980 USAID study estimated that health services provided by the PVOs
> reached about 4.5 million; in 1992 this number rose to 14 million.
> Between charity and health services, it is estimated that PVOs cater
> to about 20 million Egyptians (1 out of 60); with a per capita service
> ranging from an estimated L.E. 12 to L.E. 60.

Several factors make the NGO operating environment in Egypt challenging.

-   Citizen participation at the grassroots level appears to succeed.
    Factors underlying the success of informal attempts may be the very
    fact that they are informal - i.e. free from much of the
    bureaucratic encumbrances that limit the formal PVO as a result of
    inertia and governmental practices (Ibrahim 1994).

-   Law 32 (1964) puts Egyptian PVOs under tight governmental control
    and domination -- administratively, substantively, technically and
    financially. Law 32 and other existing Laws and practices governing
    PVOs which served their purpose in an earlier phase of Egypt's
    development are now being reviewed and modified in order to keep
    pace with the changes in society and with the needs of an emerging
    civil society.

-   The gradual withdrawal of the Egyptian state from many of the
    production and service fields has left a substantial vacuum in
    Egypt's public space. This vacuum started to show up in the 1970s.
    NGOs and other civil society formations have not been able to fill
    the vacuum because they were neither equipped nor allowed to do so.

Thus, the nature of Egyptian NGOs and their contexts require a sensitive
approach to changing patterns of decision-making. While democratic
culture is emerging, social values run contrary to the premise of
citizen participation; respect for authority is fundamental, regardless
of how authority operates. Finally, engaging the ultimate customers
require more time than the usual one to two year project time period.
One to two years does not allow time for NGOs to fully engage
communities in the process of defining and analyzing problems, which is
a critical step in enabling the communities to take responsibility for
solutions. This process of institution-building and community
development, if it were to contribute to democratization, takes
nurturing, nurturing takes time, and progress will be uneven and
uncertain.

## B. NCNW UMI Approaches

During the past twelve months (Phase IIa of the PVO Development
Project), NCNW Umbrella Management Institute (UMI) has continued with
its provision of training, technical and financial assistance to its
intermediate customers -- across the whole spectrum of CSOs in Egypt.
NCNW UMI has emphasized (a) the formation of strategic partnerships
between US PVOs and Egyptian civil society organizations and (b)
promotion of citizen participation in planning, implementing, and
monitoring development initiatives. NCNW UMI recently established a
mechanism for reporting on results or organizational performance of U.S.
and Egyptian PVOs that will make it easier to document how improved
organizational capacity has made a difference in the quality of life
(increased income from micro-enterprises, more girls in quality basic
education, and improved health) of NCNW UMI's ultimate customers -- the
ordinary citizen. **NCNW UMI's approach of working with its intermediate
customers, in a partnership mode, have undoubtedly increased citizen
participation in public decision making which, in turn, is contributing
to sustainable development results.**

**TABLE 1: NCNW UMI PVO DEVELOPMENT PROJECT**

+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+
|                | PHASE I           | PHASE II     |                 |
+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+
| NCNW UMI       | 1993-1996         | FY 1997      | FY 1998         |
| ASSISTANCE     |                   |              |                 |
+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+
| Capacity       | 26                | 12           | 23              |
| building       |                   |              |                 |
|                | 113               | 116          |                 |
| -EPVOs         |                   |              |                 |
|                |                   |              |                 |
| -CSOs          |                   |              |                 |
+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+
| TIE (proposal  | 17                | 5            | 25              |
| development)   |                   |              |                 |
+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+
| Grants         | 20                | 22           | 15              |
+----------------+-------------------+--------------+-----------------+

# Part II. Progress toward Results

**NCNW-UMI's DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS**

> Citizen participation is essential to achieve sustainable development
> results. Building citizen participation in decision-making requires
> mobilizing communities around their concerns and strengthening the
> capacity and commitment of organizations to engage their ultimate
> customers, the ordinary citizen -- women and men in the process.

**STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: INCREASED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC
DECISION-MAKING**

> Indicator: level of citizen participation in public fora to make
> decisions

NCNW UMI's PVO Development Project has succeeded in contributing to
increased citizen participation - not merely to enable a few NGO leaders
to persuade policy makers. About 750,000 ultimate customers in 19
governorates have benefited from sectoral activities as a result of
increased citizens participation. Of these, it is estimated that at
least **100,000 citizens** have participated in at least one of the
following levels of citizen participation. NCNW UMI's intermediate
customers have succeeded in **empowering the voiceless to speak for
themselves.**

> NCNW UMI has developed a 5-point scale to measure level of citizen
> participation as follows:
>
> Level 1: participation in needs assessment
>
> Level 2: participation in project/activities design
>
> Level 3: participation in project/activities implementation
>
> Level 4: participation in project/activities in monitoring and
> evaluation of results
>
> Level 5: participation in ensuring project/activities sustainability
> (including valuation of community contributions)

+-------------------------------------------------------------+------+---+
| **What are the results from increased citizen               |      |   |
| participation?**                                            |      |   |
|                                                             |      |   |
| From the efforts of the **Moslem Young Women's              |      |   |
| Association**:                                              |      |   |
|                                                             |      |   |
| -   After attending a human (women) rights awareness        |      |   |
|     training program - twelve women decided to run for      |      |   |
|     local elections in El Arish, a predominantly            |      |   |
|     traditional Moslem society, and WON!                    |      |   |
|                                                             |      |   |
| -   A homeless woman who lived in the streets with her      |      |   |
|     children joined the Moslem Young Women's Association is |      |   |
|     now engaged in an income generating activity and is no  |      |   |
|     longer homeless. She has given back to the community by |      |   |
|     being a trainer and acting as a group leader.           |      |   |
|                                                             |      |   |
| -   300 families who are members of the association have    |      |   |
|     100 percent full vaccination for their children and,    |      |   |
|     from their example, another 300 non-member families     |      |   |
|     from the same area also have 100 full vaccination for   |      |   |
|     their children.                                         |      |   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+------+---+
|                                                             |      |   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+------+---+

**IR 3.1 INCREASED CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION (CSO) PARTICIPATION IN
PUBLIC DECISION-MAKING**

> Indicator(s):

a.  number of CSOs who have attempted to influence decision-making over
    > the total number of CSOs who have strengthened organizational
    > capacity

b.  percent increase in attempts by CSOs to influence (1) policy makers
    > and (2) public at large and the community

CSOs are the institutional embodiments of empowerment of all social
formations -- women, the poor, and other marginalized or disadvantaged
groups. Thus, CSO participation in public decision-making is a necessary
step that will lead to increased citizen participation.

a.  number of CSOs who have attempted to influence decision-making over
    the total number of CSOs who have strengthened organizational base
    (see IR3.1.2 below)

    **A hundred percent of the CSOs who make up the strengthened
    organizational base have attempted to influence decision-making.**

b.  percent increase in attempts by CSOs to influence decision-making.

> **Attempts included: meetings between local authorities and CSOs,
> visits to CSOs by local authorities, initiatives taken to local
> authorities, and more importantly, making the concern be realized as a
> public concern.**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The most **successful** attempt in influencing decision-making is in  |
| the development of community programs through strategic partnerships. |
| NCNW UMI has developed strategic partnerships between US PVOs and     |
| Egyptian CSOs that go beyond simple networking. NCNW UMI has created  |
| purposeful coalitions to affect change that meets the needs of the    |
| ultimate customers. For example:                                      |
|                                                                       |
| -   Working with 10 Community Development Associations (CDAs), Moslem |
|     Young Women's Association has expanded its health, education, and |
|     social services across the North Sinai Governorate.               |
|                                                                       |
| -   The Alexandria Association for Home Economics (AAHE) and the Home |
|     Economics Department of Alexandria University, in partnership     |
|     with ACDI/VOCA , are engendering citizen participation in         |
|     provision of credit for 1,000 micro-entrepreneurs in 34 villages  |
|     in Alexandria Governorate.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   1,200 women are generating income from handicrafts as a result of |
|     the collaboration between the Women Income Generation and         |
|     Training Association, Orthodox Youth Association of Akhim,        |
|     Mottamadya Women's Group, Assuit Burns Program, Helwan Women's    |
|     Association, Nubian Heritage Preservation Association and World   |
|     Education.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   The Coptic Evangelical Organization for Social Services (CEOSS)   |
|     is working with 10 CDAs to increase the income of                 |
|     micro-entrepreneurs.                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**IR3.1.1 Improved skills to promote special concerns**

> Indicator: special concerns matrix (showing skill level by level of
> progress towards successful promotion of special concerns)

Embedded in this result are the following elements which are discussed
more fully in NCNW UMI's Performance Monitoring and Evaluation and
Results Reporting Plan:

-   special concerns being promoted

-   who is expected to act on the special concerns being promoted

-   what additional skills were gained to promote special concerns

-   types of promotion activities

-   results of promotion of special concerns

**Special Concerns**. NCNW-UMI intermediate customers have promoted
special concerns related to USAID/Egypt's special concerns.

SO1 Private sector led, export oriented economic growth

> IR1.2 Increased productivity of private enterprise (improved capacity
> to promote the growth of SMEs)

SO2 Increased participation of girls in quality basic education

IR2.1 Increased number of schools in which constraints to girls'
attendance have been removed

IR2.2 Increased demand for girls' education

SO4 Reduced fertility

IR4.1 Increased use of family planning services

> IR4.2 Strengthened sustainability of family planning systems

SO5 Sustainable improvements in the health of women and children

IR5.1 Increased knowledge and improved health behavior in households

IR5.2 Improving the quality and increasing the utilization of health
services provided to women, infants, and children

IR5.3 New tools and approaches to combat selected endemic and emerging
diseases developed and disseminated

IR5.4 Improving the environment to plan, manage and finance sustainable
maternal and child health systems

**Who is expected to act on special concerns being promoted.** The
special concerns were taken mainly to the general public or community
and, to some extent, to local decision makers.

**Skills to Promote Special Concerns**. Effective promotion of special
concerns requires a sharp understanding and analysis of a concrete
problem (special concern) and a coherent proposal for its solution.
Because promotion of special concerns is intended to expand citizen
participation - not merely to enable a few NGO leaders to persuade a few
policy-makers - NCNW UMI's intermediate customers ensure that the
special concern that is chosen reflects actual needs and grievances felt
by a broad group of people. Ordinary people, community activists and NGO
leaders are examining their own context, starting to define promotion of
special concerns concepts for themselves and generating their own vision
for change.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NCNW UMI has developed specific skills, in addition to organizational |
| capacity-building skills, to assist ordinary citizens in              |
| understanding and transforming their own reality.                     |
|                                                                       |
| -   strengthening organizational capacity and institutional linkages  |
|     for the purpose of enhancing citizen's leverage in policy and     |
|     sustainable development.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| -   developing skills in community needs assessments which take into  |
|     account the systemic causes of problems and are based on a        |
|     long-term agenda for social change.                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Types of Attempts to Promote Special Concerns**. Please see discussion
in 3.1 above.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Results of Promotion Attempts.** The results of the promotion of    |
| special concerns by NCNW UMI's intermediate customers are:            |
|                                                                       |
| -   strengthened citizen organizations, social movements, community   |
|     development associations, and NGOs that assist disadvantaged      |
|     communities to articulate demands to the state and ensure         |
|     sustained participation and influence on the decision-making      |
|     process                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| ```{=html}                                                            |
| <!-- -->                                                              |
| ```                                                                   |
| -   trained women, workers and other marginalized communities to be   |
|     able to identify and analyze problems, define their own           |
|     priorities and solutions, exercise their rights and understand    |
|     and use the "system" to their benefit.                            |
|                                                                       |
| -   expanded citizen participation in decisions that affect their     |
|     lives.                                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

> Levels of skills to promote special concerns
>
> Level 1: no skills available
>
> Level 2: some but not all
>
> Level 3: most plus some application
>
> Level 4: skills being applied for promotion of special concerns
>
> Level 5: skills being applied for promotion of special concerns plus
> demonstrable results
>
> Levels of Promotion of Special Concerns
>
> Level 1: no promotion of special concerns
>
> Level 2: initiation of promotion of special concerns campaign
> (strategy, vision, etc.)
>
> Level 3: public education ongoing but no indication of campaign
> effectiveness, plans for constituency building, etc.)
>
> Level 4: promotion of special concerns has external relationships
> (governmental, community, media, private sector) -- strategic
> partnerships defined
>
> Level 5: promotion of special concerns showing results \--decisions
> made, policy formulated, etc.

**TABLE 2: PROMOTION OF SPECIAL CONCERNS MATRIX:**

**SKILL LEVEL BY SUCCESSFUL PROMOTION LEVEL**

+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| [SKILL LEVEL   | Level  | Level 2  | Level 3 | Level 4 | Level 5  |
| BY PROMOTION   | 1 no   | some     | most    | skills  |          |
| LEVE           | skill  | skills   | skills, | being   | skills   |
| L]{.underline} |        |          | some    | applied | being    |
|                |        |          | appl    |         | a        |
|                |        |          | ication |         | pplied + |
|                |        |          |         |         | results  |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| Level 1 - no   |        |          |         |         |          |
| promotion      |        |          |         |         |          |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| Level 2 -      |        |          |         |         |          |
| initiation     |        |          |         |         |          |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| Level 3 -      |        |          |         |         |          |
| public         |        |          |         |         |          |
| awareness      |        |          |         |         |          |
| ongoing but no |        |          |         |         |          |
| indication of  |        |          |         |         |          |
| campaign       |        |          |         |         |          |
| effectiveness  |        |          |         |         |          |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| Level 4 -      |        |          |         |         |          |
| external       |        |          |         |         |          |
| relationships  |        |          |         |         |          |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+
| Level 5 -      |        |          |         |         |          |
| successful     |        |          |         |         |          |
| promotion of   |        |          |         |         |          |
| special        |        |          |         |         |          |
| concerns plus  |        |          |         |         |          |
| results        |        |          |         |         |          |
+----------------+--------+----------+---------+---------+----------+

> **IR3.1.2 Stronger organizational base**
>
> Indicator: 5 point rating scale showing progress towards improved
> organizational performance

**A stronger organizational base now exists in seventeen (17) out of
twenty-six (26) governorates \-- Cairo, Alexandria, Giza, Dakahliya,
Suez, Gharbiya, Fayoum, Minia, North Sinai, North Sohag, Assiut,
Sharkia, Aswan, Beheira, Quena, Menoufia, and Beni Sueif.**

> Levels of progress towards organizational performance
>
> Level 1: No systems available
>
> Level 2: Some but not all system components developed. System not in
> use.
>
> Level 3: Major system components developed and in testing.
>
> Level 4: Most system components developed and in routine use. Not
> fully integrated and my be completely meeting all requirements.
>
> Level 5: System developed, fully integrated and meeting requirements.
> In use by all appropriate staff. PVO showing improvements in
> organizational performance.

During the past five years, NCNW UMI and its intermediate customers,
including about 40 EPVOs, have succeeded in building organizational
motivation and capacity of more than a hundred CSOs. NCNW UMI has built
organizational capacity in ethics, governance, project management, audit
and evaluation procedures and financial management \-- financial and
administrative policies and procedures, organizational structure,
budgeting, internal control, accounting cycles, indirect cost,
compliance, audit, financial statements.

-   Fifty-five percent of the assisted EPVOs have moved at least one
    level up the 5 point scale.

-   Those who moved two levels up within two years have succeeded in
    winning competitive grants.

-   100 percent of those who make it to Level 4 are implementing
    projects.

The enabling environment for nurturing civil society organizations in
Egypt has improved along with positive signs of advances, such as
increased school attendance and literacy rates and increased domestic
and foreign investments.

# Part III: Expected Progress through FY 1998 and Management Actions

During the next two years, NCNW will move beyond reporting on the number
of organizations assisted with capacity building inputs (training,
technical assistance and financial assistance) but will also monitor and
report on whether organizational performance, in terms of increasing
citizen participation and how citizen participation contributes to more
girls in schools, reduced fertility, improved health of women and
children, has improved as a result of organizational capacity building.
NCNW UMI has developed a five-point rating scale to show progress
towards organizational performance.

Successful attempts in influencing decision-making include:

-   changing or educating leaders, policy makers and those who carry out
    policies

-   reforming policies, laws and budgets, developing new programs

-   making decision-making and procedures more transparent, democratic
    and accountable.

To further strengthen CSOs, NCNW UMI will focus on strengthening
strategic partnerships, that is nurturing a set of organizations
operating collectively and individually that effectively promote
sustainable development in targeted governorates in Egypt. Finally, NCNW
UMI will make more effective use of the Internet to link their
intermediate customers with NCNW chapters in the U.S. and with
NCNW-IDC's global outreach.

**TABLE 3: PERFORMANCE DATA TABLE (SO LEVEL)**

+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| OBJECTIVE APPROVED: INCREASED CITIZEN |      |           |         |
| PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC DECISION      |      |           |         |
| MAKING COUNTRY: Egypt                 |      |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| INDICATOR: level of citizen           |      |           |         |
| participation in public fora          |      |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| UNIT OF MEASURE: 5-point scale        | [Y   | [PL       | [ACTUA  |
| showing level of citizen              | EAR] | ANNED]{.u | L]{.und |
| participation                         | {.un | nderline} | erline} |
|                                       | derl |           |         |
|                                       | ine} |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| SOURCE: CSO records and quarterly     |      |           |         |
| reports; NCNW UMI field reports       |      |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: A 5-point      | [1   | [100 % of |         |
| scale showing level of citizens       | 998] | assisted  |         |
| participation as follows:             | {.un | CSOs have |         |
|                                       | derl | at least  |         |
| Level 1 - participation in community  | ine} | level 1   |         |
| needs assessment;                     |      | of        |         |
|                                       |      | citizen   |         |
| Level 2 - participation in            |      | particip  |         |
| project/activities design;            |      | ation]{.u |         |
|                                       |      | nderline} |         |
| Level 3 - participation in            |      |           |         |
| project/activities implementation     |      | [100% of  |         |
| (including community contributions);  |      | assisted  |         |
|                                       |      | CSOs will |         |
| Level 4 - participation in            |      | move at   |         |
| project/activities monitoring and     |      | least one |         |
| evaluation of results; and            |      | level     |         |
|                                       |      | up]{.u    |         |
| Level 5 - participation in ensuring   |      | nderline} |         |
| project/activities sustainability     |      |           |         |
| (including valuation of community     |      |           |         |
| contributions)                        |      |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+
| COMMENTS: Request data for USAID plus | [1   | [100 % of |         |
| counterpart project. If possible      | 999] | assisted  |         |
| request data for similar projects     | {.un | CSOs have |         |
| funded by other sources.              | derl | at least  |         |
|                                       | ine} | level 1   |         |
| DATA COLLECTION METHOD/APPROACH:      |      | of        |         |
|                                       |      | citizen   |         |
| a.  during visits to CSOs, ask for    |      | particip  |         |
|     results (success stories) of      |      | ation]{.u |         |
|     citizen participation             |      | nderline} |         |
|                                       |      |           |         |
| b.  in the quarterly reports, ask     |      | [100% of  |         |
|     subgrantees and their partners to |      | assisted  |         |
|     rate the level of citizen         |      | CSOs will |         |
|     participation (ultimate           |      | move at   |         |
|     customers) and to provide         |      | least one |         |
|     qualitative assessments           |      | level     |         |
|                                       |      | up]{.u    |         |
| c.  do focus group interviews with    |      | nderline} |         |
|     NCNW's intermediate customers and |      |           |         |
|     ultimate customers for            |      |           |         |
|     qualitative assessments of the    |      |           |         |
|     extent of citizen participation   |      |           |         |
|     and the results of citizen        |      |           |         |
|     participation                     |      |           |         |
|                                       |      |           |         |
| SCHEDULE/FREQUENCY: Quarterly         |      |           |         |
|                                       |      |           |         |
| RESPONSIBLE PERSON: GRANT UNIT        |      |           |         |
+---------------------------------------+------+-----------+---------+

**TABLE 4: PERFORMANCE DATA TABLE (IR3.1 LEVEL)**

+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| OBJECTIVE APPROVED: INCREASED       |         |          |          |   |
| CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC     |         |          |          |   |
| DECISION MAKING COUNTRY: Egypt      |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| IR 3.1 RESULT NAME: Increased civil |         |          |          |   |
| society organization (CSO)          |         |          |          |   |
| participation in public decision    |         |          |          |   |
| making                              |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| INDICATOR: (a) percent increase of  |         |          |          |   |
| CSO who have attempted to influence |         |          |          |   |
| and (b) percent increase in         |         |          |          |   |
| attempts of subgrantees to          |         |          |          |   |
| influence (1) policy makers and (2) |         |          |          |   |
| public at large and the community   |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| UNIT OF MEASURE:                    | [YEA    | [PLAN    | [ACT     |   |
|                                     | R]{.und | NED]{.un | UAL]{.un |   |
| a.  number of CSOs who have         | erline} | derline} | derline} |   |
|     attempted to influence over     |         |          |          |   |
|     total CSOs provided with        |         |          |          |   |
|     capacity building/TIE           |         |          |          |   |
|     assistance                      |         |          |          |   |
|                                     |         |          |          |   |
| b.  percent increase in attempts    |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| SOURCE: NGO records and results     | [199    |          | a.  [100 |   |
| reports                             | 7]{.und |          |          |   |
|                                     | erline} |          |   %]{.un |   |
|                                     |         |          | derline} |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| INDICATOR DESCRIPTION:              | [199    | [100% of |          |   |
|                                     | 8]{.und | all      |          |   |
| a.  number of CSOs who have         | erline} | assisted |          |   |
|     attempted over total CSOs       |         | CSOs     |          |   |
|     provided with                   |         | will     |          |   |
|     capacity-building/TIE           |         | have     |          |   |
|     assistance                      |         | a        |          |   |
|                                     |         | ttempted |          |   |
| b.  qualitative assessment of       |         | to       |          |   |
|     attempts to influence public    |         | i        |          |   |
|     decision-making include:        |         | nfluence |          |   |
|     meetings between local          |         | deci     |          |   |
|     authorities and CSOs, visits to |         | sion-mak |          |   |
|     CSOs by local authorities,      |         | ing]{.un |          |   |
|     initiatives taken to Local      |         | derline} |          |   |
|     Authorities, and making the     |         |          |          |   |
|     concerns be realized as a       |         |          |          |   |
|     public concern. Successful      |         |          |          |   |
|     attempts in influencing include |         |          |          |   |
|     changing or educating leaders   |         |          |          |   |
|     and policy makers, reforming    |         |          |          |   |
|     policies, laws and budget,      |         |          |          |   |
|     developing new programs, etc.   |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+
| COMMENTS: Request data for USAID    | [199    | [100% of |          |   |
| plus counterpart project. If        | 8]{.und | all      |          |   |
| possible request data for similar   | erline} | assisted |          |   |
| projects funded by other sources.   |         | CSOs     |          |   |
|                                     |         | will     |          |   |
| DATA COLLECTION METHOD/APPROACH     |         | have     |          |   |
|                                     |         | a        |          |   |
| a.  check NGO records during        |         | ttempted |          |   |
|     monitoring visits               |         | to       |          |   |
|                                     |         | i        |          |   |
| b.  ask for examples of attempts    |         | nfluence |          |   |
|     made by NGOs and any            |         | deci     |          |   |
|     demonstrable results from those |         | sion-mak |          |   |
|     attempts                        |         | ing]{.un |          |   |
|                                     |         | derline} |          |   |
| SCHEDULE/FREQUENCY: Quarterly       |         |          |          |   |
|                                     |         |          |          |   |
| RESPONSIBLE PERSON: GRANT UNIT      |         |          |          |   |
+-------------------------------------+---------+----------+----------+---+

**TABLE 5: PERFORMANCE DATA TABLE (IR3.1.1 LEVEL)**

+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| OBJECTIVE APPROVED: INCREASED     |         |            |         |
| CITIZEN PARTICIPATION             |         |            |         |
|                                   |         |            |         |
| IN PUBLIC DECISION MAKING         |         |            |         |
| COUNTRY: Egypt                    |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| IR3.1 RESULT NAME: Increased      |         |            |         |
| civil society organization (CSO)  |         |            |         |
| participation in public           |         |            |         |
| decision-making                   |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| IR3.1.1 Improved skills to        |         |            |         |
| promote special concerns          |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| INDICATOR: special concerns       |         |            |         |
| matrix (showing skill level by    |         |            |         |
| level of progress towards         |         |            |         |
| successful promotion of special   |         |            |         |
| concerns)                         |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| UNIT OF MEASURE:                  | [YEA    | [          | [ACTUA  |
|                                   | R]{.und | PLANNED]{. | L]{.und |
| a.  levels of skills to promote   | erline} | underline} | erline} |
|     special concerns              |         |            |         |
|                                   |         |            |         |
| b.  levels of promotion of        |         |            |         |
|     special concerns              |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| SOURCE: NGO records and quarterly | [199    |            |         |
| results reports                   | 7]{.und |            |         |
|                                   | erline} |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| INDICATOR DESCRIPTION:            | [199    | [100% of   |         |
|                                   | 8]{.und | CSOs will  |         |
| a.  levels of skills to promote   | erline} | move one   |         |
|     special concerns range from   |         | level up   |         |
|     Level 1 - no skills available |         | in         |         |
|     to Level 5 - skills being     |         | improved   |         |
|     applied for promotion of      |         | skill]{.   |         |
|     special concerns              |         | underline} |         |
|                                   |         |            |         |
| b.  levels of promotion of        |         | [100% of   |         |
|     special concerns range from   |         | CSOs will  |         |
|     Level 1 - no promotion of     |         | move one   |         |
|     special concerns to Level 5 - |         | level up   |         |
|     promotion of special concerns |         | in         |         |
|     showing results               |         | promotion  |         |
|                                   |         | of special |         |
|                                   |         | skills]{.  |         |
|                                   |         | underline} |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+
| COMMENTS: Request data for USAID  | [199    | [100% of   |         |
| plus counterpart project. If      | 9]{.und | CSOs will  |         |
| possible request data for similar | erline} | move one   |         |
| projects funded by other sources. |         | level up   |         |
|                                   |         | in         |         |
| METHOD/APPROACH OF DATA           |         | improved   |         |
| COLLECTION:                       |         | skill]{.   |         |
|                                   |         | underline} |         |
| a.  request subgrantees to        |         |            |         |
|     complete Table 2              |         | [100% of   |         |
|                                   |         | CSOs will  |         |
| b.  ask for examples of promotion |         | move one   |         |
|     of special concerns and any   |         | level up   |         |
|     demonstrable results from     |         | in         |         |
|     these promotion of special    |         | promotion  |         |
|     concerns                      |         | of special |         |
|                                   |         | skills]{.  |         |
| SCHEDULE/FREQUENCY: Quarterly     |         | underline} |         |
|                                   |         |            |         |
| RESPONSIBLE PERSON: GRANT UNIT    |         |            |         |
+-----------------------------------+---------+------------+---------+

**TABLE 6: PERFORMANCE DATA TABLE (IR3.1.2 LEVEL)**

+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| OBJECTIVE APPROVED: INCREASED CITIZEN     |     |         |         |
| PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC DECISION-MAKING   |     |         |         |
| COUNTRY EGYPT                             |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| IR 3.1 RESULT NAME: Increased civil       |     |         |         |
| society organization (CSO) participation  |     |         |         |
| in public decision-making                 |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| IR 3.1.2 Strengthened organizational base |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| INDICATOR(S): 5-point rating scale        |     |         |         |
| showing progress towards improved         |     |         |         |
| organizational performance                |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| UNIT OF MEASURE:                          | [YE | [PLANNE | [ACTUA  |
|                                           | AR] | D]{.und | L]{.und |
| 5-point scale showing progress towards    | {.u | erline} | erline} |
| improved organizational performance       | nde |         |         |
|                                           | rli |         |         |
|                                           | ne} |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| SOURCE: NGO records and results reports   |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Levels of progress | [19 | [13     | [13     |
| towards improved organizational           | 97] | EPVO -  | EPVO -  |
| performance:                              | {.u | (Level  | (Level  |
|                                           | nde | 5       | 4       |
| Level 1 - no organizational systems       | rli | )]{.und | )]{.und |
|                                           | ne} | erline} | erline} |
| Level 2 - some but not all system         |     |         |         |
|                                           | [19 | [14     | [1      |
| Level 3 - major system components         | 98] | EPVO -  | EPVO -  |
| developed                                 | {.u | (Level  | (Level  |
|                                           | nde | 4       | 2       |
| Level 4 - most system components          | rli | )]{.und | )]{.und |
| developed and in routine use. Not fully   | ne} | erline} | erline} |
| integrated but sufficient for             |     |         |         |
| "graduation"                              |     | [23     | [13     |
|                                           |     | EPVO -  | EPVO -  |
| Level 5 - System developed, fully         |     | (Level  | (Level  |
| integrated, and still in place one year   |     | 1       | 1       |
| after graduation. PVO showing             |     | )]{.und | )]{.und |
| improvements in organizational            |     | erline} | erline} |
| performance (see Table 3 for framework    |     |         |         |
| for organizational analysis).             |     |         | [4      |
|                                           |     |         | EPVO -  |
|                                           |     |         | w       |
|                                           |     |         | ithdraw |
|                                           |     |         | n]{.und |
|                                           |     |         | erline} |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+
| COMMENTS: Request data for USAID plus     | [19 | [13     |         |
| counterpart project. If possible request  | 99] | EPVO -  |         |
| data for similar projects funded by other | {.u | (Level  |         |
| sources.                                  | nde | 5       |         |
|                                           | rli | )]{.und |         |
| DATA COLLECTION METHOD/APPROACH           | ne} | erline} |         |
|                                           |     |         |         |
| a.  NGO self-assessment                   |     | [14     |         |
|                                           |     | EPVO -  |         |
| b.  NCNW UMI assessment during field      |     | Level   |         |
|     visits                                |     | 5]{.und |         |
|                                           |     | erline} |         |
| c.  case studies of PVOs that made it to  |     |         |         |
|     Level 5 and nature of organizational  |     | [23     |         |
|     performance (link to people level     |     | EPVO -  |         |
|     impact or ask SO WHAT? WHAT DOES      |     | (Level  |         |
|     IMPROVED ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE   |     | 4       |         |
|     MEAN FOR THE ULTIMATE CUSTOMER?)      |     | )]{.und |         |
|                                           |     | erline} |         |
| SCHEDULE/FREQUENCY: Quarterly             |     |         |         |
|                                           |     |         |         |
| RESPONSIBLE PERSON: HRD UNIT              |     |         |         |
+-------------------------------------------+-----+---------+---------+