NGO support toolkit (English)  >  Strategic planning 

Situation assessment

For NGO/CBO support providers (NSPs) the purpose of situation assessments is to gather context specific information and evidence to inform their strategic decision-making and ensure that they put their resources to best use in the local setting.

Situation assessments may differ significantly in how ambitious they are and their depth and comprehensiveness. This depends on each NSP’s remit, scope, timescale, and funding level. For instance, the degree of commitment from donors will determine the scope and sustainability of a programme and the type of information required. Similarly, if the NSP is intending to establish multi-sectoral programmes, the assessment must look at the relevant range of sectors also.

Most NSPs will not be able to conduct major primary research as part of an assessment, or they may not wish to because of the time delays that would result. Instead, initial situation assessments usually gather data already available, assess its quality, and then interpret or analyse it as far as the quality of the data permits. When they draw conclusions, the assessment teams should also record any assumptions that had to be made because of the limitations of available data.

There are many kinds of data that can contribute to a situation assessment, and the gathering of information and analysis can be grouped in various ways. Those we consider in more detail below include HIV/AIDS situation analysis , institutional response analysis and capacity analysis. Additionally, in strategic reviews, later in the programme’s life, NSPs can draw on a wider range of information, including:

• community and situation data collected by their NGO or CBO partners (see Collecting and reporting data)
• the results of monitoring and evaluation from all levels of the programmes
• sometimes research especially commissioned by the NSP itself (or by other programmes) to fill gaps that were identified in the initial assessment.

There are a number of key criteria to address in the design of a participatory strategic assessment or appraisal in order to make it as useful as possible for planning:

• Selection of a mixed discipline assessment team, which should include representation from people and communities affected within the assessment area; outsiders who can bring a different perspective to the data; and people with expertise in looking critically at data quality and interpretation.
• Clear terms of reference for the assessment team, including the purpose and level of detail expected of the assessment and any pre-existing parameters and constraints on the work of the NSP.
• Clear public statements about the scope and ambition of the assessment in order to avoid raising false expectations in other agencies, which may in turn jeopardise future working relationships.
• Careful attention to identifying the different types of data that will be needed to reach valid conclusions. For example, it is important to balance information not only from powerful policy-makers, but also service providers and members of vulnerable community groups.
• Analysis to understand or identify the ‘optimal role’ or ‘comparative advantage’ of the programme. An NSP may have to choose between prioritising organisations or locations where it can most quickly and easily provide support, and sites and interventions that are the most significant to the epidemic. A good assessment will differentiate between the two and identify possible overlaps. The data can be tabulated thus:

  	Sites	Populations	Potential NGO/CBO partners	Intervention types
  Must do
  May do
  Can’t do

• Verification. Because much of the assessment process will involve summarising, interpreting and reinterpreting existing information, it is important to provide an opportunity for feedback and further input from participants who have provided information for the assessment before the team departs from the assessment location.
• Transparency. Any rapid assessment will draw on data of variable quality. It is important to note clearly what is known, what can reasonably be assumed and what is not yet known. It is helpful to record assumptions to enable them to be revisited in future review and replanning, or be investigated through operations research. It is also useful to interpret ‘trends’ rather than particular points in time.

Issues to consider

• Each programme will be faced with a choice about where to draw the boundaries of its assessment. For example, if NSPs cannot currently support care work there may be no point in assessing treatment needs. On the other hand, some programmes will choose to include such an assessment in order to prepare for possible future extension of the scope of its work.
• Some NSPs will want to designate particular priority ‘sites’ within their overall region of operation (for example, certain towns, districts, neighbourhoods or border crossings) in which to conduct more detailed landscape assessment.
• If an NSP only has a very limited budget and there is limited HIV/AIDS programming money available in the country, there may be little point in an assessment that covers all possible regions and needs in detail, but some form of assessment may still be needed to prioritise work in such a situation.
• Pre-assessment desk research can prepare for an assessment in a strategic and productive way by identifying existing sources of usable data. However, to avoid relying on preconceived ideas, it is important for the assessment team to check how well the data has been selected and the quality of the data itself.
• In some situations, formal assessments may unnecessarily raise expectations of communities and stakeholders, another way of assessing the landscape may be to undertake initial pilot work.

• Send to a friend
• Printer-friendly