Complex program management standards

Table of Contents Complex Program Management Standards An Addendum to the Mercy Corps Program Management Manual... List of Abbreviations Complex Program Complex Program Management Stand

Table of Contents

Complex Program Management Standards

An Addendum to the Mercy Corps Program Management Manual

List of Abbreviations

Complex Program Complex Program Management Standards

m Management Standards

An Addendum to the Mercy Corps Program Management Manual

The intent of this effort is to ensure that Mercy Corps implements Complex Programs on-scope, on-time and within-budget, capitalizing on the impact and thought leadership

potential of Complex Programs The Mercy Corps Program Management

Manual provides the minimum standards required when managing all

Mercy Corps programs Complex Programs will adopt Program

Management Minimum Standards as well as ALL processes and tools in

this document

1 In general, a Mercy Corps initiative above USD 6 million/year,

meeting the following two characteristics may be designated a

Complex Program:

A Potential for impact on at least 500,000 individuals

B Strategic/high profile program as viewed by the donor/host

country/Mercy Corps

2 Additional characteristics that may warrant designation as a

Complex Program include:

A High levels of complexity due to multi-sectoral approach

i More than three cross-matrixed objectives; interdependent

for success

ii More than three distinct sectors in the program

iii Multiple implementing partners

iv Mercy Corps will invest in or support the establishment of a

new, separate legal entity

B High potential for mismanagement or fraud

i High volume of sub-awards or loans

ii Heavy cash programming

iii Heavy procurement and/or construction

C Complex operating environment

i Remote management and/or wide geographic dispersion

ii High level of insecurity or significant security related issues

iii Policy issues such as engagement with military, or issues

with no-weapons security policy, or requirements to report staff personal information to donors or governments

iv Rudimentary country infrastructure

Problem Statement: Implementation

of Complex Programs is one of the most challenging missions that we take on as an agency These programs must be implemented well and with precision for a myriad of reasons, most importantly because they offer great opportunity for impact and learning as an agency, and because they are of strategic significance to our donors and our beneficiaries

Solutions: Complex Programs

require a systematic agency (as opposed to Country) monitoring and oversight plan that will be met through the new Program Board mechanism as outlined in Annex 1 of

this document The Program Management Manual has many, but

not all, of the answers that a Complex Program implementation

requires, including the Minimum

Standards for Program Implementation This document is

comprised of the additional standards and processes required of

Complex Programs

Section 2: Complex Program Definition

Section 1: Introduction

Complex Programs will adopt Program Management Minimum Standards

as well as ALL processes and tools in this document

The Senior Vice President of Programs makes the final decision to

assign the classification of Complex Program

An Addendum to the Mercy Corps Program Management Manual

Complex Program Management Standards

1 Classification as a Complex Program and Go/No-Go Process

1 Classification as a Complex Program and Go/No-Go Process

A Within 48 hours of release of a solicitation that meets the

value threshold for Complex Programs (USD 6 million per

year or more):

i The RPD makes a provisional Go/No-Go decision, in

consultation with the NI Director, SPO, RFO, and CD

(and MCS Deputy Executive Director for grants to be

administered by MCS)

ii The RPD flags the solicitation as a potential Complex

Program to the SVP of Programs

B With a Provisional Go decision:

i Lead writer is identified and Proposal Team assembly

begins

ii Partner discussions and assessment work begins

iii NI completes risk and competitive analysis within 5

days of solicitation release with input from RPD, CD

and others

iv NI shares RFA and analysis with SVP Programs and

other senior team members as needed, such as: CFO,

Director of Operations, Director of Compliance, LOE

team, Policy and Advocacy Director, TSU Director(s),

PALM Director

C Within 5 days of release of a solicitation that meets the

value threshold for Complex Programs: 1

i NI facilitates Final Go/No-Go call with all designated

reviewers in point 1.B.iv above

D Within 7 days of release of a solicitation that meets the

value threshold for Complex Programs:

i RPD makes Final Go/No-Go decision based on input

from SVP Program and the reviewers listed above

ii SVP makes a decision on the classification of the solicitation as a Complex Program

E With Go decision and classification as a Complex Program:

i Program Board is formed (SVP, RPD, CD, SPO, RFO, Proposal Lead, with Program Manager (PM)/Chief

of Party (CoP) added when funded)

2 Program Board

A Board is governed by the Program Board Charter which also defines: Purpose, Scope, Meeting Frequency, Commitment, Constitution, and Board Membership, and is attached as Annex 1

B PM/CoP and Complex Program Board are responsible for program performance and compliance

3 Designing and Budgeting Support Structures

A Proposal Team and Board: The Proposal Team lead (usually NI) serves on the Program Board until handover

to the implementation team at startup or until notification that a proposal will not be funded The team lead ensures board consultation on key issues during the design process This may include periodic board calls, regular written updates on key issues/discussions, and/or one-on-one consultation with appropriate board members on specific issues

i Only SVP Programs or CFO sign final submissions for Complex Programs

B Designated Complex Programs are designed as fully resourced programs This means:

1

Value threshold for Complex Programs is defined as USD 6 million per year or more.

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

Program Identification and Design (Chapter 3)

A Written assessment or problem analysis exists, based on primary or secondary data (note: this can be contained in the proposal documentation, or can be a separate assessment document)

B A list of external stakeholders participating in initial consultations is available

C Program Logical Framework exists

D Lead designer has checked for lessons learned from similar programs globally

E Program proposal with summary budget (sometimes called preliminary program scope statement) exists

Section 3: Program Identification and Design Phase

i Reporting Line: The SVP and RPD determine whether the PM/CoP reports to the Country Director or directly to the RPD Regardless of the reporting line, PM/CoPs and CDs are expected to ensure

coordination, sharing of lessons and information, and cross learning between the Complex Program and other country activities

ii Staffing and Resourcing: The cost proposal and staffing structure reflect a standalone program (no

pooled staff, resources or costs) with all staff and resources managed by the PM/CoP Resource: Functional Analysis Example in Office-in-a-Box

C HQ Support: Proposal should identify the anticipated level of effort required from HQ support teams (e.g.,

RPT, Finance, TSU, PALM, MEL, etc.) For example, does the Complex Program require a dedicated Senior Program Officer, or extensive support from HQ/Finance? See Annex 2 for roles and responsibilities of RPT,

IF, and Compliance teams for each phase of a Complex Program

D Core Resources: Where anticipated needs exceed resources, either because in-country costs would make the budget non-competitive, or because HQ teams lack the capacity to provide the needed level of

support, the Board should identify solutions (e.g allocation of country core, staffing up of support teams)

E Follow-up Questions from funder/resource partner: If after reviewing the proposal the funder has

additional questions or suggestions for changes in cost and scope (sometimes known as “Issues Letter” or

“Best and Final Offer”), the Proposal Team lead will spearhead Mercy Corps’ response and consult with the Program Board regarding material changes to the program design and budget

i Only SVP Programs or CFO sign final submissions for Complex Programs

4 Award Negotiation

The award negotiation phase begins after the funder has accepted the final proposal and has confirmed the final decision to award the program to Mercy Corps This phase includes the steps required to complete the negotiation of the final award agreement and secure the final signed award document This phase does not include responding to follow-up questions on the proposal or to “Best and Final Offer” revisions of the

proposal, which should still be considered part of the Design Phase and involve the Proposal Team

A Award document reviewed and negotiated by HQ

i Reviewers include SPO, RFO, Deputy Director-FCSU, RPD, Proposal Team lead, and PM/CoP (if known)

ii Reviewers provide comments to the SPO who coordinates the response with the Deputy Director -FCSU

iii Deputy Director FCSU reviews final requests before submission to the funder

B Only SVP Programs or CFO sign award agreements for Complex Programs SVP Programs or CFO ensure:

i All review parties have completed sign-off checklist and any risks/exceptions associated with final award have been identified to them

ii Final decisions are made on threshold issues, risks/exceptions or compromise language

5 Talent Acquisition

A If the solicitation timeline allows, finalists for PM/CoP position (including internal and national finalists) are flown to Portland HQ for the deeper LEAP assessment process The process is managed by the Talent Acquisition team

B The RPD and key members of the Program Board determine which positions are critical

C The RPD participates in the interview process for positions designated critical by the Program Board

D References are collected by the Talent Acquisition team by phone for positions designated as critical

E When the solicitation timeline does not allow for an in-depth assessment, the PM/CoP of the Complex Program undertakes, within four months of deployment, a visit to HQ as part of the onboarding experience and participates in an externally-administered leadership assessment The PM/CoP and supervisor use assessment data to identify areas that may need strengthening The process will be managed by LOE

1 The CD works with the PM/CoP to ensure a robust in-country

technical orientation for the team implementing the Complex

Program (including the in-country team supporting

implementation) by relevant HQ design and technical point

persons This includes aspects of the program design (i.e., original

assessment findings, logical framework, intervention and cost

design rationale, M&E plan, etc.) as well as organizational values,

processes and procedures (PALM, IF, Compliance, Program

Management, MEL, relevant technical sectors, Gender, Security

and other areas as appropriate)

A Key individuals from the Proposal Team, technical support and

M&E team (whether or not they were part of the Proposal

Team) participate in:

i The kick-off meeting

ii Development of the Program Workplan and M&E indicator

plan

B Regulations training focused on the award is implemented in

the field as part of program kick-off

C Sub-award start up support is provided by the HQ Sub-Grant

Compliance Officer who:

i Assists in drafting any program-specific sub-award

manuals or templates

ii Drafts sub-award agreements

iii Assists in the development of sub-award monitoring plans

2 Stakeholder Management Plan

A Stakeholder Register is created and kept updated as part of

the Program File

B Compliance tracker is maintained throughout the life of the

program

1 Issues Log and Risk Register are required for Complex Programs

and monitored by the Program Board as outlined in the standard

agenda items within the Program Board Charter (see Annex 1)

2 An Audit Score can be a key indicator of program health and

compliance Financial and/or Programmatic internal audits are

conducted at least once during the life of the Complex Program,

ideally at mid-point, with identified issues logged and tracked

through the Issues Log and/or Risk Register as appropriate

3 Compliance tracker is maintained throughout the life of the

program The tracker is monitored by the Board Potential

disallowances are reported immediately to the Board The

Program Board should survey the donor/ resource partner for

satisfaction at least twice a year Questions and point person to

lead this process to be determined by the Board

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

Set Up and Planning (Chapter 4)

A Program File is created

B Program Work Plan (PWP) exists, with the following minimum contents:

 Key program parameters, coming from preliminary program documents

 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

 Program Schedule

 Coded Program Budget

 End-of-Program Transition Plan

C Technical, Cross-cutting Theme, and Sub-grant/ Partnership Planning is conducted Supply Chain and Contracting, Personnel, Operations & Security, and Planning is conducted

D Program Organizational Chart exists

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

Program Implementation Phase (Chapter 5)

A Program Work Plan (PWP) is approved and regularly updated

B Program Kick-Off Meeting is conducted, and minutes are available

C Program Team Coordination Meetings take place at least once per quarter with documented minutes

Section 4: Set Up and Planning Process

Section 5: Program Implementation Phase

4 Partner relationship and communications are managed –

aiming for effective, productive, aligned and transparent

partnership Clear communication and decision making

guidelines are included within the partnership agreement,

and quality reviews of partner data and deliverables are

included in the monitoring and quality assurance plans The

Program Board surveys key partners for health of the

partnership at least once a year

5 People Management

A When the solicitation timeline does not allow for an

in-depth assessment, the PM/CoP of the Complex

Program undertakes, within four months of

deployment, a visit to HQ as part of the onboarding

experience and participates in an

externally-administered leadership assessment The PM/CoP and

supervisor use assessment data to identify areas that

may need strengthening The process will be managed

by LOE

B Complex Program Team and Program Board identify

specific support required for critical team members

taking on positions of greater responsibility RPD and

SVP Programs, with support from LOE and other

support functions, provide the needed support

C Complex Program team members work with

supervisors to develop individual work plan within 60

days of start date

D Continued monthly check-ins on performance with

supervisor and team member are suggested

E At the six month anniversary of hiring, a 360

assessment-for-development of the PM/CoP of the

Complex Program (if new to Mercy Corps and not a

graduate of CDLP), based on the Cornerstones of

Leadership will be administered by LOE Feedback to

the individual and manager will be conducted by LOE

F Team Satisfaction Survey and Engagement Survey

conducted and administered annually by LOE, with

results from Complex Program countries called out

Feedback provided to RPDs and CDs on analysis and

recommendations

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

Program Implementation Phase (Chapter 5) continued…

D Program progress reports (narrative and financial) exist and include progress toward indicator targets

E Scheduled and ad hoc reports and updates are communicated to stakeholders

F Actual Program Schedule (within PWP) is updated against the Baseline Schedule by PM/CoP and submitted to supervisor on a monthly basis

G Descriptions of deliverables exist, and quality assurance checks are carried out at least twice per program year

H Budget vs Actual reports for the Program Budget are prepared monthly, and projections against the Program Budget are prepared quarterly

I Program Team receives copies of, and is oriented on: Proposal & Logical Framework, M&E plan, Program Work Plan, Kick-Off Meeting minutes and relevant parts of the Program Budget and Grant Agreement Program Team is oriented on administration and finance procedures (FAM, FFM, FPM), and roles & responsibilities for contractors and partners

J Program Team is recruited; roles, responsibilities, and required skills have been articulated; Position Descriptions exist; Training Needs Assessment is carried out

K Program Team member performance is assessed and documented by PM/CoP within three months of program start, and annually thereafter

1 Key individuals from the Proposal Team, key technical

support, and M&E team (whether or not they were part of the

Proposal Team) participate in:

A Development of the Program Workplan and M&E

indicator plan

B The kick-off meeting

C Provision of a robust orientation to the Complex Program

team on Mercy Corps’ M&E practices, tools, systems

2 The Complex Program team, in consultation with relevant HQ

teams, will:

A Set up the M&E system to inform program management

with a view to improving impact, enhancing accountability

to beneficiaries, ensuring gender equity and inclusion of

disenfranchised groups

B Set up clear community based complaints mechanism

C Maintain Quality Assurance plan that is linked to the

monitoring systems and the descriptions of deliverables

This plan must be approved by the Board annually

3 Quality review of partner data and deliverables is included in

the monitoring and quality assurance plans

1 End-of-Program Transition Plan is reviewed by the

Program Board mid-way through the program

2 In addition to field staff, HQ SPO and RFO will

attend the 90 day meeting (travel to the field)

3 Contract/sub-awardee status is reviewed and

finalization plans specified

4 HQ Sub-grant Compliance Officer reviews

sub-award monitoring plan status before final

close-out

5 Handover procedures and templates are reviewed

by the HQ Compliance team

6 SPO and RFO perform a review of all

program/finance/compliance files in the field 90

days before the award end date

7 Final Program report is reviewed by SPO prior to

submission Supporting M&E documentation is

reviewed to ensure accuracy of data If financial

figures are contained in the Program Report, RFO

reviews for accuracy prior to submission

8 SPO and RFO are responsible for ensuring all

close-out steps have been completed based on

end of program transition plan Close-out

Checklists.

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

End-of-Program Transitions (Chapter 7)

A Written End-of-Program Transition Plan exists

B “Final 90 day” meeting has taken place, and minutes exist

C Contract/ sub-grantee status reviewed and finalization plans specified

D Deliverables to be transitioned to external stakeholders have been handed over, and handover documentation exists

E Lessons learned have been documented, and have been sent to the Senior Program Officer (SPO) and Technical Support Unit (TSU)

F End-of-Program Transition has been clearly communicated to the Program Team, beneficiaries, host government

counterparts, and partners

G Program File is complete

H Final report is completed and donor close-out requirements are met

Mercy Corps Program Management Manual Minimum Standards Checklist

Evaluation and Measurement (Chapter 6)

A Indicator Plan exists (Planning Phase)

B Key program M&E events (at a minimum, baseline, evaluation, and routine monitoring) have been carried out, and reports of these events exist (Implementation Phase)

C Basic M&E data management system exists (Implementation Phase)

D Final Evaluation report exists(Implementation Phase)

Section 6: Measurement and Evaluation (M&E)

Section 7: End-of-Program Transition

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1 COMPLEX PROGRAM BOARD CHARTER

1 Opportunity / Risk Statement

High-profile, Complex Programs in critical countries offer an opportunity to attain demonstrable impact and move Mercy Corps closer towards achieving our mission, while leveraging our experience and reputation globally The Program Board puts management weight behind the PM/CoP’s requests and conveys to the Program Team the serious interest of the organization

in ensuring the program’s success The Board shares responsibility for the program success with the PM/CoP It does not replace supervisory line management If not done well Complex Programs are not only a lost opportunity for impact but also pose a huge reputational risk for the agency Achieving scale is important to us and Complex Programs are often an ideal in-hand opportunity for reaching scale Successful implementation could result in transformational change in communities; build Mercy Corps’ credibility as a partner; allow us to test, document and refine approaches, and build thought leadership.2

2 Purpose: The purpose of the established Board is to enable strong and implementable program designs and achieve the program objectives, and to:

a Ensure organizational commitment and accountability for the program

b Decide on proposed program changes (scope, budget, calendar etc); support and advise the PM/CoP on the

management of the program, especially on issues that extend beyond the span of control of the PM/CoP

c Oversee the PM/CoP’s management of the program, providing resources, direction and insight as necessary

d Monitor the ongoing viability of the program, making decisions to terminate the program if necessary

e Secure necessary organizational support and resources for the program

f Convey issues occurring within the organization, that might affect implementation, to the PM/CoP

g Ensure that the organization ‘owns’ the process and results of the program.3

3 Scope: All members of the Program Board shall be responsible for all of the following:

a Ensure the PM/CoP’s management of the program is effective for ensuring that it arrives on scope, on time and on budget at an acceptable quality to the organization

b Monitor performance against the workplan and award agreement, understanding and recording the cause of missed milestones and ensure a strategy is in place to get the program on the right track

c Monitor performance against the budget, understanding the cause of under-or over-spending and ensure a strategy is

in place to get the program on the right track

d Ensure the PM/CoP is managing issues effectively

e Ensure the program is in compliance with Mercy Corps & donor standards, policies, regulations and applicable laws

f Confirm the quality of program design, implementation & deliverables is consistent with Mercy Corps’ expectations

g Provide the PM/CoP with sufficient organizational and technical support to effectively meet commitments and expectations and to leverage programmatic or contextual opportunities for increased impact and learning

h Ensure the program implementation team is adequately staffed and functioning efficiently and effectively

4 Board Meeting Agenda:

a Standard Agenda items: In support of these responsibilities, standard agenda items for board meetings shall include,

but may not be limited to:

i Review of actual performance against the workplan and budget

ii Review of status and updates to the Risk Register

iii Review of status and updates to the Issues Log

2 Thought leadership: recognition from peers and stakeholders that an organization has a deep understanding of this technical sector; of the needs of its clients/

beneficiaries; and the broader context or marketplace in which it operates (Elise Bauer) This combined understanding informs its program methodologies

(synthesis of theory and practice: praxis), which it tests (applied research), analyzes and communicates to the broader world as a thought leader There is also a

strong element of influence in thought leadership: you cannot be a thought leader if no one else recognizes you as one Kurtzman, J (2010) Common Purpose: How great leaders get organisations to achieve the extraordinary, ISBN 978-0-470-49009-9

3 PM4NGOs, A Guide to the PMD Pro , 2 February 2012, p.42

iv Review of status of Program Team (structure, gender & diversity balance, turn-over, vacancies, morale, degree of

conflict, level of engagement)

v Review of status of Compliance Tracker

vi Review of most recent audit report and status towards addressing issues;

vii Review of recent reports from HQ or TDY trips, quality assurance checks, donor visits, and similar;

viii Review of monitoring reports and/or indicator measurements with an eye to accountability to beneficiaries,

gender equity and inclusiveness of disenfranchised groups; and

iv Requests for resources, assistance or support by the PM/CoP.

b Seasonal Agenda Items:

i At start-up, the Board provides LOE with names of manager-level positions within the Complex Program to enable LOE to conduct 60, 90 day telephone check-ins with them Led and managed by LOE

ii At start-up, the Board identifies specific support required for critical team members who are “stepping up.” RPD and SVP Programs, with support from LOE and other support functions, to provide the needed support

iii Semiannually, the Program Board should survey the donor/resource partner for satisfaction (standard practice in for-profit world) at least twice a year Questions to be determined by the Board

iv Semiannually, the Program Board should review opportunities for leveraging impact, e.g., potential partnerships with other actors active in this space and new partners who could add value

v Annually, the Program Board should survey key partners for health of the partnership

vi Annually, review Quality Assurance plan that is linked to the monitoring systems and the descriptions of

deliverables

vii Mid-way through the program, EOPTP is reviewed by Program Board (For a 5-year program, 2.5 years is the program mid-way point)

viii At the onset of the final year of program implementation, the Program Board reviews the updated End-of-Program Transition Plan

ix Six months before program closeout, the Program Board reviews the updated EOPTP

x Three months before program closeout, the Program Board reviews the updated EOPTP

5 Meeting Frequency: The Program Board shall be constituted following a ‘go’ decision to submit a proposal for a potential

Complex Program award Thereafter, the Program Board shall meet in person or via teleconference:

a For special meetings as needed to support the needs and issues faced by the program;

b As needed during the program design and proposal development phase;

c Minimum of monthly during program set up (usually the first three-six months of the award cycle);

d Minimum of quarterly throughout the program lifecycle;

e A special 90 day meeting three months prior to the end of the award period;

f At the end of the award period to review the final evaluation and ensure documentation and dissemination of key lessons learned; and

g In support of any post-program evaluations, audits or reviews by external stakeholders

6 Board Member Commitment: Program Board members are expected to dedicate the necessary time to Board

responsibilities throughout the program lifecycle Board members must commit to preparing for and attending all board meetings Board Members shall be removed from their position on the board in the event that they do not attend the

regular meetings of the board without the explicit permission of the SVP

7 Key Assumptions, Constraints, Risks

a The program Design Team will collaborate with the board in the design and costing for the program proposal and shall further commit to collaboration during the program set up and initial program board meetings to inform the board of design considerations and commitments

b Program Board core membership will remain consistent throughout the life of the program;

c Program Board members will spend the necessary portion of their work time in support of the program and will carefully review all program documents in advance of board meetings