Phase | Common activities | Generic indicators derived from activities | Examples of sources of evidence for indicators used in case studies |
---|---|---|---|
Awareness | Lack of local capacity recognised early in project Stakeholders agree to support activities to address capacity gaps Need for uptake of research outputs identified | List of capacity gaps to be filled List of stakeholders who will be critical for implementing project outputs Evidence of engagement of stakeholders (beyond core project team) able to facilitate capacity building activities | Written assessment of gaps in capacity Notes of meetings with stakeholders beyond research team (e.g. government or institutional directors) |
Experiential | Capacity building activities focused primarily on individuals directly involved in project Formal and informal routes for using project outputs to influence policy/guidelines are explored Formal plans for addressing capacity gaps are gradually defined Preliminary models for capacity building are tested and adapted for scale up Strategies for ensuring that the relevant policies were in place or updated | Written plan and timescale for addressing gaps agreed with stakeholders Documented strategy for using project outputs to rectify mismatches/gaps between evidence and policy/practice Results of testing of pilot projects/models for capacity building | Annual plans with targets, timescale and details for rectifying policy gaps Review of comparison of different models and report of testing of models |
Expansion | Concerted effort to influence policies and practice Focus broadens from individuals to strengthening institutions and systems Capacity building activities and individuals expand and begin to be integrated in existing structures Researchers inputs down-scaled to provide light touch guidance Sustainable funding actively sought Peer-reviewed publications from research and capacity building published | Expanded relevant skills and workforce Reduction of inputs by northern partners Regular review process instigated for updating/developing relevant policies Evidence of strengthening of systems (e.g. new committees or reporting structures) Diversification of funding sources independent of original funders Publications and/or presentations at national/international meetings | Training records indicating number of individuals trained, topics covered, skills audit and evidence of use of new skills Individual student assessments to demonstrate knowledge, skills and competencies Institutional annual budgets showing earmarked research funds Workplan showing phase out of northern partners, policy review and set up of new structures Documentation of number, type and success rates of publications and funding applications |
Consolidation | Expansion beyond initial project objectives and original institution/region/country Southern partners lead bids for alternative sources of funding independent of original project funds Southern partners responsible for project and budget management | Evidence that long-term funding has been secured Project management and key decisions, such as commissioning of further external inputs, led by southern partners | Financial statements showing diverse sources of funds and that southern institution is responsible for budgeting Minutes of meetings showing key decision-making by southern partners |