- Atlas

The Atlas Alliance: 2015 Organizational
Review Terms of References
1. Background
The Atlas Alliance, hereby referred to as ‘AA’, commissions organizational reviews of four its member
organizations (see below) in preparation for its 2016-19 Development Framework Cooperation Agreement
application to the Norwegian Directorate for Development Assistance (NORAD).
The Atlas Alliance (AA) is an umbrella organization of 16 Norwegian disabled persons organizations (DPOs),
parents and patients. Since 1981, AA has supported development projects of and for people with disabilities in
the global south. The AA Secretariat is responsible for common technical, administrative and financial matters,
for executing the Executive Board's decisions, internal competence building, as well as overall program quality
assurance. Currently, AA handles a portfolio of approximately 60 projects in 20 countries in Africa, Asia and the
Middle East with approximately 60 million NOK annually from NORAD. The overall goal of AA is to contribute to
improving living conditions of and for people with disabilities (PwDs) in development countries. AA completed
an organizational review in 2014 by Scanteam AS.
The Norwegian Association of Disabled or Norges Handikapforbund (NAD) is an independent advocacy
organization working for equal rights and social participation for people with disabilities. NAD has 19 000
members and 300 local branches in Norway, as well as 30 years experience with international solidarity work
and development cooperation. NAD's projects are primarily within organizational development and community
based rehabilitation (CBR). As part of the current AA NORAD Framework agreement, NAD supports projects in
South Africa, Lesotho, Malawi, Uganda, Zambia and Palestine.
The Norwegian Diabetes Association or Diabetesforbund was founded in 1948 with the objective of serving
people with diabetes as well as others that has an interest in the subject/disease. Today, the association has
more than 40 000 members and 150 local offices in Norway. In 2008, the association started cooperation with
their Zambian partner.
The Norwegian Association for Spinal Bifida and Hydrocephalus or Ryggmargsbrokk- og
Hydrocephalusforeningen (RHF) was established in 1973 and their mission is to improve the quality of life of
people with Spinal Bifida and/or Hydrocephalus and their families. Beginning in 1998 together with the
International Federation of Spinal Bifida and Hydrocephalus (IF), RHF provides advice and support to parents as
well as they support equipment and train health personnel in necessary operations and other health initiatives
in Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya, Malawi and Zambia
The Norwegian Federation of Organizations of Disabled People or Funksjonshemmedes Fellesorganisasjonn
(FFO) is an umbrella organization with 72 member-organizations in Norway. Since 1991, FFO has supported
internal efforts organizational development and research through studies on living conditions among people
with disabilities in southern Africa, China and Nepal.
THE ATLAS ALLIANCE|PLAN 2015
2.
Purpose of the review
The organizational review will assess the extent that the respective AA organization has achieved results in
1
accordance with own stated goals and strategy, joint AA program objectives and guidelines, NORAD
framework grant guidelines, and in conformity with general Norwegian policy/principles for development
cooperation.
Additionally, the review will assess the AA organizations technical, organizational, management, financial and
administrative qualifications for achieving planned results in a cost effective way, in collaboration with its
partners.
The review will draw conclusions regarding the organizations suitability and ability to deliver desired results,
and will present recommendations for follow-up action toward/by the respective AA organization and, where
appropriate, by the AA secretariat.
3.
Scope of the review
The review will describe and analyze [AA Org] ability to document and deliver results in accordance with agreed
goals, including, but not limited to the following:
[AA Org] objectives, mandate and development assistance strategy:
 Value base
 Added Value per program approach, partners’ needs and stated expectations (comparative advantage
and especially the use of peer-experiences)
 Supporting country project partners policy and priorities
 Thematic and geographical priority areas
 Contextual understanding and sensitivity
 Project ownership by country partners in development and implementation of plans
 Relevance and quality of development strategy
 Receiving and using support from AA Secretariat
[AA Org]’s organizational structures
 Type of organization management.
 Decision-making lines and internal communication
 Fund raising systems, communication with non AA donors ( if applicable)
 Collaboration with AA Secretariat and/or other organizations and relevant stakeholders
 Budget
[AA Org]’s partnership work:
 Strategy for choosing partners
 Roles/relationships or type of agreement/ownership with project partners
 Transparency throughout the partnership
 Competence and capacity development of project partners
 Sustainability and exit strategies
 Network-building
1
2010-14 AA NORAD Vedlegg 1
1
THE ATLAS ALLIANCE|PLAN 2015
[AA Org]’s administrative/management capacity, including financial management:
 Planning capacity and risk assessments and management
 Work plans for technical assistance in accordance with guidelines
 Quality assurance and control systems
 Program staff resources
 Clarity and transparency of financial management systems
 Systems for disclosing, reporting corruption and financial irregularity (own organization and partners)
 Oversight/monitoring of money flows
[AA Org]’s professional and technical capacity and knowledge management, including systems for
management of:
 Thematic, geographical and organizational knowledge
 Locally owned project design
[AA Org] use of resources related to activities (cost effectiveness):
 The relation between overhead costs versus operating costs
 Budget ratio for activities in Norway versus activities/partners in the South
 Ability to prioritize according to strategy
[AA Org] Results management:
 Achievement of results by past/current performance
 System for monitoring results/end-user relevance ( indicators, sources used)
 System for results assessment and reporting
 System for learning & adjustment (including risk management)
 [AA Org]’s relationship to Atlas Alliance on results management
Coordination with other stakeholders
 Ability and willingness to coordinate activities and ensure effective task-sharing with other
stakeholders at country level
 Relationship with national/local authorities
4.
Implementation
The following methods and information sources should be used in the review:
 Document studies with particular emphasis on - specify key policy/reference documents, relevant
reports, evaluations, including (for example)o Current AA cooperation agreement, correspondence with NORAD
o [AA ORG] and relevant Atlas Alliance policy and strategy for aid work
o Recent reviews/evaluations, annual reports, website and applications
o Research-based literature
o Norwegian/NORAD guidelines for grants to civil society, policy papers, and other relevant
documents



Interviews with [AA Org]’s management/staff, AA secretariat and if relevant, other external
persons/organizations.
Including field visit to interviews with partners and relevant authorities and, if, Norwegian embassy
project countries.
Other methods including electronic surveys should be considered.
2
THE ATLAS ALLIANCE|PLAN 2015
Composition of team:
The review will be carried out by a team of external consultants. The Team leader shall have comprehensive
experience from relevant evaluations or reviews. The Team should have competence in the field of NGO/CSOs,
in particular issues within financial management (accounting and audit).
Timetable:
The review shall start in March and completed no later than the end of April. A more detailed timeline and
travel schedule for interviews with Norwegian stakeholders as well as field visits will be decided in
consultations between [AA Org], AA secretariat and the review team.
5.
Reporting





6.
All reporting to be submitted to AA Secretariat - Advisory team comprised of AA Org rep) will arrange
an inception meeting with the review team to clarify questions related to the assignment description.
After completion of document studies, data collection and interviews in Norway, the review team will
submit a draft report containing a brief overview of preliminary findings, along with a plan and focus
points for field visits. The draft report shall be submitted to AA secretariat and [AA Org] for comments
within 10 days after completion of field visit.
The final report shall be submitted to AA secretariat and [AA Org] within 20 days after receipt of
th
comments to the draft; no later than May 29 2015
The final report should be written in English (word format) and not exceed approximately 40 pages,
including a summary of approximately 5 pages; submitted electronically.
After submission of Final Report, the review team will present findings, conclusions and
recommendations to a stakeholder’s audience in Norway; too be determined upon completion of final
report.
Budget
 Maximum NOK 400 000 + VAT
 Review budget should be allocated per 4 organizations in accordance respective size and proportion of
per current Atlas Alliance project portfolio.
For inquiries, contact Samuel Sanders at Sammy.sanders@atlas-alliansen.no
3