DRAFT
DFID/Nike Foundation Girl Hub
Aide memoire for first annual review (Jan/Feb 2011)
(version: 28 February 2011)
Contents
1. This aide memoire accompanies the annual review template. It describes
the review process and sets out where information is recorded within the
review template. The aide memoire then summarises the strategic
importance of the Girl Hub and characteristics of progress in 2010, overall
and for each output. It then identifies experience in 2010 that has informed
institutional arrangements for Girl Hub and the partnership between DFID
and Nike Foundation. Illustrative examples of progress in 2010 are
included in this aide memoire; the review template should be used for full
details of progress. Finally, the aide memoire lists recommendations
included in the review template.
Review process
2. This first annual review was carried out by a DFID review team from
Governance and Social Development Department. Team members were
Karen Johnson (leading), Ros Ebdon (Girl Hub lead adviser), David
Campbell (project officer) and Maria Cushion (Business Manager).
3. Review team members gathered evidence in two meetings with Girl Hub
leadership team (Caroline Whaley, Ellen Wratten, Ben Gallagher), who
also provided written answers to supplementary questions. The review
leader also spoke with Nike Foundation staff (Maria Eitel, Stuart Hogue,
Swan Paik), DFID UK staff (Mark Lowcock, Bella Bird, Shiona Ruhemann,
Ben Mellor) and DFID staff from Ethiopia (Jillian Popkins), Nigeria (Jakesh
Mahey) and Rwanda (Elizabeth Carriere, Rahul Malhotra).
4. The review team leader completed a draft annual review template and
aide memoire.
5. The annual review assessment was discussed in a meeting between the
review team (Karen Johnson, David Campbell) and the Girl Hub team
(Caroline Whaley, Ellen Wratten, Ben Gallagher, Kemi Williams, Fatima
Sada). Girl Hub and DFID staff also commented on the draft template and
aide memoire.
How the evidence from the annual review is matched against the
logframe
6. Agreed programme documentation sets out that, because Girl Hub is an
innovation, the initial programmatic logic should be re-visited at the same
time as the first review process. This is underway, but a fully revised
1
logical framework (logframe) is not yet concluded. Therefore, this annual
review assessed evidence against the initial (draft) logframe outputs and
logical theory.
7. The initial logical theory is that change for girls and young women will be
achieved by helping people who have power over resources to include
girls’ opinions in their decision-making, helping girls and champions of girls
influence those power-holders and making sure anyone who wants up-tothe-minute knowledge can get it.
Achieving these three changes will
result in developing country decision-makers doing more for girls and
doing it better. This will help girls have more assets (in the widest sense),
being empowered and realising their rights.
8. In the annual review template, details of progress towards outputs made
during the period covered by this review is recorded against initial outputs
as follows:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
Rwanda data is provided against Kenya indicators. This is because
Kenya appears in programme documentation as one of two
expected initial start-up countries. A postponed start-up is agreed.
In practice, Rwanda is one of the two initial start-up countries
“Partners” in output 1 refers only to actors beyond the DFID/Nike
Foundation partnership. Influence on DFID corporate processes is
documented in output 3
Output 2 includes information that is broader than “in country
coalitions”, covering individual civil society organisations (CSOs)
and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), plus informal actors
outside government, such as religious leaders
Output 3 records all progress related to knowledge or
communications. Indicator 1 (worldwide) covers progress related to
DFID corporate processes and other donors. Indicator 2
(developing country experts) includes leaders (e.g. President
Kagame). Indicator 3 (girls) covers all results from girls’
participation, not mentioned elsewhere.
Strategic importance of Girl Hub
9. This partnership is strategically important as a contribution to taking
forward DFID’s commitment to gender equality. This partnership brings a
specific focus on adolescent girls. Scaling up delivery is also a key
component of the partnership, which will play a part in DFID’s strategic
focus ensuring results on the ground.
10. For Nike Foundation, Girl Hub provides the strategic opportunity to test
the validity of Nike Foundation’s proposition for development; that
adolescent girls are often invisible, but are the most likely agents of
change in raising the standard of living in the developing world (the girl
effect.)
2
11. The combination of DFID and Nike Foundation is intended to make
strategic use of the different strengths of each partner to achieve the girl
effect at scale. Nike Foundation argue that the girl effect begins when
experience of what works on a small scale is converted into getting the
same results at large scale. They argue that, once this scale is achieved,
girls will lead the way to change across their community and society. DFID
and Nike Foundation have identified that working together will move pilot
success into delivery at scale. This will enable the partnership to test how
this contributes to achieving change for all adolescent girls in a society.
Examples of this type of change include shifting norms towards later age
of marriage, or routine access to health checks for adolescents. Nike
Foundation understands, from its pilots, how to get local level change for
girls. Nike Foundation also has the communications expertise relevant to
amplifying change that is beginning to happen, so that whole societies are
reached. DFID understands the ‘missing middle’ of how to support the shift
from local level change to change at scale.
12. The partnership is a catalyst for drawing development resources into an
expanded and extended Girl Hub approach. Other foundations, bilateral
donors (USAID) and multilateral agencies (World Bank) have already
expressed interest in the potential contribution Girl Hub will make to better
development results for girls and their communities and societies. This
catalytic impact of the partnership will remain strategically important, if Girl
Hub is able to define coherent institutional arrangements to enable funds
to flow to Girl Hub from multiple sources (within DFID or from other
donors).
Overall characteristics of progress in 2010
13. Girl Hub has already demonstrated success in getting leadership-level
buy-in for testing the hypothesis that girls hold a key part of the answer to
development. One example is President Kagame’s decision to raise
adolescent girls’ health issues at the September 2010 MDG Summit,
following detailed meetings with Girl Hub. Another example is the shift in
thinking by Rwandan Ministry of Health decision-makers, that the
adolescent health 12+ programme should conceptualised at a national
scale from the outset. The Girl Hub approach has also resonated with
DFID leadership thinking for how to advance gender equality, positively
contributing to DFID’s gender visioning process. Girl Hub contributed by
making adolescent girls a specific focus in this thinking. The Girl Hub
model for developing new strategic thinking, i.e. pulling together top
leadership in a dynamic and energising process, also contributed to
results.
14. Girl Hub has responded to demand from across DFID, including central
processes. As envisaged in the initial programme documentation, this has
led to Girl Hub now being in a position to define more precisely outputs
and purpose. This is reflected in the current process to update the logical
framework.
3
15. The partnership between DFID and Nike Foundation envisages DFID as a
key channel for delivering change for girls at scale. DFID demand for
support from Girl Hub has been high and has absorbed available Girl Hub
capacity. Following the UK change of government, 2010 has been a very
distinctive year for DFID. This has resulted in Girl Hub allocating
considerable resources to influencing DFID corporate, centrally managed
processes.
16. In this period, building blocks have been put in place that indicate Girl Hub
is adequately positioned for 2011 to accelerate delivery and reassert its
focus on country level results for girls. These building blocks include initial
staff in post in Rwanda and northern Nigeria, Girl Hub premises ready in
Rwanda and negotiations to establish Girl Hub Ethiopia well advanced. In
northern Nigeria, progress has been limited, with Girl Hub in the early days
of defining a clearly distinctive added value, beyond what DFID achieves
through its own programming. Output level results in 2010 at country level
have mainly been achieved in Rwanda.
Characteristics of progress in 2010 on Output 1:
Partners have increased capacity to integrate girls into programmes &
policies
17. The first Girl Hub overseas staff member (DFID secondee) took up post in
Rwanda from June 2010. Staff in DFID country offices and Nike
Foundation staff in Oregon commented on remarkable achievement in a
short time. Progress was helped by the offer from the Imbuto Foundation
(chairperson is the First Lady) to provide temporary office space. This also
helped with profile and political access. Girl Hub was also able to build on
existing relationships between DFID and the Ministry of Health. The
evolving model for achieving change is based on direct Girl Hub
engagement at national level with a sector ministry. For example, Girl Hub
facilitated workshops with girls have demonstrated to Rwandan decisionmakers that girls have meaningful opinions, that make a relevant
contribution to consultation on new national programming (see review
template output 1).
18. In Nigeria, the Girl Hub staff member took up post in October 2010 and is
based in DFID’s Kano office. Initial scoping recommended that Girl Hub
should not establish a high profile in Nigeria (scoping study report, May
2010, section 4). The model for achieving change is therefore to influence
state governments by playing a think-tank role, primarily to influence DFIDfunded State Level Programmes (SLPs). These SLPs are already
underway, have established links with state governments and will deliver
at scale. Direct Girl Hub delivery will be through informal actors – religious
leaders and girl hawkers (see review template, output 2).
19. In Ethiopia, the Girl Hub leadership team and DFID Ethiopia staff have
identified two opportunities; (i) to establish a Girl Hub in Addis Ababa and
4
(ii) to ensure that a successful pilot on girls’ marriage, Berhane Hewan,
progresses to deliver at scale. The pilot has involved the Government of
Ethiopia (federal level Ministry of Youth and Sport and regional Youth
Bureau). Preparations in 2010 will enable delivery from 2011. he scale of
ambition is to integrate girls in the Government of Ethiopia's current
National Growth and Transformation Plan (2010/11 to 2014/15 (see review
template output 1).
Characteristics of progress in 2010 Output 2:
In-country coalitions promoting rights of girls are better able to
influence decision-makers
20. Girl Hub activity in 2010 has involved contact with a diverse range of nonstate actors – who are not operating as coalitions. In Rwanda, initial
scoping has not yet produced conclusions about prioritisation of Girl Hub
efforts with civil society. However, being initially hosted in the offices of the
First Lady’s organisation, the Imbuto Foundation, enabled Girl Hub staff to
help that organisation move towards a clearer results focus (see review
template output 2). In Nigeria, the conclusion from initial scoping, that
religious leaders are a key focus, continues to guide prioritisation. The
focus is now on non-state actors that can influence the situation of girl
informal street traders (see review template output 2).
21. Girl Hub will also make decisions on which relationships are a priority by
assessing which organisations, groups, coalitions etc develop girls as
leaders of change, as this is a premise of the girl effect.
Characteristics of progress in 2010 Output 3:
Cutting-edge knowledge and information being increasingly accessed
and used
22. DFID staff acknowledge and value Girl Hub expertise in communications,
giving examples of useful country level contributions and being aware of
key Nike Foundation products, especially the girl effect video. DFID staff
praise Girl Hub’s combination of written and visual reporting. For example,
State of Nation reports will include accompanying DVDs which document
girls’ opinions (also see review template outputs 1 and 2). Based on
experience in 2010, Nike Foundation leadership underline the importance
of Girl Hub enabling general DFID staff, advisory staff and management to
strengthen core skills and understanding of communications.
23. Girl Hub’s expertise in knowledge about adolescent girls is recognised
and appreciated by DFID staff. DFID Country Office staff gave examples
of drawing on Girl Hub knowledge to inform their Bilateral Aid Review
(BAR) offers and operational planning. For example, DFID Ethiopia
introduced a focus on adolescent girls in their BAR offer, drawing together
existing successful pilot work and a strategic ambition to change the age
of girls’ marriage across the country (also see output 1). The BAR team
5
assessed the gender review of all BAR offers, commissioned by Girl Hub,
as very effective. This complemented DFID inputs available to the Steering
Group, by providing a detailed gender analysis from an informed and
external perspective.
24. Girl Hub staff see the location and style of Girl Hub offices as an
important influence on increasing access to knowledge. For example,
drop-in visits from decision-makers in USAID led to negotiations for
collaboration (see review template output 3). In Rwanda, girls helped
design new offices, which will increase communications hardware, by
including radio and magazine editing facilities.
Experience in 2010 and institutional arrangements
25. Experience in 2010 has increased DFID, Nike Foundation and Girl Hub
understanding of the practical challenges of working across the public
and private sector. Each organisation’s systems and decision-making are
very different. For example, this has meant that Girl Hub has faced a
challenge in identifying how best to receive funds from different DFID
sources (centre, country offices). Mechanisms for Girl Hub using DFID
services (e.g. office space, security assessments) have also had to be
negotiated.
26. All partners identified positive differences. DFID processes were
generally characterised as slower, with more decision-making steps. DFID
staff characterised the Nike approach as bringing willingness to think of an
idea, try it and adapt (“instant evolution”) and thought DFID could learn
from this. Nike Foundation staff characterised DFID’s approach as robust,
backed up by strong monitoring and evaluation. They saw this as
important for Girl Hub operational effectiveness.
27. To deliver its ambition, Girl Hub needs strategic leadership management
of operations, social analysis of girls’ situations, strategic understanding of
communications, plus the financial and administrative support to be
operational at country level. Achieving this scale and scope has two
implications for human resources. Girl Hub staff numbers need to be high
enough to cover the workload and Girl Hub staff expertise needs to cover
this range of different skills. This applies for Girl Hub in London and Girl
Hub in focal countries.
Recommendations
28. The logic of the girl effect should continue to inform decisions as Girl Hub
becomes operational. Girl Hub needs to work not only on moving from
delivery at local level to at scale, but also to drive forward scaled up
change into social change. Work at both these levels needs to be taken
forward simultaneously. Even in the early days of strategising and delivery,
Girl Hub should not focus solely on ensuring delivery from pilot to at-scale.
6
29. The priority for 2011 should be accelerated delivery at country level.
30. The original focus at country level should inform Girl Hub management
choices, if deciding between supporting DFID country programmes and
DFID central processes. The experience in 2010 (of allocating about half
of Girl Hub staff time to supporting DFID central processes) should not be
taken as the norm.
31. The revised logical framework should accommodate the different models
for delivering results in Rwanda, northern Nigeria and Ethiopia. Therefore,
logframe outputs should no longer be expressed in terms of specific actors
(partners, coalitions), as partners will be different in each model and
context.
32. It will still be important to identify which partners are key for delivering
specific outputs in each context. This can be done by defining indicators
that identify the different actors. Girls’ contributions as leaders of change
should be measured through appropriate indicators.
33. Girl Hub should help general DFID staff, advisers and management
develop a more nuanced understanding of communications. The Girl Hub
logical framework should unpack the different elements of communications
and their links to achieving Girl Hub results. Girl Hub should ensure that
communications products are recognised as a means to an end
(communications for what?), rather than an end in their own right.
34. DFID and Girl Hub should ensure that Girl Hub knowledge is tapped in
ways that retain the benefits of an external think-tank role, when
contributing to DFID corporate processes (such as the Bilateral Aid
Review). This think-tank function combines being a source of research and
evidence, providing external perspectives, expertise and human resources
to address specific tasks and acting as advocates for specific policy and
programming priorities related to adolescent girls.
35. Decision-making on solutions to differences between DFID and Nike
Foundation systems should be guided by getting the most efficient solution
for Girl Hub operations, within existing systems. DFID (Equity and Rights
team) should take forward discussions on most efficient funding flow from
different DFID sources, within existing systems
36. Girl Hub should ensure that it draws on DFID’s experience of monitoring
and evaluation. Girl Hub should do this as part of revising the logframe.
37. Girl Hub staff numbers should be increased in focus countries and in
London. The types of expertise should cover the range of skills needed for
strategic management through to practical implementation. Nike
Foundation should submit a request for increased funding to DFID (Equity
and Rights team).
7