Strategic Planning for Development Programmes Training Course

Participants can assemble an evidence base that supports defensible programme priorities.

• Evidence hierarchy for programme planning: administrative, survey, evaluation and qualitative sources
• Secondary data review using source credibility, recency and disaggregation criteria
• Problem statements separating symptoms, causes, consequences and affected populations
• Trend analysis identifies changes in needs, services, markets and institutions
• Data gaps prioritised by decision importance, feasibility and ethical risk
• Evidence briefs communicate findings, limitations and planning implications concisely

Participants can map stakeholders and design participation approaches appropriate to programme decisions.

• Stakeholder mapping assesses interest, influence, legitimacy and potential contribution
• Power-interest grids identify engagement approaches for diverse stakeholder groups
• Rights-holder analysis distinguishes duty bearers, claimants and accountability relationships
• Participation plans define purpose, representation, feedback and decision authority
• Community consultation methods address exclusion, language, accessibility and safeguarding
• Conflict-sensitive engagement identifies tensions, gatekeepers and representation risks

Participants can assess political and institutional factors affecting programme feasibility and change.

• Political economy analysis examines actors, incentives, institutions and power relations
• Formal mandates compared with informal rules shaping service delivery decisions
• Actor mapping identifies champions, blockers, brokers and potential coalition members
• Institutional capacity assessment reviews authority, capability, resources and legitimacy
• Rent-seeking and elite capture risks considered within programme design choices
• Feasibility judgements test political support, implementation capacity and timing

Participants can define priority problems and select strategic areas of programme focus.

• Problem trees distinguish root causes, direct causes and observable effects
• Causal analysis tests evidence behind relationships rather than assumed connections
• Equity analysis identifies groups facing unequal access, outcomes and decision power
• Priority-setting criteria weigh severity, tractability, mandate and comparative advantage
• Strategic focus statements specify population, geography, issue and intended change
• Exclusion decisions document activities outside the programme's strategic scope

Participants can construct a Theory of Change with explicit pathways, assumptions and evidence.

• Theory of Change pathways connect interventions, outputs, outcomes and impacts
• Backward mapping starts from long-term change and identifies necessary conditions
• Assumptions stated as testable conditions beyond direct programme control
• Causal links supported through research evidence, evaluation findings and local knowledge
• Outcome statements describe observable changes in behaviour, practice or systems
• Visual diagrams communicate pathways, actors, assumptions and feedback loops

Participants can compare strategic options and make transparent portfolio choices.

• Strategic options generated from evidence, Theory of Change and stakeholder priorities
• Decision matrices score relevance, feasibility, impact potential and resource demand
• Comparative advantage assessed through mandate, capability, access and partner relationships
• Portfolio mapping compares interventions by strategic value and delivery risk
• Resource allocation scenarios expose trade-offs between depth, reach and quality
• Prioritisation records document decisions, rejected options and underlying assumptions

Participants can translate strategic priorities into coherent results frameworks and Logical Frameworks.

• Results chains align activities, outputs, outcomes and impact statements
• Logical Framework matrices define objectives, indicators, sources and assumptions
• Vertical logic tests whether planned outputs plausibly contribute to outcomes
• Horizontal logic links indicators, verification sources and critical assumptions
• Outcome indicators measure change without confusing attribution and contribution
• Results framework quality checks identify gaps, duplication and weak causal logic

Participants can design a proportionate MEAL system for strategic programme management.

• Indicator reference sheets define measures, formulas, disaggregation and collection frequency
• Baseline plans establish starting conditions, sampling needs and data quality controls
• MEAL plans assign monitoring, evaluation, accountability and learning responsibilities
• Data quality assessments test validity, reliability, timeliness, precision and integrity
• Feedback mechanisms capture complaints, suggestions and community response commitments
• Learning questions focus evidence collection on priority management uncertainties

Participants can select delivery models and sequence interventions for realistic implementation.

• Delivery models compare direct implementation, partnerships, grants and technical assistance
• Intervention sequencing accounts for readiness, dependencies, seasons and institutional capacity
• Pilot-to-scale pathways define adaptation criteria, replication conditions and funding triggers
• Geographic targeting combines need, access, vulnerability and delivery feasibility
• Service delivery standards specify minimum quality, referral and supervision arrangements
• Implementation assumptions tested against staffing, procurement and partner capacity

Participants can develop partnership arrangements that support accountable local leadership and delivery.

• Partnership mapping identifies local actors, mandates, capacities and relationship histories
• Partner due diligence reviews governance, financial controls, safeguarding and operational capability
• Localisation commitments translated into decision rights, funding terms and capacity support
• Memoranda of understanding define roles, information sharing and dispute resolution
• Consortium structures clarify lead agency duties, coordination and sub-award management
• Partnership performance reviews assess mutual commitments, delivery quality and learning

Participants can align programme ambition, budgets, resource requirements and funding strategies.

• Costed workplans connect activities, inputs, timing and responsible budget holders
• Activity-based budgeting estimates personnel, procurement, partner and operating costs
• Unit cost analysis tests efficiency assumptions for planned service delivery
• Funding gap analysis compares confirmed income, pipeline prospects and programme commitments
• Donor mapping matches programme components with funding priorities and eligibility rules
• Budget narratives explain cost drivers, value for money and resource trade-offs

Participants can prepare risk treatments and strategic responses to plausible programme disruptions.

• Risk registers assess likelihood, impact, ownership, controls and residual exposure
• Risk appetite statements distinguish acceptable, tolerable and unacceptable programme risks
• Scenario planning develops responses to political, financial and climate uncertainty
• Early warning indicators signal conditions requiring management action or escalation
• Business continuity measures protect critical services, information and staff safety
• Contingency triggers specify decisions, authorities, resources and communication actions

Participants can integrate safeguarding, ethical practice and conflict sensitivity into programme strategy.

• Do No Harm analysis identifies programme effects on dividers and connectors
• Safeguarding risk assessments address sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment
• Informed consent procedures protect participants during assessment, monitoring and evaluation
• Data protection controls cover collection, storage, access, retention and disposal
• Referral pathways define survivor-centred responses, confidentiality and external services
• Ethical review criteria address power, incentives, privacy and foreseeable harm

Participants can establish governance structures that support timely, accountable programme decisions.

• Governance structures define oversight, management, technical advice and partner representation
• RACI matrices assign responsibility, accountability, consultation and information rights
• Terms of reference specify meeting purpose, membership, cadence and decisions
• Decision rights clarify authorities for scope changes, budgets and risk acceptance
• Escalation protocols define thresholds, reporting routes and response timeframes
• Management information packs combine performance, finance, risk and learning evidence

Participants can use evidence and structured review processes to adapt programme strategy responsibly.

• Adaptive management cycles connect monitoring evidence, reflection, decisions and action
• Pause-and-reflect sessions test assumptions, delivery quality and contextual changes
• Decision logs record evidence, options, approvals and follow-up responsibilities
• After-action reviews identify causes, lessons and corrective actions after key events
• Strategy review triggers distinguish routine adjustment from formal programme redesign
• Knowledge products package transferable lessons for partners, donors and leadership

Participants can communicate programme strategy clearly to donors, boards, partners and communities.

• Strategic narratives connect evidence, problem analysis, choices and intended results
• Executive summaries communicate programme rationale, investment case and delivery confidence
• Donor alignment matrices compare strategic priorities, compliance requirements and funding windows
• Visual results summaries present pathways, indicators, milestones and governance arrangements
• Board papers frame decisions, options, risks and recommended actions succinctly
• Communication plans tailor messages for communities, partners, government and funders

Participants can build, review and present a complete strategic development programme plan.

• Evidence synthesis defines the priority problem, population, geography and strategic context
• Theory of Change presents pathways, assumptions, stakeholders and intended outcomes
• Results framework specifies objectives, indicators, baselines and verification sources
• Implementation roadmap integrates sequencing, partnerships, governance and resource requirements
• Risk treatment plan addresses scenarios, safeguards, contingencies and escalation thresholds
• Peer review tests strategic coherence, feasibility, accountability and donor readiness