Implementation

Measures associated with the presence of a detailed work plan can be collected as: binary data (e.g. presence or absence), OR categorical data using a tool such as the Conservation Audit Tool or the Conservation Standards Scorecard. Work plans should also capture and budget activities for monitoring and operational needs. 

This indicator assesses how much of the work plan has the required staffing capacity secured, i.e. the proportion of actions with identified implementing actors that have the skills and experience needed to carry out those actions. Teams may choose whether to assess this indicator on the strategy- or activity-level depending on the level of detail required. Ideally activities would be child factors of strategies, i.e. one could assess the number of activities (for a given strategy) with the required capacity. 

This indicator assesses how much of the work plan has the required resources secured (e.g. equipment, vehicles, technology, software etc.). Funding is excluded from this indicator, as it is covered below. Teams may choose whether to assess this indicator on the strategy- or activity-level depending on the level of detail required. Ideally activities would be child factors of strategies, i.e. one could assess the number of activities (for a given strategy) with the required resources.

This indicator assesses how much of the work plan has the required funding secured. Teams may choose whether to assess this indicator on the strategy- or activity-level depending on the level of detail required. Ideally activities would be child factors of strategies, i.e. one could assess the number of activities (for a given strategy) with the required finances available. 

To assess the question: "Are we doing what we said we would do?" compare staff time spent on activities that fall within the work plan to staff time spent on activities that fall outside of the work plan. As an alternative (or additional indicator), teams could measure the amount of funding that is being spent on planned activities compared to unplanned. [NOTE: It is difficult to anticipate all the activities required to deliver an intermediate result at the start of implementation, and there will be changing contexts and unforeseen needs. If the work plan is broken down quarterly it may help manage implementation efficiency.]

Overall time spent implementing the plan. This is a useful indicator to share with other teams implementing similar projects, and could be disaggregated by strategy type. 

Teams may wish to disaggregate by the type of expense, e.g. is the expense for fieldwork or administrative purposes? This is a useful indicator to share with other teams implementing similar projects. 

Priorities, frequencies and methods (or means) of communication should be defined in the operational plan. Measure the degree to which this communications plan is being implemented. 

Collecting baseline data early on in (or even before) the implementation phase could help you test your methods. If you cannot establish baselines within the first few months of a project, then most likely you need to review the methods or the indicators. This indicator allows teams to assess whether their project indicators and methods are feasible and appropriate for effective adaptive management. 

Degree to which project goals and objectives have been scaled up following successful implementation. For example, if a team is initially working with landowners covering 20,000 ha to implement Climate-Smart farming techniques, and then later (following project success) decides to include more farmers and scale up to 35,000 ha, the degree of scale up is equal to 75%. 

Exit criteria (the defined requirements that need to be met for a project team to end involvement at a project site) should be defined in the operational plan. This indicator assesses how close a project is to reaching those criteria, and ensuring sustainability of the project's achievements beyond the team's involvement. 

Methods & Details