1. Proposal Preparation & Review Process
Keith Hansen
AIDS Campaign Team for Africa
May 2003

2. Proposal Preparation & Review Process
Basic proposal components for community-based organizations
Key organizational capacity questions
Issues identified in the site visits in Kenya & Ethiopia and in survey responses from FBO workshop participants
NAP perspective on proposal preparation & review process

3. (Annex 6.1 from Generic Operations Manual)
CBO Application Form
(Annex 6.1 from Generic Operations Manual)
  To be translated into local languages where necessary
1.0 General Information on the Project
organization name and information, location, & contact persons
2.1 Declaration
endorsement of committee members, organization registration confirmation, previous experience  
3.0 Project Description
objectives, problems to be addressed, expected results, activities planned
4.0 Project identification
project rationale & identification process, support received or needed in proposal preparation, other funding sources, project committee composition, community involvement, number and kinds of beneficiaries

4. CBO Application Form (2)
5.0 Project Implementation 
Implementation process, training/technical assistance needed, schedule of activities and costs, results and expenditures to date
6.0 Project Reporting
Responsible party, reporting capacity/experience
7.0 Community Contribution
Financial, material, labour
8.1 Project Budget
Community contribution, other sources, total funding requested, budget breakdown
8.2 Audit
Willingness to undergo independent financial audit

5. Organization Capacity Assessment Checklist
From the Generic Operations Manual for National HIV/AIDS Programs, Annex 6.1
Management Capacity: What is the capacity of the
organization to plan, manage and supervise project activities?
Beneficiary Involvement: To what extent has the target
community been involved in identifying their needs and
planning for implementation?
Gender: Has the involvement of youth, women and men
been planned for in the proposed project?
Collaboration: What other stakeholders in the community
have been involved in either the planning or the implementation
of the proposed activities?

6. Organization Capacity Assessment Checklist (2)
Budgeting: What proportion of the budget has been
assigned to direct activity costs relative to overhead? Does
this seem reasonable given the planned activities?
Community contribution: What is the community’s
contribution to the overall budget? How has this been
demonstrated? Have other sources of support been sought?
Accounting: Does financial responsibility rest with more
than two officials? Is the larger group involved? Does
the organization have internal controls to ensure resources
are used for agreed purposes?
Overall comments: e.g., organization’s past experience in
HIV/AIDS or similar activities.

7. What has worked well?
Participation of FBOs in the MAP-preparation and in the National HIV/AIDS Policy Dialogue (Worked well in some countries, less so in others.)
National HIV/AIDS Program provision of support in proposal development (Worked well in some countries, less so in others.):
-Distribution of proposal guidelines
-Training on proposal development
-Feedback on submitted proposals
-Timely proposal review

8. What has worked well? (2)
Collaboration with other faith colleagues locally and abroad on proposal development
Use of external consultants to support proposal preparation
Ability to build on previous organizational experience with proposal/program development

9. Obstacles
Lack of information about the availability of NAP funding to civil society organizations
Lack of experience in preparing project proposals, particularly for small FBOs
Lack of clear guidelines from the NAP on proposal development
Must be stressed that none of the NAPs provide information currently about their (NAP) funding to CSOs.
Also needs to be made clear that things that are obstacles in some countries are actually working well in other countries, e.g. the provision of guidelines on proposal development. Also, in some cases, the NAPs did not provide guidelines initially, but they have subsequently begun to provide guidelines and/or templates.

10. Obstacles (2)
Ceilings for funding (as established by some countries) were not provided before applications were solicited by the NAP
Large differential between requested and approved amount with little or no explanation from the NAP
Maximum 12-month project span (varies by country)
Proposal format differs substantially from those used by other donors
Gambia has no limit on maximum project length.

11. Perspectives from National HIV/AIDS Program Staff
Communications strategy for civil society organizations (CSOs)
Elements of a strong proposal
Proposal review process
Common problems with proposals from CSOs including faith-based organizations
Strategy for improving quality of proposals and of proposal review process