Prototype — every organisation, score and review below is illustrative sample data, not a real assessment.
Arua · Maternal & newborn care
Antenatal and newborn care inside and around refugee settlements.
Operates two static clinics and a mobile antenatal team serving both refugee and host-community women, deliberately kept at a 60/40 split to reduce local tension. Reporting is strong because of humanitarian funder requirements; community feedback structures are newer.
How the organisation is rooted in the community it serves, and whether its work holds together as a credible theory of change.
1.Community voice & beneficiary feedback
6.0Suggestion boxes and two focus groups submitted; no systematic survey cycle yet.
2.Local leadership & staff representation
7.0Clinical lead and most staff are from the region; senior management includes two expatriates.
3.Theory of change coherence
9.0Detailed logic model with four years of antenatal coverage and birth outcome data.
4.Transparency & financial accountability
9.0Audited accounts for three consecutive years plus published annual reports.
5.Adaptive capacity & learning culture
6.0Reports on adaptation to funding cuts, though without a formal learning review process.
What a donor's money reaches, who it reaches, and what funding history the organisation already carries.
6.Cost per impacted woman or child
8.0Unit costs derived from audited expenditure and verified attendance registers.
7.Demographic focus & vulnerability specificity
9.0Refugee and host-community split documented with vulnerability screening.
8.Economic factor impacted
7.0Transport and referral cost relief quantified for a subset of clients.
9.Number of previous donor relationships
9.0Six named funders including two multilaterals, with grant periods and references.
10.Types of previous donor support received
8.0Restricted, unrestricted and technical assistance all documented.
Compare with
Gulu
Kampala