Docstoc

The Task

Document Sample
The Task Powered By Docstoc
					                         Yezingane Network:

                                  Report of a
   rapid network governance and management systems review
                                         &
                     proposals for the 2010/11 period



                                   30 October 2009




Submitted to: Yezingane Network Working Group
Prepared by: Warren Banks, Organisation Development Practitioner
Contents

Executive Summary: recommendations & decision-points ........................................................... 3

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6

2. The Task............................................................................................................................................ 6

3. Motivation for this work ................................................................................................................. 7

4. The process of this consultancy..................................................................................................... 8

5. The scope of the task: framing the issues and questions ........................................................... 8

6. Some theory: basis for organisation and network design ........................................................ 10

7. A rapid review of the Yezingane Network ................................................................................ 11
   7.1. What is Yezingane Network?................................................................................................ 12
             Core process .................................................................................................................... 12
             Values and principles underpinning network functioning ....................................... 15
   7.2. Strengths .................................................................................................................................. 16
   7.3. Challenges, issues and gaps ................................................................................................... 19

8. Proposals and options for the future .......................................................................................... 23
   8.1 Structure and Identity issues and options ............................................................................ 21
   8.2. Alternatives for network functioning: degree of formal structure; degree of
   participation .................................................................................................................................... 26
   8.3 Adaptations to ToRs of Yezingane Network structures ................................................... 28
            Secretariat ........................................................................................................................ 28
            Executive ......................................................................................................................... 30
            Working Group .............................................................................................................. 32
   8.4 Defining who a member is ..................................................................................................... 33
   8.5 Election system ........................................................................................................................ 31

9. Next steps ....................................................................................................................................... 32

Appendix 1: Yezingane Network Values and Principles .............................................................. 37
Appendix 2: Secretariat TOR ........................................................................................................... 38
Appendix 3: Executive ToR ............................................................................................................. 40
Appendix 4: Working Group ToR .................................................................................................. 40
Appendix 5: Nomination and election process (2007) ................................................................. 42




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                                                            2
Executive Summary: recommendations & decision-points

This brief review has focused on the general functioning, governance and management of the Yezingane
Network. It has shown Yezingane Network to be in a good state of organisational health in the run up to
elections of new SANAC representatives in 2010. At the same time, several questions have arisen which
require strategic decisions from Network leadership. These include questions around:
 balancing representivity and effectiveness;
 clarifying the role of membership;
 deciding how to organise at provincial, district and local levels;
 selecting appropriate election processes;
 clarifying the relationships and accountabilities between Yezingane Network structures;
 and so on.

As such, Yezingane Network‟s Working Group (WG) finds itself at an appropriate moment to reflect on
the Network‟s current functioning and to take some decisions about the future.

This summary focuses on the recommendations and decision-points arising from this review. It is
intended to facilitate Working Group member‟s engagement with the whole document, not to take the place of
such engagement. For a brief review of the Network‟s current functioning (core process; strengths and
weaknesses; etc.) see Section 7 of the main report.

>> Maintain the current form/structure and Yezingane Network’s
identity as a network
Section 8.1 argues that a relatively flexible network form remains the most appropriate
vehicle for Yezingane Network‟s work. At the same time it is recommended that the
Working Group explore their long term vision of Yezingane Network: doing this would
serve to further clarify their thinking about the nature, purpose and future of the network.

>>      Organise at provincial and local levels, but do not prematurely
        create additional structures
Section 8.2 suggests that Yezingane Network‟s current strategy in relation to provincial level
organising should be continued with increased emphasis and coherence. That is, organise
members at provincial level and local levels using existing SANAC and other structures (e.g.
Provincial AIDS Councils and District AIDS Councils), but do not form Provincial Working
Groups or other structures until the energy, will and need to do so emerges clearly from
members working at these levels.
Working Group members could play a key role in developing a strategy for this and making
it a reality.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                               3
>> Adapt and further develop the ToR of Yezingane Network
structures
Section 8.3 outlines a set of detailed recommendations for additions and changes to the ToR
of Yezingane Network structures (Working Group, Executive and Secretariat). These
recommendations cannot be usefully summarised, save to say that their goal is to bring
greater clarity and coherence across the various ToRs. It is recommended that the Secretariat
and Working engage with these recommendations and consider their implications before
adopting them.

Some specific and more substantive recommendations in this section are the following:
       Expand the number of elected members of the Executive (to 3) to increase
          the elected leadership base, emphasise the importance of memberships‟ role in
          selecting and mandating leaders, and further empower the Executive by
          encouraging the elected group to function more consciously as a leadership team.
       Phased change to the procedure by which the Working Group is
          appointed. In the longer term, the WG would be appointed at the Summit; for
          the upcoming Summit a simpler procedure of confirming current WG
          membership is proposed. The aim here is to support the WG to fulfil its role as
          an effective and representative structure.
       Develop the Code of Conduct that is referred to in all of the ToRs. The
          material in Appendix 1 and the values and principles outlined on page 13 will be
          of value to the WG in engaging in this task. In order for the Code of Conduct to
          be a living and practically useful document it will need to define the agreed values
          and principles in terms of behaviours and practices. Broader membership should
          be involved in this process.
       Include an additional clause in the ToRs of all structures requiring annual
          self-assessment processes to review their own functioning against the
          ToR, Code of Conduct and strategies/plans. The Secretariat will support this
          process. Such self-assessments could usefully precede the annual Summit: in this
          way, reflections on the previous year could feed into Summit design.

>>      Decide on clear criteria for membership
Section 8.4 suggests that the WG clarify the boundaries of the system by stating clearly who
is eligible for membership (e.g. organisational and individual membership?). Some options
and ideas are presented in this section.

>> Further engaging members in Yezingane Network’s work:
orientation; database development
Clarifying the boundaries of the system and the rights and responsibilities of membership
should make it easier to further develop Yezingane Network‟s database of members‟
interests and competencies, and facilitate the process of engaging members more actively in
the work of the Network. Establishing procedures for orientating new members (which
would include signing the Code of Conduct – see above) should also assist in bringing


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                    4
members on board in a more active and engaged manner. At the same time, procedures for
orientating members to Yezingane Network and SANAC structures (WG, TTTs, etc.) could
also be developed.

>>      Election process for the Executive
Section 8.5 recommends that Yezingane Network use its existing election system during the
coming transition to a new Executive. Some recommendations are made for the further
development of criteria for nominating Executive members. See also the box on p.28 for a
recommendation related to continuity of leadership.
In the longer term, it is recommended that the next round of elections (2012/13) be held at
the Summit; this should increase the likelihood of a robust and highly participatory election
process, and enhance the transparency of the elections.

Some considerations for scheduling this work

Assuming the above recommendations are accepted in whole or in part, the following steps
might be involved:
Pre-Summit 2009:
        Agree on changes to ToRs of Yezingane Network structures
        Agree on current election procedure and confirm criteria
        Engage with the question of membership and boundaries – prepare a proposal to
           share at the Summit

At or around the Summit:
         Present key changes to ToRs of structures
         Present the election procedure and criteria for the 2010/11 election of Yezingane
           Network representatives to SANAC
         Confirm current WG and appoint additional members as necessary
         Begin (or agree on a procedure for) consultation around the formulation of a
           Code of Conduct
         Engage with the question of membership and boundaries
         Test members‟ will to organise at provincial/district levels (preferably around
           emerging issues/content areas); identify interested members who could act as
           focal/link people at these levels

Medium term (3-6 months):
       Finalise membership criteria
       Finalise Code of Conduct; members sign Code of Conduct
       Design and introduce orientation procedures for membership and Yezingane
          Network structures
       Orientation of new Executive and WG members

Ongoing and longer term:
       Network development: organising at provincial, district and local levels
       Membership database development



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                     5
            Develop agreed procedures for formulating Network positions and for dealing
             with conflict/deadlock
            Visioning and ongoing strategic thinking




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                6
1. Introduction
The purpose of this report is to reflect the current situation as regards Yezingane Network –
with a special focus on its governance and management – and to provide guidance as the
network experiences change in elected leadership in the coming months.

The report is not the result of an exhaustive study, but rather aims to reflect back a snapshot
of the current reality and to outline a range of options for the future and explore their
probable consequences. It is intended as a support to the Yezingane Network Working
Group‟s (WG) decision making process: key questions to guide the decision process are
framed and explored in the text.

The content and analyses in this report were informed by a perusal of Yezingane Network
documentation and a series of interviews with Yezingane Network stakeholders and others
with experience of network leadership and management in the children‟s sector and related
civil society sectors. The analytical lens which has been applied is informed by the author‟s
organisation development practice which is, in turn, underpinned by open systems theory
and Gestalt systems development theory.

The analysis and recommendations found here are also limited by the fact that the author
has had relatively little direct contact with Yezingane Network; this document therefore
inevitably reflects a partial picture of the network, though it is hoped, a helpful one. The
responsibility for engaging with, testing and using this material in a collective decision-
making process lies with the Yezingane Network Working Group, this document‟s main
audience.

Any errors of fact or interpretation are the author‟s.


2. The Task
The outputs and outcomes of this assignment were framed as follows during the contracting
process:

        Outputs:

        A report including:
             an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Yezingane Network‟s current
               governance system;
             a summary of the guiding principles embedded in the current system and in
               Yezingane Network‟s ways of working - this material could form the basis
               for developing a code of conduct;
             proposals for alternative election systems for the election/appointment of an
               executive which enable continued efficiency and effectiveness as well as
               enhanced democracy and transparency within the network (and take into



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                     7
                 account considerations around sustainability and ongoing leadership
                 development);
                recommended amendments to the ToRs of the Secretariat, Executive and
                 Working Group; and
                an outline of next steps in the process (which could address questions of
                 representivity at provincial level, procedures for formation of the Working
                 Group, and other issues which emerge in the initial review).

    Outcomes:

            The Working Group (WG) has cogent material on which to base their decision
             about the election/appointment of SANAC plenary representatives (Yezingane
             Network Executive) for the 2010-11 period. The WG will take a decision about
             an appropriate procedure prior to the Summit in November 2009.
            The Working Group has cogent material to guide decision-making about future
             work on governance (including adapting the ToRs) and network development.

The above formulation of the task was drafted in early August 2009 and revised in early
September 2009 following the consultant‟s participation in a Working Group meeting at end
August.


3. Motivation for this work
In my understanding, Yezingane Network‟s motivation for undertaking this task at this time
is fourfold:

       Institutional change: SANAC had extended the mandate of sector representatives
        until the end of this year (2009); however, a new children‟s sector representative on
        SANAC needs to be elected for the 2010/11 period.

       The network has had one formally elected representative and two additional
        nominated people. The current representative of the Children‟s Sector on SANAC
        (who is also the Yezingane Network Chairperson, Cati Vawda), has provided
        leadership to Yezingane Network for the past two terms (5 years, since the second
        term was extended by a year). The network has known no other Chairperson. The
        other two executive members have served for a shorter period of time. Naturally
        there is some anxiety in the Working Group about the implications of the coming
        change. Inept (or simply less competent) leadership could damage the foundation
        that has been built over the past five years, and Yezingane Network seeks to avoid
        this consequence, build on its strength and continue to develop.

       Awareness that Yezingane Network is seen, by national and some international
        players, as an effective and successful network. WG members clearly wish to
        continue to function effectively and for the network to be seen as a role model of
        good practice.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                     8
        Yezingane Network is committed to good governance, both in principle and in the
         interests of fulfilling its purpose.

4.       The process of this consultancy
The steps towards producing this report were as follows:

        Consultant briefed by Shirin Motala and Meera Levine
        Reading ToRs and other background documents
        Engaging with the WG during their meeting at the end of August 2009
        Submission of a first draft/outline report; incorporating feedback from Shirin and
         Meera (late September 2009)
        Interviews with five informants identified by Yezingane Network:
             o Denise Hunt (NGO Sector of SANAC & Executive Director of The AIDS
                 Consortium)
             o Rama Naidu (Executive Director, Democracy Development Progamme; lead
                 partner/member of several democracy-related networks)
             o Shereen Usdin (Yezingane Network member; Soul City)
             o Dr Samu Dube (Women‟s Sector of SANAC; PATH)
             o Vuyiseka Dubula (General Secretary, Treatment Action Campaign)
        Submission of a draft report for engagement and further feedback (7 October 2009).
        Submission of final report (30 October 2009).

         A limitation:
         It is notable that there is little literature available on best practice (or even just on
         practice) where network governance and management is concerned. This is a
         limitation to the extent that external sources of wisdom and inspiration are thin on
         the ground. At the same time, it means that there are no definitively “right answers”
         or “truths” to limit the network‟s future choices: Yezingane Network has the
         opportunity to craft the answers that will work in its own unique circumstances and,
         at the same time contribute to the development of knowledge in this area. This
         makes it especially critical that this report is engaged with in a thorough and critical
         fashion: ultimately, an outsider cannot reliably plot a course into the future – the
         impulse for making changes to the system must arise from within for the outcomes
         to be sustainable and truly appropriate.


5.       The scope of the task:
         framing the issues and questions
Although this work has been framed with a focus on governance, it is important to look
beyond this apparently discrete area of organisational functioning. It is of limited value to
look at governance alone: governance takes place in the context of the whole organisational
system.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                          9
Governance is the oversight and fiduciary responsibility function of an organisation: it is
about ensuring that the system is managed responsibly, in line with its stated purpose, values
and strategy. Governance is separate (at least in principle) from operations and
implementation – its purpose is to hold the executive and administrative functions to
account.

For example, in a Section 21 organisation (a common form of NGO registration in South
Africa) the governance role is held by the Board – they are highest decision making body of
the organisation, in principle if not in reality. In membership-based organisations, the
membership is the highest decision making body and is collectively responsible for holding
the organisation‟s elected executive members to account for their actions and choices; a
general secretary appointed from within the executive in turn manages the secretariat (which
usually carries the administrative/operational function). In most larger membership
organisations, a selected or elected group of members forms a committee of one kind or
another to pay closer attention to the governance (and sometimes also the leadership)
function.

To a degree, the Yezingane Network Working Group, Executive and Secretariat (together)
form the governance system – all of these bodies were appointed by the original Reference
Group of the Chidren‟s Sector, and they function together to enable the whole system to
work: they perform the oversight role for each other. Although these structures have
differentiated their functions over time and continue to do so, they form a web of mutual
accountabilities that holds the system and its work together. In the process of differentiating
(e.g. framing Terms of Reference for the different structures), more clarity has emerged
about the nature of the accountabilities and reporting relationships involved. At present it
seems fair to say that the Working Group is the primary governance structure and delegates
the management (executive) and operational functions to the Executive and Secretariat.
Nevertheless, these structures function in a “porous” manner: the Secretariat is not imagined
as an unthinking implementer that carries out Executive instructions; the Executive is not
primarily the day-to-day decision maker: indeed, in the case of Yezingane Network, its
primary function has been playing the role of Yezingane Network representative on the
SANAC plenary and other SANAC structures (PIC, etc.). Further, Working Group members
sit on TTTs and other structures – the Working Group too, is engaged in the operational
and executive functions.

Many organisations could not manage this degree of interdependence, flexibility and
openness: it can result in chaos. That is what structure and hierarchy are for: they remove
ambivalence and uncertainty and provide “a place for each person and put each person in
her place”. Hierarchy has value – it reduces the energy wasted on fighting over murky
boundaries. It also limits the extent to which trust is necessary for functioning; one need
only trust the people at the top; it is their job to make the system function. Of course, at the
same time, there is a big shadow to this kind of differentiation: rigid hierarchy can reduce
response time, limit development and awareness, make relationships static, infantalise parts
of the system, and so on.

Yezingane Network however, perhaps because of its leadership‟s relatively sophisticated
understanding of relationships and process, seems to manage this ambiguity well; mutual


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   10
accountability is also in line with the system‟s values. There is little cause to introduce high
levels of hierarchy and starkly delineated structure when the system is, overall, functioning
well. The author has elected therefore to suggest relatively minor changes that would take
the differentiation process one step further by further clarifying the role of different
Yezingane Network sub-systems.

The broader question related to network governance relates to the identity and destiny of
Yezingane Network as a whole:
         Should Yezingane Network be governed primarily by the will of its members, or in line with a set of
value and        principles, or both?

Yezingane Network‟s credibility is drawn in part from the fact that it has a defined
constituency (membership), but also (at SANAC at least) from the quality of its engagement
in the Plenary, TTTs and other structures. The most commonly referred to success factor
seems to be the presence of some common, underlying values and principles which inform
all of the work of the system, and indeed its culture. This has helped Yezingane Network to
avoid the squabbles and stucknesses that characterised the early years of several other
sectors. The Children‟s Sector is not homogenous, but seems to enjoy a degree of basic
coherence not found in other civil society sectors.

To return to the italicised question above, it seems apparent that the „answer‟ must be: Both –
the will of members and the core values are both critical factors (as is a strategic insight into the constantly
changing environment). This seems congruent with the values and actual practice of the network.
The practical question then, is: How can we achieve a balance between these factors? Or
more concretely: How best can we ensure that members‟ voices are heard and seen to guide
the direct the work of the network?

In relation to these questions, there are several potential structural options, some policy changes
(changes to the ToRs for example) that could be considered, and some processes and practices
worth considering. These are discussed further in later sections this report.


6.       Some theory:
         basis for organisation and network design
In considering the governance of an organisation we enter the realm of organisation design.
A little theory and framing may be of value here.

A sustainable organisational system needs several ingredients:
   1. Members: who directly or indirectly supply material (content), energy (work,
        resources, finance, etc.) and will (direction and focus) to the system
   2. Boundaries: which define what and who is inside/outside of the system. For
        example, who can be a member and what kinds of work the system will and will not
        do. Boundaries are substantially defined by the system‟s purpose and meaning, and
        by the values and principles which underpin its practice
   3. Purposeful relationships: the relationships between system members and between
        the system and other systems in its environment define the space within which the


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                  11
       system can engage and work; these relationships also give rise to structure/form1,
       including the identification of leadership (which is hopefully credible and
       competent).
    4. Core process: the primary process through which the system does its work – how
       energy flows through the system and connects to the environment within which the
       organisation functions in order to achieve desired outcomes and fulfil purpose.
    5. Learning and change: necessary ingredients if the system is to survive and retain
       purpose and relevance in a constantly changing environment.

These are not the only elements, but they are the absolute minimum required for sustainable
organisation. The third of these elements – i.e. purposeful relationships – is our focus in this
report, but it is not constructive to consider this area in isolation. The nature of these
relationships (and the forms that arise from them, or are imposed to contain and structure
them) is strongly influenced by the other elements of organisation listed above. This report
therefore focuses on structural and relational issues, but also considers matters that may
appear not to only tangentially related to governance and management – for example:
purpose, boundaries, identity and culture.

The Yezingane Network formed organically in response to the imperative and opportunity
for engagement offered by the formation of SANAC. This organic process has thus far
resulted in the formation of a functional and apparently effective network organisation
which has begun to establish an identity independent of SANAC (reflected, for example, in
the choice to define itself as a network and call itself “Yezingane Network”, as opposed to
merely a “sector” of the National AIDS Council).

However, clear, shared understanding and awareness of the nature of the evolving system
allows greater flexibility and facilitates conscious choices about the future. This report is a
part of the process of supporting greater awareness of the system‟s current reality and
supporting this kind of conscious choice about the future. As such, it is a strategic exercise
rather than simply a matter of considering the existing structures and their interactions: such
a perspective (which was attempted in the first draft of this report) proved too limited to
inform useful recommendations for the future.


7. A rapid review of the Yezingane Network
This section contains an overview of Yezingane Network and a brief summary2 of the
strengths and weaknesses of the network. It is based on a reading of the literature and
engagements with the Working Group, the Secretariat and five informants (one of whom
1 When organisations are designed (consciously or unconsciously, or more usually, some mixture of the two) it
is common to think in terms of structure rather than relationships. This is a result of the dominant
paradigm/worldview within which most of us think. It is common practice to see the world as something
composed of blocks of matter which can be analysed into subordinate parts: an atomistic approach. However
this mode seems less than helpful when considering network organisations. A functioning network is clearly
composed primarily of relationships and flows of information and energy rather than clearly defined units and
structures whose interactions are characterised by simple transactions.
2 The Working Group and Secretariat of Yezingane Network are conscious of the key strengths and

weaknesses of the network; for this reason this section has been limited to a précis of the main issues.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                12
belongs to an organisation which is also a member of Yezingane Network), and is therefore
by no means exhaustive or authoritative. This section provides the context for the ideas and
suggestions for the future which follow.


7.1. What is Yezingane Network?

According to the report of 2009 Summit, the goals of the network are to:
       Improve civil society effectiveness and „cohesion‟ in addressing:
             o Issues affecting children especially in relation to HIV/AIDS in South Africa at all levels
       Participate meaningfully and effectively
             o In SANAC structures and
             o With other relevant bodies and forums
       Support the implementation and monitoring of the NSP to fulfill, promote and protect children‟s rights

In the light of this, and in the light of my engagement with Yezingane Network and other
stakeholders, it seems clear that Yezingane Network exists as an organisational form in order
to:
         - channel knowledge, information and will;
         - forge relationships between stakeholders who share some key values and interests
           (which can perhaps best be summed up as “the best interests of South children in
           South Africa growing up in the content of the HIV/AIDS pandemic”) and
           between these stakeholders and other influential players; and
         - through the above processes, influence policy and practice (within and at the level
           of the state and other key players who influence children‟s lives).

The above three points are also a summary of the essential core process of the organisation:
the process that allows it to engage in proactive and responsive work towards its goals.


Core process

The substance of Yezingane Network is relationships; the purpose of these relationships
(beyond the important consideration of solidarity) is to facilitate flows of information, the
production and dissemination of shared knowledge and the transformation of this
knowledge (through the lens of values, principles and practice-based knowledge) into
“agendas” and advocacy messages which members can stand behind and which will enable
the network as a whole to influence policy and practice (in particular as regards
implementation of the NSP).

Diagrammatically, a simplified version of the network‟s core process might look something
like this (see overleaf).




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                      13
        Forming relationships
        (networking)

                                                                       Influencing member’s
        Communicating                                                  practice and agendas
                                    Facilitating
                                    learning
        Sharing information


        Developing knowledge/agendas/
        positions – towards policy formulation
        and improved practice



                                                     Influencing key stakeholders
                                                     (through SANAC and other forms)


This is an iterative process in which communication flows in many directions simultaneously
– this diagram is considerably simplified.

Yezingane Network‟s ultimate target groups are:
     government departments engaging in work that affects the lives of children affected
        by HIV/AIDS; and
     its own membership.
There is no apparent impetus or will to become a monolithic structure which somehow
integrates or renders homogenous the diverse voices within the children‟s sector – and such
a goal would be unrealistic, given the nature of civil society organisation in South Africa.
Rather, Yezingane Network functions to bring coherence and organise (mainly at a high
level and through SANAC at present) around key issues of relevance to children‟s lives.

Communication, process facilitation and knowledge management are therefore the
primary practices which support the functioning of the Network and the achievement of
its goals. The network possesses (through its Secretariat and current Working Group) quite
high levels of capacity in these areas of practice. It is worth noting however, that these would
be the primary areas for capacity development as the network moves into the future. (It goes
without saying that ongoing development of a strong awareness and knowledge base of the
content-issues in the sector will always be critical.)

The structures which have been formed to support the network‟s functioning (i.e.
Secretariat, WG, Executive) play more obvious and in some cases, more significant, roles in
this core process than general membership. The Secretariat, for example, plays a very
significant role in facilitating the whole process, while the WG and Exec are perhaps most
visible in their knowledge development and influencing roles. However, the core process is
ultimately carried by the network as a whole – the communication web that links members
should ideally, in the course of purposeful transactions, enable the wisdom and general will
of members to form and be translated into coherent messages and knowledge. In practice,


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   14
this process will always be somewhat patchy and characterised by incomplete transactions as
some members engage more than others or as issues that cannot be resolved on the basis of
consensus are decided by the leadership structures. Maintaining network integrity, however,
depends on maintaining this flow as far as possible. One of the critical functions of network
management and governance is to maintain the integrity of this flow and of the relationships
that support it. Thus, the importance of effective systems for electing or appointing credible
and effective leaders (Executive and WG) and maintaining and developing the effectiveness
of the Secretariat (the day-to-day guardian of the core process).


Values and principles underpinning network functioning

A key factor for successful functioning is the presence of consciously held and practiced
values and principles. See Appendix 1 for more information about the Yezingane Network
values and principles surfaced by the consultant and the Working Group. Some of the key
principles which emerged include:

        Effective representivity and democracy: this involves holding the tension between
        rapid and effective responses to arising issues and full consultation and collective
        decision-making.

        Efficiency: this implies using the minimum energy and resources to achieve the
        maximum result. The children‟s sector does not have access to limitless resources
        and Yezingane Network recognises that working in as efficient and low-cost manner
        as possible is a priority. The value of voluntarism and personal and organisational
        commitment is strongly related to this principle.

        Facilitative leadership (in line with the above principle): the function of the
        Executive and the Working Group is to listen, to facilitate and synthesise towards
        consensus, and, as far as possible to act on the will and interests of the membership
        and, critically the primary constituency: South African children.

        Transparency and accountability: Within and beyond the network. This implies a
        high degree of openness to membership and other stakeholders

        Inclusivity: Again, openness is a critical factor here – the willingness to include and
        involve interested parties in network processes as is needed. This implies the
        willingness to manage structures effectively too: e.g. maintaining flexible boundaries
        around structures such as the Working Group, such that it is possible to co-opt
        willing non-members in the interests of network effectiveness.

        Competency and high quality: the Network engages and influences from a
        credible and informed base – knowledge of the reality as opposed to on a purely
        polemical or affective basis. This also implies a degree of professionalism and
        maturity in how the system engages in its work of building consensus and
        influencing.



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   15
A few OD principles may also be usefully considered here. These include:
    1. Form follows function: the necessary forms are those, and only those, that support
       the core process. Beyond this…
    2. Simplicity is best: simple, “light” and resilient systems retain the capacity to
       respond flexibly and effectively to a changing context better than over-structured
       and heavy systems. The goal of organisation design is to discover what is enough to
       sustainably carry the organisation‟s core process for as long as this process (and the
       purpose that it aims to realise) is relevant in the context.
    3. Change requires energy and attention; it tends to stress the system. Thus, the folk
       wisdom, “if it ain‟t broke, don‟t fix it!” There are basically two kinds of change:
       transformative and incremental. Transformative change is usually a consequence of
       developmental crisis which arises as a result of the natural maturation process
       through which most organisational systems pass (cf. Phases of Organisation
       Development) or as a result of substantial environmental change which the system
       has not responded to timeously and consciously. Yezingane Network is not a system
       in crisis, but a system seeking to consciously manage its own development. The
       recommendations outlined in this report are therefore mostly conservative and
       incremental in nature, although options for more fundamental change are also briefly
       explored.

So, the next question is:
        To what extent does the current Yezingane Network live up to its principles and to what extent is
        change needed to enhance its effectiveness?
The brief review below attempts to assess current functioning on the limited basis possible
here.


7.2. Strengths

Clarity of shared purpose and core values: putting children first
Yezingane Network‟s specific purpose in relation to its participation in SANAC is clear and
shared. Perhaps more fundamentally, Yezingane Network is unusual in that its members
appear to share a deep and basic commitment to acting in the best interests of children. This
may be thought obvious, but this is not necessarily the case in other sectors networks. For
example, such unanimity of purpose is not present, and perhaps not possible, in the NGO
Sector of SANAC; this sector brings together a wide range of potentially competing interests
and politics. Yezingane Network‟s membership is certainly not homogenous – it no doubt
contains a diversity of organisations with different focus areas, approaches and agendas.
However, it is extremely clear that Yezingane Network does not exist for the primary
purpose of advancing its members‟ interests: children and their needs are placed at the centre
of the system‟s work. Several interviewees noted that the children‟s sector, in general, shares
this quality: a frame condition and facilitating factor which has supported the relative
stability and effectiveness of Yezingane Network in comparison to other civil society-based
sectors.

In addition, there are several values and principles which, while not formally documented and ratified by
Yezingane Network, seem to be broadly shared and to inform practice. This is a considerable strength and


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                 16
could provide the basis for the development of a useful Code of Conduct. See Appendix 1 for a summary of
these values (as discussed with the Working Group) as well as the list of principles on page 14 of this report.

Strong, facilitative and clear leadership
The Yezingane Network Executive (and in particular the current Chairperson and the
Secretariat) have adopted a facilitative orientation to providing leadership within the network
and engaging in SANAC processes. In practice, the Executive acts mainly at the level of the
SANAC Plenary and other SANAC structures; indeed, within Yezingane Network,
engagement at the level of the WG and consultation with membership are more common
means of moving towards decisions and action. The Working Group is the primary
„representative space‟ where issues are engaged with and explored.

The close relationship between the Chair and the Secretariat has also been a strength of the
Network: having both situated in the same organisation has assisted in this regard (a
condition that will change following the 2010 elections).

Several informants also pointed towards several important qualities of the Executive and the
Chair in particular as strengths of Yezingane Network. Courage was on such quality – the
willingness to challenge and confront in an honest and respectful manner.

         A contextual note: qualities required of Yezingane Network leadership in the
         coming years
         According to some informants, SANAC has now reached a new stage in its development – partly
         as a consequence of changes in ANC leadership and leadership of the Health Ministry in
         particular. In the coming period, the capacity to co-ordinate and strengthen the network as an
         effective structure will be as critical as Yezingane Network seeks to contribute to building a web of
         relationships to contribute to the effective realisation of the NSP (in the interests of children). This
         capacity is present in Yezingane Network, but will need to be consciously deepened and developed.
         And the ability to engage at high levels and challenge with integrity will remain important going
         forward. These qualities should be considered as new leadership is elected.

The Chair, Executive, Secretariat and Working Group have emphasised consultation,
listening and reflecting the perspectives and issues raised by members rather than pushing
agendas of their own. This has been important in establishing the very high level of trust in
the current Chair and the credibility of the network leadership as a whole. Yezingane
Network members and other stakeholders perceive the current leadership as committed,
skilled and effective at engaging at the multiple levels required of them.

The style of leadership of the Chair was also pointed to as a strength. Many (perhaps most)
of Yezingane Network‟s members come from a participatory tradition of leadership and
management: the Chair‟s capacity to work effectively in a participatory mode is an important
strength.

Another key strength has been a committed and engaged Working Group which has enabled
a high degree of mutuality in leadership. The presence of WG members who have the
influence, knowledge and experience to work effectively at high levels and participate fully in
SANAC forms and processes (e.g. TTTs) is also a key strength.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                     17
Effective and consultative Secretariat: a critical success factor
A key factor in Yezingane Network‟s successful development to date is the presence of a
small, but efficient, effective and sensitive (to dynamics and processes) Secretariat which:
         co-ordinates and manages processes;
         raises and manages resources;
         responds rapidly to issues as they arise; and
         facilitates communication within and beyond the network.

The effectiveness of the Secretariat rests on the fact that it is not just a co-ordination and
administrative body, but is alive to the critical importance of several factors which seem
essential for the success of the network, including:
        - keeping members in regular contact with issues and processes as they arise, and
             with each other;
        - maintaining momentum – ensuring that energy moves through the system; that
             work is done, progress is made and that members are aware of this;
        - building and maintaining functional relationships at all levels of the network;
        - maintaining high levels of professionalism and so role-modelling this within and
             beyond the network (and contributing to its credibility in the eyes of other
             sectors) – this includes, listening to all perspectives and being seen to carry the
             will of the network, rather than expressing its own will.
What are described above are leadership functions. It is important to recognise the
importance of a Secretariat that is capable of engaging effectively in this work: this is a key
strength of Yezingane Network. In addition, the presence of a stable Secretariat is an
enabling factor in times of change: because of the stable hub of the Secretariat, Yezingane
Network can face change with a high degree of security. The Secretariat provides an
integrative function and so greatly reduces the chance of network disintegration as change
unfolds; it makes for a more resilient and robust network than is often the case.

Structures: Terms of Reference exist; functional and simple
Yezingane Network structures (WG, Secretariat and Executive) function and are simple and
have relatively clear roles. Yezingane Network, unlike many other networks, has developed
ToR for these structures which guide their functioning and enable accountability, monitoring
and management of their work. In addition, WG and Executive members sign contracts
(based on the abovementioned ToRs) which commit them to fulfilling their responsibilities.
This is an important ingredient should office bearers ever need to be called to account; it
also makes it possible to transparently monitor their effectiveness in their roles.

Growing national presence
Through its annual Summit, its publications and its effective participation in SANAC,
Yezingane Network is becoming increasingly visible and recognised.

One caveat: The network‟s new name was not generally known among interviewees. Further, most seemed to
think of it as a sector of SANAC rather than an independent network. This will no doubt change in time
as the identity of the network becomes increasingly clear and it continues to work within and beyond
SANAC.



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                         18
Contribution to an effective SANAC
Yezingane Network is perceived by interviewees who are familiar with its work as having
made a significant contribution to the effective functioning of SANAC. This perception
reflects leadership‟s commitment to engaging with SANAC, well organised systems, and
regular, consistent feedback and communication with members.

7.3. Challenges, issues and gaps

(This section includes material generated by the Yezingane Network Working Group.)

Definition of structures and authority relationships
This is noted as a strength above. However there are weaknesses and some contradictions
within the ToR of the structures. For example, at present, the ToR gives the single elected
representative of the network – the Chairperson – enormous autonomy and authority: e.g.,
the right to appoint the WG and the other Executive members. This authority has never
been used, but could be in future if the ToR is not amended; it needs clarification. A further
example: the issue of leadership development and leadership continuity is not adequately
addressed in the ToR.

See section 8.1 of this report for some recommendations in relation to the above examples,
and other specific issues in relation to the ToR.

Representivity: reflecting members’ voices
The role of membership in framing the agenda of Yezingane Network is not entirely clear:
the Summit is not seen as a decision-making body. Rather, it serves as a consensus building
forum and provides the broad mandate for the work and functioning of the Network. In
effect, makes the Working Group the highest decision-making body. Currently, the WG is
not democratically elected by membership. This is not necessarily a problem: what is critical
is that some mechanism is put in place to ensure that the WG is seen by membership as
representative of the most important perspective on the issues. A recommendation in this
regard is included in Section 8.

One measure of the health of a network is the degree of members‟ interest and participation
in its decision making procedures. The first election of the Sector Chair was (according to
Working Group members) not a robust process. While the election was carefully planned
and well managed (by Lawyers for Human Rights), Yezingane Network members did not
participate in significant numbers or engage substantively with the process. Members‟
participation in election processes is worth monitoring: a paradoxical consequence of
competent and strong leadership can be growing complacency amongst membership. The
danger here would be that the leadership of the network (at WG level) could become a static
oligarchy – no matter how well-intentioned, static structures tend to get into “group think”.
A further risk is leader fatigue and burn-out: it is important to bring new blood into
leadership in order to sustain energy and focus.

Transparency and elections



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                 19
To date, the election of the Chair has taken place via e-mail and fax. This process has been
managed by an independent electoral agency. This is a strength to the extent that it increases
the potential for participation: people who could not make it to a meeting are able to engage
in the process. However, in a context of information overload, this method may actually
reduce the likelihood of substantive member participation. The indirect method of voting
does also have effect of reducing transparency to some extent (though the sector appears to
constitute a fairly high trust environment). Ideally, nominations should take place via e-mail,
fax or letter, and elections at a network meeting (with provisions made for those who cannot
be present to vote ahead of time). The more contact members have with the concrete
election process the more likely they are to take ownership of the network and engage
actively with it.

Member consultation is limited
This is true of all networks, to a greater or lesser extent.

Most member consultation happens via e-mail. This form of consultation is limited and self-
limiting:
         not everyone has easy access to e-mail (less-resourced organisations may be
          excluded from consultation);
         rapid consultations via e-mail have a random quality (they depend on who has
          time to respond within the given deadline); and
         e-mail does not lend itself to the formulation of complex positions (synthesis is
          always partial and the richness of conversation is lost).

The previous two limitations may simply be the way that things are: what is possible given
the current reality. Further, as noted in the first point under strengths, Yezingane Network‟s
function is not primarily to push the interests of its members (it is not a special interest
lobby) but of their shared constituency: Yezingane Network‟s work is to provide oversight
and contribute to policy and strategy development in the best interests of South African
children through SANAC and other structures. Indeed, it is also the case that e-mail-based
communication also has considerable value: it enables rapid turn around, it is cost-effective,
it avoids the need for huge bureaucracies and endless meetings, etc.

The need to further explore and strengthen meaningful child participation
This issue has been discussed extensively in Yezingane Network and a resolution around
child participation arose from the 2008 summit. Working Group members noted that the
network is committed to promoting meaningful child participation processes, but needs to
explore this issue further: what is meant by meaningful child participation and how can the
Network support this in ways that go beyond inviting children to sit in meetings? It is
notable, that some members of the network (e.g. CRC) have done considerable work in this
area, including workshopping the NSP with children – this provides a base to build on in
future.

Child participation is both a complex and challenging issue on which the author lacks the
expertise to comment further; it is an issue for Yezingane Network to consider as it develops
future strategy. Underneath the issue of child participation is the basic question of



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                  20
accountability to one‟s beneficiary group: this is the fundamental accountability on which
Yezingane Network‟s legitimacy and credibility rests.

There is no explicit Code of Conduct for Yezingane Network members, and in
particular, WG, Executive and Secretariat members
This has not presented significant problems to date; it is however, a gap that could be
usefully addressed. The current ToRs refer to a Code of Conduct though none exists at
present: the intention to develop such a Code was clearly present when the ToRs were
drafted.

Yezingane Network’s role at provincial, district and local levels needs further
clarification
The role of Yezingane Network at provincial and local levels needs further exploration and
clarification. What would it mean to have Children‟s Sector representation at provincial,
district and local levels and how might Yezingane Network support linkages across these
different levels of the system?

There is an expressed need to engage in further thinking around these questions at Working
Group level. Indeed, Yezingane Network has begun mobilising members at provincial level,
but without the intention of creating formal network structures in each province. As noted
later in this report, the author supports this emphasis on „organising rather than (or at least,
before) structuring‟: this is a legitimate approach which perhaps simply needs a little strategic
thinking and a co-ordinated approach.

Engaging with membership:
        >>      Who qualifies to be a member?
        >>      Further developing a database of member competencies and areas of
                interest/focus
At present the boundary of the network is not particularly clear: in theory anyone can join,
participate and vote. Like several of the issues raised in this section, this is an area for
ongoing development rather than a particular weakness. The Network may benefit from
gaining greater clarity on the role of, and criteria for, membership. This could include
deciding whether organisational and individual members have the same status; what rights
and responsibilities members have, and so on.

A database of member competencies and interests has begun to be developed. This could be
further developed and used more creatively if there were more clarity on the nature and role
of membership.

Clear approaches to orientation onto Yezingane Network structures is needed
As leadership changes this becomes a pertinent issue to take up. There is a need to careful
orientation of members who take up leadership positions on the WG, TTTs or Executive.

Agreements on how to formulate Yezingane Network positions
There is no agreed procedure for the development of Yezingane Network advocacy/policy
positions. At present, there are informal ways of doing this which involve consulting the
Working Group and/or e-mailing members. A procedure for consulting and formulating
positions may be a useful addition to the existing policies and procedures.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                    21
Yezingane Network: network governance and management review   22
Formal agreements around how to work with conflict or deadlock
Significant conflict has apparently not arisen so this is presently a largely theoretical/“what
if” issue. Where differences did arise within the WG in the past (e.g. when the former
Deputy Minister of Health was dismissed) they were resolved through dialogue. When
feasible, this is perhaps the ideal way of resolving contentious and potentially conflictual
issues. Nevertheless, it may be helpful to clarify the formal procedure for handling disputes
within and between structures, in the event that dialogue alone is insufficient and deadlock
results. Clarifying the ToRs of the different structures should itself, assist with this (see
section 8.3 below).

8. Proposals and options for the future
Below some of the key choices and options facing Yezingane Network as a whole system are
explored. The possible consequences of these choices are briefly discussed and a set of
general recommendations are outlined. Following this, more specific attention is given to the
ToR of Yezingane Network structures and other key issues raised in the ToR of this
assignment.


8.1 Structure and Identity issues and options

The question of organising at provincial level raises several questions as to the nature of
Yezingane Network in the future: i.e. what does the system seek to develop into?

If the core process as outlined in section 7.1 above holds, then the natural option would
seem to be continuing to develop as a network-type organisation. There are however three
basic alternatives:

    1. Create a new organisational base; i.e. transform the Secretariat into an
       advocacy organisation.
       One of this organisation‟s programmes would continue to be the management of the
       Yezingane Network. The organisation‟s core business would be advocacy; it would
       consult with its constituency (children‟s sector organisations engaged in work around
       HIV/AIDS) in order to develop advocacy positions and inform the sector. The
       position adopted here would be that of “issue-leader” (a role already being played in
       a variety of ways by programmes of organisations such as CRC). The organisation‟s
       orientation would be that of professional advocate.

        Such a system would not itself be representative/membership-driven, but issues-
        driven. It would be free to take up issues that may be controversial or on which the
        majority of its constituency may not agree and would be free to invest substantially in
        building its capacity as an advocate – this would probably include developing media,
        research and multi-level network competencies.

        Such a system could not itself claim to represent the sector at SANAC. However, it
        could take over the management of Yezingane Network as one of the networks it
        used to achieve its purpose. The new organisation would need a skilled and


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   23
        committed board, its own leadership, staff, programmes and finance. Yezingane
        Network members would become a resource and client-base (and would have to
        agree to this substantial transformation before it could legitimately take place).
        Yezingane Network itself would continue to function as a volunteer-based,
        membership-led structure, but with access to the resources of the new system.

        Organisations already exist which run similar programmes to those which this system
        would run – there is a significant risk of duplicating work and entering into
        competition with existing members.

        On the other hand, through Yezingane Network, the new organisation could
        potentially draw on a wider range of expertise and resources than any one of its
        members.
        The process of forming a new organisation takes time and considerable energy – this
        is not a short-term option.

                 o Questions for exploration:
                 >>   Is there a need for an independent organisation that would focus exclusively on
                      advocating for the rights of children in the context of HIV/AIDS?
                 >>   Does leadership for such a system exist? Who would champion it?
                 >>   Would the formation of such a system be in the best interests of children? Would
                      it be in the best interests of Yezingane Network membership?

    2. Build a mass-based movement.
       This is one logical end point of the impulse to engage members at provincial level.
       Yezingane Network could choose to focus on building a truly representative
       structure that functions from local up to national levels: a kind of “Children‟s Party”.

        The degree of formality of such a structure would depend on choices made by
        membership, but it would probably need to a secretariat independent from any of its
        organisational or individual members.

        The structure would mirror that adopted by unions, political parties and
        organisations/movements like the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC): a nested
        form made up of local branches, District Committees, Provincial Executive
        Committees, a National Executive Committee and Executive with elections at every
        level and mandates moving up and down the system.

        This kind of system is powerful to the extent that its credibility rests on a mass-base
        of membership. It needs a clear issue or cause to organise around and this cause
        needs to be explicitly shared by members: their commitment to the cause is the
        foundation of its effectiveness. It also requires a particular quality of leadership:
        activist and preferably charismatic.

        It may be more feasible to build child participation into such a structure than has
        proved to be the case with a looser, network form, partly because of the presence of
        local structures where children could play a more active role.



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                          24
        Such structures tend to be cumbersome and their mass-base may in fact limit their
        capacity to support change and to change themselves: the competing interests they
        inevitably contain tend to maintain the status quo after a time and become
        institutionalised forces rather than agents of change. The process of organising itself,
        is enormously energy-consuming.

                 o Questions for exploration:
                 >>   Is there a need for a mass-based movement that would focus exclusively on
                      advocating for the rights of children in the context of HIV/AIDS? Is this a role
                      that existing forms (such as TAC) could play?
                 >>   Is it feasible to build mass-based organisation?
                 >>   Does leadership for such a system exist? Who would champion it?
                 >>   Would the development of such a system be in the best interests of children?
                      Would it be in the best interests of Yezingane Network membership?

    3. Focus on deepening the core process and effectiveness of Yezingane Network
       in its current form: a network rather than a party or a provider of professional
       advocacy services.
       The network form which Yezingane Network has adopted does not allow it to
       function as a fully representative system: in its current form, the system‟s work and
       focus will always be influenced not just by the will of its members, but by the
       particular interests of the individuals and organisations who choose to make their
       time and energy available (free of charge, with the exception of the Secretariat) to do
       the work.

        In Yezingane Network, it is the process of engagement which is being organised, not
        the people or the things – Yezingane Network itself has no resources and employs
        no staff. Co-ordination rather than control is its organising principle. This is
        appropriate for the Children‟s Sector – as already noted, the political divisions and
        leadership challenges which have plagued some other sectors are much less
        dominant dynamics in this sector.

        Further, one of the key goals of Yezingane Network is to support the implementation
        of the NSP. This is not the function of a mass movement or even of an advocacy
        organisation. A network however seems an appropriate form: it enables the
        formation of shared positions and policies through consultative processes and the
        co-ordination of members‟ activities. All of this work is done on the basis of contact
        and connection: this is the medium through which networks support and influence
        the work of their members and through which they support effectiveness of, and
        change in, the systems with which they engage (such as SANAC).

Recommendation: identity and vision

It is worth exploring the will of the current Working Group in relation to the options above
as they open up some long-term alternatives for the future of Yezingane Network: engaging
in this level of thinking (and, indeed generating further alternatives) is an important part of
the ongoing strategic thinking process. The underlying questions at work here is:



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                         25
         What does Yezingane Network need to become? What is the environment calling us to do and be at
this time?

It seems clear however, that in the short-term, the third option is most realistic and relevant
in terms of Yezingane Network‟s current mandate, purpose and core process.

8.2. Alternatives for network functioning: degree of formal
structure; degree of participation

Formal structure
Some networks function in a purely voluntary and mostly ad hoc fashion without even a basic
secretariat. At present, the Women‟s Sector is in this position, though it is in the process of
working towards the employment of a dedicated person to fulfil the secretariat function (like
Yezingane Network, the secretariat will be housed within a member organisation). The
presence of a dedicated and skilled secretariat has already been noted as a key strength of
Yezingane Network.

At the same time, there is considerable flexibility in having a light structure: anything more
substantial than the current form would be likely to drain more resources than overstretched
members can easily support (especially those serving on the WG and Executive). Adding
additional structure – for example by establishing formal Yezingane Network structures at
provincial level – would also increase the workload of the Secretariat and necessitate
increased capacity at Secretariat level.

At present, Yezingane Network seems to have the balance right – it retains a high degree of
fluidity with enough formal structure to make it effective in its work.

Members’ participation and role
Some networks function primarily as information clearing houses – the role of membership
here is, crudely, „to be educated/developed‟: i.e. members are clients or service-users. One
Yezingane Network member interviewed noted that one of the strengths of Yezingane
Network has been the extent to which members are kept informed: the member did
however note that there seemed to have been a shift from more consultation toward more
information provision in the communications flowing from the Secretariat. This was not
presented as a criticism, but does probably reflect a basic reality… The reality is that unless
members are actually dependent on the system or it is taking up an issue that is directly
relevant to them and their immediate constituency, their degree of participation is likely to
fluctuate substantially based on their interest in a particular issue and the degree to which
other matters attract their attention.

The majority of potential members (whether individuals or organisations) are likely to be
engaged in local level work and the degree to which they see the connection between their
work and the issues with which Yezingane Network engages is also likely to differ widely.
Supporting members to become aware of these linkages is surely one of the functions of
Yezingane Network – by which it supports enhanced member effectiveness and its own
development as a effective and highly connected system.



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                         26
Recommendation: structures; provincial level organisation

The current structures of Yezingane Network are working. They could benefit from some
“tweaking” (see detailed recommendations in relation to structures‟ ToR below), but
fundamental change is not indicated.

The important question which remains is:
      How to increase member participation in and ownership of the network?

I recommend that this be a priority consideration for the leadership structures of Yezingane
Network (in particular the WG) in the coming year. Some options here include:

1.      Structuring for increased participation: create Provincial Working Groups
        Develop provincial level equivalents of the Working Group to engage at PAC level.
        This may require the allocation of resources to provincial level organisers (which may
        be WG members) and contracting these organisations/individuals to do the work.

        The risk: Hollow and ineffective structures drain energy. In general structures are more sustainable if
        they arise because local people see the need for them (as opposed to being organised from national level
        down). This would also involve significant new investment in provincial level organising and an
        increased work load for the Secretariat. Additional questions which would arise should this option
        be chosen is: How would the communication happen between provincial and national WG? Would
        each provincial WG need to be represented on the national WG?


2.      Focus on member participation in existing provincial and district level processes:
        Assign responsibility to carefully chosen members to engage and organise at
        provincial/district level. WG members would play a key role here. In other words,
        focus on getting provincial and district level work happening before creating
        structures to hold this work. The Provincial and District AIDS Councils may be
        important sites for this work. The energy to organise at Provincial Level needs to
        arise from within membership: once functioning organisation is in place it becomes
        feasible to seek finance and other support for it as necessary.

The second option seems most appropriate in the current climate: in general, it is more
effective to create structures to support existing processes rather than the other way around.
In other words, if there is a need for provincial level meetings of Yezingane Network
members in addition to the opportunities provided by existing provincial structures (e.g.
PACs) these will emerge. Members will no doubt make this need heard and begin to organise
themselves if it is appropriate to do so. On balance, the existing Yezingane Network structure
is sufficiently flexible to allow member‟s voices from local level to be heard and engaged
with by the national Working Group. There seems no immediate need for the creation of
formal structures at provincial level.

The first option (creating new structures) would move Yezingane Network away from being
a network and towards being a membership-based organisation like a union or political
party. Is such a shift needed for Yezingane Network to do its work effectively? This is a



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                  27
question for the Working Group to answer, but I would caution against creating additional
layers of structure without local level leadership to energise and hold them. There seem
already to be far too many ineffective structures at every level of South African state and
civil society.




8.3 Adaptations to ToRs of Yezingane Network structures

Below is a set of recommendations in relation to each of the ToRs. The purpose of these
recommendations is, in most cases, to:
        bring the ToRs in line with actual practice;
        address technical problems and overlaps between ToRs; and
        clarify basic lines of reporting and authority relationships (again, in ways
            congruent with current practice).

Only four recommendations involving substantive change are proposed:

            Expand the number of elected members of the Executive (to 3) to increase the
             elected leadership base, emphasise the importance of memberships‟ role in
             selecting and mandating leaders, and further empower the Executive by
             encouraging the elected group to function more consciously as a leadership team.
            Phased change to the procedure by which the Working Group is appointed (see
             below) ; the aim here is to support the WG to fulfil its role as an effective and
             representative structure.
            Develop the Code of Conduct that is referred to in all of the ToRs. The material
             in Appendix 1 and the values and principles outlined on page 11 will be of value
             to the WG in engaging in this task. In order for the Code of Conduct to be a
             living and practically useful document it will need to define the agreed values and
             principles in terms of behaviours and practices. Broader membership should be
             involved in this process.
            The inclusion of an additional clause in the ToRs of all structures which requires
             annual self-assessment processes to review their own functioning against the
             ToR, Code of Conduct and strategies/plans. The Secretariat will support this
             process. Such self-assessments could usefully precede the annual Summit: in this
             way, reflections on the previous year could feed into Summit design.

This detailed recommendations below should be read in conjunction with Appendices 2 to 4
which contain the current ToR for each of the structures.

Secretariat

        Under “Composition of the Secretariat”:




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   28
                 Include criteria for the selection of the member organisation to hold the
                  Secretariat role. Some criteria could include:
                      - they should have the capacity to employ, support and co-manage a
                          dedicated network co-ordinator/programme manager;
                      - adequate administrative, communication and IT support for the high
                          volumes of communication involved;
                      - a strong history of financial probity;
                      - skills and experience in effective communication, network
                          management, facilitation and process management, project
                          management, and advocacy

         Additions to “Functions of the Secretariat”:
             Organising the annual summit and other meetings of members and
                 Yezingane Network structures.
             Financial management and accountability.
             Facilitating and participating in the orientation3 of new members of the WG
                 and Executive.

         Additions to “Code of Conduct” – retitle “Code of Conduct, Management and Review”:
             The Secretariat will account on an ongoing basis to the Executive.
             The Secretariat will ensure that an independent evaluation of Network
                 functioning, effectiveness and impact in line with the Secretariat‟s funding
                 cycle (at minimum on a five-yearly basis).
                           [Aside from the obvious accountability issues, the importance of the above points
                           is to make visible the role of the Secretariat‟s – a gap in many network
                           organisations. Transparency and accountability are key values for network
                           effectiveness.]

         Include an additional section: Executive-Secretariat relationship
               The Secretariat and Executive should meet after the election of the Executive
                  to frame their relationship and agree on how they will work together. They
                  may choose to involve others (e.g. previous Chairperson) in this process. Key
                  tasks in this meeting would be to clarify accountability relationships in a
                  context of multiple accountabilities (to the management of the Secretariat
                  host organisation and to Yezingane Network) and to review working
                  procedures. Agreements made should be captured in writing, signed by
                  Secretariat and Chairperson and attached to this ToR as an appendix.

         Additions to “Remuneration” – retitle “Financing and remuneration”:
             The Secretariat shall be responsible for fundraising for Secretariat costs
                 (including salaries) and resourcing of the overall network plan (meetings,
                 etc.).

3A reading of Pia Zain‟s (May 2002) report for the Alliance for Children‟s Entitlement to Social Security on
“the nature and function of an alliance” may be useful as part of the orientation process. This document
provides several useful concepts and guidelines for the consideration of Working Group members. It could
form part of the induction package for new WG members. It provides a clear and simple introduction to some
of the issues which need to be considered by network leadership.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                                29
                Fundraising documents must be approved an endorsed by the Executive on
                 behalf of Yezingane Network.
                Where possible, the WG should participate in the strategic review and
                 development of Yezingane Network related funding proposals.


Executive

        Under “Composition of the Executive” and “Appointment of the Executive”:
            Change:
                  o Three Executive representatives will be elected by members – the
                       Chairperson and two other members. The specific roles of each
                       Executive member will be discussed within the Executive and
                       approved by the Working Group. These roles will be attached as an
                       appendix to this ToR. Executive members automatically become
                       members of the Working Group.
                  o In the event of a resignation or the non-performance of an Executive
                       Member, the WG is responsible for appointing a new member in
                       consultation with the remaining Executive members.
                  o The Executive, with the approval of the Working Group, has the
                       right to co-opt additional Executive members should this prove
                       necessary (for example if specific technical skills or other experience
                       are needed). Co-opted members must be member of Yezingane
                       Network and may serve for one year or a period negotiated between
                       the Working Group and Executive.

        Under “Functions of the Executive”
            Addition to “4.1. Provide strategic leadership…”:
                   o Define the nature of leadership more clearly: facilitative approach,
                        etc. See section 7.2, in particular the box on page 16 for a description
                        of some of these criteria. [The selected criteria should also be
                        included in the criteria for election (see nomination form in
                        Appendix 5).]
            Account to the Working Group and involve the WG in formulating
               positions and strategies

         Under “Duration of term”
            Addition: maximum of two consecutive terms two year terms, with the
                possibility of an addition term of one year for the purpose of handover, i.e.
                max. 5 years (to be decided by the Working Group and presented to
                membership at the Summit).
            Overlapping terms are encouraged in order to encourage continuity and
                leadership development. [This point will need to be included in the
                nomination form criteria/considerations as well as in these ToR].

The current situation: ensuring continuity during the transition


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                     30
It is recommended that the Working Group, in consultation with the current Executive, take
a decision as to whether all current Executive members should end their terms at the time of
the upcoming elections. If so, it will be important to decide which of the current members
would be willing and eligible to stand for election for the 2010-11 term.
Alternatively, the co-option clause under “Duration of Term” above can be activated to
appoint some of the existing members to the Executive in addition to those elected by
membership.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                               31
Working Group

        Under “Purpose”
            Add to first paragraph: “… reflect the views of the sector and serve the best
               interests of children.”

        Under “Functions of the Working Group”
            Changes:
                   o NEW: 4.4. Appoint the Chairperson from the three member-elected
                        Executive representatives.
                   o 4.5. Hold the Executive and Secretariat accountable…
                   o NEW: 4.6. Network development: build the network at local
                        provincial level.
                              Working Group members are responsible for taking up
                                 Yezingane Network issues within their own organisations.
                              Working Group members are responsible for engaging in
                                 provincial level organising work on behalf of the network if
                                 mandated to do so by the Working Group. This may include
                                 facilitating Children‟s Sector participation in DACs and
                                 PACs.
                              Working Group members are responsible for keeping the
                                 Working Group informed of relevant issues and processes
                                 unfolding within their own networks.

        Under “Duration of term”
            Addition: maximum of three consecutive terms. Overlapping terms are
               encouraged in order to encourage continuity and leadership development.
               (also to be included in the criteria for changes/appointment to the WG).

        A phased process of change in relation to the WG:

        Given the coming changes in Executive leadership, the following proposals and
        considerations are offered:
        - The WG should not increase substantially in size (in the interests of efficiency) –
           though; 7 people would be a reasonable minimum; 20 a maximum.
        - The WG is potentially the most representative structure in Yezingane Network. In
           the longer term I would recommend that members be appointed at every
           second Summit. This need not be an election: based on agreed criteria (approved
           by Summit) members could volunteer themselves and/or nominate others. The
           test of whether or not the WG is appropriately formed rests on the group‟s
           response to the question, “Do you have confidence in this group to provide
           direction and leadership to Yezingane Network over the coming two years?”
           [There are ways of doing this as a facilitated process; the design for such a
           process could be produced on request.] Transparency is an important value
           within Yezingane Network and such a process is in line with this value. Another



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                 32
             key value is openness: it is important to regularly create space for new people
             who have the will and energy to participate and add value to join the WG.
        -    However, I do not suggest that the above be adopted in 2010. Instead, given the
             change in Executive Leadership, I recommend that a core of the current WG
             remains unchanged for 2010. At the Summit:
                 >       Check for resignations.
                 >       Invite volunteers or additional nominations for the number of spaces
                         available.
                 >       Confirm the group, indicating it will be reviewed again and a more
                         fulsome appointment process adopted in 2011.

        Eligibility for WG membership
        Any member in good standing should be eligible to serve on the WG. At present,
        some organisational members have two individuals serving on the WG. The essential
        bases for appointment are capacity and will. If these members add value to the work
        of the Group this need not be a problem.

        However, the principle of representivity is important at the level of the WG. This
        consideration should be one of the criteria borne in mind when the WG when it
        engages in self-assessment, and by members when they appoint a Working Group.
        One option would be to rationalise the WG membership by having only one
        representative per organisation and thus enable increased participation from other
        organisations without increasing WG numbers. However, this choice should not be made
        at the expense of the Working Group‟s effectiveness. The current situation does not call for
        hard and fast policy – rather, the current WG should reflect on their current make-
        up and consider whether such change would be of benefit to Yezingane Network as
        a whole.
        Should the WG choose to make change in this area, it should still be possible to
        engage members who step down from the WG in sub-committee work.

        An additional idea from a WG member: increasing member involvement and participation
        One Working Group member noted that: “One way of increasing member
        participation could be the formation of special committees, task teams or
        programme teams with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The coordination of
        these teams work would happen at WG level.”



8.4 Defining who a member is

At present, Yezingane Network is a very open and inclusive network indeed: any individual
or organization can join. This has not proved problematic in the past, but it does not clarify
the boundary of the system. The values of the network and its purpose define its possible
membership.

In practice, members may be individuals or organizations with an interest in furthering the
values and purpose of Yezingane Network.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                        33
        Recommendation
        If not already in existence, I recommend the development of a membership database
        and mailing list which differentiates between:
         individual members (who do not represent an organization engaged in work
            related to the network‟s purpose);
         organizational members;
         subscribers (individuals/organisations who are interested in receiving updates
            and information but not in participating directly in network processes).
        The former two groups would need to sign some form of the Code of Conduct on
        joining the network (as would old members once the Code is developed).
        Subscribers would not need to do so and would not have voting rights.

Some questions…
Should individuals have the same voting rights as organisations?
Should a new organization with 3 staff members and little experience have the same voting
rights as ELRU or CRC?

Yezingane Network‟s present practice answers both questions in the affirmative. Most
developmental networks that I am familiar with answer the latter question in the affirmative:
the alternative is to define very clearer criteria for membership – and run the risk of being
labeled an exclusive club…

In relation to the former question, many networks operate successfully on the basis of
organizational membership only, but make considered exceptions in the case of individuals
who clearly add value by bringing much needed experience, capacity and will.

The Working Group faces a choice here:
           leave things as they are and monitor the dynamics that arise from this during
             future elections, OR
           adopt the common practice of accepting organizational membership only
             and develop a procedure for processing individual applications for
             membership.

Existing individual members have participated in and contributed to the development of the
network to date: their right to continue to participate should be accepted on the basis of this
contribution.


8.5 Election system

The nomination document and election procedure used in 2007 is acceptable and will suffice
for the coming elections (see Appendix 5). It needs to be adapted in line with the
recommendations relating to the Executive above (if these are accepted) and to reflect other
changes within Yezingane Network.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                  34
In terms of Yezingane Network‟s value of transparency, elections should ideally culminate at
the annual Summit rather than being finalised via electronic communications. It is
recommended that this approach be adopted from 2012 for the election of the Executive.
The reason for delaying this process for two years is purely based on time considerations:
membership need to be informed of changes to some systems and practices at this year‟s
Summit in order to begin preparing them for the next; there is insufficient time between
now and November to do this.


9. Next steps
This document has attempted to map out some of the general considerations and provide
some specific options and recommendations for the future of Yezingane Network
governance and management. It is not a definitive or exhaustive document, but I trust it will
serve to stimulate thinking and provide some support to the Yezingane Network Working
Group in taking these important and strategic decisions.

Should the recommendations of this report be accepted in part or as a whole, the following
steps could be undertaken:

Pre-Summit 2009:
        Agree on changes to ToRs of Yezingane Network structures
        Agree on current election procedure
        Engage with the question of membership and boundaries – prepare a proposal to
         share at the Summit

At or around the Summit:
         Present key changes to ToRs of structures
         Present the election procedure and criteria for the 2010/11 election of Yezingane
           Network representatives to SANAC
         Confirm current WG and appoint additional members as necessary
         Begin (or agree on a procedure for) consultation around the formulation of a
           Code of Conduct
         Engage with the question of membership and boundaries
         Test members‟ will to organise at provincial/district levels (preferably around
           emerging issues/content areas); identify interested members who could act as
           focal/link people at these levels

Medium term (3-6 months):
       Finalise membership criteria
       Finalise Code of Conduct; members sign Code of Conduct
       Design and introduce orientation procedures for membership and Yezingane
          Network structures
       Orientation of new Executive and WG members




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                35
Ongoing and longer term:
       Network development: organising at provincial, district and local levels
       Membership database development
       Develop agreed procedures for formulating Network positions and for dealing
          with conflict/deadlock
       Visioning and ongoing strategic thinking

External facilitation of some of the above steps and decision-making processes may be of
value.

Thank you for the opportunity to engage in this work. I wish you well as you work through
the decisions and issues facing the Network at this time, and in your important ongoing
work of consciously guiding the development of the Yezingane Network and so contributing
to the strengthening of the Children‟s Sector‟s voice.

                                      Warren Banks, OD Practitioner, wjbanks@polka.co.za
                                                                 Durban, 28 October 2009




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                36
Appendix 1: Yezingane Network Values and Principles
This material was generated in consultation with the Working Group:

The facilitator presented the following values and principles:

        Mutual accountability – great when it works; potentially messy
        Accountability
        Flexibility
        Democracy
        Integrity
        Personal responsibility
        Voluntarism
        Representivity
        Open engagement
        Children’s rights & HIV/AIDS
        Child participation
        Common purpose: issue and principle centred

Group members broadly agreed with the above and made the following additional
contributions:

       Transparency
       Identity as civil society
       Leadership
       Competency
       High quality
       Child participation lacking
       Caring , compassion & camaraderie
       Fun, laughter, humour, lightness Commitment
       Participation
       E-mail networking – speed and responsiveness
       Voluntarism - it is a mutually beneficial engagement; for example, being part of the
                  Working Group process provides one with opportunities to learn, to make a
                  difference, etc.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                    37
    Appendix 2: Secretariat TOR


Purpose
   The primary function of the Secretariat is to ensure the smooth and effective functioning of
   the SANAC Children’s Sector Network (CSN).

Composition of the Secretariat
   The Children’s Sector Network (CSN) Secretariat includes the Children’s Sector Chairperson and
   the staff and resources necessary to function effectively as a secretariat.

    The Secretariat will be housed within a member organization, on the understanding that this
    arrangement would be reviewed if:

       Funding were no longer available to the organization for this function
       The SANAC Children’s Sector Network became an independent, legal entity
       The organization were unable to adequately fulfill the functions required of the Secretariat
       Other reasons justified the review of the location of the secretariat

Independence
    The functions of the Secretariat are independent of any Government structure or Department,
    including SANAC.

Functions of the Secretariat
   Activities include:

       Co-ordinating SANAC Children’s Sector network membership, and the member database
       Communication and information dissemination on issues related to SANAC
       Encouraging, co-ordinating and collating inputs from the Children’s Sector into key SANAC
        processes and decisions
       Documenting processes and decisions
       Supporting multiple sector representatives on the High Level Strategic Leadership Structure
        (Executive)
       Co-ordinating the activities of the working group
       Outsourcing and managing additional tasks as necessary
       Liaising with SANAC and other structures
       Ensuring co-ordination and linkages between various Sector representatives


Duration of term
   The Secretariat shall be expected to serve for a minimum term of 2 years.

Code of conduct
   All CSN representatives are expected to adhere to a CSN code of conduct.

Remuneration
   The Secretariat will be expected to raise funds to cover their own costs, including the salaries
   of administrative and other support staff




    Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                   38
Public representation
   The Secretariat may publicly represent the opinions, statements and plans of the SANAC CSN as
   and when necessary and appropriate. The Secretariat must inform members of all such
   representations.


Acceptance of terms and conditions

   I understand and accept the conditions of this appointment, as laid out in the terms of
   reference.


   Full name of Secretariat representative: __________________________________________

   Signature of Secretariat representative: __________________________________________

   Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________2007.



   Endorsement of organization:

   Name of Director / Chairperson of Board:___________________________________________

   Signature: ____________________________________________________________________

   Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________2007.




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                39
   Appendix 3: Executive ToR

Purpose
   The SANAC Children’s Sector Executive provides strategic and operational leadership to the
   Children’s Sector network. These individuals represent the Children’s Sector on the High Level
   Strategic Leadership Structure of SANAC, the National AIDS Council.

Composition of the Executive
   The Children’s Sector Network (CSN) Executive includes three individuals from the Children’s
   Sector, including the sector chair, who is the elected representative.

Appointment of the Executive
   The chair of the Executive is elected via an independent nomination and voting process
   involving all members of the CSN. The remaining two members of the Executive are identified
   by the principal member, in consultation with the working group.

   Executive members require endorsement from their organisations, supporting their
   appointment on this structure.

Functions of the Executive
   Under the leadership of the chair person the role of the SANAC CSN Executive is to:

   Provide strategic leadership within the Children’s Sector Network

   Identify and address key issues
   Collectively, members of the Executive are required to remain abreast of key HIV/AIDS related
   issues affecting children. The Executive will lead consultation and consensus building with the
   CSN around such issues and formulate strategic plans for addressing issues of national
   importance.

   Represent the Children’s Sector on the NAC
   The Executive team represents the Children’s Sector within the SANAC High Level Strategic
   Leadership Structure (National AIDS Council) and other relevant structures as determined in
   consultation with the Secretariat. In this capacity, individuals represent the views and
   activities of the CSN at large and not the views and activities of their particular organization
   per se.

   To make the most of Sector representation on the NAC, Executive members will be required to:

      Draw on the skills and experience of relevant technical experts within the sector
      Attend the relevant SANAC meetings
      Consult as appropriate, necessary and reasonably possible, prior to meetings around key
       issues to be addressed
      Where necessary and strategic, make strategic decisions in the absence of an opportunity
       to consult.
      Engage constructively with Government and other Sector representatives at these
       meetings, so as to ensure that the needs of children and the concerns of Children’s Sector
       organisations are heard and considered.
      Communicate key decisions, concerns and outcomes of meetings to relevant parties




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                        40
   The activities of the Executive are co-ordinated and supported by the CSN Secretariat,
   currently housed within the CRC.

Duration of term
   In order to build capacity and ensure continuity, members of the Executive are expected to
   serve for a term of 2 years.

Obligations

   Active participation
   Members of the Executive are expected to participate actively in the group and to attend
   quarterly meetings, or send apologies if unable to attend. If Executive members are
   consistently unable to attend meetings and to contribute to supporting the activities of the
   CSN, they may be replaced with an alternative Children’s Sector representative.

   Reporting
   Executive members are expected to report to the Secretariat on progress with specific tasks at
   agreed upon timeframes. Upon attending SANAC related meetings members are expected to
   submit a written or telephonic report to the Children’s Sector Secretariat within one week of
   the event. The report should include an overview of:
        Meeting attendance
        Agenda
        Discussion points
        Key outcomes
        Action to be taken (if any)

Code of conduct
   All CSN representatives are expected to adhere to a CSN code of conduct.

Remuneration
   Members of the Executive will not be paid for their time.

Expenses
   All CSN related expenses reasonably incurred in the completion of relevant tasks will be
   reimbursed through the Secretariat, only if prior approval for said expenses has been obtained
   from the Secretariat. Expenses related to attending SANAC meetings will be covered by SANAC.
   In the event that these expenses are not covered, Executive members are expected to liaise
   timeously with the CSN Secretariat so that alternate arrangements can be made.

Public representation
   Members of the Executive may publicly represent the opinions, statements and plans of the
   SANAC CSN as and when necessary and appropriate. The Secretariat must be informed of all
   such representations.

Acceptance of terms and conditions

   I understand and accept the conditions of this appointment, as laid out in the terms of
   reference.

   Full name of Executive member: __________________________________________

   Signature of Executive member: __________________________________________




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                    41
Endorsement of member’s organisation: _____________________________________________

Full name of Director: ___________________________________________________________

Signature: ____________________________________________________________________

Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________2007.



Full name of Secretariat Representative: ____________________________________________

Signature of Secretariat Representative: ____________________________________________

Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________ 2007.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                             42
   Appendix 4: Working Group ToR

Purpose
   The primary function of the working group is to support the activities and decision-making
   processes of the SANAC Children’s Sector Network, to ensure as far as possible that
   recommendations put forward to SANAC reflect the views of the sector.

   The working group needs to remain flexible enough to respond rapidly to issues as and when
   they arise.

Composition of the Working Group
   The Children’s Sector Network (CSN) working group includes a maximum of 15 individuals from
   the Children’s Sector. Where necessary, additional individuals may be co-opted to assist with
   specific tasks or on a long term basis.

   The working group brings together the composite skills and experience necessary to inform
   decisions around the full spectrum of HIV/AIDS related issues affecting children, namely:

   o   Expertise in programme implementation, monitoring and evaluation, research, advocacy,
       strategy and communication.
   o   Knowledge of prevention, treatment, care and support, and child rights issues


Appointment of the Working Group
   Potential working group members are shortlisted by the CSN Executive, in consultation with the
   network. The final decision on suitable candidates will be taken by the members of the
   Executive.

   Working group members require endorsement from their organisations, supporting their
   appointment on this structure.

   If the working group member leaves their organisation, their position on the working group may
   be reviewed.

Functions of the Working Group
   The SANAC CSN working group was established to support the activities and decision-making
   processes of the Executive Team. The primary functions of the working group are to:

   Represent children’s issues on various SANAC structures and committees.
   Selected working group members will represent the CSN on key SANAC structures. In this
   capacity, individuals represent the views and activities of the CSN at large and not the views
   and activities of their particular organization per se.

   At the moment, identified structures include: the Programme Implementation Sub-Committees,
   Sectoral Level Co-ordinating Structure and Resource Management Committee. In this regard,
   members will be expected to:
    Attend the relevant meetings
    Consult as appropriate, necessary and reasonably possible, prior to meetings around key
       issues to be addressed




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                      43
      Engage constructively with Government and other Sector representatives at these
       meetings, so as to ensure that the needs of children and the concerns of Children’s Sector
       network are heard and considered.
      Communicate key decisions and outcomes of meetings to relevant parties in the CSN


   Help facilitate the active engagement of Children’s Sector network in SANAC and related
       processes.

   Activities may include:
    Empowering member networks to engage their respective member organizations around
       key SANAC tasks and/or advocacy issues.
    Expanding the membership base to ensure participation of currently excluded groups


   Support the Executive and Secretariat in specific tasks as and when they arise, as per the
       skills and availability of individual Working Group members.

   Hold the Executive and Secretariat accountable to commitments and consultative
       processes and provide an oversight function

Duration of term
   In order to build capacity and ensure continuity, working group members shall be expected to
   serve for a minimum term of 2 years.

Obligations

   Active participation
   Working group members are expected to participate actively in the group and to attend
   quarterly meetings, or send apologies if unable to attend. If working group members are
   consistently unable to attend meetings and to contribute to supporting the activities of the
   CSN, they may be replaced with an alternative Children’s Sector representative.

   Reporting
   Working Group members are expected to report to the Secretariat on progress with specific
   tasks at agreed upon timeframes.

   Working group members who represent the CSN on SANAC structures are expected to submit a
   written or telephonic report to the Children’s Sector Secretariat within one week of attending
   relevant meetings / engaging in relevant events. The report should include an overview of:
        Meeting attendance
        Agenda
        Discussion points
        Key outcomes
        Action to be taken (if any)

Code of conduct
   All CSN representatives are expected to adhere to a CSN code of conduct.

Remuneration
   Working group members will not be paid for their time.




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                    44
Expenses
   All CSN related expenses reasonably incurred in the completion of relevant tasks will be
   reimbursed through the Secretariat, only if prior approval for said expenses has been obtained
   from the Secretariat. Expenses related to attending SANAC meetings will be covered by SANAC.
   In the event that these expenses are not covered, working group members are expected to
   liaise timeously with the CSN Secretariat so that alternate arrangements can be made.

Public representation
   Media representation of the SANAC Children’s Sector network will remain the responsibility of
   the Executive. Responsibility for such may from time to time be delegated to Working Group
   members or other members of the network as appropriate.

   Within other forums, working group members are encouraged to share information on the CSN,
   SANAC and its activities in order to raise awareness and encourage the active participation of
   children's sector organisations in the CSN.

   While consensus on issues is preferable, it is not always possible. When representing the CSN,
   the views expressed are therefore those of the CSN and not necessarily of the individual
   members.

Acceptance of terms and conditions

   I understand and accept the conditions of this appointment, as laid out in the terms of
   reference.

   Full name of Working Group member: __________________________________________

   Signature of Working Group member: __________________________________________


   Endorsement of member’s organisation: _____________________________________________

   Full name of Director: ___________________________________________________________

   Signature: ____________________________________________________________________

   Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________2007.



   Full name of Secretariat Representative: ____________________________________________

   Signature of Secretariat Representative: ____________________________________________

   Signed at _____________________________________________ on ________________ 2007.




   Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                                      45
Appendix 5: Nomination and election process (2007)
Can we clean up with document if we are going to attach it here

PURPOSE OF THIS BRIEF
This letter aims to:
   1. Inform organisations working in the children’s sector of the changes within
        SANAC;
    2. Explain the role of the children’s sector representative on SANAC;
    3. Provide an update of the process to date the children’s sector representative
       to SANAC;
    4. Outline the criteria for Children’s Sector representative candidates;
    5. Invite you to participate in selecting a suitable candidate to be appointed as
       the Children’s Sector representative on SANAC for the next two years.


DEVELOPMENTS IN SANAC

The South African National AIDS Council (SANAC) is the highest body advising
Government on all matters related to HIV/AIDS. SANAC has recently undergone a
process of restructuring. In addition, there is a new era of commitment to
government and civil society working together in addressing the pandemic and
mitigating its impact.
The new SANAC is still a high-level multi-sectoral partnership body. Its aim is to play
a leadership role, ensuring consensus is built and maintained on issues of policy and
strategy, as well as overseeing overall implementation and review of the National
Strategic Plan (2007-2011) on HIV and AIDS, STIs, and TB (NSP) as well as the
National Comprehensive Plan for Management, Treatment and Care for South
Africa.
The aim of SANAC is to build commitment and to foster relationships that help to
improve health outcomes for all South Africans. SANAC will also encourage sectors
to organize themselves and provide progress reports to SANAC in respect of the
implementation of the National Strategic Plan.
The specific objectives of SANAC will be to:
    a. Advise government on HIV, AIDS, STI and TB policy and strategy, and
       related matters.
    b. Create and strengthen partnerships for an expanded national response to
       HIV and AIDS in South Africa,
    c. Communicate and assess progress and challenges in all sectoral
       interventions to HIV and AIDS
    d. Oversee on-going monitoring and evaluation of all aspects of the NSP.



Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                             46
The Deputy President of South Africa will chair SANAC. The Deputy Chair will be
elected from the leaders represented in the civil society sectors of SANAC, and will
be elected by the sectors themselves.

The term of current sector representatives on SANAC is coming to an end. All civil
society sectors need to elect their representatives for the next two-year term of
SANAC.

The current SANAC Council has mandated all existing sector representatives to
organise their elections prior to the first meeting of the re-structured SANAC, which
is provisionally scheduled for early March 2007.




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                             47
The role of a Children's Sector representative on SANAC
SANAC sector representatives have been and will continue to be responsible for:
    a. Attending SANAC Council and other SANAC committee meetings and
       additional ad hoc meetings where necessary.
    b. Coordinating consultation and communication between the sector and
       SANAC
    c. Reporting to and keeping SANAC informed of developments and challenges
       in the sector.

The representative needs to ensure that the Children’s Sector has a voice in SANAC
processes and decisions and that SANAC fulfills its responsibilities to children.

In order to do this, s/he would need to be
     Well-informed of key issues of concern to the Children’s Sector in relation to
       HIV/AIDS;
       Prepared and able to ensure that these issues are adequately and
        appropriately addressed in various SANAC meetings and processes.
       In a position to communicate and consult with the sector (via existing
        networks) regarding the deliberations and outcomes of these meetings.

While the work done as Children’s Sector Representative is on a voluntary basis,
travel costs to meetings are covered by SANAC.

An Overview of the Children’s Sector Representation to date
2003 – The first Children’s Sector representative appointed as an interim
representative. Based on the mandate from SANAC, the SANAC Children’s Sector
Network elected the current Children’s Sector representative – Cati Vawda of the
Children’s Rights Centre. The SANAC Children’s Sector Network brought and has
kept a number of stakeholders together, including: the Children’s Rights Centre, the
Children’s Institute, the Children’s HIV/AIDS Network CHAIN/ NACOSA- Western
Cape), CINDI (Children in Distress Network), RAPCAN, the Child Health Unit (now
Children’s Institute), ChildLine South Africa, ACESS, the South African
Paediatricians’ Association, NACCW (National Association of ChildCare Workers),
SASPCAN (SA Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect), the New
Women’s Movement, World Conference on Religion and Peace, Elim Care Group,
the Treatment Action Campaign and Children First, among others.

During this period, the SANAC Children’s Sector has been active advocating for
SANAC to fulfill its mandate and to work for Children. As such we are fully part of the
new partnership between government and civil society. The SANAC Children’s
Sector has made substantive inputs into SANAC processes most recently the
National Strategic Plan on HIV, AIDS, STIs and TB for 2007 –2011, as well as into
the re-structuring of SANAC to be an effective body.


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                          48
Criteria for Children’s Sector Representative Nominees

The criteria for candidates are that they should:
   a. Have a strong knowledge of HIV and AIDS
   b. Have experience, understanding of, and involvement in the Children’s sector
   c. Possess strong advocacy and lobbying skills
   d. Be highly respected by the children’s sector community
   e. Be committed and dedicated to the task at hand
   f. Be accessible for the sector activities and the quarterly SANAC meetings

In addition to the above, it is essential that the sector representative and the
representative’s organisation have the means and the time to consult with
communicate effectively with the range of organisations that constitute the children’s
sector. S/he must have an understanding of the impact of HIV/AIDS on children in
South Africa, strong networking skills, and an excellent knowledge of the key
networks through which communication with the sector can be enhanced. In
addition, s/he must be prepared to commit themselves for the full two year period as
the full term children’s sector representative.
Children’s Sector Representative Election - Nominating a
Candidate

The process of electing a candidate will work as follows:
       This letter and the attached nomination will be distributed to the Children’s
        Sector Network members.
       In order to nominate a candidate, you, as a SANAC Children’s Sector
        Network member will need to complete the attached nomination form and fax
        it to Varshi Rajcoomar on (033) 3949522 or e- mail it to varshi@lhr.or.za or
                                                     th
        zandile@lhr.org.za, by 12.00 noon on 26 January 2007.
       Nominees will be asked to accept their nomination in writing, provide the
        selection committee with a CV and short motivation for accepting the
        nomination.
       All nominations will be reviewed by the Reference Group to ensure that
        nominees meet the criteria and therefore are eligible for election.
       Details of the nominees will be circulated to all those who registered to vote.
       The only requirement for nominating and voting is that your organization is a
        formal member of the SANAC Children’s Sector Network.
       Each SANAC Children’s Sector Network member has one vote.
        Organisations and individuals each have one vote.
       The candidate with the most votes will be elected as the sector representative
        for a period of 2 years




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                               49
Many thanks for your participation in this important process!

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact Varshi
Rajcoomar on Tel No: 033 – 3421130/80, Fax No: 033 - 3949522 0r e-mail her at
varshi@lhr.org.za or zandile@lhr.org.za




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                       50
NOMINATION FORM

CHILDREN’S SECTOR REPRESENTATIVE ON SANAC
        PLEASE FAX 0R E-MAIL TO Varshi Rajcoomar on (033 ) 3949522 or
    varshi@lhr.org.za or zandile@lhr.org.za BY 12.00 noon 26 January 2007

                                 Nominee                      Proposer    Seconder
Name of



Organisation



e-mail address



Office Telephone
Number


Cell Number



FAX Number



Postal Address



Signature




       The nominee must accept the nomination in writing. A Nomination Acceptance
        Form is available from the Varshi Rajcoomar. Please call her on 033 –
        3421130/80 for a copy of the form or send an e-mail to varshi@lhr.org.za or
        zandile@lhr.org.za

       Acceptance of the nomination means the nominee
            Will make his or her self available for meetings and activities
              Will consult with and report back to the SANAC Children’s Sector Network
              No person shall be eligible if he or she is


Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                          51
                         An unrehabilitated Insolvent
                         Has been convicted of a criminal offence, which would constitute a
                          breach of human rights in terms of the 1994 Constitution of the
                          Republic of South Africa, or for theft, fraud, deceit or dishonesty




Yezingane Network: network governance and management review                               52

				
DOCUMENT INFO